Home » Academics » Prof's Office » Ask Theophilus

Ask Theophilus: Start with the Spices, End with the Herbs

SON WON'T BE CRONIES WITH PHONIES

Dear Professor Theophilus:

My wife just got off the phone with our son, who lives in another city. Some of what he told her in their two-hour-plus conversation echoes what I've read and heard about your own journey from nihilism to Christian faith. He confesses that he is finding it a struggle to maintain an existentialist worldview. Even now he clings to belief in a real right and wrong, although when I've asked him how he can anchor that belief in his worldview, he usually changes the subject or gets too riled up for us to continue.

Reply

I do have a few suggestions. The first is to pray for him all the time, even silently, while talking with him; remember the example of the ancient mother whose wayward son we now know as St. Augustine. The other is to remember that sheer argumentation is not what leads most young people out of the faith, and sheer argumentation is not usually what leads them back. Certainly argumentation is part of it; your points must be logically cogent. What I mean, though, is that often nonbelievers use argumentation not as a way to probe deeper into the issues but as a way to avoid them. I am not suggesting that you should say that to your son; it would only make him defensive, and besides, it isn't a refutation. It is just one of the psychological possibilities to be aware of. Always ask yourself, "Is the question that he asks his real question, or is it a cover for another question that he hasn't expressed?" Then address the real issue, not the surface issue. I'll pray for him, and for you too.

My reader wrote back, "I agree with you that intellectual issues often point to deeper heart issues. One thing that came out in that telephone conversation was my son's bitterness about hypocrisy among people in the Church. I think this is big for him, and I consider the fact that he was finally able to talk about it as an answer to prayer." I'm sure that the reader is right, and I responded to him like this:

May I add a couple of thoughts about your son's bitter feelings about hypocrisy? If Christianity taught that everyone who professed Christianity were good and sincere, then the existence of wolves and phonies might be a good argument against the faith. Bitterness about hypocrites is understandable, but what the faith actually teaches is this: (1) That there will always be wolves and phonies among the flock. (2) That this is a very bad thing. (3) Believers should beware of them. You might point out to your son that it's hard to see how the fact that these three teachings are true is an argument against the Christian faith. It looks more like a testament to its honesty and realism.

I don't know what kind of hypocrisy your son is bitter about; perhaps someone has done him personal harm. From your letter, though, I get the impression that he is angry just because he knows so many sinful Christians. If that's how it is, a bit of Christian charity might do him some good too. You might point out that for all we know, some of those sinners might be sweating bullets to become better than they are. How much worse they might have been if God hadn't been working in their lives! Or consider all those annoying people who spout pious God talk but who don't lead particularly holy lives. Is all that phony talk just a disguise, as your son thinks it is? Or could it be that some of these people are trying to talk themselves into leading holier lives than they do? Besides, we ought to consider why people wear pious disguises in the first place. Some people wear them to take advantage of others — but other people wear them because they are ashamed that they aren't already holier than they are. Sure, pretense is bad, but shame is a stage in repentance. I'll bet your son hasn't considered that.

Without belittling your son's own struggles, you might remind him that we know so little of the struggles of other people. Christ said, "Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. Go and learn what this means, 'I desire mercy, and not sacrifice.' For I came not to call the righteous, but sinners."¹ Like you, and me and him.

Peace be with you,

PROFESSOR THEOPHILUS

DEPRESSION STUFFS

Dear Professor Theophilus:

What can I tell this random guy who came asking me for advice? He opened up even though the only thing he knew about me was that I'm a Christian. I barely know him, but somehow God made me graceful in his eyes. Out of nowhere he asked me, "How can you be happy in a world where you have everything you want — money, girls, a car and all that — but still you feel empty?" One of the last things we talked about is that he has already tried to suicide himself twice. He told me, "I know I need God, so everyone tells me, but that's not what I need to hear."

Personally, professor, I sort of agree with the guy. If I was an atheist, how could anyone get me to seek God if I didn't believe in Him? But in that case, what can I tell him, other than "Seek God, and He will take that depression away?"

