Split (1)

train · 9.53k rows

prompt stringlengths 0 158	response stringlengths 14 40.2k
Is the “The Suffering Servant” prophecy in Isaiah 53 about Jesus?	Answer Perhaps the greatest of all Messianic prophecies in the Tanakh (the Hebrew Scriptures / the Old Testament) concerning the advent of the Jewish Messiah is found in the 53rd chapter of the prophet Isaiah. This section of the Prophets, also known as the “Suffering Servant,” has been long understood by the historical Rabbis of Judaism to speak of the Redeemer who will one day come to Zion. Here is a sampling of what Judaism has traditionally believed about the identity of the “Suffering Servant" of Isaiah 53: The Babylonian Talmud says: “The Messiah, what is his name? The Rabbis say, The Leper Scholar, as it is said, ‘surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him a leper, smitten of God and afflicted...’” (Sanhedrin 98b). [Midrash](Mishnah-midrash.html) Ruth Rabbah says: “Another explanation (of Ruth 2:14\): He is speaking of king Messiah; ‘Come hither,’ draw near to the throne; ‘and eat of the bread,’ that is, the bread of the kingdom; ‘and dip thy morsel in the vinegar,’ this refers to his chastisements, as it is said, ‘But he was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities.’” The [Targum](Jewish-Targum.html) Jonathan says: “Behold my servant Messiah shall prosper; he shall be high and increase and be exceedingly strong." The Zohar says: “‘He was wounded for our transgressions,’ etc....There is in the Garden of Eden a palace called the Palace of the Sons of Sickness; this palace the Messiah then enters, and summons every sickness, every pain, and every chastisement of Israel; they all come and rest upon him. And were it not that he had thus lightened them off Israel and taken them upon himself, there had been no man able to bear Israel’s chastisements for the transgression of the law: and this is that which is written, ‘Surely our sicknesses he hath carried.’” The great [(Rambam) Rabbi Moses Maimonides](Maimonides.html) says: “What is the manner of Messiah’s advent....there shall rise up one of whom none have known before, and signs and wonders which they shall see performed by him will be the proofs of his true origin; for the Almighty, where he declares to us his mind upon this matter, says, \`Behold a man whose name is the Branch, and he shall branch forth out of his place’ (Zechariah 6:12\). And Isaiah speaks similarly of the time when he shall appear, without father or mother or family being known, He came up as a sucker before him, and as a root out of dry earth, etc....in the words of Isaiah, when describing the manner in which kings will harken to him, At him kings will shut their mouth; for that which had not been told them have they seen, and that which they had not heard they have perceived.” Unfortunately, modern Rabbis of Judaism believe that the “Suffering Servant” of Isaiah 53 refers perhaps to Israel, or to Isaiah himself, or even Moses or another of the Jewish prophets. But Isaiah is clear \- he speaks of the Messiah, as many ancient rabbis concluded. The second verse of Isaiah 53 confirms this clarity. The figure grows up as “a young plant, and like a root out of dry ground.” The shoot springing up is beyond reasonable doubt a reference to the Messiah, and, in fact, it is a common Messianic reference in Isaiah and elsewhere. The Davidic dynasty was to be cut down in judgment like a felled tree, but it was promised to Israel that a new sprout would shoot up from the stump. King Messiah was to be that sprout. Beyond doubt, the “Suffering Servant” of Isaiah 53 refers to Messiah. He is the one highly exalted before whom kings shut their mouths. Messiah is the shoot who sprung up from the fallen Davidic dynasty. He became the King of Kings. He provided the ultimate atonement. Isaiah 53 must be understood as referring to the coming Davidic King, the Messiah. King Messiah was prophesied to suffer and die to pay for our sins and then rise again. He would serve as a priest to the nations of the world and apply the blood of atonement to cleanse those who believe. There is One alone to whom this can refer, Jesus Christ! Those who confess him are his children, his promised offspring, and the spoils of his victory. According to the testimony of the Jewish Apostles, Jesus died for our sins, rose again, ascended to the right hand of God, and He now serves as our great High Priest who cleanses us of sin (Hebrew 2:17; 8:1\). Jesus, the Jewish Messiah, is the one Isaiah foresaw. Rabbi Moshe Kohen Ibn Crispin said, “This rabbi described those who interpret Isaiah 53 as referring to Israel as those ‘having forsaken the knowledge of our Teachers, and inclined after the stubbornness of their own hearts, and of their own opinion, I am pleased to interpret it, in accordance with the teaching of our Rabbis, of the King Messiah.’” This prophecy was delivered by Isaiah at the divine command for the purpose of making known to us something about the nature of the future Messiah, who is to come and deliver Israel, and his life from the day when he arrives at discretion until his advent as a redeemer, in order that if anyone should arise claiming to be himself the Messiah, we may reflect, and look to see whether we can observe in him any resemblance to the traits described here; if there is any such resemblance, then we may believe that he is the Messiah our righteousness; but if not, we cannot do so.
What is the Swoon Theory?	Answer The Swoon Theory is the belief that Jesus didn’t really die at His crucifixion, but was merely unconscious when He was laid in the tomb and there He resuscitated. Accordingly, His appearances after three days in the tomb were merely perceived to be resurrection appearances. There are several reasons why this theory is invalid and can be easily proven as false, and there were at least three different persons or groups involved in Jesus’ crucifixion who were all satisfied concerning the fact of His death on the cross. They are the Roman guards, Pilate, and the Sanhedrin. The Roman Guards \- There were two separate groups of Roman soldiers given the task of ensuring the death of Jesus: the executioners and the tomb guards. The soldiers in charge of execution were specialists in capital punishment, and crucifixion was one of the most brutal forms of execution in history. Jesus was nailed to a cross after enduring horrible beatings at the hands of these professional death merchants, and every person put to death by way of crucifixion was dealt with by these soldiers. Their job was to ensure the task was completed. Jesus could not have survived crucifixion, and these soldiers made certain that Jesus was dead before His body was allowed to be taken from the cross. They were completely satisfied that Jesus was truly dead. The second group of soldiers was given the task of guarding the tomb of Jesus because of the request made to Pilate by the Sanhedrin. Matthew 27:62\-66 tells us “On the next day, which followed the Day of Preparation, the chief priests and Pharisees gathered together to Pilate, saying, ’sir, we remember, while He was still alive, how that deceiver said, “After three days I will rise.” Therefore command that the tomb be made secure until the third day, lest His disciples come by night and steal Him away, and say to the people, "He has risen from the dead." So the last deception will be worse than the first.' Pilate said to them, 'You have a guard; go your way, make it as secure as you know how.' So they went and made the tomb secure, sealing the stone and setting the guard" (NKJV). These guards ensured that the tomb was secure, and their lives depended upon completion of their mission. Only the resurrection of the Son of God could have stayed them from their task. Pilate \- Pilate gave the order for Jesus to be crucified and entrusted this task to be carried out by a [Roman centurion](Roman-Centurion.html), a trusted and proven commander of 100 Roman soldiers. After the crucifixion, a request for the body of Jesus was made by [Joseph of Arimathea](Joseph-of-Arimathea.html), in order that His body could be placed in a tomb. Only after confirmation was given to him by his centurion did Pilate release the body into the care of Joseph. Mark 15:42\-45: “Now when evening had come, because it was the Preparation Day, that is, the day before the Sabbath, Joseph of Arimathea, a prominent council member, who was himself waiting for the kingdom of God, coming and taking courage, went in to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus. Pilate marveled that He was already dead; and summoning the centurion, he asked him if He had been dead for some time. And when he found out from the centurion, he granted the body to Joseph” (NKJV). Pilate was completely satisfied that Jesus was truly dead. The Sanhedrin \- The Sanhedrin was the ruling council of the Jewish people, and they requested that the bodies of those crucified, including Jesus, be taken down from the cross after their death because of the ensuing Sabbath day. John 19:31\-37: “Therefore, because it was the Preparation Day, that the bodies should not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day), the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away. Then the soldiers came and broke the legs of the first and of the other who was crucified with Him. But when they came to Jesus and saw that He was already dead, they did not break His legs. But one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately blood and water came out. And he who has seen has testified, and his testimony is true; and he knows that he is telling the truth, so that you may believe. For these things were done that the Scripture should be fulfilled, 'Not one of His bones shall be broken.' And again another Scripture says, ‘They shall look on Him whom they pierced.’” These Jews who demanded that Jesus be crucified, and even going so far as to suggest an insurrection had He not been crucified, would never have allowed Jesus’ body to be removed from the cross were He not already dead. These men were completely satisfied that Jesus was truly dead. There is other evidence that the Swoon Theory is invalid, such as the condition of Jesus’ body after the resurrection. At every appearance, Jesus’ body was shown to be in a glorified state, and the only marks remaining as proof of His crucifixion were the nail prints He asked Thomas to touch as proof of who He was. Anyone who had experienced what Jesus experienced would have needed months to recover physically. Jesus’ body bore only the marks of the nails in His hands and feet. The way in which Jesus’ body was prepared after the crucifixion is further evidence to refute the theory. Had Jesus only been unconscious, the linens He was wrapped in would have been impossible for Him to escape from, had He been merely a man. The way in which the women attended to Jesus’ body is further evidence of his death. They came to the tomb on the first day of the week to further anoint His body with embalming ointments as they had little time to prepare His body prior to the beginning of the Sabbath after His crucifixion. Had He been merely unconscious as the theory supposes, they would have brought medicinal tools to help in His resuscitation. The purpose for the Swoon Theory is not to dispute His death, but rather, it seeks to disprove His resurrection. If Jesus didn’t resurrect, then He’s not God. If Jesus truly died and rose from the dead, His power over death proves that He is the Son of God. The evidence demands the verdict: Jesus truly died on the cross, and Jesus truly rose from the dead.
What is animism?	Answer Animism is the belief that everything has a soul or spirit, an anima in Latin, including animals, plants, rocks, mountains, rivers, and stars. Animists believe each anima is a powerful spirit that can help or hurt them and are to be worshiped or feared or in some way attended to. Animism is a primitive religion whose adherents have for thousands of years deified animals, stars, and idols of any kind, and practiced spiritism, witchcraft, divination, and astrology. They use magic, spells, enchantments, superstitions, amulets, talismans, charms, or anything that they believe will help to protect them from the evil spirits and placate the good spirits that are found everywhere in everything. Elements of animism are present in many false religions including Hinduism, Mormonism and all New Age cults. False religion always teaches in some way that the spirit within human beings is really God and the practices of the religion will help us to realize this and develop the god\-spirit so that we, too, may be God. This is the same old lie Satan has been propagating since the garden of Eden when he tempted Adam and Eve by telling them, "You shall be as God" (Genesis 3:5\). The Bible states unequivocally that there is one God and everything else, from the angels in heaven to the grains of sand on the beach, was created by Him (Genesis 1:1\). Any religion that teaches there is more than one god is teaching a lie. “Before Me there was no god formed, and there will be none after Me” (Isaiah 43:10\). “I am the Lord and there is no other; besides Me there is no god” (Isaiah 45:5\). The worship of false gods, who are really not gods at all, is a sin God especially hates because it robs Him of the glory that is rightfully His. A check of any Bible concordance on the subject of idolatry will show how many times God forbade the worship of false gods. In addition, the Bible strictly forbids the practices of the animists. "A man or a woman who is a medium or a wizard shall be put to death; they shall be stoned with stones, their blood shall be upon them" (Leviticus 20:27\). The practice of animism opens a door for demons to enter into the lives of people who are deceived by the lie that is animism. The Bible condemns those who practice spiritism in very strong terms: abominations to God, stone them to death, the fire shall burn them (Deuteronomy 18; Leviticus 20; Isaiah 47\). As with all false religion, animism is simply another scheme of Satan, the father of lies. Yet many throughout the world are being deceived by the “adversary, the devil, \[who] walks about like a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour” (1 Peter 5:8\).
What is Rosicrucianism?	Answer The true origin of Rosicrucianism is unknown. Today there are two groups which claim to be representative of Rosicrucianism, the Rosicrucianism Fellowship in Oceanside, Calif., and the rival organization, the Ancient Mystical Order Rosae Crucis (AMORC) in San Jose, Calif. The latter group is adamant about being the faithful Rosicrucianism order. The earliest authentically Rosicrucianism writings come from the 17th century. These anonymous works set forth the travels of the alleged founder of the order, one Christian Rosenkreutz. As the story goes, Rosenkreutz learned secrets about medicine and magic while on a trip to the Near East. Upon his return to Europe, he founded a secret fraternity whose members communicated in secret\-coded writings. The Rosicrucianism Order is syncretistic, meaning that it borrows ideas and beliefs from various other religions in an attempt to unify them under a central theme—wisdom about life after death has been preserved through the ages and is revealed only to the secret brotherhood (the Rosicrucians). There are strongly occultic teachings in Rosicrucianism, including ESP, clairvoyance, and spiritism. This goes right along with the secretive nature of Rosicrucianism because these activities are the playground of Satan and his demons, and Satan always shuns the light. Regarding the principle Christian doctrines found in the Bible, the Rosicrucians believe the following: Jesus Christ: According to Rosicrucianism, He was born of Gentile parents, did not die on the cross, did not ascend to heaven, and retired to the monastery in Carmel to carry on secret missions with His apostles. Salvation: Rosicrucianism denies that a person must trust Christ as the only Savior. Their system is one of self\-effort, their motto being “TRY.” The Bible: Rosicrucianism rejects the divine authorship of the Bible and does not hold Scripture in any special favor. As is the case with all false religion, Rosicrucianism is a lie from the father of lies, Satan, and as such it has many things in common with other false systems. First, it denies the authority of Scripture. We know from 2 Timothy 3:16 that “all scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.” Every word of the Bible is inspired by God Himself (literally God\-breathed), who moved the very hands and minds of each of the writers. Second, none of the claims regarding Jesus Christ conform to the Bible. Matthew 1:1\-18 and Luke 3:23\-28 affirm the long Jewish, not Gentile, ancestry of Jesus. Paul reminds us in 1 Corinthians 15:17 that “if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins.” Acts 1:9\-11 and Matthew 24:30 confirm Christ’s ascension into heaven and His eventual return. The Jesus of the Rosicrucians is not the Jesus of the Bible. As for the Rosicrucianism doctrine of self\-effort, the Bible teaches that man is sinful from birth (Jeremiah 17:9\) and incapable of doing enough good works to make him acceptable to a holy and perfectly righteous God. “For no human being will be justified in His sight by works of the law” (Romans 3:20\). Man is, simply put, in desperate need of a Savior to do that for him. God has provided that Savior in His Son, Jesus Christ, who died on the cross to pay the penalty of our sin and make us acceptable to God. He exchanged His perfect life for our sinful ones: “For He has made Him who knew no sin, to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Corinthians 5:21\). Finally, the secretive nature of Rosicrucianism is in direct contrast with the true faith, Christianity, which seeks to shout the message of Jesus Christ from the roof tops, as the Bible exhorts us: “What I tell you in the darkness, speak in the light, and what you hear whispered in your ear, proclaim upon the housetops” (Matthew 10:27\).
What is Rastafarianism?	Answer The word “Rastafarianism” often calls to mind the stereotypical images of dreadlocks (long braids or natural locks of hair), ganja (marijuana), the streets of Kingston, Jamaica, and the reggae rhythms of Bob Marley. Rastafarians have no universally acknowledged leaders, no universally agreed\-upon defining principles. It is a black consciousness movement—Afro\-Caribbean—and there is a split between the religion and its accompanying social consciousness, so people can appreciate what Rastas are trying to do socially while not embracing the religion. The movement takes its name from the title “Ras Tafari.” In the Ethiopian (Amharic) language, ras means “head,” “prince,” or “field marshal,” and tafari means “to be feared.” Within the system of Rastafarianism, the term is a reference most particularly to Ras Tafari Makonnen (1892–1975\), who became the Ethiopian Emperor Haile Selassie I (his Christian baptismal name) upon his coronation in 1930, when Selassie was lauded with the title “Lion of Judah, Elect of God, King of Kings.” This sent a shock wave through Afro\-Caribbean culture. In the streets of Kingston, Jamaica, preachers like Joseph Hibbert started declaring that Haile Selassie was the long awaited Messiah, the second coming of Christ. Thus was born one track of Rastafari, which looked to Selassie as the living God and black messiah who would overthrow the existing order and usher in a reign of black people. Another track of Rasta has sprung up alongside the messianic track. This group traces its roots to Leonard Percival Howell and has definite Hindu elements. Sometime in the early\- to mid\-1930s, Howell produced a 14\-page pamphlet, “The Promised Key,” which laid the groundwork for a second track within Rastafarianism influenced by [Hinduism](hinduism.html) and [Rosicrucianism](Rosicrucianism.html). Many of the leaders in this track have also been [Freemasons](free-masonry.html). The result has been a sort of Rastafarian pantheism that looks for “the Lion Spirit in each of us: the Christ spirit.” A summary of Rastafarian theology, as evidenced in the pantheistic track: the belief that “God is man and man is God”; that salvation is earthly; that human beings are called to celebrate and protect life; that the spoken word, as a manifestation of the divine presence and power, can both create and bring destruction; that sin is both personal and corporate; and that Rasta brethren are the chosen people to manifest God’s power and promote peace in the world. Both tracks of Rasta are in direct contrast to the revealed Word of God in the Bible. First, Haile Selassie is not the Messiah. Those who worship him as such worship a false god. There is only one King of Kings, one Lion of Judah, and that is Jesus Christ (see Revelation 5:5; 19:16\), who will return in the future to set up His earthly kingdom. Preceding His coming, there will be a great tribulation, after which the whole world will see Jesus “coming in the clouds of heaven with great power and great glory” (see Matthew 24:29\-31\). Haile Selassie was a man and, like all men, he was born, he lived, and he died. Jesus Christ, the true Messiah, is alive and seated at the right hand of the Father (Hebrews 10:12\). The pantheistic track of Rasta is equally false and based on the same lie that Satan has been telling mankind since the garden of Eden: “you will be as God” (Genesis 3:4\). There is one God, not many, and although believers do possess the indwelling Holy Spirit and we do belong to God, we are not God. “For I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like Me” (Isaiah 46:9\). Furthermore, salvation is not earthly, another anti\-scriptural, “salvation by works” idea. No amount of earthly works or good deeds can make us acceptable to a holy and perfect God, which is why He sent His holy and perfect Son to die on the cross to pay the penalty for our sins (2 Corinthians 5:21\). Finally, Rastafarians are not the chosen people of God. Scripture is clear that the Jews are God’s chosen people and that He has not yet completed His plan for their redemption (Exodus 6:7; Leviticus 26:12; Romans 11:25\-27\).
What is the Gospel of Philip?	Answer Similar to the [Gospel of Thomas](gospel-of-Thomas.html), the Gospel of Philip is a collection of sayings, supposedly of Jesus. The Gospel of Philip focuses a great deal on the “sacrament of marriage” as a “sacred mystery.” The Gospel of Philip does not claim to have been written by Jesus’ disciple Philip. It is titled “the gospel according to Philip” due to Philip being the only disciple of Jesus who is named in it (73:8\). The most complete manuscript of the Gospel of Philip was discovered in the Nag Hammadi library in Egypt in 1945\. It is written in the Coptic language and is dated to approximately the 4th century AD The Gospel of Philip is a Gnostic gospel, presenting a Gnostic viewpoint of Jesus and His teachings. While there are a few verses in the Gospel of Philip that resemble the four biblical Gospels, a reading of the Gospel of Philip will reveal many irreconcilable differences and a completely different message regarding who Jesus was and what He came to do. Of most interest in the Gospel of Philip is what it has to say about Jesus’ relationship with Mary Magdalene. In his popular book The Da Vinci Code, author Dan Brown points to the Gospel of Philip as evidence of Jesus’ marriage / relationship with Mary Magdalene. However, the Gospel of Philip nowhere states that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene. It does not even state that Jesus was romantically involved with Mary. The one section that deals with this issue is heavily damaged, with several portions unreadable. Here is what the Gospel of Philip states, with “…” representing missing portions: “and the companion of the … Mary Magdalene … more than … the disciples … kiss her … on her … the rest of the disciples … they said to him … why do you love her more than all of us?” Even if we assume that Jesus was kissing Mary Magdalene, the text does not imply anything other than a friendly relationship. A single man kissing a single woman on the cheek, while rare in that culture, is by no means indicative of a romantic relationship. Whatever the case, even if the Gospel of Philip explicitly stated that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene, that would not make the idea true. The Gospel of Philip was not written by the Apostle Philip or anyone who had ever met Jesus. The original writing of the Gospel of Philip is dated to the 3rd century AD at the earliest, at least 200 years after Jesus’ death. The only value in studying the Gospel of Philip is in learning what heresies existed in the early centuries of the Christian church.
What is the Gospel of Mary (Magdalene)?	Answer The Gospel of Mary was discovered in the Akhmim Codex in Cairo, Egypt, in 1896\. It was not made public until 1955, when it was published due to the popularity of the [Nag Hammadi](Nag-Hammadi.html) library. Written in Greek and Coptic, the Gospel of Mary codex is dated to the 3rd (Greek) and 5th (Coptic) centuries AD. The Gospel of Mary is mentioned in the writings of some of the early church fathers as early as the 3rd century AD. In the only known copy of the text, ten entire pages are missing, including the first six pages. As a result, it is difficult to arrive at a coherent and consistent overall message. The Gospel of Mary Magdalene would better be titled “the Gospel of Mary,” due to the fact that the Mary the gospel mentions is nowhere specified as Mary Magdalene. In the New Testament, there are six women named Mary, with three of them being prominent in the life of Jesus: Mary, Jesus’ mother; Mary Magdalene; and Mary of Bethany. It is only tradition that the Mary the Gospel of Mary refers to is Mary Magdalene. For the sake of clarity, we will assume that Mary Magdalene is the Mary of the Gospel of Mary. Conspiracy theorists have contrived a conflict between patriarchal Christianity (exemplified by Peter) and “true” Christianity (exemplified by Mary). The Da Vinci Code takes this conspiracy theory to new heights by portraying the Christian church as covering up Jesus’ relationship with Mary Magdalene and denying His appointment of Mary as the leader of the church. The problem with this conspiracy theory is that there is absolutely no evidence for it, not even in the Gospel of Mary. The Gospel of Mary nowhere states that Jesus appointed Mary as the leader of the Christian church. The Gospel of Mary nowhere states that Jesus and Mary were romantically involved. The Gospel of Mary was not written by Mary Magdalene or any other Mary of the Bible. The Gnostic teachings found in the Gospel of Mary date it to the late 2nd century AD at the earliest. As a result, there is no validity to its teachings. Similar to the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Philip, and the Gospel of Judas, the Gospel of Mary is a Gnostic forgery, using the name of a biblical character in an attempt to give validity to heretical teachings. The only value in studying the Gospel of Mary is in learning what heresies existed in the early centuries of the Christian church.
What is the Toronto Blessing?	Answer The Toronto Blessing is a supposed outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the people of the Toronto Airport Christian Fellowship Church, formerly the Toronto Airport Vineyard Church. On January 20, 1994, a Pentecostal pastor named Randy Clark spoke at the church and gave his testimony of how he would get [“drunk” in the Spirit](drunk-in-the-Spirit.html) and laugh uncontrollably. In response to this testimony, the congregation erupted in pandemonium with people laughing, growling, dancing, shaking, barking like dogs, and even being stuck in positions of paralysis. These experiences were attributed to the Holy Spirit entering people’s bodies. The pastor of the church, John Arnott, referred to it as a big Holy Spirit party. The moniker “Toronto Blessing” was given, and the church was soon in the international spotlight. When this “blessing” is held to the light of Scripture, however, it can scarcely be called such. Absolutely nowhere in Scripture can one find a precedent for what was happening at the Toronto Airport church. The nearest that Scripture comes to describing the paralysis and bizarre behavior prompted by the Toronto Blessing are its documented effects of demonic possession (see Mark 9:18\). The Toronto Airport church became known for its congregants’ emotional outbursts and odd psychological displays. Pastor Arnott began focusing almost exclusively on “the party of the Holy Spirit.” Experiences were being held in higher esteem than Scripture. This was even too much for the extremely charismatic [Vineyard Movement](Vineyard-Movement.html), which severed ties with their Toronto Airport church in 1995, prompting the name change to Toronto Airport Christian Fellowship. A believer’s focus needs to be Jesus Christ, the “author and perfecter of our faith” (Hebrews 12:2\), not on oneself, one’s experiences, or even the Holy Spirit. The Toronto Blessing focuses on the last, to the detriment of biblical faith. Believers can have fun, dance, sing, and even shout to the Lord. However, when a worship service becomes a free\-for\-all of fits, seizures, and uncontrolled outbursts—all attributed to the Holy Spirit—something is wrong. The church should be characterized by adherence to the Word of God (2 Timothy 3:16\), rejoicing (Philippians 4:4\), and “reasonableness . . . known to everyone” (Philippians 4:5, ESV).
What is the Latter Rain Movement?	Answer The Latter Rain Movement is an influence within Pentecostalism which teaches that the Lord is pouring out His Spirit again, as He did at Pentecost, and using believers to prepare the world for His Second Coming. The Latter Rain Movement is anti\-dispensational and amillennial, and many leaders of the movement embrace aberrant teachings. The term “latter rain” was first used early in the history of Pentecostalism, when David Wesley Myland wrote a book called Latter Rain Songs in 1907\. Three years later, Myland wrote The Latter Rain Covenant, a defense of Pentecostalism in general. The name comes from Joel 2:23, “Be glad then, ye children of Zion, and rejoice in the LORD your God: for He hath given you the former rain moderately, and He will cause to come down for you the rain, the former rain, and the latter rain in the first month.” Pentecostals interpreted the “rain” in this verse as an outpouring of the Holy Spirit. The “latter rain” (the end\-times outpouring) would be greater than the “former rain.” In 1948, a “revival” broke out in Saskatchewan, Canada, and the teachings of the Latter Rain movement were clarified. Those involved in the revival were convinced that they were on the verge of a new era, one in which the Holy Spirit would demonstrate His power in a greater way than the world had ever seen. Not even the age of the apostles, they said, had witnessed such a movement of the Holy Spirit. Latter Rain teaching is characterized by a highly typological hermeneutic. That is, the Bible is interpreted in a symbolic, extremely stylized manner. An emphasis is placed on extra\-biblical revelation, such as personal prophecies, experiences, and directives straight from God. Latter Rain doctrine includes the following beliefs: \- the gifts of the Spirit, including tongues, are received through the laying on of hands \- Christians can be demonized and require deliverance \- God has restored all the offices of ministry to the Church, including apostle and prophet \- divine healing can be administered through the laying on of hands \- praise and worship will usher God into our presence \- women have a full and equal ministry role in the Church \- denominational lines will be destroyed, and the Church will unify in the last days \- the “latter rain” will bring God’s work to completion; the Church will be victorious over the world and usher in Christ’s kingdom Many “apostles” in the Latter Rain Movement also teach the doctrine of “the manifest sons of God.” This is a heretical doctrine which says that the Church will give rise to a special group of “overcomers” who will receive spiritual bodies, becoming immortal. It is important to note that the Assemblies of God deemed the Latter Rain Movement to contain heresy from the very beginning. On April 20, 1949, the Assemblies of God officially denounced Latter Rain teaching, nearly splitting the denomination in the process. Other established Pentecostal groups have passed similar resolutions. Today, the term “latter rain” is rarely used, but the theology of Latter Rain continues to exert an influence. Most branches of the Charismatic Movement adhere to Latter Rain teaching. Modern movements such as the Brownsville/Pensacola Revival, the Toronto Blessing, and the “holy laughter” phenomenon are a direct result of Latter Rain theology.
What is the sacred feminine?	Answer The “sacred feminine” is a religious movement that emphasizes femininity as being closer to divinity than masculinity. Those of the sacred feminine tradition worship feminine beauty and the power of sexual reproduction. The sacred feminine assumes that women, through the ability to bear children, are more “sacred” than men. Men can only experience the sacred feminine, spiritually, through sexual intercourse. Advocates of the sacred feminine viewpoint range from pseudo\-Christians to radical feminists, goddess worshipers, and Wicca witches. Hints of the sacred feminine viewpoint can be seen in the Bible with the examples of ritual prostitution (Genesis 38:21\-22; Hosea 4:14\) and goddess worship (Jeremiah 44:17\-25; 2 Kings 23:7\). Other examples can be seen in the Easter fertility rituals and some aspects of Mariology. In The Da Vinci Code, author Dan Brown repeatedly points to “the sacred feminine.” His unfounded and baseless theory is that Jesus’ mission was to father children through Mary Magdalene, thereby producing a “royal” bloodline. According to Brown, Mary Magdalene was the “holy grail” that carried Jesus’ blood, and Mary Magdalene was Jesus’ intended leader of the Christian church. It was the patriarchal disciples and early church that “demoted” Mary, denied the sacred feminine, and instituted a patriarchal caricature of Jesus’ intention for Christianity. Neither Dan Brown’s imaginations nor the sacred feminine has any basis in the Bible. Jesus chose 12 male disciples, hardly the move of a man seeking to establish the sacred feminine. The New Testament is replete with examples of male leadership in the church (1 Timothy 2:11\-14\). Biblical Christianity has lifted women to equality and oneness in the Body of Christ (Galatians 3:28\), while maintaining a distinction in roles. Yes, a woman receives glory through childbirth (1 Timothy 2:15\), but the role and value of women is no more (or less) sacred than that of men. The “sacred feminine” is not sacred, nor does it accurately represent what the Bible describes as true femininity.
What is Irreducible Complexity?	Answer Irreducible complexity is a term used to describe a characteristic of certain complex systems whereby they need all of their individual component parts in place in order to function. In other words, it is impossible to reduce the complexity of (or to simplify) an irreducibly complex system by removing any of its component parts and still maintain its functionality. Professor Michael Behe of Lehigh University coined the term in his seminal work Darwin’s Black Box, 1996\. He popularized the concept by presenting the common mousetrap as an example of irreducible complexity. A typical mousetrap is made up of five integral parts: a catch, a spring, a hammer, a holding bar and a foundation. According to Behe, if any of these parts are removed without a comparable replacement (or at least a significant restructuring of the remaining parts), the entire system will fail to function. Professor John McDonald of the University of Delaware has disputed the irreducible complexity of the mousetrap. McDonald has created an online flash presentation to illustrate his argument (see A reducibly complex mousetrap at [http://udel.edu/\~mcdonald/oldmousetrap.html](http://udel.edu/~mcdonald/oldmousetrap.html)). Behe has published a rebuttal to McDonald’s polemic, also online (see A Mousetrap Defended: Response to Critics at <http://www.arn.org/docs/behe/mb_mousetrapdefended.htm>). And so the debate over the mousetrap rages on. But this is beside the point. Whether or not the mousetrap is truly irreducibly complex is not the heart of the issue. The heart of the issue is the concept of irreducible complexity itself. The otherwise benign concept of irreducible complexity incites fierce controversy when it is applied to biological systems. This is because it is seen as a challenge to Darwinian evolution, which, needless to say, remains the dominant paradigm in the field of biology. Charles Darwin conceded, “If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down” (Origin of Species, 1859, p. 158\). Behe argues, “An irreducibly complex system cannot be produced directly (that is, by continuously improving the initial function, which continues to work by the same mechanism) by slight, successive modifications of a precursor system, because any precursor to an irreducibly complex system that is missing a part is by definition nonfunctional” (Darwin’s Black Box, 1996, p. 39\). It should be noted that by “nonfunctional” Behe does not mean that the precursor cannot serve any function – a mousetrap missing its spring can still act as a paperweight. It just cannot serve the specific function (catching mice) by means of the same mechanism (a spring\-loaded hammer slamming down upon the mouse). This leaves open the possibility that irreducibly complex systems can evolve from simpler precursors which serve other unrelated functions. This would constitute indirect evolution. Behe has conceded that “if a system is irreducibly complex (and thus cannot have been produced directly), however, one can not definitely rule out the possibility of an indirect, circuitous route” (ibid, p. 40\). In keeping with the mousetrap analogy, while a five\-piece spring\-loaded mousetrap couldn’t evolve directly from a simpler, nonfunctional version of itself (and remain in line with Darwin ’s concept of evolution by means of natural selection), it might evolve from a four\-piece paperweight. Thus, according to Behe, a more effective, more complex mousetrap evolving from a simpler version of itself would constitute direct evolution. A complex mousetrap evolving from a complex paperweight would constitute indirect evolution. Irreducible complexity is seen as a challenge to direct evolution. It should also be noted that evolution by means of natural selection does not solely act to complicate precursory systems. It can also simplify them. Thus, Darwinian evolution can produce irreducible complexity by working backwards. Consider the popular game Jenga, a game wherein players remove wooden bricks from a tower until it collapses. The tower begins with 54 wooden bricks. As players remove the bricks, the tower reduces in complexity (that is, there are fewer and fewer parts) until it becomes irreducibly complex (that is, if any more bricks are removed the tower will collapse). This illustrates how an irreducibly complex system might evolve indirectly from a more complicated system. Behe argues that the less complicated an irreducibly complex systems is, the more likely it is that it could have evolved along an indirect route (that is, either by evolving from a simpler precursor which served a different function or from a more complicated precursor which lost parts). Conversely, the more complicated an irreducibly complex system is, the less likely it is that it could have evolved along an indirect route. According to Behe, “As the complexity of an interacting system increases, though, the likelihood of such an indirect route drops precipitously” (ibid, p. 40\). Behe cites the e coli bacteria’s flagellar system as an example of a complicated irreducibly complex system which he believes could not have evolved directly (because it is irreducibly complex) and most likely did not evolve indirectly (because it is extremely complicated). The e coli flagellar system is an incredible microscopic outboard motor which e coli use to move around in their environment. It is made up of 40 individual, integral parts including a stator, a rotor, a driveshaft, a u\-joint, and a propeller. If any of these parts are removed, the entire system will fail to function. Some of the flagellum’s components exist elsewhere in the microscopic world. These parts also function as part of the Type III transport system. Thus, they could have been borrowed from a Type III transport (a process known as cooption). However, the majority of the e coli’s flagellar components are unique. They require their own evolutionary explanation, which, as of yet, s enigmatic. There has been tremendous opposition to irreducible complexity from within the Darwinist camp. Some of this criticism is valid, some is not. Likewise, one must be careful to investigate the claims made by proponents of irreducible complexity. Some of the biological examples which proponents cited early on appear now to be reducible. This does not nullify the concept itself, nor does it negate actual examples of irreducibly complex biological systems (like the e coli bacterial flagellum). It just goes to show that scientists can make mistakes, just like everyone else. In summary, irreducible complexity is an aspect of the Intelligent Design Theory that argues some biological systems are so complex and so dependent upon multiple complex parts, that they could not have evolved by chance. Unless all the parts of a system all evolved at the same time, the system would be useless, and therefore would actually be a detriment to the organism, and therefore, according to the "laws" of evolution, would be naturally selected out of the organism. While irreducible complexity does not explicitly prove an intelligent Designer, and does not conclusively disprove evolution, it most definitely points to something outside of random processes in the origin and development of biological life.
Why did Jesus teach in parables?	Answer It has been said that a [parable](what-is-a-parable.html) is an earthly story with a heavenly meaning. The Lord Jesus frequently used parables as a means of illustrating profound, divine truths. Stories such as these are easily remembered, the characters bold, and the symbolism rich in meaning. Parables were a common form of teaching in Judaism. Before a certain point in His ministry, Jesus had employed many graphic analogies using common things that would be familiar to everyone (salt, bread, sheep, etc.) and their meaning was fairly clear in the context of His teaching. Parables required more explanation, and at one point in His ministry, Jesus began to teach using parables exclusively. The question is why Jesus would let most people wonder about the meaning of His parables. The first instance of this is in His telling the parable of the seed and the soils. Before He interpreted this parable, He drew His disciples away from the crowd. They said to Him, "Why do You speak to them in parables?" Jesus answered them, "To you it has been granted to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been granted. For whoever has, to him more shall be given, and he will have an abundance; but whoever does not have, even what he has shall be taken away from him. Therefore I speak to them in parables; because while seeing they do not see, and while hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand. In their case the prophecy of Isaiah is being fulfilled, which says, ‘Hearing you will hear and shall not understand, And seeing you will see and not perceive; For the hearts of this people have grown dull. Their ears are hard of hearing, And their eyes they have closed, Lest they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears, Lest they should understand with their hearts and turn, So that I should heal them.’ But blessed are your eyes, because they see; and your ears, because they hear. For truly I say to you that many prophets and righteous men desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it" (Matthew 13:10\-17\). From this point on in Jesus’ ministry, when He spoke in parables, He explained them only to His disciples. But those who had continually rejected His message were left in their spiritual blindness to wonder as to His meaning. He made a clear distinction between those who had been given “ears to hear” and those who persisted in unbelief—ever hearing, but never actually perceiving and “always learning but never able to acknowledge the truth” (2 Timothy 3:7\). The disciples had been given the gift of spiritual discernment by which things of the spirit were made clear to them. Because they accepted truth from Jesus, they were given more and more truth. The same is true today of believers who have been given the gift of the Holy Spirit who guides us into all truth (John 16:13\). He has opened our eyes to the light of truth and our ears to the sweet words of eternal life. Our Lord Jesus understood that truth is not sweet music to all ears. Simply put, there are those who have neither interest in nor regard for the deep things of God. So why, then, did He speak in parables? To those with a genuine hunger for God, the parable is both an effective and memorable vehicle for the conveyance of divine truths. Our Lord’s parables contain great volumes of truth in very few words—and His parables, rich in imagery, are not easily forgotten. So, then, the parable is a blessing to those with willing ears. But to those with dull hearts and ears that are slow to hear, the parable is also an instrument of both judgment and mercy.
What is contemplative spirituality?	Answer Contemplative spirituality is an extremely dangerous practice for any person who desires to live a biblical, God\-centered life. It is most commonly associated with the emerging church movement, which is riddled with false teachings. It is also used by many different groups that have little, if any, connection with Christianity. In practice, contemplative spirituality is primarily centered on meditation, although not meditation with a biblical perspective. Passages such as Joshua 1:8 actually exhort us to meditate: “Do not let this Book of the Law depart from your mouth; meditate on it day and night, so that you may be careful to do everything written in it. Then you will be prosperous and successful.” Notice what the focus of meditation should be—the Word of God. Contemplative spirituality\-driven meditation focuses on nothing, literally. A practitioner is exhorted to completely empty his/her mind, to just “be.” Supposedly, this helps one to open up to a greater spiritual experience. However, we are exhorted in Scripture to transform our minds to that of Christ’s, to have His mind. Emptying our minds is contrary to such active, conscious transformation. Contemplative spirituality also encourages the pursuit of a mystical experience with God. Mysticism is the belief that knowledge of God, spiritual truth, and ultimate reality can be gained through subjective experience. This emphasis on experiential knowledge erodes the authority of Scripture. We know God according to His Word. “All Scripture is God\-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:16\-17\). God’s Word is complete. There is no reason to believe that God adds additional teachings or truths to His Word through mystical experiences. Instead, our faith and what we know about God is based on fact. The website for the Center for Contemplative Spirituality sums it up well: “We come from a variety of secular and religious backgrounds and we each seek to enrich our journey through spiritual practice and study of the world’s great spiritual traditions. We desire to draw closer to the loving Spirit which pervades all creation and which inspires our compassion for all beings.” There is absolutely nothing biblical about such goals. Studying the world’s “spiritual traditions” is an exercise in futility because any spiritual tradition other than that which exalts Christ is falsehood. The only way to draw closer to God is through the path He has ordained—Jesus Christ and the Word.
Should a Christian play video games?	Answer Completed nearly 2,000 years ago, God’s Word does not explicitly teach whether or not a Christian should play video games. But the Bible’s principles still apply today regarding the best use of our time. When God shows us that a specific activity is controlling our lives, we should break away from it for a time. This “fast” could be from food, movies, TV, music, video games—anything that distracts our attention from knowing and loving God and serving His people. While some of these things may not be bad in and of themselves, they become idols if they distract us from our first love (Colossians 3:5; Revelation 2:4\). Below are some principles to consider, whether the question is regarding video games, TV, movies, or any other earthly pursuit. 1\. Will video games edify or merely entertain me? To edify means to build up. Will playing video games build up your love for God, knowledge of Him, and ministry to others? “‘Everything is permissible’—but not everything is beneficial. ‘Everything is permissible’—but not everything is constructive” (1 Corinthians 10:23\-24; Romans 14:19\). When God gives us relaxation time, we should find uplifting activities to enjoy. Do we choose permissible over praiseworthy activities? When we have a choice between good, better, and best, we should choose the best (Galatians 5:13\-17\). 2\. Will playing video games obey self\-will or God’s will? God’s will for His children can be summed up in His greatest commandment: “’Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself’” (Luke 10:27\). Our will has been polluted by sin. Because we have been saved from our selfish desires, we should surrender our will (Philippians 3:7\-9\). God’s will transforms our will (Psalm 143:10\). Progressively, His desires for us become our deepest desires as well. Many people believe the will of God is boring and humiliating. They picture a monk in a lonely monastery or a resentful church janitor. On the contrary, people who follow God’s will for their lives are the most joyful, adventurous people ever. Reading biographies of history’s heroes such as [Hudson Taylor](Hudson-Taylor.html), [Amy Carmichael](Amy-Carmichael.html), Corrie Ten Boom, and [George Mueller](George-Mueller.html) will verify that. Certainly, these saints faced difficulty from the world, their own flesh, and the devil. They may not have had much of this world’s possessions, but God accomplished great works through them. At first, His will seems impossible and too holy to be any fun, but God will give us the power to perform it and the desires to delight in it. “I delight to do Your will, O my God” (Psalm 40:8a; see Hebrews 13:21\). 3\. Does the video game glorify God? Some video games glorify violence, lewdness, and dumb decisions (e.g., “I’m out of the race, so I’ll just wreck my car”). As Christians, our activities should bring glory to God (1 Corinthians 10:31\) and help us to grow in the knowledge and grace of Christ. 4\. Will playing video games result in good works? “For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them” (Ephesians 2:10; see also Titus 2:11\-14 and 1 Peter 2:15\). Laziness and selfishness violate God’s purpose for us—to do good works to others (1 Corinthians 15:58; see also Galatians 6:9\-10\). 5\. Will playing video games exhibit self\-control? Many people have said that video games can become an addiction or an obsession. There is no room in the Christian life for such things. Paul compares the Christian life to an athlete disciplining his body so he may win the prize. Christians have a greater motivation to live a set\-apart life of self\-control—eternal reward in heaven (1 Corinthians 9:25\-27\). 6\. Will playing video games redeem the time? You will give account for how you use your limited minutes. Spending hours at a time playing a video game can hardly be called a good use of time. “Be very careful, then, how you live—not as unwise but as wise, making the most of every opportunity, because the days are evil. Therefore do not be foolish, but understand what the Lord’s will is” (Ephesians 5:15\-17\). “Live for the rest of the time in the flesh no longer for human passions but for the will of God” (1 Peter 4:2; see also Colossians 4:5, James 4:14, and 1 Peter 1:14\-22\). 7\. Does it pass the test of Philippians 4:8? “Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things” (Philippians 4:8\). When you play video games, is your mind focused on godly or secular things? 8\. Will playing video games fit in with my life purpose? Paul wrote that in the final days people would be “…lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God” (2 Timothy 3:4\). Western culture fits that description. We love to play. Non\-Christians become addicted to entertainment such as movies, sports, and music because they do not have a purpose higher than to enjoy life before death. These amusements cannot truly satisfy (Ecclesiastes 2:1\). When Christians become addicted to the same things as non\-Christians, can we truly say that we are exhibiting the new life “in a crooked and depraved generation, in which you shine like stars in the universe” (Philippians 2:15\)? Or do we prove to others that we are really no different than they are and that Christ has not made a significant difference in our lives? Paul considered knowing, loving, and obeying God to be his highest priority. “I consider everything a loss compared to the surpassing greatness of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whose sake I have lost all things. I consider them rubbish, that I may gain Christ....I want to know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the fellowship of sharing in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death,” (Philippians 3:7\-10\). Will playing video games be showing my love for God or my love for the things of the world? (1 John 2:15\-17\). 9\. Will playing video games give me an eternal focus? Christians have hope of eternal rewards in heaven if they are faithful on earth (see Matthew 6:19\-21 and 1 Corinthians 3:11\-16\). If we focus on living for eternity rather than the passing pleasures of earth, we will have surrendered resources, time, and hearts for ministry (Colossians 3:1\-2; 23\-24\). If our possessions or activities cause us to lose our eternal rewards, of what worth are they (Luke 12:33\-37\)? Christians often try to serve both God and their own desires. But Jesus clearly stated, “No one can serve two masters” (Matthew 6:24\). God gives us joy through times of work and rest (Ecclesiastes 5:19; Matthew 11:28\-29; Colossians 3:23\-24\). We must find that balance between labor and recreation. When we do set aside time for relaxation as Jesus did (Mark 6:31\), we should choose an edifying activity. The question is not “Can I play video games?” but “Would video games be the best choice?” Will this edify me, show love to my neighbor, and glorify God? We are to pursue praiseworthy activities, not simply permissible ones. However He leads you, passionately follow Him above all else. Prepare for eternity. Every sacrifice will seem insignificant when we meet Jesus.
