Government and Faith Archives

February 12, 2020February 11, 2020

Blessing Nuclear Bombs

One of the great teachings of Jesus Christ is the separation of Church and State. The issue came up many times in His ministry and during the life of Paul. Christ’s enemies raised it directly to Him in Matthew 22:17-21. Jesus’ response was, “Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and unto God the things that are God’s.” Secular rulers have often tried to use the Church to validate what they did. A classic example of how far astray things can go is blessing nuclear bombs.

Vladimir Putin has made the Russian Orthodox Church an arm of the state, and for some time now, he has had the priests blessing nuclear bombs. They do it by splashing “holy water” on the nukes. Previously the Church was doing the blessing on all arms as well as seeking divine protection for soldiers. A church commission has been set up by the Russian Orthodox Church to investigate whether weapons of mass destruction should be included in the blessings.

The Russian military is building a cathedral in a military park outside Moscow, further emphasizing the close connection between the state and the Church. Jesus did not confront the Roman authorities of His day. Paul taught the importance of Christians being subject in civil life to civil authority (Romans 13). The idea of Christians blessing war and destruction flies in the face of all Jesus taught.

Atheists can justifiably complain about abuses like this one, but we must separate what Jesus taught from what various denominations teach and do. We can defend everything Jesus taught and show its wisdom, but blessing nuclear bombs is not defensible.

Reference: The Week, February 14, 2020, page 9.

January 23, 2020January 22, 2020

Scientism, Literalistic, Literal

As you read articles written by creationists, atheists, and apologetics authors, you sometimes see words that need an explanation. We must understand the meaning of the terms and what the author intends to convey. There are three words that you should understand the meaning of: Scientism, Literalistic, Literal.

#1 SCIENTISM. Scientism is the idea that science is the only reliable way to determine truth. It is used to exclude any consideration of the supernatural or metaphysical. Because they can not be falsified, scientism rejects miracles or claims about the divinity of Christ. Those of us who argue that science and faith support each other are sometimes accused of preaching scientism. The fact is that the scientific method prevents any consideration of many questions that are important in life. The Winter 2020 issue of God and Nature published an article by Terry Defoe titled “A Pastor’s Journey in Search of Consensus.” He wrote that, “Science can be compared to a fisherman’s net that can’t catch small fish because the holes in the net are too large.” Science is NOT the only source of truth.

#2 LITERALISM. Literalism is the approach of reading ancient documents and merely reading the words on the page in their most basic sense, not considering the context. Long ago, Augustine warned against Christians presenting their literalistic interpretations of Scripture as if they were experts in areas where they are ignorant.

“The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men.” Augustine of Hippo (A.D. 354-430) (Read more HERE.)

In literalism, there is no attempt to ask what the author intended his message to be, or to apply modern knowledge in understanding the documents.

#3 LITERAL. Literal means to understand a text as the original author intended. Here is an example of how a literal interpretation of a passage might differ from a literalistic interpretation. In Revelation 7:1, John writes, “And after these things I saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth …” If you just lift the passage off the page (literalistic), you would maintain that Earth has four corners, and therefore it is flat. Some groups actually support that view and use this passage to prove it. A literal translation would ask, “What is John attempting to say?” If you look at the context of the passage, the answer is obvious. We have a Lamb opening seals and displaying wrath in chapter 6 and 144,000 people sealed in chapter seven. Obviously, the passage is not written to give scientific data on the shape of the Earth.

We maintain that this ministry takes the Bible literally. Much of the Christian community takes selected passages such as Genesis 1 literalistically. The result is they present the Bible in a way that makes it look foolish and ignorant. Scientism is not our approach. We use all of the tools God has given us to understand His Word. That approach is essential when talking to young men and women growing up in the 21st century. One of the tools we use is science, and that is not Scientism.

January 22, 2020January 21, 2020

Alternatives to Abortion

As we enter an election year, the issue of abortion once again rises to the attention of politicians, women’s rights activists, Christians, religious fundamentalists, and the medical establishment. The issue is complicated, but we must not overlook the alternatives to abortion.

