Author: Luke Mason

Logical Fallacies From a Biblical Perspective: Straw Man

The straw man fallacy is a classic. You might have heard it mentioned in casual conversation before. It’s when someone misrepresents an opposing argument, making it easier to defeat. For example, a nutritionist might argue that fried food is bad for you. An objector might then say, “That’s absurd. Everyone needs food to survive. Frying food is a perfectly valid way to prepare it. You wouldn’t want uncooked raw meat, would you?”

This is a fallacy. The nutritionist never said people should go hungry, that frying food is an invalid method of preparation, or that meat would be better raw. He just said fried food is unhealthy, which is true. So… who is the objector arguing with? He’s arguing with a straw man, someone who doesn’t exist—a man who hates fried food so irrationally that he’s willing to condemn it at any cost, even if that means people starve to death.

It’s much easier to win an argument against a make-believe nutjob than the real person sitting in the room with you. This is why the straw man fallacy is so popular. Everyone wants to be the noble knight defeating the evil dragon. But you can’t do that without a dragon, so what happens when there is no dragon? You have to make one up.

Tilting at Windmills

A drawn picture of Don Quixote riding a horse to fight a windmill.

The famous novel Don Quixote comes to mind. In it, we see a man who longs to be a knight in shining armor in a time when such things are antiquated. But he doesn’t care. He decides he’s going to be a knight anyways, imagining windmills as towering giants he must defeat.

When we imagine our opponents as worse than they are, we become unnecessarily antagonistic towards them. We falsely attribute evils upon them so we can show others that they are wrong and we are right. But life isn’t black and white. Life is full of nuance and humans are complicated creatures.

This reminds me of the ninth commandment:

“You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.”

Exodus 20:16 (ESV)

Most of us think this means, “Don’t lie.” That’s true, but it means even more. Condemning someone for a position they don’t hold (by using a straw man) is a form of bearing false witness. You’re misrepresenting them to onlookers and purposefully ignoring the truth (the nuance of their actual position) so you can get the outcome you want and win the argument. It’s dishonest and manipulative.

Politics

The obvious example of the straw man fallacy is the discourse surrounding modern-day politics. Invariably, you see both sides go at each other’s throats with the most ridiculous straw men imaginable regardless of the conversation at hand. The media pushes this dichotomy constantly.

To liberals, anyone who voted for Trump is a deranged, hateful, racist, sexist idiot who wants to let schoolchildren be shot to death, steal elections and taxpayer dollars to feed corrupt right-wingers, take away all social programs and civil rights protections, and gleefully kill LGBTQ people in cold blood.

To conservatives, anyone who voted for Biden is an unhinged sexual deviant who wants to pervert and manipulate children, steal elections and taxpayer dollars to feed corrupt leftists, take away all of our constitutional rights, and gleefully kill babies in cold blood.

Have you noticed that it’s rare to find anyone like this in the real world? Sure, they definitely exist. But more often, you get people with a unique mix of ideas. Some will be taken from friends, family, or personal experiences. Others are copied from TV and social media. Still others are original perspectives (Who would have thought?). But everyone is a person created in the image of God with their own view of the world. It’s important that we not lose sight of the human (who isn’t made of straw) in the midst of the outrage, no matter how justified.

“With his mouth the godless man would destroy his neighbor, but by knowledge the righteous are delivered.”

Proverbs 11:9 (ESV)

How Straw Men Are Made

I think it’s worth asking where these straw men come from. They don’t really exist until we invent them. We find ourselves at odds with a person or idea we refuse to deal with honestly, so we conjure these straw men from our own imagination, puppet them around, and use them to slander people. Where does that leave us?

“A good person produces good out of the good stored up in his heart. An evil person produces evil out of the evil stored up in his heart, for his mouth speaks from the overflow of the heart.”

Luke 6:45 (CSB)

Jesus makes it clear that we are solely responsible for that which comes out of us. The words and actions we express are the sloshes of water that leap from the edges of the barrel of our heart, filled to the brim with our very souls. We should not take it lightly. We will be held accountable.

“I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak, for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.”

Matthew 12:36-37 (ESV)

So be careful what you say to make sure it’s the truth. It doesn’t matter if you’re quoting an enemy or a brother. Bear faithful witness to their actual argument so you can address it properly. A man who can’t even bear to repeat something accurately is hopeless to defend the truth with his character, much less his speech.

Let me know your thoughts in the comments below. Enter your email to keep in touch with me. Thanks for reading. Godspeed.

By entering your email, you agree to receive updates from me. You can unsubscribe any time. Your data will never be sold, traded, or disclosed.

Processing…
Success! You're on the list.

Should Christians Fight the Culture War?

The Michigan House and Senate recently advanced legislation to repeal the 1931 abortion ban (which was nullified last November) and expand the Civil Rights Act to include “sexual orientation” and “gender identity and expression.” Stories come out every day of schools approving pornographic books and LGBT propaganda in their sex ed programs. It’s considered controversial to stand against drag shows for kids. It feels like Christians are losing the culture war. Should we even be fighting it in the first place?

The Good Old Days

In a sense, Christians have been fighting (and losing) the culture war ever since the early days of America. Most of the founding fathers were just deists looking to create a better government in a new land. Some probably had genuine faith, but most didn’t follow Jesus. Don’t get me wrong, Judeo-Christian values were a solid foundation for what is arguably the greatest country in the world. But more cultural support for Christianity doesn’t necessarily translate to “more Christians.”

The most common religion in the western world is moralistic therapeutic deism. That’s a term I stole from one of my favorite Adam4d comics. It’s the belief that a god exists who watches over us and helps us resolve our problems, that we should all be nice to each other, and that life is about being happy. As you can see, the gospel is nowhere to be found. Jesus is nowhere to be found. Neither are repentance, faith, or worship of God. Yet this is the religion most self-proclaimed “Christians” subscribe to in their cushy American lifestyles of traditionally acceptable hedonism.

We Can’t Win

So if most Christians aren’t Christians and Judeo-Christian values can’t save you, what’s the point of fighting the culture war? Is it just for our own comfort? That doesn’t sound like Christianity.

“If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you.”

John 15:19 (ESV)

“All who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, while evil people and impostors will go on from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived.”

2 Timothy 3:12-13 (ESV)

True Christianity necessarily involves some kind of persecution simply because true Christianity is never popular. The invisible church will always be a minority. That’s normal. Comfort and acceptance is not our goal. No matter how much the government adheres to Judeo-Christian values, it will never adhere to Christ himself. It’s impossible. The world is, and always has been, at odds with God.

“You adulterous people! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God.”

James 4:4 (ESV)

The idea that we can win the culture war is ultimately a lie. Our battle is not for the presidency, the schools, or the public square. It’s a fight against our own disobedience, disunity, and selfish living. It’s a fight to spread the Word of Christ to all corners of the earth.

“Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you.”

Matthew 28:19-20a (ESV)

“For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers of this darkness, against evil, spiritual forces in the heavens.”

Ephesians 6:12 (CSB)

But We Should Still Fight

Does this mean we should forget the culture at large? No. I’m sure you’ve heard the popular phrase, “In the world, but not of the world.” David Mathis wrote a fantastic article on this.1 His advice was to change the phrase to: “not of, but sent into.” His reasoning is based on John 17, where we hear Jesus pray to the Father.

“The world hated them because they are not of the world, just as I am not of the world. I am not praying that you take them out of the world but that you protect them from the evil one.”

John 17 14b-15 (CSB)

We are not of the world, similar to how Jesus is not of the world. But instead of praying for our escape from the world, Jesus prays for our protection from temptation. It’s actually a good thing that we’re stuck here on this sinful planet. God put us here for a reason. We shouldn’t seek to be rid of it or ignore it.

“As you sent me into the world, I also have sent them into the world.”

John 17:18 (CSB)

Christ has specifically sent us into the world to carry out his mission of evangelism and to glorify God with our words and deeds. We dare not shy away from our culture to live in isolated bubbles. That would be disobedience.

How We Fight

So what does this mean for the culture war? Our primary influence on the world should be for evangelism and obedience to God in our own communities, but that doesn’t mean we can’t also guide our culture into a morally sound framework with the tools God has given us.

In America, we can vote. That’s a pretty amazing thing. It only takes a little effort to have an impact on our culture for the better. But we can do more. We can run for school board, precinct delegate, and other local positions. We can speak the truth in love to our neighbors. We can testify for or against bills and local policy changes. We can gather signatures for ballot initiatives.

That said, our goal in this should not be to force people into Christianity. We’ve seen how ugly things can get with state religions and forced conversions. If someone wants to live in sin by committing adultery or acting selfishly, we can’t stop them. That’s not our job. Instead, we should aim to create a society that gives us the freedom to do God’s work and live godly lives.

“I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way.”

1 Timothy 2:1-2 (ESV)

“Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God . . . if you do wrong, be afraid, because [the government] does not carry the sword for no reason. For it is God’s servant, an avenger that brings wrath on the one who does wrong.”

Romans 13:1, 4b (CSB)

God has told us to obey our governments because they are his servants to keep the peace and punish evildoers. It’s in everyone’s best interest that the government stays true to its purpose. If we fail to pay attention, our leaders are sure to stray from justice and we will see the consequences.

“When the righteous increase, the people rejoice, but when the wicked rule, the people groan.”

Proverbs 29:2 (ESV)

This World Will Not Last

My brother gave a great sermon recently. One of his points stuck out to me as being relevant to this topic. This is the passage he talked about:

“As he was going out of the temple, one of his disciples said to him, ‘Teacher, look! What massive stones! What impressive buildings!’ Jesus said to him, ‘Do you see these great buildings? Not one stone will be left upon another—all will be thrown down.'”