Please, I really need your help on this one. I'm a worship leader, so I can help people who have problems with worship teams and stuff like that, but not depression stuffs.

Reply

I'm glad you wrote about your despondent friend, because this is a matter of life and death. If your friend is suicidal, then the main form that your witness should take right now is not to be a preacher, but to be a Christian. In other words, the crucial thing isn't to dump all the reasons why he should believe in Christ on his head, but to encourage him to seek help for his depression. By "help," I mean professional help, because what your friend needs goes beyond what you can give him.

Besides, you cannot promise your friend that if he believed in God, then God would take his depression away. Depression occurs for many different reasons. Some of them are medical. Yes, you're right that false beliefs about God lead some people to fall into depression. But it can work the other way around too: Depression can draw some people into false beliefs about God.

When I say that what your friend needs goes beyond what you can give him, I'm not denying that it includes what you can give him. What then can you give him? You can give him the encouragement to seek other help. You can remain in friendship with him through this dark time in his life. You can keep telling him that life is worth living. You can be for him a voice of hope. To be for him a voice of hope is to be for him the voice of Christ.

You can even speak to him about God, but the best way to do that right now isn't to try to talk him into believing in God — that may come — but to reassure him that Christ loves him, that you and his other friends love him too and that the precious life that the Father has given him is worth holding onto — even if it doesn't feel that way right now.

Peace be with you,

PROFESSOR THEOPHILUS

DIGGING THE GROOVE DEEPER

Dear Professor Theophilus:

I'm a seminary student with an interest in apologetics. Recently I read your excellent book What We Can't Not Know. I have used some material from it in conversation with an atheist. The atheist claims that humans are moral so that social cohesion can exist.

What's a good response in defense of the natural law written on the human heart?

Reply

It doesn't sound as though your atheist friend has thought his argument through. Why don't you do him a favor by giving him a little workout?

If morality evolved merely to promote social cohesion, it's surprising that our morality genes work so poorly. Why aren't they better at their job? Why should anyone ever murder, steal, covet, bear false witness, commit adultery or dishonor his parents? Your friend can't appeal to free will, because if biology is all there is, then there isn't any room for free will.

Besides, morality is a pretty roundabout way to promote social cohesion. Instead of evolving genes for morality for the sake of social cohesion, why not just evolve genes for social cohesion? Your friend may try to say that honoring parents, not murdering, and so on are simply what he means by social cohesion. Don't let him get away with that. If morality and social cohesion are merely synonyms, then his argument "Humans are moral so that they can have social cohesion" boils down to "Humans have social cohesion so that they can have social cohesion." That's circular, and a circularity doesn't explain anything at all.

By the way, does morality promote social cohesion? Take the moral principle of treating others as they deserve — for example, giving a workman his wages. I suppose that on your friend's argument, the reason we act that way (when we do) is that we have genes for acting that way. And it might well seem that having such genes would eliminate certain causes of social disharmony — after all, if you don't give your workman his wages, he will be angry with you. But wait a moment — why is he angry? Presumably because he has genes for expecting to be treated that way. But in that case, social cohesion doesn't require me to have the genes for treating him as he deserves unless at the same time he has the genes for expecting to be treated as he deserves. Why should he have them in the first place? If he didn't have them, then he wouldn't be angry! Cows don't have a concept of treating other cows as they deserve; bees don't have a concept of treating other bees as they deserve; yet herds and hives seem to cohere just fine. If it's possible to have social cohesion without morality, then the best your friend can say is that morality is a way to promote a certain kind of social cohesion — the moral kind of social cohesion — and there is that circularity again.

Finally, why must evolution promote social cohesion anyway? Worms don't have social cohesion, but they survive. Amoebas don't have it, but so do they. I showed a moment ago that morality promotes not social cohesion as such, but only the moral kind of social cohesion. Now you see that social cohesion promotes not survival as such, but merely the socially cohesive kind of survival. So the groove of circularity cuts deeper and deeper.

