Last week I interacted with some atheists on an atheist’s blog on a post that wasn’t necessarily antagonistic towards Christianity, or Christians in general for that matter. The topic was the familiar atheisitic observation that most of the world’s major religions, specifically Christianity, disdain the present life and our current dwelling place, namely earth, due to the fact that we are “only passing through” and are eager to be the catalysts for setting off ”the End of Days” or the Apocalypse. I responded trying to communicate that, though there is some truth to those ideas, at least for Christianity’s sake, the Bible does not allow in any way, shape, or form for believers to look at this life with contempt. One man replied to my comments with a general assertion that anyone who holds to the view that there is an afterlife will inevitably devalue his or her life on earth, and thus, would soon view this present state as nothing more than a waiting room for the “main event”.

The implications, if such a perception were in fact true, would lead Christians to definitely withdraw any type of serious concern or involvment from issues such as the environment, the society, the government, and really anything else that would not fall under the priority of a basic evangelical, or rather “Christian” agenda. Knowing that the theme of my blog, which is an overflow out of my philosophy of life, is the “journey” or “Sojourner” motif, this has been something that I’ve tried to prevent others from assuming, since it would seem at a very surface level to be true. Looking at Christianity in particular, do our doctrines of heaven, hell, and eschatology leave us no choice but to devalue the life we now live? Do the Scriptures guard us from having a divine license to trash this world because something better is to come? Well, though you all may already know all the answers to these questions, I’ve been meditating on this issue, and I wanted to compile a brief and concise, though by no means exhaustive, list of reasons why the Bible does not permit Christians to devalue this life, despite the fact that some of us may in fact do.

1. Genesis 1:31 – “And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good.” We see this positive affirmation from God in response to his divine creative activity in making all that exists before the Fall in Gen 3, but never see him retract it once sin enters the world. The Lord was pleased with the physicality of the universe, and though we see in Scripture his extreme displeasure towards a contaminated world and humanity, God still expects his people to tend and to care for his creation, even our own bodies, despite the truth that one day he will remove the curse and make all things new.
2. Exodus 20/The Ten Commandments - With commandments from the One True God like “You shall not murder, commit adultery, steal, lie, and covet” it would be rather difficult for God’s people to trivialize the importance of living rightly on this earth. Moreover, these commands, if kept, benefit more than just the obedient individual; they are a blessing to everyone else also. In addition, the admonition for one to honor his or her father and mother does not in any way permit a person of any age to reduce his or her relationship with one’s parents to something of insignificance. This is, of course, a very special commandment insofar as the Apostle Paul points out in Ephesians 6:2 that ”this is the first commandment with a promise.”
3. Matthew 6:19-21 - “Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, . . . but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, . . . For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.” Taking into account the reality of an afterlife, especially one as glorious as the eternal future that awaits us in heaven with God and the saints, our earthly lives have a direct effect on the welfare of our heavenly ones. To say it another way, in the words of Maximus Decimus Meridias from Gladiator, “Brothers, what we do here in life, echoes in eternity.” Obviously, I don’t have the space nor the time to flesh out exactly how “treasures” ought to be defined, but what we can recognize immediately from this text is that what we do in life now will have a lasting effect on the one we will have in the age to come. Not much room for any devaluing here.
4. Romans 13: 1-7 (cf. Matt 22:21ff) - “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have benn instituted by God (13:1).” Point blank, Christians are to be the best of citizens. I am more than aware that this is both a broad and controversial subject; however, Scripture is clear here in Rom 13 that as part of this life, we are subject to those whom God has set in place. This not only says we are to stay out of trouble with the law, but that we also ought to have a genuine concern, interest, and involvment with the state of political affairs wherever we may live. Once again, there isn’t much room for Christian passivity in this case as we wait for the heavens to open and the trumpets to sound.
5. Romans 12:1; 1 Cor 6:19-20 (cf. Rom 6:4) - “I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship. . . . So glorify God in your body.” As I mentioned earlier under Genesis 1, though corrupted by the Fall, there is still an element of worth retained in God’s creation, even our bodies. These two verses communicate clearly that we are still capable of using our physical bodies in a manner that glorifies God. This is true especially in light of the early part of 1 Cor 6:19-20 where Paul asks rhetorically, “Or do you know know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, . . .?” Any Christian who would slip into some form of modern Gnosticism thereby hating one’s material body has completely missed the point of an extreme amount of the purpose of the Cross and redemption in itself. There is no excuse for believers to devalue this present life in light of these truths.
6. Mark 12:29-31 - Ah yes, the first and second greatest commandments. We most certainly must not leave these out. For as Jesus said in Matt 22:40, “On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.” However, not to neglect the immense implications of the first greatest commandment for our study, the second one is purely fundamental for this topic. Who is my neighbor? Well, I think the answer is everyone. The interesting thing about the use of the term “neighbor” here in Jesus’ teaching is that it never stipulates as to whether your “neighbor” is friend or foe. But what is certain is that we are to love our neighbor as ourselves, and this task can only be fulfilled by someone who is doing quite the opposite of devaluing his or her earthly life.
7. The Incarnation/John 1:14 - “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.” Wow, what a verse! This has to be one of my absolute favorite passages of Scripture. How often we forget the immediate implications of the Incarnation. I think too that we have neglected to meditate upon the nature of the Son of God in a post-resurrection state. Jesus never ceased from being the Incarnate Word. That truth speaks volumes with respect to how we ought to view and to treat our fleshly lives now and our time on earth in these bodies. Jesus most definitely valued his life while in this world. He treasured his opportunity to enter this realm, to love his disciples, to heal the masses, to recline at the table with others, to fellowship with the little children, to stand for God’s truth, and to endure the cross and the shame for the joy that was set before him (Heb 12:1-3). Christians must not belittle their privilege to take up their crosses and to walk in the paths of the Savior who humbled himself in the form of a servant and was born in the likeness of men to be crushed by the Father so that all of the universe may be restored and renewed and that his wrath and justice might be satified, and then, his creation, in perfect holiness, may ascribe to him the glory that is due to his name forever (Phil 2:5-11; Rom 8:18-25; Isa 53:10; 1 Chron 16:29).

