Chapter

W OR L D

VIE

W WE

EK
END

UB

LIS HIN

Christian WorldvieW for students a PriCeless Gift in 30 daily readinGs Published by Worldview Weekend Publishing a division of Worldview Weekend 2006 by Brannon howse international standard Book number: 0-978504-0-3 Cover design by steve Gamble unless noted otherwise, scripture quotations are from The Holy Bible, new King James version (nKJv) 994 by thomas nelson, inc. all riGhts reserved no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any meanselectronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or otherwisewithout prior written permission. for information: www.worldviewweekend.com Printed in the united states of america

DeDication

his book is dedicated to Landon Howse, my oldest son. I pray that you, Landon, will always be a student of the Word of God as you seek to apply a Biblical worldview to every area of your life. May you be a bold and courageous leader that defends and proclaims the truth of Christianity even in the face of Americas ever-increasing hostility to Biblical truth. With love and thankfulness for you,

Dad

acknowleDgments
I would like to thank my content editor Greg Webster of The Gregory Group for his excellent editing and work on this book. Greg is a true talent, and I am very fortunate to have him as a part of my team. I would like to thank Steve Gamble and Bob Heyer of T. Gamble Productions for their excellent work in regards to cover design and page layout. T. Gamble Productions has been a very important part of the growth and success of Worldview Weekends through professional filming and editing of many of our conferences.

contents
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 introDuctionwar of the worlDviews ......................................... 7

The TruTh AbouT TruTh

Is Truth Created or Discovered? ................................................... 12 Overdosing on Non-Judgmentalism ............................................. 15 True for Whom? ........................................................................... 18 The New Absolutes ....................................................................... 21 The Consequences of Rejecting Truth .......................................... 24

The reAl AmericA

So You Think You Live in a Democracy? ...................................... 28 The Worldview Connection to Poverty ........................................ 32 The Biblical Foundation for Free Enterprise ................................ 36 Were Americas Founders Deists? ................................................. 39 Are Capital Punishment and Military Action Biblical?................. 43

Science And FAiTh cAn be FriendS

Everythings a Religious Issue ...................................................... 48 Blind Science: The Humanists Alternative to Reasonable Faith .......................... 51 Evolution: Science or Philosophy? ............................................... 55 The Greater the Design, the Greater the Designer ....................... 58 Evolution Anti-Science ................................................................. 62 olerAnce, humAniSm, T
And oTher PhiloSoPhicAl ProblemS

16 17

The Humanist Worldview Breeds Persecution ............................. 68 Americas Students Denied Freedom of Religion! ........................ 71

18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Is Postmodernism the Smart Persons Way to Think? .................. 74 Can You Legislate Morality? ........................................................ 77 If There Is No God .................................................................... 81

Sex And morAliTyA GreAT couPle

The No-Guilt, No-STD Sexual Freedom Guarantee ..................... 86 Are Traditional Morals Relevant? ................................................ 89 Why Abortion Tears People Apart ................................................ 93 Should Same-Sex Marriage Be Allowed? ...................................... 96 Euthanasia and Doctor-Assisted Suicide .................................... 100

Why chriSTiAniTy hAS The AnSWerS

How Authentic Is the Bible? ....................................................... 104 Reading the Bible to Find Out Where to Dig ............................. 107 Self-Esteem Just Isnt Enough ..................................................... 111 Are All Religions Created Equal?................................................ 114 What Sets Jesus Apart from All Other Religious Leaders? ......... 117 notes .......................................................................................... 120 . about the author ....................................................................... 126 . about worlDview weekenD conferences .................................... 127

IntroductIon
War of the Worldviews
worldview is the lensthe glassesthrough which you view the world. its the foundation of your values, and your values determine how you act and how you live your life. Whether conscious of it or not, everyone has a worldview. you are surrounded by friends, fellow students, teachers, and family members that have their own way of looking at things, and many of these will have views that oppose Christianity. readings in this book spell out the Biblical viewpoint of issues as varied as americas free enterprise system, evolution, and same-sex marriage. But before you begin, there are a few things you will want to know about the worldviews that compete for your allegiance. although a variety of forms exist, they can be categorized into one of three basic types: Judeo-Christian, Cosmic humanism, and secular humanism. the Christian angle on things begins with a belief in Goda theistic worldview. the God we believe in is the one described in the Bible. on the other hand, a Cosmic humanist (also known as a new ager) believes in pantheism, the belief that everything is God. it (not he) is a force you can use to your advantage through the power of your mind (think: Star Wars). yet another alternative is secular humanistthe belief that there is no God. People are the highest order of creature. Christian theism says there is both a spiritual world and a natural world. a Cosmic humanist believes only in the spiritual world and holds that the natural world is essentially an illusion. at
7

B rannon howse

the other extreme, secular humanists believe in naturalism, which means they think all that exists is the natural world. there is no spiritual side. a Christian believes people are in need of redemption, and that this can happen only through repenting of sins, believing in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ, and accepting him as lord and savior. a Cosmic humanist believes mankind is saved through reincarnation. that is the belief a persons soul passes repeatedly from one body to another until his or her good deeds (good karma) outweigh bad deeds (bad karma). When that finally happens, the person becomes a spirit or master guide. the reward is to become a part of the Great nothing. a secular humanist believes people die, and thats itthere is nothing beyond the grave. Christians believe the world was created by God through his spoken word and that he is the source of all truth. People have a soul that will live forever in either heaven or hell, depending on whether or not they have accepted the atonement of Christ. since the Cosmic humanist believes the natural world is an illusion, it really does not matter how we got here. a Cosmic humanist believes heaven and hell are merely states of mind. a secular humanist believes in darwinian evolution. the cosmos came about at random. Cosmic and secular humanists hold in common the belief that truth is relative, not a fixed reference point. they likewise believe that mankind does not have a free will but is ultimately good and only does bad things because of negative influences in the environment. a Christian believes mankind is born with a sin nature but that each person does have a free will and can choose to be a slave to sin or a servant of Jesus Christ.
8

introduction

as you read on, youll see how a worldview impacts every area of your life. Christians are to love the lord their God with all their heart, soul, strength, and mind, and i pray you will sharpen your mind to think and live according to a Christian worldview. these readings are presented in six groups of five each. that gives you several options as to how you might go through the book. you can read one each weekdaybefore class, after class, at bedtime, wheneverand complete the readings in six weeks. you can read one each day for a month. you can read as many as you want at a timelike a good noveland get through it in a few days. or you can pick the topics of most interest to you and read whichever ones you need most. Whether you use this book to build confidence in what you know to be true or you need a specific answer to a hostile question about your Christian worldview, you can win the war in your part of the world.

the truth about truth

is truth createD or DiscovereD?

In 1492, Columbus sailed the ocean blue. And created America.

ound familiar? oh, not quite? Perhaps, then, youre savvy enough to know Christopher Columbus did not create the continent on which you live. and im likely safe in stating categorically that neither he nor any historian has ever claimed anything so foolish as to say that he did. the worlds greatest discoverer was not the worlds greatest creator. yet, that peculiar shift in thinking is exactly what postmodernism would have you believe about the truths built into the landscape of our lives. Postmodernism is the belief that truth is not discovered by man but created by man. through surveying every situation and choosing a course of action that will result in the most beneficial outcome, people create their own truth. this concept derives from a humanist worldview that proclaims man as the measure of all things, and therefore, each person is free to do whatever he or she deems to be in his or her best interest. there is no ultimate truth on which our lives depend. Most people who hold to such a notionwhich unfortunately is most people these daysreject as unsophisticated any other way of looking at reality. People who believe in absolute truth are considered dismally anti-intellectual or such religious fundamentalists as to be soaring out of touch with the real world. Consider for a
2

I s Tr uth Created or Discovered?

quiet moment, though, who it is that truly is anti-intellectual or out of touch. a postmodern worldview allows that two opposing truth claims can be equal. in other words, if i say stealing a car is wrong but you say its not, then all we can conclude is that my truth (car stealing is wrong) is simply one version of truth, and your version (car stealing is okay) is equally valid. two contradictory claims can both be true. While that is as stupid as saying black and white are the same colors, this is the absurdity of postmodernism. Can two chairs fit in the same physical space in your dorm room? (it might make a fun late-night experiment, but i can tell you the outcome.) Will two cars fit in the same parking spot? (dont try that one!) What makes it difficult to argue the point with someone who believes in postmodernism is that these people will say things like, Well, both are true because its just a matter of perspective. they do it with such a how-can-you-be-so-stupid-as-to-think-otherwise attitude that arguing does indeed seem pointless. and it may be but not because youre wrong to think truth is truth. the idea that always creates shockwaves with the no absolute truth crowd is the belief that truth exists and that it comes from a fixed moral standard set up by God. this view is not seen by postmodernists as another equal truth but as being unacceptable and intolerant. to the postmodern humanist, Christianity is the enemy, the reason for all problems in our world, the worldview that slows progress, that prohibits equality, and sabotages world peace. Postmodern humanism allows no tolerance for Christianity. if you want to understand the perversely extreme possibilities of postmodernism, consider the life of Michael foucault, a french philosopher and key founder of postmodern thinking. Convenient
3

B rannon howse

for his own inclinations, foucault came up with a truth that homosexuality is a species, not an action. during his visits to the united states in the late seventies, foucault became fascinated by san franciscos gay scene with its bathhouses, leather bars, chains, whips, glory holes, and sadomasochistic rituals. for two years after foucault learned that he had contracted aids as the result of his pursuit of free sexual expression, he continued to indulge in gay orgies, passing his disease on to anonymous partners. We are inventing new pleasures beyond sex, foucault told an interviewer, in this particular case, sex as murder. Postmodern thinking allowed Michael foucault to justify murder for the fulfillment of his own desires and sexual pleasures. recognizing how warped Michael foucault was should help you see how deviant his postmodern worldview isalong with the negative consequences it is having on america and around the world. Christians believe God created truth for man to discover and that Gods truth is for all times, all places, and all people. scripture also holds that people will be held accountable by God at the end of their lives for what they did with his truth. thats why youll want to set a course throughout life to discover the reality of Gods truth and avoid the flat-earth foolishness of postmodernism.

4

overDosing on non-JuDgmentalism

ost any substance can be lethal. Poison control hotlines offer first aid tips to people whove swallowed too much of anything from baking soda and laundry detergent to insect repellant and drain cleaner. even good things used in the wrong way can kill the user, and this is just as true in the world of ideas as it is in the world of household baking, health, and cleaning products. an article in U.S. News & World Report reflects a bizarre misapplication of the principle that we shouldnt judge others. in John leos article, no-fault holocaust, he makes this remarkable observation about college students perception of the World War ii nazi genocide: in 20 years of college teaching, Prof. robert simon has never met a student who denied that the holocaust happened. What he sees quite often, though, is worse: students who acknowledge the fact of the holocaust but cant bring themselves to say that killing millions of people is wrong. simon reports that 0 to 20 percent of his students think this way. usually they deplore what the nazis did, but their disapproval is expressed as a matter of taste or personal preference, not moral judgment. of course i dislike the nazis, one student told simon, but who is to say they are morally wrong?2

5

B rannon howse

Why would anybodymaybe even one of your classmates say they dont agree with hitler but wont go so far as to say he was wrong? it is largely because americas educational system is dominated by those who believe in moral relativism, situational ethics, and postmodernismnone of which is based in Biblical Christianity. so if youve come through the public education system, youve had a serious dose of non-judgmentalism, whether you realize it or not. and even if you havent spent years in a public school, the nonjudging thought pattern is so pervasive that youve been exposed repeatedly in television, movies, music, and magazines. the Chronicle of Higher Education says some students are unwilling to oppose large moral horrors, including human sacrifice, ethnic cleansing, and slavery because they think that no one has the right to criticize the moral views of another group or culture.3 unless you recognize that some things are right and others wrong, youll end up with some very strange conclusions about the world. for instance, there are some people who say we should not even call wrong or evil the terrorists that attacked america on september , 200. alison hornstein is a student at yale university who has observed a disconnect between non-judgmentalism and reality. Writing on the Question that We should Be askingis terrorism Wrong? in the december 7, 200 issue of Newsweek, alison writes of her experiences the day after the 9/ attacks: student reactions expressed in the daily newspaper and in class pointed to the differences between our life circumstances and those of the perpetrators, suggesting that these differences had caused the previous days events. noticeably absent was a general outcry of indignation
6

O v e rdosing on Non-Judgmentalism

at what had been the most successful terrorist attack of our lifetime. these reactions and similar ones on other campuses have made it apparent that my generation is uncomfortable assessing, or even asking whether a moral wrong has taken place.4 Why would this be? hornsteins next observation from one of her classes explains the answer. her professor: did not see much difference between hamas suicide bombers and american soldiers who died fighting in World War ii. When i saw one or two students nodding in agreement, i raised my hand. . american soldiers, in uniform, did not have a policy of specifically targeting civilians; suicide bombers, who wear plainclothes, do. the professor didnt call on me. the people who did get a chance to speak cited various provocations for terrorism; not one of them questioned its morality.5 there is a place for reserving judgment, of course. But not on clear moral issues like the ones noted above. Jesus certainly did caution us to Judge not, that you be not judged (Matthew 7:). hes talking here, though, about showing mercy on another individual in light of your own sinfulness, not about whether its right to uphold a godly moral standard or not. no matter what you may hear otherwise, you can be confident that some things really are wrongand its okay to admit it. and while i cant tell you what a lethal dosage of non-judgmentalism is, i can assure you that even just a little too much can make your spirit so sick you wont know when enough is enough.
7

true for whom?

ave you ever heard someone say, that may be true for you, but it is not true for me? or perhaps you have gone to great pains to explain an important Biblical idea only to have your hearers roll their eyes and utter the chronic pop-culture expression, What-ever! Both reactions actually are saying that your arguments do not matter because there is no such thing as absolute moral truth. Many americans have accepted the outrageous notion that there are no moral truths valid for all times, all places, and all people. if you havent encountered it in your school career yet, you will! folks accept the lie because our educational establishment has spent years teaching childrenwho are now adults, including some of your teachersthings like values clarification courses. values clarification teaches that truth is relative and that the end justifies the means. this is also known as situational ethics. sidney simon and lawrence Kohlberg, two powerful proponents of values clarification, believe that moral education has amounted to little more than an attempt by elders to impose values upon the young.6 Kohlberg also disdains parents who try to build a Christian worldview into their children in which right and wrong are based on the Bible: traditional moral education[is] undemocratic and unconstitutional. instead of teaching morals to children, Kohlberg stresses the need for a new psychology and a new philosophy that recognizes the childs right to freedom from indoctrination.7
8

Tr ue for Whom?

adults, he further claims, should view young people not as pupils but as moral philosophers who assemble their own personal concepts of right and wrong. this, Kohlberg says, reflects a progressive ideology with a liberal, democratic and non-indoctrinative notion of education.8 Beware that such labels as progressive and liberal are nearly irresistible to many academicians, and anyone who might be labeled traditional, conservative, or religious will receive the added stigma of ignoramus. again: if youre trying to be Biblical in your thinking and havent been labeled this way yet, you will! so be prepared. William Bennett, former u.s. secretary of education, has spoken out against values clarification, revealing the dangers and consequences of this approach: People are bundles of wants; the world is a battlefield of conflicting wants; and no one has room for goodness, decency, or the capacity for a positive exercise of will. Moral maturity is certainly not to be found in the clarification of values, which is cast solely in the language of narrow self-gratification and is devoid of any considerations of decency whatsoever.9 situational ethics and values clarification courses have many names such as Quest, Pumseys Program, and Finding My Way. regardless of title, though, the intent is to instill in students a nonBiblical perspective of morality. and who is behind these courses? it is not some neutral or default position created by educators for the good of students.
9

B rannon howse

the concepts offer an atheistic perspective on life straight from the Bible of contemporary humanism. (there are actually three such BiblesThe Humanist Manifesto, The Humanist Manifesto II, and Humanist Manifesto 2000all developed during the last 00 years to delineate the beliefs of the worlds atheists.) some of the most important leaders in americas public education system are supporters of humanism (does the name John dewey sound familiar?). regarding this issue of whose truth is true, for instance, The Humanist Manifesto II states: We affirm that moral values derive their source from human experiences. ethics is autonomous and situational needing no theological or ideological sanction. ethics stems from human need and interest. to deny this distorts the whole basis of life. human life has meaning because we create and develop our futures. you must understand that regardless of how the ideas are packaged or promoted, this is not a morally neutral worldview. there is no such thing. to be morally neutral, relative, or situational is itself a moral stanceone that is antithetical to Biblical Christianity. the choice is to build a life and worldview on scripture or on anti-God sources like the humanist Manifestos. Whatever someone may say about your beliefs, the truth is not, What-ever!

