How God's Attributes Shape Man's View of Ecclesiology

Recently I sent out a request to see if anyone would like to do a quest post for my blog. Quickly my friend Ryan Johnston replied saying that he would be more then happy to share an essay that he has written for the website www.helwyssocietyforum.com. I jumped at the opportunity to take him up on this offer. If you haven't checked this website out yet, I highly recommend that you do. The website hosts multiple essays from various young writers on a host of subjects concerning: theology, spirituality, ministry and culture. As for Ryan, Ryan is a great friend of mine. I look up to him and his diligence as a preacher, pastor, and as a mentor. Just all the more reason I was very happy to post his essay here on my blog. Without further ado...

How God's Attributes Shape Man's View Of Ecclesiology

Essay by Ryan Johnston

The Church, above all else, should mirror the character and attributes of God. Sadly many churches do not. Instead of appealing to God, they focus on that which the target group desires. What is the newest and trendiest thing the church down the road is doing? What is the largest church in your movement practicing? What’s new in television ministries? In sum, pastors, teachers, laymen, students, and Christians in general are subjected to countless approaches to ‘practicing church’. However, the question remains, which approach is the biblical approach? This is the topic I wish to explore in this essay.

Within the church there are varying models, methods, and paradigms of ministry. Of these paradigms two are in strict contrast, namely, the “Seeker Sensitive” model and the “Ultra-Conservative Fundamentalist” model. These have continually held opposing views on evangelism, discipleship, worship, and other ecclesial practices.

There has always been heated debate over the chief attribute of God, whether it is His love or His holiness. When one accentuates the “love” of God as His chief attribute, there is a tendency to be more inclined to assimilate your church into the “Seeker Sensitive” movement. On the other hand, when one emphasizes the “holiness” of God as His chief attribute there is a propensity to fall under a category of strict “Fundamentalism” where no one deserves God (or even the local ultra-conservative church for that matter). There is a middle ground on these issues where many churches, ministers, and even Christians would lie. (There are even branches from these two attributes, which warrant discussion.)

The question remains whether or not the correct attribute of God has been emphasized and if so, how to interact with this attribute being demonstrated in our lives and in our ecclesial practices. God’s holiness is not rigid or cumbersome, nor is God’s love painful or exclusive. Yet the way we view these attributes shapes us as individuals, what our churches become, and how we pass our faith on. If we as Christians are to reflect God’s image, then our churches should reflect His attributes as seen in His Word.

I believe in the absolute holiness of God being His chief attribute. However, if one sees God in a pattern of righteousness and purity but fails to see His hatred of sin, we neglect to comprehend the biblical view of His holiness. If we view God’s love as over exemplified and fail to stand against sin, corruption, and immoral behaviors, we have diminished one attribute for the over emphasis of another. In evaluating our own ministries and personal lives, what we believe (or don’t believe) about God’s holiness and love will drive how we live and how we lead others.

One’s view of God’s attributes are closely related to many facets concerning the local church—for example, the way one’s focus is placed upon ecclesiology (study of the church), their practice of worship and ministry, and Christianity in general. The local church consists of believers who are set apart to embody distinct beliefs ascertained in God’s Word by discovering the fundamentals of God through edifying the saints while evangelizing the lost. Without a proper view of God one will falter in their faith and ultimately their Christian maturity.

Consider church discipline. It is a biblical practice that must be guided by a proper understanding of God’s holiness and love. As a pastor and shepherd, I will be held accountable for the flock entrusted to me (Heb.13:17). Therefore I must faithfully guide my church to practice discipline with a view of God’s holiness in mind. There is a loving way to practice church discipline since love is part of what compels discipline. However, it is because of God’s holiness and the church’s reflection of it that one must lovingly practice discipline.

On the other hand, when one accentuates God’s love over His holiness, the church may become nothing more than a place where love is demonstrated while holiness, and the dangers of sin and worldliness, are forgotten. Churches fail to adhere to Scripture when the aim of the church is to make individuals feel good about themselves. When an individual is self absorbed on the experiential nature of church instead of being shown their own sinfulness in light of God’s holiness, or how to reflect God by being more like Him and following after Him, their worldview is distorted and misguided.

