Why Reformed Cessationists Should NOT Quote Church History to Support Their Position

Although it is common for my Calvinist, non-charismatic friends to point to church history in support of their cessationist position, it’s really a mistake for them to do so. A big mistake. Church history actually works AGAINST them...

Why Reformed Cessationists Should Not Quote Church History to Support Their Position | Articles | AskDrBrown

Although it is common for my Calvinist, non-charismatic friends to point to church history in support of their cessationist position, it’s really a mistake for them to do so. 

Church history actually works against them.

The first reason is the most obvious. Reformed cessationists, like me, are in the Protestant, rather than Catholic, camp of the church. That means that we believe that, in some very fundamental ways, much of the church lost its way through history, because of which a massive reformation was needed. Many Reformed Christians even argue that Roman Catholics are not Christians at all, meaning that roughly half of all professing Christians today are de facto disqualified.

On what basis, then, does a Reformed cessationist appeal to church history, when so much of that history is rejected from the outset? 

If the argument is that the miraculous gifts of the Spirit which were normative in New Testament times gradually disappeared from church history, what do these cessationists do with Roman Catholic miracles through the centuries? They must reject them as counterfeits or frauds. As a result, they appeal to church history while rejecting large portions of that history that violate their narrative. 

And on what basis can a Reformed cessationist argue against God restoring something that was lost in light of the whole premise of the Reformation? Pentecostals and charismatics believe that, even though there was definitely a decrease in the use of these miraculous gifts at certain points in church history, there is no doubt that they have been powerfully restored in the last 150 years.

Yet it is the very essence of Protestantism to argue that, in much larger ways, things that were part of the early church were subsequently lost to history, only to be recovered by Luther and the other reformers. As British theologian Andrew Wilson rightly noted, 

“this sort of argument - that, since something gradually disappeared from the church over the course of the first two or three centuries, it must therefore be invalid - should strike any five sola Protestant as providing several hostages to fortune.”

As one popular website states, the Reformation slogan, ecclesia reformata, semper reformand, “the church reformed, always being reformed,” is meant to ensure “that our hearts, lives, and practices are being reformed by God’s Word.” That’s what we have been calling for for decades: let us continually reform our practices, beliefs, and attitudes by what is written in the Word. 

A second reason why church history works against Reformed cessationists is that there is clear testimony that the miraculous gifts of the Spirit did not cease with the death of the apostles.

Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho (written around 160 A.D.): “For the prophetical gifts remain with us, even to the present time.”

Irenaeus of Lyon in Against Heresies (180 A.D.): “For some do certainly and truly drive out devils, so that those who have thus been cleansed from evil spirits frequently both believe, and join themselves to the Church. Others have foreknowledge of things to come: they see visions, and utter prophetic expressions. Others still, heal the sick by laying their hands upon them, and they are made whole. Yea, moreover, as I have said, the dead even have been raised up, and remained among us for many years. . . . We do also hear many brethren in the Church, who possess prophetic gifts, and who through the Spirit speak all kinds of languages.” 

Basil the Great (350 A.D.): “The Spirit enlightens all, inspires prophets, gives wisdom to lawmakers, consecrates priests, empowers kings, perfects the just, exalts the prudent, is active in gifts of healing, gives life to the dead, frees those in bondage, turns foreigners into adopted sons.”

The position of Augustine (354-430) is often quoted, as he “stated quite specifically that Christians are not to look for continuance of the healing gift” (in the words of Morton Kelsey, Healing and Christianity). He also stated that the gift of tongues had ceased in his Homilies on the First Epistle of John.

But Augustine decidedly changed his views while completing his magnum opus, The City of God. 

“how many miracles were occurring in our own day and which were so like the miracles of old and also how wrong it would be to allow the memory of these marvels of divine power to perish from among our people. It is only two years ago that the keeping of records was begun here in Hippo, and already, at this writing, we have nearly seventy attested miracles.” (City of God, XXII.8, cited in Morton Kelsey, Healing and Christianity.)

And, as I previously mentioned, if church history is used to argue that the gifts dissipated and disappeared, then church history (in contemporary times) proves the opposite. (For a detailed, carefully documented survey of contemporary miracles, see Craig S. Keener, Miracles Today: The Supernatural Work of God in the Modern World; for the larger exegetical and philosophical underpinnings, see Keener, Miracles: The Credibility of the New Testament Accounts.)

A third reason that Reformed cessationists should not cite church history to support their position is that the Calvinistic distinctives of their faith cannot be traced to the earliest church fathers but rather to Augustine, despite some claims to the contrary (conveniently, see here and here). 

