Overcoming Doubt

             In my last post, I argued that doubt is normal and not something to fear or be ashamed of. Instead, doubt ought to be embraced as an opportunity to research and further increase our confidence that the claims of Christianity are true. In this post, I would like to continue this topic and discuss the best ways to deal with doubt when we experience it.

            Again, the first thing we must do is embrace doubt and not fear it. When we have doubts, we need to bring them out in the open and talk about them rather than ignore them. During periods of doubt we should talk to others who have struggled with similar questions to benefit from their experience and the answers they found to their own questions. There will never be a point in our lives when we will be sure to never again experience periods of doubt, so it should not surprise us. Even C.S. Lewis, probably one of the greatest defenders of Christianity who ever lived, once said “There are times when my Christian faith seems very improbable.” But Lewis recognized that it is human nature to have doubts occasionally, no matter what our beliefs are, and he follows the above quote by saying “... there were many times when I was an atheist that atheism seemed improbable as well.”

            We can separate doubt into two general categories, each of which will require a different approach. In a broad sense, doubt will be either intellectual or emotional. Intellectual doubt occurs when we encounter new information that raises questions to which we do not yet have answers. It is good for this to happen occasionally because it means we are learning new things and exploring new territory. We may hear of a new scientific theory that seems to explain the origin of the universe by purely naturalistic processes, or some historical evidence that seems to cast doubt on the resurrection of Jesus or the trustworthiness of the Bible. This type of doubt can be overcome by looking further into the matter and finding answers. As a result, once a particular question has been answered, it may not be a source of further doubt in the future.

            The other type of doubt, likely far more common, is emotional doubt. This kind of doubt often (but not always) is triggered by a personal event, perhaps a tragedy. Emotional doubt often has something to do with the abundance of suffering and evil in the world, which causes us to wonder how a good God could exist and tolerate such things. But it may be as simple as a feeling that our belief in God is silly and similar, for example, to belief in Santa Claus. This doubt is very much like the inevitable fluctuation of feelings in a long-term marriage. And unlike intellectual doubt, it can have the same cause repeatedly.

 It is very important for us to be able to distinguish between these two types of doubt. Have we stumbled upon a new question that we should look into further? Or is it simply a temporary feeling that makes Christianity seem unlikely to be true?

            Next, we need to be familiar with the most common arguments for and against Christianity. It is tempting to focus entirely on arguments for Christianity and assume this is sufficient, but this may leave us defenseless if we encounter an argument in conversation that we’ve never heard before. Some of us will dig more deeply into this than others, but we all should have a general knowledge of both sides. There are an abundance of books, Youtube videos, and other resources that many of us never take advantage of. If we know the basic arguments in favor of Christianity, we will be prepared when we encounter objections. And if we are familiar with the basic objections, we will be prepared and not be caught off guard when we hear them.

One mistake that often leads to people walking away from God is that as soon as they encounter a challenge to their beliefs, they assume that because they haven’t yet found an adequate answer, there must not be one. If we stumble upon an unresolved issue or question, we should continue to search for an answer! Undoubtedly it’s a question that many people have struggled with before us, and at least some of them have found an answer.

Debates over the truth of Christianity tend to focus on science, history, or philosophy. Scientific arguments deal with the origin of the universe and life, whether there are sufficient naturalistic explanations for what we observe, and whether there are signs of an intelligent designer. Historical arguments deal with the reliability of the Bible and whether Jesus was a real historical figure, and whether He literally rose from the dead. And philosophical arguments deal with problems such as the abundance of suffering the world, God’s sovereignty vs. human free will, or issues having to do with morality. Familiarity with each of these categories is essential to building up a solid defense against doubt.

Additionally, we should also always remember that the case for Christianity is cumulative. No single piece of information is enough to prove that God is real and the claims of Christianity are true. Often, when we doubt, it is because our minds have fixated on a single weak point in the evidence for Christianity. Maintaining a sense of the big picture will help keep things in the proper perspective.

