Romans 8:28

Recently a dear friend sent this e-mail to me about his wife who has been struggling the past few years with medical issues. We often question God's existence and His goodness in times of intense trial, but here is a testamony from a couple that has a proper understanding of who God is because of their experience with pain and suffering. May we be blessed to face trials with such faith and courage.

"The purpose of this email is to let you know about the latest miracle in our lives. Since I last sent you an update, Paulette has had some challenges with pleural effusions or to us regular folks that's fluid collecting around her lung. The obvious result is difficulty in breathing. She was hospitalized almost 3 months ago for removal of approximately one and a half liters of fluid. Seven weeks later an equal amount had collected again and had to be removed. Three weeks later (which was one week ago) the pulmonologist estimated that one and a half quarts of fluid had built up again. She was scheduled for the procedure to remove the fluid last Thursday. X-rays were made upon her arrival for the appointment, and when the Dr. came into the room and saw her x-ray, a broad grin spread across his face. He said that Paulette is one lucky lady because most of the fluid had vanished, and there was not enough to be concerned about. We told him that people around the world are praying for us, and that we've experienced miracles before. The Dr. said, "well, somebody is listening because you've just had another miracle." He ended the 3 to 4 minute Dr. visit by giving Paulette a big hug (not his usual style) and wished us a Merry Christmas.

Few people that I have met experience these kinds of miracles in a lifetime. Yet during the past three years, Paulette has been the recipient of three really big ones. In 2006 she was diagnosed with untreatable and inoperable cancer. Miraculously, the cancer disappeared. In 2007 a growth appeared in her heart which prevented her body from processing blood. The doctors thought her death was near. Miraculously, within a few days the fluid disappeared along with the blockage in her heart. And now in 2008 a large amount of fluid disappeared from around her lung.

I won't pretend that I understand why we've been singled out for these blessings anymore than I understand why there is now a plum sized growth on the outside of Paulette's heart. We've known about this growth for over a year. We know that should either or both of us die tomorrow, we have had three incredible "bonus" years together on this earth, since our odyssey began the day before Christmas 2005. It is a certainty that God is good, and His mercy lasts forever. What a gift, and what better time than the Christmas Season to be reminded of God's grace and mercy. Two thousand years ago He gave the greatest gift of all -- His son, Jesus. All of this is about Him, not us. "

Romans 8:28 "And we know that all things work together for the good to them that love God, to them who are called according to His purpose."

Consider the works of His hands!

THE GREATEST OF THESE REASONS

Saturday morning we were locked out of our home. I had thrown my keys on the kitchen table because Joanna was planning on driving me to work. She thought I grabbed her keys. What had started out as a peaceful family morning was about to turn sour. If our neighbors had been watching what they would have seen was a display of my sinful nature.

Upon reflection I realize that my actions were a response to the stresses of the moment. My reaction, that's important to note. I had a choice to react differently, but I chose to be angry at my wife for not bringing out her keys. I did not have to be angry. I chose to be. I also chose to be anxious because by this time I was late for work. I care about what people would think of me. I want to be known as reliable, and dependable, and being late could stain my good image.

Quickness to anger, and fear of man are unfortunately sins I recognize in myself. God was teaching me and my lesson was not over. Since we moved from our apartment into this house I have noticed that I have been dealing with fearful thoughts stemming from issues of security. We are more in the city now, and one window in the house is broken. I thought I had secured it until it could be repaired. As I was circling he house trying to break in I decided to try the window I had secured. I removed the screen and knocked the window with the palm of my hand totally expecting it to remain firmly in place. Instead the entire window fell backwards out of the frame into the house. It was in this moment I realized that I had been holding on to a false sense of security. How foolish to trust in locked doors and windows. Anyone who wanted in the house clearly is going to get in the house regardless of how secure it is. I need to place my faith and trust in God and not locks and keys.

What does this lesson from the Lord teach me? I am prideful, and I don't trust God. I am in desperate need of the Gospel. The only hope for my sinfulness is the grace of God, His forgiveness obtained by the death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ. I needed that grace the moment I first believed in Him, and I need it still today as I continue to allow Him to conform me more and more into His image. Clearly He has much work left to do with me. How thankful I am for the coming of Christ into our world. During this season of advent I have many reasons to be thankful. The forgiveness of sins and the promise of eternal life found only through Jesus Christ are the greatest of these reasons.

And if you think God was done teaching me this weekend you should have seen my reaction this morning when Joanna asked me the question, "Steve did you park the car in the cul-de-sac"?

A ONE IN SEVEN CHANCE THAT LIFE HAS MEANING

At the approaching of each years close we have the opportunity to reflect upon our lives in a way that is different from other days throughout the year. Perhaps it has to do with the nostalgia of days past, or the promise of starting anew in the coming year. Whatever the reason we certainly are faced with hopeful messages during the advent season. What is the message you hear at Christmas? Hope, peace, love, the brotherhood of man, setting all differences aside? Does the message promise peace of mind, or peace on earth lasting throughout the year? Does the message and your hope in it last past January?

Alfred Delp writes that during this time of the year we experience contrasting emotions. "We are eager, yet frazzled; sentimental, yet indifferent. One minute we glow at the thought of getting together with our family and friends; the next we feel utterly lonely. Our hope is mingled with dread, our anticipation with despair. We sense the deeper meanings of the season but grasp at them in vain; and in the end, all the bustle leaves us frustrated and drained."

I believe it is possible that even with all the hopeful messages being sung, and caroled to us we can still miss the point. And each advent season I am reminded of the importance of the longing of ancient prophets awaiting the Messiah, and their hope as they longed for the fulfillment of what the foresaw thousands of years before he was born.

"We...are often so dulled by superficial distractions that we are incapable of hearing any voice within, let alone listening to it. Consequently, the feeling we know as Christmas cheer lacks any real connection to the vital spirit that radiated from the manger...Advent marks something momentous: God's coming into our midst...Advent is not merely a commemorative event or an anniversary, but a yearly opportunity for us to consider the future, second Advent, the promised coming of God's kingdom on earth." (Alfred Delp ) That Christ is returning is more than just a promise of glad tidings or peace on earth. His return is the righting of all wrongs, the answer to so many tears shed in a moment of "Why God?" He is coming to complete the good news of the Gospel message. As Christ spoke of Himself in His first advent with the words of Isaiah the prophet "The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, Because He has anointed Me to preach the Gospel to the poor. He has sent Me to proclaim release to the captives, and recovery of sight to the blind, to set free those who are oppressed, to proclaim the favorable year of the Lord." (Luke 4:18-19). Now on his second advent he will complete the work adding to this quote the rest of Isaiah 61 ending with, "So the Lord God will cause righteousness and praise to spring up before all the nations." The hope we are dreaming of, the peace we are hopeful for are coming with the Lord Jesus.

But what about those who would say belief in God is irrational? Take for example the most recent attack on faith. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,450445,00.html

The anti-theists ads that came out this year saying "Why believe in a god? Just be good for goodness' sake". While the men and women who believe themselves to be agnostic or atheist (I contend it is impossible to be either) certainly desire peace on earth, and good will toward mankind they believe it cannot come from blind faith.

Chuck Colson writes that knowledge of God is innate within humans. (see Genesis 1:26-27; Romans 1:18 and following). He tells us that today "secular biologists and scientists studying the human mind have found strong evidence of this intuitive knowledge...what some have even called the God gene. This need to connect to God and to one another was documented in a recent scholarly study entitled 'Wired to Connect.' We are made to seek meaning beyond ourselves in ways a purposeless, random process could not explain." Colson continues by saying we are made this way because what we long for is real. He adds that C.S. Lewis once commented that we all hunger by nature and food has been made to satisfy our hunger, we are made for it.