I have sometimes heard Reformed teachers claim that Augustine recovered what Paul had taught, meaning that the disciples of the apostles failed to grasp Paul’s teaching and it was only Augustine, three centuries later, who really got it. Consequently, the evidence for Reformed/Calvinist theology is weakened (if not undermined) by the earliest centuries of church history, the very period of history they use to argue that the gifts had ceased.

Fourth, and most fundamentally, Reformed cessationists believe in the sufficiency of Scripture, and while church traditions and creeds can be respected, only the written Word of God has final authority. 

That is my position as well, which is the ultimate reason why I am not a cessationist: not only does the Word of God fail to support cessationism, it consistently supports the continuationist position.

And whereas many cessationists admit that there is no specific verse in the New Testament that states the gifts will cease before the Lord returns, there are quite a few verses that speak of their continuance, including verses that urge us to pursue these gifts earnestly, including 1 Corinthians 14:1: “Follow the way of love and eagerly desire gifts of the Spirit, especially prophecy.” This is a command from the Lord, not a suggestion. (Among many other verses, see also John 14:12; Acts 2:14-21, 39; 1 Corinthians 14:26, 39; 1 Thessalonians 5:19-21; James 5:13-16.)

What the Word says alone is more than enough for me, and when you add in the glorious testimony of the Lord’s miraculous acts worldwide today, you have all the proof that you need. 

Let us embrace the Spirit’s work to the glory of Jesus’ name.

Authentic Fire: A Response to John MacArthur's 'Strange Fire'

Whatever Happens, Don’t Lose Your Grip in God

The same God who promises healing and protection also inspired books like Job to be put in the Bible, where that godly man experienced the opposite of what he had learned to expect...

Whatever Happens, Don’t Lose Your Grip in God | Articles | AskDrBrown

I heard this moving story firsthand in the summer of 1983 at a large gathering of Christian believers. 

The speaker was an internationally respected Bible teacher, and his audience consisted of Christians who believed in the goodness of God, who believed that He still healed and worked miracles today, who believed that He even promised supernatural protection to His children. After all, didn’t the Scriptures state that, “The angel of the LORD encamps around those who fear him, and he delivers them” (Psalm 34:7)? 

That’s what made this whole story all the more profound. It violated the expected narrative.

Having related the divine call to minister internationally with his singing group, this Christian leader then described the group’s successful work in Africa, Europe, and especially behind the Iron Curtain. This was over a period of several years, up until the fall of 1982. Then while working in England, he was given a piece of unbelievable news: his precious wife had been killed in an automobile accident in the States, and now he was left a widower with three children. 

Naturally, he was totally crushed by this report and returned home broken. 

How could it be that he gave himself completely to the work of the Lord, only to have something like this happen in his family? 

In his anguish, he went to see the most prominent faith teacher of the day who spoke these precious words to him: “Son, there are some things we just simply will never understand, and there are no answers for them.” 

But, he added, “You can’t lose your grip in God.” 

Yes, there are some things for which we have no answers, things that seem to make no sense, things that seem to “break the rules,” things that seem even to contradict the Scriptures. But whatever happens and however much disappointment we might endure, one thing is critical. 

We cannot lose our grip in God. We cannot abandon Him.

“But,” you say, “that’s the whole problem. I thought I knew God. I thought I trusted Him. I thought I understood Him. But now I don’t know if anything is real – including Him. I feel like I’m grasping at straws.”

Yes, that is the essence of the problem, and I am not telling you to put your head in the sand or turn off your mind. Quite the contrary. What I’m saying is that the one thing that is constant, no matter what we experience and no matter how we feel, is that God exists and that He is good – eternally and unchangeably good.

On a purely intellectual level, the argument for God is very strong.

Science still cannot explain the origin of the universe or the fact that the universe runs with mathematical precision. 

Science still cannot explain the origin of life, let alone the unique DNA coding that is imprinted on our cells at the moment of conception. (For the record, if you read your own DNA coding out loud at the rate of one letter per second, it would take you almost 100 years to read it all. Yet this coding is written on every single cell in your body – roughly 37 trillion of them!)

So, again, on a purely intellectual level, going through tragedy or loss or disappointment doesn’t change the reality of God’s existence.

But that is not the main point I want to make. 

Instead, what I want to emphasize here is that the same God who gives us wonderful promises in the Bible also guarantees us hardship. 

And pain. And difficulty. And tribulation. 

The same God who promises healing and protection also inspired books like Job to be put in the Bible, where that godly man experienced the opposite of what he had learned to expect.

