prompt
stringlengths 0
158
| response
stringlengths 14
40.2k
|
|---|---|
Is cleanliness next to godliness? |
Answer
The saying “cleanliness is next to godliness” does not appear in the Bible. The expression is an archaic proverb found in Babylonian and Hebrew religious tracts. Its debut in the English language, in a modified form, is found in the writings of philosopher and scientist Sir Francis Bacon. In *Advancement of Learning* (1605\) he wrote, “Cleanness of body was ever deemed to proceed from a due reverence to God.” Almost two hundred years later (1791\), John Wesley made a reference to the expression in one of his sermons in the form we use it today. Wesley wrote, “Slovenliness is no part of religion. Cleanliness is indeed next to Godliness."
It’s hard to say where the idea of a connection between cleanliness and godliness originated. The Israelites were certainly concerned about the concepts of “clean” and “unclean” because a major portion of the Mosaic Law outlines the principles of each. Among the unclean things that God’s people were to avoid are dead bodies and carcasses, eating certain animals, leprosy, and bodily discharges. Elaborate washing rituals were prescribed to render an unclean person clean again so that he could re\-enter the community and the sanctuary of the Lord (Numbers 19\). For the Jew, keeping the ceremonial laws and regulations was considered the way to approach God. Therefore, it is no wonder that the expression has its roots in Hebrew literature.
Biblically speaking, however, outward cleanliness has no connection to godliness. Jesus made it clear that men are defiled by what is in their hearts and that godliness is not attained by what we eat or don’t eat or by how often we wash our hands (Matthew 7:18\-23\). The Pharisees who questioned Jesus on His teachings failed to understand that truth. They adhered to the Old Testament requirements and ceremonies as they waited for their Messiah. But when He came and stood before them, they were blinded by their own efforts to obtain righteousness by the Law, and they denied Him. He told them, “You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life” (John 5:39\-40\). For all their attention to the details of clean and unclean, they remained far from godliness.
The Greek word translated “godliness” in the New Testament means “holiness,” without which no one will see God (Hebrews 12:14\). But it is a holiness not obtained by keeping the Law, which is impossible (Romans 3:20; Galatians 2:16\), but by being transformed into completely new creations in Christ by the power of God (2 Corinthians 5:17; Ephesians 4:24\). At the moment of salvation, we are made completely clean and righteous before God and only then can we share in His godliness.
|
What is the Lutheran Church, and what do Lutherans believe? |
Answer
The Lutheran Church is actually many different bodies, all of which base their teachings and practice to some degree on the work of [Martin Luther](Martin-Luther.html). There is such a wide variance in their particular beliefs that it would be difficult to address them all, but this article will attempt to outline those most commonly held.
Martin Luther was born and raised in Germany and studied philosophy and law as a young man, but soon became discouraged by those studies. He became an Augustinian Monk in 1505, but the isolated lifestyle only led him to further despair as he spent countless hours in meditation and contemplation. In 1507, he was ordained a Roman Catholic priest and later began teaching theology at the University of Wittenberg. During his years teaching theology, Luther grew increasingly frustrated at the excesses and abuses which he saw within the leadership of the Roman Catholic Church. On October 31, 1517, he posted his *95 Theses* on the door of All Saint’s Church in Wittenberg, which was the accepted practice for anyone at the university who wanted to engage in theological debate. The majority of Luther’s theses addressed the lack of biblical knowledge, practice, and accountability among the leaders of the church, and were intended to point them back to Scripture. Martin Luther was not the first to address these issues; in fact, most of them had been pointed out by other men within the Roman Catholic Church for nearly 100 years. Despite the steady stream of critics, the Catholic Church refused to admit error or make any substantial changes.
As with the other Reformers, who were all born, baptized, confirmed and educated in the Roman Catholic Church, Luther had no intention of starting a new church, but only wanted to correct what he saw as violations of clear biblical teaching. Part of the problem was a widespread ignorance of the Bible, even among ordained priests. Carlstadt, an older peer of Luther, admitted that he was made a Doctor of Divinity before he had even seen a complete copy of the Bible. One of the driving factors in Luther’s work was the desire to have clear teaching for the common questions of the people, such as, “What must a man do to be saved?” and “How shall a sinner be justified before God and attain peace for his troubled conscience?” After a series of meetings in which Luther refused to recant his views, Pope Leo X excommunicated Martin Luther in 1521\. Many of the common people and German nobility followed Luther’s teaching, and the Lutheran Church began to be organized as a separate body in 1525\. In recent years, most Lutheran bodies have made efforts to mend the breach with the Roman Catholic Church.
In 1530, the German lords were requested by the Pope to give an accounting of their beliefs (as well as reconfirm their fidelity to the Holy Roman Empire), and they gave their reply in the [Augsburg Confessions](Augsburg-Confession.html). This was the first detailed confession of faith by German Lutherans, and it is still the primary document used by Lutherans to describe and guide their faith. In 1580, the Book of Concord combined 10 documents which were considered authoritative for guiding the Lutheran faith. That book is still used today, but has a different degree of authority within the various Lutheran bodies.
Though there are quite a few organized Lutheran groups around the world, the two main bodies in America are the [Evangelical Lutheran Church of America](Evangelical-Lutheran-Church-America.html) (ELCA), and the [Lutheran Church Missouri Synod (LCMS)](Lutheran-Church-Missouri-Synod.html). The ELCA has roughly 5 million members in 10,500 churches, and the LCMS has roughly 2\.3 million members in 6,167 churches. The ELCA was formed in 1988 by a merger of the American Lutheran Church, the Association of Evangelical Lutheran Churches, and the Lutheran Church in America. The LCMS was formed in 1847 by Saxon (German) Lutherans who came to America to escape persecution and the detrimental effects of German Rationalism on their faith. Both churches hold to the Augsburg Confession, which teaches that all men are born in sin, and therefore need to be justified through faith in Christ’s sacrifice on the cross. Along with faith in Christ, baptism is “[necessary for salvation](baptism-salvation.html)” and therefore “[children should be baptized](infant-baptism.html), for being offered to God through baptism they are received into his grace” (Art. IX). \[Note: the LCMS qualifies the official position on baptism by saying, “The LCMS does not believe that Baptism is ABSOLUTELY necessary for salvation,” but then goes on to say that baptism is “a powerful means of grace by which God grants faith and the forgiveness of sins” (emphasis in the original, <http://www.lcms.org/faqs/doctrine>, accessed 11/9/2016\).] The Lutheran church teaches that all men have some measure of freedom of the will—which is ironic considering Luther comes to the opposite conclusion in one of his most famous books, *The Bondage of the Will*. Lutherans also believe that, without God’s grace and help, given by the Holy Spirit, man is incapable of fearing or believing in God.
Many of the ceremonies and liturgies of the Catholic Church have been carried over into the Lutheran Church, with modifications to reflect their distinct doctrines. Some of the differences between the ELCA and LCMS stem from their divergent views on the Bible. While the LCMS affirms that the Bible is infallible in all areas (Psalm 19:7; 2 Timothy 3:16\), the ELCA states that it is possible for [the Bible to be in error](Bible-errors.html) concerning some areas, like science or history. In general, all Lutheran churches teach salvation by grace alone, through faith alone, but the manner in which that faith is lived out can vary from an empty participation in ceremonies to a very personal relationship with God.
|
What does the Bible say about loneliness? |
Answer
Being alone and being lonely are two different things. One can be alone without being lonely, and one can be lonely in a crowded room. Loneliness is, therefore, a state of mind, an emotion brought on by feelings of separation from other human beings. The sense of isolation is very deeply felt by those who are lonely. The Hebrew word translated “desolate” or “lonely” in the Old Testament means “one alone, only; one who is solitary, forsaken, wretched.” There is no deeper sadness that ever comes over the mind than the idea that we are alone in the world, that we do not have a friend, that no one cares for us, that no one is concerned about anything that might happen to us, that no one would care if we were to die or shed a tear over our grave.
