AI and Ethics: 10 Concerns
Plato criticized the use of the original clay tablet. There was concern that people would rely on writing instead of memory. People would seem to know many things, but not actually know anything deeply. Also, written texts cannot defend themselves when misunderstood, unlike spoken conversations.
Even the technology of the clay tablet had drawbacks. We would be wise to consider the potential problems of AI.
Writing out “Artificial Intelligence” reminds us of something important. The intelligence of AI is artificial. It is not the same as naturally occurring human intelligence. AI has different advantages and different limitations. Awareness of both is critical. As well as understanding the vast difference between raw facts and wisdom.
I share 10 concerns below, though others could be raised. For example, I don’t share about security threats, deepfakes, and misinformation.
1) The Environmental Impact of AI
Water is used in AI data centers for cooling; a lot of water. A less efficient model, for example ChatGPT3, consumes the equivalent of one water bottle to generate 100 words of text. Newer models are more efficient, but they have to be trained, which uses vast amounts of energy and water to do so. We are currently in an “AI arms race” leading to a proliferation of new AIs requiring training.
AI comes with a high environmental price tag. Most AI facilities draw water from municipal supplies, and about 80% of the water evaporates, removing water from the local watershed. America has a vast watershed, but it is a finite and precious resource that takes time to replenish.
It is always wrong to be haphazard with anything finite and precious. When some people are dying of thirst, and others are using AI to cheat in school, which consumes a bunch of good water, we are in a moral quagmire.
Environmentally responsible AI is a must. Thought and money must be invested in not just faster AI, but environmentally responsible AI. Also, as is pointed out below, responsible AI use includes using AI where it is actually needed. For example, creating nonessential memes is not a good use of AI.
2) The Epistemological Echo Chamber of AI
Epistemology relates to how we know things. It involves methods and how we justify what is true and false. One of the problems with AI is that it does not weigh the factuality of information. Recycling wrong data is a concern when using AI.
False information can be replicated and presented as true. It is all the more insidious because it is often accurate, trusted, and not fact-checked. People often use AI for the very reason that they do not want to take the time to do actual research. This is problematic.
You may remember the big old copy machines and the problem of making copies of copies. If an imperfection is introduced in one copy, it is then passed on. The text gets blurrier each time. That’s what AI does. Envitably, false information is in the system and is then built upon and multiplied, compounding the false information. The trajectory of relying on and getting information from AI is not good. Is the future potentially riddled with false information?
This is an ethics concern because the truth is an ethical concern. Regurgitating information does nothing to further us as a civilization. Stagnant water only breeds disease. This is especially true if something bad is introduced into the water source. This seems inevitable if AI-generated information just builds upon other AI-generated information.
AI is good for distilling, organizing, and summarizing information. It does not provide new information, even if it helps us see and understand information better. We must be wise users of AI, and not let it take our wisdom.
3) The Economic Impact of AI
AI chatbots are used in call centers to field questions and perhaps at your local Taco Bell. Most people are annoyed by call centers either way, but chatbots replacing humans still represents jobs lost. And it doesn’t stop with call centers and fast food. It impacts programmers, administrators, and many others. Some expect 9% of workers to be displaced by AI.
There is a clear economic impact of AI. This represents heartache and loss to many people and families. It also has a toll on the US. This has happened in the past. Technology has wreaked havoc on various parts of industry. The government and employers should prepare employees as best as they can. One way employers could do this is by providing retraining in other areas within the company or even allowing extra transition time so employees can prepare and find a new job.
4) The Biased Algorithms of AI
Were there “Black Nazis”? No. Never. I do not believe so. Except when AI generated pictures of them. Developers added strict “diversity filters” to correct past biases; this caused the system to force diversity in inappropriate places.
In reality, black people in Nazi-occupied lands were treated very harshly and even murdered. To picture black Nazis is not only inaccurate, it is also offensive. But AI does not have a brain or a moral compass. AI also lacks common sense and may apply rules where they do not belong, like adding racial diversity to Nazis.
AI learns by looking at millions of examples. Humans can be biased and create biased information. If an AI is trained using biased information, it will be biased. Garbage in, garbage out. One of the inherent problems with AI is that it is made by humans with human information, so it will never be foolproof.[2] The bias of AI must be understood and taken into account.
5) The Specific Ethical Concerns of AI
Related to the above concerns, there are concerns that military decisions will be made using AI, and it will make the wrong decision either because the AI is based on faulty information or because AI does not have the moral compass that humans can and should have. “These systems can get the answers wrong, and those wrong answers can be morally significant,”[3] especially in the military that focuses on the use of violence. “Military activities are inherently of great moral significance.”[4] And we have not even considered autonomous weapons systems.
There’s also the creativity-killing effects of AI. AI has “the capacity to plagiarize, and can generate content that looks like it was produced by a specific human creator, raising potential copyright issues.” Coopting creativity is no light thing. Creativity is a big part of what it means to be human and a big portion of where we receive our pleasure. To divert that duty to a machine is as foolish as it is un-fun.
Another specific ethical concern is that the data AI uses is in some ways just large-scale stealing from others. “AI artwork” is just copied and compiled from thousands of pieces of artwork.[1] It is not a new creation; it is a conglomeration.
6) The Frivolous Focus of AI
There are certainly good, wise, and positive applications of AI. Medical research benefits from AI. AI is effectively used to identify signs of tumors in X-rays. But a lot of AI is focused on creating cute kitty videos or funny spoofs (if not desecrating videos). For example, a recent analysis from Forbes found that 71% of images shared on social media are now AI-generated.
So, while AI has the potential to cure cancer, we’re sadly likely to focus on creating cute cat videos. The potential power for good that something has correlates with the seriousness with which we should evaluate and use that thing.
7) The Power Grid Problem of AI
Training AI models like GPT-4 requires immense computational power, leading to significant and unstable electricity consumption, increased carbon dioxide emissions, and power grid problems. Data center power requirements in North America rose from 2,688 megawatts in 2022 to 5,341 megawatts in 2023, driven by the demands of generative AI. Globally, data centers consumed 460 terawatt-hours in 2022, making them the 11th largest electricity consumers, between Saudi Arabia (371 terawatt-hours) and France (463 terawatt-hours) (See “Explained: Generative AI’s environmental impact”).
AI seems forced upon us. It seems to be replacing regular searches. ChatGPT queries, however, consume about five times more electricity than simple web searches. The power grid problem connects to ethics because it impacts people, their everyday lives, and finances. People should understand the impact of AI on the power grid and should be given every opportunity to speak into AI and its use.
8) The Social and Relational Problems of AI
Loneliness and social isolation are already a problem in America. The impact of social media and AI is keenly felt in social settings. It’s not just conversations that have been impacted. Marriages have been affected as spouses connect with chatbots instead of their spouse.
In fact, this is what replika.com says about their chatbot: “Always here to listen and talk. Always on your side.” The website says there are 42,160,934 users worldwide. Another provider of AI companions, nomi.ai, says, “Create an AI companion, girlfriend, boyfriend, or friend with human-level memory, a personality that’s genuinely theirs, and real emotional intelligence.”
When people are told they can create a “companion, girlfriend, boyfriend, or friend,” we are clearly in territory that requires ethical reflection. What are the implications, potentially good and bad, of creating these AI companions? These questions must be asked and carefully answered.
9) The Abrogation of Work and AI
There are certain things that technology advances allow. Many advances are good and helpful, but we should be mindful of the potential results. We should also be aware of what we are likely to sacrifice through the use of the technology.
The automation of certain things—such as simple tasks—may have few ethical ramifications, but certain things have much more moral weight. I, for example, don’t hate that washboards are now a thing of the past for most people; even while the simple practices we do each day can be profoundly important and a type of ritual when done with the right heart and mindset. But all that is to say that different things have different moral weight. A person given a school assignment of writing an essay on racism will be impacted differently if they write it themself rather than having an AI write it. The finished project may be of higher quality if the AI writes it, but the moral impact on the person will be greatly reduced. Many other examples could be given, but this proves that we must consider what tasks should and should not be given to AI.
Sometimes the work is as important as the final product. If we skip the journey, we may be shortchanging ourselves and the final destination we’ll be able to reach. Character counts, but when we skip important steps, we limit our own meaningful transformation.
10) The Anthropological Impact of AI
What is the impact of AI on what it means to be human? Technology has always profoundly shaped our understanding of humanity. AI intensifies this question as we create machines that mimic and imitate what we once thought was uniquely human.
Jason Thacker has pointed out that “Until we begin to see how these technologies shape every aspect of our lives, including how we understand what it means to be human, we will fail to understand just how far-reaching and life-altering these technologies are and will be.”[5] But the truth is we tend to use technology thoughtlessly without ever considering its impact. The colossal companies behind AI have substantial economic incentives to keep it that way.
Neil Postman, the late media theorist and cultural critic, perceptively said, “embedded in every tool is an ideological bias, a predisposition to construct the world as one thing rather than another, to value one thing over another, to amplify one sense or skill or attitude more loudly than another.”[6] AI has an inherent biased and shaping influence on people and culture.
