So some Christian organization put up a video billboard in New York’s Times Square in which they jeer at atheists. What follows is Christians bemoaning about how unloving and insensitive this is.
We’ve forgotten that “we are not fighting against flesh-and-blood enemies, but against evil rulers and authorities of the unseen world, against mighty powers in this dark world, and against evil spirits in the heavenly places.” (see Eph. 6:12)
We’ve forgotten that the “atheists” are flesh-and-blood, fellow humans. We aren’t supposed to be fighting against them. Our real enemies, the “evil rulers and authorities of the unseen world”, aren’t going to be defeated by snarky ad campaigns.
We’ve forgotten that atheists are not the enemy.
Rather than drawing a circle bigger and bigger, inviting others inside, we reinforce out boundaries and declare with certainty that God is on our side. All the while, we’re making enemies out of neighbors.
“Love your enemies”, He said, but we’d rather fight them to the death.
We want to defeat them in Times Square. But you can’t love somebody once you’ve slain them.
So maybe it’s time to put down our swords and reach out with arms of love instead. To our brothers and sisters. To our enemies. To our neighbors.
To all of our atheist friends. (emphasis in original)
Oh, boo-hoo. I haven’t forgotten that “atheists are not the enemy.” They are in the grips of an Evil who would just love for us to tip-toe around him. This silly notion that we should “reach out with arms of love” — sort of like Rachel Held Evans did? — has turned us into namby-pamby do-gooders who have zero backbone to stand up to people who believe they randomly arose of from sludge and tell them they’re full of crap. And don’t get me started about this dumb idea of “inviting [atheists] inside” our “circle. ” And inside our “circle” we do, what? Toast marshmallows, tell atheists they’re bitchin’, and worship Nature? Sorry. If my “atheist friends” want to enjoy a dog and a beer at the ball game with me, fine. But if we’re talking about a spiritual “circle” — you know, the one where “light” and “darkness” are at odds (II Cor. 6:14) — then maintaining some distance might be healthy.
Chuck McKnight is much less pretentious. In Responding to Things Like AiG’s Billboard (AiG is Answers in Genesis, the group promoting the ad), McKnight writes:
First, to those atheists I count as friends, as well as those I have not yet had the pleasure of meeting, I unreservedly apologize for the existence of that sign. It does not reflect well on my Savior, on my friends at AiG, or on Christianity as a whole.
I am sorry. Please forgive us.
Second, to my friends at AiG, I know your heart is in the right place. Because I know you, I know that your sincere desire is to proclaim the truth to unbelievers. But I can’t understand what made you think this was a good way to do so.
Hearts are not changed by shouting “YOU’RE WRONG” from the corner of Times Square. And the fact that you dragged God into the same sentence could only possibly serve to harden people against him. True, God works in mysterious ways, and he can redeem even this debacle, but it would be in spite of that sign, not because of it.
Am I the only one who is getting tired of Christians apologizing for other Christians? Please. Maybe you should just stick to apologizing for, um, yourself. Listen, Mr. McKnight seems like a nice guy. But who is he to say that this billboard campaign “does not reflect well on my Savior… or on Christianity as a whole”? Frankly, I like it and wish Christians would be more smart and savvy in the marketplace. Besides, Ken Ham, part of the AiG braintrust, has gone on record saying the campaign has been a huge success.
…the whole package of billboards, web articles, and a video has done what we and JDA [the ad firm that put together this campaign] hoped it would do: get secularists to visit our website, comment about it, and have the nation talking about God’s existence.
McKnight might think the billboard campaign “does not reflect well on my Savior.” Problem is, Ken Ham doesn’t. And they purportedly serve the same Savior. As far as how this represents “Christianity as a whole,” I’m a part of that “whole” and I kind of like this approach.
Does Ken Ham and AiG reflect me and my beliefs? Sort of.* Is this ad a cheap shot at attention-getting? Absolutely! Are there better ways to engage atheists in dialog? Of course! But if part of that “dialog” includes billboards, soundbites, stickers, T-shirts, logos, and pop cultural trivialities, then by all means — engage!