One of the anti-theists of our day Richard Dawkins says, "Any God capable of designing a universe, carefully tuned to lead to our evolution, must be a supremely complex and improbable entity that needs an even bigger explanation than the one He is supposed to provide." Dawkins believes God is therefore ruled out by the laws of probability. He simply cannot be God because he is beyond our understanding. But this is the very definition of God. St Anselm proposed so many years ago that God is that which is beyond what the human mind can comprehend. And years before Anselm, Isaiah inspired by God wrote, "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, declares the Lord." (55:8).

Dawkins says "that he chooses to live as if God does not exist. But at the same time, he concedes that on a scale of 1 to 7, 1 being certainty that God exists, and 7 certainty He doesn't, Dawkins rates himself a 6, at least acknowledging that he cannot prove his position." (Colson)

A one in seven chance that life has meaning is better than a zero in seven. It was the philosopher Pascal who argues that if there is no God, and you bet your life there is then you have lost nothing. But if there is a God, and you bet your life that there is not, then you have lost everything, making the greatest mistake possible.

Colson adds, "If Dawkins had been on the titanic and was offered two lifeboats, one certain to sink as opposed to one with a one in seven chance of staying afloat, he would have instantly chosen the latter. To choose the boat with no hope would be clearly irrational."

And so it is with us this advent season. As we reflect on hope filled messages we can choose to gamble on the empty promise of peace, comfort and joy from the world which melt away with the spring or trust on Christ and His coming advent in which the Gospel message will find its complete fulfillment.

Concerns for the Respect of Human Life

A friend of mine recently published a note on his Facebook account concerning Gianna Jenssen and pro-choice advocates. One of the comments to his note was an intelligent response to a difficult subject that raised some serious ethical questions for pro-life advocates. Here is part of that response:

"What happened to this woman was horrible. This is why partial birth abortions, along with all late term abortions should be illegal - these are babies. In the first couple of months, however, there is definitely an intelligent debate whether it's a baby at that point or not. Believe it or not, some people genuinely don't believe an embryo is a human being any more than they believe they're buying baby chickens when they buy a dozen eggs from the grocery store.Consider fertility treatments. They are performed by fertilizing hundreds of eggs in hope that one might become a baby. Since no one has hundreds of babies, you must consider what happens to the other fertilized eggs (they're frozen indefinitely). If you think they're babies, then fertilization treatments are unthinkable massacres that must be stopped. If you believe life begins at conception, you have to be anti-fertility treatments. There is no way around it."

Is there any ethical way around being anti-fertility treatments? This was his strongest point, and one that I agree poses a challenge to Christians. We need to know what we believe, and why we believe it. What I want to do is share some thoughts from a book called God, Marriage, and Family by Andreas J. Kostenberger. Kostenberger is a New Testament scholar, and director of PhD/ThM studies at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, he also serves as editor of the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society. In his book the challenge of artificial reproductive technologies are explored.

First we are presented with descriptions of the methods. These methods include iintrauterine insemination (IUI) also known as artificial insemination (AI), gamete intrafallopian transfer (GIFT), in vitro fertilization (IVF), and surrogacy or surrogate motherhood.

Simple description of the procedures:

1. IUI or AI: "Involves the collection and accumulation of male sperm and then the injection of that sperm into the female uterus during the most fertile part of the woman's cycle."

2. GIFT: "Female eggs are harvested through the use of super-ovulatory hormonal drugs stimulating the maturation and release of several eggs. These eggs are then harvested by means of a minor surgical procedure utilizing ultrasound guidance in the vagina. The male sperm...(along with eggs) are then placed together in the woman's fallopian tubes." Once in the fallopian tubes the hope is that fertilization will happen naturally.

3. IVF: Similar in nature to GIFT except, "the fertilization takes place in an artificial environment ("in vitro" literally means "in glass," referring to the test tube or petri dish where conception occurs.)" The first successful IVF treatment in the US took place in 1981, and there have been 45,000 babies born with the aid of IVF treatment since then. (See http://www.doctorslounge.com/fertility/procedures/ivf.htm)

4. Surrogacy or surrogate motherhood: "refers to the procedure in which the gestation and birth of a baby occur in a woman who is either not the child's biological mother or who is willing to donate her egg and carry a child but relinquishes parenting rights to those contracting with her to carry the child."

For the Christian there are clear principles we need to consider when approaching this subject. The first of these principles is respect for the sanctity of human life. "For example, it is common practice in certain methods of artificial insemination or in vitro fertilization to fertilize 5 or 6 ova at a time. Each of the resulting conceptions is a child waiting to be placed in a woman's uterus in order to grow toward birth. Unfortunately, it is also common practice for the doctors to select only 1 or 2 of these eggs for implantation, leaving the others to be 'destroyed'" (p.144). The problem with not believing that these fertilized eggs are human life is the difficulty of then deciding at what point human life does begin, and its easy to see how at this point multiple opinions arise. But who is right? We know from a simple argument of logic that two opposing idea's cannot both be true at the same time in the same place. I would argue that because the potential now exists of "growing toward birth" then the fertilized egg is a life.

Another concern with the technique of artificial insemination that can also ethically pose a problem for the sanctity of human life is that of "selective reduction". The procedure of AI often results in "a multi-child pregnancy". A woman could potentially be carrying 4-5 children in her womb. "Because there is a greater risk of miscarrying under these conditions, it is often the case that reproductive specialists will recommend [selective reduction a procedure] that is nothing more than a form of abortion in which one or more of the children are killed in order to increase the odds of the others proceeding to live birth" (p.145).

It is best in these procedures that a couple be willing to have all "conceptions implanted and carried to full term in order for this technology to meet the biblical standards with regards to sanctity of human life" (p. 145-6). In other words Christians, don't allow more embryos to be formed than you are willing to parent, recognize beforehand the chances of a multiple child birth, and understand that selective reduction is not a biblical option.

The second principle that Christians must consider is that of respect for all human beings as image bearers (Gen. 1:27). "Because all humans bear the image of God, it is wrong to use or treat another as a means to an end only, or purposely to put them in harm's way when they have not incurred guilt and there is no other reason than convenience for such a choice." The common practice of freezing fertilized eggs is one of convenience. Couples can have them frozen for an indefinite period of time only to be used or discarded if the couple doesn't want to have more children. This is a disrespectful act toward the child and life in general. These children are not a means to an end, or "to a parents' chosen goals" and these practices must be discarded by Christians. (for more on the ethic's of this see: http://www.doctorslounge.com/fertility/procedures/ivf.htm)

The third principle is in respect to the fidelity of the marital bond. Gen 2:24 (the two become one flesh). Within this context God said to be fruitful and multiply, and in various places in scripture God clearly condemns adultery. "One could easily argue that using donor eggs or sperm is tantamount to adultery or at the very least an inappropriate intrusion upon the exclusive nature of marital fidelity and sexuality. As Scott Rae rightly points out, 'the weight of biblical teaching suggests that third-party contributors are not the norm for procreation'...technologies such as donor insemination, egg donation, and surrogate motherhood are morally problematic" (p. 147).

The last principle I want to share concerning this topic is that of the heart of the one wanting to use these technologies. We should never cross the bounds of placing our hope or worth in the ability to have children. Our hope and worth must always rest in the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and the grace that He grants to us.

In conclusion "While the use of reproductive technology may be generally permissible, one should not make the further assumption that every form of reproductive technology is therefore biblically and morally acceptable" (p. 147). We as Christians must trust even this area to God's sovereignty remembering that children are a gift from him. Something he gives, not a procedure that we need to try and manipulate according to our desires. "Indeed, once one considers the rather large ethical uncertainty and 'gray areas' regarding many of these technologies perhaps wisdom would suggest limiting one's efforts in this direction in favor of pursuing adoption" (p. 147). Is there any ethical way around being anti-fertility treatments? This is a question of wisdom. These principles should help guide the Christian as he or she thinks through the options.

