Posted on Wednesday,

Are People Free To Believe Whatever They Want About God?

Yes and no. If all that is meant here is that people should not be coerced or forced to believe something or follow a certain religion—then I wholeheartedly agree. Religious liberty and freedom of conscience are extremely important principles to defend. The Manhattan Declaration captures this well: “No one should be compelled to embrace any religion against his will, nor should persons of faith be forbidden to worship God according to the dictates of conscience or to express freely and publicly their deeply held religious convictions.”

In his excellent book The Case for Civility, Os Guinness articulates a vision of what we should be after in public discourse about our various religious beliefs:

The vision of a civic public square is one in which everyone—people of all faiths, whether religious or naturalistic—are equally free to enter and engage public life on the basis of their faiths, as a matter of “free exercise” and as dictated by their own reason and conscience; but always within the double framework, first, of the Constitution, and second, of a freely and mutually agreed covenant, or common vision for the common good, of what each person understands to be just and free for everyone else, and therefore of the duties involved in living with the deep differences of others.

This is an example of what true tolerance is. True tolerance is where we extend to each other the right to be wrong. False tolerance, on the other hand, naïvely asserts that all ideas are created equal and this must be rejected. Not only is this obviously false, it’s unlivable. Unfortunately, “The ideal of religious tolerance has morphed into the straitjacket of religious agreement.” Contrary to what is commonly believed, the height of intolerance is not disagreement, but rather removing the public space and opportunity for people to disagree.

However, true tolerance is usually not what people have in mind when they say people should be free to believe in whatever God (or no god at all) they want to. Here is the simple, but profound point to grasp—merely believing something doesn’t make it true. Put differently, people are entitled to their own beliefs, but not their own truth. Belief is not what ultimately matters—truth is. Our believing something is true doesn’t make it true. The Bible isn’t true simply because I have faith. Truth is what corresponds to reality—telling it like it is.

The bottom line is that we discover truth; we don’t create it. Reality is what we bump (or slam!) into when we act on false beliefs. Spending a few minutes fondly reflecting on your junior high, high school, and college years will bring this principle vividly and painfully to life.

Question: How would our culture–and educational system–be better if took this to heart? Leave a comment below!

Listen to the latest Think Christianly podcast: Subscribe with iTunes I RSS

Posted on Thursday,

Why Christians Need To Change Their Tone In Cultural Conversations

The truth about God is too important not to be seriously investigated and honestly discussed. Unfortunately, it doesn’t take very long for friendly conversations to devolve into shouting matches—and this helps no one. The fact of the matter is that belief and unbelief are here to stay: neither one will be disappearing anytime soon. So it does no good to vilify the other side. If any real progress is to be made, we must change the tone of this cultural conversation.

In his thought-provoking book No One Sees God: The Dark Night of Atheists and Believers, Michael Novak contends that “unbelievers and believers need to learn a new habit of reasoned and mutually respectful conversation.” I agree, and as we now inhabit a post-Christian culture, this posture is more important than ever.

What do you think? Have you found it easier or more difficult to have helpful spiritual conversations with people today? Leave your comments below.

Listen to “Living As A Christian In A Post-Christian Culture” (Podcast)

Subscribe with iTunes I RSS

Posted on Tuesday,

J.P. Moreland on Tolerance, Religion, and Morality

“Tolerance has come to mean that no one is right and no one is wrong and, indeed, the very act of stating that someone else’s views are immoral or incorrect is now taken to be intolerant (of course, from this same point of view, it is all right to be intolerant of those who hold to objectively true moral or religious positions). Once the existence of knowable truth in religion and ethics is denied, authority (the right to be believed and obeyed) gives way to power (the ability to force compliance), reason gives way to rhetoric, the speech writer is replaced by the makeup man, and spirited but civil debate in the culture wars is replaced by politically correct special-interest groups who have nothing left but political coercion to enforce their views on others.”

Posted on Wednesday,

Dr. Ben Carson’s Speech at the National Prayer Breakfast (Video)

Being respectful to one another as we speak up for what we believe is critical for the common good. Dr. Ben Carson also explains why political correctness is so dangerous and education so essential.

More on the Carson’s Scholars Fund

Listened to our latest Podcast? Subscribe with iTunes I RSS

Found this blog helpful? You can have it delivered right to your inbox in one easy step.

Posted on Saturday,

Tolerance and the Louie Giglio / White House Controversy – 3 Opinions

Earlier this week prominent evangelical Christian Louie Giglio (of the Passion Conference) withdrew or was uninvited to give the benediction at the inauguration of President Obama. Why? Because it came to light that 15 years ago that he preached a sermon that stated clearly and unambiguously that homosexuality was a sin and that this was less than God’s best for us as human beings. In his statement, Giglio said the following:

I am honored to be invited by the President to give the benediction at the upcoming inaugural on January 21. Though the President and I do not agree on every issue, we have fashioned a friendship around common goals and ideals, most notably, ending slavery in all its forms.

Due to a message of mine that has surfaced from 15-20 years ago, it is likely that my participation, and the prayer I would offer, will be dwarfed by those seeking to make their agenda the focal point of the inauguration. Clearly, speaking on this issue has not been in the range of my priorities in the past fifteen years. Instead, my aim has been to call people to ultimate significance as we make much of Jesus Christ.

Neither I, nor our team, feel it best serves the core message and goals we are seeking to accomplish to be in a fight on an issue not of our choosing, thus I respectfully withdraw my acceptance of the President’s invitation. I will continue to pray regularly for the President, and urge the nation to do so. I will most certainly pray for him on Inauguration Day.

Our nation is deeply divided and hurting, and more than ever need God’s grace and mercy in our time of need.

There are several revealing parts of this controversy. First the nature of tolerance (or intolerance) on display. But also, what as Christians should we expect when it comes to voicing our convictions in the public square? Should the events of this past week surprise us? Several Christian leaders have weighed in making some interesting observations:

Dr. Albert Mohler discusses the new Moral McCarthyism.

Dr. Russell Moore wonders if we are seeing the emergence of a new state church.

Dr. Darrell Bock raises important observations about what our expectations ought to be in a culture increasingly hostile to the Christian Worldview.

I have written in great detail how Christians should thoughtfully engage by seizing the opportunities we have every day to speak the life Jesus offers into our culture. What is clear is that the times they are a changin’ and Christians need to prepare to engage with courage and compassion.

Did you miss our latest Podcast with a leading NT scholar on Bible Contradictions? You can listen here.