Freedom of the Atheist vs. Freedom of the Christian

The idea of freedom is easily the greatest appeal of atheism. Intellectual freedom. Philosophical freedom. Freedom of lifestyle. Freedom from the guilt and restrictions provided by religion. If you don't want to use your money for charity, you don't have to. Marriage? Sure, if you want. Or you can have a great life of sex. There's no reason why you shouldn't. We're here to procreate; it's instinctual. And if you don't want a child or can't handle one, there's no reason why you can't get an abortion. This is about self-preservation. Again, it's necessary to rely on our biology. It knows us better than ourselves. So long as we aren't hurting anyone, nothing is wrong with holding an atheistic worldview. Society would run more smoothly if we allowed ourselves the freedom of naturalism.

Except that it wouldn't. The natural world can be a brutal place. Watch the Discovery Channel and you'll see it pretty quickly. When you realize that these animals are acting on instinct, things come into focus. Naturalism is able to explain how life works. In simplistic terms, organisms are what they are because of chemical reactions to stimuli. Everything is dictated by this. And that terrifies me.

An atheist, a true atheist, must subscribe to this view. Even Secular Humanism, which claims that humanity can be moral without spirituality, must concede to this fact. Atheism rejects God and the supernatural in favor of empiricism. The natural world is tangible and it can be tested and have proof. Because science is the study of nature and provides knowledge for these things, it becomes the highest form of truth.

However, in accepting naturalism there comes the necessity to yield what atheism values most: freedom. Choice no longer exists or, rather, it never did. Everything you are, everything you do, feel, and think is nothing more than chemical reactions to stimuli. Nothing is "wrong" or "right" because it's just things doing what they do. You're nothing more than a machine that's part of a machine and so on and so on. Nothing has value and, therefore, you have no value.

It's for this reason, first and foremost, that I'm not an atheist. A clockwork existence is a sad and pointless one. Critics of Christianity like to point at how we "suppress" rights and halt progress without realizing that we believe in an actual, non-illusory freedom.

I believe in the processes of how things work. It's undeniable. What differentiates me from the atheist is that I believe in transcendent ideas. I believe that actions and thoughts, sadness, hope, morality, love, and creativity are more than just chemicals. I believe that they are what God put in us. It's what separates us from all other life. It reveals our value and our individuality. It reveals God's love in creating us. And any true atheist that's intellectually honest with himself will recognize that he cannot believe in these things without a God in existence.

-L. Travis Hoffman

7/23/2015

"But Jesus Was God!"

Hebrews 4:15

"For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are -- yet he did not sin."

Every once in a while, you'll find yourself at a place in life where things just plain suck. Things that don't seem to be getting better. Inevitably for the Christian you will likely be met with the consolation that even Jesus went through rough times. Very rarely do I ever feel any sort of relief from that. In fact, it almost always irks me.

Jesus was God. I mean, he still is God but I'm speaking specifically to His life on Earth. At the same time, He was also fully man. As such, He felt the pains and temptations of sin that plague every one of us. But did He really? I find myself asking this question frequently. If Christ felt temptation to sin yet was still perfect and pure in nature, was there any real temptation to be had? He was aware of His own divinity. Wouldn't He also be aware that He would never succumb and, therefore, never needed to be concerned? This is where I get annoyed.

Until recently, it never occurred to me that my questions and frustrations are exactly what makes Christ so far beyond our understanding. The Bible says that He faced temptation and always conquered it and I believe this to be true. I've never given pause to think that I could be interpreting this verse incorrectly. For all the times I've stressed contextualizing scripture, I found myself falling to the same mistake that again and again I've had to address.

So what if Jesus faced temptation? That doesn't need to be the draw of Hebrews 4:15. The point is that "he did not sin". Picture a time in the past when there was something that you really wanted to do, agonizingly so, but knew that it was wrong and that, in your conviction, you would never do it. Now take that and apply it to Jesus with every single temptation in His life. Imagine the emotional and even physical toll that would take upon a man. An ever-increasing burden made worse with the knowledge that He would be taking all of mankind's sins with Him in the most horrible death imaginable. It's no wonder He was sweating blood.

I could very well be misinterpreting this verse. My knowledge of hermeneutics is limited, however much I find it enlightening. But I have little doubt that the conclusion I've made is consistent with the character of Christ. The value in that is something that has brought me comfort in a way that it never had before.

-L. Travis Hoffman

7/23/2015

What's Really Wrong with Abstinence Education

I don't care for the public school system as it exists today. For all the people that have graduated from high school, a good many don't seem to be very educated or lack common sense altogether. I blame the schools for this in many cases. Whether we're talking about illiteracy, an inadequate special education department, or lack of discipline, things don't seem to be improving. The thing that really bothers me, however, is how we handle sex education.