Angry, and Can't Sleep...

I should be in bed tonight sleeping, but I am wrestling with anger. There are many thoughts turning over in my mind, God and his sovereignty, the up coming elections, my pregnant wife, our unborn son, and abortion.

I recently had a conversation at work with a co-worker about politics. Although we agree politically on many issues one issue we disagree on is abortion. I am "pro-life" which really means I don't think it is right to mistreat people. For me it is not a question of "born" or "unborn" I value the life of a child in or out of the womb the same way I value the life of grown men and women, those with disabilities, those with life threatening diseases, and those who are walking through their final days on this earth. I believe life holds great value. My co-worker while respectfully disagreeing with me on abortion appreciated the value I place on life, and we had a peaceful conversation on the subject. Unfortunately not every conversation on this subject can be peaceful. Abortion is an emotional subject because it is a moral subject much like the debate over slavery in the history of Western Civilization. When the topic of right and wrong enter into the conversation it is difficult to find middle ground, yet concerning a topic like abortion it is impossible to avoid "right and wrong". Sometimes it is necessary to pick a side and stop riding the fence, even when the side you choose is unpopular. Abortion is an issue that demands one to choose a side. I believe the side you choose ultimately reveals your worldview, beliefs, and morals. The problem I have with abortion stems back to my belief on the origin of suffering. John Piper writes,

"Much of our suffering comes from the sins of others against us and from our own sins. Satan is called in the Bible "the temper" (Matt. 4:3; 1 Thess. 3:5). This was the origin on earth of all the misery that we know-- Satan tempted Eve to sin, and sin brought with it the curse of God on the natural order (Gen. 3:14-19; Rom. 8:21-23). Since that time Satan has been tempting all human beings to do what will hurt themselves and others."

Tonight my wife and I spent time watching the testimony of Gianna Jessen a saline abortion survivor (see http://www.giannajessen.com/ ). She is an example of the type of suffering described by John Piper. We saw the video on a blog called Radical Womanhood (http://solofemininity.blogs.com/). Gianna Jessen is quoted on that blog as saying "Now I am just compelled to say this: If abortion is merely about women's rights, ladies and gentlemen, then what were mine? There was not a radical feminist standing up and yelling about how my rights were being violated that day. In fact, my life was being snuffed out in the name of women's rights." The video of her testimony is worth viewing so I posted it below. As I watched the video I was reminded that we must consider what is truly important as we pray about the election this November. I strongly encourage you to watch both parts. Perhaps righteous anger will boil up within you as well prompting you to spread the word to others reminding them to stand up for the rights of those who cannot stand for themselves.

Part One:

Part 2:

God's Sovereignty over Man's Salvation

This video sums up much of what has been discussed recently on this blog. The video speaks for itself. Watch it and let me know what you think.

A SOURCE OF PEACE IN UNCERTAIN TIMES

We live in uncertain times. Anxiousness is in the air as we all await a solution to our nations economic problems. The threat of terrorism still lurks around the corner. War continues to rage with the promise of more to come. Even as Americans prepare to elect new leaders in November there is still a sense that our problems are bigger than any administrations solutions. The world looks on and awaits stability, but the more we strive to eliminate the reverberating motion of our problems the more our hands shake in the attempt. We are unable to control completely what is happening around us, and it leads to increased fear, anxiety, and worry.

I am thankful in times like these for the promise of the gospel. When we understand that there is a loving, powerful God who is bigger than our fears, worries, and anxieties then freedom is available. Recently I started a discussion on the gospel and I was encouraged by the responses I have received to the question, "What is the gospel?". Here are some examples of responses:

"because we are enemies in our minds due to evil behavior, Christ has to reconcile us to God through his physical death on the cross and resurrection to present us "holy in his sight, without blemish and free from accusation" if we "continue in our faith, established and firm, not moved from the hope held out in the gospel". col 1:22-23a"

"God had an eternal, loving plan though - since the beginning of time. God chose out of the human race a holy people through which God Himself would enter the human race (through His Son) and make atonement for the sins of the people of the world. God's Son (God in the flesh) came to earth as the awaited Messiah within the Jewish race - Jesus the Christ. Jesus Christ was the perfect, sinless Son of God. Unlike us, it is well documented that He committed no sin. This allowed him to be our "sin bearer" (He would bear the consequences for the sins of the entire world) - the One that would allow Himself to be beaten, tortured and crucified on a cross whereupon God could pour out all of his vengeful, holy wrath upon this perfect sacrificial Lamb - His earthly Son. After receiving all of God's punishment that had been ear-marked for us, Jesus Christ died an earthly death. And then He did what no other earthly man could have done. He rose from the dead three days later. "

"In my own words, and another quote from Romans, the gospel is the fact that while man's free will was so fallen that he was incapable of seeking after God and pleasing Him that God sent His only Son to take on the sins of the elect and receive their judgement, which is death, so that "God would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus." Rom. 3:26 "

"The salvation and reconciliation that God provided for mankind through his Son can only be received as a gift, by believing in his Son Jesus, not just intellectually accenting, but by acknowledging that Jesus died for my sins personally, and committing to a life of him as my Lord.Conversion then, is our “stake-in-the ground” if you will, but our journey does not end here. The Bible is clear that upon our conversion we have moved from the kingdom of this world, to the kingdom of heaven."

"Perhaps the “greatest” part of the good news is what being a kingdom citizen (or Christian) means for us! Not only are we saved from eternity apart from God, we are reconciled to God and to relationship with Him. We have the privilege of calling the infinite God of the universe “father,” or perhaps even more literally translated “daddy.” No other religion in the world has anything even remotely resembling the intimacy with which Christians have with their God. Benefits are manifold, and cannot all be expounded upon here, but include: comforting, being made complete (or whole), receiving mercy, seeing God, healing, purpose, empowerment to bear the fruit required of us, and a promise from God that “he who began a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus” (Philippians 1:6)!"

Many place their hope in the things of this world. Government (9-11 showed to us how quickly that can be shaken) Money (Stocks dropped 700 points this week, is that a safe place to rest our security?) Friends/Family (our life is but a mist, we are here today and gone tomorrow. We don't know when we will die let alone those we depend on. Again there isn't much security in people). Leaders, (if we are honest we understand that all of us are capable of doing terrible things. Our actions may not prove it today, but our thoughts do), ourselves (do you really believe you are capable to sustain your own life?) What then can we trust in?

In Psalm 2 we read

Why are the nations in an uproar and the peoples devising a vain thing? The kings of the earth take their stand and the rulers take counsel together against the LORD and against His Anointed...He who sits in the heavens laughs, The Lord scoffs at them. Then He will speak to them in His anger and terrify them in his fury, saying, 'But as for Me, I have installed My king upon Zion, My holy Mountain'...How blessed are all who take refuge in Him!

We learn that God is not worried about the chaos we fear. He is not worried about those who doubt or hate him. In fact he laughs. Why? He knows what the outcome is. He has established His plan and nothing will interfere. We can have confidence that when our hope is in the Salvation of Jesus, God will finish what he has started. After all, it was God the Father who loved us enough to send His Son Jesus. When we accept the gift of the gospel we no longer need to fear our immediate future, because we belong to the one who knows the future. We can cling to this security in uncertain times. Wall Street may fail, our government may fail, but our loving, sovereign God does not fail. We can trust in his promise to complete the work of salvation that he began in us with the cross of Jesus Christ.

"he who began a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus" Philippians 1:6

Removing the Obstacles to Lasting Joy

What is the gospel?