What does the Bible say about keeping your vows / oaths?	Answer There are about 30 biblical references to vows, most of which are from the Old Testament. The books of Leviticus and Numbers have several references to vows in relation to offerings and sacrifices. There were dire consequences for the Israelites who broke vows, especially vows to God. The story of Jephthah illustrates the foolishness of making vows without understanding the consequences. Before leading the Israelites into battle against the Ammonites, Jephthah—described as a mighty man of valor—made a rash vow that he would give to the Lord whoever first came out of doors to meet him if he returned home as the victor. When the Lord granted him victory, the one who came out to meet him was his daughter. Jephthah remembered his vow and offered her to the Lord (Judges 11:29–40\). Whether or not Jephthah should have kept this vow is dealt with in another [article](Jephthahs-daughter.html). What this account shows is the foolishness of rash vows. Jesus taught concerning vows, “You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not break your oath, but keep the oaths you have made to the Lord.’ But I tell you, Do not swear at all: either by heaven, for it is God’s throne; or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King. And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make even one hair white or black. Simply let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No ,’ ‘No’; anything beyond this comes from the evil one” (Matthew 5:33–37\). A little background information is helpful in understanding Jesus’ words here. The religious leaders of the day advocated keeping a vow if it was a public vow using God’s name; however, if the vow was made in the course of everyday conversation, referencing only “heaven” or “earth” or “Jerusalem,” it was not really binding. People had a loophole. They could lie or exaggerate in their conversations and lend themselves an air of credibility by saying, “I swear by heaven that this is true!” They could not be held to account because they did not specifically swear by God’s name and the vow was private. Jesus countered that idea. If you swear something, it had better be true, He says. In fact, all you need to say is “yes” or “no.” Your word should be good. There’s no need for overwrought expressions to bolster your case. Psalm 15:4 describes a righteous person as one “who keeps an oath even when it hurts, and does not change their mind.” Jesus’ teaching in Matthew 5 supports this biblical principle. Oaths are binding, even when spoken frivolously or privately as part of everyday conversation. A promise is a promise, and there is no loophole in God’s eyes to allow a person to renege on an oath. So, Jesus was not condemning all forms of promises, contracts, or agreements. Jesus was speaking of the kind of spontaneous vow made when a person says, “I cross my heart and hope to die” or “I swear on a stack of Bibles” or “I swear on my mother’s life.” Jesus warns against using those types of flippant oaths. His teaching in Matthew 5 is not meant to discourage careful, thought\-out promises, such as wedding vows or a legal contract. The principle here is clear for Christians: be careful about making vows, either to the Lord or to one another. The fact that we are prone to errors in judgment means that we may make vows foolishly or out of immaturity. Further, the informal vows we make (“I swear by all the angels in heaven!”) are completely unnecessary. Our word is our bond.
How should a Christian view materialism?	Answer Materialism is defined as “the preoccupation with material things rather than intellectual or spiritual things.” If a Christian is preoccupied with material things, it is definitely wrong. That is not to say we cannot have material things, but the obsession with acquiring and caring for “stuff” is a dangerous thing for the Christian, for two reasons. First, any preoccupation, obsession, or immoderate fascination with anything other than God is sinful and is displeasing to God. We are to “love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might” (Deuteronomy 6:5\), which is, according to Jesus, the first and greatest commandment (Matthew 22:37\-38\). Therefore, God is the only thing we can (and should) occupy ourselves with habitually. He alone is worthy of our complete attention, love, and service. To offer these things to anything or anyone else is idolatry. Second, when we concern ourselves with the material world, we are easily drawn in by the “deceitfulness of wealth” (Mark 4:19\), thinking that we will be happy or fulfilled or content if only we had more of whatever it is we are chasing. This is a lie from the father of lies, Satan. He wants us to be chasing after something he knows will never satisfy us so we will be kept from pursuing that which is the only thing that can satisfy—God Himself. Luke 16:13 tells us we “cannot serve both God and money.” We must seek to be content with what we have, and materialism is the exact opposite of that contentment. It causes us to strive for more and more and more, all the while telling us that this will be the answer to all our needs and dreams. The Bible tells us that a person’s “life is not in the abundance of the things which he possesses” (Luke 12:15\) and that we are to “seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness” (Matthew 6:33\). If materialism were ever to satisfy anyone, it would have been Solomon, the richest king the world has ever known. He had absolutely everything and had more of it than anyone, and yet he found it was all worthless and futile. It did not produce happiness or the satisfaction our souls long for. He declared, “Whoever loves money never has money enough; whoever loves wealth is never satisfied with his income” (Ecclesiastes 5:10\). In the end, Solomon came to the conclusion that we are to “fear God, and keep His commandments. For this is the whole duty of man” (Ecclesiastes 12:13\).
Does God have a physical body?	Answer Both the Bible and good philosophy report that God is non\-physical \- spirit. In John 4:24 it is said that God is spirit (see also Luke 24:39; Romans 1:20; Colossians 1:15; 1 Timothy 1:17\). This is why no material thing was to be used to represent God (Exodus 20:4\). But this can also be shown by reflecting on what God is. Philosophically the same truth comes through. All that is created is necessarily finite and limited. But the first cause (God) is uncreated, and therefore must be non\-finite, or infinite. That which is beyond the finite must, by definition, be infinite, and the Bible states that God is beyond creation (1 Kings 8:27; Job 11:7\-9; Isaiah 66:1\-2; Colossians 1:17\). That which is physical cannot be infinite \- for you cannot add finite parts together until they reach infinity. Therefore God is spirit as opposed to physical/material in His Being. This does not mean He cannot localize a physical appearance. God is not composed of matter nor any other imaginable substance. He also cannot be measured, is not spatial, and has no true location (presence is a different concept). Knowing this truth can help us understand the metaphorical speech often used to describe God or, more often, God’s actions in Scripture. In the case of God, once all finitude is negated from a statement, what is left is what is actually true. If nothing is left, then it is a pure metaphor. Some metaphors use attributes from creation itself (2 Samuel 22:3\). Others use man’s attributes (anthropomorphism \- Deuteronomy 33:27\). In this way we can go from what we know by experience to what we know through the metaphors. For example, when Scripture describes God’s mighty arm we know that arms are by definition limited \- but might is not. So God’s mighty arm is actually unlimited power to act (what we call omnipotence). When Scripture describes God’s mind, we know that minds are limited, but knowledge is not. God’s mind is actually His infinite knowledge (what we call omniscience). There were times in the Bible when God appeared in a physical body in order to be seen by men in a form which they could perceive without danger to themselves. Because God said, “No man can see me and live” (Exodus 33:20\), He chose at certain times to reveal Himself in human form. These occurrences are called theophanies (Genesis 12:7\-9; 18:1\-33; 32:22\-30\). Every theophany wherein God takes on human form foreshadows the incarnation, where God took the form of a man to live among us as Emmanuel, “God with us” (Matthew 1:23\).
How should a Christian view global warming?	Answer The phrase global warming has faded from use, having been almost entirely replaced by the term [climate change](climate-change.html). The topic is subject to intense disagreement and debate. Unfortunately, discussions tend to follow political and social lines, rather than lines of evidence, reason, and Scripture. God appointed humanity to be the steward of this world (Genesis 1:28\), not the destroyer of it. Christians ought to care about what effects we have on earth. However, we should not allow [environmentalism](environmentalism-Christian.html) to become a form of idolatry (Romans 1:25\). The “rights” of an inanimate planet and non\-human life should never outweigh those of humanity, who is created in God’s image. In the global warming/climate change debate, it seems that only extremes are discussed. One extreme says humanity is entirely at fault for climate change, all of which is bad, that science knows exactly the results for failing to make changes, and that only drastic measures will prevent billions from dying in the next few years. The other extreme says humans have literally zero impact on climate, that science cannot predict anything related to climate, and there is no reason to care about the issue. Rather than being unreasonable (Philippians 4:5\), believers should seek to understand. That means knowing what the facts are, from whom those facts come, how they are interpreted, and what spiritual implications result. Especially important is separating the questions “what is the situation?” and “what should we do about it?” Blurring those domains is a major reason this topic inspires so much venom. Hard facts are rarely presented on either side of the global warming debate. Instead, there are many references to conjectures, statistical models, studies of studies, or what percentage of some group agrees with a particular phrasing regarding the issue. Projected consequences, real or imagined, become the basis for recommending policy, rather than logic. Facts are sometimes ignored, both by those who blame humanity for climate change and those who hold humanity totally innocent of it. Almost no one, on either side, has a solid grasp of the “hard” science or mathematics at work. Those said to “believe in” or “support” the popular stance on global warming have reasons behind their views. Experience and research seem to indicate that climate change, including aspects of global warming, is indeed occurring. The same data suggests that human activity can influence the atmosphere and weather patterns. Humans have negatively impacted our environment in the past. Those who disagree may seem dismissive of all science related to the problem or discounted as conspiracy theorists. Those who reject the popular view of global warming also have their reasons. Doomsday predictions that prove untrue foster skepticism. When failed prophecies of global disaster are followed by revised proclamations with new timelines, the skepticism increases, and the cycle repeats. Predictions related to global warming are often based on speculative models, multiple layers of conjecture, and obscure data greatly subject to interpretation. Worse, proposed solutions often seem overblown or unreasonable; life\-altering extreme measures are often suggested by those who might understand climate but have little grasp of economics, ethics, or history. Those who support the popular view often come across as dismissive of any and all criticism or questioning and are prone to labelling everyone who disagrees with their views as “anti\-science.” [Politics](Christian-politics.html), perhaps more than any other factor, muddies the discussion of global warming. The most strident voices blaming mankind for climate change are tied to left\-leaning politics. Claims that mankind must act urgently on global warming generally come from the same voices denying the humanity of the unborn, redefining gender and sexuality, and scorning religious beliefs. In response, the most vehement opposition to prevailing climate theories tends to be associated with right\-leaning political and social groups. In other words, the debate over global warming and climate change has become a proxy war in the modern progressive\-versus\-conservative political struggle. Whatever reason or truth there might be in the issue is easily lost in an “us\-versus\-them” melee. Regarding issues such as this, skepticism is not the same as disbelief. There are fragments of evidence to support both sides, and logical reasons to choose one interpretation over another. The question of anthropogenic global warming should not divide Christian believers from each other (see Luke 11:17\). Environmental issues are important, but they are not the most important questions facing mankind. Christians ought to treat our world with respect and good stewardship, but we should not allow politically driven hysteria to dominate our view of the environment—regardless of which direction it might lead. Our relationship with God is not dependent on belief or disbelief in human\-caused global warming.
What is contemplative prayer?	Answer It is important to first define “contemplative prayer.” Contemplative prayer is not just “contemplating while you pray.” The Bible instructs us to pray with our minds (1 Corinthians 14:15\), so, clearly, prayer does involve contemplation. However, praying with your mind is not what “contemplative prayer” has come to mean. Contemplative prayer has slowly increased in practice and popularity along with the rise of the emerging church movement—a movement which embraces many unscriptural ideas and practices. Contemplative prayer is one such practice. Contemplative prayer begins with “[centering prayer](centering-prayer.html),” a meditative practice where the practitioner focuses on a word and repeats that word over and over for the duration of the exercise. The purpose is to clear one’s mind of outside concerns so that God’s voice may be more easily heard. After the centering prayer, the practitioner is to sit still, listen for direct guidance from God, and feel His presence. Although this might sound like an innocent exercise, this type of prayer has no scriptural support whatsoever. In fact, it is just the opposite of how prayer is defined in the Bible. “Do not be anxious about anything, but in everything, by prayer and petition, with thanksgiving, present your requests to God.” (Philippians 4:6\). “In that day you will no longer ask me anything. I tell you the truth, my Father will give you whatever you ask in my name. Until now you have not asked for anything in my name. Ask and you will receive, and your joy will be complete” (John 16:23\-24\). These verses and others clearly portray prayer as being comprehendible communication with God, not an esoteric, mystical meditation. Contemplative prayer, by design, focuses on having a mystical experience with God. Mysticism, however, is purely subjective, and does not rely upon truth or fact. Yet the Word of God has been given to us for the very purpose of basing our faith, and our lives, on Truth (2 Timothy 3:16\-17\). What we know about God is based on fact; trusting in experiential knowledge over the biblical record takes a person outside of the standard that is the Bible. Contemplative prayer is no different than the meditative exercises used in Eastern religions and New Age cults. Its most vocal supporters embrace an open spirituality among adherents from all religions, promoting the idea that salvation is gained by many paths, even though Christ Himself stated that salvation comes only through Him (John 14:6\). Contemplative prayer, as practiced in the modern prayer movement, is in opposition to biblical Christianity and should definitely be avoided.
What are territorial spirits?	Answer “Territorial spirits” is a term some Christians use to identify demonic occupation of a specific geographic location. Ironically, it is also a term pagans use to describe an otherworldly presence believed to be residing in a specific geographical location. The Christian concept of territorial spirits comes from passages such as Daniel 10; John 12:31; John 14:30; John 16:11; Mark 5:10; and Ephesians 6:12\. All of these passages imply that fallen angels have been given some type of responsibility over a certain area. Thus, they seem to be territorial. However, we need to remember that this teaching is inferred; the Bible never explicitly delineates a hierarchy of demonic authority in the world. What the Bible is clear about is that demons are at work in the world and that believers are very much involved in a battle against them. In Daniel 10, for example, an angel struggled against a demonic adversary the entire time Daniel was praying and fasting. It wasn’t until the end of Daniel’s spiritually focused time that the angel finally broke away and came to Daniel. Ephesians 6 exhorts believers to stand firm against our spiritual adversaries and to remain alert and ready for battle. There is no doubt that our struggle on Earth is mirrored in some way in the spiritual realm. The problem inherent in the term “territorial spirits” is that some Christians believe it is their duty to engage territorial demons in spiritual warfare. This, however, cannot be justified by Scripture. There is not a single instance in the Bible where someone actively sought out a demon in order to engage it. Demon\-possessed individuals were encountered, and some were brought to Jesus and His disciples for healing, but the disciples didn’t go looking for demons to cast out of people. No one in the Bible ever prayed that the “demon princes” of a town be “bound” from working their will against the residents of that town. Territorial spirits, although not explicitly a scriptural idea, may very well exist, as seen in the previous passages. Whether or not a spirit is “territorial” is really not that important, though. What is important is our response. A believer in Christ has no biblical support to engage in prayer\-led spiritual warfare against demons. Rather, a believer needs to be aware that there is a spiritual battle and to take it seriously (1 Peter 5:8\). Our lives need to be focused on prayer and on growing in faith. Should we ever encounter a demon, we definitely have the Christ\-given authority to deal with it, but we should not go looking for them, territorial or otherwise.
How should a Christian view genetic engineering?	Answer Because genetic engineering was unknown at the time that the Bible was written, it is difficult to establish definitive references on that topic alone. In order to determine the Christian view of genetic engineering, we need to establish a grid of principles through which to view genetic engineering. For specifics on the Christian view of cloning, please see “[What is the Christian view of cloning?](cloning-Christian.html)” The element of greatest concern with genetic engineering involves how much liberty mankind can take in its responsibility to care for the human body and the rest of creation. There is no doubt that the Bible exhorts us to be responsible for our physical health. Proverbs refers to certain activities regarding restoring the health of an individual (Proverbs 12:18\). The apostle Paul states that we have a certain duty to care for the body (Ephesians 5:29\). He also encouraged his protégé, Timothy, to take medicinal action for his infirmities (1 Timothy 5:23\). Believers have the responsibility to use the body properly in that it is the temple of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 6:19,20\). We show our faith by offering assistance to those who have physical needs (James 2:16\). Therefore, as Christians we should be concerned about the physical well\-being of ourselves and others. Creation was to be under the care of humans (Genesis 1:28; 2:15\-20\), but the Bible tells us that creation was impacted by our sin (Genesis 3:17\-19, Romans 8:19\-21\) and anticipates being redeemed from sin’s effects. It is possible to conclude that, as caretakers of creation, humans have an obligation to “fix” the effects of the sin curse and attempt to bring things into a better alignment, using any means possible. Therefore, the thinking goes, any scientific advance can be used for the betterment of the creation. However, there are concerns regarding the use of genetic engineering to accomplish this good. 1\. There is a concern that genetic engineering will take on a role beyond that which God has given to us as stewards of His creation. The Bible states that all things were created by God and for Him (Colossians 1:16\). God designed all living things to reproduce after certain “kinds” (Genesis 1:11\-25\). Too much manipulation of the genetics (altering species) could be tampering with things reserved for the Designer. 2\. There is a concern of genetic engineering attempting to preclude God’s plan for the restoration of creation. As already stated, the creation was affected by the events recorded in Genesis 3 (mankind’s rebellion against God’s plan). Death entered into the world, and man’s genetic make\-up and that of the rest of creation began a change toward demise. In some instances, genetic engineering could be seen as an attempt to undo this result of sin called the “curse.” God has said that He has a remedy for this—redemption through Jesus Christ, as described in Romans 8 and 1 Corinthians 15\. The creation anticipates newness associated with the culmination of God’s promise to restore things to an even better state than the original. To go “too far” to fight this process may compete with the responsibility of individuals to trust in Christ for restoration (Philippians 3:21\). 3\. There is a concern that genetic engineering may interfere with the God\-ordained process of life. It seems evident from a general study of Scripture that God has a plan for the process of life. For example, Psalm 139 describes an intimate relationship between the psalmist and his Creator from the womb. Would the use of genetic manipulation to create life outside of God’s plan jeopardize the development of a God\-conscious soul? Would interfering with the process of physical life affect the prospects of spiritual life? Romans 5:12 tells us that all humanity sins because Adam sinned. It is understood that this involved the transference of the sin nature from generation to generation so that all have sinned (Romans 3:23\). Paul explains the hope of eternity through the conquering of Adam’s sin. If all that are in Adam (from his seed) die, and Christ died for those in such condition, could life created outside of that “seed” be redeemed? (1 Corinthians 15:22, 23\). 4\. There is a concern that a bold pursuit of advances in genetic engineering is motivated by a defiance of God. Genesis 11:1\-9 shows what happens when the creation attempts to exalt itself above the Creator. The people in Genesis 11 were unified, yet they were not submissive to God. As a result, God stopped their progress. God certainly recognized that there were some dangers involved with the direction in which the people were headed. We have a similar warning in Romans 1:18\-32\. There God describes individuals that have become so enamored with the creation (actually worshiping it instead of the Creator) that they were brought to destruction. The fear is that genetic engineering could foster similar motivations, and ultimately, similar results. These are questions and issues for which we have no answers at present, but they are concerns, and they should be carefully considered by Christians attempting to adopt a view of genetic engineering.
What is the purpose of church by-laws (bylaws)?	Answer Most churches have a doctrinal statement, a document which condenses and systematizes the church’s tenets of faith. A doctrinal statement is valuable in ensuring conformity to the Word of God and preventing the church from being “tossed to and fro, and carried about by every wind of doctrine” (Ephesians 4:14\). In addition to the articles of faith, most churches also have a set of by\-laws (or bylaws), sometimes called rules of order or a [constitution](church-constitution.html). There are several practical reasons to have bylaws. First, to promote efficiency, a church must have some type of organization. By\-laws specify a church’s governing structure; define the roles of pastor, elder, deacon, and other leaders; and stipulate the requirements for membership. In other words, bylaws allow “all things \[to] be done decently and in order” (1 Corinthians 14:40\). Second, to provide direction, a church needs to articulate its mission and methodology. The by\-laws of a church are useful in setting parameters for fund raising, outreach, ordination, expenditures, and missionary support. Third, to preserve unity and maintain its testimony, a church should agree on certain issues of Christian living and separation. A “gray area” which the Bible does not specifically address may be covered in a by\-law. For example, a church may require its members to refrain from the consumption of alcohol; since this is not a doctrinal issue, per se, it is better dealt with in the by\-laws. Fourth, to protect itself from liability, a church should have written policies on church discipline, screening youth workers, etc. By\-laws can be a way of averting calamity in a crisis situation.
Why was Moses not allowed to enter the Promised Land?	Answer [Moses](life-Moses.html) is hailed as the leader of the Exodus, the one through whom God delivered His people from Egyptian slavery. To Moses God entrusted the Law. Jesus demonstrated that Moses foreshadowed His own work as the Messiah (John 3:14–15\). Moses is listed in Hebrews 11 as exemplary of faith. In Deuteronomy 34 we read that God Himself buried Moses. We are also told that, “since then, no prophet has risen in Israel like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face. . . . For no one has ever shown the mighty power or performed the awesome deeds that Moses did in the sight of all Israel” (Deuteronomy 34:10, 12\). Yet Moses, for all of his blessings, was not allowed to enter the [Promised Land](Promised-Land.html). Why not? In Deuteronomy 32:51–52 God gives the reason that Moses was not permitted to enter the Promised Land: “This is because . . . you broke faith with me in the presence of the Israelites at the waters of Meribah Kadesh in the Desert of Zin and because you did not uphold my holiness among the Israelites. Therefore, you will see the land only from a distance; you will not enter the land I am giving to the people of Israel.” God was true to His promise. He showed Moses the Promised Land, but did not let him enter in. The incident at the waters of [Meribah Kadesh](Meribah-in-the-Bible.html) is recorded in Numbers 20\. Nearing the end of their forty years of wandering, the Israelites came to the Desert of Zin. There was no water, and the community turned against Moses and Aaron. Moses and Aaron went to the [tent of meeting](tent-of-meeting.html) and prostrated themselves before God. God told Moses and Aaron to gather the assembly and speak to the rock. Water would come forth. Moses took the staff and gathered the men. Then, seemingly in anger, Moses said to them, “Listen, you rebels, must we bring you water out of this rock?” Then Moses struck the rock twice with his staff (Numbers 20:10–11\). Water came from the rock, as God had promised. But God immediately told Moses and Aaron that, because they failed to trust Him enough to honor Him as holy, they would not bring the children of Israel into the Promised Land (verse 12\). The punishment may seem harsh to us, but, when we look closely at Moses’ actions, we see several mistakes. Most obviously, Moses disobeyed a direct command from God. God had commanded Moses to speak to the rock. Instead, Moses struck the rock with his staff. Earlier, when God had brought water from a rock, He instructed Moses to strike it with a staff (Exodus 17\). But God’s instructions were different here. God wanted Moses to trust Him, especially after they had been in such close relationship for so many years. Moses didn’t need to use force; he simply needed to obey God and know that God would be true to His promise. Also, Moses took the credit for bringing forth the water. He asks the people gathered at the rock, “Must we bring you water out of this rock?” (Numbers 20:10, emphasis added). Moses seemed to be taking credit for the miracle himself (and Aaron), instead of attributing it to God. Moses did this publicly. God could not let it go unpunished and expect the Israelites to understand His holiness. The water\-giving rock is used as a symbol of Christ in 1 Corinthians 10:4\. The rock was struck in Exodus 17:6, just like Christ was crucified once (Hebrews 7:27\). Moses’ speaking to the rock in Numbers 20 could have been meant as a picture of prayer. Jesus was “struck” once, and He continues to provide living water to those who pray in faith to Him. When Moses angrily struck the rock, he destroyed the biblical [typology](typology-Biblical.html) and, in effect, crucified Christ again. Moses’ punishment for disobedience, pride, and the misrepresentation of Christ’s sacrifice was steep; he was barred from entering the Promised Land (Numbers 20:12\). Yet we do not see Moses complain about his punishment. Instead, he continues to faithfully lead the people and honor God. In His holiness, God is also compassionate. He invited Moses up to [Mount Nebo](mount-Nebo.html) where He showed His beloved prophet the Promised Land before his death. Deuteronomy 34:4–5 records, “Then the Lord said to him, ‘This is the land I promised on oath to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob when I said, “I will give it to your descendants.” I have let you see it with your eyes, but you will not cross over into it.’ And Moses the servant of the Lord died there in Moab, as the Lord had said.” Moses’ failure at the rock did not negate or break his relationship with God. God continued to use the prophet and continued to love him with tenderness.
Should a Christian go into business with an unbeliever?	Answer The question of whether a Christian should go into business with an unbeliever is a common one. The most often\-quoted Scripture is “Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness?” (2 Corinthians 6:14\). Many times, this verse is taken to be a prohibition against Christians marrying non\-Christians. Marriage would definitely apply here, but there is nothing in the context to limit it to marriage. All types of “unequal yokes” are forbidden—marriages, intimate friendships, and, in many instances, business partnerships. The command implies that a great difference exists between a believer and an unbeliever. Generally speaking, the motivations, goals, and methods of a Christian are incompatible with those of an unbeliever. Faith changes the character of a person. A Christian’s highest ambition in life is to glorify the Lord Jesus and please Him in all things; an unbeliever is, at best, indifferent to such goals. If a Christian’s methods and goals in business are identical to the methods and goals of an unbeliever, the Christian very likely needs to reevaluate and reconsider his/her priorities. Second Corinthians 6:14 goes on to ask, “What fellowship can light have with darkness?” People are said to be “in fellowship” when they share something. Business partners are united in such a way that they must share things—what belongs to one also belongs to the other. This is precisely what is meant by “fellowship.” With these principles in mind, it is best to avoid uniting with unbelievers in business. If a Christian is truly seeking to honor the Lord through the business, conflict with the unbelieving business partner is unavoidable. “Can two walk together, except they be agreed?” (Amos 3:3 KJV).
Does everyone have a "God-shaped hole"?	Answer The “God\-shaped hole” concept states that every person has a void in his soul/spirit/life that can only be filled by God. The “God\-shaped hole” is the innate longing of the human heart for something outside itself, something transcendent, something “other.” Ecclesiastes 3:11 refers to God’s placing of "eternity in man’s heart." God made humanity for His eternal purpose, and only God can fulfill our desire for eternity. All religion is based on the innate desire to “connect” with God. This desire can only be fulfilled by God, and therefore can be likened to a “God\-shaped hole.” The problem, though, is that humanity ignores this hole or attempts to fill it with things other than God. Jeremiah 17:9 describes the condition of our hearts: “The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?” Solomon reiterates the same concept: “The hearts of men, moreover, are full of evil and there is madness in their hearts while they live…” (Ecclesiastes 9:3\). The New Testament concurs: “The sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God’s law, nor can it do so” (Romans 8:7\). Romans 1:18\-22 describes humanity ignoring what can be known about God, including presumably the “God\-shaped hole,” and instead worshiping anything and everything other than God. Sadly, too many spend their lives looking for something other than God to fill their longing for meaning—business, family, sports, etc. But in pursuing these things that are not eternal, they remain unfulfilled and wonder why their lives never seem satisfactory. There is no doubt that many people pursuing things other than God achieve a measure of “happiness” for a time. But when we consider Solomon, who had all the riches, success, esteem, and power in the world—in short, all that men seek after in this life—we see that none of it fulfilled the longing for eternity. He declared it all “vanity,” meaning that he sought after these things in vain because they did not satisfy. In the end he said, “Now all has been heard; here is the conclusion of the matter: Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole \[duty] of man” (Ecclesiastes 12:13\). Just as a square peg cannot fill a round hole, neither can the “God\-shaped hole” inside each of us be filled by anyone or anything other than God. Only through a personal relationship with God through faith in Jesus Christ can the “God\-shaped hole” be filled and the desire for eternity fulfilled.
What was the star of Bethlehem?	Answer The star of Bethlehem is associated with the birth of Christ and the visit of the [magi](three-wise-men.html) (wise men) as recorded in Matthew 2:1–12\. The text implies the star of Bethlehem appeared only to the magi in the East (most likely the area of Persia, or modern\-day Iran). There is no biblical record of anyone else observing the star of Bethlehem. The magi in the East saw something in the heavens—the star of Bethlehem—that alerted them to the fact that the Jewish Messiah was born. The magi do not call the star of Bethlehem by that name; in Matthew 2:2 they refer to it as being “his star,” since it was a sign to them that a king was born. The star prompted the magi to travel to Jerusalem, the capital of Israel. This would be the logical place to start looking for the birth of the King of the Jews for someone who did not know of Micah’s prophecy about [Bethlehem](Bethlehem-in-the-Bible.html). In Jerusalem, the magi visited King Herod and were told that the new king they were looking for would be born in Bethlehem, not in Jerusalem (Matthew 2:5\). The wise men left Herod’s palace, and the star of Bethlehem appeared to them once again. In fact, the star “went ahead of them until it stopped over the place where the child was. When they saw the star, they were overjoyed” (verses 9–10\). The star of Bethlehem, apparently mobile, led the magi to the precise place where they could find Jesus. Modern portrayals of the Christmas nativity scene usually show the wise men visiting Jesus on the night of His birth. That is likely not what truly occurred. King Herod discovered from the magi the “exact time” the star of Bethlehem had first appeared to them (Matthew 2:7\), and he later ordered all male children two years old and under in Bethlehem to be killed (verse 16\). Herod obviously thought the star of Bethlehem had first appeared when Christ was born; if he was right, then Jesus could have been up to two years old when the star of Bethlehem later guided the magi through the streets of Bethlehem. The Greek word translated “young child” in Matthew 2:9 can mean anything from a newborn infant to a toddler. So, the magi may have first observed the star of Bethlehem the night of Jesus’ birth, or they may have first seen it up to two years beforehand. Either way, they found Jesus still in Bethlehem when they arrived. Joseph and Mary almost surely stayed in Bethlehem until Mary could travel again. In fact, they probably stayed there for the 40 days necessary to complete Mary’s purification. From Bethlehem, they could easily make the five\-mile trip to Jerusalem for the sacrifice for Mary’s purification (Luke 2:22\). The fact that the magi came to a “house” (Matthew 2:11\) rather than the stable makes sense because Joseph naturally would have moved his family to a more protected place as soon as possible—the morning after Jesus was born, in all probability. After seeing the star of Bethlehem, the magi traveled to Jerusalem to look for the Messiah. The question arises, how would Persian magi know about the Jewish Messiah? Undoubtedly, they would have been exposed to the writings of the Jewish prophet Daniel, who had been the chief of the court seers in Persia. Daniel 9:24–27 is a prophecy that gives a timeline for the birth of the Messiah. Also, they may have been aware of the words of the pagan prophet Balaam (who was from the town of Pethor on the Euphrates River near Persia) in Numbers 24:17\. Balaam’s prophecy specifically mentions “a star” and “a scepter” rising out of Jacob. What exactly was the star of Bethlehem? The Greek word translated “star” in the text is the word aster, which is the normal word for a star or celestial body. The word is used 24 times in the New Testament, and most of the time it refers to a celestial body. It can be used to denote angels, as in Revelation 12:4, where aster seems to refer to the fallen angels who followed Satan’s rebellion. Basic rules of biblical interpretation state that we should take the normal sense of a word unless there is compelling evidence to suggest otherwise. In that case, the star of Bethlehem should be considered an actual heavenly body. Many Bible scholars suggest a natural explanation for the star of Bethlehem, their theories ranging from a supernova to a comet to an alignment of planets. Something in the heavens provided a brighter\-than\-normal light in the sky. However, there is evidence to suggest that the star of Bethlehem was not a natural stellar phenomenon, but something unexplained by science. First, the fact that the star of Bethlehem seemed to appear only to the magi indicates that this was no ordinary star. Also, celestial bodies normally move from east to west due to the earth’s rotation, yet the star of Bethlehem led the magi from Jerusalem south to Bethlehem. Not only that, but it led them directly to the place where Joseph and Mary were staying, stopping overhead. There is no natural stellar phenomenon that can do that. So, if the normal usage of the word star doesn’t fit the context, what does? The star of Bethlehem in Matthew 2:1–12 was likely an angel or a manifestation of the [Shekinah Glory](shekinah-glory.html). The Shekinah, which literally means “dwelling of God,” was the visible presence of the Lord. Prior to this, the most notable appearance of the Shekinah was the pillar of cloud that led the Israelites by day and the pillar of fire that led them by night (Exodus 13:21\). The Shekinah can obviously lead people to specific locations, and it was seen later in connection with Christ’s ministry (e.g., Matthew 17:5; Acts 1:9\). Either an angel or the Shekinah would fit the evidence. It shouldn’t surprise us that God would use a miraculous sign to signal the advent of His Son into the world. Those with eyes to see joyfully beheld His glory.
What is the Olivet Discourse?	Answer The Olivet Discourse is the name given to the orderly and extended teaching given by Jesus Christ on the Mount of Olives. His subject is the end times. This discourse is recorded in Matthew 24:1 – 25:46\. Parallel passages are found in Mark 13:1\-37 and Luke 21:5\-36\. The record in Matthew is the most extensive, so reference here will be to Matthew’s Gospel. It is important to recognize that Jesus’ teaching in this discourse is in reference to Israel and not the Church. Christ was speaking of God’s future program for Israel. Other passages to consider when studying the Olivet Discourse are Daniel 9:24\-27 and Revelation 6:1–19:21, which refer to the future seven\-year period called the [tribulation](tribulation.html). God’s program for the Church concludes with the [rapture](rapture-of-the-church.html), which is not taught in the Olivet Discourse. The rapture of the Church is found in John 14:1\-4; 1 Corinthians 15:51\-52; and 1 Thessalonians 4:13\-18\. In Matthew 23, Jesus had spoken to the Pharisees concerning judgment. This can be seen in the "woe" statements in that chapter. In 24:1, Jesus was leaving the temple when the disciples called His attention to the magnificent buildings on the temple mount. Jesus then tells the disciples that “not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down” (verse 2\). This prophecy was literally fulfilled in A.D. 70 when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem. The temple was burned. The gold in the temple melted in the fire and ran down into the cracks between the stones. As people later searched for the gold, they toppled every stone from its place. This destruction of Jerusalem was but a foreshadowing of what is yet to come. Jesus’ prophecy of doom got the disciples curious, and probably more than a little concerned. When they were alone with Jesus on the Mount of Olives, they asked Him, "Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?" (verse 3\). What follows in Matthew 24–25 refers to the future, seven\-year tribulation period and the second coming of Christ at the end of the tribulation. During that time, God will complete His chastisement and purification of Israel and judge the whole world (Daniel 9:24\-27; Revelation 6–19\). Daniel 9:27 indicates that the tribulation will be divided into two equal parts. Jesus’ teaching in Matthew 24:4\-8 refers to the first half. The “birth pangs” (verse 8\) refer to the sufferings that Israel will experience during the first 3 1/2 years. The signs with reference to the end of the age are the coming of false messiahs (verse 5\), the threat of wars and widespread conflict (verses 6\-7\), and various natural catastrophes (verse 7\). Revelation 6 is a parallel passage. The apostle John writes of the seal judgments. Revelation 6:2 speaks of a rider on a white horse, which refers to a false messiah called elsewhere the Antichrist and the Beast. Revelation 6:4 says that peace is taken from the earth. Revelation 6:6\-8 speaks of famine and death. Jesus said these things are only the “beginning of birth pangs” (Matthew 24:8\). Worse is yet to come. In Revelation 13, the second half of the tribulation begins when the Beast, or Antichrist, sets up his rule for 42 months (cf. Daniel 9:27; Matthew 24:15\). In the Olivet Discourse, the second half of the tribulation is described in Matthew 24:9\-14\. Persecution of the Jews and death (verse 9\) will be the result of the Beast’s rise to power. The Antichrist will also persecute anyone who refuses to follow him (Revelation 13:1\-18\). The salvation promised in Matthew 24:13 is deliverance from the Beast’s persecution. The one who endures until Christ returns will be saved from the Beast. Jesus says that “this gospel of the kingdom” will be preached worldwide before the end comes. In other words, the good news (gospel) will be available during the tribulation; the message will be that Christ will soon return in judgment to set up His earthly kingdom (Revelation 20:4\-6\). This message will cause many people to realize their sinful state and receive the Savior during the tribulation. Matthew 24:15\-26 gives further details concerning the tribulation. Jesus refers to an “abomination” and desolation of a future temple in Matthew 24:15\-22; this is more clearly spoken of in Luke 21:20\-24\. The Beast will take authority and set up an image of himself in the future temple (Daniel 9:27; 2 Thessalonians 2:1\-4; Revelation 13:1\-18\). When this happens, Jesus says, head for the hills. Those in Jerusalem are advised to flee for their lives when they see that the Beast has taken his seat of authority (Matthew 24:16\-20\). The Antichrist will rule from Jerusalem for 42 months (3 1/2 years), the latter half of the tribulation, called the “[great tribulation](Great-Tribulation.html)” in verse 21\. Jesus warns that the great tribulation will be the worst time ever seen on earth (verse 21\). In fact, if those days were not cut short by the return of Christ, no one would survive (compare the bowl judgments in Revelation 16\). Jesus again gives a warning of false prophets in the last days (Matthew 24:23\-28\). At the end of the tribulation, there will be astronomical upheaval (verse 29\), and the nations of the world will see the Christ “coming on the clouds of the sky, with power and great glory” (verses 29\-30\). Those who were saved during the tribulation will be gathered out of the world by the angels (verse 31\). Jesus emphasizes the facts that there will be signs leading up to the day of judgment (Matthew 24:32\-34\) and that His Word is sure (verse 35\). Jesus says that no one knows the timing of these events and that those upon whom judgment is coming will be caught unawares (verses 36\-44\). Jesus ends the Olivet Discourse with four parables. The first one concerns a wicked servant whose master punishes him upon his return home (Matthew 24:45\-51\). The next, the [Parable of the Ten Virgins](parable-ten-virgins.html), encourages readiness and watchfulness (25:1\-13\). The [third parable](parable-talents.html), relating the story of three servants and their use (or misuse) of finances, teaches faithfulness in view of the fact that God’s servants must give an account of themselves one day (25:14\-30\). Jesus ends His discourse by telling the [Parable of the Sheep and Goats](parable-sheep-goats.html), which pictures the dividing of the saved from the unsaved at the end of the tribulation before the commencement of Christ’s millennial reign (25:31\-46\). Within days of the Olivet Discourse, Jesus was betrayed into the hands of unbelievers and crucified for sinners. The Holy One of God will one day return in glory to judge the world, but first He had to provide the way of salvation for all who would trust in Him.
What happened in the Garden of Gethsemane?	Answer The garden at Gethsemane, a place whose name literally means “oil press,” is located on a slope of the Mount of Olives just across the [Kidron Valley](Kidron-Valley.html) from Jerusalem. A garden of ancient olive trees stands there to this day. Jesus frequently went to Gethsemane with His disciples to pray (John 18:2\). The most famous events at Gethsemane occurred on the night before His crucifixion when Jesus was betrayed. Each of the Gospel writers describes the events of that night with slight variations, so reading the four accounts (Matthew 26:36\-56, Mark 14:32\-52, Luke 22:40\-53 and John 18:1\-11\) will give an accurate picture of that momentous night in its entirety. As the evening began, after Jesus and His disciples had celebrated the Passover, they came to the garden. At some point, Jesus took three of them—Peter, James and John— to a place separated from the rest. Here Jesus asked them to watch with Him and pray so they would not fall into temptation (Matthew 26:41\), but they fell asleep. Twice, Jesus had to wake them and remind them to pray so that they would not fall into temptation. This was especially poignant because Peter did indeed fall into temptation later that very night when three times he denied even knowing Jesus. Jesus moved a little way from the three men to pray, and twice He asked His Father to remove the cup of wrath He was about to drink, but each time He submitted to the Father’s will. He was “exceedingly sorrowful unto death,” but God sent an angel from heaven to strengthen Him (Luke 22:43\). After this, Judas Iscariot, the betrayer, arrived with a “multitude” of soldiers, high priests, Pharisees, and servants to arrest Jesus. Judas identified Him by the prearranged signal of a kiss which he gave to Jesus. Trying to protect Jesus, Peter took a sword and attacked a man named [Malchus](Peter-cut-off-ear-Malchus.html), the servant of the high priest, cutting off his ear. Jesus rebuked Peter and miraculously healed the man’s ear. It’s surprising that witnessing this amazing miracle of healing had no effect on the multitude. Neither were they shaken by His awesome display of power as described in John 18:5\-6, where either at the majesty of His looks, or at the power of His words, or both, they became like dead men, falling to the ground. Nevertheless, they arrested Him and took Him to Pontius Pilate, while the disciples scattered in fear for their lives. The events that occurred in the Garden of Gethsemane have reverberated down through the centuries. The passion Jesus displayed on that momentous night has been depicted in music, books, and films for centuries. From the 16th century, when Bach wrote two magnificent oratorios based on the gospel accounts of Matthew and John, to the present day with the film The Passion of the Christ, the story of this extraordinary night has been told again and again. Even our language has been affected by these events, giving us such phrases as “he who lives by the sword dies by the sword” (Matthew 26:52\); “the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak” (Mark 14:38\); and “sweating drops of blood” (Luke 22:44\). Of course, the most important impact of this night was the willingness of our Savior to die on the cross in our place in order to pay the penalty for our sins. God “made Him who knew no sin, to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Corinthians 5:21\). This is the gospel of Jesus Christ.
