A Bad Case of M.T.D.
by Steve Watters on 07/26/2007 at 2:31 PM
In a column about the uproar following Pope Benedict's statements about proper churches, columnist Rod Dreher made an interesting observation about what faith looks like among a new generation of Americans:
Several years ago, researchers with the University of North Carolina's National Study of Youth and Religion polled American teenagers and found that faith was important to them. But it's faith not in established religion but rather in what NYSR's social scientists termed "Moralistic Therapeutic Deism."
Moralistic Therapeutic Deism, as researchers explain, teaches that a vaguely defined God exists, cares about us and wants us to be good, nice and fair. You don't need to get too involved with God, absent a problem or crisis. The point of life is to be happy and to feel good about oneself. Good people go to heaven.
Whatever that relativist mush is, it has little to do with the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, or any traditional religion. Researchers concluded that either American youths don't know their traditions' teaching, or don't much care. Strikingly, they found that many teenagers interviewed had never discussed theology with an adult. The theological content of our faiths is fast eroding because of the lazy indifference of older generations to whom the traditions were delivered.
Have you heard this term -- Moralistic Therapeutic Deism -- before? M.T.D. seems like a helpful description in a day when so many people aspire to be simultaneously freelance theologians and libertarian cultural consumers.
1. Nate said the following at 5:07 PM on Jul 26:
Yep, heard it, think it's spot on. Is it a problem with Sunday school or church in general?
2. James said the following at 5:26 PM on Jul 26:
Possibly, but that's only part of the problem. The other part is simply lack of outreach or cowardice among individuals. After all, churches are made up of individuals. If those people are too afraid to NOT sugar-coat the gospel (or have only been given a sky-faerie-Jesus gospel), then that's what is going to be given to the upcoming generation.
I've been to plenty of chruches that accurately handle and teach the whole counsel of God, and while I know that overall such churches are in the minority, there are more of those churches than I think there are congregations where people actually begin to act on what is taught and encouraged.
Along with the warnings of being sluggards in the Faith once delivered to the saints, we should encourage one another to be bold and courageous in living lives like Daniel's and in being resolute in following up our living with professing and proclaiming Christ to those around us.
I'm not being all high and mighty here because I am one of those people who needs to act on what I've just written. But I do see this as the problem.
3. John said the following at 6:52 PM on Jul 26:
I've seen evidence of this in a lot of youth who first came to Christ in high school. The problem was not that their elders didn't pass theology on - the problem was that the adults in their lives weren't even Christians.
I suppose these kids picked up the MTD idea as they grew up, and then carried it forward into their Christianity. My hope is that as they spend more and more time in a Godly environment they will begin to acquire a truly Christian paradigm.
4. Nelson said the following at 9:09 PM on Jul 26:
I think it has something to do with an idolized frenzy of the western culture of rights. My rights, my thoughts, my beliefs, etc.
When the concept of faith is turned from facts and reality to personal satisfaction, then God and the drive to understand Him will be the first thing to go.
5. farmer Tom said the following at 12:11 AM on Jul 27:
Nelson,
I understand your point about rights, and I do agree that it is part of the problem, but the concept of rights is a Biblical one. "we are endowed by the Creator with certain unalienable rights,""
The problem is the assertion of rights over responsiblity. Our rights are to be governed by the Law. Too many in our culture want to assert their rights, while failing to understand that the Laws of God and nature do not change. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. The consequences of sinful behavior will always ultimately lead to death. Engage in behavior that God condemns and you will pay a price.
MTD on the other hand says, don't worry, be happy.
6. Joseph said the following at 1:03 AM on Jul 27:
I remember hearing about this around Christmas time. I agree with Nelson that MTD is partially the product of the Me attitude. Taking into account the prevalency of pluralism/post modernism MTD seems to be the "spiritual" version or result of the growing attitudes that everyone is okay, while still acknowledging a diety for little more than arguments sake.
7. John said the following at 8:13 AM on Jul 27:
It just goes to show you that what you believe is important. Understanding sound doctrine and theology is important. It's not an optional side dish, nor should it be. Sound and systematic Bible teaching should be offered to church members of all ages,
farmer Tom, much as I revere the Founding Fathers, can you show me where the Bible teaches that we are endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights?
8. Sarah said the following at 8:28 AM on Jul 27:
I agree with Rod Dreher that "theological content of our faiths is fast eroding because of the lazy indifference of older generations to whom the traditions were delivered." I was blessed to have parents that were not lazy or indifferent, and we often talked theology. But it seems that the majority of people have not experienced that.