Mark 13:1-2 (CSB)

Jesus quickly shoots down his disciple’s excitement over the temple, foretelling its destruction. We should not put too much faith in earthly institutions. Nothing made by men can stand forever. Nothing made by men is pure. Jesus came to God’s chosen people and found that they had rejected God’s ways. He rebuked them in the presence of the temple.

“Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her… See, your house is left to you desolate.”

Jesus, Matthew 23:37a, 38

The glorious buildings mean nothing if the hearts of those within are cold. So whatever you do to fight the culture war, remember what you’re fighting for. All political movements will come to an end. All nonprofits will come to an end. All the works of the enemy will come to an end. This world will not last. Praise God.

Let me know your thoughts on the culture war in the comments below. Enter your email to keep in touch with me. Thanks for reading. Godspeed.

By entering your email, you agree to receive updates from me. You can unsubscribe anytime. Your data will never be sold, traded, or disclosed.

Processing…
Success! You're on the list.
  1. David Mathis, “Let’s Revise the Popular Phrase ‘In, But Not Of’,” DesiringGod.org, August 29, 2012, https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/lets-revise-the-popular-phrase-in-but-not-of

A Critique of the Asbury Revival

I’m sure you’ve seen the headlines about a revival at Asbury University in Kentucky. A routine worship service was extended as the musicians said they felt led by the Holy Spirit to continue singing. It’s been going on for two weeks now. Yesterday, the administration decided to restrict some services to students only, while leaving other services public and relocating them to larger spaces to accommodate the thousands of outsiders driving in to join.1

I’m deeply concerned that this is devolving into a spectator sport, an unhealthy glut of emotional affirmation in lieu of genuine repentance, sanctification, and holy living. Did it start out that way? Probably not. Is it entirely fake and vain? No. I’m sure there are hundreds of people worshiping God truthfully at Asbury. But it’s worth talking about whether this event matches up to a real movement by the Holy Spirit and the motivations of spectators and copycat revivals popping up around the country.

What is a Revival?

Based on what we’re seeing at Asbury, a revival is when Christians meet together to sing praises to God for a long time with some public confessions now and then. That doesn’t sound quite right to me. Let’s look at the definition according to Webster as a starting point.

Revival, noun: Renewed and more active attention to religion; an awakening of men to their spiritual concerns.2

Revival isn’t just about Christians singing together. It’s about all spiritual concerns of men. This means unbelievers coming to salvation in Christ for the first time, believers renewing their faith and obedience to God, and the Bible being rightly preached to the people at large. And yes, worship through song or other means is part of it too.

This makes sense when you look at the revivals of history. The Great Awakening was a blend of preaching, evangelism, calls to holy living, and worship. There was a core focus on conversion and repentance.3 It wasn’t perfect by any means, but it convicted hearts and drew both the world and the church towards following Jesus. Is that what the Asbury revival is doing?

Is Asbury’s Revival Real?

I haven’t witnessed the event myself, but from livestreams and the accounts others have given online, I’ve see both sides of the issue. Proponents who have attended say the Holy Spirit is moving there. How do they know this? They felt comforted, invigorated, and empowered. They focus on their feelings and the atmosphere of the room. Here’s an example:

I want to be careful not to paint this event with too broad a brush. I don’t doubt that many attending are having genuine encounters with God. I’m sure there’s been real conversions and worship. What concerns me is the leadership’s narrow focus on emotions and the reports of teaching that’s lukewarm at best and heretical at worst. We have to be discerning and test that which claims to be the work of God. Do not abandon reason in your search for hope.

“Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world.”

1 John 4:1 (ESV)

Scott Brown says the testimonies are “extremely emotional” without much doctrinal truth or repentance. It’s more about feeling close to God than obeying Him. He also notes that there’s a distinct lack of mature pastors present.4 It’s student-led, as proponents have verified.5

Samuel Sey wrote a fantastic piece about his concerns with the event. Out of the attendees he spoke with, only one said the gospel was being preached. Everyone else contradicted that claim. One said the following:

“Attending the few chapels I have at seminary, apart from one [or] two chapels that preach a biblical message of repentance, it’s always been about ‘being who you are’ and God loving you ‘as you are.’ There are a lot of messages that are about being ‘true to yourself.'”6

Sey goes on to note the affirmation of the event by LGBT students and progressive “Christians,” the prominence of female pastors, and the presence of “charismatic chaos.”6 He’s not convinced the event is a true revival. It’s worth noting that Sey grew up and was saved in a culture where emotionally driven “revivals” were the norm. He believes God can save anyone in any context (as do I), but many of his peers returned to lives of sin after professing faith at events like Asbury. The seeds fell on rocky ground and that which sprang up quickly withered away. It’s easy to see why he’s concerned.

“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.”

Matthew 7:21 (ESV)

Since when are revivals for Christians to have a nice-feeling experience? True revival is when all kinds of people are called through the faithful preaching of the Word to repent, return to God, and reject sin. I like how John Piper puts it.

“The term revival in its most biblical sense has meant a sovereign work of God in which the whole region of many churches, many Christians has been lifted out of spiritual indifference and worldliness into conviction of sin, earnest desires for more of Christ and his word, boldness in witness, purity of life, lots of conversions, joyful worship, renewed commitment to missions.”7

John Piper

There’s nothing about revival that leaves discernment behind in favor of emotions. Revival is not the goal itself—obedience is. Revival is just a tool God can use to draw us back into obedience on a larger scale, convicting individual hearts to follow Him rightly.

“If my people who are called by my name humble themselves, and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and heal their land.”

2 Chronicles 7:14 (ESV)

Why are so many Christians driving across the country to join Asbury? What are they hoping to find? Jesus doesn’t live in Kentucky. The Holy Spirit isn’t contained on a campus.

“An hour is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. But an hour is coming, and is now here, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in Spirit and in truth.”

Jesus, John 4:21, 23 (CSB)

We can worship with our own church body in Spirit and in truth no matter where we are. Jesus makes clear that, in the New Covenant, we don’t need to go to a special location. Most people are going to Asbury for the emotional high or to spectate out of curiosity. Neither are spiritually sound intentions.

Joel Abbott wrote a great article with his own thoughts on the event. He writes:

“I heard this trend put best by a woman who once tweeted about how she lost her faith. She grew up feeling like she was deeply in love with Jesus, but then she attended a Taylor Swift concert with the same emotional vibe and she realized she just liked the high she got from attending concerts.

People like this were once sold out for Jesus, but they had never been prepared to apply their faith in real life—the realities of working for food and housing, of love, commitment, and parenthood, or the slow, sometimes seemingly boring task of following Christ.”8

I wholeheartedly agree. It’s far too easy to mistake emotional highs for spiritual realities. Crowds of people can do strange things to your psyche whether you’re at a concert or a chapel service. Is emotion bad? No. But it needs solid Biblical truth behind it and it needs holy living to follow it. There’s no good reason for substantive preaching to be absent from an event that’s supposed to be the work of the Holy Spirit.

“This type of emotional fluff won’t lead to ‘revival’: It’s a mix of genuine worship and emotional existentialism that has no ability to call our culture to repentance outside the groupies that want in on the experience.”

Joel Abbott

Was This Planned?

I’m skeptical about the origin of this event. I don’t think it’s as spontaneous as it seems. As Scott Brown points out, Asbury has a history of planning revivals in February. Don’t believe me? Check out this page on their website. It covers eight previous Asbury revivals. Six occurred in February and two in March. Is that a coincidence? Note this section: “In February 1921 the last service of a planned revival lasted until 6 a.m., and services were extended for three days.”9 So they admit they do plan revivals.

According to Sey’s sources on the event at hand, the president of the seminary emailed the students asking them to visit the chapel to join in “an outpouring of the Holy Spirit.”6

“The student maintains the ‘revival’ wasn’t planned. But it’s worth noting that Asbury University is part of what is known as the revivalist movement—a group of Charismatic Christians who consistently attempt to produce revivals.”

Samuel Sey

After looking at the history of Asbury’s previous revivals, it’s easy to spot a trend. These events usually start with singing or confession in chapel, which is then extended. They always occur in February or March. They frequently draw in significant media coverage. One section reads: “In February 1950 a student testimony led to confessions, victories, and more testimonies. This… became the second leading news story nationwide.”9

There’s a huge incentive to manufacture events like this. This much media attention leads to thousands of dollars in donations and tuition from new students hungry for an emotionally rich college experience. This wouldn’t be a problem if the event was organic, but the evidence seems to indicate that it’s probably not. We’re seeing history repeat itself.

Copycat “Revivals”

The news coverage of Asbury has sparked a nationwide interest in mislabeling extended worship services as “revivals.” Universities supposedly experiencing spontaneous outpourings of the Holy Spirit include Campbellsville University, Northern Kentucky University, and the University of the Cumberlands in KY, along with Lee University in TN, Cedarville University in OH, and Samford University in AL.

Online, groups of students can be seen singing praise songs and praying together. I have connections at Cedarville specifically, where I’m told students are also going to nearby campuses and malls to evangelize. That’s great to hear! But is it revival?

It might be the Holy Spirit working powerfully throughout our nation. I hope it is. The evangelism in particular is encouraging. But it might also be an attempt to copy Asbury by extending worship services and calling it “revival” to get a taste of the media spotlight. That’s definitely not the work of the Holy Spirit. That sounds man-centered and manufactured.

You don’t need to be in the midst of a revival to worship Jesus; you can just have a nice worship service. You don’t need an emotional experience to obey God; you can just follow Him in your day to day life. You certainly don’t need to be plastered all over the news for your Christianity to be valid.