What is British Israelism and is it biblical?	Answer British Israelism, also known as Anglo\-Israelism, is the belief that the "lost ten tribes" of Israel migrated to Europe and then to England and became the primary ancestors of the British people and, thereby, the United States. British Israelism was made popular by the [Worldwide Church of God](Worldwide-Church-God-Armstrongism.html) and Herbert Armstrong, but other groups have held the doctrine as well. Is British Israelism true and biblical? In order to determine this, we need to examine the two primary claims: (1\) The [ten tribes](lost-tribes-Israel.html) were lost, and (2\) the ten tribes migrated to England. (1\) 2 Kings 17:18 states that Israel was deported to Assyria in 722 B.C. After this time, mention of the ten northern tribes (Israel) is rare in Scripture. However, other Scriptures (and historical records) indicate that some of the people of the northern ten tribes remained in the land. Second Chronicles 35:18 records Israel celebrating the Passover with Judah approximately 90 years after the Assyrian deportation. It is likely that many people of the northern ten tribes fled to Judah to escape the Assyrians, and even more fled to the safety of Judah after the Assyrians had ransacked Israel. Second Chronicles 15:9 records people from Ephraim, Manasseh, and Simeon settling in Judah long before the Assyrian invasion. In the New Testament, the prophetess Anna is said to be from the tribe of Asher (Luke 2:36\), one of the supposed ten lost tribes. So, yes, many people from the northern ten tribes were deported to Assyria, never to be mentioned again. At the same time, there is sufficient evidence in Scripture to prove that the ten tribes were not lost, but rather rejoined with Judah in the south. It is likely that when Judah was deported by the Babylonians, the people would have sought out the Israelites in Assyria (very near Babylon) and joined with them. In the returns to Israel recorded in Ezra and Nehemiah, the Scriptures nowhere limit the returnees as being entirely from the tribe of Judah. (2\) Is it possible that some of the deported Israelites emigrated to Europe, even England? Yes. Is it likely? No. A journey from Assyria to England would have been exceedingly difficult in ancient times, especially for a large number of people. Geographically speaking, Afghan\-Israelism and even Japanese\-Israelism have a greater possibility of truth. Further, why would Assyria, or later Babylon, or later Persia allow the Israelites to migrate outside of their territories? Further, if the Israelites had the ability to migrate, why would they travel to Europe / England instead of back to their ancestral homeland? So, while it is possible that some Israelites migrated to Europe / England, it is highly unlikely that this occurred to any significant degree. The primary goal behind British Israelism is to claim that England and the United States have inherited the covenant promises God made to Israel. While England and the United States have been blessed by God in many ways, it is not because God’s promises to Israel have been transferred to those two nations. God’s covenants with Israel always involved the specific land of Israel. Abraham’s descendants would inherit the land. The blessings of God to Israel were always in connection with the specific land that was promised. These promises, therefore, cannot apply to England or the United States, as those two nations do not possess the [promised land](Israel-land.html). Further, while a significant number of Americans have English heritage, there are far more American immigrants from other nations combined than from England. British Israelism (and other forms of Israelism) should be rejected because it does not have a solid basis biblically or historically.
Who are the Hare Krishnas and what do they believe?	Answer The origin of Hare Krishna, also called Gaudiya Vaishnavism or Chaitanya Vaishnavism, is promoted through the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (or ISKCON). Hare Krishna is a mystical sect of [Hinduism](hinduism.html). It is usually classified as a monotheistic form of Hinduism, since Hare Krishnas believe that all deities are simply various manifestations of the one god, Vishnu or Krishna. The “monotheism” of Hare Krishna is a little muddled, however, as Sri Krishna has an “eternal consort” named Srimati Radharani; together, Krishna and Radharani comprise the “Divine Couple.” The Hare Krishna movement dates back to the fifteenth century (1486\), when its founder, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, began teaching that Krishna was the supreme Lord above every other god. Mahaprabhu advocated a devotional method of faith in which adherents of Gaudiya Vaishnavism entered into a relationship with Krishna and expressed their adoration for Krishna through dancing and chanting. Mahaprabhu’s public displays of adoration gained a large following, in part, due to their sharp contrast with the dispassionate and ascetic expressions common to Hinduism. This Hindu sect, however distinct it is in its unique adherence to Krishna, is still quite Hindu, since even Krishna is but a manifestation (or "Avatar") of Vishnu—one of the classic deities of Hinduism. Moreover, Hare Krishnas retain the [Bhagavad Gita](Bhagavad-Gita.html), a Hindu Scripture, as well as the doctrines of [reincarnation](reincarnation.html) and [karma](karma.html). The ultimate goal for Hare Krishnas is a transcendental, loving relationship with Lord Krishna. Hare refers to “the pleasure potency of Krishna.” Due to their mystical devotion expressed in chanting and dancing, the Hare Krishnas can be compared to Sufi Muslims ("Whirling Dervishes") and some mystical expressions of Christianity that emphasize ecstatic experiences and mystical transcendence. In 1965 the Hare Krishna movement came to America by means of Abhay Charan De Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada. The Hare Krishna movement grew quickly in the ready soil of the 1960s. Western values were being questioned, and Eastern thought was becoming fashionable. ISKCON is a wealthy organization today, having gained its wealth largely through soliciting funds and distributing its literature, including the Bhagavad Gita and its periodical Back to Godhead. During the 1960s and 1970s, Hare Krishnas were so prevalent in public places such as airports that laws had to be passed to prevent them from accosting people with their often aggressive and intimidating demands for money. Hare Krishna is quite demanding of its adherents. Becoming a member involves choosing a guru and becoming his disciple. This guru is critical to attaining enlightenment: “Without \[the guru] the cultivation of Krishna consciousness is impossible.” On the devotee’s side, “initiation means that he accepts the guru as his spiritual master and agrees to worship him as God” (Ron Rhodes, The Challenge of the Cults and New Religions 2001, p. 176\). And the whole of one’s life is to be encompassed by Krishna\-centered practice and devotion. ISKCON pulls its members into communal settings where everything is deliberately centered on Krishna. Much of Indian/Hindu culture is imported into these communes. It must be noted that these communes have been harshly criticized by ex\-members, and ISKCON has faced criminal charges alleging illegal and immoral practices, including widespread child abuse, taking place within the movement. The beliefs of the Hare Krishnas are typically Hindu and are incompatible with biblical Christianity. First, the view of God is basically pantheistic, meaning that they believe God is all and in all. For Hare Krishnas, God is everything and everything is God. For the Christian, God is transcendent—He is above all that He created. One of the tenets of ISKCON thought is that we actually achieve relational unity with God ourselves. The goal of the Hare Krishna is to reach “Krishna consciousness,” a kind of enlightenment. This is the deepest identification with Krishna. Insofar as ISKCON is truly Hindu, it can ascribe to a pantheistic view of God and therefore teach that man is ultimately identical to God. This is an old lie dating back to the Garden of Eden: “You will be as God” (Genesis 3:5\). Like all false religions, Hare Krishna requires a series of works for salvation. Yes, devotion and relationship are packed into their belief system, but these are built up from works, from [bhakti\-yoga](Christian-yoga.html) to meditation before an altar to soliciting funds. Chanting is a major part of Hare Krishna. Sri Chaitanya recommended that his followers chant 100,000 holy names every day. The chanting is facilitated by the use of a mala, a rosary of 108 beads. Eating meat is disallowed, as is dining in restaurants, due to the belief that food retains the consciousness of the cook—ingesting food prepared by an angry chef will make the eater angry. In Hare Krishna, there is always a push to chant more, dance more, and work harder lest some bit of karmic debt is retained and cause one to fail to enter Krishna consciousness. Self\-denial and sacrifice are also crucial for salvation in Hare Krishna. Salvation, according to ISKCON, is thoroughly entwined with the Hindu concept of karma, or retributive justice. This teaching requires belief in reincarnation and/or the transmigration of the soul. One’s works, good and bad, are measured and judged after death. If one’s deeds are good, he continues to be reincarnated into higher life forms; if his deeds are bad, he will become a lower life form. It is only when one’s good deeds have counterbalanced the bad that he can cease the cycles of rebirth and realize his oneness with Krishna. How different Krishna is from the compassionate and merciful God of the Bible who “so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have eternal life” (John 3:16\). The Bible is clear that salvation is by grace through faith in the shed blood of Jesus Christ (Ephesians 2:8–9\). “For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Corinthians 5:21\). No amount of good deeds can ever achieve salvation for anyone. Hare Krishnas, like all humanity, have only one hope for eternal life: Jesus Christ, crucified, resurrected, and exalted forever. All other paths lead to destruction. Jesus Himself said, “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No one comes to the Father except by Me” (John 14:6\), and “there is salvation in no other one; for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12\).
Is the Catholic concept of a nun biblical?	Answer For some people, the solemn, floor\-length, black\-and\-white habit brings repressed nightmares involving rulers and bleeding knuckles flooding into the conscious mind. Others regard these women as repressed and living in a very unnatural state. As with everything that is even slightly mysterious, there is much misunderstanding when it comes to the real story behind Catholic nuns. Nuns, first and foremost, devote themselves to a life of service and spirituality away from the outside world. They are actually the female equivalent of a monk. The vast majority of nuns are Catholic; however, there are several Protestant churches (particularly Episcopal) that have orders of nuns. The term "nun" is generic, and can refer to either nuns (who live a completely cloistered existence) or to sisters (who work within a parish). All nuns must take vows of chastity, obedience, and poverty. Nuns, properly so called, have taken solemn vows and received a papal enclosure. They will never venture out and cannot receive visitors at their convent, under pain of excommunication. Sisters, on the other hand, have taken simple vows and commit themselves to work within the diocese or abroad on missions. Nuns may be purely contemplative, relegating them to the status of "prayer warriors"; these orders are strictly enclosed. Others combine contemplation with works of charity or foreign missions. Some orders focus on the education of young girls. And still others dedicate their lives to caring for the sick, poor, mentally challenged, and elderly. The Catholic Encyclopedia claims that women were the first to embrace the religious life for its own sake. The Scriptures cited are 1 Timothy 5:9 and 1 Corinthians 7\. These passages do not speak about nuns specifically; the former is in a context of taking care of widows, while the latter is an exhortation to remain content with the life God has given us. Perhaps the best scriptural foundation for the position of "nun" is 1 Corinthians 7:34, "...an unmarried woman or virgin is concerned about the Lord’s affairs: Her aim is to be devoted to the Lord in both body and spirit. But a married woman is concerned about the affairs of this world — how she can please her husband." There is some truth to the idea that an unmarried woman can more faithfully serve the Lord. There is nothing in Scripture that explicitly forbids the practice of nuns. However, there is also nothing that explicitly describes any similar practice. So, perhaps this is one of those cases when one should look at the motives of the women involved. Many women have felt a call from God to give up all worldly possessions (poverty), remain chaste (chastity), and submit to the authority of the church (obedience). Is there any good reason to assume that this calling did not come from God? Generally, the enemy does not call people into a life of serving others and of prayer. Without a reason to speculate otherwise, perhaps there are many nuns who are genuinely serving God precisely as He has called them to. At the same time, any nun who believes that serving as a nun merits salvation is terribly mistaken. We are saved by faith, receiving Christ as Savior, not by acts of charity, poverty, or obedience.
Dealing with a mother-in-law...?	Answer A meddling mother\-in\-law who is demanding, controlling, and intrudes into the lives of her son/daughter and daughter\-in\-law/son\-in\-law is what the Bible calls a "busybody" (1 Timothy 5:13\). The meaning of the Greek word that is translated "busybody" in the 1 Timothy passage means "a self\-appointed overseer in other men’s matters." Overseeing is what some mothers\-in\-law are engaged in, or at least accused of. This kind of behavior is annoying, very frustrating, and contrary to God’s plan for the family. Obviously, the dynamics in such a situation are frustrating. A mother\-in\-law may do these things because no one else in the family has given her boundaries. Therefore, she becomes an overbearing "bully." Perhaps she does not even realize how intrusive and controlling she is. To her it may just be "loving." If that is the case, perhaps a heart\-to\-heart talk will clear the air. If she does understand what she is doing and does it on purpose even after she has been asked to stop, then there is nothing that you are going to be able to do to alter that. Regardless of which side of the family the interference comes from, it is an assault upon the sanctity of the marriage and violates the "leave and cleave" of God’s order for marriage (Genesis 2:23\-24\). A man and woman leave their birth families and begin a new family, and they are to love and protect each other. A husband who allows his mother or his mother\-in\-law to interfere with his marriage is not living up to the commandment given to husbands in Ephesians 5:25\-33\. Boundaries need to be set and then held regardless of the resistance encountered. The reality is that people treat us the way we allow them to treat us. If we permit them to trample the sanctity of our family, then that is what they will do. No one, not even our extended family, has the right to invade the privacy of our home, and it is the responsibility of the husband to guard that privacy. He should take the lead in gently—but firmly—explaining to his mother\-in\-law what she is doing that is over the line and assuring her that such behavior cannot be tolerated. He should remind her that God has given him the responsibility for his family and to relinquish any of that responsibility to her is to disobey God. He should also assure her that he and his wife still love her, but that the relationship has changed and he is in charge now. That is God’s design for the family, and that is the way it will be. Then the couple must stand firm in their resolve. What can we do about reacting to a woman who acts in the way a meddling mother\-in\-law does? We can make a choice not to allow her to take away our peace of mind. We may not be able to change the way others behave, but how we respond to their behavior is our choice. We can allow the actions of other people to get to us, or we can choose to give it over to God and allow Him to use this to strengthen us spiritually. It is our own response to this type of situation that fuels our frustration. Only we can stop wearing ourselves out emotionally by allowing an interfering mother\-in\-law’s actions to be the arbiter of our own peace. Her behavior is not our responsibility; our response is. Parents and in\-laws should be treated with respect and love, but we must not allow our emotions to entangle us. The best way to disengage an enemy is to make him an ally. This is done through God’s grace. Christians can always give the grace of forgiveness (Ephesians 4:32\). It may not stop a mother\-in\-law from interfering, but it will be a source of strength and peace to stand in (Ephesians 6:11\-17\). The only place to find true peace of heart is in a personal relationship with God through Christ. Only then can we respond by resting in His peace.
How should a Christian deal with feelings of guilt regarding past sins?	Answer Everyone has sinned, and one of the results of sin is guilt. We can be thankful for guilty feelings because they drive us to seek forgiveness. The moment a person turns from sin to Jesus Christ in faith, his sin is forgiven. Repentance is part of the faith that leads to salvation (Matthew 3:2; 4:17; Acts 3:19\). In Christ, even the most heinous sins are blotted out (see 1 Corinthians 6:9\-11 for a list of some unrighteous acts that can be forgiven). Salvation is by grace, and grace forgives. After a person is saved, he will still sin, and when he does, God still promises forgiveness. “But if anybody does sin, we have one who speaks to the Father in our defense—Jesus Christ, the Righteous One” (1 John 2:1\). Freedom from sin, however, does not always mean freedom from guilty feelings. Even when our sins are forgiven, we still remember them. Also, we have a spiritual enemy, called “the accuser of our brothers” (Revelation 12:10\) who relentlessly reminds us of our failures, faults, and sins. When a Christian experiences feelings of guilt, he or she should do the following things: 1\) Confess all known, previously unconfessed sin. In some cases, feelings of guilt are appropriate because confession is needed. Many times, we feel guilty because we are guilty! (See David’s description of guilt and its solution in Psalm 32:3\-5\.) 2\) Ask the Lord to reveal any other sin that may need confessing. Have the courage to be completely open and honest before the Lord. “Search me, O God, and know my heart; test me and know my anxious thoughts. See if there is any offensive way in me, and lead me in the way everlasting” (Psalm 139:23\-24\). 3\) Seek to make restitution, where possible, of the sins committed against others. [Zacchaeus](Zacchaeus-in-the-Bible.html), in repenting of his sin, promised the Lord, “If I have cheated anybody out of anything, I will pay back four times the amount” (Luke 19:8\). This is part of the “fruit in keeping with repentance” that John preached (Luke 3:9\). 4\) Trust the promise of God that He will forgive sin and remove guilt, based on the blood of Christ (1 John 1:9; Psalm 85:2; 86:5; Romans 8:1\). 5\) On occasions when guilty feelings arise over sins already confessed and forsaken, reject such feelings as false guilt. The Lord has been true to His promise to forgive. Read and meditate on Psalm 103:8\-12\. 6\) Ask the Lord to rebuke Satan, your accuser, and ask the Lord to restore the joy that comes with freedom from guilt (Psalm 51:12\). Psalm 32 is a very profitable study. Although David had sinned terribly, he found freedom from both sin and guilty feelings. He dealt with the cause of guilt and the reality of forgiveness. Psalm 51 is another good passage to investigate. The emphasis here is confession of sin, as David pleads with God from a heart full of guilt and sorrow. Restoration and joy are the results. Finally, if sin has been confessed, repented of, and forgiven, it is time to move on. Remember that we who have come to Christ have been made new creatures in Him. “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come!” (2 Corinthians 5:17\). Part of the “old” which has gone is the remembrance of past sins and the guilt they produced. Sadly, some Christians are prone to wallowing in memories of their former sinful lives, memories which should have been dead and buried long ago. This is pointless and runs counter to the victorious Christian life God wants for us. A wise saying is “If God has saved you out of a sewer, don’t dive back in and swim around.”
Will babies and young children be taken in the Rapture?	Answer The Bible does not specifically say what will happen to babies, infants, and children when the rapture occurs. This causes many Christians to worry that they will be taken in the rapture, and their young children will be left behind to face the terrible tribulation. Is this possible? No, we do not believe it is. As we explain our viewpoint, please understand that this is, at best, informed speculation. Again, the Bible does not specifically address this issue. As a background, please read our article on the "[age of accountability](age-of-accountability.html)." It is our view that children who are under the age of accountability will be taken in the rapture. If a child has not reached the point that he/she can make a decision for or against Christ, we would hold that if he/she dies, he/she will be granted entrance into heaven. We also hold that this principle, based entirely on God’s mercy, applies to the rapture. Some propose that only the children of believers will be raptured. We disagree. If a child’s salvation while under the age of accountability is not based on the faith\-status of his/her parents, neither is the child’s participation in the deliverance of the rapture. It is our belief, albeit not explicitly taught in Scripture, that all those under the age of accountability will be taken in the rapture.
How should a Christian view homeopathic medicine?	Answer Homeopathy is a symptom\-based method of treating illness and disease by administering substances that would, in a healthy person, produce symptoms similar to those of the disease being treated. The word homeopathy itself means “same suffering”; the idea is that, if something is causing a problem, a little more of the “same” thing will help cure it. At least, the body will cure itself. Homeopathy should not be confused with home remedies or natural remedies such as herbal treatments and essential oil therapies. Homeotherapy was developed in the late 18th century and is based on the idea that the body can heal itself. Homeotherapy introduces small doses of an agent that is similar, but not identical, to the causative agent of the illness. For example, a homeopathic treatment of hay fever would involve administering a diluted compound into the body to stimulate an allergic reaction—the thought being that forcing the body to fight off a mild irritation will strengthen it enough to also fight off the allergy. Given this definition, live\-culture immunization could be considered a form of homeopathy in which a small amount of a disease is given to a healthy person in the hope that the body will develop antibodies to combat that particular disease. Therefore, modern medicine uses some “homeopathic” practices. The differences between immunization and true homeopathy are that immunizations are preventative, not curative, and that the active ingredients in immunizations are measurable, while the “active ingredients” in homeopathic solutions are so diluted as to be unmeasurable. In fact, homeopathy teaches that “the smaller the dose, the more powerful the effect.” There is more to the use of homeotherapeutic “medicines” than simply taking a weak solution of water and graphite or sulphur (for example). According to one homeopathy website, preparing a remedy “is not a simple matter of mixing the ingredients with water.” The mixture must be shaken or pounded in a certain way, or the “medicine” will not be effective. According to the website, “the diluted ingredients become part of the water, leaving the curing effects in the water while removing the physical ingredients.” The theory is that, when the ingredients are removed from the solution, the water somehow “remembers” the properties of the illness and can cure it. Critics of homeopathy are quick to point out that, when the ingredients are removed from the solution, all that is left is the solvent. Any perceived “cure” is due to a placebo effect. Other areas of concern are that homeopathy often involves examining “energy fields” along [acupuncture meridians](acupuncture-Christian.html) to diagnose a condition, and homeopathic therapists often prescribe Eastern meditation to strengthen one’s “spiritual core.” A Christian, that is, a born\-again believer, should view medicine as a gift from God. However, there seems to be little medicine in homeopathy. Rather, homeopathy relies on ritualistic preparation techniques and a superstitious faith in what amounts to “magic water.” As believers, our responsibility is not to follow medical fads but to investigate the validity of all claims. Our conclusions must be based on research bolstered by God’s viewpoint and not on humanistic or [New Age](new-age-movement.html) values. A wise believer should be wary of anything that sounds “too good to be true,” but that caution applies to every aspect of our lives. We are to be good stewards of what God has given us (1 Corinthians 4:2\), and that stewardship extends to our bodies and our health. We should be wise in how we treat ourselves and in the ways (and from whom) we seek medical treatment.
Does Bible prophecy predict that there will be a World War 3 before the end times?	Answer There is no doubt that world war will be a part of the future. Christ plainly taught that there would be war prior to His return (Matthew 24:4\-31\). Some hold that He spoke generally of the Church age in verses 4\-14 and spoke of the tribulation period starting at its mid\-point in verses 15\-31\. Others believe that Christ spoke of only the seven\-year period known as the tribulation in verses 4\-31\. Though verses 4\-14 do seem to be giving general descriptions, they parallel the description given early in Revelation 6, which records details concerning the beginning of the tribulation. Matthew 24:6\-7 says there will be "wars and rumors of wars...For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and in various places there will be famines and earthquakes." Here, Christ makes it very clear that war will play a significant role in the last seven years prior to His return. To be more specific, the future does hold at least one more world war. There is nothing in Scripture that says there will be only a certain number of world wars. World Wars I and II are not explicitly mentioned in Scripture, nor is a possible third World War. It is only the last war that is mentioned in detail, which allows the interpretation that there may be others before the final conflict. John the Apostle was shown what the end times would be like, specifically the last seven years prior to Christ’s return. Beginning in Revelation 6, he recorded what he saw concerning the future. War is found in this chapter, and continues to be a part of the unfolding events until Christ returns in chapter 19 (Revelation 6:2; 4; 11:7; 12:7; 13:4, 7; 16:14; 17:14; 19:11; 19:19\). Revelation 19:11 says, ". . . in righteousness He \[Christ] judges and wages war." Revelation 19:19 says John "saw the beast and the kings of the earth and their armies, assembled to make war against Him (Christ) who sat upon the horse, and against His army." Take special notice that it says the kings of the earth and their armies assembled to make war against Christ. This clearly describes a world war. It also should be noted that the victor in this war is clearly Christ, who seizes the beast/antichrist and the false prophet and casts them into the lake of fire, and the armies that followed them are destroyed (Revelation 19:20\-21\). So, although there will be at least one more world war, there is no doubt of the outcome—righteousness will prevail as Christ, the King of kings and Lord of lords, defeats all who oppose Him. It is also worth mentioning at this time that following the 1,000\-year reign of Christ, there will be another uprising which could possibly have the scope of a world war. Satan will be bound for 1,000 years and then released. Upon his release, he leads a rebellion among the peoples of the earth. Christ quickly puts down this rebellion and permanently judges Satan, casting him into the lake of fire as He did with the beast/antichrist and the false prophet (Revelation 20:7\-10\).
What does INRI stand for?	Answer John 19:19 records, “Pilate had a notice prepared and fastened to the cross. It read: JESUS OF NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS.” John 19:20 continues, “Many of the Jews read this sign, for the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city, and the sign was written in Aramaic, Latin and Greek.” Today, many times when the cross of Jesus is displayed, the letters INRI are placed on the sign above the cross. In Latin, the text “JESUS OF NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS” would have been written, “Iesus Nazarenus Rex Iudaeorum.” Abbreviated, this phrase results in “INRI.” It is unlikely that the letters INRI were truly on the sign that Pilate placed over Jesus’ head, as John 19:20 specifically states that the sign was written in Aramaic, Greek, and Latin. Although John’s gospel refers to the writing as a “title,” Mark and Matthew both refer to it as an “accusation.” It was customary to set up over the heads of persons crucified the crime for which they suffered, and the name of the sufferer. The accusation on which Jesus had been condemned by Pilate was his claiming to be the King of the Jews. Ironically, the “crime” for which Jesus was crucified is not a crime at all, but an absolutely true statement. Not only is Jesus King of the Jews, He is the King of all – the King of kings and the Lord of lords (Revelation 17:14 and 19:16\). He is King over all the universe and all its inhabitants. And it was not any crime of His own that was nailed to the cross; it was the crimes (sins) of everyone who would ever put his or her faith in Him for salvation. He has “blotted out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and has taken it out of the way, nailing it to the cross” (Colossians 2:14\). Just as the title King of the Jews was written in three languages, so do those of all nations and languages recognize Him as Savior, as indeed He is of all the elect of God whom He saves from all their sins, by bearing them in His own body on the cross, and of whom He is the able and willing, the perfect and complete, the only and everlasting Savior.
Does the Bible say that there was once a Pangea / Pangaea?	Answer Pangea is the concept that all of the land masses of the earth were at one time connected as one giant super\-continent. On a world map, some of the continents look like they could fit together like giant puzzle pieces (Africa and South America, for example). Does the Bible mention Pangea? Not explicitly, but possibly. Genesis 1:9 records, “And God said, ‘Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.’ And it was so.” Presumably, if all the water was “gathered to one place,” the dry ground would also be all “in one place.” Genesis 10:25 mentions, “…one was named [Peleg](earth-divided-Peleg.html), because in his time the earth was divided…” Some point to Genesis 10:25 as evidence that the earth was divided after the Flood of Noah. While this view is possible, it is most definitely not universally held by Christians. Some view Genesis 10:25 as referring to the “division” that occurred at the Tower of Babel, not the division of the continents via “continental drift.” Some also dispute the post\-Noahic Pangea separation due to the fact that, at the current rates of drift, the continents could not possibly have drifted so far apart in the time that has transpired since the Noahic Flood. However, it cannot be proven that the continents have always drifted at the same rate. Further, God is capable of expediting the continental\-drift process to accomplish His goal of separating humanity (Genesis 11:8\). Again, though, the Bible does not explicitly mention Pangea, or conclusively tell us when Pangea was broken apart. The post\-Noahic Pangea concept does possibly explain how the animals and humanity were able to migrate to the different continents. How did the kangaroos get to Australia after the Flood if the continents were already separated? Young\-earth creationist alternatives to the standard continental drift theory include the Catastrophist Plate Tectonics Theory (see <http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v16/i1/plate_tectonics.asp>) and the Hydroplate Theory (see [http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/HydroplateOverview2\.html](http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/HydroplateOverview2.html)), both of which place accelerated continental drift within the cataclysmic context of Noah’s Flood. However, there is another explanation offered by Christian scientists that does not require a post\-Noahic Pangea. According to this view, intercontinental migration most likely began while sea levels were still low during and immediately following the post\-Flood Ice Age when much of the water was still trapped in ice at the poles. Lower sea levels would have left the continental shelves exposed, connecting all of the major land masses through land bridges. There are (or at least were) shallow underwater land bridges connecting all of the major continents. North America, Southeast Asia, and Australia are all attached to continental Asia. Britain is attached to continental Europe. In some places, these intercontinental bridges are only a few hundred feet below our current sea level. The theory can be summarized as follows: (1\) After the Flood, an Ice Age occurred. (2\) The vast amount of water that was frozen resulted in the oceans being much lower than they are today. (3\) The low level of the oceans resulted in land bridges connecting the various continents. (4\) Human beings and animals migrated to the different continents over these land bridges. (5\) The Ice Age ended, the ice melted and the ocean levels rose, resulting in the land bridges being submerged. So, while Pangea is not explicitly mentioned in the Bible, the Bible does present the possibility of a Pangea. Whatever the case, either view presented above presents a viable explanation for how humanity and animals were able to migrate to continents now separated by vast oceans.
What is the Anthropic Principle?	Answer Anthropic means “relating to human beings or their existence.” Principle means “law.” The Anthropic Principle is the Law of Human Existence. It is well known that our existence in this universe depends on numerous cosmological constants and parameters whose numerical values must fall within a very narrow range of values. If even a single variable were off, even slightly, we would not exist. The extreme improbability that so many variables would align so auspiciously in our favor merely by chance has led some scientists and philosophers to propose instead that it was God who providentially engineered the universe to suit our specific needs. This is the Anthropic Principle: that the universe appears to have been fine\-tuned for our existence. Consider protons, for example. Protons are the positively charged subatomic particles which (along with neutrons) form the nucleus of an atom (around which negatively charged electrons orbit). Whether by providence or fortuitous luck (depending on your perspective), protons just happen to be 1,836 times larger than electrons. If they were a little bigger or a little smaller, we would not exist (because atoms could not form the molecules we require). So how did protons end up being 1,836 times larger than electrons? Why not 100 times larger or 100,000 times? Why not smaller? Of all the possible variables, how did protons end up being just the right size? Was it luck or contrivance? Or how is it that protons carry a positive electrical charge equal to that of the negatively charged electrons? If protons did not balance electrons and vice versa, we would not exist. They are not comparable in size, yet they are perfectly balanced. Did nature just stumble upon such a propitious relationship, or did God ordain it for our sakes? Here are some examples of how the Anthropic Principle directly affects the livability of our planet: The unique properties of water. Every known life form depends on water. Thankfully, unlike every other substance known to man, water’s solid form (ice) is less dense than its liquid form. This causes ice to float. If ice did not float, our planet would experience runaway freezing. Other important properties of water include its solvency, cohesiveness, adhesiveness and other thermal properties. Earth’s atmosphere. If there were too much of just one of the many gases which make up our atmosphere, our planet would suffer a runaway greenhouse effect. On the other hand, if there were not enough of these gases, life on this planet would be devastated by cosmic radiation. Earth’s reflectivity or “albedo” (the total amount of light reflected off the planet versus the total amount of light absorbed). If Earth’s albedo were much greater than it is now, we would experience runaway freezing. If it were much less than it is, we would experience a runaway greenhouse effect. Earth’s magnetic field. If it were much weaker, our planet would be devastated by cosmic radiation. If it were much stronger, we would be devastated by severe electromagnetic storms. Earth’s place in the solar system. If we were much further from the sun, our planet’s water would freeze. If we were much closer, it would boil. This is just one of numerous examples of how our privileged place in the solar system allows for life on Earth. Our solar system’s place in the galaxy. Once again, there are numerous examples of this. For instance, if our solar system were too close to the center of our galaxy, or to any of the spiral arms at its edge, or any cluster of stars, for that matter, our planet would be devastated by cosmic radiation. The color of our sun. If the sun were much redder, on the one hand, or bluer, on the other, photosynthesis would be impeded. Photosynthesis is a natural biochemical process crucial to life on Earth. The above list is by no means exhaustive. It is just a small sample of the many factors which must be just right in order for life to exist on Earth. We are very fortunate to live on a privileged planet in a privileged solar system in a privileged galaxy in a privileged universe. The question for us now is, with so many universal constants and cosmological parameters defining our universe, and with so many possible variables for each one, how did they all just happen to fall within the extremely narrow range of values required for our existence? The general consensus is that we are either here by fortuitous luck against tremendous odds or by the purposeful design of an intelligent Agent. Some proponents of the here\-by\-chance perspective have sought to level the odds against fortuitous luck by hypothesizing a scenario whereby our universe is just one among many in what has come to be termed a “multiverse.” This gives nature many more chances to “get it right,” bringing the odds against its success down significantly. Imagine innumerable lifeless universes in which one or more of the necessary variables fail to fall within the specific range of values required for life. The idea is that nature would eventually get it right, and apparently has done so as evidenced by the fact that we exist (or so the argument goes). We are the lucky ones whose universe stumbled upon the right combination of cosmological values. The Anthropic Principle is often cited as empirical grounds for the otherwise mathematically hypothetical multiverse. Intelligent Design theorists hail the Anthropic Principle as further evidence in support of their thesis that life was engineered by a transcendent Mastermind. Not only do biological systems bear the hallmarks of design (the information content of DNA, specified complexity, irreducible complexity, etc.), but the universe which supports and provides a context for life appears to have been designed as a means to that end.
What is the Spear of Destiny?	Answer The Spear of Destiny is the name given to the spear that was used to pierce Jesus after He was crucified on the cross. John 19:34 records, “…one of the soldiers pierced Jesus’ side with a spear…” Because of the contact between the spear and Jesus’ blood, all sorts of myths and legends have been attached to the spear. One legend says that whoever possesses the “spear of destiny” has great power and authority—the ability to essentially control one’s own destiny. According to legend, the “spear of destiny” was rediscovered during the Crusades and has since passed from one powerful ruler to the next, although there is no historical proof of this. This entire idea is completely unbiblical. The Bible never again refers to the spear that pierced Jesus after the Roman soldier used it. The Bible nowhere even hints that the spear would have any power whatsoever. No object has any power to control destiny. That power is God’s alone.
Is it acceptable to God for a husband and wife to have sex while the wife is menstruating / having her period?	Answer Leviticus 15:19 says, “When a woman has her regular flow of blood, the impurity of her monthly period will last seven days, and anyone who touches her will be unclean till evening.” Similarly, Leviticus 15:24 says. “If a man lies with her and her monthly flow touches him, he will be unclean for seven days; any bed he lies on will be unclean.” Finally, Leviticus 20:18 declares, “If a man lies with a woman during her monthly period and has sexual relations with her, he has exposed the source of her flow, and she has also uncovered it. Both of them must be cut off from their people.” As a result of these Scriptures, some hold that a married couple should not have sex while the wife is having her period. The problem with this view is that if the Scriptures are applied consistently, even touching a woman who is having her menstrual flow would be forbidden. Further, according to Leviticus 15:20\-23, even touching something that the woman has also touched would be forbidden. Do these laws apply to us today? No, they do not. Why? It is important to remember the purpose of the Old Testament laws concerning blood. In the sacrificial system, blood was sacred (Leviticus 17:11\). A woman’s “uncleanness” during her period was symbolic of the value placed on blood. As a result, contact with a woman who was having her period was forbidden. Christians today are not under the Old Testament ceremonial law (Romans 10:4; Galatians 3:24\-26; Ephesians 2:15\). There no longer is a sacrificial system. Jesus’ blood sacrifice paid the penalty for sins once and for all. The Levitical ceremonial laws do not apply today. There is no biblical reason why a married couple cannot have sex during the wife’s period. Some doctors do not recommend it from a medical perspective, but there are no proven “dangers” of having sexual intercourse during a woman’s period. Usually women have no desire to have sexual relations during their period, so that is definitely another thing to consider. Basically, this issue must be decided by a husband and wife in the spirit of “mutual consent” as 1 Corinthians 7:5 describes.
Is it wrong for a Christian husband and wife to attend separate churches?	Answer A husband and a wife attending separate churches is a situation that is more common than one might think. It’s also common for the children of such a couple to be divided between the two churches, thereby creating a rift in the family that is never healthy. In order to determine whether or not it is “wrong” for a husband and wife to attend separate churches, we must first look at marriage as a relationship instituted by God. Genesis 2:24 tells us God created man and woman to become “one flesh” when they marry, not two separate beings who go their own separate ways. There is a unity in marriage that is unique and holy. Moreover, marriage is the picture of Christ and His church (believers) as described in Ephesians 5:31\-32\. The marriage covenant between a man and a woman is symbolic of the covenant between Christ and those for whom He died. His is an everlasting covenant and one that is holy and sacred, just as marriage is to be holy, sacred and unbroken. This unity of two people into one reaches its most sacred in the spiritual realm, where the two are to be of one mind regarding the basic doctrines of Christianity – God, Christ, sin, salvation, heaven/hell, etc. This unity of understanding through the ministry of the Holy Spirit unites a husband and wife in a bond unlike any other on earth. While it’s possible for a husband and wife to have differing tastes as far as music, preaching or worship styles, children’s programs, etc., none of these things are significant enough to break up the family into two parts so they can attend different churches based on tastes. It is clear that if both churches are Bible\-based and Christ\-honoring, there is no reason why one spouse can’t bend a little and put his/her personal preferences aside. An even better alternative is for the couple to join together to seek a church where the Word of God is preached as the only guide for faith and practice, where the entire family can learn the true gospel of Jesus Christ, and where the family can fellowship with like\-minded believers. In this, the husband, as the spiritual head of the family, should take the lead and make the final decision, lovingly taking his wife’s input into consideration. Sadly, the two\-church family most often crops up in marriages where one spouse was raised Roman Catholic and the other was raised in a Protestant denomination. In situations such as these, it would have been wise for the couple not to marry. Please read the following article: [Should Christians of different denominations date or marry?](date-denominations.html) If a marriage has already taken place, the couple should strive for spiritual unity. Two people entrenched in their different doctrinal positions often find it very difficult to compromise and reconcile, but with God, all things are possible. A couple in such a situation may be forced to attend different churches, especially if one or both spouses consider the other spouse’s beliefs to be unbiblical. In such a situation, both spouses should commit to praying that truth be revealed and spiritual unity be achieved. These doctrinal conflicts must be resolved in a family before true unity can be achieved. A couple attending different churches must be willing to hold everything they are taught up to the light of Scripture and be ready to discard anything that is contradicted by the Bible. They must “test all things and hold fast to that which is true” (1 Thessalonians 5:21\).
What were the Inquisitions?	Answer The Inquisitions were judicial institutions or tribunals that were established by the Roman Catholic Church in order to seek out, try, and sentence people that the Roman Catholic Church believed to be guilty of heresy. The purpose of the inquisitions was to secure and maintain religious and doctrinal unity in the Roman Catholic Church and throughout the Holy Roman Empire, through either the conversion or persecution of alleged heretics. Historians generally distinguish the Inquisitions based on four different time frames and areas that they took place in. These are the Medieval or Episcopal Inquisition, the Spanish Inquisition, the Portuguese Inquisition, and the Roman Inquisition. Prior to the founding of the Roman Catholic Church and the establishment of their version of Christianity as the official state religion of the Roman Empire in the 4th century, the punishment for heresy among Christians was usually excommunication from the church. However, with the marriage of church and state that arose in the 4th century, people that the Roman Catholic Church considered to be heretics also came to be considered as enemies of the state and were subject to many forms of extreme punishment, including death. It wasn’t until the 12th century that official Inquisitions were organized and sanctioned by the Roman Catholic Church to officially deal with what they saw as a rise in organized heretical groups within the Holy Roman Empire. The first of the Inquisitions is known as the Medieval or Episcopal Inquisition and refers to the various tribunals that started around 1184\. It includes the Episcopal Inquisition (1184\-1230\) and the Papal Inquisition (1230\), which arose in response to large popular movements in Europe that were considered to be heretical by the Roman Catholic Church. It was during this time (1231\) that Pope Gregory IX shifted the power to punish heretics away from the local bishops and put the inquisitors under the special jurisdiction and authority of the papacy. He also established severe penalties for those found guilty of committing heresy, and his decree set forth new guidelines for investigating and punishing heresy in the Holy Roman Empire. Generally, when an Inquisition was set up to investigate heresy in a particular area of the Holy Roman Empire, the Pope would appoint two inquisitors, each of which had equal authority in the Inquisition or tribunal. Because these inquisitors had the power to investigate and excommunicate even princes, they wielded enormous power and influence in the Holy Roman Empire. While some of the inquisitors had reputations as being men of justice and mercy, others were known to subject people to cruel and unusual punishment, including many different kinds of torture, which is what the Inquisitions are generally remembered for. Because they could imprison suspects that they thought were lying, some inquisitors used torture as an attempt to get them to admit what the inquisitor wanted to hear. In 1252 Pope Innocent IV officially sanctioned torture as a way of extracting the “truth” from suspects. Prior to that time, this type of extreme punishment was foreign to church tradition and practice. During the Spanish Inquisition alone, as many as 2,000 people were burned at the stake within one decade after the Inquisition began. The next major Inquisition period is known as the Spanish Inquisition. It was set up by King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella of Spain in 1478 with the approval of Pope Sixtus IV. Unlike the previous Inquisition, it was completely under royal authority and was staffed by secular clergy. It mainly focused on Jews who had professed to be converts to Roman Catholicism but who were suspected of having continued to practice Judaism. Later on, with the spread of Protestantism into Spain, the Inquisition would also begin to persecute Protestants who broke away from the Roman Catholic Church. However, after the decline in religious disputes in the 17th century, the Spanish Inquisition essentially became more like a secret police that would investigate and retaliate against internal threats to the Spanish authorities. The Spanish Inquisition is probably the most infamous for its torture and the number of people executed as a result of it. Over the course of its history, the Spanish Inquisition tried more than 341,000 people, of whom about 32,000 were executed. Another important period is known as the Portuguese Inquisition and was established in Portugal in 1536 by the king of Portugal, João III, and operated much like the more famous Spanish Inquisition. Later, in 1560, in India and other parts of the Portuguese Empire in Asia, the Goa Inquisition was set up in the Indian state of Goa to deal with converts from Hinduism who were suspected of continuing to practice or hold to some Hindu beliefs. The last period is known as the Roman Inquisition, and it was established in 1542 when Pope Paul III established the Holy Office as the final court of appeals in all trials of heresy. This group was made up of cardinals and other officials whose task was to maintain and defend the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church. This group played an important role in the [Counter\-Reformation](Counter-Reformation.html), and it was also this body that condemned Galileo for “grave suspicion of heresy” and banned all of his works in 1633 for teaching that the earth and other planets orbited the sun. In 1965, Pope Paul VI reorganized the Holy Office and renamed it as the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and it remains in effect today.