Most of these ideas must be implemented on an ongoing basis. They may be useful preparation, but what do we do when we are afflicted with sudden doubt? It’s not as though we can always drop what we’re doing and conduct research. I have found that the most effective method for dealing with this has to do with the idea that doubt is either intellectual or emotional. The key is to choose two things to remember that we will keep ready for moments of doubt. The first should be the single most convincing intellectual support for Christianity that we know of. My personal favorite is the historicity of Jesus’ resurrection, because it is so central to Christianity and also one of the most well-attested historical events having to do with Christianity. Alternatively, we should choose one event in our own lives, a time when God clearly intervened in our lives that is difficult to explain otherwise (if we can’t think of one, we ought to ask God to provide one!). The idea is that we will have both of these readily available to call to mind whenever we have moments of doubt, whether the doubt is intellectual or emotional, without requiring the lengthy process of conducting further research. And each may be most effective for the opposite type of doubt. For example, if the intellectual case for Christianity begins to appear insufficient, we can remind ourselves of our personal experience of God’s intervention in our lives. And if we begin to doubt our own feelings and experience, we can remind ourselves of the objective intellectual facts that also points toward the truth of Christianity.

Finally, we must eventually make a commitment regarding what we believe. Periods of doubt should be transitional and temporary. There will still be times when we will wonder if we really know what we think we know, no matter how certain we are of it. But we cannot remain in a position of uncertainty forever, since we can never have 100% certainty about anything (unless we are omniscient!). Eventually, we have to make a choice, or else we will forever waver between one option and another. This is similar to getting married. It is impossible to know with 100% certainty that we have chosen the right spouse, but if we insisted on this level of certainty, we simply would never get married! And once we are married, we should not allow rising and falling emotions cause us to go back on our commitment. Similarly, once we’ve determined that belief in the truth of Christianity is justified, we need to make a commitment and determine not to allow temporary periods of doubt to sway us. Otherwise we will never move forward in our relationship with God. This doesn’t mean we won’t experience times when we wonder whether we made the correct choice. But if we have put in the necessary time and effort to look into the evidence for Christianity for ourselves, when our emotions waver, we will be able to remind ourselves that we have done so and that there is no need for our temporary doubt to undermine our beliefs. 

Is it Wrong to Doubt?

James 1:6 says that a person who doubts is like “a wave of the sea, blown and tossed by the wind.” And in John 20:29, after Thomas doubts that Jesus has risen from the dead, Jesus says to him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed." Verses such as these certainly don’t cast doubt in a positive light. On the surface, they seem to be implying that God will be more pleased with us if we believe without questioning and never have doubts. Many authors and speakers warn against the dangers of doubt and encourage us to take every thought captive, not allowing ourselves to entertain any thoughts that are contrary to the truth. But is doubt a sin? Is it dangerous? Should it be avoided?  

The answer is complicated, but in a simple sense I would answer “no” to all three of these questions. However, I would like to explore this issue a little more deeply, because I feel that there are some misconceptions we may have about doubt that could be a greater threat to our beliefs than doubt itself.

Often we fear that if we experience doubt, fellow Christians, or God Himself, will be disappointed with us. We may think it is a sign of weak faith, or perhaps even that we are not true Christians. And even if we admit to ourselves that there are times we experience doubt, we may be reluctant to admit it to others. It is imperative that we understand doubt and not be afraid of it, as doubt actually is a necessary and powerful tool for acquiring knowledge, determining truth, and setting our beliefs on a solid foundation.

The first thing we must understand is that doubt is normal. In fact, we will all have doubts at some point about nearly everything, so it isn’t unusual that sometimes we may doubt the truth of Christianity. At various times I have doubted whether I was marrying the right person, whether I had chosen the right career, whether I could trust a friend of mine, my ability to perform a particular task, and all kinds of other things. Sometimes our doubts are reasonable, and sometimes they’re completely crazy. As we mature, we (hopefully) become better at distinguishing between reasonable and unreasonable doubts, and are better able to tune out the unreasonable ones. But there will always be times when we pause for a moment and ask ourselves whether we’re really sure about a particular thing. As George W. Bush wrote in his book Decision Points, “If you haven’t doubted, you haven’t thought very hard about what you believe.”

