Protestantism

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!