Brian Tubbs's Blog

Posted by Brian Tubbs

Few things are more sensitive, controversial, and yet important than talking to children about Jesus Christ. Jesus is the most important person who ever lived, and making a decision to trust Jesus as one's Savior is the most important decision a person will ever make.

When talking with a child about Jesus, you should not force or manipulate that child in any way. A decision to accept Jesus must be that child's decision - not yours. You can't decide for the child, whether that child be your son or daughter or a member or visitor to your church.

The worst thing you can do is try to manipulate, scare, or pressure a child to making a profession of faith that he or she does not understand. If the child is not ready or does not understand what faith in Jesus means, then don't force it.

As a pastor, I've found questions to be the best approach in discussing God and Jesus with kids. In fact, it's the best approach with adults as well. Ask questions. Find out what the child knows about Christianity and what he or she currently believes or understands. Don't put words in the child's mouth. Your goal is twofold:

1. Help the child articulate and understand what he or she feels about God, Jesus, the Bible, church, etc.

2. Understand where the child is in his or her personal faith journey

When you know the above two things, you can then prayerfully and sensitively decide how you can best help the child.

The most important thing to remember is that you're not leading the child toward a relationship with YOU. The goal is a relationship with God. Thus, you're talking to him or her about Jesus. So, don't get in the way. Facilitate. Don't manipulate.

Posted by Brian Tubbs

According to a study conducted by Louisiana State University sociology professor Troy Blanchard, the religious environment of a community (measured by attendance and involvement) affects mortality rates, usually in a positive manner.

A prevalence of religious congregations, says the study, improves mortality rates in a given community. This is especially so, says Blanchard, "in areas with a large number of Catholic and Mainline Protestant churches."

By contrast, conservative Protestant churches represent a mixed effect. Fundamentalist congregations apparently affect mortality rates in a negative manner. Blanchard cites their "reclusive" nature and their inward focus on personal faith.

Evangelical churches (particularly those with service and outreach commitments) tell a different story. According to Blanchard, evangelicals "do a better job of engaging the broader community and promoting social connectedness that is so essential for longer life expectancies."

For more on this story, click here.

Posted by Brian Tubbs

There are some who say that the Founding Fathers were virtually all Deists. And there are others who say that they were all Christians. Here are three signers of the Declaration of Independence - the signing of which we in America celebrate on July 4 - who leave little doubt as to their faith.

In his will, Samuel Adams, widely regarded as the "Father of the American Revolution," wrote: “I ... recommend my Soul to that Almighty Being who gave it, and my body I commit to the dust, relying upon the merits of Jesus Christ for a pardon of all my sins."

Roger Sherman, who signed both the Declaration and the Constitution, wrote: “I believe that there is one only living and true God, existing in three persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. . . . that the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are a revelation from God. . . . that God did send His own Son to become man, die in the room and stead of sinners, and thus to lay a foundation for the offer of pardon and salvation to all mankind so as all may be saved who are willing to accept the Gospel offer.”

And then there's signer Benjamin Rush, a close friend of both Thomas Jefferson and John Adams and one of the earliest pioneers for abolition and women's rights, who said: “My only hope of salvation is in the infinite, transcendent love of God manifested to the world by the death of His Son upon the cross. Nothing but His blood will wash away my sins. I rely exclusively upon it. Come, Lord Jesus! Come quickly!”

Happy Fourth of July!

Posted by Brian Tubbs

Does your marriage need a little help? or perhaps a lot of help? Just because yours is a faith-based marriage doesn't mean it will be trouble-free. Christian marriages need attention and maintenance as much as any other marriage. Here is a simple action plan to help get your marriage back on the right track.

1. Reaffirm your faith in God

Make sure your foundation is in order. Pray. Read the Bible regularly. Get back into church. Bring your thoughts and your lifestyle back into conformity with what God wants in your life and home.

2. Pray regularly for your mate

Don't just focus on your own needs. Begin to pray regularly for the needs, wants, hopes, desires, and feelings of your wife or husband. Make this a priority, and be sincere about it.

3. Speak affirmations and encouragement toward your mate.

Don't criticize or put down your husband or wife. Affirm him. Encourage her. Show your spouse kindness, graciousness, and respect - even if you don't feel or think he or she deserves it. Make a commitment to love him or her unconditionally - and express that love.

4. Take actions to improve your marriage.

This may involve reading books, articles, etc. on marriage or seeking professional counsel. Don't sit back and wait for things to get better. Take the initiative.

For a FREE 7-Day E-Course to help you get on the right track, click here.

Posted by Brian Tubbs

The questions of religion's role in America's founding are among the most contentious and controversial issues in today's political landscape. What role did faith play in the founding of the United States?

Opinions on this vary. Consider Michael Newdow, who has sued to stop the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in schools and prayer at presidential inaugurations. Newdow says: "When [the Constitution] was written, it was clear the founding fathers wanted the separation of church and state."

Is it clear? Well, Newdow is referring to the First Amendment, which forbids Congress from making any "establishment of religion." But, the very same Congress that sent the First Amendment to the states for ratification voted to hire chaplains at taxpayer expense for both houses of Congress. And President George Washington, who supported the First Amendment and presided over its adoption, is the man who called on God at his inauguration and urged the nation to pray with the America's first Thanksgiving Day Proclamation.

