Unconditional Love or Unconditional Affirmation?

Introduction- Unconditional Love or Unconditional Affirmation?

It is increasingly becoming popular in culture to think that unconditional affirmation of one's thoughts about themselves (identity), whether objectively true or not, is a necessary feature of unconditional love. The idea is that if you claim to unconditionally love someone, you will always affirm their identity and celebrate every action and behavior that reinforces their identity. If you do not affirm and celebrate, then it is impossible for you to unconditionally love that person.

This cultural idea, though, is increasingly showing its intolerance of even the slightest disagreement, even among those who generally agree on a modern view of tolerance. Those who have championed this view for years are now finding themselves splitting from each other along the lines of sexual identity- not just what they prefer but what they are. 

I believe that this newer cultural split and even the foundations of the modern tolerance movement are enabled due to a conflation between the meanings of "love" and "affirmation." Unless and until our culture distinguishes between them again, the modern tolerance movement will continue to splinter along ideological lines until every individual stands alone with neither the love nor affirmation of another. 

Before You Hit Send by Emerson Eggerichs- Audio Book Highlight

Introduction

If you consume a large portion of your material through audio, it is hard to get past a good deal on an excellent audio book. Twice every year ChristianAudio.com runs a sale on most of their collection, and you can usually pick up these great audio resources for $7.49. The time has come for the first sale of 2021 (and beyond), so I will be highlighting some of my favorite audio books. I'll include a few of my favorite quotes from the books, my recommendation from my chapter-by-chapter reviews, links to posts that were inspired by the books, and, of course, I will include links to the audio book deal throughout the article. Today, I am highlighting Before You Hit Send: Preventing Headache and Heartache by Dr. Emerson Eggerichs. 

Before You Hit Send- My Recommendation

I was first introduced to Dr. Emerson Eggerichs' work about a decade ago when my wife and I were at the local Christian bookstore, and one of his books about communication in marriage was on sale. I picked it up and found that it was on target with what Scripture taught about male and female communication and what my wife and I had experienced in our own marriage. After reading his flagship book "Love and Respect: The Love She Desires Most; The Respect He Desperately Needs" and listening to the podcast he produced for a couple years, I (along with many others) realized that the communication principles he drew from Scripture rang true in all relationships, not just marriage.

When I found out that he wrote a book on general communication in all relationships and focused on communication in the age of social media, I was ecstatic! As a defender of the Christian worldview, I am constantly engaging skeptics and presenting the evidence for the truth of what I believe. The common passage of scripture that is quoted to support this aspect of evangelism is 1 Peter 3:15: "Always be ready to give a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you, and do so with gentleness and respect." This passage emphasizes not merely the content of our defense but also the delivery of the content: "with gentleness and respect." Learning to be wise communicators is necessary for anyone who wishes to obey Peter's command in full. 

Finding Common Ground In A Time of Stark Division

"While we all want to believe that we are committed to truth rather than a narrative, our actions in conversation—how we mistreat evidence, mischaracterize opposing views and arguments, and attack the challenger rather than the challenge—often tell a different story."- Luke Nix

The Importance of Recognizing Common Ground

In these times of stark division, it is important that we not allow our disagreements to ultimately result in the destruction of our unity as a society, culture, and Church. There is nothing wrong with a society having a diversity of ideas, as long as those ideas are discussed and debated respectfully. When the wrong ideas are identified, such a respectful dialog can result in the dismissal of false ideas and the acceptance of true ideas. This is progress. Progress towards the objective goal of a society that has and lives according to the view of reality as it actually is and not some delusion. 

However, many times discussion is stifled because we do not recognize common ground with those in which we disagree. When we possess and recognize common ground, we have a connection to maintain a healthy relationship when we have stark disagreements and rigorously debate which view (if either) accurately reflect reality. Today I want to point out six different things that we all hold in common that, if recognized by even one side, can help keep relationships healthy despite disagreements. 

Defending Truth or Relieving Suffering: Which Should Be A Christian's Focus?

