Pop Tarts are Sandwiches? and Other Gospel Foolishness

I have reason to believe that the Apostle Paul argued the gospel with conspiracy theorists, atheists, and people of other religions. And likely, it was frustrating. How many times did he walk away talking with his companions about some guy’s non-sensical line of discussion that went nowhere? I bet it happened a lot.  

In a letter to the church in Corinth, Paul wrote, "The word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but it is the power of God to us who are being saved" (1 Corinthians 1:18). No matter how clear and compelling an argument one makes about the gospel, it still lands as a fool's speech on those whom God is not saving. Jesus shared a parable where a man in hell wanted Abraham to send Lazarus to warn his brothers. Abraham said, "They have Moses and the prophets [meaning the Bible at the time]; they should listen to them" (Luke 16:29). The man pleaded even more and wanted a person raised from the dead to warn them. Because that would be a severe sign and offer a clear and compelling warning, right? But Abraham responded, "If they don't listen to Moses and the prophets, they will not be persuaded if someone rises from the dead" (Luke 16:31).      

We might read something like the Scriptures mentioned above and struggle to believe that people would consider clear, articulated gospel evidence as foolishness. But after what we've seen in 2020 & 2021, is this such a stretch of the imagination?  

My 12-year-old son, Daniel, was involved in a school debate. The topic: A Pop-Tart is a sandwich. Daniel argued against the claim. He emailed Kellogg's to inquire if they identified their product (the Pop-Tart) as a sandwich. Steve Cahillane, the CEO, said no. Daniel contacted Jimmy John's--professionals of the sandwich--with the same inquiry. Their headquarters also said no and wished him luck with his debate.  

One of the counterarguments was that the Uncrustable is similar to a Pop-Tart, and an Uncrustable is called a sandwich. So Daniel contacted the J. M. Smucker Company and asked if they consider the Pop-Tart a sandwich. To remain politically correct, they said it is up to Kellogg's to give the Pop-Tart its identity. In this case, the Kellogg’s Pop-Tart does not identify as a sandwich.  

Finally, Daniel conducted an online survey that showed pictures of items and then asked the respondents to check all the words they would use to describe the displayed item. For example, Coke and Pepsi products were shown, and then terms like soda, cola, pop, etc. were offered as options. Of 284 respondents, not a single person checked "sandwich" as an option to describe the Pop-Tart, even when asked to check all the words that could apply.  

The evidence is compelling and clear.  

Circumstances canceled the debate, but some of Daniel's friends were still unwilling to concede that a Pop-Tart is not a sandwich when shown all of the evidence. They didn't care.  

Is this example so hard to believe? Is this not the problem with COVID? We have determined what we believe regardless of any evidence. It's the same about our favorite football teams and politics and just about everything else in life. We just don't care about the evidence, no matter how clearly it is articulated. 

How much more complicated will this be in matters of salvation and the gospel? Why are we so surprised to learn that it is God's work to open eyes, soften hearts, and turn people toward the clear, compelling truth of the gospel? Without God doing this work, we remain unconvinced. We want our way to be correct, and no amount of information will change our sinful wants. But God has a way of doing what God does, for God's glory. 

We may not have settled the Pop-Tart/sandwich matter, but it is clear, if God is saving us, the gospel is incredible. If we are not saved, we see the gospel as foolishness.