Fellow Christians, when we devalue this life, we devalue the cross and the person of Christ. Let us not be so careless nor that over zealous. But let us still continue on in the journey to a better country.

How does that work actually? Apparently Dinesh D’Souza knows, but I’m not convinced. Actually, I’m rather disappointed and frustrated as to his attempt to do so. While I was catching up on my blog reading after being gone for a few weeks, I clicked on a post from D’Souza’s blog called “Is Christianity the Only Way?” As usual, I was curious to see what his answer would be, especially since he has recently been a somewhat unlikely defender of the faith inasmuch as he has mainly thrived in political circles rather than theological ones. The post started off great and I had little reason to be alarmed concerning his final conclusions. Yet, mid-way through, I was taken by complete surprise.

D’Souza, after recounting some statistics on the rise of theism in America, proceeded to tell a story of a recent debate he had with former opponent Christopher Hitchens and a Jewish radio host named Dennis Prager. Hitchens singled D’Souza out on the question of whether or not “good and descent Jews go to heaven“? His reply was, “I believe they can.” D’Souza first affirmed that his position was in no way “a denial of the central Christian position that Christ is the way to salvation.” I hope you caught the missing adjective in his statement; notice that he said “Christ is the way to salvation” instead of “Christ is the only way to salvation.” Still, he further explained that “Scripture and Christian teaching leave open the question of what happens to virtuous non-Christians who lived either before Christ or who have not had a chance to accept him.”

To extend clarification of his stance, D’Souza tried to distinguish between two different types of pluralism of which I’m not sure if “pluralism” serves as the most appropriate title for what he describes. Nonetheless, in a nutshell, the two sides of pluralism, as D’Souza sees them, are first, the kind where truth does not matter, and second, the kind where truth does matter, but humans are sober-minded with respect to the limitedness of the knowability and accessibility of truth. Ultimately, what he is saying is that he’s a “good and thinking” pluralist. Sadly enough, D’Souza’s position is not uncommon nor unfamiliar within the “evangelical” world. Even in my short life, I am constantly amazed by how many people, some of whom I respect like D’Souza, are willing to broaden the way to eternal life where there are entry ways other than Christ.

In his explanation, one could say that D’Souza does in fact believe that Christ is the only way to salvation, since it is his atoning sacrifice that still covers those who go through life without believing on his name for salvation. Yet, glancing on his position, it is obvious that he has some erroneous views concerning the nature of salvation in the OT or pre-Christ’s coming, the nature and extent of the atonement, and the necessity of belief in the gospel for eternal life. Another topic that seems to be misunderstood in D’Souza’s stance is the character of God insofar as he appeals to God’s merciful nature in view of those who have lived “morally” good lives without acceptance of the gospel. But with respect to his answer regarding the fate of Jews, his thoughts fall short due to the fact that there is probably a small chance that most “good and descent Jews” have not heard of Jesus Christ and have not willingly rejected his gospel.

I’m not going to try and refute pluralism, per se, by the typical arguments and Scriptures. There are plenty of books out there that have done it with extensive treatment. However, what I am most concerned about stems from issues similar to the ones I encountered from speaking out against The Shack’s unorthodox portrayal of the Trinity as well as its pluralistic tendencies. It seems that Christians are eager to water down the gospel. We get asked the tough questions that sound much harsher and non-sensical out loud than they do in our minds and on paper, and we scramble for something to say. Yet, we must not be surprised that the claims of the gospel seem so foreign to the secular mind. Didn’t Jesus say they would? I’ve been reading through the gospels the past few months and I am more aware than ever concerning Jesus’ promise that the world will hate his disciples. Wasn’t Jesus the one who said that the gospel would be like a sword, having the ability to make members of the same household enemies (Matt 10:34-39)?  Even Paul says that there is an “offense of the cross” (Gal 5:11). No one should accept it or consider it lightly. Jesus’ demands are not rules that are meant to be bent. They can either be kept or broken. This isn’t legalism, it’s obedience. That’s where true freedom lives.