In a recent sermon I heard, the pastor talked about how the Israelites made an memorial of stones after crossing the Jordan. When their children asked what the stones were for, the Israelites were to tesitfy to what God had done for them there. The pastor went on to say that today, however, there are no stone memorials. With this, I also agree. Those of us who are older have kept too silent about God's work in our lives and have not passed on to those who follow us the news of His power and faithfulness. We have mistakenly come to believe that a personal relationship also translates to a private relationship, and in so doing, we have hurt other believers, especially younger ones, by keeping to ourselves the testimony of God's goodness and mighty work in our own lives.
9. Laura said the following at 10:45 AM on Jul 27:
Farmer Tom, bad news: that quote is not from the Bible. As far as our "rights," what we have earned in our sin is misery, death, and hell (Rom 3).
10. farmer Tom said the following at 5:05 PM on Jul 27:
John, an exellent question, I don't have time to post it all now, I'll try and get to it tomorrow if I can.
Laura, I am aware that the quote is not from the Bible. John asked an exellent question, I will defend the founding fathers belief that we have God given unalienable rights. A hint, when I quote Scripture, I use chapter and verse.
Going back to what Nelson said, I would assert that the problem is individualized ethics. They say, whats right for you is not necessarily right for me. Whether they realize it or not they do not believe in absolute truth. They claim a "right" which is in fact a violation of absolute truth.
I'm taking my kids to the fair, I'll be back tomorrow.
11. Athena said the following at 5:07 PM on Jul 27:
>>The theological content of our faiths is fast eroding because of the lazy indifference of older generations to whom the traditions were delivered. <<
It's easy to get frustrated with the "lazy indifference." I think the church body is not entirely immune to MTD either. This seems to me to be a call for people to attend seminary in order to receive sound theological training. Good theology courses should be introduced to everyone. Isn't it the least we can do to equip ourselves, since our whole lives center around our Lord? Theology can help re-orient our thinking, as well as cause us to be more effective salt and light out there.
The sermons I've enjoyed from different pastors all have one thing in common - good theology. It makes each message meaningful, rich and clear. If we can extend that to Sunday school teachers, lay leaders and even the regular church members, positive change may result in the nearby communities as well.
12. Laura said the following at 7:43 PM on Jul 27:
I'm glad that I misunderstood you, Farmer Tom! But I just don't see that the American ideal of inalienable rights (namely life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness -- particularly as secular society defines those terms) corresponds with the doctrine of Sin. In the loosest and vaguest of terms, I would admit that certain similarities between the two regarding human dignity. But "rights" as conceived by a secular, deist (at best) government find no parallel, in my reading, in Scripture.
13. Zusanne said the following at 11:25 PM on Jul 27:
Isn't this similar to the discussion about Francene Rivers's book? We define what is right and wrong based on how we "feel" and not on God's standards. Unfortunately, too much of this individualized concept of godliness has leaked into the minds of those who wish to live Godly lives as well.
One of the saddest--and most frustrating--experiences I've had was at a Christian concert at which at least 10,000 people were in attendance. I'm assuming that most people who go to a Christian concert are believers, so I was disturbed to see almost 90% of the people present stand after a gospel presentation, indicating that they had just prayed to receive Christ. This brings me to my point--who is teaching these people? Is no real teaching going on in their churches? If they are confused about something as basic as salvation, what else are they not learning?
The world will not know genuine, well-informed Biblical believers if individuals aren't "searching the scriptures" themselves and if churches aren't teaching God's Word clearly.
14. farmer Tom said the following at 7:31 PM on Jul 28:
To John and Laura, and anyone else interested,
Several matters of clarification. One, none of the thoughts I am about to share are original with me. Many men wiser and more intelligent than I have studied and pondered these ideas for literally centuries. I'm just repeating what I have read and learned from some of them.
Second, Laura, please understand this is not a criticism, but I believe you have been lied to about the spiritual lives and beliefs of the Founding Fathers. Most of them were devout Christian men. If you would like to learn more about this fact, I recommend "Christianity and the Constitution" by John Eidsmoe. There are also some books by David Barton on this subject as well. The titles escape me at the moment.
Third, just as there is no chapter and verse which tells us that abortion is wrong, we must develop that understanding from Scripture which talks about life and how God sees it, so human rights are an implied thought in Scripture. It requires study of Scripture and reasoned thought.
We must start at the beginning. If God did not create life as Genesis Chapter 1-3 tells us, then life is simply the result of time/chance and is therefore abstract in its occurrence. Life is merely here and we do not know why nor are we accountable for treating it any different than any other thing that exists. A rat is a dog is a man. All exist therefore all have equal value.