Doubt is not only normal, it occurs involuntarily, which is key to understanding whether it is inherently wrong. We don’t choose to doubt something; it is simply a natural result of certain thoughts and emotions. Therefore, doubt cannot be a sin, since sin is a voluntary rebellious choice. Our only choice is how to respond to it.

The second important point is that doubt is not only normal, it is essential for critical thinking. Beliefs that have not been doubted are on a very shaky foundation, whereas those that have been doubted at some point and have stood the test are much stronger. The default position whenever we hear new information should be to doubt it, and it is this doubt that motivates us to check it out for ourselves and find out whether it is true. The alternative would be to accept automatically any new information we hear, which would be extreme gullibility. It is this process of doubting and checking things out that weeds out unfounded assertions and helps us become more confident in the things that are reasonable to believe.

Thirdly, doubt is not a position, it’s a method. Many who hear the word “doubt” may think of it as the opposite of belief or faith. We may imagine that it means a permanent resistance to acceptance of the claims of Christianity, but this is not what the word implies. Like I said before, the opposite of doubt is gullibility. It is the starting position we ought to have regarding any new information, but the goal will always be to investigate further until we can accept or reject a proposition. In either case, we don’t remain in a position of doubt. Doubt is merely the middle ground between accepting and rejecting a truth claim.

How, then, do we interpret verses such as the ones mentioned above? To answer this question we must differentiate between two different types of doubt a Christian may have. The first type is doubt that God is real, the Bible is accurate, or that Christianity is true. The second type is doubt that God can be trusted or that He really loves us or has our best interests in mind. Notice that the latter already accepts those things that are doubted by the former. I believe it is to this second type of doubt that the verses above are referring. The verse in James is referring to asking God for wisdom, but then doubting that He will answer that prayer. And Thomas was not doubting anything basic such as the existence of God. He had been around Jesus for quite a while and seen plenty of evidence that Jesus was who He said He was. Jesus was chastising him for not trusting that He would do what He said He would (rise from the dead). Therefore, these verses are not condemning the former type of doubt. In fact, elsewhere the Bible encourages a healthy skepticism, such as in 1 Thes. 5:21, where it says to “..test all things” and “hold fast to the good.”

To return to the point I made earlier, it is particularly important that we create an environment in which we are all encouraged to bring up our questions and doubts, to admit when we’re struggling with certain beliefs and talk to those who may be able to help us work through it. If we fail to do this, Christians who struggle with doubt will be far more likely to walk away from God not only because they haven’t found adequate answers to their questions, but also because of the perceived necessity to put on a facade and pretend they are not feeling and thinking what they are.

The logical follow-up issue is how to deal with and overcome doubt. However, this is a topic for another time. For now, my main goal has been to argue that doubt is normal, not something to be afraid or ashamed of, and something which we need to be more willing to discuss openly without judgment. Ultimately, doubt can be a powerful tool for making more solid our conviction that Christianity is true, by putting it to the test and revealing that it does hold up to scrutiny.

Are there Biblical Money Principles?

From Larry Burkett to Dave Ramsey, Christian financial experts have gained quite a following. A while ago I got ahold of a copy of one of Dave Ramsey’s books just to see for myself why he is so popular. While some of his ideas are very good, I found myself disagreeing with significant parts of his advice. One of the primary problems is that he has a single plan for all people in all varieties of situations, while in reality, every financial plan must be unique. Since this is a blog about Christianity and not personal finance, I don’t intend to discuss the details or merits of his or anyone else’s particular financial advice. However, reading his book illustrated the importance, for those who follow Dave Ramsey or any other Christian financial expert, to think critically about their advice and not assume it always is applicable to our particular situation. My fear is we may conclude automatically that any advice “based on biblical money principles” is trustworthy, that is it sufficient on its own to prepare us for making financial decisions, or perhaps even that it will guarantee God’s blessing on our finances.

