prompt
stringlengths 0
158
| response
stringlengths 14
40.2k
|
|---|---|
Why are all Christians hypocrites? |
Answer
Perhaps no accusation is more provocative than that of “hypocrite.” Unfortunately, some feel justified in their view that all Christians are hypocrites. The term “hypocrite” enjoys a rich heritage in the English language. The term comes to us via the Latin hypocrisies meaning “play\-acting, pretense.” Further back, the word occurs in both classical and New Testament Greek and has the very same idea—to play a part, pretend.
This is the way the Lord Jesus employed the term. For example, when Christ taught the significance of prayer, fasting, and alms\-giving for kingdom people, He discouraged us from following the examples of those who are hypocrites (Matthew 6:2, 5, 16\). By making long public prayers, employing extreme measures to ensure others noticed their fasts, and parading their gifts to the Temple and the poor, they revealed only an outward attachment to the Lord. While the Pharisees performed well their dramatic role as public examples of religious virtue, they failed miserably in the inner world of the heart where true virtue resides (Matthew 23:13\-33; Mark 7:20\-23\).
Jesus never called His disciples hypocrites. That name was given only to misguided religious zealots. Rather, He called His own “followers,” “babes,” “sheep,” and His “church.” In addition, there is a warning in the New Testament about the sin of hypocrisy (1 Peter 2:1\), which Peter calls “insincerity.” Also, two blatant examples of hypocrisy are recorded in the church. In Acts 5:1\-10, two disciples are exposed for pretending to be more generous than they were. The consequence was severe. And, of all people, Peter is charged with leading a group of hypocrites in their treatment of Gentile believers (Galatians 2:13\).
From the New Testament teaching, then, we may draw at least two conclusions. First, hypocrites do exist among professing Christians. They were present in the beginning, and, according to Jesus’ parable of the tares and wheat, they will certainly exist until the end of the age (Matthew 13:18\-30\). In addition, if even an apostle may be guilty of hypocrisy, there is no reason to believe “ordinary” Christians will be free from it. We must always be on our guard that we do not fall into the very same temptations (1 Corinthians 10:12\).
Of course, not everyone who claims to be a Christian is truly a Christian. Perhaps all or most of the famous hypocrites among Christians were in fact pretenders and deceivers. To this day, prominent Christian leaders have fallen into terrible sins. Financial and sexual scandals sometimes seem to plague the Christian community. However, instead of taking the actions of a few and using them to denigrate the whole community of Christians, we need to ask whether all those who claim to be Christians really are. Numerous biblical passages confirm that those who truly belong to Christ will exhibit the fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22\-23\). Jesus’ parable of the seed and the soils in Matthew 13 makes it clear that not all professions of faith in Him are genuine. Sadly, many who profess to belong to Him will be stunned one day to hear Him say to them, “I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!” (Matthew 7:23\).
Second, while it should not surprise us that people who pretend to be more holy than they are claim to be Christians, we cannot conclude that the church is made up almost entirely of hypocrites. One surely may concede that all of us who name the name of Jesus Christ remain sinners even after our sin is forgiven. That is, even though we are saved from sins’ eternal penalty (Romans 5:1; 6:23\), we are yet to be saved and delivered from the presence of sin in our lives (1 John 1:8\-9\), including the sin of hypocrisy. Through our living faith in the Lord Jesus, we continually overcome sin’s power until we are finally delivered (1 John 5:4\-5\).
All Christians fail to perfectly live up to the standard the Bible teaches. No Christian has ever been perfectly Christ\-like. However, there are many Christians who are genuinely seeking to live the Christian life and are relying more and more on the Holy Spirit to convict, change, and empower them. There have been multitudes of Christians who have lived their lives free from scandal. No Christian is perfect, but making a mistake and failing to reach perfection in this life is not the same thing as being a hypocrite.
|
Do we need to confess our sins to those we have sinned against? |
Answer
We know we are to confess our sins to God, but many Christians wonder whether we need to confess to those we have sinned against. Do we need to tell the person we’ve sinned against that we’re sorry? “Walking in the light” (1 John 1:7\) means that we are living in obedience to God’s commandments. In the same verse, we have references to forgiveness through Christ and “fellowship one with another.” So, there is a connection between having a “clean slate” and our relationship with other people.
Every sin is ultimately committed against God (Psalm 51:4\). The Bible consistently emphasizes our need to confess our sins to Him (Psalm 41:4; 130:4; Acts 8:22; 1 John 1:9\). As for the confession of our sins to people, the Bible gives no blanket command. We are told many times to confess our sins to the Lord, but the only direct command to confess to someone else is in the context of church elders praying on behalf of the sick (James 5:16\).
This does not mean that we are never to seek another person’s forgiveness. The Bible gives examples of confession to other people. One is Joseph’s brothers asking for his forgiveness in Genesis 50:17\-18\. And person\-to\-person confession is implied in such passages as Luke 17:3\-4; Ephesians 4:32; and Colossians 3:13\.
The principles here seem to be 1\) We should seek forgiveness from the Lord for every sin. He desires “truth in the inward parts” (Psalm 51:6\). 2\) If our relationship with the Lord is right, then our relationships with other people will fall in line. We will treat others graciously, with justice and honesty (Psalm 15\). To sin against someone and not attempt to make it right would be unthinkable. 3\) The extent of the apology for a sin should match the extent of the impact of the sin. In other words, we should seek forgiveness from whoever was directly involved in order to ensure healing.
For example, if a man looks with lust at a woman, he should immediately confess the sin to the Lord. It would not be needed or appropriate to confess that sin to the woman. That sin is between the man and the Lord. However, if a man breaks a promise, or does something that directly impacts the woman, he must confess to her and seek her forgiveness. If a sin involves a large number of people, such as a church, a man or woman must then extend the confession to the members of the church. So the confession and apology should match the impact. Those impacted by the sin should hear the confession.
While our forgiveness with God is not dependent on our confessing our sins to others and/or their forgiving us, God does call us to be honest and forthcoming with others regarding our failings, especially when our mistakes involve them. When we have offended, hurt, or sinned against others, we should seek to offer a sincere apology and confession and ask for forgiveness. Whether the forgiveness is granted is up to those who were confessed to. Our responsibility is to genuinely repent, confess the sin, and ask for forgiveness.
|
Who am I in Christ? |
Answer
According to 2 Corinthians 5:17, “If anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come!” There are two Greek words which are translated “new” in the Bible. The first, *neos*, refers to something that has just been made, but there are already many others in existence just like it. The word translated “new” in this verse is the word *kainos*, which means “something just made which is unlike anything else in existence.” In Christ, we are made an entirely new creation, just as God created the heavens and the earth originally—He made them out of nothing, and so He does with us. He does not merely clean up our old selves; He makes an entirely new self. When we are in Christ, we are “partakers of the divine nature” (2 Peter 1:4 KJV). God Himself, in the person of His Holy Spirit, takes up residence in our hearts. We are in Christ and He is in us.
In Christ, we are regenerated, renewed, and born again, and this new creation is spiritually minded, whereas the old nature is carnally minded. The new nature fellowships with God, obeys His will, and is devoted to His service. These are actions the old nature is incapable of doing or even desiring to do. The old nature is dead to the things of the Spirit and cannot revive itself. It is “dead in trespasses and sins” (Ephesians 2:1\) and can only be made alive by a supernatural awakening, which happens when we come to Christ and are indwelt by Him. Christ gives us a completely new and holy nature and an incorruptible life. Our old life, previously dead to God because of sin, is buried, and we are raised “to walk in newness of life” with Him (Romans 6:4\).
If we belong to Christ, we are united to Him and no longer slaves to sin (Romans 6:5\-6\); we are made alive with Him (Ephesians 2:5\); we are conformed to His image (Romans 8:29\); we are free from condemnation and walking not according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit (Romans 8:1\); and we are part of the body of Christ with other believers (Romans 12:5\). The believer now possesses a new heart (Ezekiel 11:19\) and has been blessed “with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus” (Ephesians 1:3\).
We might wonder why we so often do not live in the manner described, even though we have given our lives to Christ and are sure of our salvation. This is because our new natures are residing in our old fleshly bodies, and these two are at war with one another. The old nature is dead, but the new nature still has to battle the old “tent” in which it dwells. Evil and sin are still present, but the believer now sees them in a new perspective and they no longer control him as they once did. In Christ, we can now choose to resist sin, whereas the old nature could not. Now we have the choice to either feed the new nature through the Word, prayer, and obedience, or to feed the flesh by neglecting those things.
When we are in Christ, “we are more than conquerors through Him that loved us” (Romans 8:37\) and can rejoice in our Savior, who makes all things possible (Philippians 4:13\). In Christ we are loved, forgiven, and secure. In Christ we are adopted, justified, redeemed, reconciled, and chosen. In Christ we are victorious, filled with joy and peace, and granted true meaning in life. What a wonderful Savior is Christ!
|
What is the Catholic sacrament of Holy Eucharist? |
Answer
For Catholics, the Holy Eucharist / Catholic Mass is considered the most important and highest form of prayer. In fact, attending Mass is an obligation, under penalty of mortal sin, each Sunday and on certain other Holy Days of Obligation. The Mass is divided into two sections, the Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Eucharist. The Liturgy of the Word consists of two readings (one from the Old Testament and one from the New Testament), the Responsorial Psalm, the Gospel reading, the homily (or sermon), and general intercessions (also called petitions).
The center of the Mass is its second part, the Liturgy of the Holy Eucharist. During this time, Catholics share in the body and blood of Jesus in the form of the bread and wine passed out to the congregation. According to the Bible, this is done in remembrance of Christ (1 Corinthians 11:23\-25; cf. Luke 22:18\-20 and Matthew 26:26\-28\). However, according to the *Catechism of the Catholic Church*, paragraph 1366, "The Eucharist is thus a sacrifice because it re\-presents (makes present) the sacrifice of the cross, because it is its memorial and because it applies its fruit." The catechism continues in paragraph 1367:
The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Holy Eucharist are one single sacrifice: "The victim is one and the same: the same now offers through the ministry of priests, who then offered himself on the cross; only the manner of offering is different." "And since in this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross is contained and is offered in an unbloody manner . . . this sacrifice is truly propitiatory."
In the book of Malachi, the prophet predicts elimination of the old sacrificial system and the institution of a new sacrifice: "I have no pleasure in you, says the Lord of hosts, and I will not accept an offering from your hand. For from the rising of the sun to its setting my name will be great among the nations, and in every place incense will be offered to my name, and a pure offering. For my name will be great among the nations, says the Lord of hosts" (Malachi 1:10\-11\). This means that God will one day be glorified among the Gentiles, who will make pure offerings to Him in all places. The Catholics see this as the Eucharist. However, the apostle Paul seems to have a different slant on it: "I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship" (Romans 12:1\). The Eucharist can only be offered in select places: churches consecrated and blessed according to Catholic canon law. The idea of offering our bodies as living sacrifices fits better with the language of the prediction, which says that the sacrifices will be offered "in every place."
The Roman Catholic Church believes that the bread and wine of the Holy Eucharist become the actual body and blood of Jesus. They attempt to support their system of thought with passages such as John 6:32\-58; Matthew 26:26; Luke 22:17\-23; and 1 Corinthians 11:24\-25\. In A.D. 1551, the Counsel of Trent officially stated, "By the consecration of the bread and wine there takes place a change of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of his blood. This change the holy Catholic Church has fittingly and properly called transubstantiation" (Session XIII, chapter IV; cf. canon II). By sharing in the Eucharistic meal, the Church teaches that Catholics are fulfilling John 6:53: "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you."
What does that really mean? Jesus goes on to say that "it is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is of no avail. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life" (John 6:63\-64\). So, if "the flesh is of no avail," why would we have to eat Jesus’ flesh in order to have eternal life? It does not make sense, until Jesus tells us that the words He speaks are "spirit." Jesus is saying that this is not a literal teaching, but a spiritual one. The language ties in perfectly with the aforementioned statement of the apostle Paul: "Present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship" (Romans 12:1\).
In Jewish thought, bread was equated with the Torah, and "eating of it" was reading and understanding the covenant of God (cf. Deuteronomy 8:3\). For example, the apocryphal book of Sirach states, "'He who eats of me will hunger still, he who drinks of me will thirst for more; he who obeys me will not be put to shame, he who serves me will never fail.' All this is true of the book of Most High’s covenant, the law which Moses commanded us as an inheritance for the community of Jacob" (Sirach 24:20\-22\). Quoting from Sirach here is not endorsing it as Scripture; it only serves to illustrate how the Jewish people thought of Mosaic Law. It is important to understand the equating of bread with the Torah to appreciate Jesus’ real point.
In [John 6](Jesus-eat-flesh-drink-blood.html), Jesus is actually telling the crowd that He is superior to the Torah (cf. John 6:49\-51\) and the entire Mosaic system of Law. The passage from Sirach states that those who eat of the Law will "hunger still" and "thirst for more"; this language is mirrored by Jesus when He says, "He who comes to Me will never be hungry, he who believes in Me will never be thirsty" (John 6:35\). Jesus is not commanding people to literally eat His flesh and drink His blood. He is telling them the core of all Christian doctrine: belief in Jesus Himself ("The work of God is this: to **believe** in the One He has sent," John 6:29, emphasis added). Therefore, the Catholic interpretation of John 6 is unbiblical.
Second, there is a very clear analogy in John 6 to the days of Moses and the eating of manna. In the days of Moses, manna was God’s provision for food for the Israelites as they wandered in the wilderness. In John 6, however, Jesus claimed to be the true manna, the bread of heaven. With this statement Jesus claimed to be God’s full provision for salvation. Manna was God’s provision of deliverance from starvation. Jesus is God’s provision of deliverance from damnation. Just as the manna had to be consumed to preserve the lives of the Israelites, so Jesus has to be consumed (fully received by faith) for salvation to be received.
It is very clear that Jesus referred to Himself as the Bread of Life and encouraged His followers to eat of His flesh in John 6\. But we do not need to conclude that Jesus was teaching what the Catholics have referred to as transubstantiation. The Lord’s Supper / Christian communion / Holy Eucharist had not been instituted yet. Jesus did not institute the Holy Eucharist / Mass / Lord’s Supper until John chapter 13\. Therefore, to read the Lord’s Supper into John 6 is unwarranted. As suggested above, it is best to understand this passage in light of coming to Jesus, in faith, for salvation. When we receive Him as Savior, placing our full trust in Him, we are “consuming His flesh” and “drinking His blood.” His body was broken (at His death) and His blood was shed to provide for our salvation. 1 Corinthians 11:26, “For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes.”
Whether the Catholic definition of Holy Eucharist is a "re\-sacrifice" of Christ, or a "re\-offering" of Christ’s sacrifice, or a “re\-presentation” of Christ’s sacrifice, the concept is unbiblical. Christ does not need to be re\-sacrificed. Christ’s sacrifice does not need to be re\-offered or re\-presented. Hebrews 7:27 declares, "Unlike the other high priests, He (Jesus) does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins ONCE for all when He offered Himself." Similarly, 1 Peter 3:18 exclaims, "For Christ died for sins ONCE for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God..." Christ’s once\-for\-all death on the cross was sufficient to atone for all of our sins (1 John 2:2\). Therefore, Christ’s sacrifice does not need to be re\-offered. Instead, Christ’s sacrifice is to be received by faith (John 1:12; 3:16\). Eating Christ’s flesh and drinking His blood are symbols of fully receiving His sacrifice on our behalf, by grace through faith.
|
What does it mean that God is infinite? |
Answer
The infinite nature of God simply means that God exists outside of and is not limited by time or space. *Infinite* simply means “without limits.” When we refer to God as "infinite," we generally refer to Him with terms like omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence.
[Omniscience](God-omniscient.html) means that God is all\-knowing or that He has unlimited knowledge. His infinite knowledge is what qualifies Him as sovereign ruler and judge over all things. Not only does God know everything that will happen, but He also knows all things that could have possibly happened. Nothing takes God by surprise, and no one can hide sin from Him. There are many verses in the Bible where God reveals this aspect of His nature. One such verse is 1 John 3:20: “...God is greater than our heart, and knows all things.”
[Omnipotence](God-omnipotent.html) means that God is all\-powerful or that He has unlimited power. Having all power is significant because it establishes God’s ability to carry out His sovereign will. Because God is omnipotent and has infinite power, nothing can stop His decreed will from happening, and nothing can thwart or stop His divine purposes from being fulfilled. There are many verses in the Bible where God reveals this aspect of His nature. One such verse is Psalm 115:3: “But our God is in the heavens; He does whatever He pleases.” Or when answering His disciples' question “Then who can be saved?” (Matthew 19:25\), Jesus says, “With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible” (Matthew 19:26\).
[Omnipresence](God-omnipresent.html) means that God is always present. There is no place that you could go to escape God’s presence. God is not limited by time or space. He is present at every point of time and space. God’s infinite presence is significant because it establishes that God is eternal. God has always existed and will always exist. Before time began, God was. Before the world or even matter itself was created, God was. He has no beginning or end, and there was never a time He did not exist, nor will there be a time when He ceases to exist. Again, many verses in the Bible reveal this aspect of God’s nature to us, and one of them is Psalm 139:7\-10: “Where can I go from Thy Spirit? Or where can I flee from Thy presence? If I ascend to heaven, Thou art there; If I make my bed in Sheol, behold, Thou art there. If I take the wings of the dawn, If I dwell in the remotest part of the sea, Even there Thy hand will lead me, And Thy right hand will lay hold of me.”
Because God is infinite, He is also said to be transcendent, which simply means that God is exceedingly far above creation and is both greater than creation and independent of it. What this means is that God is so infinitely above and beyond us and our ability to fully comprehend that, had He not revealed Himself, we would not know or understand what He is like. But, thankfully, God has not left us ignorant about Himself. Instead, He has revealed Himself to us through both general revelation (creation and our conscience) and special revelation (the written Word of God, the Bible, and the living Word of God, Jesus Christ). Therefore, we can know God, and we can know how to be reconciled to Him and how to live according to His will. Despite the fact that we are finite and God is infinite, we can know and understand God as He has revealed Himself to us.
|
What does it mean that women will be "saved" through childbearing (1 Timothy 2:15)? |
Answer
This verse has been misinterpreted to mean that any woman who bears a child is automatically saved by virtue of the childbearing. First Timothy 2:15 is the conclusion of Paul’s teaching concerning the roles of men and women in the church which he began in verse 11\. It is a notoriously difficult verse with a myriad of potential interpretations. “But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.” As always, the immediate context should serve in determining the precise meaning of a text. The preceding verse speaks of Eve’s deception at the Fall and the subsequent consequences.
In Genesis 3:16, God curses Eve with, “I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing; with pain you will give birth to children.” This may seem to indicate that Paul meant that women would be physically preserved through the pain of childbirth. However, the verb used here in 1 Timothy 2:15 (*soqhsetai*) always carries the meaning of spiritual salvation in Paul’s writings. Further, Christian women still experience pain in childbirth, and sometimes die as a result of the childbearing process. If physical deliverance is the meaning of verse 15, then that would indicate that Christian women who die in childbirth perhaps did not “continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.”
A second option would be that women are spiritually saved through childbearing. This obviously cannot be the case, for it would contradict the consistent message of salvation by grace through faith in Christ (Ephesians 2:8–9\). A third possibility is that the word “childbearing” (*teknogonias*) refers to the birth of Christ, potentially a link to Genesis 3:15 and the promise of a Seed to come through the woman. This is unlikely, considering Paul nowhere else refers to the birth of Christ in this manner. A reference to the incarnation seems dubious, considering the context and the subject at hand.
The most likely interpretation that takes into account the immediate context is that, rather than abandoning their intended roles by demanding teaching and authoritative positions in the church, women will find true fulfillment through childbearing. Paul is saying God calls women to be faithful, helpful wives, raising children to love and worship God and managing the household wisely (1 Timothy 5:14; Titus 2:3–5\). While this view is not without its difficulties, it appears to harmonize best with the context and with the remainder of Scripture.
|
Why does God allow evil? |
Answer
The Bible describes God as holy (Isaiah 6:3\), righteous (Psalm 7:11\), just (Deuteronomy 32:4\), and sovereign (Daniel 4:17\-25\). These attributes tell us the following about God: (1\) God is capable of preventing evil, and (2\) God desires to rid the universe of evil. So, if both of these are true, why does God allow evil? If God has the power to prevent evil and desires to prevent evil, why does He still allow evil? Perhaps a practical way to look at this question would be to consider some alternative ways people might have God run the world:
1\) God could change everyone’s personality so that they cannot sin. This would also mean that we would not have a free will. We would not be able to choose right or wrong because we would be “programmed” to only do right. Had God chosen to do this, there would be no meaningful relationships between Him and His creation.
Instead, God made Adam and Eve innocent but with the ability to choose good or evil. Because of this, they could respond to His love and trust Him or choose to disobey. They chose to disobey. Because we live in a real world where we can choose our actions but not their consequences, their sin affected those who came after them (us). Similarly, our decisions to sin have an impact on us and those around us and those who will come after us.
2\) God could compensate for people’s evil actions through supernatural intervention 100 percent of the time. God would stop a drunk driver from causing an automobile accident. God would stop a lazy construction worker from doing a substandard job on a house that would later cause grief to the homeowners. God would stop a father who is addicted to drugs or alcohol from doing any harm to his wife, children, or extended family. God would stop gunmen from robbing convenience stores. God would stop high school bullies from tormenting the brainy kids. God would stop thieves from shoplifting. And, yes, God would stop terrorists from flying airplanes into buildings.
While this solution sounds attractive, it would lose its attractiveness as soon as God’s intervention infringed on something we wanted to do. We want God to prevent horribly evil actions, but we are willing to let “lesser\-evil” actions slide—not realizing that those “lesser\-evil” actions are what usually lead to the “greater\-evil” actions. Should God only stop actual sexual affairs, or should He also block our access to pornography or end any inappropriate, but not yet sexual, relationships? Should God stop “true” thieves, or should He also stop us from cheating on our taxes? Should God only stop murder, or should He also stop the “lesser\-evil” actions done to people that lead them to commit murder? Should God only stop acts of terrorism, or should He also stop the indoctrination that transformed a person into a terrorist?
3\) Another choice would be for God to judge and remove those who choose to commit evil acts. The problem with this possibility is that there would be no one left, for God would have to remove us all. We all sin and commit evil acts (Romans 3:23; Ecclesiastes 7:20; 1 John 1:8\). While some people are more evil than others, where would God draw the line? Ultimately, all evil causes harm to others.
Instead of these options, God has chosen to create a “real” world in which real choices have real consequences. In this real world of ours, our actions affect others. Because of Adam’s choice to sin, the world now lives under the curse, and we are all born with a sin nature (Romans 5:12\). There will one day come a time when God will judge the sin in this world and make all things new, but He is purposely “delaying” in order to allow more time for people to repent so that He will not need to condemn them (2 Peter 3:9\). Until then, He **IS** concerned about evil. When He gave the Old Testament Law, one of His goals was to discourage and punish evil. Throughout history, He has judged nations and rulers who disregard justice and pursue evil. Likewise, in the New Testament, God states that it is the government’s responsibility to provide justice in order to protect the innocent from evil (Romans 13\). He also promises severe consequences for those who commit evil acts, especially against the "innocent" (Mark 9:36\-42\).
In summary, we live in a real world where our good and evil actions have direct consequences and indirect consequences upon us and those around us. God’s desire is that for all of our sakes we would obey Him that it might be well with us (Deuteronomy 5:29\). Instead, what happens is that we choose our own way, and then we blame God for not doing anything about it. Such is the heart of sinful man. But Jesus came to change men’s hearts through the power of the Holy Spirit, and He does this for those who will turn from evil and call on Him to save them from their sin and its consequences (2 Corinthians 5:17\). God does prevent and restrain some acts of evil. This world would be **MUCH WORSE** were God not restraining evil. At the same time, God has given us the ability to choose good and evil, and when we choose evil, He allows us, and those around us, to suffer the consequences of evil. Rather than [blaming God](blame-God.html) and questioning God on why He does not prevent all evil, we should be about the business of proclaiming the cure for evil and its consequences—Jesus Christ!
|
What is the meaning of the Parable of the Unforgiving / Unmerciful Servant? |
Answer
We find the Parable of the Unforgiving Servant only in Matthew 18:23\-35\. The Apostle Peter had asked how many times one should forgive, "Till seven times?" and Jesus answered, "Not seven times but seventy times seven" (Matthew 18:21\-22\). The context of this passage is Jesus teaching His disciples about the "kingdom of heaven." We can take some very important principles from this parable and apply them to our lives today.
The servant whose lord forgave him much, ten thousand talents, equivalent to several millions of dollars, was unwilling to forgive another servant who owed him a hundred denarii. A denarius was a day’s wage and was worth approximately sixteen cents. Therefore, compared to what the first servant was forgiven, this was a very small amount. The principle here is, "the one forgiven much should forgive much." In other words, the principle of forgiveness is that grace or forgiveness to another is without limit. The disciples are not to count the number of times they forgive. Rather, as the parable teaches, they are to forgive much because God has forgiven much.
In the Parable of the Unforgiving Servant, Jesus is presenting a new principle that is similar to the basis of the forgiveness command for believers found in Ephesians 4:32, "And be ye kind to one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ’s sake hath forgiven you." Jesus is teaching His disciples pre\-cross, and therefore in the pre\-church age, but the basis for forgiveness is the same. Because God has forgiven us, we are to forgive each other. Therefore, because we have received much grace, "while we were yet sinners Christ died for us" (Romans 5:8\), we are commanded to give that same grace to others. In the Parable of the Unforgiving Servant, the first servant’s debt was forgiven, and he was not required to repay until his unforgiving nature was discovered. In contrast, our sin debt was paid in full by Christ and is the only basis for God’s forgiveness. We cannot repay our debt to God or earn our salvation. It is a gift of grace (Ephesians 2:8\-9\).
Therefore, in the Parable of the Unforgiving / Unmerciful / Unjust Servant, Jesus is teaching His disciples, and us by extension, that forgiveness should be in like proportion to the amount forgiven. The first servant had been forgiven all, and he then should have forgiven all. In like manner, a child of God by faith through Christ has had all sins forgiven. Therefore, when someone offends or sins against us we should be willing to forgive him from a heart of gratitude for the grace to which we ourselves are debtors.
|
What is the meaning of the Parable of the Good Samaritan? |
Answer
The Parable of the Good Samaritan is precipitated by and in answer to a question posed to Jesus by a lawyer. In this case the lawyer would have been an expert in the Mosaic Law and not a court lawyer of today. The lawyer’s question was, “Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?" (Luke 10:25\). This question provided Jesus with an opportunity to define what His disciples’ relationship should be to their neighbors. The text says that the scribe (lawyer) had put the question to Jesus as a test, but the text does not indicate that there was hostility in the question. He could have simply been seeking information. The wording of the question does, however, give us some insight into where the scribe’s heart was spiritually. He was making the assumption that man must do something to obtain eternal life. Although this could have been an opportunity for Jesus to discuss salvation issues, He chose a different course and focuses on our relationships and what it means to love.
Jesus answers the question using what is called the [Socratic method](Socratic-Method.html); i.e., answering a question with a question: “He said to him, ‘What is written in the law? What is your reading of it?’" (Luke 10:26\). By referring to the Law, Jesus is directing the man to an authority they both would accept as truth, the Old Testament. In essence, He is asking the scribe, what does Scripture say about this and how does he interpret it? Jesus thus avoids an argument and puts Himself in the position of evaluating the scribe’s answer instead of the scribe evaluating His answer. This directs the discussion towards Jesus’ intended lesson. The scribe answers Jesus’ question by quoting Deuteronomy 6:5 and Leviticus 19:18\. This is virtually the same answer that Jesus had given to the same question in Matthew 22 and Mark 12\.
In verse 28, Jesus affirms that the lawyer’s answer is correct. Jesus’ reply tells the scribe that he has given an orthodox (scripturally proper) answer, but then goes on in verse 28 to tell him that this kind of love requires more than an emotional feeling; it would also include orthodox practice; he would need to “practice what he preached.” The scribe was an educated man and realized that he could not possibly keep that law, nor would he have necessarily wanted to. There would always be people in his life that he could not love. Thus, he tries to limit the law’s command by limiting its parameters and asked the question “who is my neighbor?” The word “neighbor” in the Greek means “someone who is near,” and in the Hebrew it means “someone that you have an association with.” This interprets the word in a limited sense, referring to a fellow Jew and would have excluded [Samaritans](what-is-a-Samaritan.html), Romans, and other foreigners. Jesus then gives the parable of the Good Samaritan to correct the false understanding that the scribe had of who his neighbor is, and what his duty is to his neighbor.
The Parable of the Good Samaritan tells the story of a man traveling from Jerusalem to Jericho, and while on the way he is robbed of everything he had, including his clothing, and is beaten to within an inch of his life. That road was treacherously winding and was a favorite hideout of robbers and thieves. The next character Jesus introduces into His story is a priest. He spends no time describing the priest and only tells of how he showed no love or compassion for the man by failing to help him and passing on the other side of the road so as not to get involved. If there was anyone who would have known God’s law of love, it would have been the priest. By nature of his position, he was to be a person of compassion, desiring to help others. Unfortunately, “love” was not a word for him that required action on the behalf of someone else. The next person to pass by in the Parable of the Good Samaritan is a Levite, and he does exactly what the priest did: he passes by without showing any compassion. Again, he would have known the law, but he also failed to show the injured man compassion.
The next person to come by is the Samaritan, the one least likely to have shown compassion for the man. Samaritans were considered a low class of people by the Jews since they had intermarried with non\-Jews and did not keep all the law. Therefore, Jews would have nothing to do with them. We do not know if the injured man was a Jew or Gentile, but it made no difference to the Samaritan; he did not consider the man’s race or religion. The “Good Samaritan” saw only a person in dire need of assistance, and assist him he did, above and beyond the minimum required. He dresses the man’s wounds with wine (to disinfect) and oil (to sooth the pain). He puts the man on his animal and takes him to an inn for a time of healing and pays the innkeeper with his own money. He then goes beyond common decency and tells the innkeeper to take good care of the man, and he would pay for any extra expenses on his return trip. The Samaritan saw his neighbor as anyone who was in need.
Because the good man was a Samaritan, Jesus is drawing a strong contrast between those who knew the law and those who actually followed the law in their lifestyle and conduct. Jesus now asks the lawyer if he can apply the lesson to his own life with the question “So which of these three do you think was neighbor to him who fell among the thieves?" (Luke 10:36\). Once again, the lawyer’s answer is telling of his personal hardness of heart. He cannot bring himself to say the word “Samaritan”; he refers to the “good man” as “he who showed mercy.” His hate for the Samaritans (his neighbors) was so strong that he couldn’t even refer to them in a proper way. Jesus then tells the lawyer to “go and do likewise,” meaning that he should start living what the law tells him to do.
By ending the encounter in this manner, Jesus is telling us to follow the Samaritan’s example in our own conduct; i.e., we are to show compassion and love for those we encounter in our everyday activities. We are to love others (vs. 27\) regardless of their race or religion; the criterion is need. If they need and we have the supply, then we are to give generously and freely, without expectation of return. This is an impossible obligation for the lawyer, and for us. We cannot always keep the law because of our human condition; our heart and desires are mostly of self and selfishness. When left to our own, we do the wrong thing, failing to meet the law. We can hope that the lawyer saw this and came to the realization that there was nothing he could do to justify himself, that he needed a personal savior to atone for his lack of ability to save himself from his sins. Thus, the lessons of the Parable of the Good Samaritan are three\-fold: (1\) we are to set aside our prejudice and show love and compassion for others. (2\) Our neighbor is anyone we encounter; we are all creatures of the creator and we are to love all of mankind as Jesus has taught. (3\) Keeping the law in its entirety with the intent to save ourselves is an impossible task; we need a savior, and this is Jesus.
There is another possible way to interpret the Parable of the Good Samaritan, and that is as a metaphor. In this interpretation the injured man is all men in their fallen condition of sin. The robbers are Satan attacking man with the intent of destroying their relationship with God. The lawyer is mankind without the true understanding of God and His Word. The priest is religion in an apostate condition. The Levite is legalism that instills prejudice into the hearts of believers. The Samaritan is Jesus who provides the way to spiritual health. Although this interpretation teaches good lessons, and the parallels between Jesus and the Samaritan are striking, this understanding draws attention to Jesus that does not appear to be intended in the text. Therefore, we must conclude that the teaching of the Parable of the Good Samaritan is simply a lesson on what it means to love one’s neighbor.
|
What is the meaning of the Parable of the Rich Fool? |
Answer
The Parable of the Rich Fool can be found in Luke 12:13–21\. The key to understanding this parable is in verse 15 (and later summarized in verse 21\). Luke 12:15 says, “Take care, and be on your guard against all covetousness, for one’s life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions.” Jesus says this to the man who asked Him to arbitrate between him and his brother. In ancient times, the firstborn was guaranteed a double portion of the family inheritance. More than likely, the brother who was addressing Jesus was not the firstborn and was asking for an equal share of the inheritance. Jesus refuses to arbitrate their dispute and gets to the heart of the matter: Covetousness! Jesus warns this person, and all within earshot, that our lives are not to be about gathering wealth. Life is so much more than the “abundance of possessions.”
Jesus proceeds to tell the man the Parable of the Rich Fool. This person was materially blessed by God; his land “produced plentifully” (verse 16\). As God continued to bless the man, instead of using his increase to further the will of God, all he was interested in was managing his increase and accumulating his growing wealth. So the man builds larger barns in place of the existing ones and starts planning an early retirement. Unbeknownst to him, this was his last night on planet earth. Jesus then closes the story by saying, “So is the one who lays up treasure for himself and is not rich toward God.”
So the point of the Parable of the Rich Fool is twofold. First, we are not to devote our lives to the gathering and accumulation of wealth. There is an interesting point made in the parable. God says to the man in the story, “And the things you have prepared, whose will they be?” This echoes the thought expressed in Ecclesiastes 2:18 (“I hated all my toil in which I toil under the sun, seeing that I must leave it to the man who will come after me”). You see it all the time in people who are singularly devoted to the accumulation of wealth. What happens to all that wealth when they die? It gets left behind to others who didn’t earn it and won’t appreciate it. Furthermore, if money is your master, that means God is not (Matthew 6:24\).
The second point of the Parable of the Rich Fool is the fact that we are not blessed by God to hoard our wealth to ourselves. We are blessed to be a blessing in the lives of others, and we are blessed to build the kingdom of God. The Bible says if our riches increase, we are not to set our hearts upon them (Psalm 62:10\). The Bible also says there is one who gives freely and grows all the richer (Proverbs 11:24\). Finally, the Bible says we are to honor God with the first fruits of our increase (Proverbs 3:9–10\). The point is clear; if we honor God with what He has given us, He will bless with more so that we can honor Him with more. There is a passage in 2 Corinthians that summarizes this aptly (2 Corinthians 9:6–15\). In that passage Paul says, “And God is able to provide you with every blessing in abundance, so that having all contentment in all things at all times, you may abound in every good work.” We are blessed by God, so we can in turn “abound in every good work” and be a blessing in the lives of others. So, if God has blessed you with material wealth “set not your heart on it” and “be rich toward God.” That is the message of the Parable of the Rich Fool.
|
What is the meaning of the Parable of the Mustard Seed? |
Answer
As with all parables, the purpose of the Parable of the Mustard Seed is to teach a concept or “big idea” using various narrative elements or details that are common, easily recognized, and usually representational of something else. While the elements themselves do have importance, an overemphasis on the details or literal focus on an element usually leads to interpretive errors and missing the main point of the parable.
The Parable of the Mustard Seed is a short one: “The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed, which a man took and planted in his field. Though it is the smallest of all seeds, yet when it grows, it is the largest of garden plants and becomes a tree, so that the birds come and perch in its branches” (Matthew 13:31–32\).
One of the possible practical reasons that [Jesus used parables](Jesus-parables.html) such as this is that, by depicting concepts in word pictures, the message is not readily lost to changes in word usage, technology, cultural context, or the passage of time. Literal, detailed narratives are more susceptible to becoming archaic or obsolescent. Two thousand years later, the imagery is still vivid. We can still understand the concept of a growing seed. Jesus’ parables are brilliant in their simplicity. This storytelling approach also promotes practicing principles rather than inflexible adherence to laws.
The Parable of the Mustard Seed is contained in all three of the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew 13:31–32; Mark 4:30–32; Luke 13:18–19\). In this parable, Jesus predicts the amazing growth of the [kingdom of heaven](kingdom-of-God.html). The mustard seed is quite small, but it grows into a large shrub—up to ten feet in height—and Jesus says this is a picture of kingdom growth. The point of the Parable of the Mustard Seed is that something big and blessed—the kingdom of God—had humble beginnings. How significant could the short ministry of Christ be? He had but a handful of followers, He was a man of no rank and without means, and He lived in what everyone considered a backwater region of the world. The life and death of Christ did not catch the world’s attention any more than a mustard seed would lying on the ground by the road. But this was a work of God. What seemed inconsequential at first grew into a movement of worldwide influence, and no one could stop it (see Acts 5:38–39\). The influence of the kingdom in this world would be such that everyone associated with it would find a benefit—pictured as the birds perched on the branches of the mature mustard plant.
Elsewhere in Scripture, the kingdom of God is also pictured as a tree. A passage in Ezekiel, for example, parallels the Parable of the Mustard Seed in many ways. In this prophecy, the Lord God promises to plant a shoot “on a high and lofty mountain” (Ezekiel 17:22\). This small sprig “will produce branches and bear fruit and become a splendid cedar. Birds of every kind will nest in it; they will find shelter in the shade of its branches” (Ezekiel 17:23\). This messianic prophecy foretells the growth of Christ’s kingdom from very small beginnings to a sizable, sheltering place.
Some have wondered why, in the Parable of the Mustard Seed, Jesus calls the mustard seed the “smallest” of seeds and the mature mustard plant the “largest” of plants in the garden, when there were smaller seeds and larger plants. The answer is that Jesus is using rhetorical hyperbole—an exaggeration to make a point. He is not speaking botanically but proverbially. Jesus’ emphasis is on the change of size—from small to large—and the surprising nature of the growth.
The history of the church has shown Jesus’ Parable of the Mustard Seed to be true. The church has experienced an explosive rate of growth through the centuries. It is found worldwide and is a source of sustenance and shelter for all who seek its blessing. In spite of persecution and repeated attempts to stamp it out, the church has flourished. And it’s only a small picture of the ultimate manifestation of the kingdom of God, when [Jesus returns](when-Jesus-returns.html) to earth to rule and reign from Zion.
|
What is the meaning of the Parable of the Sower? |
Answer
The Parable of the Sower (also known as the Parable of the Four Soils) is found in Matthew 13:3\-9; Mark 4:2\-9; and Luke 8:4\-8\. After presenting this parable to the multitude, Jesus interprets it for His disciples in Matthew 13:18\-23; Mark 4:13\-20; and Luke 8:11\-15\.
The Parable of the Sower concerns a sower who scatters seed, which falls on four different types of ground. The hard ground “by the way side” prevents the seed from sprouting at all, and the seed becomes nothing more than bird food. The stony ground provides enough soil for the seeds to germinate and begin to grow, but because there is “no deepness of earth,” the plants do not take root and are soon withered in the sun. The thorny ground allows the seed to grow, but the competing thorns choke the life out of the beneficial plants. The good ground receives the seed and produces much fruit.
Jesus’ explanation of the Parable of the Sower highlights four different responses to the gospel. The seed is “the word of the kingdom.” The hard ground represents someone who is hardened by sin; he hears but does not understand the Word, and Satan plucks the message away, keeping the heart dull and preventing the Word from making an impression. The stony ground pictures a man who professes delight with the Word; however, his heart is not changed, and when trouble arises, his so\-called faith quickly disappears. The thorny ground depicts one who seems to receive the Word, but whose heart is full of riches, pleasures, and lusts; the things of this world take his time and attention away from the Word, and he ends up having no time for it. The good ground portrays the one who hears, understands, and receives the Word—and then allows the Word to accomplish its result in his life. The man represented by the “good ground” is the only one of the four who is truly saved, because salvation’s proof is fruit (Matthew 3:7\-8; 7:15\-20\).
To summarize the point of the Parable of the Sower: “A man’s reception of God’s Word is determined by the condition of his heart.” A secondary lesson would be “Salvation is more than a superficial, albeit joyful, hearing of the gospel. Someone who is truly saved will go on to prove it.” May our faith and our lives exemplify the "good soil" in the Parable of the Sower.
|
What is the meaning of the Parable of the Prodigal Son? |
Answer
The Parable of the Prodigal Son is found in Luke 15:11–32\. The character of the forgiving father, who remains constant throughout the story, is a picture of God. In telling the story, Jesus identifies Himself with God in His loving attitude toward the lost, symbolized by the younger son (the [tax collectors](Bible-tax-collectors.html) and sinners of Luke 15:1\). The elder brother represents the self\-righteous (the [Pharisees](Pharisees.html) and teachers of the law of Luke 15:2\).
The major theme of this parable is not so much the conversion of the sinner, as in the previous two parables of Luke 15, but rather the restoration of a believer into fellowship with the Father. In the first two parables, the owner went out to look for what was lost (Luke 15:1–10\), whereas in this story the father waits and watches eagerly for his son’s return. We see a progression through the three parables from the relationship of one in a hundred (Luke 15:1–7\), to one in ten (Luke 15:8–10\), to one in one (Luke 15:11–32\), demonstrating God’s love for each individual and His personal attentiveness toward all humanity. We see in this story the graciousness of the father overshadowing the sinfulness of the son, as it is the memory of the father’s goodness that brings the prodigal son to repentance (Romans 2:4\).