No one felt loneliness more keenly than David. In a series of earnest, heartfelt appeals to God, David cried out in his loneliness and despair. His own son had risen up against him, the men of Israel went after him, and he was forced to flee from the city, and leave his house and family. Lonely and afflicted (Psalm 25:16\), his only recourse was to turn to God and plead for mercy and God’s intervention (Psalm 25:21\) because his only hope was in God. It is interesting to note that the word “lonely” is never used in the New Testament to describe people. In the New Testament, the word “lonely” only occurs twice and both times refers to desolate places (Mark 1:45; Luke 5:16\), where Jesus moved off into the wilderness to be alone.
Whatever the cause of loneliness, for the Christian the cure is always the same—the comforting fellowship of Christ. That loving relationship with our Master has reassured and encouraged countless thousands who languished in prisons and even went to their deaths for His sake. He is the friend who “sticks closer than a brother” (Proverbs 18:24\), who lays down His life for His friends (John 15:13\-15\), and who has promised never to leave us or forsake us but to be with us until the end of the age (Matthew 28:20\). We can take comfort in the words of the old hymn that says it best: “Friends may fail me, foes assail me, He is with me to the end. Hallelujah, what a Savior!”
|
What does the Bible say about narcissism? |
Answer
*Narcissism* is the term used in psychology to describe a preoccupation with self. It is a Greek term taken from the name of the mythological Narcissus, who fell in love with his own image and was doomed to die because he would not turn away from it. A narcissist is a person who displays a high level of selfishness, vanity, and pride. He sees everything from a “how does this affect me?” perspective. Empathy is impossible for the narcissist because his only perspective is the one centered on self. In psychology, narcissism is seen as a broad spectrum of conditions ranging from normal to pathological.
The Bible says that we are born sinful since the fall (Romans 5:12\). This means that we are born with only sinful tendencies and no ability to be “good” or righteous on our own. What we call “human nature” the Bible calls “the flesh” (Galatians 5:19\-21\). Part of our sin nature is a total focus on self. This focus, also called “egocentrism,” is how babies see and experience the world. Narcissism is like egocentrism in that the adult still relates to the world like an infant, a perspective that impedes personal growth and relationships.
Psychological theories about narcissism suggest that the narcissistic person uses defense mechanisms to idealize self so that he does not have to face his own mistakes (sin) or flaws (fallen state). The diagnosis of narcissistic personality disorder outlines the behavior patterns of a narcissistic person as being haughty, non\-empathetic, manipulative, and envious; he also possesses a sense of entitlement and grandiosity. From a biblical perspective, it is clear that these heart conditions are due to pride, which is sin (Proverbs 16:18\). The Bible tells us to “look not only to your own interests, but also to the interests of others” (Philippians 2:4\). The narcissist routinely disobeys this command.
Pride is a reason people do not feel they need a savior or forgiveness. Pride tells them they are “good” people or have a “good” heart. Pride also blinds people to their own personal responsibility and accountability for sin. Narcissism (pride) masks sin, whereas the gospel reveals the truth that leads to remorse for sin. Narcissistic traits can be dangerous because, at their worst, they will lead a person to destroy others to satisfy the lust of the flesh (2 Timothy 3:2\-8\).
The Bible addresses the issues related to narcissism as part of our sinful natural self (Romans 7:5\). We are slaves to the flesh until we place our faith in Jesus, who sets the captives free (Romans 7:14\-25; John 8:34\-36\). Believers are then slaves to righteousness as the Holy Spirit begins the transforming work of sanctification in their lives. However, believers must surrender to the Lord and humble themselves in order to have God’s perspective rather than a selfish one (Mark 8:34\). The process of sanctification is turning away from self (narcissism) and turning toward Jesus.
All people are narcissists until they either learn how to cover it and get along in the world or until they recognize their own flesh and repent of their sin. The Lord helps people to grow out of narcissism when they receive Jesus as their savior (Romans 3:19\-26\). The believer is empowered to begin loving others as himself (Mark 12:31\).
|
What does the Bible say about deliverance? |
Answer
*Deliverance* is defined as “a rescue from bondage or danger.” Deliverance in the Bible is the acts of God whereby He rescues His people from peril. In the Old Testament, deliverance is focused primarily on God’s removal of those who are in the midst of trouble or danger. He rescues His people from their enemies (1 Samuel 17:37; 2 Kings 20:6\), and from the hand of the wicked (Psalm 7:2; 17:13; 18:16\-19; 59:2\). He preserves them from famine (Psalm 33:19\), death (Psalm 22:19\-21\), and the grave (Psalm 56:13; 86:13; Hosea 13:14\). The most striking example of deliverance is the exodus from Egypt (Exodus 3:8; 6:6; 8:10\). Here is God defined as the Deliverer of Israel who rescues His people, not because they deserve to be rescued, but as an expression of His mercy and love (Psalm 51:1; 71:2; 86:13\).
In the New Testament, God is always the subject—and His people are always the object—of deliverance. The descriptions of temporal deliverance in the Old Testament serve as symbolic representations of the spiritual deliverance from sin which is available only through Christ. He offers deliverance from mankind’s greatest peril—sin, evil, death and judgment. By God’s power, believers are delivered from this present evil age (Galatians 1:4\) and from the power of Satan’s reign (Colossians 1:13\). All aspects of deliverance are available only through the person and work of Jesus Christ, who was Himself delivered up for us (Romans 4:25\) so that we would be delivered from eternal punishment for sin. Only Jesus rescues us from the “wrath to come” (1 Thessalonians 1:10\).
Another aspect of deliverance concerns the temporal. While believers are delivered once for all time from eternal punishment, we are also delivered from the trials of this life (2 Peter 2:9\). Sometimes that deliverance is God simply walking through the trials by our side, comforting and encouraging us through them as He uses them to mature us in the faith. Paul assured the Corinthian believers that “no temptation has seized you except what is common to man. And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear. But when you are tempted, he will also provide a way out so that you can stand up under it” (1 Corinthians 10:13\). In these cases, rescue is not immediate, but in due time, after patience has had its perfect work (James 1:2\-4, 12\). God makes the way of escape simultaneously with the temptation which, in His perfect will and timing, He permissively arranges or allows for His people.
Deliverance is often sought from evil spirits or the spirit of lust, jealousy, etc. It’s important to understand that, as believers, we already have eternal victory over Satan and demons. But we can be delivered from their influence in our lives by using two weapons God has given us as part of our spiritual armor with which we battle “against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms” (Ephesians 6:12\-17\). The believer defends himself with the shield of faith and uses the offensive weapon of the Word of God. Against these two, no spirit can prevail. By holding up the shield of faith, we extinguish the flaming spiritual arrows they send against us, arrows of lust, doubt, guilt, jealousy, evil speech, and all manner of temptations. With the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God, we overcome the evil one by proving his temptations to be lies because he is the father of lies (John 8:44\). John’s second letter commends the young Christians whose spiritual strength came from the Word of God living in them. By the offensive weapon of the Truth, we overcome the evil one (1 John 2:14\).