But Genesis chapter 1:26 says that God created man in His image. That alone makes us different than the animals, plants and dirt around us. After the flood God again states specifically that Gen. 9:6 man is created in God's image.
If then man is a special creature, created in God's image, what can we deduce thru logical assumptions about the nature of man?
The Ten Commandments help answer these questions. The first four are about man's relationship with the Creator. As created beings we are accountable to the Creator. He requires that we show him honor and respect, reverence, because he gave us life. If there is no life, then we would not be accountable to Him.
The last six of the Commandments are directed to mankind's relationship with each other. Here is where we begin to see the the basis for unalienable rights. Before I go on though, I need to define some terms. Right-”just or legal claim or title, in accordance with or conformable to justice, law , morality, or another standard”. Now many in our culture today misuse the term rights by applying it to mean personal desire. They are in effect libertine-one who acts without moral restraint. They claim liberty when they are really licentious. They will claim a right to (fill in the blank) (think-right to choose) which can not be a right because it is immoral, unjust or unlawful. Life – (for this article I'm going to use my own definition for clarity's sake). So- here is my definition, life - is personal existence. Life in Scripture is a gift of God given to all mankind. Each and every person who is alive, has been given the gift of life, (I believe this is also true of those who have not yet been born, so it should be argued that life begins at the moment of conception.)
Now, if the creator God gives you a gift, what privileges come with that gift? If I give you $10,000 dollars, it yours its a gift, what can you do with it? I as the giver can put stipulations on it, if you use it to buy illegal drugs, I'll take it back, if you use it to gamble I'll take it back, but unless I tell you not to use it in a certain way, then you are free to save it, buy a car with it, eat out every meal for the next five years, it's yours to do with as you wish. God wrote some rules for the conduct of mankind. Those rules were very general in nature, in fact I'll argue later that he simply put them in our conscience, so that everyone knows these rules without seeing a written copy of them.
But to the Jewish people God gave very specific commands. God said in Exodus 20:13 that no man is to unjustly deprive another man of life, “thou shalt not murder”. BTW, the correct reading is murder, not kill, since we have already seen in Genesis, 9 that God requires the death of a murderer by other men. Killing is sometimes required by justice. Life cannot be valued correctly if there is no just penalty for depriving someone else of life. God is saying in verse 13 that because of your personal existence, you are entitled to protection of your life, i.e. a right to life. Murder is an affront to God because he gives the gift of life, no one has the right(just or legal claim) to take that life away from another human being. Your personal existence gives you an automatic claim on the Right to Life. If the Creator God did not want you to have that right, you would not exist, because God is the giver of Life.
If then, one believes that God gave the privilege of personal existence (right to life) to each human being, it logically follows that there are some other privileges of personal existence which follow that right to life. Lets look at personal property next. Exodus 20:14 “thou shalt not commit adultery”. Again, think about the assumed facts in this statement, God assumes that each man would have his own wife, a woman her own husband. Marriage is a sacred union between one man and one woman. He is hers, she is his. Don't be offended by my calling marriage a personal property issue. The couple have exclusive rights that only that couble are granted. Property is defined as – something tangible or intangible to which its owner has legal title, ownership. God respects the private contract of marriage , in fact he considers violation of the marriage union by another party to be sin. God endorses the concept of personal property, by condemning any violation of the marriage vow.
So a man given the right to life is also given the right to contract personal possessions to himself, not only marriage relationships, but look at verse 13, “thou shalt not steal” personal property itself. You have the God given right to own anything which does not violate God's law.
This ties directly to the privilege of personal liberty. Liberty- “the right to act in a manner of ones own choosing”. No man who is alive and has other men or a man telling him where, how or with whom he can live, marry, assemble etc. has liberty. God allows each person to whom he has granted the gift of life, the personal liberty to do as he pleases within the law. To get married or not, to own or rent, to make each and every choice on how to live ones life, is granted by the gift of life. If we did not have personal liberty, we would be simple robots, automatons incapable of free will. Free speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the press all stem from man's free will or personal liberty.
