Part Five:  What Does “Crutch” and Being “Weak” Mean to a Christian?

God is the sovereign, all-powerful, all-knowing creator of life and the cosmos. Therefore, the human race is not autonomous, as the secular world maintains. Instead, every human being is accountable to God. However, atheists, agnostics, and other skeptics reject this, and many claim all religious people, including Christians, are weak and insecure because they rely on a religious “crutch” to cope with life. As we saw in last week’s blog, however, the tragic paradox is that the very things unbelievers strive so hard to achieve in their so-called autonomy—inner fulfillment, peace of mind, a meaningful life—are theirs for the asking through the “crutch” of Jesus Christ.

What Crutch and Weak Mean to a Christian

I want to begin by making a statement that would have sounded contradictory in previous blog posts: Christianity is a crutch for weak people! Obviously, my definitions of a crutch and weakness are different from the critic’s. Nowhere in Scripture is a Christian’s faith seen as a crutch in the sense of an escape from the reality of a fallen, suffering world (John 17:15). Likewise, nowhere are Christians portrayed as weaklings or insecure (see Part Three). On the other hand, throughout Scripture, our faith is seen as a supporting pillar, an anchor, a means to heal broken and damaged lives, and the only true source of lasting peace and joy, even during life’s darkest hours. Likewise, throughout Scripture, believers are seen as depending on and drawing strength from the person who created and sustained them (2 Cor. 12:9-10) and who offers them life more abundantly (John 10:10). This same divine blessing is for today and all God’s people.

It’s in these senses that Christianity is a “crutch,” and Christians are “weak.” We gladly accept the power of God given to us through His Son Jesus Christ (John 14:16-17). The Lord told the apostle Paul during a time of personal struggle, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in [your] weakness” (2 Cor. 12: 9). Elsewhere Paul encourages his young disciple, Timothy, that  “God did not give us a spirit of timidity, but a spirit of power, of love, and of self-discipline” (2 Tim. 1:7). As other biblical promises, this promise was not just for Timothy, but for all people who rely on the “crutch” of Jesus Christ. ©

Next week we’ll see why every human being on Earth needs a spiritual crutch to find meaning and purpose in life—whether they realize it or not. But that crutch must be the right crutch—not a counterfeit one.

Part Four:  The Real Reason Atheists, Agnostics, and Skeptics Reject God

The relationship between God and the human race is one of dependence. God is the creator, and we are created. This means we depend on God for our very existence as well as our physical, emotional, spiritual well-being—and ultimately, our peace and joy. Furthermore, God had a purpose for creating us: to love us and to have a personal relationship with us. In turn, God desires for us to love Him, obey Him, and enjoy the eternal blessings of this relationship. Our natural response to this is to praise and worship God.

Sadly, many people choose to reject God and seek fulfillment in counterfeit ways (what I refer to as “crutches”). But this is doomed to fail—even if such failure is denied or repressed. Why? Because when God created the human race, He placed an intuitive awareness of His existence in our hearts. So compelling is this inner testimony that the Bible says people who “suppress” this revelation are “without excuse”—that is, held accountable (Rom. 1:18-20; cf. Eccl. 3:11,14). No one can achieve true inner fulfillment and meaning in life apart from God. In his typical lucid style, C. S. Lewis said it this way:

God made us: invented us as a man invents an engine. A car is made to run on petrol, and it won’t run properly on anything else. Now God designed the human machine to run on Himself. He Himself is the fuel our spirits were designed to burn, or the food our spirits were designed to feed on. There isn’t any other. . . .  God can’t give us happiness and peace apart from Himself because it isn’t there. There’s no such thing. (The Case for Christianity)

I believe the real reason atheists, agnostics, and skeptics reject God is that (1) they refuse to acknowledge their innate awareness of His existence and (2) they do not want to be held accountable to God who created and loves them. Tragically, this willful rejection of God can reach a point where unbelievers so harden their hearts they are alive physically but dead spiritually (e.g., Eph. 4:17-19 2; Thess. 2:10).

