Imagine that a friend has challenged you with this objection, and that you don’t have access to any books, sermons, or other publications to which you can refer them. They want to hear your response, in your own words!

How would you respond to this statement?

The Bible teaches that prayer is effective (James 5:16) and promises that God will give believers anything they ask for in prayer (Matthew 21:22). Yet many Christians, even the most devout and faithful, have earnestly prayed for something and not received it. This means that either God doesn’t really answer all prayers, or that prayer simply doesn’t work.

Share your response!

Previous posts in this series:

Why does God allow Hell to exist?

Did God endorse genocide?

As a teenager, I certainly did not enjoy committing huge swaths of a stuffy-sounding theological primer to memory. I envied friends at other churches whose much “cooler” Sunday school curricula involved skits and music. But those pieces of memorized catechism—particularly the wonderfully comforting Q&A #1 above—have been an encouragement to me ever since.

All this came to mind while reading this interview with Kevin DeYoung about the value of the Heidelberg Catechism at the Evangel blog. If you’re not familiar with the concept of a catechism, or if you are skeptical that a long theological treatise penned by 16th-century Protestants could possibly be relevant to your Christian life, give the short interview a read. Among other things, DeYoung describes the ways that the catechism is woven into the life of his church:

How do you use it at your church? And what are some other suggestions regarding how to use a catechism?

Kevin DeYoung: We use the Heidelberg Catechism in our worship. Sometimes we read it responsively. Other times I’ll work it into my communion liturgy. I’ll quote it in my sermons from time to time. I’ve seen the Catechism used effectively as Sunday school material. It’s best to have littler kids memorize parts of it and have older kids explore the nuances of the theology. We also have a section on the Catechism in our membership class and leadership training. And of course, my book on Heidelberg started out a weekly devotionals for my congregation.

DeYoung is talking specifically about the Heidelberg Catechism, but it is not the only catechism written to methodically introduce Christians (and particularly children) to the fundamental elements of Christianity. Depending on your denomination and theological leanings, there may be one or more catechisms written specifically to convey the Christian truths you hold dear.

What about you and your church? Does your church use a catechism as a teaching tool in sermons, Sunday school, or another part of church life?

The essay speaks directly about Wheaton’s upcoming change of leadership (shortly after the article’s publication, Wheaton announced its new president), but the issues are relevant to any Christian college or university that cares both about academic integrity and theological orthodoxy.

Does requiring all faculty at a Christian school to adhere to a very specific statement of faith lead to intellectual stagnation on campus? Wheaton’s statement of faith, like that of many Christian schools, excludes not only followers of non-Christian religions, but also fellow Christians who don’t agree with the school’s take on controversial (and often “non-salvation”) issues like Creation or homosexuality. This can result in the school not hiring otherwise superb teachers due to doctrinal disagreements; or even in the firing of professors whose beliefs don’t conform to the school’s.

It’s not an easy question to answer—everyone acknowledges that without requiring some adherence to a statement of faith, a Christian school risks drifting away from the Christian values it was founded to promote. On the other hand, there’s a point at which a statement of faith becomes too restrictive, needlessly keeping out Christian educators whose presence would be a real benefit to the school.

The article raises these questions in a challenging but fair way. What’s your reaction to the issue?

Consider how you’d answer these questions:

Did you (or do you) attend a Christian college that held faculty to a specific statement of faith?

If so, have you seen examples of such policies getting in the way of academic ideals? Any instances where the policy protected the school from unbiblical ideas?

As you read the article above, are you more sympathetic toward the traditional (keep a strict statement of faith) position, or to the progressive (allow faculty from outside the statement of faith) position?

Share your thoughts!

This Wonder of Creation devotional argues that in our attitude toward God’s Creation, we have adopted a utilitarian perspective that doesn’t fit with the Bible’s teachings:

I believe we modern followers of Christ have also become somewhat blind followers of science and have adopted the same utilitarian view toward God’s good creation that we see in much of science and industry. The utilitarian approach, however, is really the worldview of the Enlightenment and the subsequent Industrial Revolution, and not of a true understanding of the theology of nature.

Interestingly, two of the most significant Reformers, John Calvin and Martin Luther, had been quite successful in framing a sound biblical theology of nature in the 16th century that corrected the faulty dualistic theology of the Middle Ages that saw the material world as something low and degraded that needed to be escaped from (a view that goes all the way back to Plato and is also foundational to Eastern religions). Sadly, however, their followers became the champions of the “Protestant work ethic” that in part led to the Industrial Revolution and the ultimate devaluation of the creation that Calvin and Luther had helped to free from mysticism and dualism.

The full devotional has links and quotes from Calvin and Luther to ponder.

Do you see traces of this utilitarian perspective in the way Christians today talk about Creation? Do Christians put too much emphasis on productivity and efficiency in other areas of life as well?

Or perhaps neither of those extremes sits well with you. Jill Carattini, writing in the Slice of Infinity devotional agrees, and describes Christianity’s more balanced approach to the meaning of human life:

In deep contrast to such severe or optimistic readings, the Christian view of humanity adds a nuanced dimension to the conversation. Christianity admits that while there is indeed an error of a serious sort, the error is not in “humanness” itself. Rather, something has gone wrong. Thus, the great paradox of humanity can be rightly acknowledged: we find in being human both a deep and sacred honor and yet a profound disgrace. This inherent recognition of imperfection is simultaneously a recognition that there must indeed be such a thing as perfection. Here, the Christian’s advantage is not that they find themselves less fallen or closer to perfection than others, nor that they find in their religion a means of escaping the world of fragility, brokenness, guilt, suffering, or error; the Christian’s advantage is that they are aware of their own broken humanity within a broken, fallen world because they are aware of the one perfect human.