Christians claim that the message of the gospel is the most important message in history. Some of you reading this will agree with that statement. I certainly do. Yet I wonder do we have a clear understanding of the gospel? If this is the most essential message in history it is of utmost importance that we understand this message. I am afraid that most of us understand the basics but are not truly instructed in it's message. With that thought in mind I ask you to explore the depth of the gospel with me. Let's begin with a question. Please help me by taking a moment to answer no matter what your opinion is. What is the gospel?

BE MERCIFUL TO ME THE SINNER...

Grace is for sinners, a truth Christians can both abuse and misunderstand. How often have we heard the accusation "hypocrites"? This is a claim I cannot quickly reject. I am a hypocrite. The more I learn about God the more I am aware of my shortcomings. While I can acknowledge that grace is for sinners I cannot allow the claim of God's grace in my life to excuse my need to struggle with the sin in my heart.

I don't consider myself a critical or judgemental person, and that is my problem. This is an example of what Jerry Bridges calls a "refined" sin or "the sins of nice people". "Sins that we can regularly commit and still retain our positions as elders, deacons, Sunday school teachers, Bible study leaders, and yes, even full-time Christian workers."

For example, this weekend I visited a church I attended as a child. As I paid attention to the service I became aware that the reason I was listening so closely was my desire to find area's of disagreement so I could hold my doctrinal beliefs above theirs. I was pridefully thinking God was pleased with me and my religious opinions, while He was displeased with this church and their religious doctrines. The funny thing is I found little I disagreed with theologically. I was reminded that I needed to take seriously the warnings found in Matthew 7:3


"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye?"

My spirit is often critical. Bridges says, "A judgmental spirit is too often a vice of committed Christians. We need to recognize it as the sin it really is." What other refined sins do I struggle with? If I were honest my list would include the following: resentment, bitterness, an unforgiving spirit, impatience, irritability, hate, love of self, materialism, and a host of others. These are sins I am so quick to point out in others, but ignore to the point of suppression within my own heart. Perhaps I should wear the label hypocrite.


I have become too comfortable with these types of sin in my life. What I need is a stirring of the coals, a reminder of the seriousness of sin. Anselm of Canterbury believed the restoration of human beings to the position they were intended to enjoy required divine grace. In Cur Deus Homo (Why God Became A Human Being) Anselm attempts to show that the debt incurred by human sin could be forgiven, and the offense to God's dignity could be rectified, only if one who was both fully divine and fully human took it upon himself to offer his own life on our behalf. Our sin demanded a sacrifice. It is serious. This should lead us down the path toward humility!

But what about those Christians who don't struggle with sin? The ones who don't seem to care, and who believe their sin doesn't matter because God loves them unconditionally? Paul anticipated this behavior (see Romans 6:1, Gal. 5:13). Jude hinted that it was happening in the first century (see Jude 4). Bridges writes,

"We cannot allow some people's abuse of truth to deprive us of it's value."

The value is that we can now view ourselves as what we are in Christ (saints) and what we are in ourselves (sinners). The true believer will find that as they grow in God's grace, and knowledge of their sin they will desire to live a more disciplined life. Robert Jones in his book titled Uprooting Anger give us an accurate picture of such a person in the psalmist who wrote psalm 119.

How sweet are your words to my taste, sweeter than honey to my mouth! I gain understanding from your precepts; therefore I hate every wrong path. (vv.103-4).

"At the same time, this sense of hatred coexists, without contradiction, with a sense of sweet delight in God's word. The psalmist is not a raging bull; he is a lover of God's truth and a hater of anything that opposes it."

The Christian who is acutely aware of God's grace, and his own sin will develop a proper desire to obey God's word, and to distance himself from things that keep him from doing so. While in his present state he is still a sinner there is a change that is taking place (sanctifying work of the Spirit) which causes him to act more in line with God's word. This is the heart from which will flow all of the fruits of the Spirit. Those Christians who continue on a path of sin without such a struggle must at some point question their faith. A good tree is known by the good fruit it produces, if there is no good fruit, then we question if the tree is good. If there is no desire in you to walk according to God's word then perhaps the Spirit does not live within your heart. You must confess, repent, and believe that Christ will forgive you.

Christians must remember that even at their best our religious works are no more than filthy rags (Isaiah 64:6). God knows this, that's why He sent Jesus, to help us, to free us, to do what we could not do. The puritan theologian John Owen wrote,

"Believers know all their duties are weak, imperfect and unable to abide in God's presence. Therefore they look to Christ as the one who bears the iniquity of their holy things, who adds incense to their prayers, gathers out all the weeds from their duties and makes them acceptable to God."

John Owen understood the sinfulness of our good works. There is nothing we can do to please God apart from faith in Christ. We are back to grace. Grace is for sinners. It is not the sinners excuse to sin more. It is hope for a hopeless situation.

CRAFTED BY GRACE

Have you ever remembered something you learned years ago that in your present circumstances spoke to your heart in such a way that it moved you to a new level of understanding and appreciation for that knowledge?

This happened to me recently as I was reading a book by Jerry Bridges called Disciplines of Grace. In this book Bridges asks his readers to think about a sculpture of a man, who physically appears perfect in every way. The sculpture's physical features are perfect, but from his thighs downward he is unfinished, a mound of unsculpted bronze. In his hands the artist crafted a chisel and a hammer. The message seems clear, the artist wanted us to understand something along the lines of we choose our own destiny, or I can fix myself, I am in control.

The subjects hands are battered from misplaced strokes of the hammer, constant reminders of his own mistakes. Not knowing if the next strike of the chisel will cut himself off at the knee or allow him to move further toward his goal, he continues pridefully thinking I can do this. Bridges notes:

"I marveled at how [the statue] did depict so well the way many Christians try to live the Christian life."

Is there anything wrong with this thinking? Aren't we according to scripture supposed to pursue godliness? Doesn't 1 Timothy 4:7 say "...discipline yourself for the purpose of godliness"?

And what about Philippians 3:12-14 "Not that I have already obtained it or have already become perfect, but I press on so that I may lay hold of that for which also I was laid hold of by Christ Jesus." Doesn't this mean that I am responsible for pursuing my perfection?

If we are understanding scripture correctly we must answer these questions in light of the statement "...for which I was laid hold of." Who laid hold of me? Jesus. Why? So I could pursue perfection. Perfection supposes change. We also know from scripture that the Holy Spirit is the agent of change. We actively pursue this change because we are taught in Hebrews 12:14 that without it no one will see God. 12:15 adds "See to it that no one comes short of the grace of God..."

We can change, but not on our own, it must be anchored to the work of the Holy Spirit through the grace of God. This is such good, and freeing news. Why? Grace is God's unmerited favor toward those who deserve only His wrath. Although we are sinners deserving of punishment, and discipline God, through the death and resurrection of His son Jesus Christ has graciously chosen to forgive us.

When we admit that we are hopelessly lost sinners doomed for punishment, and in need of a savior, God points us to the work of Jesus. By accepting the atoning work of the cross and resurrection we are united with Christ and in a sense covered by Him. The favor of the Father toward His Son becomes ours. We are clothed in favor. The Father no longer looks on us as sinners, but as complete in Christ. Totally accepted, totally forgive, totally free. It's His grace that frees us. There is nothing we can do on our own to be accepted.

Ephesians 2:8-9 "For it is by grace that you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast."

My daughter has my acceptance. She is completely loved. Her position with me is set regardless of her obedience. I love her. Certainly she faces consequences when she does wrong, but she is never unloved, even in correction. Her position is not based upon performance. We are Saved by God's grace and our position of accepted in Christ does not change based upon our performance since we cannot earn God's blessings (see Ephesians 2:8-9).