What does the Bible say about holy water?	Answer The Bible is silent about holy water the way it is used today. For baptism, Matthew 3:11 speaks of "baptizing with water for repentance," with nothing in the context suggesting that the water itself is holy. Baptism is a symbolic ritual, identifying oneself with Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection. A closer parallel to the modern use of holy water would be God’s laws in the Old Testament, which required cleaning ritually unclean things with water to purify them before one could touch them (see Leviticus 15, 16, and 17:15\). See also a specific reference to ritually unclean people in Numbers 19:17\. Holy water is now permanently retained at the entrance of Catholic churches, blessed at the first of each lunar month, and sprinkled over patrons as they enter. This practice was created to supplant the pagan celebration of the new moon, according to Canon 65 of the Council of Constantinople (691\). According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, the earliest modern uses of holy water appear in the ninth century. With that, coupled with the New Testament’s silence regarding the practice and use of holy water, it can be concluded that the tradition of holy water was created for the sole purpose of putting a pagan ceremony out of commission, using a scant few biblical references to water for purification. Any practice that makes us feel closer to God and furthers our walk with Him should be encouraged (cf. Romans 14, esp. v23\). But also consider 1 Corinthians 6:12\. If a practice is beneficial to a relationship with God, keep it; otherwise, throw it away. This is all the more true when said practice has little biblical foundation. The Bible nowhere instructs Christians to use "holy water" in any way, shape, or form. The Catholic use of holy water is not biblical.
How should a Christian spouse handle an adulterous affair that has resulted in a child?	Answer Marriage is a covenant that brings a couple together both spiritually and physically. Infidelity causes a devastating blow that tears through the oneness of marriage, often resulting in irreparable damage. This can be especially true if a child is conceived through adultery. A parent’s responsibility to his child is not determined by the circumstances of the child’s conception. Bringing a child into the world through an adulterous act is unfavorable for all parties involved, but it is important to remember that the child is innocent and deserves to have two parents in his/her life. That child conceived through adultery also has the right to be loved, protected, and provided for. Children are a blessing from God (Psalm 127:3\). The child must not be seen as a curse, as a reminder of the sin, or as in any way less worthy. An adulterous affair generates much emotion, vented in many ways, but the child cannot be made the target of spite or ill will. If the wife decides to remain with her husband even after his affair resulting in a child, she must be prepared to forgive the sin. If the husband decides to remain with his wife who is pregnant with another man’s child, he must forgive the sin. The Bible tells us that Christians are to forgive each other, just as God has forgiven us (Matthew 6:14–15\). This means making the choice to put aside the feelings of anger and jealousy. Ideally, the wife whose husband has fathered a child with someone else will be able to embrace the child as a stepson or stepdaughter, even if the child does not live in her home. She should not stand in the way of her husband forming a relationship with his child, even though this might be painful for her. He has financial, spiritual, and emotional obligations to all his children (Ephesians 6:4\). Conversely, the husband whose wife bears a child by another man should strive to see himself as a stepfather—or even an adoptive father, depending on the living arrangements. Of course, every situation is different, and there are always legal, familial, and personal complexities. But, as believers seek to follow the Lord, their response to adulterous affairs must include measures of forgiveness, grace, love, and peace. Adultery is a sin with the potential to break up families, but it need not be the end of a marriage. Instead, the couple should work even harder at rebuilding their relationship on the firm foundation of faith and obedience to Jesus Christ. Only the grace and mercy of God and strong faith in Christ will get a couple through this difficult situation. But grace, mercy, and faith are all the gifts of God through the Holy Spirit, and they are available from God to those who truly seek to glorify Him.
Did the Bible copy some of its stories from other religious myths and legends?	Answer There are many stories in the Bible that have remarkable similarities with stories from other religions, legends, and myths. For the purposes of this article, we will examine two of the more prominent examples. For a detailed comparison of Noah’s Flood and the Gilgamesh Epic, see \- [Did the Bible copy the Flood account from other myths and legends?](Flood-accounts.html) First, let’s consider the account of the Fall of mankind (Genesis 3\). There is a Greek legend, that of [Pandora’s Box](Pandoras-Box.html), whose details differ so dramatically from the biblical account of the Fall that one might never suspect a relationship. But they may actually attest to the same historical event. Both stories tell how the very first woman unleashed sin, sickness, and suffering upon the world which had been, up to that point, an Edenic paradise. Both stories end with the emergence of hope, hope in a promised Redeemer in the case of Genesis, and “hope” as a thing having been released from the box at the very end of the Pandora legend. Like the world’s copious flood legends, Pandora’s Box demonstrates how the Bible might parallel pagan myths at times simply because they all speak of an historical core truth that has over the years manifested itself in ancient histories (as in the case of the Bible) and in poetic allegories (as in the case of Pandora, whose story was told in many different ways by the Greeks but whose core truth remained fairly constant). The similarities do not point to one account copying from the other, but to the fact that both stories point back to the same historical event. Finally, there are cases of borrowing, but in these cases the Bible was the source, not the pagan myths (despite pseudo\-academic claims to the contrary). Consider the case of Sargon’s birth. Legend has it that Sargon was placed in a reed basket and sent down the river by his mother. He was rescued by Aqqi, who then adopted him as his own son. That sounds a lot like the story of Moses in Exodus 2\. And Sargon lived about 800 years before Moses was born. So the Moses baby\-sent\-down\-the\-river\-only\-to\-be\-rescued\-and\-adopted story must have been borrowed from Sargon, right? That sounds reasonable, but what is known of Sargon comes almost entirely from legends written many hundreds of years after his death. There are very few contemporary records of Sargon’s life. The legend of Sargon’s childhood, how he was placed in a basket and sent down a river, comes from two 7th century B.C. cuneiform tablets (from the library of the Assyrian king Ashurbanipal, who reigned from 668 to 627 B.C.), written hundreds of years after the book of Exodus. If someone wants to argue that one account was borrowed from another, it would have to be the other way around: the Sargon legend appears to have borrowed from the Exodus account of Moses. The Bible is clear as to its authorship. Although many different men wrote, the Holy Spirit of God is the actual author. Second Timothy 3:16\-17 tells us that Scripture is [inspired](Bible-inspired.html) by God, which means it is literally “God\-breathed.” He wrote it, He preserved it down through the centuries, He lives within its very pages, and His power is manifest in our lives through it.
If our salvation is eternally secure, why does the Bible warn so strongly against apostasy?	Answer The Bible teaches that everyone who is born again by the power of the Holy Spirit is saved forever. We receive the gift of eternal life (John 10:28\), not temporary life. Someone who is born again (John 3:3\) cannot be “unborn.” After being adopted into God’s family (Romans 8:15\), we will not be kicked out. When God starts a work, He finishes it (Philippians 1:6\). So, the child of God—the believer in Jesus Christ—is eternally secure in his salvation. However, the Bible also contains some strong warnings against apostasy. These warnings have led some to doubt the doctrine of eternal security. After all, if we cannot lose our salvation, why are we warned against falling away from the Lord? This is a good question. First, we must understand what is meant by “apostasy.” An apostate is someone who abandons his religious faith. It is clear from the Bible that apostates are people who made professions of faith in Jesus Christ but never genuinely received Him as Savior. They were pretend believers. Those who turn away from Christ never really trusted Him to begin with, as 1 John 2:19 says, “They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us.” Those who apostatize are simply demonstrating that they are not true believers, and they never were. The Parable of the Wheat and the Tares (Matthew 13:24–30\) provides a simple illustration of apostasy. In the same field were growing wheat and “false wheat” (tares or weeds). At first, the difference between the two types of plants was undetectable, but as time went on, the weeds were seen for what they were. In the same way, in any given church today, there may be true, born\-again believers side by side with pretenders—those who enjoy the messages, the music, and the fellowship but have never repented of their sins and accepted Christ by faith. To any human observer, the true believer and the pretender look identical. Only God can see the heart. Matthew 13:1–9 (the Parable of the Sower) is another illustration of apostasy in action. The Bible’s warnings against apostasy exist because there are two types of religious people: believers and unbelievers. In any church there are those who truly know Christ and those who are going through the motions. Wearing the label “Christian” does not guarantee a change of heart. It is possible to hear the Word, and even agree with its truth, without taking it to heart. It is possible to attend church, serve in a ministry, and call yourself a Christian—and still be unsaved (Matthew 7:21–23\). As the prophet said, “These people come near to me with their mouth and honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me” (Isaiah 29:13; cf. Mark 7:6\). God warns the pretender who sits in the pew and hears the gospel Sunday after Sunday that he is playing with fire. Eventually, a pretender will apostatize—he will “fall away” from the faith he once professed—if he does not repent. Like the tares among the wheat, his true nature will be manifest. The passages warning against apostasy serve two primary purposes. First, they exhort everyone to be sure of their salvation. One’s eternal destiny is not a trifling matter. Paul tells us in 2 Corinthians 13:5 to examine ourselves to see whether we are “in the faith.” One test of true faith is love for others (1 John 4:7–8\). Another is good works. Anyone can claim to be a Christian, but those who are truly saved will bear “fruit.” A true Christian will show, through words, actions, and doctrine, that he follows the Lord. Christians bear fruit in varying degrees based on their level of obedience and their spiritual gifts, but all Christians bear fruit as the Spirit produces it in them (Galatians 5:22–23\). Just as true followers of Jesus Christ will be able to see evidence of their salvation (see 1 John 4:13\), apostates will eventually be made known by their fruit (Matthew 7:16–20\) or lack thereof (John 15:2\). The second purpose for the Bible’s warnings against apostasy is to equip the church to identify apostates. They can be known by their rejection of Christ, acceptance of heresy, and carnal nature (2 Peter 2:1–3\). The biblical warnings against apostasy, therefore, are warnings to those who are under the umbrella of “faith” without ever having truly exercised faith. Scriptures such as Hebrews 6:4–6 and Hebrews 10:26–29 are warnings to “pretend” believers that they need to examine themselves before it’s too late. Matthew 7:22–23 indicates that “pretend believers” whom the Lord rejects on Judgment Day are rejected not because they “lost faith” but because the Lord never knew them. They never had a relationship with Him. There are many people who love religion for religion’s sake and are willing to identify themselves with Jesus and the church. Who wouldn’t want eternal life and blessing? However, Jesus warns us to “count the cost” of discipleship (Luke 9:23–26; 14:25–33\). True believers have counted the cost and made the commitment; apostates fail to do so. Apostates had a profession of faith at one time but not the possession of faith. Their mouths spoke something other than what their hearts believed. Apostasy is not loss of salvation but evidence of past pretension.
Is Heaven real?	Answer Heaven is indeed a real place. The Bible tells us that heaven is God’s throne (Isaiah 66:1; Acts 7:48\-49; Matthew 5:34\-35\). After Jesus’ resurrection and appearance on earth to His disciples, “He was taken up into heaven and sat at the right hand of God” (Mark 16:19; Acts 7:55\-56\). “Christ did not enter a man\-made sanctuary that was only a copy of the true one; He entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God’s presence” (Hebrews 9:24\). Jesus not only went before us, entering on our behalf, but He is alive and has a present ministry in heaven, serving as our high priest in the true tabernacle made by God (Hebrews 6:19\-20; 8:1\-2\). We are also told by Jesus Himself that there are many rooms in God’s house and that He has gone before us to prepare a place for us. We have the assurance of His word that He will one day come back to earth and take us to where He is in heaven (John 14:1\-4\). Our belief in an eternal home in heaven is based on an explicit promise of Jesus. Heaven is most definitely a real place. Heaven truly does exist. When people deny the existence of heaven, they deny not only the written Word of God, but they also deny the innermost longings of their own hearts. Paul addressed this issue in his letter to the Corinthians, encouraging them to cling to the hope of heaven so that they would not lose heart. Although we “groan and sigh” in our earthly state, we have the hope of heaven always before us and are eager to get there (2 Corinthians 5:1\-4\). Paul urged the Corinthians to look forward to their eternal home in heaven, a perspective that would enable them to endure hardships and disappointments in this life. “For our light and momentary troubles are achieving for us an eternal glory that far outweighs them all. So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen. For what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal” (2 Corinthians 4:17\-18\). Just as God has put in men’s hearts the knowledge that He exists (Romans 1:19\-20\), so are we “programmed” to desire heaven. It is the theme of countless books, songs, and works of art. Unfortunately, our sin has barred the way to heaven. Since heaven is the abode of a holy and perfect God, sin has no place there, nor can it be tolerated. Fortunately, God has provided for us the key to open the doors of heaven—Jesus Christ (John 14:6\). All who believe in Him and seek forgiveness for sin will find the doors of heaven swung wide open for them. May the future glory of our eternal home motivate us all to serve God faithfully and wholeheartedly. “Since we have confidence to enter the Most Holy Place by the blood of Jesus by a new and living way opened for us through the curtain, that is his body, and since we have a great high priest over the house of God, let us draw near to God with a sincere heart full of assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience and having our bodies washed with pure water” (Hebrews 10:19\-22\).
What is Christian spirituality?	Answer When we are born again, we receive the Holy Spirit who seals us for the day of redemption (Ephesians 1:13; 4:30\). Jesus promised that the Holy Spirit would lead us “into all truth” (John 16:13\). Part of that truth is taking the things of God and applying them to our lives. When that application is made, the believer then makes a choice to allow the Holy Spirit to control him/her. True Christian spirituality is based upon the extent to which a born\-again believer allows the Holy Spirit to lead and control his or her life. The apostle Paul tells believers to be filled with the Holy Spirit. “Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit” (Ephesians 5:18\). The tense in this passage is continual and therefore means “keep on being filled with the Spirit.” Being filled with the Spirit is simply allowing the Holy Spirit to control us rather than yielding to the desires of our own carnal nature. In this passage Paul is making a comparison. When someone is controlled by wine, he is drunk and exhibits certain characteristics such as slurred speech, unsteady walk, and impaired decision making. Just as you can tell when a person is drunk because of the characteristics he displays, so a born\-again believer who is controlled by the Holy Spirit will display His characteristics. We find those characteristics in Galatians 5:22\-23 where they are called the “fruit of the Spirit.” This is true Christian spirituality, produced by the Spirit working in and through the believer. This character is not produced by self effort. A born\-again believer who is controlled by the Holy Spirit will exhibit sound speech, a consistent spiritual walk, and decision making based on the Word of God. Therefore, Christian spirituality involves a choice we make to “know and grow” in our daily relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ by submitting to the ministry of the Holy Spirit in our lives. This means that, as believers, we make a choice to keep our communication with the Spirit clear through confession (1 John 1:9\). When we grieve the Spirit by sin (Ephesians 4:30; 1 John 1:5\-8\), we erect a barrier between ourselves and God. When we submit to the Spirit’s ministry, our relationship is not interrupted (1 Thessalonians 5:19\). Christian spirituality is a consciousness of fellowship with the Spirit of Christ, uninterrupted by carnality and sin. Christian spirituality develops when a born\-again believer makes a consistent and ongoing choice to surrender to the ministry of the Holy Spirit.
What is the Gospel of Barnabas?	Answer It’s important that we not confuse the Gospel of Barnabas (ca. A.D. 1500\) with the [Epistle of Barnabas](Epistle-of-Barnabas.html) (ca. AD 70—90\). The Epistle of Barnabas was written in the late 1st century, but probably not by the Barnabas named in the New Testament. While more of a pseudo\-Gospel with some historical value, the Epistle of Barnabas was never considered canonical by the early church or any church council. The Gospel of Barnabas, however, has absolutely no apostolic support and was written 1,400 years after the time of Barnabas. This is evidenced by the fact that it was never quoted by any church father or church historian before the 16th century! By contrast, the books of the New Testament were all written early (before AD 100\) and by eyewitnesses, or by those who interviewed the eyewitnesses of the Lord Jesus (1 John 1:1\-5; Luke 1:1\-4\). The four Gospels found in the New Testament were never questioned as to their authenticity. Even had the Gospel of Barnabas been written during the time of the Apostles, it still would have never attained canonical status due to the historical and doctrinal errors it contains. For example, the Gospel of Barnabas purports that Jesus did not claim to be the Messiah (see Matthew 26:63\-64\). The Gospel of Barnabas also says that Jesus was born when Pilate was governor (but history records Pilate becoming governor in AD 26 or 27\). Furthermore, the Gospel of Barnabas keeps some strange company, for it’s a favorite among Muslims as it teaches a Jesus consistent with the Koran. The Gospel of Barnabas claims that Jesus did not die on the cross, as does the Koran in Sura 4:157\. Historians are unanimous that the Gospel of Barnabas was written in the 15th—16th century AD, most likely by Muslims seeking to discredit the Biblical message regarding Jesus.
Can God sin?	Answer To answer this question, we must first consider who God is. The human mind, however, cannot adequately grasp who He is if it were not for the special revelations He has given us. One avenue of revelation is through God’s creation (Psalm 19:1\-6\). Creation’s complexity, design, and order lead us to acknowledge there is an awesome Being who brought it into existence and maintains it. Another avenue is through God’s written Word. From Scripture portions, we may ascertain the attributes, or qualities, that are inherent in God, thus giving us a glimpse of His character. One theologian states that His attributes are “His perfections.” Some of them are: His eternality (Psalm 90:2\); His immutability, or unchanging quality (James 1:17\); His love (1 John 4:8\); His omnipotence, or being all powerful, the Almighty One (Revelation 1:8\); His omnipresence, or being everywhere present at all times (Psalm 139:7\-11\); His holiness, absolute purity and separation from evil (Habakkuk 1:13\); His righteousness, or justice (Psalm 11:7\); and His truth (Titus 1:2\). This is a brief picture of God who manifested Himself in three persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and the attributes, or perfections, are true for each member of the Godhead. Because God is holy, righteous and true, and He can do nothing inconsistent with Himself, we come to the conclusion that God cannot sin. Since holiness, righteousness, and God’s other perfections are who God is, if God were to sin, He would cease to be God. The fact that God is "holy, holy, holy" prevents Him from doing anything that is unholy, i.e. sinful. We cannot close, however, without realizing the amazing fact that our holy God involved Himself in mankind’s sin. He sent His one and only Son to this earth to die to pay sin’s penalty. “For Christ died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God” (1 Peter 3:18\). “He Himself bore our sins in His body on the tree, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; by His wounds you have been healed” (1 Peter 2:24\). “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by His grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. God presented Him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in His blood” (Romans 3:23\-25\).
What is fatalism? What is determinism?	Answer Let’s begin with some general definitions of fatalism and determinism and some related terms: Determinism: The view that every event has a cause and that everything in the universe is absolutely dependent on and governed by causal laws. Determinism is related to fatalism, since determinists believe that all events, including human actions, are caused by something else. Determinism is typically thought to be incompatible with free will. Fatalism: The belief that “what will be will be,” since all past, present, and future events have already been predetermined by God or another all\-powerful force, such as “Fate.” In religion, fatalism may sometimes be confused with predestination, the doctrine that God chooses those who go to heaven before they are even born. It’s important to note that the Bible teaches predestination but not to the exclusion of free will; thus, the Bible does not teach fatalism. Free will: The freedom of choice or self\-determination that human beings possess; those who believe in free will believe that, given any situation, a person could have done other than what he did. Philosophers have argued that free will is incompatible with determinism and fatalism. [Indeterminism](indeterminism.html): The view that there are events that do not have any cause; many proponents of free will believe that acts of choice are independent of any physiological or psychological cause. Theological fatalism or theological determinism is an attempt to demonstrate a logical contradiction between an omniscient God and free will, where free will is defined as the ability to choose between alternatives. In this it is similar in purpose to the conundrum “Can an omnipotent God make a rock too heavy for Him to lift?” Theological fatalism’s premises are stated as follows: God is omniscient. Since God is omniscient, God has infallible foreknowledge. If God has infallible foreknowledge that tomorrow you will engage in an event (mow the lawn), then you must invariably engage in that event (mowing the lawn). Therefore, according to theological fatalism, free will is not possible, since you have no alternative except to participate in the event (mow the lawn). If you do not mow the lawn, then God is not omniscient. But if you mow the lawn, then you don’t have free will, on account of your inability to choose an alternative. Here is an opposing argument to theological fatalism: God is omniscient. Since God is omniscient, He is also infallible. If God has infallible foreknowledge that tomorrow you will mow the lawn, then you will freely choose to do so, not out of obligation or lack of choice. You still have free will to mow the lawn or not mow it; God merely knows your choice before you make it. You are not obliged to mow the lawn tomorrow any more than you are to play tennis or bake a cake. If you were going to change your mind, God would have seen that also, so you still have free will in all matters. Also, you will still make the same choices (exercising your free will), even if God chose not to see the future. God’s passive foreknowledge of the future does not alter your free will. There is a vast difference between fatalism, chance (or fortune), and predestination. Fatalism teaches that there is a blind, impersonal force over which no one has control—not even God—and that events are swept along by this blind, purposeless power. Chance (or fortune) is a capricious force that supposedly causes things to happen “luckily,” without any control or direction by God. In a world ruled by chance, God can foresee what will happen, but that is all. Everything depends on mere luck. And if the advocate of chance is asked why or how things come to pass, he has no reply except to shrug and say, “It just happened.” Predestination, the doctrine of the Bible, says that God has a purpose and He is working all things out according to His own will and purpose (Ephesians 1:11; Daniel 4:35; Isaiah 14:24; 46:10\). Predestination teaches that God neither does nor permits anything except what serves His purpose (Psalm 33:11\). This means that GOD IS the SOVEREIGN of the world, the One who does all things as He wills. Those who blindly believe que sera, sera, or “whatever will be, will be,” are as wrong as the advocates of chance. It is true that events are certain, but only so because of the sovereign God who fulfills His own decrees. Serious students of the Bible do not believe that things “just happen.” Christians reject fatalism and godless determinism. Rather, they understand that a wise, holy, good, and sovereign God has control of every detail of life (Matthew 10:29–30\). The man who does not really want God to have this control or who despises the truth of God’s sovereignty does not love God and does not want God in his life. But God is sovereign, and He cannot deny Himself.
What is the Assumption of Mary?	Answer The Assumption of Mary (or the Assumption of the Virgin) is a teaching that, after the mother of Jesus died, she was resurrected, glorified, and taken bodily to heaven. The word assumption is taken from a Latin word meaning “to take up.” The Assumption of Mary is taught by the Roman Catholic Church and, to a lesser degree, the Eastern Orthodox Church. The doctrine of the Assumption of Mary first came to prominence in an apocryphal writing titled Transitus Mariae, dated to the latter half of the 5th century (Rush, A. C., “Scriptural Texts and the Assumption in the Transitus Mariae,” The Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 12, No. 4, Oct, 1950, p. 368\). An annual feast honoring Mary gradually grew into a commemoration of Mary’s death, called the Feast of Dormition (“falling asleep”). As the practice spread to the West, an emphasis was placed on Mary’s resurrection and the glorification of Mary’s body as well as her soul, and the name of the feast was thereby changed to the Assumption. It is still observed on August 15, as it was in the Middle Ages. The Assumption of Mary was made an official dogma of the Roman Catholic Church in 1950 by Pope Pius XII. The Bible does record God “assuming” both Enoch and Elijah into heaven (Genesis 5:24; 2 Kings 2:11\). Therefore, it is not impossible that God would have done the same with Mary. The problem is that there is absolutely no biblical basis for the Assumption of Mary. The Bible does not record Mary’s death or even mention Mary after Acts chapter 1\. The story of Mary’s Assumption, involving her resurrection and the miraculous gathering of the apostles to witness the event, is pure folklore. The doctrine of the Assumption is the result of raising Mary to a position comparable to that of her Son. Some Roman Catholics go so far as to teach that Mary was resurrected on the third day, just like Jesus was, and that Mary ascended into heaven, just like Jesus did. The New Testament teaches that Jesus was resurrected on the third day (Luke 24:7\) and that He ascended bodily into heaven (Acts 1:9\). To attribute identical events to Mary is to ascribe to her some of the attributes of Christ. In the Roman Catholic Church, the Assumption of Mary is an important part of the basis for why Mary is venerated, worshiped, adored, and prayed to. To teach the Assumption of Mary is a step toward making her equal to Christ and essentially proclaiming Mary’s deity.
What is monophysitism / Eutychianism?	Answer Monophysitism is an erroneous or heretical view concerning the nature of Jesus Christ. Two monophysite schools of thought are Eutychianism and Apollinarianism. Monophysitism taught that Christ has one nature—a divine one—not two. Eutychianism specifically taught that Christ’s divine nature was so intermixed with His human nature that He was, in fact, not fully human and not fully divine. Eutychianism and monophysitism are a denial of the biblical teaching of the [hypostatic union](hypostatic-union.html), that Christ’s two natures are united yet distinct. Eutychians followed the teaching of Eutyches (378–452\), a fifth\-century leader of a monastery in Constantinople; the word monophysitism comes from a Greek word meaning “one nature.” Eutychianism developed as a fifth\-century response to [Nestorianism](Nestorianism.html), which taught that Christ has two separate natures resulting in two different persons residing in the same body. Eutyches, however, went too far in his refutation of Nestorius and ended up teaching heresy as well. Eutyches said that Jesus’ humanity was essentially dissolved or obliterated by His divine nature, describing it as being “dissolved like a drop of honey in the sea.” An analogy that might help explain what Eutyches meant is a drop of ink put into a glass of water. The result is a mixture that is not pure water or pure ink. Instead, it is a third substance, a mixture of the two in which both the ink and water are changed in some way. In essence, that is what Eutyches taught about the natures of Christ. He believed that the human nature of Christ was absorbed into His divine nature in a way that both natures were changed to some degree, which resulted in a third nature being formed. Monophysitism, including Eutychianism, was more influential in the Eastern Church than in the West. The teaching was renounced at the [Council of Chalcedon](council-of-Chalcedon.html) in AD 451, but, at one point in the late fifth century, the Patriarch of the [Eastern Orthodox Church](Eastern-Orthodox-church.html) sought to reconcile monophysitism with orthodox teaching. No agreement could be reached, and the monophysites were eventually excommunicated. Monophysitism continued to be widely accepted, however, in Syrian Antioch, Jerusalem, and Alexandria, Egypt. Later, some people put forward a compromise between monophysitism and orthodox theology called monothelitism (from a Greek word for “one will”). Promoters of monothelitism said that Christ had two natures yet only had one (divine) will. This denial of Jesus’ human will ignored Jesus’ own statement in Luke 22:42, and the compromise failed, being rejected by both sides. Monophysites refused to accept the doctrine of Christ’s two natures, and monothelitism was itself declared heresy by the Third Council of Constantinople (680–681\). Some churches today teach what can be considered a modified form of monophysitism called miaphysitism or henophysitism. Miaphysitism teaches that Christ has one nature, but that one nature consists of two natures, united in one “without mingling, without confusion, and without alteration” (from the Coptic divine liturgy). [Oriental Orthodox](Oriental-Orthodox-Church.html) churches, including the [Coptic Orthodox Church](Coptic-Christianity.html), hold to miaphysite or non\-Chalcedonian doctrine. The shared error of monophysitism and Eutychianism is the teaching that Christ had only one nature. The doctrine of Christ’s nature is critical when it comes to the atonement. Had Jesus not been truly and fully man, then He could not have been a true substitute for humanity; had He not been truly and fully God, then His death could not have atoned for our sins.
How should Christians view the Book of Mormon?	Answer When [Mormon](Mormons.html) missionaries (properly called [Latter Day Saints](Latter-Day-Saints.html) or simply "LDS") come to your door, they will often offer a free copy of the Book of Mormon and tell you about its author, Joseph Smith. Smith, they will say, translated the Book of Mormon from golden plates he dug up in a hill in New York in the early 1800s. This is supposed to confirm his calling from God as the new prophet on the earth in these latter days. Further, they will tell you that the Holy Ghost will confirm the truth of the Book of Mormon by producing good feelings in you. Next will come the invitation to "read the Book of Mormon, pray, and ask God to show you it is true." Of course you must do this with sincerity, or it won’t work. Before you fall to your knees, there are some things you need to know that they are not telling you (and won’t unless you ask). The first concerns many LDS beliefs that separate them from historical, orthodox Christianity. These are not found in the Book of Mormon. In fact, there is really very little in that book that is doctrinally disagreeable to orthodox Christians. The real meat of Mormonism is found in their other scriptures, The [Doctrine and Covenants](Doctrine-and-Covenants.html) and [The Pearl of Great Price](Pearl-of-Great-Price.html). These books, however, Mormons do not hand out at the door—and for good reason. If people knew up front what they were really going to be asked to believe (things such as God once being a man, denial of the Trinity, Satan being Jesus’ brother, pre\-existence of souls, etc.), they may not be quite so willing to put aside their skepticism. The second thing to realize is that in accepting the Book of Mormon, one is, in fact, accepting Joseph Smith as a prophet. So what about this test of a prophet? Isn’t it legitimate to "give this question up to God?" No, it isn’t. This is because God has already revealed His test for would\-be prophets, and it has nothing to do with prayer or feelings, and God has no obligation to answer prayers that He has already answered! We do not have to ask God whether or not we should rob a bank or murder someone. Rather, James 1:5 says, "If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God . . . and it will be given to him." Wisdom is applied knowledge, not lack of it. God never tells us to pray about what is true. When we want to know how tall a wall is, we don’t pray about it; we get something that we know is true (a ruler) and compare it to the wall. The Bible, God’s Word, is true. That is our measuring stick for truth. See Acts 17:11, for example, which describes a group of people who were considered noble because when Paul came to them with the Christian message they "received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily, to see whether these things were so." Feelings are unreliable because they are subjective, easy to produce, and are not meant to discover facts but to tell us how we feel about facts. Psychological persuasion techniques, intensity, eye contact, or mere desire can produce feelings that feel real because they are real! But real feelings are still just letting us know how we are reacting to something, not the truthfulness of that thing. The Mormon missionary handbook specifically details these techniques, and missionaries go through training on how to persuade people before they ever leave the house. What are the biblical tests for a prophet? They are in God’s Word: Deuteronomy 18:21\-22 says, "You may say to yourselves, ‘How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the LORD?’ If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him." Did Joseph Smith ever claim "in the name of the LORD" that something would happen when it did not? Yes—many times, in fact. Joseph Smith prophesied that New York would be destroyed if they rejected the \[Mormon] gospel (D\&C 84:114\-115\). He also prophesied that the rebellion of South Carolina and the War Between the States would result in war being poured out upon all nations; slaves would revolt; the inhabitants of the earth would mourn; famine, plague, earthquake, thunder, lightning, and a full end of all nations would result (D\&C 87\). Oddly, this prophecy is the one most often cited by Mormons to prove Joseph Smith’s prophetic power! Further, Deuteronomy 13:5 says that "if a prophet, or one who foretells by dreams, appears among you and announces to you a miraculous sign or wonder, and if the sign or wonder of which he has spoken takes place, and he says, ‘Let us follow other gods’ (gods you have not known) ‘and let us worship them,’ you must not listen to the words of that prophet or dreamer. The LORD your God is testing you to find out whether you love him with all your heart and with all your soul." Did Joseph Smith lead his followers to other gods? Yes. Joseph Smith was a polytheist. History of the Church 6:474 records Smith stating, "I wish to declare I have always and in all congregations when I have preached on the subject of the Deity, it has been the plurality of Gods." Joseph Smith declared that "God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens!" (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 345\). This is clearly not the biblical God. Galatians 1:6\-7 says that people may be "turning to a different gospel—which is really no gospel at all . . . trying to pervert the gospel of Christ." And Paul pronounced a curse upon them for doing so. In Romans 1:16 Paul tells us that the gospel is "the power of God unto salvation"—that’s pretty important. Did Joseph Smith teach a "different gospel"? Yes. Mormons believe that the Book of Mormon contains the "fullness of the gospel." The Book of Mormon says so itself in its introduction (see also Doctrines and Covenants 20:9; 27:5; 42:12; and 135:3\). So what is the gospel according to Mormonism? It’s a tough question for many LDS to answer. According to Mormon apostle Bruce McConkie, author of the book Mormon Doctrine, the gospel is "the plan of salvation \[that] embraces all of the laws, principles, doctrines, rites, ordinances, acts, powers, authorities, and keys necessary to save and exalt men." In other words, the whole of Mormon theology. In the Mormon gospel we see belief \+ repentance \+ baptism \+ laying on of hands \+ temple work \+ mission work \+ church ministry \+ tithing \+ ceasing from sin \+ abstaining from the use of intoxicants and strong drinks and tobacco and caffeine \+ confessing Joseph Smith as Prophet \+ temple marriage \+ baptism for the dead \+ genealogy research . . . the list could go on and on and on. Only upon completion of all these things may Mormons attain to the third and highest level of heaven, thus achieving the ultimate goal of the Mormon gospel—godhood (see McConkie, Mormon Doctrine 116\-117; Book of Mormon \[3 Nephi 27:13\-21]; Doctrines of Salvation 1:268; 18:213; The 4th Article of Faith; Smith, Gospel Doctrine pg. 107; [Brigham Young](Brigham-Young.html), [Journal of Discourses](Journal-of-Discourses.html) 3:93; 3:247; 9:312; Gospel Principles 290; Doctrine and Covenants 39:5\-6; 132:19\-20\). In essence, Christ’s death means nothing more to a Mormon than the gaining of the ability to be resurrected so that his works may be judged. While we cannot judge another person’s motives, we can and must judge what a person does or says. Joseph Smith, and hence the Book of Mormon, fails the twin tests of Deuteronomy 13 and 18\. God takes false prophets very seriously. Deuteronomy 13:1\-3 says, "That prophet or dreamer must be put to death, because he preached rebellion against the LORD your God...; he has tried to turn you from the way the LORD your God commanded you to follow. You must purge the evil from among you." Deuteronomy 18:19\-21 says, "If anyone does not listen to my words that the prophet speaks in my name, I myself will call him to account. But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything I have not commanded him to say, or a prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, must be put to death..." And Galatians 1:8\-9 says, "But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!" The gospel is God’s power to bring us to Him. He will not stand for those who pervert it. He has given us the ability and the responsibility to discern whether or not the gospel is being tampered with. We must carefully investigate the claims of the LDS if we are to follow what God has commanded. In fact, Mormons invite non\-Mormons to examine their claims: "Convince us of our errors of doctrine, if we have any" (LDS Apostle Orson Pratt, The Seer, p.15\). (Editor’s note: many of the references in our articles on Mormonism are Mormon publications, such as Mormon Doctrine, Articles of Faith, Doctrines of Salvation, History of the Church, Doctrine and Covenants, and so forth. Others are from the Book of Mormon itself, e.g., books such as 1 Nephi, 2 Nephi, and Alma.)
What is the Serpent Seed doctrine?	Answer The serpent seed doctrine is a belief based on poor biblical interpretation and superstition. It is a primary doctrinal resource for those who want to use Scriptures to justify racial prejudice. The serpent seed doctrine is also closely related to other erroneous beliefs such as the Christian Identity Movement and the Kenite doctrine. Like many false beliefs, it has a built\-in defense mechanism; that is, anyone who disagrees with it is accused of being a son of the serpent. One of the most unfortunate problems with the serpent seed doctrine is that it so heavily relies on prejudice and warped biblical interpretation that it can be very difficult to discuss rationally. Simply stated, the serpent seed doctrine teaches that the sin of Eve was not simple disobedience, but sexual contact with the serpent, and that Cain was the son of Eve and the devil. Cain’s descendants are, according to this idea, the sons of Satan, and this includes most any race or group that the serpent\-seed believer chooses to dislike. This idea is rooted in superstitious beliefs and is particularly popular with white supremacists and anti\-Semites; the Unification Church also supports this idea. Noted false prophets and false teachers such as Arnold Murray of [Shepherd’s Chapel](Shepherds-Chapel.html) and [William Branham](Branhamism.html) espoused the idea. Although an idea should not be criticized when it is wrongly applied, it is appropriate to condemn an idea when it logically leads to sin. A philosophy that teaches that some races or people are universally satanic, like the serpent seed doctrine, is one such philosophy. Those who support serpent\-seed ideas cite many passages in the Bible as proof that their idea is correct. Almost without exception, these “proofs” require an interpretation that is totally inappropriate to the context of the passage. For example, Genesis 3:13 is often cited, with the claim that the word translated “beguiled” in the King James Version really meant “seduced.” Context and scholarship would disagree. Proverbs 30:20 metaphorically compares eating and sexual immorality; this is greatly overstated by the serpent\-seed believer as proof that the Fall was sexual. Another passage is the parable of the tares in Matthew chapter 13\. Those who believe in the serpent seed doctrine teach that Jesus’ description of the “children of the devil” in this parable is true in a biological sense. Again, only one who is trying to force this belief into the Bible will see it this way; it is not naturally read out of Scripture. There are literally dozens of places in the Bible where this false idea has been wedged in, yet every single one requires a person to believe in the serpent\-seed idea beforehand. Only by reading a passage and saying, “If you assume that the serpent seed doctrine is true, then this means…” can a person support this false philosophy. For this reason, arguing against the serpent seed doctrine can be difficult. Those who believe it interpret Scripture through a sort of “serpent\-seed lens,” and are not likely to accept other interpretations, no matter how well supported by context and scholarship. There are some basic questions and contradictions inherent to the serpent seed doctrine that can be used to demonstrate its lack of truth. For example, Galatians 3:28 clearly states that race and gender have no impact on our standing with God. Second Peter 3:9 says that God wants everyone to be saved, not “everyone but the children of Cain.” Nowhere in Scripture is anyone condemned based on being from Cain’s lineage. Never are we warned about such people by the New Testament writers. Also, there is the question of how or why such persons survived the flood. The doctrine supposes that original sin was sexual, but cannot explain why the whole remainder of the Bible lays out a worldview where the original sin was disobedience, not sexuality. This philosophy is most unfortunate in that it leads directly and logically to two main problems. Racism is by far the worst; believing that certain races are irredeemable has no positive application. The only possible outcome of such a worldview is prejudice and bigotry. There is also a tendency to dismiss critics of the serpent seed doctrine as being the very “Kenites” the philosophy believes in. Arnold Murray is particularly guilty of this abuse. Fortunately for believers, God has given us a resource in Scripture that can show us the truth. We need only read it with unbiased and open eyes to find true wisdom.
What is the Table of Nations?	Answer Genesis chapter 10, commonly known as the Table of Nations, is a list of the patriarchal founders of seventy nations which descended from [Noah through his three sons](sons-of-Noah.html), [Shem, Ham, and Japheth](Shem-Ham-Japheth.html). Twenty\-six of the seventy descended from Shem, thirty from Ham, and fourteen from Japheth. Genesis 10:32 sums up the chapter succinctly: "These are the families of the sons of Noah, according to their genealogies, by their nations; and out of these the nations were separated on the earth after the flood." Chapter 11 recounts their division at Babel. The text seems to imply, though it never explicitly states, that the list was intended to be an exhaustive account. It has traditionally been interpreted as such. Nevertheless, this interpretation is speculative. All of the biblical genealogies are abridged. Key historical figures are included while "lesser," or less culturally relevant, siblings are left out. It is possible that such is the case for the Table of Nations. The compiler of the Table may have focused his study on nations most significant to his own nation at the time of the Table’s compilation, while neglecting the founders of other far\-flung, perhaps even long\-forgotten nations. While every nation is ultimately related to every other nation through Noah, this ancestral tie does not indefinitely perpetuate mutual cultural significance among his descendants. While some of the nations listed are easily identifiable, some remain obscure. Numerous scholars have attempted to identify these unknown nations with varying degrees of success. Due to the archaic nature of the source material, there remains considerable ambiguity. The accuracy of the Table has been called into question by the fact that some of the relationships described do not match up with modern comparative linguistics. For example, the Elamites are said to have descended from Shem, yet their language was not Semitic. The Canaanites are said to have descended from Ham, yet their language was Semitic. This objection assumes that these languages never experienced any dramatic change. The region’s history seems to suggest that this is a dubious assumption. The cultures of the region were constantly subject to migrations and invasions by foreign powers. The conquering empires often imposed their language and culture upon the vanquished. The Hellenizing of the Persian Empire following Alexander the Great’s conquest is a classic example. Or consider the Israelites, who primarily spoke ancient Hebrew up until the Babylonian captivity and the Persian conquest. Then they adopted Aramaic, the official language of the Persian Empire. The Jewish Talmud was written in Aramaic, as were large portions of the books of Daniel and Ezra. Aramaic is thought to have been Jesus’ native language. Following Alexander’s conquest of Persia, the Jews adopted Greek as a second language. As a result, all of the New Testament was written in Greek. The languages of the region were not static. The Hebrews invaded and conquered Canaan long before the Greeks, Persians, and Babylonians. Is it surprising that the Canaanites of the region adopted a Semitic language almost identical to ancient Hebrew? As for the Elamites, if we want to make a case from Elamite we have to start with proto\-Elamite. Proto\-Elamite remains undeciphered, so it cannot form the basis for a polemic against the Table of Nations. There is no evidence that the later, non\-Semitic Elamite underlies proto\-Elamite, and we do not know what influences may have altered the language at any time. Another objection to the Table of Nations is that several of the nations listed do not appear in the historical record (as we have it today) until as late as the first millennium BC. This has led some critical scholars to date the Table no earlier than 7th century BC. This is a recurring criticism of the Bible. Rather than give the Bible the benefit of the doubt whenever it mentions a city or culture that doesn’t appear anywhere else in the historical record, or whenever it places a culture in an era that antedates any other record we have from our other limited sources, critics generally assume that the biblical authors were either disingenuous or ignorant. Such was the case for the ancient metropolis of Nineveh and the ancient Hittite civilization of the Levant, both of which were rediscovered in modern times, in the 19th and 20th centuries, respectively, in a remarkable vindication of the Bible’s historical witness. The fact of the matter is our knowledge of ancient cultures is extremely fragmented and often dependent upon key assumptions. It is therefore speculative to argue that the Table of Nations was written so late based solely on the fact that some of the nations mentioned appear nowhere else than in later historical records. One final objection concerns the fact that [Nimrod](Nimrod-in-the-Bible.html) is said to have been a son of Cush (Genesis 10:8\), who is believed to have founded Nubia just south of Egypt. Yet Nimrod established several cities in Mesopotamia that show no sign of Nubian origin (Genesis 10:8\-12\). Does this mean, as some critics claim, that the Table is therefore manifestly wrong, either about Nimrod’s lineage or his role in establishing the Mesopotamian cities? Skeptics who make this argument overlook the fact that Cush also fathered the founders of at least six Arabian nations (Genesis 10:7\), none of which show signs of Nubian origin. This is because Nubia developed along its own cultural path over many generations. Nimrod was an immediate son of Cush. We have no reason to expect him or the cities he helped establish to show any sign of Nubian origin. In summary, the Table of Nations presents the biblical, ethnological view that all nations descend from Noah through three of his sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth. It is not known whether the list of seventy was meant to be exhaustive or if there were some nations left out, intentionally or accidentally. The accuracy of what we do know about the Table has been called into question by skeptics whose polemical objections tend to be defective and insubstantial. Due to the archaic nature of the source material, the veracity of the Table ultimately remains undeterminable. In the end, those who accept it do so by faith, taking it for granted as part of a larger, justifiable perspective. Those who reject it essentially do so for the same reasons.
