Stand to Reason Blog

Do You Desire God above All Else? (A Thought Experiment)

Gary Habermas offers a thought experiment to help us examine our motives concerning what we’re asking God for in prayer:

[In his book Heaven: The Heart’s Deepest Longing,] Peter Kreeft proposes a thought experiment in order to assist believers in determining [their] motives. What would we say if God offered us whatever we most wanted in life? What would we take if, whatever it was, it was ours for the asking? Would it be wealth? Power? Honor? How about peace of mind? But while you are thinking it over, God goes on to explain that there is only one thing you may not choose. You will never see His face.

What would our response be to this declaration? Would you be secretly satisfied to take one of the many other treasures, or would you be emotionally crushed by the last condition? Where do your true desires lie? Do you desire God and His Kingdom above all else? Such an experiment might help to provide an answer to the question of our secret desires and our ultimate motivation.

James 4:3 says, “You ask and do not receive, because you ask with wrong motives, so that you may spend it on your pleasures.” This isn’t to say that when we don’t receive a particular thing we’ve asked for, the explanation is always wrong motives (see 2 Corinthians 12:7–9 for an example of where this was not the case), but it does serve as a good reminder about prayer.

Here’s a question to consider as you pray: Are your prayers oriented toward God and His Kingdom? Is that thing you’re praying for a means by which you may know, love, and serve God Himself, or is God merely the means you’re using to get that thing?

By considering this question, you may find you’re praying for something you shouldn’t be asking for. But there’s another possible—and far more exciting—outcome: you might simply increase your awareness of how the good things of this world exist for the glory of God.

For example, maybe you’ve been praying for a spouse without having thought through how marriage is a picture of the union of Christ with His church, how when a husband loves his wife “just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her,” when he “loves his own wife even as himself,” and when the wife “respects her husband,” together their relationship shows their neighbors who Christ is.

Or perhaps you’re praying about your need for a car, and as you consider the above question, you think of the many ways you will use that car to serve your neighbor and care for your family, “that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven.”

If we always considered our prayer requests this way, I think it would transform not only what we ask for, but also how we see everything we’re given.

Yes, Christians Are Hypocrites—If by “Hypocrite” You Mean “Sinner”

Andy Bannister explains that, contrary to Christopher Hitchens’s claim, religion isn’t what poisons everything. The problem is much deeper, more pervasive, and far more personal.

The problem is us. We poison everything. And, as it happens, that is precisely why we need Jesus. Far from contradicting Christianity, the existence of sin in the world (even in the church) confirms this central truth of Christianity. “For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23), and “if we say that we have no sin, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us” (1 John 1:10).

At root, the objection that “Christians are hypocrites” comes down to a fundamental misunderstanding of Christianity. It is widely believed (sadly, even by some who claim to be Christians) that Christianity is mainly about becoming a good person, and that being a good person is the way to heaven. This belief only glorifies the churchgoer, not God, for such a person is his only savior. It also inevitably leads to disillusionment and cynicism because it is false. No one is sinless, and anyone who expects otherwise of Christians will be let down sooner or later.

Christians, we openly recognize our sinfulness, so when someone accuses the church of housing sinners, that’s an opportunity to explain that our sin is the very reason why we go to church. We’re Christians because we know we sin. A Christian’s sin doesn’t contradict Christianity; it confirms it. It’s only more proof that we all need Jesus to take our sin and give us His righteousness. You can turn this objection on its head by explaining that Christianity is all about Jesus’ work for us, not about our work to become good enough to eliminate our need for Him.

God saved us “to the praise of the glory of His grace,” not the praise of our own righteousness, so don’t hide your sin. Be open about your failures and need for forgiveness, because that is how people will see and glorify Jesus’ grace.

Challenge Response: I Don't Like the Idea of People Telling Me What to Do

Here's my response to this week's challenge:

 

The Third Mission to the West

So what do we do now as Christians in a post-Christian culture? Os Guinness has some thoughts about our “third mission to the West” in his book Renaissance: The Power of the Gospel However Dark the Times:

The first mission to the West centered on the conversion of the Roman Empire. This mission is well known, the extraordinary story of how those whom the Romans saw as a bunch of provincial misfits grew and grew until their faith replaced the faith of mighty Rome itself. (The Emperor Julian after his failure to turn back the clock: “You have conquered, Galilean!”)

