Pastor Josh Loeve is the Lead Pastor of Centre Church. Here we talk about Christianity, Centre Church, and more about Canadian society and religious faith.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: So, let’s start on a fundamental issue within Christian doctrine or theology across denominations, what is the truth and the orientation around that within a Christian context for Centre Church and yourself? In other words, what is truth? How does your church live this out?

Pastor Josh Loeve: What is truth? Let’s talk about this in the religious sense, the Christian sense, we see, ultimately, Jesus is embodying Grace and Truth. When I speak about grace in the context of the church, I would speak of the person of Jesus.

In terms of science and all of that, I don’t know if I will touch on all that. In the context of Christianity, it is the death and resurrection of Jesus, and forgiveness of sin. To me, it is the highest truth.

That is what Christianity is, basically, hinging on: Did Jesus die? Did he rise again? If no resurrection, then there is no Christianity. So, really, the truth hinges on that pivotal part of history.

For me, when we speak of truth and the Christian landscape, that is what we are talking about.

Jacobsen: In Centre Church, what are the theological implications of this? What are the implications for community?

Loeve: Wow – those are huge questions [Laughing].

Jacobsen: [Laughing].

Loeve: The implications for the community are huge. Our purpose in the community is to lead people into a life centered on Jesus. The implications of that truth is that we believe when a person centers their life on Jesus and are forgiven.

Things like shame go away. There is a community of putting Christ at the center of our lives or first in our lives. We put him first. We model his life. What that means, it affects the relationships that we have; it affects the way we interact with the community around us.

It affects the way that we use our money and lead our homes. It affects every area of our lives. The implication of that truth is that we extend forgiveness, as this is a great gift. So, we are generous to the world around us.

From that position of centering Jesus on our life, we are able to model that out to other people of the grace that He extended and gave to others. It has implications in every area.

I could exhaust that list. For me, it has implications in every area.

Jacobsen: If we are looking at an ordinary Sunday service, how is this fundamental basis of theology and scriptural reading built into the things that are spoken about in an ordinary service? Also, the in-between things and the before and after of a service.

As anyone who has gone to a church or been part of a church community knows.

Loeve: I know there is a high emphasis on Sunday service. But what do the other 6 days of the look like? How that impacts our Sunday service and that truth, it is that everything that we do on weekend service is about Jesus.

Again, it hinges on the death and resurrection of Jesus. So, every Sunday, we give people an opportunity to hear that message. We challenge people to live out that reality. So, Jesus is the central theme of all of our services.

In particular, the sermons on a weekend. He is the central message of the sermons. We have a commitment to connect the Message of Jesus to those who have never heard the Message, or those who are seeking, starting, or returning.

Someone seeking answers for God that we want to get everything out of the way as to what Jesus looks like. Those who are wanting to start again. They are starting a journey with Jesus again. We want to empower them.

Or those who are returning. Those who want to return after 20, 30, 40 years. That is the implication. We want to bring that to as many people as possible.

At Centre Church, the focus is on people who are seeking, starting, or returning.

Jacobsen: Within Centre Church, what are some other derivative fundamentals of the faith for the community and you?

Loeve: Fundamentals, we have some values that we have built. These are biblical values. That we rely on. One of them is authentic community. So, I will work that into the community.

Centre Church is small groups. We meet in homes throughout the week to discuss the weekend’s message or different books about the Bible and contextualizing scripture. Things like that.

Then we have another values intent on discipleship. Discipleship is this process of helping people to grow to be more like Jesus. We need that through our serving teams.

We are a portable church. On a week, we have about 40 to 45 volunteers who do everything from run the kids’ classes to set up the environment as we are a portable church, to leading us in music, or to production teams, and small group leaders.

So, that is our intentional discipleship. Through that, we want people to serve each other, as Jesus served others. Those are 2 of our values out of 5. We live through those values.

Jacobsen: For many churches leaders in North America, they lament the lack of men within the church. How was this manifested in some of the churches that you’ve seen in the Lower Mainland [Ed. British Columbia, Canada]?

Loeve: Personally, I am not looking at those stats. I am not lamenting those things. We have a healthy contingency of both men and women in our church.

We empower both men and women into positions of leadership. So, we’re not trying to – or I am not trying to – be more edgy, cynical, or abrasive to bring more men into the doors of a Sunday service.