All of these concepts are all part of what some call the natural law. In Romans 2 verses 11 thru 15 Paul says in 11 that “there is no respect of persons with God” Jew or Gentile, “the law of God is written on their hearts, their conscience bearing witness” vs.15. Natural law is the principle that some of God's rules are universal, they apply to all men everywhere, forever. “Thou shalt not murder” is a natural law. Even in cultures that have never been exposed to the Bible or the God of the Bible, they have an idea of right and wrong. They believe that there is such thing as murder, (the unjust/unfair taking of life). God established certain universal rules of behavior for all of mankind, he treats all of mankind in the same way. Matthew 5:45
“That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. “
So the idea of right to life, liberty and property(personal happiness) are taught in Scripture, although they are not specifically stated in that manner. This has been a very short, poor written, and even more poorly documented attempt at covering a large and complicated issue. Much of what I wrote here, I learned from a couple of authors whom I highly recommend. “Christianity and the Constitution” by John Eidsmoe, he spends a good deal of time on the beliefs of the Founding Fathers, see also the the effects of evolutionary theory on the Law in the last chapter, it will astound you. “What We Can't Not Know” by J. Budziszewski is mostly about the concept of Natural Law. The Founders read and studied John Locke, Blackstone and others who believed in Natural Law. They were convinced that God had granted to all of mankind certain privileges which no man or country could justly deprived them of. So they wrote these words i n that great missive of defiance to the King of England, a statement of belief as well as a listing of the King's mistreatment of them.
“W hen in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness..........And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor
.
Laura, I believe you may be confusing the Right to Life with the promise that the wages of sin is death. The death is both physical and spiritual, the life the founders were refering to was simply personal existence. All of mankind is still subject to the wages of sin. But during a mans time of personal existence here on this earth he has opportunity to accept the free gift of salvation which gives us Eternal life. After his personal existence on this earth ends, he can no longer claim that gift.
15. Laura said the following at 2:32 PM on Jul 29:
Farmer Tom, I did emphasize that "in our sin" we deserve misery and death and hell. And I'm glad you clarified your position. I agree wholeheartedly that life is valuable.
Regarding the founders, I have gone back and forth as I've studied them. I used to believe that they were all devout, evangelical Christians who founded this country on completely biblical principles. Then, when I discovered Jefferson's deism, for example, I went through a time of being pretty disillusioned and cynical about them. I now understand them to be a mixed group of professing (but not true) believers, actual believers, and deists (i.e. unbelievers) -- just as most political groups in America seem to be. We can emphasize the legacy of the founders who were believers over the unbelievers or vice versa, but the fact remains that ours is a government characterized by secularism -- worldliness, in the most basic definition of the term -- not by an adherence to godly principles.
16. John said the following at 9:51 AM on Jul 30:
farmer Tom, thank you for that short but thought-provoking explanation of the Founders' views on liberty and natural law vis-a-vis the Bible.
It's astonishing that the Founding Fathers rebelled against the King over a three percent tax, when their descendants dutifully accept a tax burden of up to fifty percent, pervasive electronic surveillance unimaginable in the 18th century, and a whole host of other regulations and inconveniences that limit our liberty.
(Bonus question: was the Founders' rebellion against the lawfully constituted authority justified when viewed in the light of Romans 13?)
17. Sarah B. said the following at 6:56 PM on Jul 30:
I had actually never heard the term MTD before, but I think it fits the phenomenon to a "t." To steer the conversation in a slightly different direction, how does a Christian witness to one of these people whose life philosophy is described by MTD? I have many friends who would probably agree with this description of their beliefs on God.
"Moralistic Therapeutic Deism, as researchers explain, teaches that a vaguely defined God exists, cares about us and wants us to be good, nice and fair. You don't need to get too involved with God, absent a problem or crisis. The point of life is to be happy and to feel good about oneself. Good people go to heaven."
What would be the first point of this philosophy that needs to be tackled?
18. Calvin said the following at 5:32 PM on Jul 31:
Sarah,
I've been listening for some time to the discussions at the Whitehorse Inn (http://www.whitehorseinn.org/), where your question is often addressed.
The solution to MTD is the right preaching of the gospel especially the understanding that my biggest problem is not that my car isn't nice enough, or the tragedy of my personal pain, or even that I need to live a better life, but that in fact I'm completely sinful, and that I will be judged by God for my sinfulness.
Isaiah 64:6 tells us that our righteousness (that's our very best effort) is like filthy rags to God, and that our sins sweep us away as a dead leaf is swept before the wind. If God doesn't come and rescue me through the agency of Jesus Christ's atoning work on my behalf, then I have no hope of being acceptable before God.
The story found in the scriptures is not how I can live a better life and thereby be acceptable to God, but is instead the story of God's rescue mission to redeem a remnant to Himself from the rebellious mass of humanity that He might be glorified. Isn't that what Jesus was claiming when He said, "You search the scriptures because you think to find life in them; but I tell you the truth, they testify of me." (John 5:39)?
Once we recognize sin for what it is (rebellion against God), and that it grips us with a deathly grip that we cannot break on our own, then the primary issue of Christianity becomes sharply defined as does the only hope of the sinner. The perfect lamb of God, Jesus Christ.