“We encourage you, brothers and sisters… to seek to lead a quiet life, to mind your own business, and to work with your own hands, as we commanded you, so that you may behave properly in the presence of outsiders and not be dependent on anyone.”

1 Thessalonians 4:10b-12 (CSB)

The Fruit of the Spirit

Time will tell whether the events at Asbury and other colleges turn out to be anything more than emotional worship services with spectators. The proof is in the fruit. When the media stops caring, when the tourists go away, when you have to get up in the morning and go to class or work, will you still have that fire for Jesus? Will new converts remain steadfast in their faith? Will Christians abandon their allegiance with the world and turn back to obedience? Will we see newfound passion for evangelism and Biblical truth in our doctrine? I hope so. Only God knows.

“In desperation for any semblance of hope for our culture—some Christians have abandoned all discernment and they’re eager to idolize anything or any ‘revival’ that profess Christ.

But our hope isn’t in a change in our culture. Our hope isn’t in a revival. Our hope isn’t in a Christian culture. All of these are good. We should earnestly pray that God would change our culture.

But our hope isn’t in the return of a Christian culture. Our hope is in the return of Christ.”6

Samuel Sey

Let me know your thoughts on all this in the comments below. Enter your email to keep in touch with me. Thanks for reading. Godspeed.

By entering your email, you agree to receive updates from me. You can unsubscribe any time. Your data will never be sold, traded, or disclosed.

Processing…
Success! You're on the list.
  1. Asbury Revival: Professor calls for end to ‘public phase’ as school scrambles to address overcrowding, Jon Brown, Fox News, https://www.foxnews.com/us/asbury-revival-professor-calls-end-public-phase-school-scrambles-address-overcrowding
  2. Webster’s Dictionary of the English Language, 1828, https://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/revival
  3. Great Awakening, Britannica, https://www.britannica.com/event/Great-Awakening
  4. Asbury Revival – My Observations, Scott Brown, https://scottbrownonline.com/blogs/63f15155e1ef28e573d78c4e
  5. Jordan Evans, https://twitter.com/thejordy_evans/status/1624622257501773826?s=20
  6. Is the Asbury “Revival” A Real Revival?, Samuel Sey, https://slowtowrite.com/is-the-asbury-revival-a-real-revival/
  7. What Is Revival and Where Do We Find It?, John Piper, Desiring God, https://www.desiringgod.org/interviews/what-is-revival-and-where-do-we-find-it
  8. Let’s have some real talk about this whole Asbury revival thing. We’ll start with a lesson from the Western Front., Joel Abbott, Not the Bee, https://notthebee.com/article/lets-have-some-real-talk-about-this-whole-asbury-revival-thing-cuz-a-lot-of-people-are-getting-hyped-up-about-it
  9. Revivals, Asbury University, https://www.asbury.edu/academics/resources/library/archives/history/revivals/

Logical Fallacies From a Biblical Perspective: Equivocation

You probably know what a logical fallacy is, don’t you? It’s when someone declares something false to be true. Wait… that’s not it? You say it’s the use of faulty reasoning in an argument? Oh, then we had better clear up our definition of “fallacy.” Can’t have a proper discussion unless we’re all on the same page, after all. And that’s exactly what equivocation is all about.

This is one of my favorite fallacies to talk about. It’s one of the most common, yet least acknowledged. It pops up absolutely everywhere and rarely gets the attention it deserves. It most often leads to quarrels over innocuous things, but can sometimes trick entire generations into believing lies.

Equivocation

This fallacy occurs when a word is used with an ambiguous or double meaning, usually to swap out the definition when the word is used later in the argument. For instance, someone might say that critical thinking is a bad skill to learn because we already have enough critical people in the world. They’ve just used two completely different meanings for the word “critical.” In the first instance, they are referring to the skill of critical thinking in which a person carefully considers something by questioning it with sound reasoning. In the second, they are referring to people who think negatively of those around them and sling insults around. These are entirely different things.

Here’s a less obvious example. I ask my wife for my green jacket. She hands me my jacket with a green hood. But this isn’t the one I wanted. I was thinking of the jacket with a green liner. My wife isn’t ignoring me. She just interpreted “green” to mean the most visible part of the jacket. My definition of “green” was different. I shouldn’t blame my wife for handing me the wrong jacket. I should be more specific and clarify what I meant.

This is how misunderstandings can turn into fights. It’s common for people who are already at odds to use this fallacy against each other, pointing fingers and escalating small disagreements into rifts that tear the entire relationship apart.

“The one who conceals hatred has lying lips, and whoever utters slander is a fool.”

Proverbs 10:18 (ESV)

Remember this fallacy. You need to see it coming so you can stop it in its tracks and disarm bad-faith arguments from friends, news articles, and governments alike. It’s also helpful to be aware of it when you’re the one who’s speaking. You want to be properly understood by those who listen to you.

“Above all, keep loving one another earnestly, since love covers a multitude of sins.”

1 Peter 4:8 (ESV)

Stopping Useless Quarrels

Next time you find yourself on the edge of a conflict, ask yourself how sure you are of the other person’s definitions. If in doubt, ask them. The simple phrase, “What do you mean by that?” can go a long way! Seriously, try it. It can work wonders to deflate tension and bring reason back into the conversation.

It’s no use trying to have a discussion if you can’t agree on what your words mean. You’ll end up talking past each other. I can’t begin to count how many disagreements I’ve experienced or witnessed that could have been resolved right at the beginning if someone had only taken a few moments to clarify the terms.

You may not like the terms someone else uses, but that’s not the point. Your goal is to communicate. Sometimes you have to use their terms and sometimes they have to accept yours. It’s a game of give and take, but the real goal is to understand one another, removing as much ambiguity as possible.

“I urge you to walk worthy of the calling you have received, with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, making every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace.”

Ephesians 4:1-3 (CSB)

Explaining Yourself Effectively

One of the best feelings in the world is being understood. It’s an art form to speak in such a way that the contents of your heart are transported into the mind of another person. It takes practice to learn this skill, but one easy trick you can use is to keep a sharp eye on the definitions of your words.

It’s a common mistake to use equivocation on accident, especially when talking “off the cuff.” When you speak, keep tabs on what significant words you’re using as the cornerstones of your argument. These are the most important words to clarify and stay consistent with.

Let’s say you’re persuading an audience to make a savings account for emergencies only. You might talk about how this money comes in handy for unexpected bills and home repairs. But you also want to emphasize that it can’t save you from emergencies. After all, it’s just money. It won’t prevent bad things from happening to you. We have to trust God at the end of the day.

Your audience is now confused. You said this fund was for “emergencies,” but now you’ve just told them that it’s no use for some “emergencies.” You have to clarify what you mean. The fund is meant for bad situations that can be solved with money, but it won’t save you from a heart attack, it won’t keep you from being arrested if you break the law, and it won’t save your soul from sin. These are different from financial emergencies and it’s important to point that out. Just because you understand your point doesn’t mean others will.

“Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear.”

Ephesians 4:29 (ESV)

COVID-19 and Lying with Definitions

Misunderstandings and quarrels are one thing, but lies from a business, news organization, or government are another beast entirely. You had better be ready when communication experts purposefully try to brainwash and manipulate you or you won’t stand a chance.

Do you know the definition of “vaccine?” Here it is, according to Merriam-Webster:

“Vaccine – noun: a preparation of killed microorganisms, living attenuated organisms, or living fully virulent organisms that is administered to produce or artificially increase immunity to a particular disease.”

At least, that’s what it was until January 2021. Then they changed the definition. Why? Because the new shot developed for COVID-19 didn’t provide immunity. But you see, “protein spike shot” just doesn’t roll off the tongue quite as nicely. The government and big pharma wanted everyone to get this shot. They knew people would trust it more if they called it a vaccine, so they did. They lied. They knowingly advertised the shot as a vaccine even though it wasn’t.

To cover their tracks, dictionaries like Merriam-Webster and other “authoritative” sources changed the definition of a vaccine overnight. Today, it takes up your entire screen and very carefully says that vaccines “stimulate the body’s immune response.” This is different from providing immunity.

This is a clear case of equivocation. The government called the shot a “vaccine” with a new definition knowing the public would accept it based on the previous definition. When they were called out, they claimed this new definition was “more accurate.” Excuse me, but how so? Definitions are based on the use of a word in the culture at large and should never depend solely on the whims of a few ruling elite. This kind of transparent manipulation is becoming more outlandish by the day. They only do it because we fall for it. Stop taking the bait and think for yourself.

“For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naive.”

Romans 16:18 (ESV)

What is Racism?

A similar thing is happening to the definition of “racism.” It was once understood by everyone to be “prejudice or discrimination based on race,” but today you’ll hear a different story from university professors and self-important TV personalities.

Racism is now defined by some as the systematic oppression of people of color by white people. It’s being framed as an amorphous force of evil exclusive to one race (ironically enough). How convenient! This new definition absolves you of the responsibility to provide evidence that a particular person is prejudiced. You can just blame “the system” of racism and claim the same experiences as those who have actually suffered. Isn’t it great to be a victim?

“A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion.”

Proverbs 18:2 (ESV)

Gender and Sex

When I was growing up, gender and sex were interchangeable. My sex is male. My gender is male. I am a man. They all mean the same things. Today, you’ll be taught that gender is a social construct. Sex is biological and determined by reproductive organs, but gender is your self-expression and can be changed at any time. This new definition allows men to declare themselves to be women and intrude on women’s bathrooms or sports competitions, which were designed with the original (biological) definition of gender in mind.