What is prayer walking?	Answer Prayer walking is the practice of praying on location, a type of intercessory prayer that involves walking to or near a particular place while praying. Some people believe that being close to a location allows them to “pray nearer to pray clearer.” Prayer walks are taken by individuals, groups, and even whole churches. They can be as short as a block or as long as many miles. The idea is to use the five senses—sight, hearing, smell, taste, and touch—to increase the intercessor’s understanding of prayer needs. For example, if you walk through your neighborhood looking for things to pray about, you might come across a yard that is extremely untidy and rundown. This might prompt you to pray for the health, both physical and spiritual, of the residents inside. Some groups prayer walk around schools, prompting prayer for the teachers and students inside, for their safety and peace, and for the schemes of the devil in their school to be thwarted. Some people feel they can concentrate and direct their prayers more effectively by walking near the people and places they are praying for. Prayer walking is a relatively new phenomenon, the origin of which is not clear. There is no biblical model for prayer walking, although since walking was the major mode of transportation in Bible times, clearly people must have walked and prayed at the same time. However, there is no direct command that prayer walking is something we should be doing. To believe that prayers offered in any setting, or while in any position, are more effective than those offered at another time or in another manner is not scriptural. In addition, while we may feel we need to be close to a location or situation to pray more clearly, our heavenly Father, who is everywhere at all times, knows exactly what needs are present and will respond to them in His own perfect will and timing. The fact that He allows us to be part of His plans through our prayers is for our benefit, not His. We are commanded to “pray without ceasing” (1 Thessalonians 5:17\), and since walking is something we do daily, surely part of praying without ceasing is praying while walking. God hears all prayers offered by those who abide in Christ (John 15:7\), regardless of time, place, or position. At the same time, there certainly is no command against prayer walking, and anything that prompts us to pray is worthy of consideration.
I am a Buddhist. Why should I consider becoming a Christian?	Answer Compared with Buddhism, Christianity has several distinguishing features that show that it deserves consideration. First, while both Christianity and Buddhism have an historical central figure, namely Jesus and Buddha, only Jesus is shown to have risen from the dead. Many people in history have been wise teachers. Many have started religious movements. Siddhartha Guatama, the historical Buddha also called Sakyamuni, stands out among them for having special wisdom and a profound philosophy of life. But Jesus also stands out, and He has confirmed His spiritual teachings with a test that only divine power could pass. Jesus’ body of teachings is confirmed by the death and resurrection of His literal body—a fact which He prophesied and fulfilled in Himself (Matthew 16:21; 20:18\-19; Mark 8:31; 1 Luke 9:22; John 20\-21; 1 Corinthians 15\). Jesus deserves special consideration. Second, the Christian Scriptures are historically outstanding, deserving serious consideration. One could even say that the history of the Bible is so compelling that to doubt the Bible is to doubt history itself since the Bible is the most historically verifiable book of all antiquity. The only book more historically verifiable than the Old Testament (the Hebrew Bible) is the New Testament. Consider the following: 1\) More manuscripts exist for the New Testament than for any other of antiquity—5,000 ancient Greek manuscripts, 24,000 in all including other languages. The multiplicity of manuscripts allows for a tremendous research base by which we can test the texts against each other and identify what the originals said. 2\) The manuscripts of the New Testament are closer in age to the originals than are any other document of antiquity. All of the originals were written within the time of the contemporaries (eyewitnesses), in the first century A.D., and we currently have parts of manuscript dating back to A.D. 125\. Whole book copies surface by A.D. 200, and the complete New Testament can be found dating back to A.D. 250\. Having all the books of the New Testament initially written within the times of eyewitnesses means that the books did not have time to devolve into myth and folklore. Plus, their truth claims were held accountable by members of the Church who, as personal witnesses to the events, could check the facts. 3\) The New Testament documents are more accurate than any other of antiquity. John R. Robinson in Honest to God reports that the New Testament documents are 99\.9 percent accurate (most accurate of any complete antique book). Bruce Metzger, an expert in the Greek New Testament, suggests a more modest 99\.5 percent. Third, Christian ethics has a stronger foundation than Buddhist ethics. Christian ethics is founded in the personal character of God. God is personal and moral. His nature is good, and therefore all actions which align with His goodness are actually good. Whatever departs from His goodness is actually evil. For Buddhists, however, ultimate reality is not understood as personal. But morality by its very nature requires personality. To illustrate, consider the morality of a rock. One does not blame a rock for being used in a murder since it is not a person with moral duties. Rather, the moral duty lies with the person who used that rock for evil purposes. Buddhism lacks the personal framework for moral duty. With Buddhism, karma is the framework for morality. But karma is impersonal. It is akin to a law of nature. Breaking a karmic "rule" is not intrinsically evil. There seems to be no significant difference between error (non\-moral mistakes) and sin (moral wrongdoing). Furthermore, many Buddhists even assert that the dualities of "good" and "evil" ultimately break down. "Good" and "evil" would be part of maya, the illusory world of sensory reality. The categories of morality are not grand enough to map onto ultimate reality, and enlightened individuals will see that good and evil blur into one. But such a position means that ultimate reality would not be "good." It wouldn’t be "evil" either, but then what assurance exists that "ultimate reality" is even a worthwhile pursuit? And what grounds would there be for living a morally good life as opposed to an amoral life without regard for moral distinctions, or an inactive life avoiding moral choices as much as possible? If Buddhism asserts that reality is not ultimately personal and the distinctions between good and evil are not actually real, then Buddhism does not have a true foundation for ethics. Christianity, on the other hand, can point to the character of God as personally founding morality and providing a basis to distinguish good from evil. Fourth, Christianity rightly appreciates "desire." Buddhist ethics seems to have a core difficulty at this point. Sakyamuni taught that tanha, "desire" or "attachment," is the root of suffering and is to be dissolved. But some admittedly good things are based on the idea of desire. Love, for example, is "to desire the good of another" (John 15:13; 1 John 4:7\-12\). One could not even love unless one had a degree of attachment in desiring someone else’s well\-being. In contrast, Christianity teaches that desire is good when it is properly directed. Paul urges Christians to "desire the greater gifts" of the Spirit (1 Corinthians 12:31; 14:1\). In the Psalms, we see pictures of worshipers longing for and desiring fellowship with God (Psalm 42:1\-2; 84\). And, of course, God does not simply act loving, He is love (1 John 4:9; Psalm 136; John 3:16\). Sacrificing desire altogether seems to throw out the proverbial baby (love) with the dirty bathwater (suffering). Fifth is the question "What do you do with your sin?" Buddhism has at least two ideas of sin. Sin is sometimes understood as ignorance. It is sinful if one does not see or understanding reality as Buddhism defines it. However, in Buddhism, there is still an idea of moral error termed "sin." To do something deliberately evil, to break a spiritual or earthly law, or to desire wrong things, these would be identifiable sins. But, this latter definition of sin points to a kind of moral error that requires real atonement. From where can atonement rise? Can atonement come by adherence to karmic principles? Karma is impersonal and amoral. One could do good works to even the balance, but one cannot ever dispose of sin. Karma does not even provide a context whereby moral error is even moral. Whom have we offended if we sin in private? Karma does not care one way or the other because karma is not a person. Can atonement come by prayer or devotion to a Bodhisattva or a Buddha? Even if those characters could offer forgiveness, it seems like sin would still be left unpaid. They would forgive sin showing it to be excusable; it is not a big deal. Christianity, on the other hand, has the only adequate theological view of sin. In Christianity sin is moral error. Ever since Adam, humans have been sinful creatures. Sin is real. And it sets an infinite gap between man and bliss. Sin demands justice. But it cannot be "balanced out" with an equal or greater amount of good works. If someone has ten times more good works than bad works, then he or she still has bad works on the conscience. What happens to these remaining bad works? Are they just forgiven as if they were not a big deal in the first place? Are they permitted into bliss? Are they mere illusions thus leaving no problem whatsoever? None of these options are suitable. Concerning illusion, sin is too real to us to be explained away as illusion. Concerning our sinfulness, when we are honest with ourselves we all know that we have sinned. Concerning forgiveness, to simply forgive sin at no cost treats sin like it is not of much consequence even though we know that to be false. Concerning bliss, bliss is not much good if sin keeps getting smuggled in. It seems like the scales of karma leave us with sin on our hearts and bliss either cannot tolerate us, or it must cease being perfect so that we can come in. Christianity has an answer for sin. No sin goes unpunished, but the punishment has already been satisfied in Christ’s personal sacrifice on the cross. God became man, lived a perfect life, and died the death that we deserved. He was crucified on our behalf, a substitute for us, and a covering, or atonement, for our sins. Furthermore, He was resurrected, proving that not even death could conquer Him. He promises the same resurrection unto eternal life for all who put their faith in Him as their only Lord and Savior (Romans 3:10, 23; 6:23; 8:12; 10:9\-10; Ephesians 2:8\-9; Philippians 3:21\). This is no "easy believism" where God, like a janitor, just cleans up all our mistakes. Rather, this is a life\-long commitment where we take on a new nature and begin a new relationship with God Himself (Romans 6:1; Ephesians 2:1\-10\). When a person really believes God is who He says He is in the Bible, and really believes God did what He says He did in the Bible, and a person puts his or her life on that belief—that person is transformed. He becomes a new creation by the power of God (2 Corinthians 5:17\). You cannot stay the same once you have that belief. One could just as easily continue reading the morning paper after realizing his house was on fire. That knowledge (the house is on fire) motivates action and changes your life (stop reading the paper and do something about the fire). Nor is Jesus simply an answer among many others. All the world’s religions have some level of truth in them, but ultimately, Jesus is the only answer to the human condition. Meditation, works, prayer—none of these can make us worthy of the infinite and eternal gift of heaven. None of these can undo the sin we’ve done. Only when Christ pays our sin debt and we place our faith in Him can we be saved. Only then is sin covered, hope assured, and life filled with eternal meaning. Finally, it is only in Christianity that we can know that we are saved. We do not have to rely on some fleeting experience, nor do we rely on our own good works or fervent meditation. Nor do we put our faith in a false god whom we are trying to "believe\-into\-existence." We have a living and true God, an historically anchored faith, an abiding and testable revelation of God (Scripture), and a guaranteed home in heaven with God. So, what does this mean for you? Jesus is the ultimate reality! Jesus is the perfect sacrifice for your sins. God offers all of us forgiveness and salvation if we will simply receive His gift to us (John 1:12\), believing Jesus to be the Savior who laid down His life for us, His friends. If you place your trust in Jesus as your Savior, you will have absolute assurance of eternal life in heaven. God will forgive your sins, cleanse your soul, renew your spirit, give you abundant life in this world, and eternal life in the next world. How can we reject such a precious gift? How can we turn our backs on God who loved us enough to sacrifice Himself for us? If you are unsure about what you believe, we invite you to say the following prayer to God; “God, help me to know what is true. Help me to discern what is error. Help me to know what is the correct path to salvation.” God will always honor such a prayer. If you want to receive Jesus as your Savior, simply speak to God, verbally or silently, and tell Him that you receive the gift of salvation through Jesus. If you want a prayer to say, here is an example: “God, thank you for loving me. Thank you for sacrificing yourself for me. Thank you for providing for my forgiveness and salvation. I accept the gift of salvation through Jesus. I receive Jesus as my Savior. Amen!” Have you made a decision to trust Jesus as your Savior because of what you have read here today? If so, please click on the “I have accepted Christ today” button below. If you have any questions, please use the question form on our [Bible Questions Answered](Bible-Questions.html) page.
I am a Hindu, why should I consider becoming a Christian?	Answer Comparing Hinduism and Christianity is difficult, in part, because Hinduism is a slippery religion for Westerners to grasp. It represents limitless depths of profundity, a rich history, and an elaborate theology. There is perhaps no religion in the world that is more variegated or ornate. Comparing Hinduism and Christianity can easily overwhelm the novice of [comparative religions](comparative-religions.html). So, the proposed question should be considered carefully and humbly. The answer given here does not pretend to be comprehensive or assume even an "in\-depth" understanding of Hinduism at any particular point. This answer merely compares a few points between the two religions in effort to show how Christianity is deserving of special consideration. First, Christianity should be considered for its historical viability. Christianity has historically rooted characters and events within its schema which are identifiable through forensic sciences like archeology and textual criticism. Hinduism certainly has a history, but its theology, mythology, and history are so often blurred together that it becomes difficult to identify where one stops and the other begins. Mythology is openly admitted within Hinduism, which possesses elaborate myths used to explain the personalities and natures of the gods. Hinduism has a certain flexibility and adaptability through its historical ambiguity. But, where a religion is not historical, it is that much less testable. It may not be falsifiable at that point, but neither is it verifiable. It is the literal history of the Jewish and eventually Christian tradition that justifies the theology of Christianity. If Adam and Eve did not exist, if Israel did not have an exodus out of Egypt, if Jonah was just an allegory, or if Jesus did not walk the earth then the entire Christian religion can potentially crumble at those points. For Christianity, a fallacious history would mean a porous theology. Such historical rootedness could be a weakness of Christianity except that the historically testable parts of the Christian tradition are so often validated that the weakness becomes a strength. Second, while both Christianity and Hinduism have key historical figures, only Jesus is shown to have risen bodily from the dead. Many people in history have been wise teachers or have started religious movements. Hinduism has its share of wise teachers and earthly leaders. But Jesus stands out. His spiritual teachings are confirmed with a test that only divine power could pass: death and bodily resurrection, which He prophesied and fulfilled in Himself (Matthew 16:21; 20:18\-19; Mark 8:31, 1 Luke 9:22; John 20\-21; 1 Corinthians 15\). Moreover, the Christian doctrine of resurrection stands apart from the Hindu doctrine of reincarnation. These two ideas are not the same. And it is only the resurrection which can be deduced convincingly from historical and evidential study. The resurrection of Jesus Christ in particular has considerable justification through secular and religious scholarship alike. Its verification does nothing to verify the Hindu doctrine of reincarnation. Consider the following differences: Resurrection involves one death, one life, one mortal body, and one new and immortally glorified body. Resurrection happens by divine intervention, is monotheistic, is a deliverance from sin, and ultimately occurs only in the end times. Reincarnation, on the contrary, involves multiple deaths, multiple lives, multiple mortal bodies, and no immortal body. Furthermore, reincarnation happens by natural law, is usually pantheistic (God is all), operates on the basis of karma, and is always operative. Of course, listing the differences does not prove the truth of either account. However, if the resurrection is historically demonstrable, then distinguishing these two after\-life options separates the justified account from the unjustified account. The resurrection of Christ and the larger Christian doctrine of resurrection are both deserving of consideration. Third, the Christian Scriptures are historically outstanding, deserving serious consideration. In several tests the Bible surpasses the Hindu Vedas, and all other books of antiquity, for that matter. One could even say that the history of the Bible is so compelling that to doubt the Bible is to doubt history itself, since it is the most historically verifiable book of all antiquity. The only book more historically verifiable than the Old Testament (the Hebrew Bible) is the New Testament. Consider the following: 1\) More manuscripts exist for the New Testament than for any other of antiquity—5,000 ancient Greek manuscripts, 24,000 in all including other languages. The multiplicity of manuscripts allows for a tremendous research base by which we can test the texts against each other and identify what the originals said. 2\) The manuscripts of the New Testament are closer in age to the originals than are any other document of antiquity. All of the originals were written within the time of the contemporaries (eyewitnesses), in the first century A.D., and we currently have parts of manuscript as old as A.D. 125\. Whole book copies surface by A.D. 200, and the complete New Testament can be found dating back to A.D. 250\. Having all the books of the New Testament initially written within the times of eyewitnesses means that they did not have time to devolve into myth and folklore. Plus, their truth claims were held accountable by members of the church who, as personal witnesses to the events, could check the facts. 3\) The New Testament documents are more accurate than any other of antiquity. John R. Robinson in Honest to God reports that the New Testament documents are 99\.9% accurate (most accurate of any complete antique book). Bruce Metzger, an expert in the Greek New Testament, suggests a more modest 99\.5%. Fourth, Christian monotheism has advantages over pantheism and polytheism. It would not be fair to characterize Hinduism as only pantheistic ("God is all") or only polytheistic (having many gods). Depending on the stream of Hinduism to which one ascribes, one may be pantheistic, polytheistic, monistic ("all is one"), monotheistic, or a number of other options. However, two strong streams within Hinduism are polytheism and pantheism. Christian monotheism has marked advantages over both of these. Due to space considerations, these three worldviews are compared here in regards to only one point, ethics. Polytheism and pantheism both have a questionable basis for their ethics. With polytheism, if there are many gods, then which god has the more ultimate standard of ethics for humans to keep? When there are multiple gods, then their ethical systems do not conflict, do conflict, or do not exist. If they do not exist, then ethics are invented and baseless. The weakness of that position is self\-evident. If the ethical systems do not conflict, then on what principle do they align? Whatever that aligning principle is would be more ultimate than the gods. The gods are not ultimate since they answer to some other authority. Therefore, there is a higher reality to which one should adhere. This fact makes polytheism seem shallow if not empty. On the third option, if the gods conflict in their standards of right and wrong, then to obey one god is to risk disobeying another, incurring punishment. Ethics would be relative. Good for one god would not necessarily be "good" in an objective and universal sense. For example, sacrificing one’s child to Kali would be commendable to one stream of Hinduism but reprehensible to many others. But surely, child sacrifice, as such, is objectionable regardless. Some things by all reason and appearance are right or wrong, regardless. Pantheism does not fare much better than polytheism since it asserts that ultimately there is only one thing—one divine reality—thus disallowing any ultimate distinctions of "good" and "evil." If "good" and "evil" were really distinct, then there would not be one single, indivisible reality. Pantheism ultimately does not allow for moral distinctions of "good" and "evil." Good and evil dissolve into the same indivisible reality. And even if such distinctions as "good" and "evil" could be made, the context of karma voids the moral context of that distinction. Karma is an impersonal principle much like a natural law such as gravity or inertia. When karma comes calling on some sinful soul, it is not a divine policing that brings judgment. Rather, it is an impersonal reaction of nature. But morality requires personality, personality which karma cannot lend. For example, we do not blame a stick for being used in a beating. The stick is an object with no moral capacity or duty. Rather, we blame the person who used the stick abusively. That person has a moral capacity and a moral duty. Likewise, if karma is merely impersonal nature, then it is amoral ("without morality") and is not an adequate basis for ethics. Christian monotheism, however, roots its ethics in the person of God. God’s character is good, and, therefore, what conforms to Him and His will is good. What departs from God and His will is evil. Therefore, the one God serves as the absolute basis for ethics, allowing a personal basis for morality and justifying objective knowledge about good and evil. Fifth, the question remains "What do you do with your sin?" Christianity has the strongest answer to this problem. Hinduism, like Buddhism, has at least two ideas of sin. Sin is sometimes understood as ignorance. It is sinful if one does not see or understand reality as Hinduism defines it. But there remains an idea of moral error termed "sin." To do something deliberately evil, to break a spiritual or earthly law, or to desire wrong things, these would be sins. But that moral definition of sin points to a kind of moral error that requires real atonement. From where can atonement rise? Can atonement come by adherence to karmic principles? Karma is impersonal and amoral. One could do good works to "even the balance," but one cannot ever dispose of sin. Karma does not even provide a context whereby moral error is even moral. Whom have we offended if we sin in private, for example? Karma does not care one way or the other because karma is not a person. For example, suppose one man kills another man’s son. He may offer money, property, or his own son to the offended party. But he cannot un\-kill the young man. No amount of compensation can make up for that sin. Can atonement come by prayer or devotion to Shiva or Vishnu? Even if those characters offer forgiveness, it seems like sin would still be an unpaid debt. They would forgive sin as if it were excusable, no big deal, and then wave people on through the gates of bliss. Christianity, however, treats sin as moral error against a single, ultimate, and personal God. Ever since Adam, humans have been sinful creatures. Sin is real, and it sets an infinite gap between man and bliss. Sin demands justice. Yet it cannot be "balanced out" with an equal or greater number of good works. If someone has ten times more good works than bad works, then that person still has evil on his or her conscience. What happens to these remaining bad works? Are they just forgiven as if they were not a big deal in the first place? Are they permitted into bliss? Are they mere illusions, thus leaving no problem whatsoever? None of these options are suitable. Concerning illusion, sin is too real to us to be explained away as illusion. Concerning sinfulness, when we are honest with ourselves we all know we have sinned. Concerning forgiveness, to simply forgive sin at no cost treats sin like it is not of much consequence. We know that to be false. Concerning bliss, bliss is not much good if sin keeps getting smuggled in. It seems that the scales of karma leave us with sin on our hearts and a sneaking suspicion that we have violated some ultimately personal standard of right and wrong. And bliss either cannot tolerate us, or it must cease being perfect so that we can come in. With Christianity, however, all sin is punished though that punishment has already been satisfied in Christ’s personal sacrifice on the cross. God become man, lived a perfect life, and died the death that we deserved. He was crucified on our behalf, a substitute for us, and a covering, or atonement, for our sins. And He was resurrected proving that not even death could conquer Him. Furthermore, He promises the same resurrection to eternal life for all who have faith in Him as their only Lord and Savior (Romans 3:1023, 6:23; 8:12; 10:9\-10; Ephesians 2:8\-9; Philippians 3:21\). Finally, in Christianity we can know that we are saved. We do not have to rely on some fleeting experience, nor do we rely on our own good works or fervent meditation, nor do we put our faith in a false god whom we are trying to "believe into existence." We have a living and true God, a historically anchored faith, an abiding and testable revelation of God (Scripture), a theologically satisfying basis for ethical living, and a guaranteed home in heaven with God. So, what does this mean for you? Jesus is the ultimate reality! Jesus was the perfect sacrifice for our sins. God offers all of us forgiveness and salvation if we will simply receive His gift to us (John 1:12\), believing Jesus to be the Savior who laid down His life for us – His friends. If you place your trust in Jesus as your only Savior, you will have absolute assurance of eternal bliss in heaven. God will forgive your sins, cleanse your soul, renew your spirit, and give you abundant life in this world and eternal bliss in the next world. How can we reject such a precious gift? How can we turn our backs on God who loved us enough to sacrifice Himself for us? If you are unsure about what you believe, we invite you to say the following prayer to God; “God, help me to know what is true. Help me to discern what is error. Help me to know what is the correct path to salvation.” God will always honor such a prayer. If you want to receive Jesus as your Savior, simply speak to God, verbally or silently, and tell Him that you receive the gift of salvation through Jesus. If you want a prayer to say, here is an example: “God, thank you for your love for me. Thank you for sacrificing yourself for me. Thank you for providing for my forgiveness and salvation. I accept the gift of salvation through Jesus. I receive Jesus as my Savior. Amen!” Have you made a decision to trust Jesus as your Savior because of what you have read here today? If so, please click on the “I have accepted Christ today” button below. If you have any questions, please use the question form on our [Bible Questions Answered](Bible-Questions.html) page.
Do Christians believe in three gods?	Answer If you’re a Muslim, you may think Christians believe in three gods. That idea is as blasphemous to Christians as to you. There is one God! Christians believe in one God. In the Holy Bible, God commands, “You shall have no other gods before me” (Exodus 20:3\). When asked for the greatest command, Jesus responded, “. . . The Lord our God, the Lord is one. And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength” (Mark 12:29\-30\). The one God exists as three Persons. The Bible teaches that God is one in essence, three in Person: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (Matthew 3:16\-17; 28:19\). Each is fully God. God is not three gods but three in one. Although we cannot completely grasp the tri\-unity of God, we must trust His revelation is true. Is Jesus God’s Son? The same Jesus who affirmed God’s oneness also said, “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30\). Jesus’ perfect life, miracles, death, and resurrection proved He was God’s Son in the flesh. We cannot both praise Jesus’ teaching and refute His deity because He claimed to be from and of God (John 1:1\-2; 5:18\-24\). Jesus is either God’s Son or a blasphemer. The religious leaders of Jesus’ time refused to believe He was the Son of God and so desired to kill Him for blasphemy. “. . . Again the high priest asked him, ‘Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?’ And Jesus said, ‘I am, and you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.’ And the high priest tore his garments and said, ‘What further witnesses do we need? You have heard his blasphemy. What is your decision?’ And they all condemned him as deserving death” (Mark 14:61\-64\). What is your decision? Your beliefs cannot change the truth. Is Jesus the Son of God? If not, He did deserve death for blasphemy, and His bones would be resting in a tomb. But the resurrection proved Jesus divine. Being God’s Son, why did Jesus die? Death is the punishment for sinners (Romans 6:23\). Jesus kept every commandment—even the greatest command to love God. Have you? Unlike Jesus, not one of us loves God supremely. Even breaking a small command (such as lying, hating, or coveting) disqualifies us from heaven: “For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all” (James 2:10\). We deserve death—eternal separation from God in hell. But take heart. The Lord Jesus took the punishment for sin when He died on the cross. “\[God] made \[Jesus] who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Corinthians 5:21\). After dying on the cross, Jesus rose from the dead, showing God’s approval of His sacrifice for sin. The living Lord Jesus can pay for your sin, providing the way to paradise. When Jesus was promising to prepare a place in heaven for His followers, one asked Him for the way to heaven. “Jesus said to him, ‘I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me’” (John 14:6\). You cannot come to the Father on your own because you are a sinner, unable to fix yourself. Trust in Jesus as your Savior from the penalty and power of sin. Turn from your sin and your own way to follow Jesus as the Lord of your life. He is the way, truth, and life!
What are some reasons for the animosity between Christians and Muslims?	Answer On September 11, 2001, the world entered the age of terror. The terrorists wage cruel atrocities in the name of Islam. Christians wonder how to respond to the threat. To their reproach, some fearfully spurn all Muslims as terrorists. Others compromise truth to show acceptance. Both approaches dishonor God. Christians must understand their differences with Muslims so they can respond with truth and love. First, let’s prayerfully examine how to overcome some of the initial barriers between Muslims and Christians. 1\. Muslims are offended by Western secularism As global technology shrinks the world, Muslims feel threatened by Western culture: immoral movies, pornography, immodest dress, vile music, and rebellious teens. Western culture threatens the Islamic faith, worldview, and lifestyle. Muslims equate this Western culture with Christianity. Christian response: Befriend Muslims and explain how Western culture is no longer Christian but secular. Further, not all who claim to be Christians are true followers of Christ. Show by word and action an example of a true Christian: “Keep your conduct among the Gentiles honorable, so that when they speak against you as evildoers, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day of visitation” (1 Peter 2:12\). 2\. Muslims are resentful of Western dominance Some countries of the West have a history of [colonialism](colonialism-imperialism.html) and interference, which Muslims resent. While some approve of the war on terror, other Muslims bitterly object. Many also feel betrayed by the West’s “favoritism” of Israel, a nation whose formation displaced thousands of Palestinians. Christian response: Demonstrate genuine love and humility by prayer and service. Focus on Christ—not political controversies. God will one day restore justice. In the meantime, He provides government leaders to protect the good and punish the wrongdoer (Romans 13:1\-7\). “Live in harmony with one another. Do not be haughty, but associate with the lowly. Never be conceited. Repay no one evil for evil, but give thought to do what is honorable in the sight of all. If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all. Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, ‘Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.’ To the contrary, ‘if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head.’ Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good” (Romans 12:16\-21\). “Have nothing to do with foolish, ignorant controversies; you know that they breed quarrels. And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth, and they may escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will” (2 Timothy 2:23\-26\). 3\. Militant Muslims act on war verses in the Qur’an While many Muslims are peace\-loving, others interpret the Qur’an as giving them divine permission to convert or kill non\-Muslims. Verses in the Qur’an that advocate violence include Qur’an 4:76, “Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah…”; Qur’an 25:52, “Therefore listen not to the Unbelievers, but strive against them with the utmost strenuousness...”; and Qur’an 61:4, “Surely Allah loves those who fight in His way.” Christian response: Sadly, some Christians fearfully despise Muslims. But the Lord gives the perfect neutralizer to fear and hatred: His love. “There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear” (1 John 4:18a). “And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell” (Matthew 10:28\). "But I say to you who hear, Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you” (Luke 6:27\). Jesus didn’t promise His followers a life free of suffering. Instead, He assured, “If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you. Remember the word that I said to you: 'A servant is not greater than his master.' If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you. If they kept my word, they will also keep yours. But all these things they will do to you on account of my name, because they do not know him who sent me” (John 15:18\-21\). While some misunderstandings can be cleared with Muslims, the main offense is Jesus Christ (see 1 Peter 2:4\-8\). The truth about the Lord and Savior must not be compromised. Muslims reject God the Father who sent His Son to die for sinners. Most deny both the necessity and historicity of Christ’s death. While Muslims honor Jesus as a noble prophet, they depend on Islamic faith and works—submission to one Allah, belief in Muhammad’s revelation of Allah, obedience to the Qur’an and the Five Pillars—for entrance to paradise. Many Muslims believe that Christians worship three gods, deify a man, and have corrupted the Bible. Christians and Muslims should discuss doctrinal misunderstandings. Christians must understand biblical theology so they can . . . • explain the Trinity: God is one in essence, three in Person • give evidence of the Bible’s trustworthiness • show how God’s holiness and man’s sinfulness require Christ’s atoning death • clarify beliefs about Jesus: “And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent his Son to be the Savior of the world. Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God” (1 John 4:14\-15\) With love, humility, and patience, Christians must present Jesus as Lord and Savior. “Jesus answered, ‘I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me’” (John 14:6\).
Have Christians corrupted the Bible?	Answer Some Muslims accuse Christians of corrupting the Bible. While this charge would explain the differences between the Qur’an and the Bible, the allegation has no credible evidence. The Qur’an praises the Bible, and scholars verify the Bible’s authenticity. The Bible is commended in the Qur’an Islam teaches that the Bible has been corrupted. However, the Qur’an commends the Bible: “And We caused Jesus, son of Mary, to follow in their footsteps, confirming that which was (revealed) before him in the Torah, and We bestowed on him the Gospel wherein is guidance and a light, confirming that which was (revealed) before it in the Torah—a guidance and an admonition unto those who ward off (evil)” (Surah 5:46\). Muhammad was commanded by Allah to “recite what has been revealed to you of the Book” (Surah 29:45\). In addition, the Qur’an says that God’s Word cannot be changed (Surah 6:34; 10:34, 64\), and it makes no distinction between the various revelations of God. “We have believed in Allah and what has been revealed to us and what has been revealed to Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and the Descendants and what was given to Moses and Jesus and what was given to the prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them” (Surah 2:136\). The Bible is verified by scholars Scholarly evidence proves that nothing of doctrinal significance differs in the various Hebrew and Greek texts of the Bible. Aside from grammar and spelling variation, the Bible today is essentially the same Bible that Muhammad praised (Surah 3:3\). The New Testament was completed 500 years before Muhammad received the Qur’an. It is not enough to say, “The Bible and the Qur’an are different, and thus the Bible must be wrong.” Proof of corruption must be forthcoming. If a modern author wrote a book on the Gallic Wars that was found to conflict with Julius Caesar’s account of the same events, then the older, historically accepted text would carry more weight. Caesar, whose writing was contemporaneous with the events, would have more authority than the modern author. In other words, when discrepancies in a historical document are alleged, the burden of proof rests on the newer text. The Bible is truth God has preserved His truth forever. “Every word of God proves true; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him. Do not add to his words, lest he rebuke you and you be found a liar” (Proverbs 30:5\-6; see also Psalm 119:160; Matthew 5:17, 18; Luke 16:17; John 10:35b; 1 Thessalonians 2:13; 2 Timothy 3:13\-17; 2 Peter 1:20, 21; Revelation 22:18, 19\). Those who cling to the unfounded charge of corruption are rejecting life\-giving truth. The Bible shows the way to heaven. Find out what God prescribes as the only way to escape hell and [reach heaven](assured-paradise.html).
Does the Qur’an replace the Bible?	Answer Rather than replacing, the [Qur’an](what-is-the-Quran.html) urges Muslims to read the Bible. Many Muslims have never read the Bible because they think the Qur’an has replaced it. The Qur’an, however, never claims to annul the Bible. The Qur’an praises the Bible as God’s guiding truth (Surah 5:46; 3:3; 10:94\-95\). Some Muslims say that just as the Gospel (Injeel) abrogated the law (Tauret), the Qur’an replaces the Gospel. However, the Gospel did not abrogate the law. The perfect Jesus came, not to abolish the law, but to fulfill the law. Jesus said, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished” (Matthew 5:17\-18\). Jesus showed that God’s law is even harder to keep than men think. “You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder; and whoever murders will be liable to judgment.’ But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire. . . . You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart” (Matthew 5:21\-22, 27\-28\). Have you met that perfect standard? The Bible says none of us can keep the law’s demands. We deserve death (Romans 3:23; 6:23\). Thankfully, Jesus faultlessly kept the law of God. As the perfect sacrifice, Jesus paid the penalty for sin by dying on the cross. Find out how Jesus’ death gives life to believing [sinners](Muslim-why-Jesus-die.html). Trust God’s Word, the Bible, which can never be replaced. “The sum of your word is truth, and every one of your righteous rules endures forever” (Psalm 119:160\).
Do the Qur’an and Muhammad affirm or reject the Bible?	Answer The [Qur’an](what-is-the-Quran.html) praises the Bible as God’s preserved truth. As a Muslim, what is your guide? If hadiths or imams differ with the Qur’an, which would you believe? Most likely, the Qur’an is your ultimate authority. Does the Qur’an give you permission to learn from the Bible? • “Lo! We did reveal the Torah, wherein is guidance and a light” (Surah 5:44a; 2:87\). • “And We caused Jesus, son of Mary, to follow in their footsteps, confirming that which was (revealed) before him in the Torah, and We bestowed on him the Gospel wherein is guidance and a light, confirming that which was (revealed) before it in the Torah \- a guidance and an admonition unto those who ward off (evil)” (Surah 5:46\). • “It is He Who sent down to thee (step by step), in truth, the Book, confirming what went before it; and He sent down the Law (of Moses) and the Gospel (of Jesus) before this, as a guide to mankind, and He sent down the criterion (of judgment between right and wrong)” (Surah 3:3\). • “If thou wert in doubt as to what We have revealed unto thee, then ask those who have been reading the Book from before thee: the Truth hath indeed come to thee from thy Lord: so be in no wise of those in doubt. And be not thou of those who deny the revelations of Allah, for then wert thou of the losers” (Surah 10:94\-95; 16:43\). If you are a Muslim, you have no excuse not to read the Bible. The Qur’an commends it. Why don’t you start today? Begin with the Gospel of Luke, [which tells the story of Jesus](Muslim-WJD1.html). He alone can give you [assurance of paradise](assured-paradise.html).
Can a Christian lose salvation?	Answer First, the term Christian must be defined. A “Christian” is not a person who has said a prayer or walked down an aisle or been raised in a Christian family. While each of these things can be a part of the Christian experience, they are not what makes a Christian. A Christian is a person who has fully trusted in Jesus Christ as the only Savior and therefore possesses the Holy Spirit (John 3:16; Acts 16:31; Ephesians 2:8–9\). So, with this definition in mind, can a Christian lose salvation? It’s a crucially important question. Perhaps the best way to answer it is to examine what the Bible says occurs at salvation and to study what losing salvation would entail: A Christian is a new creation. “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come!” (2 Corinthians 5:17, NKJV). A Christian is not simply an “improved” version of a person; a Christian is an entirely new creature. He is “in Christ.” For a Christian to lose salvation, the new creation would have to be destroyed. A Christian is redeemed. “For you know that it was not with perishable things such as silver or gold that you were redeemed from the empty way of life handed down to you from your forefathers, but with the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect” (1 Peter 1:18–19\). The word redeemed refers to a purchase being made, a price being paid. We were purchased at the cost of Christ’s death. For a Christian to lose salvation, God Himself would have to revoke His purchase of the individual for whom He paid with the precious blood of Christ. A Christian is justified. “Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ” (Romans 5:1\). To justify is to declare righteous. All those who receive Jesus as Savior are “declared righteous” by God. For a Christian to lose salvation, God would have to go back on His Word and “un\-declare” what He had previously declared. Those absolved of guilt would have to be tried again and found guilty. God would have to reverse the sentence handed down from the divine bench. A Christian is promised eternal life. “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16\). Eternal life is the promise of spending forever in heaven with God. God promises that if you believe, you will have eternal life. For a Christian to lose salvation, eternal life would have to be redefined. The Christian is promised to live forever. Does eternal not mean “eternal”? A Christian is marked by God and sealed by the Spirit. “You also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession—to the praise of his glory” (Ephesians 1:13–14\). At the moment of faith, the new Christian is marked and sealed with the Spirit, who was promised to act as a deposit to guarantee the heavenly inheritance. The end result is that God’s glory is praised. For a Christian to lose salvation, God would have to erase the mark, withdraw the Spirit, cancel the deposit, break His promise, revoke the guarantee, keep the inheritance, forego the praise, and lessen His glory. A Christian is guaranteed glorification. “Those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified” (Romans 8:30\). According to Romans 5:1, justification is ours at the moment of faith. According to Romans 8:30, glorification comes with justification. All those whom God justifies are promised to be glorified. This promise will be fulfilled when Christians receive their perfect resurrection bodies in heaven. If a Christian can lose salvation, then Romans 8:30 is in error, because God could not guarantee glorification for all those whom He predestines, calls, and justifies. A Christian cannot lose salvation. Most, if not all, of what the Bible says happens to us when we receive Christ would be invalidated if salvation could be lost. Salvation is the gift of God, and God’s gifts are “irrevocable” (Romans 11:29\). A Christian cannot be un\-newly created. The redeemed cannot be unpurchased. Eternal life cannot be temporary. God cannot renege on His Word. Scripture says that God cannot lie (Titus 1:2\). Two common objections to the belief that a Christian cannot lose salvation concern these experiential issues: 1\) What about Christians who live in a sinful, unrepentant lifestyle? 2\) What about Christians who reject the faith and deny Christ? The problem with these objections is the assumption that everyone who calls himself a “Christian” has actually been born again. The Bible declares that a true Christian will not live a state of continual, unrepentant sin (1 John 3:6\). The Bible also says that anyone who departs the faith is demonstrating that he was never truly a Christian (1 John 2:19\). He may have been religious, he may have put on a good show, but he was never born again by the power of God. “By their fruit you will recognize them” (Matthew 7:16\). The redeemed of God belong “to him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God” (Romans 7:4\). Nothing can separate a child of God from the Father’s love (Romans 8:38–39\). Nothing can remove a Christian from God’s hand (John 10:28–29\). God guarantees eternal life and maintains the salvation He has given us. The Good Shepherd searches for the lost sheep, and, “when he finds it, he joyfully puts it on his shoulders and goes home” (Luke 15:5–6\). The lamb is found, and the Shepherd gladly bears the burden; our Lord takes full responsibility for bringing the lost one safely home. Jude 1:24–25 further emphasizes the goodness and faithfulness of our Savior: To him who is able to keep you from stumbling and to present you before his glorious presence without fault and with great joy—to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen.”
Who are the Amish, and what are their beliefs?	Answer The Amish are a group of people who follow the teachings of Jacob Ammann, a 17th\-century citizen of Switzerland. It is a Protestant denomination, closely related to the [Mennonites](Mennonite-beliefs.html). The Amish, most of whom live in the United States, follow simple customs and refuse to take oaths, vote, or perform military service. They shun modern technology and conveniences. Transportation for the Amish is by horse and buggy. They do not have electricity or telephones in their homes. The men usually wear beards and pants with buttons instead of zippers. The women wear white head coverings and plain dresses, usually without buttons—they use straight pins to fasten the clothing. The Amish believe that James 1:27 "...and to keep oneself unspotted from the world" means to stay away from things the "world" does—like driving autos, having a TV, going to movies, wearing make\-up, and the enjoying the conveniences of electricity and phones. They often use generators to create power to run their equipment and use horses, instead of tractors, to do farm work. The bishop (leader) of an Amish community (district) sets up the rules of conduct allowed for his district. Some bishops are more lenient than others. The Amish have church services in their own homes, taking turns hosting on Sundays, and do not have church buildings. They usually only go to a formal school until age 15\. The Amish groups have problems, just like anyone else. Most of these church groups try to keep their problems concealed from the outside world. The youth are given the opportunity to taste of “the world” in their late teens to determine if they want to join the church. Many young Amish people get involved in drugs, alcohol, sex, and other vices during this time period while they are allowed to own a motor vehicle, but a large number then do give up the vehicle and join the church. Others determine they will not join the church and attempt to fit into the secular world. Spiritually speaking, the Amish are very similar to the traditional Jews that keep the Old Testament Law. They have a long list of do’s and don’ts. If they fail to keep the list, they are in trouble with the church and are in danger of being shunned. Shunning is a form of excommunication. If they partake of the "worldly" things, they are shunned by the church people. The Amish believe that Jesus Christ was the Son of God, that He died for their sins, and that He is the way to salvation. However, many Amish also practice a works\-based relationship with God. They view their good works as earning favor with God. If their good works outweigh the bad works, they feel God will allow them into heaven. The Amish are basically good, hard\-working people, who have to make sure they stay on the right path, so they get final rewards in heaven when life is over. They say "Amish is a lifestyle,” not a religion. They choose to keep the simple life so they can focus more time on family and home, rather than the things that require advanced modern technology. As a group, the Amish do not believe in the security of salvation. They believe a person can lose his/her salvation if he/she strays from the path, or falls from grace. They do not believe in infant baptism, but do "sprinkle" for adult baptism, rather than immerse in water. Thankfully, some (or many) members of the Amish church do believe that Jesus paid the full price for their sins, and have truly received the grace so freely given by God. Sadly, others cling to the “works\-based” philosophy, believing their salvation is based on their “right” actions. The Amish set a powerful example by literally trying to "keep themselves unspotted from the world" (James 1:27\). At the same time, the Bible does not call us to completely separate ourselves from the world. We are called to go into all the world and preach the gospel (Matthew 28:19\-20; Acts 1:8\). We are not to withdraw and separate ourselves from those who most need to hear the gospel message. There is much for which the Amish are to be commended. The powerful example of unconditional forgiveness the Amish showed after the 2006 Amish school shooting was a demonstration of the love and grace of God. The Amish are kind, respectful, hard\-working, and God\-loving people. At the same time, the legalism and works\-based faith that is evident in some Amish communities is not to be followed.