Deliverance from sin, rescue from trials, and escape from the influence of a world in the control of the evil one come only through Christ, the Son of God who has come and “has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true. And we are in him who is true—even in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life” (1 John 5:19\-20\).
|
Can a Christian consider a career in acting / entertainment? |
Answer
This is a hard question to answer because the entertainment business includes many aspects. There is a vast difference between a theatre that presents only classics such as Shakespeare’s plays and TV shows that glorify sex and violence. Both are considered part of the entertainment business and both involve actors and actresses, but the impact on the performers and the audiences is quite different. Christians considering a career in acting or performing must consider the bearing their roles will have on themselves spiritually, the lifestyle into which they will be entering, and the influence their performances will have on others.
For the Christian actor/actress/performer, involvement in a movie that glorifies sin or the devil’s work is clearly not an option. Because actors struggle to find roles, they often take whatever parts come along, especially when they are first starting out. For unbelieving actors/actresses, the decision to take a part involves little more than the effect it will have on their careers and future roles and the money involved. But for the Christian, there is also the problem of whether the role glorifies God or at least is not actually glorifying rebellion against Him with violence or sex or other evils. Granted, the big money is probably with the ungodly roles because we live in a world where the devil has a huge influence on these matters, but the Christian actor should not take parts which promote Satan’s agenda. The overriding principle involved is found in 1 Corinthians 10:31: "So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God."
In addition, the issue of the lifestyle of performers in general must be a consideration for a Christian. There is an enormous amount of drugs, alcohol, and immoral behavior in the entertainment industry. Young people eager to get the “big break” are often used and abused by those in power. While it may be possible for a Christian to be in this world and not be affected by it, 1 Corinthians 15:33 warns us, “Do not be misled: ‘Bad company corrupts good character.’” It would be foolish to ignore that warning.
Finally, the impact performers have on others must be considered. When unbelievers see professing Christians in movies, TV shows, or live performances that promote ungodliness, they sense the hypocrisy and are given cause to “blaspheme the name of God” (Romans 2:24\). There is also a detrimental effect on the faith of other believers, especially young people and those immature in the faith. Anytime a young believer can justify ungodliness by saying, “Well, so\-and\-so does it and he’s a Christian,” the cause of Christ suffers, and the young person is drawn away from truth into sin. Jesus spoke harshly of those who cause “one of these little ones who believe in me to sin” (Matthew 18:6\).
Ultimately, the decision to enter into a career in acting or entertainment must be made prayerfully, seeking God’s wisdom (James 1:5\) and the counsel of mature Christians, remembering always that "everyone who confesses the name of the Lord must turn away from wickedness" (2 Timothy 2:19\).
|
Why do we end our prayers with “Amen”? |
Answer
The Hebrew word translated “amen” literally means “truly” or “so be it.” “Amen” is also found in the Greek New Testament and has the same meaning. Nearly half of the Old Testament uses of amen are found in the book of Deuteronomy. In each case, the people are responding to curses pronounced by God on various sins. Each pronouncement is followed by the words “and all the people shall say Amen” (Deuteronomy 27:15\-26\). This indicates that the people applauded the righteous sentence handed down by their holy God, responding, "So let it be." The amen attested to the conviction of the hearers that the sentences which they heard were true, just, and certain.
Seven of the Old Testament references link *amen* with praise. The sentence “Then all the people said ‘Amen’ and ‘Praise the LORD,’” found in 1 Chronicles 16:36, typifies the connection between *amen* and praise. In Nehemiah 5:13 and 8:6, the people of Israel affirm Ezra’s exalting of God by worshiping the Lord and obeying Him. The highest expression of praise to God is obedience, and when we say “amen” to His commands and pronouncements, our praise is sweet music to His ears.
Most of the New Testament writers use “amen” at the end of their epistles. The apostle John uses it (in the KJV) at the end of his gospel, two of his three letters, and the book of Revelation, where it appears nine times. Each time it is connected with praising and glorifying God and referring to the [second coming](second-coming-Jesus-Christ.html) and the end of the age. Paul says “amen” to the blessings he pronounces on all the churches in his letters to them, as do Peter and Jude in their letters (KJV). The implication is that they are saying, “May it be that the Lord will truly grant these blessings upon you.”
When Christians say “amen” at the end of our prayers, we are following the model of the apostles, asking God to “please let it be as we have prayed.” Remembering the connection between amen and the praise of obedience, all prayers should be prayed according to the will of God. Then when we say “amen,” we can be confident that God will respond “so be it” and grant our requests (John 14:13; 1 John 5:14\).
|
What is the United Methodist Church, and what do Methodists believe? |
Answer
The United Methodist Church is the largest American mainline denomination, with nearly 12 million members in 42,000 congregations worldwide. The United Methodist Church is a participating member of the World Council of Churches and the National Council of Churches and is one of the leading proponents of [ecumenism](ecumenism-ecumenical.html) today. The church was formed in 1968 with a merger of the Evangelical United Brethren Church and the Methodist Church, but its roots go back to England in the 1730s.
John and [Charles Wesley](Charles-Wesley.html) were missionaries in the Church of England and had returned home after an unsuccessful mission in the colony of Georgia. They were disillusioned and discouraged with their own faith and began attending prayer meetings on Aldersgate Street in London, searching for answers. In 1738, both brothers had revival experiences, which John described as being “strangely warmed” in the heart. With this newfound excitement and energy in spiritual matters, they and their Aldersgate companions began to develop guidelines, or “methods,” in seeking spiritual renewal. This led to a national renewal movement within the Church of England. This revival was then brought to America by colonists. The early Methodist movement in America was mostly led by laypeople in the 1760s and was still within the communion of the Anglican Church. In 1769 and 1771, [John Wesley](John-Wesley.html) sent preachers, including Francis Asbury, to the Colonies to help strengthen and guide the Methodist efforts. During the Revolutionary War, the Methodists were an unpopular lot due to John Wesley’s Tory stance and the unwillingness of many Methodist preachers to take up arms in support of the Colonies. Following the Revolution, Wesley saw the need to develop a distinctly American church communion, and the Methodist Episcopal Church in America was formed in Baltimore in 1784\.
From the very start, the Methodists were concerned with personal holiness and emphasized the need for an experience of salvation. To that end, they were involved in the earliest Sunday schools, and the first church publishing house in America was formed by the Methodists in 1789\. The Methodists were an integral part of the Second Great Awakening (1790—1840\) and made use of revival meetings and camp meetings to call people to conversion. The concept of circuit\-riding preachers was developed by the Methodists—a preacher would travel from settlement to settlement, preaching and serving the people there until there was a large enough body to call a full\-time pastor. Circuit riders were a big part of the frontier church in the new country.
The Methodist Episcopal Church had its share of rifts, even in the early years. In 1816 the African Methodist Episcopal Church was formed by Richard Allen, an emancipated slave who had been mistreated in the established church. In 1821 the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church was formed by former slaves for similar reasons. In 1830 the Methodist Protestant Church was formed because the church would not grant representation of the laity or permit the election of presiding elders (this rift was reconciled with a merger in 1939\). Today, the main struggles within the United Methodist Church regard the place of homosexuals within the church. Historically, the church has always condemned homosexual practice as sin, and that is still the official position of the church. There is a liberal movement within the church to grant full communion to practicing homosexuals and even to ordain homosexual clergy. The division resulted in a split of the denomination, with many conservative Methodists disaffiliating and forming the [Global Methodist Church](Global-Methodist-Church.html).
Regarding doctrine, the United Methodist Church follows general [Wesleyan](Wesleyans.html) theology. Belief in the sinfulness of man, the holiness of God, the deity of Jesus Christ, and the literal death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus for the salvation of man are held in common with other Christian churches. Belief in the [inerrancy of Scripture](Biblical-inerrancy.html) is low among Methodists, although they affirm the authority of the Bible (2 Timothy 3:16\).