Remember the D.A.R.E. program? I recall in 6th grade that we had a police officer that would teach us about the dangers of illegal drug use and how they'd try to hook us. At the end of the last class, we had to deliver a speech (side note: I had a panic attack from nerves). Each of us then took an oath to not use drugs or be involved in gang activity. How many people do you know that actually kept that oath?

Let's consider the reasons for a moment. What did most of our speeches say as to why we'd choose to avoid drugs? Health risks and jail time, both of which center around self-interest. Once young adults are old enough to be offered drugs, they believe in their own invulnerability to addiction, bodily damage, and/or the law.

This same rule applies to abstinence programs. Teens can pledge to wait for sex all they want, but if their abstinence is to avoid a pregnancy or STDs then they can justify having sex by making sure to "be careful" with condoms and birth control. We can see how well that ends up working by the number of unplanned pregnancies among our fellow alumni, most of whom are unmarried.

What if we were to teach abstinence by placing importance not on ourselves, but rather our friends and loved ones? You want to know why I'm still a virgin? Because it would bring undeserved criticism on my parents. It would dishonor everything that they've taught me. Because it would put my family in a position where they would be obligated to help me. Whether by helping financially or providing living space or taking time out of their lives to pick up my slack because of a lack of personal responsibility. Because it doesn't honor God or His teachings. Because I wouldn't be emotionally prepared or mature enough to be the best father possible for my child. Because it would force my significant other to abandon her plans and aspirations. Because it might mean that my girlfriend would choose to get an abortion and I would have that death on my conscience.

We've become such a selfish culture that can't exercise restraint. We don't know how to think about the consequences of our actions. We want what we want and no one is going to convince us otherwise. Let's work on teaching students to have humility and selflessness before we bother expecting them to wait for marriage.

-L. Travis Hoffman

7/13/2015 

Keeping It To Yourself

Did you guys hear about the reactions to UFC fighter Yoel Romero's post-fight comments? Romero took time acknowledging the good Lord for bringing him success and stressing that the United States needs to do the same. Needless to say, it annoyed people. 

The president of the UFC, Dana White, expressed his disapproval. "The reality is this: You just won the biggest fight of your career, America doesn't want to hear your thoughts on Jesus. Keep that stuff at home; religion, politics, all that stuff. When you're out there fighting and you're being interviewed, they want to hear about the fight. It's awesome you love Jesus; love Jesus all you want. You just don't have to do it publicly."

This is yet another one of those instances where a person who is not of faith should refrain from teaching orthopraxy. Christians don't have to love Jesus publicly, Mr. White? Perhaps you should open a Bible and see what it has to say about it. 

Isaiah 62:6- "I have posted watchmen on your walls, Jerusalem; they will never be silent day or night. You who call on the LORD, give yourselves no rest."

Isaiah 40:9- "You who bring good news to Zion, go up on a high mountain. You who bring good news to Jerusalem, lift up your voice with a shout, lift it up, do not be afraid; say to the towns of Judah, 'Here is your God!'"

Psalm 119:46- "I will speak of your statutes before kings and will not be put to shame."

Matthew 5:14-16- "You are the light of the world. A town built on a hill cannot be hidden. Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. In the same way, let your light shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven."

Acts 18:9- "One night the Lord spoke to Paul in a vision: 'Do not be afraid; keep on speaking, do not be silent.'"

I could go all day, Mr. White. There is no commandment that says, "Thou shalt keep thy religion to thyself." Christianity does not work that way! The Bible says that God desires all to be in heaven, not just the ones who would like to hear about Christ. We Christians have a personal relationship with Him, but not a private one. It was Christ's command to go and preach to every nation. You cannot practice the Religion while keeping it to yourself! That's not the way of the Christian. We're instructed to speak the truth in love, and that truth is that Jesus is Lord and Savior and that He is the only way to the Father's Kingdom. 

I'll end this with a quote from magician and devout atheist, Penn Jillette. 

"I don't respect people who don't proselytize. I don't respect that at all. If you believe that there is a Heaven and a Hell, and people could be going to Hell and you think it's not really worth telling them this because it would make it socially awkward, how much do you have to hate somebody to not proselytize? How much do you have to hate somebody to believe that everlasting life is possible and not tell them that? I mean, if I believed beyond a shadow of a doubt that a truck was coming at you and you didn't believe it, there's a certain point where I tackle you, and [everlasting life] is more important than that."

Should Christians Complain?

A lot of events in the world have been troubling me as of late. The censorship and suppressing of Christian expression has given me cause for concern. The recent rumblings of the State dictating policy within the Church is even more disturbing for me. Post-modernism and its offspring of cultural relativism have already taken their toll on Christianity. With all these things going on, we still don't have it all that bad. At least not in comparison to Christians in North Korea, China, and many Middle Eastern countries. In America, our expression of belief is negatively responded to with verbal abuse and the occasional fine or lawsuit. The aforementioned countries respond with prison, torture, or execution.