20

the new absolutes

ccording to Charles Kimball, a college professor at a wellknown university, there is a possibility your religion might be evil, and he offers a test to know whether or not your belief system qualifies: When zealous and devout adherents elevate teachings and belief of their tradition to the level of absolute truth, they open the door to the possibility that their religion will become evil.0 todays postmodernists believe that any time someone proclaims convictions based on absolute moral truth, something is very wrong. ironically, Professor Kimball does not seem to notice that his own conviction falls under his definition of an evil. Without absolute standards of right and wrong, there is no reference point by which to judge whether something is evil. therefore, since Kimball allows that something may be evil, he admits to an absolute standard. that is the nature of much humanistic thinking. it always comes back on itself. left-leaning folks often attack people of faith for a commitment to absolutes. yet while theyre busily attacking Christiansunder the banner of tolerance and moral relativism free-thinking humanists are forcing their new absolutes on everyone. at probe.org, rick Wade reviews the book The New Absolutes by William Watkins. Wade explains how new absolutes compete with the old ones: though these new beliefs might not be absolutes in a
2

B rannon howse

strict, philosophical sense, they function as absolutes in contemporary society. according to Watkins, the old absolute was: human life from conception to natural death is sacred and worthy of protection. the new absolute is: human life, which begins and ends when certain individuals or groups decide it does, is valuable as long as it is wanted. two issues that bring this new belief to the fore are abortion and physician-assisted suicide. few practices are as fiercely opposed or defended as abortion. opponents say abortion is morally wrong for all people. Proponents say it is a matter of individual choice. Physician-assisted suicide draws similar responses . . .they think of it as a right not to be tampered with. it is rooted, they say, in a Constitutional right to privacy. in claiming this right, however, any foundation in relativistic thinking must be abandoned. for the very right proponents claim is itself an absolute. they think the right of individuals to decide for themselves should be observed by everyone else. When they say it is wrong for pro-lifers to try to press their beliefs on others, they are stating an absolute. if they say that the value of human life is a matter of its quality rather than of intrinsic worth, they are stating another absolute. Wade further explains how these new unquestionable ideas have changed religious freedom in america: it used to be held that religion is the backbone of american culture, providing the moral
22

The New Absolutes

and spiritual light needed for public and private life. But now: religion is the bane of public life, so for the public good it should be banned from the public square. We have been told over and over the separation of church and state requires that the government not be involved with religious matters in any way. religion and public policy should be kept separate. the hypocrisy of the new absolutism is seen most clearly in political correctness. to be politically correct is to be in line with certain idealsabortion rights, multiculturalism, feminism, homosexual rights. to say or do anything which goes against these is politically incorrect.2 and thinking that way, PC proponents believe, is absolutely wrong. do you see the problem here? the argument that there are no absolutes is itself a statement of an absolute truth. it doesnt take much reflection to recognize that the line of reasoning cannot be true: if there are no absolutes, a statement claiming there are no absolutes is itself an absolute statement. so if the statement is true that there are no absolutes, then the statement cant be true. Whew! there simply is no way to conclude that we live in a world of no absolutes. When you hear such contradictory statements you can be confident in pointing out the inconsistency. you can even use it as an opportunity to (kindly) shine light on the caved-in foundation on which the false worldview of no absolutes is built. that way, you can help your relative-minded friends keep from their own worst fear: that they might hold to an absolute standard of some sort and bewellevil.

23

the consequences of reJecting truth

uppose on the first day of physics class, your professor announced an assignment that you must explain what makes water flow downhill, but he also warned that he does not believe in gravity so you are not allowed to consider the possibility of gravity or any such force in your explanation. how close do you think you could come to explaining the truth about why water acts the way it does? no matter how sophisticated your reverse intransigence theory of Watershed may sound or how convincing your proof of the inarticulate undulation of liquids may be, you would neverever!arrive at the correct explanation for the flow of water. But guess what? thats exactly how sensible it is to think the world can be explainedits design, complexity, origin, moral standards, or anything elsewithout at least allowing for the possibility that a supreme being (e.g., God) is the one behind it all. God is truth, and those that reject truth face two fairly dismal prospects. theres a spicy passage in romans :20-22 that explains: for since the creation of the world his invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, because, although they knew God, they did not glorify him as God, nor were thankful, but became
24

T h e Consequences of Rejecting Tr uth

futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools the dismal eternal prospect is this: When judgment day comes, there will be no excuse for not having known God. the second consequence is more immediate: no matter how intellectually elite or culturally sophisticated the proponent of a nonGod belief system may sound, people who reject God will become foolishtheyll look stupid. the Greek word rendered fools, literally means to become stupid, worthless or purposeless. With this in mind, perhaps you can better understand why far-left thinkersprofessorial, student, or otherwisesometimes sound so crazy. they cannot help but believe illogical thingsabout origins, social issues, moral values, or philosophybecause their prideful rejection of God has insulated them from considering the truth. as a result, God allows them the freedom to believe what is false and to go through the mental contortions necessary to create a system of thought that ignores him. the consequences of this wrong-headed thinking play out in destructive behaviors as well. the battle over same-sex marriage is a perfect example of what happens when a culture, society, and nation reject truth. as unnatural as it is for a man and man or woman and woman to engage in sexual activity with each other, the rejection of truth causes people to believe their perversions are natural, acceptable, and worthy to be condoned by society. the romans explanation continues in :26-27: for this reason God gave them up to vile passions. for even their women exchanged the natural use for what is
25

B rannon howse

against nature. likewise also men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due. if you dont worship God by living for him, serving him, obeying him, being in submission to him, then that which you do serve or upon which you base your thoughts, actions, beliefs, and passions become your warped, unreasonable god. the truth of God is an all-encompassing reality, not to be slotted into one or two philosophical schools of thought. it affects everything. People are creatures of God and find true fulfillment only in worshiping and obediently serving God the Creator.3 as long as people leave God out of the equation, they must explain the world in naturalistic, humanist terms. Whatever reasons they come up with for our surroundings will make as much sense as saying that a painting painted itself, a symphony came about at random, or water holds completely within itself the propensity to move downhill. so dont be surprisedor intimidatedby explanations for our world that are made to sound sophisticated and intellectual though convoluted and confused. if a rationalization sounds like it doesnt make sense, it probably doesnt. and theres no reason you have to be one of the fools who believes it.

26

The reAl AmericA

so You think You live in a DemocracY?

Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself.4 A simple democracy is the devils own government.5 hese are hardly the sentiments most americans today would expect from the pens of our founding fathers. yet the men who established our great nation understood a critical facet of political philosophy that is all but lost on 2st century americans. they did not set out to establish a democracy but, rather, a constitutional republic. and we should be grateful. living in a time when debating governmental systems was fashionable among intellectuals, the founders had a wide menu of forms to choose from. they chose a system of government built on a standard that is unchanging even ifand particularly if!the majority population deviates from the standard. these days, most people believe america is and was a democracy and that democracy represents the highest ideal of liberty. But the founders labored to create a system that wouldnt cave in to the baser instincts of its citizens, the self-serving potential in its leaders, and the boundless possibilities in a society for domination of the few by the many. We pledge allegiance to our flag and to the republic for which it stands, but many of us do not know the important and clear
28

S o Yo u Think You Live in a Democracy?

distinctions between a democracy and a constitutional republic. a democracy is what the late Christian philosopher francis schaeffer called the dictatorship of the 5%. the u.s. government defines democracy: a government of the masses. authority derived through mass meeting or any other form of direct expression. results in mobocracy [mob rule].6 the framers of the u.s. Constitution so feared the dangers of democracy they included a provision in the Constitution requiring each state maintain a republican form of government (article iv, section 4 of the u.s. Constitution). in addition, the founders warned about the perils: noah Webster said, a pure democracy is generally a very bad government. it is often the most tyrannical government on earth.7 John Witherspoon wrote, Pure democracy cannot subsist long nor be carried far into the departments of stateit is very subject to caprice and the madness of popular rage.8 if, then, a democracy is so menacing to social well being, what is it that makes a constitutional republic a solid base for society? turning again to an official description of a republic, we find: authority is derived through the election by the people of public officials best fitted to represent them.avoids the dangerous extreme of either tyranny or mobocracy.
29

B rannon howse

results in statesmanship, liberty, reason, justice, contentment, and progress 9 noah Webster explained what the fixed principles of this republic must be: [o]ur citizens should early understand that the genuine source of correct republican principals is the Bible, particularly the new testament, or the Christian religion.20 the founders chose a constitutional republic because they understood that, over time, people will naturally choose to do wrong. the Bible tells us clearly that every way of a man is right in his own eyes (Proverbs 2:2), that the heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked (Jeremiah 7:9), and that evil men and seducers shall become worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived (2 timothy 3:3). rufus King, signer of the Constitution, reflected this understanding: [t]helaw established by the Creatorextends over the whole globe, is everywhere and at all times binding upon mankind[t]his is the law of God by which he makes his way known to man and is paramount to all human control.2 in his book, Original Intent, historian david Barton points out: the founders understood that Biblical values formed the basis of the republic and that the republic would be destroyed if the peoples knowledge of those values should ever be lostunderstanding the foundation of the american republic is a vital key toward protecting it. therefore, in analyzing public policy remember to ask, is this act consistent with our form of government? and support or oppose the policy on that basis.22
30

S o Yo u Think You Live in a Democracy?

Maintaining a republic is hard work and requires the election of individuals that understand the unique nature and foundation of our government. if we are to preserve this heritage, we must elect men and women that understand Gods instructions on how we are to live. so regardless of where schooling takes you, find a way to voteabsentee ballot or a trip home during voting season. the republic you save may be your own.

3

The WorldvieW connecTion To PoverTy

For you have the poor with you always, and whenever you wish you may do them good... (Mark 14:7) esus offers matter-of-factly that poor people will always be around, and his acceptance of this reality can make us feel uncomfortablelargely because poverty brings us face-to-face with our own sinful natures. dr. theodore dalrymple, author of Life at the Bottom: The Worldview that Makes the Underclass, is a psychiatrist who has spent years treating the indigent in england. dalrymple believes we use the term poor flippantly to describe people who really are not poor in the sense of having nothing, being on the verge of starvation, or dying from exposure to the elements. he opens his book by explaining: a specter is haunting the Western world: the underclass. this underclass is not poor, at least by the standards that have prevailed throughout the great majority of human history. it exists, to a varying degree, in all Western societies. like every other social class, it has benefited enormously from the vast general increase in wealth of the past hundred years. in certain respects, indeed, it enjoys amenities and comforts that would have made a roman emperor or an absolute monarch gasp.23

32

T h e Worldview Connection to Poverty

so why is the underclass so dismal? dr. dalrymple lays the problem at the feet of a warped worldview: Patterns of behavior emerge in the case of the underclass, almost entirely self-destructive ones. day after day i hear of the same violence, the same neglect and abuse of children, the same broken relationships, the same victimization by crime, the same nihilism, the same dumb despair. Welfare states have existed for substantial periods of time without the development of a modern underclass: an added ingredient is obviously necessary. this ingredient is to be found in the realm of ideas.everyone has a Weltanschauung, a worldview, whether he knows it or not. it is the ideas my patients have that fascinateand, to be honest, appallme: for they are the source of their misery.24 dalrymple also details exactly where these ideas come from. the humanist worldview of if it feels good do it has ravaged the underclass: in fact, most of the social pathology exhibited by the underclass has its origin in ideas that have filtered down from the intelligentsia.25 intelligentsia is another word for the liberal, humanistic elite of educators and social engineers. their morally relativistic worldview has been propagated among the underclass in many ways, but few are as visible as their sexual promiscuity. and note the source of these actions and attitudesthe humanist Manifestos: Humanist Manifesto I: .the quest for the good life is still the central task for mankind.
33

B rannon howse

Humanist Manifesto II: neither do we wish to prohibit, by law or social sanction, sexual behavior between consenting adults. the many varieties of sexual exploration should not in themselves be considered evil. the underclass reaps tragic consequences by following the worldview of humanists, as described by dr. dalrymple: if anyone wants to see what sexual relations are like, freed of contractual and social obligations, let him look at the chaos of the personal lives of members of the underclass. here the whole gamut of human folly, wickedness, and misery may be perused at leisurein conditions, be it remembered, of unprecedented prosperity. the connection between this loosening and the misery of my patients is so obvious that it requires considerable intellectual sophistication (and dishonesty) to be able to deny it. the climate of moral, cultural, and intellectual relativisma relativism that began as a mere fashionable plaything for intellectualshas been successfully communicated to those least able to resist its devastating practical effects.26 so does a worldview and its associated ideas have consequences? you bet. Big time. Christians should reach out to the underclass but not just with
34

T h e Worldview Connection to Poverty

handouts. hearts must be changed and worldviews revisited by offering a chance for a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. We all have made bad choices in some way and suffer consequences. i am personally thankful for Gods grace, mercy, forgiveness, and compassion in my life, and we honor the lord by being to others what he has been to us. although it may seem that some people dont deserve our help or compassion, it is crucial to remember that God loved us before we loved him, and he showed his love by giving Christ on the cross. if you keep that in mind, you can acknowledge why things are the way they are and still face the poor with the compassion of Jesus.