Modern gender theory is quite recent. It was formed in the 90s by Judith Butler and others, but they refer back to an experiment in the 60s by psychologist John Money. He took twin brothers and raised one of them as a girl, forcing them into sex positions (to reinforce gender roles) and abusing them in other ways. This study was declared to be a success and stands as the foundation for much of modern gender theory.

What they don’t tell you is that the boy was miserable living as a girl and decided as a teenager to go back to living as a boy. He later killed himself with a shotgun and his brother overdosed on antidepressants. The history of modern gender theory is stained with innocent blood.

“Death and life are in the power of the tongue, and those who love it will eat its fruit.”

Proverbs 18:21 (CSB)

Stay Vigilant

Equivocation is dangerous. It can ruin marriages and it can brainwash a country. We must be vigilant in defining what our words mean and speaking the truth in love. We must keep a lookout for anyone trying to manipulate us. Be shrewd as a serpent and innocent as a dove (Matt 10:16).

“Set a guard, O Lord, over my mouth; keep watch over the door of my lips!”

Psalm 141:3 (ESV)

Let me know your thoughts in the comments below. Enter your email to keep in touch with me. Thanks for reading. Godspeed.

By entering your email, you agree to receive updates from me. You can unsubscribe any time. Your data will never be sold, traded, or disclosed.

Processing…
Success! You're on the list.

Is Dungeons & Dragons Demonic?

I recently made this YouTube video about Dungeons & Dragons, so I thought I would write a post as well with a little more info. Enjoy!

When I was growing up, Dungeons and Dragons was the stuff of legend, an ancient evil as terrifying as it was mysterious. I was homeschooled in a Christian household. I loved it! But I was definitely sheltered from some things, such as roleplaying games.

When I got older, I decided to find out for myself if they were really all that bad. So my wife and I joined a local D&D group to learn how it all worked. Today, we play D&D all the time and it’s a blast. But I didn’t have to give up my soul for it. This is your guide to D&D for Christians and homeschoolers, from a Christian homeschooler.

What Kind of Game is This?

Dungeons and Dragons is just one of many “table-top roleplaying games” or TTRPGs. These games are kind of like playing pretend with your friends. Remember when you were a kid and you said, “I am the legendary warrior! I will defeat you, villain!” and then you dueled your brother with a plastic sword? This is basically that, except you’re sitting at a table rolling dice to determine what happens. It’s make-believe, math, and a board game all rolled into one.

But that’s not all. Everyone at the table is telling a story together through the game. Groups usually meet a few times a month to keep those stories going for months or even years. There are no cults or satanic rituals. It’s just a good time with friends.

Now, I know what you’re thinking. What about all those stories I’ve heard? Isn’t D&D demonic? Aren’t the kinds of people playing this game interested in the occult? What if players pretend to be evil? Let’s address these concerns one at a time.

The “Lord of the Rings” Rule

First, here’s a good rule of thumb. If you’re okay with Lord of the Rings, you shouldn’t have any problem with D&D. They are very similar in their aesthetics and setting. There are other roleplaying games out there with all kinds of different settings such as sci-fi, the old west, superheroes, and more. But today, we’ll focus on D&D.

Magic and Fantasy Themes

Like Lord of the Rings, D&D has magic as well as good and evil fantasy elements. There are noble wizards, scary ghosts, and cursed orcs alike. That being said, every D&D group is different. Players usually sit down before starting a game to talk about what themes they’re comfortable with so everyone has a good time. If you want, you can avoid vampires or demons and just stick to fighting plain old bad guys.

Remember, it’s all make-believe. Nobody is actually trying to cast spells or speak to the dead. Yes, D&D has magic as well as good and evil fantasy tropes, but it doesn’t necessarily have to. That’s the great thing about this game. The adventure you have is up to you.

Religious Themes

As a Christian, I exclude made-up religions and gods from my D&D games. I prefer to play without them. But D&D was designed for a fantasy world where many gods exist and behave similar to the pantheons in Norse, Roman, or Greek mythology. They’re spiritual beings who fight with each other, bestow power upon mortals, and cause general chaos. They aren’t there to temp you into denouncing Christianity. They simply serve a narrative purpose, providing outside forces to explain the presence of magic, influence the world, or offer a challenge for the players. But remember, you can run the game however you want. You could have only good gods, only one god, or no gods at all! It’s entirely up to you.

Now, one core part of the game is your character’s class. This determines whether you’re a wizard like Gandalf or a ranger like Aragorn. There are a couple classes themed around magic given to you by a divine being. But this is really just for flavor. If you want, you can ignore all of that and come up with your own reason for having magic. Likewise, there are some spells designed so that your character asks a god for guidance or wisdom, but you could just flavor it so they have a keen sense of their surroundings or something. It’s not a big deal. Again, you control how the game is played.

Can Players Pretend to be Evil?

Pretending to slay foul beasts and find buried treasure is all well and good, but what if you wanted to do something bad? What if you wanted to kill innocent civilians, partake in evil rituals, or just be a creep? Well, you’ll be glad to know that for most D&D groups, this isn’t a problem. You see, D&D is a cooperative game. You have to work together with your friends. It’s difficult to function as a team with evil characters. It just doesn’t work. This is why most groups don’t allow evil characters at all.

If someone is sabotaging your team’s plans or going against their morals, that’s the fault of the player, not the game. Talk to them like an adult. If you can’t come to an agreement, you’ll be better off finding a different group to play with. It’s that simple. My best tip to avoid inappropriate roleplaying is to be mature about things and communicate, just like you would for any other conflict.

“Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear.”

Ephesians 4:29 (ESV)

How Much Does it Cost?

D&D can cost as little or as much as you want. The basic rules are available online for free. You can get a set of dice for a few bucks. The rest of the game is pen and paper. You don’t need miniatures, maps, or a dungeon master screen, but those are pretty affordable and useful to have. A great way to get into D&D is to buy a starter kit for about $20 dollars. This will give you dice, rules, premade characters, and a prewritten adventure—everything you need to play. The official books with more character options, more monsters, and more adventures usually cost 20 to 40 dollars each. It’s a very affordable hobby if you have any amount of self-control.

Is D&D Addictive?

Like any other hobby, roleplaying games are a fun pastime that can be turned into an unhealthy obsession. But there’s nothing unique about D&D in this regard. It doesn’t have expensive packs to collect like some card games. It doesn’t use instant gratification to get you addicted like some video games. It isn’t physically unhealthy like energy drinks or sugar. It’s just a game, and if you treat it like one, you have nothing to be concerned about.

“‘Everything is permissible for me,’ but not everything is beneficial. ‘Everything is permissible for me,’ but I will not be mastered by anything.”

1 Corinthians 6:12 (CSB)

The Satanic Panic

The media did a lot of fear-mongering about D&D in the 80s that, simply put, wasn’t substantiated. If you’ve heard stories about kids who played D&D and were stolen away by demon worshipers, it’s probably nonsense.

Ever heard of James Dallas Egbert? He was a student at Michigan State University in 1979 who played D&D. As the story goes, he got lost in the steam tunnels under the campus while playing a real-life version of the game with his friends. A detective found a bulletin board in his room with thumbtacks in it. He said it looked like a map of the tunnels. The media ate it up and took the opportunity to blame the entire thing on D&D with headlines like, “Game Might Have Turned Into Deathtrap” and “Did Dragons & Dungeons Swallow Dallas Egbert?”

So… what actually happened? Well, Egbert did enter the tunnels, but he left them shortly afterwards and he wasn’t playing a real-life version of D&D. The tacks in the bulletin board were not a map. In fact, D&D had nothing to do with his disappearance at all. The detective who made those claims later admitted to not knowing much of anything about the game. He just made wild speculations. As it turns out, Egbert was just a kid dealing with a stressful household, depression, and eventually substance abuse. He went into the tunnels with the intention of self-harm, but came back out to go visit a friend some distance away. Sadly, he lost his battle with depression a year later.

That’s just one of many stories the media manipulated so they could blame Dungeons & Dragons. But trust me when I say this hobby is not a cover up for cultic indoctrination, pagan rituals, or evil death traps. It’s just a roleplaying game that nerds and theater kids play for fun. Anything you hear otherwise is exaggerated by the media or just pure fiction.

How is D&D Actually Played?

Now that I’ve addressed some concerns, let me give you an idea of what playing D&D is like. First, you schedule a time to meet (that’s the hardest part). Once everyone arrives, you lay out some snacks and begin the game. One player is called the “dungeon master” (or DM for short). His job is to set the stage for the game by explaining where the party is, determining what happens when they do things, and standing in for all the different characters they meet. Everyone else plays as one of the heroes. Together, they’re the adventuring party the story revolves around, the “Fellowship of the Ring,” if you will.

“We begin where we left off last time,” says George the DM. “You enter the Gilded Hopper tavern, tired from your journey. You see all manner of travelers exchanging stories. The bartender is a pale dwarf with a sullen expression on his face. What do you do?”

“I walk up to the bartender,” says Claire the rogue.

“What can I get ye?” says George.

“Some information,” says Claire. “Have you seen a shady-looking orc with a red bandana? His name is Grimrock.”

“Make a persuasion check,” says George. Claire rolls a 20 sided die, gets a 2, and adds 6 to represent her skills in negotiation.

“Eight,” she says. Unfortunately, this is too low.

“I don’t mettle in personal business. Can I get ye anything else?”

“Let’s just leave,” says Jeff the wizard.

“Suddenly, you notice a flash of red from the corner of the room. A hulking figure steps out of the shadows,” says George. “I told you lot to stay away. But it seems you’ve forced my hand. Two more orcs join him at his shoulders and raise their swords. Roll for initiative!”