We use human-like, anthropomorphic language to refer to AI. For example, we refer to the Alexia device and say, “she said…” What impact does it have on humans when they are regularly having “conversations” with AI chatbots? As Andy Crouch has said, we would be wise to ask: “Is this technology helping me grow in my emotional and relational capacities, or is it robbing me of the very essence of what it means to be human?”[7]
Conclusion
We have highlighted ten ethical concerns surrounding AI. We have seen the need for careful consideration of AI’s role in society, urging a balance between its benefits and potential drawbacks.
We have seen that AI’s intelligence is artificial and different from human intelligence, with its own advantages and limitations. There is a significant difference between raw facts and true wisdom. AI’s inability to discern fact from fiction can lead to the spread of misinformation, similar to the “copy of a copy” effect. AI-driven social media and chatbots can negatively impact social interactions, relationships, and potentially exacerbate loneliness. While AI can automate tasks, it’s crucial to consider the ethical implications of delegating certain tasks, as the process of work itself can be valuable for human growth and development.
The most crucial problem with AI is that it is not the truth, even as it can sometimes approximate the truth. It cannot love or show us how to love, even while it can tell us about and define love in all sorts of ways. It can tell us all sorts of things and show us all sorts of ways to do all sorts of things, but it can never be the Way. It can never be the Truth. It can never be the Life. Despite its capabilities, AI cannot replace fundamental human experiences such as truth, love, and finding meaning in life.
Notes
[1] I know all artwork is built upon and comes from the influence of many others. And I have read Steal Like an Artist. But “AI art” seems somehow soulless.
[2] “In 2018, Amazon developed an Al-powered hiring tool that exhibited gender bias. The system was trained on resumes submitted to the company over a ten-year period, and in that timeframe, men were hired more often than women. As a result, the tool learned to favor male candidates and penalized resumes that included terms associated with women. Google faced a similar issue with its face recognition technology. In 2015, the company’s image recognition system labeled a photo of two Black individuals as ‘gorillas, highlighting racial bias within the algorithm. The incident exposed the limitations of training data that lacks diversity, leading to biased outcomes. Google acknowledged the problem, issued an apology, and committed to addressing the issue. The actual model performance, though, has not been corrected.’” (Joe Chapa, “Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Military Ethics” 112 in Heather Venable, The Future of Airforce and Space Power: Intersections of Theory and Technology.).
[3] Chapa, “Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Military Ethics,” 112.
[4] Ibid., 117.
[5] Jason Thacker, “You Are Not a Machine.”
[6] Neil Postman, Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology.
[7] Andy Crouch, “Redemptive Artificial Intelligence.”
*Photo by Zulfugar Karimov
The Slippery Slope, Slopes Both Ways
I’ve often heard the slippery slope argument. If we allow such and such, such and such will follow as a matter of course. If we allow smoking, soon marijuana will be legalized. If we allow this, that will be a reality. If we allow moral decay, moral madness will follow. It seems to me those arguments have proven to be prophetic.
We should consider, however, whether the slippery slope slopes both ways. I am not here saying I know all facts or what happened in each of the following examples, but consider with me.
Here’s part of the transcript from Secrtary of War Pete Hegseth’s recent address to General and Flag Officers at Quantico, Virginia:
We unleash overwhelming and punishing violence on the enemy… We also don’t fight with stupid rules of engagement. We untie the hands of our warfighters to intimidate, demoralize, hunt and kill the enemies of our country. No more politically correct and overbearing rules of engagement, just common sense, maximum lethality and authority for warfighters.
What is a potential problem with “overwhelming and punishing violence” and demoralizing the enemy?[1] Is that one of the principles of The Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC) [2] or Just War Theory[3]? The answer is “No.” Instead, “Proportionality” is. “Overwhelming force” is more in the nuclear war vein. And what would we think if our enemies used that overwhelming force logic on us? Should we so quickly and easily disregard The Law of Armed Conflict and Just War Theory principles? What might that lead to?
Yes, getting illegal drugs and drug dealers off the streets is a good thing, but doing it legally is as well. Illegal drugs, drug dealing, and illegally killing drug dealers are illegal, and for good reason. If we celebrate and overlook the killing of noncombatants, what might we slip into? What might be allowed?
What slippery slope could we be on if we kill or murder noncombatants? At what other times and who throughout history has willy-nilly done this? What precedent does this set? What slippery course could we be setting out for?
What precedent does uncharitable and extreme speech coming from the highest office of leadership create? What’s the trickle-down effect? What are we saying is okay to our kids and the broader society? Where’s the Golden Rule? I realize the President is not the Pastor-in-Chief, but does that therefore mean that his demeanor doesn’t matter? Is that a precedent we want to set, let alone for a President?
I am not saying that masked authorities have apprehended people without legal justification. I have not followed everything with fine-toothed fervor. I do think we as a people should care about this question.
We should care that the law is followed, as people are detained who are in America unlawfully. The law must cut both ways. Further, we should care (Christians should especially care!) that these people (made in the image of God, whatever their crimes) be treated humanely. If we turn a blind eye and don’t care, have we considered what slippery slope we may be on? What about the sacredness of every human life? Could there be a slippery slope concern down the road?
Jesus said, “Take the plank out of your own eye so you can see clearly to help get the speck out of someone else’s eye.” We would be wise to do that. We would be wise to see where we might be missing slippery slopes.
The slippery slope, slopes both ways.
Notes
[1] Here’s an AI introduction and overview: “Starting in September 2025, the U.S. military, under the direction of the Trump administration, initiated a campaign of lethal strikes against boats suspected of trafficking drugs from Venezuela, often using “overwhelming force” to destroy vessels in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific. This campaign, part of “Operation Southern Spear,” escalated to over 100 people killed in more than 30 strikes by late 2025, with the U.S. justifying the actions as an “armed conflict” against cartel-operated vessels designated as terrorists…
These actions have faced intense scrutiny from international observers, human rights groups, and U.S. lawmakers, who questioned the lack of public evidence and argued that the strikes constitute extrajudicial killings rather than legal, intercepted maritime law enforcement.”
It remains to be seen what will happen with this. But we should care and not just look at the explosions of boats and celebrate. We should care what’s going on legally and what slippery slope we are on if we overlook the rule of law.
[2] Again, here’s an AI introduction and overview: The Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC), or International Humanitarian Law (IHL), is a set of international rules limiting the effects of war for humanitarian reasons. It binds all parties in an armed conflict to protect non-combatants and restrict methods of warfare based on principles of distinction, proportionality, necessity, and humanity.
Key Principles of LOAC
- Distinction: Parties must distinguish between combatants and civilians, and between military objectives and civilian objects.
- Proportionality: Attacks are prohibited if the expected incidental loss of civilian life or damage to civilian objects is excessive in relation to the anticipated direct military advantage.
- Military Necessity: Only measures necessary to achieve a legitimate military purpose and not prohibited by international law are permitted.
- Humanity (Unnecessary Suffering): Weapons or methods that cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering to combatants are forbidden.
- Honor (Chivalry): Requires a degree of fairness and mutual respect between opposing forces.
[3] https://tjaglcs.army.mil/Portals/1003/SME/ETHICS/JWT%20Booklet1.pdf
*Photo by Donald Merrill
Patriotism, Nationalism, and Christianity
Too often, American Christians come off as nationalistic. What is nationalism, and why is it problematic?
I love America. I served in the Army National Guard for 9 years and now serve in the Air National Guard as a chaplain. I have sworn to defend the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic. I do not take this lightly. I deem the ideals in the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and the Bill of Rights, and the freedoms and flourishing flowing from them, as worthy of protection, even calling forth the sacrifice of my life and limbs. So, I would say I am a patriot but not a nationalist.
With anything, definitions matter. The way we define patriotism and nationalism will helpfully contrast them for our purposes. There is a healthy kind of love for country and an unhealthy, biased, and blind kind. There is also a Christian kind of love for one’s country. As well as a sub-Christian love for one’s country in which the country plays a bigger role and occupies greater space in one’s affections, allegiance, hopes, and fears than it should.
Patriotism
Stephen Nathanson defines patriotism as involving:
- Special affection for one’s own country
- A sense of personal identification with the country
- Special concern for the well-being of the country
- Willingness to sacrifice to promote the country’s good[1]
It is shown through civic virtues, national loyalty, and contributions to the country’s well-being. It involves participating in democracy, respecting national symbols, and supporting fellow citizens. Serving in the military or government, voting, paying taxes, obeying the law, and learning about and respecting the country’s history and founding principles are all patriotic. All of these things are good and honorable. There is nothing wrong with being a Christian and being patriotic.
Patriotism does not confuse the city of man with the City of God. Patriotism leaves room for serious criticism of one’s country. Patriotism is not naive.
Patriotism does not mean promoting one’s country’s interests under any circumstances and by any means. The patriot can and should recognize a higher moral principle above that of one’s own nation. A patriot does not need to and must not lose his prophetic voice. A patriot may fight for his country, but also demand that the war is just.
