5. Hitchens revealed the danger of cultural Christianity and exposure to tepid, lifeless, superficial Christian teaching.

In his childhood, Hitchens was exposed to the mild Christianity of his father and the Hitchens home. (Later in life, he discovered that his mother was, in fact, partly Jewish.) As a schoolboy, Hitchens received the customary dose of tame religious instruction. In God is Not Great, he wrote of Mrs. Jean Watts, “a good, sincere, simple woman, of stable and decent faith,” who taught him religion at his school near Dartmoor. Even as a boy, Hitchens was not impressed by her emotivist expressions of doctrine and her answers to his questions. He wrote also of a school headmaster, who seemed, among other failings, to believe that belief in God served a mainly therapeutic function. Hitchens described himself then as “quite the insufferable little intellectual,” but the damage was done. Unlike others who, as he wrote, might have rejected belief in God because of abuse or “brutish indoctrination,” Hitchens simply developed indignant contempt for a belief system that seemed so superficial and fraudulent. An exposure to tepid, lifeless, thoughtless, and intellectually formless Christianity can be deadly (emphasis added).

This is a particularly important point for Christian parents, pastors, and church members to note well and never forget.  We have to own and be serious about our faith if we intend to pass it down to the next generation.  We can blame the world, the public schools, evolution, atheists, etc., etc., etc.–all the “culprits” we can think of–but the reality is that the greatest enemy to Christianity is a professing Christian who shows little to no interest in living like a follower of Jesus.  In this sense, the biggest enemy of Christianity may be inside the walls of the church not outside of them.  Of course, the best thing believers can do is to own their faith and live it, love and serve Jesus in a way that is so inter-woven with their daily lives that it is impossible to separate the so-called sacred from the secular.  Our aim should be the sincere kind of Christianity Paul describes in 2 Corinthians 2:15-17 (ESV):

For we are the aroma of Christ to God among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing, [16] to one a fragrance from death to death, to the other a fragrance from life to life. Who is sufficient for these things? [17] For we are not, like so many, peddlers of God’s word, but as men of sincerity, as commissioned by God, in the sight of God we speak in Christ.

As a pastor, I see just how much a consumer mindset has infiltrated believers when they are 1) looking for a church and 2) serving in a church.  When people are looking for a church, they “shop” around to see which church will serve them best  When these same people join a church it impacts their service because they remain committed to getting rather than giving–or giving nominally rather than sacrificially.  I liken church membership to a bank account.  A person typically makes deposits and withdrawals.  A balanced church member does both.  A church member who only withdraws (benefits from ministry) just drains resources–it’s an unsustainable pattern.  A church member who only deposits (participates in ministry) burns himself out.  As church members, we need to do both.  I appreciate the congregation of Bible Baptist Church (BBC), the church at which I serve.  There are a good number of people involved in the work of the ministry.  This post is not a backdoor critique of the congregation I shepherd.  On the contrary, it’s a joy to do the work of the ministry with many of the saints at BBC.  At the same time, every American Christian has marinated long enough in a consumer oriented culture that we cannot escape its influence.

This brings me back to where I began.  The Apostle Paul’s teaching on the body of Christ reveals that a consumer mentality (a focus on me and what I can get)  is the polar opposite of a ministry mindset (a focus on others and what I can give).  The two cannot peacefully coexist.  So believer, do you want to be counter-cultural?  According to the Apostle Paul, if we are going to be anti-consumerism as believers we must be pro-body of Christ.

I’ll close with a citation that prompted this post.  Paul Tripp communicated the importance of the body of Christ when he wrote,

Many of us would be relieved if God had placed our sanctification in the hands of trained and paid professionals, but that simply is not the biblical model.  God’s plan is that through the faithful ministry of every part, the whole body will grow to full maturity in Christ.  The leaders of his church have been gifted, positioned, and appointed to train and mobilize the people of God for this ‘every person, everyday’ ministry lifestyle.