The Founders didn't want God removed from the public square, nor did they want a separation between politics and religious faith. What they wanted was to preserve religious freedom and to welcome religious diversity.

The issue, however, continues to spark great interest and debate. If it interests you, I encourage you to visit a new blog on the subject -- The American Creation. Click here to visit the blog, which consists of several contributors (including yours truly) from various perspectives. See you there.

Posted by Brian Tubbs

Stand-alone discussions are being phased out. I had nothing to do with this. It's a Suite101 decision.

For a brief time, people are allowed to make a single post by starting a new discussion. But no replies are possible. I suspect that this will go away soon, because having a several dozen one-post discussion threads makes little sense. It's a glitch, that I'm sure will be corrected soon.

Discussions are now encouraged to be article-based via the new comments system. In other words, you can make comments directly after most articles. Some writers have chosen to disable comments for certain articles. I have NOT disabled comments. ALL of my articles are open to comments.

As for blogs...the comment feature is NOT available. One of our frequent discussion contributors here has asked why I am not allowing comments to my recent blog post on "Faith and Reason." The answer is that I can't allow comments to that. The comments feature is presently NOT available for blog posts. It's only available for articles, which are different. So, right now, you can't make a comment to a blog post - ANY blog post. I'm told that this will be changing soon.

If you wish to respond to a blog post of mine, I recommend that you find an article written on a related or similar topic, and post your response there (citing the blog).

I know this is cumbersome, especially in the transition. But, again, I had NOTHING to do with these changes. Nevertheless, I can assure you that Suite101 is working hard to complete this transition and address some of the glitches and issues that have arisen during it.

Posted by Brian Tubbs

In a recent discussion on the resurrection of Jesus, one of the participants has continued to caricature my views as based on "medieval" reasoning and a faith-based "belief in the authority of the Bible." What this participant fails to appreciate is how I wrestled with doubt in my 20s and early 30s - and how I learned to balance faith and reason.

I grew up in a Christian home. I regularly attended church and went to a Christian school. Christianity literally defined me. I have no regrets over this, but when I came of age and got married, the faith that I grew up with had to become my own.

From my 20s through my early 30s, I went through a series of internal conflicts about that faith. Two periods really stand out - where I put Christianity to the test. In my early 30s, in particular, I came to a point where I refused to simply "toe the line" anymore. Either Christianity was real or it was not. If it wasn't real, then I didn't want to center the rest of my life on it.

During this period of intense doubt, I read parts of Sam Harris' The End of Faith and all of Letter to a Christian Nation. I read Richard Dawkins' The God Delusion and Charles Templeton's Farewell to God. I did a great deal of reading and research from atheist and agnostic sources.

How did it all turn out? Well, I'm now a pastor and I'm the Protestantism Feature Writer at Suite101. I am more committed now to the Christian faith than ever before. Why? Not because of blind faith, but because my faith stood the test of reason.

Posted by Brian Tubbs

Sherwood Pictures, the media division of Georgia-based Sherwood Baptist Church, is releasing its third film this Fall. This film, titled Fireproof, which profiles a gritty firefighter struggling to salvage his marriage. The movie stars former Growing Pains TV star Kirk Cameron.

Sherwood Baptist Church has produced two movies thus far. The first was Flywheel, made for approximately $20,000, has enjoyed modest success in DVD sales and Christian television. Sherwood's second film, Facing the Giants, achieved nationwide distribution and an impressive box office showing for an indie picture. Facing the Giants cost approximately $80-100,000 to make, and exceeded $10 million in the domestic box office. It then went on to make even more money in the DVD market.

Flywheel and Facing the Giants were low-budget indie films, to be sure. Those looking for flashy CGI effects or multimillion dollar cinematography won't be impressed. However, those interested in a good story with captivating characters shouldn't miss them. They are among the most inspirational movies I've ever seen!

If Fireproof is half as good as the first two, I can't wait! Get my popcorn and soda ready, please! And the tissue box too.....for my wife of course. Ahem.

For more up-to-date info on Fireproof, check out their official website here.

Posted by Brian Tubbs

Did Jesus Christ rise from the dead? Should we consider the doctrine of the resurrection a valid tenet or pagan-inspired myth?

One person in these discussion boards has written: "The suffering/dying/rising atoning god story was firmly established in 'pagan' beliefs before the Christian era." Ergo, the Christians stole the story from pagan beliefs and the resurrection of Jesus is nothing more than fable.

Were there myths before the life of Christ? Of course. Did some of these myths contain elements that echo parts of Christianity? In the sense that most religions share certain points in common (such as a recognition of the supernatural), the answer would have to once again be "Of course." But was the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ specifically inspired by (and taken from) other pagan mythical accounts of "suffering/dying/rising atoning god stories"?

To make an argument in the affirmative, the proponent of such a charge must do more than point to parallels between the Bible and pagan resurrection myths. She must establish (with documentary evidence) that the suffering/dying/rising atonement myths themselves predated Jesus. Unfortunately for those who try to discredit Christianity, the earliest documentation attesting to the suffering/dying/rising atonement myths POST-date Jesus. For example, the religion of Adonis predates Jesus, but the story of Adonis returning from the dead is an addition to the legend -- an addition that postdates Jesus. This is an inconvenient problem for those charging that Christ came from Mithras or Osiris or whatever - and it's a problem they haven't been able to overcome.