Jesus sets the scene for the Parable of the Prodigal Son in Luke 15:11: “There was a man who had two sons.”
**The Younger Son**
In Luke 15:12, the younger son asks his father for his share of his estate, which would have been half of what his older brother would receive (see Deuteronomy 21:17\). In other words, the younger son asked for 1/3 of the estate. Though it was perfectly within his rights to ask, it was not a loving thing to do, as it implied that he wished his father dead. Instead of rebuking his son, the father patiently grants him his request. This is a picture of God letting a sinner go his own way (Deuteronomy 30:19\).
Like the prodigal son, we all possess a foolish ambition to be independent, which is at the root of the sinner persisting in his sin (Genesis 3:6; Romans 1:28\). A sinful state is a departure and distance from God (Romans 1:21\). A sinful state is also a place of constant discontent. In Luke 12:15 Jesus says, “Watch out! Be on your guard against all kinds of greed; a man’s life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions.” The younger son in the parable learned the hard way that covetousness leads to a life of dissatisfaction and disappointment. He also learned that the most valuable things in life are the things we cannot buy or replace.
In Luke 15:13 the younger son travels to a distant country. It is evident from his previous actions that he had already made that journey in his heart, and the physical departure was a display of his willful disobedience to all the goodness his father had offered (Proverbs 27:19; Matthew 6:21; 12:34\). In the foreign land, the prodigal squanders all his inheritance on selfish, shallow fulfillment, losing everything. His financial disaster is followed by a natural disaster in the form of a famine, which he failed to plan for. At this point he hires himself out to a Gentile and finds himself [feeding pigs](animals-clean-unclean.html), a detestable job to the Jewish people (Leviticus 11:7\). Needless to say, the prodigal must have been incredibly desperate to willingly take such a loathsome position. He was paid so little and grew so hungry that he longed to eat the pig’s food. To top it off, he could find no mercy among the people he had chosen as his own: “No one gave him anything” (verse 16\). Apparently, once his wealth was gone, so were his friends. Even the unclean animals were better off than he was at that point.
The prodigal son toiling in the pig pen is a picture of the lost sinner or a rebellious Christian who has returned to a life of sin (2 Peter 2:19–21\). The results of sin are never pretty (James 1:14–15\).
The prodigal son begins to reflect on his miserable condition, and “he came to his senses” (Luke 15:17\). He realizes that even his father’s servants have it better. His painful circumstances help him to see his father in a new light. Hope begins to dawn in his heart (Psalm 147:11; Isaiah 40:30–31; 1 Timothy 4:10\).
The prodigal’s realization is reflective of the sinner’s discovery that, apart from God, there is no hope (Ephesians 2:12; 2 Timothy 2:25–26\). When a sinner “comes to his senses,” repentance follows, along with a longing to return to fellowship with God.
The son devises a plan of action, and it shows that his repentance was genuine. He will admit his sin (Luke 15:18\), and he will give up his rights as a son and take on the position of a servant (verse 19\). He realizes he has no right to a blessing from his father, and he has nothing to offer his father except a life of service. Returning home, the prodigal son is prepared to fall at his father’s feet and beg for mercy.
In the same way, a repentant sinner coming to God is keenly aware of his own spiritual poverty. Laying aside all pride and feelings of entitlement, he brings nothing of value with him. The sinner’s only thought is to cast himself at the [mercy of God](rich-in-mercy.html) and beg for a position of servitude (1 John 1:9; Romans 6:6–18; 12:1\).
**The Father**
The father in the Parable of the Prodigal Son was waiting for his son to return. In fact, “while he was still a long way off, his father saw him and was filled with compassion for him” (Luke 15:20\). He runs to his wayward son, embraces him, and kisses him. In Jesus’ day, it was not customary for a grown man to run, yet the father runs to greet his son, breaking convention in his love and desire for restoration (verse 20\). The returning son begins his prepared speech (verse 21\), but his father cuts him off and begins issuing commands to honor his son—the best robe, the best ring, the best feast! The father does not question his son or lecture him; instead, he joyfully forgives him and receives him back into fellowship.
What a picture of God’s love, condescension, and grace! God’s heart is full of compassion for His children; He stands ready to welcome the returning sinner back home with joyous celebration.
The prodigal son was satisfied to return home as a slave, but to his surprise and delight he is restored back into the full privilege of being his father’s son. The weary, gaunt, filthy sinner who trudged home was transformed into the guest of honor in a rich man’s home. That is what God’s grace does for a penitent sinner (Psalm 40:2; 103:4\). Not only are we forgiven in Christ, but we receive the Spirit of “[adoption](Spirit-of-adoption.html) to sonship” (Romans 8:15\). We are His children, heirs of God and co\-heirs with Christ (Romans 8:17\).
The father’s command to bring the best robe for the returned son is a sign of dignity and honor, proof of the prodigal’s acceptance back into the family. The ring for the son’s hand is a sign of authority and sonship. The sandals for his feet are a sign of his not being a servant, as servants did not wear shoes. The father orders the fattened calf to be prepared, and a party is held in honor of the returned son. Fatted calves in those times were saved for special occasions. This was not just any party; it was a rare and complete celebration.
All these things represent what we receive in Christ upon salvation: the robe of the Redeemer’s righteousness (Isaiah 61:10\), the privilege of partaking of the Spirit of adoption (Ephesians 1:5\), and feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace, prepared to walk in the ways of holiness (Ephesians 6:15\). The actions of the father in the parable show us that “the Lord does not treat us as our sins deserve or repay us according to our iniquities. For as high as the heavens are above the earth, so great is his love for those who fear him; as far as the east is from the west, so far has he removed our transgressions from us. As a father has compassion on his children, so the Lord has compassion on those who fear him” (Psalm 103:10–13\). Instead of condemnation, there is rejoicing for a son who “was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found” (Luke 15:32; cf. Romans 8:1; John 5:24\). Those words—*dead* and *alive*, *lost* and *found*—are terms that also apply to one’s state before and after conversion to Christ (Ephesians 2:1–5\). The feast is a picture of what occurs in heaven over one repentant sinner (Luke 15:7, 10\).
**The Older Son**
The final, tragic character in the Parable of the Prodigal Son is the older son. As the older son comes in from the field, he hears music and dancing. He finds out from one of the servants that his younger brother has come home and that what he hears is the sound of jubilation over his brother’s safe return. The older brother becomes angry and refuses to go into the house. His father goes to his older son and pleads with him to come in. “But he answered his father, ‘Look! All these years I’ve been slaving for you and never disobeyed your orders. Yet you never gave me even a young goat so I could celebrate with my friends. But when this son of yours who has squandered your property with prostitutes comes home, you kill the fattened calf for him!’” (Luke 15:29–30\). The father answers gently: “My son, . . . you are always with me, and everything I have is yours. But we had to celebrate and be glad” (verses 31–32\).
The older son’s words and actions reveal several things about him: 1\) His relationship with his father was based on works and merit. He points out to his father that he has always been obedient as he’s been “slaving away”; thus, he deserves a party—he has earned it. 2\) He despises his younger brother as undeserving of the father’s favor. 3\) He does not understand grace and has no room for forgiveness. In fact, the demonstration of grace toward his brother makes him angry. His brother does not *deserve* a party. 4\) He has disowned the prodigal as a brother, referring to him as “this son of yours” (verse 30\). 5\) He thinks his father is stingy and unfair: “You never gave me even a young goat” (verse 29\).
The father’s words are corrective in several ways: 1\) His older son should know that their relationship is not based on performance: “My son, . . . you are always with me, and everything I have is yours” (Luke 15:31\). 2\) His older son should accept his brother as part of the family. The father refers to the prodigal as “this brother of yours” (verse 32\). 3\) His older son could have enjoyed a party any time he wanted, but he never utilized the blessings at his disposal. 4\) Grace is necessary and appropriate: “We had to celebrate” (verse 32\).
The Pharisees and the teachers of the law, mentioned in Luke 15:1, are portrayed as the older brother in the parable. Outwardly, they lived blameless lives, but inwardly their attitudes were abominable (Matthew 23:25–28\). They saw their relationship with God as based on their performance, and they considered themselves deserving of God’s favor—unlike the undeserving sinners around them. They did not understand grace and were, in fact, angered by it. They had no room for forgiveness. They saw no kinship between sinners and themselves. They viewed God as rather stingy in His blessings. And they considered that, if God were to accept tax collectors and sinners into His family, then God would be unfair.
The older brother’s focus was on himself and his own service; as a result, he had no joy in his brother’s arrival home. He was so consumed with justice and equity (as he saw them) that he failed to see the value of his brother’s repentance and return. The older brother had allowed [bitterness](root-of-bitterness.html) to take root in his heart to the point that he was unable to show compassion toward his brother. The bitterness spilled over into other relationships, too, and he was unable to forgive the perceived sin of his father against him. Rather than enjoy fellowship with his father, brother, and community, the older brother stayed outside the house and nursed his anger. How sad to choose misery and isolation over restoration and reconciliation!
The older brother—and the religious leaders of Jesus’ day—failed to realize that “anyone who claims to be in the light but hates his brother is still in the darkness. Whoever loves his brother lives in the light, and there is nothing in him to make him stumble. But whoever hates his brother is in the darkness; he does not know where he is going, because the darkness has blinded him” (1 John 2:9–11\).
The Parable of the Prodigal Son is one of Scripture’s most beautiful pictures of God’s grace. We have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23\). We are all prodigals in that we have run from God, selfishly squandered our resources, and, to some degree, wallowed in sin. But God is ready to forgive. He will save the contrite, not by works but by His grace, through faith (Ephesians 2:9; Romans 9:16; Psalm 51:5\). That is the core message of the Parable of the Prodigal Son.
|
What is the meaning of the Parable of the Talents? |
Answer
Matthew, in chapters 24\-25, records the Lord’s heart of compassion and love mingled with unwavering holiness. This section of Scripture, including the Parable of the Talents, constitutes final warnings, prophecies, and encouragements to His people Israel prior to His departure. He, who is their Lord, is leaving for an undisclosed period of time. He is delegating to them the responsibility, as stewards, to care for His kingdom. The Parable of the Talents, Matthew 25:14\-30, impresses on them the weight of that responsibility and the serious consequences of neglecting to understand and apply His instructions. There is also a message to all mankind.
If the talents are talents of gold, the value of what the master entrusted to the stewards would be immensely high, in the millions of dollars. Since the Lord uses only the term "talents" we must make some assumptions, but it seems reasonable to assume that the owner of the talents, the man traveling into a far country, was a wealthy man. He is entrusting his wealth to three men who become stewards of his money. One receives five talents. Another receives two talents. A third steward receives one talent. Each is given a significant amount of money. These are stewards entrusted with the care of the money. The stewards must know the personality and character of their Lord. He expects them to know Him well enough to apply the spirit as well as the letter of His instructions. Those that do are richly rewarded. The others receive severe judgment. The amount given is based on each steward’s ability. The first two understand the spirit and letter of instructions and the character of their Lord. They both use the resources by "trading" to gain a profit. Each of them makes a 100 percent profit. Fear and mistrust of his Lord motivate the third steward. He buries the money in the earth and returns the original amount. The profitable stewards are praised, given increased responsibilities and invited to enter into the joy of their Lord. The untrusting steward is scolded, rejected, and punished.
The application of this parable must be understood within the context of the message of Matthew 24\-25\. It is first a message to the people of Israel that will live in the last days before the Lord returns. The statement, in Matthew 24:13, "But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved," is a key statement. This is the believing remnant that will receive the promise of the kingdom. In Matthew 24:32\-34, the Lord states, "Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh: So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors. Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled." These will be alive when He returns and will have understood and believed their Lord. The application to the people of Israel is graphic and relevant. Those that believe Him will be rewarded in His kingdom. The basis of the reward will be their stewardship of His resources entrusted to them. Those who fear and do not believe will be rejected and judged.
There is also a universal application to all mankind. From the time of the creation of mankind, each individual has been entrusted with resources of time and material wealth. Everything we have comes from God and belongs to Him. We are responsible for using those resources so that they increase in value. As Christians, we have additionally the most valuable resource of all – the Word of God. If we believe and understand Him, and apply His Word as good stewards, we are a blessing to others and the value of what we do multiplies. We are accountable to the Lord for the use of His resources.
|
What is the meaning of the Parable of the Sheep and Goats? |
Answer
The Parable of the Sheep and Goats is part of the [Olivet Discourse](Olivet-discourse.html). It is found in Matthew 25:31\-46\. A parable is a short, simple story of comparison. Jesus used parables to teach spiritual truths by means of earthly situations.
Jesus begins the parable by saying it concerns His return in glory to set up His kingdom (Matthew 25:31\). Therefore, the setting of this event is at the beginning of the [millennium](millennium.html), after the tribulation. All those on earth at that time will be brought before the Lord, and He will separate them “as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left” (verses 32–33\). The sheep are those who were saved during the tribulation; the goats are the unsaved who survived the tribulation.
The sheep on Jesus’ right hand are blessed by God the Father and given an inheritance. The reason is stated: “For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me” (verses 35\-36\). The righteous will not understand: when did they see Jesus in such a pitiful condition and help Him? “The King will reply, ‘I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me’” (verses 39\-40\).
The goats on Jesus’ left hand are cursed with eternal hell\-fire, “prepared for the devil and his angels” (verse 41\). The reason is given: they had opportunity to minister to the Lord, but they did nothing (verses 42\-43\). The damned ask, “Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?” (verse 44\). Jesus replies, “I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me” (verse 45\).
Jesus then ends the discourse with a contrast: “They will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life” (verse 46\).
In the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats, we are looking at man redeemed and saved, and man condemned and lost. A casual reading seems to suggest that salvation is the result of good works. The “sheep” acted charitably, giving food, drink, and clothing to the needy. The “goats” showed no charity. This seems to result in salvation for the sheep and damnation for the goats.
However, Scripture does not contradict itself, and the Bible clearly and repeatedly teaches that salvation is by faith through the grace of God and not by our good works (see John 1:12; Acts 15:11; Romans 3:22\-24; Romans 4:4\-8; Romans 7:24\-25; Romans 8:12; Galatians 3:6\-9; and Ephesians 2:8\-10\). In fact, Jesus Himself makes it clear in the parable that the salvation of the “sheep” is not based on their works—their inheritance was theirs “since the creation of the world” (Matthew 25:34\), long before they could ever do any good works!
The good works mentioned in the parable are not the *cause* of salvation but the *effect* of salvation. As Christians we become like Christ (see Romans 8:29; 2 Corinthians 3:18; and Colossians 2:6\-7\). Galatians 5:22 tells us that the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, gentleness, faithfulness, and self\-control. Good works in a Christian’s life are the direct overflow of these traits, and are only acceptable to God because of the relationship that exists between servant and Master, the saved and their Savior, the sheep and their Shepherd (see Ephesians 2:10\).
The core message of the Parable of the Sheep and Goats is that God’s people will love others. Good works will result from our relationship to the Shepherd. Followers of Christ will treat others with kindness, serving them as if they were serving Christ Himself. The unregenerate live in the opposite manner. While “goats” can indeed perform acts of kindness and charity, their hearts are not right with God, and their actions are not for the right purpose – to honor and worship God.
|
Sign of the cross - what is the meaning? |
Answer
The practice of tracing the sign of the cross is most prominent in the Roman Catholic Church but is also practiced in the Eastern Orthodox, Coptic, Lutheran, Anglican, and Episcopalian churches. The history of the sign of the cross goes back as far as Tertullian, the early church father who lived between A.D. 160 and 220\. Tertullian wrote, "In all our travels and movements, in all our coming in and going out, in putting off our shoes, at the bath, at the table, in lighting our candles, in lying down, in sitting down, whatever employment occupieth us, we mark our foreheads with the sign of the cross."
Originally, a small cross was traced by the thumb or finger on one’s own forehead. While it is difficult to pinpoint exactly when the switch was made from tracing a small cross on the forehead to the modern practice of tracing a larger cross from forehead to chest and shoulder to shoulder, we do know that the switch had occurred by the eleventh century A.D., when the Prayer Book of King Henry provides an instruction to "mark with the holy cross the four sides of the body."
Catholics find support for the sign of the cross primarily in their many years of church tradition and, secondarily, in Exodus 17:9\-14 and Revelation 7:3; 9:4; 14:1\. While the passages do speak of a sign on the forehead for protection from God’s judgment, they must be interpreted in light of their context. On the basis of their context, there is no reason to believe any of the verses prescribe the ritualistic sign of the cross.
In the sixteenth century, one of the central tenets of the Protestant Reformation was “sola scriptura,” whereby any practice that didn’t line up with Scripture was jettisoned. The English Reformers believed the use of the sign of the cross should be left up to the individual, as was written in the Prayer Book of King Edward VI. "...Kneeling, crossing, holding up of hands, knocking upon the breast, and other gestures, they may be used, or left, as every man’s devotion serveth without blame." Protestants generally viewed the sign as a tradition that was unsupported by Scripture, or even as idolatrous, and it was therefore abandoned by most.
While the Bible does not instruct us to cross ourselves, the sign of the cross is not without biblical symbolism. The shape of the sign is a reminder of the cross of Christ. Historically, the sign has also been viewed as representing the trinity: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and His substitutionary death on the cross, salvation is extended as a free gift to all of humanity. The doctrine of the trinity teaches the Godhead: one God existing in three distinct persons. Both doctrines are foundational to both Catholics and Protestants and are certainly well\-founded biblically. The sign of the cross has at certain points been associated with supernatural powers such as repelling evil, demons, etc. This mystical aspect of the sign of the cross is completely false and cannot be supported biblically in any way.
The mystical aspect aside, tracing the sign of the cross is neither right nor wrong and can be positive if it serves to remind a person of the cross of Christ and/or the trinity. Unfortunately, such is not always the case, and many people simply go through the motions of the ritual of signing themselves without a knowledge of why they do it. A final analysis of the sign of the cross is that it is by no means required of Christians because it is not instructed by the Word of God.
|
Why did Jacob give Joseph a coat of many colors? |
Answer
“Now Israel loved Joseph more than all his children, because he was the son of his old age: and he made him a coat of many colors” (Genesis 37:3 NKJV). The question of why Jacob gave a coat of many colors is one with many aspects to consider. A study of the parental mistakes of Bible characters could be in itself a full\-length volume. As examples of parental shortcomings, the erratically behaved Samson was a product of overly indulgent parents. Eli, the high priest of Shiloh, refused to discipline his lecherous sons Hophni and Phinehas. Abraham rashly acted upon his wife’s ill\-conceived plan by fathering an illegitimate son. (It is worth noting that Abraham’s two sons continue their struggle to this day.)
But it was Isaac, the son of Abraham, who committed the parental sin of sins. He and his wife, Rebekah, divided their family by showing favoritism between their sons. Isaac preferred the older son, Esau, while Rebekah loved the younger son, Jacob. Ultimately, the bad blood that existed between Esau and Jacob festered into a full\-blown hatred between their offspring, the Edomites and the Israelites. Students of Bible prophecy are well aware that much of modern\-day Israel’s troubles can be traced to the child\-rearing mistakes made by Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
As to the coat of many colors itself, the most common outer garment of this type was nothing more than a long cloth with a hole in its middle. After draping the long cloth over the shoulders, a rope or a belt was fastened around the waist. Some expositors argue that this particular coat was especially valued because sleeves were sewn into the garment. Others believe the coat was ornamented by many colors. The real issue, of course, has nothing to do with colors or sleeves. Jacob presented the special coat to Joseph as a sign that Joseph was esteemed above his brothers. The coat signified Joseph as being Jacob’s choice as the future head of the clan—an honor normally bestowed upon the firstborn son.
There is no shortage of irony in the above passage, for Jacob (Israel) had been reared by parents who each had their favorites. The favoritism that had spoiled the tranquility of his childhood home was about to wreck his family, too. Indeed, one might think that Jacob would have learned of the dangers of favoritism, but this was not the case, for Jacob proved to be a stubborn, impetuous man and a very poor father. Although he had eleven other sons, Jacob’s favor clearly rested upon the second\-youngest son, Joseph. Jacob loved Joseph more than all the other boys. As one might imagine, this overt favoritism created a dangerous schism among the brothers. The older boys hated Joseph. They hated Joseph because he received his father’s undivided attention and affection. The older sons resented Joseph, and this open contempt created a common bond that eventually resulted in a family mutiny and Joseph’s hostile banishment into Egyptian slavery.
In truth, Joseph’s character was far above that of Jacob’s other sons; he was the finest among those born to Jacob. In many ways, his sterling attributes parallel those of our Lord Jesus. It is interesting to consider that no fault or sin of Joseph is mentioned in Scripture. (The only other Old Testament hero to receive such a favorable review is the prophet Daniel.) Joseph’s life was one of character, courage, conviction, and commitment. Whether locked away in a dank and dark dungeon or ruling from an exalted throne, this noble man yielded himself to the mighty hand of God. What an extraordinary hero! In one way, it is understandable that Jacob favored him above the others; nevertheless, Jacob’s lopsided affections resulted in much family grief and tragedy. Here is a valuable lesson for all parents—never show favoritism toward any one child. Much harm can come from it.
|
What does it mean that love always hopes (1 Corinthians 13:7)? |
Answer
In the description of love in 1 Corinthians 13, we find four things that love “always” does. Love is not just an idea; it is action. The third action listed is that love “always hopes” (NIV) or “hopes all things” (ESV). It’s nice to know that love is hopeful, but what exactly does this mean?
The Greek word translated “hope” is from *elpidzo*, meaning “to hope or wait for salvation with joy and full confidence.” Used 32 times in the New Testament, this word expresses more than a wish or desire, but a confident belief in the unseen. Hebrews 11:1 says, “Faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.” Faith, hope, and love are often intimately connected in Scripture (see 1 Corinthians 13:13\).
In Colossians 1:4\-5 we find the same combination of faith, hope, and love: “We heard of your **faith** in Christ Jesus and of the **love** that you have for all the saints, because of the **hope** laid up for you in heaven” (emphasis added).
Just as God is called “love” (1 John 4:8\), Jesus is called our “hope” (1 Timothy 1:1\). Hope not only concerns our belief in Christ but describes who He is to us. The hope within us is Christ Himself. If He lives within us, His hope will be seen in how we treat others. Living with such an attitude reflects the way of Christ, leads to holy living, and brings glory to the heavenly Father (Matthew 5:17\).
Part of showing love is hoping, and part of hoping is seeing the potential of others. As Goethe said, “If we treat people as they ought to be, we help them become what they are capable of becoming.” In love, we can always be hopeful and show confidence in others. This does not rule out confrontation or the redress of wrongs, but the impact of a positive attitude in the life of another person is incalculable.
How many times in the Old Testament did Israel fail God? Yet their failure was never final. Love never says die. Peter failed Jesus, yet the Lord restored him. The Corinthians failed Paul in some ways, yet the apostle, in love, patiently corrected them and called them “sanctified” (1 Corinthians 1:2\). Love always points to a brighter day ahead. Love is the lifeline that the hurting can hold on to.
If you have ever had a person believe in you and share a hopeful attitude for your future, then you have experienced some of what 1 Corinthians 13:7 teaches. As long as there is love, there will be hope.
|
Does a person / ministry need a spiritual covering? |
Answer
The term *spiritual covering* is usually used in the context of the [Shepherding Movement](shepherding-movement.html), though it can have other meanings. In its primary context, having a spiritual covering means being submitted to the authority of another Christian believer. The concept is taken to mean that, for a person’s spiritual life and/or ministry to be valid in the eyes of God, the person or ministry must be under direct submission to a specific person. This might be an elder or pastor of a church, an older or more mature Christian, or some other authority figure. The idea that a “spiritual covering” is required was initially developed within the [Charismatic movement](Charismatic-movement.html). Today, it is sometimes associated with the [New Apostolic Reformation](New-Apostolic-Reformation.html) and the [Hebrew Roots movement](Hebrew-roots.html).
According to the teaching of spiritual covering, Christians are not only accountable to God but also to their leaders and elders. For biblical backing, supporters of spiritual covering cite verses such as Ephesians 5:2, 1 Thessalonians 5:12–13, 1 Corinthians 11:2–16, and 1 Peter 5:5\. In practice, the concept of spiritual covering makes an earthly authority figure an intercessor or a substitute for God in the life of the person or ministry that has the “covering.” This has led some Christians to consult their designated “shepherd” prior to making career or family decisions. In some cases, professing Christians have claimed that, given an apparent choice between obeying God or their shepherd, they would obey their earthly shepherd.
Naturally, this idea is not without controversy within Christianity. The teaching of spiritual covering has been the cause of various levels of authoritarian abuse. Several early proponents of the spiritual covering concept, such as Bob Mumford and Charles Simpson, have since distanced themselves from it and apologized for being involved. Of course, it is not wrong to submit to the authority of a pastor and follow his lead; however, with the “spiritual covering” concept, some groups have taken the basic structure of church authority and moved it far beyond biblical precepts.
Biblically, each person is ultimately accountable only to God (Romans 3:19; Matthew 12:36\), not to any other person. Consulting with others for guidance (Proverbs 11:14\) and being humble enough to learn from the wisdom of others (Proverbs 5:11–14\) are commendable. Our approval comes from God, not men (2 Timothy 2:15\). No person, strictly speaking, has the absolute right to declare our service to God valid or invalid (Romans 14:4\). Mandating a human shepherd for our spiritual lives not only obscures our relationship to Christ (1 Timothy 2:5\), but it can lead to division within the church (1 Corinthians 3:4–9\). Jesus, in fact, speaks against excessive earthly authority in Matthew 20:25–28\.
[Submission to the will of God](submit-to-God.html) is necessary for all people and for any activity that claims to be a “ministry.” Respect for authority (Romans 13:1\), mutual submission (Ephesians 5:21\), and cooperation between believers (John 13:34\) are commanded in the Bible. And relying on the experience and wisdom of others is a matter of common sense. However, there is no biblically valid mandate for a “spiritual covering” under a particular person in order for our efforts to be legitimate.
|
What is Jesus Culture? |
Answer
Jesus Culture is a movement that began in 1999 as a youth group and has since expanded to have an international influence. The music and conferences of Jesus Culture are aimed at young people, seeking to lead them “to experience the radical love of God” and send them back into their communities “completely impassioned and transformed” (from the official website). The ministry focuses on revival, worship, the power of God, and the “manifest presence” of Christ in the world. The founder of the movement is Banning Liebscher from Bethel Church, a [Charismatic](Charismatic-movement.html) church pastored by Bill Johnson in Redding, California.
There has always been and will always be great variety within the body of Christ. One reason for the plethora of church denominations is that human beings are unique and one size does not fit all. With every generation, there has been a revival of passion that expresses itself through different outlets. In the 1940s it was Youth for Christ; in the 1970s it was the Jesus People; since 1997 we have witnessed the 268 Generation, also known as the Passion Movement. The young people of Jesus Culture are passionate about spreading worship over the globe, and they set about to do it the way that seems best to them.
Bethel Church, from which Jesus Culture emerged, teaches salvation by grace through faith. However, the church also teaches that the positions of apostle and prophet are being filled yet today. The “apostles’ teaching” mentioned in Acts 2:42 is not necessarily the doctrine of Peter, James, and John, according to Bethel. It is whatever the modern\-day apostles are saying. Obviously, this doctrine can lead to a downplaying of Scripture and opens the door to spurious teaching.
Indeed, Jesus Culture is sometimes criticized for a lack of depth and biblical teaching at their conferences and concerts. The emphasis is on having an undefined “personal encounter with the love of God” rather than on repentance and faith. Such an emphasis appeals to emotion, and as with anything centered primarily on emotion, those participating often miss the mark. Any time we give preeminence to emotional experience over the clear teaching of the Word, we open the door to potentially harmful doctrines.
Another concern is Jesus Culture’s emphasis on signs and wonders, including visions, healings, and speaking in esoteric [tongues](gift-of-tongues.html). Johnson teaches that believers who are sick have “allowed” the sickness into their lives and that those who are not healed should “realize it’s not God’s fault” and pray for a “greater anointing” (from the official Jesus Culture website).
Within Jesus Culture are many committed believers, and their accent on worship and worldwide missions is commendable. We praise the Lord for anyone who is brought to faith in Christ through their efforts. At the same time, Got Questions Ministries disagrees with their stance on the [sign gifts](sign-gifts.html) and sees a danger in their promotion of modern\-day apostles. First Thessalonians 5:21 commands us to “prove all things; hold fast that which is good.” As believers, we ought to carefully examine *every* teaching and practice and compare them to the written Word of God.
|
What is soaking prayer? |
Answer
Since the 1990s there has been an increased focus on mysticism within various segments of Christianity. Bordering on the esoteric, these mystical experiences broaden the division between a "factual faith" and a "felt faith," and threaten to replace sound biblical teaching with emotion\-driven response. Soaking prayer is one such mystical activity. It is described as resting in God’s presence. This is accomplished by playing some gentle worship songs, either sitting or lying down, and praying short, simple prayers for an extended period of time, but otherwise keeping your mind free of other thoughts. At the point when you sense God’s presence through some type of manifestation like tingling skin, a sensation of heat or cold, or even a gentle wind seemingly blowing through your body, you are to just "soak" in that presence.
Although that might sound a little strange to some, it does not immediately come across as being necessarily bad. However, the rule by which we measure our experiences in life is the Bible (2 Timothy 3:16\-17\), and when soaking prayer is examined accordingly, we find that it comes up wanting for biblical support. Nowhere in the Bible can a model of prayer be found that soaking prayer follows.
Prayer in its simplest form in the Bible is calling on the name of the Lord (Genesis 4:26\), and in each instance where it is found in Scripture, it is descriptive of [communicating with God](communicating-with-God.html). Soaking prayer starts that way, but quickly devolves into a trance\-like meditative state. This is when soaking prayer ceases to be biblical and becomes more like a [New Age](new-age-movement.html) practice or something an adherent of [Hinduism](hinduism.html) would participate in.
There is no denying that experiencing the presence of God can be powerful and life changing. It is not the goal of soaking prayer that is biblically errant; it is its methodology. Soaking prayer focuses on obtaining a spiritual experience by seeking out the presence of God through mystical exercises. In this it is similar to ”[contemplative prayer](contemplative-prayer.html)” and [contemplative spirituality](contemplative-spirituality.html), which are equally unbiblical. Biblical prayer is talking to God with His will in mind (1 John 5:14\). A biblically praying believer already understands that God’s presence is always with him (Psalm 139:7; Matthew 28:20; 1 Corinthians 6:19; 1 Thessalonians 4:8; 2 Timothy 1:14\), and he doesn’t need to experience any type of physical sensation to prove it.
|
Is creationism scientific? |
Answer
There is currently a lot of debate over the validity of creationism, defined as “the belief that the universe and living organisms originate from specific acts of divine creation, as in the biblical account, rather than by natural processes such as evolution.” Creation science is often dismissed by the secular community and accused of lacking scientific value. However, creationism is clearly compatible with a scientific approach to any topic. Creationism makes statements about real world events, places, and things. It is not concerned solely with subjective ideas or abstract concepts. There are established scientific facts that are consistent with creationism, and the way in which those facts relate to one another lends itself to a creationist interpretation. Just as other broad scientific ideas are used to lend coherence to a series of facts, so, too, does creationism.
How, then, is creationism—as opposed to “naturalism,” defined as “a philosophical viewpoint according to which everything arises from natural properties and causes, and supernatural or spiritual explanations are excluded or discounted”—scientific? Admittedly, the answer depends on how you define “scientific.” Too often, “science” and “naturalism” are considered one and the same, leaving creationist views out by definition. Such a definition requires an irrational reverence of naturalism. Science is defined as “the observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.” Nothing requires science, in and of itself, to be naturalistic. Naturalism, like creationism, requires a series of presuppositions that are not generated by experiments. They are not extrapolated from data or derived from test results. These philosophical presuppositions are accepted before any data is ever taken. Because both naturalism and creationism are strongly influenced by presuppositions that are neither provable nor testable, and enter into the discussion well before the facts do, it is fair to say that creationism is at least as scientific as naturalism.
Creationism, like naturalism, can be “scientific,” in that it is compatible with the [scientific method](scientific-method.html) of discovery. These two concepts are not, however, sciences in and of themselves, because both views include aspects that are not considered “scientific” in the normal sense. Neither creationism nor naturalism is falsifiable; that is, there is no experiment that could conclusively disprove either one. Neither one is predictive; they do not generate or enhance the ability to predict an outcome. Solely on the basis of these two points, we see that there is no logical reason to consider one more scientifically valid than the other.
One of the major reasons naturalists give for rejecting creationism is the concept of miracles. Ironically, naturalists will typically say that miracles, such as special creation, are impossible because they violate the laws of nature, which have been clearly and historically observed. Such a view is ironic on several counts. As a single example, consider abiogenesis, the theory of life springing from non\-living matter. Abiogenesis is one of the most thoroughly refuted concepts of science. Yet, a truly naturalistic viewpoint presumes that life on earth—self\-replicating, self\-sustaining, complex organic life—arose by chance from non\-living matter. Such a thing has never been observed in all of human history. The beneficial evolutionary changes needed to progress a creature to a more complex form have also never been observed. So creationism actually holds the edge on evidence for “miraculous” claims in that the Scriptures provide documented accounts of miraculous happenings. To label creationism as unscientific on account of miracles demands a similar label for naturalism.
There are many facts that are used by both sides of the creation vs. naturalism debate. Facts are facts, but there is no such thing as a fact that absolutely requires a single interpretation. The divide between creationism and secular naturalism rests entirely on different interpretations. Regarding the evolution vs. creation debate specifically, Charles Darwin himself made this point. In the introduction to The Origin of Species, he stated, “I am well aware that scarcely a single point is discussed in this volume on which facts cannot be adduced, often apparently leading to conclusions directly opposite to those at which I arrived.” Obviously, Darwin believed evolution over creation, but he was willing to admit that interpretation was key to choosing a belief. One scientist might view a particular fact as supportive of naturalism; another scientist might view that same fact as supporting creationism.
Also, the fact that creationism is the only possible alternative to naturalistic ideas such as evolution makes it a valid topic, especially when this dichotomy has been admitted to by some of the leading minds of science. Many well\-known and influential scientists state that the only possible explanations for life are naturalistic evolution or special creation. Not all scientists agree on which is true, but they almost all agree that one or the other must be.
There are many other reasons why creationism is a rational and scientific approach to learning. Among these are the concepts of realistic probability, the flawed evidential support for macro\-evolution, the evidence of experience, and so forth. There is no logical basis to accept naturalistic presuppositions outright and flatly reject creationist presuppositions. Firm belief in creation is no barrier to scientific discovery. Simply review the accomplishments of men like Newton, Pasteur, Mendel, Pascal, Kelvin, Linnaeus, and Maxwell. All were clear and comfortable creationists. Creationism is not a “science,” just as naturalism is not a “science.” Creationism is, however, fully compatible with science itself.
|
I am a Catholic. Why should I consider becoming a Christian? |
Answer
First, please understand that we intend no offense in the wording of this question. We genuinely receive questions, from Catholics, along the lines of “What is the difference between Catholics and Christians?” In face\-to\-face conversations with Catholics, we have literally heard, “I am not a Christian, I am Catholic.” To many Catholics, the terms “Christian” and “Protestant” are synonymous. With all that said, the intent of this article is that Catholics would study what the Bible says about being a Christian and would perhaps consider that the Catholic faith is not the best representation of what the Bible describes. As a background, please read our article on “[What is a Christian?](what-is-a-Christian.html)”
A key distinction between Catholics and Christians is the view of the Bible. Catholics view the Bible as having equal authority with the Church and tradition. Christians view the Bible as the supreme authority for faith and practice. The question is, how does the Bible present itself? Second Timothy 3:16\-17 tells us, “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.” This text tells us that Scripture is not “just the beginning,” or “just the basics,” or the “foundation for a more complete church tradition.” On the contrary, Scripture is perfectly and fully sufficient for everything in the Christian life. Scripture can teach us, rebuke us, correct us, train us, and equip us. “Bible Christians” do not deny the value of church tradition. Rather, Christians uphold that for a church tradition to be valid, it must be based on the clear teaching of Scripture and must be in full agreement with Scripture. Catholic friend, study the Word of God for yourself. In God’s Word you will find God’s description of, and intention for, His Church. Second Timothy 2:15 declares, “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.”
A second key difference between Catholics and Bible Christians is the understanding of how we can approach God. Catholics tend to approach God through intermediaries, such as Mary or the saints. Christians approach God directly, offering prayers to no one other than God Himself. The Bible proclaims that we ourselves can approach God’s throne of grace with boldness (Hebrews 4:16\). The Bible is perfectly clear that God desires us to pray to Him, to have communication with Him, to ask Him for the things we need (Philippians 4:6; Matthew 7:7\-8; 1 John 5:14\-15\). There is no need for mediators or intermediaries, as Christ is our one and only mediator (1 Timothy 2:5\), and both Christ and the Holy Spirit are already interceding on our behalf (Romans 8:26\-27; Hebrews 7:25\). Catholic friend, God loves you intimately and has provided an open door to direct communication through Jesus.
The most crucial difference between Catholics and Bible Christians is on the issue of salvation. Catholics view salvation almost entirely as a process, while Christians view salvation as both a completed status and a process. Catholics see themselves as “being saved,” while Christians view themselves as “having been saved.” First Corinthians 1:2 says, “To those sanctified in Christ Jesus and called to be holy.” The words “sanctified” and “holy” come from the same Greek root. This verse is declaring that Christians are both sanctified and called to be sanctified. The Bible presents salvation as a gift that is received the moment a person places faith in Jesus Christ as Savior (John 3:16\). When a person receives Christ as Savior, he/she is justified (declared righteous – Romans 5:9\), redeemed (rescued from slavery to sin – 1 Peter 1:18\), reconciled (achieving peace with God – Romans 5:1\), sanctified (set apart for God’s purposes – 1 Corinthians 6:11\), and born again as a new creation (1 Peter 1:23; 2 Corinthians 5:17\). Each of these is fully accomplished at the moment of salvation. Christians are then called to live out practically (called to be holy) what is already true positionally (sanctified).
The Catholic viewpoint is that salvation is received by faith, but then must be “maintained” by good works and participation in the Sacraments. Bible Christians do not deny the importance of good works or that Christ calls us to observe the ordinances in remembrance of Him and in obedience to Him. The difference is that Christians view these things as the result of salvation, not a requirement for salvation or a means of maintaining salvation. Salvation is an accomplished work, purchased by the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ (1 John 2:2\). God offers us salvation and assurance of salvation because Jesus’ sacrifice was fully, completely, and perfectly sufficient. If we receive God’s precious gift of salvation, we can know that we are saved. First John 5:13 declares, “I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life.”
We can know that we have eternal life, and we can have assurance of our salvation because of the greatness of Christ’s sacrifice. Christ’s sacrifice does not need to be re\-offered or re\-presented. Hebrews 7:27 says, “He sacrificed for their sins once for all when He offered Himself.” Hebrews 10:10 declares, “We have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.” First Peter 3:18 exclaims, “For Christ died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God.” Christ’s once\-for\-all sacrifice was absolutely and perfectly sufficient. Jesus declared on the cross, “It is finished” (John 19:30\). Jesus’ atoning sacrifice was the full payment for all of our sins (1 John 2:2\). As a result, all of our sins are forgiven, and we are promised eternal life in heaven the moment we receive the gift God offers us – salvation through Jesus Christ (John 3:16\).
Catholic friend, do you desire this “so great salvation” (Hebrews 2:3\)? If so, all you must do is receive it (John 1:12\) through faith (Romans 5:1\). God loves us and offers us salvation as a gift (John 3:16\). If we receive His grace, by faith, we have salvation as our eternal possession (Ephesians 2:8\-9\). Once saved, nothing can separate us from His love (Romans 8:38\-39\). Nothing can remove us from His hand (John 10:28\-29\). If you desire this salvation, if you desire to have all your sins forgiven, if you desire to have assurance of salvation, if you desire direct access to the God who loves you – receive it, and it is yours. This is the salvation that Jesus died to provide and that God offers as a gift.
If you have received Jesus Christ as Savior, by faith, because of what you have read here today, please let us know by clicking on the “I have accepted Christ today” button below. Welcome to the family of God! Welcome, Catholic friend, to the Christian life!
If you have any questions, please use the question form on our [Bible Questions Answered](Bible-Questions.html) page.
|
What is general revelation and special revelation? |
Answer
General revelation and special revelation are the two ways God has chosen to reveal Himself to humanity. General revelation refers to the general truths that can be known about God through nature. Special revelation refers to the more specific truths that can be known about God through the supernatural.
In regard to general revelation, Psalm 19:1\-4 declares, “The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of His hands. Day after day they pour forth speech; night after night they display knowledge. There is no speech or language where their voice is not heard. Their voice goes out into all the earth, their words to the ends of the world.” According to this passage, God’s existence and power can be clearly seen through observing the universe. The order, intricacy, and wonder of creation speak to the existence of a powerful and glorious Creator.
General revelation is also taught in Romans 1:20, “For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—His eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.” Like Psalm 19, Romans 1:20 teaches that God’s eternal power and divine nature are “clearly seen” and “understood” from what has been made, and that there is no excuse for denying these facts. With these Scriptures in mind, perhaps a working definition of general revelation would be “the revelation of God to all people, at all times, and in all places that proves that God exists and that He is intelligent, powerful, and transcendent.”