Though there are individual members and Methodist congregations who are more conservative, many have given in to pragmatism, liberalism, or political correctness: the United Methodist Church ordains [women pastors](women-pastors.html), for example, and supports [abortion](abortion-Bible.html) (the church is, according to the Methodist Book of Discipline, “reluctant to approve abortion,” yet in practice it approves all forms of abortion; plus, the United Methodist Church was a founding member of the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, a pro\-abortion group).
|
What is missiology? |
Answer
Missiology can be defined as “the science of the cross\-cultural communication of the Christian faith.” In the [Great Commission](great-commission.html), the Lord Jesus told us to “go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation” (Mark 16:15\). That command forms the crux of missiology, as it seeks to understand and explain biblical values for evangelism, such as the role of culture in giving the message, both declaring and demonstrating the message of the gospel as it goes “into all the world.”
Three disciplines direct and enable the study of missiology: theology (mainly biblical), anthropology (including primitive religion, linguistics, cultural dynamics, and cultural change), and history. Missiology seeks to intelligently articulate the gospel and its power to change lives in a culturally appropriate context.
Five missiology\-related issues that Christians through the centuries have wrestled with in applying and adapting the command to world evangelization are as follows:
• Apostolic practice \- How does the church carry on the method of sending out laborers into the harvest field?
• Church structure and mission \- How does the church most effectively reproduce itself? What does local church leadership look like in a given region, whether in the United States or in the recessed corners of the world?
• The gospel and other religions \- What is the relationship between the good news about Jesus Christ and other religious systems which do not acknowledge His lordship? Is there validity to the religious experience of their devotees, or do they have to give up their religious practices?
• Salvation and non\-Christians \- Are the heathen really lost? What is their destiny if they have never heard the gospel and die without ever hearing it?
• Christianity and Culture – The same God who provided the gospel for all peoples has also prepared all peoples for the gospel. How does the church present the gospel to those who have never heard it, in such a way that it makes sense, culturally speaking, and answers their primary spiritually related questions?
Missiology seeks to “further the understanding and performance of the Christian mission in our day.” To summarize, missiology is the study of how to best do missions.
|
What is the Presbyterian Church, and what do Presbyterians believe? |
Answer
The name “Presbyterian” applies to a diverse group of churches that adhere in some degree to the teachings of [John Calvin](John-Calvin.html) and [John Knox](John-Knox.html) and practice a presbyterian form of church government led by representative elders (presbyters). The polity of Presbyterian churches calls for local congregations to elect a board called the session or consistory. Congregations also elect presbyters who form a presbytery to govern regional groups of local churches. Presbyteries are then overseen by synods, and all the synods together form the General Assembly.
Within the broad category of Presbyterianism, there are some churches that can be considered conservative or fundamental, and some that would be called liberal or progressive. On the conservative side is the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA), with about 335,000 members in 1,700 congregations; on the liberal side is the [Presbyterian Church, USA (PCUSA)](Presbyterian-Church-USA.html), with about 2 million members in 10,000 congregations. Several smaller groups of Presbyterians have formed over the years and cover the spectrum of beliefs and practices.
The Presbyterian Church was first organized in Scotland under the leadership of the Reformer John Knox. The Church of Scotland was affiliated with the Roman Catholic Church, even though it maintained an attitude of independence. John Knox was a priest in the Church of Scotland and was fed up with the abuses he saw in the Catholic leadership. Knox was exiled to England after his involvement in the murder of Cardinal Beaton in 1546\. While in England, he was licensed to preach in the Church of England and was instrumental in reforming the [Book of Common Prayer](Book-of-Common-Prayer.html). When Mary Tudor ascended the English throne and started her bloody persecutions of Protestants, Knox fled to the Continent, where he met John Calvin and began to study [Reformed theology](reformed-theology.html). In 1559, Knox returned to Scotland and became a vocal proponent of Reformed theology and the concept of presbyterian leadership in the church. A number of Scottish lords had already been promoting religious reform, and they gladly supported John Knox’s teaching. Under Knox’s leadership, these “Lords of the Congregation” wrote the Scottish Confession of Faith in 1560\. This confession ended papal rule in Scotland and outlawed the Mass. The Scottish Confession remained the primary doctrinal guide for the Church of Scotland until the [Westminster Confession of Faith](Westminster-Confession-of-Faith.html) in 1647\.
In the early 1600s, King James I sent many Scottish Presbyterians to Northern Ireland in an effort to displace the Irish and establish British control there. By the early 1700s, these Scotsmen were ready to migrate to America because of the economic trials they faced in Ireland. The first presbytery in America was formed in 1706 in Philadelphia, and Presbyterianism spread rapidly in the Colonies. One distinctive of the Presbyterian Church has been their emphasis on education—Princeton University was founded as a Presbyterian school. In the Colonial period, the Presbyterian Church required advanced theological training for its ministers, whereas the Methodists and Baptists often allowed untrained men who were zealous for the gospel to carry on ministry. The result was fewer Presbyterian frontier preachers but more theologians and seminary teachers. Even today, more theologians come from Presbyterian or Reformed backgrounds than from other groups, and Presbyterian theologians have made significant contributions to issues concerning the church.
Throughout the history of the Presbyterian Church, there have been splits and mergers based on theological and practical issues. The [Great Awakening](First-Second-Great-Awakening.html), which began in Presbyterian churches during the Colonial period, prompted a disagreement between the “Old Side” Presbyterians and the “New Side” Presbyterians. The New Side supported the revivalists of the Great Awakening as instruments of the Holy Spirit, but the Old Side disdained their lack of traditional theological training and considered the whole revival to be simply a faddish movement. The split lasted from 1741 to 1758, when the two factions reached a formal agreement with each other and made peace. Later, latent Old Side\-New Side differences led to the formation of a new denomination, the Cumberland Presbyterian Church, in 1810\. In 1837, during the Second Great Awakening, the Presbyterians were split between “Old School” and “New School” churches. The New School taught a modified understanding of sin and holiness and downplayed the need for traditional presbyterian church polity. When the two groups merged again in 1869, it was with an increased tolerance for doctrinal diversity, and this led to greater changes in the early 20th century.
Until the 1930s, Presbyterians held a leading role in the various debates over doctrinal integrity. Some of the key men supporting the Bible Conference movement were C. I. Scofield (1843–1921\), James Brookes (1830–1897\), William J. Erdman (1834–1923\), Billy Sunday (1863–1935\), William Biederwolf (1867–1939\), and J. Wilbur Chapman (1859–1918\). With doctrinal liberalism creeping into their seminaries, Presbyterians such as Louis Talbot (1889–1976\), Lewis Sperry Chafer (1871–1952\), and William Anderson (1889–1935\) helped start new Bible colleges. As Presbyterian conservatives saw the Presbyterian Church continue to tolerate doctrinal error, they led their churches to form new groups. In 1936, Princeton theologian J. Gresham Machen formed the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. In 1938, Carl McIntire and others formed the Bible Presbyterian Church and ordained [Francis Schaeffer](Francis-Schaeffer.html) as the denomination’s first minister. In 1973, the [Presbyterian Church in America (PCA)](Presbyterian-Church-America-PCA.html) broke from what is now the [Presbyterian Church (USA)](Presbyterian-Church-USA.html) over the liberalism of the latter. In 1981, the Evangelical Presbyterian Church was formed as another conservative alternative for Presbyterians dismayed by the heretical leanings of the mainstream Presbyterian Church.