And this same God inspired verses like this to be put in the Scriptures: “The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may follow all the words of this law.” (Deuteronomy 29:29)

Before His crucifixion, Jesus even said this to His inner circle of disciples: “I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world.” (John 16:33)

In this world we will have trouble, and some of it will be inexplicable – at least for the moment, given the limited information we have.

But over time, we will see the faithfulness of God. We will see that the greatest obstacles to our faith can become the greatest opportunities to grow in faith, and that the things that the world or circumstances or Satan intended to destroy us with are the very things that can make us strong.

People will disappoint us. The church will disappoint us. We will disappoint others and ourselves. 

The key thing is that in our darkest moment, when we have lost faith in everyone and everything else, we don’t lose faith in Him – we don’t “lose our grip in God.”

As the years go on, you will see His faithfulness on your behalf. You will watch Him heal the wounds. You will see Him bring life out of death and beauty out of ashes. You will – that is, as long as you don’t abandon Him and throw in the towel.

Weeping may endure for a night – sometimes for a very long night – but joy will come in the morning (see Psalm 30:5). As surely as the sun sets, it will rise again.

This is not cognitive dissonance speaking. 

This is the voice of experience speaking – in my case, the voice of more than five decades as a believer, and, more broadly, the voice of multiplied millions of witnesses over a period of thousands of years.

Lean on that unshakable, unalterable truth. Stake your life on it. Depend on it. Hold on to it as if your life depended on it. 

And when your own faith is weak and your confidence all but gone, just say from your heart, “Father, you’re just going to have to carry me now.” He will!

And during those times of darkness and storm when you cannot see the light, remember all the things He did for you in the past. He is just the same today, and He will see you through.

Has God Failed You? - Finding Faith When You are Not Even Sure God is Real

Do debates do any real good? Aren't they more a matter of having polished rhetorical skills than convincing content? And don’t they simply reinforce the beliefs of each opposing side?

Are Religious Debates Fruitful? | Articles | AskDrBrown

For the last 40 years, I have engaged in scores of public debates on religious subjects, sometimes drawing passionate, standing room only crowds. 

But are the debates actually fruitful? Do they bring more heat than light? 

By the end of this week, I will have engaged in two major debates, one in London at a university campus and the other live-streamed from here in the States. The London event was with a Muslim apologist, debating whether Muhammad was prophesied in the Bible. The online event will be with a “Hebrew Israelite” leader, debating who are the legitimate children of Israel. (If you’re on our email list at AskDrBrown.org, you’ll be notified about links where you can watch online.)

Certainly, these events stir a lot of interest and discussion. 

But, to repeat, are they actually fruitful? 

Are these debates more a matter of having polished rhetorical skills than convincing content? And don’t they simply reinforce the beliefs of each opposing side?

Let me first emphasize that public, religious debates are biblical. In fact, Paul himself frequently engaged in them (this was along with his powerful ministry of preaching and healing). 

Here’s just one example out of several that Acts records: 

“Now when they had traveled through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where there was a synagogue of the Jews. And according to Paul’s custom, he went to them, and for three Sabbaths reasoned with them from the Scriptures, explaining and giving evidence that the Messiah had to suffer and rise again from the dead, and saying, “This Jesus whom I am proclaiming to you is the Messiah.” (Acts 17:1–3)

“he greatly helped those who had believed through grace, for he powerfully refuted the Jews in public, demonstrating by the Scriptures that Jesus was the Messiah” (Acts 18:27b–28). 

This indicates, then, that there was a two-fold positive outcome from these public debates. 

The first was that other Jews were hearing the good news about Yeshua the Messiah, based on the Scriptures.

The second was that the faith of those who already believed was greatly strengthened. Apollos’s dynamic, powerful, persuasive arguments were a real encouragement to the other Jewish believers, strengthening their own faith and resolve. They were reassured that they were on the right side.

In my own experience, this second, positive result is of great importance. It encourages my fellow-believers. It gives them confidence that they are standing with the truth. It shows them that there are answers to the objections they commonly hear.

This produces a fresh confidence, courage, and boldness. 

I can also state firsthand that we have seen real changes of heart and mind through these debates as well. Let me share two examples from my debates with rabbis about Jesus, the most frequent subject of my debates over the decades.

Dave Gettleman is the recently retired general manager of the New York Giants and before that, was the general manager of the Carolina Panthers, taking them to the Super Bowl in 2015. As reported in Decision Magazine, 

“A major turning point came in February 2004 when Gettleman, then working for the New York Giants, attended a debate in New York City between Michael Brown, a Messianic Jewish scholar and author, and Jewish Rabbi Shmuley Boteach.