The first question we must consider is whether there are, in fact, biblical money principles. The answer depends on what we mean by “money principles.” If we mean that the Bible provides general wisdom that can be applied to personal financial management, particularly regarding avoidance of imprudent types or amounts of debt, wise stewardship, generosity, and refraining from valuing money too much, then principles such as these certainly can be found in the Bible.

However, if we mean anything beyond this, such as that the Bible contains investment advice, likely we are reading something into the Bible that never was intended. We need to be cautious about how we read and understand the Bible. We certainly shouldn’t minimize or reduce what it says, but at the same time, we should avoid trying to make it say more than it does. Unfortunately, this may happen frequently when it comes to money management.

The idea that the Bible contains investment advice or similar information may sound odd to some. However, I have heard multiple Christian authors and speakers make this claim. Some have proclaimed that following these principles guarantee wealth, an idea that, hopefully, raises a red flag to all of us. Others have avoided making this claim but still argue that there are principles found in the Bible that, if followed, are guaranteed will improve our financial situations and be more pleasing to God than the “worldly” way of managing money.

I’ve heard that there are 2,500 Bible verses that talk about money. If we read some of these verses, we’ll find that they do provide good general wisdom. However, the problem is that we may come to believe that the Bible is entirely sufficient for developing financial competence, and furthermore, we may become afraid of trusting any source of financial advice unless it claims to derive its principles from the Bible.

            But does such a distinction even exist between “secular” and “Godly” money management principles? The Bible contains general admonitions to use our money wisely as well as ethically, but much of money management has to do with neutral facts and concepts that have nothing to do with wisdom or morality, such as math and knowledge of various financial products. Therefore, relying entirely on the Bible would exclude many important concepts from our financial knowledge. For example, there is nothing in the Bible that can help us decide how best to allocate the investments in our 401(k).

This may seem obvious. But some Christian money experts, aware of this fact, include general concepts in their advice while claiming to derive them directly from the Bible, when in fact they did not. At one time I heard someone on a Christian radio station who was answering money questions from callers. He suggested that a caller should diversify his/her investments, because it says in Ecclesiastes 11:2 that we should “Invest in seven ventures, yes, in eight; you do not know what disaster may come upon the land.” The implication was that he read the verse in Ecclesiastes and from it determined that it’s wise to diversify our investments. But this simply is not the case. Anyone with even minimal financial knowledge knows that diversification is imperative for achieving an optimal balance between risk and return, so this is not a special biblical revelation that is absent from “secular” money management. Rather, this advisor already had the principle in mind, then searched the Bible for a verse that could be interpreted to corroborate what he knew already to be true. This is reading into the BIble, and is dangerous as a general method because of the risk of interpreting the Bible to say precisely what we want it to say.

My main concern is that the presentation of general principles as if they are special divine revelation may establish a distrust in any source that is not based on the Bible, which, as I stated earlier, may result in a deficiency in our financial literacy. Further, some people, believing the ideas of a particular money expert were derived from the Bible, may be afraid to question or not follow that advice. But since all specific financial advice ultimately comes human minds, there is always a chance that it is not good advice.

Therefore, we should not avoid financial advice from outside the Bible, and we should not blindly accept advice simply because it comes from a Christian and claims to be derived from the Bible. It is important to educate ourselves from multiple sources and use our own judgement when making financial decisions. There is no problem with incorporating what the Bible says regarding money as long as we supplement it with current and more detailed information on all subjects that help us manage our money well.

And, of course, we need to avoid having the impression that there are any biblical principles that, if followed, will guarantee any level of financial success. If we are careful to understand the Bible, we will realize that achieving wealth, or even mere material comfort, is beside the point entirely. It would be contradictory (among other things) to believe that the Bible contains principles to guarantee such a thing. Whether we have wealth is based on how wise we are with our money, and some external factors outside of our control. Certainly we should be responsible and good stewards of our money, and take proper care of our families and others under our care. But our focus should not be on having wealth as an end in itself, but as a means to ends that are aligned with God’s will for our lives. We can (and should) make ourselves available to God and bring glory to Him no matter what level of wealth we have.

Prayer: How Does It Really Work?