The reminder of this lesson was so meaningful to me because many times I have fallen into the trap of misunderstanding Gods grace. Reviewing this truth has reminded me that on my worst spiritual days, the days I completely give in to sin, live for my pleasures, and just completely fail my God that I am still accepted, because my position is not based on my performance. There was nothing I could do to earn God's favor, it was a gift of grace, there is nothing I can do to lose it. On the other hand when I live out the best spiritual day, a day when I really connect with God, read my Bible, pray, and love others more than me I am still desperate for God's grace. Why? Because my position is not based upon my performance. I am a child of God, saved, accepted not by my good works, but only by His grace.

DON'T YOU SENSE THE FREEDOM IN THIS TEACHING?

Praise you Father for loving us so much that you sent your Son to free us from the bonds of sin, not according to our worthless works, but according to your amazing grace!

Come, let us reason together. Conclusion.

In this series of postings we have explored together an argument which defends the belief in a theistic God, specifically the God of the Bible. This final post on the subject will summarize briefly in bullet point fashion the argument, and conclude with one final thought on the subject.

My inspiration for such arguments comes from many devoted followers of Christ in the past starting with the Apostles. Above is a picture of Mars Hill. This is a modern day picture of the place where the Apostle Paul stood and argued for Christ with the men of Athens as recorded in Acts 17:22-32. At the conclusion of his speaking the Bible records the response of the people:

Acts 17:32-33 "Now when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some began to sneer, but others said, 'We shall hear you again concerning this.' So Paul went out of their midst. But some men joined him and believed."

Some rejected the message (atheistic), some wanted to hear more (agnostic), and some joined Paul, (believers). Certainly these are the results I can expect. My hope is that all would come to believe in Christ, but if the teaching on this blog leads one to want to learn more then my joy will be made complete.

This argument has been based on the teachings of Norman Geisler, and follows a logical progression to prove the probability of a theistic God. One step builds upon another, and I recommend before reading this post you read through the previous ones in this series.

The argument summarized:

1. Truth about reality is knowable.
2. Opposites cannot both be true.
3. The theistic God exists.
4. Miracles are possible.
5. Miracles performed in connection with a truth claim are acts of God to confirm the truth of God through a messenger of God.
6. The New Testament documents are reliable.
7. Jesus claimed to be God in the New Testament.
8. Jesus' claim to divinity was proven by miracles.
9. Therefore, Jesus was God in human form.
10. Whatever Jesus (who is God) affirms as true, is true.
11. Jesus affirmed that the Bible is the Word of God.

Which leads us to our concluding thought. Since Jesus affirmed the Bible as the Word of God, and we have shown that Jesus is God, we must conclude that the Bible is in fact the Word of God. Whatever is opposed to the Bible and the truth it contains is false. Some will read this post and argue against me claiming that I am using circular reasoning. Again, I encourage you to begin with the first posting in this series. If I began at step 6 then I would agree that the reasoning is circular, but when this argument begins at step one it builds upon itself. If a theistic God exists then there is the possibility of miracles. If Jesus is God, and proved it by a miraculous life, then he has all the attributes of God. God does not lie. If Jesus claims that the Bible is the word of God, and He is God, then we must believe Him. If the Bible is the Word of God we must conclude that Christianity is true as well. Since opposites cannot be true then all opposing world religions are simply false religions. Finally, we conclude that only Christianity is the true religion.

You have heard what I believe. Now what about you. What do you believe?

Come, let us reason together. Part 5

Building on the foundation laid in parts 1-4 this post will argue that whatever Jesus (who is God) affirms as true, is true. This includes His affirmation that the Bible is the Word of God.

God cannot make mistakes. One of His attributes is His immutability, or put another way, His unchangeable nature. Whatever changes acquires something new. God cannot acquire something new because if He did He would by definition not be God. Our idea of God is perfection. Perfection requires nothing more. God lacks no perfection. He needs nothing more. He cannot be more perfect or complete.

God cannot change. If He did He could not be God for this would mean He lacked some perfection.

God is an all-knowing, timeless being. He knows all of time in one eternal now, including the future. If this were not true He could not be immutable because He would need the ability to gain new knowledge, and therefore, would not be God. He is omniscient. He knows everything, He cannot be wrong.

Since God cannot err in His knowledge, whatever He knows is infallible. We have already argued that Jesus is God. Therefore, Jesus cannot be wrong. What He affirms as true, is true.

Jesus taught that the Bible is the Word of God. He had a high view of scripture. He taught that it was authoritative, imperishable, infallible, inerrant, historically reliable, scientifically accurate, and that it held ultimate supremacy. (At this point I must thank Dr. Normal Geisler again for his excellent work, and teaching from which I am going to borrow).

1. Authoritative.

Matthew 4:4, 7, 10

Jesus speaking"It is written 'Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God.'"

"On the other hand, it is written, 'You shall not put the Lord your God to the test.'"

Matthew 4:4, 7, 10 are three examples of the 92 times in the gospels where Jesus uses the words, "It is written" in reference to the Old Testament. When He uses this statement its like He is saying "This is the final word on the subject." He believes the scriptures are the inspired word of God and He quotes them as having authority.

2. Imperishable.

Matthew 5:17-18

Jesus speaking"Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished."

When Jesus uses the phrase "The Law and the Prophets" He is always referring to the whole Old Testament (See Luke 24:27). Nothing from these sacred writings will disappear until all has been fulfilled according to Jesus.

3. Infallible.

John 10:35

Jesus speaking"...and the scripture cannot be broken."

If you read this verse in context with 10:34-36 you find that Jesus uses three strong words to describe scripture, "Law", "word of God", and "unbreakable". Jesus thought of scripture as the unbreakable Law of God. It is the word "unbreakable" which carries the same meaning as infallible. God's word cannot be broken according to Jesus.

4. Inerrant.

Matthew 22:29, John 17:17

Jesus speaking in John 17:17, "Sanctify them in the truth; Your word is truth."

Matthew 22:29

"Jesus answered and said to them, 'You are mistaken, not understanding the Scriptures nor the power of God."

God's word is not scattered truth, His word is true in whole. This is why we cannot pick and choose what we believe. This is why we cannot quickly claim a portion of scripture to be cultural. When we make these mistakes we begin to fashion our own god, the very essence of idolatry. Instead Jesus teaches us that God's word is without errors.

How many errors can God make? None, if He is omniscient. Whatever God decides to write would have the same nature of inerrancy as He does. We argue:

1. The Bible is the Word of God.
2. God cannot err.
3. Therefore, the Bible is inerrant.

If there is an error we must conclude that either God makes errors, and He is not God, or the Bible is not His word. If you deny that the Bible is the word of God you must deny what Jesus said about the Bible. If Jesus is the son of God, then the Bible is the word of God.

5. Historically reliable.

Matthew 12:40, 24:37-39

Jesus speaking, "Just as Jonah was tree days and three nights in the belly of the sea monster, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth."

"For the coming of the Son of Man will be just like the days of Noah. For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and they did not understand until the flood came and took them all away; so will the coming of the Son of Man be."

The manner in which Jesus is speaking of these two disputed accounts from the Old Testament shows that he understood them to be historical events. Jesus sites them and gives them authority. He uses the words, "Just as..." He bases his first coming on the Jonah account, and His second coming on the Noah account. Why would He compare myth with history? He would not. Jesus used the words, "So it will be..." He believed he was comparing true events with true events.

6. Scientifically accurate.

Matthew 19:4-5

Jesus Speaking "And He answered them and said, 'Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall be one flesh'".

The most scientifically disputed chapters of the Bible are the first eleven chapters of Genesis, but Jesus affirms these accounts. He bases His teachings on marriage on the teachings of Genesis without shame. According to Jesus the creator made male and female, and marriage cannot be separated from creation. To the scientific question, "How did we get here?" Jesus answers from marriage instituted by God. Either Darwin and Evolution are correct, or Jesus is, but both cannot be correct at the same time. Jesus will not allow us to "spiritualize" away the literal male and female in the Genesis account.

Jesus said in John 3:12, "I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things?".