The fight begins! Each character moves and attacks one by one in turn order. The wizard casts a spell on the fighter, making him grow twice his size. The fighter lands a blow on one of the orcs. The other orc throws a javelin at the wizard, but misses. Grimrock swipes at the fighter with his axe. The rogue darts forward for a sneak attack, finishing off one of the orcs. Eventually, victory is claimed! The party regroups to make peace with the town and decide what they want to do next.

Conclusion

That’s basically D&D. It’s a lot of fun. It’s not about devil worship or corrupting the youth. It’s about nerding out over cool-looking dice and miniatures, developing creative backstories for characters, and channeling your inner actor through a hilariously bad accent. It’s about solving mysteries and defeating nefarious villains just like you pretended to do when you were a kid. Most of all, it’s about telling a story with your friends and improvising your way through a crazy fantasy world that’s part Lord of the Rings, part Breakfast Club, and part Princess Bride. So give it a try. You don’t have to sacrifice your soul to play a game with your friends.

What do you think about roleplaying games? Let me know your thoughts in the comments below. Enter your email if you want to be notified when my next post goes live. Thanks for reading. Godspeed.

By entering your email, you agree to receive updates from me. You can unsubscribe any time. Your data will never be sold, traded, or disclosed.

Processing…
Success! You're on the list.

Steven Crowder VS. The Daily Wire — What’s Going On?

On Tuesday, January 17th, conservative talk show host Steven Crowder posted a YouTube video titled, “It’s time to stop…” He says he got an offer from an unnamed conservative media group punishing conservative voices on behalf of “big tech” like YouTube and Facebook. The document spells out the terms of payment, saying that demonetization on YouTube and other platforms would cut pay by 25%. Content strikes for not falling in line with community guidelines is another 20% cut. Being banned off a platform is yet another 10-20% cut. So what’s the problem here?

Crowder says that major players in the conservative movement or “big con,” as he puts it, are in bed with big tech. They’re silencing controversial ideas to make more money on ads. Crowder says he’s been demonetized for years on YouTube and yet he still makes his show, Louder with Crowder, using money from his paid subscribers called the “Mug Club.” He believes in his business model.

Crowder mentioned some other details in the offer that concerned him, including the demanding work schedule, the fact that the company would own the signer’s content and social channels, the high number of ad reads, and more payment cuts for failing to deliver a certain number of episodes per month.

Crowder closed by saying he’s looking to build his own network to support up and coming conservatives. He invited content creators to reach out if they want to partner with him against big tech and “big con.”

The Daily Wire’s Response

One day later, The Daily Wire uploaded a video titled, “Our Offer to Steven Crowder.” Jeremy Boreing, Co-CEO of the company, openly admits the offer came from them. He says he thinks it’s a very good offer, but that Crowder is misunderstanding it. He then goes through the document piece by piece, breaking down the reasoning behind it.

Boreing starts by saying that the offer was a way to open up negotiations, but Crowder was not interested in coming to any agreement. The offer was for $50 million over four years, which he emphasizes several times throughout the video.

Boreing then addresses one of Crowder’s criticisms, saying that the Daily Wire would own the signer’s social channels (aside from Twitter and Instagram) and content while they’re on the team. This is standard procedure for media companies. Part of making their money back is using the signer’s social media for monetization and promotion. He also defends their proposed pay cuts for failing to deliver a specified number of episodes per month. As Boreing puts it, “You can’t pay someone… an unimaginably huge amount of money for their show and then not get the show.”

Boreing then addresses Crowder’s accusation that The Daily Wire is in bed with big tech, saying the assertion is “personally incredibly offensive.” He says The Daily Wire gets demonetized all the time, but their audience and advertisers are on YouTube. It’s the platform that gives them (and Crowder) the best reach. Other platforms like Rumble are nowhere near as big and The Daily Wire hasn’t yet built up their own YouTube alternative. A project like that is a “long term investment,” he says.

Regarding the large pay cuts for demonetization, Boreing says it’s not about punishing content creators, but rather covering the costs of running a business. If a show brings in less money, The Daily Wire pays less money in turn. Boreing says Crowder fails to understand the business model and has “never had to create the company that actually distributes, markets, and monetizes all of that content.”

Boreing asks why it’s so hard for Crowder to “preserve the revenue” on free platforms like YouTube. After all, he could speak his mind freely on paid content such as DailyWire+ without fear of demonetization. Boreing compares this to Crowder’s current model where he will sometimes ask his audience to join him on Mug Club to talk about things that might get him banned from YouTube. But just Mug Club isn’t enough revenue for Boreing. “That’s not a risk that I can take,” he says. He concludes that Crowder’s actions are wrong and that he’s burning a friend in the process.

The Recorded Phone Call

Crowder quickly shot back with another video revealing clips from a phone call he had with Boreing. In it, Boreing can be heard discussing how young talent “can be wage slaves for a little bit” with a company like The Daily Wire before using their newfound fame to go independent.

Crowder accuses Boreing of focusing on the money when “it’s not about the money.” Crowder says it’s about the conservative movement and big tech. He’s concerned about up and coming talent facing these kinds of “slave” contracts. He then plays part of the phone call where he asks Boreing if pay cuts for demonetization would apply to smaller content creators, not just Crowder. Boreing says yes, retorting that everybody loses money when monetization goes away. “You can’t pay the same amount with less revenue.” Crowder can be heard responding, “You need to change your business model or this movement cannot work, Jeremy.”

Crowder says he understands that people like to run businesses differently, but he’s firmly opposed to relying on YouTube revenue as a conservative—so much so that he walked away from $50 million for the sake of those coming after him. He even offers to guide The Daily Wire into a scaled-up version of his own business model. He maintains that taking ownership of a creator’s content is wrong, even with Boreing’s retort that the media company paid to produce this content and should therefore own it. Speaking of plans for a network of his own, Crowder says he will never take ownership of any talent’s work, social channels, or YouTube revenue.

The Bottom Line

So, what’s my take on all of this? I think the disagreement is clear. The Daily Wire has built a successful business model that relies on YouTube revenue. They are not willing to part with it right now. This means they are unable to take on “controversial” talent like Crowder without using heavy pay cuts to make up for lost funds. This leads to softer, more advertiser-friendly content on free platforms like YouTube. The raw, unfiltered content is provided on their paid platform, DailyWire+. This doesn’t mean they’re out to exploit young conservatives and it also doesn’t mean they approve of YouTube’s policies. They just don’t see any other way forward right now.

Then you have Steven. He started out with YouTube revenue as a large part of his income. Over time, he realized he couldn’t rely on it. They demonetized him over and over, but he wasn’t going to censor himself to stay in YouTube’s good graces. Instead, he would fund his show using his own paid platform, Mug Club. His business model today is successful without Google’s money and he’s very proud of that. He believes that big tech’s censorship requires conservatives to cut ties with these platforms. The first step is being financially independent from them.

Both parties agree on a lot, but they draw the (bottom) line in two separate places. The Daily Wire draws the line at demonetization. If any YouTube revenue is lost, it must be met with pay cuts to compensate. Steven Crowder draws the line at getting banned from YouTube (for now). He’s already been demonetized for years and no longer relies on them for revenue. But whether he admits it or not, he still relies on them for exposure. Those viewers contribute significantly to his Mug Club subscriptions. Crowder knows this, but he continues to push hard for a future where sites like Rumble can replace YouTube as a primary platform for conservatives. He believes in cutting all ties with big tech eventually.

And so does Boreing at The Daily Wire, but he doesn’t think it’s realistic to expect that anytime soon. He wants to build alternatives like his own DailyWire+, but in the meantime, he is perfectly happy to play ball with YouTube so he can build his empire of impactful conservative brands and personalities. He wants to compete with big media companies like Disney and Netflix, providing an alternative economy, not just one show. He doesn’t think a subscription-based model like Crowder’s would work for this kind of venture.

Who’s in the Wrong?

Crowder and Boreing disagree on the long-term vision for conservatism. Crowder sees it as a battle for the heart of America where sacrifices must be made to preserve integrity at all costs. Boreing sees it as a strategic path towards true competition and dominance in the market that takes capital to achieve.

I applaud both of their goals, but I’ll be honest, I’m leaning towards Crowder on this one. Hear me out. I don’t think he went about this the right way. I think he’s been unnecessarily confrontational and dramatic about The Daily Wire’s offer. But he’s right about one thing. It’s long past due for conservatives to abandon big tech as much as they reasonably can. I think Crowder’s success with Mug Club and his record-breaking numbers on Rumble speak to the untapped potential of taking risks and exploring other ways to fund conservative voices while still reaching a large audience. I hate self-censorship. I hate that contracts with so many media companies are overreaching and sometimes exploitative (though The Daily Wire isn’t doing anything out of the ordinary in that regard).

At the same time, I appreciate The Daily Wire’s vision of providing more than just a show. We do need an alternative economy for conservatives. We need to fight the culture war, not just the media war. The left brainwashes our kids when they’re at school, when they look at their phone, and when they go to the movies. We need to fight back with alternative social platforms, conservative education, and movies that promote our values. The Daily Wire is doing that, and it takes a lot of money to make it happen. I only worry that they might lose their edge in the meantime.

Crowder has always been at the front lines of conservatism delivering hard hits and taking the brunt of the hate for controversial opinions. I love him for that. His content feels raw and real. The Daily Wire in comparison feels a bit sanitized and their content is less interesting to watch as a result. But that doesn’t mean it’s not important. Their documentary “What is a Woman” changed the conversation on the trans movement. A message of truth with that kind of impact is a huge win for conservatives. Crowder simply isn’t making those kinds of moves yet.

Nobody Wins

It’s sad to see infighting like this. It’s the last thing conservatives need right now. We’re a divided movement after disappointing midterms, looking ahead to a turbulent future of Trumpers versus RINOs. It’s tiring.