The atheists to whom the AiG ad is addressing make no bones about offending Christians. While I’m not saying we should be intentionally offensive, I see no problem playing this game. In fact, I wish more Christians would launch smart, witty, brash, creative, bombastic, humorous, provocative salvos into the pop cultural marketplace. (And, no, I’m not talking about fish stickers eating Darwin stickers.) But this idea that “reach[ing] out with arms of love” means never chiding, challenging, or confronting — and definitely NOT using billboards to do so — is nonsense.
* I’m not a young earth creationist, which is the central position of AiG.
Amen! I’ve been wondering what to say to the complainers, but you’ve stated it perfectly.
Great article! I agree with your comment: “has turned us into namby-pamby do-gooders who have zero backbone to stand up to people who believe they randomly arose of from sludge and tell them they’re full of crap.”
If Christians don’t fight back we will end up losing any or all liberties we still have, think of New Mexico court ruling that stated we shouldn’t practice our faith in the “public discourse” or in a place of business.
I say fight the good fight.
I’m also more inclined to criticize the lame (and often self-righteous) approach of the AiG billboard campaign’s critics. (“AiG doesn’t speak for me!” “Atheists aren’t the real enemy!” “Jesus wouldn’t have done this horrible horrible thing, and neither do I! I wuv atheists more than even erring Christian siblings.” Et cetera.)
Yet I’ve also wondered if the organization’s pseudo-trolling approach isn’t the best. My main objection is that the AiG Creation Museum itself, which tells and shows God’s wonderous creation (and sin and salvation), is a better approach.
Here you’ve well challenged btoh the “I apologize for AiG” crowd, and me.
It blows my mind that you can read the Gospels and come to the conclusion you have come to. At what point did “love your enemy” turn into this? That is really astonishing to me.
At what point, exactly, did “Love your enemies” become “leave their erroneous beliefs unchallenged, and be careful not to offend the easily offendable?”
I guess I have a hard time understanding why the simple statement “You’re wrong” is so offensive to some Christians.
Don’t know what I think about the sign, but how does this billboard truly challenge atheists beliefs? Looks kind of like a cheap shot to me.
Andrew, of course it doesn’t “challenge atheists beliefs” in any substantial way. Does any billboard, T-shirt, bumper sticker, soundbite, etc.? If their purpose was to get people to their website, where a more in-depth discussion / presentation could begin, then they succeeded.
This exactly.
but…but! ..screaming “YOU’RE WRONG” is what christians do best! really, who would you be without it?
Good question about the “circle”. I think of the Kingdom of God as a circle that Jesus invited us into and that we in turn invite others into. I think that’s the circle that we should be inviting atheists into, instead of drawing that boundary firmer. In my opinion, this sort of billboard campaign just does more to ensure that those outside the circle (the Kingdom of God) stay outside, rather than inviting them in.
Micah, Jesus seemed to draw plenty of lines. Light and darkness. Life and death. Broad path and narrow path. Children of God and children of the devil. Sheep and Goats. He said, “…if you do not believe that I am he, you will indeed die in your sins” (Jn. 8:24). I’m all for inviting atheists into the Kingdom of God. But we’re doing no one any favors by watering down the requirements for entry.
I see Jesus inviting people to cross over those lines, from darkness to light. It seems that often we tend to enforce those lines in a way that drives people further away and makes us feel better about being “right”, rather than showing them how they can enter.
Micah, absolutely Jesus invited people to cross over those lines. But often that involved saying they must repent, be born again, follow him, etc. Not sure what “message” you think we need to be communicating to atheists. Reaching out in love, for sure. But at some point, don’t they need some Truth?
Yes, we absolutely need Truth. We all do. But part of speaking truth is understanding how to speak it in a way that your hearers will receive. And saying “That God you’re wrong” seems more provocative and confrontational than invitational. “Repent”, “Follow Me”, etc are invitations so something more, not simply a “provocative salvo.”
But Jesus never said this though. If you read the passage of the parable of the sower, it was never about how we create dialogue, but about the attitude of the hearer. If people reject the Gospel, it was because they were choked by the cares of the world, didn’t gain enough roots for it to endure, or didn’t understand it in the beginning. Jesus actually spoke in a way that only people with ears to hear received the truth.
Someone may plant the seed, someone water it, but God is the one who makes it grow. I think modern approaches tend to put all of the burden on the believer for them to act in an ever-changing right way in the hopes that this ensures salvation. If we are just nice enough, or open enough dialogue, they just might get saved. It’s all about us, never the receiver nor God’s power.