Basically Jesus is saying to us if we cannot believe Him when he speaks of empirical scientific matters, then why would we believe Him when He speaks of spiritual matters. Jesus considered them inseparable. Yes, we have a choice to make!

7. Ultimate supremacy.

Matthew 15:3-6

Jesus speaking, "And He answered and said to them, 'Why do you yourselves transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition? For God said, 'Honor your father and mother,' and, 'He who speaks evil of father or mother is to be put to death.' But you say, 'Whoever says to his father or mother, 'Whatever I have that would help you has been given to God,' he is not to honor his father or his mother.' and by this you invalidated the word of God for the sake of your tradition."

Jesus taught that the Bible alone holds supreme authority even in the face of conflict with the most revered human teaching. Scripture is God's supreme written authority.

"Jesus confessed the very things many modern critics deny about the Old Testament. If Jesus was right, then the critics are wrong, despite the pretense of having scholarship on their side. For if Jesus is the Son of God, then it is a matter of Lordship, not a matter of scholarship" --Norman Geisler

Which is what we have been arguing in this series of posts.

"Many critics assert that the first human beings evolved by natural processes. But...Jesus insisted that Adam and Eve were created by God. If Jesus is the Son of God, then the choice is between Charles Darwin and the divine; between a nineteenth-century creature, and the eternal creator."---Norman Geisler

This series of post has pointed to the fact that Jesus is the Son of God.

"Most negative critics of the Bible believe that the Jonah story is mythology. Indeed, with strong emphasis Jesus asserted that "just as" Jonah was in the great fish three days and nights, "even so" he would be in the grave for three days and nights. Surely, Jesus would not have based the historicity of his death and resurrection on mythology about Jonah."---Norman Geisler

The same is true of the Noah account. Jesus affirmed there was a flood. He would not want to combine the truthfulness of His second coming with a myth fueling doubt in the minds of his followers.

We come to a dilemma. Either Jesus is the Son of God, and the Bible is the Word of God, or not. If the Bible is not the Word of God, then Jesus cannot be the son of God. Why? Because He would have been teaching false doctrine.

"Many critics believe He was only accommodating Himself to the false beliefs of the Jews of his day about the Old Testament. But this hypothesis is clearly contrary to the facts. Others believe that since Jesus was only a human being that he made mistakes, some of which were about the origin and nature of Scripture. But his speculation too is not rooted in the facts of the matter. Jesus neither accommodated false beliefs nor was He limited in His authority to teach the truth of God."---Norman Geisler.

Jesus affirmed that the Bible is the Word of God. Therefore, it is true that the Bible is the Word of God, and whatever stands in opposition to biblical truth is false.

Come, let us reason together. Part 4

In the last post I continued an argument for the reliability of the New Testament. Based on that foundation this post will explore Christ's claim of deity in the New Testament. Jesus claimed to be God. This point is crucial to the overall argument. The logic behind this began with the statement that truth about reality is knowable. There are some things of which we can be absolutely sure (i.e., 2+2=4). I have also argued that the opposite of truth is false. The Law of Non-contradiction says opposite ideas cannot be both true at the same time and in the same place. That means all religions cannot be true, they teach opposites. Opposites cannot both be true at the same time or in the same place. Is it true that a theistic God exists? We explored this statement through different arguments for Gods existence. Because of these arguments we noted the probability of Gods existence. If God exists then miracles are possible, and they can be used to confirm a message from God. The New Testament can be trusted as a historically reliable source, and confirms Gods existence. This post will show that the New Testament confirms Jesus as God, as well as His message as coming from God.

Numerous times in the New Testament Jesus claimed to be God:

1. Jesus claimed to be God in the New Testament. He claimed to be the "I Am" of Exodus 3:14,

"God said to Moses, 'I AM WHO I AM'; and He said 'Thus you shall say to the sons of Israel, 'The Lord, the God of Issac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you.' This is my name forever, and this is my memorial name to all generations."

In John 8:58 Jesus says,

"Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am."

2. Jesus also forgave sins which only God can do. Mark 2:5-7 reads,

"'Son, your sins are forgiven.' But some of the scribes were sitting there and reasoning in their hearts, 'Why does this man speak that way? He is blaspheming; who can forgive sins but God alone?'"

3. Jesus claimed that He should be honored just as God the Father is honored. In John 5:23 Jesus says,

"He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent me."

4. Jesus said he was the Jewish Messiah, who was God according to the Old Testament passages Isaiah 9:6, Psalms 110:1, and Zechariah 12:10. Zechariah reads,

"I will pour out on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the Spirit of grace and of supplication, so that they will look on ME whom they have pierced; and they will mourn for Him, as one mourns for an only son, and they will weep bitterly over Him like the bitter weeping over a firstborn."

This passage shows that God is the Messiah, but also that the Messiah would suffer by a piercing. It also speaks of the Spirit being poured out. Incidentally these are the events we see happening around Christs death and resurrection.

In John 4:25-26 Jesus claims to be that Messiah,

"The woman said to Him, 'I know that Messiah is coming (He who is called Christ); when that One comes, He will declare all things to us.' Jesus said to her, 'I who speak to you am He.'"

5. Jesus went as far as to accept worship on numerous occasions. The Bible presents worship as due only to God. Jesus Himself states this as true in Matthew 4:10,

"Go, Satan! For it is written, 'You shall worship the Lord your God, and serve Him only.'"

Jesus however, accepts worship. In Matthew 8:2 a healed leaper worships Him, in Matthew 9:18 a ruler kneels before Him with a request, in Matthew 14:33 those in the boat worship Him after He calms the storm, and in Matthew 28:17 the disciples worshiped Him. While these are only a handful of examples from the Gospel of Matthew there are many more in the Gospels. What is noteworthy about a study on the accounts of worship given to Christ in the Gospels is that Jesus never rebuked anyone for worshiping Him, and on occasion He commended those who did.

6. Jesus put His words on the same level as God's. In Matthew 24:35 Jesus says

"Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away."

7. Jesus asked His disciples to pray in His name. In John 14:13 Jesus says

"Whatever you ask in My name, that will I do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son."

8. Jesus accepted titles of deity in scripture. In John 20:28 Jesus does not condemn Thomas for calling Him Lord and God.

"Thomas answered and said to Him, 'My Lord and my God!'"

These are eight ways in which Jesus claimed to be God in the New Testament. Why is this important? It is important because scripture also confirms His message as being from God. Since we can trust scripture as historically reliable the message it confirms deserves our attention. How does it confirm Christ's message? Jesus's claim to be God is confirmed in three ways. First, His fulfillment of prophecy. Second, His sinless and miraculous life. And third, His predictions and accomplishment of His resurrection. These are three things that no other religions leader can claim.

First His fulfillment of prophecy. The Old Testament predicted that the Messiah would be God (Psalms 2:7, 45:6, 110:1; Isaiah 7:14, 9:6; Zechariah 12:10). For example Isaiah 9:6 reads

"For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us; And the government will rest on His shoulders; And his name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace."

The Old Testament predicted that the Messiah would be God, and Jesus was the Messiah (John 4:25; Mark 14:61-62). Mark 14:61-62 reads

"Again the high priest was questioning Him, and saying to Him, 'Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?' And Jesus said, 'I am; and you shall see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of power, and coming with the clouds of Heaven.'"

Since the Old Testament predicted that the Messiah would be God, and Jesus was the Messiah, He had to be God in order to fulfill these predictions.

Second, the Bible confirms Christ's miraculous life. Scriptures record more than 60 miracles that cannot be explained away as either psychosomatic, or as magic. The Bible also confirms that Christ lived a sinless life. This is impossible. No mere human could live 33 years in a sinless state. Christ even invited His enemies to look at Him and accuse Him of sin. None could.