Special revelation is how God has chosen to reveal Himself through miraculous means. Special revelation includes physical appearances of God, dreams, visions, the written Word of God, and most importantly—Jesus Christ. The Bible records God appearing in physical form many times (Genesis 3:8, 18:1; Exodus 3:1\-4, 34:5\-7\), and the Bible records God speaking to people through dreams (Genesis 28:12, 37:5; 1 Kings 3:5; Daniel 2\) and visions (Genesis 15:1; Ezekiel 8:3\-4; Daniel 7; 2 Corinthians 12:1\-7\).
Of primary importance in the revealing of God is His Word, the Bible, which is also a form of special revelation. God miraculously guided the authors of Scripture to correctly record His message to mankind, while still using their own styles and personalities. The Word of God is living and active (Hebrews 4:12\). The Word of God is inspired, profitable, and sufficient (2 Timothy 3:16\-17\). God determined to have the truth regarding Him recorded in written form because He knew the inaccuracy and unreliability of oral tradition. He also understood that the dreams and visions of man can be misinterpreted. God decided to reveal everything that humanity needs to know about Him, what He expects, and what He has done for us in the Bible.
The ultimate form of special revelation is the Person of Jesus Christ. God became a human being (John 1:1, 14\). Hebrews 1:1\-3 summarizes it best, “In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son … The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being.” God became a human being, in the Person of Jesus Christ, to identify with us, to set an example for us, to teach us, to reveal Himself to us, and, most importantly, to provide salvation for us by humbling Himself in death on the cross (Philippians 2:6\-8\). Jesus Christ is the ultimate “special revelation” from God.
|
Can a person be saved through general revelation? |
Answer
General revelation can be defined as “the revelation of God to all people, at all times, and in all places that reveals that God exists and that He is intelligent, powerful, and transcendent.” Scriptures such as Psalm 19:1–4 and Romans 1:20 clearly state that certain things about God can be understood from His creation around us. Creation reveals God’s power and majesty, but it does not reveal the plan of salvation through Christ. There is only salvation in Jesus’ name (Acts 4:12\); therefore, a person cannot be saved simply through general revelation. Usually, the question, “Can a person be saved through general revelation?” is asked in relation to another question, “What happens to those who have never heard the gospel?”
Sadly, there are still parts of the world with absolutely no access to the Bible, to the gospel of Jesus Christ, or to any means of learning Christian truth. The question then arises, what happens to these people when they die? Is it fair for God to condemn a person who has never heard the gospel or of Jesus Christ? Some propose the idea that God judges those who have never heard based on how they responded to general revelation. The presumption is that, if a person truly believes what can be known about God through general revelation, God will judge the person based on that faith and allow the person entrance into heaven.
The problem is that Scripture declares that, unless a person is in Christ, he or she “stands condemned already” (John 3:18\). Romans 3:10–12, quoting Psalm 14:3, pronounces the unregenerate nature to be universally sinful: “There is no one righteous, not even one; there is no one who understands, no one who seeks God. All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one.” According to Scripture, the knowledge of God is *available* (through general revelation), but mankind perverts it to his own liking. Romans 1:21–23 states, “For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.” The status of those without God is one of rebellion, darkness, and idolatry.
Man rebels despite general revelation. Sinful man willfully rejects what can be known of God through nature and seeks ways to avoid the truth (see John 3:19\). Since man does not naturally seek God, God must seek him—and that is exactly what He did, in the Person of Jesus Christ. Jesus came “to seek and to save the lost” (Luke 19:10\).
A good example of our need for the gospel is found in Acts 10\. [Cornelius](Cornelius-in-the-Bible.html) knew about God and was “devout and God\-fearing; he gave generously to those in need and prayed to God regularly” (Acts 10:2\). Did God save Cornelius because of his devotion to God based on the limited knowledge he had? No. Cornelius needed to hear about Jesus. God instructed Cornelius to contact the apostle Peter and invite him to come to Cornelius’ home. Cornelius obeyed, and Peter came and presented the gospel to Cornelius and his family. Cornelius and his household believed in Jesus and were therefore saved (Acts 10:44–48\). No one, not even a “good” man like Cornelius, is saved simply by believing that God exists or by honoring God in certain ways. The *only* way of salvation is the gospel of Jesus Christ (John 14:6; Acts 4:12\).
General revelation can be seen as a universal call for people to acknowledge God’s existence. But general revelation, by itself, is not enough to lead a person to salvation in Christ. That is why it is so important for us to proclaim the gospel throughout the whole world (Matthew 28:19–20; Acts 1:8\). Romans 10:14 declares, “How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them?” Faith in the good news of salvation through Jesus Christ is the only means of salvation (John 3:16\).
|
Is the pope the Vicar of Christ? |
Answer
The term "vicar" comes from the Latin word *vicarius*, which means "instead of." In the Catholic Church, the vicar is the representative of a higher\-ranking official, with all of the same authority and power that that official has. Calling the pope the "Vicar of Christ" implies that he has the same power and authority that Christ had over the church. The title is derived from Jesus’ words in John 21:16\-17 to Peter, "Feed my lambs . . . Take care of my sheep." This, according to Catholic reasoning, defines Peter as the Prince of the Apostles, the first pope, and fulfills the words of Jesus in Matthew 16:18\-19 (calling Peter the rock upon which Jesus will build His church).
For a better understanding of whether or not it is biblical to consider that a mere man is the representative of Christ, we turn to the pages of Scripture to find out what it says about Jesus’ role in our lives, when He walked the earth and what He continues to do right now. The letter to the Hebrews draws the comparison between Jesus and the high priest Melchizedek (Genesis chapter 14\) and contrasts this with the old Levitical priesthood. The question posed is, if perfection could be obtained by following the law, why was another priest to come (Hebrews 7:11\)?
The writer says, “For it is clear that our Lord descended from Judah, and in regard to that tribe Moses said nothing about priests. And what we have said is even more clear if another priest like Melchizedek appears, one who has become a priest not on the basis of a regulation as to his ancestry but on the basis of power of an indestructible life. For it is declared ‘You are a high priest forever in the order of Melchizedek.’ The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless (for the law made nothing perfect), and a better hope is introduced, by which we draw near to God” (Hebrews 7:14\-19\).
This makes Jesus superior to the priests, and more importantly, the high priests. This is the key text: “Now there have been many of those priests, since death prevented them from continuing in office; but because Jesus lives forever, He has a permanent priesthood. Therefore, He is able to save completely those who come to God through Him, because He always lives to intercede for them” (Hebrews 7:23\-25\).
This means that Jesus is our high priest forever. Since He is "holy, blameless, pure, set apart from sinners, \[and] exalted above the heavens" (Hebrews 7:26\), He is unlike other priests in that He "does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for His own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once and for all when He offered Himself" (Hebrews 7:27\). Men are appointed by the Law, and men are weak. But the Son was appointed by the New Covenant, and He has been made perfect forever (Hebrews 7:28\). The ministry of Jesus is superior to the old, and it is founded on better promises (Hebrews 8:6\).
The Bible says of Jesus that there is no other name by which men can be saved (Acts 4:12\). There is only one mediator between God and men, and that is Jesus Christ (1 Timothy 2:5\). We can now see that there is no biblical foundation for claiming to be a representative of Christ on earth. No man could do what Christ has done, or what Christ is now doing on behalf of humankind. But the title of vicar also carries with it another implication: the bearer has the same jurisdictional power of the official he represents. In Matthew 16:18, Jesus Christ is the one who says He will build His church; He never delegates this power. By claiming the title of Vicar of Christ, the reigning pope is, in fact, promising to do what Christ promised.
Jesus does indeed predict a “vicar” in the sense of a “replacement” for His physical presence here on earth. However, this “vicar of Christ” is not a priest, high priest, bishop, or pope. The only biblical “Vicar of Christ” is the Holy Spirit. John 14:26 declares, “But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.” John 14:16\-18 proclaims, “And I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Counselor to be with you forever — the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept Him, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him. But you know Him, for He lives with you and will be in you. I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you.” The Holy Spirit is Christ’s “replacement” on the earth. The Holy Spirit is our Counselor, Teacher (John 14:26\), and guide into all truth (John 16:13\).
In claiming that the pope is the “Vicar of Christ,” the Catholic Church rejects the sufficiency and supremacy of Christ’s priesthood, and grants to the pope roles that Christ Himself declared would belong to the Holy Spirit. It is therefore blasphemy to ascribe to the pope the title of “Vicar of Christ.”
|
What is the meaning of the Parable of the Fig Tree? |
Answer
Jesus told the Parable of the Fig Tree—Luke 13:6\-9—immediately after reminding His listeners of a [tower](tower-of-Siloam.html) over the [pool of Siloam](Pool-of-Siloam.html) (John 9:7\) which unexpectedly fell and killed eighteen people. The moral of that story is found in Luke 13:3: “Unless you repent, you will likewise perish.” To reiterate this moral, Jesus tells the story of the fig tree, the vineyard owner, and the gardener who took care of the vineyard.
The three entities in the story all have clear symbolic significance. The vineyard owner represents God, the one who rightly expects to see fruit on His tree and who justly decides to destroy it when He finds none. The gardener, or vineyard keeper who cares for the trees, watering and fertilizing them to bring them to their peak of fruitfulness, represents Jesus, who feeds His people and gives them living water. The tree itself has two symbolic meanings: the nation of Israel and the individual.
As the story unfolds, we see the vineyard owner expressing his disappointment at the fruitless tree. He has looked for fruit for three years from this tree, but has found none. The three\-year period is significant because for three years John the Baptist and Jesus had been preaching the message of repentance throughout Israel. But the fruits of repentance were not forthcoming. John the Baptist warned the people about the Messiah coming and told them to bring forth fruits fit for repentance because the ax was already laid at the root of the tree (Luke 3:8\-9\). But the Jews were offended by the idea they needed to repent, and they rejected their Messiah because He demanded repentance from them. After all, they had the revelation of God, the prophets, the Scriptures, the covenants, and the adoption (Romans 9:4\-5\). They had it all, but they were already apostate. They had departed from the true faith and the true and living God and created a system of works\-righteousness that was an abomination to God. He, as the vineyard owner, was perfectly justified in tearing down the tree that had no fruit. The Lord’s ax was already poised over the root of the tree, and it was ready to fall.
However, we see the gardener pleading here for a little more time. There were a few months before the crucifixion, and more miracles to come, especially the incredible miracle of the raising of Lazarus from the dead, which would astound many and perhaps cause the Jews to repent. As it turned out, Israel as a nation still did not believe, but individuals certainly did (John 12:10\-11\). The compassionate gardener intercedes for more time to water and fertilize the fruitless tree, and the gracious Lord of the vineyard responds in patience.
The lesson for the individual is that borrowed time is not permanent. God’s patience has a limit. In the parable, the vineyard owner grants another year of life to the tree. In the same way, God in His mercy grants us another day, another hour, another breath. Christ stands at the door of each man’s heart knocking and seeking to gain entrance and requiring repentance from sin. But if there is no fruit, no repentance, His patience will come to an end, and the fruitless, unrepentant individual will be cut down. We all live on borrowed time; judgment is near. That is why the prophet Isaiah wrote, "Seek the LORD while he may be found; call on him while he is near. Let the wicked forsake his way and the evil man his thoughts. Let him turn to the LORD, and he will have mercy on him, and to our God, for he will freely pardon" (Isaiah 55:6\-7\).
|
What does the Bible say about lending money? |
Answer
God’s Word says that many people wander from the faith and pierce themselves with many griefs when they allow money to have an improper hold on their hearts. That’s why the Bible contains hundreds of verses on how God wants us to treat money, and this includes the lending of it.
Moses addressed this issue in the Old Testament. Essentially, the Israelites were not permitted to charge interest when they loaned money to an impoverished brother. They could, however, charge interest on loans made to foreigners. This rule was part of the Mosaic Law: “If you lend money to one of my people among you who is needy, do not be like a moneylender; charge him no interest” (Exodus 22:25; see also Psalm 15:5\). This prohibition against charging interest actually included “food or anything else that may earn interest” (Deuteronomy 23:19\). The purpose of the law was two\-fold: an interest\-bearing loan would only exacerbate the plight of the poor, and God promised a blessing on the gracious lender that would far surpass any interest he would make. Additionally, at the end of every seven years, creditors were to cancel all the debts they were owed by fellow Israelites (Deuteronomy 15:1\).
In the New Testament, Jesus tells us not to “turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you” (Matthew 5:42\). He applied this principle even to our enemies in their time of need: “But love your enemies and **lend to them** without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great” (Luke 6:35, emphasis added). Indeed, there are numerous passages throughout the Bible exhorting us to have a generous and giving heart, especially to the less fortunate. Moses taught his people, “If there is a poor man among your brothers in any of the towns of the land that the LORD your God is giving you, do not be hardhearted or tightfisted toward your poor brother. Rather be openhanded and freely lend him whatever he needs” (Deuteronomy 15:7\-8\).
The clear teaching of the Bible is that God expects His children to act righteously when lending money. And it helps us to remember that our ability to produce wealth comes from God (Deuteronomy 8:18\) and it is God who “sends \[both] poverty and wealth; He humbles and He exalts” (1 Samuel 2:7\). Now, there is nothing wrong with legitimately loaning money and expecting to be repaid at a fair rate of interest. Yet we need to remember that the Bible’s teaching on money matters also includes borrowing money and indebtedness. Although the Bible does not expressly forbid borrowing money, it doesn’t encourage it, either. It is not God’s best for His people, as debt essentially makes one a slave to the lender (Proverbs 22:7\). God would rather have us look to Him for our needs than rely on lenders. Additionally, as the psalmist makes clear, we are to repay our debts (Psalm 37:21\). When we loan money to someone, we increase that person’s debt load and make it easier for him to stumble.
Someone once said, “Before borrowing money from a friend, decide which you need most.” There is no doubt that friendships have been strained or even lost due to the lending of money. Yet, if both parties stay within biblical parameters, there shouldn’t be a problem. Nonetheless, to forego jeopardizing a relationship you value, in some situations a gift may be better than a loan. God expects His children to give to those in need, so we give of our time, talents and treasure. As Jesus taught us, “Give, and it will be given to you. A good measure, pressed down, shaken together and running over, will be poured into your lap. For with the measure you use, it will be measured to you” (Luke 6:38\).
|
Why does Isaiah 45:7 say that God created evil? |
Answer
In Isaiah 45:1–7, the prophet foresees God calling and anointing King Cyrus of Persia to be His chosen instrument to subdue nations (namely Babylon) for the sake of His people Israel. Cyrus, who was not yet born at the time of the prophecy, did not know the Lord or even acknowledge His existence, making him an unlikely choice to be God’s anointed. The pick of Cyrus proved all the more that God is sovereign and in control of all things and people. As the only true God and Creator of all life, His authority and decisions cannot truly be challenged:
“There is none beside me.
I am the Lord, and there is none else.
I form the light, and create darkness:
I make peace, and create evil:
I the Lord do all these things” (Isaiah 45:6–7, KJV 1900\).
If everything God created was good (Genesis 1:31; 1 Timothy 4:4; James 1:17\), why does Isaiah 45:7 say God created evil? The Hebrew word translated as “evil” (*ra‘*) in the King James Version of Isaiah 45:7 has two applications in the Bible. The term can be used in the sense of moral evil, such as wickedness and sin (Matthew 12:35; Judges 3:12; Proverbs 8:13; 3 John 1:11\), or it can refer to harmful natural events, calamity, misfortune, adversity, affliction, or disaster. It is in this second sense that Isaiah speaks, and his meaning is reflected in most modern Bible translations of Isaiah 45:7 (emphasis added): “I make success and create **disaster**” (HCSB); “I make well\-being and create **calamity**” (ESV); “I send good times and **bad times**” (NLT).
God does not create moral evil. For one thing, moral evil is not a “thing” to be made but a choice or intent contrary to God’s good purposes, His holy character, and His law. Moral evil does not conform to God and His will. God is good (Psalm 34:8\), holy (Leviticus 11:44; Isaiah 6:3; 1 Peter 1:16\), and loving (1 John 4:8\); therefore, His plans and purposes are good, holy, and loving.
As Ruler of the universe, God sometimes creates calamity to accomplish His will. He brought disaster to discipline His people when they turned their backs on Him and refused to repent (Jeremiah 18:17\). And He promised to bring calamity to Babylon through Cyrus for the sake of His chosen people—to restore them to their homeland and rebuild their ruined cities (Isaiah 41:8–10; 44:26; 45:4; 2 Chronicles 36:22–23; Ezra 1:3\).
As the Sovereign King over all earthly kings, God can make light or darkness and create peace or calamity. He can use Cyrus as His agent of redemption and peace for Israel and as the bringer of calamity upon Babylon. God moved beyond the boundaries of Israel, selecting a world power that did not even recognize His sovereignty to accomplish His greater kingdom purposes. Cyrus would be the Lord’s divine instrument to help spread the good news of God’s “righteousness” and “salvation” (see Isaiah 45:8\) to “all the world from east to west” (Isaiah 45:6, NLT). Cyrus would be the channel, but God was the Architect and Inventor of it all.
God’s sovereign rule over all things good and bad—over success and calamity for His people Israel—is cause for hope in the lives of believers today. We can trust and “know that God causes everything to work together for the good of those who love God and are called according to his purpose for them” (Romans 8:28, NLT). God’s purpose is to bring us to spiritual maturity (Romans 8:29; Ephesians 1:4; 5:27; Colossians 1:22; 1 Thessalonians 4:3; Jude 1:24\). Our experiences may seem bright or dark, peaceful or disastrous, but God promises to craft them all together, even adversity, affliction, and “evil,” for our ultimate benefit.
|
What is hope theology / theology of hope? |
Answer
The “theology of hope” is a theological perspective. Hope theology has been championed by many theologians, though the most influential by far has been Jurgen Moltmann of Germany. Moltmann’s experiences in a prisoner\-of\-war camp at the end of World War II led him to a personal relationship with Jesus Christ in which hope played a great part. This subsequently influenced his theological studies. Moltmann believed that God’s promise to work in the future is more important than what He has done in the past. The implication of this focus on the future is not withdrawal from the world in hope that a better world will somehow evolve. Rather, the theology of hope advocates active participation in the world in order to speed the coming of that better world. According to the theology of hope, the Christian is to be impatient and dissatisfied with current status of the world: “Faith, whenever it develops into hope, causes not rest but unrest, not patience but impatience“ (from *Theology of Hope: for the 21st Century*, SCM Press, 2021, p. 21\).
Theology of hope makes eschatology its central governing concept; all other teachings revolve around eschatology, and are only properly understood in that view. It begins not with creation, but with the resurrection of Christ (1 Peter 1:3\). Instead of a dispensational view of eschatology, theology of hope has an advent view of eschatology. The future events as promised in the Bible become current events, not coming events. This does not mean that the events have already taken place, but that these events are in process right now. A believer’s hope cannot rely upon a future which at some point becomes present then past, but rather on advent, in which all events are dynamically in process.
The whole idea behind the “theology of hope” is the hope of the believer. It is hope which sustains and carries each believer through life. As stated in 1 Peter 1:3, “Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! In his great mercy he has given us new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.” It is hope that changes us, hope that changes the world. It is an expectation that the promises of God are already in the process of fulfillment. While the theology of hope does have its value, its tendency to blur the lines between future fulfillment and current experience should be a cause of some concern. As with any doctrine, we must always go back to the Word of God as our standard.
|
What does the Bible say about self-hatred? |
Answer
Self\-hatred, to varying degrees, is not uncommon, but hating oneself is not what God would have for us. The world would tell us that the solution to self\-hatred is [self\-love](self-love.html). It offers various ways to conjure up this love and acceptance for self. While some are healthy practices, none are permanent solutions that speak to the depths of the needs of our souls. The Bible, on the other hand, tells us that the solution to self\-hatred is having an accurate view of God and of oneself in light of who God is.
First, let’s understand what causes self\-hatred. Some may arrive at self\-hatred because they consider themselves losers who lack certain talents or resources (intelligence, personal connections, money, and influence). Anyone who accepts the idealized standards of beauty, success, and power as portrayed in the mass media—and fails to live up to those standards—may arrive at the unreasonable conclusion that he or she is not worthy of love and begin to sink into self\-hatred. People may hate themselves because of the things they have done in their pasts, or they might hate themselves because of things with which they are currently struggling, like addiction or unhealthy relationships. In short, self\-hatred results from not living up to standards either we or others have set for acceptability. In our recognition that we cannot be perfect, we may descend into self\-hatred.
Biblically speaking, we know we are sinners who are separated from God (Romans 3:23; 6:23; Ephesians 2:1–5\). There is a standard that we will have failed to live up to and will never be able to live up to on our own (Romans 3:20\). Apart from God, we are without hope. But this is not cause to hate ourselves. Rather, it is cause to turn to God and to rely on His grace. He has made a way of salvation! God created humanity in His image (Genesis 1:27\). He loves us, and we reflect Him. Though sin marred this image, God did not abandon us. Instead, He sent His Son, Jesus, who, though remaining fully God, took on human flesh. Jesus lived a perfect life. He then died to pay the penalty for our sin, and He rose again to prove His victory over sin and death (1 Corinthians 15:3–7; Romans 5:6–11; Philippians 2:5–11\). All who put their faith in Him are saved (John 3:16–18; Romans 10:9\). This is cause for great rejoicing! When we become a redeemed child of God, there is no reason to hate ourselves.
If you have not been [reconciled with God](reconciliation.html) and brought into personal relationship with Him through Jesus Christ, that is the first step in overcoming self\-hatred. But we know that even those who have trusted Jesus as their Savior can struggle with hatred of self. What is the solution for that? Having a biblical view of who God is and who you are. Romans 12:1–2 says, “Therefore, I urge you, brothers and sisters, in view of God’s mercy, 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.” Committing our lives to God in action and thought—having a renewed and transformed mind and living our lives for God—is how we overcome self\-hatred.
What are some of the things the Bible says about who God is? God is holy, just, gracious, merciful, and compassionate (1 Peter 1:16; Psalm 103:8–12; Hebrews 6:10; Colossians 3:25; Nehemiah 9:31\). He is the Creator, all\-powerful, all\-knowing, and ever\-present. God is unchanging (Malachi 3:6; Hebrews 13:5\). God’s ways are above ours, and His Word accomplishes what He intends (Isaiah 55:8–11\). God’s promises are true. God is love, and He loves you (1 John 4:7–10\). Self\-hatred is simply not compatible with this truth.
It has been quipped that “God made you on purpose and for a purpose.” [Your life has meaning](meaning-of-life.html). God gives us many instructions in His Word about His will for our lives and how we are to live. Things like regularly studying the Bible and coming to God in prayer help us understand who God is and His heart for us. Our love for God and our trust in Him grows. Consequently, self\-hatred wanes.
When we obey God’s Word, we orient our lives to truth. This will naturally result in focusing less on ourselves, the world’s perceptions, and our own false idols. It will also result in our more often saying no to sin—which is important because sin is a primary cause of self\-hatred. When we do sin, the Bible tells us that we can come to God and receive forgiveness and mercy (1 John 1:9; Hebrews 4:14–16\). It assures us that sin has been defeated and that we need no longer live in it or in hatred of ourselves over it. We can hate the sin within us, but we do not hate ourselves because in Jesus Christ there is no condemnation and nothing that can separate us from God’s love (Romans 7—8\). When our minds and lives are steeped in truth, there is no room for self\-hatred.
Doing things like actively loving others in our words and deeds, as God calls us to, helps us have an accurate view of ourselves. Serving others can actually contribute to our own well\-being and thus remove opportunity for self\-hatred to arise. Spending time regularly with other believers and exercising our spiritual gifts within the body of Christ also helps us have a better view of God and of self. Fellow believers are our family, and they can help us reject notions of self\-hatred. Obeying God, both in loving Him and in loving others, is life\-giving (see John 15:1–11\).
The solution to self\-hatred is so much deeper than mere worldly self\-love. A person who knows and trusts God derives his or her worth from God. That worth is unchanging. The words of Ephesians 1:3–14 are true of anyone who has been born again in Jesus Christ. We have been blessed with every spiritual blessing (verse 3\), so self\-hatred due to perceived lack of ability is unfounded. We have been chosen to be holy and blameless in His sight (verse 4\), redeemed (verse 7\), and forgiven (verse 7\); we need not hate ourselves due to guilt over past sin. We have been predestined for adoption as sons (verse 5\) and marked with the seal of the indwelling Holy Spirit (verses 13–14\); we are not alone. God “lavished” “the riches” of His grace on us (verses 7–8\). God’s love for us “surpasses knowledge” (Ephesians 3:17–19\). When we understand this type of acceptance and position in God, there is simply no room for self\-hate.
|
Is God dead? |
Answer
The technical term for the teaching that "God is dead" is theothanatology, a three\-fold compound from the Greek: theos (god) \+ thanatos (death) \+ logia (word).
German poet and philosopher [Friedrich Nietzsche](Friedrich-Nietzsche.html) is most famous for making the statement "God is dead" in the Nineteenth Century. Nietzsche, influenced by both Greek philosophy and the theory of evolution, wrote, "God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we, murderers of all murderers, console ourselves? . . . Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we not ourselves become gods simply to be worthy of it?" (Nietzsche, The Gay Science, §125\).
Nietzsche’s purpose was to abolish "traditional" morality\-Christianity, in particular\-because, in his mind, it represented an attempt of self\-serving religious leaders to control the weak and unthinking masses. Nietzsche believed that the "idea" of God was no longer necessary; in fact, God was irrelevant because man was evolving to a place where he could create a deeper and more satisfying "master morality" of his own.
Nietzsche’s “God is dead” philosophy has been used to advance the theories of existentialism, nihilism, and socialism. Radical theologians such as Thomas J. J. Altizer and Paul van Buren advocated the "God is dead" idea in the 1960s and 1970s.
The belief that God is dead and religion is irrelevant naturally leads to the following ideas:
1\) If God is dead, there are no moral absolutes and no universal standard to which all men should conform.
2\) If God is dead, there is no purpose or rational order in life.
3\) If God is dead, any design seen in the universe is projected by men who are desperate to find meaning in life.
4\) If God is dead, man is independent and totally free to create his own values.
5\) If God is dead, the "real" world (as opposed to a heaven and hell) is man’s only concern.
The idea that "God is dead" is primarily a challenge to God’s authority over our lives. The notion that we can safely create our own rules was the lie that the serpent told Eve: "ye shall be as gods" (Genesis 3:5\). Peter warns us that "there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction" (2 Peter 2:1\).
The "God is dead" argument is usually presented as a rational, empowering philosophy for artists and intellectuals. But Scripture calls it foolish. "The fool hath said in his heart, 'There is no God'" (Psalm 14:1\). Ironically, those who hold to the “God is dead” philosophy will discover the fatal error in the philosophy when they themselves are dead.
|
Why is it important to believe in biblical inerrancy? |
Answer
We live in a time that tends to shrug its shoulders when confronted with error. Instead of asking, like Pilate, “What is truth?” postmodern man says, “Nothing is truth” or perhaps “There is truth, but we cannot know it.” We’ve grown accustomed to being lied to, and many people seem comfortable with the false notion that the Bible, too, contains errors.
The doctrine of biblical inerrancy is an extremely important one because the truth does matter. This issue reflects on the character of God and is foundational to our understanding of everything the Bible teaches. Here are some reasons why we should absolutely believe in biblical inerrancy:
1\. The Bible itself claims to be perfect. “And the words of the Lord are flawless, like silver refined in a furnace of clay, purified seven times” (Psalm 12:6\). “The law of the Lord is perfect” (Psalm 19:7\). “Every word of God is pure” (Proverbs 30:5 KJV). These claims of purity and perfection are absolute statements. Note that it doesn’t say God’s Word is “mostly” pure or scripture is “nearly” perfect. The Bible argues for complete perfection, leaving no room for “partial perfection” theories.
2\. The Bible stands or falls as a whole. If a major newspaper were routinely discovered to contain errors, it would be quickly discredited. It would make no difference to say, “All the errors are confined to page three.” For a paper to be reliable in any of its parts, it must be factual throughout. In the same way, if the Bible is inaccurate when it speaks of geology, why should its theology be trusted? It is either a trustworthy document, or it is not.
3\. The Bible is a reflection of its Author. All books are. The Bible was written by God Himself as He worked through human authors in a process called “inspiration.” “All scripture is God\-breathed” (2 Timothy 3:16\). See also 2 Peter 1:21 and Jeremiah 1:12\.
We believe that the God who created the universe is capable of writing a book. And the God who is perfect is capable of writing a perfect book. The issue is not simply “Does the Bible have a mistake?” but “Can God make a mistake?” If the Bible contains factual errors, then God is not omniscient and is capable of making errors Himself. If the Bible contains misinformation, then God is not truthful but is instead a liar. If the Bible contains contradictions, then God is the author of confusion. In other words, if biblical inerrancy is not true, then God is not God.
4\. The Bible judges us, not vice versa. “For the word of God...judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart” (Hebrews 4:12\). Notice the relationship between “the heart” and “the Word.” The Word examines; the heart is being examined. To discount parts of the Word for any reason is to reverse this process. We become the examiners, and the Word must submit to our “superior insight.” Yet God says, “But who are you, O man, to talk back to God?” (Romans 9:20\).
5\. The Bible’s message must be taken as a whole. It is not a mixture of doctrine that we are free to select from. Many people like the verses that say God loves them, but they dislike the verses that say God will judge sinners. But we simply cannot pick and choose what we like about the Bible and throw the rest away. If the Bible is wrong about hell, for example, then who is to say it is right about heaven—or about anything else? If the Bible cannot get the details right about creation, then maybe the details about salvation cannot be trusted either. If the story of Jonah is a myth, then perhaps so is the story of Jesus. On the contrary, God has said what He has said, and the Bible presents us a full picture of who God is. “Your word, O Lord, is eternal; it stands firm in the heavens” (Psalm 119:89\).
6\. The Bible is our only rule for faith and practice. If it is not reliable, then on what do we base our beliefs? Jesus asks for our trust, and that includes trust in what He says in His Word. John 6:67\-69 is a beautiful passage. Jesus had just witnessed the departure of many who had claimed to follow Him. Then He turns to the twelve apostles and asks, “You do not want to leave too, do you?” At this, Peter speaks for the rest when he says, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life.” May we have the same trust in the Lord and in His words of life.
None of what we have presented here should be taken as a rejection of true scholarship. Biblical inerrancy does not mean that we are to stop using our minds or accept what the Bible says blindly. We are commanded to study the Word (2 Timothy 2:15\), and those who search it out are commended (Acts 17:11\). Also, we recognize that there are difficult passages in the Bible, as well as sincere disagreements over interpretation. Our goal is to approach Scripture reverently and prayerfully, and when we find something we do not understand, we pray harder, study more, and—if the answer still eludes us—humbly acknowledge our own limitations in the face of the perfect Word of God.
|
Is the Holy Spirit a “He,” “She,” or “It,” male, female, or neuter? |
Answer
A common mistake made with regard to the Holy Spirit is referring to the Spirit as "it," something most translations of the Bible are careful to avoid. The Holy Spirit is a person. He has the attributes of personhood, performs the actions of persons, and has personal relationships. He has insight (1 Corinthians 2:10\-11\). He knows things, which requires an intellect (Romans 8:27\). He has a will (1 Corinthians 12:11\). He convicts of sin (John 16:8\). He performs miracles (Acts 8:39\). He guides (John 16:13\). He intercedes between persons (Romans 8:26\). He is to be obeyed (Acts 10:19\-20\). He can be lied to (Acts 5:3\), resisted (Acts 7:51\), grieved (Ephesians 4:30\), blasphemed (Matthew 12:31\), even insulted (Hebrews 10:29\). He relates to the apostles (Acts 15:28\) and to each member of the Trinity (John 16:14; Matthew 28:19; 2 Corinthians 13:14\). The personhood of the Holy Spirit is presented without question in the Bible, but what about gender?
Linguistically, it is clear that masculine theistic terminology dominates the Scriptures. Throughout both testaments, references to God use masculine pronouns. Specific names for God (e.g., *Yahweh, Elohim, Adonai, Kurios, Theos*, etc.) are all in the masculine gender. God is never given a feminine name or referred to using feminine pronouns. In the New Testament, the Holy Spirit is referred to by the Greek word for "spirit" (*pneuma*), a gender\-neutral term. In the Old Testament, the Hebrew word for "spirit" (*ruach*) is feminine (see Genesis 1:2\). But the gender of a word in Greek or Hebrew has nothing to do with gender identity.
Theologically speaking, since the Holy Spirit is God, we can make some statements about Him from general statements about God. God is spirit as opposed to physical or material. God is invisible and spirit (i.e., non\-body) \- (John 4:24; Luke 24:39; Romans 1:20; Colossians 1:15; 1 Timothy 1:17\). This is why no material thing was ever to be used to represent God (Exodus 20:4\). If gender is an attribute of the body, then a spirit does not have gender. God, in His essence, has no gender.
Gender identifications of God in the Bible are not unanimous. Many people think that the Bible presents God in exclusively male terms, but this is not the case. God is said to give birth in the book of Job and portrays Himself as a mother in Isaiah. Jesus described the Father as being like a woman in search of a lost coin in Luke 15 (and Himself as a "mother hen" in Matthew 23:37\). In Genesis 1:26\-27 God said, "Let us make humankind in our image, after our likeness," and then "God created humankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them, male and female he created them." Thus, the image of God was male and female \- not simply one or the other. This is further confirmed in Genesis 5:2, which can be literally translated as "He created them male and female; when they were created, he blessed them and named them Adam." The Hebrew term "adam" means "man" \- the context showing whether it means "man" (as opposed to woman) or "mankind" (in the collective sense). Therefore, to whatever degree humanity is made in the image of God, gender is not an issue.
Masculine imagery in revelation is not without significance, however. A second time that God was specifically said to be revealed via a physical image was when Jesus was asked to show the Father to the disciples in John chapter 14\. He responds in verse 9 by saying, “The person who has seen me has seen the Father!" Paul makes it clear that Jesus was the exact image of God in Colossians 1:15 calling Jesus "the image of the invisible God." This verse is couched in a section that demonstrates Christ’s superiority over all creation. Most ancient religions believed in a pantheon \- both gods and goddesses \- that were worthy of worship. But one of Judeo\-Christianity’s distinctives is its belief in a supreme Creator. Masculine language better relates this relationship of creator to creation. As a man comes into a woman from without to make her pregnant, so God creates the universe from without rather than birthing it from within . . . As a woman cannot impregnate herself, so the universe cannot create itself. Paul echoes this idea in 1 Timothy 2:12\-14 when he refers to the creation order as a template for church order.
In the end, whatever our theological explanation, the fact is that God used exclusively masculine terms to refer to Himself and almost exclusively masculine terminology even in metaphor. Through the Bible He taught us how to speak of Him, and it was in masculine relational terms. So, while the Holy Spirit is neither male nor female in His essence, He is properly referred to in the masculine by virtue of His relation to creation and biblical revelation. There is absolutely no biblical basis for viewing the Holy Spirit as the “female” member of the Trinity.
|
Is it wrong for parents to select the gender of their children? |
Answer
PGD stands for “pre\-implantation genetic diagnosis.” It is a procedure in which a woman’s eggs are collected, fertilized in a dish (through in\-vitro fertilization), and then tested for genetic defects. If abnormalities are found, the embryos are destroyed. Though this procedure can be used to select the gender of a child (gender selection), it was never meant for this purpose, and many physicians will not use it for such.
The main approach to gender selection is done by sorting and separating sperm before fertilization. Sperm are separated into a male group, a female group, and an abnormal group. The abnormal sperm are discarded, and the proper sperm for whichever gender is desired are then used to fertilize a woman’s eggs in\-vitro.
In both cases, the normal procedure is for many eggs to be fertilized, then only a woman’s choice of embryos to be implanted. This means that the rest of the embryos, though viable, are destroyed or given to embryonic research. Passages such as Exodus 21:22\-25, Psalm 139:13\-16, and Jeremiah 1:5 make it clear that God views human life as beginning at conception, and that throughout the process of development within the womb, a baby has the same right to defense of its life as an adult.
Embryo destruction and the controversial PGD aside, many believe that gender selection has little moral complication. Sperm sorting does not offer a 100% guarantee that a baby will be the gender selected. Because of this, people reason that if God wants that baby to be a boy instead of the chosen girl, or vice\-versa, then He will intervene in the fertilization process. While this may be true, when it comes down to it, gender selection is all about selfishness.
There is simply no good reason, medical or otherwise, for a person to medically determine a child’s gender. James 3:15\-16 reads, "For jealousy and selfishness are not God’s kind of wisdom. Such things are earthly, unspiritual, and motivated by the Devil. For wherever there is jealousy and selfish ambition, there you will find disorder and every kind of evil." Throughout the Bible, we are exhorted to find contentment in our circumstances and not to pursue selfishness. Because our lives are to be modeled after Christ’s own selflessness, selfishness is a sin. Therefore, the Bible does not support gender selection.
|
I want a baby, but my spouse does not. What do we do? |
Answer
The Bible declares children to be a blessing. Psalm 127:3 says, "Behold, children are a heritage from the Lord, the fruit of the womb is a reward." This is contrary to the way much of the world views children—as a hindrance and a burden. Children should not be viewed as a liability.
The lack of desire to have children sometimes stems from selfish motives. Some people do not want children because they want to focus on themselves, their careers, and their money. They do not want to be “tied down” or give up their expensive cars, homes, or vacations. This kind of attitude is sinful. Others do not want children because of fears about not being able to parent successfully or not being able to afford to raise the child properly. Some have fears about childbirth itself. God is big enough to handle these fears. For others, not wanting children has to do with wounds from painful past experiences. God can bring healing to these hurts. For others, the reason for not wanting children might come from something completely different.
Without knowing the reasons for not wanting to have children, it is difficult to determine whether or not the feelings are "wrong." Are there health issues? Are there unresolved issues from childhood? These are things that should be discussed between spouses, and if need be, Christian marriage counseling should be sought.
As Christians, our devotion should first be to God, who says that children are a blessing. After that, the most important relationship is with our spouse. If it is very important to a spouse to have children, it should definitely be considered, with an attitude of respect and submission (see Ephesians 5:21\-33\). Practically speaking, this is a topic that should be thoroughly discussed before marriage.
If we devote ourselves to prayer, Bible reading, and meditation, God will reveal His will if we put Him first. Romans 12:2 declares, “And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.”
|
What does the Bible say about permanent forms of birth control? |
Answer
[Birth control](birth-control.html) can be a controversial subject among Christians because the Bible does not clearly condone or condemn its use. Neither does the Bible address permanent forms of birth control such as tubal ligation or vasectomy, as these procedures were unknown in Bible times. Birth control, permanent or otherwise, is a matter of the heart and of a husband’s and wife’s personal convictions.
In any discussion of permanent birth control, we must recognize that children are a gift from God (Psalm 127:3–5\). Children are not burdens to bear but blessings to receive with joy. From a biblical perspective, every married couple should [“expect” to have children](should-I-have-children.html) and at least be prepared for the possibility. The inability to have children was considered a curse in ancient times, and the ability to conceive a joy. No one in the Bible is ever recorded as being unhappy about bearing children.
Permanent birth control (i.e., a vasectomy or tubal ligation) may be appropriate for some couples who feel they should not have any more children. There may be health, financial, or relationship issues to consider. The decision to utilize permanent birth control should not be based on selfishness or vanity (Philippians 2:3–4\) but on a desire to please God and follow His will.
Many people feel we should desire to have children just as we desire to receive all of God’s blessings and that we should not limit family size through permanent birth control. However, because the Bible does not forbid contraception, temporary or permanent, we cannot say that it is wrong in all circumstances. Through our personal relationships with God, we can seek God’s will to determine the size of our families.
|
What does the Bible say about Limbo? |
Answer
The root of the word *limbo* is “the edge of a hem on a garment,” so the word itself is telling us that limbo is someplace which borders very close to another. A very broad definition of *limbo* is “a zone which exists between two definite places.” The Bible does not give the name “limbo” to any specific place or realm, but various people have used the word “limbo” in various ways.
One Roman Catholic tradition names a “limbo” for children who die before their baptisms or die outside of the Roman Catholic religion. There is no biblical support for this view. It is merely a religious opinion which has been handed down by Catholic theologians. For a study on the destiny of children who die, please read our article on the [age of accountability](age-of-accountability.html).
The closest biblical account for a “limbo” concerns “Abraham’s bosom” and “paradise” in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19\-31\). Although some view it as a parable to teach a truth concerning prophecies declaring the kingdom of God, the places mentioned must exist or Jesus would not have used them. Parables are not based upon imaginary objects and locations, but on things which are real. So before the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, there were two places souls went upon death. One place is at the side of Abraham (often described as Abraham’s bosom); this would be for people who died in faith in God’s promised Messiah, just as Abraham did, and were declared righteous by faith (Genesis 15:4\-6; Romans 4:13\-24\). Those who died in unbelief went to a place of torment, commonly called “hell.”
But this is also a temporary “limbo.” These souls will appear at the second resurrection before the great white throne of Revelation 20:11\-13\. These people are not in the Book of Life because they do not have eternal life through faith in Christ, and they are cast into their final destination in the “lake of fire / gehenna.” The idea of “limbo” as a realm in between heaven and hell, sort of another [purgatory](purgatory.html), is not biblical. If there is any sort of a “limbo,” it is the temporary holding place of departed spirits called “hades” or “sheol” in the Bible.
|
Can keeping the Five Pillars of Islam get me to heaven? |
Answer
Because God is just, He will punish sin—regardless of how well you keep the Five Pillars of Islam.