I believe in retrospect that there are two basic reasons why so many Christians would have no problem saying “Amen” to D’Souza’s comments without a second thought. First, people just don’t know their bibles. I believe D’Souza probably is well-acquainted with his copy of God’s Word, but obviously not enough, or else he would at least be fully aware that “Scripture and Christian teaching” does not leave this question open; instead, the Bible has plenty to say on the matter, and Christian theology has not neglected dealing with this issue either. Christian history itself is packed full of theologians who have tried to answer this very honest question. However, though the issue in a broad stroke has to do with people not being immersed in God’s Word, I fear that the unfamiliarity is more so associated with people’s knowledge of the gospel, and not necessarily whether or not they can tell me how many chapters there are in Genesis or what’s their eschatological take on Revelation. I am always astounded by how unaware many Christians are of the nature and components of the gospel in which they claimed to have believed.

The second reason I believe is that people have a complacent and surface-level love for the person of Christ. I know this is a bad example, but in the movie Gladiator, Maximus tells Proximo that he will return to Rome with an army and will make good on his offer to kill the emperor so long as Proximo will give him his freedom. Maximus tells him, “I give you my word.” Proximo scoffs, and says that he knows that Maximus is a man of his word and that he would die for the honor of his ancestors and his family. Proximo, however, is being made rich by Maximus’ victories and refuses. Proximo’s observation of Maximus’ devotion to the honor of thosehe loves dearest is what I want to emphasize. A real love for God is one that will not tolerate any type of dishonor to his name. I cringe when I hear bad theology not becauseI’m a “heretic hunter”, but because what I hear contradicts the God whom I love more than anything in this world. If you remember, Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar got in trouble with God because they spoke wrongly of him unlike his upright servant Job. If Jesus Christ has made the claim that he is the only way to eternal life, we should love him enough to defend what he has made plain. Be bound to God, and loyal to him above all else. This will make standing up for doctrines that come across as “hard” much easier.

I think it is time for us to reacquaint ourselves with Jesus’ words in the Sermon on the Mount. So many people talk about the Christian life as walking the “straight and narrow road”. Yet this isn’t what Christ said. Instead, Jesus made it known that it’s not the road, but the gate that is narrow. He then goes on to say that “the way [road] is hard, and those who find it are few” (Matt 7:13-14).

(**This post does not affect my recommendation of D’Souza’s book, What’s So Great About Christianity?. As far as I can tell, he thoughts on pluralism do not appear in this monograph.)

If you can remember, a little while back I pointed you all to a set of lectures that could be downloaded in an audio or video format by Dr. Al Mohler on the New Atheism movement delivered at Dallas Theological Seminary. Now, I’m not a prophet or a son of a prophet, but in that post I made the comment that I really hoped that Mohler would convert his lecture series into a book, and now, I believe that wish has come true. I just so happened to search to see if Mohler was coming out with a published form of these speeches anytime soon and found an entire website devoted to promoting its upcoming release.

Although nowhere on the website does Mohler come outright and say that his new book is the publicized version of his lectures, the content description and philosophy behind the thesis is exactly parallel to the what he spoke on at DTS. I love the title for the book, which is, Atheism Remix: A Christian Confronts the New Atheists. I won’t steal Mohler’s thunder since the book is supposed to be about 112 pages, but “Atheism Remix” is a perfect title to illustrate just exactly how the “New Atheism” has arisen in our culture in terms of its arguments and even publicity. Mohler demonstrates this in his lectures, and I’m sure also in his book, that the “New Atheism” differs from older versions insofar as atheism has never been praised by the culture as a preferred worldview in the manner it has today. In the past, no one ever thought it was popular to disbelieve in the existence of God. Now, as a broad generalization, theism, but even more so Christianity, in our culture is gradually becoming something that is frowned upon. This, and many other critiques, contribute to Mohler’s assessment of the “New Atheism” with respect to how what we are hearing from the popularized books and speeches from the leading atheists today is much different than what has been encountered in the past, primarily since the Enlightenment.

The book is due out sometime in July. The website gives various details and descriptions about its content as well as a brief audio clip from Mohler telling his motivations behind writing it. There is also a link for pre-order and several other endorsements. Check it out, I’m excited to see a resource on how to respond to this movement in today’s culture from one of evangelicalism’s and Southern Baptist’s most influential and intellectual leaders. I know it will be well worth the money spent.

• Click here to view the website for Atheism Remix.
• Visit Al Mohler’s personal website where you can gain access to articles, his blog, and radio program.
• Visit The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary’s website where Mohler is the president.