Nationalism
The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines nationalism as an ideology that elevates one nation or nationality above all others and places primary emphasis on promoting its culture and interests rather than those of other nations or nationalities. I would further add, from a Christian perspective, that we consider this definition in relation to God’s Kingdom. Patriotism has its rightful place and perspective within our earthly nation. But with nationalism, the nation occupies a bigger place in hearts, minds, and allegiance than is warranted. “Patriotism that loses perspective and offers our highest loyalty to a specific state is an evil and destructive thing. In essence, nationalism is the imbalanced and distorted form of something that is good—patriotism.”[2]
| Healthy Patriotism | Unhealthy Nationalism |
| America < Jesus’ Kingdom | America > Jesus’ Kingdom |
| Subservient to King Jesus and His policies | Subservient to the President and his policies |
| Ultimately concerned about Jesus’ transnational Kingdom | Ultimately concerned about America |
| Eschatology: Hope in Jesus | Eschatology: Hope in American greatness |
| The fall/problem: everyone are sinners in need of Jesus and His love and truth (right and left) and Satan is set to destroy everyone (right and left) | The fall/problem: The left (or the right) are the problem. If we can deal with them, this nation will be back to its original state (Eden/Promised Land)[3] |
| Savior/messiah: Jesus who fixes the problem of sin, is truth incarnate and thus shows us how to live—lives of love. And who will ultimately destroy Satan, sin, and death. | Savior/messiah: a strong political leader who will fix what is broken (and remember the other side is what is broken) |
| Loves everyone. Wisely, carefully, and considerately protects America. | Loves America. Brashly and thoughtlessly does whatever it thinks is in the interest of America. |
| Open to critique and correction. Not naive. Prophetic voice remains. | No critique or correction. No place for the prophetic voice. |
Powerful Push Towards Nationalism
Any powerful nation will push towards nationalism. Of course, no nation says, “We are a variable and artificial entity that sometimes fails in our moral duties, but we want your allegiance in order to increase our power and security.” Instead, God is often co-opted to bolster the country’s standing in the eyes of the people. That is why people who are nationalistic tend to be religious. A link has been made between one’s nation and one’s God.
We see the messianic undertones all over the place, from “Obamacare” to “TrumpRX.” We can trust the Führer to provide what we need. The president is my shepherd, I shall not want. The president leads me to prosperity. The President is here; I will fear no enemy.
The immense power, rich history, and traditions of the United States can inadvertently foster nationalistic tendencies. While the story of the United States, on balance, is predominantly positive, this goodness can be perilous. Nationalism becomes alluring when nations possess sufficient strength or goodness to garner deep loyalties.[4] This can facilitate false beliefs and narratives, and promote placing hope where it should not be placed.
Our nation’s “superpower status and the longevity of our political system provide a potent seedbed for nationalist ideas. When this is combined with a rather widespread belief that the United States is (or in some cases, was) a Christian nation, nationalism becomes a seductive worldview for Christians.”[5]
One of my major critiques of nationalism is that it takes something that may very well be good, or even very good, and transforms it into an absolute good.[6] Of course, every culture and nation has some redeemable qualities. And “It is indisputable that different nations reflect varying degrees of Christian influence in their histories.”[7]
But no nation is God’s ideal. No nation will ever bring heaven to earth. That is a utopian concept. The New Jersusalem will come down from and by God from heaven (Revelation 21:2).
The reality is, however, there will always be temptation to place our hope in govermental powers on earth. Christians must remember that Revelation warns us against the sin of nationalism. We must not put our hope in Babylon. Babylon will fall (Revelation 17-18).
Christianity
The only nationalism the Christian should be about is trans-nationalism: Jesus and His eternal Kingdom made up of people from every tribe, language, nation, and tongue. Christianity is transcultural and transnational.[8] Christianity is not America, and it’s not American. Jesus was a Middle Eastern Jewish carpenter who was crucified. “Jesus people” have historically transformed culture sacrificially and lovingly from the margins.
Christianity is not about my church or your church, this country or that country; it’s about the whole universe being subservient to Jesus. Jesus is the Boss before whom every being in the entire universe will be made to bow. Jesus is bigger than politics. “The Christians primary solidarity is not with those who pledge alliagnce to a particular flag but those who confess Jesus as Lord regardless of their nationality.”[9]
Christianity is political, but it is first and foremost about Jesus reigning in individual hearts and lives; and Jesus’ command is summed up in this: love the LORD (YHWH) with every fiber of your being—material and immaterial—and others as yourself. Jesus will soon reign on this very earth. Christians are about that political reign not by getting overly caught up in earthly politics, but by ensuring they themselves are following Jesus the King and helping others to see who He is and bow before Him.
People will not bow their head, heart, and hands (and morality) before Him until they know and love Him. Christians are not about outward conformity but conformity from the heart. And that happens through love by the Spirit.
One of the death knells of nationalism is the historical perspective that remembers the transitory nature of nations. Nationalism is short-sighted and wrong in its diagnosis and offer of a cure. It’s demonic because it distracts from the real hope of Jesus. Nationalism is also deeply off base because, as Brenda Salter-McNeil has said, ”Cultural difference and diversity was always a part of God’s original plan for human beings. No one culture, people, or language can adequately reflect the splendor of God.” Nationalism and Christianity don’t go together.
Some people might respond…
Some people might respond: “Your unrealistic or unfaithful talking about all the high-fluent Jesus’ Kingdom stuff… You are unrealistic and should care about America. Don’t you care about our kids‽ Don’t you see the moral collapse of the nation‽”
First, I do care about America, and I do things for the betterment of America. As stated above, I am in the Air Force. I also vote and carryout other civic duties, volunteer, serve my local community as a pastor and hospice chaplian.
Second, Colossians 3 says “Set your mind on things which are above, not on things which are on the earth.” This and other Scriptures demonstrate that our first focus as Christians should be Jesus’ eternal Kingdom and our heavenly citenzenship (Philippians 3:20). This positions us to be more profitable people in whatever earthly kingdom we find ourselves.
Third, the hope of America is a person. And that person is Jesus. It’s not any other person or policy. It’s not morality. The hope of America is not America. Jesus, that’s who we all need: His person and policy.
Yes, I know we can’t actually vote for Jesus. Yes, I know the President is not the “pastor and chief.” But yes, the diagnosis and what we think is the cure for this country radically matters. A lot of people seem to be “practical nationalists” even if they say they aren’t.
Fourth, we can’t piecemeal take God’s word. God’s word that says, “thou shalt not commit adultery,” thus condemning homosexuality and pornography, also says, “love your enemies” and “pray for those who spitefully use you.” Sometimes political opponents don’t take into account the whole counsel of God or the weightier matters of the law.
How can we hold to the sacredness of the family with one breath but with the next belittle and objectify women or put down people of different nationalities—people made in the image of God for whom Jesus died? Don’t we get the value of the family and the value of all humans from the same place?
If God’s word, the truth, is our mother, then the indoctrination of the internet should not be our father. We should keep suckling from the same source, that of love and truth, not one mixed with poisonous lies. We should keep in mind that this world’s wisdom is mixed with the serpent’s bite of devilish deceit.
The God of moral order is also the God of sacrificial love. We can’t have actual moral order and the flourishing it promises without the accompanying love. It’s a fool’s errand to think we can have the heads of the quarter without taking the tales’ side too.
Conclusion
So, as a Christian, I do not believe there should be any connection between Christianity and nationalism. I do, however, think there is a clear place for appropriate patriotism.
Patriotism has warrant in Scripture. Patriotism realizes that the freedoms, blessings, and prosperity we have as a nation are a stewardship from God, which is meant to be wisely managed. Patriotism realizes the freedoms we enjoy are not free and they are not just to be enjoyed but leveraged for higher purposes. Patriotism realizes that freedoms are meant to be protected along the lines laid out in the just war literature.[10]
Patriotism realizes that the government is not infallible but is under the higher government of someone higher. Patriotism praises God for the country in which God has placed us, but has no illusions of perfection or the possibility of perfection.[11]
Psalm 23 is not just a funeral poem. It’s political. YHWH is my shepherd. He leads and I follow Him. He is the great shepherd who shows His love by laying His life down for His sheep. It is He—King Jesus—who brings eternal goodness, prosperity, and flourishing; not any earthly ruler.
“Trust in Him at all times. Pour out your heart to Him, for God is our refuge. Common people are as worthless as a puff of wind, and the powerful are not what they appear to be. If you weigh them on the scales, together they are lighter than a breath of air… Power, O God, belongs to You; unfailing love, O Lord, is Yours. Surely You repay all people according to what they have done.” (Ps. 62:8-9, 11b-12)
Notes
[1] https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/patriotism/
[2] Steve Wilkens and Mark L. Sanford, Hidden Worldviews: Eight Cultural Stories That Shape Our Lives, 62.