What is the Nicene Creed?	Answer Other than the [Apostles’ Creed](apostles-creed.html), the Nicene Creed is likely the most universally accepted and recognized statements of the Christian faith. The Nicene Creed was first adopted in A.D. 325 at the [Council of Nicea](council-of-Nicea.html). The Roman Emperor Constantine had convened the Council of Nicea in an attempt to unify the Christian church with one doctrine, especially on the issues of the Trinity and the deity and humanity of Jesus Christ. The Nicene Creed reads as follows: "We believe in one God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. “And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only\-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds, God of God, Light of Light, Very God of Very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father by whom all things were made; who for us men, and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the Virgin Mary, and was made man, and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate. He suffered and was buried, and the third day he rose again according to the Scriptures, and ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father. And he shall come again with glory to judge both the quick and the dead, whose kingdom shall have no end. “And we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of Life, who proceedeth from the Father, who with the Father and the Son together is worshiped and glorified, who spoke by the prophets. And we believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church. We acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins. And we look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen." There have been some revisions to the Nicene Creed, including one with the “[Filioque Clause](filioque-clause-controversy.html).” The [Council of Constantinople](Council-of-Constantinople.html) in AD 381 expanded the language of the creed to clarify the orthodox concept of the Trinity. This is the version (shown above) today most commonly referred to as the “Nicene Creed.” Overall, the Nicene Creed is a good summary of Christian doctrine. There are two primary issues, however. The first regards the phrase "catholic and apostolic church"—this does not refer to the Roman Catholic Church as we know it today. The word "catholic" means “universal.” (The true "catholic" church is all those who have placed their faith in Jesus Christ for salvation. Please see our article on the [universal church](universal-local-church.html).) Also, "apostolic" means "built on the teaching of the apostles" and is not a statement of support for [apostolic succession](apostolic-succession.html). Second, "baptism for the remission of sins" is a much misunderstood concept. See [Is baptism necessary for salvation?](baptism-salvation.html)
What is the Athanasian Creed?	Answer The Athanasian Creed (known in Latin as Quicumque vult) is an early summary of Christian doctrine. It is traditionally believed to have been written by [Athanasius](Athanasius.html), archbishop of Alexandria, who lived in the 4th century A.D. However, this traditional view of its authorship is challenged by some historians and scholars. The Athanasian Creed seems to have been written primarily to refute heresies involving the deity and humanity of Jesus Christ, such as [Arianism](arianism.html), [Nestorianism](Nestorianism.html), and [Monophysitism](monophysitism.html). The Athanasian Creed traditionally reads as follows: “Whoever wants to be saved should above all cling to the catholic faith. Whoever does not guard it whole and inviolable will doubtless perish eternally. Now this is the catholic faith: “We worship one God in trinity and the Trinity in unity, neither confusing the persons nor dividing the divine being. For the Father is one person, the Son is another, and the Spirit is still another. But the deity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is one, equal in glory, coeternal in majesty. What the Father is, the Son is, and so is the Holy Spirit. Uncreated is the Father; uncreated is the Son; uncreated is the Spirit. The Father is infinite; the Son is infinite; the Holy Spirit is infinite. Eternal is the Father; eternal is the Son; eternal is the Spirit: And yet there are not three eternal beings, but one who is eternal; as there are not three uncreated and unlimited beings, but one who is uncreated and unlimited. Almighty is the Father; almighty is the Son; almighty is the Spirit: And yet there are not three almighty beings, but one who is almighty. Thus the Father is God; the Son is God; the Holy Spirit is God: And yet there are not three gods, but one God. Thus the Father is Lord; the Son is Lord; the Holy Spirit is Lord: And yet there are not three lords, but one Lord. “As Christian truth compels us to acknowledge each distinct person as God and Lord, so catholic religion forbids us to say that there are three gods or lords. The Father was neither made nor created nor begotten; the Son was neither made nor created, but was alone begotten of the Father; the Spirit was neither made nor created, but is proceeding from the Father and the Son. Thus there is one Father, not three fathers; one Son, not three sons; one Holy Spirit, not three spirits. And in this Trinity, no one is before or after, greater or less than the other; but all three persons are in themselves, coeternal and coequal; and so we must worship the Trinity in unity and the one [God in three persons](God-in-three-persons.html). Whoever wants to be saved should think thus about the Trinity. It is necessary for eternal salvation that one also faithfully believe that our Lord Jesus Christ became flesh. “For this is the true faith that we believe and confess: That our Lord Jesus Christ, God’s Son, is both God and man. He is God, begotten before all worlds from the being of the Father, and he is man, born in the world from the being of his mother—existing fully as God, and fully as man with a rational soul and a human body; equal to the Father in divinity, subordinate to the Father in humanity. Although he is God and man, he is not divided, but is one Christ. He is united because God has taken humanity into himself; he does not transform deity into humanity. He is completely one in the unity of his person, without confusing his natures. For as the rational soul and body are one person, so the one Christ is God and man. “He suffered death for our salvation. He descended into hell and rose again from the dead. He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again to judge the living and the dead. At his coming all people shall rise bodily to give an account of their own deeds. Those who have done good will enter eternal life, those who have done evil will enter eternal fire. This is the catholic faith. One cannot be saved without believing this firmly and faithfully.” While the Athanasian Creed is a good summary of Christian doctrine on the subjects of the Trinity, and the deity / humanity of Jesus Christ, there are a couple of issues that must be dealt with. First, in regards to the phrase “catholic church,” this does not refer to the Roman Catholic Church. The word catholic means “universal.” The true “catholic” church is all those who have placed their faith in Jesus Christ for salvation. Please see our article on the [universal church](universal-local-church.html). Second, the Athanasian Creed demands belief in all of its tenets for salvation. While we agree with the tenets, we do not believe that all of them are mandatory for salvation.
How long was Jesus’ ministry?	Answer According to Luke 3:1, John the Baptist began his ministry in the fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar’s reign. Tiberius was appointed emperor in AD 14, and “in the fifteenth year“ would be AD 28 or 29\. Jesus began His ministry shortly thereafter, so, around AD 29\. As for the end of His ministry, we know that it culminated with His crucifixion, resurrection, and ascension. According to John’s Gospel, Jesus attended at least three annual Feasts of Passover through the course of His ministry: one in John 2:13, another in 6:4, and then the Passover of His crucifixion in 11:55–57\. Just based on that information, Jesus’ ministry lasted 2 years, at the very least. Because of the amount of things that Jesus accomplished and the places He traveled during His ministry, many scholars believe there was another Passover, not mentioned in the Gospels, which fell between the Passovers of John 2 and John 6\. This would lengthen Jesus’ ministry to at least 3 years. We can add more time because of all that took place before the first Passover of Jesus’ ministry in John 2\. By the time of that first Passover (in the spring of 30\), Jesus had already traveled from the area of the Jordan to Cana to Capernaum to Jerusalem. He had been baptized by John (Matthew 3:13–17\), been tempted in the wilderness (Matthew 4:1–2\), began His preaching ministry (Matthew 4:17\), called His first disciples (John 1:35–51\), performed His first miracle (John 2:1–11\), and made a trip to Capernaum with His family (John 2:12\). All this would have taken several months, at least. Add to that the 40 days between Jesus’ resurrection and His ascension (Acts 1:3\), and we have a total length of Jesus’ earthly ministry. From His baptism to His ascension, the late summer of 29 to the spring of 33, we have approximately 3½ years.
What is Christadelphianism?	Answer The Christadelphian sect was founded in 1838 by John Thomas, a London\-born physician\-turned\-Bible teacher. Like the founders of the [Jehovah’s Witnesses](Jehovahs-Witnesses.html), [Mormons](Mormons.html), and [Christian Scientists](Christian-science.html), Thomas believed he had found the truth of real Christianity. Christadelphianism, like other cults and false religions, denies the [deity of Jesus Christ](deity-of-Christ.html) and preaches a works\-based salvation. Regarding the deity of Christ, Christadelphianism teaches that Jesus was more than a man, but less than God. According to A. Hayward in Great News for the World, Jesus was a created being with “strength of character to right some of the most appalling wrongs of his time” (p. 41\). Christadelphians teach that Jesus, although sinless, had a sinful nature, was not pre\-existent, and did not come into existence until He was born in Bethlehem. Contrary to those teachings, the Bible declares that Jesus was perfectly untainted by sin. He “committed no sin” (1 Peter 2:22\); “in him is no sin” (1 John 3:5\); He “had no sin” (2 Corinthians 5:21\); He was “tempted in every way . . . yet was without sin” (Hebrews 4:15\). That Jesus was pre\-existent is evident from such passages as John 1, where He (the Word) was “in the beginning with God” (verse 2\), all things that were created “were created through him” (verse 3\), and “he became flesh and dwelt among us” (verse 14\). Christadelphianism also promotes the concept of [salvation by works](salvation-faith-alone.html). Christadelphians believe that faith in Christ is the beginning point, but salvation is not completed there. Salvation according to the Christadelphians is a process dependent upon “belief in the covenants,” good works, and baptism. Salvation is the gift of God, but it is only bestowed on those whose works merit it. In opposition to this, the Bible teaches that “all our righteousness is as filthy rags” (Isaiah 64:6\), that works cannot save us, and that we are all lawbreakers: “For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it” (James 2:10\). But, praise the Lord, “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us” (Galatians 3:13\). The law, works, and personal righteousness are powerless to save us. Only faith in Christ and His perfect sacrifice on the cross can save us (Galatians 2:16; Romans 3:28; John 3:16\). We are saved by faith alone, in Christ alone. “God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God” (2 Corinthians 5:21\). If, as the Christadelphians teach, we must merit our salvation through our own efforts, then Christ died in vain (Galatians 2:21\), and the free gift described in Ephesians 2:8–9 is not free at all. Other unbiblical beliefs of the Christadelphians include the teaching that the Holy Spirit is an impersonal force; man does not have an immortal soul; [Satan](who-Satan.html) is not a personal being; death is unconsciousness or [annihilation](annihilationism.html); and [hell](hell-real-eternal.html) is synonymous with the grave where the deceased lie unconscious. Rather than restoring true Christianity, the Christadelphians deny some of the basic doctrines of Scripture.
Who are the Mennonites, and what are their beliefs?	Answer The Mennonites are a group of Anabaptist (opposed to infant baptism) denominations named after and influenced by the teachings and tradition of Menno Simons (1496\-1561\). Mennonites are committed to nonviolence, nonresistance, and pacifism. Mennonite congregations worldwide embody the full scope of Mennonite practice from old\-fashioned “plain” people to those who are indistinguishable in dress and appearance from the general population. There are many different groups who call themselves Mennonite, primarily because they refer back to their founding leader, Menno Simons, and their stance on nonviolence and pacifism. Early Mennonites in Europe were good farmers and were invited to take over poor soils and enrich them through hard work and good sense. Often the governing bodies would take back the land and force the Mennonites to move on since they would offer no resistance. So the migration to America started, and they were welcomed by the Colonists. There are many schisms, which actually started in Europe in the 1600s and continued after the immigration to America. Many of these churches were formed as a response to deep disagreements about theology, doctrine, and church discipline. Mennonite theology emphasizes the teachings of Jesus as recorded in the New Testament. Their core beliefs deriving from Anabaptist traditions are the authority of Scripture and the Holy Spirit; salvation through conversion by the Spirit of God; believer’s baptism, usually by pouring or immersion; discipline in the church (including shunning in some congregations); and the Lord’s Supper as a memorial rather than as a sacrament or Christian rite. There is a wide scope of worship, doctrine and traditions among Mennonites today. Old Order Mennonites use horse and buggy for transportation and speak Pennsylvania Dutch (similar to German). They refuse to participate in politics and other so\-called “sins of the world.” Most Old Order groups also school their children in church\-operated schools. Traditionally, they used horses to pull the farm equipment, but within the past ten years some are now using steel\-wheeled tractors for farm work. Conservative Mennonites maintain conservative dress but accept most other technology. They are not a unified group and are divided into various independent conferences. Moderate Mennonites differ very little from other conservative, evangelical Protestant congregations. There are no special form of dress and no restrictions on use of technology. They emphasize peace, community and service. Another group of Mennonites have established their own colleges and universities and have taken a step away from strict Bible teaching. They ordain women pastors, embrace homosexual unions, and practice a liberal agenda, focusing on peace studies and social justice issues. Very little is mentioned in their church services regarding the fact we are all sinners and in need of a Savior as a sacrifice for our sins, rather focusing on maintaining good works and service to others. The word “Mennonite” today can mean so many things; there are almost as many varieties of Mennonites as there are fast food chains. Some groups are more evangelical than others; some groups are focused on Bible study and prayer; other groups are carefully maintaining the works\-based tradition set out by their ancestors; and, sadly, some groups have left the faith of their fathers and focus instead on current social issues.
Is Jesus God’s Son? How could Allah, being one, have a Son?	Answer Muslims ask, “How could Allah, being one, have a Son?” Misunderstanding the Trinity, they sometimes charge Christians with worshiping three gods. However, Christians believe that only one true God exists. Jesus Himself upheld monotheism. When asked for the greatest command, Jesus responded, “. . . The Lord our God, the Lord is one. And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength” (Mark 12:29\-30\). Jesus taught that God is one, and Jesus taught that He was one with God (John 10:30\). In response, the Jews picked up stones to stone Jesus because they thought He was guilty of blasphemy. Similarly, Muslims would say a man claiming to be God would be guilty of “shirk.” However, Jesus is not a mere man claiming to be God. He is the Son of God in human flesh (John 10:36\-38\). The title “Son of God” does not mean Jesus was literally born from God. The Bible does not teach a physical relationship between God and Mary, as Muslims sometimes charge. As he announced the birth of Jesus, the angel told the virgin Mary: “. . . ‘Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. . . . of his kingdom there will be no end.’ And Mary said to the angel, ‘How will this be, since I am a virgin?’ And the angel answered her, ‘The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy—the Son of God’” (Luke 1:30\-35\). Pastor John MacArthur explains these verses: “Since a son bears his father’s qualities, calling a person someone else’s ‘son’ was a way of signifying equality. Here the angel was telling Mary that her Son would be equal to the Most High God” (The MacArthur Study Bible). Man’s testimony that Jesus is God’s Son When people witnessed Jesus’ miracles, teaching, death, resurrection, and ascension to heaven, many believed Jesus is the Son of God. • Followers of Jesus testified after He calmed a storm: “And when they got into the boat, the wind ceased. And those in the boat worshiped him, saying, ‘Truly you are the Son of God’” (Matthew 14:32\-33\). • Peter testified: “Now when Jesus came into the district of [Caesarea Philippi](Caesarea-Philippi.html), he asked his disciples, ‘Who do people say that the Son of Man is?’ And they said, ‘Some say John the Baptist, others say Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.’ He said to them, ‘But who do you say that I am?’ Simon Peter replied, ‘You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.’ And Jesus answered him, ‘Blessed are you, Simon Bar\-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven’” (Matthew 16:13\-17\). • A woman, whose brother Jesus raised to life, testified: “Jesus said to her, ‘I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live, and everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die. Do you believe this?’ She said to him, ‘Yes, Lord; I believe that you are the Christ, the Son of God, who is coming into the world’” (John 11:25\-27\). • Even the demons know Jesus is the Son of God: “Whenever the evil spirits saw him, they fell down before him and cried out, ‘You are the Son of God’” (Mark 3:11\). • A military officer and soldiers who were guarding Jesus at His death on the cross testified: “When the centurion and those who were with him, keeping watch over Jesus, saw the earthquake and what took place, they were filled with awe and said, ‘Truly this was the Son of God!’” (Matthew 27:54\). • Thomas testified after Jesus rose from the dead: “Now Thomas, one of the Twelve, called the Twin, was not with them when Jesus came. So the other disciples told him, ‘We have seen the Lord.’ But he said to them, ‘Unless I see in his hands the mark of the nails, and place my finger into the mark of the nails, and place my hand into his side, I will never believe.’ Eight days later, his disciples were inside again, and Thomas was with them. Although the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, ‘Peace be with you.’ Then he said to Thomas, ‘Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side. Do not disbelieve, but believe.’ Thomas answered him, ‘My Lord and my God!’ Jesus said to him, ‘Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.’ Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name” (John 20:24\-31\). Jesus’ own testimony that He is God’s Son • “This was why the Jews were seeking all the more to kill \[Jesus], because not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God. So Jesus said to them, ‘Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing. For whatever the Father does, that the Son does likewise. For the Father loves the Son and shows him all that he himself is doing. And greater works than these will he show him, so that you may marvel. For as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son gives life to whom he will. The Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son, that all may honor the Son, just as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him. Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life’” (John 5:18\-24\). • At Jesus’ trial, He testified: “. . . Again the high priest asked him, ‘Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?’ And Jesus said, ‘I am, and you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven’" (Mark 14:61\-62\). • “We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true. And we are in him who is true—even in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life” (1 John 5:20\). God’s testimony that Jesus is His Son • God spoke at Jesus’ baptism: “This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased” (Matthew 3:17\). • “While he was speaking, a cloud appeared and enveloped them, and they were afraid as they entered the cloud. A voice came from the cloud, saying, ‘This is my Son, whom I have chosen; listen to him’” (Luke 9:34\-35\). • “If we receive the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater, for this is the testimony of God that he has borne concerning his Son. Whoever believes in the Son of God has the testimony in himself. Whoever does not believe God has made him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has borne concerning his Son. And this is the testimony, that God gave us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. Whoever has the Son has life; whoever does not have the Son of God does not have life. I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God that you may know that you have eternal life” (1 John 5:9\-13\). • Previously, God had spoken to man through His prophets, but then He sent His own Son: “In the past God spoke to our forefathers by the prophets at many times and in various ways. But in these last days He has spoken to us by His Son whom He has appointed heir of all things, and through whom He made the universe. The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of His being, sustaining all things by His powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven” (Hebrews 1:1\-3\). Jesus is the “exact representation” of God. Although one with His Father in essence, Jesus is also distinct in Person as God’s Son. God has revealed Himself as one God manifest in three Persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Even before the world began, Jesus was always with God and was God (John 1:1\-2; 17:5\). God created all things in the universe through Jesus (John 1:3; Colossians 1:15\-20\). Although eternally one with God, Jesus came to earth in the form of man (Philippians 2:5\-11\). Born to the virgin Mary, Jesus is fully God and fully man at the same time (the incarnation: Matthew 1:22\-23; John 1:14; Romans 1:3\-4; Colossians 2:9; 1 John 4:1\-3; 5:20\). Believe in the Son of God We must believe God’s Word that Jesus is God’s Son, even though it’s hard to understand. We will die with many hard questions unanswered. But we dare not die without responding to God’s promise of judgment and salvation through His Son (John 3:35\-36; 5:25\-29; Acts 10:38\-43; 17:30\-31; 1 John 4:14\-15\). As the perfect Son of God, Jesus didn’t deserve the punishment for sin, death (Romans 6:23\). But by dying on the cross and rising from the dead, Jesus paid the penalty of sin and broke the power of sin for those who would be in Him (Romans 8:1\-3\). God is calling sinners to turn from their own way to follow the living Lord Jesus in repentance and faith (Luke 24:46\-47\). We cannot save ourselves. Only those who turn from sin and trust in the Son of God are saved from sin and eternal death. “God loved the world so much that He gave His only Son that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God” (John 3:16\-18\). Through reading this article, have you trusted Jesus as Savior from your sin and Leader of your life? If so, please click on the “I have accepted Christ today” button below.
Why don’t Christians fast the same as Muslims?	Answer Both Muslims and Christians fast, but their purposes for fasting differ. In order to keep one of the Five Pillars, a Muslim is obligated to fast during Ramadan. The Bible teaches that fasting merits neither God’s favor nor a place in paradise. Christians may fast for one of the following reasons: • To demonstrate their satisfaction in God (Matthew 4:4\) • To humble themselves before God (Daniel 9:3\) • To request God’s help (2 Samuel 12:16; Esther 4:16; Ezra 8:23\) • To seek God’s will (Acts 13:2\-3\) • To turn from sin (Jonah 3:5\-10\) • To worship God without distractions (Luke 2:36\-38\) Jesus fasted At the beginning of Jesus’ public ministry, before His great miracles and teaching, He fasted forty days. Afterwards, the devil tested Jesus while He was weak with hunger: “And after fasting forty days and forty nights, he was hungry. . . . Again, the Devil took Him up into a very high mountain and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory. And he said to Him, ‘All these things I will give You if You will fall down and worship me.’ Then Jesus said to him, ‘Go, Satan! For it is written, “You shall worship the Lord your God, and Him only you shall serve.”’ Then the Devil left him. And behold, angels came and ministered to Him” (Matthew 4:2, 8\-11\). Although Satan tempted Jesus to sin, Jesus remained perfect, unlike all other human beings in history. Jesus’ warning against prideful fasting The religious leaders of Jesus’ day prided themselves in fasting twice a week, but Jesus challenged their sincerity. • Don’t fast to appear religious before men “And when you fast, do not look gloomy like the hypocrites, for they disfigure their faces that their fasting may be seen by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you fast, anoint your head and wash your face, that your fasting may not be seen by others but by your Father who is in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you” (Matthew 6:16\-18\). • Don’t fast to earn forgiveness of sin (A Pharisee is one who belonged to a religious, fundamental sect of the Jews.) “The Pharisee, standing by himself, prayed thus: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I get.’ But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, a sinner!’ I tell you, this man went down to his house justified, rather than the other. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but the one who humbles himself will be exalted” (Luke 18:11\-14\). Jesus taught that we cannot earn entrance to paradise through fasting. Our sin renders even our best religious deeds unworthy (Isaiah 64:6\). Jesus’ transformation of fasting Jesus taught that following God’s will brings more satisfaction than eating: “. . . His disciples were asking Him, saying, ‘Master, eat.’ But He said to them, ‘I have food to eat which you do not know.’ Therefore the disciples said to one another, ‘No one brought Him anything to eat?’ Jesus said to them, ‘My food is to do the will of Him who sent Me and to finish His work’” (John 4:31\-34\). What is God’s will? “And Jesus said to them, ‘I am the bread of life. He who comes to Me shall never hunger, and he who believes on Me shall never thirst. But I said to you that you also have seen Me and do not believe. All that the Father gives Me shall come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will in no way cast out. For I came down from Heaven, not to do My own will but the will of Him who sent Me. And this is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all which He has given Me I should lose nothing but should raise it up again at the last day. And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes on Him should have everlasting life. And I will raise him up at the last day’” (John 6:35\-40\). Just as we will die if we don’t eat bread, we will die (i.e., be separated from God eternally in hell) if we don’t receive Jesus, the Bread of Life. Because He came “down from heaven,” born of a virgin, Jesus called God His Father. Jesus proved by His perfect life, death, and resurrection that He is divine, the Son of God. Jesus fulfilled His Father’s will: saving believing sinners by taking their punishment for sin on the cross. By raising Jesus from the dead, God showed that He accepted Christ’s sacrifice. How do you receive the Bread of Life? You must turn from sin and trust in the Lord Jesus’ death and resurrection to save you—not your own goodness through works such as fasting. After saving you from sin, the Lord will give you the desire and strength to glorify God through good works—even fasting: “But now, being made free from sin, and having become slaves to God, you have your fruit to holiness, and the end everlasting life. For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord” (Romans 6:22\-23\). A personal testimony of fasting A wise man, who spent years of his life serving Muslims in the Middle East, shares his reasons for fasting. I want fasting to be . . . • an honest statement of what is most important to me. I want this simple act (going without food for a while) to remind me that spiritual, eternal things are more important than temporal things. • a symbol of the satisfaction I’m finding in God Himself: loving Him, learning of Him, doing His will. • a celebration of God’s setting me apart, granting me forgiveness through the Lord Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross and rescuing me from the sinful habits that were enslaving me. • a time of gladness, praise, and intercession on behalf of my family and friends in many countries. • a means of deeper contentment in the Lord. Thus, I will be more motivated and better able to share my material and spiritual gifts with others. The Lord Jesus said, “And your Father . . . will reward you” (Matthew 6:18b).
Who were the spirits in prison?	Answer The “spirits in prison” are mentioned in the broader context of suffering righteously. First Peter 3:18–20 says, “For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit; in which also He went and made proclamation to the spirits now in prison, who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark” (NASB95\). Some people use this passage to infer what Jesus did during the time that His body was in the grave. As background, please read our [article](where-was-Jesus.html) on “Where was Jesus for the three days between His death and resurrection?” We know three things for sure about the spirits mentioned in 1 Peter 3:19\. They are incorporeal, they are imprisoned, and their sin was committed before the Flood. Their relation to Jesus and the nature of His announcement to them are open to speculation. Who exactly these spirits are has been the subject of some debate through the years. Here are two theories: 1\) The spirits in prison are fallen angels or demons. The spirits in prison cannot be holy angels because the holy angels have not sinned and are not imprisoned. And not all the fallen angels are imprisoned, of course, for the New Testament gives many examples of demonic activity on earth. That leaves a select group of demons who, unlike the their fellow demons, are held captive. What might be a reason for some, but not all, of the demons to be imprisoned? Jude 1:6 gives us an important clue: “The angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their proper dwelling—these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day.” Some fallen angels committed an egregious crime of some kind; Jude 1:6 does not give details, but the demons’ sin was related to how they “did not keep their own position but deserted their proper dwelling.” Revelation 9:1–12, 14–15, and 2 Peter 2:4 also speak of a group of wicked angels that are currently bound. If the spirits in prison are fallen angels, the sin they committed could be the one in Genesis 6:1–4, which records the “[sons of God](sons-of-God.html)” mating with the “daughters of men” and producing a race of giants, the [Nephilim](Nephilim.html). If the “sons of God” were fallen angels, then the sin of Genesis 6 involved angels leaving the place where they belonged in an act of disobedience before the Flood—and that corresponds to what the apostle mentions in 1 Peter 3:19\. It could be that the demons who cohabited with human women were imprisoned by God to prevent them from repeating that sin and to discourage other demons from trying it. According to 1 Peter 3:19, Jesus “made proclamation” to these spirits in prison. The Greek word translated “proclaimed” or “preached” means “to publicly declare” or “to herald.” If the spirits are demons, then Peter says that Jesus went to [the Abyss](what-is-the-abyss.html) and proclaimed His victory to the fallen angels imprisoned there. They had lost, and He had won. The cross triumphs over all evil (see Colossians 2:15\). 2\) The spirits in prison are the human spirits of those who perished in the flood of Noah’s day. As for Christ preaching to them, there are three possible interpretations: a) Christ preached to them figuratively, in and through Noah, while they were in the flesh; b) Christ preached to them literally, being present with Noah through the Holy Spirit who inspired Noah to proclaim the message of coming judgment; and c) Christ preached to them literally in between His death and resurrection. According to each of these interpretations, the spirits are called such because they existed in a spiritual condition when Peter wrote; they were no longer in the flesh but lived in Hades/hell.
What is praying in tongues?	Answer As a background, please read our article on the [gift of speaking in tongues](gift-of-tongues.html). There are four primary Scripture passages that are cited as evidence for praying in tongues: Romans 8:26; 1 Corinthians 14:4\-17; Ephesians 6:18; and Jude verse 20\. Ephesians 6:18 and Jude 20 mention “praying in the Spirit.” However, tongues as a prayer language is not a likely interpretation of “praying in the Spirit.” Romans 8:26 teaches us, “In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness. We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groans that words cannot express.” Two key points make it highly unlikely that Romans 8:26 is referring to tongues as a prayer language. First, Romans 8:26 states that it is the Spirit who “groans,” not believers. Second, Romans 8:26 states that the “groans” of the Spirit “cannot be expressed.” The very essence of speaking in tongues is uttering words. That leaves us with 1 Corinthians 14:4\-17 and verse 14 especially: “For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful.” First Corinthians 14:14 distinctly mentions “praying in tongues.” What does this mean? First, studying the context is immensely valuable. First Corinthians chapter 14 is primarily a comparison/contrast of the gift of speaking in tongues and the gift of prophecy. Verses 2\-5 make it clear that Paul views prophecy as a gift superior to tongues. At the same time, Paul exclaims the value of tongues and declares that he is glad that he speaks in tongues more than anyone (verse 18\). Acts chapter 2 describes the first occurrence of the gift of tongues. On the day of Pentecost, the apostles spoke in tongues. Acts chapter 2 makes it clear that the apostles were speaking in a human language (Acts 2:6\-8\). The word translated “tongues” in both Acts chapter 2 and 1 Corinthians chapter 14 is glossa which means “language.” It is the word from which we get our modern English word glossary. Speaking in tongues was the ability to speak in a language the speaker does not know, in order to communicate the gospel to someone who does speak that language. In the multicultural area of Corinth, it seems that the gift of tongues was especially valuable and prominent. The Corinthian believers were able to better communicate the gospel and God’s Word as a result of the gift of tongues. However, Paul made it abundantly clear that, even in this usage of tongues, it was to be interpreted or “translated” (1 Corinthians 14:13, 27\). A Corinthian believer would speak in tongues, proclaiming God’s truth to someone who spoke that language, and then that believer, or another believer in the church, was to interpret what was spoken so that the entire assembly could understand what was said. What, then, is praying in tongues, and how is it different from speaking in tongues? First Corinthians 14:13\-17 indicates that praying in tongues is also to be interpreted. As a result, it seems that praying in tongues was offering a prayer to God. This prayer would minister to someone who spoke that language, but would also need to be interpreted so that the entire body could be edified. This interpretation does not agree with those who view praying in tongues as a prayer language. This alternate understanding can be summarized as follows: praying in tongues is a personal prayer language between a believer and God (1 Corinthians 13:1\) that a believer uses to edify himself (1 Corinthians 14:4\). This interpretation is unbiblical for the following reasons: 1\) How could praying in tongues be a private prayer language if it is to be interpreted (1 Corinthians 14:13\-17\)? 2\) How could praying in tongues be for self\-edification when Scripture says that the spiritual gifts are for the edification of the church, not the self (1 Corinthians 12:7\)? 3\) How can praying in tongues be a private prayer language if the gift of tongues is a “sign to unbelievers” (1 Corinthians 14:22\)? 4\) The Bible makes it clear that not everyone possesses the gift of tongues (1 Corinthians 12:11, 28\-30\). How could tongues be a gift for self\-edification if not every believer can possess it? Do we not all need to be edified? Some understand praying in tongues to be a “secret code language” that prevents Satan and his demons from understanding our prayers and thereby gaining an advantage over us. This interpretation is unbiblical for the following reasons: 1\) The New Testament consistently describes tongues as a human language, and Satan and his demons are well able to understand human languages. 2\) The Bible records countless believers praying in their own language, out loud, with no concern of Satan intercepting the prayer. Even if Satan and/or his demons hear and understand the prayers we pray, they have absolutely no power to prevent God from answering the prayers according to His will. We know that God hears our prayers, and that fact makes it irrelevant whether Satan and his demons hear and understand our prayers. What do we say, then, about the many Christians who have experienced praying in tongues and find it to be very personally edifying? First, we must base our faith and practice on Scripture, not experience. We must view our experiences in light of Scripture, not interpret Scripture in light of our experiences. Second, many of the cults and world religions also report occurrences of speaking in tongues/praying in tongues. Obviously the Holy Spirit is not gifting these unbelieving individuals. So, it seems that the demons are able to counterfeit the gift of speaking in tongues. This should cause us to compare even more carefully our experiences with Scripture. Third, speaking/praying in tongues can be a learned behavior. Through hearing and observing others speak in tongues, a person can learn the procedure, even subconsciously. This is the most likely explanation for the vast majority of instances of speaking/praying in tongues among Christians. Fourth, the feeling of “self\-edification” is natural. The human body produces adrenaline and endorphins when it experiences something new, exciting, emotional, and/or disconnected from rational thought. Praying in tongues is most definitely an issue on which Christians can respectfully and lovingly agree to disagree. Praying in tongues is not what determines salvation. Praying in tongues is not what separates a mature Christian from an immature Christian. Whether or not there is such a thing as praying in tongues as a personal prayer language is not a fundamental of the Christian faith. So, while we believe the biblical interpretation of praying in tongues leads away from the idea of a private prayer language for personal edification, we also recognize that many who practice such are our brothers and sisters in Christ and are worthy of our love and respect.
How do we know that the Bible is the Word of God?	Answer The question of which (if any) religious text is the true word of God is of utmost importance. To avoid circular reasoning, the first question we must ask is: how would we know if God communicated in the first place? Well, God would have to communicate in a manner that people could understand, but that also means that people could make up their own messages and simply claim that they came from God. So, it seems reasonable to think that if God wanted to authenticate His communication He would have to verify it in a manner that could not be duplicated by mere humans \- in other words, by miracles. This narrows the field considerably. Beyond the evidence for the Bible’s correctness (manuscript evidence) and its historicity (archeological evidence), the most important evidence is that of its inspiration. The real determination of the Bible’s claim to absolute inspired truth is in its supernatural evidence, including prophecy. God used prophets to speak and write down His Word and God uses miracles like fulfilled prophecy to authenticate His messengers. For example, in Genesis 12:7, God promises that the land of Israel was to be for Abraham and his descendants. In 1948 Israel was returned back to the Jewish people for the second time in history. This may not seem so astonishing until you realize that no nation in the history of the world has been scattered from its homeland and returned! Israel has done it twice. The book of Daniel predicts with accuracy the coming of the four great kingdoms from Babylon, to Medo\-Persia, to Greece, to Rome centuries before some of those kingdoms came on the scene with details concerning how they would rule and be broken. This includes the reigns of Alexander the Great and Antiochus Epiphanies. In Ezekiel 26 we can see in astonishing detail how the city of Tyre was to be destroyed, how it would be torn down, and how its debris would be thrown into the sea. When Alexander the Great marched on that area, he encountered a group of people holed up in a tower on an island off the coast near there. He could not cross the sea, so he could not fight those in the tower. Rather than wait them out, the proud conqueror had his army throw stones into the sea to build a land bridge to the tower. It worked. His army crossed the sea and overthrew the occupants of the stronghold. But where did he get so much stone? The rocks that were used for the land bridge were the leftover rubble from the city of Tyre . . . its stones cast into the sea! There are so many prophecies concerning Christ (over 270!) that it would take more than a few screens worth of space to list them all. Further, Jesus would have had no control over many of them such as His birthplace or time of birth. Second, the odds of one man accidentally fulfilling even 16 of these are 1 in 10^45\. How many is that? For comparison, there are less than 10^82 atoms in the entire universe! And Jesus, who affirmed the Bible as the Word of God, proved His reliability and deity by His resurrection (an historical fact not easily ignored). Now consider the Quran \- its author, Muhammad, performed no miracles to back up his message (even when he was asked to by his followers \- Sura 17:91\-95; 29:47\-51\). Only in much later tradition (the Hadith) do any alleged miracles even show up and these are all quite fanciful (like Muhammad cutting the moon in half) and have zero reliable testimony to back them up. Further, the Quran makes clear historical errors. Muslims believe the Bible is inspired but with some errors from editing (Sura 2:136 as well as Suras 13, 16, 17, 20, 21, 23, 25\). The question they cannot adequately answer is: "When was the Bible corrupted?" If they say before 600 A.D. then how can the Quran admonish believers to read it? If they claim it was after 600 A.D., then they have jumped out of the frying pan and into the fire, for we have absolutely no doubt as to the accuracy of biblical manuscripts from at least the 3rd century forward. Even if Christianity were false, the Quran still has an insurmountable problem because it makes judgments against Christians for believing things that they do not (nor have they ever) believed. For example, the Quran teaches that Christians believe the Trinity is the Father, the Mother (Mary), and the Son (Sura 5:73\-75, 116\), and the Quran also teaches that Christians believe that God had sex with Mary to have a son (Suras 2:116; 6:100\-101; 10:68; 16:57; 19:35; 23:91; 37:149\-151; 43:16\-19\). If the Quran is really from God, then it should at least be able to accurately report what Christians believe. Joseph Smith, the author of the Book of Mormon, tried to do some miracles such as prophecy (a test for a true prophet in Deuteronomy 18:21\-22\) but failed several times. He foretold of Christ’s second coming in History of the Church (HC) 5:336: “There are those of the rising generation who shall not taste death till Christ comes.“ Smith consistently taught that the coming of Christ was near. In 1835, he spoke of “the coming of the Lord, which was nigh—even fifty\-six years should wind up the scene“ (HC 2:182\). He also claimed that, while praying, “a voice said unto me, ’My son, if thou livest until thou art eighty\-five years of age, thou shalt see the face of the Son of Man’“ (ibid., see also also D\&C 130:14–17\). From these pronouncements, Smith’s followers began looking for the Lord to come about 1890\. Jesus did not return in 1890, and the Mormon church does not claim that He did. Nor has it occurred since. He also prophesied that several cities would be destroyed in Doctrine and Covenants (D\&C) 84:114\-115\. New York, Albany and Boston were to be destroyed if they rejected the gospel according to Smith. Joseph Smith himself went to New York, Albany, and Boston and preached there. These cities did not accept his gospel, yet they have not been destroyed. Another famous false prophecy of Joseph Smith was his "END OF ALL NATIONS" in D\&C 87 concerning the rebellion of South Carolina in the war between the states. The South was supposed to call on Great Britain for aid, and as a result war would be poured out upon all nations; slaves would revolt; the inhabitants of the earth would mourn; famine, plague, earthquake, thunder, lightning, and a full end of all nations would result. The South finally did revolt in 1861, but the slaves did not rise up, war was not poured out upon all nations, there was no worldwide famine, plague, earthquake, etc., and there was no resulting "end of all nations." The collection of writings that Protestants call the Apocrypha (hidden writings), Roman Catholics call the deuterocanonical (later or second canon) books. These books were written between 300 B.C. and 100 A.D., the Intertestamental Period between the inspired writings of God’s Prophets in the Old Testament and those of the Apostles and their contemporaries in the New Testament. These were "infallibly" accepted into the Bible by the Roman Catholic Church in 1546 at the Council of Trent. Now the Apocrypha would be covered under the evidence for the Bible if these writings were truly inspired \- but evidence seems to indicate that they are not. In the Bible we find prophets of God whose messages are ratified by miracles or prophecy that comes true, and whose message is immediately accepted by the people (Deut 31:26; Josh. 24:26; 1 Samuel 10:25; Daniel 9:2; Col. 4:16; 2 Peter 3:15\-16\). What we find in the apocrypha is just the opposite \- no apocryphal book was written by a prophet. None of these books were included in the Hebrew Scriptures. There is no ratification of the authors of any apocryphal book. No apocryphal book is cited as authoritative by later Biblical writers. There is no fulfilled prophecy in any apocryphal book. Finally, Jesus, who quoted from every section of Old Testament Scripture, never once quoted from the apocrypha. Neither did any of His disciples. The Bible so far outshines every competing source for being God’s revelation that if it is not God’s Word, it would seem impossible to choose among the leftovers. If the Bible is not God’s Word, then we have been left with no clear criteria by which to know what might be.
What can we learn from the prayers that Jesus prayed?	Answer The prayers Jesus prayed give us insight into His nature, His heart, and His mission on earth. The prayers of Jesus also inform and encourage us in our own prayer lives. Far more important than where He prayed, when He prayed, and in what position He prayed is the fact that He prayed. The theme of His prayers is instructive for all of us. Prayer was an integral part of Jesus’ time on earth, and He prayed regularly: “Jesus often withdrew to lonely places and prayed” (Luke 5:16\). If the Son incarnate found it necessary to commune with the Father frequently, how much more do we need to do so? Jesus faced persecution, trials, heartache, and physical suffering. Without regular and continual access to the throne of God, He would surely have found those events unbearable. In the same way, Christians must never neglect to “approach God’s throne of grace with confidence, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help us in our time of need” (Hebrews 4:16\). What is often called [“The Lord’s Prayer”](Lords-prayer.html) is actually a teaching tool of Christ as part of His Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 6:9–13\). In this model prayer, Jesus teaches us to approach God as “our Father”; to hallow God’s name; to pray for God’s will; and to ask for daily provision, forgiveness, and spiritual protection. In addition to His regular times of prayer, Jesus prayed at some important events in His life: He prayed at His baptism (Luke 3:21–22\); before feeding the 5,000 (Luke 9:16\) and the 4,000 (Matthew 15:36\); and at the moment of His transfiguration (Luke 9:29\). Before Jesus chose His twelve disciples, He “spent the night praying to God” on a mountainside (Luke 6:12\). Jesus prayed at the return of the 72 disciples: “At that time Jesus, full of joy through the Holy Spirit, said, ‘I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. Yes, Father, for this is what you were pleased to do’” (Luke 10:21\). Jesus prayed at [Lazarus’](Lazarus-in-the-Bible.html) tomb. As they rolled away the stone from His friend’s tomb, “Jesus looked up and said, ‘Father, I thank you that you have heard me. I knew that you always hear me, but I said this for the benefit of the people standing here, that they may believe that you sent me’” (John 11:41–42\). This is a good example of prayer prayed in the hearing of others for the sake of the hearers. In Jerusalem the week of His arrest, Jesus predicted His soon\-to\-come death. As He spoke of His coming sacrifice, Jesus prayed a very short prayer: “Father, glorify your name!” (John 12:28\). In response to Jesus’ prayer, a voice from heaven said, “I have glorified it, and will glorify it again.” Spending a last few minutes with His disciples on the night of His arrest, Jesus prayed an extended prayer known today as His “high priestly prayer” (John 17\) on behalf of His own, those given to Him by the Father (verse 6\). In this prayer, Jesus is the Intercessor for His children (cf. Hebrews 7:25\). He prays “not . . . for the world, but for those you have given me, for they are yours” (verse 9\). He prays that they would have His joy (verse 13\) and that God would keep them from the evil one (verse 15\). He prays for His own to be sanctified by the truth, which is the Word of God (verse 17\), and to be unified in that truth (verses 21–23\). In the John 17 prayer, Jesus looks to the future and includes all those who would ever believe in Him (verse 20\). Jesus prayed in the [Garden of Gethsemane](garden-of-Gethsemane.html) just before His arrest (Matthew 26:36–46\). He had asked His disciples to pray with Him, but they fell asleep instead. Jesus’ agonized prayer in the garden is a model of submission and sacrifice: “My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will” (verse 39\). Three times Jesus prayed this. Jesus even prayed from the cross, in the midst of His agony. His first prayer echoes Psalm 22:1 and expresses His deep distress: “About three in the afternoon Jesus cried out in a loud voice, ‘Eli, Eli, lemasabachthani?’ (which means “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”) (Matthew 27:46\). Jesus also prayed for the forgiveness of those who were torturing Him to death: “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing” (Luke 23:34\). In His final breath, Jesus continued to express His faith in God: “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit” (Luke 23:46\). Several themes are apparent in Jesus’ prayers. One is the giving of thanks to the Father. Praise was a regular part of Jesus’ prayers. Another theme is His communion with the Father; His relationship with His heavenly Father naturally resulted in His desire to spend time communicating with Him. The third theme in Jesus’ prayers is His submission to the Father. Our Lord’s prayers were always in accordance with God’s will. Just as Jesus gave thanks, we should in all things pray with thanksgiving (Philippians 4:6–7\). As God’s adopted children, we should naturally desire to talk to God (Ephesians 3:12\). And in everything we should seek the Lord’s will above our own. Jesus prayed in a variety of settings, public and private. He prayed in times of joy and times of sorrow. He prayed for Himself, and He prayed for others. He prayed to express thanks, to petition for needs, and to commune with His Father. Jesus set the example of how we should trust God, submit to God, and seek fellowship with God. To this day, Jesus continues to pray for His own from His exalted position in heaven at the right hand of God. Scripture says He makes intercession for those who belong to Him (Hebrews 7:25; Romans 8:34; 1 John 2:1\). It is significant that, at Jesus’ ascension, He was taken away from His disciples into heaven “while he was blessing them” (Luke 24:51\). That blessing has never stopped. Jesus will continue to bless those who come to God through faith in Christ until He comes again.