James 5:16 promises that “The prayer of a righteous person is powerful and effective.” There are numerous other verses that declare the effectiveness of prayer. But if you have put any thought into prayer, likely you’ve wondered, as I have, how it actually works. You may even have wondered whether it works at all.

There are some indirect ways in which we could say truthfully that prayer is effective. For example, it draws us closer to God and helps us to align our will with His. However, while true, this is not generally what we mean when we wonder whether prayer is effective. Usually we are wondering whether our requests will be granted.

But the idea of God answering our prayers raises some puzzling questions. If God knows everything, then He already is aware of whatever He plans to do in the future. If prayer is a request that God perform a particular action, if the prayer works, wouldn’t it entail influencing what God will choose to do? If so, wouldn’t this mean that God would choose a different action from what He intended originally? In that case, it would be impossible for God to know His own future actions. Either His foreknowledge was correct, in which case He could not alter His intent in response to prayer, or else He didn’t know the future (because the future turned out to be different from what He “knew”).

While these may seem to be strong challenges, they are illusory, not actual, problems. Close inspection reveals an erroneous assumption. Though it’s difficult to comprehend, God does not experience time in the same way we do.

The difficulty only arises if at one moment, God is planning a particular action, but then at the next moment He decides to do something different. However, it is only within the universe that the passage of time is experienced. Without getting into too much detail, according to physics, time began at the origin of the universe in the same way that matter did. As a result, it is only within the universe that the passage of time is experienced. Further, the concept of time cannot be separated from physical matter. Outside of the universe (whatever that may mean), time has no meaning. Therefore, to God (an immaterial Being), every moment is the present. Because He does not experience the passage of time, there isn’t one moment in which He’s planning to do one thing, and another in which He decides to do something else.

But if God cannot change His intent, how can prayer (a request intended to influence God’s intent) be effective? I don’t claim to have figured this out completely, but my best guess is that God simply incorporates our prayer into His original choice. Although from our perspective each of our prayers occurs at a particular point in time, God “hears” all prayers simultaneously. It’s hard to visualize, but in that single “moment”, from God’s perspective, He performs every action He ever has or will do. Therefore, at that “moment”, it’s entirely possible for Him to do something in response to a particular prayer, regardless of when the prayer occurs. He didn’t have one intent, hear a prayer, and then have a different intent as a result of the prayer. Rather, He always is aware of the prayer and (at least in some cases) performs the requested action in response. The prayer does not change His mind from one plan to another; it is part of the reason for the original action.

This solution preserves the idea that prayer is important, because it means it’s entirely possible that if we don’t pray for a particular thing, that thing may not happen. The prayer has had a direct impact on the outcome even though God does not change His intent.

This idea also implies a possibility that I would like to mention briefly simply because of how intriguing it is. Because God is not limited by time, it seems to follow that it might be effective to pray for past events, as long as we don’t yet know the outcome. If God hears all prayers simultaneously, in a single “moment”, that would mean the timing of our prayers have no impact on their effectiveness (since the “moment” at which God hears them is not before, after, or during the prayer no matter when it takes place). Therefore, there seems to be no reason that a prayer offered after an event couldn’t impact that event. For example, suppose you know a friend who is taking a difficult test from 12:00 to 1:00, and it’s now 1:05. If you have not yet heard whether the friend passed the test, a prayer for them at this time still may be effective. However, it seems to me (though only intuitively) that once you’ve heard whether your friend passed, further prayer would not be necessary.* This is not a well-developed idea, and it has no impact on the general subject of the effectiveness of prayer, but I thought I would mention it briefly because of how interesting it is.

Ultimately, we should not expect to understand prayer completely. There have been several attempts to study prayer scientifically, with varying results, but it is difficult to study as a result of its nature. Nevertheless, there is solid anecdotal evidence of its effectiveness, as well as the unambiguous promise of God. And, fortunately, it is not necessary to understand prayer in order to do it!

*Science nerds: doesn’t this remind you of quantum mechanics?

Are there Alternative Explanations for the Empty Tomb?