[3] “The supposed antidote for the nation’s ills is sought by a recovery of some golden age within our national history when those things did not exist. Usually, this blessed and right time is not specifically identified, but it often looks a lot like the world the Cleaver family inhabited” (Hidden Worldviews, 70). “Several problems emerge immediately from this idea. First, when “golden eras” are defined by a narrowly construed set of issues, they quickly take on a mythical character in which all the blemishes of that gilded age are ignored or glossed over. Thus, it is common to hear a desire to return to the Christianity of our founding fathers without recognizing that many of them were deists who talked a lot about God but were hostile toward Christianity. A second problem is that we run the risk of turning God into a vending machine with the idea that he will provide us with the national protection, status and well-being if we behave in proper ways. Finally, our return to God’s favor is generally thought to be orchestrated by political actions that will get us back on the right cultural and moral track. In each case, Christians are tempted to rely on political methods and goals to define our mission” (Hidden Worldviews, 70).
[4] Wilkens and Sanford, Hidden Worldviews: Eight Cultural Stories That Shape Our Lives, 65.
[5] Wilkens and Sanford, Hidden Worldviews, 62.
[6] Wilkens and Sanford, Hidden Worldviews, 73.
[7] Wilkens and Sanford, Hidden Worldviews, 75. It should also be noted that “Much of what we believe to be true, good or just proper manners is not filtered through conscious decision-making processes, but is a matter of absorption… Greater awareness of differences between cultures can remind us of the relativity of one’s own national traditions, ideas and assumptions” (Hidden Worldviews, 73).
[8] “Nationalism ignores the transnational nature of Christianity. Perhaps one of the most overlooked lessons in Scripture’s account of Pentecost (Acts 2) is that Christianity is not the sole possession of any particular nation. Instead, God’s new work now transcends old boundaries and encompasses all the nations” (Wilkens and Sanford, Hidden Worldviews, 75).
[9] Wilkens and Sanford, Hidden Worldviews.
[10] See Eric Patterson’s book A Basic Guide to the Just War Traditionfor a good book on the subject.
[11] There is thankfulness and humility so there can be, when appropiate, partnerships with other nations.
*Photo by Janay Peters
Should Christians Legislate Morality?
Christians Should Not Enforce “Vertical” Morality
In our modern, pluralistic, and heavily secularized society, John Warwick Montgomery points out that Christians should be particularly cautious not to jeopardize the spread of the gospel by insensitively imposing Christian morality on unbelievers. We must avoid any recurrence of the Puritan Commonwealth, where people are compelled to act externally as Christians regardless of their true faith. Unfortunately, these efforts often lead to the institutionalization of hypocrisy and a decline in respect for genuine Christian values.[1] It can also lead people to a false assurance of a right relationship with God.
Instead, Montgomery says Christians should recognize that Scripture presents two distinct types of moral commands. We see this in the first and second parts of the Ten Commandments.[2] In the first part, we see duties related to God. These commands cover the relationship between individuals and God (“vertical” morality). In the second part, we see duties related to neighbors. These commands cover the relationship between individuals and other people (“horizontal” morality).
Montgomery believes it is crucial not to impose the first part of the Ten Commandments on unbelievers. These commands are:
- “You must not have any other god but Me.”
- “You must not make for yourself an idol.”
- “You must not misuse the name of the Lord your God.”
- “Remember to observe the Sabbath day by keeping it holy.”
Even if Christians are in the majority in a country, they should not impose laws related to the above four commandments. “This is because the proper relationship with God can only be established through voluntary, personal decision and commitment.”[3]
1 Corinthians 5:10 is an important verse for us to consider on this subject as well. Paul argues that avoiding all sinful individuals in the world would mean that Christians would need to “leave the world” entirely, which is an impractical and unrealistic standard. Instead, the church’s primary responsibility is not to judge those outside the faith; it is their duty to judge those who claim to be believers but live in sin within the church.
The Quran says there is no compulsion in religion. Jesus demonstrated that principle. He never forced anyone to follow Him. That’s what we see throughout the New Testament. Christians are to be evangelistic and strive to compel people to see the goodness and glory of Jesus. Still, they are never commanded to command people to bow to Jesus.
Christians Should Work Towards A General “Horizontal” Morality
Christians should, however, encourage people towards general “horizontal” morality. Even while the focus in the New Testament is on the morality of Jesus’ followers, we do see warrant for the promotion of social order and general morality. I think of John the Baptizer and the Apostle Paul, for example (Mark 6:14-20; Matt. 14:1-12; Acts 16:35-39; 24:25; 1 Tim. 2:1-4 also see Rom. 13 and 1 Peter 2). But the letters of the New Testament were written to Christians, telling Christians how to live.
Here’s the second part of the Ten Commandments, which are good for every society to lovingly and practically apply.
- “Honor your father and your mother”
- “You shall not murder”
- “You shall not commit adultery”
- “You shall not steal”
- “You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor”
- “You shall not covet”
These commands are applied in various ways throughout the Bible. For example, the Bible talks about the importance of railings on the top of buildings to protect people from falling off and getting hurt or killed.
But even here, we don’t want to put our hope or emphasis on “horizontal” morality. Part of the point of the law is to point us to our need for Jesus. It is not an end in itself. So, we must remember that mere morality is not the solution.
The Problem of Secularism and Morality
Britannica says secularism is “a worldview or political principle that separates religion from other realms of human existence, often putting greater emphasis on nonreligious aspects of human life or, more specifically, separating religion from the political realm.”
One of the problems with secularism, though, is that it is not set up very well to give us a societal analysis. How is secularism going to provide us with:
- The Ideal of what’s healthy
- Observation of symptoms
- Diagnosis or analysis of the disease/disorder
- Prognosis or prediction of cure/remedy
- Prescription or instruction for treatment/action for a cure
Secularists believe Christians should not legislate morality. They say that religion has no place in government. Christian beliefs are not allowed, but their core beliefs are allowed. But, as Britannica aludes to, secularism is really an ultimate commitment—a whole world-and-life-view.
Even atheism has the markings of a religion. Atheists have a creed. Theirs is just that there is no god. Atheism addresses the ultimate concerns of life and existence and answers the questions of who people are and what they should value. A committed atheist is even unlikely to marry someone outside of their beliefs. Many atheists even belong to a group and may even attend occasional meetings (see e.g., atheists.org) and have their own literature they read that supports their beliefs.
A merely secular society cannot give a moral framework that transcends individual belief systems. We are left with a “might makes right morality.” It seems to me that secularism leaves us with the column on the left, whereas Christianity gives us the column on the right.
I believe we need and should want Christianity to help our nation work towards a general “horizontal” morality. Our Founding Fathers (along with Alexis de Tocqueville), many of whom were deists and not Christians, agree. Yet, Christians should realize that legislating morality is not the answer.
Legislating Morality is Not the Ultimate Solution
Christians both understand that sinners will sin and that morality is good for the nation. Righteousness exalts the land, as Proverbs says (Prov. 14:34). Yet, Christians are compassionate and humble. We realize that we all stumble in many ways, as the letter of James says, but if we can help people from stumbling, that’s good. But Christians don’t confuse the kingdom of man with the Kingdom of God. Christians know that here we have no lasting city, but we seek the City that is to come (Heb. 13:14).
Legislating morality is not the solution; Jesus is. As C.H. Spurgeon said, “Nothing but the Gospel can sweep away social evil… The Gospel is the great broom with which to cleanse the filthiness of the city; nothing else will avail.”
Paul David Tripp has wisely said that “We should be thankful for the wisdom of God’s law, but we should also be careful not to ask it to do what only grace can accomplish.” It is the Spirit of God that transforms, although it is true that He often works through law. We need our rocky hearts to become flesh through the work of the Spirit.
Conclusion
The question of whether Christians should legislate morality reveals the complexities of faith in a diverse and secular society. While Christians are called to embody and promote a morality rooted in their faith, imposing a “vertical” morality can hinder the spread of the gospel, foster hypocrisy, and promote a misunderstanding of genuine faith. Instead, the focus should be on humbly and lovingly encouraging “horizontal” morality—principles that promote societal well-being and can be embraced by individuals regardless of their faith.
As apprentices of Jesus, Christians are primarily called to lead by example and encourage ethical behavior rooted in love and respect for one another. The emphasis should be on exemplifying Jesus’ teachings and fostering relationships that draw others to the faith, rather than seeking to enforce morality. That’s what Jesus Himself did.
By fostering relationships and demonstrating the transformative love of Jesus, Christians can influence the moral fabric of society without simply relying on legislation. True change comes through the work of the Holy Spirit rather than external mandates. In this way, the Christian community can contribute to a more just and moral society while remaining faithful to the fundamental teachings of their faith.
Notes
[1] John Warwick Montgomery,Theology: Good, Bad, and Mysterious, 122.
[2] Often referred to as the First and Second Tables of the Decalogue. The “First Table” consists of commands 1-4 and has to do with people’s relationship with God (vertical relationship). The “Second Table” consists of commands 5-10 and has to do with people’s relationship with other humans (horizontal relationships). The First Table can be summed up by “love God,” and the Second Table can be summed up by “love others.”
[3] Montgomery, Theology: Good, Bad, and Mysterious, 123.
Jesus is the foundation, not “free love” or “forced law”
Why do you call me ‘Lord, Lord,’ and not do what I tell you? Everyone who comes to me and hears my words and does them, I will show you what he is like: he is like a man building a house, who dug deep and laid the foundation on the rock. And when a flood arose, the stream broke against that house and could not shake it, because it had been well built. But the one who hears and does not do them is like a man who built a house on the ground without a foundation. When the stream broke against it, immediately it fell, and the ruin of that house was great (Luke 6:46-49).