While most Presbyterian churches will agree on general themes such as the depravity of man, the holiness of God, and salvation by faith, there is wide divergence in how they define and apply those themes. Some churches treat sin as a disease and essentially erase any personal responsibility, while others hold a firm line that sin is a violation of God’s unchanging law. Some Presbyterian churches teach that the Bible is the verbally inspired, infallible Word of God, while others teach that it is a human book subject to error. Some Presbyterians believe Jesus is the virgin\-born Son of God, and others deny His divine nature. When seeking out a church, a person would be well advised to carefully examine the church’s formal statements of doctrine and the practical implementation of that doctrine. Any church worthy of the label “church” must conform to Scripture as its ultimate authority (1 Thessalonians 5:21\).
|
What does the Bible say about shame and regret? |
Answer
Everyone experiences a certain amount of shame and regret over sins committed in the past. The Bible has much to say about shame and regret, and there are numerous examples of people in the Bible who experienced these negative feelings.
Can you imagine the shame and regret Adam and Eve lived with after their sin? They spoiled the perfect creation God had made. Adam and Eve were in a perfect world, had perfect minds and bodies, and had perfectly close fellowship with God. When they chose to sin against God, all of God’s creation was made subject to sin’s effects, including disease, decay, death, and separation from God for eternity. Every human being afterward was born with a [sin nature](sin-nature.html)—the natural inclination to sin. Thankfully, God is sovereign, and He had a plan even then to redeem His world through His Son, Jesus Christ, and give mankind a choice for salvation and eternal life with Him. But Adam and Eve must have lived out their lives on earth with much regret over their loss of innocence and its associated blessings. We know they were ashamed at their nakedness (Genesis 3:10\). They must have lived the rest of their lives with regret—after all, they remembered paradise.
Another biblical example of shame and regret is the experience of the apostle Peter. John 13:37–38 describes the night of Christ’s betrayal. Right after the Passover meal, Peter tells Jesus that he would lay down his life for his Lord. Jesus responds by telling him that on that very night Peter would deny three times even knowing the Lord. Later that night, out of fear of losing his own life, Peter denied ever knowing Jesus (John 18:15–27; Matthew 26:31–35, 69–75\). After Peter’s denial of Christ, “he went outside and wept bitterly” (Luke 22:62\). Later, Peter was restored and grew in his faith, becoming one of the founding fathers of the early church. Peter did indeed “strengthen his brothers” after being forgiven, just as Jesus had foretold (Luke 22:32\). While Peter must have lived with much shame and regret over his public denial of Christ, his deepened understanding of the person and work of Christ overcame his feelings of failure. He realized that he was forgiven by the grace of God, and he moved past his personal regret to feed Jesus’ sheep (John 21:17\).
The Bible teaches us that, when we confess our sins and have faith in Christ’s sacrifice and resurrection, we become children of God (John 1:12\). We are cleansed from all our unrighteousness (Colossians 1:15–22\), and our salvation is eternally secure (John 10:27–30; Hebrews 7:24–25\). As we grow spiritually by spending time with God daily in prayer and reading His Word, we find ourselves loving and trusting Him more. We trust that God has cast our sins from us as far as the east is from the west (Psalm 103:12\).Yes, we regret our past mistakes, but that is not our focus. We keep our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Finisher of our faith (Hebrews 12:2\). Paul put it this way: “Brothers and sisters, I do not consider myself yet to have taken hold of \[the goal]. But one thing I do: Forgetting what is behind and straining toward what is ahead, I press on toward the goal to win the prize for which God has called me heavenward in Christ Jesus” (Philippians 3:13–14\). Shame and regret are part of what is behind us. We must learn to forget.
Romans 8:1 is a great comfort to any believer who struggles with leftover feelings of shame and regret: “There is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.” We are sinners, but we are justified. We have a shameful past, but we have a better future. We used to walk in foolishness and rebellion, but now we walk in newness of life (Titus 3:3–7; Romans 6:4\). God has forgiven those sins we feel shame and regret over. We can move on. “I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me, and delivered Himself up for me” (Galatians 2:20\).
|
What is the transcendental argument for the existence of God? |
Answer
The transcendental argument for the existence of God is the argument that attempts to prove God’s existence by arguing that logic, morals, and science ultimately presuppose the theistic worldview and that God’s transcendent character is the source of logic and morals. The transcendental argument for the existence of God argues that without the existence of God it is impossible to prove anything because, in the atheistic world, you cannot justify or account for universal laws.
Deductive reason presupposes the [laws of logic](Christian-logic.html). But why do the laws of logic hold? For the Christian and other theists, there is a transcendent standard for reasoning. As the laws of logic are reduced to being materialistic entities, they cease to possess their law\-like character. But the laws of logic are not comprised of matter; they apply universally and at all times. The laws of logic are contingent upon God’s unchanging nature and are necessary for deductive reasoning. The invariability, sovereignty, transcendence, and immateriality of God are the foundation for the laws of logic. Thus, rational reasoning would be impossible without the biblical God.
The [atheist](atheism.html) might respond, “Well, I can use the laws of logic, and I am an atheist.” But this argument is illogical. Logical reasoning requires the existence of a transcendent and immaterial God, not a profession of belief in Him. The atheist can reason, but within his own worldview his reasoning cannot rationally be accounted for.
If the laws of logic are merely manmade contentions, then different cultures could adopt different laws of logic. In that case, the laws of logic would not be universal laws. Rational debate would be impossible if the laws of logic were conventional, because the two parties could simply adopt different laws of logic. Each would be correct according to his own arbitrary standard.
If the atheist argues that the laws of logic are simply the product of electro\-chemical impulses in the brain, then the laws of logic cannot be regarded as universal. What happens inside your brain cannot be regarded as a law, for it does not necessarily correspond to what happens in another person’s brain. In other words, we could not argue that logical contradictions cannot occur in a distant galaxy, distinct from conscious observers.
One common response is, “We can use the laws of logic because they have been observed to work.” However, this is to miss the point. All agree that the laws of logic work, but they work because they are true. The real issue is, how can the atheist account for absolute standards of reasoning like the laws of logic? Why does the material universe feel compelled to obey immaterial laws? Moreover, the appeal to the past to make such deductions concerning the way matter will behave in the future—from the materialistic point of view—is circular. Indeed, in the past, matter has conformed to uniformity. But how can one know that uniformity will persist in the future unless one has already assumed that the future reflects the past (i.e., uniformity)? To use one’s past experience as a premise upon which to build one’s expectations for the future is to presuppose uniformity and logic. Thus, when the atheist claims to believe that there will be uniformity in the future since there has been uniformity in the past, he is trying to justify uniformity by presupposing uniformity, which is to argue in a circle.
To conclude, the transcendental argument for the existence of God argues that atheism is self\-refuting because the atheist must presuppose the opposite of what he is attempting to prove in order to prove anything. It argues that rationality and logic make sense only within a theistic framework. Atheists have access to the laws of logic, but they have no foundation upon which to base their deductive reason within their own paradigm.
|
Is the similarity in human/chimp DNA evidence for evolution? |
Answer
In recent years, genome mapping has enabled detailed comparisons between human and chimp DNA. Many have claimed that humans and chimpanzees share over 98% of their DNA. This is often taken as decisive evidence of the common ancestry of apes and humans. But is this argument tenable? Is this really a fact which definitively proves a human\-chimp common ancestry? It is our contention that the percentage is misleading. In fact, when the human and chimp DNA data is examined more closely, the human\-chimp genome comparisons turn out to contradict what would be predicted by evolution.