The paradigm is simple: when God calls you to himself, he also calls you to be a servant, and instrument in his redeeming hands.  All of his children are called into ministry, and each of them needs the daily intervention this ministry provides.  If you followed the Lord for a thousand years, you would still need the ministry of the body of Christ as much as the day you first believed.  This need will remain until our sanctification is complete in Glory (Paul Tripp, Instruments in the Redeemer’s Hands, ix).

I am coming to the understanding that nit-picking at music and especially music that encourages us to offer praise and thanksgiving to God and reflect on his greatness can actually discourage the praise we are commended to offer. This motivates me to ask a few questions with regard to why we find it necessary to be over-critical of worship music, to the extent that it can appear to have no redeeming value.

I went over to the full post.  The author, Lisa Robinson, continues,

The last question I’d have to ask is if worship music criticism does not point to a deeper issue and that of being critical in general.  While I can’t speak for individual motives behind each rendering of criticism, I have found with my own self it stems from a prideful arrogance that somehow my standard should set the precedent for how we worship God.  Yes, I stated correctly – pride and arrogance.  Not only that, we can come off as people without hope who find no beauty in the simplest of creation.  We should not be this way.

One can legitimately quibble with the author but her main point is worth chewing on . . .

So my critique is this – stop being so critical.  Worship God with music that honors Him with whatever lyrics are consistent with His character, from the simplest to the most compact.  Allow others to worship Him as well.  Don’t ruin someone else’s worship experience because you don’t think the song has value.  If it directs us to the Lord, that is all the value we truly need.

And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God and saying, [14] ‘Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among those with whom he is pleased!’ (Luke 2:13-14, ESV)

After the angels announced the birth of Jesus in Luke 2, a heavenly host erupted in praise declaring, “Glory to God in the highest!”  They were glorifying God for His work, in this case redemptive work of sending the promised Messiah in Jesus.  The works of God in nature also redound to the glory of God.

The now late outspoken atheist Christopher Hitchens said,

Religion has run out of justifications.  Thanks to the telescope and the microscope, it no longer offers and explanation of anything important (Christopher Hitchens, God is not Great, 282).

One man would beg to differ.  The man’s name is Wilson Bentley (1865-1931).*  Bentley was taken by Job 38:22 which speaks about “the treasures of the snow” (KJV).  At 14, Bentley already showed a scientific bent.  Bentley’s mother, a school teacher, gave him a microscope.  He used it to observe anything that fit under the lens.  Later in his life, Bentley said he felt compelled to proclaim the Great Designer’s glory through the microscope.  He recounted,

I became possessed with a great desire to show people something of this wonderful loveliness, an ambition to become in some measure, its preserver.

What was Bentley talking about?  He was talking about the snowflake.  When he first began observing snowflakes, he expected them all to look the same.  He was surprised to learn that they were all different.  Bentley concluded that, to the best of his knowledge, no snowflake

was an exact duplicate of any other snowflake!

adding

with profound humility, we acknowledge that the Great Designer is incomparable an unapproachable in the infinite prodigality [extravagance] and beauty of His works.

Turns out that the combination of water molecules, air currents, temperature, and humidity make it extremely unlikely that one snowflake will resemble another—much like a human fingerprint.  Bentley explained that the matchlessness of each snowflake

can only be referred to the will and pleasure of the Great First Cause, whose works, even the most minute and evanescent, and in regions the most removed from human observation, are altogether admirable.

So taken by their beauty, Bentley began to draw snowflakes when he was 15 but they melted before he could finish.  He learned about a camera that could be used with a microscope.  He bought it when he was 17.  A year after he bought the camera—he did it!  He took a picture of a snowflake; the first one ever taken.  It was tedious work.  Even with a camera, the snowflakes would melt or break like glass depending on the temperature.  Over the years, he managed to take many pictures of snowflakes capturing their unique beauty.