Why should Christians spend so much time and energy debating true theology when people are dying every day? 

The Current Suffering In America

In the last year America has experienced a crazy amount of unrest and carnage (or at least that is what is put in front of our eyes every single day). And the opportunities for Christians to minister to those who are suffering due to the evil continue grow by the day. While these existential issues are piling up and many Christians are on the front lines of tending to physical, psychological, emotional, and spiritual wounds, many other Christians continue to have, what seem to be, abstract and less important discussions and arguments over theology. A friend of mine expressed his concern on social media when we were discussing a particular theological issue (but his concern can be aimed at any of the numerous theological debates). He states: 

"I’m confused, why is it so important to show that your understanding of how old the Earth is, is the correct one? When people are destroying businesses while the police are told it’s okay because we need to let them vent, I’m thinking there are more important things Christians could be doing right now, than trying to prove to each other that their version of how and when God created our world, is the correct one. But I could be wrong...For the record, I do think it’s important to understand scriptures correctly, but some things like how and when God did certain things, are not as important to be understood correctly. In fact, I can imagine God being displeased with people on both sides of the age issue, because they lose sight of what the entire Bible is really all about. That doesn’t mean God didn’t stick some cool science answers in there, but OECists are correct when they object to how many YECists make it so important and I believe I’m correct when I complain about OECists seemingly making it so important too."

He is not the only one who I have heard express similar concerns. 

Many Christians believe that the reason that we see so much evil in America today is because, as a culture, we have forgotten God. As a culture, we have intentionally removed Him from our education and legal systems, and as a result we have removed any objective standard by which to judge what is morally good and logically valid. This has led to several generations of Americans who are never taught of objective morality or even proper logical reasoning. As a result they feel free to do whatever they want, to whom ever they want, to get whatever they want. There is no consideration for what actions and what goals are objectively, morally good and objectively, logically justified. Our culture has devolved into a struggle for and demonstration of physical, legal, and rhetorical power over those who have different understandings of reality than our own. And as long as Americans feels that they are justified in continuing to reject God, there is no hope in sight for this sad state of affairs to ever change. 

💬45 Quotes About Relativism vs.Truth

1. "When it comes to truth, the outcome affects not only individuals but nations and even civilizations. What starts looking like a small abstract issue ends with titanic, public consequences for all who love freedom and justice."
- Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin

2. "Although someone's beliefs and assumptions may not be true and do not describe reality, they will still drive their behavior. So if someone doesn't believe in truth, count on him to lie. If someone says there are no objective facts, expect her to be careless with facts to further her own interests. If someone explains everything by referring to evolution and the 'selfish gene,' be sure that at some point he will be extremely selfish on behalf of the fitness of his own survival."

- Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin

3. "Our challenge today is not to lament, protest, or simply talk about the crisis of truth in one of a hundred ways. Rather, it is to do something about it by becoming people of truth and learning to live free."
- Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin

4. "Far from being a naive and reactionary notion, truth is one of the simplest, most precious gifts without which we would not be able to handle reality or negotiate life."
- Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin

5. "When nothing can be judged except judgment itself-- 'judgmentalism'--the barriers between the unthinkable, acceptable, and doable collapse entirely. And then, since life goes on and the sky doesn't fall, people draw the conclusion that the original concern was unfounded. Lighten up, the newly amoral say as they skip forward blithely, complicit in their own corruption."
- Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin

6. "If truth is truth, then differences make a difference -- not just between truth and lies but between intimacy and alienation in relationships, between harmony and conflict in neighborhoods, between efficiency and incompetence in business, between reliability and fraud in science and journalism, between trust and suspicion in leadership, between freedom and tyranny in government, and even between life and death."
- Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin

7. "While we all may have a sense of what is evil and what is good under the philosophy of cultural tolerance, evil and good can only be relative ideals. Without an objective truth—a set of universal moral values—good and evil are defined by the individual, community, or society. Therefore we have no moral basis by which to judge another person, community, or nation for what they do or don't do."
- Josh McDowell and Sean McDowell, The Beauty of Intolerance