When churches preach, teach, and model a “love-only” approach to God and Christianity, His righteousness, justice, and even His holiness are replaced by a message able to tickle the ears, but diminishes God. F. Leroy Forlines says in The Quest for Truth, “When Love is made the basic attribute of God, it leads to the idea of universal salvation – an idea that finds no support whatever in scripture. It also leads to compromise in moral issues because love that is not subject to holiness is too ready to modify and compromise.”[1]

If a church does not emphasize the Gospel because of God’s holiness and then only through his love, to repent and place their belief fully and completely in Christ alone, then the message is futile. Universal salvation may not be said, but it is implied. The church must allow individuals to place their faith in Christ and Him alone. That is when churches model God’s attributes, by reflecting His glory through extending His holiness and love to sinners and saints alike.

David F. Wells, states in his work, The Courage to be Protestant:

"Churches that want to influence their culture are often tempted to think that to be effective they must hide their otherworldliness and become this-worldly. They think they must identify with their culture as if they knew nothing but that culture. They imagine their chief tool, if not their only tool, of influence is friendship and love with their world.

Churches that actually do influence the culture – here is the paradox – distance themselves from it in their internal life. They do not offer what can already be had on secular terms in the culture. They are an alternative to it. They stand over against it in their preoccupations, because their preoccupations are with the God of their salvation who in his holiness and grace is completely unlike anything we find in life. In life we find preoccupations that are thoroughly this-worldly. The preoccupations in the church arise from the knowledge of God in Christians and from his written Word. Because of this they are necessarily “otherworldly”." [2]

May we reflect the character of God in the church and in our lives by distinguishing ourselves from the culture around us, imitating the one who has saved and redeemed us (Titus 2:11-14). When God’s holiness is proclaimed and exemplified, along with the need to love our neighbor we see a beautiful depiction of what God intended: the universal church, the local church, and the individual Christian glorifying God and being empowered by Him for ministry.



[1] F. Leroy Forlines, The Quest for Truth (Nashville: Randall House, 2001), 73.

[2] David F. Wells, The Courage to be Protestant (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008), 224.

Also consulted: Millard Erickson, Christian Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1998).

To read this essay and many more concerning: theology, spirituality, ministry and culture, check out www.helwyssocietyforum.com

Mohler's Library

A few months ago I had the opportunity to drive up to SBTS with a friend and view their campus and facilities during one of their preview days. It was an amazing experience. I was able to meet some great people up there. One of the greatest highlights of the visit though was the opportunity we had at the end. At the very end of the day they had a reception at the President's House (Al Mohler). During the reception they allowed whoever wanted to a chance to go downstairs to view his personal library. As a enthusiast of books, theology and anything academic I was like a kid in the candy store. This video is for anyone that can empathize with me.

Al Mohler - Study Tour from Together for the Gospel (T4G) on Vimeo.

Theology: Whether You Want To Or Not

The·ol·o·gy - "The study of the nature of God and religious truth; rational inquiry into religious questions"

Theology. Kind of sounds like a bad word in today's culture, doesn't it? We associate it with extreme liberalism or ultra conservatism. Often times people assume that one that is concerned about theology is really only viewing God through the glasses of academia. We associate Theology with the mind and the rest of Christianity with the heart. Somehow we've cast this ever-important part of our faith away into a collection of archaic disciplines. There is a misconceived assumption that one has to be named Eusebius, Ambrose, or Augustine in order to understand anything that remotely deals with Theology. It is a sad state that we are in. In our Post-Modern culture, in which we value opinion over truth, and the search over the end result, many people don't care about important Theological issues. We like to throw important doctrine under the rug for the sake of "searching for ourselves". It doesn't matter if Theologians spent gave up their lives to defend heresies or become catalyst for reformation. We would rather neglect that knowledge in order to mysticize our faith.

But there is one thing we're forgetting. Whether we embrace theology or not, we our creating our own theology. It doesn't matter whether or not we say we are theologically minded or not; we cultivate our own theology each and everyday. Theology is more then being able to argue the peccability verse the impeccability of Christ or being able to adequately explain the governmental view of atonement. Theology is any study and understanding of God. If we tell people that God is love, then that is part of our theology. If we show mercy to one another, because God showed mercy toward us, that is theology. If we explain to people that we need to bring lost souls back into union with God, that is theology. Simply by the way we live we are developing our theology. Theology doesn't have to be all lofty ideas and concepts, although there is great benefit in knowing those, it is also the specific way in which we see the nature of God. We share our theology with people everyday in the way in which we live.

Harry Reeder III tells a story about a woman coming up to him after a service and explaining to him that she has a question. She says "don't worry though, it's not theological", to which he responds "well, you really don't have a question then do you?". He was simply explaining that everything in our lives is theological. Not just whats in our textbooks, but every action we do.