The beautiful seasons give us cause to join the heavens as they declare the glory of God.  Thanks to William Bentley, we now know that the white stuff that falls from the sky is made up of intricate little masterpieces called snowflakes.  These snowflakes are another reason to proclaim the glory of our powerful Creator.  This brings us back to the angelic proclamation of the good news of Jesus’ birth and the heavenly choir.  The Christmas season is a time when we ought to give glory to God not only for His handiwork displayed in the snowflake but supremely for the first advent of His Son, Jesus Christ.  This is the work of our Divine and gracious Redeemer.  With the heavenly host, we too should exclaim, “Glory to God in the highest!”

*Taken from Jerry Bergman, “Snowflake Bentley: Man of Science, Man of God,” Acts & Facts (December 2011), 12-14.

One part of Wilson’s article caught my attention because I’m teaching a class at church on the gospel and evangelism.  This Sunday we will talk about the importance of knowing, believing, and defending our faith.  Wilson mentioned this in his article.  You cannot approach a person like Hitchens and be tentative about your faith.  You cannot strive for respectability and accommodation at the same time.  You either believe it with conviction or why bother.  I hope this citation spurs you on to be a Christian who holds your faith with conviction instead of seeking to accommodate for the sake of respectability.  It won’t work.  Here’s what Wilson said,

So we [Hitchens and Wilson] got on well with each other, because each of us knew where the other one stood. Eugene Genovese, before he became a believer, once commented on the tendency that some have to try to garner respect by giving away portions, big or small, of what they profess to believe. “If other religions offer equally valid ways to salvation and if Christianity itself may be understood solely as a code of morals and ethics, then we may as well all become Buddhists or, better, atheists. I intend no offense, but it takes one to know one. And when I read much Protestant theology and religious history today, I have the warm feeling that I am in the company of fellow unbelievers” (The Southern Front, pp. 9–10). Ironically, the branch of the faith most interested in getting the “cultured despisers” to pay us some respect is really not that effective, and this is a strategy that can frequently be found on the pointed end of its own petard. Respectability depends on not caring too much about respectability. Unbelievers can smell accommodation, and when someone like Christopher meets someone who actually believes all the articles in the Creed, including that part about Jesus coming back from the dead, it delights him. Here is someone actually willing to defend what is being attacked. Militant atheists are often exasperated with opponents whose strategy appears to be “surrender slowly.”

Eisenhower told his soldiers to be good witnesses of all they saw during World War II, specifically of the Holocaust.  Why?  He had enough insight to recognize that if the embers of a historical event fade from the memory of first-hand witnesses, they will never be rekindled.  Eisenhower visited concentration camps with reserve but compelled by the necessity to be an eye-witness of the horrors that occurred at these places of indescribable human suffering.  Following one of his visits, he sent a cable to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in Washington, General George C. Marshall.  It said, in part:

The visual evidence and the verbal testimony of starvation, cruelty and bestiality were so overpowering as to leave me a bit sick. In one room, where they [there] were piled up twenty or thirty naked men, killed by starvation, George Patton would not even enter. He said that he would get sick if he did so. I made the visit [to Gotha] deliberately, in order to be in a position to give first-hand evidence of these things if ever, in the future, there develops a tendency to charge these allegations merely to “propaganda” (Michael Hirsch, The Liberators: America’s Witnesses to the Holocaust; emphasis added).

Eisenhower was prophetic.  While few, some have dismissed the Holocaust as a fabrication.  The Holocaust was an awful event that has been propagated by those who were first-hand eyewitnesses.  As followers of Christ we have the glorious event of the gospel that was propagated by the apostles who were first-hand eyewitness of Jesus Christ’s life, death, resurrection, and ascension.  It is now our duty as witnesses to carry forward the message that Christ died for our sins and rose from the dead.