“‘The place was packed, and probably half the people there were Jews,’ Gettleman said. ‘Michael presented the Gospel in such a way that was crystal clear and so compelling that I noticed many looks of concern in the audience.’”

When I met Dave in North Carolina, he shared more details of the story. Prior to the debate he had started attending a Messianic congregation, but he still had many doubts and questions. 

After the debate, the doubts were gone and he knew that Yeshua was the Messiah. He has been a committed follower of the Lord ever since.

Or consider the case of Bernard Starr, PhD, whose bio on the Huffington Post, where he is a frequent contributor, begins with, 

“…a college professor (Professor Emeritus CUNY), psychologist, journalist, and gerontologist. He was formerly professor of developmental and educational psychology and director of a graduate program in gerontology at the City University of New York, Brooklyn College. He is founder, and for 25 years the managing editor, of the cutting-edge Annual Review of Gerontology and Geriatrics (Springer Publishing Co.); also editor of the Springer Series, Adulthood and Aging and Lifestyles and Issues in Aging.”

The bio ends with this (and note the shift in subject matter towards the end!):

“From 2008–2010 he was president of the Association for Spirituality and Psychotherapy and is currently the main United Nations representative for the Institute of Global Education that founded the Mucherla Global School in Mucherla, India. Dr. Starr is co-author of The Starr-Weiner Report on Sex and Sexuality in the Mature Years (Stein and Day and McGraw Hill; also British and German editions). His book Escape Your Own Prison: Why We Need Spirituality and Psychology to be Truly Free, published by Rowman and Littlefield, presents spirituality as a psychology of consciousness. His latest book (expanded edition) is Jesus, Jews, and Anti-Semitism in Art: How Renaissance Art Erased Jesus’ Jewish Identity and How Today’s Artists Are Restoring It. He is also organizer of the art exhibit “Putting Judaism Back in the Picture: Toward Healing the Christian/Jewish Divide.”

Professor Starr was not a religious Jew, being more interested in Eastern spirituality than in traditional Judaism, even spending time in India. 

How, then, did he come to start writing books on Jesus, most notably, Jesus Uncensored: Restoring the Authentic Jew? How is it that he began urging other Jews to overcome their “Jesus phobia” and start reading the New Testament for themselves? 

To be sure, when on the radio with me, he was intentionally coy, not willing to say publicly if he believed that Jesus was the Messiah. That, he said, would remove the drama and intrigue! But he was quite clear in saying that my debate with Rabbi Shmuley Boteach in 2004, the same event attended by Dave Gettleman in New York City, was a turning point in his life. He also said that a subsequent debate I had with Rabbi Shmuley, one that he also attended in person, greatly impacted him. 

Since then, he has encouraged many Jews to read the New Testament for themselves and reconsider Jesus. (He has just released a fascinating historical novel titled, The Crucifixion of Truth.)

On a personal level, I can share that doing these debates forces me to dig even deeper into the subject matter, making these events great learning experiences as well. 

It also allows me to meet (and sometimes become lasting friends with) people with radically different, and opposing views. This also makes it easier to humanize those I differ with rather than demonize them. And, if we present our own positions in an intelligent and Christlike spirit, that will break many negative stereotypes. 

This, too, is a major victory in a debate.

Will everyone in the audience be forced to think again? Will hardcore believers on the other side of the aisle reconsider their views? Most likely, the great majority will remain entrenched. 

Many in the middle will see things in a brand-new light. And those on our side (if we do well) will leave with a renewed holy confidence.

A Heartfelt Thank You to My Atheist Readers

Imagine my shock, when my staff sent me over 200 pages of responses sent to our ministry by atheist readers. But that was only the beginning...

A Heartfelt Thank You to My Atheist Readers | Article | AskDrBrown

Towards the end of the first week of July, a number of websites carried my article titled, “Some Honest Questions for Atheists.” What prompted me to write the article, seemingly quite out of the blue, was some of the material in the new book I’m working on. The book addresses the question of why so many Christians are leaving the faith today.

Why do people struggle with their beliefs? What causes them to leave the faith entirely? How many of them become atheists?

It was questions like these that prompted me to write the “honest questions” article. I wanted to have a better understanding of the atheist’s point of view, not to win an argument and not to rebut. Instead, as I stated at the outset of the article, it was simply to understand.

To explain further, I have often taught that for me, there are two key principles in doing solid apologetics work (meaning, the intellectual defense of the faith).