Finally, to help justify their false sense of autonomy, some unbelievers perceive those who open their hearts and minds to God as weak, insecure, and need a religious crutch to cope with life. The tragic paradox is that the very things unbelievers strive so hard to achieve in their autonomy—inner fulfillment, the ultimate meaning of life, and genuine peace of mind—are there for the asking through the “crutch” of Jesus Christ. Apart from that crutch, the unbeliever will never obtain his or her deepest desires. Their ultimate destiny is not nonexistence—but an eternity in the worst of all possible worlds (see my six-part blog series beginning May 17, 2020).  ©

NOTE:   To receive personal notification for new blog posts, please join my blog email list. Click on “contact” above and send me a request. I do not share email addresses.

Next week’s blog post will explore what “crutch” and “weak” mean to a Christian.

Part Three:  “Do Atheists, Agnostics, and Skeptics Rely on ‘Crutches’—or only Christians?”

The claim that non-religious people don’t need a crutch to get through life is totally out of sync with what we observe in the real world. There are crutches other than religion: drugs, alcohol, cigarettes, overeating, material possessions, abnormal sexual appetites, money, power . . . the list goes on and on. Moreover, many atheists use their disbelief in God as a crutch to enable them to lead a lifestyle they intuitively know is not in accord with God’s moral law (Rom. 2:14-15). Astrophysicists Hugh Ross gives an example of this:

         Several months ago I spoke at a prestigious American university to a group of about forty science professors. I presented much of the information that appears in the pages of this book (The Creator and the Cosmos; How the Greatest Scientific Discoveries of the Century Reveal God). Afterward, I conversed with four physics professors and asked for their response.

        One of the four said he could not deny the truth of my message. The others nodded in agreement. I ask if they could see, then, the rationality of turning over their lives to Jesus Christ. Another of the four spoke up, saying, yes, they could see it, but they weren’t yet ready to be that rational.

         This statement was not a brush-off. Each man went on to name his reasons for resistance. One confessed his unwillingness to give up sexual immorality. The others spoke of deep wounds inflected long ago by people who called themselves Christians. What each of them needed and showed willingness to receive was compassion—not to mention further dialogue (p.153).

That Christians are weak because they rely on God is one of the most absurd excuses ever concocted to ridicule Christians. Nowhere in the annals of history can one find more courage in the face of adversity, more perseverance in the face of affliction, and more boldness in the face of persecution than what faithful Christians have displayed.  The apostle Paul wrote of his own suffering for Jesus:

“Five times I received from the Jews thirty-nine lashes. Three times I was beaten with rods, once I was stoned, three times I was shipwrecked, a night and a day I have spent in the deep. I have been on frequent journeys, in dangers from rivers, dangers from robbers, dangers from my countrymen, dangers from the Gentiles, dangers in the city, dangers in the wilderness, dangers on the sea, dangers among false brethren; I have been in labor and hardship through many sleepless nights, in hunger and thirst, often without food, in cold and exposure.” (2 Cor. 11:24-27, NASB)

Christians are not weak people. In today’s increasingly secular society, where the Christian worldview is ridiculed and rejected without rational justification in movies, books, television, academia, and the media, where individual Christians are mocked for their faith when they talk about the Lord, it is much easier to be an unbeliever. Atheists or others who claim Christians are weak have never tried to live an active Christian life. ©

Next week’s blog will reveal the real reason atheists, agnostic, and skeptics reject God and rely on other crutches to get through life.

NOTE:   To receive personal notification for new blog posts, please join my blog email list. Click on “contact” above and send me a request. I do not share email addresses.

Part Two: “Did Religious Belief Evolve as Darwinists Claim?”

The theory that religion is a product of evolution began in the nineteenth century when intellectuals, seduced by Darwin’s biological evolutionary theory, attempted to apply evolution to religious beliefs—and is still accepted by evolutionists and materialists today. According to this theory, contemporary religions evolved from animistic roots. Animism (the religious belief of all primitive cultures) was thought to be the earliest evolutionary state of all religions. Supposedly, polytheism evolved out of animism as the various animistic spirits became viewed as individual gods. Monotheism eventually evolved out of polytheism as one of the many gods became supreme. Thus, monotheism (e.g., Christianity) was considered the most sophisticated and advanced evolutionary form of worship

Today, the theory that religions evolved have fallen on hard times among scholars. Anthropologists and ethnologists (a branch of anthropology that studies cultures) have proven beyond doubt that religion is intrinsic to the oldest cultures. Evidence shows that even Neanderthal had religious beliefs.