While there are many strong arguments for the existence of God, most (if not all) of these are general and do not support a specific God. It may be possible to show that there was some force or entity external to the universe that set it into motion, but this is nothing more than the God of Deism, an impersonal and largely undefined God. There is a long way yet to go to argue for Christianity.

There are many arguments in favor of Christianity, but the strongest argument is centered on the Resurrection. Paul affirms this in 1 Corinthians 15:14: “And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith.” If we can be confident that Jesus rose from the dead, this is a solid enough foundation that most (if not all) other challenges will not be enough to topple our confidence in the truth of Christianity.

However, the mere fact that the tomb was empty on Sunday morning is not enough to prove that Jesus rose from the dead. Indeed, there have been numerous alternative theories that we must face before we can assert that the Resurrection is the only plausible explanation.

1. The Conspiracy Theory

According to this theory, the disciples stole Jesus’ body from the tomb in order to fool everyone into thinking He had risen from the dead. Unlike the others, this theory is mentioned explicitly in the New Testament (Matthew 28:13). This would explain the empty tomb as well as the reports of the sightings of Jesus after His death: the disciples did not actually see Jesus but made up all the stories.

There are several problems with this theory:

• There is no explanation of how they got past the guards at the tomb.  
• There was no motive. It’s not as if the disciples gained any popularity, wealth, or political power as a result of proclaiming Jesus’ resurrection. In fact, from a material perspective, their lives became much worse as a result!
• They all refused to recant their claims, even faced with death. No one would die for a lie.

2. The Hallucination Theory

It is obvious from analysis of the Conspiracy Theory that the disciples sincerely believed that Jesus had risen from the dead and could not have made it up. However, many people sincerely believe things that are still false. The Hallucination Theory suggests that the disciples, overcome with grief at the death of their leader, merely imagined that they saw Him.

Problems with this theory include the following:

• Hallucinations are individual events, like dreams. A group of people cannot have the same hallucination at the same time, and yet there are multiple reports in the Gospels of groups of people, even at one point 500 at a single time, seeing Jesus alive.
• The sightings continued over a period of 40 days. Hallucinations generally are isolated events and would not be likely to continue consistently over such a long period of time.
• Since the body would still have been in the tomb in this scenario, it would have been easy for the authorities to show this to be the case and prevent Christianity from ever spreading in the first place.

3. The Swoon Theory

If the disciples weren’t lying or hallucinating, is there any other possible theory that explains the sightings and the empty tomb without accepting that Jesus rose from the dead? In fact, there is. This theory states that Jesus did not completely die on the cross, but was only mistaken as being dead. Once He had lain in the cool, dark tomb for a few days, he was revived and escaped, finding His disciples and proclaiming that He had returned from the dead.

This theory avoids the major problems of the first two, but it actually creates more problems than the other two:

• Anyone who knows the process of crucifixion would rightly doubt that anyone could survive it.
• The Romans were trained killers. It is incredibly unlikely that they could have been mistaken about whether Jesus was dead.
• Lying in a cold, dark tomb without food, water, or medical care hardly seems like the most likely place to recover.
• How would Jesus have single-handedly rolled away the stone and overpowered the guards, especially in His weakened state?
• How would Jesus, considering the state of His body after the crucifixion process, convince His disciples that He was a risen, victorious Savior? Even if He somehow made it this far, it would be very obvious that He was still near death.  

4. The Wrong Tomb

What if the disciples were not lying, didn’t hallucinate, and Jesus was in fact still dead and in the tomb? This is the theory that the disciples were simply mistaken about the tomb in which Jesus was buried. They went to the wrong tomb on Sunday morning, found it empty, and thus began the rumor that Jesus had risen from the dead. At this point desperation is evident, as this theory seems to fall even shorter than the others:

• It doesn’t explain the appearances of Jesus.
• It is nearly impossible that all of the disciples would have been mistaken; surely at least one would have realized the mistake and found the real tomb with Jesus’ body still in it.
• The Roman or Jewish authorities could have easily pointed out the location of the correct tomb and prevented Christianity from ever gaining momentum.