What value is growth of the seed if it is preoccupied with separating itself from the chaff pre-harvest? I’m blurring the lines between stories here, but only to say that the point of the parable is absolutely about the heart of the hearer…and the willingness of the one who hears (for the first time or the hundredth) to lay aside presuppositions about the fertility of the soil in which he is planted. Fertility brings new life…billboards like this serve only to alienate us from our neighbor before we have an opportunity to connect and discover commonality. The gospel is not a “gotcha” story, it’s a “come and see” invitation (not referring to the AIG website here btw).
I’m not sure I follow you. I’m not saying that we should make presuppositions about people’s willingness to receive, or to write them off. My point is more that it’s not about speaking it in a way the hearers will receive, because it’s more about them and God than us. To me that felt like it’s all our approach and that it heaps burdens on us to be perpetually nice and almost saintly. I totally agree with Mike about how tiring it is, and how we always seem to be apologizing for ourselves like the reason is entirely our fault.
“Thank God You’re Wrong” is not the gospel. The gospel is about the Kingdom of God breaking through to earth, not about a scientific debate over the existence of God or dinosaurs
Micah, the Gospel is also about John 3:16 and proclaiming that “whoever BELIEVES would not perish but have eternal life.” Atheists are wrong, right? Atheists don’t “believe,” right? Atheists will perish if they don’t believe, right? At some point telling them they’re “wrong” is right, right?
Sure, the billboard is in the vernacular of tech / pop culture. Much like when the apostle Paul said,
“One of Crete’s own prophets has said it: ‘Cretans are always liars, evil brutes, lazy gluttons.’ This saying is true. Therefore rebuke them sharply, so that they will be sound in the faith.” Titus 1:12-13
I wrote recently About That “Conversation” with Atheists and how Rachel Held Evans’ piece on atheists at CNN Belief Blog just got hammered. She wants to have a civil dialog, and they just… don’t. I dunno. It seems like there’s a time to call Cretans, Cretans.
Matthew 5:22
See, here’s where I think the problem is. If the goal is to lead others to believe, is telling them “you’re wrong” going to drive them closer to or away from belief, honestly?
What do you tell them though, that they are right? Or do you just ignore the question and just hang out side by side with them with your religion never discussed?
@D.M.
“What do you tell them though, that they are right? ”
Sometimes, I think we try to do the job of the Holy Spirit instead of just being a witness. Certainly, if someone asks if something is a sin or not I will answer. However, I have found that more often than not if the Holy Spirit is working, they know.
To be a good witness, you don’t have to recount someone’s sins, just point them to the way out.
And putting up a sign that tell’s them that their personal beliefs are wrong and that you are thanking God that they are incorrect….. do tell me, how does this open them up to the truth?
The lack of empathy displayed here is fantastic. Good thing you have the “truth” on your side to validate your behaviour. When dogma takes a front seat to loving and caring for the people who have been created by your god you are doing it wrong.
While we’re all in our corners arguing over which way to throw a punch, the Atheist are signing up for another Dawkins conference. Let’s each just get our heads down and do what we’ve been called to and stop devouring one another…Christians how about less friendly fire so the atheist won’t be afraid to walk over for a convo.
“…how about less friendly fire so the atheist won’t be afraid to walk over for a convo.” Amen, Sister!
I wouldn’t worry too much about Dawkins anymore, even the atheists consider him to be an embarrassment these days.
I am currently reading 2Cor. 6 when I logged onto computer and saw your post. Here’s my thing: Christians do seem weak. We are to be infecting people with the Gospel and love of the Lord- not being caught up in unbelievers’ circles. These days I see more and more believers and churches following the ways of the world and not vice versa. We want the bible to fit into our culture but not fit into the culture of God.
Having said that, I would not have put a giant sign up with those particular words because now we are a resounding gong(minus the Love makes us this way).
So how can we bridge gaps without giving up being holy? Read the last chapter in Mark. Jesus tells us exactly what to do(some manuscripts do not have Mark 16) and we must remember that Love covers a multitude of sins but we must first love and submit to God.
Not love and submit to the world.