35

the biblical founDation for free enterprise

If anyone will not work, neither shall he eat. statement like that sounds as though it came from some hard-nosed, oppress-the-poor manual on capitalism, doesnt it? Well, it may be written somewhere in a piece like that, but it is definitely in 2 thessalonians 3:0. americas free enterprise system is based on the Biblical principle of working hard and not being lazy or slothful. in 2 thessalonians 3:6-2 Paul tells Christians to imitate his industrious pattern of working diligently and not relying on others to provide for him. he also warns those that are lazy to get to work! for anyone who does not want to adopt Biblical principles of conduct and character, they will not reap the rewards of a system based on personal responsibility. although any economic system is less than ideal because of the innate sinfulness of those in the society (that means everybody), the free enterprise system provides such great rewards that people are encouraged to do the right thing and apply Biblical principles that help them take care of themselves and others. the genius of free enterprise is that the good side of every persons self-interestthe part that wants to provide well for his or her family and to be of benefit to societyis the same thing that encourages people to work selflessly for others. Without happy customers, for instance, no business lasts very long. People do not want to
36

T h e B i b l ical Foundation for Free Enterprise

shop, consult, partner, or sell stuff with someone they cannot trust. and no one wants second-rate products and services. When i point out that free enterprise rewards self-interest, it is crucial to understand the legitimate distinction between self-interest and selfishness. When people are aware of their best interests and the interests of those for whom they are responsible (usually their family), it is a good thing. even Jesus taught people that one of the two great commandments is to love your neighbor as yourself (Matthew 22:39). so an appropriate level of self-love (self-interest) is a necessary starting point to carry out Jesus instructions on how to treat other people. By contrast, under socialism, everyone is guaranteed an income, and the government taxes its citizens at high levels to fund those who are lazy and to support the lifestyle of the elite ruling class. as a result, there is no incentive to work hard, to take risks, to be an entrepreneur, to invest, to save, or to serve others. historian Kerby anderson addresses some of the benefits of capitalism as well as the arguments non-capitalists make against the free enterprise system: historically, capitalism has had a number of advantages. it has liberated economic potential. it has also provided the foundation for a great deal of political and economic freedom. When government is not controlling markets, then there is economic freedom to be involved in a whole array of entrepreneurial activities.27 Capitalism has brought about unprecedented levels of political freedom because once you limit the role of government in econom37

B rannon howse

ics, you limit the scope of government in other areas. it is no accident that the countries with the greatest political freedom usually have abundant economic freedom as well. Capitalism is a system in which bad people can do the least harm and good people have the freedom to do good works. it functions well if you have moral participants in the system, but it also operates adequately when you have selfish, greedy people, thanks to checks and balances in the structure.28 the Bible includes more than ,700 verses about money. scripture discusses private property, contracts, caring for the poor, laziness, staying out of debt, avoiding greed, working for food, investing for the future, leaving an inheritance to children, bribery, extortion, profit and loss, customer service, and many more capitalistic ideas. you can be confident that your Christian worldview on economics does well to endorse and support free enterprise honesty, hard-work, a good reputation, and the promise of material blessings for following Gods commands are the basis of americas economic structure. it is not by chance that the united statesa country founded on Christian principleshas become the wealthiest nation in the world. Biblical principles work when people do.

38

were americas founDers Deists?

t is stylish among many academicians and left-leaning intellectuals these days to proclaim that americas founders were deistssecular men who occasionally gave lip service to a divine being in order to satisfy a generally ignorant and religiously oriented culture. anyone who wonders whether or not americas founders were godly men in the Biblical sense, however, needs only to spend a little time reading their writings to answer the question. the founding fathers were prolific authors. thousands upon thousands of personal writings, letters, journals, and speeches reveal a far different picture than the liberal revisionist historians want you to know. after reviewing some 5,000 itemsnewspaper articles, pamphlets, books, monographs, etc.written between 760 and 805 by the 55 men who wrote the Constitution, Professors donald s. lutz and Charles s. hyneman published a decisive report in the 984 American Political Science Review. their findings show that the Bible contributed 34 percent of all quotations used by our founding fathers.29 other significant sources for the founders writings include: Baron Charles Montesquieu (8.3%), sir William Blackstone (7.9%), John locke (2.9%), david hume (2.7%), Plutarch (.5%), Beccaria (.5%), trenchard and Gordon (.4%), delolme (.4%), samuel von Pufendorf (.3%), Cicero (.2%), hugo Grotius (0.9%), shakespeare (0.8%), and vattel (0.5%). it is significant to note as well that of these additional citations, sixty percent were quotes from scripture used in the writings cited.
39

B rannon howse

When you add the direct and indirect citations together, you find that nearly three-quarters of all quotations referenced by the founding fathers come from the Bible!30 Many of the founders were leading religious leaders of their day. half of the men who signed the declaration of independence held seminary degrees, and many of them made significant contributions to spreading the Gospel outside of their specifically political work. among the signers of the declaration of independence and/or the u.s. Constitution, for example: Rev. Dr. John Witherspoon was responsible for two american translations of the Bible as well as americas first family Bible; Benjamin Rush not only published the first mass-produced Bible in america, but he also founded americas first Bible society, and the sunday school movement; John Langdon and Charles Cotesworth Pinckney founded the american Bible society; Rufus King was founder of the new york Bible and Common Prayer Book society; James McHenry started the Maryland Bible society; Alexander Hamilton formed the Christian Constitutional society to elect people to office who would support Christianity and the Constitution of the united states;3 John Adams wrote in a letter to thomas Jefferson on June 28, 83, that: the general principles on which the fathers achieved independence werethe general prin40

We re Americas Founders Deists?

ciples of Christianityi will avow that i then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God; Thomas Jefferson in 774, while serving in the virginia assembly, personally introduced a resolution calling for a day of fasting and prayer. later, while serving as the Governor of virginia (779-78), Jefferson decreed a day of: Public and solemn thanksgiving and prayer to the almighty God. John Jay, who was one of the men most responsible for the Constitution (and also the original Chief Justice of the u.s. supreme Court), wrote: Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the dutyas well as the privilege and interestof our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.32 George Washington in his farewell address outlined the vital role that religion and morality should have in our nation: of all the dispositions and habits, which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. in vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars.33 Pay attention, too, to what these men wrote in our founding documents. in the declaration of independence, God is mentioned four times: ) the laws of nature and of natures Godthe laws
4

B rannon howse

of nature references both the natural laws God instilled in man and creation and Gods laws found in the Bible. 2) all men are created equal, they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rightsthe word Creator is a reference to the Creator God. 3) appealing to the supreme Judge of the World for the rectitude of our intentionsthe supreme Judge of the World is God. 4) With a firm reliance on the Protection of divine Providencethis refers to Gods power, wisdom and sovereignty. the founders clearly established a Christian base for our country. if someone wants to argue that we should deviate from the foundation, they are, of course, free (thanks to the american fathers) to do all they can to change what we believe and how we act as a nation. Just be clear with anyone who tries to suggest otherwise that the foundation is undeniably Christian. What someone does with that foundation is their choiceand yours.

42

10

are capital punishment anD militarY action biblical?

he death penalty and waging war are two different aspects of one significant moral issue on which many Christians are divided. While we tend to think of them separatelywe execute an individual for a crime or we go to war against a hostile nationfrom a Biblical standpoint, the two issues are closely related. a few well-meaning Christians are pacifists and do not believe God wants them to participate in the military, since, in case of a war, that would inevitably involve directly or indirectly killing other people. for that reason, the american government allows true pacifists to claim what is called consciousness objector status and avoid military service. likewise, some serious Christians object to the death penalty, no matter what crime has been committed. While these sentiments may seem admirable, it is a Biblical fact that God gives authority to governments to administer justice through capital punishment for murder and other serious crimes. it is also true that God directs the fates of nations through the exercise of judgment and war on those who have committed national evils. Genesis records the story of God using capital punishment to judge a wicked and apostate world. he kills most of the earths population through a mega-flood, saving only noah and his immediate family. later, in a precision strike, God blasts sodom and Gomorrah for rampantly evil lifestyles. in exodus, God drowned Pharaohs army in the red sea to protect the hebrews. yet, never one to play favorites, he later rent
43

B rannon howse

the ground and swallowed some israelites who had been worshiping an idol and engaging in orgies. God allows for killing another human being only in the cases of self-defense and capital punishment. exodus 22:2, for instance, reads: if the thief is found breaking in, and he is struck so that he dies, there shall be no guilt for his bloodshed. and in Genesis 9:6 the responsibility for bringing justice to a victim of murder is given specifically to the assailants fellow human beings: Whoever sheds mans blood, by man his blood shall be shed; for in the image of God he made man. some would argue that Jesus changed the way these things should be handled, but, to show that capital punishment is still appropriate today, lets look at the new testament perspective. romans 3:-4 reads: every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. for there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by Godfor rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil. do you want to have no fear of authority? do what is good and you will have praise from the same; for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil.34 Paul is clear that the government has the God-given right to dispense justice, including capital punishment. and heres where capital punishment and war are linked. in war, government uses
44

A re C a p i t a l P unishment and Military Action Biblical ?

the power of the sword to bring justice to those that have committed capital crimes. in many cases, it also can be considered a form of national self-defense. When President Bush sent troops into afghanistan to capture or destroy terrorists who were involved in killing more than 3,000 americans on september , 200, the president was Biblically justified. the commander-in-chief of the united states has the Biblical and constitutional authority to use the countrys military to defend america. he may kill those who seek to kill us and bring justice to those who have killed innocent people. When President Bush invoked the term a just war to describe the war on terrorism after 9-, his thinking was consistent with a Biblical perspective. the president is given the power of the sword and with it the responsibility to use it Biblically. Justice is part of a Christian worldview, and there are times many times in our fallen worldin which bringing justice, whether to an individual or a nation, requires that we do things wed rather not do. administering justice may not be for the squeamish, but it is for the godly.

45

Science And FAiTh cAn be FriendS

11

EvErythings A reliGiouS iSSue

uring a phone conversation several years ago with a man who was the interim president of a well-known religious organization, this Christian leader told me he believes abortion is a moral and political issue but not a spiritual one. i was so taken aback by his comment that i repeated what he had said just to make sure i had heard him correctly. i had, and thanks to similar comments he made publicly, the acting president was not invited to become the official president of this particular religious association. While this man is someone who should have known better, his belief that abortion is of moral and political concern but is not a spiritual or religious issue is sadly consistent with what many people believe. they perceive a difference of concerns that simply isnt in harmony with the Bibles holistic approach to life. there is no area of human conduct or society that is outside of Gods sphere of interest. therefore, every issue is a religious issue. even atheists who disdain God and his laws have taken a religious position: their statement of faith is that God does not exist. i respect the honesty and intellectual integrity of many humanists who acknowledge the religious implications of the ideas, beliefs, values, and ethics that make up their particular worldview. Many who adopt non-Biblical approaches to various issues, though, are unaware of the foundational worldview upon which their ideas are based. Worse still are those who altogether deny a religious worldview as the foundation of their science, morals, economics, and
48

E verythings a Religious Issue

law. Many times these folks scream that they want a religion-free school system, government, and american culture. But the reality is that they simply want to replace americas founding belief systemwhich has given us the longest running constitutional republic in the history of the worldwith a religious system that has been the failed foundation of the former soviet union, China, Cuba, and north Korea (to name a few). the non-religious worldview liepopularized by liberal media and academiciansmust be uncovered so that their agenda can be thwarted. some who once called themselves religious humanists encourage their readers, followers, peers, and colleagues to stop calling it religious humanism. Why? Because such an admission could cause americas courts to reject the humanists religion, which currently not only enjoys free access to americas schools but also receives federal funding. the current battle to maintain our freedoms will be more readily won if enough americans awaken to this little scheme of claiming religious neutrality while attempting to replace americas foundational religious worldviewembodied in our form of governmentwith the humanist view which maintains that government is the highest authority, not God. human liberties are secure only as long as we recognize a power above government someone to whom individuals as well as government are ultimately accountable. Whether youre studying political science or physical sciences, taking a literature course, running for the student government, or leading a campus Bible study, it is imperative to understand that you are fighting a religious and spiritual worldview battle, regardless of what some may claim. youre part of a much larger culture warin
49

B rannon howse

the courts, schools, state houses, and the u.s. Congress. every issue being hammered out in all those venues is a religious and spiritual issue. so its not a matter of whether the religious or secular version of truth will win out. its a matter of which religious viewGod or no-Godwins.

50

12

blinD science: the humanists alternative to reasonable faith

n the famous scopes trial of 925, the american Civil liberties union defended the teaching of evolution in public schools. true educational freedom, attorney Clarence darrow argued, requires the teaching of both theistic and naturalistic versions of origin. While i dont think for a split second the aClu in 925 was so well-intentioned as to simply want academic freedom for all, i do agree that a well-educated person should understand the arguments for and against the major theories about how we got here. Building on the momentum started by scopes, however, the aClu has fought hard to keep creationism from being taught in americas public schools. With the aid of the national education association and other liberal groups, it has undermined those who seek the true educational freedom of teaching both darwinian evolution and creationism. since the aClu and nea have always been supported by prominent humanists, we should not be shocked by their contempt for the creationist worldview. evolution, as outlined in the Humanist Manifesto I, II and 2000, is a major doctrine of secular humanism. instead of believing in God as the basis for their religion, humanists believe in natural science or naturalism. the reason is supposedly to avoid resting an intellectual foundation on what secularists call blind faith. the Christian faith, however, is anything but blind from an intellectual standpoint. arguments for the God of
5

B rannon howse

the Bible are well-founded. What humanists have substituted for a reasonable faith in a creator God is, rather, blind science. dr. d.G. lindsay describes the intellectual foundation of evolution this way: evolution is a religion that attributes everything to nature. it demands a faith that is totally blind.the evolutionist is blind to the fact that his religion, evolution, violates every known law for its own existence, making atheistic evolution more incredible (miraculous) than the Christian faith.35 in real life, logic applies. if we see a painting, we assume there was a painter. if an airplane flies overhead, theres a pilot. it doesnt matter that we dont see the painter or the pilot. elementary logic tells us they exist. if something looks like it was designeda building, a watch, an airplane, or a cosmoswe are safe to assume it was. not so, however, in the world of blind science. naturalistic humanists believe there is no God, not because that is the logical conclusion but because that is their preference. dont think for a minute that naturalists hold the intellectual high ground. Much to the contrary, they long ago abandoned the heights occupied by deeply committed Christian scientists like Galileo, Copernicus, Pasteur, and newton. the humanist who has faith in evolution does not do so out of compelling intellectual honesty but because the alternative requires accountability to God. anything that calls into question the original presupposition that there is no God is rejected, even if it means having faith in an idea, belief, or theory that is mathematically not possible, and even it if it contradicts bedrock scientific facts such as the laws of physics. their
52

B l i n d S c i e n c e : T h e Humanists Alter native to Reasonable Faith

version of science must blind itself to logical deductions in order to draw the conclusion they prefer. Professor richard lewontin, a geneticist and self-proclaimed Marxist, reveals why the dogmatic humanist continues to accept evolution despite its improbability and the unscientific propositions on which it is built: We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so-stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. it is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow a divine foot in the door.36 so why has materialism become the assumption behind science? is it because it provides the most rational foundation? no. Professor lewontin explains it quite clearly. its because only materialism provides the liberal humanists preferred philosophical base. humanists typically mock as unscientific those who believe in a creator God, even though the science of their worldview is
53

B rannon howse

mathematically impossible, ignores facts, and creates bizarre theories simply to sidestep the logical belief in an intelligent designer. nevertheless, learn well whatever theories are thrown at youits part of a well-rounded education. But be assured that when you keep the faith, youre also remaining true to the most sensible worldview there is.