What's more, these parallels are a smoke screen for them to escape an even greater problem, namely the strong historical evidence backing the resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth. For more on this issue, read this article and watch this video.

Posted by Brian Tubbs

Why doesn't God heal amputees? According to many atheists, agnostics, and skeptics, the fact that God apparently hasn't healed amputees shows Him (or Her or It) to be a fantasy.

The argument goes like this: In the case of a person being healed from AIDS or cancer or some disease within the body, there's ambiguity. But, in a "non-ambiguous situation" (like a person's limb magically re-growing), the folks at "Why Does God Hate Amputees" explain: "There is no potential for coincidence. Because there is no ambiguity, we can actually know whether God is answering the prayer or not."

Here are my responses...

1. Can anyone prove that no amputee has ever been healed? The best that can be said is that we are unable to verify an actual, documented case of amputee limb regeneration.

2. Doesn't God call us to faith? Like it or not, the Bible repeatedly calls God's followers to faith. That requires the possibility of doubt. If God were to supernaturally regenerate limbs, there would indeed be no ambiguity. There would also be no room for faith. Healing an amputee would be the same as God audibly speaking from Heaven. Faith would be impossible. We would have certainty.

3. Does God's refusal to do something mean He doesn't exist? Even if it's "unfair" for God to heal cancer patients but not amputees (and if I were an amputee, I would be emotionally sympathetic to that position), does this disprove God's existence? Is it not equally possible that God exists, but we simply don't agree with God's way of doing things?

The bottom line...the amputee argument is emotionally effective, but that is all. Logically, the amputee issue doesn't disprove God. It doesn't even come close.

Posted by Brian Tubbs

Critics of the Bible and Christianity often call the Bible "sexist." They point to confusing aspects of the Mosaic Law, Jesus' selection of male disciples, and Paul's doctrines concerning women in the home and the church. And, of course, they attack the notion of a male God as being particularly offensive.

One of the unfortunate aspects of this issue is that men are often considered unworthy of participation - unless they, of course, agree with those criticing Christianity. For this reason and the fact that debates over these matters are increasingly bitter and "no-holds-barred," I am reluctant, in a public forum, to even wade into these issues.

The issues are important, though, and can't be avoided - no matter my or anyone else's reluctance. And when I listened to this part of a speech from Amy Orr-Ewing, a scholar and theologian for Ravi Zacharias International Ministries, I knew I had to share it.

I highly encourage you to click on this link - and listen to Ms. Ewing's excellent - indeed, BRILLIANT - response to the question "Is the Bible Sexist?"

Posted by Brian Tubbs

What is postmodernism? Defining postmodernism is extremely difficult. Why? Because no one (especially postmodernists) agree on what it is. According to the website "All About Philosophy," postmodernism is "difficult to define, because to define it would violate the postmodernist's premise that no definite terms, boundaries, or absolute truths exist."

According to "All About Philosophy," a postmodernist "views the world outside of themselves as being in error, that is, other people’s truth becomes indistinguishable from error. Therefore, no one has the authority to define truth or impose upon others his idea of moral right and wrong."

Needless to say, such a philosophical approach runs counter to Christianity, which rests on definite truth propositions -- namely that God exists, Jesus is the Son of God, mankind is corrupted by sin, etc.

In the context of Christianity and history, postmodernists more or less DISMISS the idea that one can authoritatively certify knowledge of the past or offer any credible conclusions about history. The effect of this thinking is to destroy history, says Keith Windschuttle, author of The Killing of History. "Rather than leading [history] somewhere fruitful," says Windschuttle, postmodernism "is a movement that turns the writing of history into a blind alley and leads it up to a dead end."

While the postmodern era has caused us to look again at certain assumptions and narratives with a more critical eye (a good thing!), it has done more harm than good. Taken to its extreme (and this is where academia is indeed taking it), postmodernism will bring all of us to a dead end!

Posted by Brian Tubbs

I am not one to harp on old news. But conservative commentator Dinesh D'Souza, in a recent op-ed, writes: "[Barack] Obama's connection with the Reverend Jeremiah Wright makes him unelectable in the general election, even though neither he nor most of the pundits seem to have recognized this yet."

D'Souza explains by envisioning the following Republican campaign commercial:

It begins by showing the rantings of Wright: America deserved to be attacked on 9/11, the government sponsors the Ku Klux Klan, AIDS is a federal plot, God damn America! These images are accompanied by a voice-over noting that Wright is Obama's longtime mentor, and that Obama has attended this church for two decades. Then we see Obama saying he will no more disavow Wright than he would disavow a family member. Finalloy we see pictures of the two men embracing while a voice says, “Is this the man who is going to bring America together and stand up to our enemies?” At this point, it's done!

I admit that it would be hard for any candidate to survive such a commercial - especially if it were broadcast regularly and repeatedly in every major media market in the nation. However....