There are a variety of streams of approaches to engaging others in Evangelicalism, and in regards to a so-called “kinder, gentler” approach, one is the movement toward civility in cultural encounters. Rich Mouw, formerly the President of Fuller Seminary, has been a major force behind this. The issues involved include considerations of the example of Jesus (particularly toward “outsiders” such as the Gentiles and Samaritans), the call to love neighbor, rhetorical strategy, and concerns over boundaries between Evangelicals and “others.”
For me I have to fall on the side of civility without compromise. There is no reason why we can’t be civil to others, and yet also engage them with attempts at persuasion that do not compromise our basic convictions. This is what we advocate and practice at the Evangelical Chapter of the Foundation for Religious Diplomacy.
It’s not about civility allegedly turning “us into namby-pamby do-gooders who have zero backbone to stand up to people who believe they randomly arose of from sludge and tell them they’re full of crap.” For civility engaged in properly and in balance the way I am advocating, this has certainly not been the case. What it is about is wanting to retrieve the neglected example of Jesus. Yes, he did confront the Pharisees with talk of serpents and “white washed tombs,” but let’s not forget this is an example of an in-house confrontation with religious leaders that should have known and done differently. This is not an example of how to engage those outside the Evangelical tribe. For that we must turn to Jesus’ encounters with Gentiles and Samaritans, and the latter are particularly instructive given the religio-cultural friction between them and the Jews, paralleling the same hostilities between Evangelicals and Mormons…or even atheists. In his book-length analysis of this phenomenon in ‘Jesus & the Religions,’ and in particular after consideration of Jesus and the Samaritan woman in John 4, Bob Robinson notes that “Jesus’ attitude towards Samaritans includes a refusal to respond to provocation.” In addition, he draws attention to “the often neglected model of Jesus is usually one of a humble encounter framed in contextually sensitive categories and respectful, non-condescending (and yet culture-transcending) dialogue.”
Beyond this there is the psychological and social scientific data to consider. Research in psychology and sociology indicates that people are rarely likely to find the arguments of others persuasive when they undercut self-identity and self-worth. In fact, it has also been show to have a “backfire effect,” as such “smashmouth” approaches tend to intensify the commitment of people to the very ideas we are trying to persuade them to abandon.
In my view American Evangelicals in particular have lost their way in the manner in which they engage others, particularly in the culture wars. We sound more like the bombastic Bill O’Reilly than Jesus of Nazareth.
Praying I just read some version of The Onion, because this article and the sentiments it expresses are repulsive.
I was hoping the same thing Pete. Hate and anger ooze from Mike’s words.
Oh, give me a break. There is neither hate nor anger here. People seriously need to learn what “hate” actually is, so they don’t keep misidentifying it.
Randy, I grew up in evangelical Christianity. There was a time when I might have written a “grow up and put your big boy pants on” criticism of the critics as Mike has done here, but now I’m with Micah and Stephanie and others who recognize that if we aren’t willing to create Kingdom space “on earth [in our communities inside and outside of the church] as it is in heaven” we are doing ourselves a grave disservice the purity of the gospel message. There is not one shred of hope or love in the billboard or anyone who applaud its deployment in the public square.
Andrew, so are people like me welcome in your “Kingdom space”?
Absolutely Mike. Just as others graciously extended that space to me when I held the same “us vs. them” convictions and approach to evangelism.
Cool! So what are the requirements for entry?
To be human; created in the image of God.
So stop harshing on people who are welcome in your space, Andrew. That’s not very hospitable to say that your guest is oozing hate and anger! I know I sure wouldn’t want to stick around if my host was calling me mean things while inviting me in…
Mike, this makes me so sad.
Oh, Stephanie, I’m sorry you’re sad. I just woke up in my “bad cop” mood. Hopefully, I’ll see the light some day. 😉
I totally understand bad cop moods! I just think that this “thank God you’re wrong” thing is really shaming and it makes me feel bad for my atheist friends. If they made a billboard for me saying “thank a non-existent God that you’re wrong for thinking there could be a God” that wouldn’t help me see truth any faster than these billboards would. I think it’s too meta to be put on a billboard. Anyway, thanks for replying!
Ironically more Christians are upset about this billboard than atheists. Most of us (there may be some exceptions) shrug our shoulders and go about our day.
I would love to hear about just one person, any single atheist or even agnostic person who was driven to the website because of the giant billboards who came away thinking that maybe there was a God rather than being more atheist than before.
Thank God you’re wrong.