54

13

evolution: science or philosophY?

n case you hadnt noticed, evolutionists generally say that if, regarding the origin of life, you believe in something other than evolutionintelligent design or creationism, for exampleyou do not believe in science. But lets be clear about this for a moment and return to an unmanipulated definition of the term science. When people compare scientific studies of the last several centuries with those of more ancient times, the term modern science is the common way to refer to what we do now. and scientists rightly pride themselves on the scientific method which has brought about every technological revolution from airplanes to microchips. the bedrock of this method is observation and repeatable experimentation. that means no study of originsnaturalistic, theistic, evolutionary, or creationisticis science in this way. since none of us observed the creation of the world and we cannot repeat that event, the clash over the question of origins is not a scientific debate but a philosophical one. Creationists, evolutionists, theologians, and humanists all have the same evidence, and the data is more like the pieces an archaeologist assembles from an excavation than like the observations in a chemistry lab. in other words, one view, naturalistic evolution, is just as scientific (or not) as the other, intelligent design. the central issue is the grid through which each interprets the information. since evolutionists have no evidence for macro-evolution, or vertical change, from one species into another, they liken evolution
55

B rannon howse

to horizontal change, an observable phenomenon called microevolution. Micro-evolution does happen, but it is not one species changing into another. it is the changing of characteristics within a given species. an everyday dog breeding program can change the size of a dog, but this is horizontal, not vertical, change. the breeder starts with a dog and ends up with a doga bigger, smarter, prettier dog, perhaps, but a dog, nonethelessnot a small horse. despite what they will tell you, evolutionists have no unassailable proofnot one iota, none, nadathat any species any time in history, anywhere on the globe has ever changed into another species. thats why they argue the case for macro-evolution from the observation of micro-evolution, minimizing the chasm that separates the two. But to offer another analogy: the gulf is less like a hop across the brook in a city park than it is like trying to step across the wide spot in the Grand Canyon. someone who says macro-evolution happened because weve observed micro-evolution is like suggesting that matter transfer (Beam me up, scottie) should be an everyday experience since we all have television sets in our living rooms. so i say again, the naturalistic evolution vs. intelligent design debate is really a philosophical one. there is God, or there is not. an all-knowing intelligent designer created everything, or it did not. the implications of a supernatural being creating the world with order and design is diametrically opposed to the worldview of humanists who declare they are their only god and the captain of their own souls and destinies. evolutionists have excluded the possible answerand it is a possible answerthat an intelligent designer made the world. such a ridiculous ban is equal to a teacher telling a class of students there
56

E v o lution: Science or Philosophy?

is no such thing as air and then asking them why they breathe. Because the teacher has eliminated the central point of the explanation, whatever response the students come up with can only be an inaccurate interpretation of the respiratory process. the presupposition guarantees students wont discover respiration and, worse in the case of the evolution debate, that they wont find God anywhere they look. this hope of keeping people away from God is a powerful toxin in the stream of rational thought. evidence not supporting, evolutionists hold on to darwins theory even though it pre-dates the discovery of the cells complexity and dna, even though no fossils demonstrate transitional forms, and even though their own reckonings set an age of the universe that is only a nano-fraction of the length of time their process would take even using the most conservative mathematical models available. the antiquated theory of evolution seems to have the same appeal to its adherents as the flat-earth theory held centuries ago. ironically, it is not the religious community these days who are the modern flat-earthers. apparently, were the ones who can draw the rational conclusions from what we see, even if the status quo tries to squash the evidence.

57

14

the greater the Design, the greater the Designer

ouve probably been designing and building paper airplanes since you were a child. Perhaps by now youre even winning flight contests down your dorm hallway. all the same, if you were to compare yourself to a designer of a jumbo jet, who is the greater airplane engineer? the one whose design is more sophisticated, more technologically wondrous, and immeasurably more functional wins that contest, right? despite the straightforward logic about airplane builders, when naturalists look at the world in which we live they choose not to acknowledge a designer. the inconceivable order and complexity of the universe loudly proclaim that someone is behind all this, but the implication is vigorously ignored. stephen Meyer, historian and philosopher of science, has said, We have not yet encountered any good in-principle reason to exclude design from science.37 similarly, George Gallup, the world-famed statistician, claimed, i could prove God statistically! take the human body alone. the chance that all the functions of the individual would just happen is a statistical monstrosity!38 With that in mind, lets look at just a few examples of how complex and orderly many things are that we take for granted. your brain weighs a little over three pounds and contains 5 billion neurons, each a living unit within itself. that glob of gray matter is wired with more than 00 thousand billion (04) electri58

T h e G re a t e r the Design, the Greater the Designer

cal synapsesmore than all the connections in all the appliances in the world.39 the human eye contains 30,000 light sensitive rods and cones which generate photochemical reactions that convert light into electrical impulses. these transmit a staggering one billion impulses to the brain every second. the eye can make over 00,000 separate motions and, when confronted with darkness, can increase its ability to see 00,000 times. it is equipped with automatic aiming, selffocusing, and after-hours maintenance. the ear is as much an acoustic marvel as the eye is an optic one. it can distinguish 5,000 different tones (imagine a piano with that many keys!). and not only does the ear perform the function of hearing, it controls your bodys equilibrium as well. each one of us started as a single fertilized cell, and in the nucleus of that little dot was the genetic programming for every facet of your beingorgans, nerves, hair, skin color, and even personality traits. these were hardwired into miniscule specks called chromosomes. according to ashley Montague in Human Heredity, the space occupied by all this data is unbelievably small. if the blueprints for every human being on earth were gathered together, they would fit into the space of an aspirin tablet.40 Microsoft founder Bill Gates has noted, dna is like a computer program, but far, far more advanced than any software weve ever created.4 every adult carries about 00 billion miles of dna strandsa distance greater than the diameter of the solar system. each cell has four to six feet of the dna ladder, and every adult human has 00 trillion cells.42 the cell in which this information storehouse resides is itself a micro-universe, containing trillions of molecules, the build59

B rannon howse

ing blocks for countless intricate structures that perform complex biochemical reactions with precision. d.G. lindsay expands on the sophistication of the cell: a single cell exhibits the same degree of complexity as a city with all of its systems of operation, communication and government. Within each tiny cell are power plants that generate energy; factories that produce foods essential for life; complex transportation systems that guide specific chemicals from one location to another; barricades that control the import and export of materials across the cell. every minute structure within a cell has a specific function. Without the full complement of all these systems, the cell cannot function. in fact, even the slightest malfunction within the cell can bring about the immediate termination of its existence. how unbelievable that such awesome complexity could have arisen by chance!43 in his book Darwins Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution, biochemist Michael Behe argues that many biological systems are irreducibly complex. if any element were missing because the needed part had not yet evolved, the entire system would not work. so if what we see is not formed by natural processes, the only alternative is a supernatural means by a transcendent designer God. that being the case, ill let Michael Behes bold analysis leave you with the inescapable conclusion: the result of these cumulative efforts to investigate the cellto investigate life at the molecular levelis a loud,
60

T h e G re a t e r the Design, the Greater the Designer

clear, piercing cry of design! the result is so unambiguous and so significant that it must be ranked as one of the greatest achievements in the history of science.44

6

15

evolution anti-science
eve already pointed out that teaching evolution belongs more in the philosophy department than the sciences, but even that doesnt take the problem about evolutionary thinking quite far enough. While i explained earlier some of the reasons evolution is not science in the way required by the modern scientific method (see #3evolution: science or Philosophy?), there also are reasons why naturalistic evolution is not only unscientific but actually anti-scientific. the naturalist has to reject known laws of science to believe in evolution and our uncaused cosmos. the first law of thermodynamics (also known as the law of energy Conservation), for example, holds that the total amount of energy in the universe remains constant. although energy can change form, it is not created or destroyed, and since natural processes cannot create energy, something outside of the universe had to create energy. similarly, the second law of thermodynamics (the law of energy decay or law of entropy) asserts that the amount of energy available for useful work is being depleted. like a wind-up watch, the universe is running downwhich means there had to have been a point at which it was wound up. the second law also says things move from a state of order to disorder. evolution, on the other hand, claims the world has gone from disorder to complex order. that evolutionists believe some primordial soup gave rise to life that became more and more organized to the point of creating the human eye, ears, brain, or dna is not consistent with the second law.
62

Evolution Anti-Science

another element of evolutionary anti-science lies in the evolutionists disregard for what we learn from fossils. the fossil record does not document a single transitional life form that would be needed to substantiate the theory that one species evolved into another. darwin himself wondered about this: Why is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this is the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against the theory.45 since fossil exploration was relatively new in his day, Charles darwin expected that countless transitional fossils eventually would be found, but after nearly 50 years of searching, not one credible bone has been found that reveals some species changing into another. dr. Colin Patterson, an evolutionist with the British Museum of natural history, wrote a book about evolution but did not include any pictures of transitional fossils. When a reader wrote him to ask why this was the case, Patterson replied: i fully agree with your comments on the lack of direct illustration of evolutionary transitions in my book. if i knew of any, fossil or living, i would certainly have included them. you suggest that an artist should be used to visualize such transformations, but where would he get the information from? i could not, honestly, provide it, and if i were to leave it to artistic license, would that not mislead the reader?...as a paleontologist myself, i am much occupied with the philosophical problems of identifying ancestral forms in the fossil record. you say that
63

B rannon howse

i should at least show a photo of the fossil from which each type of organism was derived. i will lay it on the linethere is not one such fossil for which one could make a watertight argument.46 stephen Jay Gould is perhaps one of the most well known evolutionists today, and even he wonders: the absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages between major transitions in organic design, indeed our inability, even in our imagination, to construct functional intermediates in many cases, has been a persistent and nagging problem for gradualistic accounts of evolution.47 so if the fossil record does not show transitional forms or any transformation of one species into another, then what does it reveal? historian oswald spengler has the answer: We find perfectly stable and unaltered forms preserving through long ages, forms that have not developed themselves on the fitness principle, but appear suddenly and at once in their definitive shape; that do not thereafter evolve towards better adaptation, but become rarer and finally disappear48 Christians have been derided for believing in a God that created the world, yet now evolutionists stumble all over their theories, changing positions, and fearing how further scientific discoveries may cause them to zig and zag to miss another fatal blow. the ques64

Evolution Anti-Science

tion becomes: how many fatal blows will it take? like a cat whose nine lives are running out, evolution is, bit by bit, discovery by discovery, coming to a point of total demise. few premier scientists any longer believe in darwins evolution. eventually only the terminally stubborn will accept evolutionwhich is all the more amusing because a few years ago it was the evolutionist that claimed only stupid people would believe in creation. as science historian henry Margenau notes, if you take the top notch scientists, you find very few atheists among them.49

65

TolerAnce, humAniSm, And oTher PhiloSoPhicAl ProblemS

16

the humanist worlDview breeDs persecution

n the early 990s, i met two education leaders from the former soviet union. they had come to the united states to ask american Christian schools international, americas largest association of Christian schools, to train russian teachers and students in Biblical worldview principles. as a result, aCsi sent hundreds of Christian school teachers and administrators, along with thousands of Christian worldview books, to the former soviet union. along with many friends and colleagues, i told the one-time soviet officials that they now had more religious freedom in their schools than we do in america. after hearing the facts about our situation, they were not only shocked but fearful for our country. they desperately wanted us to understand that america is following the path of secular humanism that had led their nation into godlessness and communism. an element of their fear was legitimately self-serving. these russian leaders were afraid that, if america does not reject secular humanism and socialist ideals, the former soviets would no longer have a strong, free, and virtuous america to assist them in the years to come as they seek to secure their freedoms and rebuild from the destruction of atheism and communism. in sharing with our russian friends how the secular humanist worldview is taught in our schools and how religious liberties are being stripped from american culture, we explained that many years ago humanistic liberals strategized about how to inculcate
68

T h e H u manist Worldview Breeds Persecution

their humanist worldview into the hearts and minds of as many americans as possible. some of the stories i have compiledtoo many to detail in this bookremind me of the religious persecution that was so common in the former u.s.s.r. Just to give you a flavor of how humanism inevitably brings about the persecution of anyone who does not acquiesce to that viewpoint, let me highlight one especially significant case in point. in 997, federal judge ira deMent issued a sweeping order that eliminated virtually all voluntary religious speech in alabamas public schools. Judge deMents detailed dictate was repressive, to say the least. it barred student-led prayer in almost any form and dictated that student commencement speakers could make only a brief reference to God and could not ask any audience member to join in. the judge threatened students and school officials with disciplinary action if they violated his order. in addition, Judge deMent specifically banned prayer in a time of national emergency. the judge added the final draconian touch by establishing undercover school monitors in the deKalb County school system to check for violations. incensed, then-governor of alabama fob James called the monitors secret police. this 997 decision was one of many rulings that laid the foundation for a u.s. supreme Court decree in the year 2000 that stripped americas public school students of the freedom of religion and freedom of speech. We will look at that case later, but we first need to see the consequences as america goes from being one nation under God to one nation outlawing God. there is a direct correlation between americas academic decline and the humanists successful expulsion of God from americas schools. While the united states once had an educational system
69

B rannon howse

that was the envy of the world, today we consistently rank toward the bottom of all industrialized nations in academic scores. recognizing the problem as early as 98, President reagan ordered a study of americas educational system. released two years later, the report, entitled A Nation at Risk, stated: our nation is at riskWe report to the american people thatthe educational foundations of our society are presently being eroded by a rising tide of mediocrity that threatens our very future as a nation and a peopleif an unfriendly foreign power had attempted to impose on america the mediocre educational performance that exists today, we might well have viewed it as an act of war. as it stands, we have allowed this to happen to ourselves.our society and its educational institutions seem to have lost sight of the basic purposes of schooling, and of the high expectations and disciplined effort needed to attain them. the trend has continued to the present, despite many governmental attempts at education reform. america has compromised and redefined the original goal of inculcating religion, morality, and knowledge into our nations studentswith devastating consequences. to keep your head above this rising tide, youll need to make sure you maintain strong connections with church, Christian friends, and others who can support your Biblical worldview.

70

17

americas stuDents DenieD freeDom of religion!

ometimes its hard to picture how events that seem like ancient history can be relevant, but let me explain a few things that began changing your life even before you were born. in the 962 case Engel v. Vitale, the u. s. supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional for students in new york public schools to recite a prayer that was a long-standing tradition: almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon thee, and we beg thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers and our Country.50 it didnt matter that the prayer was voluntary or that it did not favor any particular denomination or religion. the judges simply did not want prayer in the schools. as with the non-coercive prayer in new york, the next religious activity to come under attack was voluntary reading of the Bible. the 963 u.s. supreme Court case, School District of Abington Township v. Schempp, involved a Pennsylvania policy which allowed: each schoolshall be opened by the reading, without comment, of a chapter in the holy BibleParticipation in the opening exercisesis voluntary. the student reading the verses from the Bible may select the passages and read from any version he chooses.5 edward schempp sued the school district of Pennsylvania to save his children from voluntary reading of the Bible, even though Mr. schempps own daughter had once offered to read scripture for
7

B rannon howse

her fellow students. the court threw out the Pennsylvania policy. next came the ten Commandments. in a Kentucky case, Stone v. Graham, that reached the u.s. supreme Court in 980, the court ruled against a state law that had required the ten Commandments be posted in every classroom. at the bottom of each ten Commandments poster was an explanation of the importance of the decalogue: the secular application of the ten Commandments is clearly seen in its adoption as the fundamental legal code of Western Civilization and the Common law of the united states of america.52 down came the ten Commandments. But ive saved for last the most appalling example of obliterating student freedoms. What would you think if i told you a judge in Galveston ruled that any student mentioning the name of Jesus in a graduation prayer would be sentenced to a six-month jail term? you might wonder if i were talking about Galveston, texas or perhaps a Galveston, China. the parents and community leaders probably wondered if theyd been transported across the Pacific ocean when they heard this pronouncement from Judge samuel B. Kent of the u.s. district Court for the southern district of texas on May 5, 995: the court will allow that prayer to be a typical non-denominational prayer, which can refer to God or the almighty or that sort of thing. the prayer may not refer to a specific deity by name, whether it be Jesus, Buddha, Mohammed, the great god sheba, or anyone else. and make no mistake, the court is going to have a united states marshal in attendance at the graduation. if any student offends this court, that student will be summarily arrested and will face up to six months incarceration in the
72

A m e r i c a s Students Denied Freedom of Religion!