First, we must rightly understand what the other person is saying rather than simply responding, in which case we often pass each other like ships in the night. All too often I have seen this happen, as the response of Party B has little to do with the objection of Party A (and vice versa).

The best way to avoid this is to repeat back to the person what you understand their objection (or question) to be, using your own words. “I understand you to be saying this. Is that accurate?”

The second principle is much more difficult. In short, we must also feel the weight of the objection (or question) that is being raised, This requires empathy. This requires trying to see the world through the eyes of those with whom we differ. This requires trying to walk in their shoes, at least in theory.

To do it well takes time and can be very costly. Will my own views be changed in the process? Will I lose the sharpness of my convictions?

As a Jewish believer in Jesus in dialogue with rabbis for more than 50 years, I have lived these principles out very deeply – and with tears.

And as someone called into the culture wars, especially since in 2004, I have sought to live these principles out in terms of LGBTQ+ engagement, reaching out to the people with compassion while resisting the agenda with courage. This, too, has been costly. And this too, has brought me to tears, as I realized how deeply my words would appear hurtful to those I truly loved and wanted to help.

But I have not done the same with atheism or atheists, despite having countless conversations over the years with atheists and agnostics over the course of 50-plus years. I have not focused on debate and dialogue with atheists.

To be sure, my wife Nancy, herself a former atheist, has often discussed with me how an atheist would see the world or view our faith. And, on the rare occasions when I have formally debated an atheist or agnostic, I have presented my arguments to her in advance, asking for her input. (For the best known of these debates, with Prof. Bart Ehrman, see here – and yes, I weighed a lot more in that debate than I do today.)

On more than one occasion she has said to me, “That’s meaningless to an atheist,” or, “You just don’t get it.”

So, to say it again, it was the spirit of honest inquiry, not polemical argumentation, that prompted me to write the article, inviting atheist readers to respond, either in the comment section to the article (if there was one) or by writing directly to our ministry.

I have my perspective on how the world looks to an atheist, but I wanted your perspective as an atheist.

To be candid, though, I did not assume that many atheists would read the article, since I do not assume that I have a lot of atheist readers. And, while I expected some responses, I thought that very few would take the time to write out answers to the 7 questions I posed and email those answers to us.

Imagine my shock, then, when on Friday, July 8, my staff sent me a 45-page document compiling the responses sent to our ministry by atheist readers. Forty-five pages! And this was separate from the few pages sent in by Christians who were atheists in the past and wanted to share their perspective today.

But that was only the beginning. On Monday, July 11, I was informed that we had a flood of emails sent in over the weekend, resulting in a second document that my staff compiled. This one was 143 pages long. That means that, overall, we received almost 200 pages of responses from atheists (and roughly 100,000 words), all within a matter of days.

So, to all of you who took the time to read the article and respond, thank you from the bottom of my heart. I am in the process of reading each of your responses, and, at my request, you should have received a personal email from my staff, conveying my appreciation to you for writing.

As soon as I get through the responses, I hope to write a follow-up article, not to debate but simply to synthesize your responses and to share them with all my readers. Then, I’ll share my reflections on what you wrote.

If you consider yourself an atheist today, or if you considered yourself an atheist in the past, I’d love to ask you some honest questions. I ask these questions so I can better understand your mindset as an atheist...

Some Honest Questions for Atheists | Article | AskDrBrown

If you consider yourself an atheist today, or if you considered yourself an atheist in the past, I’d love to ask you some honest questions. 

But I do not ask these questions to win a debate. Or to be antagonistic. Or to buttress my own beliefs by exposing alleged weaknesses in your position. 

To the contrary, I ask these questions so I can better understand your mindset as an atheist.

When my wife Nancy and I met in 1974, I was a committed believer in Jesus, with my life dramatically transformed in 1971. She was a staunch atheist, looking down on religious believers as weak. And her atheism was firmly entrenched in her life, having concluded when she was no more than 8 years-old that there was no such thing as God. Yes, it would have been great if He was real. But clearly, she concluded, He was not. (For the record, Nancy and I are both Jewish.)

Nancy had her own, quite unexpected encounter with God in 1974, but she has always rejected the idea that “there is no such as an atheist.” And over the years, she has helped me better understand how atheists think and how they view the world.

It is in that spirit of genuinely wanting to understand the atheist mindset better that I ask these questions.

First, would you say that you are (or, were) an atheist based primarily on intellectual study or based on experience? Or did you never believe in God at all?