In reality, the genetic differences between humans and chimpanzees are probably greater than 2%. More recent studies have shown that the true genetic divergence between humans and apes is probably closer to 5%. Thus, the “over 98% similarity” argument is probably an overstatement.
The differences between the DNA sequence of the human and the chimp are not distributed randomly throughout the genome. Rather, the differences are found in clusters. Actually, at those specific locations, the chimp’s genome is similar to that of other primates. It is the human that stands out from the rest. Scientists often refer to these "clusters" as human accelerated regions (HARs) because the human genome supposedly shared a common ancestor with chimps. These HARs are located in DNA segments that do not code for genes. But this requires us to believe that evolution just so happened to cause such rapid change to occur in sites where those changes make an important difference in an organism’s functioning necessary to ultimately create a human.
Such would be a whopper of a just\-so story. But it gets better. Some HARs are found in DNA segments that do code for genes, and herein lies another multitude of difficulties. Evolution would predict that humans evolved from the chimp\-human ancestor via natural selection acting on chance variations induced by mutations. However, recent research reveals just the opposite. The HARs that were found in protein coding genes showed evidence not of mutations that had been selected in view of their advantageous phenotype, but rather the exact opposite. The genetic changes showed evidence that they were, in point of fact, deleterious. They had become established in the population not because they provided some physiological advantage, but in spite of being deleterious. Such results make little sense within an evolutionary framework.
Clearly, the HARs show a trend in which the differences observed in the human DNA (as compared to similar species) typically increase the G\-C content of that particular region of the DNA strand. Evolution would predict that the G\-C content of the underlying gene should remain relatively constant, as natural selection picks out the DNA mutations that improve the protein. If evolution is true, therefore, we should not expect a consistent trend toward an increasing G\-C content.
These HARs are not always limited simply to the protein coding part of the gene, but often extend beyond the border into the flanking sequences. This further suggests that these differences which are observed in the human DNA are not, in fact, consequences of natural selection enhancing the protein that the gene encodes. The HARs often tend to cluster in a single part of a gene, in and around a single exon (as opposed to across the entire gene), and they tend to correlate with male (but not female) recombination. Such observations make little sense in light of evolution.
In conclusion, as interesting as genetic similarities between chimpanzees and humans are, they are not evidence for Darwinism. Design is also able to explain them. Designers often make different products by utilization of similar parts, materials, and arrangements. The common percentage pertains to the regions of our DNA that result in proteins. It makes more sense of the data for the Designer of nature to have used the same proteins to perform the same function in a variety of organisms.
|
What does it mean to “fall from grace” (Galatians 5:4)? |
Answer
Galatians 5:4 and its reference to falling from grace is one of those “[warning passages](warning-passages.html)” pointed to by those who reject the doctrine of the [eternal security](eternal-security.html) of the believer. But because of the biblical doctrine of the [perseverance of the saints](perseverance-saints.html), we know the warnings cannot be directed at true believers in Christ because once grace has been obtained, believers cannot fall from it.
In Galatians 5:4, the context is Paul’s warning against mixing law and the Gospel to attain justification. He says to those who let themselves be circumcised (Galatians 5:2\) that they are “trying to be justified by law” and have therefore “been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace.” It should be noted that there is no mention of salvation or the security of the believer. He is telling those who receive circumcision—in other words attempt to justify themselves through the rites and rules of the Law—that Christ will be of “no benefit” to them.
Paul expounds further in verse 3 when he says that “every man who receives circumcision” is “under obligation to keep the whole Law.” Why is such a statement important in regards to Christ being “no benefit to you”? Note what Paul says in Galatians 3:13 concerning Christ’s sacrifice: “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us.” Taken in this light, along with a brief understanding of the Greek terms used, we can get a better understanding of what Paul is saying.
The two most important words in Galatians 5:4 are καταργέω (severed) and ἐκπίπτω (fallen). The word καταργέω does not require the “harsh” implications that come with “sever” in the English language, though it should not be taken lightly. In light of Paul’s words in Galatians 5:2 and how Paul uses the term in verses such as Romans 3:3, 4:14, and 1 Corinthians 1:28, a good way of understanding the term καταργέω is “nullify” or “done away with.” While the word ἐκπίπτω can undoubtedly mean to fall away from a previously held position, as those who deny the eternal security of true believers assert, in the context of this verse and how it is used in passages such as Acts 27, a good understanding of the phrase in Galatians 5:4 is that of “estranged” or “separated from.”
Paul warns against setting aside the grace that comes from Christ. Those who do have nullified, or run away from, the grace that comes through His blood and attempted instead to justify themselves by the works of the Law. The purpose of Paul’s letter to the Galatians was to warn against the Judaizers because they attempted to lure born\-again Christians back to justification through the Law, which is impossible (Galatians 2:16\). He reminds them of the freedom they have in Christ: “It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery” (Galatians 5:1\).
|
What is the proper way to dispose of a ruined Bible? |
Answer
There is no "biblical" way to dispose of an old/damaged/ruined Bible, as the Bible itself does not address this question. It is, therefore, a matter of personal conviction. It is important to understand that it is not the paper, binding, and ink that are "sacred" or "holy." It is the Word of God that is holy, not the material it is printed on. We are not to worship or idolize the Bible. The purpose of the Bible is to teach us about Jesus the Savior and the salvation He provides and to point us to worship Him with all our heart, soul, mind, and strength. The paper and ink of a Bible are merely the means through which God communicates His Word to us.
It would seem, though, that throwing away a Bible would have to be the absolute last resort. Many old Bibles, if rebound, would be "as good as new" and could then continue to be used or given to someone else to use. Even an old/tattered Bible, given to someone who does not have a Bible, can be a tremendous blessing. Some people keep old Bibles as family heirlooms to remind future generations of how committed to God’s Word their ancestors were. There are many such options and all are worth prayerfully considering.
Ultimately, if a Bible is genuinely damaged to the point of being unusable, it can be discarded. In no sense will discarding a Bible invite God’s displeasure. Some prefer to burn a Bible rather than placing it in the garbage. Neither method is right or wrong. There is a story of a person who threw a Bible out with the trash. A garbage collector saw the Bible and removed it from the trash, began to read it, and placed his faith in Jesus Christ as Savior. God can use His powerful Word (Isaiah 55:11; Hebrews 4:12\) to testify of Him, even from the pages of a Bible that has been discarded.
|
If Jesus was God, why did He say "No one is good but God alone"? |
Answer
It is often claimed by those who reject the deity of Christ that in Mark 10:17\-22 Jesus denies His divinity by rejecting the notion that He is good. It reads as follows:
*“As Jesus started on his way, a man ran up to him and fell on his knees before him. ‘Good teacher,’ he asked, ‘what must I do to inherit eternal life?’ ‘Why do you call me good?’ Jesus answered. ‘No one is good – except God alone. You know the commandments: Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false testimony, do not defraud, honor your father and mother.’ ‘Teacher,’ he declared, ‘all these I have kept since I was a boy.’ Jesus looked at him and loved him. ‘One thing you lack,’ he said. ‘Go, sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.’ At this, the man’s face fell. He went away sad, because he had great wealth.”*
Is Jesus here rebuking the man for calling Him good and thereby denying His deity? No. Rather, He is using a penetrating question to push the man to think through the implications of his own words, to understand the concept of Jesus’ goodness and, most especially, the man’s lack of goodness. The young ruler "went away sad" (Mark 10:22\) because he realized that although he had devoted himself to keeping the commandments, he had failed to keep the first and greatest of the commandments—love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength (Matthew 22:37\-38\). The man’s riches were of more worth to him than God, and thus he was not "good" in the eyes of God.