We believe God calls people into church through invitations to our church. I don’t think that I am lamenting. As a matter of fact, I think we see mostly men who are coming through the doors looking for purpose, looking for meaning, and addressing the truths about who God is.

Since day 1, we are a 4-and-a-half-year-old church. Not once have I thought, “Gosh, I wish we had more men here.”

Jacobsen: [Laughing].

Loeve: But we are having a healthy contingency of men and women. It is really exciting. It is really on God and on us. He has brought the right people through the door to connect with us.

I cannot speak to other churches. I do not really hear that discourse happening amongst other pastors. I think there is a lot of pastors who have seen an influx in Cloverdale into their churches. They are having to lead and pastor them.

Not once have I said, “Are they men? Or are they women?” [Laughing]

Jacobsen: [Laughing].

Loeve: I felt people are coming through the doors looking for meaning and purpose and wondering who God is. I think there is a lot of people in process who belong to different churches.

Jacobsen: There are a lot of different definitions of God. There are many, many gods on offer. What definition of a god or God makes most sense to you – either emotional appeal or philosophical solidity to you?

Loeve: I believe in the Trinitarian God of the Bible. God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit, one God in three persons. I hold to the biblical text in terms of my view of who God is, and, in terms of the emotional appeal, when I was 17-years-old; I had a profound about something we spoke about in our earlier [Ed. pre-interview] conversation.

I had a transcendent experience with God. That was in a much more charismatic church than we are today. There was emotion attached to that. But, for me, I look at the biblical text, “Who is God defined there?”

A lot of my perspectives of who God is and the fleshing out of who God is, is defined by the biblical text, which is, as I said, the Trinitarian God.

Jacobsen: What have been atheist and theist counters to those? How do you respond to them?

Loeve: I think in terms of an atheistic response to that. I have heard a lot of criticism against my beliefs. But one of the things, too, is that part of the Christian perspective is that God is the one who opens up the eyes and ears of those around us while we carry the Message.

Our responsibility is to carry the Message. Yes, there are many different countering messages against the person of Jesus or against the death & the resurrection, against the validity of the Bible, and the list goes on, and on, and on.

So, we can wrestle with them and Christians still wrestle with those questions. To me, though, it rests on the Death and Resurrection of Jesus. When it comes to criticism against the Bible, I bring it back, “What about the resurrection of Jesus?”

We can take a historical perspective and in Gospel accounts of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John if the New Testament. To me, if a critique outside of that, as a first conversation, typically, I start here because Christianity hinges on the Resurrection.

I focus on it, as Christianity hinges on it. That is the “truth” that we talked about in the beginning of this. It affects all of our churches. It is the truth that Christianity hinges on. Again, I, generally, field criticism around that.

I think that’s what people really should be having conversations around.

Jacobsen: How do you make a split between sacred and secular values in Canada now?

Loeve: A lot of the Christian worldview was a part of Canada, as it was formed as a nation. So, yes, the lines are, definitely, blurred. I think what I can say about that. We love the benefits of the Judeo-Christian worldview, but just don’t love all the things about it.

I think there is still a lot of benefits. Some of those benefits are focused on the family, the sovereignty of the individual. These are Christian values that come out of that worldview. I think that’s, maybe, one of those sacred values that had become one of the benefits for the secular community.

Where I think there is a great contrast between the secular and the sacred is in general belief in God, often, I see this in the idea of hope for the future, where people place their hope. Seculars tend to place hope in science and human determination.

The sacred is placing their hope in a God who controls the universe. So, it is where we place our hope, where we place our trust, it is one of the areas. The idea of hope with competing values of sacred and secular.

There are a lot of different areas where relationally. I see this often. There is a separation between sacred and secular, whether divorce and remarriage, or views around sexual orientation. This is where we see secular and sacred competing with each other as well.

Jacobsen: Within the domain of the sacred, there are the formally or the anti-divine within most Christian theologies. Those have to do with things like angels and fallen angels, and demons, and the Devil, and so on.

How does this fit into your general framework for understanding the world? For example, if you’re taking into account a God who controls the world, maintains and manifests the world, what of these other forces more or less counter to that?

Loeve: First of all, I would say, “Yes.” You are, in some ways, explaining a supernatural world that interacts with our world. I don’t know all specific examples in how that plays out. I think C.S. Lewis tried to play a little bit with that in The Screwtape Letters.

In terms of “hell,” for instance, a lot of people question whether hell is a literal place. I think for most of us as human beings; hell is a real place of suffering, cancer, relational separation. So, I would say that we see some of that evil itself. We see the effects of evil.