What it comes down to is that you are theological, whether you want to be or not. Just by the way you live your life and the things you tell people about God, you are forming a theology. So this demands some questions: are you spreading true theology? Are you demonstrating the correct nature of God in your actions and your life? Paul talks a lot throughout his epistles about keeping the message true and constantly rebuking false teachings. I think it goes without saying that one of the best ways for us to betray the Gospel message is through the way we live our lives. Do not betray the life changing message of the Gospel through sinful actions. Make sure your theology is sound.

Journaling

Journaling. It's been around for millennia. Recording the various events of a particular day is a discipline that has a long history. One could even state that some of the Psalms read as though they were torn out of David's personal Journal. Journaling is a ancient discipline that I hope doesn't dwindle with the rise of technology. I find it interesting when we look at the writings of the scholars of yesteryear, we see that they are often noted as "the collected works, letters and journal of...". Obviously journaling was once a art that was held in high regard. Recently I have been trying to work my way through reading John Wesley's journal. It is just an awesome gift to be able to look into the life of a Christian hero like that and see what they did in their everyday life. The same is true about countless authors and leaders. We have the opportunity to read into their lives and see what it consisted of on a day to day basis.

With that said, I bring a challenge to you. Start journaling. I know this sounds ridiculously easy, but the benefits are numerous. I do have to give credit where credit is due. My friend Heath is the one that got me onto the idea of journaling. He simply encouraged me to start journaling right along with my devotions. It's that simple. It may just be for me, but journaling has helped my devotion life excessively. Just knowing that I will have to write about what I read in my devotions makes me not only keep up with my devotional reading, but also forces me to pay more attention to the material I'm reading,

Not only that, but while I'm journaling, I also get a chance to put on paper what has been floating around in my head all day. Often times we allow idea to sit in our minds but never come to fruition because we don't write them down. Journaling about them not only allows you to write them down, but forces you to think through whatever it is you have been meditating on.

I do have to warn you though. Don't write like someone is going to read it one day. You may think I'm joking, but talking with some friends this is a real problem some people run into. There's always that chance that you might become a historical figure of one kind or another, but don't write to imitate that style of writing. You'll just end up writing nonsense. Instead, write sincerely. Write what is on your heart and what is on your mind. Writing is a art that seems to be dwindling in this age of instant gratification and short attention spans. Take time out of your day to spend with your thoughts. I promise it'll benefit you.

And They Crucified Him - Art Katz

A Promise

"No temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your ability, but with the temptation he will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it."

- 1 Corinthians 10:13 (ESV)

Temptation and Promises isn't exactly what you think of when you try to pair up terms. They don't follow under famous duos such as Peanut Butter and Jelly, Batman and Robin, Abbott and Costello, Salt and Pepper (or Salt and Pepa for that matter). If anything, we often look at Temptation and Promises as two things that are on the opposite sides of the spiritual spectrum from one another. Throughout our Christian life we are given Biblical promises that we can hold on to. Most famous of these is most likely Romans 8:28, which reads: "And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose." As far as promises go in the Bible, Romans 8:28 ranks at the top. It's quoted in sympathy cards and encouragement notes alike; and with good reason. We should hold to promises like this. We know that Scripture is true and that we can put our hope in anything that it affirms.

But what about other Promises that Scripture has given us? Of course they're countless. From the covenants of the Old Testament to the decrees of Christ himself, we have promises that we know are true. Even when it comes to Temptation. Recently it seems that this subject has been like a broken record in my life. I know that we all face temptation on a daily basis, and it is a daily battle. I am certainly no exception to that. Temptation happens daily, in word, thought and deed. When I say it has been showing up in my life lately, I mean more so in reading and in sermons that I've been hearing. God has been reminding me through His word what He has to say about it. This promise has been my comfort here lately.

I know that this verse isn't a obscure one by any means. As a matter fact, many may have memorized this in Sunday School when they were little. But often we don't understand the fullness of a promise like this. The Holy Spirit working through the Apostle Paul here tells us that there is no temptation that God cannot give us a way out of. As always the passage tells us that God is faithful, as He is always in our lives and that He will not allow us to be tempted more then we can endure, but always be there for us. In times of temptation this is the verse we must search after. This is the verse that we must cling too. Just as Christ rebuked Satan with Scripture during His temptation, we too must run to God's Holy Word when we are under the Temptation of the Evil One.

It is not my desire to sound overly-pious by sharing this verse and encouraging others to cling to it. I just know the help and comfort that it has offered me in my life. Hopefully through this transparency I will benefit someone else. When you face temptation daily, hold strong to the Promise that God has offered us.