You know this?
As a Christian minister who has recently become an agnostic, I find this whole thing humorous. It reminds me of Mars Hill church in Seattle- be a dick to people and when they start talking about it, claim that you are just serving god and are being attacked by your enemies. If the goal of this sign is to convince people that AIG or whatever has no tenable position, it succeeded. And trust me- the amount of atheist people who would actually see a sign and go to the website to engage in further discussion or learning is likely zero.
Uh, this is Answers In Genesis…you do realize that that chances are, any atheist that goes to that site is there to argue anyways, and that a billboard like this is nothing compared to them being young earth creationists? It’s funny how many people who supposedly know what atheists and agnostics think seem to not realize that nothing AIG could do would have any difference anyways.
The people you quote are sensitive and loving. They understand how humans react and how humans think, you on the other hand seem to just be angry and disregard others emotions as “wrong” and “invalidated”. This is pretty ignorant.
I do agree that Christians should stand up for what they believe. Nor should we back down on our boundaries, or fail to make them clear. Because a person capable of respect does that. Only those with self-esteem issues find confrontation unacceptable. For the record, I don’t think Christians need to be apologizing for other Christians’ actions anymore than I expect an atheist to apologize for Stalin’s.
It is also true that to enter constructive dialogue, respect needs to be shown. A comment like the one above may initiate discussions and get traffic to their site, but I can practically guarantee you that the ensuing discussions will be anything close to constructive, save God doing a miracle…and He can.
Putting people on the defensive in a statement that challenges their character, is not a healthy way to start a discussion.
Not convinced? Give this a try. Next time you have a conflict/disagreement with your spouse or boss, open your remarks with, “Thank God I’m right and you’re wrong.” See how constructive the conversation ends up being.
It isn’t because it draws lines and sticks to them that it is wrong. It is because it is disrespectful to its target audience and so will produce the opposite results that God would desire. The response you quoted here, Mike, did fly too far the other direction. Loving people requires confrontation when the need arises. However, there is a middle road that tells the truth while respecting those who are “wrong.” This isn’t it.
You know what. I find the whole ” turned us into namby-pamby do-gooders who have zero backbone to stand up to people who believe they randomly arose of from sludge and tell them they’re full of crap” thing utterly disgusting. The only people Jesus ever had strong words for were legalistic hypocrites who placed unnecessary burdens on people.
Looking at scripture I don’t think we are mandated to stand up for our rights, or even to pick theological fights with the world around us. We are to rejoice in suffering and persecution, blessing those who do it, loving our enemies and being willing to be mistreated and misunderstood. There are plenty of things in this world to get angry about: the sex-trafficking of children, sweatshops, women and children killed in military activity, female genital mutilation, forced marriages and so many other things. An atheist won’t be convinced by grandstanding and, I have to say, an infantile and historically illiterate view of scripture and creation. Bu they will be convinced by those who show them the good news that is the grace and love of Christ.
If that is “namby pamby” then fine. But it is still right.
Ian, so Jesus would NEVER have strong words for someone who blatantly rejected Him? So Jesus would NEVER warn an unbeliever that, unless they believe, they would die in their sins? So Jesus would NEVER rebuke a Gentile for believing there is no God and the Universe is one big Mistake?
“So Jesus would NEVER rebuke a Gentile for believing there is no God and the Universe is one big Mistake?”
I cannot think of anyplace in the Gospels where Jesus rebuked any Gentile for anything. He had plenty to say to Jews who were given all of the signs in Scripture. He did tell the Samaritan woman about her sins, but never rebuked her for not knowing who He was. If I am wrong, please cite Scripture.
But Jesus talked to all of three gentiles, two of which actively sought him out and believed in him in the start, and the third who at least believed in God if not practiced it. I don’t think we can really claim Jesus would act a specific way to a belief system that barely existed in Biblical times.
Mike, don’t resort to constructing stupid arguments just to win a point. Going to the extreme for your already tenuously-justifiable position doesn’t help anyone, and makes you look dumber than you are.
And like Steve D, I can think of several NT passages that would contradict you. Perhaps familiarizing yourself with that portion of the Bible might help…..
Good Lord, it’s just a snarky billboard. So what if atheists might get offended? I don’t see any atheist recrimination about the flying spaghetti monster, Darwin fish, raptor Jesus, or whatever they do and how it might affect chances of atheism being accepted among society.
