• Home
  • About This Blog
  • Contact Me
  • Subscribe
  • Comment Policy

Attempts at Honesty

Reflections on the interplay of the Bible and Culture

  • Westminster Shorter Catechism Series
  • Sermon on the Mount Series
Home Archives for Richard Dawkins

Homeland Security for the Church – The Need to Defend the Faith

Posted on January 10, 2012 Written by Mark McIntyre 3 Comments

For my generation and our progeny, the church cannot start from the Defend the faithposition that people want religion and are shopping around to determine what religion is right or best. We cannot take for granted that people in the community feel a need for God. The popularity of the writings of Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins is evidence enough of hostility in our culture toward God and religion.

The fact that acts of aggression are done in the name of religion does not increase receptiveness to Christianity. The church (using the term very loosely) does not have a perfect record in this regard. The Inquisition and the Crusades are often used as evidence of the danger of religion. Added to this are recent horrors perpetrated by followers of Islam. Homicidal bombers and terrorist pilots have murdered thousands of innocent people in the name of Allah.

In the face of all this, the church is still called to fulfill her mission. Jesus gave the church her marching orders as recorded in Matthew 28:18–20. We are called by Jesus to make disciples. Disciple making is the main verb and main thought of this commission. We make disciples by going, teaching and baptizing.

Because boomers are suspicious of religion, it is not enough for the church to know what we believe, it is now more important to know why we believe it. We not only need to know the truth, we need to understand why it is the truth and why Christianity offers the best explanation of man and his world.

We, as the church, must stand up to the false dichotomy between belief and reason that permeates western culture. This dichotomy is illustrated by a bumper sticker that a coworker proudly displayed saying, “If you don’t pray in my school, I won’t think in your church.” The implication is that there can be no overlap between thinking and believing.

Many churches do a fantastic job of teaching the Bible and how to live according to Biblical principles. Yet too often, believers are not trained in how to explain their belief to their neighbors. We often do a poor job of training our young people about how Christianity stands out in the marketplace of ideas and competing world views. Because we do not explain to our young people that there is a rational basis for belief in Jesus Christ, because we do not train them about the implications of belief or non-belief, because we do not prepare them to encounter hostility and pseudo-intellectualism, many of our young people fall away and reject Jesus Christ.

The Apostle Peter challenges us to

“sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence” (1 Peter 3:15 NASB)

We take national security very seriously. In response to the September 11 attacks, America developed an organization called the Department of Homeland Security. In the same way, the church should have a renewed interest in homeland security for the church. We are under attack, we have an enemy that wants to destroy us and we need to know how to respond.

This is a call to church leaders to train themselves to defend the faith and contend for the claims of Jesus Christ. We need to offer answers to those who are searching for them. The Sunday sermon, as important as it is, is not enough to sustain belief. Other opportunities for discussion and training need to be provided.

We also need to provide a forum for questioners to find answers. There are answers to the questions that they are asking, but too often the church shames them into silence.

If we do not raise up a generation of defenders of the faith, those of us in church leadership will one day have to give an answer to our Lord as to why we did not.

Question: What is your church doing to provide answers to hard questions and train people to defend their faith?

Filed Under: Bible Reflection, Christianity and Culture, Church Leadership Tagged With: Bible, Christ, Christianity, Jesus, Jesus Christ, Religion, Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris

Living Water or Broken Cisterns – A Choice for Western Society

Posted on May 4, 2011 Written by Mark McIntyre 2 Comments

Broken CisternsNature abhors a vacuum is a proverb that came to me as I contemplated Jeremiah 2:12–13 recently:

12 Be appalled, O heavens, at this; be shocked, be utterly desolate, declares the Lord, 13 for my people have committed two evils: they have forsaken me, the fountain of living waters, and hewed out cisterns for themselves, broken cisterns that can hold no water. (ESV)

This prophetic statement was made to the Nation of Israel who had rejected God’s principles for living and had replaced worship of the Living God with the pagan rituals of the surrounding nations.

Anyone who has spent time in an arid climate understands the importance of water. A source of water is the first necessity in choosing a place to live. A spring, creek or river which flows year round would be the first choice. Living (moving) water is fresh and clean, and if it comes from a spring the water is cool.

A cistern, on the other hand, collects the water when it rains and the water becomes stagnant. As the water sits, microbes and insects grow in it and dust collects. It is water, and it will keep you alive, but is not nearly as pleasant as flowing water.

But notice that God makes reference to broken cisterns that can’t even hold water. It is not that the Israelites had chosen a viable alternative source for what they need. They had rejected God and replaced him with empty rituals that provided no benefit.

In 21st Century America, there is a renewed and more vigorous attack on the Judeo/Christian principles upon which this country was founded. The “new” atheists would like to remove thought and speech about God from public discourse. Religion is viewed by them as an old fashioned idea that has outlived its usefulness.

The popularity of books by Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins is evidence of how many in our society have adopted this premise. Yet, have the readers of these books thought through the implications of this choice?

Remember, nature abhors a vacuum. If we reject God and exclude him from our society, something will replace him, but what? Where will we find our guiding principles? Who or what will prevent totalitarianism? What will the “new atheists” give people as a means of determining value?

It is my opinion that if the Western culture continues the rejection of the Judeo/Christian God and his principles, society will succumb to one of two types of totalitarianism.

The first option is an atheistic totalitarianism such as fascism or communism. It is no mystery as to why atheism is the religion of the communist states. The communists build upon the concept of Darwinism; the strong dominate the weak. The “state” becomes the guide by which all decision should be made. Choice and freedom are greatly reduced or eliminated and conformity to the state is enforced.

The second option is a religious totalitarianism such as that of Islam and Sharia law. This is probably the more dangerous and likely option because of the devotion that Islam engenders. Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world because of its militaristic foundation and its goal of universal conquest.

How will atheism stand up to Islam? I have never been aware of any atheist that was passionate enough about his atheism to strap a bomb on his body and die a martyr. This is commonplace (if misguided) in Islam.

The third and best option is for us to return to the God upon whom our country was founded. It seems to me that the only places where freedom of expression and freedom of belief have been in operation have been places where Christianity once held a dominant position. That freedom is the living water that we crave. Why reject that freedom when bondage is the alternative?

Do we really want to reject the one system that engendered freedom to pursue systems that take it away? I hope not.

What do you think?

Filed Under: Apologetics Tagged With: atheism, Islam, Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, water

Follow Attempts at Honesty

Honesty in your Inbox

Post Series

  • Westminster Shorter Catechism Series
  • Sermon on the Mount Series
August 2025
SMTWTFS
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31 
« Jul    

Categories

Archives

Blogger Grid
Follow me on Blogarama

Copyright © 2025 · Focus Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in