I don't think John McCain will authorize such a campaign. Say what you will about the Arizona senator's age, but his age brings with it a sense of "Old Boy" (and "Girl" - if the nominee is Hillary) cordiality between national leaders, especially US senators.

The question is...would such a refusal be to McCain's credit? Is this not a legitimate issue? Obama has condemned some of Wright's specific statements, but it's hard to see the media (or the American people) giving McCain a pass had he claimed Fred Phelps of Westboro Baptist Church as his longtime spiritual mentor.

We shall see if D'Souza's prediction comes true.

Posted by Brian Tubbs

It's hard to believe that Easter is upon us. Time sure flies. Of course, Easter is taking place rather early this year. I'm used to Easter being in April. Nevertheless, Easter is here. And I want to wish all Suite101 Protestantism readers, contributing writers, and discussion board participants a happy one.

Easter isn't simpy a day to hunt Easter Eggs and get pictures with the Easter Bunny - although I have no problem with those things. (I say that, knowing that some of my more fundamentalist readers may cringe). I think family-friendly fun activities are a great way to enjoy the Easter weekend - and that most certainly includes hunting for Easter eggs.

The key is to make sure that we don't lose sight of the true meaning of Easter, as we do with pretty much all our holidays. Christmas has become centered on Santa Claus and presents. Memorial Day is about the opening of swimming pools, retail sales blitzes, and family picnics. George Washington has completely lost his birthday to the vain "Presidents' Day," which has become our most meaningless holiday. And the Fourth of July is all about fireworks. There's little mention of those men who risked their lives, putting their names to the parchment that heralded our independence.

Likewise, Easter is becoming lost in egg hunts and bunny rabbits. It should not be this way, for Easter is the most important holiday on our calendar. It is the day that confirms the very purpose and nature of Jesus' coming to earth. So explains Paul in I Corinthians 15. Without the resurrection of Christ, Christianity is all but vanity.

So, this Easter Sunday, celebrate the resurrection of Jesus Christ - knowing that His resurrection confirms our faith in Him as our Lord and Savior.

Posted by Brian Tubbs

Have you been hurt by someone you considered a role model or hero? Even worse, were you hurt by someone who supposedly was a strong follower of God? Maybe it was a pastor. Maybe it was a parent. Maybe a husband or wife. Maybe a Sunday School teacher, Christian school principal, or Bible study leader. Maybe it was a church. Have you been hurt by someone who claims to follow and imitate Jesus Christ?

Many people have been hurt by professing Christians. And...for many, that hurt has shaken their faith in Christianity itself.

The book of Psalms hits this problem square on. In fact, it does so with a verse that sits right at the center of the 66-book Bible. The verse is Psalm 118:8 and it reads: "It is better to trust in the LORD; Than to put confidence in man."

Where is your confidence? Is your confidence and trust in a person who claims to follow Jesus Christ - or is it in Christ? Is your confidence in the those who claim to follow God - or is your confidence in God Himself?

How you answer that question will determine much about the strength of your faith and your ability to endure pain and achieve victory in your life.

Posted by Brian Tubbs

On February 28, 1953, scientists James Watson and Francis Crick made perhaps the most remarkable discovery in the history of biological science. Watson and Crick discovered the structure of DNA - the chemical code for all life.

Richard Dawkins, author of The God Delusion and The Selfish Gene, has written that DNA's discovery "dealt the final killing blow to the belief that living material is deeply distinct from nonliving material."

Scientist George Williams says not so fast. One of the foremost authorities on gene selection, Williams argues that DNA is not the object of information, but rather the "medium" of information. Thus, says Williams, scientists are really grappling with "two more or less incommensurable domains: that of information and that of matter." According to Williams, the gene "is a package of information, not the object."

What's the relevance of this disagreement? The following illustration should explain:

A book is more than just paper and ink. Paper and ink are the means by which information is transmitted from the author to the reader. The information is something that utilizes paper and ink, but it is not paper and ink. Your DNA is the "paper and ink" of the illustration. That DNA conveys information in a language that is, in the opinion of a growing number of scientists and philosophers, more than the DNA itself.

So, who is the author of that information? A great question - and one that should lead you eventually to the God of the Bible.

Posted by Brian Tubbs

Well, it took a few years, but I now have my first master's degree. On February 14, Liberty Theological Seminary awarded me a Master of Arts in Theological Studies. I told the congregation at Sligo Baptist Church (where I pastor) that this degree means that I'm now "smart." I don't believe they are convinced of that. Of course, neither is my wife.

What does having a master's degree mean? Well, frankly, I'm not sure. I don't feel any different from before receiving the degree. And come to think of it, I've only been electronically notified of the degree. I don't yet actually have a framed diploma. Probably a consequence of being a distance-learning student.

Maybe that's the ticket! Get a framed diploma on the wall. THEN...the feelings of smartness and scholarly accomplishment will kick in. Okay....maybe not.

In all seriousness, I have nothing but praise for Liberty Theological Seminary. The distance learning program is fully accredited - and it's not for slackers. You have to be committed to get through it. I know, because I've dropped a few classes due to a lack of commitment. You can't just skate through it. You don't just fill out a workbook, send it in, and get credit for it. Liberty's DLP is the real thing.