We can understand the rhetoric that a woman should have control of her own body. But from a scientific standpoint, there is no question–a baby is NOT just an extension of the mother’s body. Morning sickness is the body’s reaction to an invasive foreign object that has entered the woman’s body. When the sperm meets the egg, a unique individual is produced. It is not a dog or a cat or something unknown–it is a human. Mountains of evidence exist that show the baby does human things long before birth. The preborn child hears, feels, reacts, and responds to outside influences on its environment.

Do we, as a culture, wish to sanction infanticide? Is a baby better off dead than born to a mother who doesn’t want it? Is infanticide a slippery slope to horrible misuse–harvesting organs or paying for organs from a baby not yet conceived? These questions are complicated, and in an election year, inflammatory literature abounds on all sides. Working together to provide alternatives to abortion can help to settle this issue. Here are three points to consider:

*Easy abortion as a method for birth control is foolish. Abortion does physiological and psychological damage to most women. Repeated abortions can lead to serious health problems even when the abortion is done in an ideal environment by competent doctors.

*Reproductive healthcare is needed for all women, and abortion is not the sum total of that care. This healthcare can and should include modern contraception methods, moral teaching about sexual relationships, prenatal care, family planning, and options about alternatives to abortion. Adoption is an option that is used far too infrequently. Abortion should not be the first or only choice given to women.

*World population growth is also an issue. Every day the world population grows by 225,000, adding up to 82 million per year. God has told us to “take care of the garden, dress it and keep it” (Genesis 2:15). He also gave us the family as the proper vehicle to populate the Earth. Dumping unwanted children into the world without family, love, care, or the physical things they need to survive violates God’s commands (James 1:27). However, abortion (infanticide) is a poor alternative to education and moral teaching.

We need to join hands and work for alternatives to abortion and solutions to this issue on this 47th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision by the US Supreme Court.

A footnote from Roland Earnst: An organization that is doing a great job in providing abortion alternatives and helping families is LifePlan of Niles, Michigan. You can visit their website HERE.

January 18, 2020January 17, 2020

Government Easing Restrictions on Prayer in School

In 2003, the United States Education Department issued a document called “Guidance on School Prayer.” It contained very restrictive rules for prayer in a school setting. We have reported on some cases where a student was prohibited from giving a talk connected to an earned award because they insisted on including a prayer. Now, we see the government easing restrictions on prayer in school.

The 2020 release by the Education Department states that “student speakers can pray at assemblies or sports games as long as they were not chosen to speak based on their religious perspective.” Education Secretary Betsy DeVos says, “Our actions today will protect the constitutional rights of students, teachers, and faith-based institutions.”

The new rules also expand the ability of faith-based groups to participate in government programs, and it “aims to put religious groups on equal footing when competing for federal grants and other funding.” We have recently pointed out the problems with accepting government money when it means the government gets to decide what you can teach, preach, and do.

Since this new set of rules comes in an election year, some may impugn the motives of the government rule-makers. I am sure it will generate a lot of reaction from atheistic groups. At the very least, the government easing restrictions on prayer in school will move it away from a totally atheistic stance on the rights of young people.

Data from Associated Press, January 17, 2020.

You can read the new guidelines HERE.

January 17, 2020January 15, 2020

Fires in Australia and God

Not long ago, we were appalled at the horrendous fires in California, and now we hear about terrible fires in Australia. In our August 16, 2018, post we talked about the California fires, and we discussed why they happened. We pointed out that blaming God for the wildfires in California was not logical, scientifically correct, or biblical. (You can read that again by clicking HERE.)

Our primary resource for that discussion was Keith Crummer, whose whole career with the United States Forrest Service revolved around managing the forests in California. His main point was that the cause of the fires was mismanagement by people who thought they were protecting the forests. They were stopping the natural fire-preventing design from operating. Now we see this again with the fires in Australia.