Quite frequently, I'll read posts from non-Christians or even political liberals who believe that Christians in the U.S. play victim and close their eyes to their dominance within the culture. I'm of two minds on this subject. I think non-Christians, being what they are, cannot see how the Church and its values are being undermined simply because they support the views and causes that are behind that very undermining. They have no vested interest in the survival of Christianity and therefore see no persecution taking place. At the same time, I do think that the Church underestimates itself and resigns to having lost what's termed as the "Culture War".

I really hate it when well-known evangelists and pastors talk about how "the end times are here". I think it's rubbish. It's presumptuous and fails to take into account how much pull the Church still has in the world. Maybe same-sex marriage poses a potential threat toward Christian expression, but abortion has gone down considerably in the US, even in the states with few restrictions. The Church played a big part in that. Or how about the fact that Roman Catholicism hasn't budged on its position of homosexuality and abortion as being sins? Many churches have been swayed on this, but what is arguably the most powerful denomination in Christendom has still stuck to its guns. They haven't backed down. That's something to celebrate. However much controversy Pope Francis continues to generate, he hasn't changed the Roman Catholic Church into some mirror-universe equivalent. Well, not yet anyway.

What I'm trying to say is that the world hasn't been given to hell in a handbasket. The end times do approach closer each day, but that doesn't mean that those days are here. The world hasn't gotten nearly bad enough to warrant using that phrase. Yes, Christians are getting marginalized within our culture, but this is nothing new. Christians were oppressed in the Church's infancy. That this sort of thing goes on just proves that events run circular, that there's an ebb and flow to the persecution of Christianity.

We also need to take into account that this may just be God's way of seperating the sheep from the goats. It's easy to call one's self a Christian when those tenets of faith are without heavy resistance. But a true Christian will stick it out when the world is working against them. Even when receiving verbal abuse, whether we be referred to as hate-mongerers or anti-science or an obstruction to social progress, the true Christian shows his loyalty to Christ and His teachings.

Just for the record, I have no desire to give people the impression that my being a true Christian somehow elevates me above others. I know many within the Church that are far better examples than myself. But having those qualities of a true Christian is something I aspire to. I want God to be pleased with me that I made attempts, though not without stumbling, to serve Him and seek His Kingdom.

-L. Travis Hoffman

6/9/2015

When is it no longer legalism?

Every few months or so, I find myself asking this question. When does an act, behavior, or what have you, become distinctly and instrinsically sinful as opposed to being something that is meant to fit the box of the Christian "image"? I really don't know. I'm not sure if this should bother me or not. I only know that I want to avoid legalism and also avoid ways of being pulled further away from Christ. That doesn't necessarily mean that I feel closure, however.

I love listening and watching stand-up comedy. And, putting it out there, I enjoy the comedy of comedians like Louis C.K., Dane Cook, and Pablo Francisco. Guys that are most definitely crass and crude with their material. I enjoy R-rated comedies like Superbad or The 40-Year-Old Virgin. I get a lot of amusement out of its humor.

Perhaps I'm trying to justify myself, but I feel that this humor taps into who we are. We are people that are impure; we lust, we let our tempers get out of control, we covet, and we hate. There's a certain honesty about that type of comedy. And sometimes when it gets dirty or dark, it's oftentimes out of sheer absurdity. The humor becomes surreal. Does Louis C.K. really want to get AIDS so he can pass it onto deer so they can die? No, of course not. He's using hyperbole to make a point that he really hates having deer on his property. Do I always enjoy their humor? No. There are many times that I think Louis or Dane go over the line for me. Blasphemous or hurtful. They frequently condone values that are very much un-Christian.

It's said that our behavior reflects what we take into our lives. In fact, even the Bible says something to that effect. I don't know the verse off-hand, but I do recall it. The point is that it's a truth and therefore absolute. The Word also says to be in the world and not of it. I'm trying to figure out where one ends and the other begins.

I'll use another example of something I enjoy. I really dig mythology, especially of the Greek variety. It's imaginative and it's informative of what culture was like in their respective eras. It also consists almost exclusively of pagan gods and magic and, compared to Christianity, acts of sin. Is it morally sound for me to gain pleasure from the stories of cultures that created and worshipped false gods? Stories that were created by people who likely condemned themselves to hell? I think that this is a legitimate question to pose to one's self, because I don't know the right answer. I really wish I did. My only advice, my only comfort, is to pray for proper descernment and vigilance toward what might be sinful. Pray to recognize what is offensive to God and what He probably doesn't care about. As frivilous as this sounds, we're going to have to answer for our sins, regardless.