Jesus’ fundamental lesson here is that goodness flows not from a man’s deeds, but rather from God Himself. Jesus invites the man to follow Him, the only means of doing good by God’s ultimate standard. Jesus describes to the young ruler what it means to follow Him—to be willing to give up everything, thus putting God first. When one considers that Jesus is drawing a distinction between man’s standard of goodness and God’s standard, it becomes clear that following Jesus is good. The command to follow Christ is the definitive proclamation of Christ’s goodness. Thus, by the very standard Jesus is exhorting the young ruler to adopt, Jesus is good. And it necessarily follows that if Jesus is indeed good by this standard, Jesus is implicitly declaring His deity.
Thus, Jesus’ question to the man is designed not to deny His deity, but rather to draw the man to recognize Christ’s divine identity. Such an interpretation is substantiated by passages such as John 10:11 wherein Jesus declares Himself to be “the good shepherd.” Similarly in John 8:46, Jesus asks, “Can any of you prove me guilty of sin?” Of course the answer is "no." Jesus was “without sin” (Hebrews 4:15\), holy and undefiled (Hebrews 7:26\), the only One who “knew no sin” (2 Corinthians 5:21\).
The logic can thus be summarized as follows:
1: Jesus claims only God is good.
2: Jesus claims to be good.
3: Therefore, Jesus claims to be God.
Such a claim makes perfect sense in light of the flow of Mark’s narrative with regards to the unfolding revelation of Jesus’ real identity. It is only before the high priest in Mark 14:62 that the question of Jesus’ identity is explicitly clarified. The story of the rich young ruler is one in a sequence of stories designed to point readers toward Jesus as the eternal, divine, incarnate Son of God.
|
What does it mean to work out salvation with fear and trembling (Philippians 2:12)? |
Answer
In Philippians 2:12\-13, Paul writes, “Therefore, my dear friends, as you have always obeyed – not only in my presence, but now much more in my absence – continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you to will and to act according to his purpose.”
This text is often misused to instill fear into people, warning them that it means that they can [lose salvation](Christian-lose-salvation.html). What does it mean to work out our salvation with fear and trembling? Paul can hardly be encouraging believers to live in a continuous condition of nervousness and anxiety. That would contradict his many other exhortations to peace of mind, courage, and confidence in the God who authors our salvation. The Greek word translated "fear" in this context can equally mean "reverence" or "respect." Paul uses the same phrase in (2 Corinthians 7:15\) where he refers to Titus as being encouraged by the Corinthians’ reception of him “with fear and trembling,” that is, with great humility and respect for his position as a minister of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Paul himself came to the Corinthian church in “weakness and fear, and with much trembling” (1 Corinthians 2:3\), mindful of the great and awesome nature of the work in which he was engaged.
The sense in which we are to work out our salvation in fear and trembling is twofold. First, the Greek verb rendered “work out” means "to continually work to bring something to completion or fruition." We do this by actively pursuing obedience in the process of sanctification, which Paul explains further in the next chapter of Philippians. He describes himself as “straining” and “pressing on” toward the goal of Christlikeness (Philippians 3:13\-14\). The “trembling” he experiences is the attitude Christians are to have in pursuing this goal—a healthy fear of offending God through disobedience and an awe and respect for His majesty and holiness. "Trembling" can also refer to a shaking due to weakness, but this is a weakness of higher purpose, one which brings us to a state of dependency on God. Obedience and submission to the God we revere and respect is our “reasonable service” (Romans 12:1\-2\) and brings great joy. Psalm 2:11 sums it up perfectly: “Serve the LORD with fear and rejoice with trembling.” We work out our salvation by going to the very source of our salvation—the Word of God—wherein we renew our hearts and minds (Romans 12:1\-2\), coming into His presence with a spirit of reverence and awe.
|
Is the “Way of the Master” evangelism method biblical? |
Answer
The “Way of the Master” evangelism method is a technique developed by TV\-show hosts Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron, which seeks to witness to the lost by application of the Mosaic Law to show men their sin and ultimately bring them to conviction and subsequent repentance.
Way of the Master witness encounters are typically initiated with the question “Do you consider yourself to be a good person?” When the individual answers positively, the evangelist will walk him or her systematically through the Law (How many lies do you think you have told in your life? Have you ever stolen something, irrespective of its value? Have you ever taken the Lord’s name in vain? Have you ever looked at a woman with lust?). This is followed by a brief summation of the individual’s admissions and the question is asked concerning the individual’s eternal well\-being: “In light of your own admission, if God were to judge you by the standard of the ten commandments, do you think you would be found innocent or guilty and would you be going to heaven or hell?” This is followed by a summary of the key elements of the gospel, with particular emphasis on doctrines such as propitiation and the need for faith and repentance.
Is the “Way of the Master” evangelism method biblical? Biblical support includes such passages as Romans 3:19\-20 – “Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God. Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of sin.” Similarly, Galatians 3:24\-25 declares – “…the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith. Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law.” Psalm 19:7 also proclaims that “the law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.”
In conclusion, the “Way of the Master” methodology is assuredly a biblical approach, founded on scriptural principles. When self\-examined under the mirror of God’s law, man’s heart is prepared for the seed of the gospel. If the Holy Spirit opens the eyes of the individual to receive truth, the heart of man is then able to understand the message of God’s holiness—His justice and perfect righteousness, and the glorious salvation made available through the sacrificial provision of Jesus Christ.
As the Apostle Paul puts it in Romans 3:21\-26 – “But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished – he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.”
|
Who is the false prophet of the end times? |
Answer
The false prophet of the end times is described in Revelation 13:11\-15\. He is also referred to as the “second beast” (Revelation 13:11; 16:13, 19:20, 20:10\). Together with the Antichrist and Satan, who empowers both of them, the false prophet is the third party in the unholy trinity.
The apostle John describes this person and gives us clues to identifying him when he shows up. First, he comes out of the earth. This could mean he comes up from the pit of hell with all the demonic powers of hell at his command. It could also mean he comes from lowly circumstances, secret and unknown until he bursts on the world stage at the right hand of the Antichrist. He is depicted as having horns like a lamb, while speaking like a dragon. The horns on lambs are merely small bumps on their heads until the lamb grows into a ram. Rather than having the Antichrist’s multiplicity of heads and horns, showing his power and might and fierceness, the false prophet comes like a lamb, winsomely, with persuasive words that elicit sympathy and good will from others. He may be an extraordinary preacher or orator whose demonically empowered words will deceive the multitudes. But he speaks like a dragon, which means his message is the message of a dragon. Revelation 12:9 identifies the dragon as the devil and Satan.
Verse 12 gives us the false prophet’s mission on earth, which is to force humanity to worship the Antichrist. He has all the authority of the Antichrist because, like him, the false prophet is empowered by Satan. It is not clear whether people are forced to worship the Antichrist or whether they are so enamored of these powerful beings that they fall for the deception and worship him willingly. The fact that the second beast uses miraculous signs and wonders, including fire from heaven, to establish the credibility of both of them would seem to indicate that people will fall before them in adoration of their power and message. Verse 14 goes on to say the deception will be so great that the people will set up an idol to the Antichrist, "[the image of the beast](image-of-the-beast.html)," and worship it. This is reminiscent of the huge golden image of Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel 3\) before which all were to bow down and pay homage. Revelation 14:9\-11, however, describes the ghastly fate that awaits those who worship the image of the Antichrist.