Before we go any further, let us state that our hearts go out to our friends in Australia, who, like the victims in California, have suffered an unimaginable loss. To watch everything you own go up in flames is a heart-wrenching tragedy no matter what the cause. There are two points we want to make:

#1) The fires in Australia are not a retaliatory act of God. Some religious figures are saying the fires are God’s punishment for Australia’s movement away from belief in God and its immersion in secularism. There is no question about the contributing factors to the fires, and none of them include miraculous acts of God. That is also not the way God operates. If God retaliated every time a group of people deliberately defied Him, Washington D.C. would have gone up in flames long ago. Passages like James 1:13 tell us that God is not the source of the bad things that happen to us. The following eight verses identify the cause as human greed and selfishness.

#2) Like the California fires, the fires in Australia are a consequence of human mismanagement of resources. In its natural state, the environment prevents such massive fires. Water storage in the soil, small fires that clean up underbrush so it can’t erupt in huge, hot fires, plants that are resistant to fire and don’t burn well all reduce the fire hazard. Imported plants, inadequate management of water resources, and overuse of the land are the main contributors to massive fires
.
Today you can go back to the areas in California that were scorched so severely in 2018 and see that the land is recovering. Hopefully, the bad management practices of the past won’t be repeated, but sometimes humans fail to learn from past mistakes. God doesn’t cause tragedies like this, but He also doesn’t force humans to manage intelligently, and He doesn’t take away the results of mismanagement.

January 16, 2020January 15, 2020

Year-End Report for 2019

Our year-end report for 2019 is now available. One of the frequent challenges that atheists and skeptics bring against religion and those of us who publicly argue for the existence of God is that the only reason we do it is to make money.

There is no question that some have used religion as a money-making business or as a tool to promote some secular cause. Yes, there are TV preachers who have become millionaires by promoting their religious views. There are also atheists and skeptics who use their opposition to religion or to religious persons in the same way. The only way to know the truth is to look at what the religion or ministry does, and what is the personal gain for its leaders.

It’s with that objective in mind that the “Does God Exist?” ministry and John Clayton offer a year-end report at the start of each new year. If you would like to receive a copy of the four-page year-end report for 2019, send us your postal address or email address, and we will send it to you. Send your request to John Clayton, 1555 Echo Valley Drive, Niles, MI 49120, or email to jncdge@aol.com.

January 15, 2020January 14, 2020

Christian Seminary Students in Same-sex Marriages

Yesterday we reported on the LGBT conflict which is breaking the United Methodist Church apart. The dispute over sexual morality is also affecting one of the oldest and most highly regarded theological seminaries in the United States–Fuller Theological Seminary. The conflict involves Christian seminary students in same-sex marriages.

Fuller has a “Sexual Standards Policy,” which states that the seminary “holds marriage to be a covenant union between one man and one woman.” The policy also says that “homosexual forms of explicit sexual conduct” are “inconsistent with the teaching of Scripture.” Two students, one man and one woman, were expelled because the seminary learned that they were in same-sex marriages. They are both suing the school for one million dollars each.

The problem here is that Fuller and many other Christian colleges and seminaries receive government assistance in scholarships and other educational funding. Title IX government funding rules bar “discrimination based on sex.” The original intent of this rule was that women could not be refused participation in educational programs just because they were women. Now LGBT supporters are mounting legal efforts to expand Title IX protections to gender identity and sexuality.

What happens here will have a profound effect on Christian colleges who participate in any scholarship program where government grants or loans allow students to get an education. This would include those with minority and military scholarships. It will also affect those schools and churches that use government commodities in benevolent programs or minority support programs.

Christian seminary students in same-sex marriages is only one aspect of a growing problem. It seems that the government’s beliefs about morality are dictating what Church programs can teach. The only option is for churches and schools not to use government support in any way, or else they must change their moral teachings.

You can read about this on the Christianity Today website at THIS LINK.

January 13, 2020January 12, 2020

Chinese Persecution of Christians

Our materials have been used in China for many years. Our DVD series was translated into Mandarin, and many years ago, we helped arrange for a Chinese national to duplicate the DVDs in large quantities and distribute them throughout China. We are now hearing from our contacts in China about an increase in Chinese persecution of Christians.