It might be different if the theory of natural selection theory predicted which organisms would develop which strategies for passing on their genes. But it doesn't. It is not a predictive, or forward-looking theory; it is a backward-looking theory. It can't say "This state of affairs will come to pass"; it can only see which state of affairs did come to pass and cook up just-so stories about how they might have done so. If humans didn't have morality or didn't have social cohesion, the theorist of natural selection would have found it just as easy to cook up just-so stories about how those states of affairs might have come to pass.

I admit that the theory of natural selection is very inventive in cooking up such stories. But to justify its claim that it actually explains anything, a theory must have consequences; it must be able to rule some things out. A theory that "explains everything," in the sense that it rules nothing out, explains precisely nothing.

Think about it. Then — this is harder — see if you can get your friend to think about it too.

Peace be with you,

PROFESSOR THEOPHILUS

THE MINT, THE DILL AND THE CUMIN²

Reader 1. Dear Professor Theophilus: I have a new business. It's not making any money yet. I hope I'll be able to pay my mom a small salary — she's my secretary. I work full time at another job, so I tithe out of my salary there. Within the next six months, though, I hope to start drawing a salary for myself from the business. When it does start making money, how do I tithe? Do I tithe on the income of the business, or just on the money that I pay me?

Reader 2. Dear Professor Theophilus: I don't have a job while school is in session. The money I use is from savings and from summer jobs, and from a small amount my parents give me each month. Should I give 10 percent of this, or is tithing only for when I'm actually earning? Also, what about if someone gives me a monetary gift — should I give 10 percent of that too?

Reply

The Law of Moses required the Jews to "tithe" — to give 10 percent of certain categories of wealth — for the support of the worship of God. However, Jesus completely fulfilled the law of Moses.³ Christians should live in the spirit of the tithe, but, just as we are released from Jewish dietary law, we are released from the legal requirement of giving precisely 10 percent.

What is the spirit of the tithe? The spirit of the tithe is giving whatever we can to support God's work, not because of a legal requirement, but joyfully, from love and from gratitude.

Here is how St. Paul puts it in one of his letters to the young Church at Corinth:

So I thought it necessary to urge the brethren to go on to you before me, and arrange in advance for this gift you have promised, so that it may be ready not as an exaction but as a willing gift. The point is this: he who sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and he who sows bountifully will also reap bountifully. Each one must do as he has made up his mind, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver. And God is able to provide you with every blessing in abundance, so that you may always have enough of everything and may provide in abundance for every good work.⁴

So how much is whatever we can? I'm not dissing the practice of giving a tenth; 10 percent is an excellent guideline for most Christians, most of the time. Not all can give that much; consider the guy who has just lost his job and is struggling to pay the bills while looking for another one. On the other hand, in this rich country, many people can give more — and I mean some students too. If it's easy to give a tenth, then you probably aren't giving enough. If it's hard to give a tenth even though you have lots of money, then you probably aren't exercising good stewardship — and giving a tenth back to God is a good place to start.

Having emphasized that tithing is no longer a law, I'm in no position to lay down the law to either one of you — but here is what I suggest. Make a tithe your target. Later in life try to increase it. If circumstances force you to fall temporarily behind, try to catch up. But give from what you have, not from what you don't have.

Reader 1: I'd advise you to give from the salary and benefits that you actually pay yourself, not on income of the business that never reaches you personally. Isn't that income what the business uses so that everyone else can go on getting paid?

C O F F E E  S H O P

---

How have you reached out to a friend who struggles with depression?.

Join the discussion!

Reader 2: Give from what you actually gain, whether from summer jobs or from gifts. If you had invested your savings and were living on the proceeds, I'd advise you differently, but that's not your situation. As to the small amount your parents give you each month — well, it depends. Do they say, "We know you don't have enough to meet your expenses, so this is for paying your rent"? Then use it for paying your rent. Do they say, "We know things are tight for you, so here's a little extra?" Then give part of it back to the Lord — and while you're thanking Him, don't forget to thank them too.

Peace be with you,

PROFESSOR THEOPHILUS

If you have a question you'd like Professor Theophilus to consider for this column, please send it to asktheo@trueu.org. Please note, all questions selected for "Ask Theophilus" may be edited for clarity and privacy, and become the property of Focus on the Family.