"Atheism turns out to be too simple. If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning."
C.S. Lewis
"The fingers of your thoughts are molding your face ceaselessly."
Charles Reznikoff
"Art, like morality, consists in drawing the line somewhere."
G.K. Chesterton
"Humility enforces where neither virtue nor strength can prevail, nor reason."
Francis Quarles
"Education without values, as useful as it is, seems rather to make man a more clever devil."
C.S. Lewis
Resistance Thinking Faith
It is through the Jesus lense the Resistance Thinking seeks to explore truth about the world in which we live. In this faith section you will find articles, news and reivews that will help you explore the complexities of the Christian faith.
We will cover a broad range of topics, including: theology, church, leadership, devotions, classic Christian literature, prayer, everyday faith, apologetics, church history, Christian living, Old Testamnet, New Testament, creation, fresh expressions, epistomology...the list could go on and on!
If there is any topic you would like the Resistance Thinking team to go to work on please shoot us an email. If you have any work that could help us all to be more effective 'Resistance Thinkers' please send it in for our team to review.
"I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen: not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else." CS Lewis
One of the silliest arguments I have heard in the ongoing dialogue between Christian and atheist is the question of which worldview has caused the most casualties. The discussion generally goes like this:
Atheist: "Religion is the root of all evil."
Christian: "What about Mao or Stalin? They caused great atrocities and they were humanists."
Atheist: "Their actions were not spawned from their worldview..."
That is usually as far as the dialogue gets. This discussion is a moot point, regardless. Even if one accepted where the goalposts were (i.e. who is a humanist, who is a Christian and what either was acting upon), added up the body count (which is a disappointing simplification of these atrocities) and reached a final conclusion this wouldn't determine whether a God did or did not exist. It wouldn't even establish which worldview is actually "less evil". No matter what worldview we prescribe to we all do good and bad things.
Perhaps this is the actual point. Mao and Stalin were responsible for their own actions, as were all other tyrants in history. But the catch is that we too are responsible for our actions. We are in a war of the worldviews but it is not a worldview that causes the casualties, it is our sin. And sin claims the most casualties of anyone. It is also having the greatest say in government policy decisions in nearly every country around the world.
Standing against atheism, Islam or Buddhism is about standing against sin. And we should desire to do so. In our own lives, in our country and in the lives of others around us. This will make us perhaps the most hated people in our community. Very few people like to be told that their actions are not a good way of behaving. Yet, we know there is no freedom in the entanglements of sin. There is nothing to be gained from our sinful lives. As Paul tells us:
Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.
1 Corinthians 6:9-11
It will be said that such behaviours should concern no-one but those participating in them. However, these are the deeds of the damned and should concern us greatly. Sometimes you've got to try and rescue someone even when they don't won't to be rescued. After all that's what Jesus did for us.
It may be claimed that "there is nothing about atheism that necessarily leads to mass murder or genocide" but substitute sin for atheism and this sentence makes sense. Atheists are condemning of the followers of religion. When I look at atheism I see what I expect to see. Broken, sinful people. Same as Christianity. However, the ideology behind atheism derives itself from idolatry. It is a flesh-enslaving worldview that chortles as it condemns its subject to an eternal abyss.
For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. For to set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God's law; indeed, it cannot. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.
Richard Dawkins, the world's foremost atheist, has stated today that he will assemble a legal team to charge the Pope with crimes against humanity, news.com.au reports.
"Atheist campaigner Richard Dawkins has vowed to arrest the Pope for crimes against humanity.
Professor Dawkins has hired a team of lawyers to see if Pope Benedict XVI can be charged over his handling of the sexual abuse scandal engulfing the Roman Catholic Church, according to The Sunday Times.
Professor Dawkins, who wrote The God Delusion, claims that the Pope has shielded paedophile priests from the authorities.
However, he and fellow writer Christopher Hitchens believe they can make a case for arresting the Pope during the Pope's planned visit to Britain in September.
Among the human rights lawyers they have hired is Australian-born barrister Geoffrey Robertson.
They do not believe the Pope will be able to claim diplomatic immunity because he is not recognised as a head of state by the United Nations...."
How do you stand on this issue as a Christian? Is Dawkins right to try to charge the Pope or has he let his hatred of religion blind him? Have your say on our forum.
Culture Watch, Reviewed by Bill Muehlenberg, July 2008 Book by D.A Carson, Eerdmans, 2008.
In 1951 H. Richard Niebuhr penned his now classic volume, Christ and Culture. In it he sought to explore the “enduring problem” of the “many-sided debate about Christianity and civilization”. In an attempt to come to terms with this complex and important issue, he presented five answers to, or models of, this relationship.