Read the full devotional at Ravi Zacharias International Ministries.

What about you? Why do you pray?

Share your thoughts!

Although it might seem strange, I’ve found that Christian funerals are among the most powerful and uniquely Christian experiences I’ve ever encountered. Every funeral is different, and the experience of attending a funeral varies greatly depending on the circumstances of the death and other contexts. But if you’ve ever attended a funeral where the Gospel message was clearly proclaimed, perhaps you know what I’m talking about: there is nothing so powerful as hearing about the hope of Jesus Christ when you’re face-to-face with the tangible evidence of pain, sorrow, and death.

Hearing the Gospel message in those circumstances is not always a happy experience for me. Sometimes it provokes bittersweet joy, as in the case of somebody whose death came as a relief from long suffering. Sometimes it makes me angry—angry at this broken, sin-filled world, and angry at God for allowing death to claim somebody “before their time.” Most times we feel a rush of different emotions as our sorrow intertwines with the hope that we have in Jesus Christ.

The exact reaction varies greatly. But you simply cannot avoid reacting to that Gospel message when you hear it proclaimed at a funeral. You can zone out during a Sunday morning sermon, or daydream during an altar call at church. But at a funeral, the proclamation of the Gospel stands out as a bold, almost ludicrous challenge that cannot be ignored. Joy, sorrow, pain, anger—the Gospel of Jesus demands a response. In those moments, I feel the true force of Hebrews 4:12:

For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.

You can hear the Gospel preached and discussed in a lot of places. In church. At retreats or Christian events. In Bible studies and small group fellowships. But if you want to witness the Gospel with all of its power to proclaim hope amidst the horror of sin and death, perhaps that message is most clear when it is spoken amidst the pain and sorrow of a funeral.

…Satan’s lie [to Adam and Eve] had in it an element of truth that made it believable and much more subtle. “You will not surely die,” the serpent said to the woman. “For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”

To be like God is perhaps life’s greatest and most subtle of all temptations.

True, Adam and Eve would be like God—only in that they would know the difference between good and evil. What Satan didn’t tell them was that if they ate of the forbidden fruit not only would they know good and evil but they would also  be left forever in a confirmed state of evil and, as such, be separated from God.



However, the essence of Adam and Eve’s sin was not so much taking of the forbidden fruit. It was setting themselves up as judge between God and Satan. In so doing they put themselves above God—usurping his authority. This was the sin that caused their downfall. Taking the forbidden fruit was the outcome of this action.



To make this concept clearer, picture God on the left, Satan on the right, and see Adam and Eve placing themselves above both and deciding who is right and who is wrong. Absurd, I know, but this is exactly what they did. They took the place of God.

Read the complete devotional at Daily Encounter.

Sin isn’t “just” about doing something that God dislikes. When we choose to sin, whether it’s a monstrous sin or a tiny little sin, we’re trying to elevate ourselves above God Himself. Adds a bit of perspective to our everyday “little sins,” doesn’t it?

This is the first of several Daily Encounter devotionals this week that will be exploring the topic of sin, so if you find their insights helpful, be sure to check back in.

I’ve read many critiques of “prosperity theology” over the years, and tend to agree with claims that it’s a dangerous and unbiblical twist on the Gospel message. And most of the critiques I’ve read have focused on the phenomenon’s theological merits. But what are the real-world results of applying prosperity theology to your life? Are you more likely to take out a mortgage you can’t afford? Are you more likely to live beyond your means? The Atlantic piece finds some evidence that there’s more than just theology at stake:

More recently, critics have begun to argue that the prosperity gospel, echoed in churches across the country, might have played a part in the economic collapse. In 2008, in the online magazine Religion Dispatches, Jonathan Walton, a professor of religious studies at the University of California at Riverside, warned:

Narratives of how “God blessed me with my first house despite my credit” were common … Sermons declaring “It’s your season of overflow” supplanted messages of economic sobriety and disinterested sacrifice. Yet as folks were testifying about “what God can do,” little attention was paid to a predatory subprime-mortgage industry, relaxed credit standards, or the dangers of using one’s home equity as an ATM.

In 2004, Walton was researching a book about black televangelists. “I would hear consistent testimonies about how ‘once I was renting and now God let me own my own home,’ or ‘I was afraid of the loan officer, but God directed him to ignore my bad credit and blessed me with my first home,’” he says. “This trope was so common in these churches that I just became immune to it. Only later did I connect it to this disaster.”

The article also points out some truly disturbing instances in which banks and churches collaborated to pitch “financial empowerment.” The article is worth reading in full; it does not leave one feeling very positive about the prosperity gospel, but it does give adherents a chance to defend their beliefs.

After you’ve read the article, I also recommend a follow-up post at the Kruse Kronicle blog which cautions that Christians shouldn’t pin all of the blame on prosperity teaching. Mainstream churches too have failed to help Christians discern and follow Biblical teachings about money and finances.

What do you think? Does the church bear any blame for Americans’ poor financial habits and the economic crisis that continues to exact its toll on millions? What could or should the church be doing to help, now that the crisis is here?

The video describes how the export of the distinctly American prosperity Gospel is affecting Africa:

The Prosperity Gospel from The Global Conversation on Vimeo.