So, thanks to all my professors and fellow students - and thank you to my wife and kids for their patience and support.

Posted by Brian Tubbs

Fidel Castro is ending his 49-year rule of Cuba, and pundits, scholars, historians, and everyday people are now lining up to help define the Cuban leader's legacy. While I certainly have quite a few opinions about Fidel Castro, I want to focus this blog on what Castro's resignation might mean for religious freedom in Cuba.

Castro's Cuba has long regulated religious activity. Religious groups are asked to register with the government, and are encouraged to remain apolitical. (Though, of course, if they choose to be pro-Castro and/or pro-Revolution, that is presumably okay). Those groups that choose not to register are, according to the US State Department, subjected to "varying degrees of official interference, harassment, and repression."

Fidel Castro has always been vision-driven. Wayne Smith, a progressive scholar sympathetic to Castro and his agenda, acknowledges Castro's repressive record. Says Smith: "Castro was convinced that he was right, and that his system was for the good of the people. Thus, anyone who stood against the revolution stood also against the Cuban people and that, in Castro’s eyes, was simply unacceptable."

It is easy to see how Fidel Castro justified his regulation of religious activities in Cuba and his repression of those religious groups that remained outside his control - just as he has justified (in the words of Human Rights Watch) Cuba's "denial of basic civil and political rights" across the board.

With Castro's departure, we can hope and pray that the winds of freedom will soon blow in Cuba, and that Cuba will recognize the rights of its people to practice their faith openly and without fear.

Posted by Brian Tubbs

There's a lot of debate in Christian circles (and non-Christian circles, for that matter) about Christians and money. For this reason, I wrote an article (published February 12) on the subject. I encourage you to read it, and comment in the discussion forum. In the meantime, I want to add a few personal remarks about this sensitive issue (since the blog is more for personal commentary).

Is it Wrong for Christians to Make Lots of Money?

Answer: NO. It is perfectly acceptable for Christians to earn money and to even get rich. The problem comes when that becomes the primary goal of the Christian. The writer of Ecclesiastes warns that he "who loves silver shall not be satisfied with silver; nor he that loves abundance with increase" (Ecclesiastes 5:10).

What's more, as was said in the article, if you are seeking "treasures on earth" as opposed to "treasures in heaven," your priorities are out of whack. Jesus tells us to seek the kingdom of God first and foremost.

How Much is Too Much?

Answer: You can earn as much as God guides you to earn and blesses you with. Money is a tool. As long as you see it as a tool - meaning that it is a MEANS to an end, and NOT an end of itself - then you're on the right track to keeping things in balance. So, what is the "end" that you are pursuing?

Commit your heart and efforts to the Lord, and follow His leading. Make God #1 in your life, and then you'll find that money and everything else will fall into place.

Posted by Brian Tubbs

What better passage to read on Valentine's Day than the "Great Love Chapter" of the Bible: I Corinthians 13? In his letter to the church at Corinth, the Apostle Paul gave what is perhaps the best description of love ever penned by a human hand.

What follows is a portion of I Corinthians 13 - excerpted from the magisterial and eloquent King James Version:

1Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.

2And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.

3And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.

4Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up,

5Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil;

6Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth;

7Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.

8Charity never faileth...

Posted by Brian Tubbs

Was Abraham Lincoln a Christian? Of course, in order to answer that question, you must go back and ask an even more fundamental question: What is a Christian? You can't determine if someone is a Christian, unless you have a working, baseline definition of the term "Christian."

There has been much debate over Abraham Lincoln's relationship with Christianity. What makes the debate even more controversial and never-ending is that it really depends upon which part of Lincoln's life one chooses to focus.

Early in life, there is little evidence that Abraham Lincoln embraced the fullness of the Christian faith. His detachment from any church and whimsical attitude toward matters of faith (which were borderline sacrilege - in the minds of many) stand as indications that Lincoln was not a committed Christian.

As Lincoln matured, however, things changed. With the death of two of his sons and the tragedy of the American Civil War, Abraham Lincoln became much more reflective, philosophical, and (yes) religious. And it's during this latter stage of his life, where many believe he made a decision to embrace Christianity.

In the end, only God and Abraham Lincoln know the full nature of Lincoln's faith, but this article by Mark Noll may shed some light on the question. Though Noll concludes (erroneously, I believe, since the evidence doesn't warrant such a definitive interpretation) that Lincoln was "not an orthodox, evangelical, 'born-again' Christian striving toward the 'higher life'", I nevertheless highly recommend you take time to read the article.

Posted by Brian Tubbs

Ben Stein's Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed hits theaters Spring 2008. The movie claims that that a conspiracy against new ideas and academic freedom has established Darwinian evolution as the "King of the Hill" -- expelling all dissenters.

I haven't yet seen the film, and therefore can't endorse all its claims up-front. Nevertheless, I am very much looking forward to this movie. The central premise of Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed is certainly true. Science has codified two basic presuppositions (naturalism and uniformitarianism), which have effectively shut down any discussion or examination that might open the door to supernatural or non-uniformatarian possibilities.

This decision - to base all of mainstream science on naturalism and uniformitarianism - is a philosophical one. It is not science. Moreover, the decision to shut down discussion of Intelligent Design, Creationism, or other alternatives to evolution is not a scientific one, but a political one.