As a Muslim, you long to reach paradise after you die. But as a sinner, how will you escape God’s judgment? You may think, “My faithfulness in keeping the Five Pillars may outweigh my sins. Hopefully, God will admit me to paradise.”
You strive to keep the Five Pillars of Islam. Five times a day you kneel toward [Mecca](Mecca-in-Islam.html). The creed ([*shahada*](Shahada-in-Islam.html)) often forms on your lips. You bring no bread or water to your mouth during the daylight of Ramadan. You are saving up money for the pilgrimage to Mecca and are freely giving alms to the poor.
But still you question, “Is keeping the Five Pillars enough?”
Your conscience convicts you of failing God’s standard of holiness. How could the holy God accept to paradise someone stained with even a little sin?
Only one sin caused the first man’s downfall. Adam’s sin was not a “big sin” like adultery, murder, or blasphemy. By eating the forbidden fruit, Adam brought the curse of sin and death into the world.
Shall we escape? We who have dishonored our parents, lied to our neighbors, or cheated our customers (Exodus 20\)? We sin routinely by putting selfish interests ahead of loving God (Matthew 22:36–40\). We proudly overlook or excuse our sins. But God does not overlook or excuse any sin. He will judge every thought, word, and deed (Ecclesiastes 12:14; Matthew 12:36; Revelation 20:12–15\).
God is a righteous Judge. Even on earth, a judge must punish sinners. A judge cannot pardon someone who has stolen just because the criminal claims to visit the mosque every Friday and fast during Ramadan. If sin goes unpunished, the law would be disregarded, and God would be dishonored.
God is the just Judge and will not let sin go unpunished, regardless of how well you keep God’s laws or how many good deeds you do. Keeping the Five Pillars of Islam cannot get you to heaven. You are a sinner according to God’s Word (Romans 3:23; 1 John 1:8\).
The punishment for our sin is death—eternal death in hell. Our rightful home is hell. We need God’s mercy. But how can God be both merciful and just?
The Bible explains how God’s mercy fits with His justice: “For by works of the law no human being will be justified in \[God’s] sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin. But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it—the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe” (Romans 3:20–22a).
Keeping the law cannot get us to heaven. Instead, the law reveals our sin. God’s justice requires eternal death in hell for sin, but His mercy provides eternal life in heaven through faith in Jesus. “For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 6:23\).
As the eternal Son of God, Jesus is one with God the Father. God sent His Son to earth to become man, but Jesus never ceased being God. Born by the power of the Holy Spirit to the virgin Mary, Jesus didn’t inherit Adam’s sin nature. Jesus is called the second Adam (1 Corinthians 15:22\). While Adam’s one disobedience brought the curse of sin on the world, Jesus’ perfect life brings the hope of paradise to those who trust in Him.
Jesus took the punishment for sin—death—by dying on the cross on behalf of believing sinners. Then, Jesus rose from the dead, showing He conquered sin and death.
Don’t try to take care of sin on your own. Even keeping the Five Pillars of Islam, you will still fall short of God’s perfection. Turn from sin in repentance and turn to Jesus in faith (Luke 24:46–47; Ephesians 2:8–9; Romans 3:21–31; Galatians 3:6–14\). God forgives believing sinners and gives them eternal life in heaven.
God may be working in your heart, showing you your sin and need for Jesus. Receive God’s gift of eternal life! Trust Jesus as your crucified Savior and follow Him as your resurrected Lord!
|
What is the Apocalypse of Peter? |
Answer
The Apocalypse of Peter, also known as the Revelation of Peter, is a piece of literature believed to have been written around the middle of the second century A.D. The Apocalypse of Peter should not be confused with the Gnostic Gospel of Peter, a completely different work. The Apocalypse of Peter does not exist in an entire manuscript, but has been found in quotations from early church leaders and two partial fragments. The first fragment, written in Greek, was found in Egypt in 1886; a second, Ethiopian fragment was found in 1910\. The text is short, no more than a few dozen verses, and the authorship is unknown.
The two fragments found represent separate versions of the Apocalypse of Peter. The Greek and Ethiopian versions differ considerably, although they involve much of the same subject matter. In the Greek version, the disciples ask Jesus to show them believers who have passed from this world into righteousness. Christ shows them a wonderful vision of the redeemed, but He also shows them a terrible and frightening picture of the condemned. This scene has many similarities to the Greek myths of the underworld. Readers of Dante’s Inferno would find the descriptions in the Greek fragment oddly familiar.
In the Ethiopian version, the disciples ask Christ to tell them some of the signs of the end times and to further explain the incident with the fig tree (Mark 11\). Christ unveils a vision of the future that includes epic levels of destruction and chaos. This version also makes mention of the beautiful state of the righteous and the horrible torment of the unrighteous.
The Apocalypse of Peter was not accepted by early Christians into the collection of scriptures that became the Bible. There were some early Christian writers who considered it inspired, but the general consensus left it out of the final canon of Scripture. Not only do both versions of the text include imagery clearly drawn from Greek mythology, but the Apocalypse of Peter also diverges from well\-established Biblical principles. For these reasons, the Apocalypse of Peter was not included in the list of books of the Bible.
The Apocalypse of Peter was probably in wide circulation at some point, given the frequency of quotations in other sources. As an historical document, it provides interesting insights into the beliefs and opinions of some early Christians. However, as a non\-inspired work, it is valuable only for reference. Like the many other ancient documents that became part of the Old and New Testament Apocrypha, the Apocalypse of Peter is not a reliable source of doctrine.
|
What does the Bible say about being a godparent / god-parent? |
Answer
Traditionally, the godparents were counted informally responsible for ensuring that the child’s religious education was carried out, and for caring for the child should he/she be orphaned. Today, the word godparent may not have explicitly religious overtones. The (particularly) modern definition of a godparent is “an individual chosen by the parents to take a vested interest in raising a more complete human being.” However, godparent is not a legal position, and should the parents seriously intend the godparents to act as foster parents in case of their death, this must be legally specified through the usual means (such as a will). A godparent may, or may not, be related to the child. A child may have one or several godparents.
Godparenting is usually associated with a baptism or christening ceremony in some Christian denominations. The term godparenting or godparents is not addressed in Scripture. Godparenting is entirely a tradition, neither condemned nor condoned in Scripture. In those circles where godparents are chosen, they are sometimes called “sponsors.” Since the baby or small child is not able to speak for himself, the sponsors may make the statement of faith in Jesus Christ for the baby or child.
Biblical baptism requires an individual to have his/her own faith in Jesus Christ as Savior. Baptism is a symbol of one’s trust in Jesus. It is a public declaration of believing in Christ and is a picture of the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus and being raised to live for Him. Therefore, godparenting is not biblically in agreement with the baptism rite for believers. No one else can speak for a baby or small child as to his or her salvation. That must be a personal decision, and the one making it must be old enough to understand what he/she is doing and its significance. Please read our article on [infant baptism](infant-baptism.html). With believer’s baptism in mind, it would be difficult for the concept of godparenting to be compatible. If, however, somehow serving as godparent could be connected with believer’s baptism, or separated from baptism entirely, then godparenting could be appropriate and acceptable.
|
What is the meaning of those who were raised to life at Jesus’ death (Matthew 27:52-53)? |
Answer
Matthew 27:50\-53 records, “And Jesus cried out again with a loud voice, and yielded up His spirit. And behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth shook and the rocks were split. The tombs were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; and coming out of the tombs after His resurrection they entered the holy city and appeared to many.”
This event occurred as a testimony to the immortal power ascribed to Jesus Christ alone (1 Timothy 6:14\-16\). Only God has the power of life and death (1 Samuel 2:6; Deuteronomy 32:29\). Therefore, the resurrection is the cornerstone of Christianity. All other religions and their respective leaders do not serve a risen Lord. By overcoming death, Jesus Christ immediately receives precedence because He came back to life when everyone else did not. The resurrection has given us a reason to tell others about Him and place trust in God (1 Corinthians 15:14\). The resurrection has given us assurance that our sins are forgiven (1 Corinthians 15:17\). Paul clearly says in this verse that no resurrection equals zero forgiveness of our sins. And, finally, the resurrection has given us a reason to have hope today (1 Corinthians 15:20\-28\). If Christ was not raised from the dead, then Christians would be no better off spiritually than non\-Christians. But the fact is that God did raise "Jesus our Lord from the dead, who was delivered up because of our offenses, and was raised because of our justification" (Romans 4:24\-25\).
The raising of the saints fits into the overall rhetorical devices and strategies used by Matthew in his gospel. Examining Ezekiel 37 and the bones raised to life in connection with this story reveals that an Old Testament prophecy was fulfilled in the raising of these saints. Additionally, the raising of the saints relates directly to the coming kingdom. The raising of a few and not all of the saints shows that Jesus has power to resurrect, but also points forward to the second coming and judgment of Jesus Christ, which will include all those whose names are written in the Book Life by faith in the grace of God. Knowing that Jesus has died and conquered death through His resurrection ought to hasten our desire to repent and trust Him alone for salvation so we too can one day be resurrected “in the twinkling of an eye” (1 Corinthians 15:52\).
|
Why did the Prophet Elisha curse the “youths” for making fun of his baldness (2 Kings 2:23-24)? |
Answer
There are a few key issues we must understand in regards to this account of the youths cursing Elisha. The text reads, “From there Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road, some youths came out of the town and jeered at him. ‘Go on up, you baldhead!’ they said. ‘Go on up, you baldhead!’ He turned around, looked at them and called down a curse on them in the name of the LORD. Then two bears came out of the woods and mauled forty\-two of the youths.” It seems unbelievable that God would cause two bears to maul a group of children for making fun of a man for being bald.
First, the King James Version has done us a disservice by translated the term as “children.” The Hebrew word can refer to children, but rather more specifically means "young men." The NIV, quoted here, uses the word “youths.” Second, the fact that the bears mauled 42 of the youths indicates that there were more than 42 youths involved. This was not a small group of children making fun of a bald man. Rather, it was a large demonstration of young men who assembled for the purpose of mocking a prophet of God. Third, the mocking of “go on up, you baldhead,” is more than making fun of baldness. The baldness of Elisha referred to here may be: 1\) natural loss of hair; 2\) a shaved head denoting his separation to the prophetic office; or more likely, 3\) an epithet of scorn and contempt, Elisha not being literally bald. The phrase “go up” likely was a reference to Elijah, Elisha’s mentor, being taken up to Heaven earlier in 2 Kings chapter 2:11\-12\. These youths were sarcastically taunting and insulting the Lord’s prophet by telling him to repeat Elijah’s translation.
In summary, 2 Kings 2:23\-24 is not an account of God mauling young children for making fun of a bald man. Rather, it is a record of an insulting demonstration against God’s prophet by a large group of young men. Because these young people of about 20 years of age or older (the same term is used of Solomon in 1 Kings 3:7\) so despised the prophet of the Lord, Elisha called upon the Lord to deal with the rebels as He saw fit. The Lord’s punishment was the mauling of 42 of them by two female bears. The penalty was clearly justified, for to ridicule Elisha was to ridicule the Lord Himself. The seriousness of the crime was indicated by the seriousness of the punishment. The appalling judgment was God’s warning to all who would scorn the prophets of the Lord.
|
What is the meaning of Christian worship? |
Answer
The meaning of the New Testament Greek word most often translated “worship” (proskuneo) is “to fall down before” or “bow down before.” Worship is a state (an attitude) of spirit. Since it’s an internal, individual action, it could/should be done most of the time (or all the time) in our lives, regardless of place or situation (John 4:21\). Therefore, Christians worship all the time, seven days a week. When Christians formally gather together in worship, still the emphasis should be on individually worshiping the Lord. Even in a congregation, participants need to be aware that they are worshiping God fully on an individual basis.
The nature of Christian worship is from the inside out and has two equally important parts. We must worship “in spirit and in truth” (John 4:23\-24\). Worshiping in the spirit has nothing to do with our physical posture. It has to do with our innermost being and requires several things. First, we must be born again. Without the Holy Spirit residing within us, we cannot respond to God in worship because we do not know Him. “No one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God” (1 Corinthians 2:11b). The Holy Spirit within us is the one who energizes worship because He is in essence glorifying Himself, and all true worship glorifies God.
Second, worshiping in spirit requires a mind centered on God and renewed by Truth. Paul exhorts us to “present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship. Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind” (Romans 12:1b, 2b). Only when our minds are changed from being centered on worldly things to being centered on God can we worship in spirit. Distractions of many kinds can flood our minds as we try to praise and glorify God, hindering our true worship.
Third, we can only worship in spirit by having a pure heart, open and repentant. When King David’s heart was filled with guilt over his sin with Bathsheba (2 Samuel 11\), he found it impossible to worship. He felt that God was far from him, and he “groaned all day long” feeling God’s hand heavy upon him (Psalm 32:3,4\). But when he confessed, fellowship with God was restored and worship and praise poured forth from him. He understood that “the sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart” (Psalm 51:17\). Praise and worship toward God cannot come from hearts filled with unconfessed sin.
The second part of true worship is worship “in truth.” All worship is a response to truth, and that which is truth is contained in the Word of God. Jesus said to His Father, “Thy word is truth” (John 17:17b). Psalm 119 says, “Thy law is truth” (v. 142b) and “Thy word is true” (v. 160a). To truly worship God, we must understand who He is and what He has done, and the only place He has fully revealed Himself is in the Bible. Worship is an expression of praise from the depths of our hearts toward a God who is understood through His Word. If we do not have the truth of the Bible, we do not know God and we cannot be truly worshiping.
Since external actions are unimportant in Christian worship, there is no rule regarding whether we should sit, stand, fall down, be quiet, or sing praises loudly while in corporate worship. These things should be decided based on the nature of the congregation. The most important thing is that we worship God in spirit (in our hearts) and in truth (in our minds.)
|
What should I be looking for in a husband? |
Answer
When a Christian woman is looking for a husband, she should seek a man “after God’s own heart” (Acts 13:22\). The most important relationship that any of us have is our personal relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ. That relationship comes before all others. If our vertical relationship with the Lord is as it should be, then our horizontal relationships will reflect that reality. Therefore, a potential husband should be a man who has his focus upon walking in obedience to God’s Word and who seeks to live so that his life brings glory to God (1 Corinthians 10:31\).
What are some other qualities to look for? The apostle Paul gives us the qualities we should look for in a husband in 1 Timothy chapter 3\. In this passage are the qualifications for a leader in the church body. However, these qualities should grace the lives of any man who walks “after God’s heart.” The qualities can be paraphrased as follows: a man should be patient and controlled in his demeanor, not filled with pride but of sober mental attitude, able to master his emotions, given to graciousness to others, able to patiently teach, not given to drunkenness or uncontrolled use of any of God’s gifts, not prone to violence, not overly focused upon the details of life but focused upon God, not apt to be a hot\-head or be thin\-skinned so that he takes offense easily, and grateful for what God has given, rather than envious of what gifts others have received.
The above qualities describe a man who is actively engaged in the process of becoming a mature believer. That is the type of man a woman should look for as a potential husband. Yes, physical attraction, similar interests, complementary strengths and weaknesses, and the desire for children are things to consider. These things, though, must be secondary to the spiritual qualities a woman should look for in a man. A man you can trust, respect, and follow in the path of godliness is of far greater value than a man of good looks, fame, power, or money.
Finally, when “looking” for a husband, we must be surrendered to God’s will in our lives. Every woman wants to find her “prince charming,” but the reality is that she will probably marry a man with as many flaws as she has. Then, by God’s grace, they will spend the rest of their lives together learning how to be a partner to, and servant of, each other. We must enter into the second most\-important relationship of our lives (marriage), not under an emotional cloud, but with eyes wide open. Our most important relationship, with our Lord and Savior, has to be the focus of our lives.
|
What should I be looking for in a wife? |
Answer
The most important personal relationship that a man can have, outside of his spiritual relationship with God through the Lord Jesus Christ, is his relationship with his wife. In the process of looking for a wife, the highest principle is to look for a woman with a personal faith in Jesus Christ. The Apostle Paul tells us not to be "unequally yoked" with unbelievers (2 Corinthians 6:14\). Unless a man and woman are in full agreement on this most crucial issue, a godly and fulfilling marriage cannot take place.
However, marrying a fellow believer does not guarantee the full experience of being "equally yoked." The fact that a woman is a Christian does not mean she is necessarily a good match for you spiritually. Does she have the same spiritual goals as you? Does she have the same doctrinal beliefs? Does she have the same passion for God? The qualities of a potential wife are crucially important. Far too many men marry for emotional or physical attraction alone, and that can be a recipe for failure.
What are some godly qualities a man can look for in a wife? Scripture gives us some principles we can use to create a picture of a godly woman. She should first be surrendered in her own spiritual relationship with the Lord. The apostle Paul tells the wife that she is to submit to her husband as unto the Lord (Ephesians 5:22\-24\). If a woman is not surrendered to the Lord, she will not likely see submission to her husband as necessary to her own spiritual well\-being. We cannot fulfill the expectations of anyone else without first allowing God to fill us with Himself. A woman with God at the center of her life is a good candidate for a wife.
Paul also gives some character traits for a woman in his instructions about leaders in the church. "In the same way, their wives are to be women worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything" (1 Timothy 3:11\). In other words, this is a woman who is not overly proud, knows when to speak and when to be silent, and is able to take her place beside her husband in confidence. She is a woman whose first focus is upon her relationship with the Lord and her own spiritual growth.
The responsibilities of marriage are greater for the husband, for God’s order places him as the head of his wife and his family. This headship is modeled after the relationship between Christ and the church (Ephesians 5:25\-33\). It is a relationship grounded in love. Just as Christ loved the church and gave Himself for it, the husband is to love his wife as he does his own body. Therefore, a man’s personal spiritual relationship with the Lord is of supreme importance in the success of his marriage and his family. Willing sacrifice and the strength to choose to be a servant to the betterment of his marriage are the marks of a maturing spiritual man who honors God. Wisely choosing a wife based upon biblical qualities is important, but of equal importance is a man’s own ongoing spiritual growth and his surrender to God’s will in his life. A man who is seeking to be the man God wants him to be will be able to help his wife be the woman God desires her to be and will be able to build the marriage into the union God, he, and his wife desire it to be.
|
What does the Bible say about astrology and the zodiac? |
Answer
The Bible has much to say about the stars. Most basic to our understanding of the stars is that God created them. They show His power and majesty. The heavens are God’s “handiwork” (Psalm 8:3; 19:1\). He has all the stars numbered and named (Psalm 147:4\).
The Bible also teaches that God arranged the stars into recognizable groups that we call constellations. The Bible mentions three of these: Orion, the Bear (Ursa Major), and “the crooked serpent” (most likely Draco) in Job 9:9; 26:13; 38:31\-32; and Amos 5:8\. The same passages also reference the star group Pleiades (the Seven Stars). God is the One Who “fastens the bands” of these constellations; He is the One who brings them forth, “each in its season.” In Job 38:32, God also points to the “Mazzaroth,” usually translated “constellations.” This is thought by many to be a reference to the twelve constellations of the zodiac.
The constellations have been tracked and studied for millennia. The Egyptians and Greeks knew of the zodiac and used it to measure the beginning of spring centuries before Christ. Much has been written of the meaning of the zodiacal constellations, including theories that they comprise an ancient display of God’s redemptive plan. For example, the constellation Leo can be seen as a celestial depiction of the Lion of the Tribe of Judah (Revelation 5:5\), and Virgo could be a reminder of the virgin who bore Christ. However, the Bible does not indicate any “hidden meaning” for these or other constellations.
The Bible says that stars, along with the sun and moon, were given for “signs” and “seasons” (Genesis 1:14\); that is, they were meant to mark time for us. They are also “signs” in the sense of navigational “indicators,” and all through history men have used the stars to chart their courses around the globe.
God used the stars as an illustration of His promise to give Abraham an innumerable seed (Genesis 15:5\). Thus, every time Abraham looked up at the night sky, he had a reminder of God’s faithfulness and goodness. The final judgment of the earth will be accompanied by astronomical events relating to the stars (Isaiah 13:9\-10; Joel 3:15; Matthew 24:29\).
Astrology is the “interpretation” of an assumed influence the stars (and planets) exert on human destiny. According to astrology, the sign you were born under, Aquarius, Pisces, Aries, Taurus, Gemini, Cancer, Leo, Virgo, Libra, Scorpio, Sagittarius, or Capricorn, impacts your destiny. This is a false belief. The royal astrologers of the Babylonian court were put to shame by God’s prophet Daniel (Daniel 1:20\) and were powerless to interpret the king’s dream (Daniel 2:27\). God specifies astrologers as among those who will be burned as stubble in God’s judgment (Isaiah 47:13\-14\). Astrology as a form of divination is expressly forbidden in Scripture (Deuteronomy 18:10\-14\). God forbade the children of Israel to worship or serve the “host of heaven” (Deuteronomy 4:19\). Several times in their history, however, Israel fell into that very sin (2 Kings 17:16 is one example). Their worship of the stars brought God’s judgment each time.
The stars should awaken wonder at God’s power, wisdom, and infinitude. We should use the stars to keep track of time and place and to remind us of God’s faithful, covenant\-keeping nature. All the while, we acknowledge the Creator of the heavens. Our wisdom comes from God, not the stars (James 1:5\). The Word of God, the Bible, is our guide through life (Psalm 119:105\).
|
What are the differences between the Sadducees and Pharisees? |
Answer
The Gospels refer often to the [Sadducees](Sadducees.html) and [Pharisees](Pharisees.html), as Jesus was in almost constant conflict with them. The Sadducees and Pharisees comprised the ruling class of Jews in Israel. There are some similarities between the two groups but important differences between them as well.
The Pharisees and the Sadducees were both religious [sects within Judaism](sects-of-Judaism.html) during the time of Christ. Both groups honored Moses and the Law, and they both had a measure of political power. The [Sanhedrin](Sanhedrin.html), the 70\-member supreme court of ancient Israel, had members from both the Sadducees and the Pharisees.
The differences between the Pharisees and the Sadducees are known to us through a couple of passages of Scripture and through the extant writings of the Pharisees. Religiously, the Sadducees were more conservative in one doctrinal area: they insisted on a literal interpretation of the text of Scripture; the Pharisees, on the other hand, gave oral tradition equal authority to the written Word of God. If the Sadducees couldn’t find a command in the Tanakh, they dismissed it as manmade.
Given the Pharisees’ and the Sadducees’ differing view of Scripture, it’s no surprise that they argued over certain doctrines. The Sadducees rejected a belief in the resurrection of the dead (Matthew 22:23; Mark 12:18–27; Acts 23:8\), but the Pharisees did believe in the resurrection. The Sadducees denied the afterlife, holding that the soul perished at death, but the Pharisees believed in an afterlife and in an appropriate reward and punishment for individuals. The Sadducees rejected the idea of an unseen, spiritual world, but the Pharisees taught the existence of angels and demons in a spiritual realm.
The apostle Paul shrewdly used the theological differences between the Pharisees and the Sadducees to escape their clutches. Paul had been arrested in Jerusalem and was making his defense before the Sanhedrin. Knowing that some of the court were Sadducees and the others Pharisees, Paul called out, “My brothers, I am a Pharisee, descended from Pharisees. I stand on trial because of the hope of the resurrection of the dead” (Acts 23:6\). Paul’s mention of the resurrection precipitated a dispute between the Pharisees and the Sadducees, dividing the assembly, and causing “a great uproar” (verse 9\). The Roman commander who watched the proceedings sent troops into the melee to rescue Paul from their violence (verse 10\).
Socially, the Sadducees were more elitist and aristocratic than the Pharisees. Sadducees tended to be wealthy and to hold more powerful positions. The chief priests and high priest were Sadducees, and they held the majority of seats in the Sanhedrin. The Pharisees were more representative of the common working people and had the respect of the masses. The Sadducees’ locus of power was the temple in Jerusalem; the Pharisees controlled the synagogues. The Sadducees were friendlier with Rome and more accommodating to the Roman laws than the Pharisees were. The Pharisees often resisted [Hellenization](Hellenism.html), but the Sadducees welcomed it.
Jesus had more run\-ins with the Pharisees than with the Sadducees, probably because of the former’s giving preeminence to oral tradition. “You ignore God’s law and substitute your own tradition,” Jesus told them (Mark 7:8, NLT; see also Matthew 9:14; 15:1–9; 23:5, 16, 23, Mark 7:1–23; and Luke 11:42\). Because the Sadducees were often more concerned with politics than religion, they ignored Jesus until they began to fear He might bring unwanted Roman attention and upset the status quo. It was at that point that the Sadducees and Pharisees set aside their differences, united, and conspired to put Christ to death (John 11:48–50; Mark 14:53; 15:1\).
The Sadducees as a group ceased to exist after the destruction of Jerusalem, but the Pharisees’ legacy lived on. In fact, the Pharisees were responsible for the compilation of the Mishnah, an important document with reference to the continuation of Judaism beyond the destruction of the temple. In this way the Pharisees laid the groundwork for modern\-day Rabbinic Judaism.
|
Should Christians support the nation of Israel? |
Answer
Christians should definitely support the nation of Israel. We must remember that Israel, the nation, is very special to God. We read in Deuteronomy 7:6\-8 these words: "For you are a people holy to the LORD your God. The LORD your God has chosen you out of all the peoples on the face of the earth to be his people, his treasured possession. The LORD did not set his affection on you and choose you because you were more numerous than other peoples, for you were the fewest of all peoples. But it was because the LORD loved you and kept the oath he swore to your forefathers that he brought you out with a mighty hand and redeemed you from the land of slavery, from the power of Pharaoh king of Egypt."
God’s eternal purpose is to bless the world through Israel. Already He has done so in measure, for "salvation is from the Jews" (John 4:22\), but the fullness of future blessing is indicated in the wondrous promise of Isaiah 27:6: "In days to come Jacob will take root, Israel will bud and blossom and fill all the world with fruit."
The declaration that "salvation is from the Jews” suggests our immeasurable debt to Israel. All that we have worth having has come to us through the Jews. Our Bible is a Jewish Book, and our Savior is a Jewish Savior. Let us never forget to pray for God’s chosen people. It is true that Israel is currently in rebellion against God because of their rejection of Christ. The nation is a secular, unbelieving (as to the claims of Scripture and their Messiah, Jesus Christ) nation; but "…at the present time there is a remnant chosen by grace" (Romans 11:5\). Some Jews are being saved and are becoming members of the body of Christ through faith in their Messiah.
Jews are, biblically speaking, the "chosen people of God" and dearly loved by Him. Another reason for Christians to support the nation of Israel is because of the Abrahamic Covenant. We read of God’s promise in Genesis 12:2\-3, "I will make you into a great nation and I will bless you; I will make your name great, and you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse; and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you" (see also Genesis 27:29; Numbers 24:9\).
One of the United States’ most worthwhile accomplishments has been its consistent regard for the plight of the Jewish nation. No nation in the history of the world has a better record of treating individual Jews with respect than does America. The same can be said for our befriending Israel as a nation. America has committed many sins for which we may well deserve judgment, but as a nation, we have been a consistent friend of the Jews and the nation of Israel, as well as a benefactor. In 1948, President Harry Truman helped persuade the United Nations to recognize Israel as a nation. Since then, the United States has contributed billions of dollars in aid to Israel.
From the biblical declarations of God’s love and care for His chosen people, the nation of Israel, and from the history of nations being destroyed because of their evil dealings with God’s chosen people, the Jews, Christian believers should give support to the chosen people of God. This is not to say that we necessarily support the methods they use in their relationships with the Arab nations. The Bible warned that conflict would always characterize the relations between the descendants of Isaac and Ishmael. Sadly, this conflict will continue until Jesus comes back to judge the nations and sets up His 1,000\-year reign of peace on earth. We must look at the "big picture” with a biblical worldview. While we do not have to support everything Israel does as a nation, we most definitely should support Israel’s right to exist. God will fulfill His promises and covenants with Israel. God still has a plan for Israel. Woe to anyone who seeks to defeat that plan; “whoever curses you I will curse” (Genesis 12:3\).
|
What was the firstfruits offering? |
Answer
Firstfruits was a Jewish feast held in the early spring at the beginning of the grain harvest. It was observed on Nissan 16, which was the third day after Passover and the second day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread. Firstfruits was a time of thanksgiving for God’s provision.
Leviticus 23:9\-14 institutes the firstfruits offering. The people were to bring a sheaf of grain to the priest, who would wave it before the Lord. A burnt offering, a meal offering, and a drink offering were also required at that time. Deuteronomy 26:1\-10 gives even more detail on the procedure of firstfruits.
No grain was to be harvested at all until the firstfruits offering was brought to the Lord (Leviticus 23:14\). The offering was made in remembrance of Israel’s sojourn in Egypt, the Lord’s deliverance from slavery, and their possession of “a land that floweth with milk and honey.” The day of the firstfruits offering was also used to calculate the proper time of the Feast of Weeks (Leviticus 23:15\-16\).
In the New Testament, the firstfruits offering is mentioned seven times, always symbolically. Paul calls Epaenetus and the household of Stephanas “the firstfruits of Achaia” (Romans 16:5; 1 Corinthians 16:15\). His meaning is that, just as the firstfruits offering was the first portion of a larger harvest, these individuals were the first of many converts in that region. James calls believers “a kind of firstfruits of His creatures” (James 1:18\). Just like the sheaf of grain was set apart for the Lord, so are believers set apart for God’s glory.
The firstfruits offering found its fulfillment in Jesus. “But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep” (1 Corinthians 15:20\). Jesus’ resurrection has paved the way for our resurrection. Significantly, if Jesus was killed at Passover, then His resurrection on the third day would have fallen on Nissan 16—the Feast of Firstfruits.
The firstfruits offering is never directly applied to Christian giving in the New Testament. However, Paul taught the Corinthian believers to set aside a collection “on the first day of the week” (1 Corinthians 16:2\). And, just as the offering of firstfruits was an occasion of thanksgiving, so the Christian is to give with gladness.
In summary, firstfruits symbolizes God’s harvest of souls, it illustrates giving to God from a grateful heart, and it sets a pattern of giving back to Him the first (and the best) of what He has given us. Not being under the Old Testament Law, the Christian is under no further obligation than to give cheerfully and liberally (2 Corinthians 9:6\-7\).
|
Was Jesus a pacifist? |
Answer
A pacifist is someone who is opposed to violence, especially war, for any purpose. A pacifist often refuses to bear arms for reasons of conscience or religious conviction.
Jesus is the “prince of peace” (Isaiah 9:6\) in that He will one day bring true and lasting peace to the earth. And His message in this world was remarkably non\-violent (Matthew 5:38–44\). But the Bible is clear that sometimes war is necessary (see Psalm 144:1\). And, given some of the Bible’s prophecies of Jesus, it is hard to call Him a pacifist. Revelation 19:15, speaking of Jesus, declares, “Coming out of his mouth is a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. ‘He will rule them with an iron scepter.’ He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty.” The setting up of Jesus’ millennial kingdom will necessitate violence in the form of a war waged against the forces of the [Antichrist](what-is-the-antichrist.html). Jesus’ robe will be “dipped in blood” (Revelation 19:13\).
In Jesus’ interaction with the Roman centurion, Jesus received the soldier’s praise, healed his servant, and commended him for his faith (Matthew 8:5–13\). What Jesus did *not* do was tell the centurion to quit the army—for the simple reason that Jesus was not preaching pacifism. John the Baptist also encountered soldiers, and they asked him, “What should we do?” (Luke 3:14\). This would have been the perfect opportunity for John to tell them to lay down their arms. But he did not. Rather, John told the soldiers, “Don’t extort money and don’t accuse people falsely—be content with your pay.”
Jesus’ disciples owned [weapons](Christian-weapons.html), which conflicts with the idea that Jesus was a pacifist. On the night Jesus was betrayed, He even told His followers to bring swords. They had two, which Jesus claimed was enough (Luke 22:37–39\). As Jesus was being arrested, Peter drew his sword and wounded one of the men present (John 18:10\). Jesus healed the man (Luke 22:51\) and commanded Peter to put away his weapon (John 18:11\). Of note is the fact that Jesus did not condemn Peter’s ownership of a sword, but only his particular misuse of it.
The book of Ecclesiastes presents [life’s balance](time-for-everything.html) of contrasting activities: “There is a time for everything, and a season for every activity under the heavens: . . . a time to kill and a time to heal, a time to tear down and a time to build, . . . a time to love and a time to hate, a time for war and a time for peace” (Ecclesiastes 3:1, 3, and 8\). These are not the words of a pacifist.
Jesus did not sound like a pacifist when He said, “Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. ‘For I came to SET A MAN AGAINST HIS FATHER, AND A DAUGHTER AGAINST HER MOTHER, AND A DAUGHTER\-IN\-LAW AGAINST HER MOTHER\-IN\-LAW; and A MAN’S ENEMIES WILL BE THE MEMBERS OF HIS HOUSEHOLD’” (Matthew 10:34–36\). While Jesus is not stipulating warfare, He definitely embraces the conflict that comes with the incursion of truth.
We are never commanded to be pacifists, in the usual sense of the word. Rather, we are to hate what is evil and cling to what is good (Romans 12:9\). In doing so we must take a stand against evil in this world (which requires conflict) and pursue righteousness (2 Timothy 2:22\). Jesus modeled this pursuit and never shrank from conflict when it was part of the Father’s sovereign plan. Jesus spoke openly against the religious and political rulers of His time because they were not seeking the righteousness of God (Luke 13:31–32; 19:45–47\).
When it comes to defeating evil, God is not a pacifist. The Old Testament is full of examples of how God used His people in war to bring judgment upon nations whose sin had reached its full measure. A few examples are found in Genesis 15:16; Numbers 21:3; 31:1–7; 32:20–21; Deuteronomy 7:1–2; Joshua 6:20–21; 8:1–8; 10:29–32; 11:7–20\. Before the battle of Jericho, Joshua was met by “the commander of the army of the Lord” (Joshua 5:14\). This personage, who was most likely the pre\-incarnate Christ, was distinguished by holding a “drawn sword in his hand” (verse 13\). The Lord was ready to fight.
We can be assured that it is always with justice that God judges and makes war (Revelation 19:11\). “We know him who said, ‘It is mine to avenge; I will repay,’ and again, ‘The Lord will judge his people.’ It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Hebrews 10:30–31\). What we learn from these and other biblical passages is that we are only to participate in warfare when it is justified. The countering of aggression, injustice, or genocide would justify a war, and we believe that followers of Jesus are free to join the armed forces and participate in warfare.
|
What is the meaning of the Parable of the Ten Virgins? |
Answer
As we take a good look at the Parable of the Ten Virgins (Matthew 25:1–13\), we must acknowledge up front that there has been much debate as to the meaning of these words of our Savior. At least one aspect of this parable can be known with absolute certainty. The [bridegroom](https://www.gotquestions.org/bridegroom.html) is Jesus Christ, and this parable describes His return. In the Old Testament (Isaiah 54:4–6; 62:4\-5; Hosea 2:19\), God pictures Himself as the “husband” of Israel, and in the New Testament (John 3:27–30; Matthew 9:15; Mark 2:19–20\), Christ is pictured as the bridegroom of the Church. The Church is described in Scripture as the bride of Christ (Ephesians 5:25–32\).
The historical setting can also be known with a fair amount of certainty. In describing a first\-century Jewish wedding, D.A. Carson in the *Expositor’s Bible Commentary* describes the setting this way: “Normally the bridegroom with some close friends left his home to go to the bride’s home, where there were various ceremonies, followed by a procession through the streets – after nightfall – to his home. The ten virgins may be bridesmaids who have been assisting the bride; and they expect to meet the groom as he comes from the bride’s house…Everyone in the procession was expected to carry his or her own torch. Those without a torch would be assumed to be party crashers or even brigands. The festivities, which might last several days, would formally get under way at the groom’s house.” The torch was either a lamp with a small oil tank and wick or a stick with a rag soaked in oil on the end of it which would require occasional re\-soaking to maintain the flame.
Of interpretive significance is which return of Christ is this? Is it His return for the rapture of the Church, or is it His return to set up the Millennial Kingdom at the end of the Tribulation? Dispensational scholars divide over this issue, and no attempt will be made to answer that question here. Regardless of which return it is, the lessons to be learned are relevant to both.
The overall and easily seen thrust of the parable is that Christ will return at an unknown hour and that His people must be ready. Being ready means preparing for whatever contingency arises in our lives and keeping our eyes fixed on Jesus at all times while we eagerly await His coming. As seen in the fact that all the virgins were sleeping when the call came indicates that it doesn’t matter what we are doing when Christ returns. We may be working, eating, sleeping, or pursuing leisure activities. Whatever it is, we must be doing it in such a way that we don’t have to “make things right” (get more oil) when He comes. This would apply to either the coming of Christ for His Church or for the Tribulation saints as they await His second coming.
Being ready for Christ’s return ultimately involves one major thing which manifests itself in several areas of our lives. If we would be ready for Christ’s return, we must be born again through saving faith in Jesus Christ…His death, burial and literal resurrection from the dead (John 3:16; 14:6; Romans 10:9 and 10; 1 Corinthians 15:1\-4; Ephesians 2:1\-10\). Saving faith in Jesus Christ will manifest itself in every aspect of our lives. The fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22\) will begin to show. A desire for greater holiness and less sin will be apparent. And a consistent looking for His coming will mark our lives. One of the best passages articulating what saving grace and faith look like in a believer’s life is Titus 2:11\-14, “For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men. It teaches us to say ‘No’ to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self\-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age, while we wait for the blessed hope — the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good."
The five virgins who have the extra oil represent the truly born again who are looking with eagerness to the coming of Christ. They have saving faith and have determined that, whatever occurs, be it lengthy time or adverse circumstances, when Jesus returns, they will be looking with eagerness. The five virgins without the oil represent false believers who enjoy the benefits of the Christian community without true love for Christ. They are more concerned about the party than about longing to see the bridegroom. Their hope is that their association with true believers (“give us some of your oil” of verse 8\) will bring them into the kingdom at the end. This, of course, is never the case. One person’s faith in Jesus cannot save another. The “Lord, lord” and “I do not know you” of verses 11 and 12 fit very well with Jesus’ condemnation of the false believers of Matthew 7:21\-23, “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness.’”
May we not be found “going away to make the purchase” (v. 10\) when Christ returns. Take the time now to fill your lamp with oil and take extra along. Keep waiting and watching with joy and anticipation.
|
What is the meaning of the Parable of the Vineyard? |
Answer
The Parable of the Vineyard appears in three of the gospels (Matthew 21:33\-46; Mark 12:1\-12; Luke 20:9\-19\), with Matthew’s account being the most complete. However, there are additions in the others; hence, it is wise to study all three accounts so as to achieve the greatest understanding. To get the context of what is happening, we need to look at Matthew 21:18\. Early in the morning, Jesus goes to the temple courts to teach (21:23\). While He is teaching, the chief priest and elders confront Him, wanting to know by what authority He is teaching. Not allowing them to control the conversation, Jesus answers the question by first asking a question (21:24\-26\). They do not like His question nor His response to their answer; essentially, He has told them that they can’t save face from their obvious attempt to cajole Him and, therefore, He is not obligated to answer their question (21:27\). What Jesus told them is that John the Baptist and He received their authority from the same source. This exchange causes the leaders to become angry and puts them in opposition to Jesus. Jesus then further frustrates the priests by telling two parables: the first one is the Parable of the Two Sons, and the second is the Parable of the Vineyard, sometimes called the Parable of the Wicked Tenants.
The first parable Jesus teaches tells the priests that they have claimed to accept the message from God but they have failed to live up to it by being obedient. Outwardly, they are pious and appear to be people of God, but God knows the heart, and there they have failed miserably. The next parable (the Parable of the Vineyard) is like pouring salt on a wound. Just in case they didn’t fully understand (which they did), Jesus gives a much clearer picture of what He means. Obviously, this further infuriates the priests, but it also gives the others who were present an opportunity to hear Jesus fully explain the implications of the disobedience of the Jewish people throughout the ages.
Background: There are 6 main characters in this parable: 1\) the landowner—God, 2\) the vineyard—Israel, 3\) the tenants/farmers—the Jewish religious leadership, 4\) the landowner’s servants—the prophets who remained obedient and preached God’s word to the people of Israel, 5\) the son—Jesus, and 6\) the other tenants—the Gentiles. The imagery used is similar to Isaiah’s parable of the vineyard (it would be prudent to study this also) found in Isaiah chapter 5\. The watchtower and the wall mentioned in verse 33 are means of protecting the vineyard and the ripened grapes. The winepress is obviously for stamping out the juice of the grapes to make the wine. The farmer was apparently away at the time of harvest and had rented the vineyard to the tenants. This was customary of the times, and he could expect as much as half of the grapes as payment by the tenants for use of his land.
Explanation: Verses 34\-36 tell us the landowner sent his servants to collect his portion of the harvest and how they were cruelly rejected by the tenants; some were beaten, stoned, and even killed. Then he sent even more the second time and they received the same treatment. The servants sent represent the prophets that God had sent to His people/Israel and then were rejected and killed by the very people who were claiming to be of God and obedient to Him. Jeremiah was beaten (Jeremiah 26:7\-11; 38:1\-28\), John the Baptist was killed (Matthew 14:1\-12\), and others were stoned (2 Chronicles 24:21\). In this parable Jesus is not only reminding the religious establishment what they were like, but He was putting in their minds a question: how could they claim obedience as God’s people and still reject His messengers? We don’t know how many servants the owner sent, but that is not what is important; the theme is God’s repeated appeal through His prophets to an unrepentant people. In the next verses (37\-39\), the situation becomes even more critical. The landowner sends his own son, believing that they will surely respect him. But the tenants see an opportunity here; they believe that if they kill the son they will then receive his inheritance. The law at the time provided that if there were no heirs then the property would pass to those in possession (possession is nine tenths of the law). This amounts to conspiracy to commit murder by the Jewish leadership, and it is prophetic in the sense that Jesus is now telling them what they are going to do to Him (see Psalm 118:22; Isaiah 28:16\). After Jesus’ death, Peter would make the same charges against the religious establishment (Acts 4:8\-12\). The tenants probably thought that the fight for the property was over, but it wasn’t; the owner would now appear on the scene.