-L. Travis Hoffman

6/3/2015

Why I Lean Toward Calvinism (Kind of)

I'm not a Calvinist. That is, if you were to ask someone that adheres to John Calvin's approach to Christian theology, I wouldn't fit the bill. I'm hesitant to subscribe to all five points of Calvinism. At best, I'm a four-point Calvinist. But close is only good in horse shoes, so I won't describe myself as one.

However, as I've learned about John Calvin's observations on sin and grace, I feel inclined to agree with him. Questions about heaven, hell, and salvation seem to have some clarity and bring me some peace of mind.

For those who aren't well-learned of church history, John Calvin was among many thinkers who furthered the Reformation or Protestant movement. I don't want anyone to think that I'm somehow worshipping Calvin or elevating him to prophet status. In fact, for this reason many prefer to be identified as Reformed. It's merely referring to those who agree with Calvin's studies and interpretations about Christian theology. I believe in the same tenets and foundations as my family and friends who are Christians.

I'll be honest in saying that I don't know anyone personally that follows this school of thought. I know at one point that there was a movement within my own church to push for this system. However, this was years back. What little knowledge I have of Calvinism has been gathered from a podcast series that focused on it and a little bit of reading here and there. I'm not claiming to be an authority or even terribly knowledgable about it, but I can express my own reflections on what I've learned. Onward to my reasons.

My investigations on Calvin's interpretation of divine election and grace have provoked thoughts and, potentially, answers to things that I frequently ponder. Particularly as of late. The concept of irresistable grace, that a person who might be completely hostile to Christianity and then joins the Body of Christ, for example, explains some things. Another example could pertain to our concern about areas of the world where people are unaware or not exposed to Christianity. Through this idea of irresistable grace, we can take comfort in knowing that the Father is more than fair and chooses His elect without discrimination. No location, color, age, gender, or history can obstruct His blessing of election. It is not earned, but given. Through His will, an individual among the elect will naturally be pulled into accepting Christ's gift of salvation. This doesn't negate the necessity to witness, but it does bring a sense of privilege and devotion toward Him in that we can be His instrument to carry out His will.

On the other side of the coin, this can also explain how certain individuals will adamantly refuse and reject Christianity. They could be subjected to the most compelling of evidence or experiences and still would not admit that Christ is Lord. I know someone that is exactly like this. I've mentioned him in a previous entry. Both the doctrines of total depravity and irresistable grace (or lack thereof) could feasibly explain that. I hope that I'm wrong and he comes around.

What has likely given me the most to occupy my mind is the fifth point of Calvinism, Perserverance of the Saints. This is not new doctrine for me as my church has always taught this view. However, my exposure to it from the aforementioned podcast provided food for thought. When leading the reformation, Martin Luther was challenged on this view by the Roman Catholic Church. They objected to this interpretation of scripture, believing that if salvation did not require continuous renewal then man would feel free to do as he pleased without fear of repercussions. Luther replied that one who has the gift of salvation will desire to please God. The point being that a Christian, a true Christian, displays the fruits of the Spirit. It may not be apparent to others, but God knows. We generally look at the people that are "playing the part" and make a judgement call based on that. It's all about the heart. It's reflected in whether you're being good to become a Christian or you're being good as a result of being a Christian.

I lost a close friend some time ago. His mother, naturally, was concerned about where he was in eternity. She asked me if I thought he was in heaven. I said that I hoped so and assured her that God is more than fair. I told her that if he was saved, then his soul would be with Christ. Then she got into some other stuff that Roman Catholics don't believe in getting saved (which is not true, FYI), but it did get me thinking. Assuming that he had asked for salvation, did he receive it? By that I mean, in his heart was he really asking for it? I knew my friend for nearly his entire life and yet I never found myself exposed to his fruits of the Spirit. He never expressed much love for religion or anything remotely spiritual.

What I'm saying is that it made me realize that words from the mouth do not bring salvation. Words from the heart do. My inclination is to believe that my friend did not receive salvation. It's disconcerting on one hand at the thought of my friend being in hell. On the other hand, God is fair. Beyond more than fair. I take comfort in knowing that. It's nothing I have control over, anyway.

As far as points of doctrine that are chaffing to me, I have a hard time with limited atonement. I believe that Christ's sacrifice atoned for the sins of everyone and not just those among the unmerited elect. The idea that even the possibility of salvation is denied to many people seems to fly in the face of God's gift of free will. However, the Calvinist's understanding of free will seems to function differently than what is taught to Arminians. But getting into that might make this entry even more longer than it is now. Maybe another time.

It's been fun reading and learning about this stuff if for no other reason than to provide me with the challenge to observe my faith through a different set of lenses.

-L. Travis Hoffman

5/1/2015