How should the academic scientific community deal with those skeptical of Darwinian evolution? Phillip E. Johnson, author of Defeating Darwinism by Opening Minds, answers:

One way would be to treat the doubts of the people with respect, to bring them out in the open and to deal with them rationally. The opposite way is to tell the people that all doubts about naturalistic evolution are inherently absurd, that they should believe in the orthodox theory because experts agree that it is correct, and that their silly misgivings will be allowed no hearing in public education. American educators have chosen the second path.

Sounds like this country definitely needs to see Ben Stein's Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed.

Posted by Brian Tubbs

Here are three excellent Christian novels I've read over the last year. I've obviously read more than these, but these are three Christian fiction titles that I recommend...

The Chronicles of Soone: Heir to the King by James Somers

Heir to the King is James Somers' debut novel. While the first printing contains some distracting grammatical and spelling issues, the story is outstanding. It grabs you and doesn't let go! Exciting action. Great sci-fi battle scenes. Good stuff. If you want a good, clean, sci-fi adventure with Christian themes, pick up a copy of The Chronicles of Soone: Heir to the King.

Three by Ted Dekker

If you like thrillers and/or mysteries, you'll enjoy Ted Dekker's Three. I can't speak for the movie. Didn't see it. But the book is excellent. Draws you in. Keeps you guessing. Pretty good twist. Great ending.

Sorcerer by James Byron Huggins

If you like solid, action-packed, "monster on the loose" type novels -- novels with lots of weaponry and explosions -- then start reading some of James Byron Huggins. Sorcerer is an interesting concept, in that it takes one of the ancient magicians from Pharoah's court that dueled with Moses - and turns him into a semi-eternal, demonic villain. It's like a Christian version of The Mummy. Don't pick it up, if you're looking for solid theology. It's fantasy, but enjoyable fantasy.

****

And then, I just started reading The Chronicles of Xan: Shadow in the Dark by Antony Barone. I'll let you know more about it later, but it's good so far.

Happy reading!

Posted by Brian Tubbs

The modern marketplace is obsessed with video games. I can't say I blame them. When I was in junior high, my parents bought me a brand new Intellivision video game system. (Technically, it was the Sears Super Video Arcade - but same thing). Yes, I know I'm dating myself. Hey, at least it was a couple steps up from Pong! Anyway...ever since my Intellivision, I've been hooked on video (and computer) games.

Over the years, I've owned a Sega Genesis, a Dreamcast, a PlayStation 2, an XBOX, a Nintendo GameCube, and now a brand new XBOX 360 - which is still in the box, because I have no games for it. **Note: I didn't buy it. I won it in a contest. And it came with only one controller and NO games. So, it's still in the box.

Anyway...where was I? Oh, yeah, video gaming and Christianity. Here's the deal...

There are some Christians who believe that video gaming is wrong. For that matter, there are some Christians who believe that pretty much all forms of entertainment are wrong. And there are other, more reasonable (I would add) Christians, who accept video gaming, but believe violence in video games is wrong. For these Christians, playing Halo 3 on my new XBOX 360 is a big, fat "No-No."

So...fellow Christians...what do YOU think? What XBOX 360 games are acceptable for a Christian family? Any recommendations?

Posted by Brian Tubbs

On February 3, 1943, US transport ship Dorchester sank in the icy waters above Greenland and four World War II chaplains became not only heroes that night, but legends. The four chaplains were: Rev. George Fox (Protestant), Rabbi Alexander Goode (Jewish), Rev. Clark Poling (Protestant), and Father John Washington (Catholic).

Tomorrow morning, Sligo Baptist Church - the local church in Wilmington, Ohio that I have the honor of pastoring - will co-sponsor a patriotic ceremony with the local American Legion post to commemorate the courageous and inspiring story of the four chaplains.

Of course, such a ceremony doesn't sit well with some Independent Baptists. There are many in the fundamentalist community that object to anything that approaches ecumenicalism or seemingly honors non-Christian faiths.

The reasons that Sligo Baptist Church is hosting this tribute are:

• We are commanded repeatedly in Scripture to serve and honor our national institutions. A patriotic ceremony honoring the courage and heroism of our veterans, including our veteran chaplains, is altogether appropriate in this context.
• The Apostle Paul tells us that we are to focus on whatever things are pure, lovely, and wholesome. Patriotism, courage, self-sacrifice and heroism all qualify -- especially in a culture that is obsessed with dysfunctional celebrities and destructive behavior.
• A ceremony honoring the selfless sacrifice of four men laying down their lives so others might live is the perfect example of what God did through His Son, Jesus Christ, providing a compelling opportunity to share the Gospel

Are you familiar with the story? If not, you owe it to yourself to check it out. Usually, the best stories are true stories. This is certainly a case in point.

Posted by Brian Tubbs

Fred Phelps and Westboro Baptist Church are at it again. In a flyer announcing a picket of Heath Ledger's upcoming funeral, Westboro Baptist Church triumphantly declares that the Brokeback Mountain star is now "in Hell...and nothing else about Heath Ledger is relevant or consquential."