Galveston County Jail for contempt of Court. anyone who thinks im kidding about this order . . . [or] expressing any weakness or lack of resolve in that spirit of compromise would better think again. this same judgeobviously suffering from delusions of grandeurdid not stop with oppressing students rights to free speech at school. he went on to limit the rights of school teachers and administrators to attend, organize, or promote a private baccalaureate service: now the Court is going to further order that a baccalaureate service on or about May 2, 995not occur during school hours or as part of normal school functions. thankfully, five days after his ruling, Judge Kenthoping to save face in the light of public outrage at his Gestapo tacticsruled that graduates could use the name of Jesus but not in a proselytizing manner. But what if no one had objected to Judge Kents blatantly unconstitutional order? heres where using your Biblical foundation and standing up against non-Christian worldviews comes in. there are still students, teachers, and community leaders who have the courage to stand against high-minded government officials who try to rob their fellow americans of constitutional rights. so allow me to say it plainly: you need to be one of them. remember: the first amendment says Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion. a student invoking the name of Jesus Christ or God in a graduation speech is not Congress. You are not Congress. no student should lose rights to freedom of speech and religion when he or she walks through the school door.
73

18

is postmoDernism the smart persons waY to think?

ull out your Websters Collegiate Dictionary and youll find this definition of the word knowledge: Knowledge is the circumstance or condition of apprehending truth or fact through reasoning.53 as i pointed out earlier, knowledge is the discovery of truth. this implies that unless there is something true, nothing is reasonable, logical, consistent, understandable, probable, believable, or applicable. Without truth, there is no such thing as knowledge because there is nothing to be apprehended or understoodby reasoning or any other way. enter postmodernism. Postmodernism is the belief that truth is created by man. its made up. the search for truth is an esoteric exercise dreamed up by intellectual elitists in order to justify whatever morals, perversions, or lifestyles they choose. nothing is based on any absolute reference points. But consider the implications for the definition of knowledge. unless someone believes in truth and is committed to the existence of truth for all time, places, and people, the discoveries of mankind do not produce knowledge but confusion. as long ago as ancient Greece, folks knew there was some basis for knowing things. the Greek ideal of knowledge was a contemplation of reality in its static and abiding being.54 there is either fixed truth, or there is no truth at all. no one can
74

I s P o s t m o d e r nism the Smart Persons Way to Think?

have it both ways. the fact that you are reading this sentence is an example of truth at work. letters are arranged to form words. the words create a sentence. each sentence has a meaning and can be understood based on the fixed and commonly agreed upon meanings of words from which it is composed. Words are the building blocks of the truth in our language. Without those building blocks, neither english nor any other dialect makes any sense whatsoever. even many non-Christians recognize that without absolute truth their thinking is futile. Cornelius van til says it this way: there are those, of course, who deny that they need any form of authority. they are popular atheists and agnostics. such men say that they must be shown by reason whatever they are to accept as true. But the great thinkers among non-Christian men have taken no such position. they know that they cannot cover the whole area of reality with their knowledge.55 for postmodernists to claim there is no such thing as truth is self-defeating because to say there is no absolute truth is itself an absolute statement. i said it before: if there is no absolute truth, then the absolute statement that there is no absolute truth is false. it is self-refuting. no matter how you slice it, truth must exist. hopefully, you realize that Christianity is in no way hostile to reason. throughout history, Christians have used reason coupled with Biblical revelation to explain the great truths about God and his universe. Christians believe in God and use their reason under God.56 Without a belief in absolute truth, a persons knowledge is extremely limited. finding something you dont believe exists is hard,
75

B rannon howse

because if you dont believe its there, you wont look for or recognize it even if you stumble upon it. the word know or knowledge occurs more than ,600 times in the Bible,57 and it is not by coincidence that one of the three pillars of americas educational systemaccording to our founderswas to be the pursuit of knowledge. these are some of the scripture verses americas founders considered important (all quotes from the nasB): My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge. (hosea 4:6) how long, o naive ones, will you love being simpleminded? and scoffers delight themselves in scoffing and fools hate knowledge? (Proverbs :22) the fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge; fools despise wisdom and instruction. (Proverbs :7) take my instruction and not silver, and knowledge rather than choicest gold. (Proverbs 8:0) a wise man is strong, and a man of knowledge increases power. (Proverbs 24:5) the type of knowledge discussed in the Bible is likened to obedience, and its opposite is not simply ignorance but rebellious, willful turning away from God.58 have you ever thought of it that way? the opposite of knowledge is rebellion. not believing in knowledge is rebelling not only against God but against the natural, logical way the world operates. talk about a lose-lose proposition! if you really are smart, you wont go there.

76

19

can You legislate moralitY?

f it hasnt happened to you yet, it will. youre debating a controversial issue of some sort when suddenly your opponent bellows you cant legislate morality! and stabs you with a how-couldyou-be-so-stupid-as-to-think-otherwise look that is supposed to end the conversationcase closed. But i say, ha. not hardly. and i hope you will, too. unfortunately, many Christians buy the silly cant-legislate-morality line without thinking it through. usually, it is thrown out by someone who knows you have moral convictions, and he or she doesnt like that. the reality is that with laws on whatever issue abortion, same-sex marriage, religion in schoolssomeones morality is getting legislated. those of us who desire to see partial birth abortion outlawed are attempting to bring our Biblical morality to bear. those who support legislation that allows it want to maintain a morality based on a relativistic, humanist worldview. the question is not if morality can be legislated but whose morality will be legislated. laws always reflect someones view of right and wrong. laws against murder, rape, stealing, child pornography, and kidnapping all reinforce the belief that murder, rape, stealing, child pornography, and kidnapping are immoral and shouldnt be allowed. sometimes people counter with arguments such as Just because you legislate morality does not mean people will obey the law.
77

B rannon howse

Well, yeah, but just because not everyone obeys the law, thou shalt not murder, does not mean we eliminate laws against murder. another retort youll hear is you cant change the heart with legislation. Maybe. Maybe not. Changing of the heart is not the foremost goal of legislation. the primary goal is to create a stable, secure society. that means setting up a system to help keep peoples baser instinctslust, greed, hatredin check. if nothing else, we need to prevent people from engaging in criminal acts because theyre afraid of punishment. there is evidence, however, that over time, laws can change the heart. take slavery, for instance. at the time our nation outlawed slavery, many people thought they should be allowed to enslave other individuals based on the color of their skin. in 2st century america, though, you will be hard pressed to find anyone who still thinks slavery is morally acceptable. over time, the law against slavery has caused people to change the way they think and feel about the issue. this changing of the heart business, by the way, can go against us as well. in 960, few americans would have agreed that abortion is morally acceptable. But because the highest court in the land has ruled that the killing of an unborn child is legal, many americans have come to view abortion as morally acceptable. the supreme Courts position has had a powerful, negative impact on the morals of thousands of americans. you see, most people really do equate the law with what is right. they assume legislation is moral. in his outstanding book, Why We Cant Stay Silent, tom Minnery of focus on the family writes: When people say, you cant legislate morality, they probably mean there is a limit to how effective laws are
78

Can You Legislate Morality?

in bringing people to act rightly.admittedly, we cant force anyone to acknowledge God or willingly obey him, but like it or not, they either have to accept Gods ideas about whats right and wrong or pay the consequences. Weve just said that Biblical morality: no lying, cheating, stealing, murdering, et cetera is good for society, and we should be pleased that our forefathers had enough sense to translate these godly principles into law. Why did the founders decide americas laws were to be based on Gods laws? Because they believed Gods moral law was written on the hearts of all people. in his book, Original Intent, david Barton points out: the founders believed the Bible to be the perfect example of moral legislation and the source of what they called, the moral law. the Bible offers numerous verses that relate morality to government. scripture calls all nations to promote righteousnessright living and justice: righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people (Proverbs 4:34). By the blessing of the upright the city is exalted, but it is overthrown by the mouth of the wicked (Proverbs :). When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice; but when a wicked man rules, the people groan (Proverbs 29:2).

79

B rannon howse

Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be filled (Matthew 5:6). so: yes, you can legislate morality, and somebody always will. despite the beliefs of many misguided individuals, Christians must be involved in the process if we hope to promote righteousness and be light in a dark world. if laws are going to reflect someones morality no matter what, then it might as well be Gods.

80

20

if there is no goD
Everything happens by chance or by mistake (mutation); There is no right or wrong; Only the natural world exists; People do not have eternal souls, and there is no life after death. and i should be concerned about these things because you might wonder. Big deal? so what? What ever! ick the response du jour for whichever unconcerned attitude you or someone you know may be tempted to feel. then take a minute, and think again. Because more people have died prematurely during the past 00 years due to these ideas than from all diseases, natural disasters, and non-manmade causes combined. the no-God, humanistic worldview allowed hitler, stalin, and Mussolini to justify the murder of millions upon millions of people. More recently, you could add Pol Pot, ho Chi Minh, and Mao tse tung, but even that would not exhaust the portfolio of unrestrained destroyers of humanity. if there is no God to which man is accountable, then the only standard is survival of the fittest or might makes right. yale university history professor donald Kagan acknowledges
8

B rannon howse

the consequences of a worldview that says God is dead. often called nihilism, this philosophy is based primarily on the writings of fredrick nietzsche. such thinking leaves a society, culture, or country at the mercy of whomever has won the latest coup, revolution, or invasion. But as Kagan helps us see, the problem is that this sort of thinking is not just over there. he warns: [a] vulgar form of nihilism has a remarkable influence in our educational system through our universities. the consequences of the victory of such ideas would be enormous. if both religion and reason are removed, all that remains is will and power, where the only law is that of tooth and claw.59 if government is the highest authorityand all rights are given to people by the governmentthen what the government gives, the government also can take away. on the other hand, if our rights are given to us by a Creator, then they are inalienable rights for all people, all times, and all places, as stated in the declaration of independence. our God-given rights cannot justly be taken from us by government because they did not come from government. to be sure, rights can be infringed upon and violated but not taken away. or under the right circumstances, they can be protected and encouraged. in his 96 inaugural address, President John f. Kennedy proclaimed, the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state but from the hand of God. similarly, President harry truman at an attorney Generals Conference in 959 claimed, if we dont have a proper fundamental
82

If There Is No God

moral background, we will finally end up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state. Bill federer, historian and prolific author, connects an individuals belief to his or her religion, and the actions of the government are influenced by the religion of those in charge: thus it follows, that as long as a person is doing actions, they have thoughts preceding those actionsand that collection of thoughts is that persons system of belief or religion. as long as the government is doing actions, the government has thoughts preceding those actions and that collection of thought is the governments system of belief or religion. so there can never really be a separation of religion and governmentas long as the government is doing actions there are thoughts or beliefs underlying those actions. the aClu is not trying to be religion neutral, but, in fact, it is promoting a religiona non-deity based secular humanism system of belief.60 the 20th Century was the most murderous 00 years in history, and it is due largely to tyrants and dictators who did not acknowledge any authority higher than themselves. hitler killed as many as 6 million Jews and 5 million non-Jews for a total of  million people obliterated during his holocaust. stalin likewise destroyed some 20 million people. our founders believed that as soon as americans cease to believe in God, they will be laying the foundation for a tyrant to take control, stealing our God-given freedoms. the founders also believed
83

B rannon howse

that religion is vital to law, order, the security of liberty, and even good manners. While not desiring to establish a state church, they wrote again and again about the importance of religion. they really understood there to be a God to whom they were accountable. not a bad idea.

84

Sex And morAliTy A GreAT couPle

21

the no-guilt, no-stD sexual freeDom guarantee

mericans revel in the notion of political freedom, and we love to summon the feel of freedom into our personal lives as well. i sometimes feel the most free on a warm day when i roll down my truck window, hang an arm in the wind, head west on the interstate, and breathe in the sweet smells of summer. and as long as i keep my freedom to 70 miles per hour or so, no one else minds a bit. if i ratchet up the speed too much, though, freedom shuts down quickly. Press its limits, and freedom on the road will land you in jail, in the hospital, or in an early grave. no one denies that freedom on our highways must happen within reasonable, healthy constraints. and while the same applies across the board in life, many folks would like to think freedom should be limitless in our personal relationships. it might be titillating to think you should be able to do whatever you want with any girl or guy you choose. the more socially liberal among us make the promise of sex all around! sound great, but the reality is that sex with whomever and whenever is just as suicidaland ultimately un-freeingas driving 25 miles an hour in traffic. the Bible says clearly that we have very real freedom to enjoy sex, but it has to happen within limits thatlike the wind in your hair at 70 mphmake the experience glorious without landing you in a prison of serious trouble. the Bible describes any sexual relationship outside a husband and wife (married to each other) as
86

T h e N o - G u i lt, No-STD Sexual Freedom Guarantee

immoral, one that results in some serious enslavement to consequences you dont want to face. outside of marriage, sexual activity is a prescription for fear, depression, anxiety, hopelessness, hostility, and devastation. not just maybe. the bad stuffemotional, physical, medical, social will happen. Consider the facts below, and tell me if this is how to experience a life of freedom. More than  in 4 americans between the ages of 5 and 55 has a sexually transmitted disease. Chlamydia variously infects 20 to 40% of sexually active groups, including teenagers. in men, chlamydia can cause infertile sperm, although it is treatable with antibiotics. in women, however, acute chlamydia causes pain, fever, and irreversible damage to female organs. the chance of infertility after even just one episode of chlamydia Pid is 25%. With a second infection, the rate rises to 50%, and, in women, treatment with antibiotics is not always successful. as many as 4% of teenagers do not respond and require a hysterectomy. it is devastating for an 8- or 9-year-old girl to realize she will never be able to bear a child.6 a university of California, Berkeley, study reported that 46% of sexually active coeds were infected with human papilloma virus (hPv). another study reported that 38% of the sexually active females between the ages of 3 and 2 were infected.62 hPv is the major cause of venereal warts, which are extremely difficult to treat and may require expensive procedures such as laser surgery. Cancers associated with this virus kill more women in the united
87

B rannon howse

states than aids. hPv also can result in painful intercourse for years after infection even though visible signs of the disease have disappeared.63 and of course there is the human immunodeficiency virus (hiv), the virus that causes aids. the first few cases of aids were discovered in 98. now in the u.s., there are between  and 2 million people infected with the disease. as far as we know, all of these people will die in the next ten to fifteen years.64 at rutgers university, 35 to 44% of sexually active students were infected with one or more stds, no matter what form of contraception they used. Condomshero of the safe sex messageprovided virtually no protection from stds.65 a study from florida looked at couples in which one partner was hiv positive and the other was negative. they used condoms as protection during intercourse, but after 8 months, 7% of the previously uninfected partners were hiv positive. that is a one-in-six chance of deaththe same as in russian roulette.66 a non-Biblical sexual freedom worldview has serious consequences that lead to anything but freedom. on the other hand, following the Bible guarantees truly exhilarating results (for a summary of scriptural teaching, see hebrews 3:4). studies show that men and women who are sexually abstinent until marriage have a more rewarding and satisfying sex life and a deeper trust of one another. Whats more, no one practicing abstinence ever contracted a sexually transmitted disease from his or her partner or faced an unwanted pregnancy. you see, the real sexual freedom of marriage makes even the wind in your hair while doing 70 feel pretty tame.
88

22

are traDitional morals relevant?

es. But to appreciate why, we need to look at how traditional morals got to be traditional in the first place. the early days of american history speak volumes on the subject. americas founders understood that a persons worldview is the basis of his or her values. values, in turn, are the source from which conduct emerges. early american leaders recognized that if we have a worldview based on an eternal, fixed morality, created by a God who will punish or reward our choices in the next life, americans will enjoy beneficial government and the best possible hope for personal happiness. early on, securing this good government and happiness involved developing a Christian conscience through education. in Christian Ethics in Secular Society, Philip edgcumbe hughes explains the connection of the conscience to knowledge: Conscience is an inner self-knowledge which is moral in character. By it man knows instinctively and constitutionally that there are at the same time a distinction between right and wrong and an obligation to choose what is right and refuse what is wrong. that is why a person who conducts his life in accordance with what he knows to be just and honorable is called conscientious. the conscience is a line connecting man to his Creator67
89

