Many of the evangelicals who cheered at the end of God’s Not Dead (and texted all their friends to let them know!) rightly sense the inherent worldview conflict between secularism and Christianity. They feel the pressure of living in a world in which belief in God is no longer unquestioned, but is often challenged by naturalistic and evolutionary assumptions. They recognize the difference between divine revelation and human reason, but also the importance of human reason in making a case for believing divine revelation. And they see the university as the battleground for worldview conflict.
The situation? Christian students regularly encounter intellectual challenges to their faith in college.
The solution? Prepare Christian young people to give good reasons for their faith.
I enjoyed this comic by Adam Ford.
Betsy Childs Howard considers an interesting question raised by an off-Broadway show called The Christians:
This aspect of the story brought to the fore an overlooked complication of ministry. When one’s career is tied into one’s theology, it’s hard to disentangle it from financial realities. Would it have been better for Pastor Paul to come clean and resign, leaving the church he planted deep in debt? Ministers who change their minds on hell or gay marriage or biblical authority may be tempted to keep the faith publicly while rejecting orthodoxy privately, in the hope that—if they reveal their views gradually—neither they nor their people will have to pay a price.
It’s a good start, but there’s more to be done:
China will finally end the restrictive one-child policy that has reduced its population by 400 million over the past 35 years.… But the government’s move does not address the root problem, says Reggie Littlejohn, the president of Women’s Rights Without Frontiers, whose group has fought against China’s one-child policy for years.
It seems to me that the consumption or promotion of goods based on their “Christian-ness” contributes to that false and prevalent mindset of a divide between sacred and secular. We have imbued cultural goods of various kinds with a supernatural value which allows them to be “better” than other “secular” goods whether or not they are qualitatively so. In so doing, we have determined their value based on criteria that aren’t inherent to their respective mediums and have praised work that is qualitatively deficient by the standard of the field.
Erik Raymond offers good advice here.