Book Review: Adopted for Life

It has been quite a while since my last blog post. I do not intend to bore you with irrational excuses on why I haven't been blogging lately and I will not make false promises of blogging more in the future. I do intend to write on here when it is possible, as I am now. With that said, I only found it fitting that my first post in a while would be another book review. But before I get started, allow me to chase a small rabbit trail.

Read. I ask you and I challenge you. First, read your Bible. You cannot live a Christian life without reading from direct revelation that God has given specifically to you. If you do not read anything else, read God's Holy Word. Second, read Christian literature. My advice, and it is exactly that, take it or leave it, would be to stray away from shallow overly-popular Christian Literature. Instead read works that have been tested by time. Read something by Schaeffer, Lewis, Augustine, Bunyan, etc. It is highly beneficial to your Christian life to expand both your intellectual horizons, which in turn can allow you to follow God commandments more fully.

Now back to the subject at hand: Russel Moore's book Adopted for Life. Now you are probably asking yourself: why is Chris, a unmarried, poor, undergrad pastoral student doing reading a book on adoption. Better yet some of you may be wondering if this book is about theological adoption; us as believers being 'grafted' into the body of Christ through Christ's death, or is it about adopting a child into your family? My answer to the latter question: Both. Moore does a terrific job in this book melding theological adoption with physical adoption in a way that helped me understand the gospel better then I ever have before. He quoted scripture after scripture (all in context) explaining how we are orphans, children of the devil, that have been adopted into the family of God as heirs to throne.

This was a moving book. In the same way that Eric Ludy's book The Bravehearted Gospel urged me to get up and charge the gates of hell, Moore's book brought me to the verge of tears. He explained thoroughly how beneficial it would to cultivate a spirit of adoption among the body of Christ. He emphasized the importance of the gospel in adoption and how we can truly show Christ's love in the adoption of unwanted children.

I recommend this book to everyone. Whether you are thinking about adoption, have thought about it, or could care less, I beg you to read this book. Moore is passionate about this worthy cause, and all I ask is that you listen.

Insight on Sin

"Certain new theologians dispute original sin, which is the only part of Christian theology which can really be proved... But they essentially deny human sin, which they can see in the street. The strongest saints and the strongest skeptics alike took positive evil as the starting-point of their argument. If it be true (as it certainly is) that a man can feel exquisite happiness in skinning a cat, then the religious philosopher can only draw one of two deductions. He must either deny the existence of God, as all atheists do; or he must deny the present union between God and man, as all Christians do. The new theologians seem to think it a highly rationalistic solution to deny the cat."

- taken from G.K. Chesterton's "Orthodoxy" pg. 7

C.S. Lewis Song

Now, I do understand that many people are fans of C.S. Lewis. I've also came to realization that there are very few people that are true fans. I found this song a little while back by artist Brooke Fraser. I can hardly think of anything better than a girl singing quotes by this great author. Beautiful.

Book Review: The End of Reason

I have added one more notch to my belt of book reading for this year. Ironically, this wasn't on my tentative reading list for this year. This was also my first book by Ravi Zacharias, and I have to admit that I wasn't disappointed. Officially, this was a rebuttal to Sam Harris' book Letter to a Christian Nation. Unofficially, it was a systematic approach in apologetics. It was a good book altogether and I enjoyed reading through it. I recommend it to anybody looking for a response to the new atheist movement.

Here are some of my thoughts about this book. It was smaller in size so it made for a quick read. He did a good job of taking the different parts of Harris' argument, explaining it, and then explaining the falsehood behind it. I found a big contrast between the way Zacharias approached apologetics and the way Keller approaches apologetics. Of course you have to take into account that this book wasn't clear propositional apologetics, but rather a response to Sam Harris' accusations. Zacharias also does a great job with illustrations. He is able to put together an argument (or destroy one for that matter) with simple illustrations and reasoning. He also shows the many flaws in Harris' argumentation. He explains how he is unfair in his accusations and doesn't use the the same standard upon himself.

I wish that Ravi Zacharias would have been a little bit more respectful in his response. He never crossed the line into rude or cynical, yet he did make Harris' out to be an idiot a lot (not that he isn't). He constantly would besiege Harris' accusations with logical responses, but would sometimes push towards mockery. He did say on the safe side of the line, yet I wish he would have been slightly more respectful in his argument.

Overall, this was a good book. I wouldn't say that it is a must read like the last few books that I have read though. It was a short, intriguing book that I think would be beneficial for anyone to read.