If Jesus was God, how could He pray to God?	Answer To understand Jesus as God on earth praying to His Father in heaven, we need to realize that the eternal Father and the eternal Son had an eternal relationship before Jesus took upon Himself the form of a man. Please read John 5:19\-27, particularly verse 23 where Jesus teaches that the Father sent the Son (also see John 15:10\). Jesus did not become the Son of God when He was born in Bethlehem. He has always been the Son of God from eternity past, still is the Son of God, and always will be. Isaiah 9:6 tells us that the Son was given and the Child was born. Jesus was always part of the tri\-unity, along with the Holy Spirit. The tri\-unity always existed, the Father God, the Son God, and the Spirit God, not three gods, but one God existing as three persons. Jesus taught that He and His Father are one (John 10:30\), meaning that He and His Father are of the same substance and the same essence. The Father, Son and Spirit are three co\-equal persons existing as God. These three had, and continue to have, an eternal relationship. When Jesus, the eternal Son of God, took upon Himself sinless humanity He also took on the form of a servant, giving up His heavenly glory (Philippians 2:5\-11\). As the God\-man, He had to learn obedience (Hebrews 5:8\) to His Father as He was tempted by Satan, accused falsely by men, rejected by His people, and eventually crucified. His praying to His heavenly Father was to ask for power (John 11:41\-42\) and wisdom (Mark 1:35, 6:46\). His praying showed His dependence upon His Father in His humanity to carry out His Father’s plan of redemption, as evidenced in Christ’s high priestly prayer in John 17\. His praying demonstrated that He ultimately submitted to His Father’s will, which was to go to the cross and pay the penalty (death) for our breaking God’s law (Matthew 26:31\-46\). Of course, He rose bodily from the grave, winning forgiveness and eternal life for those who repent of sin and believe in Him as the Savior. There is no problem with God the Son praying or talking to God the Father. As mentioned, they had an eternal relationship before Christ became a man. This relationship is depicted in the Gospels so we can see how the Son of God in His humanity carried out His Father’s will, and in doing so, purchased redemption for His children (John 6:38\). Christ’s continual submission to His heavenly Father was empowered and kept focused through His prayer life. Christ’s example of prayer is ours to follow. Jesus Christ was no less God on earth when praying to His Father in heaven. He was depicting how even in sinless humanity it is necessary to have a vital prayer life in order to do His Father’s will. Jesus’ praying to the Father was a demonstration of His relationship within the Trinity and an example for us that we must rely on God through prayer for the strength and wisdom we need. Since Christ, as the God\-man, needed to have a vibrant prayer life, so should the follower of Christ today.
How should conflict in the church be handled?	Answer There are many areas of a church where conflict can develop. However, most of them tend to fall under one of three categories: conflict due to blatant sin among believers, conflict with leadership, conflict between believers. Admittedly, many issues can cross over and actually involve two or more of these categories. Believers who blatantly sin pose a conflict for the church as described in 1 Corinthians 5\. The church that does not deal with sin among the members will open the door to more problems. The church is not called to be judgmental of unbelievers, but the church is expected to confront and restore believers who are unrepentant of sins such as those listed in 1 Corinthians 5:11: " . . . anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler." Such individuals are to not be accepted by the church until they are willing to repent. Matthew 18:15\-17 provides a concise procedure for the confrontation and restoration of a believer. Confrontation should be done carefully, meekly, and with the goal of restoration (Galatians 6:1\). Churches that lovingly discipline sinning individuals will curtail a great deal of conflict in the church. At times believers might not be content with the direction or actions of church leaders. This was the case early in the history of the church (Acts 6:1\-7\). Complaints about the lack of care of a certain group in the church were taken up with the leaders. This was remedied, and the church grew (Acts 6:7\). The early church used a conflict to improve the ministry. However, when churches do not have a clear process for dealing with such concerns, people tend to create their own platforms. Individuals may begin polling others in the church, get involved in gossip, or even develop a bloc of "concerned people." Leadership can help avoid this by leading like selfless, loving shepherds that are examples of servants rather than ones that lord over others (1 Peter 5:1\-3\). Those who are frustrated should respect the leaders (Hebrews 13:7, 17\), be slow to accuse them (1 Timothy 5:19\), and speak the truth lovingly to them, not to others about them (Ephesians 4:15\). On those occasions when it appears the leader is not responding to the concern, an individual should follow the pattern set down in Matthew 18:15\-17 to ensure that there is no confusion as to where each stands. The Bible warns that people in church may have difficulties with conflict. Some conflict is due to pride and selfishness (James 4:1\-10\). Some conflicts come about because of offenses that have not been forgiven (Matthew 18:15\-35\). God has told us to press toward peace (Romans 12:18; Colossians 3:12\-15\). It is the responsibility of each believer to seek to resolve a conflict. Some basic steps toward resolution include the following: 1\. Develop the proper heart attitude \- Meek (Galatians 6:1\); Humble (James 4:10\); Forgiving (Ephesians 4:31,32\); Patient (James 1:19,20\). 2\. Evaluate your part in the conflict \- Matthew 7:1\-5 (removing the log from your own eye first is necessary before helping others). 3\. Go to the individual (not to others) to voice your concern \- Matthew 18:15\. This is best done in love (Ephesians 4:15\) and not to just get something off your chest. Accusing the person tends to encourage a defensiveness. Therefore, attack the problem rather than the person. This gives the person a better opportunity to clarify the situation or to seek forgiveness for the offense. 4\. If the first attempt does not accomplish the needed results, continue with another person or persons that can help with mediation (Matthew 18:16\). Remember that your goal is not to win an argument; it is to win your fellow believer to reconciliation. Therefore, choose people who can help you resolve the conflict. Conflict is best handled when individuals prayerfully and humbly focus on loving others, with the intent of restoring relationships. Most issues of conflict should be manageable if the above biblical principles are followed. However, there are times when specific outside counsel may help. We recommend utilizing resources such as the PeaceMaker Ministries \- [http://peacemaker.net](http://peacemaker.net/).
What does it mean that God sent Jesus in the “fullness of time”?	Answer “But when the time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law” (Galatians 4:4\). This verse declares that God the Father sent His Son when “the time had fully come.” There were many things occurring at the time of the first century that, at least by human reasoning, seem to make it ideal for Christ to come then. 1\) There was a great anticipation among the Jews of that time that the Messiah would come. The Roman rule over Israel made the Jews hungry for the Messiah’s coming. 2\) Rome had unified much of the world under its government, giving a sense of unity to the various lands. Also, because the empire was relatively peaceful, travel was possible, allowing the early Christians to spread the gospel. Such freedom to travel would have been impossible in other eras. 3\) While Rome had conquered militarily, Greece had conquered culturally. A “common” form of the Greek language (different from classical Greek) was the trade language and was spoken throughout the empire, making it possible to communicate the gospel to many different people groups through one common language. 4\) The fact that the many false idols had failed to give them victory over the Roman conquerors caused many to abandon the worship of those idols. At the same time, in the more “cultured” cities, the Greek philosophy and science of the time left others spiritually empty in the same way that the atheism of communist governments leaves a spiritual void today. 5\) The mystery religions of the time emphasized a savior\-god and required worshipers to offer bloody sacrifices, thus making the gospel of Christ which involved one ultimate sacrifice believable to them. The Greeks also believed in the immortality of the soul (but not of the body). 6\) The Roman army recruited soldiers from among the provinces, introducing these men to Roman culture and to ideas (such as the gospel) that had not reached those outlying provinces yet. The earliest introduction of the gospel to Britain was the result of the efforts of Christian soldiers stationed there. The above statements are based on men looking at that time and speculating about why that particular point in history was a good time for Christ to come. But we understand that God’s ways are not our ways (Isaiah 55:8\), and these may or may not have been some reasons for why He chose that particular time to send His Son. From the context of Galatians 3 and 4, it is evident that God sought to lay a foundation through the Jewish Law that would prepare for the coming of the Messiah. The Law was meant to help people understand the depth of their sinfulness (in that they were incapable of keeping the Law) so that they might more readily accept the cure for that sin through Jesus the Messiah (Galatians 3:22\-23; Romans 3:19\-20\). The Law was also “put in charge” (Galatians 3:24\) to lead people to Jesus as the Messiah. It did this through its many prophecies concerning the Messiah which Jesus fulfilled. Add to this the sacrificial system that pointed to the need for a sacrifice for sin as well as its own inadequacy (with each sacrifice always requiring later additional ones). Old Testament history also painted pictures of the person and work of Christ through several events and religious feasts (such as the willingness of Abraham to offer up Isaac, or the details of the Passover during the exodus from Egypt, etc.). Finally, Christ came when He did in fulfillment of specific prophecy. Daniel 9:24\-27 speaks of the “seventy weeks” or the seventy “sevens.” From the context, these “weeks” or “sevens” refer to groups of seven years, not seven days. We can examine history and line up the details of the first sixty\-nine weeks (the seventieth week will take place at a future point). The countdown of the seventy weeks begins with “the going forth of the command to restore and build Jerusalem” (verse 25\). This command was given by Artaxerxes Longimanus in 445 B.C. (see Nehemiah 2:5\). After seven “sevens” plus 62 “sevens,” or 69 x 7 years, the prophecy states, “the Anointed One will be cut off and will have nothing. The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary” and that the “end will come like a flood” (meaning major destruction) (v. 26\). Here we have an unmistakable reference to the Savior’s death on the cross. A century ago in his book The Coming Prince, Sir Robert Anderson gave detailed calculations of the sixty\-nine weeks, using ‘prophetic years,’ allowing for leap years, errors in the calendar, the change from B.C. to A.D., etc., and figured that the sixty\-nine weeks ended on the very day of Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem, five days before His death. Whether one uses this timetable or not, the point is that the timing of Christ’s incarnation ties in with this detailed prophecy recorded by Daniel over five hundred years beforehand. The timing of Christ’s incarnation was such that the people of that time were prepared for His coming. The people of every century since then have more than sufficient evidence that Jesus was indeed the promised Messiah through His fulfillment of the Scriptures that pictured and prophesied His coming in great detail.
How can I overcome being hurt by the church?	Answer The pain caused by a church is a “silent killer.” This doesn’t mean that the words and events that “burned” and hurt your heart are not very ugly and public. It is a “silent killer” because of what it does deep in the fabric of the mind, heart, and soul of the wounded. If not dealt with, it will destroy future happiness, joy, and well\-being. The collateral damage negatively affects the ministry and outreach of the church, too, and some churches never recover. Recognize that the behavior that brought such devastation to your heart is not much different than the hurt any of us can encounter in the workplace, marketplace, or home. The difference is we don’t expect God’s people to behave like those without Christ in their lives. The church is the one place almost everyone agrees should be safe, accepting, forgiving, and free from conflict and pain. Yet in most churches at least some elements of strife, conflict, and hatred creep in and tarnish that ideal. It happens more in some churches than others. The spiritual health of people in a church and the strength of leadership determine how prevalent and to what extent divisive behavior can gain control. Out of control, it has the effect of a termite infiltration that slowly and surely decays the foundation of the spiritual life of a congregation. It is important to turn your focus away from the people involved and the church itself and identify the root cause of your pain, turmoil, and disillusionment. Honestly identify what you are feeling. If you are like most people, here are some possibilities: anger, sorrow, disappointment, rejection, hurt, jealousy, vulnerability, fear, rebellion, pride, shame, embarrassment, or loss. Find out what is at the core of your hurt—not what someone said or did to you, but what is really causing your pain? Then search the Scriptures to discover what God says about it. Take a Bible concordance and look up each word and read, think, pray, and apply the verse. For example, you may think that you are angry when in reality you feel rejected. What does God say about rejection? He says, “Never will I leave you; never will I forsake you” (Hebrews 13:5\); “I have loved you with an everlasting love” (Jeremiah 31:3\); and, “Surely I am with you always" (Matthew 28:20\). When you truly identify the root of your pain, God has a balm of wisdom, compassion, and love to heal your wounds. If you call on Him for help, your focus shifts to Him and off of other people and their actions. You will stop rehearsing the event that caused you harm. You truly may be harmed, injured, or offended. You certainly feel it. Those feelings are byproducts of deeper, more important realities that have derailed your passion for God, His church, and His purpose for your life. If left unattended, those feelings will lead to a root of bitterness that will negatively affect every fiber of your soul and rob you of your [abundant life](abundant-life.html) in Christ (John 10:10\). You do not want this to happen in your life. How do we keep hurtful experiences from moving their destruction into our souls? The book of wisdom from the Bible says we must “guard your heart above all else, for it determines the course of your life” (Proverbs 4:23, NLT). We guard our hearts by carefully choosing our thoughts, feelings, attitudes, and actions. Guard your heart by refusing to dwell on what happened, refusing to focus on the people who hurt you, and refusing to belabor the weaknesses of the church. Giving up bitterness takes humility, but “God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble” (James 4:6; Proverbs 3:34\). It takes forgiving attitudes and actions (Matthew 18:22; Mark 11:27; Ephesians 4:32; Colossians 3:13\) with no hint of vengeance (Romans 12:19\). Mostly, it takes the power of the Holy Spirit working in and through you (Ephesians 3:16\). Don’t blame God for how His children behave. Don’t abandon the church, either. There are many more dedicated, grace\-filled, loving, and forgiving people than not in most churches. Seek them out. Spend time with them. If you cannot find them, [find another church](find-local-church.html) (it is rare that you cannot find them even in the most difficult church environment). The church is God’s idea, and He protects it faithfully even though He is sometimes pained by its behavior (see Revelation 2–3\). You can have hope because you are seeking [healing](emotional-healing.html) from the Lord. It is now up to you to do the right thing and turn your focus to the Person who will truly transform your life above and beyond this hurt. Jesus promised, “Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light” (Matthew 11:28–30\).
What is the Christian perspective on Goth / Emo?	Answer A Christian’s viewpoint on the Gothic / Emo movement should be avoidance of the culture’s dark attitudes while still loving those involved in it. Yes, there are definitely certain aspects of the Gothic and Emo subcultures that are incompatible with Christianity, but no more so than similar aspects of mainstream society. These particular communities identify themselves with artistic darkness—darker clothing, darker writing, darker music. In fact, both Goth and Emo originally (and presently) referred to specific music genres with punk roots before they were considered personal styles. While it may seem that all Goths or Emos share the same level of devotion to darkness, each individual will have his or her own preferences about which aspects he or she chooses to partake in. What is important to understand is that, for most Goths / Emos, it is a "dark" aesthetic they subscribe to, not necessarily darkness as it relates to evil. Wearing black clothing is not inherently sinful. Enjoying art that emphasizes black is not inherently sinful. There is nothing evil about the color black. The Gothic / Emo subculture is no more inherently wicked or wrong than any other subculture. Condemnation of Gothic / Emo adherents is usually brought on by a knee\-jerk reaction to their uncommon appearance, but that condemnation is a sin (John 3:17\). As followers of Christ, we need to be beyond that (John 7:24\). Like all of us, they are people who desperately need Christ in their lives. Every human being is on an equal level of sin as far as God is concerned (Romans 3:23\), and being a part of the Goth or Emo subculture makes no difference in terms of eternal security. Can Goths or Emos come to faith in Christ and still involve themselves in a dark aesthetic? If they are glorifying Christ in what they do, yes (1 Corinthians 10:31\). We cannot impose our own spiritual maturity, personal convictions, or style choices on another person—no matter how strange they may seem to us. Let the Christian Goth / Emo wrestle with his/her ideologies as God brings them out for scrutiny. What we can do is provide support, counsel, and love as the Holy Spirit guides us in our relationships (John 16:13\). Conforming to the image of Christ does not mean you must stop wearing black and dress like every other upper\-middle class American / Western European. That has nothing to do with Christianity. It does mean, though, that a Goth’s or Emo’s mindset and dark attitudes will undergo a change, even if the black clothes and attraction to darkness might remain to a certain extent. It is the heart that God searches (1 Chronicles 28:9\), thus the heart is what we must first look at ourselves, whether it be among Goths, Emos, punks, gamers, jocks, etc.
Why do the four Gospels seem to present a different message of salvation than the rest of the New Testament?	Answer We must keep in mind that the Bible is intended to be taken as a whole. The books preceding the Four Gospels are anticipatory, and the books that follow are explanatory. Throughout the whole Bible, what God requires is faith (Genesis 15:6; Psalm 2:12; Habakkuk 2:4; Matthew 9:28; John 20:27; Ephesians 2:8; Hebrews 10:39\). Salvation comes not by our own works but by trusting what God does on our behalf. Each of the Gospels has its own emphasis on the ministry of Christ. Matthew, writing to a Jewish audience, emphasizes Jesus’ fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy, proving that He is the long\-awaited Messiah. Mark writes a fast\-paced, condensed account, recording Jesus’ miraculous deeds and not recording His long discourses. Luke portrays Jesus as the remedy of the world’s ills, emphasizing His perfect humanity and humane concern for the weak, the suffering, and the outcast. John emphasizes Jesus’ deity by selecting many conversations and sayings of Jesus on the subject and also including "signs" that prove He is the Son of God. The Four Gospels work together to provide a complete testimony of Jesus, a beautiful portrait of the God\-Man. Although the Gospels differ slightly in theme, the central Subject is the same. All present Jesus as the One who died to save sinners. All record His resurrection. Whether the writers presented Jesus as the King, the Servant, the Son of Man, or the Son of God, they had the common goal that people believe in Him. We’ll delve into the theology of the Gospels now. John includes many statements of faith and commands to believe. These inclusions fit his stated purpose, "that you might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you might have life through His name" (John 20:31\). The other Gospels (the Synoptics) are no less concerned that we trust in Christ. Their appeals to faith are less overt but are just as genuine. Jesus proclaims the need for righteousness, and He warns of the penalty of sin, which is hell. However, Jesus always presents God as the standard of righteousness and Himself as the means of righteousness. Without Christ, righteousness is unattainable and hell is inevitable. The Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5—7\) is a case in point: \- Jesus begins the Sermon on the Mount with a description of the blessed life (Matthew 5:1–12\). The Beatitudes are not telling us "how to" be righteous, but are simply describing righteousness. \- He presents Himself as the fulfillment of the Old Testament law (Matthew 5:17–18\). This is a key verse because, to earn our own righteousness, we must fulfill the law; here, Jesus says that He will do it for us. \- He says that no amount of our own good works will gain us entrance to heaven (Matthew 5:20\). This is another important statement in the sermon. The Pharisees were the most religious people of the day, but Jesus says even they are not good enough to enter heaven. Jesus will go on to say that it’s not a religious system that saves, but He Himself. \- He deepens the understanding of righteousness and defines it according to God’s standard, instead of man’s interpretation of the law (Matthew 5:21–48\). He explains God’s intent behind several Old Testament laws. The standard is so high as to make everyone, even the most dedicated religious practitioner, guilty before God. \- He describes three popular religious activities—almsgiving, prayer, and fasting—as hypocritical when practiced by the outwardly religious (Matthew 6:1–18\). Jesus’ focus, as with the laws He just mentioned, is the heart condition of man, not the works we can see. \- He warns that there will be "many" in the day of judgment who will have performed great works for God yet will be turned away from heaven (Matthew 7:21–23\). The reason given is that Jesus never "knew" them. There was no familial relationship, only "good" works, which is not enough. \- Jesus concludes the Sermon on the Mount with the audacious statement that He alone is the foundation for building one’s religious life (Matthew 7:24–27\). It is an appeal to trust "these sayings of Mine" enough to abandon all other foundations. To summarize, in the Sermon on the Mount Jesus meticulously deconstructs the pharisaical religion of good works, points to a holiness greater than our own, and offers Himself as the sole basis of religion. Accepting what Jesus says in this sermon requires faith in His Person. Matthew’s Gospel goes on to emphasize faith in at least the following verses: Matthew 8:10, 13, 26; 9:2, 22, 28\-29; 12:21; 13:58; 14:31; 15:28; 16:8; 17:17; and 18:6\. Also, Matthew includes a very clear presentation of Jesus as the Son of God in this exchange: "He said to them, ‘But who do you say that I am?’ Simon Peter answered and said, ‘You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.’ Jesus answered and said to him, ‘Blessed are you, Simon Bar\-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven’" (Matthew 16:15\-17\). Mark’s Gospel contains at least the following references to faith in Christ: Mark 1:15; 2:5; 4:40; 5:34, 36; 6:6; 9:19, 23, 42; 10:52; 11:23; and 16:14\. In Luke’s Gospel we see at least these verses promoting faith in Christ: Luke 5:20; 7:9, 50; 8:12, 25, 48, 50; 9:41; 12:28, 46; 17:19; 18:8, 42; and 24:25\. As we continue to see Scripture as a unified whole, we will see that there is only one message of salvation, and the Four Gospels provide the basis for that message. The Epistles, which follow the Gospels, elaborate upon the same theme: salvation by faith in Christ. The overarching theme of Romans is the righteousness that comes through God and the doctrine of justification by grace through faith. The central theme of Galatians and Colossians is the same. The book of Hebrews stresses the pre\-eminence and perfection of Christ, the “author and perfecter of our faith” (Hebrews 12:2\). First and Second Corinthians, Ephesians, Philippians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, the pastoral epistles of Timothy and Titus, Philemon, James, 1 and 2 Peter, all describe the holy living, both personally and corporately within the church, and the hope for the future that should be the natural result of life in Christ. The three epistles of John reiterate the basics of the faith and warn against those who would call them into question, also the main theme of Jude. Revelation, the final book of the New Testament, presents the last act of God’s plan for mankind and the fate of those who hold onto the same faith expounded in the entirety of the New Testament—faith in Christ alone.
Why are so many evangelical Christian leaders caught in scandals?	Answer First, it is important to point out that “so many” is not an accurate characterization. It may seem like many evangelical Christian leaders are caught in scandals, but this is due to the vast amount of attention such scandals are given. There are thousands of evangelical Christian leaders, pastors, professors, missionaries, writers, and evangelists who have never participated in anything “scandalous.” The vast majority of evangelical Christian leaders are men and women who love God, are faithful to their spouses and families, and handle their activities with the utmost honesty and integrity. The failures of a few should not be used to attack the character of all. With that said, there is still the problem that scandals do sometimes occur among those claiming to be evangelical Christians. Prominent Christian leaders have been exposed for committing adultery or participating in prostitution. Some evangelical Christians have been convicted of tax fraud and other financial illegalities. Why does this occur? There are at least three primary explanations: 1\) Some of those claiming to be evangelical Christians are unbelieving charlatans, 2\) some evangelical Christian leaders allow their position to result in pride, and 3\) Satan and his demons more aggressively attack and tempt those in Christian leadership because they know that a scandal involving a leader can have devastating results, on both Christians and non\-Christians. 1\) Some “evangelical Christians” who are caught in scandals are unredeemed charlatans and false prophets. Jesus warned, “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves … Therefore by their fruits you will know them” (Matthew 7:15\-20\). False prophets pretend to be godly men and women and appear to be solid evangelical leaders. However, their “fruit” (scandals) eventually reveals them to be the opposite of what they claimed to be. In this, they follow the example of Satan, “And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. It is not surprising, then, if his servants masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve” (2 Corinthians 11:14\-15\). 2\) The Bible makes it clear that “pride goes before destruction, a haughty spirit before a fall” (Proverbs 16:18\). James 4:6 reminds us that “God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble.” The Bible repeatedly warns against pride. Many Christian leaders begin a ministry in a spirit of humility and reliance upon God, but as the ministry grows and thrives, they are tempted to take some of this glory for themselves. Some evangelical Christian leaders, while paying lip\-service to God, actually attempt to manage and build the ministry in their own strength and wisdom. This type of pride leads to a fall. God, through the prophet Hosea, warned, “When I fed them, they were satisfied; when they were satisfied, they became proud; then they forgot me” (Hosea 13:6\). 3\) Satan knows that by instigating a scandal with an evangelical Christian leader, he can have a powerful impact. Just as King David’s adultery with Bathsheba and arranged murder of Uriah caused great damage to David’s family and the entire nation of Israel, so has many a church or ministry been damaged or destroyed by the moral failure of its leader. Many Christians have had their faith weakened as a result of seeing a leader fall. Non\-Christians use the failure of “Christian” leaders as a reason to reject Christianity. Satan and his demons know this, and therefore direct more of their attacks against those in leadership roles. The Bible warns us all, “Be self\-controlled and alert. Your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour” (1 Peter 5:8\). How are we to respond when an evangelical Christian leader is accused of or caught in a scandal? 1\) Do not listen to or accept baseless and unfounded accusations (Proverbs 18:8, 17; 1 Timothy 5:19\). 2\) Take appropriate biblical measures to rebuke those who sin (Matthew 18:15\-17; 1 Timothy 5:20\). If the sin is proven and severe, permanent removal from ministry leadership should be enforced (1 Timothy 3:1\-13\). 3\) Forgive those who sin (Ephesians 4:32; Colossians 3:13\), and when repentance is proven, restore them to fellowship (Galatians 6:1; 1 Peter 4:8\) but not to leadership. 4\) Be faithful in praying for our leaders. Knowing the problems they deal with, the temptations they suffer, and the stress they must endure, we should be praying for our leaders, asking God to strengthen them, protect them, and encourage them. 5\) Most importantly, take the failure of an evangelical Christian leader as a reminder to put your ultimate faith in God and God alone. God never fails, never sins, and never lies. “Holy, holy, holy is the LORD Almighty; the whole earth is full of His glory” (Isaiah 6:3\).
Why did God accept Abel’s offering but reject Cain’s offering?	Answer The stories of the first act of worship in human history and the first murder are recorded in Genesis chapter 4\. The act of worship—Cain’s and Abel’s offerings—follows the account of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, their disobedience to God, and the entrance of sin into the human race. Death, the judgment pronounced upon them by God, soon made its entrance in the first family. [Cain](Cain-in-the-Bible.html) and [Abel](Abel-in-the-Bible.html), the sons of Adam and Eve, “in the course of time” brought offerings to the Lord (Genesis 4:3\). Without doubt, they were doing this because God had revealed to them the necessity of a sacrifice. Some wonder how Cain and Abel were supposed to know what to sacrifice. The answer is that God must have instructed them concerning the details of acceptable worship, although those instructions are not included in the Genesis narrative. Abel was a shepherd, and his offering to the Lord was “the best portions of the firstborn lambs from his flock” (Genesis 4:4, NLT). Cain was a farmer, and his offering was “some of his crops” (Genesis 4:4, NLT). The most evident difference between the two sacrifices is that Abel’s offering was an animal (blood) sacrifice, and Cain’s was a vegetable (bloodless) sacrifice. There may be an additional implication that, while Abel brought “the best portions,” Cain simply brought some of his ordinary crops. Scripture does not give an indication, however, that either of these differences factored into God’s acceptance of Abel and rejection of Cain. What we know for sure is that “the LORD looked with favor on Abel and his offering, but on Cain and his offering he did not look with favor” (Genesis 4:4–5\). We also know that God looks on the heart (1 Samuel 16:7\). There was something in Cain’s motivation and heart attitude, and possibly something in his performance, that made his offering unacceptable to God. It was obviously something that he was aware of and could remedy, since God tells him after the fact, “You will be accepted if you do what is right” (Genesis 4:7, NLT). Abel, on the other hand, had the proper [motivation](Bible-motivation.html), the proper procedure, and the proper relationship with God. That relationship was based on faith: “By faith Abel offered God a better sacrifice than Cain did” (Hebrews 11:4\). Ever since the beginning, people must come to God in faith. “Without faith it is impossible to please God” (Hebrews 11:6\), and faith is evidently what Cain lacked. In Jude 1:11, we read, “They have taken the way of Cain,” a description that refers to lawless men. This may mean that they, like Cain, disobediently devised their own ways of worship, and they did not come to God by faith. Cain’s offering, while acceptable in his own eyes, was not acceptable to the Lord. In some way, Cain had perverted God’s prescribed form of worship, and his heart was not right. He grew jealous of Abel, and he selfishly nursed his wounded pride. Rather than repent at God’s rebuke, Cain became angry, and later, in the field, he killed Abel and brought judgment upon himself (Genesis 4:8\). The apostle John gives us more insight into Cain’s heart: “Do not be like Cain, who belonged to the evil one and murdered his brother. And why did he murder him? Because his own actions were evil and his brother’s were righteous” (1 John 3:12\). Those who belong to the evil one will have evil actions, and those with evil actions will naturally hate those with righteous actions. The evil in Cain’s heart was further revealed when the Lord asked him, “Where is your brother Abel?” to which Cain replied, “I don’t know. . . . Am I my brother’s keeper?” (Genesis 4:9\). In this response Cain tells a stone\-cold lie and shows an amazing level of insolence. When Jesus Christ died upon the cross, He became the substitutionary atonement for our sins. The blood of Christ “speaks a better word than the blood of Abel” (Hebrews 12:24\). Both Abel and Christ were slain by wicked men. But, as the theologian [Erasmus](Desiderius-Erasmus.html) commented, “The blood of Abel cried for vengeance; that of Christ for remission.”
What was the relationship between David and Jonathan?	Answer We know from 1 Samuel 18:1 that [Jonathan](Jonathan-in-the-Bible.html) loved David. Second Samuel 1:26 records David’s lament after Jonathan’s death, in which he said that his love for Jonathan was more wonderful than the love of a woman. Some use these two passages to suggest a homosexual relationship between David and Jonathan. This interpretation, however, should be rejected for at least three reasons. First, the Hebrew word for “love” used here covers a broad range of meanings and does not mean “romantic” or “sexual” love unless the context demands it. Forms of the same word are used for loving God (Exodus 20:6\), loving one’s neighbor as oneself (Leviticus 19:18\), treating foreigners well (Leviticus 19:34\), sharing friendship (Job 19:19\), having diplomatic ties (1 Kings 5:1\), taking pleasure in the work of a subordinate (1 Samuel 16:21\), and even “loving” inanimate things (Proverbs 21:17\). Second, David’s comparison of his relationship with Jonathan with that of women is probably a reference to his experience with King Saul’s daughters. He was promised one of Saul’s daughters for killing Goliath. The first daughter was abruptly given to another man. The second daughter was promised, but Saul continued to add conditions to the deal, hoping to see David killed in battle (1 Samuel 18:17, 25\). The loyalty and camaraderie David had with Jonathan came with no conditions and was of greater value than the companionship of Saul’s daughter. Third, the Bible clearly and consistently denounces homosexuality (Genesis 1:26–27; Leviticus 18:22; 20:13; Romans 1:18–25\). Extolling a homosexual love between David and Jonathan would be contradicting the prohibitions of it found throughout the Bible. The friendship between David and Jonathan was a covenantal relationship. In 1 Samuel 18:1\-5, we read of David and Jonathan forming an agreement. In this agreement, Jonathan was to be second in command in David’s future reign, and David was to protect Jonathan’s family (1 Samuel 20:16\-17, 42; 23:16\-18\). Obviously, these two men were also very good friends. In their relationship we can see at least three qualities of true friendship. First, they sacrificed for one another. In 1 Samuel 18:4, we read that Jonathan gave David his clothes and military garb. The significance of this gift was that Jonathan recognized that David would one day be king of Israel. Rather than being envious or jealous, Jonathan submitted to God’s will and sacrificed his own right to the throne. Second, in 1 Samuel 19:1\-3, we read of Jonathan’s loyalty toward and defense of David. King Saul told his followers to kill David. Jonathan rebuked his father and recalled David’s faithfulness to him in killing Goliath. Finally, Jonathan and David were also free to express their emotions with one another. In 1 Samuel 20, we read of a plan concocted by Jonathan to reveal his father’s plans toward David. Jonathan was going to practice his archery. If he told his servant that the arrows he shot were to the side of the target, David was safe. If Jonathan told his servant that the arrows were beyond the target, David was to leave and not return. Jonathan told the servant that the arrows were beyond the target, meaning that David should flee. After releasing his servant, Jonathan found David and the two men cried together. Rather than being evidence for a homosexual relationship in the Bible, the account of David and Jonathan is an example of true biblical friendship. True friendship, according to the Bible, involves loyalty, sacrifice, compromise, and yes, emotional attachment. That is what we should learn from David and Jonathan. The idea that David and Jonathan were practicing homosexuals (or bisexuals) has no biblical basis.
How should a Christian view Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD)?	Answer Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD) was formerly classified as an anxiety disorder but is now categorized separately by the American Psychological Association. OCD is characterized by obsessive thoughts that lead to compulsive behaviors. The thoughts are invasive and feel uncontrollable. Furthermore, the thoughts are anxiety\-provoking, compelling the person to carry out certain behaviors to temporarily relieve the anxiety. Both the thoughts and compulsive routines interfere with daily life to varying degrees. Researchers have not found a cause for OCD, but they have identified parts of the brain that seem to be involved. In popular culture, we sometimes use “OCD” to describe people with an A\-type personality or who may have excessive worry. But it is important to distinguish true Obsessive Compulsive Disorder from a heightened affinity for organization or cleanliness and from chronic worry. OCD is a real mental illness and is most often helped through specific forms of therapy and medication. That being said, it is important for those suffering from OCD to look at what the Bible says about anxiety and the trustworthiness of God. The root of OCD, or OCD\-like behavior in those not actually suffering with the illness, is anxiety. While OCD is not mentioned by name in Scripture, the word worry occurs 36 times (NLT). The consistent warning is not to worry. Worry is sin because it ignores the power of prayer and obstructs faith (Philippians 4:6\). Those who have never trusted Jesus as their Savior are slaves to sin such as worry and cannot free themselves (Romans 6:17–22\). Believers who struggle with chronic worry have yet to understand their freedom in Jesus to have victory over sin (Ephesians 6:10–18\). Once we have received Jesus as our Savior, we are a new creation in Christ. Christians must walk in the Spirit in order to put off their earthly nature and begin to think and act like Jesus (Colossians 3:1–10\). This is also called having the mind of Christ (1 Corinthians 2:15–16\). With the mind of Christ, we can set our minds on things above (2 Corinthians 10:5; Colossians 3:1–3; Philippians 4:8\). More importantly, as we grow in Christ, we begin to understand God’s sovereignty and His character. We come to trust Him more fully and can therefore give up our worries. Those suffering with OCD can be greatly helped by recalling the truth of Scripture. When confronted with an invasive thought, they can combat it with truth. A firm foundation in God’s Word will prove a reliable base from which to evaluate thoughts and compulsions. Sufferers can also be helped by therapeutic protocols designed specifically for OCD, through counseling and the use of pharmaceuticals. There is much hope for those suffering with OCD. Often, it is a combination of personal Bible study, medication, and discipling with a biblical counselor that leads to freedom. Regardless of their troubling symptoms, those with OCD can rest in the love of God and rely on the power of the Holy Spirit to give them grace to walk the path before them (2 Corinthians 12:8–10\).
What was the story of Jacob and Esau?	Answer [Jacob](life-Jacob.html) and [Esau](Esau-in-the-Bible.html) were the sons of Isaac and Rebekah and the first twins mentioned in the Bible. Even before they were born, they were struggling together in the womb of their mother. Their prenatal striving foreshadowed later conflict (Genesis 25:21\-26\). The twins grew up very different. Jacob was “a quiet man, staying among the tents” and his mother’s favorite. Esau was “a skillful hunter, a man of the open country” and his father’s favorite. One day, Esau returned from hunting and desired some of the lentil stew that Jacob was cooking. Jacob offered to give his brother some stew in exchange for his birthright—the special honor that Esau possessed as the older son, which gave him the right to a double portion of his father’s inheritance. Esau put his temporary, physical needs over his God\-given blessing and sold his birthright to Jacob (Genesis 25:27\-34\). When the time came for Isaac to bestow his blessing on his sons, Jacob and his mother contrived to deceive Isaac into blessing Jacob in Esau’s place. When Esau found that his blessing had been given to Jacob, he threatened to kill his brother, and Jacob fled (Genesis 27:1 \- 28:7\). Years later, Jacob and Esau met and were reconciled (Genesis 33\). Both Jacob and Esau were fathers of nations. God changed Jacob’s name to Israel (Genesis 32:28\), and he became the father of the 12 tribes of Israel. Esau’s descendants were the Edomites (Genesis 36\). Edom was a nation that plagued Israel in later years and was finally judged by God (Obadiah 1:1\-21\). In the New Testament, Esau’s choice to sell his birthright is used as an example of ungodliness—a “godless” person who will put physical desires over spiritual blessings (Hebrews 12:15\-17\). By his negative example, Esau teaches us to hold fast to what is truly important, even if it means denying the appetites of the flesh. Both Old and New Testaments use the story of Jacob and Esau to illustrate God’s calling and election. God chose the younger Jacob to carry on the Abrahamic Covenant, while Esau was providentially excluded from the Messianic line (Malachi 1:2\-3; Romans 9:11\-14\).
What does the Bible say about snake handling?	Answer Snake handling, as practiced by some misguided churches, is not a biblical endeavor. Mark 16:17–18 is used by some as a basis for handling snakes: “These signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will . . . pick up snakes with their hands.” Churches that practice snake handling have special services in which people actually handle venomous snakes, supposedly giving evidence that the church members are true believers who are empowered and protected by God. It’s true that Mark 16:17–18 says Jesus’ followers will “pick up snakes,” but there are several problems with the modern practice of snake handling. First, the practice of handling snakes for the purpose of “proving” one’s faith (or proving God’s protection) is a violation of God’s command not to [put Him to the test](test-God.html): “It is also written: ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test’” (Matthew 4:7; cf. Deuteronomy 6:16\). Trying to force God’s hand by requiring that He perform an obvious miracle is more than foolish; it is sinful. To test God’s presence and power by purposely placing oneself in an unsafe situation is expressly forbidden in Scripture. Daniel did not seek out the lions, but when he found himself surrounded by them, through no fault of his own, he found God was there. Likewise, we trust God in dangerous situations, but we never purposely seek out danger. Second, it is important to remember that there are serious questions regarding whether verses 9–20 of Mark 16 belong in the Bible. The evidence suggests that these verses were not originally part of the Gospel of Mark. Some of the oldest and most reliable Greek manuscripts do not contain verses 9–20\. Other manuscripts contain verses 9–20 but set them apart from the rest of the Gospel. The most likely explanation is that Mark 16:9–20 is an interpolation. As a result, it is unwise to use anything from Mark 16:9–20 as the sole basis for any doctrine or practice. Snake handling is one such example of a dubious concept drawn from Mark 16:9–20\. For more information, please see our article [“Should Mark 16:9–20 be in the Bible?”](Mark-16-9-20.html) If we assume, despite the evidence to the contrary, that Mark 16:17–18 does belong in Scripture, does it teach that we should be handling snakes in church? Absolutely not. Mark 16:17–18 contains no imperatives. The verse does not say, “Go out and handle snakes”; it says, “They will pick up snakes with their hands.” It is a declaration that something will occur, not a command that someone make it occur. Again assuming that the snake\-handling passage belongs in Scripture, we could say that Jesus’ words were fulfilled by the apostle Paul in Acts 28:3–5: “Paul gathered a pile of brushwood and, as he put it on the fire, a viper, driven out by the heat, fastened itself on his hand. . . . But Paul shook the snake off into the fire and suffered no ill effects.” Notice that Paul was not seeking out snakes to handle. He was handling firewood and was bitten by a snake against his wishes. God intervened and miraculously protected Paul from the effects of the snake bite. Jesus’ words in Mark 16:17–18 gave His apostles the assurance that, as they faithfully served God in the spread of the gospel, He could protect them from anything that crossed their paths. If the snake\-handling churches were consistent, they would also observe the second part of Mark 16:18: “And when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all.” Why not drink a vial of strychnine or arsenic and “prove” one’s faith that way? Why stop with the snakes? God can and will protect us, according to His will, as we are serving Him. But we are not to put the Lord to the test. Just as Jesus refused to jump off the pinnacle of the temple and just as Daniel did not go lion\-hunting, so are we not to intentionally seek out situations that require God’s miraculous intervention. While not speaking directly of snake handling in churches, 1 Corinthians 10:9 could apply: “We should not test the Lord, as some of them did—and were killed by snakes.”
