Thursday, January 14, 2010
The Hope Venture
The Hope Venture is a newly founded compassion-based venture that I'm really excited about! It is a local (to Lincoln, NE) organization whose goal is to "bring help and hope to people around the world. Through trusted partnerships, The Hope Venture engages primarily in compassion-based projects emphasizing better education, health, clothing and shelter for children, orphans and the needy poor, for the honor of Christ." (emphasis mine). Their mission is to "foster a global community that is meeting the needs of people worldwide by compassionately connecting resources with needs." (Join The Hope Venture page on facebook for updates on projects)
One of the things that makes the Hope Venture exciting is that they really put themselves into the hands of people like you and me, asking that we use whatever forums we have to partner with them in spreading the word about their organization and giving more & more people the opportunity to make a difference.
The Hope Venture just finished their first project which was to fund 1000 backpacks filled with school supplies for an entire year to distribute in India. It was a very successful first project!!
The second project is to fund a new addition to the Home of Hope-Bangalore which takes children in from the streets. They are currently running over capacity and more room is greatly needed if the Home of Hope is to continue rescuing orphans. The Hope Venture wants to raise $11,000 to fund this project.
James 2: 15-16 says, "Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to him, 'Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed,' but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it?"
What will you do to put your faith into practice? What good fruits will give evidence to God's Spirit in your life?
I hope you will prayerfully consider giving to help the Hope Venture fund this project. Any amount, no matter how small, helps. (Just click on the "chip in" button at the top of this post to make a secure donation. You will be able to print a receipt at the end of the transaction.) It all adds up, so also consider sharing this post with friends and family. We are children of God called to show Jesus' love to a hurting world - and what a privilege that is!
Monday, January 11, 2010
Teaching Teens to Argue
O.K. Stay with me. I know most teens don't need any lessons in arguing but that's not quite what I have in mind. I'm interested in teaching teens to direct their natural argumentative skills :) in the right direction, teach them to argue well, and in the right situations. Of course, adults should learn these things as well, but when statistics show that more than 50% of teens eventually leave the faith after graduating high school and moving out on their own, it seems clear that the earlier teens are able to defend their faith and recognize bad arguments against it, the better off they'll be. This series of posts will highlight different fallacies people make in arguing so that you will recognize them when someone uses them, as well as different tactics to use when defending the Christian faith.
Assertions & Supporting Arguments
In a book titled Relativism: Feet Firmly Planted in Mid-Air, (Koukl & Beckwith) the authors use the following example to show that it is important to challenge someone making untrue claims, and how to do so in the right way. In this example, a professor is promoting ethical subjectivism based on cultural relativism. (The idea that there are no moral absolute based on the fact that cultures seem to differ in their morals & values.)
A student who recognizes that ethical subjectivism does not follow from cultural relativsm might ask, "How does it follow that if people have different points of view, then nobody's right?"
The professor might respond, "If you believe in moral absolutes, what are they?"
Instead of defending her view, the professor has challenged the student to defend his view. (Nevermind that he has not claimed a view, he has simply asked a question regarding her view.)
A wise student will recognize that this may not be the time to present his arguments, but he can respectfully ask the professor to present hers. "Professor, it doesn't really matter what I believe. I'm not making the claim. You are. I may even believe as you do, for all you know. I'm just asking you to prove your point. I asked a fair question and you changed the subject, throwing it back on me. I'm not making any claim about morality. But you're teaching that morality is relative because you think cultures have different values. I'm simply asking if that works. So please tell me how your conclusion follows."
This example shows that Christians are not the only ones who need to defend their claims and it is okay to ask someone else to defend claims they have made. Stating something as if it were true does not make it true. Someone who does so is making an "assertion" which is making a claim as if no proof or evidence is necessary. If you catch someone doing this, gently & respectfully call them on it and ask them to give their arguments for making and believing their claim.
So two things to remember: First, recognize when someone is making an assertion - claiming something without offering any support for it. When they do so, ask them to support it with sound arguments &/or evidence. Second, anyone - not just Christians - making a claim needs to be able to support it. When you ask someone to support their claims, don't let them turn it around as if you're the one who's made a claim.
As always, remember to be gracious, kind, & respectful - your goal is not to win an argument but to show someone making false claims the flaws & inconsistencies in those claims. A great conversation might follow if you're non-threatening & non-defensive. And maybe God has been preparing someone for that very converstaion!
Assertions & Supporting Arguments
In a book titled Relativism: Feet Firmly Planted in Mid-Air, (Koukl & Beckwith) the authors use the following example to show that it is important to challenge someone making untrue claims, and how to do so in the right way. In this example, a professor is promoting ethical subjectivism based on cultural relativism. (The idea that there are no moral absolute based on the fact that cultures seem to differ in their morals & values.)
A student who recognizes that ethical subjectivism does not follow from cultural relativsm might ask, "How does it follow that if people have different points of view, then nobody's right?"