My readers know that I'm no moral relativist. I believe in God, Jesus, the Bible, and the reality of Rights and Wrongs. And while I believe that homosexuality (a lifestyle that was celebrated and defended in Ledger's Brokeback Mountain) is unnatural and destructive, I nevertheless refuse to buy into the virtriol and hate spewed forth by many fundamentalist Christians on this issue (and others, for that matter).

The Apostle Paul told the church at Ephesus that believers should not be "tossed to and fro and carried about by every wind of doctrine." Accordingly, I do not approve of the shifting winds of public and cultural opinion, which have so often shaped and influenced church doctrine. The church is to stand for the truths of God...period.

However, Paul makes clear that we are to speak the "truth in love," and NOT in hate. Later in Ephesians, he writes: "Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers."

I see no grace and no love from Fred Phelps and the folks at Westboro Baptist.

The proper response for the Christian community at a time like this is to mourn the passing of Heath Ledger, to reach out to his family, to offer whatever help and support it can during this time of sadness and need.

Posted by Brian Tubbs

For quite some time, the Internet has been buzzing with accusations that Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama is a Muslim. I confess that I have received quite a few of those emails, though I have not forwarded them. In the midst of a heated Democratic primary, Senator Barack Obama and his supporters are taking those emails more seriously.

In an interview with Christian Broadcasting Network (CBN), Barack Obama flatly denied any adherence to the Islamic faith and labeled those who charge otherwise as being guilty of "dirty tricks."

Obama is quoted (in a CNN article - that appears to be based on the CBN interview) as saying:

"I think that those who are of the Muslim faith are deserving of respect and dignity, but to try and feed into this fear-mongering and try to question my faith commitments and my belief in Jesus Christ, I think is offensive. And I want to make sure that people are absolutely clear about what's going on with this, and if they get another one of these e-mails that they're deleting it and letting their friends know that it's nonsense."

Last year, CNN took on some of the allegations surrounding Obama's faith, including the charge that Obama attended a radical Muslim school as a youth. You can read the CNN article here. That article was primarily a response to an Insight magazine article on Obama's Islamic ties.

So, is Barack Obama a committed Christian or a closet Muslim? And does it matter? What do you think?

Posted by Brian Tubbs

One of the most famous quotes in all of history is Martin Luther's declaration to the Diet of Worms (the German Congress), in which he said: "Here I stand, I can do no other. God help me. Amen." It was the summation of his refusal to recant his protests of the Roman Catholic Church - and it cemented his central role in the Protestant Reformation, arguably even more than his initial nailing the Ninety-Five Theses to the wall in Wittenberg.

Martin Luther was not a perfect man. No one is perfect, save Jesus himself. But Martin Luther remains an inspiring figure in world history.

If you haven't seen the movie Luther, check out this link. The title character is played by Joseph Fiennes.

Posted by Brian Tubbs

President George W. Bush issued a proclamation this week, designating Sunday, January 20 as the "National Sanctity of Human Life Day." President Ronald Reagan started the tradition, issuing the first such proclamation in 1984 to commemorate the anniverary of the infamous Roe v. Wade ruling. The tradition continued through the administration of George H.W. Bush, was discontinued by Bill Clinton, and revived by George W. Bush.

Some of my readers will likely object to my use of the word "infamous," but Roe v. Wade was poorly reasoned and tragically consequential. It was poorly reasoned in that the High Court clearly usurped the legislative branch of the government (both nationally and in the fifty states). Of course, the legal and political nature of the Court's ruling is beyond the purview of this website, so I will decline any further comment on that.

The moral component of the abortion issue is, however, very much within this site's scope. Thus I can speak to the tragic consequences of Roe v. Wade, a ruling that cleared the way for a multi-billion dollar industry that has exploited women in difficult circumstances and erased the lives of nearly 49 million pre-born infants since 1973.

I hope that all my readers, including those who believe a woman should have a legal right to abortion services, will rejoice that the number of abortions has declined in the last few years. What's more, I hope that we will all do what we can to affirm the inherent value of human life from its very beginning - and look forward to the day when the abortion industry goes bankrupt, due to a lack of demand.

To read the proclamation, follow this link.

Posted by Brian Tubbs

This pirate movie doesn't have Johnny Depp, living hearts in treasure chests, or dreaded ships that travel back and forth from the underworld. Instead, it has....talking vegetables. Talking vegetables that sing, dance, and have lots of fun.

Well, actually, these particular vegetables pride themselves on not doing anything. They are, after all, the Pirates Who Won't Do Anything.

And that's the name of this film: The Pirates Who Won't Do Anything: A Veggie Tales Movie.

You might remember these pirates from the Veggie Tales' first big-screen outing several years ago. They were the pirates who aided Jonah in his little "run the other way" rebellion with God. Well, those pirates are back.

I personally can't wait to check this movie out. When you see it, let us know what you think in our discussion forum.

Posted by Brian Tubbs

Recently, a family left our church. This was somewhat of a blow to me personally. Since becoming pastor, our small church has added families. This was the first to go the other way. Moreover, I really appreciate this family, and the heart they brought to the fellowship.