But when the Western Roman Empire fell in the fifth century, so also did much of the church in the West, so the second mission to the West centered on the conversion of the barbarian kingdoms. This took place against the backdrop of the Dark Ages and the tribal conditions and conflicts from the fifth to the tenth centuries. Less well known than the story of the conversion of Rome, this story was every bit as heroic. It included the celebrated “gentling” of the European people, as the cross of Jesus became what the poet Heinrich Heine called the “taming talisman” that subdued the “berserker rage” of barbarians such as the Celts, the Goths, the Visigoths, the Franks and the Vikings.

The second mission also includes the stories of Skellig Michael and communities like it. Skellig Michael was the rocky pyramid in the storm-tossed Atlantic, eight miles off the western coast of Ireland. For six centuries, part of the church clung to its faith by the skin of its teeth at a place that for them was the end of the world and at a moment they believed was the end of time. The second mission certainly includes the story of “how the Irish saved civilization,” the brief, bright hour captured by Thomas Cahill’s book of the same title when St. Columbanus and other missionaries from the Emerald Isle fanned out down and across Europe, a missionary journey that can still be traced today by the trail of Celtic crosses as far down as St. Gallen in Switzerland and Bobbio in northern Italy.

What those of us who are European Christians must acknowledge humbly is that when the Chinese and other peoples in the world had reached a high level of civilization, we were still barbarians and we might still be barbarians apart from the gospel. It took the gospel of Jesus Christ to tame our barbarian violence and unite our warring continent. For the intrepid missionaries who sailed forth from Ireland in flimsy coracles, or who journeyed up from Rome under the second St. Augustine, brought both the gospel and its fruits. Along with the gospel, they brought the Scriptures, then literacy, then education, and all the gifts of the gospel that later on were to lay the foundations from which Christendom was built.

Never forget the power of the Gospel. Jesus is in the business of changing human beings into people who love and follow Him. People who love and follow Him, when there are enough of them faithfully doing so, can’t help but affect the shape of the whole culture. In this way, God has transformed the cultures of greater and more wretched nations than ours. When He has chosen to. But whether or not He chooses to do so in our day, we’re called to follow Him. This, Guinness says, we must do faithfully and completely:

The deepest question concerns the Lord himself: Is it really conceivable that God will revive the Western church a third time, after it has gone cold twice? Another question concerns our response: What are we to do as we wait for God’s answer to that first titanic question? In other words, our deepest questions at this moment echo the very question God asked of the prophet Ezekiel as he surveyed a valley full of the sun-bleached bones of a defeated and slaughtered army, “Can these bones live?”

And like Ezekiel, our answer can only be, “O Lord, you know.”

The answer to the second question is the clearer. Acknowledging the essential part that only God can play should never lead to quietism or passivity. We may contribute little to our own renewal except the needs that make our renewal necessary, but to return to Christ in repentance is to shoulder our full responsibilities as disciples—including our commitment to engage to the fullest extent our callings in the world, and our dedication to re-evangelize the advanced modern world. For whether the times are bright or dark, whether we can see God in action in front of us or he seems absent and long delayed, and whether our cultural standing is once again admired or disdainfully cold-shouldered, we have our trust in him to be true to, our tasks to perform and our callings to which we must prove faithful.

As always, faithfulness is all, and the circumstances are beside the point. Our faithfulness must therefore show itself in a waiting that is vigilant, energetic and enterprising. Wherever there are men and women faithful to the Lord, let them trust God and live out their calling to Jesus and their callings in the world wherever those callings take them. That is the call to faithfulness and active transforming engagement that we pray will flower in a new Christian renaissance in our time.

Much of the recent debate about changing the world sounded like a clash between those who say, “Yes, we can,” and those who say, “No, you can’t.” That at least is an issue that can be resolved. The true answer is one we must both declare and live out: Yes, we can, because God can—and he has in the past, and he is doing so elsewhere in the world, and he is able to do so again even here in the advanced modern world, because God is God, and his is the last word in human affairs.

Let it be clearly understood that our hope in the possibility of renewal is squarely grounded, not in ourselves, not in history and the fact that it has happened before, but in the power of God demonstrated by the truth of the resurrection of Jesus…. The risen Jesus stands as the Lord of life, and the lesser challenge of Christian renewal looks puny in the light of the greater triumph of the resurrection of Jesus.

Guinness’s book can be summed up by this quote, and it’s one we should take to heart:

The time has come to trust God, move out, sharing and demonstrating the good news, following his call and living out our callings in every area of our lives, and then leave the outcome to him.