Third, the Bible confirms Christ's predictions and accomplishment of His resurrection. There is plenty of evidence in scripture for Christ's death. The nature and extent of His injuries as recorded in the passion sections of the Gospel accounts are suffienct to show he died. The nature of cruxifiction itself assures us He was dead. The piercing of His side as assurance of His death in the Gospel accounts confirms He was dead. His death was predicted in the Old Testament (Isaiah 53, Daniel 9). Jesus Himself predicted His own death and resurrection (John 2:19; John 10:18; Matthew 12:40; Matthew 17:22). The Gospel writers wrote that His death and resurrection was accomplished (Matthew 28:6; Mark 16:6; Luke 24:39; John 20:27). What evidence do we have for the accomplishment of Christ's death and resurrection? First, the Jews admit that the tomb was empty, but they did not produce the body. Second, Jesus made 12 different physical appearances over 40 days to over 500 people. Third, many Jewish priests were converted and thousands of unbelievers were converted. Fourth, His unbelieving brother James and hardened opponent Saul were converted. Fifth, His scared, skeptical, disciples were transformed overnight into brave missionary martyrs.

The summary stems from all we have explored so far. Jesus is God, and He must be to fulfill prophecy, to manifest deity, and to redeem humanity. The Old Testament predicted that the Messiah would be God. Jesus was the Messiah, therefore He must be God to fulfill the prophecy. Jesus is the mediator between God and man (1 Timothy 2:5). He is the reconciler of God and man (2 Corinthians 5:19). Jesus must be both God and man to be reconciler and mediator because only a God-Man can bridge the gap between God and man.

(Thanks to Normal Geisler for influencing my thinking on this subject).

Come, let us reason together. Part 3

In part one and two of this post I began an argument for why I believe theism, specifically Christianity, to be the true faith. I included arguments for Gods existence. I wrote that if God exists then miracles are possible, and they can be used to confirm a message from God. This gives credibility to the claim that the Bible is the Word of God. If the Bible is the Word of God we must consider what it teaches. This post will not go into great detail, but I encourage you to read previous posts for more information, (see: http://stevepack.blogspot.com/2008/05/laying-foundation.html and http://stevepack.blogspot.com/2008/06/shibileth.html ).

The New Testament documents are historically reliable. The New Testament has more, earlier, and more accurately copied manuscripts than any other book from the ancient world.

The New Testament events are recorded accurately. There were more, earlier, and more accurate writers than for any other book from the ancient world. The New Testament has nine writers who wrote 27 books. The authors include eyewitnesses, contemporary writers of Christ, contemporary authors of the eyewitnesses, and writers who wrote within 20 years of the New Testament events. Even with the diversity displayed in the authorship of the Bible the themes beginning in the Old Testament are constant throughout the New Testament. The whole of scripture is beautifully unified.

The gospels claim 500 eyewitness to Christ's resurrection. Luke based his gospel, and the book of Acts on eyewitness accounts. Hebrews has been confirmed by the Apostles who were eyewitnesses themselves.

There is evidence that the book of Acts was written by 62 AD. If this is true then we know that the gospel of Luke was written earlier because of the prologue in Acts. Josephus recorded the death of James at 62 AD. In Acts James is still alive. Paul is still alive in Acts, his death occurred under the persecution of Nero between 64-67 AD. But in Acts there is no mention of Nero's persecutions. There is no mention of the Jewish wars that took place around 66AD. Finally there is no mention of the fall of Jerusalem which took place in 70AD. Considering the nature of the book of Acts you would expect major events like these to be mentioned if they had occurred. None of these major events are mentioned suggesting that Acts was written around 62 AD. The book of Luke would have been written before Acts and without exploring this timeline any further we already have one gospel written 60 years after the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

According to the teachings of the Greek historian Herodotus any date in the 1st century is too early to allow mythological development on foundational truths. Many people will not accept the accuracy of the New Testament writings even though the New Testament is closer in time to the actual events than any other ancient books. Usually the earliest is considered the most accurate. There are few questions about the reliability of sources teaching on Alexander the Great even though the ancient writings we have about him are written around 300 years after his death. There are five main surviving accounts on Alexander by Arrian, Curtius, Plutarch, Diodorus, and Justin. The problem of the sources concern Alexander-historians, because each presents a different "Alexander". Will the real Alexander the Great please stand up?

The accuracy of the New Testament writings has been confirmed by noted Roman historians, legal experts, Non-Christian sources, and archaeological finds. No archaeological evidence has ever refuted the Bible, yet thousands of them support the accuracy of scripture.

Because we can trust in the accuracy of the New Testament we must trust what it says. In the New Testament Jesus claimed to be God, and his claim was miraculously confirmed. My next post will explore these claims.

(Thanks to Normal Geisler for influencing my thinking on this subject).

Come, let us reason together. Part 2

In my last post I began an argument for why I believe theism, specifically Christianity, to be the true faith. The post ended with arguments that prove the likelihood of Gods existence. While everyone who reads these posts may not agree that the arguments prove the existence of God they should at least recognize that the probability exists. If the existence of God is probable, then so are miracles. This is the key point. Without miracles Christianity crumbles. Without miracles the Bible cannot be the Word of God, Jesus cannot be the Son of God, and Salvation cannot be an act of God. The Bible claims that miracles occurred. Without miracles the Bible loses its credibility. Jesus claimed to be the Son of God and proved it true by performing miracles. If miracles are impossible then Jesus loses credibility. Without Christ's resurrection from the dead there is no salvation, and we are still dead in our sins. In other words there is no hope. Paul even wrote in 1 Corinthians 15:17 -19 "...if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins. Then those who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. If we have hoped in Christ in this life only, we are of all men most to be pitied." Christians need not despair. We have good arguments for the existence of God. For further discussion on these arguments I recommend this blog: caisonjones.blogspot.com

If God exists then miracles are possible. If God is supernatural, then He can preform supernatural acts. If God can create a universe, then God can act within that universe. If He could not, then the effect would be greater than the cause, that's illogical. The burden of proof lies in the hands of the skeptic. To disprove miracles, you must first disprove God.
My responsibility is to show that theism makes miracles possible. Here is some logic I learned from Normal Geisler:

1. If the world had a beginning, then it had a beginner.

2. The world had a beginning.

3. Therefore it had a beginner.

4. Creation is the biggest miracle of all (something out of nothing).

5. If God can do greater miracles (like creation) then he can do lesser.

If God can create matter, then He can multiply matter. (The feeding of the 5000/see Matthew 14:14-21, Mark 6:30-44, Luke 9:10-17, John 6:1-14).

If God can create life from non life, then He can bring life to a dead corpse. (Christ's resurrection/ see Matthew 27:57-28:20, Mark 15:42-16:12, Luke 23:50-24:27, John 19:31-20:31).

Miracles can be used to confirm a message from God. (see John 3:2, Acts 2:22, Hebrews 2:3). Of all the three major world religions (theism, pantheism, atheism) only theism has miracles.

Here is some more logic from Normal Geisler:

1. If a theistic God exists, then miracles are possible.

2. A miracle is a special act of God.

3. God is the standard, and source of all truth, he cannot err. (moral argument)

4. Nor would a theistic God act to confirm something as true that was false.

5. True miracles in connection with a message, confirm that message to be

from God.

In summary, if God exists then miracles are possible, and they can be used to confirm a message from Him. This gives credibility to the claim that the Bible is the Word of God. If the Bible is the Word of God we must consider what it teaches.

Come, let us reason together.