B rannon howse

When a person turns from God, the conscience switches off. People then do evil without feeling guilty for it ( timothy 4:2). this means that no individuals conscience can be the final authority for right and wrong. it is simply too vulnerable to distortion for that to work, but it can convict us of wrong if we keep our minds immersed in the truth of Gods Word. this is why the founders wanted to make sure the Bible was central in americas educational system. even as school children, many founders were themselves influenced by scripture in the classroom. for instance, one of the first laws establishing public education in america was the 642 old deluder satan law, passed in Massachusetts and then five years later in Connecticut. the law stated: it being one chief project of that old deluder, satan, to keep men from the Knowledge of the scriptures, as in the former time . . .it is therefore ordered . . .[that] after the lord hath increased [the settlement] to the number of fifty householders, [they] shall then forthwith appoint one within their town, to teach all such children as shall resort to him, to write and read . . .and it is further ordered, that where any town shall increase to the number of one hundred families or householders, they shall set up a grammar school . . .to instruct youths, so far as they may be fitted for the university.68 founders John adams, John hancock, elbridge Gerry, John Pickering, William Williams, rufus King, William hooper, William ellery, samuel adams, robert treat Paine, and others attended harvard university69 where the rules of 636 reveal that
90

A re Traditional Morals Relevant?

schools position that the pursuit of knowledge is based on the truth of the Bible: let every student be plainly instructed and earnestly pressed to consider well the main end of his life and studies is to know God and Jesus Christ which is eternal life (John 7.3) and therefore to lay Christ in the bottom as the only foundation of all sound knowledge and learning. and seeing the lord only giveth wisdom, let every one seriously set himself by prayer in secret to seek it of him (Prov. 2, 3). every one shall so exercise himself in reading the scriptures twice a day that he shall be ready to give such an account of his proficiency therein.70 similarly, in 743 and again in 755, yale university instructed its students: above all have an eye to the great end of all your studies, which is to obtain the clearest conceptions of divine things and to lead you to a saving knowledge of God in his son Jesus Christ.7 as i pointed out earlier in this book, when a person rejects knowledge, he or she is in rebellion against God. that being the case, we should not be surprised by statistics revealing that mutiny against God has become commonplace in america. abortion, samesex marriage, doctor-assisted suicide, pornography, child abuse, drug abuse, and violent crime all result from this insurgency against divine authority.
9

B rannon howse

sadly, our nations schools have assisted in this shift by denying God and his principles. as more and more americans reject absolute standards of truth, knowledge will decline still further, and rebellion will increase. Crime, violence, laziness, apathy, and ill manners form the dismal future for any countryours includedthat departs from the traditional means of assuring that we reverence God and treat each other with love.

92

23

whY abortion tears people apart

W
. 2.

hile the primary victims of abortion are literally ripped to pieces each day, the rest of us get pretty torn up by opinions on both sides of the issue. the typical arguments in favor of abortion end up being pretty lame, though, once you look at why some people think terminating a pregnancy is okay. Proponents of abortion generally justify the killing of babies with some form of one or both of these arguments: a fetus is not a human being; a woman has a right to do whatever she wants with her own body.

the first rationale presupposes that an unborn child is not human, but the burden of proving this clearly lies with those who make the assertion. Without a lead-tight case to the contrary (and there isnt one), theres no reason to think a fetus is not human. a mere glance at an ultrasound shows a babynot a dog, cat, mouse, or fish. even a four-year-old knows that humans have humans, dogs have dogs, cats have cats, and birds have birds. to claim that a fetus is not human goes against both common sense and science. in his book, Moral Dilemmas, Kerby anderson describes the medical and scientific evidence that the fetus is a living human being:

93

B rannon howse

death used to be defined by the cessation of heartbeat. a stopped heart was a clear sign of death. if the cessation of heartbeat could define death, could the onset of a heartbeat define life? the heart is formed by the eighteenth day in the womb. if heartbeat were used to define life, then nearly all abortions would be outlawed. Physicians now use a more rigorous criterion for death: brain-wave activity. a flat eeG (electroencephalograph) is one of the most important criteria used to determine death. if the cessation of brain-wave activity can define death, could the onset of brain-wave activity define life? individual brain waves are detected in the fetus in about forty to forty-three days. using brain-wave activity to define life would outlaw at least a majority of abortions.72 having the right to choose sounds seductively appealing to american ears, and it has given rise to a strange notion that a woman should be able to do whatever she wants with her own body. But the fact is, that it is not now nor has it ever been true that any woman has such a right. is it legal, for instance, for a woman to commit suicide? no, women who try it are regularly arrested and taken to jail or a mental hospital. Can a woman lawfully shoot her veins up with methamphetamines or use her nose to snort cocaine? no again. is a woman allowed to sell her body for sex? Walk naked at a shopping mall? not in my town. laws apply every day that prohibit women (and men!) from doing certain things society deems unacceptable with their bodies. so if we choose to forbid the aborting of a child, there is plenty of legal precedence to make that fully acceptable. even this, though, begs the question of whether or not an in94

W h y Abortion Tears People Apart

utero baby is part of the mothers body. Before the days of contemporary science, it may have been possible to intelligently assert that the baby and the woman are one. nowadays, though, the idea is ludicrous in light of what we know. again, Kerby anderson points out the unmistakable separate identity of a fetus: at conception the embryo is genetically distinct from the mother. to say that the developing baby is no different from the mothers appendix is scientifically inaccurate. a developing embryo is genetically different from the mother. a developing embryo is also genetically different from the sperm and egg that created it. a human being has forty-six chromosomes (sometimes forty-seven chromosomes). a sperm and an egg each have twenty-three chromosomes. a trained geneticist can distinguish between the dna of an embryo and the dna of a sperm and egg. But that geneticist cannot distinguish between dna of a developing embryo and the dna of a full-grown human being.73 in exodus 2:22-25, we read that there was punishment for causing harm or death to an unborn child, and Psalm 5:5 explains that a baby even has a sin nature. it is also noteworthy that the Biblical Greek word for baby is the same whether referring to a child inside or outside of his or her mother, clearly suggesting that God views the born and unborn baby equally. the Biblical worldview argues that abortion is murder, and the ten Commandments is clear on that one: thou shalt not.

95

24

shoulD same-sex marriage be alloweD?

nly if you think leaving the chocolate out of a batch of brownies makes for a good dessert. stay with me, and ill explain. While most Christians oppose the homosexual lifestyle because scripture specifically denounces homosexuality as sinunnatural and not what God intended when he created male and female most dont comprehend the sweeping consequences america will face if governments legalize same-sex marriage. under the guise of protecting individual rights, gay and lesbian activists work relentlessly to legalize same-sex marriage in one state after another. for many, their sole reason for trying to destroy the traditional, legal, and Biblical definition of marriage is that marriage was created by God, and their activism is an effort to run from his conviction of their aberrant lifestyle. Writing in The Village Voice, Judith levine reveals her obvious offense at the God-ordained concept of marriage in an article entitled stop the Wedding: Why Gay Marriage isnt radical enough: Because american marriage is inextricable from Christianity, it admits participants as noah let animals on the ark. But it doesnt have to be that way. in 972 the national Coalition of Gay organizations demanded the repeal of all legislative provisions that restrict the sex or number of persons entering into a marriage unit; and the exten96

S h o u l d Same-Sex Marriage Be Allowed?

sion of legal benefits to all persons who cohabit regardless of sex or numbers. Group marriage could comprise any combination of genders.74 laws that recognize same-sex unions attempt to redefine marriage and family. the problem is that marriage cannot be redefined. it can only be destroyed. author and family expert Bob Knight explains why: the term marriage refers specifically to the joining of two people of the opposite sex. When that is lost, marriage becomes meaningless. you can no more leave an entire sex out of marriage and call it marriage than you can leave chocolate out of a chocolate brownie recipe. it becomes something else. Giving non-marital relationships the same status as marriage does not expand the definition of marriage; it destroys it. for example, if you declare that, because it has similar properties, wine should be labeled identically to grape juice, you have destroyed the definitions of both wine and grape juice. the consumer would not know what he is getting.75 Mr. Knights observation that marriage simply becomes something elselike brownies without chocolate cease to be browniesis critical. Worse, there are already painful examples that the something else marriage becomes is, in fact, nothing at all. in the february 2004 issue of The Weekly Standard, stanley Kurtz reports: Marriage in scandinavia is in deep decline, with children shouldering the burden of rising rates of family dissolution.
97

B rannon howse

and the mainspring of the declinean increasingly sharp separation between marriage and parenthoodcan be linked to gay marriage.76 if two men or two women can be legally married, marriage becomes a meaningless term and is quickly abandoned. People find it easier to ignore making such a strenuous commitment altogether. once marriage is undermined the shockwaves ripple everywhere. Consider these implications: if two men or two women can have a legally recognized marriage, then why should we not legalize polygamy and allow a man to have three or four wives? Polygamists are already organizing challenges to legalize polygamy in whatever states legalize same-sex marriage. if same-sex marriages are allowed, then what is to stop the legalization of sexual relationships between adults and children? Before you say that cannot happen, you need to know that as far back as 977, an attorney with the american Civil liberties union argued in favor of lowering the legal sex age limit to twelve. that attorney was ruth Bader Ginsburg who has served on the u. s. supreme Court since her appointment in 993. same-sex marriage laws would likely lay the groundwork for eliminating freedom of religion and speech. even now in Canada, if pastors or commentators discuss on the airwaves their opposition to the homosexual lifestyle, they can face up to six months in prison for hate speech. in sweden, sermons are explicitly covered by an anti-hate speech law passed to protect homosexuals. in england,
98

S h o u l d Same-Sex Marriage Be Allowed?

the Gender recognition Bill allows people to declare their gender and makes it illegal for a clergyman to refuse to conduct a marriage between two people of the same sex if they say they are not of the same sex.75 as the radical, homosexual agenda is advanced through the coercive power of law, Christian schools and colleges, Christian ministries, and even churches could be prosecuted for refusing to hire gays or lesbianseven for simply speaking out against homosexual practices. ideas have consequences, and rejecting Gods definition of marriage has far-reaching implications for our society. and you, iall of us will pay a hefty price for the sinful proclivities of a few.

99

25

euthanasia anD Doctor-assisteD suiciDe

lthough they may sound different, euthanasia and doctorassisted suicide are actually two facets of the same issue. you may even hear someone argue that euthanasia is consistent with a Biblical worldview, and it could be that theyre right. it all depends on how you define the terms. in Moral Dilemma, Kerby anderson explains the various forms of euthanasia: Voluntary, passive euthanasia: this form of euthanasia assumes that medical personnel, at the patients request, will merely allow nature to take its course.the physician did nothing to hasten death78 Voluntary, active euthanasia: this means that the physician, by request, hastens death by taking some active means (e.g., lethal injection).79 Involuntary, passive euthanasia: this assumes that the patient has not expressed a willingness to die or cannot do so. the medical personnel do not go to any extraordinary measures to save the patient and often withhold food (by removing nasogastric tubes), antibiotics, or life-support systems (respirators).80 Involuntary, active euthanasia: in this case the physician does something active to hasten death, regardless of the patients wishes, for humanitarian reasons, economic considerations, or genetic justifications.8
00

E u t h a nasia and Doctor-Assisted Suicide

Passive forms of euthanasia are not problematic in most cases because nothing is done to hasten the end of a persons life. Medical personnel keep a terminal patient as comfortable and pain-free as possible while allowing nature to take its course. it is the active forms of euthanasia that are of serious concern. active, involuntary euthanasia can include what has been called mercy killing in which a family member or doctor takes the life of a terminally ill patient or a patient that has no quality of life. in the past few years there have been several cases in which a wife or husband has shot and killed a sleeping spouse that was terminally ill or severely disabled by alzheimers or Parkinsons disease. the spouses rightly have been prosecuted for murder. in other forms of active, involuntary euthanasia, family members convince a doctor to use drugs to terminate a patient, much as a veterinarian would put an ailing dog to sleep. or at times a doctor simply does so without the familys knowledge or consent. either situation is unacceptable. the Biblical position on the issue is absolute. While many scriptures that address abortion also can be applied to euthanasia, there are scriptures that focus specifically on taking the life an adult. the death of King saul is an important example: now it came about after the death of saul,behold, a man came out of the camp from saul, with his clothes torn and dust on his head.and he said, the people have fled from the battle, and also many of the people have fallen and are dead; and saul and Jonathan his son are dead also. so david said to the young man who told him, how do you know that saul and his son Jonathan are dead? the young man who told him said, By chance
0

B rannon howse

i happened to be on Mount Gilboa, and, behold, saul was leaning on his spear. and behold, the chariots and the horsemen pursued him closely. When he looked behind him, he saw me and called to me. then he said to me, Please stand beside me and kill me, for agony has seized me because my life still lingers in me. so i stood beside him and killed him, because i knew that he could not live after he had fallen.then david said to him, how is it you were not afraid to stretch out your hand to destroy the Lords anointed? and david called one of the young men and said, Go, cut him down. so he struck him and he died. david said to him, your blood is on your head, for your mouth has testified against you, saying, i have killed the Lords anointed. (2 samuel :-6, holman CsB, selected verses) instead of a doctor doing the killing, here we see a solider carry out active euthanasia. When the young man tells the new King david what he has done, david announces that the mercy killing was an act of murder and orders a death sentence. davids judgment makes clear that even voluntary, active euthanasia is not to be tolerated. this conclusion is further underscored by the Bibles general prohibition against killingboth in the old testament (exodus 20:3) and the new testament (Matthew 5:2; 9:8; Mark 0:9; luke 8:20; romans 3:9). While there are exceptions to the rule (killing in self-defense, capital punishment, war), there is no exception for anything remotely like euthanasia. Biblical teaching renders those cases morally unacceptable,82 and no quality of life argument changes the outcome of the debate. tragically, suffering is sometimes an overwhelming part of liferight up to its end.
02

Why chriSTiAniTy hAS The AnSWerS

26

keptics claim that duplication of the Bible from generation to generation has made it a victim of an historical version of the telephone gamethe childrens party diversion in which a secret passed around a circle ends up bearing little or no resemblance to the original message. Given that its been nearly 2,000 years since the last of the Bible was written, such criticism at first sounds plausible. But dont be too quick to nod your head if someone throws that argument at you. unless theyre also willing to chunk the works of Julius Caesar, aristotle, homer, and Plato out the window as well, theyd better leave the Bible alone. the facts about the Bibles authenticity are pretty exciting. since there are no original manuscripts of any ancient writings Bible, Plato, or otherwisescholars consider that the closer the earliest copies are to the date of the original, the better. By this standard, the writings of other men from ancient times are not anywhere near as well documented as the new testament. for instance, the time from the original writing to oldest existing manuscripts of Caesar, aristotle, or Plato span anywhere from ,000 to ,400 years. yet the period from the original writing to the oldest existing pieces of the new testament is about fifty years. in fact, the oldest complete manuscript of the new testament is a copy made 225 years after the originalless than one-fourth the time of other key ancient writings. there also are far more manuscripts to back up the new testament than any other work of antiquity. logically enough, scholars
04

how authentic is the bible?