The result was his famous fivefold reply: Christ against Culture; Christ of Culture; Christ above Culture; Christ and Culture in Paradox; and Christ the Transformer of Culture. Each of these models he describes in detail, and he notes both strengths and weaknesses to the five options. He suggests that believers will have to make up their own minds as to which is the preferred option.
In Carson’s new volume he seeks to carry on from where Niebuhr left off. He begins by assessing his work and the five models. He rightly notes that for Niebuhr the real issue is not so much how Christianity relates to culture, but “two sources of authority as they compete within society, namely Christ … and every other source of authority divested of Christ”. And Niebuhr is especially thinking of secular or civil authority here, Carson reminds us.
Carson also notes some weaknesses in Niebuhr’s important volume. He did a good job of aligning various historical figures with the five models, but sometimes the fit is far from precise. For example, while Augustine or Calvin may well fit in the transformationist model, they do so only partially. And Tertullian cannot consistently be seen as fitting in the opposition (“against”) model. And so on.
Carson then discusses the biblical plotline, and what are some nonnegotiable elements of the biblical worldview. He rightly notes that we do very much have a responsibility to our surrounding culture. Believers have a relationship with God “in the context of embodied existence”. Indeed, as image bearers of God, we have “responsibilities toward the rest of the created order – responsibilities of governance and care”. He discusses the fall and sin, and the call of Israel. But he notes that with the arrival of Christ, something new entered human affairs: “up to that point in history, religion and state were everywhere intertwined”. This was just as true of Israel as with the surrounding pagan nations. But when Jesus announced that we should “give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s” he initiated a whole new paradigm. Prior to Jesus there were no genuinely secular states. All nations were involved with gods. Jesus was the first to highlight that there are two separate and distinct realms here. They of course overlap, but are not identical.
Thus there has always being – even if imperfectly – church-state divisions within Christendom. Islam of course has never known this dichotomy, nor does it want to. And Carson reminds us that in the words of Jesus we have real differentiation between Caesar and God. However, Jesus intended that God should have the pre-eminence.
Of course how all that fleshes itself out in the daily life of both individuals and nations is the big question – the sort of question that Niebuhr sought to address. And that is what Carson seeks to further explore in this book.
Other theological givens must inform our thinking on this issue. For example, the now commonly accepted understanding of believers “living between the times” comes into play here. We live between the inauguration of Christ’s kingdom, and its consummation. Thus we live in both the old age and the new age, and tensions abound.
In the light of this biblical truth, believers should neither expect utopia on earth, nor settle for corrupt and unjust rule. We can fight for justice, although realising that perfection can never be achieved in a fallen world. Our ideals must be tempered by realism.
Carson examines other issues, such as the postmodern understanding of culture. In contrast to the cultural relativism that characterises postmodern thought, Carson argues that biblical motifs regarding culture must be adhered to. These include the awareness that there is a mixture of good and evil in every culture, and that all cultures ultimately stand under the judgment of God.
Of course the biblical belief in, and understanding of, absolute and universal moral truth makes it possible for us to evaluate and assess every culture. We can determine, albeit imperfectly, how close to, or how far away from, a culture is in relation to God’s moral standards. Carson also devotes substantial chapters to the important concepts of freedom, democracy, secularism, church and state relationships, and power. For example, he notes how a vigorous and militant secularism becomes a competing religion and worldview. It has its own notion of the ultimate good, and a well-developed belief system.
And as secularism seeks to squeeze religion out of the public square altogether, it becomes a competing or false religion, the threat of which Christians must take most seriously. But the value of a democracy – based as it is on the division launched by Jesus – is that both camps can engage in the battle of ideas, and let the democratic process decide which side prevails.
Democracy is a great good, argues Carson, but it is not the Kingdom of God, and is limited in many ways. A healthy democracy depends upon a shared set of values and beliefs. But when this unity is frayed, then democracies tend to unravel. And as democracies disintegrate, stronger and more intrusive state powers are needed to hold things together.
With the West quickly abandoning its Judeo-Christian roots, there seems to be little on the horizon to takes its place in terms of holding a nation together with a common core of beliefs and values. As people in a democracy increasingly disagree on what is the good or what it means to be free, the state steps in more and more, and people become less free.
The only real check to unrestrained statism and state power is the biblical notion that God alone is the ultimate authority, and no man-made authority should overstep it bounds. “The doctrine of God reminds us that we are not ultimate: God is” says Carson. And the “doctrine of creation tells us that we are not our own: we are responsible to the One who made us”.
Carson summarises some of the biblical data this way: “Owing to the teaching of the Master himself, Christians in the first century understood that the Christian church was not isomorphic with any nation but was a transnational community, and that the sovereign God whom they confessed had ordered the government of the state for good purpose.”