Jesus now (vs.40\-41\) asks the question, what will the owner do to the evil tenants? What He is doing is forcing the religious leaders/priests to declare their own miserable fate: condemnation for their blatant disobedience. This is similar to the question that Nathan put to David (2 Samuel 12:1\-7\). Up to this point, Jesus has been dealing with the immediate situation of Israel and its past disobedience; now Jesus leaves open the question of what Israel’s leadership is going to do with the Messiah, the Son of God, whom He refers to as the “chief cornerstone” (vs 42\). Cornerstones and capstones are used symbolically in Scripture and picture Christ as the main piece of the foundation of the church and the head of the church, respectively. Jesus is the beginning of and is foundational to the church, and He now stands over the church in His rightful position of honor, guiding the church to fulfill its divine destiny. This verse makes clear prophetically how Jesus will be rejected by the religious establishment and ultimately be crucified (see Psalm 118:22\-23\).
The key to understanding this parable and what it says about the religious leaders is found in verse 43, where Jesus makes their lack of obedience personal. Jesus tells the leaders that because of their disobedience they will be left out of the kingdom of heaven (individually and as a people); that they have let their opportunity for the time being slip away to be given to the Gentiles (see verse 41, “other tenants”). This will be more than they can tolerate, as we will see in verses 45 and 46\. He is saying that there will be a new people of God made up of all peoples who will temporarily replace the Jews so that Jesus can establish His church. This will change the way God deals with man, from the old dispensation of the law to a new dispensation of God’s grace. It will usher in a period of time where man will no longer understand forgiveness of sins as man’s work through what he does or doesn’t do or by the sacrifices of animals on the altar, but by the work of Christ on the cross. It will be a time where each individual can have a personal and saving relationship with the One and only God of the universe. The exciting part of the verse is the phrase “who will produce fruit”; this gives authority to the church to share the gospel of Christ to the lost of the world. Up to this time, the Jews felt that they had automatic membership in God’s kingdom because of their relationship to Abraham; this is why they put so much emphasis on genealogies. But the new people of God would truly have what God wanted for Israel all along: a personal and holy relationship that would be honored through the spreading of God’s word to all peoples (see Exodus 19:5\-6\).
Jesus continues the stone metaphor in verse 44 to show how a stone can be used to build something beautiful, such as His church, or it can be used to crush and destroy, depending on the situation. This could be likened to God’s word: to some it is salvation, peace and comfort. To others it is foolish and disconcerting because of its ability to convict man of his sins (2 Timothy 3:16\).
Verses 45 and 46 give us three insights into the psyche of the chief priest of the religious establishment. 1\) They are jealous and envious of Jesus’ popularity with the common people. This encroaches on their authority and power to govern. 2\) They have come to the realization that Jesus is talking about them. This hurts their pride and embarrasses them in front of the people. 3\) They understood the analogy of the son and that Jesus was referring to Himself. This would be blasphemous to them, and they would now seek to kill Jesus. From here the leaders would meet in secrecy to plot how they would get rid of Jesus. Why all the secrecy? The people thought of Jesus as a prophet from God; arresting Him could cause an uprising. An uprising would jeopardize the leaders’ relationship with the Roman authorities, something that the Jews did not want at any cost.
Application: We apply this parable to our lives by asking two questions; first, have you come to know Christ as your Lord and Savior, or have you rejected Him like the Jewish leadership did? The process is simple, as long as you are sincere in seeking a relationship with Christ. You need to recognize your sins, and then accept Christ as the only One who can save you from the penalty of your sins. Second, if you are a believer, what have you done with Jesus? Are you like the bad tenants, rejecting His Word and living a life of disobedience? If you are, you need to study God’s Word and pray for guidance, seeking His will for your life and living out that will as best as you can, moment by moment, day by day.
|
What is the meaning of the Parables of the Lost Sheep and Lost Coin? |
Answer
The Parables of the Lost Sheep and the Lost Coin (Luke 15:3–10\) are the first two in a series of three. The third is the “lost son” or the “[prodigal son](parable-prodigal-son.html).” Just as in other cases, Jesus taught these parables in a set of three to emphasize His point. To properly understand the message of these parables, we must recognize exactly what a parable is, and why it is used.
**What is a parable?**
At a basic level, a parable is a short story designed to convey a concept to be understood and/or a principle to be put into practice. This, however, tells us more about the intent of a parable than what it actually is. The word “parable” in Greek literally means, “to set beside,” as in the English word “comparison” or “similitude.” In the Jewish culture, things were explained not in terms of statistics or definitions as they are in English\-speaking cultures. In the Jewish culture of biblical times, things were explained in word pictures.
**Why did Jesus use parables?**
Word pictures do not draw attention to technicalities (like the Jewish law) but to attitudes, concepts, and characteristics. Jesus was speaking a language that all Jews could understand, but with an emphasis on attitudes rather than the outward appearances that the Pharisees focused on (John 7:24\). Parables also have an emotional impact that makes them more meaningful and memorable to those who are soft of heart. At the same time, the parables of Jesus often times remained a mystery to those with a hardened heart because parables require the listeners to be self\-critical and put themselves in the appropriate place in the story. The result was that the Pharisees would “be ever hearing, but never understanding; be ever seeing, but never perceiving” (Isaiah 6:9; Psalm 78:2; Matthew 13:35\).
By using parables, the teaching of Jesus remains timeless despite most changes in culture, time, and technology. For example, these two parables convey commonly understood concepts like grace, gentleness, concern, pride and others, all of which we can understand, even though the story is over two thousand years old. In Jewish culture character traits are often described in relation to objects that are universally recognized like the regularity of the sun or the refreshing nature of rain (Hosea 6:3\). This also explains why poetry is the most common mode of language used in the Bible. In the case of parables specifically, the elements mentioned in them are usually representations of something else, just as in an allegory. However, an overemphasis on a particular detail in a parable tends to lead to interpretive errors. Repetitions, patterns, or changes will often help us in identifying when we should focus on a particular detail.
**Why Jesus taught these parables**
Let us look at the particular details of these parables. The situation in which Jesus is speaking can be seen in Luke 15:1–2\. “Now the tax collectors and ‘sinners’ were all gathering around to hear him. But the Pharisees and the teachers of the law muttered, ‘This man welcomes sinners and eats with them’” (NIV). Notice that the Pharisees did not complain that Jesus is teaching sinners. Since the Pharisees thought themselves to be righteous teachers of the law and all others to be wicked, they could not condemn His preaching to “sinners,” but they thought it was inconsistent with the dignity of someone so knowledgeable in the Scriptures to “eat with them.” The presupposition behind the statement of the Pharisees, “this man welcomes sinners,” is what Jesus addresses in all three parables.
To understand the significance of the opening statement in chapter 15, we must consider that the Jewish culture is a shame/honor\-driven society that used shame/honor in a way that developed a sort of caste system. Virtually everything that is done in Jewish culture brings either shame or honor. The primary motivation for what and how things are done is based on seeking honor for oneself and avoiding shame. This was the central and all\-consuming preoccupation of all Jewish interaction.
In the first parable, Jesus invites His listeners to place themselves into the story with, “Suppose one of you has a hundred sheep.” In doing this Jesus is appealing to their intuitive reasoning and life experiences. As the story completes, the Pharisees in their pride refuse to see themselves as shameful “sinners,” but eagerly take the honoring label of being “righteous.” However, by the implication of their own pride, they place themselves in the position of being the less significant group of ninety\-nine: “There will be more rejoicing in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety\-nine righteous persons who do not need to repent.” There may be a bit of sarcasm in the reference to the Pharisees “who do not need to repent” (see Romans 3:23\).
In the “lost coin” parable, the ten silver coins refers to a piece of jewelry with ten silver coins on it worn by brides. This was the equivalent of a wedding ring in modern times.
Upon careful examination of the parables, we can see that Jesus was turning His listeners’ understanding of things upside down. The Pharisees saw themselves as being the beloved of God and the “sinners” as refuse. Jesus uses the Pharisees’ prejudices against them, while encouraging the sinners with one clear message. That message is this: God has a tender, personal concern (“and when he finds it, he puts it on his shoulders,” v. 5\). God has a joyous love for individuals who are lost (in sin) and are found (repent). Jesus makes it clear that the Pharisees, who thought they were close to God, were actually distant and those sinners and tax collectors were the ones God was seeking after. We see this same message in 18:9\-14\. There, Jesus is teaching on attitudes of prayer, but the problem he is addressing is the same as in chapter 15\. In 18:14 Jesus provides the conclusion for us: “I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. Everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.”
**Patterns of progression in the parables**
By identifying things in common in the parables, we can gain context to help us understand the significance of otherwise subtle elements in the story. As the old saying goes, “Proper context covers a multitude of interpretive errors.” 1\) The progression of value: in the first parable a sheep is lost, then a silver coin in the next, followed by a son in the third. As mentioned before, part of the power of these parables to reach the audience comes from the shame/honor aspect of their culture. To lose a sheep as a shepherd would be a very shameful thing, a coin from a piece of bridal jewelry lost in her own house would be more shameful, followed by the lost son, which was the worst of all in Jewish culture. 2\) The personal progression from seeking after only 1 of 100 sheep, then 1 of 10 coins, then 1 of 2 sons. This shows the scope of God’s personal concern for individuals and would have been of great comfort to the “sinners” Jesus was teaching. 3\) A change in tense in each parable regarding the rejoicing at that which was found, from future tense, to present, and then to past tense: “will be more joy” to “there is joy” and finally “had to be.” This may have communicated the certainty of God’s acceptance of those who repent. 4\) The progression of earthly references to what the thing was lost in (a subtle reference to sin). The sheep was lost in open fields, the coin was lost in the dirt that was swept up, and son was in the mud of a pigsty before coming to his senses. 5\) The relational power of each parable: Poor men and young boys would have related best to the shepherd and the lost sheep. Women would have related best to the lost bridal coin. The last parable dealt with everyone present by dealing with the relationship of a father and son.
**Patterns of Consistency in the parables**
1\) The main character possesses something valuable and does not want to lose it.
2\) The main character rejoices in the finding of the lost thing, but does not rejoice alone.
3\) The main character (God) expresses care in either the looking or the handling of that which was lost.
4\) Each thing that was lost has a personal value, not just a monetary value: shepherds care for their sheep, women cherish their bridal jewelry, and a father loves his son.
Incidentally, this first illustration of the shepherd carrying the sheep on his shoulders was the original figure used to identify Christians before people began identifying Christianity with crosses. In these parables Jesus paints with words a beautiful picture of God’s grace in His desire to see the lost return to Him. Men seek honor and avoid shame; God seeks to glorify Himself through us His sheep, His sons and daughters. Despite having ninety\-nine other sheep, despite the sinful rebellion of His lost sheep, God joyfully receives it back, just as He does when we repent and return to Him.
|
Can man live without God? |
Answer
Contrary to the claims of atheists and agnostics through the centuries, man cannot live without God. Man can have a mortal existence without acknowledging God, but not without the fact of God.
**As the Creator, God originated human life.** To say that man can exist apart from God is to say that a watch can exist without a watchmaker or a story can exist without a storyteller. We owe our being to the God in whose image we are made (Genesis 1:27\). Our existence depends on God, whether we acknowledge His existence or not.
**As the Sustainer, God continuously confers life (Psalm 104:10\-32\).** He is life (John 14:6\), and all creation is held together by the power of Christ (Colossians 1:17\). Even those who reject God receive their sustenance from Him: “He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous” (Matthew 5:45\). To think that man can live without God is to suppose a sunflower can continue to live without light or a rose without water.
**As the Savior, God gives eternal life to those who believe.** In Christ is life, which is the light of men (John 1:4\). Jesus came that we may have life “and have it to the full” (John 10:10\). All who place their trust in Him are promised eternity with Him (John 3:15\-16\). For man to live—truly live—he must know Christ (John 17:3\).
**Without God, man has physical life only.** God warned Adam and Eve that on the day they rejected Him they would “surely die” (Genesis 2:17\). As we know, they did disobey, but they did not die physically that day; rather, they died spiritually. Something inside them died—the spiritual life they had known, the communion with God, the freedom to enjoy Him, the innocence and purity of their soul—it was all gone.
Adam, who had been created to live and fellowship with God, was cursed with a completely carnal existence. What God had intended to go from dust to glory now was to go from dust to dust. Just like Adam, the man without God today still functions in an earthly existence. Such a person may seem to be happy; after all, there is enjoyment and pleasure to be had in this life. But even those enjoyments and pleasures cannot be fully received without a relationship with God.
Some who reject God live lives of diversion and merriment. Their fleshly pursuits seem to yield a carefree and gratified existence. The Bible says there is a certain measure of delight to be had in sin (Hebrews 11:25\). The problem is that it is temporary; life in this world is short (Psalm 90:3\-12\). Sooner or later, the hedonist, like the prodigal son in the parable, finds that worldly pleasure is unsustainable (Luke 15:13\-15\).
Not everyone who rejects God is an empty pleasure\-seeker, however. There are many unsaved people who live disciplined, sober lives—happy and fulfilled lives, even. The Bible presents certain moral principles which will benefit anyone in this world—fidelity, honesty, self\-control, etc. But, again, without God man has only this world. Getting smoothly through this life is no guarantee that we are ready for the afterlife. See the parable of the rich farmer in Luke 12:16\-21 and Jesus’ exchange with the rich (but very moral) young man in Matthew 19:16\-23\.
**Without God, man is unfulfilled, even in his mortal life.** Man is not at peace with his fellow man because he is not at peace with himself. Man is restless with himself because he has no peace with God. The pursuit of pleasure for pleasure’s sake is a sign of inner turmoil. Pleasure seekers throughout history have found over and over that the temporary diversions of life give way to a deeper despair. The nagging feeling that “something is wrong” is hard to shake off. King Solomon gave himself to a pursuit of all this world has to offer, and he recorded his findings in the book of Ecclesiastes.
Solomon discovered that knowledge, in and of itself, is futile (Ecclesiastes 1:12\-18\). He found that pleasure and wealth are futile (2:1\-11\), materialism is folly (2:12\-23\), and riches are fleeting (chapter 6\).
Solomon concludes that life is God’s gift (3:12\-13\) and the only wise way to live is to fear God: “Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep His commandments: for this is the whole duty of man. For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil” (12:13\-14\).
In other words, there is more to life than the physical dimension. Jesus stresses this point when He says, “Man does not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God” (Matthew 4:4\). Not bread (the physical) but God’s Word (the spiritual) keeps us alive. It is useless for us to search within ourselves for the cure to all our miseries. Man can only find life and fulfillment when he acknowledges God.
**Without God, man’s destiny is hell.** The man without God is spiritually dead; when his physical life is over, he faces eternal separation from God. In Jesus’ narrative of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19\-31\), the rich man lives a pleasurable life of ease without a thought of God, while Lazarus suffers through his life but knows God. It is after their deaths that both men truly comprehend the gravity of the choices they made in life. The rich man realized, too late, that there is more to life than the pursuit of wealth. Meanwhile, Lazarus is comforted in paradise. For both men, the short duration of their earthly existence paled in comparison to the permanent state of their souls.
Man is a unique creation. God has set a sense of eternity in our hearts (Ecclesiastes 3:11\), and that sense of timeless destiny can only find its fulfillment in God Himself.
|
Is the New World Translation a valid version of the Bible? |
Answer
The *New World Translation* (NWT) is defined by the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ parent organization (the Watchtower Society) as "a translation of the Holy Scriptures made directly from Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek into modern\-day English by a committee of anointed witnesses of Jehovah." The NWT is the anonymous work of the “New World Bible Translation Committee.” Jehovah’s Witnesses claim that the anonymity is in place so that the credit for the work will go to God. Of course, this has the added benefit of keeping the translators from any accountability for their errors and prevents real scholars from checking their academic credentials.
The New World Translation is unique in one thing – it is the first intentional, systematic effort at producing a complete version of the Bible that is edited and revised for the specific purpose of agreeing with a group’s doctrine. The Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Watchtower Society realized that their beliefs contradicted Scripture. So, rather than conforming their beliefs to Scripture, they altered Scripture to agree with their beliefs. The “New World Bible Translation Committee” went through the Bible and changed any Scripture that did not agree with Jehovah’s Witness theology. This is clearly demonstrated by the fact that, as new editions of the New World Translation were published, additional changes were made to the biblical text. As biblical Christians continued to point out Scriptures that clearly argue for the deity of Christ (for example), the Watchtower Society would publish new editions of the New World Translation with those Scriptures changed. Here are some of the more prominent examples of intentional revisions:
The New World Translation renders the Greek term word *staurós* ("cross") as "torture stake" because Jehovah’s Witnesses do not believe that Jesus was crucified on a cross. The New World Translation does not translate the words *sheol*, *hades*, *gehenna*, and *tartarus* as "hell” because Jehovah’s Witnesses do not believe in hell. The NWT gives the translation "presence" instead of “coming” for the Greek word *parousia* because Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that Christ has already returned in the early 1900s. In Colossians 1:16, the NWT inserts the word “other” despite its being completely absent from the original Greek text. It does this to give the view that “all other things” were created by Christ, instead of what the text says, “all things were created by Christ.” This is to go along with their belief that Christ is a created being, which they believe because they deny the Trinity.
The most well\-known of all the New World Translation perversions is John 1:1\. The original Greek text reads, “the Word was God.” The NWT renders it as “the word was a god.” This is not a matter of correct translation, but of reading one’s preconceived theology into the text, rather than allowing the text to speak for itself. There is no indefinite article in Greek (in English, "a" or "an"), so any use of an indefinite article in English must be added by the translator. This is grammatically acceptable, so long as it does not change the meaning of the text.
There is a good reason why *theos* has no definite article in John 1:1 and why the New World Translation rendering is in error. There are three general rules we need to understand to see why.
1\. In Greek, word order does not determine word usage like it does in English. In English, a sentence is structured according to word order: Subject \- Verb \- Object. Thus, "Harry called the dog" is not equivalent to "the dog called Harry." But in Greek, a word’s function is determined by the case ending found attached to the word’s root. There are two case endings for the root *theo*: one is \-s (*theos*), the other is \-n (*theon*). The \-s ending normally identifies a noun as being the subject of a sentence, while the \-n ending normally identifies a noun as the direct object.
2\. When a noun functions as a predicate nominative (in English, a noun that follows a being verb such as "is"), its case ending must match the noun’s case that it renames, so that the reader will know which noun it is defining. Therefore, *theo* must take the \-s ending because it is renaming *logos*. Therefore, John 1:1 transliterates to "*kai theos en ho logos*." Is *theos* the subject, or is *logos*? Both have the \-s ending. The answer is found in the next rule.
3\. In cases where two nouns appear, and both take the same case ending, the author will often add the definite article to the word that is the subject in order to avoid confusion. John put the definite article on *logos* (“the Word”) instead of on *theos*. So, *logos* is the subject, and *theos* is the predicate nominative. In English, this results in John 1:1 being read as "and the Word was God" (instead of "and God was the word").
The most revealing evidence of the Watchtower’s bias is their inconsistent translation technique. Throughout the Gospel of John, the Greek word *theon* occurs without a definite article. The New World Translation renders none of these as “a god.” Even more inconsistent, in John 1:18, the NWT translates the same term as both "God" and "god" in the very same sentence.
The Watchtower, therefore, has no hard textual grounds for their translation—only their own theological bias. While New World Translation defenders might succeed in showing that John 1:1 can be translated as they have done, they cannot show that it is the proper translation. Nor can they explain the fact that that the NWT does not translate the same Greek phrases elsewhere in the Gospel of John the same way. It is only the pre\-conceived heretical rejection of the deity of Christ that forces the Watchtower Society to inconsistently translate the Greek text, thus allowing their error to gain some semblance of legitimacy in the minds of those ignorant of the facts.
It is only the Watchtower’s pre\-conceived heretical beliefs that are behind the dishonest and inconsistent translation that is the New World Translation. The New World Translation is most definitely not a valid version of God’s Word. There are minor differences among all the major English translations of the Bible. No English translation is perfect. However, while other Bible translators make minor mistakes in the rendering of the Hebrew and Greek text into English, the NWT intentionally changes the rendering of the text to conform to Jehovah’s Witness theology. The New World Translation is a perversion, not a version, of the Bible.
|
What is the time of Jacob’s trouble? |
Answer
The phrase *the time of Jacob’s trouble* comes from Jeremiah 30:7, which says, “Alas! for that day is great, so that none is like it: it is even the time of Jacob’s trouble; but he shall be saved out of it” (KJV). It is our view that the time of Jacob’s trouble corresponds to the [seven\-year tribulation](tribulation.html) of the end times.
In the previous verses of Jeremiah 30, the Lord is speaking to Jeremiah the prophet about Judah and Israel (Jeremiah 30:3–4\). In verse 3, the Lord promises that, one day in the future, He will bring both Judah and Israel back to the land He had promised their forefathers. But their return will involve many distresses: “How awful that day will be!” (Jeremiah 30:7\). It will be “the time of Jacob’s trouble”—*Jacob* being a synecdoche for all the nation of Israel. Verse 5 describes Jacob’s trouble as a time of great fear and trembling. Verse 6 describes it in terms of the pains of childbirth, indicating a time of agony. But there is hope for the people of Israel, for the Lord promises He will save them. Even though this is “the time of Jacob’s distress” (NASB), and even though “in all history there has never been such a time of terror” (Jeremiah 30:7, NLT), God will deliver His people.
In Jeremiah 30:10–11 the Lord references the blessings that will come after the time of Jacob’s trouble: “‘I will surely save you out of a distant place, your descendants from the land of their exile. Jacob will again have peace and security, and no one will make him afraid. I am with you and will save you,’ declares the Lord.”
As part of the deliverance He provides from the time of Jacob’s trouble, the Lord says He will destroy the nations who held Judah and Israel in captivity, and He will never again allow Jacob to be completely destroyed. The Lord also describes this as a time of discipline for His people. He says of Jacob, “Though I completely destroy all the nations among which I scatter you, I will not completely destroy you. I will discipline you but only with justice; I will not let you go entirely unpunished.”
Jeremiah 30:7 says, “That day is great, so that none is like it.” The only time period that fits this description is the end\-times tribulation. This time is unparalleled in history.
Like Jeremiah, Jesus described the tribulation as a unique time of suffering, speaking of “great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now—and never to be equaled again” (Matthew 24:21\). The Lord also used some of the same imagery as Jeremiah. In Matthew 24:6–8, He said the appearance of false christs, wars and rumors of wars, famines, and earthquakes are “the beginning of birth pains.”
Paul, too, described the tribulation using the simile of birth pains. First Thessalonians 5:3 says, “While people are saying, ‘Peace and safety,’ destruction will come on them suddenly, as labor pains on a pregnant woman, and they will not escape.” This event follows the rapture and the removal of the church in 1 Thessalonians 4:13–18\.
These “birth pains” are described in detail in Revelation 6—12\. One purpose of the tribulation—“the time of Jacob’s trouble”—is to bring Israel back to the Lord (see Jeremiah 30:22; Hosea 6:1–2; Zechariah 12:10\).
The time of Jacob’s trouble demonstrates that God keeps His promises, judges sin, and saves those who trust in Christ. In the end times, God will pour His judgment on a wicked world, and this seven\-year tribulation, from Israel’s point of view, is the time of Jacob’s trouble. In this time, God purges His chosen people of the wicked and unbelieving, but “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved; for on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there will be deliverance, as the Lord has said, even among the survivors whom the Lord calls” (Joel 2:32; cf. Romans 10:13\). After that time of Jacob’s trouble is a time of peace, as the Lord Himself sets up [His kingdom on earth](millennium.html) for 1,000 years (Revelation 20:1–6; cf. Isaiah 11\).
|
What is the connection between prayer and fasting? |
Answer
Although the connection between prayer and fasting is not specifically explained in Scripture, a common thread connecting the two seems to run through all the instances of prayer and fasting recorded in the Bible. In the Old Testament, it appears that fasting with prayer had to do with a sense of need and dependence, and/or of abject helplessness in the face of actual or anticipated calamity. Prayer and fasting are combined in the Old Testament in times of mourning, repentance, and/or deep spiritual need.
The first chapter of Nehemiah describes Nehemiah praying and fasting, because of his deep distress over the news that Jerusalem had been desolated. His many days of prayer were characterized by tears, fasting, confession on behalf of his people, and pleas to God for mercy. So intense was the outpouring of his concerns that it’s almost inconceivable he could “take a break” in the middle of such prayer to eat and drink. The devastation that befell Jerusalem also prompted Daniel to adopt a similar posture: “So I turned to the Lord God and pleaded with him in prayer and petition, in fasting, and in sackcloth and ashes” (Daniel 9:3\). Like Nehemiah, Daniel fasted and prayed that God would have mercy upon the people, saying, “We have been wicked and have rebelled; we have turned away from your commands and laws” (v. 5\).
In several instances in the Old Testament, fasting is linked with intercessory prayer. David prayed and fasted over his sick child (2 Samuel 12:16\), weeping before the Lord in earnest intercession (vv. 21\-22\). Esther urged Mordecai and the Jews to fast for her as she planned to appear before her husband the king (Esther 4:16\). Clearly, fasting and petition are closely linked.
There are instances of prayer and fasting in the New Testament, but they are not connected with repentance or confession. The prophetess Anna “never left the temple but worshiped night and day, fasting and praying” (Luke 2:37\). At age 84, her prayer and fasting were part of her service to the Lord in His temple as she awaited the promised Savior of Israel. Also in the New Testament, the church at Antioch was fasting in connection with their worship when the Holy Spirit spoke to them about commissioning Saul and Barnabas to the Lord’s work. At that point, they prayed and fasted, placed their hands on the two men and sent them off. So, we see in these examples that prayer and fasting are components of worshiping the Lord and seeking His favor. Nowhere, however, is there any indication that the Lord is more likely to answer prayers if they are accompanied by fasting. Rather, fasting along with prayer seems to indicate the sincerity of the people praying and the critical nature of the situations in which they find themselves.
The more critical the situation, the more appropriate the fasting and prayer. In Mark 9, Jesus casts a demon from a boy. The disciples had been unable to perform the exorcism, although they had previously been given authority over unclean spirits (Mark 6:7\). Later, the disciples asked Jesus why they failed in their attempts to free the boy from the demon, and Jesus said, “This kind can come out only by prayer” (Mark 9:29\). Matthew’s account adds the phrase “and fasting” (Matthew 17:21\). In this particular case, the demon was exceptionally malicious and obdurate (Mark 9:21\-22\). Jesus seems to be saying that a determined foe must be met with an equally determined faith. Prayer is a ready weapon in the spiritual battle (Ephesians 6:18\), and fasting helps to focus prayer and give it resolve.
The theology of fasting is a theology of priorities in which believers are given the opportunity to express themselves in an undivided and intensive devotion to the Lord and to the concerns of spiritual life. This devotion will be expressed by abstaining for a short while from such normal and good things as food and drink, so as to enjoy a time of uninterrupted communion with our Father. Our “confidence to enter the Most Holy Place by the blood of Jesus” (Hebrews 10:19\), whether fasting or not fasting, is one of the most delightful parts of that “better thing” which is ours in Christ. Prayer and fasting should not be a burden or a duty, but rather a celebration of God’s goodness and mercy to His children.
|
Where is God? |
Answer
The Bible teaches that God reigns over the nations from His holy throne in heaven (Psalm 47:8; Isaiah 6:1, 66:1; Hebrews 4:16\). Even though we know that God’s presence is in some sense uniquely in heaven, the teachings of Scripture also make it clear that God is omnipresent (present everywhere at the same time). From the beginning of Scripture, we see the presence of God hovering over the earth, even when it was still formless and empty (Genesis 1:2\). God filled the world with His creation, and His presence and glory continue to inhabit the whole earth (Numbers 14:21\). There are many examples throughout Scripture of God’s presence moving on the earth, interacting with His creation (Genesis 3:8; Deuteronomy 23:14; Exodus 3:2; 1 Kings 19:11\-18; Luke 1:35; Acts 16:7\). Hebrews 4:13 says, “Nothing in all creation is hidden from God’s sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eyes of him to whom we must give an account.” Jeremiah 23:24 exclaims, “‘Can anyone hide in secret places so that I cannot see him?’ declares the Lord. ‘Do not I fill heaven and earth?’ declares the Lord.” Psalm 139 is an amazing study in God’s omnipresence.
**Where is God?**
If you are a believer in Jesus Christ, God is with you, beside you, above you, and inside you. God’s presence and watchful care never leave you. If you are not a believer in Jesus Christ, God is right in front of you, inviting you, drawing you, offering you the love, mercy, and grace that He longs to give you. If you are unsure of your relationship with God through Jesus Christ, please read our article on how to “[Get right with God](get-right-with-God.html).” Perhaps a better question than “Where is God?” is “Where are you, in relationship to God?”
**Where is God when it hurts?**
It seems we desire to know the answer to this question most when faced with painful trials and attacks of doubt. Even Jesus, during His crucifixion, asked, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46\). To the onlookers of that time, as well as to those who first read the story, it seems that God did forsake Jesus, so we obviously conclude that He will forsake us as well in our darkest moments. Yet, upon continued observation of the events that unfolded after the crucifixion, the truth is revealed that nothing can separate us from the love of God, not even death (Romans 8:37\-39\). After Jesus was crucified, He was glorified (1 Peter 1:21; Mark 16:6, 19; Romans 4:24\-25\). From this example alone we can be assured that even when we do not feel God’s presence in the midst of our pain, we can still believe His promise that He will never leave us nor forsake us (Hebrews 13:5\). “God sometimes permits what He hates to accomplish what He loves” (Joni Eareckson Tada).
We put our trust in the fact that God does not lie, He never changes, and His Word stands true forever (Numbers 23:19; 1 Samuel 15:29; Psalm 110:4; Malachi 3:6; Hebrews 7:21; 13:8, James 1:17; 1 Peter 1:25\). We do not lose heart over painful circumstances because we live by faith in every word that has proceeded from the mouth of God, not putting our hope in what is seen or perceived. We trust God that our light and momentary troubles are achieving for us an eternal glory that far outweighs all the suffering that we will endure on this earth. So, we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen, because we know and believe that what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal (2 Corinthians 4:16\-18; 5:7\). We also trust God’s Word, which says He is constantly working things together for the good of those who love Him and have been called according to His purpose (Romans 8:28\). Even though we do not always see the good ends to which God is working things out, we can be assured that a time will come when we will understand and see more clearly.
Our lives are like a quilt. If you look at the back side of a quilt, all you see is a mess of knots and loose ends hanging out all over. It is very unattractive, and there seems to be no rhyme or reason to the work. Yet when you turn the quilt over, you see how the maker has craftily woven together each strand to form a beautiful creation, much like the life of a believer (Isaiah 64:8\). We live with a limited understanding of the things of God, yet a day is coming when we will know and understand all things (Job 37:5; Isaiah 40:28; Ecclesiastes 11:5; 1 Corinthians 13:12; 1 John 3:2\). Where is God when it hurts? The message to take with you in hard times is that when you cannot see His hand, trust His heart, and know for certain that He has not forsaken you. When you seem to have no strength of your own, that is when you can most fully rest in His presence and know that His strength is made perfect in your weakness (2 Corinthians 12:9\-10\).
|
What is the meaning of the Parable of the Wedding Feast? |
Answer
Jesus told the Parable of the Wedding Feast in Matthew 22:1\-14\. This parable is similar in some ways to the [Parable of the Great Banquet](parable-great-banquet.html) (Luke 14:15\-24\), but the occasion is different, and it has some important distinctions. To better understand the context of this story, it is important to know some basic facts about weddings in Jesus’ day.
In Jewish society, the parents of the betrothed generally drew up the marriage contract. The bride and groom would meet, perhaps for the first time, when this contract was signed. The couple was considered married at this point, but they would separate until the actual time of the ceremony. The bride would remain with her parents, and the groom would leave to prepare their home. This could take quite a while. When the home was all was ready, the groom would return for his bride without notice. The marriage ceremony would then take place, and the wedding banquet would follow.
The wedding banquet was one of the most joyous occasions in Jewish life and could last for up to a week. In His parable, Jesus compares heaven to a wedding banquet that a king had prepared for his son (Matthew 22:2\). Many people had been invited, but when the time for the banquet came and the table was set, those invited refused to come (verses 4\-5\). In fact, the king’s servants who brought the joyful message were mistreated and even killed (verse 6\).
The king, enraged at the response of those who had been invited, sent his army to avenge the death of his servants (verse 7\). He then sent invitations to anyone his servants could find, with the result that the wedding hall was filled (verses 8\-10\).
During the feast the king noticed a man “who was not wearing wedding clothes” (verse 11\). When asked how he came to be there without the furnished attire, the man had no answer and was promptly ejected from the feast “outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth” (verses 12\-13\). Jesus then ends the parable with this statement: “[For many are invited, but few are chosen](many-called-few-chosen.html)” (verse 14\).
The king is God the Father, and the son who is being honored at the banquet is Jesus Christ, who “came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him” (John 1:11\). Israel held the invitation to the kingdom, but when the time actually came for the kingdom to appear (see Matthew 3:1\), they refused to believe it. Many prophets, including John the Baptist, had been murdered (Matthew 14:10\). The king’s reprisal against the murderers can be interpreted as a prophecy of Jerusalem’s destruction in A.D. 70 at the hands of the Romans (cf. Luke 21:5\). More broadly, the king’s vengeance speaks of the desolation mentioned in the book of Revelation. God is patient, but He will not tolerate wickedness forever (Obadiah 1:15\). His judgment will come upon those who reject His offer of salvation. Considering what that salvation cost Jesus, is not this judgment well deserved (see Hebrews 10:29\-31\)?
Note that it is not because the invited guests *could not* come to the wedding feast, but that they *would not* come (see Luke 13:34\). Everyone had an excuse. How tragic, and how indicative of human nature, to be offered the blessings of God and to refuse them because of the draw of mundane things!
The wedding invitation is extended to anyone and everyone, total strangers, both good and bad. This refers to the gospel being taken to the Gentiles. This portion of the parable is a foreshadowing of the Jews’ rejection of the gospel in Acts 13\. Paul and Barnabas were in Pisidian Antioch, where the Jewish leaders strongly opposed them. The apostle’s words echo the king’s estimation that those invited to the wedding “did not deserve to come”: “We had to speak the word of God to you first. Since you reject it and do not consider yourselves worthy of eternal life, we now turn to the Gentiles” (Acts 13:46\). The gospel message, Jesus taught, would be made available to everyone.
The matter of the wedding garment is instructive. It would be a gross insult to the king to refuse to wear the garment provided to the guests. The man who was caught wearing his old clothing learned what an offense it was as he was removed from the celebration.
This was Jesus’ way of teaching the inadequacy of self\-righteousness. From the very beginning, God has provided a “covering” for our sin. To insist on covering ourselves is to be clad in “filthy rags” (Isaiah 64:6\). Adam and Eve tried to cover their shame, but they found their fig leaves to be woefully scant. God took away their handmade clothes and replaced them with skins of (sacrificed) animals (Genesis 3:7, 21\). In the book of Revelation, we see those in heaven wearing “white robes” (Revelation 7:9\), and we learn that the whiteness of the robes is due to their being washed in the blood of the Lamb (verse 14\). We trust in God’s righteousness, not our own (Philippians 3:9\).
Just as the king provided wedding garments for his guests, God provides salvation for mankind. Our wedding garment is the righteousness of Christ, and unless we have it, we will miss the wedding feast. When the religions of the world are stripped down to their basic tenets, we either find man working his way toward God, or we find the cross of Christ. The cross is the only way to salvation (John 14:6\).
For his crime against the king, the improperly attired guest is thrown out into the darkness. For their crimes against God, there will be many who will be consigned to “[outer darkness](outer-darkness.html)”—existence without God for eternity. Christ concludes the parable with the sad fact that “many are invited, but few are chosen.” In other words, many people hear the call of God, but only a few heed it.
To summarize the point of the Parable of the Wedding Feast, God sent His Son into the world, and the very people who should have celebrated His coming rejected Him, bringing judgment upon themselves. As a result, the kingdom of heaven was opened up to anyone who will set aside his own righteousness and by faith accept the righteousness God provides in Christ. Those who spurn the gift of salvation and cling instead to their own “good” works will spend eternity in hell.
The self\-righteous Pharisees who heard this parable did not miss Jesus’ point. In the very next verse, “the Pharisees went out and laid plans to trap him in his words” (Matthew 22:15\). The Parable of the Wedding Feast is also a warning to us, to make sure we are relying on God’s provision of salvation, not on our own good works or religious service.
|
What is Evangelicalism? |
Answer
Evangelicalism is a somewhat broad term used to describe a movement within Protestantism that is characterized by an emphasis on having a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. This relationship begins when a person receives Christ’s forgiveness and is spiritually reborn. Those who ascribe to this belief are called Evangelicals.
The word *evangelicalism* is derived from the Greek words *euangelion*, which means "good news," and *euangelizomai*, which means "to proclaim as good news." This good news is that "Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that He was buried, that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve" (1 Corinthians 15:3b\-5\). This good news, which is the Gospel of Christ, and the preaching of it are what Evangelicalism was based upon.
The roots of Evangelicalism go back to the Protestant Reformation, during which time the Bible was brought to the masses. Formerly neglected biblical truths were rediscovered and taught. It wasn’t until the great revivals of the 18th and 19th centuries in Europe and America, though, that Evangelicalism truly began as a movement. As happened during the Reformation, the Evangelical movement and its focus on having a personal relationship with Jesus Christ brought a renewed vigor in accurately interpreting and applying God’s Word. This has carried through to this day, though the term has come to be misused and misapplied.
Traditionally, Evangelicalism has been theologically conservative. This has become less and less distinctive, however. Its current use is no longer limited to actual born\-again Christians, nor to those considered to be conservatives or fundamentalists. In fact, some simply equate Evangelicalism with Protestantism itself, liberal or otherwise. Sadly, Evangelicalism is now most often equated with conservative politics. While an Evangelical Christian worldview will result in conservative political views, politics is definitely not the focus of true Evangelicalism.
So, the definition of Evangelicalism varies in the eyes of the world. The true heart of Evangelicalism, though, is in proclaiming the Gospel message in both word and deed. To an Evangelical Christian, there is no higher calling than to live out and share this message and the truth of God’s love.
|
Who was Jose Luis de Jesus Miranda? |
Answer
To put it bluntly, Jose Luis de Jesus Miranda was a heretic. He was a native Puerto Rican and a false messiah who claimed to be the second coming of Jesus Christ. He founded the *Ministerio Creciendo en Gracia* (“Growing in Grace”) church and referred to himself as “Jesus Christ Man.” He claimed that, in 1973, through a vision he received, Jesus Christ “integrated with him.” In 1998, he claimed that he was the reincarnation of the apostle Paul. In 2005, he officially claimed to be Christ.
Jose Luis de Jesus Miranda’s followers disbanded after his death in 2013, but some formed various religious groups of their own. His Growing in Grace group had all of the classic signs of a [cult](cult-definition.html). De Jesus claimed to have extrabiblical authority by way of sharing Christ’s spirit. He was the sole, undisputed leader of his movement and as such exerted total authority over his ministry. He taught aberrant doctrines, saying that the devil, hell, and sin did not exist; prayer was futile; and God’s moral code (i.e., the Ten Commandments) was irrelevant. De Jesus exploited his people financially, living a lavish lifestyle based on the generosity of his followers. Finally, he claimed to be greater than Jesus Christ and that his teachings superseded those of Christ.
The Bible predicted that there will be people coming in the last days claiming to be Christ. In Matthew 24:5, Jesus told His disciples, “See that no one leads you astray. For many will come in my name, saying ‘I am the Christ,’ and they will lead many astray.” Jose Luis de Jesus Miranda was one such false christ.
Pardoxically, Jose Luis de Jesus Miranda also referred to himself as the Antichrist and sported a “666” tattoo on his forearm. He claimed that, since He was Christ, worship of Jesus was invalid. He told his followers to get 666 tattoos themselves to declare their allegiance to him. The Bible says that the Antichrist will be a world leader, a satanically empowered dictator. Jose Luis de Jesus Miranda was not such a man. Jose Luis de Jesus Miranda was simply a charismatic cult leader, a charlatan, a wolf in sheep’s clothing, and yet another in a long line of false prophets and false messiahs. He was an antichrist, not THE Antichrist.
|
How can I, a Muslim, become assured of paradise? |
Answer
“Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God’s wrath remains on him” (John 3:36\).
Jesus said, “For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?” (Mark 8:36\). Life on earth is short. No matter how prosperous, life is tragic if it ends in eternal separation from God.
Jesus warned that the way to heaven is hard: "Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few. Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves” (Matthew 7:13\-15\).
The Bible tells us how we can enter the narrow gate and be assured of paradise.
**Can good works earn me a place in heaven?**
Many people think following God’s laws and doing good works will get them into heaven. Muslims, for example, strive to keep the Five Pillars. If good deeds outweigh bad deeds, people hope God will accept them. But God says in the Bible that no person can earn heaven.
“For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin. . . . for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:20, 23\).