I don’t think Crowder will get the kind of reaction he’s going for. He’s stirring the pot and promoting his own brand at the cost of another. It’s going to rub people the wrong way no matter what. His demeanor is needlessly antagonistic. He makes a big deal out of walking away from $50 million when he admits he doesn’t even need it. But The Daily Wire isn’t innocent either. Boreing says $50 million is an “unimaginably huge amount of money.” That might be true for the average American, but in the media space it’s not the killer deal he makes it out to be. The Daily Wire is looking out for their own financial interests at the end of the day. Boreing has also framed this situation as a personal betrayal of friendship on Crowder’s part. Don’t be fooled. This isn’t Crowder attacking Boreing as an individual. It’s a business strategy and a disagreement about the future of the conservative movement as a whole. I hope both parties are able to look past the opportunity for clout and move forward. It’s what’s best for everyone.

Let me know your thoughts in the comments below. Enter your email if you want to be notified when my next post goes live. Thanks for reading. Godspeed.

By entering your email, you agree to receive updates from me. You can unsubscribe any time. Your data will never be sold, traded, or disclosed.

Processing…
Success! You're on the list.

Logical Fallacies From a Biblical Perspective: Appeal to Authority

A logical fallacy is the use of faulty reasoning in the construction of an argument. It’s usually the rule, rather than the exception, that logical fallacies come into play in modern discourse. It’s far too common. Few people care to be internally consistent, form their statements properly, or in some cases use basic logic at all. It’s much better to copy the beliefs you think you’re supposed to have from the people you’ve been told are in the right, right?

No. That’s what today’s fallacy is about. I’ll be going through a bunch of these, but first on the agenda is the appeal to authority.

Appeal to Authority

It’s a very popular tactic to appeal to an authority figure (on the subject at hand, hopefully) when making a point. If the authority figure agrees with you, then it’s settled, right? After all, they must know better than us because they’re an expert on the matter. Maybe, but not necessarily.

When making an appeal, we argue that our position is the correct one. We claim it’s rooted in truth. But truth doesn’t care about authority. Truth stands alone, available for anyone of any status, any fame, any ability, any age, any gender, any location, any appearance, or any wealth to possess it. It cannot be held captive by any one person or group.

Truth in the Bible

“So Jesus said to the Jews who had believed him, ‘If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.'”

John 8:31-32 (ESV)

God is the only one who has an unequivocal claim to truth.

“Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth.”

John 17:17 (ESV)

In John 17, we read that God’s word is truth. It doesn’t say God’s word is “true.” It says God’s word is literally “truth” itself. We ought to read the Scriptures if we desire to align ourselves with truth.

“Lead me in your truth and teach me, for you are the God of my salvation; for you I wait all the day long.”

Psalm 25:5 (ESV)

God speaks the truth, but people in authority are just people. They’re fallible and imperfect. Sometimes they’re right, but other times they’re wrong. What makes them valuable, then? Well, that depends on the authority.

The Value of Authority

Some authority figures are experts, meaning we trust them because they’ve done the research or have the experience to back up their claims. Others are leaders, meaning they know how to effectively direct people to action. The former is more likely to offer valuable insight on a given topic than the latter, but many still trust leaders because they inspire us on an emotional level.

Either kind of authority figure may know better than us, but they won’t always. This is why experts meet together on a regular basis to exchange ideas and information. If they were already individually perfect, there would be no need for this. But even after doing the research and discussing it with other professionals, authority figures in the same field still disagree with one another on a regular basis.

The Problem

The problem with appealing to authority is that truth is not inherent in any authority apart from the divine. Not even the apostles claimed to be perfect.

“I appeal to you, brothers, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment. For it has been reported to me by Chloe’s people that there is quarreling among you, my brothers. What I mean is that each one of you says, ‘I follow Paul,’ or ‘I follow Apollos,’ or ‘I follow Cephas,’ or ‘I follow Christ.’ Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?”

1 Corinthians 1:10-13 (ESV)

In 1 Corinthians, Paul rebukes the people for aligning themselves with specific authority figures and forming divisions among themselves. This passage is primarily about church unity, but there’s also a lesson to be learned about human authority. Paul asks, “Was Paul crucified for you?” No, of course not. Jesus was crucified for us. Rather than align ourselves with Paul, we should align ourselves with Jesus.

This fallacy betrays that the person using it probably doesn’t have an argument of their own. They either don’t have the truth or they don’t know how to express it. Pointing at someone else to do the job for them is irresponsible, ignorant, and risky. At best, the authority figure is correct and the person committing the fallacy is revealed to have taken a shortcut to truth with little to no idea why they believe what they believe. At worst, the authority figure is wrong and the person committing the fallacy is revealed to be incorrect, using confirmation bias to recklessly latch on to a claim they find attractive while forgoing an honest search for truth.

The Solution

What then should we do? If an authority figure claims something to be true, our goal should be to discover that truth for ourselves so we can understand it and make our own arguments based on it. Truth should be our appeal, not the person we hope possesses it.

“Now these Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica; they received the word with all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so.”

Acts 17:11 (ESV)

Only by doing our due diligence will we be able to argue aright, with educated opinions of our own rather than appealing to someone else. By doing our own research, we learn so much more about the subject at hand. We’ll be better equipped to argue our position and we’ll be arguing from an informed perspective.

And guess what? If, after looking into something, you find yourself disagreeing with the opinion you previously had from an authority figure, so much the better! That’s called thinking for yourself and it’s a good thing. Don’t let your biases constrain you. Pursue truth relentlessly, holding God’s truth above all. In doing so, you’ll strengthen your worldview and ensure its foundations are solid.

That’s all for now. I’ll write about more logical fallacies in the future. Let me know which fallacy you want to see next by commenting below. Enter your email if you want to be notified when my next post goes live. Thanks for reading. Godspeed.

By entering your email, you agree to receive updates from me. You can unsubscribe any time. Your data will never be sold, traded, or disclosed.

Processing…
Success! You're on the list.

Does Proposal 3 Legalize More Than Just Abortion?

On November 8th, Michigan citizens will vote on whether or not to adopt Proposal 3, a constitutional amendment to legalize abortion. But what about the claims you’ve heard from conservative sources? Does Proposal 3 legalize late-term abortions? Does it allow abortion and sex change therapy on minors without parental consent? Does it allow anyone to perform an abortion?

Today, I give you the answers. No propaganda, no vague nonsense, no misdirection. Just the facts. I highly recommend you also read the proposal yourself by CLICKING HERE. Let’s get to work.

Does Prop 3 Invalidate Existing Laws?

You’ve probably heard liberals claim that Prop 3 won’t change any existing laws. “It just affects abortion!” they say. This is patently false, as you can clearly see in the proposal language. The introductory section reads:

Constitutional Amendment to: …invalidate all state laws that conflict with this amendment.

This is not just an addition to our Constitution for abortion only. Prop 3 is specifically designed to invalidate existing laws that conflict with it. Keep that in mind. We’ll come back to it.

Sterilizing Kids

Now, let’s go over the body of the proposal language. Here’s the first section:

(1) Every individual has a fundamental right to reproductive freedom, which entails the right to make and effectuate decisions about all matters relating to pregnancy, including but not limited to prenatal care, childbirth, postpartum care, contraception, sterilization, abortion care, miscarriage management, and infertility care.

Sounds tame enough, right? It seems like they just want women to be able to make all their own decisions regarding pregnancy. Who could argue with that? The problem is how vague the language is. This ambiguity is present throughout the proposal. Whether you believe it’s intentional or not, it opens the doors to some truly horrible things (besides just abortion).

First, this applies to “every individual.” Not just mothers. Not just women. Not just adults. It applies to a 6 year old boy just as much as a 36 year old woman. That’s important. It shows their fear of affirming the biological fact that only women can have pregnancies to begin with. But that’s not all.

“Every individual” is said to have the right to “reproductive freedom.” What does that mean? They define it as the right to make decisions about “all matters relating to pregnancy.” That’s quite broad. After all, sex is directly related to pregnancy. Can a 6 year old boy consent to sex under this proposal? We don’t know. What is clear is their list of examples, one of which is “sterilization.”

Already, we have a case that this proposal would reasonably allow for a 6 year old boy to choose to sterilize himself for life. That’s not conjecture or me twisting words. That’s explicitly allowed in the actual language. Are you starting to see the problem?

Late-Term Abortion

Conservatives say Prop 3 allows for late-term abortions. Is that true? Let’s review the language:

…the state may regulate the provision of abortion care after fetal viability, provided that in no circumstance shall the state prohibit an abortion that, in the professional judgment of an attending health care professional is medically indicated to protect the life or physical or mental health of the pregnant individual.

At first, this appears to allow for abortion restrictions after “fetal viability” (defined later on). But this is made irrelevant by the exception for “mental health.” Under Prop 3, anyone could get a late-term abortion as long as their “attending health care professional” said it would protect their mental health. The baby can be perfectly healthy and fully developed, yet still killed at the last second because the mother has anxiety.

Not Just Doctors

Notice they don’t say “doctor,” but “health care professional.” This is important. It means anyone working in healthcare could approve of late-term abortions on “mental health” grounds. That applies to dentists, dietitians, and even veterinarians. But it gets worse. Anyone could perform an abortion as well, as we’ll see in a minute.

Enforcing Rights?

(2) The state shall not discriminate in the protection or enforcement of this fundamental right.

I won’t focus on this section too much, but the wording is a bit strange. Since when are rights enforced by the state? Having a right usually means you’re free to do something without the state impeding you. Does this section imply that the state could arrest people who try to discourage abortion or sterilization, such as parents or counselors? We don’t know.