8. "Right up to the end of the nineteenth century, the most important course in an American student's college career was moral philosophy, or what we today call ethics."
- Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin

9. "Much of today's focus is on 'prevention ethics' rather than on principled ethics. It is more concerned with 'not being caught' (or sued or exposed in the press) than with doing right."
- Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin

10. "What is seen as important are issues related to corporations, schools, courts, governments, and the treatment of the environment-- not the individual's virtue and responsibility that underlie these secondary issues."
- Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin

11. "The current ethics is often taught with a shallow view of human nature and an even more superficial view of evil in human society."
- Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin

12. "The emphasis now is on surface, not depth; on possibilities, not equalities; on glamour, not convictions; on what can be altered endlessly; not achieved for good; and on what can be bought and won, not gained by education and formation."
- Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin

13. "The present preoccupation with ethics in elite intellectual centers has an element of absurdity because they have no moral content left to teach. The fruit of the Western universities in the last two hundred years has been to destroy the possibility of any moral knowledge on which to pursue moral formation."
- Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin

14. "If truth is contingent upon the society in which we live...there is nothing intuitive or universally or absolutely true about freedom from torture or freedom from slavery; our society just happens to have come up with these values over time."
- Stephen McAndrew, Why It Doesn't Matter What YOU Believe If Its Not True

15. "If moral truths do not exist as a foundation for law, then law itself becomes merely a system of raw political power accountable to no one."
- Scott Klusendorf, The Case for Life

16. "Just as iron filings are drawn to the strongest magnet, so minds weakened by a loss of truth are drawn to the most powerful positions."
- Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin

17. "What happens when we succeed in cutting away truth-claims to expose the web of power games only to find we have less power than the players we face? If truth is dead, right and wrong are neither, and all that remains is the will to power, then the conclusion is simple: Might makes right. Logic is only a power conspiracy. Victory goes to the strong, and the weak go to the wall."
- Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin

18. "Just as the Greeks entered Troy concealed in the hollow wooden statue of a horse, so post-modernism is providing the cover for all sorts of ideas and practices to enter American life--ideas that on their own would have difficulty gaining entrance."
- Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin

19 "Short of total isolation, the American society you live in today is going to influence how your children make moral choices in one way or another. Stop and think about it. What are the voices of society telling your children about the choices they are about to make? What is the central theme that today's culture emphasizes over and over again? If you were to reduce it to a single sentence, it might look like this: You have the right to choose for yourself what is right for you and what is wrong for you--and no one should judge that choice."
- Josh McDowell and Sean McDowell, The Beauty of Intolerance

20. "When nothing can be judged except judgment itself— 'judgmentalism'—the barriers between the unthinkable, acceptable, and doable collapse entirely.
- Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin

21. "If everything is endlessly open to question and change, then everything is permitted, nothing is forbidden, and literally nothing is unthinkable."
- Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin

22. "Applying to the skeptics the skepticism they apply to others [pushes] them out toward the negative consequences of their own beliefs."
- Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin

23. "While all beliefs appear consistent to those who believe them, they always have one of two problems. They are either constricting or contradictory. In the first case the beliefs are more consistent but are incomplete in the sense that they are too small for the fullness of life...And in the second case the beliefs are more comprehensive but are inconsistent—which in the worst cases makes them self-refuting- a problem Chesterton calls 'the suicide of thought.'"
- Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin

24. "Inevitably, moral choices based on our own moral compass will often be wrong choices. And wrong moral choices can result in consequences ranging from minor disappointments to major disasters emotionally, relationally, physically, and spiritually."
- Josh McDowell and Sean McDowell, The Beauty of Intolerance

25. "Truth is true even if nobody believes it, and falsehood is false even if everybody believes it."
- Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin

26. "It is that truth, like meaning as a whole, is not for to us to create but for us to discover. Each of us may be small, our lives short, and our influence puny. But if truth is there—objective, absolute, independent of minds that know it— then we may count on it."
- Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin

27. "In order to discover truth it is necessary to coldly dissect and examine all of our prejudices and inherent biases to ensure we receive unbiased answers. This takes effort. It is always easier to simply accept the ideas presented to us than to question the status quo."
- Stephen McAndrew, Why It Doesn't Matter What YOU Believe If Its Not True

28. "While we all may have a sense of what is evil and what is good under the philosophy of cultural tolerance, evil and good can only be relative ideals. Without an objective truth—a set of universal moral values—good and evil are defined by the individual, community, or society. Therefore we have no moral basis by which to judge another person, community, or nation for what they do or don't do."
- Josh McDowell and Sean McDowell, The Beauty of Intolerance

29 "We are all entitled to our own beliefs, but this doesn't mean each of us has our own truths. Our beliefs describe the way we think the world is. Truth describes the objective state of the world regardless of how we take it to be. Beliefs can be relative, but truth cannot. So when we consider the nature of truth—that it is an objective description of reality—it makes no sense to say that something is true for you and not for me."
- Josh McDowell and Sean McDowell, The Beauty of Intolerance

30. "Without truth, a belief may be only speculation plus sincerity."
- Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin

31. "While we all may have a sense of what is evil and what is good under the philosophy of cultural tolerance, evil and good can only be relative ideals. Without an objective truth—a set of universal moral values—good and evil are defined by the individual, community, or society. Therefore we have no moral basis by which to judge another person, community, or nation for what they do or don't do."
- Josh McDowell and Sean McDowell, The Beauty of Intolerance

32. "It is often said that to have a fulfilling life, three essentials are required: a clear sense of personal identity, a deep sense of faith and meaning, and a strong sense of purpose and mission."
- Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin

33. "For those who find themselves without faith in God and who conclude that the world they desire does not fit with the world they discover, life is fundamentally deaf to their aspirations."
- Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin

34. "For all the fragile precariousness of our human existence on our tiny earth in the vastness of space, we may throw the whole weight of our existence on God, including our truth-seeking desires, because he is wholly true."
- Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin

35. "Those who put their faith in God do so for all sorts of good reasons, but the very best reason is that they are finally, utterly, and incontrovertibly convinced that the faith which they put their confidence in is true."
- Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin

36. "All truth is God's truth and is true everywhere, for everyone, under all conditions. Truth is true in the sense that it is objective and independent of the mind of any human knower. Being true, it cannot contradict itself."
- Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin

37. "The beauty of intolerance is its opposition to wrong and evil in the world—in alignment with God's righteous and perfect standard of justice, equality, human rights, and caring for others. Intolerance of evil is not mean-spirited and condemnatory; it is actually the only way to be loving and caring."
- Josh McDowell and Sean McDowell, The Beauty of Intolerance

38. "What is more beautiful than God's intolerance expressed in his moral outrage toward the tragedies of poverty, racism, sexual abuse, slavery, AIDS, bigotry, and other such evils?"
- Josh McDowell and Sean McDowell, The Beauty of Intolerance

39. "Human beings are truth-seekers by nature, and truth persuades by the forces of its own reality."
- Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin

40. "It is impossible to experience love without being truthful, and it is impossible to discover truth without loving it."
- Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin

41. "Truth is our best friend, and it is an inseparable part of what real love is. While cultural tolerance may disguise itself as caring, understanding, and loving, it lacks the moral authority of an authentic love that looks out for the best interest of others. That is another quality of authentic, real love—it is always other-focused."
- Josh McDowell and Sean McDowell, The Beauty of Intolerance

42. "As human beings we are by nature truth-seekers; as fallen human beings we are also by nature truth-twisters. And a proper account of truth in the human project must do justice to both."
- Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin

43. "Conforming our desires to the truth is harder in the short term but easier in the long. We give up our need for control and submit to truth outside us which, if we were wrong about truth before, requires repentance rather than rationalization. We have to face up to reality rather than trying to fit reality into our schemes. But the long-term outcome is freedom because...truth is freedom and we are engaging with reality at it truly is."
- Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin

44. "What distinguishes God's unconditional acceptance from that of our culture is authentic love. His love is intended to make the security, happiness, and welfare of another as important as his own. It is other-focused, not performance-focused. God knows the real truth about us—that we were created in his image—and that truth allows him to separate the person from performance. God unconditionally values us for who we are without always approving of what we do, because he separates the value of the person from the acts of the person."
- Josh McDowell and Sean McDowell, The Beauty of Intolerance

45. "The Christian faith is not true because it works; it works because it is true. It is not true because we experience it; we experience it—deeply and gloriously—because it is true. It is not simply 'true for us'; it is true for any who seek in order to find."

- Os Guinness, Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin

Follow Faithful Thinkers On Social Media

 

All these quotes can be found in the following books by the cited authors:

• Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin- Os Guinness
• The Beauty of Intolerance: Setting A Generation Free to Know Truth and Love- Josh McDowell and Sean McDowell
• Why It Doesn't Matter What YOU Believe If Its Not True- Stephen McAndrew
• The Case For Life- Scott Klusendorf

Book Review: Time For Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin

Introduction

"Time for Truth: Living Free In A World of Lies, Hype, and Spin" by Os Guinness has been on my reading list for several years now. It is a relatively short book, so I popped it in my bag to read during downtime on a trip to see family. By the time I had made it through the first chapter, I wished that I had made time to read it sooner!

In today's cultural and political climate that seems to twist and spin reality to fit certain narratives, it is vital that people be able to distinguish between truth from falsehood. The history of the East demonstrates the implications of denying truth as an accurate reflection of reality. In "Time for Truth" sociologist Os Guiness takes the reader through the philosophies and events that led to the fall of the East and compares them to current philosophies and events in the West. He warns that if the West continues on its current trajectory, it is headed for a similar collapse.

As usual, this review will take the form of a chapter-by-chapter summary and conclude with my thoughts and recommendation. 

🤔 25 Thoughtful Quotes On Tolerance and Diversity

Can there be true tolerance without uniformity? Challenge assumptions and ponder the necessity of diversity in these 25 tolerance quotes.

1. "Most of what passes for tolerance today is not tolerance at all but actually intellectual cowardice. Those who hide behind that word are often afraid of intelligent engagement and don't engage or even consider contrary opinions. It's easier to hurl an insult than to confront the idea and either refute it or be changed by it."
- Greg Koukl, Relativism

2. "Proponents of [this] cultural tolerance will point out that when you fail to endorse a person's beliefs and behavior, you are, in effect, rejecting the person. [For example], many claim that homosexuality is not merely a sexual act or a natural orientation; it is a state of being—an identity. Many assert that people are born gay, and when you condemn homosexuality, it's an affront to their personhood and a direct condemnation and discrimination against them as human beings."
- Josh McDowell and Sean McDowell, The Beauty of Intolerance

3. "[Ironically], Some of the most vocal advocates for tolerance are completely intolerant of those who express their belief in a biblical morality, especially if they do so in the public arena."
- Josh McDowell and Sean McDowell, The Beauty of Intolerance

4. "Cultural tolerance does not simply require that we give others the freedom to believe or live differently than we do. It has evolved into a demand that we accept, respect, and affirm the rightness of others' views and behavior--or be labeled intolerant, bigoted, and even hateful."
- Josh McDowell and Sean McDowell, The Beauty of Intolerance

Book Review: The Beauty of Intolerance

Introduction

A few years ago, Sean McDowell gave a talk at the AMP Conference called "The Beauty of Intolerance." In the talk, he spoke of two different views on tolerance that seem to be clashing in today's society. He explained how the differences explain much of the political rhetoric of "hate" and "phobias" and "intolerance." He focused specifically on the Church's speaking truth in love and how this view is actually the most tolerant. This talk has been one of my favorites for a while. I discovered shortly after I first saw the talk that Sean and his father, Josh McDowell, coauthored a book, "The Beauty of Intolerance," that went into the topic much deeper and focused on how Christian parents can effectively communicate moral truth to a morally relativistic generation. As a parent and one who defends the objectivity of morality (and, thus, the existence of God), this book was one I dare not pass on reading, which turns out was an excellent decision. Now, before I get to my usual chapter-by-chapter summary review and the remainder of my thoughts, here is the talk by Dr. Sean McDowell that originally caught my attention.