If religion evolved, there should be a time when religion was absent from human cultures. Yet no such evidence has ever been found. Moreover, if monotheism arose from animism, then primitive religions should be void of monotheism. But again, this is not the case. Not only is there no evidence that animism evolved into polytheism and later into monotheism, but there is tremendous evidence supporting just the opposite. It turns out that belief in a supreme God is characteristic of animistic religions. Thus, it appears that monotheism de-evolved into polytheism and pantheism.

The various evolutionary theories on the origin of religion have been discredited. The assumption that religion evolved as a crutch to comfort fearful humanity and to explain the great mysteries of life is without verifiable evidence (see Part One).

This becomes even more obvious when we consider the “kind” of God that Christianity supposedly evolved. God revealed in the Bible is more than just a loving God. He is also a powerful God who knows every thought and intention (1 Chron. 28:9) and from whom we can never hide (Ps. 139:7-12). He is a God who wants our obedience (Josh. 22:5; Luke 8:21; John 14:15) and whose judgments are totally beyond human control (Rom. 2:5; Eph. 5:3-6; Rev. 6:12-17). He is a God whose perfect justice does not allow people into Heaven who rejects Jesus’ offer of salvation (Matt.5:31-46; John 5:28-29; cf. Acts 17: 26-27).  Certainly, if people were to invent a god (or if one evolved to comfort people), they would create one more manageable and less threatening—a god more easily appeased and controlled—as was the case with idol worshipers. Or they would invent a god who takes little interest in people’s affairs, such as the pantheistic gods of Eastern religions. ©

Next week we’ll see that everyone—including atheists and evolutionists—need and have crutches.

NOTE:   To receive personal notification for new blog posts, please join my blog email list. Click on “contact” above and send me a request. I do not share email addresses.

Part One: Introduction: “Is There Any Truth to This Claim?”

When someone accuses Christianity of being a crutch for weak and insecure people, they echo Karl Marx’s well-known dictum:  “Religion is the opiate of the masses.” When any such critical statement against Christianity is made, our first response is to clearly understand what is being said. In particular, are there any underlying premises or hidden assumptions? Often an evaluation of the assumptions discloses the fallacious nature of an argument and removes it as a significant objection against Christianity. There are three erroneous assumptions in the claim Christianity is a crutch for weak and insecure people.

1. Because the human psychic seems wired to need assurance in the face of the unknowable, unexplainable, and painful, people created religion as a remedial measure, as an “opiate” for comfort and encouragement. In other words, when early humans began to ask themselves why things happened as they did, who they were, and what happens after death, they concocted religion. Religion, then, evolved right along with humankind’s evolving intellectual probing, social interactions, and awareness of his psychological needs.
2. Since the mass of humanity is unable to cope with the realities of life—its hardships, sicknesses, disappointments, frustration, afflictions, and death. People need the psychological security of Christianity or some other religion to assure them that life offers more than what they experience in the here and now. They need to believe in a future state where the present suffering will be gone, a time of universal bliss that will last forever. Hence the evolution of some form of the afterlife.
3. There are a few individuals, however, who are alert and self-assured enough to perceive people accept Christianity to meet these psychological needs but who themselves are fearless enough to face life without a religious crutch. Moreover, because these courageous individuals are not addicted to religion, they are free to live life autonomously and unrestricted by the repressive rules and constraints of religion, including Christianity.

There are three sensible responses to these three assumptions, and together they demonstrate that Christianity is not a crutch for weak and insecure people. The truth of Christianity is affirmed not only by objective evidence but by subjective experiences that reveal Jesus Christ meeting human needs at their deepest level. Responding to these three assumptions is the topic of this new blog series. ©

Next week  I’ll respond to the claim religion is a product of evolution.

NOTE:   To avoid missing weekly blog posts, please join my blog email list. You will receive notifications for each new blog. Click on “contact” (above) and send me a request. I do not share email addresses.

Part Six:  Conclusion:  What Does Jesus and the New Testament Writers Have to Say about Hypocrisy among Christians?