Put another way, was it the lack of answers to prayer or failures within organized religion or some other anti-faith experience that first caused you to question the existence of God? Or was it something you learned in school or your studies that caused you to doubt? Or were you raised without belief in God and you’ve never found a good reason to question it?

Second, would you say that even as an atheist, you still have a sense of purpose and destiny in your life, a feeling that you were put here for a reason and that you have a mission to accomplish? Or is it primarily people of faith who feel like this, since we are simply the products of an unguided, random evolutionary process?

Third, would you say that you are 100 percent sure there is no such being as God – meaning, an eternal, all-powerful, all-knowing being? Or would you say that, for all practical purposes you have concluded that this God does not exist, although it is impossible to prove such a negative with absolute certainty?

Fourth, do you believe that science can provide answers for many of the remaining mysteries of the universe, including: how the universe began (including where matter came from and where the Big Bang derived its energy); the origin of life; and DNA coding?

Again, these questions are not intended to “stump you” or prove that science can’t answer everything. Instead, I’m genuinely wondering if you feel comfortable saying, “We may not be able to answer all these questions now, but over time, we’ll get the answers – and we won’t need a God to fill in the gaps.”

Fifth, have you had any experiences in life that caused you to question your atheism? Has something happened to you that seemed genuinely supernatural or otherworldly? Or have you been confronted with some information that shook your atheistic foundations, such as a scientific argument for intelligent design? If so, how have you dealt with such doubts to your atheism?

Sixth, are you completely materialistic in your mindset, meaning, human beings are entirely physical, human consciousness is an illusion, and there is no spiritual realm of any kind? Or are you superstitious, reading horoscopes or engaging in new age practices or the like?

Seventh, if you were convinced that God truly existed – meaning the God of the Bible, who is perfect in every way, full of justice and mercy, our Creator and our Redeemer – would that be good news or bad news? And would you be willing to follow Him and honor Him if He were truly God?

I understand that no two atheists are identical, anymore than any two believers are identical, and that everyone has their own unique story. I also understand that some of you who are believers today were once atheists and that others who were once believers are atheists today.

Either way, whatever your own story might be, I’d love to hear your answers to these questions, even if you choose to answer only a few of these seven questions.

And if there’s no way to leave comments where you’re reading this article, feel free to send your responses to info@askdrbrown.org.

To say it once more: I have no ulterior motives in asking. What you see is what you get.

The Problem of Suffering, Atheism, and the Killing of Innocent Children

In the aftermath of the senseless slaughter of little children and schoolteachers this week, the question of “why” comes up again. If God is really there and if He is truly good, why does He allow things like this to happen?

The Problem of Suffering, Atheism, and the Killing of Innocent Children | Article | AskDrBrown

In the aftermath of the senseless slaughter of little children and schoolteachers this week, the question of “why” comes up again. 

If God is really there and if He is truly good, why does He allow things like this to happen? 

For some people, the answer is simple... Read the Full Article on Stream.org

When Bill Maher and Joe Rogan Make the Pro-Life Case

When talking with people who do not share our religious values or do not hold the Bible in esteem, there are common-sense, logical arguments we can raise that might just get people to rethink their position.

At the least, these arguments, especially when tied to people like Joe Rogan and Bill Maher, who are anything but Bible-thumping Christian fundamentalists, might just lower the temperature in the room, allowing for cooler heads to prevail.

Interestingly, it was the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, herself staunchly pro-abortion, who had warned back in 1992 that Roe was built on a flimsy foundation...

When Bill Maher and Joe Rogan Make the Pro-Life Case | Articles | AskDrBrown

A recent article posted on Red State pointed to abortion-related comments made by podcast giant Joe Rogan, suggesting that we can win the pro-life argument by listening to his approach. In the same way, recent comments by the very liberal Bill Maher point to ways that we can have a discussion with pro-abortion friends and colleagues without using religious-based arguments.

To be sure, in order to change hearts and minds, we need God’s help. And under no circumstances should we ever back away from our deeply-held, biblically-based convictions about the humanity of the baby within the womb.

At the same time, when talking with people who do not share our religious values or do not hold the Bible in esteem, there are common-sense, logical arguments we can raise that might just get people to rethink their position.

At the least, these arguments, especially when tied to people like Rogan and Maher, who are anything but Bible-thumping Christian fundamentalists, might just lower the temperature in the room, allowing for cooler heads to prevail.

Interestingly, it was the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, herself staunchly pro-abortion, who had warned back in 1992 that Roe was built on a flimsy foundation.