We see the effects of good. However specifically each one of those interacts with the world around us, I am not really sure. However, that is one of the effects of evil on the world. I do see the effects of good in the world.

I can share story after story of the effects Jesus has had on people in our church. That would be the divine interacting with the natural world. I don’t know, specifically when and how all those moments happen.

I do know good exists. I do know evil exists. I do see them interacting with our world. In terms of how, I know we talked earlier in our conversation about if this is just a figment of our imaginations as human beings. I would say, “Human beings can be quite evil, quite malicious, to one another. But I do think there is a driving force behind evil and a driving force behind the good.”

I think that’s what we are obsessed with as a culture. I think that’s why Avengers, Marvel comics, and Star Wars, and all this stuff.

Jacobsen: [Laughing].

Loeve: We are so fascinated by it because we love that story. We love and we hate it at the same time.

Jacobsen: [Laughing].

Loeve: I always find that fascinating. Why do we want the good to win? I do think that these ideas are not just constructs of the human imagination. They seem to have permeated – the ideas of good and evil – thought, and have permeated cultural norms.

I think there is a cause for that. That morality was placed in human beings, which is a Christian perspective. God created the world and created human beings with that type of moral compass, and gave option and allowance to evil.

Jacobsen: What one or two examples, as a closer to the conversation today, come to mind in terms of this, as per the argument, of the intervention of the divine or the supernatural into the natural, or the anti-divine or the demonic into the natural?

Loeve: [Laughing] an example that comes to mind is a couple that came to our church a few years back. He was struggling with addiction. Their marriage was done. She came to church. Her friend invited her. It happened to be the church in an elementary school.

She was a teacher at the elementary school and felt comfortable enough to come. She was, as far as I know, not an agnostic and would probably identify as an atheist. She connected with Canada Service with the sermon preached on the Sunday morning, and felt the love and support of the community.

She said, “I have not met people who have loved and supported me this way before.” We began to mention the Message of Jesus to her. Her husband came a couple weeks later. She was mad about it. Because this was her thing.

But when you’re going through a separation, [Laughing] you’re not always wanting to see the other person.

Jacobsen: [Laughing].

Loeve: But he heard the Message and began to get over some of his addictions. They did begin to move back together. They have been part of the community for 2 years. They are part of a small group and serve on a team.

I am going to have the privilege of marrying them.

Jacobsen: Congratulations.

Loeve: When I look at all these events that had to happen, and all the different components, the right timing and the church being in a school that had to be comfortable for her to come. I look at all these events.

It is hard for me to say, “I cannot deny God having a hand in that.” I can hardly pick a Netflix show.

Jacobsen: [Laughing].

Loeve: Yet, I see this relationship rise from the dead. This is where I see the effects of the divine and Jesus working in our church, and in the people or the lives of the people within our church.

Jacobsen: Any recommended authors, speakers, or organizations?

Loeve: Yes, I really enjoy Ravi Zacharias. I appreciate his choice to what we call Apologetics and Christianity. He is answering the questions rather than debating or speaking at people. Ravi Zacharias is one of those people.

There is a local pastor in the area who wrote The Problem of God named Mark Clark. I think he is a very smart guy. He grew up in an atheist home and had a radical transformation with Jesus. Village Church is the name of that church.

Jacobsen: It is a fast growing one.

Loeve: He is abrasive. He’s solid in his doctrine, but he just loves people as well. I think that’s just a great guy. I would probably recommend some of his resources. Those two guys in terms of Apologetics and talking about atheists, what we’re talking about right now, too.

There are a lot of others, like William Lane Craig [Laughing]. He is another guy out there. He is a pretty interesting guy. But that is just within the Apologetics landscape.

Jacobsen: Any final feelings or thoughts in conclusion based on the conversation today?

Loeve: If someone is reading this, and if they are truly searching for answers, I think there are places to wrestle with competing opinions and beliefs. There are churches that can be places of refuge, and not just places of opposition.

I think it is really important in these conversations. I don’t think the church is as closed to conversations and questions as they are pegged as. I work at Centre Church. I know a lot of other churches, where there is a lot of good dialogue and pastors willing to step up to answer the questions.

I would encourage people reading this or listening to it. To know that there are places that pastors are willing to have conversations like this, to hear different and competing opinions and ideas, there’s also just places where we would love to pray and walk alongside people.