Infanticide

(3) The state shall not penalize, prosecute, or otherwise take adverse action against an individual based on their actual, potential, perceived, or alleged pregnancy outcomes, including but not limited to miscarriage, stillbirth, or abortion.

On the surface, this seems to prevent the state from punishing women for miscarriages. That’s a good thing, right? Yes, but this is a solution for a problem that does not exist. The danger is that this prevents prosecution for any “pregnancy outcome,” real or alleged. This effectively legalizes infanticide. A woman who blatantly murders her baby after it’s born could not be investigated, as this would be an “adverse action” against an “alleged pregnancy outcome.” Nobody should be able to kill a newborn baby, and (almost) no liberal will argue for that. But Prop 3 could make the state enforce it as a right.

Anyone Can Perform Abortions

Nor shall the state penalize, prosecute, or otherwise take adverse action against someone for aiding or assisting a pregnant individual in exercising their right to reproductive freedom with their voluntary consent.

This language says the state can’t do anything to prevent anyone from “assisting” an abortion (or other “reproductive freedom”). This allows anyone to perform an abortion as long as the pregnant woman consents. This is even less strict than “health care professionals.”

Invalidating Existing Laws

Now let’s review the language that raises the most questions about existing laws and regulations (such as parental consent):

An individual’s right to reproductive freedom shall not be denied, burdened, nor infringed upon unless justified by a compelling state interest achieved by the least restrictive means.

At first, this seems to allow for restrictions under certain circumstances. But what does “a compelling state interest” mean? This phrase is part of the strict scrutiny test, which is a judicial standard applied when a law might conflict with the Constitution. For the law to survive, it must be crafted to further a “compelling state interest,” such as protecting public health and safety or regulating violent crime. Not even a constitutional right can prevent the government from carrying out these essential functions. This is why crimes such as defamation are illegal despite the right to freedom of speech, for example.

If the writers of Prop 3 wanted these new “reproductive freedom” rights to be treated like all other constitutional rights, they would have stopped there. But they didn’t. They added the following language, drastically narrowing the definition of a “compelling state interest.”

(4) For the purposes of this section: A state interest is “compelling” only if it is for the limited purpose of protecting the health of an individual seeking care, consistent with accepted clinical standards of practice and evidence-based medicine, and does not infringe on that individual’s autonomous decision-making.

We are given three conditions that must be met. For an existing law to restrict or regulate abortion, sterilization, or any other “reproductive freedom,” it must:

  1. Be for the purpose of protecting the health of the individual
  2. Be consistent with clinical standards of practice
  3. Not infringe on the individual’s decision-making

First, restrictions must be for the purpose of protecting the health of the individual. Does this include mental health? Again, we don’t know. This could invalidate laws preventing tax money from funding abortions, as they protect the conscience of taxpayers and have nothing to do with health. Theoretically, a doctor (or anyone for that matter) could not refuse to perform a late-term abortion on grounds of conscience or religion since this also isn’t concerned with health.

Second, restrictions must be consistent with “accepted clinical standards of practice.” If the “practice” is abortion, who writes these standards? The abortion clinics themselves. This means the abortion industry gets to dictate how abortions are done and remove anything that impedes their business. They make a lot of money from this, meaning they are incentivized to make abortions as expedient as possible. They could ignore health and safety regulations. They could ignore screening requirements designed to ensure that the woman isn’t being coerced into an abortion by an abuser or sex trafficker. They could ignore waiting periods and informed consent laws designed to educate women on the risks of and alternatives to an abortion. It gives abortion providers the power to completely deregulate abortion, making things more dangerous for women.

Third, restrictions must not infringe on the individual’s decision-making. This language is extremely broad, making consent the only real requirement for exercising “reproductive freedom.” Remember, “reproductive freedom” means anything related to pregnancy. A brother and sister could choose to have a baby together. A child could choose to be sterilized for life. A child could consent to sex with an adult, since sex is related to pregnancy. Michigan’s ban on cloning could be nullified, since this is also related to pregnancy. The open-ended language allows for so many horrific possibilities with no room for common-sense regulations applicable to other constitutional rights (via strict scrutiny).

Fetal Viability

One last section to review. Remember the exception for fetal viability I mentioned earlier? Here’s their definition of the term:

“Fetal viability” means: the point in pregnancy when, in the professional judgment of an attending health care professional and based on the particular facts of the case, there is a significant likelihood of the fetus’s sustained survival outside the uterus without the application of extraordinary medical measures.

This seems correct at first glance, but upon further inspection, it actually broadens the definition beyond its original meaning. If you look it up online, you’ll see that fetal viability is defined as “the ability of a human fetus to survive outside the uterus.” That’s it. But Prop 3 adds the condition, “without the application of extraordinary medical measures.” This means babies who could theoretically survive outside the womb with the aid of advanced medical assistance are not protected.

The Rebuttal

The left’s rebuttal to the arguments I’ve made here is that Proposal 3 is only designed to protect a right to abortion. They say the intent isn’t to legalize statutory rape, sterilization of minors, infanticide, or incest. They say they don’t want to erase parental consent or religious freedom. So how do they justify the broad language in the proposal?

They usually bring up other constitutional rights, such as the right to bear arms. The Michigan Constitution says that every person has this right, yet we know kids are excluded and guns are still regulated. Doesn’t the same logic apply to Prop 3?

No, it doesn’t. Regulations on the right to bear arms are tested under their own standard of “historical tradition of firearm regulation.” In addition, this and all other constitutional rights can be limited by regulations that further a “compelling state interest,” such as public health and safety. But Prop 3 goes out of its way to redefine “compelling state interest” such that any law infringing on an individual’s “decision-making” is invalidated.

Parental consent laws might infringe on a child’s decision to have an abortion or sterilize themselves. Statutory rape laws might infringe on a child’s decision to have sex with an adult. Informed consent laws might infringe on a woman’s decision to have a late-term abortion. All of these regulations (and more) have to be thrown out.

This is why Prop 3 is so radical. This is why its defenders rely heavily on “intent” to claim that future case law won’t affect anything but abortion. But how can they be sure? It’s funny. Conservative justices are usually the ones who interpret based on original intent. Liberal justices—the ones Prop 3 advocates will vote for—frequently argue that the Constitution should be interpreted according to the times. What happens when the times change? Why leave the possibility open for Prop 3 to be abused at all? Why not clarify the ambiguous language? Why redefine “compelling state interest?” They don’t have an answer.

The Bottom Line

Even if you believe abortion should be legal in some cases, Prop 3 is extremely problematic. What is meant and what is said are very different things. Aside from the goal of legalizing abortion, the problem with Prop 3 is that its language is far too broad. It fails to clarify questions about the age of those affected, the limits of “reproductive freedoms,” and the state’s ability to interfere. It explicitly removes nearly all restrictions on abortion and anything else related to pregnancy. As written, Prop 3 is a disaster. It’s unprofessional at best and downright villainous at worst.

I will be voting NO on Proposal 3 this coming Tuesday. Enter your email if you want to be notified when my next post goes live. Thanks for reading. Godspeed.

By entering your email, you agree to receive updates from me. You can unsubscribe any time. Your data will never be sold, traded, or disclosed.

Processing…
Success! You're on the list.

How to Find Lasting Positive Change

Last time, we talked about what it means to acknowledge who you truly are. Far from self-centered affirmation, this entails the voluntary dissection of your very soul, the opening up of yourself to God. He created us. We ought to have the courage to face him and admit our shortcomings. That doesn’t mean it won’t be difficult, of course.

Today, I want to talk about some steps we can take to move towards lasting change in our lives. Acknowledging your sin and your tendencies is one thing, but repenting and moving unto action is another entirely. Let’s begin.

“Those whom I love, I reprove and discipline, so be zealous and repent. Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me.”

Revelation 3:19-20 (ESV)

This verse shows us what it really means to let conviction move us to be more like Christ. Repentance isn’t just saying we’re sorry. Jesus stands at the door. He knocks, asking us to let him into our life. We cannot reap the benefits of a proper relationship with Christ unless we open the door and let him in. But letting him in requires us to surrender ourselves to him—not just the most attractive parts, either. We’re talking about everything. But “everything” is a rather unimpressive word on its own. Let me paint you a picture.

Jesus Pays a Visit

Imagine for a moment that Jesus knocks on the front door. We think of ourselves as a pretty good Christian, so we have no problem letting him in, right? We undo the lock. We turn the handle, slowly swinging the door open. We greet our Lord and Savior. He asks if we would like him to step inside. Oh, of course! How silly of us. So we step aside and allow him access to our living room. It’s organized fairly well. There’s a couch on the far side and a welcome mat laid before the door with a coat rack and a place for shoes. The room is well-lit and inviting.

This is nice, we think to ourselves. Jesus in my house? What a privilege! Pleasantries are exchanged. We shuffle our feet and stare up at the ceiling, wondering what to say next. Then Jesus asks if he might take a look around the house. What? We weren’t expecting this, but that’s okay. We lead him into the office and show him our projects. We lead him upstairs to the guest room. We show him where the bathroom is. We might even comment on the kitchen as we pass through it. But then Jesus speaks up.

“What about your closet?” We stop, stunned for a moment. Why on earth would he want to look in there, we ask ourselves. We weren’t planning on letting him see every part of the house. This is most irregular. Jesus asks where the bedroom is. We stare at our feet for a moment, trying to think of an excuse. “Oh, still tidying up in there. Sorry about that!”