There are additional theories beyond these four, although these are the most commonly heard. I have only dealt briefly with each, so for those who found this interesting, I encourage you to look into the subject further! Books such as The Case for Christ by Lee Strobel, I Don’t Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist by Norman Geisler and Frank Turek, The Handbook of Christian Apologetics by Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli, Who Moved the Stone? By Frank Morison, and Cold Case Christianity by J. Warner Wallace provide much greater detail.

However, I would like to make one more interesting point. The purpose of these theories is to cast doubt on the resurrection of Jesus, but not only do they fail to do so, they result in further support of the resurrection. This is because their very existence proves that there was an empty tomb to explain in the first place. Without it, there would have been no need for alternative theories. As a result, it’s completely impossible for anyone to try to argue against the resurrection of Jesus by claiming that the tomb was not empty, and, therefore, the central piece of evidence for the truth of Christianity rests on a solid foundation.

What Exactly is an Idol?

We would all agree that while the Bible was written long ago in very different cultures from our own, it still is relevant to our lives. However, there are certain portions that need to be “translated” in order to make sense to us in a modern context. For example, blessings often are described as increases in our flocks, but none of us fear that if we ask for God’s blessing our home will be filled with sheep. This wording is specific to shepherds, but when we read it, we understand that it means blessings or prosperity in a general sense.  

The same can be said regarding idols. During the time the Bible was written, there were many people who worshiped literal figures made out of gold, or wood, or other material. However, obviously this isn’t quite so common in the modern age, at least where we live. Yet, we know this doesn’t mean we are free from the danger of having idols. In order to guard against this, we need to understand what it means to have an idol in a modern context.

No doubt we all have heard a teaching or read a devotional on this topic. Often, the word “idol” is used to refer to things that take our time away from God, that are more important to us than God, or that have a higher priority in our lives than God. According to this definition, things such as hobbies, relationships, careers, etc. are labeled idols. It is said that we all worship something; if not God, then something else (such as the material things mentioned above).

No doubt this is a valid point. However, I believe this definition of idols is incomplete and perhaps even misleading. This would mean that I’m “worshipping” books if I spend more time reading than with God. But doesn’t worshiping God mean more than giving Him time? Defining an idol simply as something that takes our time and focus away from God seems to me to imply an inadequate definition of worship. Worshiping God is more than simply giving Him our time. It means to give Him honor, to acknowledge His goodness and sovereignty over us, and literally offer our entire lives to Him. I may waste a lot of time on an activity with little long-term value, but this does not mean I’m surrendering my entire life to it or reverencing it as being holy and perfect.

I would like to suggest that something is an idol not merely if we give it more time than God, but more specifically, if it takes the place of God in our lives in some way. Initially there may not seem to be any difference between these two, but I believe there is a significant contrast. I’m not referring to things that merely occupy our time or that are a priority to us, but rather, to things in which we place our trust or turn to for fulfillment when that trust or fulfillment ought to be in God alone. Assuming this definition, even things or activities that are central to the Christian life may qualify as idols, depending on the role they play in our lives.

For example, good works, or our efforts to improve our character, can become an idol if we believe we actually can earn our way to God. Abstaining from a sinful lifestyle can become an idol if we think it makes us better than other people. Obedience to God can become an idol if attempt to do so with our own power and become prideful as a result. Money can be an idol if we believe that we have enough to eliminate our need for God (or, alternatively, if we don’t have enough but assure ourselves that God will provide it because we “know” we can’t live without it). Ministry can be an idol if we derive our identity and sense of purpose from it. Tithing can be an idol if we do it as a way of “bribing” God into blessing us. Reading the Bible can become an idol if we do it primarily to create the illusion that our hearts are right with God (if in fact they are not).  

Of course, there is nothing inherently bad about these things! But that is precisely the point. It is not about the thing or activity, but rather, our attitude towards it and the role it plays in our lives. Even the most important and valuable religious disciplines can become idols if we place our trust in them rather than in God, or if we put them before our relationship with Him.

A thing also may be an idol if we turn to it in order to receive something we feel we need but are not receiving from God. In the Old Testament, idols were often worshipped for this purpose. A familiar example is the forging of the golden calf by the Israelites while Moses was receiving the stone tablets on the mountain. The Israelites were not satisfied with God’s performance for them, so they created a substitute for God from which they hoped to receive more quickly the fulfillment of their desires.