There are hypocrites in the Christain church. Jesus foretold this and spoke of a day when true believers will be identified and separated from the unfaithful (see Matt. 7: 21-23; 13:24-30) and when all hypocrisy will be revealed (Luke 12: 1-3). Jesus strongly condemns hypocrisy, especially among religious leaders who present a sense of piety but are hypocritical to their calling (Matt. 23:13-15, 23-25).

The Apostle Paul also addressed this issue. In 1 Timothy 4: 1-2, he warns that in “later times” some people will fall away from Christianity due to “the hypocrisy of liars” (NASB). Elsewhere, in 1 Corinthians 5:11, Paul warns Christians not to associate with a professing believer living a life of open and direct sin (i.e., hypocrisy). In other words, Christians need to identify unrepentant hypocrites and remove them from ministering in the Church. It is sad when the Church does this many critics take it as an opportunity to highlight the hypocrisy rather than to congratulate the Church for trying to maintain its integrity.

In His dealings with hypocrisy, Jesus did not show the gentleness He normally exhibited when confronting sinners.  He called them them  “whitewashed tombs,” “snakes,” and “brood of vipers” (Matt. 23: 27, 33). Jesus knew that the evil of hypocrisy would discredit His work and cause countless people to turn from the Church to disillusionment and disappointment. Hypocrisy is one of the most potent weapons in Satan’s arsenal used to weaken the Christian testimony. A non-Christian, hearing the words and observing the actions of hypocritical Christians, is quick to judge all of Christianity by his or her actions. Tragically, many people alive today may enter a Christless eternity because of the hypocrisy they observe in Christians prevents them from seriously investigating the truth-claims of our Faith.

Yet it must also be remembered that hypocrisy is not the product of Christianity. It is the product of sinful people. And like all other sins, the Bible condemns it. It is unfair and illogical to condemn Christianity because some Christians have been guilty of hypocrisy, especially when the Bible unequivocally condemns all hypocrisy. Moreover, in light of all the apologetic evidence outlined in the previous five blog posts—there is no legitimate moral or intellectual reason to censor Christianity because of occasional hypocrites in the Church. If that standard is applied to other areas of knowledge, all science and medicine, for example, would likewise be censored because of a few quacks engaged in those occupations.

In sum, the truth of Christianity does no rest on the behaviors of its adherents. Instead, it rests on the reality of Jesus Christ and the fact that He rose from the dead to demonstrate His deity (Rom. 1:4) and confirm His promise of eternal life for those who receive Him as Lord and Savior Rom. 10:9-10). ©

Next week I’ll begin a new series titled:  “IS CHRISTIANITY A ‘CRUTCH’ FOR WEAK AND INSECURE PEOPLE–AND APOLOGETIC RESPONSE.”

 NOTE:   My weekly notices on Facebook can vanish quickly. To avoid missing weekly blogs, please join my blog email list. You will receive personal notifications for each new blog post. Click on “contact” (above) and send me a request. I do not share email addresses.

Part Five:  Are Critics Right When They Claim the Christian Church Has Done More Harm than Good throughout the World?

 As pointed out in last week’s blog, critics claim the dark pages of Church history make the Christian faith hypocritical. There are two apologetic responses to this. Last week, Part Four, I explained the first response. Below is the second response:  Of all the religions or political systems in the world, none has had the far-reaching and positive influence Christianity has had across the globe.

When critics point out the unChrist-like behaviors of some Christians, they conveniently overlook the incredible benefits Christianity has contributed to the human race. A simple survey of the influence of Christianity around the globe reveals the profound positive impact the Church has had on the world.

More than any other religion or philosophy, Christianity has contributed the most to human welfare and social reform. Many hospitals and colleges, as well as orphanages and charity organizations, were begun and operated by Christians. The Christian Church promoted child welfare programs until they became government policy. Christian started humane societies for the protection of farm animals. Christian ethics eventually undermined the structure of slavery. Before Jesus, women were often the chattel of men. Jesus set the stage for women’s emancipation. Many of the brutal practices in the Roman world, such as contests between gladiators and infanticide, were abolished after Christianity became the dominant religion. Today, hundreds of Christain relief agencies exist worldwide, and Christians are among the first to respond to disasters and famines wherever they occur. The political concept of checks and balances, so important to democratic government, is based on the biblical principle of wisdom being found in a “multitude of counselors” (e.g., Prov. 11:14; 15:22).