The professor might respond, "If you believe in moral absolutes, what are they?"
Instead of defending her view, the professor has challenged the student to defend his view. (Nevermind that he has not claimed a view, he has simply asked a question regarding her view.)
A wise student will recognize that this may not be the time to present his arguments, but he can respectfully ask the professor to present hers. "Professor, it doesn't really matter what I believe. I'm not making the claim. You are. I may even believe as you do, for all you know. I'm just asking you to prove your point. I asked a fair question and you changed the subject, throwing it back on me. I'm not making any claim about morality. But you're teaching that morality is relative because you think cultures have different values. I'm simply asking if that works. So please tell me how your conclusion follows."
This example shows that Christians are not the only ones who need to defend their claims and it is okay to ask someone else to defend claims they have made. Stating something as if it were true does not make it true. Someone who does so is making an "assertion" which is making a claim as if no proof or evidence is necessary. If you catch someone doing this, gently & respectfully call them on it and ask them to give their arguments for making and believing their claim.
So two things to remember: First, recognize when someone is making an assertion - claiming something without offering any support for it. When they do so, ask them to support it with sound arguments &/or evidence. Second, anyone - not just Christians - making a claim needs to be able to support it. When you ask someone to support their claims, don't let them turn it around as if you're the one who's made a claim.
As always, remember to be gracious, kind, & respectful - your goal is not to win an argument but to show someone making false claims the flaws & inconsistencies in those claims. A great conversation might follow if you're non-threatening & non-defensive. And maybe God has been preparing someone for that very converstaion!
Friday, January 1, 2010
2010 ~ Do God's Morals Still Apply?
2010. Can you believe it? Wow...I remember thinking 1990 was exciting!!
As we begin yet another new year, I thought an appropriate apologetic topic might be the relevance of the Bible as a guide for living almost two thousand years after its last author wrote his last words.
Let's first take a look at what God considers immoral. In Mark, Jesus says this, "For from within, out of people's hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immoralities, thefts, murders, adulteries, greed, evil actions, deceit, lewdness, stinginess, blasphemy, pride, and foolishness. All these evil things come from withing and defile a person." (Mark 7:21-23) Paul gives a similar list in Galatians. "Now the works of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, moral impurity, promiscuity, idolatry, sorcery, hatreds, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, selfish ambitions, dissensions, factions, envy, drunkenness, carousing, and anything similar..." (Gal. 5:19-21a)
This is a good guide if we want to know how to live holy lives as God's image bearers and as His temples. This guide is said by some, however, to be outdated.
When skeptics throw the "the Bible is outdated" argument into the ring, they most typically have an agenda: They don't want someone else telling them how they should live. One blogger disgusted with the "outdated" laws of the Bible (and the uneducated people who still follow its teachings) writes that it should have "no more right to govern one's life than a copy of Cosmopolitan." Is that true? Are we culturally so far removed from the Bible that its laws and commands no longer have any relevance to us?
This is a very common claim.
So how do you respond to someone who says biblical commands are outdated and don't apply to our culture? You have to realize that most are not primarily concerned with living right according to God's Word. They aren't trying to figure out how to get it right given the cultural differences. They are interested in living according to their own pleasures and they don't want to be told that what they are doing is wrong. Ask them this: What basis do you have for your claim that some of God's laws no longer apply to us because they were only cultural? Most will never have given this any thought.
The one answer I have been given (over and over again)-in regards to claiming that sex before marriage is no longer wrong in our day-is that people in the OT days married much younger and God never expected people to abstain from sex into their late teens and beyond if they weren't married. So lets look at this answer. Problem #1: There is no basis whatsoever for this assumption about what God expected. Problem #2: Even if God never intended for people to wait so long before marriage, it doesn't follow that his law is thus invalid for people who do. (Pre-marital sex & homosexuality seem to be the biggest concerns when one is trying to get out from underneath God's laws by claiming they are no longer relavant today.)
Another question you might want to ask is this: Where do we draw the line when deciding biblical commands no longer apply to us? If some commands can go, why not all? Shall we throw out theft and murder as well?
Some will say that laws against murder, theft, and the like do still apply to our culture. But why? What is the difference that makes some laws still applicable & others outdated? Without a grounding in the Supreme Law Giver - the perfectly moral God - why should I submit myself to any laws? What makes "culture" able to tell me what is right and wrong. It's all just being made up as we go along. What do I care if it's good for the masses - why shouldn't I do what's good for me? Why should I choose to live by the laws of our culture any more than I choose to live by the Bible or the latest Cosmopolitan?