As pointed out by New York Times columnist David Brooks on the PBS NewsHour on May 5, “Ruth Bader Ginsburg made this point back in 1992, that that decision was so big, she said it’s fragile. It’s — and then law professors, even very pro-choice law professors, have always said, we’re worried about this decision. It’s not a great decision. They liked the outcome. They worried about the decision. So, it was fragile. And so, hanging all that on that decision was always going to be — it was waiting to go off. And then Alito just ran through it. I — personally — there are two separate issues here: Should abortion be a right that people get to enjoy? Should — does the Constitution guarantee that right? And it’s important to separate those two things.”

In Ginsburg’s own words, “Doctrinal limbs too swiftly shaped, experience teaches, may prove unstable. The most prominent example in recent decades is Roe v. Wade.”

As for saying that Justice Samuel Alito “ran through it,” I take Brooks to mean that Alito exposed these very weaknesses in his devastating, leaked opinion. (Prof. Jay Richards rightly noted that, “Because of the outrage of the leak, etc. Alito's opinion has not [yet] gotten enough credit for being an utterly persuasive and accessible piece of legal reasoning. Notice the social media screamers aren't engaging his arguments.”)

To quote Alito directly, “Although the Court acknowledged that States had a legitimate interest in protecting ‘potential life,’ it found that this interest could not justify any restriction on pre-viability abortions. The Court did not explain the basis for this line, and even abortion supporters have found it hard to defend Roe's reasoning. One prominent constitutional scholar wrote that he ‘would vote for a statute very much like the one the Court ended up drafting’ if he were ‘a legislator’, but his assessment of Roe was memorable and brutal: Roe was ‘not constitutional law’ at all and gave ‘almost no sense of an obligation to try to be’. . . .

“As Justice Byron White aptly put it in his dissent, the decision represented the ‘exercise of raw judicial power,’ and it sparked a national controversy that has embittered our political culture for a half-century.”

And as a legal colleague of mine mentioned after reading Alito’s 98-page document in full, Alito also cites the views of other liberals who recognized the deficiencies of Roe. Those arguments should be part of our arsenal as well.

Getting back to Joe Rogan, he said, “I am 100% for a woman’s right to choose. But as a human being, just a person observing things, there’s a big difference between a little clump of cells and a fetus with the eyeball and a beating heart. And for anybody to pretend there’s not.”

Rogan’s guest, comedian Doug Stanhope asked, “Where do you draw the line?”

Rogan replied, “Right. Where do you draw the line? Yeah, that’s the question. It’s what I call a human issue. It’s a very complicated issue. It’s so fraught with emotion. And it’s so political.”

Again, Rogan’s musing represents just one step in the right direction in the midst of his other statements, with which we strongly differ as pro-lifers. But his words do point to the fact that a strong majority of Americans want some limits on abortion. (On a related note, I believe that if Americans were asked if the states should make their own abortion laws, thereby representing the will of the people in each state, most Americans would agree with this. When they’re asked if Roe should be overturned, most say no, but in my opinion, it’s because they think that would mean a national ban on abortion.)

As for Bill Maher, he said on his Real Time broadcast on May 5, “This whole [expletive] argument about, well, it’s settled law, so was segregation. Plessy v. Ferguson was settled law in 1896 and thank God somebody said, let’s unsettle it. So, it’s not — that’s a [expletive] argument. It’s what you think, if you like babies, then you’re pro-life, and if you like women, you’re pro-choice. I like women.”

So, even Maher recognizes that, if your emphasis is on the wellbeing of the baby, then you’ll be pro-life.

He added, “I just — I feel like…abortion is unique. It is. Because people either — you just have this view that it’s murder — I could put the argument on a hat when people talk about a woman’s right, murder isn’t a right. If you think it’s murder — I don’t — again, crazy me.”

At the least, using his logic (and quoting him directly), we can ask, “So, what do you think about what he said? What if you really believe there’s a little baby in there? Would that affect your viewpoint?”

Again, there’s nothing new in these arguments at all, nor do they provide unique insights into the controversies surrounding abortion.

But they do remind us that plenty of non-religious people recognize the complexity of abortion and that more and more Americans recognize that the standard pro-abortion talking points are not aging well.

If you have accepted God’s calling on your life to serve His people as a shepherd and a leader, then you have my respect. I honor you for your service, and I recognize your sacrifice. The last thing I want to do is add more pressure to your life.

Instead, on behalf of many of your people who are hurting and really need help, I want to make this appeal: My brothers and sisters, at times like this, you simply cannot be silent.

What, exactly, am I speaking about? I’m speaking about LGBTQ+ issues and people.

