Greetings all!  My name is Mike Howard and I was invited to begin contributing to this blog so will do so as time permits.  I have been married to my lovely wife Elisabeth for nearly 7 years and we have two truly tremendous boys, Christian and Elisha.  We currently reside in Columbus, but my wife graduated high school from Madison Plains and I from Waverly, Ohio.  We attend church at the Vineyard in Grove City.

I have a BA in Social Science from Shawnee State University and an MA in Pastoral Counseling from Liberty University.  I am essentially a full-time, independently ordained pastor, even though some of my calling to ministry is performed in the “secular” world with some in the more traditional “ministry” settings.  In sharing this description with my wife, she reminded me that Jesus was this way as well to remind me both that I am on a good path with the Lord and of why He blessed me with a wife like her.

With my calling being as such, the postings I share on here at times may be somewhat “sermonish” in format, but hopefully practical in nature.  My hope is that they are enjoyable and helpful towards serving Him and others trying to walk out life with Him.  God bless all!

The online Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines the word proselytize as inducing someone to convert to one’s faith. It is a word that seems to carry a negative connotation and, based on the reaction of Brit Hume’s comments regarding Tiger Woods, is a concept that offends a number of people. Based on his comments, Hume has been charged with (and seemingly found guilty of) proselytizing by the media and members of the Buddhist faith. Here is what he said:

“The extent to which he can recover seems to me depends on his faith,” said Hume. “He is said to be a Buddhist. I don’t think that faith offers the kind of redemption and forgiveness offered by the Christian faith. My message to Tiger is, ‘Tiger turn to the Christian faith and you can make a total recovery and be a great example to the world.”

Hume’s comments were made on the show Fox News Sunday when a member of the shows panel predicted Woods would rebound from his current mess and win the Masters tournament in 2010. Hume’s words have been interpreted by some as inappropriate proselytizing and by others as disparaging to Buddhists in a firestorm of responses across the blogosphere.

This story caught my attention because Hume was involved. While I did not watch him a great deal during his career at the Fox News anchor desk, I was impressed by the story he revealed in the course of his retirement. Hume related how he had turned to Christianity in the wake of his son’s tragic death and how he hoped to spend more time serving Christ in his retirement. His testimony caught my eye. I was impressed that a prominent figure such as Hume was willing to share his faith to a nationwide audience. Hume seemed to me to be a genuine and honest person at the time.

In light of his past, I doubt Hume was in any way trying to insult or degrade Buddhists with his comments.  In fact, I am a little stunned that his words were perceived that way. In fact, his comments seem fairly accurate. In the course of criticizing Hume, Buddhist writer Barbara O’Brian writes that that the concept of sin is foreign to Buddhism. While forgiveness from one person to another may be a part of a Buddhist’s faith, there is no concept of divine forgiveness in Buddhism. Christ’s take on sin was a little different … in fact; one of the things that irked the Jewish leaders of the day was that Jesus dared to forgive sins:

When Jesus saw their faith, he said, “Friend, your sins are forgiven.” The Pharisees and the teachers of the law began thinking to themselves, “Who is this fellow who speaks blasphemy? Who can forgive sins but God alone?” (Luke 5: 20-21, NIV)

Then Jesus said to her, “Your sins are forgiven.” The other guests began to say among themselves, “Who is this who even forgives sins?” (Luke 7: 48-49, NIV)

It seems as if Hume was accurate when he said Buddhism doesn’t offer the kind of redemption and forgiveness offered by Christ. Buddhism’s claim that there is no sin makes it clear there is a huge difference on the issue between the two faiths. Hume was right to claim the two faiths are different (there’s no denying they are), but his words were taken as insulting because they were unsolicited. Proselytizing has been given a negative connotation in our modern culture because it is assumed the act is unwanted by the recipient. It is viewed by most as being forced on the recipient against his or her wishes. In that regard, Hume did offer unsolicited advice for Tiger Woods. According to most people, this fact alone places Hume in a bad light; this is a shame, however, because in my experience, some of the best advice I ever received was unsolicited.  

In a perfect world and circumstance a Christian will have the opportunity to forge a relationship with a person before sharing Christ with them. In the absence of that relationship, it is too easy to interpret proselytizing in a negative light. Hume shared his faith with Tiger outside of a caring relationship and on such a public stage that it was too easy for others to misconstrue what he was trying to do. It’s important to remember; however, that we are not always presented with a perfect situation. Sometimes, as Christians, we have to take the best shot we have and share Christ in spite of the backlash. Hume took that chance and for that should be respected.