The more a person tries to obey God’s laws found in the Bible (ultimately fulfilled in perfectly loving God and neighbor—Matthew 22:34\-40\), the more a person sees he is a sinner. God is a just Judge with a holy wrath against sinners (Romans 2:5\). He will punish sinners—regardless of good deeds done or laws kept (Ecclesiastes 12:14; James 2:10; Revelation 20:11\-15\). Since sin prevents our entrance to heaven, who can help us?
**Can Jesus bear the wrath of God against sinners?**
A substitute, taking the punishment for a sinner, must be perfect. Otherwise, that substitute must receive God’s punishment for his own sin. The only perfect One who walked on earth is Jesus (1 Peter 2:22\-24\).
Thousands of people witnessed Jesus’ miracles, teachings, and prophecies. They knew “. . . how God anointed Him with the Holy Spirit and with power, and how He went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with Him. We are witnesses of all the things He did both in the land of the Jews and in Jerusalem. They also put Him to death by hanging Him on a cross. God raised Him up on the third day and granted that He become visible, not to all the people, but to witnesses who were chosen beforehand by God, that is, to us who ate and drank with Him after He arose from the dead. And He ordered us to preach to the people, and solemnly to testify that this is the One who has been appointed by God as Judge of the living and the dead. Of Him all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins" (Acts 10:38b\-43\).
All true prophets witness that believing in Jesus is the only way sinners can be forgiven. Without Jesus as your Savior from sin, you will face Jesus as Judge with your sins exposed. Either Jesus dies for your sin (bearing the wrath of God on the cross), or you die for your sin (bearing the wrath of God eternally in hell). Jesus says, "Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for unless you believe that I am He, you will die in your sins" (John 8:24\).
**How can I believe in Jesus?**
Who is Jesus? What must you believe about Him so that you do not “die in your sins”? Read the book of John in the Bible to find out. “But these are written 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 20:31\).
You will find that Jesus is not only Man but He is also the Word who was eternally with God and was God (John 1:1\). By Him, God the Father created all things (John 1:3\). God the Father sent Jesus, His beloved Son, to earth in human flesh to die on behalf of believing sinners (John 3:16\). Then, Jesus became alive again to show He conquered sin and death. After 40 days, He rose to the Father’s side in heaven. One day, He promises to come again to judge the world and rule forever.
Even the demons believe Jesus is God’s Son (Matthew 8:29\). To be saved, you must not only believe the truths about Jesus, but you must believe in Jesus.
Jesus alone can save you from sin. You must repent of your sin—not trying to take care of sin on your own but trusting in Jesus Who died to pay for your sin and set you free from sin (John 8:31\-36\).
Those who believe in Jesus—not merely knowing about Him but trusting in Him as Savior from sin and Lord/Master of their lives—will be saved from sin and hell.
Jesus assures those who believe in Him of heaven! “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\).
|
Should Muslims read the Gospel of Barnabas as the true story of Isa? |
Answer
Evidence reveals that the Gospel of Barnabas was most likely written by a fifteenth\-century European who wrote inaccurately about the life of Jesus.
Beliefs about Jesus vary widely between Christians and Muslims because their sources differ. While Muslims often get their impression of Jesus from the Gospel of Barnabas, Christians trust the Gospels found in the Bible. Since the Gospel of Barnabas differs significantly from the Gospels of the Bible, one side must be false. Let’s first examine whether the Gospel of Barnabas is an accurate biography of Jesus.
**The author: not Barnabas**
The author of the Gospel of Barnabas could not have been the biblical Barnabas. The real Barnabas was a generous encourager of the early church (Acts 4:36\-37\). He was not one of the original twelve disciples of Jesus as the Gospel of Barnabas mistakenly claims. Barnabas was the one who persuaded the apostles that Paul had changed from a persecutor of the church to a follower of Jesus (Acts 9:27\). The true Barnabas was a missionary, telling the good news of Jesus (Acts 13:2\).
**Date of authorship: the Middle Ages**
If the Gospel of Barnabas were written in the first century, it would have been quoted in other documents of the same time period. It is not cited, however, a single time in works of either the church fathers or Muslim clerics until the fifteenth century. Those who claim the early authorship of the Gospel of Barnabas may be referring to the [Epistle of Barnabas](Epistle-of-Barnabas.html)—a first\-century book, though not divinely inspired.
A reading of the Gospel of Barnabas clearly shows that it was written neither in Jesus’ time nor shortly thereafter, as alleged. It contains far too many historical errors. The Gospel of Barnabas contains quotations from Dante Alighieri, references to an edict from Pope Boniface, and descriptions of feudalism. Therefore, scholars place the date of authorship around the fifteenth century.
**Legitimacy: full of errors**
The descriptions of Israel show that the author of the Gospel of Barnabas was not familiar with its geography. He alleged that Jesus sailed to Nazareth—an inland city.
The Gospel of Barnabas says that Jesus was born when Pilate was governor, but history records Pilate becoming governor in A.D. 26 or 27—long after Jesus’ birth.
Trustworthy scholars have exposed the Gospel of Barnabas as a counterfeit. Therefore, it cannot be trusted as the biography of Jesus’ life.
**What is the true story of Jesus?**
If not the Gospel of Barnabas, where can you find the truth about Jesus? The Bible contains four Gospels that illustrate Christ from four divinely inspired perspectives. Evidence has consistently affirmed the Gospels as authentic and accurate.
Don’t be ashamed to read about the Lord Jesus. The Bible says, “So do not be ashamed to testify about our Lord, or ashamed of me his prisoner. But join with me in suffering for the gospel, by the power of God, who has saved us and called us to a holy life—not because of anything we have done but because of his own purpose and grace. This grace was given us in Christ Jesus before the beginning of time, but it has now been revealed through the appearing of our Savior, Christ Jesus, who has destroyed death and has brought life and immortality to light through the gospel” (2 Timothy 1:8\-10; see also Romans 1:16\-17\).
Find out who Jesus is by reading the Gospels [today](Muslim-WJD1.html)!
For more information about the gospel of Barnabas, read this external link: [http://answering\-islam.org/Gilchrist/barnabas.html](http://answering-islam.org/Gilchrist/barnabas.html)
|
What is the Jesus Family Tomb? |
Answer
In 1980, in Talpiot (a suburb of Jerusalem), Israel, a construction crew unearthed an ancient tomb. Inside the tomb was discovered ten (or nine) ossuaries (burial bone boxes). Inscribed on these bone boxes were names. The discovery of the ossuaries was not unusual, as thousands of ancient ossuaries have been discovered in ancient tombs in and around Jerusalem. What was somewhat unusual were the names that were inscribed on the ossuaries: Jesus son of Joseph, Maria, Mariamene, Matthew, Judas son of Jesus, and Jose (likely an abbreviation of Joseph). The similarities of these names to those of the biblical Jesus and His family have led TV director Simcha Jacobovici and movie producer James Cameron to produce “The Jesus Family Tomb” in book form and "The Lost Tomb of Jesus" as a movie/documentary. Jacobovici and Cameron are making the claims that the Jesus Family Tomb is indeed the family burial place of Jesus and His family, and that the presence of Jesus’ bones disproves His resurrection. Is there any validity to the claims of the Jesus Family Tomb?
First, before we examine the question biblically, it is important to understand that no influential archaeologist has come forward in agreement with the Jesus Family Tomb project. The curator for anthropology and archeology at the Rockefeller Museum in Jerusalem from 1972 to 1997, Joe Zias, states that the project “makes a mockery of the archaeological profession.” Second, there is evidence that the tomb had been disturbed and vandalized. It cannot be verified what was, or what was not, vandalized or stolen. On an archaeological basis alone, there is serious reason to doubt the authenticity of the Jesus Family Tomb project.
Historically and culturally speaking, there is further reasoning to reject the ideas of the Jesus Family Tomb project. The names “Jesus, Maria, Matthew, Judas, and Joseph” were all very common names in 1st\-century Israel. Some cultural historians estimate that as many as 25 percent of 1st\-century Jewish women were named Mary (Miriam). The New Testament confirms this by mentioning six different women named Mary, including three who were prominent in Jesus’ life (Jesus’ mother, Mary Magdalene, and Mary of Bethany). It would not be uncommon for a 1st\-century Jewish family to have the names Jesus (Yeshua), Mary (Miriam), Joseph, and Judas (Judah) – as all were very popular Jewish names (due to their background in the Hebrew Scriptures).
Biblically speaking, there are numerous reasons to reject the idea of the Jesus Family Tomb. First, the New Testament consistently states that Jesus’ family was from Nazareth (Matthew 2:13; Luke 2:4, 39, 51; John 1:45\-46\). If Jesus’ family had a tomb, it would have very likely been in Nazareth. Second, the Bible describes Jesus and his adopted father Joseph as carpenters (Matthew 13:55; Mark 6:3\), likely making them financially poor and of a lower social status. The tomb discovered in Talpiot is the tomb of a wealthy family. Third, the New Testament states that Jesus’ body was buried in a tomb that belonged to [Joseph of Arimathea](Joseph-of-Arimathea.html), and that there were witnesses as to where Jesus was buried (Matthew 27:57\-61; Mark 15:43\-47; Luke 23:50\-54; John 19:38\-42\).
The "Lost Tomb of Jesus" documentary advocates the concept that Jesus’ disciples stole His body from the tomb, and then buried it in His family tomb. If the disciples were going to steal Jesus’ body in an attempt to argue for a resurrection, why would they then bury Jesus’ body in His own family’s tomb, and even inscribe Jesus’ name on His ossuary? That does not make any sense whatsoever. If the disciples wanted to fake a resurrection, the last thing they would do would be to bury Jesus in His family tomb (which other people could easily examine) and write Jesus’ name on His ossuary (providing undeniable evidence that Jesus was not resurrected).
Now, let’s get to the crux of the matter. The true motivation of the Jesus Family Tomb project is to deny the resurrection of Jesus Christ. The subtitle of the book is “The Discovery, the Investigation, and the Evidence That Could Change History.” Cameron, Jacobovici, and co\-author Pellegrino have a clear agenda. They do not believe that Jesus was the Messiah, that Jesus was God incarnate, or that Jesus was resurrected after His crucifixion. The discovery of the “Jesus Family Tomb” is simply a convenient basis for their argument, due to the similarities of the names on the ossuaries to the names of Jesus and His family. If it could be proved that the “Jesus Family Tomb” was indeed the tomb of the biblical Jesus of Nazareth and His family, the resurrection would be disproved, thus destroying the very foundation of the Christian faith (see 1 Corinthians chapter 15\).
None of the suppositions of the Jesus Family Tomb project can be proved. In fact, the archaeological community is nearly unanimous in condemning the Jesus Family Tomb as a hoax, with no basis in history or archaeology. There is every reason to doubt the claims of the Jesus Family Tomb – archaeologically, historically, and biblically. The Christian faith has nothing to fear from honest and scientific archaeology.
In regards to the resurrection of Jesus Christ, the true heart of this issue, there is much to be considered. Please examine our articles on “[Why should I believe in Christ’s resurrection?](why-believe-resurrection.html),” “[Biblical evidence for the resurrection of Jesus](was-Jesus-resurrected.html),” and “[Why is the resurrection of Jesus Christ important?](resurrection-Christ-important.html)”
|
Why is the science community so opposed to creationism? |
Answer
It is important to distinguish between the terms "science" and "scientific community." Science is a discipline concerned with observing, experimenting with, and explaining phenomena. The scientific community is composed of the living human persons who participate in this discipline. The distinction is important, because there is no logical contradiction between science and creationism. Science is a generic term for a type of study, while creationism is a philosophy applied to the interpretation of facts. The scientific community, as it exists today, holds naturalism as the preferred philosophy, but there is no overt reason why naturalism should be preferred by science over creationism.
In general, there is a perception that creationism is "unscientific." This is partly true, in the sense that creationism entails certain assumptions that cannot be tested, proven, or falsified. However, naturalism is in exactly the same predicament, as an untestable, unprovable, non\-falsifiable philosophy. The facts discovered in scientific research are only that: facts. Facts and interpretations are two different things. The current scientific community rejects, in general, the concepts of creationism, and so they define it as "unscientific." This is highly ironic, given the scientific community’s preference for an interpretive philosophy—naturalism—that is just as "unscientific" as creationism.
There are many reasons for this tendency towards naturalism in science. Creationism involves the intervention of a supernatural being, and science is primarily concerned with tangible and physical things. For this reason, some in the scientific community fear that creationism will lead to a "God of the Gaps" dilemma, where scientific questions are shrugged off by the explanation, "God did it." Experience has shown that this is not the case. Some of the greatest names in scientific history were staunch creationists. Their belief in God inspired them to ask, "How did God do it?" Among these names are Pascal, Maxwell, and Kelvin. On the other hand, an unreasonable commitment to naturalism can degrade scientific discovery. A naturalistic framework requires a scientist to ignore results that do not fit the established paradigm. That is, when new data does not correlate to the naturalistic view, it is assumed to be invalid and discarded.
There are distinct religious overtones to creationism. Science is only as objective as those who participate in it, and those persons are just as subject to bias as in any other field. There are those who reject creationism in favor of naturalism purely for personal "moral" reasons. In fact, this number is probably much higher than would be admitted to. Most people who reject the concepts of God do so primarily because they disagree with some perceived restriction or unfairness, despite claims to the contrary, and this is as true for those in lab coats as those in coveralls.
In the same way, an unfriendly attitude in the scientific community has had its impact on the perception of creationism. Science has benefited from creationist contributors for centuries; yet today the scientific community, at large, takes a hostile and condescending attitude towards anyone who doesn’t take a naturalistic perspective. This open hostility towards creationist views, and religion in general, creates a strong incentive for persons with those views to avoid scientific study. Those who do often feel compelled to remain silent for fear of ridicule. In this way, the scientific community has degraded and "pushed out" a segment of the population, and then has the audacity to claim that a lowered percentage of creationists in their ranks is evidence of naturalism’s superior scientific merit.
There are also political reasons for the scientific community’s hostility towards creationism and religion in general. Christianity, more so than any other religious system, places immense value on every individual human life. This causes tensions with the scientific community when that concern for life gets in the way of some type of scientific process. Christian values tend to act as a brake on experiments or positions that cause harm to people, or that destroy or damage human life. Examples include embryonic stem cell research, abortion, and euthanasia. In other cases, Christian values butt heads with secular ones when science promotes certain sinful activities by making them easier. While naturalistic scientists may see this as an unnecessary hindrance, they should consider what happens when scientific research is conducted with no regard for morality or conscience. Echoing this idea was actor Jeff Goldblum’s character in the movie *Jurassic Park*. He stated, "Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should."
There is also a level of competition between the scientific community and the religious community over power, producing additional tensions between science and creationism. As even some leading skeptic scientists have admitted, there is a tendency for the scientific community to position itself, even subconsciously, as a priesthood. This secular priesthood has the wondrous and elite knowledge that the laymen need for salvation, and cannot be questioned by any outsiders. In plain terms, religiously tinged ideas, such as creationism, impinge on the scientific community’s claim to superior knowledge of the universe.
While there may be many reasons for tension between the scientific community and creationism, there are plenty of reasons why they should be able to coexist peacefully. There are no logically valid reasons to reject creationism in favor of naturalism, as the scientific community has done. Creationism does not inhibit discovery, as evidenced by the titans of science who believed strongly in it. The derisive attitude spewed at creationists has diminished the number of capable and willing minds in many fields. Creationism has much to offer science and the scientific community. The God who made the universe revealed Himself through it (Psalm 19:1\); the more we know about His creation, the more glory He receives!
|
What is Landmarkism? |
Answer
Landmark theology, or heritage theology, is the belief among some independent Baptist churches that only local, independent Baptist congregations can truly be called “churches” in the New Testament sense. They believe that all other groups, and even most other Baptists, are not true churches because they deviate from the essentials of landmarkism.
Those essentials are 1\) church succession—a landmark Baptist church traces its “lineage” back to the time of the New Testament, usually to Jesus’ calling of the disciples in Galilee; 2\) a visible church—the only church is a local (Baptist) body of believers; there is no such thing as a universal Body of Christ; 3\) opposition to “pedobaptism” (sprinkling of infants) and “alien immersion” (any baptism not performed under the auspices of a landmark Baptist church)—all such baptisms are null and void.
Another corollary belief is that only faithful landmark Baptists will comprise the Bride of Christ. Other Christians (non\-Baptists) will either be the guests or the servants at the marriage supper of the Lamb. These other Christians are called the “family of God” or sometimes the “kingdom of God.” So, in heaven will be all the redeemed (the “family of God”), but only those who have been duly baptized by immersion (in an independent Baptist church) will have the special honor of being the Bride of Christ. The landmark Baptists use the story of the choosing of Isaac’s wife to illustrate God’s choosing of Christ’s Bride (Genesis 24\).
Landmark Baptists consider church membership one of the highest priorities in life; in fact, being a member of a landmark Baptist church is second in importance only to one’s personal relationship with Christ. Because of their emphasis on local church membership (and their denial of the universal Body of Christ), landmark Baptists hold a closed communion; that is, only official members of their own local church are allowed to share in the ordinance of communion. No one, not even a Baptist, can partake of the Lord’s table away from his or her home church.
Landmarkism had its beginning in 1851, when a group of Southern Baptists met to oppose the liberalism creeping into their denomination. At issue was an “open” pulpit vs. a “closed” pulpit. Was it right to welcome non\-baptized preachers from other denominations as guests in their pulpits? “Here are men,” they said, “who are not baptized according to the New Testament model, men ordained by churches that do not teach salvation by grace through faith, yet we are inviting them to preach as if they were true Christian ministers of the gospel.” Out of this meeting came the Cotton Grove Resolutions, the first articulation of the tenets of landmarkism.
The term landmarkism comes from Proverbs 22:28, “Remove not the ancient landmark, which thy fathers have set” (KJV). Landmark Baptists also use Leviticus 25:23\-34 as support for their doctrine. Just as the Israelites were not to “remove the ancient landmark” or sell, neglect, or give away their property, Baptists today are not to remove the theological “guideposts” that separate the church from the world. “The faith which was once delivered unto the saints” (Jude 3\) is their heritage. Landmark Baptists see themselves as safeguarding the purity of the church, as originally established in the New Testament. It is this purity which will be rewarded with being selected as the Bride.
The landmark Baptists’ original goal—to stem the tide of encroaching liberalism—was admirable. The problem is that landmarkism, in its attempt to fight error, has fallen into error of a different and more egregious kind—the misinterpretation of Scripture. Here are a few points that landmark theology fails to acknowledge:
1\) The “one baptism” of Ephesians 4:5 is not a water baptism, but a spiritual one.
2\) The church did not begin with John the Baptist but with the Spirit’s baptism on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 11:15\-16\).
3\) The baptism of John is not sufficient for the New Testament church (Acts 18:24\-28; also Acts 19:1\-7\).
4\) The church is not just a local body but a worldwide entity comprised of all believers, with Christ as their Head (Ephesians 1:21\-22\).
5\) Scripture lists three categories of people: unsaved Jews, unsaved Gentiles, and the church (1 Corinthians 10:32\). The “family of God,” therefore, is not separate from the church.
The “Baptist Bride” churches, with their emphasis on the ordinance of baptism, are surely missing the point of 1 Corinthians 1:10\-17\. There, Paul rebukes the church for the schisms arising over who had baptized whom. Paul goes so far as to say, “Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel.” Strange words, indeed, if water baptism is what makes one part of the Bride of Christ.
|
What is the law of attraction? |
Answer
“The Secret” also known as the “law of attraction,” is the idea that because of our connection with a “universal energy force,” our thoughts and feelings have the ability to manipulate this energy force to our liking. According to “The Secret,” our thoughts and feelings attract a corresponding energy to ourselves. If our thoughts are negative, we attract negative things. If our feelings are positive, we attract positive things. The essential message of “The Secret” is that we all have the power to determine our own destiny. We can all create our own reality. Through fully and consistently applying the “law of attraction,” we can be who we want to be and have everything we want to have.
Is there any truth to “The Secret”? Is there any validity to the law of attraction? As with most other popular ideas, “The Secret” has a nugget of truth that is expanded to unbiblical and illogical extremes. For example, a thesis of the law of attraction is that our physical health is determined by our thoughts and feelings. It has been medically proven that stress and worry are harmful to the body, while joy and peace actually aid in the healing process. The Bible agrees, “A cheerful heart is good medicine, but a crushed spirit dries up the bones” (Proverbs 17:22\). “A cheerful look brings joy to the heart, and good news gives health to the bones” (Proverbs 15:30\). As David was struggling with the guilt of his unconfessed, evil actions, he declared, “When I kept silent, my bones wasted away through my groaning all day long” (Psalm 32:3\). Our thoughts and feelings do have an impact on our physical well\-being. However, this is due to how God designed our bodies—not because of our connection with a universal energy force and our negativity or positivity attracting negative or positive physical symptoms.
A second error in the “law of attraction” is its emphasis on money and wealth. The Bible has much to say regarding wealth and the management of money and resources. Proverbs 13:11 exclaims, “Dishonest money dwindles away, but he who gathers money little by little makes it grow.” Similarly, Proverbs 17:16 proclaims, “Of what use is money in the hand of a fool, since he has no desire to get wisdom?” Our financial success is determined by our decisions, our hard work, and our wise stewardship of what we have. No matter how positive our thoughts and how focused our mind is on wealth, if we have built mountains of debt, the bills will continue to come (Proverbs 22:7\). The only impact the secret of “positive thinking” can have on our financial situation is in motivating us to work harder and spend more wisely. The Secret—and its focus on achieving wealth—goes directly against the teachings of the Bible. Solomon, the wisest and richest man in the Bible, observed, “Whoever loves money never has money enough; whoever loves wealth is never satisfied with his income. This too is meaningless” (Ecclesiastes 5:10\). Jesus, who possessed everything, warned us, “Watch out! Be on your guard against all kinds of greed; a man’s life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions” (Luke 12:15\). First Timothy 6:10 could not say it any more clearly, “For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.”
With that said, the primary error of “The Secret” / law of attraction is its view, or lack thereof, of God. In the law of attraction, God, if He even exists, is nothing more than a universal energy force that we manipulate by our thoughts and feelings. The law of attraction assumes a pantheistic (God is everything) view of God. The Secret denies the ideas of a personal God (with thoughts, feelings, and emotions) and a sovereign God (omnipotent and omniscient, perfectly in control of everything). The core message of “The Secret” is that we are in control of our own destiny. God knows the truth to be very different, “All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be” (Psalm 139:16\). Nebuchadnezzar, the greatest king of ancient Babylon and a prime candidate for someone who would know “The Secret,” declared, “Then I praised the Most High; I honored and glorified Him who lives forever. His dominion is an eternal dominion; His kingdom endures from generation to generation. All the peoples of the earth are regarded as nothing. He does as He pleases with the powers of heaven and the peoples of the earth. No one can hold back His hand or say to Him: ‘What have you done?’” (Daniel 4:34\-35\).
According to the proponents of the law of attraction, we are all “incarnations of God.” We are all our own gods, able to create our own reality, able to control our own destiny. This lie is not a secret, and it is nothing new. Satan’s primary temptation has always been to obtain knowledge and thereby to become like God, “For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God—” (Genesis 3:5\). Satan’s own fall from glory was this same error, “You said in your heart, ‘I will ascend to heaven; I will raise my throne above the stars of God; I will sit enthroned on the mount of assembly, on the utmost heights of the sacred mountain. I will ascend above the tops of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High’” (Isaiah 14:13\-14\). The message of “The Secret” is the same message that Satan used to tempt Adam and Eve into sin: “You do not need God—you can be God!” And just as Satan will fail in his quest to be God (Isaiah 14:15; Revelation 20:10\), so too will all those who seek to be their own god fail: “'You are "gods" but you will die like mere men” (Psalm 82:6\-7\).
The true “secret” is that God is in control. God has a sovereign and perfect plan for us. The key is getting in tune with God, thereby understanding His heart and knowing His will. Rather than seeking after wealth, fame, power, and pleasure (in which there is nothing but emptiness), we are to seek a relationship with God, allowing Him to place His perfect desires in our heart and mind, conforming our feelings to His – and then granting us the desire of His, and our, hearts. “Delight yourself in the LORD and He will give you the desires of your heart. Commit your way to the LORD; trust in Him and He will do this: He will make your righteousness shine like the dawn, the justice of your cause like the noonday sun” (Psalm 37:4\-6\).
If you have a desire to discover the true secret to a joyous and fulfilling life, please read our article on “[What is the way of salvation?](way-of-salvation.html)”
|
Is there meaning in tragedy? |
Answer
When tragedy strikes, it is common for people to ask, “What does this mean?” When we witness some disaster or mass murder, there is a natural feeling that what has happened should not have happened. This innate sense of “wrongness” is a clue to meaning in these events. When we look to find meaning in tragedy, we must have the right perspective. We need to approach the question in a way that allows for a coherent answer, and this is only possible through a Christian worldview. Because God instills meaning into every moment and event in history, through Him we can begin to find meaning in suffering. The nature of this world lends itself to tragic events. Fortunately, God speaks to us, so that we can find not only meaning, but salvation and relief from the sufferings of the world.
When studying physical motion, it is crucial to understand perspective. Speed and acceleration are only meaningful in relation to some other object; this object is the reference point. The way in which the reference point moves affects our perception. The same is true in our sense of right and wrong. For concepts of good, bad, right, wrong, or tragedy to be meaningful, they have to be anchored to a reference point that does not change or move. The only valid reference point for these issues is God. The very fact that we consider a mass murder wrong strongly supports the idea of God as the reference point for our sense of good and evil. Without God, even the events we consider the most tragic are no more meaningful than anything else. We have to understand the nature of this world and our relationship to God in order to draw any meaning at all from the things we see.
God infuses every moment and every event with meaning and gives us confidence that He understands what we are going through. When Jesus instituted communion, He tied the past, present, and future together. First Corinthians 11:26 says, “For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup (the present), you proclaim the Lord’s death (the past) until He comes (the future).” God’s knowledge of all events means nothing is insignificant to Him. If God knows when a sparrow falls, He certainly knows when we face tragedy (Matthew 10:29\-31\). In fact, God assured us that we would face trouble in this world (John 16:33\) and that He has experienced our struggles personally (Hebrews 2:14\-18; Hebrews 4:15\).
While we understand that God has sovereign control over all things, it is important to remember that God is not the source of tragedy. The vast majority of human suffering is caused by sin, all too often the sin of other people. For instance, a mass murder is the fault of the murderer disobeying the moral law of God (Exodus 20:13; Romans 1:18\-21\). When we look to find meaning in such an event, we have to understand why this world is the way it is. The hardship of this world was originally caused by mankind’s sin (Romans 5:12\), which is always a matter of choice (1 Corinthians 10:13\). While God is perfectly capable of stopping tragedies before they begin, sometimes He chooses not to. While we may not know why, we do know that He is perfect, just, and holy, and so is His will. Also, the suffering we experience in this world does three things. It leads us to seek God, it develops our spiritual strength, and it increases our desire for heaven (Romans 8:18\-25; James 1:2\-3; Titus 2:13; 1 Peter 1:7\).
In the garden of Eden, God spoke to Adam and communicated in clear and direct ways, not in abstract concepts. God speaks to us today in the same way. In some ways, this is the most important meaning to be found in any tragedy. Tragic events demonstrate much of their meaning in the way we react to them. C.S. Lewis said, “God whispers to us in our pleasures, speaks in our conscience, but shouts in our pains. It is his megaphone to rouse a deaf world.” This does not mean that God causes tragedy, but that He uses our reaction to tragedy to speak to us. Tragic events remind us not only that we live in an imperfect and fallen world, but that there is a God who loves us and wants something better for us than the world has to offer.
|
What is Lectio Divina? |
Answer
*Lectio divina* is Latin for “divine reading,” “spiritual reading,” or “holy reading.” Lectio divina, according to author and spiritual director Becky Eldredge, is “a slow, rhythmic reading and praying of a Scripture passage” (from *Busy Lives \& Restless Souls*, Loyola Press, 2017\). The intention of this traditional monastic practice is to promote communion with God and provide special spiritual insight. The principles of lectio divina were first expressed around the year 220 and later practiced by Catholic monks, especially the monastic rules of Saints Pachomius, [Augustine](Saint-Augustine.html), [Basil](Basil-of-Caesarea.html), and [Benedict](Benedict-of-Nursia.html). The practice of lectio divina was revived in 1965 with the publication of *Dei Verbum* by the Vatican II Council.
A related practice is visio divina, which is praying while contemplating on icons, illustrations, or other visual images. In addition, various Catholic teachers promote musica or audio divina (using music as a means of opening the “ears of the heart”) and walking divina (participating in a Corpus Christi procession or a rosary procession, visiting the [Stations of the Cross](stations-of-the-cross.html), or walking the Camino).
The practice of lectio divina is popular among Catholics and is gaining acceptance in the evangelical church, especially those involved in the [spiritual formation](spiritual-formation.html) movement. Pope Benedict XVI promoted lectio divina, and in a 2005 speech, he mentioned its purpose: “I would like in particular to recall and recommend the ancient tradition of lectio divina: the diligent reading of Sacred Scripture accompanied by prayer brings about that intimate dialogue in which the person reading hears God who is speaking, and in praying, responds to him with trusting openness of heart. If it is effectively promoted, this practice will bring to the Church—I am convinced of it—a new spiritual springtime” (“Address to the Participants in the International Congress Organized to Commemorate the 40th Anniversary of the Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation *Dei Verbum*,” 9/16/05\).
Lectio divina is easily adaptable to the reading of other sacred texts of other faiths. And, as psychologist John Uebersax points out, the steps of lectio divina “correspond fairly well to the four primary cognitive functions posited by psychologist Carl Jung: sensing, thinking, feeling, and intuiting” (“A Method for *Lectio Divina* Based on Jungian Psychology,” www.john\-uebersax.com/plato/lectio.htm, accessed 3/2/23\).
The practice of lectio divina begins with a time of relaxation, making oneself comfortable and clearing the mind of mundane thoughts and cares. Some practitioners find it helpful to concentrate by beginning with deep, cleansing breaths and repeating a chosen phrase or word several times to help free the mind. Then they follow four steps:
*Lectio* – Reading the Bible passage slowly several times. The passage itself is not as important as savoring each portion of the reading, constantly listening for the “still, small voice” of a word or phrase that speaks to the practitioner.
*Meditatio* – Reflecting on the passage and thinking about how it applies to one’s life. The practitioner pays special attention to feelings that arise and ways that God is speaking.
*Oratio* – Responding to the passage by praying and opening the heart to God. This is seen as the beginning of a conversation with God. Some practitioners of lectio divina keep a journal to record their prayers to God and God’s messages to them.
*Contemplatio* – Contemplating on all that was learned. This step involves sitting in silence, resting in God’s presence, and experiencing union with Christ.
Some versions of the instructions for lectio divina also include a fifth step: *Actio*, or action. Having received God’s love, the practitioner is to go about serving others in love.
Of course, devotional Bible reading, unhurried prayer, and meditating on and responding to the written Word are good. Insofar as lectio divina promotes those activities, believers can participate. Focusing on the Bible to commune with God is laudable. But there are some cautions concerning lectio divina:
1\) The origin of lectio divina is problematic. Anything that originated with monks, practiced by mystics, recommended by popes, and taught by Catholic teachers is suspect. Believers should be wary of any exercise identified as a traditional monastic practice.
2\) The subjective, personal focus of lectio divina downplays objective, methodical Bible study. Proponents of lectio divina freely admit that the practice “does not treat scripture as texts to be studied. . . . In Lectio Divina we let go of more intellectual, studious, or effortful ways of reading the scripture. . . . Although Lectio Divina involves reading, it is less a practice of reading than one of listening to the inner message of the Scripture delivered through the Holy Spirit. Lectio Divina does not seek information or motivation” (Archdiocese of St. Louis, www.archstl.org/Portals/0/Documents/Worship/Divina%20Resources/Lectio%20Divina.pdf, accessed 3/2/23\). A devotional reading of Scripture should not *replace* “intellectual, studious” Bible study but supplement it. A serious study of the Bible should naturally lead to communion with and worship of God.
Believers have a responsibility to correctly handle the word of truth and be workers who do not need to be ashamed before God (2 Timothy 2:15\). We approach the Bible from a position of sound knowledge and faith; the personal experience of peace and contentment comes as a byproduct of knowing and communing with God rightly.
|
What are the steps to salvation? |
Answer
Many people are looking for “steps to salvation.” People like the idea of an instruction manual with five steps that, if followed, will result in salvation. An example of this is [Islam](Islam.html) with its Five Pillars. According to Islam, if the Five Pillars are obeyed, salvation will be granted. Because the idea of a step\-by\-step process to salvation is appealing, many in the Christian community make the mistake of presenting salvation as a result of a step\-by\-step process. Roman Catholicism has seven sacraments. Various Christian denominations add baptism, public confession, turning from sin, speaking in tongues, etc., as steps to salvation. But the Bible only presents one step to salvation. When the Philippian jailer asked Paul, “What must I do to be saved?” Paul responded, “Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved” (Acts 16:30\-31\).
Faith in Jesus Christ as the Savior is the only “step” to salvation. The message of the Bible is abundantly clear. We have all sinned against God (Romans 3:23\). Because of our sin, we deserve to be eternally separated from God (Romans 6:23\). Because of His love for us (John 3:16\), God took on human form and died in our place, taking the punishment that we deserve (Romans 5:8; 2 Corinthians 5:21\). God promises forgiveness of sins and eternal life in heaven to all who receive, by grace through faith, Jesus Christ as Savior (John 1:12; 3:16; 5:24; Acts 16:31\).
Salvation is not about certain steps we must follow to earn salvation. Yes, Christians should be baptized. Yes, Christians should publicly confess Christ as Savior. Yes, Christians should turn from sin. Yes, Christians should commit their lives to obeying God. However, these are not steps to salvation. They are results of salvation. Because of our sin, we cannot in any sense earn salvation. We could follow 1000 steps, and it would not be enough. That is why Jesus had to die in our place. We are absolutely incapable of paying our sin debt to God or cleansing ourselves from sin. Only God could accomplish our salvation, and so He did. God Himself completed the “steps” and thereby offers salvation to anyone who will receive it from Him.
Salvation and forgiveness of sins is not about following steps. It is about receiving Christ as Savior and recognizing that He has done all of the work for us. God requires one step of us—receiving Jesus Christ as our Savior from sin and fully trusting in Him alone as the way of salvation. That is what distinguishes the Christian faith from all other world religions, each of which has a list of steps that must be followed in order for salvation to be received. The Christian faith recognizes that God has already completed the steps and simply calls on the repentant to receive Him in faith.
|
What is Christian missions? |
Answer
Christian missions is following Christ’s call: sharing the [gospel](what-is-the-gospel.html) with the lost world through God’s wisdom and strength.
**Christian missions is obeying Christ**
After Christ’s death and resurrection, the Lord commanded the disciples to share the gospel, the message of His redemption: “Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age” (Matthew 28:19–20\).
This [Great Commission](great-commission.html) applies to Christians today. Rather than weighing us down with a burden, obeying God’s call brings joy and reward in heaven. We should fulfill our mission not out of duty but love: “For Christ’s love compels us, because we are convinced that one died for all, and therefore all died. And he died for all, that those who live should no longer live for themselves but for him who died for them and was raised again. . . . All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people’s sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation. We are therefore Christ’s ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ’s behalf: Be reconciled to God. 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 5:14–21\).
God could convert everyone using a [blinding light](Damascus-Road.html) and the voice of Christ as He did with the apostle Paul. Instead, He gives Christians the mission of reconciliation (Acts 1:8–9\). He works through us, calling sinners to turn to Christ in repentance and faith.
**Christian missions is sharing Christ**
Our mission is proclaiming Christ as the only Savior from sin and the only way to abundant, eternal life. Whom do we tell? Jesus told Christians to reach out to “all nations” (Matthew 28:19\). Jesus sends us to all people groups, to every ethnic culture without a gospel witness.
Christian missions, however, is not limited to international ministry. While believers should faithfully support those who go to the unreached on foreign soil, all Christians have the mission to share Christ on the home field with family, friends, coworkers, and the community.
The Christian mission of sharing Christ does not end with a sinner’s salvation. The commission was to make disciples—not immature believers. Thus, Christian missions involves not only evangelism but also discipleship.
**Christian missions is relying on Christ**
Sharing the gospel humbly, boldly, and passionately is our Christian mission. But we cannot do it alone. The power and results of Christian missions come from the Lord. He gives us the wisdom, strength, and desire to witness! Through our witness, He works repentance and faith in the sinner’s heart (2 Corinthians 5:20–21\).
Although missions is ultimately God’s work, Christians are responsible to understand and share the gospel and to have a strong relationship with Christ. Such a relationship guards against hypocrisy. “But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander” (1 Peter 3:15–16\). Jesus assured us that suffering would accompany missions, but God uses even suffering for good (Romans 8:28\).
In sum, Christian missions is obeying Christ, sharing Christ, and relying on Christ. Specifically, God sends missionaries through the support of the church to the unreached. All Christians, however, have the mission of reconciliation. The Lord works through them to rescue the lost. What greater mission can one fulfill?
|
How does creationism vs. evolution impact how a person views the world? |
Answer
The key difference between creationism and evolution comes down to our certainty about everything we think we know. Think about it: if our five senses and our brains are merely the product of random, purposeless evolution, how can we be sure that they’re giving us reliable information? The thing that my eye and brain perceives as “red” might be perceived by your eye and brain as “blue,” but you call it “red” because that’s what you’ve been taught. (The colors themselves won’t actually change, since they consist of certain, unchangeable frequencies of the electromagnetic spectrum.) We have no sure way of knowing we’re talking about the same thing.
Or suppose you see a rock that seemed to have a carving on it that reads “Chicago: 50 miles.” Now also suppose you believe that those markings really are nothing but the result of random erosion from wind and rain that just appear to spell out this message. Could you have any real confidence that Chicago is really 50 miles away?
But what if you knew that every normal set of eyes and brains is designed to perceive a certain frequency of the electromagnetic spectrum as “red”? Then you can have confidence in knowing that what I see as red is also what you see as red. And what if you knew that a man had carefully measured the distance 50 miles from Chicago and then put a marker there to indicate that? Then you can have confidence that that marker is giving you accurate information.
Another difference in how creationism vs. evolution affects a person’s view of the world is in the realm of morality. If we are merely the products of random, purposeless evolution, what, precisely, do the terms “good” and “evil” mean? “Good” as compared to what? “Evil” as compared to what? Indeed, without a measuring stick (e.g., God’s nature), we have no basis for saying that something is good or evil; it is merely an opinion, which really has no weight in judging how I act or how I judge the acts of others. Mother Teresa and Stalin simply made different choices in such a world. There is no answer to the ultimate “Says who?” when it comes to determining right and wrong. And while atheists and evolutionists can certainly lead moral lives—if they were true to their beliefs they would have no reason to—nor would they have any basis to judge the actions of those they determine to have done something “wrong.”
But if there is a God who created us in His image, then we are not only created with a sense of what is right or wrong, but we also have an answer to “Says who?” Good is what comports with God’s nature, and evil is anything that does not.
|
Is God restoring the offices of apostle and prophet in the church today? |
Answer
The movement to restore the offices of apostle and prophet bases the claim that apostles and prophets are to be a part of the church on Ephesians 4:11\-12\. These verses say, "And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ."
During the first century of the church, there was an office of apostle and there was a spiritual gift of apostle. The office or position of apostle was held by the 12 disciples of Jesus plus Matthias, who took Judas’ place, and Paul. Those who held the office or position of apostle were chosen specifically by Christ (Mark 3:16\-19\). The replacement for Judas is seen in Acts 1:20\-26\. Note in this passage that Judas' position was called an office. It should also be noted that Paul was chosen by Christ (1 Corinthians 15:8\-9; Galatians 1:1; 2:6\-9\). These men were given the task of setting up the foundation of the church. It should be understood that it was for the universal church that these men were a part of the foundation (Ephesians 2:20\). The foundation of the church (universal church) was laid in the first century. This is why the office of apostle is no longer functioning.
There was also a spiritual gift of apostle (this is not to be confused with the office—they are separate). Among those who had the spiritual gift were James (1 Corinthians 15:7; Galatians 1:19\), Barnabas (Acts 14:4, 14; 1 Corinthians 9:6\), Andronicus and Junias (Romans 16:7\), possibly Silas and Timothy (1 Thessalonians 1:1; 2:7\), and Apollos (1 Corinthians 4:6, 9\). This latter group had the gift of apostleship but not the apostolic "office" conferred upon the Twelve and Paul. Those who had the gift of apostle, then, were those who carried the gospel message with God’s authority. The word "apostle" means "one sent as an authoritative delegate." This was true of those who held the office of Apostle (like Paul) and those who had the spiritual gift (like Apollos). Though there are men like this today, men who are sent by God to spread the gospel, it is best NOT to refer to them as apostles because of the confusion this causes since many are not aware of the two different uses of the term apostle.
The gift of prophet was a temporary gift given by the Christ for the laying of the foundation of the universal church. Prophets also were foundational to the universal church (Ephesians 2:20\). The prophet proclaimed a message from the Lord for the believers of the first century. These believers did not have the advantage we have of having a complete Bible. The last book of the New Testament (Revelation) was not completed until late in the first century. So the Lord provided gifted men called prophets who proclaimed messages from God to the people until the canon of Scripture was complete.