I think more than being right and wrong. There’s also an element of being human together. We can find solidarity together. I want people to know that there are places where they can come and wrestle with life’s big questions.

There are a lot of pastors wrestling with these.

Jacobsen: Thank you very much for the opportunity and your time, Pastor Josh.

Photo by Edwin Andrade on Unsplash

Dr. Herb Silverman is the Founder of the Secular Coalition for America, the Founder of the Secular Humanists of the Lowcountry, and the Founder of the Atheist/Humanist Alliance student group at the College of Charleston. He authored Complex variables (1975), Candidate Without a Prayer: An Autobiography of a Jewish Atheist in the Bible Belt (2012) and An Atheist Stranger in a Strange Religious Land: Selected Writings from the Bible Belt (2017). He co-authored The Fundamentals of Extremism: The Christian Right in America (2003) with Kimberley Blaker and Edward S. Buckner, Complex Variables with Applications (2007) with Saminathan Ponnusamy, and Short Reflections on Secularism (2019).

Here we talk about scientific skepticism and modern secularism.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Some of the pillars of American freethought have been individuals including H.L. Mencken, Carl Sagan, Paul Kurtz, or Martin Gardner, or in the everyday world of needed problem-solving in Parade Magazine with Marilyn (Mach) Vos Savant. 

Whether in the acerbic and sardonic writings of Mencken or in the ordinary American household language of Vos Savant, the wide-ranging philosophizing by Gardner or Kurtz, or the popularization of advanced scientific concepts to a lay audience in the case of Sagan, a delivery of wide-ranging scientific skepticism as a retort to the wide-spread irrationalism in American life. 

How have some of the larger figures of American scientific skepticism been helpful in providing another area of critical thinking for the public against common supernaturalisms? How have those, in turn, helped the cause of furtherance of secularism in the United States?

Dr. Herb Silverman: You mention famous American freethought individuals, some of whom might be acerbic, sardonic, read by ordinary Americans, philosophers, popularizers of science, or debunkers of irrationalism. I think all such people are useful to a freethought movement because they often represent different constituencies. I’m a “big tent” atheist who welcomes all to come out of their atheist closets to help normalize freethought in America.

I’ll describe my personal journey to atheism with four examples.

As a youngster, I was influenced by the movie The Wizard of Oz, where the gatekeeper told Dorothy that nobody had ever seen the great Wizard. Dorothy replied, “Then how do you know he exists?” The curtain is later pulled back to reveal that the “Wizard” is an elderly man operating machinery and speaking into a microphone. So the Wizard didn’t exist, and Dorothy was on her own. That sounded to me a lot like what I was beginning to think of God.

I was also influenced by the Bible. I “knew” as a trusting child that the Bible was God’s word. But after many of my biblical questions went unanswered, I became an example of what Isaac Asimov observed, “Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived.”

At age 16, in 1958, I hadn’t told anyone that I no longer believed in God, thinking I might be the only one in this country with that opinion. Then I discovered Bertrand Russell’s Why I Am Not a Christian in the public library. I felt better about myself after learning that Russell was more than just not a Christian. He was as many “nots” as I was, and brave enough to say so. Russell transformed the lives of many in my generation. For the first time we heard articulate arguments that confirmed and gave voice to our own skepticism and doubts. Even some true believers were led on a thoughtful journey toward altered religious states. Learning that Russell was a logician and mathematician at least partially inspired me to become a mathematician.

When I read George Orwell’s 1984, I thought the character “Big Brother” appeared to be an omnipotent, omniscient, eternal, authoritarian figure who demanded absolute obedience. I didn’t know at the time that Orwell was an atheist. Here’s what Orwell said about Big Brother: “In 1984, the concept of Big Brother is a parody of God. You never see him, but the fact of him is drilled into people’s minds so that they become robots, almost. Plus, if you speak bad against Big Brother, it’s a Thoughtcrime.”

You also asked why there might now be more critical thinkers in America, helping to further the cause of secularism in the United States.

In “The Last Taboo: Why America Needs Atheism,” published in the New Republic in 1996, Wendy Kaminer wrote, “Atheists generate about as much sympathy as pedophiles. But, while pedophilia may at least be characterized as a disease, atheism is a choice, a willful rejection of beliefs to which vast majorities of people cling.” I have one slight disagreement: Atheism is not a “choice.” For me, the only choice is whether to be open about my atheism or pretend to believe in a deity for which there is not a scintilla of evidence.