Others will say that things like murder and theft are crimes against other people. That's what makes them wrong. They'll argue that if the act isn't hurting anyone, on the other hand, it shouldn't be prohibited, and where the Bible does so, it is outdated. But is that the criteria for what makes something wrong or right - whether or not it can be percieved as hurting someone? Problem #1: Even if it was, we do not have omniscients view points. We cannot see how these things will affect anyone else in the future and so cannot guarantee that someone won't be hurt. Problem #2: If the criteria is whether or not it hurts someone else, can you tell me how these things were hurting people in ancient times that made God feel the need to prohibit these acts for just that time period? How were people being hurt then and why aren't they being hurt in the same way now? Problem #3: I don't think a case can be made that these things don't hurt people today. Just take a look around - STD's, unwanted pregnancies, tragic deaths at the hands of drunk drivers, betrayed spouses and children, sexually abused children, crippling financial debt, addiction,...the list goes on.
Frankly, there is no basis for claiming that any of God's commands are outdated. What was immoral, unholy, and unrighteous in biblical times is still immoral, unholy, and unrighteous today. The only thing that has changed is, well...nothing.
As we begin yet another new year, I thought an appropriate apologetic topic might be the relevance of the Bible as a guide for living almost two thousand years after its last author wrote his last words.
Let's first take a look at what God considers immoral. In Mark, Jesus says this, "For from within, out of people's hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immoralities, thefts, murders, adulteries, greed, evil actions, deceit, lewdness, stinginess, blasphemy, pride, and foolishness. All these evil things come from withing and defile a person." (Mark 7:21-23) Paul gives a similar list in Galatians. "Now the works of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, moral impurity, promiscuity, idolatry, sorcery, hatreds, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, selfish ambitions, dissensions, factions, envy, drunkenness, carousing, and anything similar..." (Gal. 5:19-21a)
This is a good guide if we want to know how to live holy lives as God's image bearers and as His temples. This guide is said by some, however, to be outdated.
When skeptics throw the "the Bible is outdated" argument into the ring, they most typically have an agenda: They don't want someone else telling them how they should live. One blogger disgusted with the "outdated" laws of the Bible (and the uneducated people who still follow its teachings) writes that it should have "no more right to govern one's life than a copy of Cosmopolitan." Is that true? Are we culturally so far removed from the Bible that its laws and commands no longer have any relevance to us?
This is a very common claim.
So how do you respond to someone who says biblical commands are outdated and don't apply to our culture? You have to realize that most are not primarily concerned with living right according to God's Word. They aren't trying to figure out how to get it right given the cultural differences. They are interested in living according to their own pleasures and they don't want to be told that what they are doing is wrong. Ask them this: What basis do you have for your claim that some of God's laws no longer apply to us because they were only cultural? Most will never have given this any thought.
The one answer I have been given (over and over again)-in regards to claiming that sex before marriage is no longer wrong in our day-is that people in the OT days married much younger and God never expected people to abstain from sex into their late teens and beyond if they weren't married. So lets look at this answer. Problem #1: There is no basis whatsoever for this assumption about what God expected. Problem #2: Even if God never intended for people to wait so long before marriage, it doesn't follow that his law is thus invalid for people who do. (Pre-marital sex & homosexuality seem to be the biggest concerns when one is trying to get out from underneath God's laws by claiming they are no longer relavant today.)
Another question you might want to ask is this: Where do we draw the line when deciding biblical commands no longer apply to us? If some commands can go, why not all? Shall we throw out theft and murder as well?
Some will say that laws against murder, theft, and the like do still apply to our culture. But why? What is the difference that makes some laws still applicable & others outdated? Without a grounding in the Supreme Law Giver - the perfectly moral God - why should I submit myself to any laws? What makes "culture" able to tell me what is right and wrong. It's all just being made up as we go along. What do I care if it's good for the masses - why shouldn't I do what's good for me? Why should I choose to live by the laws of our culture any more than I choose to live by the Bible or the latest Cosmopolitan?
Others will say that things like murder and theft are crimes against other people. That's what makes them wrong. They'll argue that if the act isn't hurting anyone, on the other hand, it shouldn't be prohibited, and where the Bible does so, it is outdated. But is that the criteria for what makes something wrong or right - whether or not it can be percieved as hurting someone? Problem #1: Even if it was, we do not have omniscients view points. We cannot see how these things will affect anyone else in the future and so cannot guarantee that someone won't be hurt. Problem #2: If the criteria is whether or not it hurts someone else, can you tell me how these things were hurting people in ancient times that made God feel the need to prohibit these acts for just that time period? How were people being hurt then and why aren't they being hurt in the same way now? Problem #3: I don't think a case can be made that these things don't hurt people today. Just take a look around - STD's, unwanted pregnancies, tragic deaths at the hands of drunk drivers, betrayed spouses and children, sexually abused children, crippling financial debt, addiction,...the list goes on.
Frankly, there is no basis for claiming that any of God's commands are outdated. What was immoral, unholy, and unrighteous in biblical times is still immoral, unholy, and unrighteous today. The only thing that has changed is, well...nothing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