To oversimplify, it seems to me that Christians who lean towards the conservative right could be liable to overly rejoice when moral ground is gained. On the other hand, more liberal-leaning Christians may be tempted to be overly distraught with certain people’s elections.
The reality is, however, that Jesus is the foundation—He is the solid ground. Everything else is sinking sand. Everything.
As Christians, may we not sing moralities praise or prosperities praise! No. Just Jesus’! Sure, prosperity is a blessing and a stewardship and I definitely believe it’s better to have a moral nation rather than an immoral one. But still, let’s keep our focus where our focus should lie: Christ and His Kingdom.
To oversimplify (again!), if one society leans towards “free love” and license (licentiousness), and one towards “forced law” and legalism, the ramifications will obviously be different but neither will be wholly good. The only truly good society is one built on Jesus. Now, of course, the full realization of that Kingdom is in the future (already/not yet).[1]
But we should faithfully work within our current “kingdoms,” and work for their prospering (Jeremiah 29:7). We shouldn’t be overly pessimistic or optimistic. We should think with sober and realistic judgment. And we should ever look to Jesus and His word and radically love and trust Him so we’re not hoodwinked (Revelation 2:4).
Sometimes the “free love” side rejoices when people have the freedom to make whatever choices they want, whatsoever those choices are. The “free love” side seems to see this “freedom” to align with love. On the other hand, Christians who lean towards the “forced law” side, see the enforcement of morality as good because law is good.
But Jesus talked about the law of Christ. He talked about the law of liberty. Jesus talked about something different from either one of those paradigms. We see this “law of love” in a few different places in Scripture.
- Starting in Deuteronomy 6:5 and 18, God says, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might… you shall do what is right and good in the sight of the Lord.”
- In Matthew 22:37–40, Jesus states that the two greatest commandments are to love God and love your neighbor as yourself.
- In John 13:34 Jesus says, “A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you.”
- Romans 13:8 and 10 says, “Owe no one anything, except to love each other, for the one who loves another has fulfilled the law… Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.
- Galatians 5:14 says about the same thing: “The whole law is fulfilled in one word: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.'”
- James 2:8–9 shows us that the royal law of love is to love your neighbor as you love yourself.
Jesus isn’t building a “free love” or a “forced law” structure. Jesus explodes both of those paradigms as wrong and shortsighted. As Christians, we are to be about the Jesus structure, Jesus’ Kingdom. A whole different way of being human.
Jesus wasn’t with the Pharisees rejoicing at morality. Though, He did say you should do as they do—i.e., be moral (Matthew 23:3).[2] But Jesus wasn’t just super stoked at morality for morality’s sake. He didn’t act like morality itself was the cure to all that ails society (I know this sounds strange but hear me out).
But Jesus did talk about law. He fulfilled it! He also talked about and showed love. What Jesus got at, and the level we need to most care about, is the heart!
Jesus is the tightrope. We stand on Him or else! It’s perilous on either side. The solution is not merely “love” or “law.” It’s something altogether different. It’s the law of love.
Jesus is the way, the truth, the life. Until individuals in society have their houses firmly built on Him “love” and “law” are both sand and the house is destined to fall.
Let’s rejoice at what God rejoices at. We’re told God rejoices when a sinner comes to Him for salvation. God throws a party when that happens! God doesn’t throw a party when someone allows someone else to “follow their own heart,” whatever it is their heart says. God also doesn’t throw a party when someone is more morally upstanding than someone else. Actually, God says, “Woe to you hypocrites!” God rejoices, rather, when those who are utterly needy see their need and turn to Him. He rejoices when people build their everything on Jesus.
Are moral laws good for society? Is love good for society? Yes and yes! With Jesus they are. When Jesus defines law and love, yes. But where Jesus is not King, Satan reigns.[3] There have been nations that have been considered quite moral. Many Muslim countries are “moral” and Nazi Germany was even moral in many ways. But “moral” is not the Christian’s ultimate desire.
We pray “Thy Kingdom come, Thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.” Heaven is not just moral, however. Heaven is a world of love. But it’s not “love” in the sense of the culture of the French Revolution.
We’d be wise to remember these words from that old hymn, “How Firm A Foundation”:
How firm a foundation, ye saints of the Lord,
Is laid for your faith in His excellent word!
What more can He say than to you He hath said,
To you who for refuge to Jesus have fled?Fear not, I am with thee, O be not dismayed,
For I am thy God, and will still give thee aid;
I’ll strengthen thee, help thee, and cause thee to stand,
Upheld by My righteous, omnipotent hand.When through the deep waters I call thee to go,
The rivers of sorrow shall not overflow;
For I will be with thee, thy troubles to bless,
And sanctify to thee thy deepest distress.When through fiery trials thy pathway shall lie,
My grace, all sufficient, shall be thy supply;
The flame shall not hurt thee; I only design
Thy dross to consume, and thy gold to refine.E’en down to old age all My people shall prove
My sovereign, eternal, unchangeable love;
And then, when grey hairs shall their temples adorn,
Like lambs they shall still in My bosom be borne.The soul that on Jesus hath leaned for repose,
I will not, I will not desert to his foes;
That soul, though all hell should endeavor to shake,
I’ll never, no, never, no, never forsake!
Whether the dictatorship of oppressive law or the rage and licentiousness of the masses, the Christian’s hope is this: we have a firm foundation on the Lord. If to Jesus we have fled, no tempest can touch us. No breach can be made. We are loyal to the Lord of angelic armies, the King of kings, and the Lord of lords. The path to victory may lay in the grave, we’re not promised the road will be easy, but as sure as we’re planted we will rise.
The soul that on Jesus hath leaned for repose,
I will not, I will not desert to his foes;
That soul, though all hell should endeavor to shake,
I’ll never, no, never, no, never forsake!
So, let come what may! This world’s awash in sand but we’re built on the Stone! Let’s rejoice not in so-called “law” or “love,” but in Christ! And let’s ourselves live the law of love. A more moral culture is great but may we never forget we need Jesus!
As Christians, let’s build our house on Jesus the Rock and not just hear His word but do what He says (Luke 6:47). Let’s articulate and live a positive vision of life that calls us forward.[4] Let’s actually be what Jesus has called us to be. Let’s be salt in a world of decay, loving light in a world of darkness.
Notes
[1] The “already/not yet” theological concept refers to the idea that Christians already possess spiritual blessings, but they are not yet fully experiencing the complete consumption of those blessings.
[2] Jesus says, “Do and observe whatever they tell you, but not the works they do. For they preach, but do not practice.”
[3] Obviously, Jesus is King of kings and Lord of lords, and there is no being in the universe who will not bow before Him. But Satan is the god of this world and we can’t serve two masters (2 Cor. 4:4; Matt. 6:24). So, it would seem, that people are either ultimately following Jesus or following Satan.
[4] “As Christian theologians, we are not followers of John the Baptist, the prophet of national repentance, but of Jesus Christ, the bringer of good news to the whole world. The core of our response toward moral decline—where and when it exists—should be to articulate a positive vision of life that calls us forward” (Miroslav Golf and Matthew Croasmun, For the Life of the World: Theology That Makes a Difference).
Photo by Julian Gentile
Equality: What it is & where it comes from
In the United States equality is at least expressed to be important. Its importance is seen in people’s views and policies on political participation, education access, views on employment and pay, and disability rights. The Civil Rights Movement has shown that equality is valued by many but not all.
What does equality mean and where did the concept of equality come from? It means the state or quality of being equal. Are there good reasons for believing in equality?
The Assumption of Equality is An Assumption
Naturalism, the belief that no God exists, gives no explanation or reason for equality. People who don’t believe in God or the relevance of God might believe in equality but the belief for them is not based on any foundation. The idea of equality is accepted as true without proof or a solid reason to believe it.
Yuval Noah Harari is a historian, philosopher, and author who received a PhD from the University of Oxford and is a lecturer at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. I appreciate his candor in this quote from his book Sapiens:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. According to the science of biology, people were not ‘created’. They have evolved. And they certainly did not evolve to be ‘equal’. The idea of equality is inextricably intertwined with the idea of creation. The Americans got the idea of equality from Christianity, which argues that every person has a divinely created soul, and that all souls are equal before God. However, if we do not believe in the Christian myths about God, creation and souls, what does it mean that all people are ‘equal’? Evolution is based on difference, not on equality. Every person carries a somewhat different genetic code, and is exposed from birth to different environmental influences. This leads to the development of different qualities that carry with them different chances of survival. ‘Created equal’ should therefore be translated into ‘evolved differently.’[1]
So, Harari rewrites the famous line from the Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truth to be self-evident, that all men evolved differently, that they are born with certain mutable characteristics, and that among these are life and the pursuit of pleasure.”[2]
For the naturalist, equality isn’t really a thing. It is a dream wish. Perhaps maybe pleasant make-believe.