Make it the first priority of your life to conform your mind, your view of the world, your understanding of your profession, your treatment of others, the workings of your family, your willingness to sacrifice for others, and your love, to Jesus. As Guinness says, “We are called to define our faith, our lives and all we are and think and do by the standard of Jesus Christ our Lord, the precepts of the good news of the kingdom, and the authority of the Holy Scriptures.” You cannot skip over this in a misguided attempt to put all your efforts into doing something “big.” In the end, this is what makes the difference: one human being at a time being changed by Jesus, living in community with His other followers.

I just finished reading a book about Christopher Hitchens’s friendship with Larry Taunton, and it wasn’t Taunton’s superior argumentation that drew Hitchens to personally discuss Christianity with him; it was the fact that Taunton’s Christian life was lived with conviction, love, and sacrifice—sometimes shockingly so, to Hitchens—that moved him. The beauty of a life conformed to Jesus—His humility, His sacrificial love—demonstrates the plausibility of Christianity in a way that opens people up to hearing intellectual arguments. We dare not skip over conforming our lives to Jesus within a community of fellow Christians in order to focus on learning arguments.

I hope you feel as convicted by this as I do, and that you’ll take some time to consider ways your life could better reflect Christ’s love, humility, and self-sacrifice to the world.

Challenge: I Don’t Like the Idea of People Telling Me What to Do

This week’s challenge comes from “After 13 Years, I’m Leaving Christianity”:

Now at 26, I don’t go to church anymore. Because I don’t like the idea of people telling me what I should do, and how I should be doing them. I think many millennials feel the same way.

During my time in university, I’ve learned to be my own teacher when it comes to issues close to my heart. It’s about objectivity. This is why I did my own research on the subject of homosexuality. I stop letting one specific group of people dictate how I should view myself, and other gay people. I realise that what it means to be gay is really, my own business. How I want to live my life is my choice, not some other people’s.

I think this is probably a very common sentiment in our culture. There are really two aspects to this challenge: First, there’s the question of why this approach to life is unwise. Second, there’s the matter of how you would communicate that to someone who expressed this opinion. I’d love to hear your thoughts on both.

What is wisdom? How do we find it? How do we evaluate it? Where does it come from? Is there a standard? Is it a good standard? Can we trust it? All of these things and more play in the background of this challenge. Give us your thoughts in the comments below, and come back on Thursday to hear what Alan has to say about it.

[View Alan's video response. Explore past challenges here and here.]

On a Scale of 0-100, What's the Chance God Exists?

Greg shares why the chances that God exists are extremely high.

 

Our Society Should Not Stifle Religious Dissent

Andrew Walker warns of our society’s need for allowing religious dissent and the danger of denying religious liberty:

Protecting religious dissent is at the foundation of America’s history and constitutional legacy. As Madison and Adams argued, religion is prior to the claims of the state. It provides the grounding for democracy necessary for ordered liberty. And if religion is prior to the state, its importance looms larger than the state’s reach. This understanding wasn’t a secondary feature to America: it was, arguably, its distinguishing feature. Seen in this light, the Constitution didn’t bequeath religious liberty. Rather, religious liberty helped bequeath a penumbra of other rights that are enshrined in our Constitution.

Two of the reasons why undermining religious liberty undermines our society: 1) Constricting debate by disallowing dissenting voices “is the enemy of reason itself.” 2) Removing the religious foundation of our society’s concept of human dignity and rights endangers everything that was built on that foundation:

Denying true religious liberty communicates that participation in civil society is conditioned exclusively by accepting contested categories for participation in communal life. This reality paves over the conscience by declaring some issues untouchable and beyond debate. Untouchable orthodoxies that are given official government sanction will treat any dissenting voice as an enemy to be vanquished. Secular progressivism isn’t only the enemy of religious liberty and civil society; it is the enemy of reason itself.

Religious liberty contributes to the diversity of civil society. By its very nature, civil society will be contested territory. Contested debate helps give rise to democratic order, and democratic governance relies on spirited debate. Societies, of which governments are but a reflection, consist of various voices, movements, and ideologies vying for acceptance. In the interest of advancing justice, prophetic difference and prophetic dissent are necessary ingredients if progress is to occur. Allowing citizens the freedom and space to appeal to transcendent duties forces reason to determine what is true or false. From our deepest understanding of truth, we order our lives accordingly, and our lives bear witness to whether our values benefit society. Signaling that Christians aren’t welcome in the public square undermines the public square by robbing it of the religious-ethical system responsible for fostering norms and values that protect individual rights and a humane public morality.

Read the rest of Walker’s article.