It should be noted that the current teaching of the restoration of prophet and the office of apostle is far from what Scripture describes of the men who held the gift of prophet and the office of apostle. Those who teach the restoration of the office teach that the men who claim to be apostles and prophets should never be spoken against, should never be questioned, because the person who speaks against them is speaking against God. Yet, the Apostle Paul commended the people of Berea for checking what he said against the Word of God to make sure he spoke the truth (Acts 17:10\-11\). The Apostle Paul also stated to those in Galatia that if anyone, including himself, should teach another Gospel, that person should be "accursed" (Galatians 1:8\-9\). In everything, Paul kept pointing people to the Bible as the final authority. The men who claim to be apostles and prophets today make themselves the final authority, something Paul and the Twelve never did.
It should also be noted that Scripture refers to these men in the past tense. 2 Peter 3:2 and also Jude 3\-4, state that the people should not stray from the message the apostles gave (past tense). Hebrews 2:3\-4 also speaks in the past tense of the those who performed (in the past) signs, wonders, miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit.
|
What is Restorationism? |
Answer
“Restorationism” refers to a group of unaffiliated 19th\-century movements from within Christianity based upon the premise that the true faith and practice of the church had been lost due to apostasy and that the church needed to be restored to its New Testament model. Restorationist organizations include [Jehovah’s Witnesses](Jehovahs-Witnesses.html), [Mormons](Mormons.html), and [Seventh\-day Adventists](Seventh-Day-Adventism.html), as well as the adherents to the Stone\-Campbell [Restoration Movement](Restoration-movement.html), which consists today in three main groups: Christian Churches (Disciples of Christ), Churches of Christ, and Independent Christian Churches/Churches of Christ.
While all these groups teach widely divergent theologies, and while some restorationist groups are considered cults (Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses) with other groups being considered valid Christian movements (the Restoration Movement), they have in common the notion that true Christianity had died out many years ago and it needed to be restored to its original New Testament form. Some of these groups believe they alone are the embodiment of true Christianity, some going so far as to teach that all other groups, including mainline Protestant denominations, are not really Christians at all, having lost their way over the centuries to complete apostasy. They are convinced that the drift from Christian principles is so extreme as to render the church irredeemable, and, therefore, it must be completely rebuilt. Denying that past historical patterns have any validity at all, they are free to embrace what they understand to be pure biblical truth as revealed to the apostles.
Certainly, there have been abuses and misuses of the Word of God down through the years by churches claiming to speak for Christ. One has only to look at the Roman Catholic doctrines of purgatory, prayer to Mary, and the veneration of saints—all of which are completely unscriptural—to agree that, in some cases at least, church tradition has superseded the Bible as authority. However, some of the restorationists have also jettisoned such biblical doctrines as the Trinity, hell, and salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. Of course, parts of the church have apostatized, but there has always been a remnant of the faithful preserved by God for His purposes.
At least two disastrous consequences can be expected to result from a zealous embrace of restorationist philosophy. First, it easily leads to a spirit of exclusivism and arrogance, not to mention error. The natural outcome of believing one’s own group has the corner on the truth is the despising of all others who claim the name of Christ, seeing them as apostates, or worse, tools of the devil. No spirit of Christian unity can survive such a mindset. One has only to look at the diverse beliefs that exist among the restorationists themselves, and the resulting animosity that accompanies them, to see the inevitable result of adopting such a belief system. Exclusivism leads to pride, a sin especially abhorred by God (Proverbs 16:5; James 4:6\). In addition, exclusivism can provoke delusions of grandeur in its leaders, making possible all manner of erroneous interpretations, not to mention rewriting, of Scripture designed to fit it to the paradigm of the group, without regard for clear and concise biblical scholarship and exegesis.
The second, and far more destructive, result of restorationist philosophy is that it denies God’s ability, or willingness, to preserve the faith “once delivered to the saints” (Jude 3\), rejects His sovereignty over His people, and disavows His plan to bring to pass His will without fail, despite attempts by Satan and his minions to derail it. God did not send His Son to die on the cross for the sins of His people only to allow those same people to lapse into apostasy and languish there for 1800 years. Such a notion is not only absurd, but it defines God as a ruthless and capricious entity, not the loving and merciful Father God we know Him to be. Those who believe God abandoned mankind for centuries because of their unbelief and sin need only to read Romans 3, which makes it clear that even though men are unfaithful, this does not nullify God’s faithfulness. The Holy Spirit is, and always has been, active in the world “convict\[ing] the world concerning sin, and concerning righteousness, and concerning judgment” (John 16:8\), drawing God’s people from every race, tribe, nation and language to the Savior. In every era, the redeemed of God have responded to His Spirit because that is God’s plan, and it will continue unabated to the day of Christ’s return. Until then, we have the assurance of Jesus Himself that He will be with us “always, even until the end of the world” (Matthew 28:20\).
|
What is a Christian missionary? |
Answer
A Christian missionary is commissioned by the Lord to make disciples, followers of Christ. Jesus commands all Christians to share the Gospel, the message of His death and resurrection that conquered the penalty and power of sin.
“Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age" (Matthew 28:19\-20\).
**Who is a Christian missionary?** Many people picture a missionary as a middle\-aged man who leaves his job in America to evangelize and plant churches in Africa. But that is a simplistic view. Today, African Christians reach out to Muslims in the Middle East. College students spend their summer teaching English in Asia. A family in America befriends and witnesses to international students. A truck driver responds to an international disaster, meeting both physical and spiritual needs. All these are missionaries.
Although missionaries cannot be stereotyped, they each have a call. God calls them to set aside personal ambitions in order to be witnesses of the Gospel. Like Isaiah, a missionary gladly responds, "[Here am I. Send me!](here-am-I-send-me.html)" (Isaiah 6:8b). Often God sends a missionary to a particular people group as Paul was sent to the unreached Gentiles and Peter to the Jews (Galatians 2:8\). Although technically a Christian missionary is one specifically called by God and sent out by the local church, every Christian has a mission to make disciples.
**What does a Christian missionary do?** A Christian missionary proclaims Jesus as Savior and Lord. Whom do they tell? Jesus made it clear that Christians are to reach out to “all the nations” (Matthew 28:19\), especially those ethnic groups without a Gospel witness. Unreached people groups are still waiting for the way, truth, and life found in Christ (Romans 15:20\). But Christians at home should be missionaries in their own communities, doing personal evangelism (Acts 1:8\).
Missionaries do more than evangelism. The commission was to make disciples, not immature believers. Thus, a Christian missionary’s outreach involves evangelism, discipleship, and church planting. These main goals are accomplished in a variety of ways: street preaching, tract hand\-outs, church building, Bible studies, teaching English as a second language, relief projects, children’s clubs, mountain trekking, literacy teaching, radio broadcasting, etc.
**Why does a Christian missionary go?** Christian missionaries go in obedience to God’s call. God called the apostle Paul, “to appoint you as a servant and witness to the things in which you have seen me and to those in which I will appear to you, delivering you from your people and from the Gentiles— to whom I am sending you to open their eyes, so that they may turn from darkness to light and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me” (Acts 26:16\-18\).
Jesus assured us that missionaries will face surrender and suffering. Missionaries leave friends behind, experience culture shock and rejection (Matthew 10:16\-31\). But instead of falling into self\-pity or pride, they learn to delight in serving God. Rather than being a burden, obeying His call brings joy and reward in heaven. Therefore, a missionary serves not out of duty but love (2 Corinthians 5:14\-21\).
A Christian missionary delights in spreading the good news of Christ to the lost just as Paul did: “Now when I came to Troas for the gospel of Christ and when a door was opened for me in the Lord. . . . thanks be to God, who always leads us in triumph in Christ, and manifests through us the sweet aroma of the knowledge of Him in every place. For we are a fragrance of Christ to God among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing; to the one an aroma from death to death, to the other an aroma from life to life. And who is adequate for these things? For we are not like many, peddling the word of God, but as from sincerity, but as from God, we speak in Christ in the sight of God” (2 Corinthians 2:12\-17\). Rather than seeking personal gain while witnessing, Christian missionaries bring glory to God by honoring Christ’s righteous life, sacrificial death, and absolute authority.
**Will you be a Christian missionary?** A Christian missionary is an ambassador of Christ. Each one must be yielded to the Lord, loving Him with all their heart, soul, mind, and strength. Specifically, a missionary is one whom God sends through the support of the Church to the unreached. All Christians, however, are called to be missionaries of the Gospel. The Lord works through them to rescue the lost. What greater call can one answer?
|
What are the pros and cons of short-term missions? |
Answer
Although short\-term missions have drawbacks, they can be overcome with godly wisdom, training, and heart.
**The Pros:**
*1\. Short\-term missionaries better understand the ministry and purpose of missions.*
Those who have never experienced cross\-cultural missions often have wrong impressions about it. They may view missions as a glamorous ministry with thankful natives coming to Christ each day. After participating in a short\-term missions trip, they better appreciate the goals and service of missions.
*2\. Short\-term missionaries become more sacrificial supporters of long\-term missionaries.*
A short\-term mission trip often increases a person’s interest in and support of missions. God may use a short\-term mission trip to call a person to long\-term missions. Besides going long\-term, multiple opportunities await to support missions.
The short\-term mission trip itself strengthens missionaries. The church group brings fresh hands to work, enthusiasm for the ministry, and Christian fellowship to encourage. They can help with tasks the long\-term missionaries don’t have the time or numbers to do: relief projects, tract handouts, children’s clubs, etc.
Once back home, the short\-term missionary doesn’t easily forget the need. They often become life\-long supporters of missionaries through prayer, gifts, and letters. Their passion for missions spreads to others back home.
*3\. Short\-term missions develop passion for knowing Christ and making Christ known.*
A short\-term mission trip teaches people dependence on God. They face customs to get through, an unfamiliar language to understand, and culture shock to overcome. As they turn to God for help, short\-term missionaries experience the power of prayer. Seeing God move in and through lives, they develop a love for Christ and the Gospel. This passion does not end at the mission trip’s end but should continue to energize the short\-term missionary back home. By God’s grace, personal evangelism increases. Prayer and Bible study become a delight, not a duty or drudgery.
**The Cons:**
*1\. Short\-term missions are expensive.*
If cost were the only factor, short\-term missions would not be worthwhile. Some people point out that the money used to fly 30 teens to Peru could be sent to the long\-term missionaries there. After all, the youth group could do missions at home: passing out tracts at a park, teaching a children’s Bible club, or helping in a soup kitchen in the inner city.
*2\. Short\-term missions may not require “counting the cost."*
Some who go on a short\-term mission trip still don’t understand the sacrifices of missions. They haven’t spent the grueling hours learning the language; they haven’t had to leave family and friends for more than a few weeks; they haven’t experienced the years of service without visible results. Besides, short\-term missionaries sometimes only add to the burdens of long\-term missionaries.
*3\. Short\-term missions may not have a lasting impact.*
Some short\-term missionaries come with the haughty idea that they can single\-handedly change the nation in the few weeks they serve. Without regard to the long\-term missionaries, native church leaders, or even the Lord, they hand out a few tracts, hold a puppet show, or put a new roof on an orphanage. Their impact on the community fades as soon as they hop on the plane back home. Even with the proper heart attitude and goals, short\-term missionaries have more limitations than long\-term missionaries. Short\-term missions may not provide the time it takes to learn the language and culture, build relationships, and make disciples.
*Conclusion: Are short\-term missions worthwhile?*
God uses both short\- and long\-term missionaries to make disciples of all nations (e.g. the apostle Paul vs. Timothy). The call and heart of both types of missionary are most important. While long\-term missionaries carry out the bulk of missions work, short\-term missions can lighten the load. Short\-term missions are usually most effective under the direction of long\-term missionaries and the national church. Although short\-term missions has drawbacks, they can be overcome with godly wisdom, training, and heart.
**Possible Short\-Term Missions Opportunities:**
<http://www.shorttermmissions.com/>
<http://www.missionfinder.org/summerbW.htm>
<http://www.adventures.org/>
<http://www.wycliffe.org/Go/ShortTerm.aspx>
[http://www.ntm.org/missiontrips/index.php?page\=mission%20trips](http://www.ntm.org/missiontrips/index.php?page=mission%20trips)
[Short Term Missions Trip Search](http://www.christianvolunteering.org/shorttermmissions.jsp)
[http://www.missions\-trip.com](http://www.missions-trip.com)
<http://experiencemission.org>
<https://www.prayingpelicanmissions.org>
|
How does the translation process impact the inspiration, inerrancy, and infallibility of the Bible? |
Answer
This question deals with three very important issues: inspiration, preservation, and translation.
The doctrine of the inspiration of the Bible teaches that scripture is “God\-breathed”; that is, God personally superintended the writing process, guiding the human authors so that His complete message was recorded for us. The Bible is truly God’s Word. During the writing process, the personality and writing style of each author was allowed expression; however, God so directed the writers that the 66 books they produced were free of error and were exactly what God wanted us to have. See 2 Timothy 3:16 and 2 Peter 1:21\.
Of course, when we speak of “inspiration,” we are referring only to the process by which the original documents were composed. After that, the doctrine of the preservation of the Bible takes over. If God went to such great lengths to give us His Word, surely He would also take steps to preserve that Word unchanged. What we see in history is that God did exactly that.
The Old Testament Hebrew scriptures were painstakingly copied by Jewish scribes. Groups such as the Sopherim, the Zugoth, the Tannaim, and the [Masoretes](who-Masoretes.html) had a deep reverence for the texts they were copying. Their reverence was coupled with strict rules governing their work: the type of parchment used, the size of the columns, the kind of ink, and the spacing of words were all prescribed. Writing anything from memory was expressly forbidden, and the lines, words, and even the individual letters were methodically counted as a means of double\-checking accuracy. The result of all this was that the words written by Isaiah’s pen are still available today. The discovery of the Dead Sea scrolls clearly confirms the precision of the Hebrew text.
The same is true for the New Testament Greek text. Thousands of Greek texts, some dating back to nearly A.D. 117, are available. The slight variations among the texts—not one of which affects an article of faith—are easily reconciled. Scholars have concluded that the New Testament we have at present is virtually unchanged from the original writings. Textual scholar Sir Frederic Kenyon said about the Bible, “It is practically certain that the true reading of every doubtful passage is preserved. . . . This can be said of no other ancient book in the world.”
This brings us to the translation of the Bible. Translation is an interpretative process, to some extent. When translating from one language to another, choices must be made. Should it be the more exact word, even if the meaning of that word is unclear to the modern reader? Or should it be a corresponding thought, at the expense of a more literal reading?
As an example, in Colossians 3:12, Paul says we are to put on “bowels of mercies” (KJV). The Greek word for “bowels,” which is literally “intestines,” comes from a root word meaning “spleen.” The KJV translators chose a literal translation of the word. The translators of the NASB chose “heart of compassion”—the “heart” being what today’s reader thinks of as the seat of emotions. The Amplified Bible has it as “tenderhearted pity and mercy.” The NIV simply puts “compassion.”
So, the KJV is the most literal in the above example, but the other translations certainly do justice to the verse. The core meaning of the command is to have compassionate feelings.
Most translations of the Bible are done by committee. This helps to guarantee that no individual prejudice or theology will affect the decisions of word choice, etc. Of course, the committee itself may have a particular agenda or bias (such as those producing the current “gender\-neutral” mistranslations). But there is still plenty of good scholarship being done, and many good translations are available.
Having a good, honest translation of the Bible is important. A good translating team will have done its homework and will let the Bible speak for itself.
As a general rule, the more literal translations, such as the KJV, NKJV, ASB and NASB, have less “interpretative” work. The “freer” translations, such as the NIV, NLT, and CEV, by necessity do more “interpretation” of the text, but are generally more readable. Then there are the paraphrases, such as The Message and The Living Bible, which are not really translations at all but one person’s retelling of the Bible.
So, with all that in view, are translations of the Bible inspired and inerrant? The answer is no, they are not. God nowhere extends the promise of inspiration to translations of His Word. While many of the translations available today are superb in quality, they are not inspired by God, and are not perfect. Does this mean we cannot trust a translation? Again, the answer is no. Through careful study of Scripture, with the Holy Spirit’s guidance, we can properly understand, interpret, and apply Scripture. Again, due to the faithful efforts of dedicated Christian translators (and of course the oversight of the Holy Spirit), the translations available today are superb and trustworthy. The fact that we cannot ascribe inerrancy to a translation should motivate us towards even closer study, and away from blind devotion towards any particular translation.
|
Is the Conversations with God series biblically sound? |
Answer
The book that started it all, *Conversations with God, Book 1: An Uncommon Dialogue*, spent over two and a half years on the *New York Times* Best Sellers List, and in 2006 a movie based on the book was released. *Conversations with God*, or *CwG*, is the brainchild of Neale Donald Walsch. In 1995, Walsch released the first book in the series, followed by eight more books, all written as dialogues between Walsch and “God.” The basic premise of the series is that God is “speaking” to everyone all the time and that Walsch began listening. He wrote Book 1 while struggling with thoughts of suicide and questions over the meaning of life.
Walsch claims divine inspiration for *Conversations with God*, saying that God literally spoke to him (“over my right shoulder”), and he wrote down what he heard as if taking dictation. However, in an April 7, 2000, interview on CNN’s *Larry King Live*, Walsch admitted that he couldn’t be sure that it was God speaking and that the books could have been the product of his own subconscious.
In *Conversations with God*, Walsch says a voice told him that God is everything and everything is God. Therefore, we humans are “God.” Everyone around you is simply “you” in a different form, and we are all “God.” Here, Walsch is repeating one of Satan’s original lies, “You will be as God” (Genesis 3:5\).
Walsch also claims in the *Conversations with God* series that all life is eternal. Death is “the great illusion.” There is no judgment, no punishment, and no hell, for there is no reason for any of that—there is no sin. After death, a person goes to a different level of existence in order to “continue the evolution of the human soul.” This teaching in *Conversations with God* is in direct conflict with Hebrews 9:27 and many other passages of Scripture that teach the reality of judgment after death.
Walsch’s defense of Hitler’s actions are in line with his teaching of relativism: Hitler might be called “evil” but only “within the context of our human experience.” And Hitler was commissioned by God “to show humanity to itself for the purpose of lifting humanity above what it had become and what it had sunk to” (Larry King interview, op. cit.). Therefore, in Walsch’s world, Hitler was just another thread of the tapestry and was necessary to help us move forward.
According to the author of *Conversations with God*, there is no right way to live or one way to come to God. There are many ways, and all of them are equally valid. All the gods of various religions are really the same “God.” Of course, the One True God disagrees with Walsch: “Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel, And his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: ‘I am the First and I am the Last; Besides Me there is no God’” (Isaiah 44:6\).
Walsch insists in Book 1 of *Conversations with God* that words cannot communicate truth. Instead, truth comes as each individual consults his or her own feelings. Everyone is right, and no one is wrong; contradictory “truths” are not a problem in Walsch’s faulty logic. It’s interesting for a man who has given the world nearly 3,000 pages of *words* to state that *words* cannot communicate truth. What, then, is he communicating?
|
After His resurrection, why did Jesus tell Mary not to touch Him, but later tell Thomas to touch Him? |
Answer
Jesus tells Mary, “Touch Me not” (John 20:17, KJV); but then later, speaking to Thomas, He says, “Reach hither thy finger and behold My hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into My side” (verse 27\). The seeming incongruity of Jesus’ statements is resolved when we examine the language Jesus employed and consider the basic difference between the two situations.
In John 20:17, the word translated “touch” is a Greek word which means “to cling to, to lay hold of.” This wasn’t just a touch; it was a grip. Obviously, when Mary recognized Jesus, she immediately clung to Him. Matthew 28:9 records the other women doing the same thing when they saw the resurrected Christ.
Mary’s reaction was motivated, possibly, by several things. One is simply her loving devotion to the Lord. Mary is overwhelmed by the events of the morning, and as her grief turns to joy, she naturally embraces Jesus. Another motivation is Mary’s desire to restore the fellowship that death had broken. She had lost Him once, and she was going to make sure she didn’t lose Him again—she wanted to keep Jesus with her always. Also, Mary may have been thinking that this was the fulfillment of Jesus’ promise to return (John 14:3\), in which case He would take her (and all believers) with Him to heaven.
However, it was not Jesus’ plan to stay in this world always, and His resurrection was not to be seen as His promised return. That is why He tells Mary of the ascension. His plan was to ascend to the Father and then send the Holy Spirit (John 16:7; 20:22; Acts 2:1\-4\). Fellowship with Jesus would continue, but it would be a spiritual communion, not a physical presence.
In loosening Mary’s hold on Him, Jesus was, in effect, saying this: “I know you desire to keep Me here, always present with you. I know you want everything to be just the same as before I died. But our relationship is about to change. I’m going to heaven, and you will have the Comforter in My place. You need to start walking by faith, Mary, not by sight.”
When Jesus spoke to Thomas, it was not to counter a misplaced desire but to rebuke a lack of faith. Thomas had said he would not believe until he had touched the living body of Jesus (John 20:25\). Jesus, knowing all about Thomas’s declaration, offered His body as living proof of His resurrection. This was something He did on another occasion as well (Luke 24:39\-40\).
So, both Mary and Thomas needed more faith. Mary needed faith enough to let Jesus go. Thomas needed faith enough to believe without empirical proof. Mary needed to loosen her grip; Thomas needed to strengthen his. The resurrected Christ gave both of them the faith they needed.
|
What does it mean for salvation to be a gift from God? |
Answer
The word gift is an important one in the Bible, and it is good that we understand its definition and implications.
In the New Testament, there are several Greek words translated “gift.” Some of these words are used in contexts other than God’s gift of salvation, such as the reciprocal gift\-giving of celebrants (Revelation 11:10\), the things received from fathers (Matthew 7:11\), offerings to a ministry (Philippians 4:17\), and the gifts of the magi (Matthew 2:11\).
However, when it comes to the matter of our salvation, the New Testament writers use different Greek words—words that emphasize the gracious and absolutely free quality of the gift. Here are the two words most commonly used for the gift of salvation:
1\) Dorea, meaning “a free gift.” This word lays particular stress on the gratuitous nature of the gift—it is something given above and beyond what is expected or deserved. Every New Testament occurrence of this word is related to a spiritual gift from God. It is what Jesus offers to the Samaritan woman at the well (John 4:10\). It is the “unspeakable \[or indescribable] gift” in 2 Corinthians 9:15\. This gracious gift is identified as the Holy Spirit in Acts 2:38; 8:20; and 11:17\.
The adverb form of this word is dorean, translated “freely” in Matthew 10:8; 2 Corinthians 11:7; Revelation 21:6; 22:17\. In Romans 3:24, immediately following God’s pronouncement of our guilt, we have this use of dorean: “Being justified FREELY by His grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.” The gift of salvation is free, and the motive for the gift is nothing more than the grace of the Giver.
2\) Charisma, meaning “a gift of grace.” This word is used to define salvation in Romans 5:15\-16\. Also, in Romans 6:23: “For the wages of sin is death, but the GIFT \[charisma] of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.” This same word is used in conjunction with the gifts of the Spirit received after salvation (Romans 12:6; 1 Timothy 4:14; 2 Timothy 1:6; 1 Peter 4:10\).
Obviously, if something is a “gift of grace,” it cannot be earned. To work for something is to deserve it, and that would produce an obligation—a gift of debt, as it were. That is why works destroy grace (Romans 4:1\-5; 11:5\-6\).
When presenting salvation, the New Testament writers carefully chose words that emphasize grace and freedom. As a result, the Bible could not be more clear—salvation is absolutely free, the true gift of God in Christ, and our only responsibility is to receive the gift by faith (John 1:12; 3:16; Ephesians 2:8\-9\).
|
How can salvation be not of works when faith is required? |
Answer
Our salvation depends solely upon Jesus Christ. He is our substitute, taking sin’s penalty (2 Corinthians 5:21\); He is our Savior from sin (John 1:29\); He is the author and finisher of our faith (Hebrews 12:2\). The work necessary to provide salvation was fully accomplished by Jesus Himself, who lived a perfect life, took God’s judgment for sin, and rose again from the dead (Hebrews 10:12\).
The Bible is quite clear that our own works do not help merit salvation. We are saved “not because of righteous things we had done” (Titus 3:5\). “Not by works” (Ephesians 2:9\). “There is no one righteous, not even one” (Romans 3:10\). This means that offering sacrifices, keeping the commandments, going to church, being baptized, and other good deeds are incapable of saving anyone. No matter how “good” we are, we can never measure up to God’s standard of holiness (Romans 3:23; Matthew 19:17; Isaiah 64:6\).
The Bible is just as clear that salvation is conditional; God does not save everyone. The one condition for salvation is faith in Jesus Christ. Over one hundred times in the New Testament, faith (or belief) is declared to be the sole condition for salvation (e.g., John 1:12; Acts 16:31\).
One day, some people asked Jesus what they could do to please God: “What must we do to do the works God requires?” Jesus immediately points them to faith: “The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent” (John 6:28\-29\). So, the question is about God’s requirements (plural), and Jesus’ answer is that God’s requirement (singular) is that you believe in Him.
Grace is God giving us something we cannot earn or deserve. According to Romans 11:6, “works” of any kind destroys grace—the idea is that a worker earns payment, while the recipient of grace simply receives it, unearned. Since salvation is all of grace, it cannot be earned. Faith, therefore, is a non\-work. Faith cannot truly be considered a “work,” or else it would destroy grace. (See also Romans 4—Abraham’s salvation was dependent on faith in God, as opposed to any work he performed.)
Suppose someone anonymously sent you a check for $1,000,000\. The money is yours if you want it, but you still must endorse the check. In no way can signing your name be considered earning the million dollars—the endorsement is a non\-work. You can never boast about becoming a millionaire through sheer effort or your own business savvy. No, the million dollars was simply a gift, and signing your name was the only way to receive it. Similarly, exercising faith is the only way to receive the generous gift of God, and faith cannot be considered a work worthy of the gift.
True faith cannot be considered a work because true faith involves a cessation of our works in the flesh. True faith has as its object Jesus and His work on our behalf (Matthew 11:28\-29; Hebrews 4:10\).
To take this a step further, true faith cannot be considered a work because even faith is a gift from God, not something we produce on our own. “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God” (Ephesians 2:8\). “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them” (John 6:44\). Praise the Lord for His power to save and for His grace to make salvation a reality!
|
What does it mean that Jesus is the “firstborn” over Creation? |
Answer
In a letter to the church at Colossae, the Apostle Paul gave an intriguing description of Jesus. In it, he explained Christ’s relationship to God the Father and to creation. Some have claimed that Paul’s description of Christ as the firstborn of creation means that Jesus was created—not eternal, not God. Such a doctrine, however, conflicts with the rest of the Bible. Christ could not be both Creator and created; John 1 clearly names Him Creator. Let’s take a careful look at the passage where Jesus is called the firstborn.
**Colossians 1:15\-21**
“And He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities — all things have been created by Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together. He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; so that He Himself might come to have first place in everything. For it was the Father’s good pleasure for all the fullness to dwell in Him, and through Him to reconcile all things to Himself, having made peace through the blood of His cross; through Him, I say, whether things on earth or things in heaven.”
**Jesus is God**
Christ’s relationship to His Father begins with the phrase "the image of the invisible God." The word “image,” meaning copy or likeness, expresses Christ’s deity. This word involves more than a resemblance, more than a representation. He is God! Although He took on human form, He has the exact nature of His Father (Hebrews 1:3\).
The "Word" of John 1:1 is a divine Person, not a philosophical abstraction. In the incarnation, the invisible God became visible in Christ; deity was clothed with humanity (Matthew 17:2\). God is in Christ: visible, audible, approachable, knowable, and available. All that God is, Christ is.
**Jesus is Lord of Creation**
The description "firstborn of all creation" speaks of Christ’s preexistence. He is not a creature but the eternal Creator (John 1:10\). God created the world through Christ and redeemed the world through Christ (Hebrews 1:2\-4\).
Note that Jesus is called the firstborn, not the first\-created. The word "firstborn" (Greek word "prototokos") signifies priority. In the culture of the Ancient Near East, the firstborn was not necessarily the oldest child. firstborn referred not to birth order but to rank. The firstborn possessed the inheritance and leadership.
Therefore, the phrase expresses Christ’s sovereignty over creation. After resurrecting Jesus from the dead, God gave Him authority over the Earth (Matthew 28:18\). Jesus created the world, saved the world, and rules the world. He is the self\-existent, acknowledged Head of creation.
Finally, the phrase recognizes Him as the Messiah: "I will make Him \[Christ] My firstborn, higher than the kings of the earth" (Psalm 89:27\).
Six times the Lord Jesus is declared to be the firstborn of God (see Romans 8:29; Colossians 1:15, 18; Hebrews 1:6; 12:23; Revelation 1:5\). These passages declare the preexistence, the sovereignty, and the redemption that Christ offers.
Thus, the phrase "firstborn of all creation" proclaims Christ’s preeminence. As the eternal Son of God, He created the universe. He is the Ruler of creation!
|
What is the Parable of the Wheat and the Tares? |
Answer
The Parable of the Wheat and the Weeds, or Tares, is filled with spiritual significance and truth. But, in spite of the clear explanation of the parable that Jesus gave (Matthew 13:36\-43\), this parable is very often misinterpreted. Many commentaries and sermons have attempted to use this story as an illustration of the condition of the church, noting that there are both true believers (the wheat) and false professors (the weeds) in both the church at large and individual local churches. While this may be true, Jesus distinctly explains that the field is not the church; it is the world (v. 38\).
Even if He hadn’t specifically told us the world is the setting of the story, it would still be obvious. The landowner tells the servants not to pull up the weeds in the field, but to leave them until the end of the age. If the field were the church, this command would directly contradict Jesus’ teaching in Matthew 18, which tells us how to deal with unrepentant sinners in the church: they are to be put out of the fellowship and treated as unbelievers. Jesus never instructed us to let impenitent sinners remain in our midst until the end of the age. So, Jesus is teaching here about “the kingdom of heaven” (v. 24\) in the world.
In the agricultural society of Christ’s time, many farmers depended on the quality of their crops. An enemy sowing weeds would have sabotaged a business. The tares in the parable were likely darnel because that weed, until mature, appears as wheat. Without modern weed killers, what would a wise farmer do in such a dilemma? Instead of tearing out the wheat with the tares, the landowner in this parable wisely waited until the harvest. After harvesting the whole field, the tares could be separated and burned. The wheat would be saved in the barn.
In the explanation of parable, Christ declares that He Himself is the sower. He spreads His redeemed seed, true believers, in the field of the world. Through His grace, these Christians bear the fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22\-24\). Their presence on earth is the reason the “kingdom of heaven” is like the field of the world. When Jesus said, “The kingdom of heaven is at hand” (Matthew 3:2; 4:17\), He meant the spiritual realm which exists on earth side by side with the realm of the evil one (1 John 5:19\). When the kingdom of heaven comes to its fruition, heaven will be a reality and there will be no “weeds” among the “wheat.” But for now, both good and bad seeds mature in the world.
The enemy in the parable is Satan. In opposition to Jesus Christ, the devil tries to destroy Christ’s work by placing false believers and teachers in the world who lead many astray. One has only to look at the latest televangelist scandal to know the world is filled with professing “Christians” whose ungodly actions bring reproach on the name of Christ. But we are not to pursue such people in an effort to destroy them. For one thing, we don’t know if immature and innocent believers might be injured by our efforts. Further, one has only to look at the Spanish [Inquisition](inquisitions.html), the [Crusades](Christian-crusades.html), and the reign of “[Bloody Mary](Bloody-Mary.html)” in England to see the results of men taking upon themselves the responsibility of separating true believers from false, a task reserved for God alone. Instead of requiring these false believers to be rooted out of the world, and possibly hurting immature believers in the process, Christ allows them to remain until His return. At that time, angels will separate the true from false believers.
In addition, we are not to take it upon ourselves to uproot unbelievers because the difference between true and false believers isn’t always obvious. Tares, especially in the early stages of growth, resemble wheat. Likewise, a false believer may resemble a true believer. In Matthew 7:22, Jesus warned that many profess faith but do not know Him. Thus, each person should examine his own relationship with Christ (2 Corinthians 13:5\). First John is an excellent test of salvation.
Jesus Christ will one day establish true righteousness. After He raptures the true church out of this world, God will pour out His righteous wrath on the world. During that tribulation, He will draw others to saving faith in Jesus Christ. At the end of the tribulation, all unbelievers will be judged for their sin and unbelief; then, they will be removed from God’s presence. True followers of Christ will reign with Him. What a glorious hope for the “wheat”!
|
What did Jesus mean when He said, “Take up your cross and follow Me”? |
Answer
In Matthew 16:24, Jesus told His disciples, “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me.” Let’s begin with what Jesus didn’t mean in this verse. Many people interpret the “cross” to be taken up as some burden they must carry in their lives: a strained relationship, a thankless job, a physical illness, etc. With self\-pitying pride, they look at their difficulty and say, “That’s my cross I have to carry.” Such an idea is not what Jesus meant when He said, “Take up your cross and follow Me.”
When a person carried a cross in Jesus’ day, no one thought of it as a persistent annoyance or symbolic burden. To a person in the first century, the cross meant one thing and one thing only: death by [crucifixion](crucifixion.html). To carry a cross was to face the most painful and humiliating means of death human beings could develop.
Two thousand years later, Christians view the cross as a cherished symbol of atonement, forgiveness, grace, and love. But in Jesus’ day the cross represented a torturous death. The Romans forced convicted criminals to carry their own crosses to the place of crucifixion (see John 19:17\). Bearing a cross meant one was about to die, and that one would face ridicule and disgrace along the way.
Therefore, Jesus’ command to “take up your cross and follow Me” is a call to self\-abasement and self\-sacrifice. One must be willing to die in order to follow Jesus. Dying to self is an absolute surrender to God.
After Jesus commanded cross\-bearing, He said, “For whoever wants to save their life [will lose it](he-who-loves-his-life-will-lose-it.html), but whoever loses their life for me will find it. What good will it be for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul? Or what can anyone give in exchange for their soul?” (Matthew 16:25–26\). Although the call to take up our cross is tough, the reward is matchless. Nothing in this world is worth passing up eternal life.
Wherever Jesus went, He drew crowds. Their view of who the Messiah really was—and what He would do—was often distorted. They thought the Christ would immediately usher in the restored kingdom (Luke 19:11\). They believed He would free them from the oppressive rule of their Roman occupiers. Some hoped He would continue to provide free lunches for everyone (John 6:26\). Jesus’ statement that following Him requires taking up a cross made people think twice about their motivations and level of commitment.
In Luke 9:57–62, three people seemed willing to follow Jesus. When Jesus pressed them, however, their commitment was shown to be half\-hearted at best. They failed to count the cost of following Him. None were willing to take up their cross and crucify upon it their own interests.
Jesus’ apparent attempts to dissuade people from following Him surely limited the number of false converts and insincere disciples (see John 6:66\). But God seeks “true worshipers \[who] will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth” (John 4:23\). Jesus’ call to “take up your cross and follow Me” serves to screen out the disingenuous, double\-minded, and dissembling.
Are you ready to take up your cross and follow Jesus? Consider these questions:
– Are you willing to follow Jesus if it means losing your closest friends?
– Are you willing to follow Jesus if it means alienation from your family?
– Are you willing to follow Jesus if it means losing your reputation?
– Are you willing to follow Jesus if it means losing your job?
– Are you willing to follow Jesus if it means losing your life?
In some places of the world, these consequences are a reality. But notice the phrasing of the questions: “Are you willing?” Following Jesus doesn’t necessarily mean all these things will happen to you, but the disciple of Christ must be willing to suffer loss. Are you willing to take up your cross? If faced with a choice—Jesus or the comforts of this life—which will you choose?
Commitment to Christ means taking up your cross daily, giving up your hopes, dreams, possessions, and even your very life if need be for the cause of Christ. Only if you willingly take up your cross may you be called His disciple (Luke 14:27\). The reward is worth the price. Remember that, as Jesus called His disciples to “take up your cross and follow Me,” He, too, bore a cross. Our Lord led the way.
|
What is Heaven like? |
Answer
Heaven is a real place described in the Bible. The word “heaven” is found 276 times in the New Testament alone. Scripture refers to three heavens. The apostle Paul was “caught up to the third heaven,” but he was prohibited from revealing what he experienced there (2 Corinthians 12:1\-9\).
If a third heaven exists, there must also be two other heavens. The first is most frequently referred to in the Old Testament as the “sky” or the “firmament.” This is the heaven that contains clouds, the area that birds fly through. The second heaven is interstellar/outer space, which is the abode of the stars, planets, and other celestial objects (Genesis 1:14\-18\).
The third heaven, the location of which is not revealed, is the dwelling place of God. Jesus promised to prepare a place for true Christians in heaven (John 14:2\). Heaven is also the destination of Old Testament saints who died trusting God’s promise of the Redeemer (Ephesians 4:8\). Whoever believes in Christ shall never perish but have eternal life (John 3:16\).
The apostle John was privileged to see and report on the heavenly city (Revelation 21:10\-27\). John witnessed that heaven (the new earth) possesses the “glory of God” (Revelation 21:11\), the very presence of God. Because heaven has no night and the Lord Himself is the light, the sun and moon are no longer needed (Revelation 22:5\).
The city is filled with the brilliance of costly stones and crystal clear jasper. Heaven has twelve gates (Revelation 21:12\) and twelve foundations (Revelation 21:14\). The paradise of the Garden of Eden is restored: the river of the water of life flows freely and the tree of life is available once again, yielding fruit monthly with leaves that “heal the nations” (Revelation 22:1\-2\). However eloquent John was in his description of heaven, the reality of heaven is beyond the ability of finite man to describe (1 Corinthians 2:9\).
Heaven is a place of “no mores.” There will be no more tears, no more pain, and no more sorrow (Revelation 21:4\). There will be no more separation, because death will be conquered (Revelation 20:6\). The best thing about heaven is the presence of our Lord and Savior (1 John 3:2\). We will be face to face with the Lamb of God who loved us and sacrificed Himself so that we can enjoy His presence in heaven for eternity.
|
What caused the extinction of the dinosaurs? |
Answer
The extinction of the [dinosaurs](dinosaurs-Bible.html) is an enigma that has captivated scientists for well over a century. We find the fossilized remains of giant reptiles all over the earth, yet we do not see any of these creatures alive today. What happened to them all?
The conventional paradigm says that the dinosaurs mysteriously went extinct around 65 million years ago. An assortment of explanations has been offered as to why. The two most popular hypotheses to explain dinosaur extinction are the Impact Event Hypothesis and the Massive Volcanism Hypothesis. The first proposes that one or more asteroids struck the earth, causing a “nuclear winter” that wiped out the dinosaurs. The second blames intense volcanism—sustained, widespread volcanic eruptions—for their demise. Both theories make note of the high concentration of iridium (Ir) found buried in the sediments that separate the Cretaceous Period from the Paleogene (known as the K\-Pg boundary; formerly known as the K\-T boundary), which, according to the conventional paradigm, was the period in Earth’s history during which the dinosaurs went extinct.
Both hypotheses of dinosaur extinction take into account some of the evidence while ignoring some. For example, if either hypothesis is correct and there is a 60\+ million\-year gap between man and dinosaur, how then do we explain petroglyphs and other forms of ancient art that depict humans interacting with such familiar dinosaurs as the triceratops, stegosaurus, tyrannosaurus, and the sauropods? (In some cases the glyphs show people taming them and riding them around.) Moreover, some claim to have found fossilized dinosaur prints in the same rock layers as hoof prints and human footprints. How are we supposed to explain this within the framework of the conventional perspective? If dinosaurs went extinct long before mankind evolved, why do ancient cultures from every inhabited continent on the planet record interactions with giant reptiles? These creatures are commonly called “dragons” today and have been collectively relegated to mythology.
But we must ask ourselves, how is it that so many isolated cultures from around the world came to share the same mythos of dragons? Could there be a core historical truth to the legends? Could it be that the extinct dinosaurs—the giant reptiles we find buried in the dirt—have something to do with the giant reptiles our ancestors spoke of just centuries ago? We believe that this is the case. The preponderance of evidence suggests to us that the conventional perspective is fundamentally flawed. Mankind appears to have collective amnesia regarding this matter, and we have effectively constituted a “scientific” paradigm to keep us in the dark.
How then do we account for the extinction of the dinosaurs? The same way we account for the extinction of the other estimated 20,000 to 2 million species that scientists believe may have gone extinct over the past century alone—a combination of climate change and the proliferation of the human species after the [worldwide flood](global-flood.html) of Noah’s day. Climate change can be very destructive to ecosystems in general, and we tend to kill or drive out all of our major competition in particular. That is why we don’t find too many other predators—lions, tigers and bears, etc—in our suburbs and cities or even rural communities. We are at the very top of the food chain for a reason.
In Hollywood movies like *Jurassic World*, we see dinosaurs brought back from extinction—and hunting us down and eating us alive. And, no doubt, if humans and dinosaurs coexisted, some of that carnage certainly happened. But, for the most part, the opposite was true. We hunted them down and cooked them for dinner. In many of the legends and much of the ancient artwork that is exactly what we find—humans hunting down the giant reptiles and killing them. Lions and tigers and bears did not have it quite as bad as the dinosaurs (hence, they are still around). That is because our ancestors seemed particularly fixated on “slaying the dragon”!