I was baptized unbiblically. Do I need to be rebaptized?	Answer The Bible is very clear about baptism. There are two points we all need to understand. (1\) Baptism is to take place after a person has received Jesus Christ as Savior, trusting in Him alone for salvation. (2\) Baptism is to be by immersion. The word baptize literally means to "immerse / submerge in water." Baptism by immersion is the only method of baptism that adequately illustrates what baptism symbolizes—believers dying, being buried with Christ, and being raised to newness of life (Romans 6:3\-4\). With those two key points in mind, what about those who were baptized unbiblically? For the sake of clarification, let’s divide this into two categories as well. First, in the instance of someone who was baptized before he/she became a Christian. Common examples of this are those who were baptized as infants, or those who were baptized later in life, but did not truly know Jesus as Savior when they were baptized. In these instances, yes, such a person definitely needs to be rebaptized. Again, the Bible states that baptism is post\-salvation. The symbolism of baptism is lost if a person has not truly experienced salvation by faith in Jesus Christ. Second, in the instance of those who were baptized after faith in Christ, but in a method other than immersion. This issue is a little more difficult. It would seem to come down to the fact that such a person did not truly receive baptism. If the method was sprinkling or pouring, it does not fit the definition of baptism. Again, the word baptize means "to submerge in water." However, the Bible nowhere specifically addresses those who have been baptized but not immersed. This issue, then, is a matter of a believer’s personal relationship with God. A believer who has been baptized unbiblically should ask the Lord for wisdom (James 1:5\). If the believer’s conscience is unsure, it would be best to go ahead and be rebaptized biblically to put the conscience at ease (Romans 14:23\).
Why should I believe in Christ’s resurrection?	Answer It is a fairly well\-established fact that Jesus Christ was publicly executed in Judea in the 1st Century A.D., under Pontius Pilate, by means of crucifixion, at the behest of the Jewish Sanhedrin. The non\-Christian historical accounts of [Flavius Josephus](Flavius-Josephus.html), [Cornelius Tacitus](Tacitus.html), Lucian of Samosata, [Maimonides](Maimonides.html) and even the Jewish Sanhedrin corroborate the early Christian eyewitness accounts of these important historical aspects of the death of Jesus Christ. As for His resurrection, there are several lines of evidence which make for a compelling case. The late jurisprudential prodigy and international statesman Sir Lionel Luckhoo (of The Guinness Book of World Records fame for his unprecedented 245 consecutive defense murder trial acquittals) epitomized Christian enthusiasm and confidence in the strength of the case for the resurrection when he wrote, “I have spent more than 42 years as a defense trial lawyer appearing in many parts of the world and am still in active practice. I have been fortunate to secure a number of successes in jury trials and I say unequivocally the evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ is so overwhelming that it compels acceptance by proof which leaves absolutely no room for doubt.” The secular community’s response to the same evidence has been predictably apathetic in accordance with their steadfast commitment to methodological naturalism. For those unfamiliar with the term, methodological naturalism is the human endeavor of explaining everything in terms of natural causes and natural causes only. If an alleged historical event defies natural explanation (e.g., a miraculous resurrection), secular scholars generally treat it with overwhelming skepticism, regardless of the evidence, no matter how favorable and compelling it may be. In our view, such an unwavering allegiance to natural causes regardless of substantive evidence to the contrary is not conducive to an impartial (and therefore adequate) investigation of the evidence. We agree with Dr. Wernher von Braun and numerous others who still believe that forcing a popular philosophical predisposition upon the evidence hinders objectivity. Or in the words of Dr. von Braun, “To be forced to believe only one conclusion… would violate the very objectivity of science itself.” Having said that, let us now examine several lines of evidence for Christ’s resurrection. The First Line of Evidence for Christ’s resurrection To begin with, we have demonstrably sincere eyewitness testimony. Early Christian apologists cited hundreds of eyewitnesses, some of whom documented their own alleged experiences. Many of these eyewitnesses willfully and resolutely endured prolonged torture and death rather than repudiate their testimony. This fact attests to their sincerity, ruling out deception on their part. According to the historical record (The Book of Acts 4:1\-17; Pliny’s Letters to Trajan X, 97, etc) most Christians could end their suffering simply by renouncing the faith. Instead, it seems that most opted to endure the suffering and proclaim Christ’s resurrection unto death. Granted, while martyrdom is remarkable, it is not necessarily compelling. It does not validate a belief so much as it authenticates a believer (by demonstrating his or her sincerity in a tangible way). What makes the earliest Christian martyrs remarkable is that they knew whether or not what they were professing was true. They either saw Jesus Christ alive\-and\-well after His death or they did not. This is extraordinary. If it was all just a lie, why would so many perpetuate it given their circumstances? Why would they all knowingly cling to such an unprofitable lie in the face of persecution, imprisonment, torture, and death? While the September 11, 2001, suicide hijackers undoubtedly believed what they professed (as evidenced by their willingness to die for it), they could not and did not know if it was true. They put their faith in traditions passed down to them over many generations. In contrast, the early Christian martyrs were the first generation. Either they saw what they claimed to see, or they did not. Among the most illustrious of the professed eyewitnesses were the Apostles. They collectively underwent an undeniable change following the alleged post\-resurrection appearances of Christ. Immediately following His crucifixion, they hid in fear for their lives. Following the resurrection they took to the streets, boldly proclaiming the resurrection despite intensifying persecution. What accounts for their sudden and dramatic change? It certainly was not financial gain. The Apostles gave up everything they had to preach the resurrection, including their lives. The Second Line of Evidence for Christ’s resurrection A second line of evidence concerns the conversion of certain key skeptics, most notably Paul and James. Paul was of his own admission a violent persecutor of the early Church. After what he described as an encounter with the resurrected Christ, Paul underwent an immediate and drastic change from a vicious persecutor of the Church to one of its most prolific and selfless defenders. Like many early Christians, Paul suffered impoverishment, persecution, beatings, imprisonment, and execution for his steadfast commitment to Christ’s resurrection. James was skeptical, though not as hostile as Paul. A purported post\-resurrection encounter with Christ turned him into an inimitable believer, a leader of the Church in Jerusalem. We still have what scholars generally accept to be one of his letters to the early Church. Like Paul, James willingly suffered and died for his testimony, a fact which attests to the sincerity of his belief (see The Book of Acts and Josephus’ Antiquities of the Jews XX, ix, 1\). The Third and Fourth Lines of Evidence for Christ’s resurrection A third line and fourth line of evidence concern enemy attestation to the empty tomb and the fact that faith in the resurrection took root in Jerusalem. Jesus was publicly executed and buried in Jerusalem. It would have been impossible for faith in His resurrection to take root in Jerusalem while His body was still in the tomb where the Sanhedrin could exhume it, put it on public display, and thereby expose the hoax. Instead, the Sanhedrin accused the disciples of stealing the body, apparently in an effort to explain its disappearance (and therefore an empty tomb). How do we explain the fact of the empty tomb? Here are the three most common explanations: First, the disciples stole the body. If this were the case, they would have known the resurrection was a hoax. They would not therefore have been so willing to suffer and die for it. (See the first line of evidence concerning demonstrably sincere eyewitness testimony.) All of the professed eyewitnesses would have known that they hadn’t really seen Christ and were therefore lying. With so many conspirators, surely someone would have confessed, if not to end his own suffering then at least to end the suffering of his friends and family. The first generation of Christians were absolutely brutalized, especially following the conflagration in Rome in A.D. 64 (a fire which Nero allegedly ordered to make room for the expansion of his palace, but which he blamed on the Christians in Rome in an effort to exculpate himself). As the Roman historian Cornelius Tacitus recounted in his Annals of Imperial Rome (published just a generation after the fire): “Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired.” (Annals, XV, 44\) Nero illuminated his garden parties with Christians whom he burnt alive. Surely someone would have confessed the truth under the threat of such terrible pain. The fact is, however, we have no record of any early Christian denouncing the faith to end his suffering. Instead, we have multiple accounts of post\-resurrection appearances and hundreds of eyewitnesses willing to suffer and die for it. If the disciples didn’t steal the body, how else do we explain the empty tomb? Some have suggested that Christ faked His death and later escaped from the tomb. This is patently absurd. According to the eyewitness testimony, Christ was beaten, tortured, lacerated, and stabbed. He suffered internal damage, massive blood loss, asphyxiation, and a spear through His heart. There is no good reason to believe that Jesus Christ (or any other man for that matter) could survive such an ordeal, fake His death, sit in a tomb for three days and nights without medical attention, food or water, remove the massive stone which sealed His tomb, escape undetected (without leaving behind a trail of blood), convince hundreds of eyewitnesses that He was resurrected from the death and in good health, and then disappear without a trace. Such a notion is ridiculous. The Fifth Line of Evidence for Christ’s resurrection Finally, a fifth line of evidence concerns a peculiarity of the eyewitness testimony. In all of the major resurrection narratives, women are credited as the first and primary eyewitnesses. This would be an odd invention since in both the ancient Jewish and Roman cultures women were severely disesteemed. Their testimony was regarded as insubstantial and dismissible. Given this fact, it is highly unlikely that any perpetrators of a hoax in 1st Century Judea would elect women to be their primary witnesses. Of all the male disciples who claimed to see Jesus resurrected, if they all were lying and the resurrection was a scam, why did they pick the most ill\-perceived, distrusted witnesses they could find? Dr. William Lane Craig explains, “When you understand the role of women in first\-century Jewish society, what’s really extraordinary is that this empty tomb story should feature women as the discoverers of the empty tomb in the first place. Women were on a very low rung of the social ladder in first\-century Israel. There are old rabbinical sayings that said, 'Let the words of Law be burned rather than delivered to women' and 'blessed is he whose children are male, but woe to him whose children are female.' Women’s testimony was regarded as so worthless that they weren’t even allowed to serve as legal witnesses in a Jewish court of Law. In light of this, it’s absolutely remarkable that the chief witnesses to the empty tomb are these women... Any later legendary account would have certainly portrayed male disciples as discovering the tomb \- Peter or John, for example. The fact that women are the first witnesses to the empty tomb is most plausibly explained by the reality that \- like it or not \- they were the discoverers of the empty tomb! This shows that the Gospel writers faithfully recorded what happened, even if it was embarrassing. This bespeaks the historicity of this tradition rather than its legendary status." (Dr. William Lane Craig, quoted by Lee Strobel, The Case For Christ, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1998, p. 293\) In Summary These lines of evidence: the demonstrable sincerity of the eyewitnesses (and in the Apostles’ case, compelling, inexplicable change), the conversion and demonstrable sincerity of key antagonists\- and skeptics\-turned\-martyrs, the fact of the empty tomb, enemy attestation to the empty tomb, the fact that all of this took place in Jerusalem where faith in the resurrection began and thrived, the testimony of the women, the significance of such testimony given the historical context; all of these strongly attest to the historicity of the resurrection. We encourage our readers to thoughtfully consider these evidences. What do they suggest to you? Having pondered them ourselves, we resolutely affirm Sir Lionel’s declaration: “The evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ is so overwhelming that it compels acceptance by proof which leaves absolutely no room for doubt.”
What is agape love?	Answer The Greek word agape is often translated “love” in the New Testament. How is “agape love” different from other types of love? The essence of agape love is goodwill, benevolence, and willful delight in the object of love. Unlike our English word love, agape is not used in the New Testament to refer to romantic or [sexual love](eros-love.html). Nor does it refer to close friendship or [brotherly love](phileo-love.html), for which the Greek word philia is used. Agape love involves faithfulness, commitment, and an act of the will. It is distinguished from the other types of love by its lofty moral nature and strong character. Agape love is beautifully described in 1 Corinthians 13\. Outside of the New Testament, the word agape is used in a variety of contexts, but in the vast majority of instances in the New Testament it carries distinct meaning. Agape is almost always used to describe the love that is of and from God, whose very nature is love itself: “God is love” (1 John 4:8\). God does not merely love; He is love. Everything God does flows from His love. Agape is also used to describe our love for God (Luke 10:27\), a servant’s faithful respect to his master (Matthew 6:24\), and a man’s attachment to things (John 3:19\). The type of love that characterizes God is not a sappy, sentimental feeling such as we often hear portrayed. God loves because that is His nature and the expression of His being. He loves the unlovable and the unlovely, not because we deserve to be loved or because of any excellence we possess, but because it is His nature to love and He must be true to His nature. Agape love is always shown by what it does. God’s love is displayed most clearly at the cross. “God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved” (Ephesians 2:4–5, ESV). We did not deserve such a sacrifice, “but God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us” (Romans 5:8\). God’s agape love is unmerited, gracious, and constantly seeking the benefit of the ones He loves. The Bible says we are the undeserving recipients of His lavish agape love (1 John 3:1\). God’s demonstration of agape love led to the sacrifice of the Son of God for those He loves. We are to love others with agape love, whether they are fellow believers (John 13:34\) or bitter enemies (Matthew 5:44\). Jesus gave the parable of the Good Samaritan as an example of sacrifice for the sake of others, even for those who may care nothing at all for us. Agape love as modeled by Christ is not based on a feeling; rather, it is a determined act of the will, a joyful resolve to put the welfare of others above our own. Agape love does not come naturally to us. Because of our fallen nature, we are incapable of producing such a love. If we are to love as God loves, that love—that agape—can only come from its Source. This is the love that “has been poured out into our hearts through the Holy Spirit, who has been given to us” when we became His children (Romans 5:5; cf. Galatians 5:22\). “This is how we know what love is: Jesus Christ laid down his life for us. And we ought to lay down our lives for our brothers and sisters” (1 John 3:16\). Because of God’s love toward us, we are able to love one another.
What is the prayer of salvation?	Answer Many people ask, “Is there a prayer I can pray that will guarantee my salvation?” It is important to remember that salvation is not received by reciting a prayer or uttering certain words. The Bible nowhere records a person’s receiving salvation by a prayer. Saying a prayer is not the biblical way of salvation. The biblical method of salvation is faith in Jesus Christ. John 3:16 tells us, “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” Salvation is gained by faith (Ephesians 2:8\), by receiving Jesus as Savior (John 1:12\), and by fully trusting Jesus alone (John 14:6; Acts 4:12\), not by reciting a prayer. The biblical message of salvation is simple, clear, and amazing at the same time. We have all committed sin against God (Romans 3:23\). Other than Jesus Christ, there is no one who has lived an entire life without sinning (Ecclesiastes 7:20\). Because of our sin, we have earned judgment from God—death (Romans 6:23\). Because of our sin and its deserved punishment, there is nothing we can do on our own to make ourselves right with God. As a result of His love for us, God became a human being in the Person of Jesus Christ. Jesus lived a perfect life and always taught the truth. However, humanity rejected Jesus and put Him to death by crucifying Him. Though that horrible act killed the only truly innocent man, our salvation was obtained. Jesus died in our place. He took the burden and judgment of our sin upon Himself (2 Corinthians 5:21\). Jesus was then resurrected (1 Corinthians 15\), proving that His payment for sin was sufficient and that He had overcome sin and death. As a result of Jesus’ sacrifice, God offers us salvation as a gift. God calls us all to repent of our sins (Acts 17:30\) and have faith in Christ as the full payment of our sins (1 John 2:2\). Salvation is gained by receiving the gift God offers us, not by praying a certain prayer. Now, that does not mean prayer cannot be involved in receiving salvation. If you understand the gospel, believe it to be true, and have accepted Jesus as your salvation, it is good and appropriate to express that faith to God in prayer. Communicating with God through prayer can be a way to progress from accepting facts about Jesus to fully trusting in Him as Savior. Prayer can be connected to the act of placing your faith in Jesus alone for salvation. Again, though, it is crucially important that you do not base your salvation on having said a prayer. Reciting a prayer cannot save you! If you want to receive the salvation that is available through Jesus, place your faith in Him. Fully trust His death as the sufficient sacrifice for your sins. Completely rely on Him alone as your Savior. That is the biblical method of salvation. If you have received Jesus as your Savior, by all means, say a prayer to God. Tell God how thankful you are for Jesus. Offer praise to God for His love and sacrifice. Thank Jesus for dying for your sins and providing salvation for you. That is the biblical connection between salvation and prayer.
Why are there so many different Christian interpretations?	Answer Scripture says there is “one Lord, one faith, one baptism” (Ephesians 4:5\). This passage emphasizes the unity that should exist in the body of Christ as we are indwelt by “one Spirit” (verse 4\). In verse 3, Paul makes an appeal to humility, meekness, patience, and love—all of which are necessary to preserve unity. According to 1 Corinthians 2:10\-13, the Holy Spirit knows the mind of God (verse 11\), which He reveals (verse 10\) and teaches (verse 13\) to those whom He indwells. This activity of the Holy Spirit is called illumination. In a perfect world, every believer would dutifully study the Bible (2 Timothy 2:15\) in prayerful dependence upon the Holy Spirit’s illumination. As can be clearly seen, this is not a perfect world. Not everyone who possesses the Holy Spirit actually listens to the Holy Spirit. There are Christians who grieve Him (Ephesians 4:30\). Ask any educator—even the best classroom teacher has his share of wayward students who seem to resist learning, no matter what the teacher does. So, one reason different people have different interpretations of the Bible is simply that some do not listen to the Teacher—the Holy Spirit. Following are some other reasons for the wide divergence of beliefs among those who teach the Bible. 1\. Unbelief. The fact is that many who claim to be Christians have never been born again. They wear the label of “Christian,” but there has been no true change of heart. Many who do not even believe the Bible to be true presume to teach it. They claim to speak for God yet live in a state of unbelief. Most false interpretations of Scripture come from such sources. It is impossible for an unbeliever to correctly interpret Scripture. “The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned” (1 Corinthians 2:14\). An unsaved man cannot understand the truth of the Bible. He has no illumination. Further, even being a pastor or theologian does not guarantee one’s salvation. An example of the chaos created by unbelief is found in John 12:28\-29\. Jesus prays to the Father, saying, “Father, glorify your name.” The Father responds with an audible voice from heaven, which everyone nearby hears. Notice, however, the difference in interpretation: “The crowd that was there and heard it said it had thundered; others said an angel had spoken to him.” Everyone heard the same thing—an intelligible statement from heaven—yet everyone heard what he wanted to hear. 2\. Lack of training. The apostle Peter warns against those who misinterpret the Scriptures. He attributes their spurious teachings in part to the fact that they are “ignorant” (2 Peter 3:16\). Timothy is told to “Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15\). There is no shortcut to proper biblical interpretation; we are constrained to study. 3\. Poor hermeneutics. Much error has been promoted because of a simple failure to apply good hermeneutics (the science of interpreting Scripture). Taking a verse out of its immediate context can do great damage to the intent of the verse. Ignoring the wider context of the chapter and book, or failing to understand the historical/cultural context will also lead to problems. 4\. Ignorance of the whole Word of God. Apollos was a powerful and eloquent preacher, but he only knew the baptism of John. He was ignorant of Jesus and His provision of salvation, so his message was incomplete. Aquila and Priscilla took him aside and “explained to him the way of God more adequately” (Acts 18:24\-28\). After that, Apollos preached Jesus Christ. Some groups and individuals today have an incomplete message because they concentrate on certain passages to the exclusion of others. They fail to compare Scripture with Scripture. 5\. Selfishness and pride. Sad to say, many interpretations of the Bible are based on an individual’s own personal biases and pet doctrines. Some people see an opportunity for personal advancement by promoting a “new perspective” on Scripture. (See the description of false teachers in Jude’s epistle.) 6\. Failure to mature. When Christians are not maturing as they should, their handling of the Word of God is affected. “I gave you milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it. Indeed, you are still not ready. You are still worldly” (1 Corinthians 3:2\-3\). An immature Christian is not ready for the “meat” of God’s Word. Note that the proof of the Corinthians’ carnality is a division in their church (verse 4\). 7\. Undue emphasis on tradition. Some churches claim to believe the Bible, but their interpretation is always filtered through the established traditions of their church. Where tradition and the teaching of the Bible are in conflict, tradition is given precedence. This effectively negates the authority of the Word and grants supremacy to the church leadership. On the essentials, the Bible is abundantly clear. There is nothing ambiguous about the deity of Christ, the reality of heaven and hell, and salvation by grace through faith. On some issues of less importance, however, the teaching of Scripture is less clear, and this naturally leads to different interpretations. For example, we have no direct biblical command governing the frequency of communion or the style of music to use. Honest, sincere Christians can have differing interpretations of the passages concerning these peripheral issues. The important thing is to be dogmatic where Scripture is and to avoid being dogmatic where Scripture is not. Churches should strive to follow the model of the early church in Jerusalem: “They devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer” (Acts 2:42\). There was unity in the early church because they were steadfast in the apostles’ doctrine. There will be unity in the church again when we get back to the apostles’ doctrine and forego the other doctrines, fads, and gimmicks that have crept into the church.
What is the Christian doctrine of salvation?	Answer Salvation is deliverance from danger or suffering. To save is to deliver or protect. The word carries the idea of victory, health, or preservation. Sometimes, the Bible uses the words saved or salvation to refer to temporal, physical deliverance, such as Paul’s deliverance from prison (Philippians 1:19\). More often, the word salvation concerns an eternal, spiritual deliverance. When Paul told the Philippian jailer what he must do to be saved, he was referring to the jailer’s eternal destiny (Acts 16:30\-31\). Jesus equated being saved with entering the kingdom of God (Matthew 19:24\-25\). What are we saved from? In the Christian doctrine of salvation, we are saved from “wrath,” that is, from God’s judgment of sin (Romans 5:9; 1 Thessalonians 5:9\). Our sin has separated us from God, and the consequence of sin is death (Romans 6:23\). Biblical salvation refers to our deliverance from the consequence of sin and therefore involves the removal of sin. We are saved from both the power and penalty of sin. Who does the saving? Only God can remove sin and deliver us from sin’s penalty (2 Timothy 1:9; Titus 3:5\). How does God save? In the Christian doctrine of salvation, God has rescued us through Jesus Christ (John 3:17\). Specifically, it was Jesus’ death on the cross and subsequent resurrection that achieved our salvation (Romans 5:10; Ephesians 1:7\). Scripture is clear that salvation is the gracious, undeserved gift of God (Ephesians 2:5, 8\) and is only available through faith in Jesus Christ (Acts 4:12\). How do we receive salvation? We are saved by faith. First, we must hear the gospel—the good news of Jesus’ death and resurrection (Ephesians 1:13\). Then, we must believe—fully trust the Lord Jesus (Romans 1:16\). This involves repentance, a changing of mind about sin and Christ (Acts 3:19\), and calling on the name of the Lord (Romans 10:9\-10, 13\). A definition of the Christian doctrine of salvation would be “the deliverance, by the grace of God, from eternal punishment for sin that is granted to those who accept by faith God’s conditions of repentance and faith in the Lord Jesus.” Salvation is available in Jesus alone (John 14:6; Acts 4:12\) and is dependent on God alone for provision and assurance.
Was John the Baptist really Elijah reincarnated?	Answer Matthew 11:7–14 declares, “Jesus began to speak to the crowd about John: ‘What did you go out into the desert to see? A reed swayed by the wind? If not, what did you go out to see? A man dressed in fine clothes? No, those who wear fine clothes are in kings’ palaces. Then what did you go out to see? A prophet? Yes, I tell you, and more than a prophet. This is the one about whom it is written: “I will send my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way before you.” I tell you the truth: Among those born of women there has not risen anyone greater than John the Baptist; yet he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he. From the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven has been forcefully advancing, and forceful men lay hold of it. For all the Prophets and the Law prophesied until John. And if you are willing to accept it, he is the Elijah who was to come.’” Here Jesus quotes from Malachi 3:1, where the messenger appears to be a prophetic figure who is going to appear. According to Malachi 4:5, this messenger is “the prophet Elijah,” whom Jesus identifies as John the Baptist. Does this mean that John the Baptist was Elijah reincarnated? Not at all. First, Jesus’ original hearers (and Matthew’s original readers) would never have assumed Jesus’ words to refer to reincarnation. Besides, [Elijah](life-Elijah.html) did not die; he was taken to heaven in a whirlwind as he rode in a chariot of fire (2 Kings 2:11\). Arguing for a reincarnation (or a resurrection) of Elijah misses that point. If anything, the prophecy of the Elijah “to come” would have been viewed as Elijah’s physical return to earth from heaven. Second, the Bible is quite clear that John the Baptist is called “Elijah” because he came in the “spirit and power of Elijah” (Luke 1:17\), not because he was Elijah in a literal sense. John the Baptist is the New Testament forerunner who points the way to the arrival of the Lord, just as Elijah filled that role in the Old Testament (and might again in the future—see Revelation 11\). Third, Elijah himself appears with Moses at Jesus’ transfiguration after John the Baptist’s death. This would not have happened if Elijah had changed his identity into that of John (Matthew 17:11–13\). Fourth, Mark 6:14–16 and 8:28 show that both the people and Herod distinguished between John the Baptist and Elijah. Finally, proof that this John the Baptist was not Elijah reincarnated comes from John himself. In the first chapter of John the Apostle’s gospel, John the Baptist identifies himself as the messenger of Isaiah 40:3, not as the Elijah of Malachi 3:1\. John the Baptist even goes so far as to specifically deny that he was Elijah (John 1:19–23\). John did for Jesus what Elijah was to have done for the coming of the Lord, but he was not Elijah reincarnated. Jesus identified John the Baptist as Elijah, while John the Baptist rejected that identification. How do we reconcile these two teachings? There is a key phrase in Jesus’ identification of John the Baptist that must not be overlooked. He says, “If you are willing to accept it, he is Elijah.” In other words, John the Baptist’s identification as Elijah was not predicated upon his being the actual Elijah, but upon people’s response to his role. To those who were willing to believe in Jesus, John the Baptist functioned as Elijah, for they believed in Jesus as Lord. To the religious leaders who rejected Jesus, John the Baptist did not perform this function.
What is the origin of the Roman Catholic Church?	Answer The Roman Catholic Church contends that its origin is the death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus Christ in approximately AD 30\. The Catholic Church proclaims itself to be the church that Jesus Christ died for, the church that was established and built by the apostles. Is that the true origin of the Catholic Church? On the contrary. Even a cursory reading of the New Testament will reveal that the Catholic Church does not have its origin in the teachings of Jesus or His apostles. In the New Testament, there is no mention of the papacy, worship/adoration of Mary (or the immaculate conception of Mary, the perpetual virginity of Mary, the assumption of Mary, or Mary as co\-redemptrix and mediatrix), petitioning saints in heaven for their prayers, [apostolic succession](apostolic-succession.html), the ordinances of the church functioning as [sacraments](seven-Catholic-sacraments.html), [infant baptism](infant-baptism.html), confession of sin to a priest, [purgatory](purgatory.html), [indulgences](plenary-indulgences.html), or the equal authority of [church tradition](Catholic-tradition.html) and Scripture. So, if the origin of the Catholic Church is not in the teachings of Jesus and His apostles, as recorded in the New Testament, what is the true origin of the Catholic Church? For the first 280 years of Christian history, Christianity was banned by the Roman Empire, and Christians were terribly persecuted. This changed after the “conversion” of the Roman Emperor [Constantine](Constantine-the-Great.html). Constantine provided religious toleration with the Edict of Milan in AD 313, effectively lifting the ban on Christianity. Later, in AD 325, Constantine called the [Council of Nicea](council-of-Nicea.html) in an attempt to unify Christianity. Constantine envisioned Christianity as a religion that could unite the Roman Empire, which at that time was beginning to fragment and divide. While this may have seemed to be a positive development for the Christian church, the results were anything but positive. Just as Constantine refused to fully embrace the Christian faith but continued many of his pagan beliefs and practices, so the Christian church that Constantine and his successors promoted progressively became a mixture of true Christianity and Roman paganism. Following are a few examples: Most Roman Catholic beliefs and practices regarding Mary are completely absent from the Bible. Where did those beliefs come from? The Roman Catholic view of Mary has far more in common with the Isis mother\-goddess religion of Egypt than it does with anything taught in the New Testament. Interestingly, the first hints of [Catholic Mariology](Mariology.html) occur in the writings of [Origen](Origen-of-Alexandria.html), who lived in Alexandria, Egypt, which happened to be the focal point of Isis worship. The Lord’s Supper being a consumption of the literal body and blood of Jesus is not taught in the Bible. The idea that bread and wine are miraculously transformed into the literal body and blood of Jesus ([transubstantiation](transubstantiation.html)) is not biblical. However, several ancient pagan religions, including [Mithraism](Mithraism.html), which was very popular in the Roman Empire, had some form of “theophagy” (the eating of one’s god) as a ritualistic practice. Roman Catholicism has “saints” one can pray to in order to gain a particular blessing. For example, Saint Gianna Beretta Molla is the patron saint of fertility. Francis of Assisi is the patron saint of animals. There are multiple [patron saints](patron-saints.html) of healing and comfort. Nowhere is even a hint of this taught in Scripture. Just as the Roman pantheon of gods had a god of love, a god of peace, a god of war, a god of strength, a god of wisdom, etc., so the Catholic Church has a saint who is “in charge” over each of these and many other categories. Many Roman cities had a god specific to the city, and the Catholic Church provided “patron saints” for cities as well. The idea that the Roman bishop is the [vicar of Christ](vicar-of-Christ.html), the supreme leader of the Christian Church, is utterly foreign to the Word of God. The supremacy of the Roman bishop (the papacy) was created with the support of the Roman emperors. While most other bishops (and Christians) resisted the idea of the Roman bishop being supreme, the Roman bishop eventually rose to supremacy, again, due to the power and influence of the Roman emperors. After the western half of the Roman Empire collapsed, the popes took on the title that had previously belonged to the Roman emperors—Pontifex Maximus. Many more examples could be given. These four should suffice in demonstrating the origin of the Catholic Church. Of course, the Roman Catholic Church denies the pagan origin of its beliefs and practices. The Catholic Church disguises its pagan beliefs under layers of complicated theology and church tradition. Recognizing that many of its beliefs and practices are utterly foreign to Scripture, the Catholic Church is forced to deny the authority and sufficiency of Scripture. The origin of the Catholic Church is the tragic compromise of Christianity with the pagan religions that surrounded it. Instead of proclaiming the gospel and converting the pagans, the Catholic Church “Christianized” the pagan religions and “paganized” Christianity. By blurring the differences and erasing the distinctions, the Catholic Church made itself attractive to the idolatrous people of the Roman Empire. One result was the Catholic Church becoming the supreme religion in the Roman world for centuries. However, another result was the most dominant form of Christianity apostatizing from the true gospel of Jesus Christ and the true proclamation of God’s Word. Second Timothy 4:3–4 declares, “For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.”
Does the Bible teach that Sophia is the goddess of wisdom?	Answer The Bible does not teach that Sophia is the goddess of wisdom. In fact, no one by the name of Sophia is even mentioned in the Bible. While relying heavily on the book of Proverbs and verses that evangelicals point to as evidence for the Incarnation, adherents to the Sophia goddess movement are gaining numbers by the thousands as conferences are held, books are published, and, most profane of all, worship services for Sophia in the name of Jesus Christ are held each year across the United States and around the world. Although goddess worship can be traced back as far as the earliest civilizations (the Romans gave Sophia the title “god of wisdom”), the most recent uprising occurred after the social reforms of the 1960s and ‘70s in America. The most notable event occurred when one pastor in the mid\-1970s did a survey of his female church population and found that most women were dissatisfied with the portrayal of masculine symbols depicting the God of the Bible. His solution was the introduction of the Greek word Sophia, or “wisdom,” into corporate worship. This allowed for a feminine goddess named Sophia to be worshiped freely. This traces its origins to the time of the Gnostics in the late first and early second centuries. Recall that Gnosticism in itself sought to discover the "secret wisdom" of God and did not embrace that Jesus was the true God\-man. The goddess’s characteristics were likened to that of the Trinity, noting perhaps that she is a fourth member left out by the early patriarchal church fathers. Various trends continued through the next two decades until it climaxed in 1993 when the Re\-Imagining Conference was held in Minnesota. There, participants worshiped Sophia freely, advocated praying to trees in nature, cast off the need for the atoning work of Jesus Christ, declared God the Father was an "abusive parent" in sending Jesus to die for the sins of humanity, and issued an ultimatum for the continued progress of Sophia worship in congregational gatherings. Most recently, Sophia goddess worship has been embraced by laypeople and clergy alike. Just as Arius looked to the personification of wisdom in literature to support his false stance on Christ, Sophists garner the majority of their theological thrust from the first nine chapters of the [book of Proverbs](wisdom-she-Proverbs.html). The focus of the argument says that towards the end of the Old Testament, specifically in Proverbs, the feminine noun for “wisdom” (chokmah in Hebrew) was personified. By definition, personification is "the attribution of a personal nature or character to inanimate objects or abstract notions, such as rhetorical figure." Clearly, no reader of Scripture can say personification does not occur. Rather, the astute reader will exegete, or draw out from the text, in accordance with good Bible study methods. For instance, meaning should always be determined by its context. In this case, Proverbs 8:22\-31 is often quoted to support Sophia goddess worship. Wisdom declares her supremacy in the gifts she is able to bestow from the creation of the world. History tells us that many of the earliest cultures used the personification of deity so the divine being could praise itself. In other words, wisdom here is praising itself by making claims that only belong to God. God is the source of all true wisdom (Romans 11:33; James 1:5, 1:17\-18, 3:13\-17\), and, consequently, any reference to wisdom in Scripture that includes divine language should be attributed to His character and nature. The Jews believed in only one God (Deuteronomy 4:35\-36, 6:4; Isaiah 42:8, 44:6\-8, 45:5\-6; Jeremiah 10:10\-11\). Therefore, to suggest that wisdom is a separate god or goddess alongside God Himself is to blaspheme the name of God, which was punishable by death in the Old Testament. The Jews would have dismissed the writings of Proverbs just as they did the extra books of the Septuagint that depict late historical instances. The Sophia\-goddess controversy leads to some simple conclusions. First, the Bible must be read for what type of literature it is. A proper understanding of feminine personification in relation to this passage and many others is necessary to stay within the framework of biblical doctrine. There is one God who eternally exists in three persons—the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:18; Eph. 4:4\-7; 1 Peter 1:2\). Such a position excludes any mention of a goddess or secondary deity. Finally, one must acknowledge that poetry can contain elements that are clearly not to be taken literally. For example, the Bible is full of poetic language that speaks in personified metaphors rather than pure scientific rhetoric. Cain really did kill Abel, but then God said that "…the voice of your brother’s blood is crying to Me from the ground" (Genesis 4:10\). Literally, the blood did not cry from the ground, but the rhetorical device used here communicates another form of personification found in Scripture to emphasize the killing. As Proverbs 8:22\-31 describes, poetry and personification do not invalidate Scripture. Instead, these essentials are necessary to demonstrate words, phrases, feelings, and meanings that cannot be understood easily any other way or that continue from a previous argument. In the latter case, the Lord created the heavens by His wisdom found in Proverbs 3:19, and 8:22\-31 exists to continue that figurative speech (personification). Historic Christianity is at a crossroads like never before. The goddess\-worship thrust of Sophia and other similar deities shows the ever\-changing landscape of the spiritual climate of the world. What may be politically or socially acceptable in the form of worship, however, is diametrically opposed to the Bible. One must learn to recognize the subjective difference between literal truth and metaphors in the Bible through constant practice (2 Timothy 2:15\). Both areas of speech are the infallible, inerrant, and inspired Word of God, but demand a patient and Spirit\-led eye for interpretation. Otherwise, one will be left to replay the words of the prophet Jeremiah: "But the LORD is the true God; he is the living God, the eternal King. When he is angry, the earth trembles; the nations cannot endure his wrath. ‘Tell them this: “These gods, who did not make the heavens and the earth, will perish from the earth and from under the heavens”’" (Jeremiah 10:10\-11\).
How should a Christian view ADD and ADHD?	Answer The John’s Hopkins Psychiatry Guide defines attention\-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) as “a neurodevelopmental, chronic disorder involving a persistent pattern of inattention and/or hyperactivity/impulsivity that interferes with functioning or development” ([www.hopkinsguides.com](https://www.hopkinsguides.com/hopkins/view/Johns_Hopkins_Psychiatry_Guide/787036/all/Attention_Deficit___Hyperactivity_Disorder), accessed 7/31/2024\). Some use the label ADD to refer to symptoms that mostly involve inattention, but the clinical diagnosis is still ADHD. To be diagnosed with ADHD, a person must be adversely affected in two or more settings (e.g., home and school). The behavior stemming from ADHD is distinct from normal childhood inattention or hyperactivity, as well as from a variety of other disorders. ADHD is considered a childhood disorder in that symptoms begin before age twelve, but some people are not diagnosed until adulthood. In adulthood, those with ADHD will exhibit different symptoms than they had in childhood, and the severity of the symptoms may be lessened. In short, ADHD is a brain and developmental abnormality that leads to challenges with attention, impulse control, and activity levels. Those challenges can result in other issues like relational strain, difficulties in school, problems with regulating emotions, and even a sense of shame or frustration. Because ADHD affects the brain, sufferers cannot simply “try harder” to concentrate or control their behaviors. However, though there is no cure, ADHD can be managed; multiple supports have proven advantageous. For example, behavioral coping strategies, adjustments to school or work environments, emotional regulation habits, social engagement, exercise, nutrition, and medication all may have a positive impact. Those with ADHD or parents of children with ADHD should work with their doctors, employers, teachers, therapists, and other healthcare resources to determine the best interventions. With that cultural understanding of ADHD, what perspective does the Bible give us? First, the Bible says that every human is made in God’s image (Genesis 1:27\). Developmental abnormalities, physical differences, and behavioral or mental challenges will never change this fact. Humans have inherent dignity and worth simply because they are created [in God’s image](image-of-God.html)—this is true of all humans, regardless of any earthly label. Because of the reality of the fall (Genesis 3\), we expect things like brain abnormalities, disease, relational hardships, and the like. That ADHD exists is not a surprise within the biblical framework. It is also not a surprise that God has provided means of help. In His grace, God has given humanity ways to ameliorate the effects of the fall. As Christians, we can rejoice in sound medical inquiry and proven interventions. We should, of course, also be conscientious consumers. Every field of research has a particular worldview. We should be careful to ensure what is characterized as “health” is in line with biblical truth. Even within the medical and psychological fields, the diagnosis and treatment of ADHD are debated. Be wise and intentional in seeking the best treatment for your case (Proverbs 18:17; 1 Timothy 4:1–10; 2 Timothy 4:1–5; 1 John 2:15–17; 4:1–3\). We also know that we are intricately connected to spiritual reality. ADHD is not simply a brain difference or an attentional or impulse challenge to manage without thought of its spiritual impact. Those with ADHD need the gospel and discipleship as much as those without it. Believers who have ADHD are in no way lesser. All who are in Christ, regardless of background or cultural distinction, are children of God through faith (Galatians 3:26–29\). The Holy Spirit indwells all who have trusted in Christ (Romans 8:9–17\). He helps believers know, love, and obey God. The Holy Spirit also provides comfort in our hardships (Romans 8:18–30\). All believers have access to God in [prayer](what-is-prayer.html) and are exhorted to pray regularly (Philippians 4:4–8; 1 Thessalonians 5:17; Hebrews 4:14–16\). Believers with ADHD are by no means alone! Not only do believers have the [indwelling Holy Spirit](indwelling-of-the-Holy-Spirit.html) and access to God in prayer, but they have the Word of God to help them know who He is, who they are, and how they are to live. Studying the Bible is important for all who want to grow in Christ. Too, we have one another. Every believer, regardless of any earthly distinctive, needs the body of Christ (Hebrews 10:19–25; Ephesians 4:11–16\). The call for all believers is summed up in the command to love God and love others (Matthew 22:37–40; John 13:34–35; 1 John 3:23; 4:13–21\). Scripture assigns us the duty “to offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God—this is your true and proper worship. Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will” (Romans 12:1–2\). We are to put our sin to death (Matthew 5:29–30; Colossians 3:5–8\) and participate in the Spirit’s work of sanctification (Philippians 2:12–13; 1 Peter 1:3–25\). We all have [spiritual gifts](purpose-of-spiritual-gifts.html) to use for the benefit of the church (1 Corinthians 12\). We are all called to live lives that reflect the reality of who God is (Colossians 3; Ephesians 4: Galatians 5\). How we follow God’s call will look different in each believer. There are a multitude of methods to love others with the [agape](agape-love.html) love of God (1 Corinthians 13\). Speaking truth can be done in many ways (Ephesians 4:15, 29\). The way of Christ is open to all who are in Him; a diagnosis of ADHD will not change that. Some think of ADHD as only a barrier and neglect to see the unique advantages it can bring. But consider the ways a higher energy level might lend itself to more easily inviting others into the faith. Those with ADHD might be more apt to ask questions that prove helpful to others. There is creativity in developing effective coping strategies, and that process might help those with ADHD think outside the box or more readily adapt to other cultures. Having experienced hardships themselves, those with ADHD may be more naturally empathetic and gracious (2 Corinthians 1:3–7\). As believers, we should bear with one another in love (Colossians 3:13–14; Ephesians 4:32\) and help carry one another’s burdens (Galatians 6:2\). Managing ADHD can feel exhausting, discouraging, and lonely. Believers can come alongside one another to help ease the burdens, speak truth, and encourage one another to press on. We should all be careful not to put a stumbling block before others with our words, expectations, or behaviors (Ephesians 6:4; Romans 14\). We do well to follow Paul’s instructions to “encourage the disheartened, help the weak, be patient with everyone” (1 Thessalonians 5:14\). Resources: [www.mayoclinic.org/diseases\-conditions/adhd/symptoms\-causes/syc\-20350889](https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/adhd/symptoms-causes/syc-20350889) [www.mayoclinic.org/diseases\-conditions/adult\-adhd/symptoms\-causes/syc\-20350878](https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/adult-adhd/symptoms-causes/syc-20350878) [mcpress.mayoclinic.org/parenting/busting\-adhd\-myths\-helping\-parents\-better\-understand\-what\-adhd\-can\-look\-like\-and\-how\-it\-can\-be\-managed/](https://mcpress.mayoclinic.org/parenting/busting-adhd-myths-helping-parents-better-understand-what-adhd-can-look-like-and-how-it-can-be-managed/) [www.health.harvard.edu/blog/5\-things\-parents\-and\-teachers\-need\-to\-know\-about\-adhd\-2017102712643](https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/5-things-parents-and-teachers-need-to-know-about-adhd-2017102712643) [www.hopkinsguides.com/hopkins/view/Johns\_Hopkins\_Psychiatry\_Guide/787036/all/Attention\_Deficit\_\_\_Hyperactivity\_Disorder](https://www.hopkinsguides.com/hopkins/view/Johns_Hopkins_Psychiatry_Guide/787036/all/Attention_Deficit___Hyperactivity_Disorder)

Subsets and Splits

Top Long Responses

Returns the prompts and responses where the response length falls within a specified range, ordered by decreasing length, which provides basic insight into the distribution of response lengths.