How Authentic Is the Bible?

again consider it better to have more copies, and the extent of Biblical manuscripts is stunning compared to other ancient works. the new testament is supported by more than 24,000 manuscripts.83 the next closest work of antiquity is homers Illiad with only 643. for Caesars Gallic Wars, we have only ten, and for the works of Plato, just three. not only that, the Bible has been cited so ofteneven in antiquitythat experts could assemble almost the entire new testament just from sources in which it is quoted.84 When looking at old documents to determine their accuracy, experts apply three tests. since weve already explained the Bibles high marks on its manuscripts (the bibliographical test), ill briefly outline how well it performs on the other two as wellthe internal and external tests. the internal test looks for contradictions within a document. While skeptics and critics point to a list of 800 alleged contradictions in the Bible, an examination of each shows them not to be contradictions at all. for example, the books of Matthew and Mark note that when the women visited Jesus tomb on resurrection morning, an angel was there, but the books of luke and John say there were two angels at the tomb. are these contradictory? no! it is plausible that one woman told of the angel that spoke to her while the other woman mentioned having seen two angels. accordingly, two gospel writers focused on the angel that spoke while the others added that at least one of the women saw two angels. let me offer an analogy of how this works. actor Kirk Cameron has given talks at several of my Worldview Weekend conferences. if two newspaper reporters show up at the event, one might offer a summary of Kirks remarks but not mention other details. the other might add a descriptive note that while Cameron spoke, Brannon
05

B rannon howse

howse was seated on stage in a chair to the speakers left. But the reports dont contradict one another. one reporter simply chose to give more detail than the other. the external test looks at how outside sources confirm the validity of a document, and numerous external sources corroborate scripture. the Jewish historian Josephus, for instance, records the existence of James the brother of Jesus as well as John the Baptist. he even provides a brief description of Jesusand Josephus is just one of several non-Christian historians from Biblical times whose writings substantiate the Bible. the evidence for the veracity of the Bible fills thousands of books that are easily obtained by anyone who truly wants proof that the Bible is more reliably preserved than any other book ever written. as Biblical scholar B.B. Warfield observes, the great mass of the new testament, in other words, has been transmitted to us with no, or next to no variations.85 all this is to say that if you ever catch anyone trying to invoke something like the telephone game against the Bible, just point out that the telephone wasnt invented until the nineteenth centuryand the Bible was soundly established long before that.

06

27

reaDing the bible to finD out where to Dig

ou might call the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries the Good ol days of Biblical skepticism. those doubters of scripture back then really had it made. all they had to do was declare that history as recorded in the Bible is not accuratesome sort of religious mythand no one could prove otherwise. But pity the poor skeptic today. archeology is now skeptic enemy #. archeologist William f. albright observes: the excessive skepticism shown toward the Bible by important historical schools of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, certain phases of which still appear periodically, has been progressively discredited. discovery after discovery has established the accuracy of innumerable details, and has brought increased recognition to the value of the Bible as a source of history.86 discovery after discovery is almost putting it too mildly. there have, in fact, been more than 25,000 archeological finds that have a connection to the old testament, and not one contradicts the Bible. to the contrary, archeological discoveries continue to confirm the accuracy of the Bible as archeologists unearth artifacts and cities described in scripturesome with the names of leaders and rulers etched in stone. archeologists used to dig to disprove the Bible, now archeologists read the Bible to find out where to dig.
07

B rannon howse

Millar Burrows of yale university confirms that excavators continue to discover what the Bible says they should find, exactly where they should find it: the Bible is supported by archaeological evidence again and again. on the whole, there can be no question that the results of excavation have increased the respect of scholars for the Bible as a collection of historical documents. the confirmation is both general and specific. the fact is that the record can be so often explained or illustrated by archaeological history as only a genuine product of ancient life could do. in addition to this general authentication, however, we find the record verified repeatedly at specific points. names of places and persons turn up at the right places and in the right periods.87 one riveting example is the excavation of Gezer in 969. diggers ran across a massive layer of ash that covered most of a mound. sifting through the cinders yielded hebrew, egyptian, and Philistine artifacts. apparently, all three cultures had lived there at the same time. this greatly puzzled researchers until they realized the Bible told them exactly what they had found: (Pharaoh king of egypt had gone up and taken Gezer and burned it with fire, had killed the Canaanites who dwelt in the city, and had given it as a dowery to his daughter, solomons wife.) ( Kings 9:6)88 even though it is already clear that skeptics cannot use archeo08

R e a d i n g the Bible to Find Out Where To Dig

logical discoveries to discredit the Bible, British scholar sir frederic Kenyon says their plight will only get worse: it is therefore legitimate to say that, in respect of that part of the old testament against which the disintegrating criticism of the last half of the nineteenth century was chiefly directed, the evidence of archaeology has been to re-establish its value by rendering it more intelligible through a fuller knowledge of its background and setting. archaeology has not yet said its last word: but the results already achieved confirm what faith would suggest, that the Bible can do nothing but gain from an increase of knowledge.89 the same can be said of the new testament. the gospel of luke, for example, was once a target of undue criticism. Professor f.f. Bruce notes: Where luke has been suspected of inaccuracy, and accuracy has been vindicated by some inscription evidence, it may be legitimate to say that archaeology has confirmed the new testament record.90 even a one-time luke skeptic, sir Willaim ramsey, changed his mind after studying the evidence: luke is a historian of the first rank; not merely are his statements of fact trustworthythis author should be placed along with the very greatest of historians.9 discoveries of other new testament sites have likewise proven the accuracy of the Bible, for instance:

09

B rannon howse

the Pavement of John 9:3 the Pool of Bethesda Jacobs well the pool of siloam the ancient cities of Bethlehem, nazareth, Cana, Capernaum, and Chorazin the residence of Pilate in Jerusalem.92 Millar Burrows concludes: on the whole, archaeological work has unquestionably strengthened confidence in the reliability of the scriptural record. More than one archaeologist has found his respect for the Bible increased by the experience of excavation in Palestine.93 its been a long time since anyone had reason to doubt the veracity of Biblical history because of archeology. so much so that if you hear anyone mention such a thing these days, you can feel free to call them a little bitwellold-fashioned.

0

28

self-esteem Just isnt enough

o many secular psychologistsand even some popular Christian teachers i like to call happy-talk pastorsthe main goal in every persons life should be to make sure your own self-love life is real fine. Be sure youre treating yourself to all the feel-good goodies you deserve. But is this Biblical? should our focus be on our own selfworth? those that argue self-love, self-esteem, or having a healthy self-image are Biblical often justify their teaching by using leviticus 9:8 which Jesus quotes in luke 0:27you shall love... your neighbor as yourself. in the leviticus passage, Gods instructions include a list of ways we should treat other individuals respectfully in our daily conduct. the direction never shifts from social interaction to descriptions of our own inner esteem or affirmation of our goodness. When Jesus quotes the passage, he clearly is saying Christians should look out for the best interests of others and not simply think of their own well-being, even though self-interest would be the natural (but, many times, sinful) reflex of every human. Jesus instruction is an admonishment to avoid being selfish or self-centered. self-love in leviticus and luke refers to a persons natural compulsion to watch out for his or her own welfare. in the physical realm, this simply allows people to survive. it is an instinctive motivation that does not require a lengthy decision-making process.


B rannon howse

the impulse seeks to gain pleasure and avoid pain. it compels a person to eat when he is hungry and sleep when she is tired. it is the kind of self-love that causes you to look both ways before crossing the street, to brush your teeth so they do not rot (you do that every night, right?), to wear a helmet when mountain biking through rough terrain (yes?), or to get out of the pool when you hear thunder so as not to be struck by lightning. it is that unlearned, intuitive prompting that gives human beings enough sense to get in out of the rain.94 Biblical self-love is common to all peopleChristian as well as non-Christian. this self-love is instinctive, spontaneous, and effortless. it needs no lessons, encouragement, or therapy. impulse drives it, and it is consistently present in all people. Were not talking about self-promotional psychology herejust basic survival instincts. esteem takes us into another category of thinking altogether. to teach self-esteemor its corollary, mankinds basic goodnessis to say that people really are not 00% in need of Jesus Christ and his sacrifice on the cross. it suggests that we are pretty much good enough to face judgment, and perhaps all the cross really did was to shore up our natural human failings, shortcomings, or flawsnot redeem some overwhelming condition like depravity. the Bible, however, tells us to boast only in Christ and the work of the cross (Galatians 6:4) and to have confidence in the lord and not in our own works or abilities apart from him (Proverbs 4:6). the truth is, we are not good, honorable, or deserving of respect based on who we are. only in and through Christ do the fruit and actions of our lives have merit. the work that is worthy of reward can only happen when a person dies to self as described in romans 6 and 8.
2

S elf-Esteem Just Isnt Enough

this dying to self is so complete that it may even require giving up the self-preservation kind of love weve just said is legitimate. the Christian that has surrendered his or her life to Christ may be called to reject even such a natural reflex and accept places and positions that are not safe, secure, comfortable, and free of danger. if the martyrs of Christian history had put the instinct of self-love before their Christian calling, they would have pursued self-preservation rather than submit to premature death. But by preaching the gospel when it was illegal, punishments, torture, and death were often assured. the martyrs denied the basic reflex of self-love because they placed a higher priority on fulfilling the will of God through their lives. the challenge for the true convert of Christ in todays postmodern world is to recognize and reject the false version of self-love as taught by its humanistic and psychological proponents. We also must be willing to reject the natural impulse for comfort and selfpreservation when it conflicts with Gods desire for our living out Biblical truth. that may not result in the feel-good version of life, but it matches Jesus way to achieve an abundant one.

3

29

are all religions createD equal?

ack in 2005, several european newspapers published cartoons showing Mohammed wearing a turban in the shape of a bomb. you may recall that the display ignited among Muslims worldwide rioting that killed dozens of people, including a number of children. i remind you of this incident in order to make a very politically incorrect observation. Politically correct thinking adores pluralism. this means that all religions are equal. But certainly if we compare religions by the actions they produce, the rioting, killing, and destruction of private property by angry Muslims reveals something grossly unequal about islam and Christianity. a few years ago, Christians and Jews were outraged when the Brooklyn art Museumwhich receives public fundsdisplayed a picture of Mary, the mother of Jesus, covered in elephant dung. and in 989, the national endowment for the arts gave tax dollars to an artist who created a display featuring a crucifix submerged it in a jar of urine. While these spectacularly offensive exhibits outraged Christians and Jews alike, none took to the streets of new york to burn buildings, destroy private property, kill neighbors, and assault police officers. so compare: one group, in the name of allah, riots over cartoons, justifies beheading innocent people as an act of jihad, and celebrates the 9/ deaths of 3,000 americans. the other objects politically to one set of abuses, yet also sends millions of dollars to
4

A re All Religions Created Equal?

Muslim nations after the december 2004 tsunami. While these examples contrast islam and Christianity, the inequality of all the worlds religions derives from the source of each. dr. erwin lutzer, pastor of the historic Moody Church in downtown Chicago, has spoken for my Worldview Weekends on several occasions and recounted an outstanding observation he made on this point while visiting a 994 symposium on world religions in Chicago. i will quote at length from dr. lutzers book, Called, his marvelous experience as he walked the convention center and talked with some of the 7,000 attendees from around the world: i walked through the display area in search of a sinless prophet/teacher/savior. i asked a hindu swami whether any of their teachers claimed sinlessness. no, he said, appearing irritated with my question, if anyone claims he is sinless, he is not a hindu! What about Buddha? no, i was told, he didnt claim sinlessness. he found a group of ascetics and preached sermons to them. he taught that all outward things are only distractions and encouraged a life of discipline and contemplation. he sought enlightenment and urged his followers to do the same. he died seeking enlightenment. no sinlessness here. What about Baha ullah? he claimed he had a revelation from God that was more complete and more enlightened than those before him. though he was convinced of the truth of his teachings, he made few personal claims. he thought his writings were more perfect than others, but he never claimed perfection or sinlessness for himself.
5

B rannon howse

When i came to the representatives of the Muslim faith, i already knew that in the Koran the prophet Mohammed admitted he was in need of forgiveness. they agreed. there is one God, allah, and Mohammed was not perfect. again, no sinlessness there. Why was i searching for a sinless savior? Because i dont want to have to trust a savior who is in the same predicament as i am. i cant trust my eternal soul to someone who is still working through his own imperfections. since im a sinner, i need someone who is standing on higher ground. understandably, none of the religious leaders i spoke with even claimed to have a savior. their prophets, they said, showed the way, but made no pretense to be able to personally forgive sins or transform so much as a single human being. like a street sign, they gave directions, but were not able to take us where we need to go. if we need any saving, we will have to do it ourselves. the reason is obvious: no matter how wise, no matter how gifted, no matter how influential other prophets, gurus, and teachers might be, they had the presence of mind to know that they were imperfect just like the rest of us. they never even presumed to be able to reach down into the murky water of human depravity and bring sinners into the presence of God.95 Jesus alone claimed he was sinless. he claimed to be our savior. and therein lies the differenceand the great inequalitybetween religions.
6

30

what sets Jesus apart from all other religious leaDers?

uch of what has been proclaimed by religious teachers throughout history is fairly predictable stufftreat others well, dont be materialistic, believe in God. But not so with Jesus. he said some really crackpot things. in particular, he claimed to be God, and he promised to die and come back to life. then he did it. in fact, the foremost thing that sets Jesus and Christianity apart from every other belief system is the resurrection of Christ. Jewish Pharisees once asked Christ to give them a sign that all of his teachings were true, and Jesus pointed them to his resurrection, yet to come: .no sign will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. for as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.96 (Matthew 2:39-40) Jesus foretold his own death which, of course, anyone could do if he or she were willing to arrange it, but he also promised to come back to life. so the question becomes, how do we know the resurrection actually happened? as much as skeptics would like to think otherwise, its not really so hard to prove true. the most compelling evidence for Jesus resurrection is that
7

B rannon howse

more than 500 eyewitnesses saw him. Jesus not only appeared to his followers, but he also appeared to one of the greatest enemies of Christianity at the timesaul, a Jewish leader from tarsus. saul had killed numerous Christians, yet when Jesus (after his resurrection) appeared to saul, the man became one of the greatest defenders of Christianity. it is an undisputed fact of history that saul was a prominent persecutor of Christians. it is also a matter of record that he changed radically and became known as Paul, a powerful leader of the early church. the most likely explanation for his change from hating, persecuting, and killing Christians to becoming a Christian and defender of Christianity is, as Paul said, an encounter with the risen lord. like Paul, the lives of anyone who saw the resurrected Christ were changed, and they became willing to die rather than to say they had not seen Jesus alive after his crucifixion. former atheist frank harber correctly points out that people are not willing to die for something they know to be a lie: Many people have died for a cause they believed was true even though it was false; however, no one ever eagerly dies for a cause knowing it to be false. Christianity could have never endured had these first Christians not believed in the resurrection. the tenacity of these early eyewitnesses in the face of death testifies to the truth that the resurrection must have occurred.97 With the exception of John, every one of Jesus disciples died a martyrs death. Peter was crucified, Paul killed after several long imprisonments, and thomas, who had been a doubter until he
8

W h a t S e t s J e s u s Apart from All Other Religious Leaders?

saw the resurrected Christ, carried the message all the way to india, where he ministered for many years before finally being martyred.98 it is simply not plausible that so many disciples would endure martyrdom for a lie. skeptics also have made claims that attempt to undermine the Biblical accounts of the resurrection, but none hold water. a favorite is the stolen body theory. supposedly, the disciples stole Jesus body to give the appearance that he had risen from the dead. But disturbing a tomb was a crime punishable by death, and so was falling asleep at his post for any guard who would have slept through the heist. its reasonable to think the fear of the death penalty would have kept at least one guard awake to stop the thieves, and it seems unlikely that the disciples would risk being executed themselves just to fake a resurrection. Whats more, Jesus enemies never denied or acknowledged that his body was missing. rather, they hatched a plan to explain away what the overwhelming evidence revealed: Jesus had risen from the dead. if the authorities really believed the disciples had stolen the body of Jesus, they would have had them killed. or if the body of Jesus were still in the tomb and the disciples were lying about the resurrection, the authorities simply would have put the body of Jesus on display and ended the resurrection story. as i said earlier, Jesus made a lot of crazy claims, and the most outrageous was that he would come back to life. But it didnt end up being so loony after all. the fact remains that his resurrection makes him fantastically different from anyone else in the history of religious faith. yeah!