Christians have a Foundation for Equality
The Bible teaches the equality of all humans by saying all humans are made in the image of God (Gen. 1:26-27). It also explains that we are all equally fallen. That is, we all sin and do wrong things. Lastly, it says that salvation is freely offered to all through Jesus.[3]
In Dominion: How the Christian Revolution Remade the World, Tom Holland argues that Christianity has profoundly shaped Western civilization, influencing core values like human rights and equality. It may not be consciously recognized but many Christian beliefs our embedded in society. As Harari has said, we “got the idea of equality from Christianity.”
The belief in human equality and rights, equality of men and women, love for foreigners, and care for the poor, weak, and marginalized are specifically Christian beliefs. History shows us that it was only as Christianity spread that these believes became generally accepted. The ancient Greeks and Romans would have laughed at them.[4]
Christian Equality has a lot of Explanatory Power
“We’ve all got both light and dark inside us. What matters is the part we choose to act on. That’s who we really are.” Sirius Black said this to Harry Potter in one of their last meanings. Humans have complexity as J.K. Rowling is so adept at showing. The Bible agrees. We are complex beings. We are all equally made in the image of God, fallen, and redeemable.
The Bible says we all stumble in many ways (James 3:2). We are all broken. Christians are no less complex. Christians are simultaneously sufferers, strivers, sinners, and saints. So, “The line between good and evil is never simply between ‘us’ and ‘them.’ The line between good and evil runs through each one of us.”[5] Or as Dietrich Bonhoeffer said in prison in Nazi Germany, “Nothing that we despise in the other man is entirely absent from ourselves.”[6]
Therefore, in one sense, Christians should be “culturally wary because they know that evil is real, that everyone is a sinner, that no one is beyond a stumble or a scandal, and that human beings are capable of some devious deceptions and horrific thoughts, words, and acts.”[7] Yet, in another sense, Christians should also be cultural optimists “because they know that no matter how grim and hopeless sin makes the world or how wretched sin makes an individual or a group, it does not define us at our deepest level, and it is an imposter that has no ultimate claim on anyone, whoever they may be and whatever they may have done.”[8]
Christianity gives a realistic and complex picture that explains the paradoxical nature of people.
If we lose Jesus, we lose our bases for Equality
I appreciate how Rebecca McLaughlin says it:
Even if historians agree that our moral building blocks came to us from Christianity it’s tempting to think we can keep the values we cherish while gently removing the claims about Jesus Himself. Like easing out a bottom layer Jenga block, perhaps we can build our moral tower higher without belief in God at all. But extracting Jesus from our moral structure isn’t like gently sliding out a Jenga block. It’s like pulling the pin on a grenade. In the resulting explosion we don’t just lose morality, are sense of meaning blows up too.”[9]
This is the case because if Jesus is not real and right, the next most plausible explanation is that of Harari or Nietzsche.
Conclusion
Secular culture assumes equality but gives no basis for it. Christianity, and specifically Jesus, gives a solid footing for equality. Without Jesus equality is on a shoddy structure and is destined to fall. In other words, if Jesus is make-believe so is equality. On the other hand, if Jesus and His ethic are real, we can’t mix and match to our liking. He is either a liar, lunatic, legend, or the Lord. But if He is anything other than the Lord, His emphasis on equality evaporates with Him.
Notes
[1] Yuval Noah Harari, Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind, 109.
[2] Harari, Sapiens, 110.
[3] See Christopher Watkin, Biblical Critical Theory: How the Bible’s Unfolding Story Makes Sense of Modern Life and Culture, 116.
[4] Rebecca McLaughlin, Is Christmas Unbelievable?
[5] N. T. Wright, Evil and the Justice of God, 38.
[6] Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Letters and Papers from Prison, 10 as quoted in Biblical Critical Theory, 128.
[7] Watkin, Biblical Critical Theory, 168
[8] Ibid.
[9] McLaughlin, Is Christmas Unbelievable?
Photo by Jacek Dylag
Does Satan exist? And if so…
Does Satan exist? There is trouble for us if Satan exists and if he does not exist. Let me explain…
𝐈𝐟 𝐒𝐚𝐭𝐚𝐧 𝐝𝐨𝐞𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐞𝐱𝐢𝐬𝐭
If Satan does not exist, how then do we think about the existence of evil? If God is dead, as Nietzsche argued and many have quipped, then so is Satan, and so is our concept of good and evil. Personal likes and dislikes, yes, we still have individual tastes and preferences. Some people like lima beans, some don’t. Some think murder is in good taste, and others don’t. But there is no moral high ground, no actual good and evil.[2]
Andrew Delbanco wrote a book called The Death of Satan. In it, he explains that evil used to “have a face, a name, an explanation.”[1] But now, modern refined humanity doesn’t believe in an evil force at work in the world. Yet, this hasn’t been the case for most of history or even for most people across the globe, even now.
Germany went from being the most sophisticated culture to being a killing culture. They went from a people of art, architecture, and invention to the mass murder of some six million Jews. If evil and Satan don’t exist, then we can’t say the mass murder of millions is evil. We can say we personally don’t like mass murder, but we can’t call it “evil.” That’s problematic.
“We live in the most brutal century in human history.” “The work of the devil is everywhere, but no one knows where to find him.” We have a crisis in our culture. We experience evil, but many don’t believe in actual evil. “We feel something that our culture no longer gives us the vocabulary to express.”[3]
If Satan and evil don’t exist, then it’s bad because there is no real category for “bad.” Then there is no explanation for the things that seem evil; they would then just be, be a regular part of the world. Seemingly evil experiences would just be normal. The way the world is. Also, if evil is not real, it can’t be overcome, defeated, or done away with.
“Don’t be evil” used to be Google’s corporate motto. It’s not now. Did they change their motto because there is no longer a real category of “evil”? If evil is not a real category, people can’t be evil.
𝐈𝐟 𝐒𝐚𝐭𝐚𝐧 𝐝𝐨𝐞𝐬 𝐞𝐱𝐢𝐬𝐭
The truth is, however, it sure seems like evil and Satan exist. I’m reading The Others Within Us: Internal Family Systems, Porous Mind, and Spirit Possession. It’s essentially about what various cultures have to say about spirit possession. The author says spiritual possession is found in every major world religion. One of the researchers cited did a study in 488 societies worldwide and found that it is “probably universal and occurs in all societies.”[4] The book said, “spirit possession often gives the possessed physical abilities that are not explainable.” I have credible friends who have told stories of people who were out of their mind, were not on drugs, yet possessed physical strength not explainable from a merely material perspective. Could what they witnessed be spirit possession?
We are very likely to be outwitted by Satan and his fellow conspirators when we are unaware of their schemes, let alone their existence. As the movie The Usual Suspects says, “The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn’t exist.”
In Harry Potter, “Voldemort, Lucius Malfoy, and their associates are bent on hating and destroying the stability and structures of the wizard world. Dumbledore, Hagrid, Harry, and their friends are committed to saving them.”[5] In the real world, there’s also a battle going on. We’re in trouble if we’re unaware.
The world is at war. There is an enemy always seeking to harm. We are in a world of magic, good and bad. As C.S. Lewis has said, “There is no neutral ground in the universe. Every square inch, every split second is claimed by God, and counterclaimed by Satan.” But the Bible says that the boss of the universe is good. And that’s a good thing. The sinister Satan will finally and decisively be defeated, never to work his woe again. If Satan and evil exist, it’s bad because Satan and evil are bad. It’s bad because there are actors in our world who want to inflict harm and intentionally destroy.
(𝐒𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐨𝐟) 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐁𝐢𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐬𝐚𝐲𝐬 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐒𝐚𝐭𝐚𝐧 & 𝐄𝐯𝐢𝐥
The Bible makes sense of the weird wild world we inhabit. The Bible is a big, amazing story. It surpasses Marvel and the Lord of the Rings. It tells us about God making the universe. It tells us about spiritual beings rebelling against God and starting a cosmic battle.
The Bible says in our world there is not one actor—humanity, but three—God, spiritual beings, and humans. Christians both believe in actual evil and resistance to evil. There’s a danger to not believing in actual evil; if there’s no evil, evil can’t be resisted. If there is no evil, individuals might label this or that thing “bad” or “good” but that’s just opinion.
For Christians, the understanding of evil and Satan is not simplistic. In regards to human beings, there’s not a clear-cut divide between good and evil. I want to do good but often do bad (Rom. 7:15-20). We all stumble in many ways (James 3:2). Yet, there is something beyond human dysfunction. “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places” (Eph. 6:12).
The Bible says we are in a world where sinister evil lurks. But it also tells us about God’s rescue mission in Christ Jesus. Jesus fought the evil enemy, He defeated and cast out the great dragon’s evil henchmen. Jesus casts out demons like light expels darkness. Jesus, in contrast, to other exorcists “is presented as an authority in control of the unclean spirits. He typically rebuked and commanded them. He relied on the spirit of God and did not use charms or talismans or magical papyri, which were common in his day. He sent out his disciples, clearly stating that he gave them the authority and power to control demons.”[6]
There will come a day when every being will bow, and every entity in the entire universe will publicly acknowledge that Jesus is Lord (Phil. 2:10-11). As humans confess with every breath that we need air, it will be abundantly and eternally clear that Jesus is the boss of every creature. We can withstand anything the world throws at us, not in our power, but through the power of Jesus (Rom. 8; Eph. 6:10).