Pastors, You Cannot Be Silent | Article | AskDrBrown

If you have accepted God’s calling on your life to serve His people as a shepherd and a leader, then you have my respect. I honor you for your service, and I recognize your sacrifice.

Pastoral ministry is anything but easy, and only those who have served as pastoral leaders know the immense pressures you face.

You are the one to get the phone call from the shocked parents who just learned that their child was killed in a car accident. You have to bring comforting words at the funeral. You have to answer the questions of, “Where was God?”

And you have to do this while preparing your message for Sunday. And while counseling a couple on the verge of divorce. And while helping a young man struggling with porn. And while figuring out how to make up for the budget shortfall. And while trying to encourage your people to spend more time in prayer and reading the Bible. And while looking for new ways to do community outreach.

No wonder so many pastors burn out and quit, especially when they do not have a strong support team with them.

That’s why the last thing I want to do is add more pressure to your life.

Instead, on behalf of many of your people who are hurting and really need help, I want to make this appeal: My brothers and sisters, at times like this, you simply cannot be silent.

What, exactly, am I speaking about? I’m speaking about LGBTQ+ issues and people.

I’m speaking about the mothers and fathers facing crises within their own home, not knowing where to turn. I’m speaking about the kids in school (from pre-K to college) who are getting indoctrinated with all the radical LGBTQ+ talking points until they have embraced them for themselves.

I’m speaking about the family members that write to me in tears, sharing their own horror stories.

That’s why I say that, at times like this, you cannot remain silent.

I understand the reticence you may have had in the past to talk about homosexuality or transgenderism from the pulpit. Why stir up a hornet’s nest? Why be branded a homophobe and a bigot? Why subject your church to a flood of hateful attacks and bad publicity? And who has time to research all the relevant issues? Isn’t it just better to preach through the Bible and bring your flock into spiritual health? Why not leave the politics to others?

The answer is that this is not a matter of politics but of human lives.

The answer is that the Bible absolutely speaks with authority and relevance to these difficult cultural issues.

The answer is, as representatives of Jesus, we can never avoid controversy and conflict.

And the answer is that people in your own congregation are hurting, and you have a sacred responsibility to help them.

Last Sunday, after touching on some of these issues while preaching at a fine church near Saint Louis, there was a line of people waiting to talk with me.

One woman told me that in a local, private pre-school, a boy recently announced that he was a girl, because of which the teacher decided to educate the other kids about trans issues. (We’re talking about kids as young as three or four.)

Books were read to them about a red crayon that feels like a blue crayon, helping them understand that they too might be trapped in the wrong bodies. And this went on for a few weeks before the parents found out about it.

Another woman told me that she has been working in special education in a local high school since 2006. When I asked her if the school had changed over the years, she replied, “Totally.”

She then told me that the new principal only wants gay faculty at the school and that he will not hear a dissenting word from anyone.

My driver then told me he had been working at Wells Fargo bank for 41 years. When I asked him if things had changed (with specific reference to LGBTQ+ activism), he literally grabbed his head with his hands (while driving). He was grieved beyond words.

Things have gotten to the point, he explained, that if you do not actively support this radical agenda, you will be marginalized and pushed out.

In fact, a friend of mine who used to work for Bank of America left the company a few years ago after getting systematically pushed out because of his failure to be an open and active LGBTQ+ ally.

Apologetics

Why Reformed Cessationists Should NOT Quote Church History to Support Their Position

Whatever Happens, Don’t Lose Your Grip in God

Are Religious Debates Fruitful?

A Heartfelt Thank You to My Atheist Readers

Some Honest Questions for Atheists

The Problem of Suffering, Atheism, and the Killing of Innocent Children

When Bill Maher and Joe Rogan Make the Pro-Life Case

Pastors, You Cannot Be Silent

From Time’s “Is God Dead?” in 1966 to the New York Times’ Call to “Give Up God” Today

Substitutionary Atonement: Jesus Died for Us

Responding to the Latest Christian Leader to Renounce His Faith

Is Our God No Different than the ‘Flying Spaghetti Monster’?

No, it is Not Cognitive Dissonance to Proclaim that God is Good When Things Go Bad

Has God Failed You?

Why Has John Piper’s Son Become a Bible-Bashing Tik-Tok Star?

Why the Hysterical Attack on James White for His Interfaith Dialogue?

Is it Possible to Lose Your Salvation?

Future Sins Forgiven in Advance? The Fundamental Error of Hyper-Grace

The Shocking Truth About the Most Quoted Verse in the Quran