Book Review: Before You Hit Send

Introduction

I was first introduced to Dr. Emerson Eggerichs' work about a decade ago when my wife and I were at the local Christian bookstore, and one of his books about communication in marriage was on sale. I picked it up and found that it was on target with what Scripture taught about male and female communication and what my wife and I had experienced in our own marriage. After reading his flagship book "Love and Respect: The Love She Desires Most; The Respect He Desperately Needs" and listening to the podcast he produced for a couple years, I (along with many others) realized that the communication principles he drew from Scripture rang true in all relationships, not just marriage.

When I found out that he wrote a book on general communication in all relationships and focused on communication in the age of social media, I was ecstatic! As a defender of the Christian worldview, I am constantly engaging skeptics and presenting the evidence for the truth of what I believe. The common passage of scripture that is quoted to support this aspect of evangelism is 1 Peter 3:15: "Always be ready to give a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you, and do so with gentleness and respect." This passage emphasizes not merely the content of our defense but also the delivery of the content: "with gentleness and respect." Learning to be wise communicators is necessary for anyone who wishes to obey Peter's command in full. That is why I chose to review "Before You Hit Send: Preventing Headache and Heartache" on Faithful Thinkers. As with my other reviews, this one will be a chapter-by-chapter summary. Eggerichs describes eighty (yes, 80) unique pitfalls in communication, and while I will not attempt to describe each one, I have added bold type to emphasize their particular applicability to those defending the faith. Before I get to the review, here is a short interview with Dr. Eggerichs about the content of the book:

Is Education Overrated?

Introduction

A couple months ago I read an interesting article about a professor who made the case that today's education system is grossly overrated. If the article's author represented him correctly, his contention is that because a large portion of educational resources focus on credentials and self-esteem ("vanity" in the words of the author), the system is overrated and needs a major overhaul. You can read the article here: "Professor: 'Education is Grossly Overrated'." The last couple of lines are particularly what caught my attention:

"Is our quest to give students ever-higher levels of education and credentialing based more in vanity hits than in true knowledge and understanding of the world?"

That alone warrants this article for reasons that I will discuss shortly. But also happening in my home state of Oklahoma, as I write this blog post, is a dispute between public school teachers and law-makers regarding funding (you can check out any of our local media for the stories). As I have been involved in discussions at work and on Facebook about this local situation I recalled the content of the article above, that I believe may help explain how our education system got to producing the disrespectful display we have witnessed on both sides of the dispute. Let me get straight to my point.

Deconstructionism, the Constitution, and Biblical Interpretation

Introduction

As a defender of the Christian worldview my primary goal is to see unsaved people be saved, but in many conversations, I see numerous intellectual stumbling blocks for them, many put in place by other Christians. This is the reason that I not only defend the Christian worldview in general but also in details, often to fellow Christians who disagree with me (see a fuller explanation in this post: Internal Debates and Apologetics). In many of my discussions with fellow Christians on different theological positions, the proper interpretation (meaning) of what the Bible says is the focus. I also have political discussions with Christians in which we discuss the meaning of the words of the U.S. Constitution. Most of us agree that the proper interpretation of the Constitution is found in its authors, just as we believe that the proper interpretation of the Bible is found in its Author. We agree that in neither case is the meaning of the two ever found in the readers (deconstructionism). However, I have detected an inconsistency in the rejection of such an idea when it comes to one and not the other. Today, I want to explore this inconsistency and how removing it from our thinking can help, at least one, theological debate come closer to resolution.