The situation in the United States has improved significantly since Kaminer’s piece appeared twenty-three years ago. Much has been written about atheism, including best-selling books by Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett, Susan Jacoby, and others. A number of popular blogs now promote atheism and secularism. In the Internet age, people hear about many worldviews, not just the one in which they were raised. Every new national survey shows a rapid increase of atheists, agnostics, and those who claim no religious affiliation (called “nones”). Many “nones” broke from conservative religion because it is anti-LGBTQ, anti-women’s rights, and anti-science. Pedophilia has also discouraged people from maintaining their church affiliation. 

Fivethirtyeight, which takes its name from the number of electors in the U.S. electoral college, is a website that focuses on opinion poll analysis. A recent piece, “Millennials Are Leaving Religion and Not Coming Back,” pointed out that 40 percent of millennials are religiously unaffiliated. And there’s mounting evidence that today’s younger generations may be leaving religion for good. Changing views about the relationship between morality and religion also appear to have convinced many young parents that religious institutions are simply irrelevant or unnecessary for their children. A majority (57 percent) of millennials agree that religious people are generally less tolerant of others, compared to only 37 percent of Baby Boomers.

The Christian conservative movement warns about a rising tide of secularism, but the strong association between religion and the Republican Party may be fueling this divide. And as more members of the Democratic Party become secular, the rift between secular liberals and religious conservatives will be exacerbated. I’m hoping we will return to the day when Republicans identify as economic conservatives who want less government interference, rather than identify with the Christian religion as so many now do. I would still be a Democrat, but at least I’d understand that the Republican Party had a legitimate point-of-view.

When it comes to voting, 60 percent of Americans say they prefer a candidate who believes in God and only 6% say they prefer a candidate who doesn’t.  However, this preference for candidates who believe in God nearly disappears when policy positions are included in the question. The percent who say they would vote for a well-qualified atheist has steadily risen from 18 percent in 1958 to 58 percent in 2015. The Congressional Freethought Caucus, formed in 2018 with 4 members, is a forum for secular members of Congress who promote evidence-based public policy. It now has 12 open members, with more likely to join. There are also more than 50 state legislators who identify with the atheist and humanist community.

While our community is growing rapidly, we are still severely underrepresented in politics. We need to encourage more members of our freethought community to run for public office, and also encourage elected officials to acknowledge their nonbelief. Here are some of our important issues: protecting a strict separation of religion and government, addressing climate change, advancing human rights and civil liberties (including disparities in incarceration rates, easy access to register to vote, women’s rights), health and safety (vaccines, death with dignity), and promoting religious freedom abroad (opposing blasphemy and apostasy laws). We need our atheist and humanist community to become more visible and welcomed by participants in the electoral arena. I hope for a day when every political party at every governmental level will embrace our constituency.

Jacobsen: Thank you for the opportunity and your time, Dr. Silverman.

Photo by Luke Stackpoole on Unsplash

As reported by the CBC News, the economic of Canada reduced by a tenth of one percent in October of 2019.

The economic condition for Canadians remains quite strong with the 10^th largest economy in the world, according to Business Insider. Not only this, its oil reserves may exceed the Middle East. (However, this may become less relevant into the future with the rather rapid and predicted transition into renewable energy sources in the 2020s, 2030s, and further into the future.

With a shrinkage of the real Gross Domestic Product of GDP of the Canadian economy, based on reportage by Statistics Canada, this will be the first decline in the last 8 months of either economic stabilization, as in July, or growth, as see in, for example, May, June, August, and September with growth percentages of 0.3%, 0.2%, 0.1%, and 0.1%.

The economy, how ever slight, appears to show a several month slowing of the growth rate of the economy. The projection was a 0.0% growth rate of the Canadian economy in October in September. This did not play out.

With the manufacturing sector in Canada down for the 4^th time in 5 months, this impacted the growth of the Canadian economy.

As reported, “The United Auto Workers (UAW) strike in the U.S. caused Canada to scale back production contributing to the decline. Retail trade declined 1.1 per cent—it’s largest decline in three years, while wholesale trade declined one per cent.”

However, oil production increased by 0.1% and real estate by 0.7%. So, we had a rapid growth in real estate, minor growth in oil production, and an overall decrease in the economy where a prediction was for a halted economy for October.

Photo by Markus Spiske on Unsplash