By contrast, one can look far and wide and fail to find comparable achievements growing out of any other religion in the world. Human misery under the umbrella of historic Hinduism, for example, is well known. Rather than concerning themselves with esoteric matters, the Christian Church ministries to people. And let me add this. If one were to take a “body count” of destroyed lives as a result of misguided Christians, it would come nowhere close to the extermination resulting from other philosophical and political systems. The torture and murder that occurred in the twentieth century under the atheistic political systems of Nazi Germany and Soviet Marxism are many millions more than the number of people wrongly killed in the name of Christianity throughout the entire history of the Christian Church. As Dr. Robert Morey reports, “over one hundred and fifty million people . . . have been killed by atheistic governments.” (The New Atheism and the Erosion of Freedom)

Next week I’ll end this series with what Jesus and the authors of the New Testament have to say about the problem of hypocrisy among Christians. ©

NOTE:   My notices on Facebook can vanish quickly. To avoid missing weekly blogs, please join my blog email list. You will receive personal notifications for each new blog. Click on “contact” (above) and send me a request. I do not share email addresses.

Part Four:  Do the Dark Pages in Church History Make the Christian Faith Hypocritical? Two Apologetic Responses

In previous blogs in this series, we saw that one of the most common attacks against Christians is that we are hypocrites because we sometimes sin. I refuted this in Part Two. In this and next week’s blog, I’ll disprove the more serious challenge: The dark pages of Church history demonstrate the Christian Faith itself is hypocritical because the church had engaged in behaviors that are not in harmony with biblical moral teachings. (I gave examples in last week’s blog.)

I’ll begin today by demonstrating that the ethical standard critics use to judge Christianity has its source in Christianity—making the critics’ claim of hypocrisy itself somewhat hypocritical, as I’ll explain below.

A Borrowed Standard

Critics who denounce Christianity because of activities in the distant past fail to acknowledge that the moral absolutes they use to justify their condemnation turn out to be the very moral values written by Moses thousands of years ago and later recorded in the Bible!  Why was murdering so-called witches wrong? God forbids murder. Why was torturing heretics during the inquisition wrong? God forbids torture. And so it goes. In fact, it was biblical principles that lay the groundwork to end centuries of slavery and subjugation of women common in other cultures throughout much of history.

Non-Christians cannot stand in judgment of the actions of Christians—past or present—without using the ethical standards described in the Bible as their source of reference. This can only mean that biblical ethics are the absolute standard of human morality applied by the very critics who reject Christianity.  This, in turn, demonstrates that the Christian faith is not the source of hypocrisy—people are.

Let me carry this thought a step further. Without Bible-based Christianity, there would be no adequate moral foundation on which to make ethical decisions. Apart from the Christian God, one cannot judge what is right or wrong, know if what is wrong today will be wrong tomorrow, or know if what is wrong for me is also wrong for you. If such a philosophy is carried to its logical conclusion, persecuting minorities, murdering babies, the aged, and the infirm are perfectly acceptable acts, providing one’s personal or cultural belief system embraces it.

To sum up, without an absolute moral standard mandated by God and recorded in the Bible, there would be no universal moral code applicable to all people and every culture whereby one can judge and condemn sin and evil. Concerning the issue of hypocrisy, regardless of what individual Christians do or what the Christian church has been guilty of in history, Christianity as the voice of God’s moral will revealed in Scripture is in no way falsified. This is further proven by the fact that the Bible is the very standard by which the Christian Church has purged itself of sinful behaviors and by which non-Christians themselves judge the actions of others. ©

Next week we’ll look at the second apologetic response to the claim that the dark pages in church history make the Christian faith hypocritical and illegitimate: The positive influence Christianity has had throughout the world.

Part Three:  “Do the Dark Pages in Church History Make the Christian Faith Hypocritical?”

In last week’s blog, we saw when Christians sin, non-Christians frequently accuse them of being hypocrites. This accusation fails to qualify as real hypocrisy because a hypocrite is a person who purposely and secretly claims to be something they are not. Christians who are honest and open about their sinfulness, therefore, are not hypocrites. I explained this “less serious charge” in detail in last week’s blog.

