The Challenge

I thought it would be good to detail the challenge put before me at the suicide prevention brief, as it shows a bit of the hostility Christians are facing in the coming, post-Christian era. In the briefing it was noted that one of the possible indicators of someone entering a depressive state was a movement away from things that formerly held meaning for them. The example given was of a man who previously had held Catholic Mass as of great importance in his life. Since his return from war, however, he had shrugged off mass as being of little importance.

The challenge was brought forth in the class that it could be the other way around, too: specifically, that someone turning TO religion might also be entering depression and considering suicide, looking to "check the block" with God on accepting some religious tenet before checking out of life. This falls short of logic, as I pointed out, since people are well aware that the Christian version of God clearly stands against suicide. Who would come closer to a God that would wish to prevent them from doing themselves in, if that is what they truly wanted? The logical answer was that people find faith in these times exactly because they have come to the end of themselves and know instinctively that suicide is not the right answer - therefore they "find God."

When the explosives expert that was challenging me then stated that we would have to "agree to disagree," I simply stated that the next time there was a dispute between us as to whether an IED was dangerous or not, we would simply have to "agree to disagree." Otherwise, we could "stay in our lane" of expertise and trust one another in areas in which we were not experts. This received a good chuckle from the group, as I mentioned in the last blog. While many people have their opinions about God, religion, philosophy, etc., it amuses me that they are always willing to rely upon their own expertise in those areas, even when confronted with someone who logically and soundly counters them from the position of true expertise. I don't plan on dealing with explosives while I'm overseas, as I have little training in the area. No matter how well formed my opinions, I will defer to the experts in matters of things that go "boom."

Anyhow, last night my logic paid off. The explosives expert started quizzing me in a side conversation, asking the age-old questions about why God would condemn people to Hell who may have never heard about Jesus, and about why they just couldn't be "good" people and make it. Having gained the audience I started answering with both logic and Scripture, offering answers I have offered to the same questions hundreds of times (feel free to email if you have the same questions!). While this is just the first of what I am sure will be many conversations this year about God and religion, it showed that a calm, non-accusatory, non-dogmatic, patient approach to even hostile questions can lead to more significant dialogue.

I don't know that my answers will change the course of a life lived in hostility to God. I don't know that my answers will be sufficient to convince those who have chosen non-belief. I do know that I am either planting or watering - and that God will reap the harvest in due time. And with Afghanistan looming, and the dangers there growing each day, I feel I am in a special place for these men and women. It was my prayer last tour to bring everyone home safely - and we brought everyone home alive, with only one purple heart in the battalion. It continues to be my prayer that each of these will come home alive and well. Even more importantly, however, I pray that each person in this battalion will move just a little closer to God - perhaps all the way, in the sense of accepting Him for who He has revealed Himself to be in Jesus Christ.