Carson reminds us that while we are to submit to the ruling authorities as good citizens and good Christians, there may be times to resist the state when the state abuses its God-given powers and forces believers to disobey God.
In the end, Christianity cannot be reduced to merely privatised religion, and we have obligations to both the state and the surrounding culture. But a Christian’s ultimate loyalties are with God, and he must be preeminent in everything.
So there's a new Christian movie on the block called Courageous. Usually I don't promote movies directly on this website but this movie looks like it could be a great change from the regular mainstream Hollywood movie.
Besides I like people who are unapologetically Christian. Particularly when they are trying to shake up what it means to be a father:
Adobe Flash Player not installed or older than 9.0.115!
Adobe Flash Player not installed or older than 9.0.115!
Thousands of copies of 'Origin' with creation intro distributed at 100 universities WorldNetDaily, November 18, 2009
"Actor Kirk Cameron and best-selling author Ray Comfort are joining more than 1,200 Christians today in a nationwide event marking the 150th anniversary of the publication of Charles Darwin's "Origin of the Species" by distributing 170,000 copies of a special edition of the book on the campuses of 100 of America's top universities.
The distribution, which is taking place one day earlier than announced, has been derided by many proponents of Darwin's theory, including prominent atheist Richard Dawkins, who told students to rip out Comfort's introduction, which critiques Darwin's theory and argues for a universe created by an intelligent designer.
Comfort – host of "The Way of the Master" television show with Cameron and head of Bellflower, Calif.-based Living Waters ministry – told WND he plans to be at a Southern California university today, where he hopes to give an open-air talk along with the distribution.
He says he thinks it's strange that Dawkins, an Oxford University biology professor, would say that the book's introduction didn't worry him and then tell university students to rip it out.
"If, I am, as he says, an 'ignorant fool,' then what I have written will be nothing but ignorance and foolishness. So why is he so concerned? I think the man protesteth too much," Comfort said.
Comfort, author of a new book on atheism and evolution, "Nothing Created Everything," told WND a team also is at Oxford today to give away 1,000 copies of "Origin." Dawkins will get a copy as well, he said.
"I sent him a gift basket with an 'Origin of Species' gift book and a banana," said Comfort, alluding to a TV spot by Comfort derided by atheists that uses the fruit to argue for intelligent design.
Comfort said he included an unsigned card, so Dawkins will have to come up with a "theory" about who sent it..."
The Shack Boundless Magazine, Tim Challies, July 2008
The Shack is the unlikeliest of success stories. The first and only book written by a salesman from Oregon, it was never supposed to be published. William P. Young wrote the tale for the benefit of his children and after its completion in 2005, it was copied and bound at Kinko's in time for him to give it to his children for Christmas.
Shortly after he completed the book, Young showed the manuscript to Wayne Jacobsen, a former pastor who had begun a small publishing company. After the manuscript was rejected by other publishers, Jacobsen and his co-publisher Brad Cummings decided to publish it themselves under the banner of Windblown Media.
The three men, with only a $300 marketing budget at their disposal, began a word-of-mouth campaign to let people know about the book. The rest, as they say, is history.
Since its first publication The Shack has gone through printing after printing. There are now over a million copies of the book in print and its popularity continues to rise. The book has climbed as high as #8 on the USA Today bestseller list and at least as high among all books at Amazon.com where it is also approaching 500 reader reviews. Windblown Media is negotiating with film studios about the possibility of a movie version of The Shack. The publisher has also recently signed a distribution agreement with Hachette Books, which has now begun to handle sales, marketing, distribution, licensing, and manufacturing. The book is set to go even further and climb even higher in the months and years to come.
The Shack has been received among Christians with decidedly mixed reviews. While many have acclaimed it as a groundbreaking story that brings to life heart-stirring theology, others insist that some of what it teaches is patently unbiblical.
Where Eugene Peterson, Professor Emeritus of Spiritual Theology at Regent College in Vancouver says it "has the potential to do for our generation what John Bunyan's The Pilgrim Progress did for his," Dr. Albert Mohler, President of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary says, "This book includes undiluted heresy." While singer and songwriter Michael W. Smith says "The Shack will leave you craving for the presence of God," Mark Driscoll, Pastor of Mars Hill Church in Seattle says, "Regarding the Trinity, it's actually heretical."
Over the next few minutes, I hope to guide you through The Shack. We will look at the book with a charitable but critical eye, attempting to understand what it teaches and how it can be that opinions about the book vary so widely. We do this not simply to be critical, but as an exercise in discernment and critical thinking. We will simply look at what the author teaches and compare that to the Bible.