[1] Andrew Delbanco, Death of Satan, 4.
[2] See J. Daniel McDonald, “Natural Selection and an Epistemology of Evil: An Incompatible Pair.”
[3] Andrew Delbanco, The Death of Satan, 9.
[4] Robert Falconer, The Others Within Us: Internal Family Systems, Porous Mind, and Spirit Possession.
[5] John Killinger, God, The Devil, and Harry Potter, 178.
[6] Falconer, The Others Within Us.
Should Christians Vote for Christian Values?
Yes but realize…
Voting for Christian values is important. It’s difficult, however, when we cannot be sure elected officials will support Christian values. Politicians blow with the wind of popular opinion.[1] And what if there are potentially Christian values on both sides? Further, what if Christian values are not the most important? What if Christian witness also matters? And what if people find themselves conflicted because they can’t, in good conscience, go with either party?
What if people feel that sometimes Christians have appeared to idolize political leaders and thus compromise Christian witness? We must value Christ and love others like Christ. Those are Christian values that aren’t a matter of conscience.
Also, the good news of Jesus is the power of God to salvation and thus transformation, not Christian morality. When Paul spoke to people in the secular marketplace, he didn’t preach Christian values. He lovingly related to them their need for Jesus.
Voting for Christian values may not be as cut and dry as it used to be. Christian values cut both ways. Christian values say abortion is wrong and honesty and humility are right; it says sexual immorality is wrong and radically loving others is right.
Yes but be aware of hypocrisy
As much as caring about Christian values for our country is a way of caring about people’s good and loving them, I think it is appropriate and commendable. But our concern for Christian values can easily devolve into fear. Are we advocating for Christian values from a place of fear or care? The way that we advocate will reveal a lot about our motivations. When Christians are belligerent and unkind, it appears the motivation is coming from a place of fear and not because they want to love their neighbor and protect them from the consequences of an immoral lifestyle.
Our motivation for voting for Christian values should not be a desire to stay safe or the moral majority. Our motivation should be the good of our neighbor. I believe Christian values are a form of common grace that leads to human and societal flourishing. It makes sense for Christians to want even a secular society to practice Christian values. The expectation, however, should be that secular society will not be inclined to practice those values. Why should Christian values be valuable to nonChristians?
This is especially true when Christians themselves aren’t living out the virtues. When Christians fail to display the fruits of the Spirit, for example, they’re not making a good case for nonChristians living Christian values. What impact might it have if Christians lived a lot more like Jesus? What if Christians were loving, kind, moral, gentle, hospitable, and not fearful? People might be intrigued, and Christian values might be more attractive. It sadly seems like the average Christian will talk about the woes of politics in the world but won’t weep about the prevalence of pornography in the Church.
Perhaps Christians need to focus more on living Christian values than implementing those values for others. If Christians across the USA are not themselves living Christian values, it seems like the height of hypocrisy to force them on others. If Christians across the nation lived like Jesus and practiced Christian values, I believe people would be very interested in Christian values. And more importantly, they would be interested in Christ.
Yes but more is needed than voting
As it is, I feel like Christians trying to pull the spec out of others’ eyes has distracted us from the log in our own eyes. But again, that’s not to say I don’t care about the USA or any other nation practicing Christian values. I would like every nation and everyone to practice Christian values! I want everyone to be like little Jesuses. But judgment starts with the church (1 Peter 4:17). If the Church isn’t healthy and following the Lord Jesus’ commands, maybe that’s the bigger deal. We should want everyone to practice Christian morality, but we shouldn’t expect it. In a sense, we should expect them not to (cf. 1 Corinthians 5:10).[2] Just as the president is not our pastor and chief, Babylon will never be the new Jerusalem. To what degree should we be satisfied enforcing Christian values? I’d much rather the Zeitgeist in the USA be changed, which happens by the Spirit through His people.
I also think it’s a problem when Christians seem to wholesale lineup with one party. Christians should be willing to lovingly critique both the right and the left. If we care about Christian values, it applies to both parties. Just as we want America to practice Christian values, we want politicians from the left and right to practice Christian values. If we call out people on the left (remember Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky?), we should be consistent and call out people on the right. If we’re not consistent in our critique, we make it seem like we are not standing on the solid basis of transcultural truth but are biased and trying to protect our preferred political party. Then Christian witness is inconsistent and incongruent.
Also, as the Founding Fathers and Alexis de Tocqueville said in Democracy in America, this country is for a moral people.[3] As John Adams famously said, “Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” In his farewell address, George Washington said, “Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that National morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.” Essentially, when the morality, virtue, and integrity of the people begin to fail, the American experiment will begin to fail. Yet, we can’t change people’s hearts by changing rules. As the University of Pennsylvania seal says, “Laws without morals are useless” (Leges sine moribus vanae). Sure, I believe in good moral laws, but it is short-sighted to think an election can hold off what’s coming down the pike. Many Christians focus too much on politics and not enough on loving hospitality to those who are different than them.
The USA may be helped through voting, but it won’t be saved. We need an overhaul of character and yet at this time, Christians don’t seem to care about character. Many Christians seem to be looking for rescue from the rash and brash.
If we trust a political party to keep back the flood as the damn breaks, we’re trusting in a façade. No political party is the hope of America. If our morality is to truly change, hearts must change. Politics might be able to patch a hole here and there, but our focus must be concentrated where more impact will be felt. Plus, our goal as Christians is not to save America. It sadly seems that a lot of Christians care more about morality than people. It appears like many American Christians want to save America rather than Americans and care more about an earthly country than Jesus’ Kingdom.
Notes
[1] See e.g., https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/how-the-gop-became-pro-choice/ and https://wng.org/opinions/the-veepstakes-and-the-sanctity-of-life-1720520906.
[2] “Most of the New Testament’s moral witness is about Christian morality inside the life of the church. But that focus about Christian moral integrity doesn’t welcome moral chaos outside the church” (Andrew T. Walker, Faithful Reason: Natural Law Ethics for God’s Glory and our Good, 68).
[3] Tocqueville, for example, said, “Society is endangered not by the great profligacy of a few, but by the laxity of morals amongst all” and “A nation cannot long remain strong when every man belonging to it is individually weak.” Also, “Without common ideas, there is no common action, and without common action men still exist, but a social body does not. Thus in order that there be society, and all the more, that this society prosper, it is necessary that all the minds of the citizens always be brought together and held together by some principle ideas.”
Photo by Elliott Stallion
Biblical Womanhood
What does the Bible say about Biblical Womanhood?
Biblical Womanhood
The concept of “biblical womanhood” has gotten a “bad rap” outside and even inside the church. Actual biblical womanhood, however, is beautiful and provides a context for a bounty of good. Actual biblical womanhood is like a fortress that allows for flourishing.
Masculinity, femininity, and gender roles have sometimes been overly and legalistically defined. People have said in the past that men should drive the family vehicle and women should wash the dishes, but the Bible doesn’t say that.
Instead, the Bible calls husbands and elders/pastors to sacrificial leadership. It calls wives to submit to their husbands, and the church body—males and females—to submit to the church’s loving leadership (Heb. 13:17). That’s what the Bible says. The Bible doesn’t specifically spell out what that should look like and never says submit to abuse.
However, the Bible does, over and over again, show the worth of women. This is in great contrast
to the culture of its time. Rebecca McLaughlin has pointed out that “According to many ancient philosophies, men were more important than women. But the Bible tells a different story. God made humans—’male and female’—’in his own image’ (Genesis 1:26–28). Men and women are equally important. But they are also importantly different” (The Secular Creed).
The Bible shows the worth and defends the worth of women over and over in its pages. There are some 202 women listed in the Bible. This is significant, for example, because the Quran lists just one and the Hindu Bhagavad Gita lists none.
The Bible shows women in high roles of leadership, compliments them, greets them, and considers them fellow workers in the gospel. Jesus spoke to and cared for the outcast Samaritan woman at the well. Even Jesus’ disciples were surprised. “They marveled that He was talking to a woman” (John 4:27). Yet He was. Jesus loved and cared for women.
Of course He loved women. He created them. And He created women as part of His good design to image Himself through humanity. The world has fallen into faulty design, but Jesus always demonstrated His good, intended design.
So, part of understanding biblical womanhood is understanding that the Bible is emphatic that women have worth. Women are precious and made in the image of God. Women do not have less worth than men. Sadly, this has not always been understood or agreed with.
Within the Trinity, there is unity and diversity. God is three persons in one God, yet each member of the Trinity has different roles. God the Father sent Jesus the Son, and Jesus sent the Spirit as the comforter and counselor to be with us and help us. Therefore, within the Trinity, we see different roles but different roles do not communicate different worth.
Women are not one ounce less important than men because they are called to be helpers (Gen. 2:18). In the Bible, God Himself is described as a helper (Ps. 54:4; 118:7). Women are certainly not less important because they were created to be helpers.