The More Serious Charge

This week we’ll look at the more serious charge of hypocrisy against Christians; this time not against just individual Christians—but the entire Christian Church. This much more severe objection is the claim that Christianity, as a religious faith, is hypocritical and thus fraudulent because the Church’s action in history have contradicted its professed standards of love, forgiveness, and morality.

The Christian Church has indeed been involved in some very brutal acts against non-believers, false religions, and even fellow Christians. Witches have been burned at the stake in the name of Christianity. Slavery has been sanctioned. Holy wars and inquisitions resulted in the deaths of countless thousands of people. Science has been censured. Even our present ecological crisis has been blamed on Christian principles. (By the way, this is a false accusation. See my book, Should Christian Be Environments, Kregel Publications, 2012).

In short, many people, judging Christianity according to the dark pages of its history, have concluded that little or no good has ever come from the Christian faith. They consider Christianity a hypocritical and, therefore, fraudulent religion and refuse to investigate it’s truth-claims.

It is undeniable that historically the Christian Church has sometimes been on the wrong side of moral issues that are unambiguously contrary to the teachings of Jesus Christ. (Of course, this was even more the case in the contemporary cultures at the time.) Although such ungodly behaviors are now virtually nonexistent in the Church, the dark pages of church history still give fodder to critics of Christianity. They choose to focus on the dark pages of history and ignore the overwhelmingly positive influence the Church has had on societies and cultures everywhere throughout the world. I’ll give examples of this in Part Five.

Next week:  There are two responses to the claim that the Christian faith is hypocritical because of the dark pages in its history. Next week we’ll explore the first and see that the criterion critics use to judge Christianity has its source in Christianity. In other words, the very ethical standard used by critics to condemn atrocities, slavery, witch burnings, and the other un-Christlike behaviors that Christians have sometimes been guilty of turns out to be Christian ethics! ©

Part Two:  “Are Christians Who Sin Automatically Hypocrites?”

The Lesser Charge: There’s no doubt that Christians go wrong, make mistakes, and sin—sometimes even deliberately. The Bible affirms this at every turn. It teaches that all people are guilty of sin—Christians and non-Christian alike. And if anyone denies this, they are a liar (Rom. 3:23; 1John 1:10). Indeed, the purpose of Jesus’ coming, and the heart of His present ministry, is to save lost sinners. Jesus came to heal the “sick”, not the “healthy” (Matt. 9:12-13). For this reason, Christians are the first to admit they are sinners. That’s how they came to Christ, accepting His invitation to all sinners to come to Him. Christians are even encouraged to confess their sins “to each other” (James 5:16).

Does this make Christians hypocrites? No. Why? Because a hypocrite is a person who purposely and secretly claims to be something they are not. Christians who are honest and open about their sinfulness, therefore, are not hypocrites. Let me explain.

The heart of the problem, it seems, is that non-Christians have the attitude that if a Christian sins, he or she is automatically a hypocrite. There are hypocrites in the church—this is true. Some people claim to be believers in Jesus Christ but secretly are not. Others vow to live according to Christian principles, but, when away from other Christians, don’t.

The confusion lies in thinking that sinner and hypocrite are synonymous. If one is a hypocrite, that person is certainly a sinner. But being a sinner does not automatically mean that one is a hypocrite. All people are sinners, and thus all Christians are sinners. But not all Christians are hypocrites. In fact, because Christians so readily recognize the presence of sin in all people, and therefore emphasize the confession and repentance of sins among themselves, it’s likely fewer hypocrites exist within the Christian church than in any other organization—religious or secular.

The truth of Christianity is not dependent on the actions of individual Christians. We do not falsify science and say that all scientists are hypocrites because of an occasional quack. Nor do we condemn the field of medicine because some doctors perform abortions or in other ways break the Hippocratic oath (“I will not give a woman a pessary to cause an abortion”). Likewise, the Christian church is not full of hypocrites simply because Christians sin. ©

This is the lesser charge against Christianity, and relatively easy to refute—as I did above. Next week we’ll look at the more serious charge: Do the dark pages in the history of Christianity make our faith hypocritical?