The bottom line is that anything can be an idol, even (and perhaps especially) good things. We need to be sure we understand ourselves in relation to God and what place He ought to occupy in our lives, and not let anything else occupy that place. Of course, this does not mean we cannot enjoy anything other than God or trust anything else. But it is up to each one of us to analyze our own lives and determine from what we derive our sense of purpose, and in what we have placed our trust for salvation.

Should Everyone Memorize Bible Verses?

For those of us who have been Christians for any significant length of time, it’s likely that we have been encouraged at some point to memorize Bible verses. I have what may be an uncommon opinion of Bible verse memorization, but I want to begin by acknowledging that doing so has been helpful for very many people. I’m certainly not saying that it’s universally a bad idea and should never be done. However, I generally avoid memorizing Bible verses (at least in their exact wording), and I simply want to explain my reasons for having this position.

When I was younger, I recall some of my friends from church being involved in Bible quizzing. I was never involved in these competitions myself, but I was awed by the stories I heard of kids my age having the ability to memorize and recite entire books of the Bible. Yet, even though I was fairly young, a part of me was uncomfortable with Bible quizzing. It seemed to me that mindlessly reciting the words in order to win a competition might somehow detract from the significance and impact of the words. This is not a criticism of anyone who participated in Bible quizzing, it’s simply the thought I had at the time.

Perhaps one of the ideas behind Bible Quizzing was that if these kids knew portions of the Bible so well, their lives couldn’t help but be enriched by the words they had memorized. But I think it possibly might have had the opposite effect: if you become too familiar with something, it can lessen the impact and become a meaningless recitation of words.

I have a one-year-old daughter, and one of the most fascinating things about her is watching her discover the world for the first time. When we take her to the park, she’s mesmerized by the leaves on the ground, the grass, sticks, and anything else she finds. I’m so accustomed to seeing these things that I barely notice them anymore; they’re like background noise that is tuned out. But from her perspective, this was the first time she had ever seen them up close, so they occupied her entire focus. This same phenomenon can happen with words if they are heard, read, or spoken in exactly the same form too frequently; they begin to be stale and less impactful than they might be otherwise. We hear the beginning, realize it’s something we’ve heard many times before, and find it hard not to tune out the rest.        

            It’s important to realize that Bible verses aren’t magic words; they’re not incantations or spells that we say, producing some sort of magical effect. Yes, they are powerful words, but the power comes from their meaning, and the impact that meaning has on us.I still remember the first verse I ever memorized, Phillipians 4:8: “Finally, my friends, keep your minds on whatever is true, pure, right, holy, friendly, and proper. Don’t ever stop thinking about what is truly worthwhile and worthy of praise.” If I read that and truly grasp its meaning and importance, it will hopefully help me manage my own thoughts in a productive and beneficial way. However, if I were to read it in another language that I didn’t understand, would it have the same effect? Clearly not. It’s not merely reading or reciting the words that has an impact on my life; it’s my ability to grasp their meaning, and then to apply it.  

            This is why I generally avoid memorizing Bible verses. I’ve memorized several in the past (and still remember them), but those verses have unfortunately become some of the least meaningful to me, because they’re too familiar. I can recite them without thinking about the words, and that’s precisely the problem.

            I believe the solution is to be familiar with everything in the Bible, and obviously in some cases this will result in virtual memorization of some portions; but it’s possible that, by avoiding focusing on mere memorization, the point of a verse may become fixed in our minds and have an impact on us without becoming stale or easy to tune out. As a result, our attempts to apply those words (and their meaning) to our lives may be far more effective. Once again, memorizing verses has been helpful to many people, and to anyone for whom this is true, I certainly wouldn’t suggest that you stop doing so. However, it’s possible that for others complete memorization may be counterproductive, and I believe it’s wise for each of us to consider for ourselves what would be the best way for us to ensure that the words and ideas in the Bible can be most impactful and familiar.