Resistance of God's Moral Order

Though Viktor Frankl was an inmate in Auschwitz, he didn't blame God for the Holocaust. He laid the blame for that horror at the feet of men and women who thought like Sam Harris. Listen to Frankl's words in The Doctor and the Soul:

If we present a man with a concept of man which is not true, we may well corrupt him. When we present man as an automaton of reflexes, as a mind-machine, as a bundle of instincts, as a pawn of drives and reactions, as a mere product of instinct, heredity, and environment, we feed the nihilism to which modern man is, in any case, prone.

I became acquainted with the last stage of that corruption in my second concentration camp, Auschwitz. The gas chambers of Auschwitz were the ultimate consequence of the theory that man is nothing but the product of heredity and environment - or, as the Nazi liked to say, "of Blood and Soil." I am absolutely convinced that the gas chambers of Auschwitz, Treblinka, and Maidanek were ultimately prepared not in some Ministry or other in Berlin, but rather at the desks and in the lecture halls of nihilistic scientists and philosophers.

Taken from The End of Reason by Ravi Zacharias, pg. 62

Sunday School Answers

Anyone that has spent any substantial amount of time in church knows what I am talking about when I say the term "Sunday School Answer". Even more so, you know the type of person that uses them. It's usually a guy, family is heavily involved in church, but probably doesn't work in full-time ministry, they usually wear argyle and have their hair combed perfectly (This is purely speculation). You get into Sunday School or Small Group or whatever you church calls it, the teacher gets into the lesson and in an attempt to integrate the class they start to drop questions about the bible and spirituality. Then come the "answers". You know what I'm talking about. The perfectly molded answer from the dude in the argyle that makes you feel like sub-par Christian. Apparently he has his junk together, either that or he's lying through his teeth. Is he wrong? Are you wrong?

I had some good talks about this lately. I have constantly found myself apprehensive about praying among friends at the fear of looking self-righteous. I was with a group of very close guy friends the other night and felt a heavy desire to pray with them. Immediately, I felt the fear of coming off as being self-righteous. I tried to put that fear away and sequentially lead into a 5 minute preface on how I missed spontaneous corporate prayer. After this long dissertation, I asked my close brothers if it would be ok if we all prayed together and to my surprise they were excited at the thought.

This got me thinking. Why do we get so upset at the Sunday School answers? I've never wanted to be "that guy" in Sunday School that answered all the questions perfectly. I was even scared the other night at asking everyone to pray because I didn't want to come off as "the perfect Christian". I think this is where we find the dichotomy. Here's the difference: they become Sunday School answers when they are insincere. When we are just saying a statement to appease the people around us and make us look like a Super Christian then it is nothing more than a Sunday School Answer. On the other hand, if we are truly speaking the truth of the Bible and seeking to practice Christian disciplines out of sincerity, it ceases to be a Sunday School Answer. One one side we don't want to come off as a Super Christian and on the other hand, some of us find it cool to be on the verge of the world and still be a Christian. The answer: Seek Christ and allow Him to transform you into His likeness, not for your glory, but for His. That way, you will be neither self-righteous nor a fence-sitter.

So as always, I challenge you. Seek sincerity in your life. Seek Christ's likeness in yourself and allow that to manifest itself. Remember: God only looks for in us that which God produced.

2010 Reading List

As many people try to do near the beginning of the year, I have tried to formulate an adequate reading list for this year. Obviously I am neither constrained, nor obligated to follow this list, but hopefully it will at least motivate me to keep on task with reading good books of substance. This is what I have so far:

Cost of Discipleship by Dietrich Bonhoeffer

Letter from Birmingham Jail By Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Atheism Remix by R. Albert Mohler Jr.

The Journal of John Wesley by John Wesley

Confessions by Saint Augustine

Adopted for Life: The Priority of Adoption for Christian Families and Churches by Russell D. Moore

Ministries of Mercy by Timothy Keller

The Weight of Glory by C.S. Lewis

The Fundamentals edited by R.A. Torrey

Revolution in World Missions by K.P. Yohannan

The Pursuit of God by A.W. Tozer

A Christian Manifesto by Francis Schaeffer

I would love to hear your suggestions, comments, or recommendations on books I should (or shouldn't read for that matter) for this year.