Norman Geisler: There Is Some Truth In False Views

Introduction

In the process of defending views (whether they are worldview, political, or others) we will always come across people who hold to other views. Usually people hold to a particular view because they believe the view accurately reflects reality. However, since no two contradicting views can both be correct, one or both must be incorrect. But why would someone believe a false view? Norman Geisler provides insight into this in his book "Christian Ethics: Options and Issues":

"Few positions are totally without any merit. There is usually enough truth in any false view to make it hold water."

Distinguishing the True and False Parts

It is often difficult to persuade someone of the truth of your view if they believe that their view is accurate. The fact that their view may be able to explain certain parts of reality is what is the foundation for their holding their view. If their view did not have portions of it that were correct, they would not believe it. It is important to recognize these true parts as areas of agreement between the two different views. This will usually establish some trust between the two parties and allow for intellectual (rather than emotive and rhetorical) discussion about the false areas of their opposing view. We can then challenge the false views and show how our view not only explains the true views we've already agreed upon but better explains the areas of reality that the other view cannot.

Could WE Have The False View?

It is important that we also recognize the fact that none of us is omniscient. It is very possible that we would be the one with the incorrect view and are holding to that view because it explains enough (has enough truth) to appear accurate. The difficulty in persuading someone thatbelieve our view is correct could be founded in the fact that our view is actually false. We need to be willing to not only challenge other views but allow our views to be challenged. If our views are the false views, we must change them.

Conclusion

All views that people hold to explain reality contain some portion of truth that allows them a logical reason to believe the view. However, if the true parts are the only part they focus on, they can be blinded to the falsehood of their overall view. It is important that we recognize the true parts of their view to establish unity, but we do that in order to show them where they have gone wrong. If we expect others to recognize that their views may be false and need changing, we must be willing to examine our own views and change them when the evidence and logic is against our view.

To Investigate More, I Recommend:

• Reasons In And Out of a Worldview
• 3 Good Reasons to Question What You Believe
• Is Your View Falsifiable? 
• Book Review: Tactics: A Game Plan for Discussion Your Christian Convictions

Follow Faithful Thinkers On Social Media

  

The Difference Between An Attack and A Critique

"Someone's Wrong On The Internet!"

As I have defended the Christian faith against challenges on Facebook, I have come across several posts in various discussion groups that I feel need to be addressed. I have seen these posts in Christian groups that debate different theological positions and in general debate groups that discuss worldviews. I have also seen these from those who agree with me and disagree with me on various issues. So, please do not think that this is aimed only at those with whom I disagree; there are plenty who agree with me who have posted these also.

The Posts

Generally, the posts are targeted towards a specific "side" in the group. They are often written in the language of a "locker room pep talk" to the members of the team. Usually, the posts call out everyone who disagrees with them as attacking them through ridicule. These posts rarely differentiate between those who disagree with them regarding the general worldview and those who disagree in the details of the same general worldview. They encourage the teammates to "keep up the good fight" and offer some kind of existential or eternal "reward" for sticking to their belief. Some of the more rhetorical posts even go so far as to present an eternal threat to those who disagree.

Falsifiability and Faith: Finding Truth Amid Worldview Debates

Introduction
It is quite common to be in discussions about worldviews and scientific evidence and the issue of falsifiability comes up. Usually, one side offers several pieces of evidence that they believe shows the other worldview to be false, but the other person has a logical answer to rebut their claims of incompatibility. The skeptic, in frustration, often claims that the opposing view is therefore "unfalsifiable" on the adherent's view. The skeptic believes that the other person is somehow cheating and denying the possibility that their worldview could be falsified. For if something is not falsifiable, then it cannot be considered scientific (and is often labeled as "pseudoscience"). The term "unfalsifiable" is tossed around a lot, but it is unclear whether those hurling it at their "opponents" actually know what it means or how to properly apply it to the opposing worldview (or their own). So today I want to take some time to examine falsifiability to clear up some misconceptions.