Criticize Hume if you must … but how awesome would it be if Tiger did turn to Christ in his darkest moments? What if he did become a Christian and use his faith to inspire countless fans and youth? We’ve all been in Tiger’s shoes in some way or another. The enemy loves to expose and embarrass us. The enemy loves to drag us through the gutter whether we deserve it or not. In Christ, there is a clear path to turn darkness into light. It is up to us to flip the switch.

Okay … the Center for Inquiry recently sponsored one of the dumbest competitions I have ever seen. To enter, a contestant needed to create a statement, phrase, or poem that would normally be considered blasphemous. The competition was a part of Blasphemy Day 2009. Normally, I try to ignore stupidity on both sides of the spectrum; however, this one has me fired up for some reason. The Center of Inquiry is an organization that hopes to foster in a world, “devoted to promoting science, reason, freedom of inquiry, and humanist values.”  In other words, a world of free-thinkers, provided you aren’t thinking about God or religion.

I’m all for free-thinking and I am fairly certain God is as well. My common response to the question of why a good God would allow anyone to go to Hell is that He obviously thinks it is important for people to be free to reject Him. I believe that free-thinking is an inalienable, God-given right. I also believe that stupidity of this nature should be exposed and confronted.

One of the goals of the Center for Inquiry as presented on their website is to end the stigma attached to being a nonbeliever. I’m all for that goal as stated. I believe that atheists are every bit a creation of God as I am; however, I believe that competitions such as the “blasphemy challenge” reveal more about the organization than they will ever admit. I suspect their real goals are less about ending the stigma attached to nonbelievers and more about reattaching that stigma to Christians. The competition is unproductive, divisive and should be an insult to all free-thinkers … religious or not.

While watching this debate between pundit Bill O’Reilly and atheist Richard Dawkins, something within me snapped. I suddenly grew very tired of the entire religion versus science debate. Rarely is anything ever accomplished when these two side clash; both have dug in their heels and are unwilling to budge. At this point, the entire dialogue has been reduced into a bunch of blustering sound bytes.

Perhaps my perspective is a little skewed. I’m in favor of both Christ and science. Obviously, I am a Christian. I believe that the Bible is inspired and fully confess a belief in the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. I am also a fan of science. Perhaps due to all the episodes of Star Trek I’ve watched in my life I am a huge proponent of space travel. I can get lost for hours looking at the images of space that NASA provides on their website. Also, I lost a mother to cancer and have a child with type one diabetes and a step son with epilepsy, so I get a little jazzed up anytime the news reports that scientists are one step closer to curing these and other diseases. Simply put, science is cool.

I do not believe; however, that science and faith-based religions are at odds.

I think atheists are out of line when they suggest that faith should play no part in science; rather, I feel that faith should be the driving force behind science. Let me explain. To be human is to be curious. The human race is born with an innate desire to explore and learn. We are programmed to ask really big questions. This programming, much like our innate moral code, comes from somewhere beyond ourselves; I would suggest the possibility that it comes from God. Dawkins and his kind suggest we should stop short of asking the really big questions. It is okay to ask how the human machine works or how it came to be what it is, but the second we ask “who” put the machine in motion, atheists slam on the brakes and tell us we’ve gone too far. I’m sorry, but if science is unwilling to even entertain the big questions, I want new scientists.

For example, when I look at look at a great piece of art, I can study its lines, shape, and composition for awhile, but eventually I’m going to want to know who painted it. To become truly intimate with a piece of music, you must eventually come to know the composer. Who was she? What type of mood was she in when she wrote it? Of what culture did she belong? Without asking these questions, we might as well examine art with our eyes half shut.

In all honesty, I don’t expect science to answer all of the big questions. Along with our innate curiosity, we are also born with a certain uncertainty about life after death and God. Christ has eased many of these fears for me, but I would be lying if I told you all my questions have been answered. It might be a little idealistic to believe that science can answer all of these questions; however, it is inspiring to know that every time there is a scientific breakthrough, we are one step closer to understanding our creator. I believe science has a high purpose that is encouraged by God. Scientific proof may not be required to believe in God, but if God is real, He can teach us and speak to us in a variety of ways including the Bible, His creation, and science.

It might surprise you to know that students in the United States currently rank 29th amongst other developed countries in science education. Atheists tell us we shouldn’t allow the big questions that concern creation in the classroom. Perhaps if we were able to ask those big questions and hint at the possibility of a God, our children would be inspired to accomplish more.

Welcome to the new digs of The Imperfect Disciples! For those of you that have found your way here from our old site, we ask that you change your bookmarks and links. The old site will remain for awhile as a backup to this one, but all of the fun should take place here. For any new visitors, welcome! We hope everyone will enjoy our blog.

Clark