Links Mentioned on the 7/22/16 Show

The following is a rundown of today's podcast, annotated with links that were either mentioned on the show or inspired by it:

Interview: Wayne Rossiter – Theistic Evolution and the Absent God (0:00)

• Shadow of Oz: Theistic Evolution and the Absent God by Wayne Rossiter
• Wayne Rossiter's blog
• Yes, the Evolutionary Process Does Depend on Randomness by Amy Hall (quoting Stephen Meyer)
• Mind Over Matter: The Necessity of Metaphysics in a Material World by Wayne Rossiter
• The Third Way – Scientists who argue against Neo-Darwinism. From their description: “The vast majority of people believe that there are only two alternative ways to explain the origins of biological diversity. One way is Creationism that depends upon intervention by a divine Creator. That is clearly unscientific because it brings an arbitrary supernatural force into the evolution process. The commonly accepted alternative is Neo-Darwinism, which is clearly naturalistic science but ignores much contemporary molecular evidence and invokes a set of unsupported assumptions about the accidental nature of hereditary variation. Neo-Darwinism ignores important rapid evolutionary processes such as symbiogenesis, horizontal DNA transfer, action of mobile DNA and epigenetic modifications. Moreover, some Neo-Darwinists have elevated Natural Selection into a unique creative force that solves all the difficult evolutionary problems without a real empirical basis. Many scientists today see the need for a deeper and more complete exploration of all aspects of the evolutionary process.”
• Drifting towards Darwin by Greg Koukl

– Announcements:

• Good Little Giants – Music mentioned on the show (see videos here)

Listen to today's show or download any archived show for free. (Find links from past shows here.)

To take part in the Twitter conversation during the live show (Tuesdays 4:00–6:00 p.m. PT), follow @STRtweets and use the hashtag #STRtalk.

The Question for Jehovah’s Witnesses: Who Is Jesus?

Tim Barnett wrote this month’s Solid Ground to help you prepare for conversations with Jehovah’s Witnesses. He says the best thing you can do is to focus on the most important question:

A host of issues can get you sidetracked with Jehovah’s Witnesses if you’re not careful—soul sleep, celebrating birthdays or Christmas, blood transfusions, Heaven, Hell, war, even the Holy Spirit. Don’t go there. None of these are the most important issue. The goal of your conversation is to answer only one question: Who is Jesus? How you answer this question changes everything.

Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that the archangel Michael was the very first being in the universe created by Jehovah-God. Michael was then used by God to create the rest of the universe. Later, at the appointed time, Michael was born to the virgin Mary as a human being, thus ceasing to be an angel. Then after His spiritual resurrection, Jesus resumes His identity as Michael. That is the Jehovah’s Witness answer to the question, “Who is Jesus?” Jesus, is the archangel Michael incarnate….

The salvation of anyone, including Jehovah’s Witnesses, depends on an accurate understanding of and belief in God the Son. Jesus said, “I told you that you would die in your sins, for unless you believe that I am He you will die in your sins” (Jn. 8:24). Here Jesus is claiming to be the “I AM” recorded in Isa. 43. The irony is that Isa. 43 is the chapter where Jehovah’s Witnesses derive their name. Isaiah writes, “You are my witnesses,” declares the Lord, “and my servant whom I have chosen, that you may know and believe me and understand that I am He” (Isa. 43:10).

Jehovah says His true witnesses will believe of Him that “I am He.” Yet, Jesus says true believers must believe of Him that “I am He.” In fact, this claim, coupled with Jn. 8:58 (“…before Abraham was, I am”), was the reason the Jews tried to stone Jesus (Jn. 8:59). His point was clear: Rejecting Jesus’ deity is rejecting salvation itself. That’s why our question, “Who is Jesus?” is the only question we should focus on.

Tim goes on to explain how a simple comparison between Psalm 102 and Hebrews 1 can help you demonstrate to your Jehovah’s Witness friend that Jesus is Jehovah. Read the rest of this month’s Solid Ground here.

Are You Ready for What’s Waiting for You on Your College Campus?

Are you (or is your child) ready to stand firm in your trust in Jesus Christ on your college campus? Do you know what’s waiting for you there? Can you answer the challenges you will hear from professors and fellow students?

Brett discusses the need to be prepared in this motion graphics video:

We have resources for students that go along with the four questions Brett says students need to settle in their own minds before they go away to college:

• Does truth exist, and can we know it?
• Does God exist?
• Does God act in the world?
• Does God communicate with us in Scripture?

These resources can be found at STRNextGen.com. Remember that URL, and pass it along!

We also hope you’ll join us for one of our upcoming reTHINK Student Apologetics Conferences (in California, Texas, and Alabama) for more training.