So, what happened to the dinosaurs? Apparently, the ones that survived the global climate change after the flood got eaten by us. It could even be that not all of the dinosaurs are extinct. Some may still survive in remote areas of the world that have not yet come under our complete dominion, and there are hundreds of such sightings every year to this effect—especially from indigenous people groups in remote areas who tell their tales to incredulous Western scientists (who naturally do not believe the natives because of their own entrenched, so\-called “scientific” presuppositions). In our view, this incredulity is wrong. Science should involve the impartial investigation of evidence without prejudice, not an arbitrary human effort to prop up flawed, theoretical histories of the earth.
|
How can we trust that biblical prophecy can indeed predict the future? |
Answer
The main reason we can trust biblical prophecy is that it, like the rest of Scripture, was written—literally “God\-breathed”—by the Creator of the universe. It is inerrant, perfect, and true. We must understand that before we can understand the role of biblical prophecy. (Please see: [Why is it important to believe in biblical inerrancy?](Biblical-inerrancy.html))
Biblical prophecy plays two roles. It foretells the future, and it explains what the positive or negative results of future events will be. Prophecy may announce events that bring joy and pleasure or fear and foreboding. When prophecy is ignored, it is usually because the hearers don’t like what they hear for one reason or another. Biblical prophecy is not usually general in nature. It normally is very specific as to how it will affect someone or something. But it is always dependable and worthy of our complete trust. We can allow prophecy to help shape our lives, giving us direction and guidance in serving our Lord. It should be a source of strength and instruction for us. Unlike what we hear called “prophecy” today, both in the church and outside the church, true biblical prophecy is always accurate and precise. What God prophesies always occurs.
The prophecy of the flood in Genesis 6 is an example. God explains His reasons for the flood, gives specific instructions for Noah to build the ark to preserve lives, then produces this first great worldwide catastrophe. Afterwards, God prophesied that He would never flood the whole earth again, in Genesis 9:12–16\. Joseph’s dreams in Genesis 37:5–10 contain prophecies that came to pass later in his life. In Deuteronomy 18:18 God says to Moses, “I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers; I will put my words in his mouth, and he will tell them everything I command him.” This prophecy predicts the Jewish Messiah, our Lord Jesus, and is quoted in Acts 3:22–26\. One of the most detailed prophecies of the Messiah, in Isaiah 53, contains predictions of Christ’s ministry, sin\-bearing, and suffering. Psalm 22 gives another prophecy of our Lord’s suffering, couched in a description of troubled time in King David's life.
In our Lord’s own prophecies, in Matthew 24, He spoke of wars, famines, earthquakes, persecutions, apostasy and betrayals, and finally of His own return, unexpected and widely rejected today. This and other end\-time prophecies are as dependable as Noah’s warning of the Flood. Similar predictions of catastrophic events still to come are found in 2 Peter chapters 2–3, together with a prediction (2 Peter 3:7\) of God’s intervention. And in 1 Thessalonians 4:13\-18, Christians are promised a rescue or a resurrection appointment, whether we’re alive or dead. Biblical prophecy provides us a roadmap of the future. To fail to understand these prophecies of the rapture is to miss one of the greatest gifts of God.
Finally, since we can trust John 3:16, that God loves us and gave us His Son, surely we can rely on Him as Author of biblical prophecy to predict, to encourage, to direct and provide for our future physical and spiritual needs. Our Lord said, in John 14:2, “In my Father’s house are many rooms; if it were not so, I would have told you. I am going there to prepare a place for you.” And that should be a prophecy of assurance and encouragement for all Christians. So place your trust in God’s prophecies, just as you placed your trust in His Son.
|
I have committed _____ sin. Will God forgive me? |
Answer
Insert whatever sins you have committed into the \_\_\_\_\_\_. Yes, God can and will forgive any sin. The doctrine of [atonement](substitutionary-atonement.html) is what explains salvation and forgiveness of sin. God imputed Christ’s righteousness to those who humbly ask for forgiveness of sin (Isaiah 53:5\-6; 2 Corinthians 5:21\). He paid the full price for our sin, and believers are forgiven fully for every sin they commit—past, present, and future. There is also daily forgiveness as we confess our sins and forsake them for our sanctification. If you compare any sin to the murder of Jesus, it pales in comparison, yet Jesus said, “Father, forgive them for they know not what they do” (Luke 23:34\).
The concepts of salvation and forgiveness of sin are inextricably linked. Fortunately, God’s grace is sufficient for any and all sin, whatever sin you put in the blank. Receiving forgiveness of sin is up to the individual. That is the first issue; will you receive the salvation (forgiveness of sin) that Christ is offering? If the answer is "yes," then you are fully forgiven of all debt of sin (Acts 13:38\-39\). This forgiveness comes by faith in Jesus and God’s grace alone, not by works or good deeds (Romans 3:20,22\). Salvation begins by humbly acknowledging that we will never be good enough to get into heaven on our own merit and that we need forgiveness of sin. Accepting Jesus Christ means believing that His death and resurrection paid the penalty for all sin ever committed and that it is sufficient to cover all sin (1 John 2:2\).
So, if you have received Jesus Christ as your Savior, God has already forgiven all your sins. If you have not, confess your sins to God, and He will cleanse you and restore you to fellowship with Him (1 John 1:8\-9\). Even with forgiveness of sin, you may still experience feelings of guilt. Feeling guilty over sin is actually a natural response of our conscience, and it is there to remind us not to repeat sinful patterns. Understanding that Jesus is fully capable of forgiving any measure of sin is the hope of our salvation. Understanding forgiveness is the cure for guilty feelings.
Knowing that forgiveness is really a beautiful, graceful gift from a God who loves us allows us to see how truly wonderful He is. When we contemplate our own sin and how wretched and unworthy of forgiveness we are, it becomes clear that God is loving, compassionate, and worthy of our worship. Our sinful pride that resists asking for forgiveness is what stands between us and a relationship with a caring Savior. But for those who ask for forgiveness of sin, they can believe that Jesus is sufficient and eager to forgive and save them from their sin, and they will ultimately enter into His courts with praise (Psalm 100:4\).
|
How does God judge those who were raised in non-Christian cultures? |
Answer
This question presupposes that the ability to be saved is dependent upon where we are born, how we are raised and what we are taught. The lives of millions of people who have come out of false religions—or no religion at all—through the centuries clearly refute this idea. Heaven is not the eternal dwelling place of those who were fortunate enough to be raised in Christian homes in free nations, but of those who came to Christ from “every tribe and language and people and nation” (Revelation 5:9\). People in all cultures and in every phase of history are saved the same way—by the grace of God given to undeserving sinners, not because of what we know, where we are born or how we have been indoctrinated, but “because God has poured out his love into our hearts by the Holy Spirit, whom he has given us” (Romans 5:5\).
While some may be ignorant of the content of Scripture and the teachings of Christ, they are by no means deprived of any knowledge of what is right and wrong, nor are they deprived of the knowledge of God’s existence. Romans 1:20 tells us, “For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.” In reality, it is not that some people have not heard about Christ. Rather, the problem is that they have rejected what they have heard and what is readily seen in nature. Deuteronomy 4:29 proclaims, “But if from there you seek the LORD your God, you will find him if you look for him with all your heart and with all your soul.” This verse teaches an important principle: everyone who truly seeks after Truth will find it. If a person sincerely desires to know the true God, God will make Himself known.
Those in false religions are always subject to the teaching of salvation by works. If they believe they can satisfy a holy and perfect God by the keeping of rules and laws, God will allow them to continue in their efforts at self\-justification until He finally judges them rightly. If, however, they respond to the goading of a conscience awakened by God and cry out to Him—as the tax collector in the temple did—“Lord, have mercy on me, a sinner” (Luke 18:9\-14\), God will respond with His truth and grace.
Only in Christ the Savior is a man freed from the liability of guilt, sin, and shame. Our right standing before our Judge is established on one thing only: the finished work of Christ crucified who shed His blood so we could live (John 19:30\). We are released from our sins by His blood (Revelation 1:5\). He has reconciled us in His earthly body through His death (Colossians 1:22\). Jesus bore our sins in His own Body on the cross so that by His wounds we are healed (1 Peter 2:24\). We are made holy through the offering up of Jesus’ body as a sacrifice once for all (Hebrews 10:10\). Christ appeared once for all to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself (Hebrews 9:26\). God sent His Son to remove the wrath that we ourselves deserved (1 John 4:10\). The penalty of sin that is rightly ours is absolved by grace through faith, not by any righteous deeds of our own (Ephesians 2:8\-9\).
Christ’s final marching orders were that His followers preach this good news to sinners throughout the world and until the end of the world when He will return to judge the living and the dead (Matthew 28:18\-20; 2 Timothy 4:1\). Where there are hearts opened by the Holy Spirit, there will God send His messengers to fill those open hearts with His truth. Even in countries where preaching Christ is forbidden by law, God’s truth still finds its way to those who truly seek it, including through the internet. The stories of thriving house churches in China, conversions to Christ in Iran and other Islamic countries, and the inroads into remote areas of the world all attest to the limitless power of God’s love and mercy.
|
Should Christians judge the teachings of their leaders? |
Answer
As Christians, we are commanded against following teachers blindly but are told rather to “test everything; hold on to the good” (1 Thessalonians 5:21\). The Apostle Peter warns us in 2 Peter 2:1\-3 that there will be false teachers in our day just as there were false teachers in his day. Among their false teachings is a denial of the sufficiency of the sacrifice of Christ on the cross to take away sin, which is a common theme among cultists today. Another characteristic of false teachers is the greed which motivates them in everything they do. Paul offers a similar warning to the Ephesian elders in Acts 20:29\-31, calling the false teachers “savage wolves” who mercilessly attempt to destroy the faith of the sheep and draw them away from the Shepherd. Paul warned the church continually, pleading with them night and day to be on their guard against such deceivers.
From these passages, we see clearly that we are to distinguish between true and false teachers. How then are we to do that? First, as Paul instructs the Ephesians, we are to “no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of men in their deceitful scheming” (Ephesians 4:14\). Rather, we are to “become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ” and we do this by “the knowledge of the Son of God” (v. 13\). The knowledge of Christ can only be obtained through the Word of God, and it is by that Word that we distinguish between the true and the false.
In Matthew 7:15\-20, Jesus offers some critical advice in discerning who is a false prophet: “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruits you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus, by their fruits you will recognize them.” Plainly stated, is the teacher’s life marked by a progressive conformity to the likeness of Christ? Is the teacher bearing the fruits of the Spirit? Just as only good trees produce good fruit, so do only true teachers of Christ display the fruit of the Spirit—love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self\-control (Galatians 5:22\-23\), whereas false prophets and teachers display the acts of their sinful natures (Galatians 5:19\-21\). By these fruits, we recognize true and false teachers.
Second, does the teaching that is being presented conform to the message as proclaimed by the early church and the apostles? As Paul writes to the church in Galatia, “I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. 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!” These are harsh words indeed that Paul has for the false teachers, but eternal condemnation is what they store up for themselves until the day of God’s wrath (Galatians 1:6\-9\).
The Apostle John tells us in his first epistle (1 John 4:1\-6\) how we are to discern which spirits are from God. “Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world. You, dear children, are from God and have overcome them, because the one who is in you is greater than the one who is in the world. They are from the world and therefore speak from the viewpoint of the world, and the world listens to them. We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit of truth and the spirit of falsehood.”
It is of utmost importance that Christians are well grounded in the Scriptures so that they are able to discern which teachers speak from God and which are false in their proclamation. Only then can we reject what is false and “hold on to the good” (1 Thessalonians 5:21\).
|
What is good biblical exegesis? |
Answer
*Exegesis* means “exposition or explanation.” Biblical exegesis involves the examination of a particular text of scripture in order to properly interpret it. Exegesis is a part of the process of hermeneutics, the science of interpretation. A person who practices exegesis is called an exegete.
Good biblical exegesis is actually commanded in scripture. “Study \[be diligent] to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15\). According to this verse, we must handle the Word of God properly, through diligent study. If we don’t, we have reason to be ashamed.
There are some basic principles of good exegesis which serious students of the Bible will follow:
1\. The Grammatical Principle. The Bible was written in human language, and language has a certain structure and follows certain rules. Therefore, we must interpret the Bible in a manner consistent with the basic rules of language.
Usually, the exegete starts his examination of a passage by defining the words in it. Definitions are basic to understanding the passage as a whole, and it is important that the words be defined according to their original intent and not according to modern usage. To ensure accuracy, the exegete uses a precise English translation and Greek and Hebrew dictionaries.
Next, the exegete examines the syntax, or the grammatical relationships of the words in the passage. He finds parallels, he determines which ideas are primary and which are subordinate, and he discovers actions, subjects, and their modifiers. He may even diagram a verse or two.
2\. The Literal Principle. We assume that each word in a passage has a normal, literal meaning, unless there is good reason to view it as a figure of speech. The exegete does not go out of his way to spiritualize or allegorize. Words mean what words mean.
So, if the Bible mentions a “horse,” it means “a horse.” When the Bible speaks of the Promised Land, it means a literal land given to Israel and should not be interpreted as a reference to heaven.
3\. The Historical Principle. As time passes, culture changes, points of view change, language changes. We must guard against interpreting scripture according to how our culture views things; we must always place scripture in its historical context.
The diligent Bible student will consider the geography, the customs, the current events, and even the politics of the time when a passage was written. An understanding of ancient Jewish culture can greatly aid an understanding of scripture. To do his research, the exegete will use Bible dictionaries, commentaries, and books on history.
4\. The Synthesis Principle. The best interpreter of scripture is scripture itself. We must examine a passage in relation to its immediate context (the verses surrounding it), its wider context (the book it’s found in), and its complete context (the Bible as a whole). The Bible does not contradict itself. Any theological statement in one verse can and should be harmonized with theological statements in other parts of scripture. Good Bible interpretation relates any one passage to the total content of scripture.
5\. The Practical Principle. Once we’ve properly examined the passage to understand its meaning, we have the responsibility to apply it to our own lives. To “rightly divide the word of truth” is more than an intellectual exercise; it is a life\-changing event.
|
Why is God going to release Satan after the 1,000 years? |
Answer
Revelation 20:7\-10, "When the thousand years are over, Satan will be released from his prison and will go out to deceive the nations in the four corners of the earth—Gog and Magog—to gather them for battle. In number they are like the sand on the seashore. They marched across the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of God's people, the city he loves. But fire came down from heaven and devoured them. And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever."
As we read these verses, we wonder, "Why will God release Satan at the end of the millennial reign of Jesus Christ?" First, we must admit that there are some biblical questions which we cannot answer this side of glory because God has chosen to reserve some mysteries to Himself (Deuteronomy 29:29, Romans 11:33\-36\). Yet, as believers, even if we cannot always understand something about God's Word, His will, or His ways, we can be sure that He remains ever faithful, true, and trustworthy, and in light of that our job remains to obey what we do understand as quickly, fully, and well as we are able. Even if we might not be able to answer why God releases Satan, we can suggest some possible reasons and motivations, based on an understanding of the entirety of the Word of God.
At the beginning of the millennium, only believers will be alive (Revelation 19:17\-21\), some who live through the tribulation period, and some who come back with the Lord at His second coming. It will be a time of peace unparalleled in history (Isaiah 2:4; Micah 4:3\). Jesus will be ruling on the throne of David, imposing a benevolent theocracy on all of His creation. Jesus will ensure that everyone has every need fulfilled, while not tolerating the sin so prevalent in today's society (Psalm 2:7\-12; Revelation 2:26\-29; 12:5; 19:11\-16\). We can only imagine such a time of "heaven on earth."
The believers who live through the tribulation will be mortal. They will live and repopulate the earth during the millennial kingdom. Without the devastation of sin taking its toll, we can imagine the population increase during the millennium will be enormous, almost incomprehensible. All those who are born during the millennium will enjoy the benefits and blessings of Christ's reign on the earth, but they will still be born with a sin nature, and they will still have to freely repent and believe the gospel, personally choosing Christ as Savior and Lord.
Yet, at the end of the millennial reign, Satan is loosed and is able to deceive a vast multitude to follow him in one final rebellion against the Lord of glory and His saints! It seems that the further humanity gets from the end of the tribulation and the start of the millennium, the more they will "take for granted" how good they have it, and some may even harbor doubts about the goodness of God. Even though the number who rebel with Satan are said to be "as the sand of the sea" (Revelation 20:8\), they may still be a minority compared to the number who do not rebel. It will still be a large number of souls who join Satan. Undoubtedly, one of the primary reasons God gives us this picture of what will happen in time is to demonstrate the deep\-seated sin nature inherent in all of humanity (Jeremiah 17:9\).
Additionally, God is trying to tell us something about His nature as displayed during the millennium. His grace and goodness will be on display continually. But at the end of the 1,000 years, He will have zero tolerance for rebellion. When it happens, He will show no mercy and offer no "second chances." At that time He will be quick to judge, and the final rebellion of Satan and sinful man will be over in a flash of fire. After this, the final judgment of the dead takes place (the great white throne judgment, Revelation 20:11\-15\). Eternity can thus begin with every aspect of sin gone for all time.
Finally, God is trying to reinforce some very important lessons concerning Satan, especially for believers. First, that he has been and always will be the enemy of humanity. As God has fixed His love on us, Satan has for us a special hatred. Ever since Satan's fall (Isaiah 14, Ezekiel 28\), he has been the adversary of believers, and he is aptly described as the ultimate deceiver of mankind (John 8:44; 1 John 2:22\). All he can give or promise man is death and destruction (John 10:10a). Satan is also shown here to be a truly defeated foe, and his ultimate doom is certain, along with the doom of all who follow him. God is trying to remind us that Satan is a created being who is powerless before Him. All this should encourage believers today to take God at His Word concerning our position in Christ with respect to the devil (Matthew 4:1\-11; Luke 4:1\-13; 1 Corinthians 10:13; 2 Corinthians 4:1\-7; James 4:6\-8; 1 John 2:15\-29; 1 John 4:1\-3\), especially as we remember this grand truth: "...greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world" (1 John 4:4, KJV).
|
What is the Urantia book? |
Answer
The Urantia Book was supposedly dictated to a Chicago psychiatrist named W.S. Sadler from 1934 to 1935 by a man who spoke in his sleep on behalf of alien super\-mortals called revelators. Sadler formed a group to discuss these revelations, from which the Urantia Foundation was formed in 1950\. The Urantia Foundation began publishing the Urantia Book in 1955\. Although there is no official religion based upon the Urantia Book, there are groups, like the Jesusonian Foundation, who teach others what is contained in the Urantia Book.
It is difficult to summarize the Urantia Book, as it encompasses many subjects and ideas, from science to politics, from philosophy to history. It is divided into four parts: Part I: The Central and Superuniverses; Part II: The Local Universe; Part III: The History of Urantia; Part IV: The Life and Teachings of Jesus. Consider a few of the teachings found in this book:
\* The cosmos is divided into seven concentric rings, the center ring being the Isle of Paradise, where God resides.
\* The Urantia Book supersedes the Bible as the ultimate source of truth.
\* God exists in three separate trinities: the existential Paradise Trinity, the experiential Ultimate Trinity, and the experiential Absolute Trinity.
\* God is known as the Universal Father and is the father of all humanity.
\* Jesus Christ is one of many Creator Sons.
\* Perfection is attained by continually seeking goodness over the course of many lifetimes, on many different planets.
Obviously, this book and its adherents are not representative of biblical Christianity—not by any stretch of the imagination. The Urantia Book is very similar to Mormonism and Christian Science beliefs, and little, if anything, found within its pages, is scriptural. Consider the following, in contrast to the teachings listed above: the Bible is our one authoritative source for truth (Acts 17:11; 2 Timothy 3:16–17\), not writings gleaned from spirits or aliens (Galatians 1:8\); Jesus is not merely an example of God but rather the One in whom the Godhead fully dwells (Colossians 2:9\); man only lives once, not many times, before He faces eternal judgment from God (Hebrews 9:27\); salvation does not come through anything that humans can do but is a gift from God (Romans 3:28; Ephesians 2:8–9\).
|
What is Renovaré / the Renovaré Spiritual Formation Bible / the Life with God Bible? |
Answer
Like so many ideas today, the Renovaré philosophy seems innocuous enough—even deeply spiritual—but there are some elements of the Renovaré movement that give cause for concern. The organization was founded in 1988 by [Quaker](Quakers-Friends.html) theologian Richard J. Foster after the success of his book *Celebration of Discipline: The Path to Spiritual Growth*. In the book, Foster describes how to practice the “twelve spiritual disciplines”—meditation, prayer, fasting, study, simplicity, solitude, submission, service, confession, worship, guidance, and celebration.
Renovaré (the Latin word for “renewal”) purports to work for the renewal of the Church by concentrating on the “spiritual formation” of individual Christians. This “spiritual formation” involves following certain practices and traditions with the result that the life of Christ is formed within the Christian. This sacramental living—a moment\-by\-moment interaction with God—Foster calls the “with\-God life.”
Of course, becoming Christlike and developing the inner person should be the goal of every Christian. There are, however, definite red flags that go up when the basic tenets of the Renovaré movement are examined. First, Renovaré is unabashedly [ecumenical](ecumenism-ecumenical.html). “Wisdom” is gathered from Catholic, Episcopal, mystic, and Protestant sources alike, with no regard for the serious theological differences these groups have. Biblical Christianity and [Roman Catholicism](Catholic-Biblical.html) are two different religions that practice and believe different things about how one is saved, the authority of the Bible, the priesthood of believers, the nature of man, the work of Christ on the cross, and the veneration of and prayer to Mary. The list of irreconcilable differences between what the Bible says and what the Roman Catholic Church says makes any joint mission between the two absolutely impossible. Those who deny this are not being true to what they say they believe, no matter which side they are on. Any Catholic who is serious about his faith will deny what a serious evangelical Christian believes and vice\-versa.
Second, Renovaré places a heavy emphasis on mysticism to the detriment of solid theology. The release of the Renovaré Spiritual Formation Bible in 2005 has packaged the mystical thinking of Renovaré scholars into “study notes” for the Bible itself (it has been recently published as the Life with God Bible). Besides Foster, editors included [Dallas Willard](Dallas-Willard.html), Walter Brueggemann, and Eugene Peterson. In an early edition of *The Celebration of Discipline*, Foster advises, “In your imagination allow your spiritual body, shining with light, to rise out of your physical body. . . . Reassure your body that you will return momentarily. Imagine your spiritual self, alive and vibrant, rising up through the clouds and into the stratosphere. . . . Go deeper and deeper into outer space until there is nothing except the warm presence of the eternal Creator. Do not be disappointed if no words come; like good friends, you are silently enjoying the company of each other” (p. 27\). This activity bears a striking resemblance to astral projection and an [out\-of\-body experience](out-of-body-experience.html), both occult practices.
The Renovaré Bible / Life with God Bible also raises the following concerns for Christians:
1\) The Renovaré Bible / Life with God Bible includes the [Apocrypha](apocrypha-deuterocanonical.html). The editors suggest that the Apocrypha is not to be viewed as equal with Bible; however, they also proclaim that “most of the Church throughout much of history has accepted the Deuterocanonicals as Scripture” (xxx.2\). This is not true. The Catholic Church has accepted the Apocrypha as Scripture since the Council of Trent in the mid\-16th century, but not “most of the Church,” and not most of the time. Also, Israel never considered the Apocrypha as Holy Writ.
2\) The Renovaré Bible / Life with God Bible attacks the divine authorship of Genesis, stating in its General Introduction that Moses did not write it, that its content is mythological, and that it was written over a process of time as tales from other religions were adapted and given a unique monotheistic twist. This flies in the face of many passages of Scripture which say that Moses, under the inspiration of God, wrote the Pentateuch (Exodus 17:14, 24:4; Deuteronomy 31:9, 25; Joshua 8:31–32; 1 Kings 2:3; 2 Chronicles 30:16; Nehemiah 8:1; Luke 24:44; John 1:17, 45; 5:45–46; 7:19–23\). Jesus Himself spoke of Moses as the author of the Pentateuch, so denying that truth denies Christ. In addition, those who accept such Renovaré teachings must reject the authority and infallibility of Scripture, two of the basic doctrines of the Christian faith.
3\) The Renovaré Bible / Life with God Bible denies that the [book of Daniel](Book-of-Daniel.html) is prophecy, stating in the introductory notes to that book, “We do not know who wrote it or exactly when it was written” (p. 1245\). The writer of the introduction, James M. Rand, goes on to set the date of Daniel’s writing around 167 BC. This would mean, of course, that the author of Daniel, who claims to be Daniel (Daniel 8:15, 27, 9:1–2; 10:2\) and who claims to have written it “in the first year of Darius” (538 BC), is a liar.
4\) The Renovaré Bible / Life with God Bible attempts to destroy the nature and power of Messianic prophecy. For example, in Isaiah 9:6–7, the Messiah is called “the mighty God, the everlasting Father,” but the Renovaré study notes attribute this description to “human agents” (p. 997\). The whole book of Isaiah (which Renovaré says Isaiah did not really write, pp. 982, 1068, again calling a prophet of God a liar) is called “tradition” (pp. 982–983\) and “poetic imagination.”
5\) The Renovaré Bible / Life with God Bible ignores the prophecies concerning Israel’s future. The prophecy of Jeremiah 31:7–14, which plainly says that Israel will be gathered and restored, is interpreted by Renovaré as God’s promise to homeless people everywhere. The “dry bones” prophecy of Ezekiel 37 (again, a passage that specifies “the whole house of Israel” in verse 11\) is twisted into a reference to the Church’s beginning at Pentecost.
For these and other reasons, Renovaré is a theologically dangerous movement. Like many parts of the [contemplative spirituality movement](contemplative-spirituality.html), Renovaré preys upon the spiritually hungry and points them not to the cross of Christ or God’s inerrant Word but to man’s traditions and emotional human experience. The wise and discerning Christian will examine carefully all claims of the Renovaré movement and compare each with Scripture. Those which contradict the Word of God must be rejected.
|
What is divine providence? |
Answer
Divine providence is the governance of God by which He, with wisdom and love, cares for and directs all things in the universe. The doctrine of divine providence asserts that God is in complete control of all things. He is sovereign over the universe as a whole (Psalm 103:19\), the physical world (Matthew 5:45\), the affairs of nations (Psalm 66:7\), human destiny (Galatians 1:15\), human successes and failures (Luke 1:52\), and the protection of His people (Psalm 4:8\). This doctrine stands in direct opposition to the idea that the universe is governed by chance or [fate](fate-destiny.html).
Through divine providence God accomplishes His will. To ensure that His purposes are fulfilled, God governs the affairs of men and works through the natural order of things. The laws of nature are nothing more than God’s work in the universe. The laws of nature have no inherent power; rather, they are the principles that God set in place to govern how things normally work. They are only “laws” because God decreed them.
How does [divine providence relate to human volition](free-will-sovereign.html)? We know that humans have a free will, but we also know that God is sovereign. How those two truths relate to each other is hard for us to understand, but we see examples of both truths in Scripture. Saul of Tarsus was willfully persecuting the church, but, all the while, he was “kick\[ing] against the goads” of God’s providence (Acts 26:14\).
God hates sin and will judge sinners. God is not the author of sin, He does not tempt anyone to sin (James 1:13\), and He does not condone sin. At the same time, God obviously *allows* a certain measure of sin. He must have a reason for allowing it, temporarily, even though He hates it.
An example of divine providence in Scripture is found in the [story of Joseph](life-Joseph.html). God allowed Joseph’s brothers to kidnap Joseph, sell him as a slave, and then lie to their father for years about his fate. This was wicked, and God was displeased. Yet, at the same time, all of their sin worked toward a greater good: Joseph ended up in Egypt, where he was made the prime minister. Joseph used his position to sustain the people of a broad region during a seven\-year famine—including his own family. If Joseph had not been in Egypt before the famine began, millions of people, including the Israelites, would have died. How did God get Joseph to Egypt? He providentially allowed his brothers the freedom to sin. God’s divine providence is directly acknowledged in Genesis 50:15–21\.
Another clear case of divine providence overriding sin is the story of [Judas Iscariot](Judas-Iscariot.html). God allowed Judas to lie, deceive, cheat, steal, and finally betray the Lord Jesus into the hands of His enemies. All of this was a great wickedness, and God was displeased. Yet, at the same time, all of Judas’s plotting and scheming led to a greater good: the salvation of mankind. Jesus had to die at the hands of the Romans in order to become the sacrifice for sin. If Jesus had not been crucified, we would still be in our sins. How did God get Christ to the cross? God providentially allowed Judas the freedom to perform a series of wicked acts. Jesus plainly states this in Luke 22:22: “The Son of Man will go as it has been decreed. But woe to that man who betrays him!”
Note that Jesus teaches both the sovereignty of God (“the Son of Man will go *as it has been decreed*”) and the responsibility of man (“*woe to that man* who betrays!”). There is a balance.
Divine providence is taught in Romans 8:28: “We know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose.” “All things” means “all things.” God is never out of control. Satan can do his worst, yet even the evil that is tearing the world apart is working toward a greater, final purpose. We can’t see it yet. But we know that God allows things for a reason and that His plan is good. It must be frustrating for Satan. No matter what he does, he finds that his plans are thwarted and something good happens in the end.
The doctrine of divine providence can be summarized this way: “God in eternity past, in the counsel of His own will, ordained everything that will happen; yet in no sense is God the author of sin; nor is human responsibility removed.” The primary means by which God accomplishes His will is through secondary causes (e.g., laws of nature and human choice). In other words, God usually works indirectly to accomplish His will.
God also sometimes works directly to accomplish His will. These works are what we call miracles. A miracle is God’s circumventing, for a short period of time, the natural order of things to accomplish His will. The blazing light that fell on [Saul on the road to Damascus](Damascus-Road.html) is an example of God’s direct intervention (Acts 9:3\). The frustrating of Paul’s plans to go to Bythinia is an example of God’s indirect guiding (Acts 16:7\). Both are examples of divine providence at work.
There are some who say that the concept of God directly or indirectly orchestrating all things destroys any possibility of free will. If God is in complete control, how can we be truly free in the decisions we make? In other words, for free will to be meaningful, there must be some things that lie outside of God’s sovereign control—e.g., the contingency of human choice. Let us assume for the sake of argument that this is true. What then? If God is not in complete control of all contingencies, then how could He guarantee our salvation? Paul says in Philippians 1:6 that “he who began a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus.” If God is not in control of all things, then this promise, and all other divine promises, is in doubt. If the future does not belong completely to God, we do not have complete security that our salvation will be made complete.
Furthermore, if God is not in control of all things, then He is not sovereign, and if He is not sovereign, then He is not God. So, the price of maintaining contingencies outside of God’s control results in a belief that God is not really God. And if our free will can trump divine providence, then who ultimately is God? We are. That conclusion is unacceptable to anyone with a [biblical worldview](Christian-worldview.html). Divine providence does not destroy our freedom. Rather, divine providence takes our freedom into account and, in the infinite wisdom of God, sets a course to fulfill God’s will.
|
What is the origin of Fat Tuesday / Mardi Gras? |
Answer
Mardi Gras, which is French for “Fat Tuesday,” is the last day of a season called “[Carnival](what-is-Carnival.html).” The Carnival season is characterized by merrymaking, feasting, and dancing. Mardi Gras is the culmination of festivities and features parades, masquerades, and, unfortunately, often drunkenness and shameless debauchery. Carnival is typically celebrated in Catholic countries of southern Europe and Latin America.
The excess of Carnival may not seem to have much in common with the austerity of [Lent](what-is-Lent.html), but the two seasons are inseparable. The day after Fat Tuesday is [Ash Wednesday](Ash-Wednesday.html); therefore, the end of Carnival is followed immediately by the beginning of Lent. Lent is a time of fasting and penance in preparation for Easter. Carnival, then, can rightly be seen as the indulgence before the fast. It is one last “binge” before having to give something up for 40 days.
What does the Bible say about all this? There is nothing in the Bible that in any way suggests that early Christians observed either Lent or Carnival. And, of course, there is no biblical support for the kind of fleshly indulgence generally practiced on Fat Tuesday. The Bible expressly forbids drunkenness, carousing, and sexual fornication. Romans 13:13\-14 says, “Let us behave decently, as in the daytime, not in orgies and drunkenness, not in sexual immorality and debauchery, not in dissension and jealousy. Rather, clothe yourselves with the Lord Jesus Christ, and do not think about how to gratify the desires of the sinful nature.”
In general, Mardi Gras revelers engage in a binge of sinning before a time of consecration to God. The celebration of Mardi Gras fosters the notion that you can do whatever you want on Fat Tuesday, as long as you show up in church on Ash Wednesday. It’s the bender before the benediction, and it’s utterly unscriptural.
**Fat Tuesday / Mardi Gras Calendar:**
2024 — February 13
2025 — March 4
|
What is the New Jerusalem? |
Answer
The New Jerusalem, which is also called the Tabernacle of God, the Holy City, the City of God, the Celestial City, the City Foursquare, and Heavenly Jerusalem, is literally heaven on earth. It is referred to in the Bible in several places (Galatians 4:26; Hebrews 11:10; 12:22–24; and 13:14\), but it is most fully described in Revelation 21\.
In Revelation 21, the recorded history of man is at its end. All of the ages have come and gone. Christ has gathered His church in the Rapture (1 Thessalonians 4:15–17\). The Tribulation has passed (Revelation 6—18\). The [battle of Armageddon](battle-Armageddon.html) has been fought and won by our Lord Jesus Christ (Revelation 19:17–21\). Satan has been chained for the 1,000\-year reign of Christ on earth (Revelation 20:1–3\). A new, glorious temple has been established in Jerusalem (Ezekiel 40—48\). The final rebellion against God has been quashed, and Satan has received his just punishment, an eternity in the lake of fire (Revelation 20:7–10\.) The [Great White Throne Judgment](great-white-throne-judgment.html) has taken place, and mankind has been judged (Revelation 20:11–15\).
In Revelation 21:1 God does a complete make\-over of heaven and earth (Isaiah 65:17; 2 Peter 3:12–13\). The new heaven and new earth are what some call the “[eternal state](eternal-state.html)” and will be “where righteousness dwells” (2 Peter 3:13\). After the re\-creation, God reveals the New Jerusalem. John sees a glimpse of it in his vision: “The Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband” (Revelation 21:2\). This is the city that Abraham looked for in faith (Hebrews 11:10\). It is the place where God will dwell with His people forever (Revelation 21:3\). Inhabitants of this celestial city will have all tears wiped away (Revelation 21:4\).
The New Jerusalem will be fantastically huge. John records that the city is nearly 1,400 miles long, and it is as wide and as high as it is long—the New Jerusalem being in equal in length, width, and depth (Revelation 21:15–17\). The city will be dazzling in every way. It is lighted by the glory of God (verse 23\). Its twelve foundations, bearing the names of the twelve apostles, are “decorated with every kind of precious stone” (verse 19\). It has [twelve gates](twelve-gates-Revelation.html), each a single pearl, bearing the names of the twelve tribes of Israel (verses 12 and 21\). The street will be made of pure gold (verse 21\).
The New Jerusalem will be a place of unimagined blessing. The curse of the old earth will be gone (Revelation 22:3\). In the city are the [tree of life](tree-of-life.html) “for the healing of the nations” and the river of life (verses 1–2\). It is the place that Paul spoke of: “In the coming ages \[God] might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus” (Ephesians 2:7\). The New Jerusalem is the ultimate fulfillment of all God’s promises. The New Jerusalem is God’s goodness made fully manifest.
Who are the residents of the New Jerusalem? The Father and the Lamb are there (Revelation 21:22\). Angels are at the gates (verse 12\). But the city will be filled with God’s redeemed children. The New Jerusalem is the righteous counter to the evil Babylon (Revelation 17\), destroyed by God’s judgment (Revelation 18\). The wicked had their city, and God has His. To which city do you belong? [Babylon the Great](whore-Babylon-mystery.html) or the New Jerusalem? If you believe that Jesus, the Son of God, died and rose again and have asked God to save you by His grace, then you are a citizen of the New Jerusalem. “God raised \[you] up with Christ and seated \[you] with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus” (Ephesians 2:6\). You have “an inheritance that can never perish, spoil or fade” (1 Peter 1:4\). If you have not yet trusted Christ as your Savior, then we urge you to receive Him. The invitation is extended: “The Spirit and the bride say, ‘Come!’ And let the one who hears say, ‘Come!’ Let the one who is thirsty come; and let the one who wishes take the free gift of the water of life” (Revelation 22:17\).
|
What is Swedenborgianism? |
Answer
The New Church and the Church of New Jerusalem are alternate names for Swedenborgianism. This group, which has been around since the late 1700s, is well outside of orthodox Christianity in its beliefs and can definitely be labeled as a cult.
Swedenborgianism bases its teachings on the writings of Emanuel Swedenborg, who was born in Stockholm, Sweden, in 1688\. His training was in science, but sometime around 1750 he had a vision in which he believed God came to him and declared him to be God’s personal messenger of new revelation. Further encounters with God and other beings in the spiritual realm he traveled to were the basis for his many writings.
These writings include teachings such as: God has many names, depending on the beliefs/religion of the individual; the Holy Spirit is not God; the Trinity does not exist; Jesus Christ’s death did not atone for our sin; salvation comes by practicing what you believe, whatever religion it might be; the afterlife is spiritual, but dependent on how well you lived in your physical body.
None of these teachings are compatible with biblical Christianity. The God of the Bible is the only true God (Exodus 3:13\-14; Isaiah 43:10\). All other gods are idols; creations of man (Exodus 20:4\-5\). The Holy Spirit is definitely declared to be God in the Bible (Acts 5:3\-4\), as is Jesus Christ (John 1:1, 14\) and God the Father (Philippians 1:2\); the Trinity is a valid, biblical reality. The Bible is also very clear on Jesus’ vicarious atonement of our sin (1 Peter 2:24; 1 John 2:2\), and that it is only through belief in Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection that salvation is possible (John 14:6; 1 Corinthians 15:1\-4\). The after\-life will be experienced in one of two places—heaven or hell—and that in a physical body (Revelation 22\).
Swedenborgianism, and its churches by whatever name they might be called, are as far outside historical, biblical Christianity as a group can get. Although they might claim to base their teachings on the Bible, every teaching is tainted by heresy, confusion, and sometimes lunacy.
|
How can I become a child of God? |
Answer
Becoming a child of God requires [faith](Bible-faith.html) in Jesus Christ. “To all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God” (John 1:12\).
**“You must be born again”**
When visited by the religious leader Nicodemus, Jesus did not immediately assure him of heaven. Instead, Christ told him he had to become a child of God, saying, “I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again” (John 3:3\).
The first time a person is born, he inherits the sin nature that stems from Adam’s disobedience in the Garden of Eden. No one has to teach a child how to sin. He naturally follows his own wrong desires, leading to such sins as lying, stealing, and hating. Rather than being a child of God, he is a child of disobedience and wrath (Ephesians 2:1–3\).
As children of wrath, we deserve to be separated from God in hell. Thankfully, Ephesians 2:4–5 says, “But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved.” How are we made alive with Christ / born again / made a child of God? We must receive Jesus by faith!
**Receive Jesus**
“To all who have received him—those who believe in his name—he has given the right to become God’s children” (John 1:12, NET). This verse clearly explains how to become a child of God. We must receive Jesus by believing in Him. What must we believe about Jesus?
First, the child of God recognizes that Jesus is the eternal Son of God who became man. Born of a virgin through the power of the Holy Spirit, Jesus did not inherit Adam’s sin nature. Therefore, Jesus is called the second Adam (1 Corinthians 15:22\). While Adam’s disobedience brought the curse of sin on the world, Christ’s perfect obedience brings a blessing. Our response must be to repent (turn from sin) and seek forgiveness in Christ.
Second, the child of God has faith in Jesus as Savior. God’s plan was to sacrifice His perfect Son on the cross to pay the punishment we deserve for our sin: death. Christ’s death frees those who receive Him from the penalty and power of sin. His resurrection justifies us (Romans 4:25\).
Finally, the child of God follows Jesus as Lord. After raising up Christ as the Victor over sin and death, God gave Him all authority (Ephesians 1:20–23\). Jesus leads all who receive Him; He will judge all who reject Him (Acts 10:42\). By God’s [grace](definition-of-grace.html), we’re born again to new life as God’s child. Only those who receive Jesus—not merely knowing about Him but relying on Him for salvation, submitting to Him as Master, and loving Him as the supreme treasure—become children of God.
**Become a child of God**
Just as we had no part in our natural birth, we cannot cause ourselves to be born into God’s family by doing good deeds or conjuring up faith of our own. God is the one who “gave the right” to become a child of God according to His gracious will. “How great is the love the Father has lavished on us, that we should be called children of God!” (1 John 3:1\). Thus, the child of God has nothing to be proud about; his only boast is in the Lord (Ephesians 2:8–9\).
A child grows up to look like his parents. Similarly, God wants His children to become more and more like Jesus Christ. Although only in heaven will we be perfect, a child of God will not habitually, unrepentantly sin. “Dear children, do not let anyone lead you astray. He who does what is right is righteous, just as he is righteous. He who does what is sinful is of the devil, because the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil’s work. No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God’s seed remains in him; he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born of God. This is how we know who the children of God are and who the children of the devil are: Anyone who does not do what is right is not a child of God; nor is anyone who does not love his brother” (1 John 3:7–10\).
Make no mistake—a child of God cannot be “disowned” by sinning. But someone who consistently engages in and enjoys sin without heeding Christ and His Word reveals that he was never born again. Jesus told such people, “You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desire” (John 8:44\). The child of God, on the other hand, no longer craves the gratification of sin but desires to know, love, and glorify his or her Father.
The rewards of being a child of God are immeasurable. As God’s child, we are a part of His family (the church), promised a home in heaven, and given the right to approach God in prayer (Ephesians 2:19; 1 Peter 1:3–6; Romans 8:15\). Respond to God’s call to repent of sin and believe in Christ. Become a child of God today!
|
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.