Jesus still wants to see it. He waits, standing patiently. We swallow the lump in our throat and force our legs to move us towards the bedroom. This isn’t fun anymore. We weren’t prepared for this! How rude of Jesus to insist on seeing the parts of our house we obviously don’t want anyone snooping around in. We open the door to the bedroom, revealing a bit of a mess. The bed isn’t made. Clothes hang over the side of the hamper. There’s a stray pair of underwear peeking out from beneath the bed. Jesus looks around the room. Then he asks again to see the closet.

The Inner Conflict

What would you say? Would you let him see what you have hiding in the far reaches of your mind? Would you allow him access to the sins you hold most dear, the grudges you’ve held onto for years, or the bad habits you still try to ignore? Maybe you’d say, “Enough! Get out.” Most people do.

One of the hardest things in the world is to let someone else see the most intimate parts of you. It’s why divorce is so common and friendships can be so fragile. It challenges your ego, forcing you to come to grips with your weakness as others see it openly. We hate dealing with our flaws and sins. We hide them away beneath layers of veneer—the Facebook posts, friendly smiles, and displays of virtue we hope distracts onlookers from the complicated mess underneath.

Yet this internal struggle is one we must face if we hope to pursue a life that honors Christ.

“You shall be holy to me, for I the Lord am holy and have separated you from the peoples, that you should be mine.”

Leviticus 20:26 (ESV)

Lest you think of this as the grumpy, domineering God of the Old Testament, here it is again in the New Testament. God does not change.

“You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.”

Matthew 5:48 (ESV)

Christ confirms the Leviticus passage here in the Sermon on the Mount. Peter confirms it in his epistle.

“As obedient children, do not be conformed to the passions of your former ignorance, but as he who called you is holy, you also be holy in all your conduct, since it is written, ‘You shall be holy, for I am holy.'”

1 Peter 1:14-16 (ESV)

There is no such thing as a “drifting” Christian, a man of God who does not seek his face. If you let yourself drift, you will invariably find yourself moving closer to sin. So what are some practical ways to start opening up your life to Christ and letting him sanctify you?

Confess

It starts with confessing. In a therapy session, clients might be asked to verbalize their desires and their realizations about themselves. This might seem unnecessary. After all, we already know how we feel. But there’s something powerful about using audible words to confess inner realities. So confess your sins to God out loud. Admit your faults. Don’t skip this part. Remember, you can’t start with changing yourself. You have to let Christ reign first.

“I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance.”

Luke 5:32 (ESV)

“If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”

1 John 1:9 (ESV)

“If my people who are called by my name humble themselves, and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and heal their land.”

2 Chronicles 7:14 (ESV)

Center Yourself in Truth

Next, center yourself in the truth. Don’t just jump into self-help books or temporary, emotional effort. You won’t get far. You have to keep your eye focused on what matters in order to get out of the wilderness. Part of this is reading God’s Word and dwelling on his truth. You have to saturate yourself with it if you expect to see its fruit in your life.

“And you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

John 8:32 (ESV)

The truth is the answer to your problems. But what is truth?

“Jesus said to him, ‘I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.'”

John 14:6 (ESV)

“Be still, and know that I am God. I will be exalted among the nations, I will be exalted in the earth!”

Psalm 46:10 (ESV)

Ultimately, God is truth. Only by pursuing Christ will we find that truth. Dwell on God’s nature and become intimately familiar with Jesus and his teachings.

“Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.”

2 Timothy 2:15 (ESV)

“Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth.”

John 17:17 (ESV)

Only when you become a real man of God—a student of theology, someone who’s “bananas for Jesus” as Keith Green said—will you become a man God uses to do great things.

“But the one who looks into the perfect law, the law of liberty, and perseveres, being no hearer who forgets but a doer who acts, he will be blessed in his doing.”

James 1:25 (ESV)

Go Forth Unto Action

This leads us to action that is supported by faith, deeds that are backed by love, and a changed life as the result of a changed heart. Don’t put the cart before the horse. This kind of thing can’t be manufactured. It has to be genuine, overflowing out of the new creation God has made you into.

“The good person out of the good treasure of his heart produces good, and the evil person out of his evil treasure produces evil, for out of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaks.”

Luke 6:45 (ESV)

“Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come. All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation.”

2 Corinthians 5:17-18 (ESV)

“Do not present your members to sin as instruments for unrighteousness, but present yourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life, and your members to God as instruments for righteousness.”

Romans 6:13 (ESV)

Persevere

But that’s not the end. The true test is consistency and perseverance. This is perhaps the least glamorous part of the process. Everyone loves stories of people who turned their life around, saved relationships, or overcame addictions. But nobody gets excited about the prospect of a long life of honest living in obedience to God, showing his love to strangers, coworkers, and family. We want the adventure and the drama without the commitment.

“Therefore, my beloved brothers, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that in the Lord your labor is not in vain.”

1 Corinthians 15:58 (ESV)

“Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us also lay aside every weight, and sin which clings so closely, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us.”

Hebrews 12:1 (ESV)

If you feel like giving up, like putting a stop to this uncomfortable process of exposing your heart for replacement and sacrificing your whole being to God’s purposes, just remember Christ. Center yourself back to the truth. This last passage convicts me regularly that I have it far too comfortable in America to be complaining. I need to persevere, keeping my sights set firmly on Christ.

“Consider him who endured from sinners such hostility against himself, so that you may not grow weary or fainthearted. In your struggle against sin you have not yet resisted to the point of shedding your blood.”

Hebrews 12:3-4 (ESV)

Let me know your thoughts in the comments below. Enter your email if you want to be notified when my next post goes live. Thanks for reading. Godspeed.

By entering your email, you agree to receive updates from me. You can unsubscribe any time. Your data will never be sold, traded, or disclosed.

Processing…
Success! You're on the list.

Who You Truly Are

Last week, I began a series about being true to yourself. No, I’m not talking about the self-love hippy dippy nonsense. I’m talking about boldly confronting yourself and making a choice—the choice to acknowledge who you are today, admit your shortcomings, see your potential, and move forward towards what God desires for you. We’ve already talked about recognizing the real you. Today, we tackle the next step.

Acknowledge Who You Are

Allowing yourself to think honestly about who you are can be quite the task, but it takes a bit more effort to accept the truths you find and acknowledge who you are, to yourself and to others. It’s easy to ask yourself what you enjoy, what makes you tick, and why you have certain tendencies. It’s a lot more difficult to say “I’m impatient,” “I care a lot about what certain people think of me,” or “I have potential I’m not realizing.”

You need to acknowledge where you are before you can get somewhere else. Nobody ever got good at playing the guitar by saying “learning guitar seems neat.” No. They first had to acknowledge their lack of ability, then let that drive them to learn. Only then did they grow and change for the better, gaining something new and valuable. The same holds true for character.

Words Have Power

I’ve noticed that the smallest of phrases can sometimes make a huge difference in living more authentically. When I got saved, I realized God had given me a heart for people I didn’t have before. So I started saying “thank you” a lot more often. I felt convicted to communicate gratitude to people, both as a form of encouragement and an acknowledgement that they met some of my needs. It was part of how I put my salvation into practice.

Another huge one for me was admitting fault or ignorance. Instead of coming up with excuses, I started saying “I was wrong.” Instead of guessing the answer to a question, I started saying “I don’t know.” It was weird at first. I was so used to putting up my guard to keep my pride and ego intact. Now I was fighting against that instinct. At first, it was uncomfortable. Then I realized it was freeing. I could be more honest with myself and others. I didn’t have to pretend. Being me was easier than fitting into the costume of a fictional character who was always right and always smart.

God Made You Special

One essential part of acknowledging who you are is accepting that God created and loves you. This is hard for some people. Whether it’s feeling like we’re unwanted, unloved, or unworthy, Christians regularly struggle with their identity in Christ. It’s something we overlook far too often. Here are some truths you can hold onto.

“For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Wonderful are your works; my soul knows it very well. My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately woven in the depths of the earth. Your eyes saw my unformed substance; in your book were written, every one of them, the days that were formed for me, when as yet there was none of them.”

Psalm 139:13-16 (ESV)

God created us. He formed us with love and care, designing a purpose and future for each of us. The Bible is clear about this. Paul reinforces that God not only made us, but predestined us for salvation and worship.

“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love he predestined us for adoption to himself as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved.”

Ephesians 1:3-6 (ESV)

The most important part of our identity in Christ is the work Christ did on the cross. This is when God truly proved his love for us and put it on magnificent display.

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.”

John 3:16-17 (ESV)

“God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.”

Romans 5:8 (ESV)

Jesus is the proof of God’s ultimate love for us. The cross is where God’s goodness and mercy finally win over mankind’s wickedness, forgiveness wins over judgement, and we gain new life in Christ rather than being condemned to death. Praise God for all that was accomplished. So what do we do now?

“I am the vine; you are the branches. Whoever abides in me and I in him, he it is that bears much fruit, for apart from me you can do nothing. If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commandments and abide in his love. These things I have spoken to you, that my joy may be in you, and that your joy may be full. You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit.”

John 15:5, 10-11, 16a (ESV)

We obey. We follow. We live our new lives for Christ. It only makes sense. He gave us a second chance. He loved us from the very beginning and saved us despite our rebellion and hatred for him. Now that our eyes are open, we look to God and do our very best with the short time we have to serve and worship our Lord. So acknowledge who you are, but more importantly, acknowledge what God has done for you, how he loves you, and what he desires for your life. Only there will you find true purpose and peace.

Next time, we’ll look at what it means to take the knowledge of who you truly are and move forward unto action. Let me know your thoughts about this series in the comments below. Enter your email if you want to be notified when my next post goes live. Thanks for reading. Godspeed.

By entering your email, you agree to receive updates from me. You can unsubscribe any time. Your data will never be sold, traded, or disclosed.

Processing…
Success! You're on the list.