9

notes
 arthur herman, The Idea of Decline in Western History, (the free Press, new york, 997) p.356-357. 2 U.S. News & World Report, July 2, 997, p. 4. 3 ibid. 4 alison hornstein, the Question that We should Be asking, Newsweek, december 7th, 200, p.4. 5 ibid. 6 William Bennett and edwin J. delattre, The Public Interest, Moral Education in the Schools, the heritage foundation, 978, p.22. 7 ibid; p.27. 8 ibid; p. 27 9 ibid; p.26. 0 Charles Kimball, When Religion Becomes Evil (new york: harper san francisco, 2002).  from an article by rick Wade posted on probe.org in which he reviews the book, The New Absolutes by William Watkins. 2 ibid. 3 Walvoord, J.f., Zuck, r. B. & dallas theological seminary (983-985). The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures (victor Books: Wheaton, il). 4 The Works of John Adams, Second President of the United States (Boston: Charles C. little and James Brown, 85), vol. vi, p. 484, discourses on davila; a series of Papers on Political history. 5 l.h. Butterfield, ed., The Letters of Benjamin Rush, vol.  (Princeton: Princeton university Press, 95), 454; quoting John Joachim Zubly, Presbyterian pastor and delegate to Congress, in a letter to david ramsay in March or april 788. 6 u. s. War department training Manual no. 2000-25 (928). 7 noah Webster, History of the United States (new haven: durie & Peck, 832), p.6 8 The Letters of Benjamin Rush, l. h. Butterfield, editor (Princeton: Princeton university Press, 95), vol. i, p. 454, quoting John Joachim Zubly, Presbyterian pastor and delegate to Congress, in a letter to david ramsay in March or april 788. 9 u. s. War department training Manual no. 2000-25 (928). 20 ibid; quoting B.f. Morris, The Christian Life and Character of the Civil Institutions of the United States (Philadelphia: George W. Childs, 864), 328. 2 rufus King, The Life and Correspondence of Rufus King, Charles r. King, ed., vol. 6

20

Notes

(new york: G.P. Putnams sons 900), 276, to C. Gore on february 7, 820. 22 david Barton, Original Intent (aledo, tX: Wallbuilders), 337-38. 23 theodore dalrymple, Life at the Bottom: The Worldview That Makes The Underclass (ivan r. dee, Chicago, il.; 200). P. vii. 24 ibid; p. ix. 25 ibid; p. x. 26 ibid; p. xi-xii. 27 Kerby anderson, a Biblical view of economics, posted at probe.org 28 thomas nelson Publishers (nashville, tn, 200). What Does the Bible Say About: The Ultimate A to Z Resource Fully Illustrated, p. 272 29 William J. federer, The Ten Commandments & Their Influence on American Law (amerisearch, inc. st. louis, Mo. 2003) p.9. 30 ibid; p.9. federers sources are as follows: donald s. lutz and Charles s. hyneman, the relative influence of european Writers on late eighteenth-Century american Political thought. American Political Science Review 89 (984): 89-97. (Courtesy of dr. Wayne house of dallas theological seminary.) John eidsmoe, Christianity and the Constitution The Faith of Our Founding Fathers (Grand rapids, Mi: Baker Book house, a Mott Media Book, 987; 6th printing, 993), pp. 5-53. Origions of American Constitutionalism, (987). stephen K. Mcdowell and Mark a. Beliles, Americas Providential History (Charlottesville, va: Providence Press, 988), p. 56. 3 ibid. 32 John Jay, The Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, 794-826, henry P. Johnson, ed. (reprinted ny: Burt franklin, 970), vol. iv, p. 393, october 2, 86. 33 david Barton, Original Intent (Wallbuilders, aledo, tX), p.24. 34 New American Standard Bible: 995 update. 995 (ro 3:). lahabra, Ca: the lockman foundation. 35 lindsay, d. G. (998, 990). Foundations for Creationism. (dallas: Christ for the nations.) 36 richard lewontin, Billions and Billions of demons, The New York Review, January 9, 997, p. 3. 37 J.P. Moreland, editor, The Creation Hypothesis, the Methodological equivalence of design and descent: Can there Be a scientific theory of Creation? by s.C. Meyer (downers Grove, il: intervarsity Press, 994), p. 98. 38 tan, P. l. (996, 979). Encyclopedia of 7700 illustrations: [a treasury of illustrations, anecdotes, facts and quotations for pastors, teachers and Christian workers]. (Garland, tX: Bible Communications.)

2

B rannon howse

dr. Walter t. Brown Jr., In the Beginning, (Phoenix, aZ., 989), p.2. lindsay, d. G. (998, 990). Harmony of Science and Scripture. (dallas: Christ for the nations.) 4 Bill Gates, The Road Ahead, rev. ed. (new york: Penguin, 996), 228. 42 lindsay, d. G. (998, 990). Harmony of Science and Scripture. (dallas: Christ for the nations.) 43 ibid. 44 Geisler, n. l., & hoffman, P. K. (200). Why I am a Christian : Leading thinkers explain why they believe. (Grand rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.), p. 93. 45 C.r. darwin, Origin of Species, 6th edition, 872 (london: John Murray, 902), p. 43. 46 letter (written april 0, 979) from dr. Colin Patterson, then senior paleontologist at the British Museum of natural history in london to luther d. sunderland, as quoted in l.d. sunderland, Darwins Enigma (Green forest, ar: Master Books, 984), p. 89. 47 s.J. Gould, in Evolution Now: A Century After Darwin, ed. John Maynard smith (new york: Macmillan Publishing Co., 982), p. 40. teaching about evolution pages 56-57, publishes a complaint by Gould about creationists quoting him about the rarity of transitional fossils. 48 oswald spengler, The Decline of the West, vol. 2 (new york: alfred a. Knopf, 966), p.32. 49 henry Margenau, Modern Physics and the turn to Belief in God, The Intellectuals Speak Out About God, ed. roy abraham varghese (dallas: lewis and stanley, 984), 43. 50 engel v. vitale, 370 u.s. 42, 422 (962). 5 abington at 2, n. 4, 207. 52 stone v. Graham, 449 u.s. 39 (980). 53 Merriam-Webster, i. Merriam-Websters Collegiate Dictionary. includes index. 0th ed. (springfield, Mass.: Merriam-Webster, 996). 54 Wood, d. r. W., Wood, d. r. W., & Marshall, i. h. (996, 982, 962). New Bible Dictionary. includes index. (electronic ed. of 3rd ed.) (downers Grove: intervarsity Press.), p. 657. 55 Gary deMar, God and Government Vol. 3. (american vision, inc. atlanta, Ga., 200), p. 36. 56 r.J. rushdoony, The Word Flux, p. 36. Quote found in: Gary deMar, God and Government Vol. 3. (american vision inc., atlanta, Ga., 200), p. 45. 57 elwell, W. a., & Comfort, P. W. (200). Tyndale Bible Dictionary. tyndale reference library. (Wheaton, ill.: tyndale house Publishers), p. 789.
39 40

22

Notes
58 Wood, d. r. W., Wood, d. r. W., & Marshall, i. h. (996, 982, 962). New Bible Dictionary. includes index. (electronic ed. of 3rd ed.) p. 658. downers Grove: intervarsity Press. 59 nihilism rejects any objective basis for society and its morality, the very concept of objectivity, even the possibility of communication itself. donald Kagan, Academic Questions 8, no. 2 (spring 995): 56. 60 Bill federer, 3 Secular Reasons Why America Should Be Under God. (amerisearch, inc., st. louis, Mo, 2004) p. 66. 6 dr. ray Bohlin, safe sex and the facts posted at probe.org 62 ibid. 63 ibid. 64 ibid. 65 dr. ray Bohlin, the epidemic of sexually transmitted diseases found at probe.org 66 dr. ray Bohlin, safe sex and the facts posted at probe.org. 67 Phillip edgcumbe hughes, Christian Ethics in Secular Society, p. 27. 68 Code of 1650, pp. 90-92; see also holy trinity at 467. 69 david Barton, Original Intent (Wallbuilders, aledo, tX 996), p. 8. 70 The Laws of Harvard College (Boston: samuel hall, 790), pp. 7-8. 7 Documentary History of Yale University, franklin B. dexter, editor (new haven: yale university Press, 96), p. 27, november , 70, Proceedings of the trustees. 72 ibid; p. 9. 73 Kerby anderson, Moral Dilemmas (Word Publishing, nashville, 998) p.8. 74 Judith levine stop the Wedding! Why Gay Marriage isnt radical enough www. freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/95350/posts The Village Voice, July 23, 2003. 75 Bob Knight, talking Points on Marriage, posted at nogaymarriage.com. 76 stanley Kurtz, the end of Marriage in scandinavia: the Conservative Case for same-sex Marriage Collapses, The Weekly Standard (february 2, 2004), 27. 77 frC President tony Perkins delivered this speech to a crowd of more than 20,000 people from the seattle, Washington, area who attended a rally in support of traditional marriage. 78 Kerby anderson, Moral Dilemmas (Word Publishing, nashville, 998), p.9. 79 ibid. 80 ibid, p. 20. 8 ibid. 82 feinberg, J. s., feinberg, P. d., & huxley, a. (996, 993). Ethics for a Brave new world. (Wheaton, ill.: Crossway Books.)

23

B rannon howse
83 for more details on these texts, see norm Geisler and William nix, A General Introduction to the Bible (Chicago: Moody, 982), 285, 366; Bruce Metzger, The Text of the New Testament (new york: oxford university, 964), 30-54; and archibald t. robertson, An Introduction to the Textual Criticism of the the New Testament (nashville: Broadman, 925), 70. 84 Josh Mcdowell, Christianity: Hoax or History? (Pocket Guides, tyndale house Publishers, inc., Wheaton, il. 989). p.52. 85 Benjamin B. Warfield, An Introduction to the Textual Criticism of the New Testament (london: n.p., 886), 54. 86 William f albright, The Archaeology of Palestine (Baltimore: Penguin, 949, p.27-28). . 87 Josh Mcdowell, The New Evidence that Demands a Verdict, (thomas nelson Publishers, nashville, tn, 999), p. 37. 88 ibid; p. 380. 89 ibid; p. 373. 90 Archaeological Confirmation of the New Testament, p.33, quoted by dr. norm Geisler in his book Unshakable Foundations (Bethany house, Mpls, Mn, 200), p.27. 9 The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament, 222. Quoted by dr. norm Geisler in his book Unshakable Foundations (Bethany house, Mpls, Mn, 200), p. 272. 92 norm Geisler and Peter Bocchino, Unshakable Foundations (Bethany house, Mpls, Mn, 200), p. 270. 93 What Mean These Stones? (new haven; Conn.: american schools of oriental research, 94), p., quoted by dr. norm Geisler in his book Unshakable Foundations (Bethany house, Mpls, Mn, 200), p. 27. 94 the Masters seminary (997; 2002). Masters seminary Journal volume 8 (vol. 8, Page 222). 95 erwin lutzer, Christ Among Other Gods (Chicago: Moody Press, 994), p. 62-64. 96 Matthew 2:39-40, New King James Version, (thomas nelson Bibles, Word Publishing, 997). 97 dr. frank harber, Reason for Believing (new leaf Press, Green forrest, ar 998), p. 9-20. 98 tim lahaye, Jesus Who Is He? (Multnomah Books, sisters, oregon, 996), p. 265.

24

about the author

Brannon howse is president and founder of american family Policy institute and Worldview Weekend, americas largest Christian worldview conference series. founded in 993, Worldview Weekend is now held in seventeen states each year with an annual attendance of approximately 20,000. Brannon is also: founder of www.christianworldviewnetwork.com, which features columns and articles by some of americas best Christian worldview authors and speakers. founder of Worldview Weekend online institute (www. worldviewtraining.com), a 2-week online course exploring the Biblical worldview. the course is also available as in-class curriculum featuring leader and student manuals, dvds, Cds, and tests. a trained tenor soloist who has sung in hundreds of american churches as well as at the anaheim Convention Center for 0,000 delegates of the association of Christian schools international. host of the Worldview Weekend family reunion held in Branson, Missouri, each spring and attended by more than 2,000 people. the three-day event features nationally known speakers, comedians, and musicians. has conducted research for the White house office of faith Based Ministries as well as for best-selling authors Michael reagan, Josh Mcdowell, and david limbaugh.

25

 the education reporter and frequent guest host for The Michael Reagan Show. author of five books on education, family issues, and Christianity, including An Educational Abduction, Reclaiming A Nation At Risk and One Nation Under Man?: The Worldview War Between Christians and the Secular Left. President of Worldview Weekend Publishing. Co-host of Christian Worldview This Week, a weekly radio broadcast heard on more than 225 stations each week. has apppeared on over 600 radio and television programs, including The OReilly Factor (fox news), The News on MSNBC, Truths That Transform with Dr. D. James Kennedy, The G. Gordon Liddy Show, The Michael Reagan Show, The Ken Hamblin Show, The Oliver North Show, Action Sixties, Point of View, Family News and Focus, U.S.A. Radio News, and Standard News.

about worlDview weekenD conferences

Christians today are bombarded with information and opinions by the media, schools, and government. no one can hope to assimilate the avalanche of data. so who could possibly understand the times in which we live? not many! But those men and women who do become the next generation of leaders. the Bible speaks of a small tribe in israel that had understand26

ing of the times and knew what israel ought to do, and, as a result, they became leaders ( Chronicles 2:32). God expects his people to seek earnestly for the truth, rewarding with greater responsibility those who comprehend. Worldview Weekend Conferences are dedicated to teaching you how to understand our times and grasp the opportunity that will give you for leadership. Worldview Weekend features nationally known speakers such as Josh Mcdowell, david limbaugh, david Barton, Kirk Cameron, david Jeremiah, Kerby anderson, star Parker, al denson, erwin lutzer, and others. u.s. Congressman tom delay has been a keynote speaker at Worldview Weekend, as well as the honorable dick armey when he was u.s. house Majority leader. to find out more about how to attend the Worldview Weekend of your choice, go to www.worldviewweekend.com.

27

worlDview weekenD resources

We invite you to take advantage of these helpful Worldview Weekend resources:
visit worldviewweekend.com and check out the Berean Club. you can load more than 25 Worldview Weekend keynote presentations onto your ipod, listen online or burn a cd. further your worldview knowledge by taking our online course, Developing a Christian Worldview. try our free demo at worldviewtraining.com We have dvds featuring Kirk Cameron, Ray Comfort, David Barton, Josh McDowell, Sean McDowell and others. Check out our books and dvds in our bookstore at worldviewweekend.com visit christianworldviewnetwork.com for daily news and columns from a Biblical worldview perspective. Brannons book, One Nation Under Man? The Worldview War Between Christians and the Secular Left, can be purchased from our online bookstore at worldviewweekend.com.