I swear, some Christians conception of love borders on the co-dependent. We can’t say anything mildly challenging or be, well human; if we are anything less then saintly sufferers we get hammered on not only by atheists or unbelievers keen to use a double standard against us, but fellow believers reinforcing it.
Being perpetually offended is fashionable. I don’t know that it’s co-dependency, so much as it’s just good, clean fun for the whole family.
Have a Snickers, Mike.
Thanks for posting this. Its good to get regular reminders of why I want nothing to do with religion, particularly Christianity. Nobody likes insensitive, tone deaf, self-righteous assholes… but that appears lost on people like you.
Good for you! You convert those heathens with your smash mouth Christianity. Know what, you should go even bolder. You should literally beat the crap out of people who don’t believe until they come around. Hit ’em in da mouf for Christ!
chrisjws, I appreciate comments like yours because they show how uncivil those who plead for civility can be. Now, excuse me while I go “literally beat the crap out of people who don’t believe.”
Whatever helps you feel better about yourself.
Glad to help.
Chris…
I don’t think us being cross carrying versions of Beavis n Butthead is the only reason you aren’t a Christian. Buttheadedness n self-righteousness is what makes us human…go on ask your mom … But I am sorry for whatever Christian turned you off Christ…. We are all stumbling toward heaven ourselves. Best example of Christ is…well…Christ… The most you can expect from people is to be disappointed.
“The Pharisee stood by himself and prayed: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other people”
The joke of a sign will do nothing to change the minds of atheists, but it might make some Christians smugly feel that atheists have been put in their place. Ken Ham wasting donor dollars.
OR, even more likely, nearly 100% of atheists won’t actually care even a little, BUT it’ll create some entertainment in the form of hilariously offended Christians.
If our aim is for people to find Jesus, then the vehicle by which they do so shouldn’t concern us, only that they do.
I know an evangelist who’s slept side by side with the homeless on Skid Row in LA who came to Jesus because a preacher wearing a black and white suit carrying a massive black Bible walked up to him and his friends in a field while they were attempting to get high and told them they were going to hell. The evangelist and his friends made fun of the preacher, the evangelist went home later that night and gave his life to Jesus.
Is the sign the most effective “method”? I don’t know, because there isn’t a “most effective method.” Some people are loved into the Kingdom over the course of years, some are stubborn as mules and need to be bashed over the head, wrestled into the dirt and have their noses shoved into manure.
Judging by today’s standards, the method God used to get Saul of Tarsus into the Kingdom was just cruel. He should be ashamed of Himself.
While Christians run around discussing this highly “controversial” billboard, I imagine atheists don’t give a rip and just roll their eyes as they pass by. Namby-pamby do-gooders are annoying, but not because they do good. They are annoying because they are usually caught up in themselves and want to sing their own praises. Reactionaries of any stripe are annoying, too. Wait a second; people are annoying. That’s why I’m a misanthrope. Misanthropes stare at billboards and wish they could burn them all down with their eye lasers.
You’ve got eye lasers??? Cool!
Were you born with them or did you require surgery?
🙂
I’m afraid I can’t tell you; I should never have let it slip in the first place that I have eye lasers. 😉
Having literally burned down a billboard once with eye lasers, let me just say, meh. Totally disappointing.
Sure, the sucker burst like a gasoline-drunk tick on a jet-fueled dog, and went up in about a thousand hues of flame. An entire neighborhood dozing in its shadow was consumed and the image burned into my brain is something from the brush of a mescaline-addicted Hieronymous Bosch. Several helicopters were downed in the attempt to quench the flames, and the ashes smoked for weeks.
But I mean, really, when you think about it, it was just a little heat and light, and it didn’t make me love myself any more than I already did. Worst part was that no imagined atheist friends of mine were harmed in the scourging. Perhaps I’m not using my God-given talent the right way.
I think I’ll stick to literally punching atheists in the mouth for being born to such stupid parents. Gotta do something to stoke this all-consuming hatred everyone keeps telling me I harbor. But what am I going to do? There’s no God, so this typical Christianity I must be suffering from is merely a mental illness for which they’ve not yet developed a pill.
tl;dr
Billboard! Everyone panic!
Dude, you’re ruining my fantasies.