What a company we have here to-night! It fills my heart with gladness, and my eyes with tears of joy, to see so many hundreds of persons gathered together at what is sometimes wickedly described as “only a prayer-meeting.”  It is good for us to draw nigh unto God in prayer, and specially good to make up a great congregation for such a purpose. We have attended little prayer-meetings of four or five, and we have been glad to be there, for we had the promise of our Lord’s presence; but our minds are grieved to see so little attention given to united prayer by many of our churches. We have longed to see great numbers of God’s people coming up to pray, and we now enjoy this sight. Let us praise God that it is so. How could we expect a blessing if we were too idle to ask for it?  How could we look for a Pentecost if we never met with one accord, in one place, to wait upon the Lord?  Brethren, we shall never see much change for the better in our churches in general till the prayer-meeting occupies a higher place in the esteem of Christians (emphasis added).

The 21st century church would do well to continue the practice of the first century church as recorded by Luke in Acts 1:14 (cf. Acts 2:42; 6:4; 13:3; Romans 12:12; Colossians 4:2; Ephesians 6:18; 1 Thessalonians 5:17),

All these with one accord were devoting themselves to prayer, together with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and his brothers (emphasis added)

Overall, about three out of ten young people who grow up with a Christian background stay faithful to church and to faith throughout their transitions from the teen years through their twenties.

The Barna findings raise a number of questions to understand why this phenomenon is so common today.  At the same time, this is not par for the course for every young person.  The article continues,

Myth 2: Dropping out of church is just a natural part of young adults’ maturation
Reality: First, this line of reasoning ignores that tens of millions of young Christians never lose their faith or drop out of church. Thus, leaving church or losing faith should not be a foregone conclusion.

What makes the difference?  It seems to me that there are two major influences on the next generation: parents and congregations.  First, parents should take their faith seriously.  This is the bare minimum.  If Christ is merely an accessory to mom and dad, He will be merely an accessory to their offspring.  Second, the Church generally and local churches particularly should cherish Christ and live the gospel sincerely.  A congregation of believers who evidence, albeit imperfectly, a warm, personal faith and love for one another passes the sniff test, so to speak.

This post is admittedly brief (it was intended to be a tweet!).  Barna’s findings warrant further interaction.  The bottom line is that we don’t want to lose a generation (cf. Judges 2:10).  We want to help the next generation be committed followers of Christ.  Let’s begin by cherishing Christ ourselves in our homes and in our assemblies.

The book of Acts is especially important because in it we can actually see the scope and nature of the earliest Christian mission.  If you are looking for a picture of the early church giving itself to creation care, plans for societal renewal, and strategies to serve the community in Jesus’ name, you won’t find them in Acts.  But if you are looking for preaching, teaching, and the centrality of the Word, this is your book.  The story of Acts is the story of the earliest Christians’ efforts to carry out the commission given to them in Acts 1:8 (Kevin DeYoung and Greg Gilbert, What is the Mission of the Church?  Making Sense of Social Justice, Shalom, and the Great Commission [Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2011], 49).

I spent a few moments developing “steadfast love”. The Hebrew word translated “steadfast love” (ESV) is hesed. It is an important word in the Hebrew Old Testament. The New Testament equivalent is “grace”. Hesed is found 244 times in the Hebrew Old Testament. Of these 244 uses, over half of them are in the Psalms (about 126 times).

So here’s the little gem. The steadfast love of God is a significant theme in Israel’s hymnal. It seems to me that if the steadfast love of God is a prevailing theme in Israel’s hymnal it should be a theme that dominates our singing as well.  This is rich gospel content for us to sing about!  The more fully we recognize that we are unable to satisfy God’s righteous demands but that He has dealt with us according to His steadfast love/grace in Jesus Christ, it will fuel a robust, heart-felt, rejoicing in God’s gracious disposition to us.  The steadfast love of God will also generate the kind of corporate singing that is not manufactured but genuine overflow from grateful and humble hearts!

The steadfast love of the LORD never ceases; his mercies never come to an end” (Lamentations 3:22, ESV)