Thinking-Christianly

How do you describe the life of someone like Jerry Falwell?

Most of us never met him personally, so our contact is limited to the edited soundbites or interviews on television, plus contact with those who may have met him, read from his limited writings, or been involved with his church or university.

I must admit that most of my impressions come from the media, which makes them suspect right away. But for what it’s worth, here are some things that catch my attention.

1. Jerry Falwell had boldness. He was one of those personalities who spoke his mind and didn’t bother to linger long and hard on the ramifications of his words.
2. Jerry Falwell had confidence. I don’t think he would have been the easiest person to work for. He strikes me as a person who would give you a choice between his way and the highway.
3. Jerry Falwell believed in the truth of scripture. While he and I would probably have found some ponints of disagreement, his belief that God’s word was the basis for his teaching and ministry was unshakable.
4. Jerry Falwell sought to influence the next generation. His focus in recent years seemed to be his university, and the equipping of men and women with a biblical worldview to bring to their generation.
5. Jerry Falwell believed in bringing values to culture. He did not assume that any kind of private religion was appropriate, but that the values of scripture belong in the marketplace as well as in the personal study. Most of his controversial moments came when he dared to challenge the culture to consider biblical values.

What impressions do you have of him? I’d be intrigued to learn more from someone who met him personally as well.

If you want to see an interesting interchange between Christiopher Hitchens, who is one of the new breed of atheist writers, and someone on the other side, check out Christianity Today’s website. It offers an email exchange between Mr. Hitchens and Douglas Wilson.

It’s fashionable today to assume that God is no longer in the business of judging cultures and nations. We don’t see AP Newswire stories about prophets and plagues of locusts or fire and brimstone falling from the sky. Some therefore conclude that God (a) doesn’t care; (b) is powerless to do anything; or (c) is waiting for some big even when the damage will be immense.

This kind of thinking assumes that God’s judgment comes only in several predictable flavors, and is still in the future. A closer look at scripture might suggest otherwise. Rather than limiting judgment to cataclysmic events foretold by prophets, the Bible suggests that judgment can fall in more subtle forms as well.

For example, the book of Judges describes eight cycles in which the nation of Israel drifted from God, fell into decay and oppression, and then begged for deliverance. The soundbite description of that period was, “Every man did that which was right in his own eyes.”

In this particular period, the judgment of God came in the form of the natural consequences of sin. There was more sin, more decay, more disorder, and greater vulnerability to outside forces. Israel was neither respected nor feared. Men of noble stature disappeared from the land. Things fell apart.

25 years ago Chuck Colson described this form of jugement saying, “Our passions and lusts are insatiable; the more we continue to indulge them, the more they imprison us. Unrestrained Licence can only lead to bondage.” (Christianity Today, 8/6/82, p. 20.) Sin is naturally destructive. It carries within it the penalty of decay, disillusionment, and meaninglessness.

If we as a culture are under the judgment of God, we are also receiving great mercy. Perhaps God is still honoring prayers like Habakkuk 3:2. In any event, it’s worth considering that judgment may be the slow corrosion of good as well as the quick annihilation of evil.

One of the most common charges against the truth of Christianity is the presence of hypocrites in Christendom. Because some act in ugly or horrid ways, the argument goes, Christianity must therefoe be false.

The problem with this argument is that it confuses the practitioner with the practice. The Bible is replete with criticism for those who profess loyalty to God’s ways, but who defy God by the way they live. Amos, Jeremiah, and Isaiah lash out against the hypocrisy that sometimes characterized Judaism in their day. Christ spoke seven “woes” to the religious leaders of his own day in Matthew chapter 23.

Failure to live up to a set of principles does not negate the validity of those principles. It’s safe to assume that Einstein lied at least once in his life. That does not negate the theory of relativity. Lawyers and judges who break the law do not invalidate the value of the laws they break. People in sports, business, journalism, and academia sometimes do things that bring dishonor to themselves and the values they espouse. That does not force us to conclude that the group to which they belong has no value.

The forgotten question in this attack on Christianity relates to it’s teaching. The Bible frankly and frequently describes much human failure to obey God. Mankind’s record is poor, both within the text of scripture and without. It’s important to ask, “What does the bible advocate?” That brings us to principles like ”do justice, love kindness, and walk humbly with God” or “Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength” or “Love your neighbor as yourself.”

Fools and evil people will always be found among those who profess connection with any movement, cause, or set of beliefs. Their misbehavior does not annul the truth held by those in the larger group. The question must be directed to the teachings and /or character of the founder–which is Jesus in the case of Christianity. To lament about the inconsistency and rebellion of Christ’s followers is to suppose that followers of Christ are to be morally perfect in this life–something the text of the New Testament insists is not the case.

Though atheism is anything but new, there is a new spirit among some of the newer and more popular atheist writers. The measured objections of a Bertrand Russell are less common. They have been replaced with strident language and numerous ad hominem arguments.

Anthony Gottleib illustrates one example of this trend in an article in the “New Yorker” magazine. The article examines the new book “God is Not Great,” and describes its author, Christopher Hitchens as an articulate and angry atheist. (May 21, 2007, p. 77 ff.) Hitchens’ remarks about Christians in his book add weight to Gottleib’s observation. He labels Creationists as “yokels.” Hitchens depicts the reasoning of C. S. Lewis as “so pathetic as to defy description.” And he tells us that John Calvin was a “sadist, torturer, and killer.”

Ridicule attracts an audience in our age of mockery and verbal abuse. Those who don’t wish to think and who prefer to attack people rather than weigh issues find such tactics inviting. Mockery never requires carefuly analysis, just a sharp tongue. Some preferred to label Christ a drunkard and a glutton rather than deal with his teaching and his claims.

This Rosie O’Donnell style of attack on Christianity is profitable. It apparently sells books, as Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins have discovered. And Hitchens will probably do well at $24.99 a copy.

What’s lost in this verbal barrage is a thoughtful approach to the issues. How does the written record of the New Teatament compare to other ancient writings, such as those of Plato and Thucydides? Is there empirical evidence for the notion that matter is eternal? What is the ofjective evidence of the resurrection? On what philosophical grounds do some in the scientific community move from the “is” to the “ought?”

Thoughtful Christians have a grand opportunity to avoid returning insult for insult (1 Peter 3:9), and move the dialogue to key quesitons atheism fails to answer and key truths Christianity offers.