GO10 Walk

Book Review: The Reason for God

This is my third book by Timothy Keller and my last, at least for a little while. Once again, Keller did not disappoint. This was a nice change from the last two books that I have read by him. The previous two were more expositions on either a section of scripture or one central concept. This book on the other hand, was much more extensive and broad. Now, I've read my share of Apologetic books, but this one was surprisingly different. It mirrored the apologetic style of Lewis more than, say, McDowell or Strobel.

There are a few reasons why I think that this book is better at defending the faith then most. First, he is extremely respectful when it comes to arguments of any kind. I find that most apologetic books can be abrasive to say the least. Don't get me wrong, I understand that when defending the basic tenants of the faith we need to be firm in our stance; it just seems that some authors err on the side of disrespect. Keller does an amazing job with this. He is able to take the arguments of the most critical scholars, concede certain points, and still come out with a rational, conservative Christian stance. The second reason I like this book, is that he is very systematic in his approach. He takes the first half of the book and discusses the major objections to Christianity (i.e. Exclusivism of Christianity, Hell, Inerrancy of Scripture, etc.). Most apologetic authors stop there and seem to have done a fair job arguing against objections. Keller takes it one step further. He then takes the latter half of the book and gives reasons for God. As with his other books, he does a fantastic job of using many different mediums as sources. Being a fanatic Lewis fan, I appreciated his numerous quotations from Lewis throughout this book.

The third and last thing that I really appreciated about this book is his conclusion. Obviously most apologetic books are specifically for believers and detailed explanations in which they can defend their faith through reason and rationality. It is quite clear that Keller is aiming specifically at self-acclaimed skeptics. He takes the last chapter of the book to lead the reader through an acceptance in Jesus Christ. He is quite thorough in doing this. Most authors neglect to do this.

Overall, Keller once again did not disappoint. He gave a great argument on many different cases. The book was well researched and should be appreciated by novice and scholar alike. I challenge you, whether you are a believer or a skeptic to read this book. Either way, you will at least walk away with some heavy arguments to meditate upon.

Security in Ignorance

There is definitely a growing majority in our society that are perfectly fine with remaining ignorant about a spectrum of different issues and subjects. Even within our colleges, universities and other learning institutions we see the attendees being content with remaining uneducated on vital problems. Why is this? Why would anyone allow themselves to remain ignorant about issues and philosophies that are so pressing? I think it goes beyond the old cliche "ignorance is bliss", but I definitely think that it starts there.

The biggest problems with using cliches it that they are so redundant that they often fall on deaf ears. So when I say "ignorance is bliss", we often don't even receive it as fact because we have heard it so many times. But why is ignorance bliss? It's because we're accountable for every piece of knowledge that we acquire. Whatever we are educated about, we are then responsible to do something with that knowledge. If we don't learn anything then we aren't obligated to do anything with the knowledge that we have. It makes logical sense and in this rationality I guess ignorance can be bliss.

But is anyone really ok with remaining ignorant? As with many things in society we see a dichotomy in this too. As we see a majority becoming more and more content with being ignorant on a variety of issues, we also see a growing number of people "spreading awareness". More and more people are finding a numerous amounts of causes to advocate for. But there is a problem with both of these schools of thought. The first is obviously bad. Remaining ignorant about something does keep you in the green about it. On top of that, being aware of something and only spreading awareness about it doesn't do much better. As Christians we're called to action.

So what do we do? First, educate yourself. Don't allow yourself to settle for ignorance on anything. Educate yourself on everything. Become knowledgeable about social issues, politics, philosophy, theology, etc. I often hear people rationalize that not everybody needs to know about that stuff, but only the professionals. I've heard this numerous times about theology in particular. That is ignorant. Educate yourself. I don't care who you are or how much you know right now, learn more. Figure out how God is integrated into every aspect of our lives, how He has worked through history, societies, politics, science, and literature. Second, once you're educated, then you're responsible for what you know. You have an obligation to share it. Teach someone. Once you have become educated on something you are then responsible to teach others what you know.

Do not give into the educational stigmas. Learn and teach.

The Opiate of the People

Czeslaw Milosz, the Nobel Prize-winning Polish poet, wrote the remarkable essay "The Discreet Charms of Nihilism." In it he remembers how Marx had called religion "the opiate of the people" because the promise of an afterlife (Marx said) led the poor and the working class to put up with unjust social conditions. But, Milosz continued:

"And now we are witnessing a transformation. A true opium of the people is a belief in nothingness after death - the huge solace of thinking that our betrayals, greed, cowardice, murders are not going to be judged... [but] all religions recognize that our deeds are imperishable."

- taken from "The Reason for God" by Timothy Keller, pg. 78