Before I begin to explore doctrines of the Christian faith I want to spend some more time exploring the reasons why I am a Christian. Skeptics may say I am naive, easily persuaded, or perhaps superstitious. They may question my reasons for claiming that out of all the world religions I believe Christianity to the the one true faith. They might label me intolerant or perhaps misguided. This post is written for them. I challenge skeptics to honestly explore the reasons for my faith, and to consider them. I invite discussion and questions. As I have said in a previous post Christianity does not have to be a blind faith, there are good reasons to believe. Just like the Apostle Paul reasoned for the faith in Acts 17, I too desire to reason for the same faith. I want to give credit to Dr. Norman Geisler for the teachings that I am presenting here. I am blessed to have read and learned these truths from him.
Lets begin again with truth. Truth about reality is knowable. There is absolute truth which corresponds to the way things are, to the facts. Absolute truth is possible, and absolutes are undeniable. How can I make such a claim in today's world where it is popular to hold to the idea of relative truth? What is my evidence? Two points help me believe in the absolute nature of truth. The first has to do with moral comparisons. For example, if we compare Mother Teresa to Adolf Hitler who will be considered a better person? There really is no comparison. Mother Teresa is considered to be a moral person, while Hitler is considered evil. But how can we make such a statement if truth is relative. We cannot. We cannot even understand what morality is unless there is a set standard to guide us. Another example deals with progress and regress. True progress or regress demands an absolute standard. How can we know that the world is getting better or worse unless we have some understanding of what is best? C.S. Lewis once wrote,

"My argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But
how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked
unless he has some idea of a straight line. What was I comparing this universe
with when I called it unjust?" - Mere Christianity.

We can be absolutely sure of some things. Take this argument for example:

I am sure I exist. This is undeniable.

I must exist to make the statement "I don't exist".

I am sure I cannot exist and not exist at the same time.

If I could exist and not exist that would break the law of non-contradiction. This law is foundational to knowledge, an example of a first principle. Without first principles nothing can be known. According to this law opposite ideas cannot both be true at the same time, and in the same place. Therefore, God cannot both exist and not exist. I doubt there will be little disagreement about that point! The question becomes why do I believe he exists?
Let me begin this section by saying that if this law is agreed upon then we can safely say that all religions cannot be true because they teach opposites. I do believe however, that a theistic God exists, and now I will present some arguments for His existence.
First:

What had a beginning had a beginner. (Like a set of dominions lined up and knocked over).

The universe had a beginning.

The universe had a beginner.

How can I say that the universe had a beginning? I was not there to see it. I will present a scientific argument for the beginning of the universe:

The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics states that in a closed, isolated system the amount of usable energy always decreases. Our universe has not run out of energy, so therefore it cannot be said to be eternal. If we liken a closed, isolated system to an hourglass then we can understand if the sand had an eternal time to funnel down then it would have finished an eternity ago. If our universe was eternal the amount of usable energy would have been used up an eternity ago. We can conclude then that our universe is not eternal. If it is not then it must have had a beginning. If it had a beginning, then it must have had a beginner. Why must that which has a beginning have a beginner? I will answer that question with an argument from astronomy:

Anticipatory design shows an intelligent designer.

Human life shows anticipatory design.

So, human life shows an intelligent designer.

Another argument from Micro biology says:

Irreducible complexity has an intelligent designer.

First life had irreducible complexity.

So, first life had an intelligent designer.

I will conclude these arguments by once again addressing morality. A moral argument:

Every law has a law giver.

There is an absolute law.

There must be an absolute moral, law giver.

We do not invent this moral law any more than we invent physical laws, or mathematical laws. They are discovered. Universal guilt proves there is a moral law. People all over the world find the same types of things evil, genocide, racism, and bigotry for example. If we combined what these arguments tell us about God we could conclude that there is a powerful, intelligent, absolutely perfect God who is unique. There cannot be two infinite beings. If God exists then miracles are possible. And that is what we will explore in my next post.

A Sibbolith

What you believe about the Bible will determine how you respond to its teachings. Many people today including Christians do not believe scripture to be inspired, or inerrant. The argument claiming that the Bible is inerrant is bound up in inspiration. Scripture makes some tremendous claims about itself:

2 Peter 1:21: "For no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God."

Peter saw the Old Testament as prophecy.

Luke 24:44: (Jesus speaking) "These are My words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things which are written about Me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled."

The prophecy in the Old Testament has to do with Christ. The whole Old Testament although historical is truly theological. The main purpose in writing the Old Testament was not to record history, but to point to the Christ.

The 2 Peter passage connects with Luke 24:44, and with John 16:13: "But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come."

The New Testament teaches that the Spirit is involved in inspiration. The Spirit is referred to by Jesus as "the Spirit of truth". Truth is the very nature of the Spirit. And this Spirit of truth moves men to remember and write the truth.

Someone might ask, "is this true for all copies and translations? Can they be considered equally inspired?" Again scripture itself makes some tremendous claims. In Deuteronomy 17:14-20 Moses instructed that when a king takes office he must write a copy of the law for himself. This had to be done in the presence of the priests. The king was also commanded to read of the copy all the days of his life so that he may learn to fear the Lord. In 1 Kings 2:3 David speaking to Solomon near the end of his life commands Solomon to walk in the way of the Lord, keeping his statutes, and commandments so that Solomon may succeed. By this time the scripture would have been a copy. David felt that the copies available to him and his family were authoritative. But they were only authoritative and sufficient so far as they accurately reflected the original. That is why the king had to write in front of the priests. If a mistake was being made the priests could correct it.

Proverbs 25:1 "These are more proverbs of Solomon, copied by the men of Hezekiah King of Judah."

Here the words had been transcribed, and the worth of the copies were held in high esteem, they carried the weight of scripture.

Nehemiah 8:8 "They read from the Book of the Law of God, making it clear and giving meaning so that the people could understand what was being read."

The Levites were working from a copy when they read and interpreted the law. The people accepted the instruction as having the authority of scripture.

In the New Testament Jesus accepted the authority of copies. In Luke 4:16-21 Jesus reads from Isaiah 61:1-2. This happened in Nazareth, the chances of a the original manuscript of Isaiah being located in Nazareth would be pretty slim, yet Jesus treats the words with all the sufficiency and accuracy of the originals. In fact over and over again Jesus says, "have you not heard", or "it is written". Jesus in His ministry saw copies of scripture as the authoritative word of God.

Acts 17:2 "As was his custom Paul went into the synagogue, and on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the scriptures". Paul did not have the original manuscripts, neither did the synagogue. Paul does not say "since you do not have the originals I cannot teach you".

Acts 18:28 "For he vigorously refuted the Jews in public debate, proving from the scriptures that Jesus was the Christ". Again Paul was arguing from copies of the originals. The Jews argued from copies of the originals. Both sides indirectly are affirming the copies to be the word of God. They do not even argue that point.

The writers of the New Testament have no issue with quoting copies of the originals, and they offer no apology for it. Still there was a concern for the originals. In 2 Thessalonians 3:17 Paul writes, "I, Paul, write this greeting in my own hand, which is the distinguishing mark in all my letters. This is how I write". Paul used a secretary to write his letters, but at the end he signed his own name. His concern is that someone might try to claim to be him, but by signing his name others will recognize his handwriting so they can be sure the letter is from Paul. In this case the original serves a great purpose. What we can learn here is that if you can get your hands on the originals that's wonderful because they are inspired, but copies are still considered authoritative. Inspiration and inerrancy apply in an undiminished way only to the original manuscripts. Copies are authoritative only in so far as the translations remain faithful to the originals.

What about our English translations? They are also the inerrant, infallible, inspired word of God to the extent that they accurately reflect the original. We need to remember that the Bible is Gods revelation, and he will be faithful to give us true copies. What would be the point of God giving us a revelation so we could know Him, yet not keeping that revelation pure? That is not how God works. If one starts with a bad opinion or understanding of God one will have a bad doctrine of scripture. We can know that our translations are not inferior because of their connection to the originals. (For example, the Dead Sea Scrolls).