For several years, churches have had to register with the government. Now the government is placing surveillance cameras in the churches to monitor congregants. Churches that refuse to allow the cameras are being shut down. All churches with a cross on their buildings have had those crosses taken down, and images of Christ are replaced with pictures of Xi Jinping.

In 2018, the Chinese government implemented a new law called “The Revised Regulations on Religion,” which forbids landlords from renting their premises to Christians for meetings. It also prohibits children and teenagers from attending church services.

One congregational leader expressed the dedication that our brothers in China have. When he was arrested, he told an American visitor, “I have lost my congregation, my freedom, and I am starting to lose my health. I have cried to God, ‘Why are You letting me go through this?’ I now see that the persecution is a formula for revival. As I read Exodus 3:7-8, I see God aware of the miserable bondage His chosen people endured for 400 years, but He was not indifferent to their sufferings. As we pray, we can rest in the fact that we are part of God’s wise and caring plan, no matter how inscrutable that plan may appear to human eyes.”

It isn’t only Chinese persecution of Christians. We hear similar stories from Nigeria, India, Eritrea, and Pakistan. Our prayers are with our brothers and sisters in these countries. New laws restricting and persecuting Christians are being considered in New York, California, Chicago, and Washington D.C. Satan makes a mistake when he uses these direct attacks on the Church because it will wake people up. The revival that results will defeat him. We are not revealing names or sources here for obvious reasons.

January 1, 2020December 24, 2019

Does God Exist? Today, Year 4

With the start of 2020, we are beginning Does God Exist? Today, Year 4. This website features the kind of information found in the “News and Notes” column in our printed quarterly publication. However, because Does God Exist? Today is published daily, the information is more up-to-date. This website continues to grow in its worldwide outreach thanks to our loyal followers.

In addition to the daily posts on this Does God Exist? Today website, we have daily posts on our Facebook page. That page continues to get the attention of people around the world. The posts on the Facebook page deal with evidence of design in living things. We have dealt with that topic for years in our printed publications. This year we plan to expand that with a new website which we will announce soon.

Also, we want you to know about our DoesGodExist.tv website (Does God Exist? Media) where you can view our entire video series. Also, on that site, you will find access to our audio series and as well as other materials.

It is essential that you know about our original website DoesGodExist.org. There you can read the current issue of our printed journal plus many other articles of interest.

Thank you for following our posts. We appreciate your feedback and support. You make it possible for us to share the message that God exists and the good news of His love with people around the world. As we begin Does God Exist? Today year 4, we pray that 2020 will bring blessings to you and your family.

December 29, 2019December 24, 2019

Why We Don’t Accept Government Grants

We have received several letters from readers who appreciate what we are trying to do in our ministry. They say that they want us to be aware that there are grants for certain types of educational efforts that we can get from the government. We serve and educate hundreds of prisoners around the country. We have to explain why we don’t accept government grants.

Many years ago, Ohio Valley Christian College (now Ohio Valley University) erected an auditorium using a grant program from the government. The auditorium served the community and provided a venue for theatrical programs. The school conducted a short devotional at the beginning of each day as a part of the education of the students presenting the values of a Christian education. The government informed the school that they could no longer use the auditorium for that purpose because it could be interpreted as the government sanctioning religion. To the school’s credit, they returned the government grant.

I happened to share a motel room with the president of the school during that time and learned first-hand the dilemma it presented. The government is very inconsistent with this kind of control. When I was involved in atheism, we were able to use public facilities free of charge, with the government providing the facility and bearing its expense. Ten years later, when I was a Christian, we tried to rent a public facility in New York. We were refused because we were talking about God and the scientific evidence for faith.

Hillsdale College here in Michigan makes a point of stating clearly: “Hillsdale refuses to accept one penny from the government – not even indirectly in the form of federal or state student grants or loans. This is essential to our ability to remain independent and stay true to our educational mission.”

We applaud Hillsdale for that policy, and we fully understand it. That’s why we don’t accept government grants. Like Hillsdale, this ministry is totally funded by the generosity of those who believe what we are doing is essential. We will not use grants or loans that have government connections.