It’s also important that we do not push unbiblical stereotypes, partly because stereotypes are often just based on the changing cultural climate and not on the objective truth of Scripture. Consider, for example, that pink has not always been considered a “girly” color; or consider that men in the 14th century were the first to wear “yoga pants” (i.e., tights that were sometimes even quite colorful).
By this, I’m not saying that we should disrespect societal norms. Scripture is our standard, not societal norms. So, for example, the stereotype that men aren’t supposed to cry is wrong. Jesus Himself cried. What about dancing and poetry? Are dancing and poetry more feminine than masculine? King David who killed wild beasts, slew a giant, and was one of the most elite soldiers that ever walked the earth also danced and composed poetry. Just because someone is different from society’s stereotypes does not mean that person is wrong or weird. God, not the ever- changing culture, should be our guide.
Therefore, nowhere is it written in Scripture that men must drive the vehicle, and women must do the dishes. Scripture gives us transcendent truths—truths that are true for all times and all places. Truths such as males and females are created different in order to together reflect the glory and goodness of God. The specifics of how these truths are to be lived out today are to be applied in love and biblical Spirit-led wisdom.
My Favorite Quote on Biblical Womanhood
“Because we are made in [God’s] likeness, it is our destiny to rule and reign like He does. But unlike kings and queens of the ancient world who ruled from lavish palaces, our God is a King who works. He is a King who rolls up His sleeves and gets down in the dust beside us. He is a King who makes Himself a servant and labors on our behalf… So being an heir to this kind of King means we are no fairytale princesses spending our days in ideal luxury. We are queens ruling creation under His authority. The very work we do, whether it is tallying numbers in columns of red or black or scrubbing red and black crayon off of newly painted walls, is an expression of God’s royal nature in us” (Hannan Anderson, Made for More).
Suggested Resources on Biblical Womanhood
- Andreas J. Kostenberger, God’s Design for Man and Woman
- Andreas J. Kostenberger, God, Marriage, and Family: Rebuilding the Biblical Foundation
- Claire Smith, God’s Good Design
- Hannah Anderson, Made for More
*Photo by ELEVATE
Laser Beam Focus on Jesus (not distracting speculation)
The world that we live in is riddled with evil. It’s full of foul and wicked plots. There are many theories and conspiracy theories that tell stories about this world that we live in. Many of these tales are attention-grabbing and even deeply disturbing. How should we respond?
God tells us how we should respond. Here are a few things He tells us:
Laser Beam Focus on Jesus
From the beginning to the end, the story of Scripture is a story about the Savior; our need for a Savior, the coming of the Savior, and the coming quick return of our Savior. Scripture says testify about the Savior! He is who the world needs!
The world does not need just more knowledge or secret knowledge. It doesn’t need to uncover all the plots of man or Satan. The world needs the experiential life-transforming knowledge of Jesus the Messiah and Savior.
Satan portrays himself as an angel of light. He’ll even quote God Himself. He’ll give what appears to be secret knowledge as he did to Eve in the Garden. But, that work of Satan is a distraction and diversion from the truth—from Jesus the Savior, answer, and solution.
Do you know who really knows what’s going on behind the scenes?! Not the person on YouTube; no matter what they say or how many followers they have.
We don’t want to be guilty of “always learning and never able to arrive at a knowledge of the truth” (2 Tim. 3:7). Instead, we want to follow Paul’s teaching, conduct, aim in life, faith, patience, love, steadfastnesses, and persecutions and sufferings (v. 11).
We also need to remember that all Scripture, all the promises of God, find their fulfillment and answer in Jesus. We need to see Jesus, not more videos on various theories. Jesus is the hope and protection of the earth, not some person with some so-called “secret knowledge” of what’s really going on behind the scenes.
That being said, there are evil and deceitful plots going on in the government—in every government. We should not be naive and think there isn’t. But there always has been. There was when Jesus physically walked the earth and Moses too. But what does the Bible say the solution is? And what should be our focus?
People clearly do follow “the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience” (Eph. 2:2). This world is often a wicked place where people creatively carry out wickedness. That is true. But what’s the solution?
It is certainly true that “ we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places” (Eph. 6:12). Yet, the solution is not some secret knowledge. It’s being “strong in the Lord and in the strength of His might” (v. 10). The solution is taking “up the whole armor of God” (v. 13), not knowing the intimate and hidden details of what the spiritual forces of evil are up to. Colossians 2:15 tells us that Jesus is the one who defeats the wicked powers.
Amid a crooked and perverse generation and while the antichrist or antichrists walk the earth, how are we to respond? How do we steel up ourselves to endure and persevere? It’s not through secret theories that we discover on the internet. No. It’s through holding fast to the word of truth, tenaciously seeking Jesus, and lovingly telling of Him and His goodness.
Jesus has the “words of life.” Jesus is our “first love” and it is He that we need to return to (Revelation 2:4). Notice what 2 Peter 1:3 says: “HIS divine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of HIM who called us to his own glory and excellence.” It is in Jesus that “are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge” (Col. 2:3). And the riches of blessing found in Him are limitless.
Thus, we need a laser focus on Jesus. Satan as the great deceiver and destroyer would have us distracted from Jesus by any means possible.
Don’t Waste Time on Old Wives’ Tales
1 Timothy 4:7-8 says: “Have nothing to do with irreverent, silly myths [some translations say, “Old Wives’ Tales.”]. Rather train yourself for godliness; for while bodily training is of some value, godliness is of value in every way, as it holds promise for the present life and also for the life to come.”
In John 17:17 Jesus says we are made holy by the truth and then He says God’s word is that truth. It is all Scripture—not secret theories—that is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the person of God may be complete, equipped for every good work (2 Tim. 3:16-17).
We need the words of life to live the life we’re called to live. We need to consume that truth every day and be able to “rightly divide the word of truth” and be like the Bereans and weigh what is said against what the Word of God shows us (Acts 17:11). And we need to be in tight relationship with other Christians so we can be accountable and encouraged by them.
In 1 Timothy 1 Paul urges that people not “teach any different doctrine, nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies, which promote speculations rather than the stewardship from God that is by faith” (v. 3-4). Paul goes on to say, “The aim of our charge is love that issues from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith. Certain persons, by swerving from these, have wandered away into vain discussion” (v. 5-6).
In 1 Timothy 2 Paul tells us what we are to do instead of engaging in “vain discussion,” internet searches, and YouTube consumption: “First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way” (v. 1-2). So, instead of reading and watching conspiracies about the government, we are to pray for the government. That’s productive, biblical, and God-honoring.[1] So, if you have concerns about what’s going on in our world and in the government—which you should!—the thing to do is pray, not feed on loads of news and theories about “what’s really happening.”
Paul says that when we pray in this way, it “is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all” (v. 3-6).
God loves people and wants them to receive salvation through Jesus. So, we pray for them and we share with them. We don’t waste time on speculation and silly myths. Instead, we should seek to be continually captured and enraptured by Christ Jesus, knowing there is solace, depth, mystery, and beauty there to sustain us a thousand lifetimes.
Spend Your Time on the Greatest TRUE Tale
Paul said, “Imitate me, as I imitate Christ.” And Paul also said, “Him [Jesus!] we proclaim, warning everyone and teaching everyone with all wisdom, that we may present everyone mature in Christ. For this I toil, struggling with all his energy that he powerfully works within me” (Col. 1:28-29).
Read 2 Timothy 4:1-5. What Paul says there is the priority. That’s what “fighting the good fight” (2 Timothy 4:7) looks like.
Paul strove and struggled to share the message of the Savior, not a secret message about something going on in the world. Satan would have us distracted from the good news of Jesus—the good news of hope and salvation to a broken and needy world.
When the chaos of wickedness ratchets up in the book of Revelation, what is it God’s people are to do? Protect the world and keep it from destruction through knowing what’s secretly going on behind the scenes and through sharing those hidden things? Is that how the book of Revelation exhorts us to persevere? No.
Revelation is about Jesus and the victory of Jesus. It’s the true story of His final triumph over every evil plot and wicked foe. It holds before us the truth that we are in a cosmic battle, that there is a god of this world who is presently working ruin, but also the truth that the Lion and the Lamb will conquer. That’s the “secret knowledge,” the revealing, the REVELATION we need. We need the true message of Jesus’ victory. We don’t need distracted by lesser stories. Instead, we need again and again to return to and be tethered to Jesus.
So many tales are a distraction from the true and greatest tale. Brothers and sisters, we don’t need new and secret knowledge. We need the old old story again and again. We need to be smothered with the truth of the Savior of the world, not suffocated by secret theories. The hope of the earth is Jesus, not some locked away thing we can learn about on a website somewhere.
We need laser beam focus on Jesus. And we need to share the true story about Him in love. We need to be evangelistic about the good news of Jesus Christ! Not any conspiracy theory.
Notes
[1] I think of Chuck Colson. If there was a theory about the watergate scandal it wasn’t just a conspiracy theory. It was true. But the answer wasn’t information, it was prayer. God brought Chuck Colson to salvation when he was in prison. Colson has gone on to lead a ministry to those in prison. So, prayer is powerful.
*Photo by Mika Baumeister
in X 