Book Review: Why It Doesn't Matter What YOU Believe If Its Not True

Introduction

I am always on the look out for books that take different apologetic issues and puts them into bite-sized chunks that a complete beginner can understand and begin interacting with. That task is quite difficult because many authors take concepts and mutilate them in such a way that the beginner would actually be more confused than when they began.

The opportunity was given a while back to review a copy of Stephen McAndrew's new book "Why It Doesn't Matter What You Believe If It's Not True". The book is a short read of only 86 pages. The eleven chapters break up the short book into sections that are extremely manageable for those with only spurts of time to read or need time to digest. This format holds much promise to being a great introductory book. But does it come through?

Can Religion Be Tested for Truth?

Most of the time, I'm not too fond of using the term "religion". I normally prefer to use "worldview" because it is more clear about what all a belief system entails. However, for this post, I will use the term common for the question posed in the title: Can religion be tested for truth?

Many years ago, I would not have even thought to ask if religion can be tested for truth. I never thought much about it, because the obvious answer to me seemed to be "Yes". Apparently, though, many people are questioning whether religion can be tested for truth today. Some even say that religion can't be tested, thus such a term as "true religion" is an oxymoron. A common slogan that I hear is, "You can't put God in a test tube". I thought that I might take a few minutes to break this down and form some kind of defense for the idea that religion can be tested.

Politics and Foundations

The other day I was in conversation with a friend who is quite involved in the political scene over here in The States. Every now and then she will forward me the latest "evidence" pointing toward the corruption of government in general. However, she had made a religious claim that she based on subjective evidence. I had asked her to support the assertion in a way that might be compelling to someone else. She not only offered the subjective evidence, but claimed that it was up to the other person to prove her point of view incorrect, then she topped it off with, "That is my opinion".

Dangers of Consistent "Tolerance"

The new tolerance has plenty of philosophical and pragmatic problems. Last year I discussed the intolerance of the new tolerance. I showed how the new tolerance is actually self-defeating. However today I want to talk about the effects if the new tolerance was the philosophy and practice of the earliest humans.

Traditionally tolerance has been described as being able to civilly live alongside a person if they hold contrary beliefs. The person being tolerant could still be considered "tolerant" if they questioned and debated the other person. However, today tolerance eliminates that last bit. In order to be considered "tolerant" we not only must be able to civilly live alongside those who hold contrary beliefs, but we cannot question or debate the other person. Some would even take it as far as to say that one person must celebrate or even accept the contrary view as containing the same level of truth as their own belief.

Opinion vs. Truth-Claim

This post is more of an addendum to my post "Positive vs. Negative Arguments". Please read that post first.

Opinions reflect feelings and may or may not be true. If one claims that their thoughts are simply "opinions" (not claiming to actually be truth- even though it might be) then they have no responsibility to provide a reasoned defense of the position.

The Intolerance of "Tolerance"

It is really quite amazing how much I hear about being "tolerant." In today's "politically correct"/"don't offend anyone" culture, it really is not surprising.

Someone told me the other day that I was being intolerant by voicing a certain opinion. I had to do the equivalent of a "double-take" with what I had just heard.

I asked her if she really valued "tolerance." Of course, she said yes. My next question was not met pleasantly. I asked, "Do you realize that you are being intolerant of my view by telling me that?"

It then occurred to me that "tolerance" can only be performed, but never voiced. When "tolerance" is articulated, it is hypocritical. The "tolerant" person is being intolerant of the person he is claiming is "intolerant". It can be easily demonstrated by showing that the intolerance is actually implicit in the accusation. The "tolerant" person may defend his statement by claiming that it is an observation- making it okay. At that point, I would agree that an observation by itself does not completely destroy his tolerance. However, if he mentions it, he is demonstrating that he is being intolerant of the other person's intolerance. The articulation of "tolerance" defeats its own definition.