Sadly, when talking with me, the husband refused to give any specifics for his reasons, citing only "issues" and "social dynamics." This situation plays itself out every day throughout churches in America -- people and families leaving churches over "personal" and often unspecified reasons. These families then float from church to church (or, in some cases, stop going to church altogether) without ever confronting the issues that led them to pull away.

I wish every church-going Christian in the world would bear these three facts in mind:

1) There are NO perfect churches. Period. Churches are made up of people. As such, churches are made up of imperfect sinners. As the saying goes, if you ever happen to find a perfect church, don't join it. If you do, you'll ruin it.

2) YOU bear a responsibility to your church. A church is what the people of that church make it. Spectator Christians frustrate me! If you think your church can do better....accept some responsibility for that. Pray for your church and get involved!

3) It's about Jesus! Let's be clear. Jesus is the "chief cornerstone" and "chief shepherd" of the church - a church that He has chosen to organize locally. That means that the church isn't about your personal agenda, feelings, opinions, tastes, etc. We need to be humble and obedient to God in the perspective and attitude we bring to our respective church bodies.

For more on this subject, click on this link for an article about changing churches.

Posted by Brian Tubbs

How do we handle the doctrine of the Trinity? One God in three persons. It doesn't seem to make any sense. At the least, it seems to violate the law of non-contradiction. Is it possible to have one God in three persons? Is it logical? Here's my attempt at answering this apparent contradiction. Let's look at this step by step:

1. The Apple

If you hold an apple in your hand, it's one piece of fruit. Yet, there are three parts to the apple. (Botanists or other fruit experts may argue there are more). The parts I'm thinking of are the core, the edible fruit, and the skin. Three parts, and yet one apple.

But this is not a perfect illustration, because the Trinity doctrine claims there are three intelligent, conscious persons and yet one God.

2. A Three-Headed Body

What if you have a body with three heads? I admit that this illustration is rather crude, but hear me out.

The head contains the brain, which is the source of our consciousness and intelligence. Could a single body have three heads - and thus three brains? Mythical literature has offered up three-headed beasts or dragons over the centuries, so the concept isn't completely foreign. What's more, we've seen conjoined twins and other such birth anomalies. It shouldn't be such a stretch to at least consider the possibility of a body with three heads - and thus three different persons.

3. Multi-dimensional God

Is God a three-headed creature? Not quite. In a single-dimensional framework, the Trinitarian God WOULD probably be best understood as a three-headed creature. But our universe is not one-dimensional, and God transcends both the spiritual and the physical dimension. The reality of multiple dimensions makes the Trinitarian doctrine more plausible.

What do you think?

Posted by Brian Tubbs

This past year, 2007, marked the passing of several prominent Christian leaders. Christian Post paid tribute to several of them, including Yolanda King (daughter of civil rights leader Martin Luther King, Jr), Ruth Graham (wife of world-renowned evangelist Billy Graham), Jerry Falwell, D. James Kennedy, and Rex Humbard.

According to the Christian Post, these leaders were "influential and well-respected" in the Christian community and cast a measure of influence even beyond Christian circles.

Writing for the Christian Post, Michelle Vu praised the leaders as follows:

• Yolanda King "urged Americans to be forces of peace and love in the footsteps of her father’s dream for an America where people of all colors are considered equal"
• Ruth Graham was the "anchor of faith" and "ministry partner to her husband, who many consider the greatest evangelist in history"
• Jerry Falwell "organized conservative Christian voters around the issues of abortion, gay rights, pornography and school prayers" and (despite the controversy) cast an "undeniable" influence on American society
• D. James Kennedy "built a Christian media empire with his radio and television ministry that reaches more than 3 million people" and "wrote more than 65 books, created Evangelism Explosion, and was a founding board member of the Moral Majority"
• Rex Humbard was "considered the pioneer of televangelism and hit the television airwaves in 1949 when the medium was largely untapped by evangelists"

Not mentioned in the Christian Post was Lee Roberson, a successful pastor and founder of Tennessee Temple University. Roberson, widely respected and influential in Baptist circles, died in April of 2007 at the age of 97.

Are there others who passed in 2007 that meant something to you? If so, tell us about it in the discussion forum.

Posted by Brian Tubbs

Happy New Year! And Happy Slave Trade Ban Day. What? You didn't know about that? Well, it's true. Two hundred years ago today, the ban on America's participation in the African slave trade took effect.

North America became involved in the dreaded practice in 1619, when the first African slave ships arrived in Jamestown. The slave trade continued and grew over the decades, until it was firmly entrenched in North America.

The rhetoric of the American Revolution brought the slave trade (along with the institution of slavery itself) into sharp focus. And many of America's Founders began to openly speak against slavery and the slave trade in particular. Some of these Founders were (some might say "ironically") slave owners - such as Thomas Jefferson and George Mason.

The slave trade proved to be an acrimonious issue at the Constitutional Convention of 1787, with the Deep South (particularly states like South Carolina and Georgia) refusing to give up their participation in the traffic of human flesh from Africa. A compromise was reached, guaranteeing the slave trade for 20 years from the adoption of the Constitution. That meant 1808.

By 1807, every state, except South Carolina, had banned the slave trade. Congress outlawed it in 1807, scheduling the ban to take effect on January 1, 1808.