Those who survive the terrors of the tribulation to this point will be faced with two hard choices. Those who refuse to worship the image of the [beast](beast-of-Revelation.html) will be subject to death (Revelation 13:15\), but those who do worship him will incur the wrath of God. The image will be extraordinary in that it will be able to “speak.” Whatever the image is (a statue? a hologram? an android? a human\-animal hybrid? a clone?), it will have some kind of ability to breathe forth the message of the Antichrist and the false prophet. Along with being the spokesman for them, the image will condemn to death those who refuse to worship the unholy pair. In our technological world, it is not hard to imagine such a scenario.
Whoever the false prophet turns out to be, the final world deception and the final apostasy will be great, and the whole world will be caught up in it. The deceivers and false teachers we see today are the forerunners of the Antichrist and the false prophet, and we must not be deceived by them. These false teachers abound, and they are moving us toward a final satanic kingdom. We must faithfully proclaim the saving gospel of Jesus Christ and rescue the souls of men and women from the coming disaster.
|
What is monothelitism? |
Answer
Monothelitism is a teaching which began in Armenia and Syria in A.D. 633 and had considerable support during the 7th century A.D. before being officially condemned at the Third Council of Constantinople in favor of dyotheletism. It holds that Jesus Christ has essentially two natures but only one will. This is contrary to the orthodox doctrine of Christology which states that Jesus Christ has two wills (human and divine) which correspond to His divine\-human nature.
The monothelite teaching emerged as essentially a compromise position. The miaphysitists could agree that Jesus possessed two natures if He only possessed one will, and some Chalcedonians could agree that Jesus had one will if He had two natures. The monothelite position was promulgated by Sergius I of Constantinople and spread under Pope Honorius I.
The doctrine of the hypostatic union states that the two natures of Christ (His deity and humanity) are united in one Person. This is often referred to as the Chalcedon Creed. The converse, non\-orthodox position (i.e., the non\-Chalcedon view) is that Jesus’ deity and humanity are united in one nature, the two being united without separation, confusion or alteration. This position is often referred to as miaphysitism.
To conclude, is the teaching of monothelitism biblical? There are numerous texts which could be cited to definitively prove that Christ possessed both a divine and a human will. In Hebrews 10:7, Paul applies to Christ the words of Psalm 40:7\-8 – “Then I said, ‘Here I am, I have come – it is written about me in the scroll. I desire to do your will, O my God; your law is within my heart.’” Here, both wills are distinctly marked—the divine (“I desire to do your will, O my God”) and the human will, subject to the divine will (“your law is within my heart”).
Christ Himself draws the same distinction in many places. For example, in John 6:38, Jesus declares, “I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me.” In Matthew, Christ says, “My father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will.” And as Jesus declares in John 10:17\-18, “The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life – only to take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father.” Clearly, these texts show the divine will which Christ had, in common with the Father and, in contrast, the human will which He subjected to the will of His Father.
|
Did the writers of the New Testament regard their writings as Scripture? |
Answer
Second Timothy 3:16\-17 declares that “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.” It is clear that the early church regarded the Old Testament as inspired Scripture. As 2 Peter 1:20\-21 explains, “Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.”
But can this be equally applied to the writings contained in the New Testament? Were the New Testament writers aware of the scriptural nature of their epistles? Although this cannot be proven definitively, there is a fairly strong case to be made that they did. In 2 Peter 3:15\-16, Peter writes, “Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable men distort, as they do *the other Scriptures*, to their own destruction” (emphasis added). Clearly, Peter regarded the writings of Paul as inspired Scripture.
A further indicator that the New Testament writers understood their writings as Scripture is in 1 Timothy 5:18, wherein it is declared, “For the *Scripture* says, ‘Do not muzzle the ox while it is treading out the grain,’ and ‘the worker deserves his wages’” (emphasis added). While the first reference is taken from the book of Deuteronomy (25:4\), the second is derived from the Gospel of Luke (10:7\). Clearly, Luke’s writings are being viewed as similar in authoritative value to the Pentateuch. Luke’s writings are also here referred to as “Scripture.”
In conclusion, there are good grounds for believing that the New Testament writers viewed each other’s writings as sacred Scripture, literally inspired by God – “and useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:16\-17\).
|
What is epistemology? |
Answer
Epistemology deals with the branch of philosophy concerned with the nature and scope of knowledge. It addresses the questions, "What is knowledge?" "How is knowledge acquired?" "What do people know?" "How do we know what we know?" "Why do we know what we know?"
Epistemology is typically divided into two categories. The first, propositional knowledge, can be thought of "knowledge that" as opposed to "knowledge how." In mathematics, for instance, it is knowledge that 1 \+ 1 \= 2, but there is also knowledge of *how* to perform mathematics. The second is personal knowledge. Personal knowledge is gained experientially. For example, the theoretical knowledge of the physics involved in maintaining a state of balance when riding a bicycle cannot be substituted for the practical (personal) knowledge gained when practicing cycling.
Epistemology also deals with statements of belief. Knowledge entails belief, and so one’s statement of belief cannot conflict with one’s knowledge. Conversely, knowledge about a belief does not necessarily entail an endorsement of its truth. For example, "I know about the religion of Islam, but I do not believe in it," is a coherent statement.
Belief is regarded as subjective, while truth is regarded as an objective reality, independent of the individual’s beliefs or experience. While one might well "believe" that atheism is true, such an inclination has no bearing upon whether atheism is really true. The truth stands as independent and transcendent of one’s beliefs and opinions concerning reality.
What is the foundation for epistemology? Science and deductive reason, by which means one may acquire knowledge, presupposes that the universe be logical and orderly and that it obeys mathematical laws consistent over time and space. Even though conditions in different regions of space can be radically diverse, there nonetheless exists an underlying uniformity.
The Christian—who believes in a transcendent causal reality—expects there to be order in the universe. Since the Bible teaches that God upholds all things by His power (Hebrews 1:3\), the Christian expects the universe to behave in an orderly and rational fashion. Since God is omnipresent and consistent within Himself, the Christian expects that all regions of the universe will obey the same laws, even though the physical conditions of different regions of the universe may be different.
God transcends time (2 Peter 3:8\). Thus, even though conditions in the past may have been different from those now, the laws of nature are not subject to arbitrary change. The Christian has a foundation upon which to base his assumption that the universe is upheld in a consistent manner, and therefore has a basis upon which to gain knowledge.
|
What is an infidel? |
Answer
The word *infidel* simply means “without faith” or “against faith.” An infidel is a person who rejects religion. More famously, though, the term *infidel* has been connected to a website that attacks the Christian faith – infidels.org. Internet Infidels, which also goes by the name Secular Web, is one of the principal websites for atheists and naturalists on the Internet. Its stated goal is to defend and promote a naturalistic worldview on the internet. Christian apologist J.P. Holding has stated, “The Secular Web has a few intelligent people, but overall has long been a haven for every skeptical know\-it\-all to pronounce judgments upon matters outside of their expertise.”
The purpose of this article is not to provide a comprehensive rebuttal of every issue that the Internet Infidels raise. Rather, the purpose is to point out just a few of the multiple fallacies behind the Internet Infidels website.
**What is an infidel? – Denying the existence of Jesus**
Among the claims of the Internet Infidels is the thesis that Jesus never existed, a hypothesis that has long hovered around the fringes of scholarly New Testament research, but that has never been able to attract support from a significant body of scholars. Marshall J. Gauvin in his article “Did Jesus Christ ever live?” states categorically that “miracles do not happen. Stories of miracles are untrue. Therefore, documents in which miraculous accounts are interwoven with reputed facts are untrustworthy, for those who invented the miraculous element might easily have invented the part that was natural.” If one is to assert a naturalistic worldview by assuming that miracles are impossible, then one might just as easily attempt to prove a theistic worldview by assuming the existence of God. Either way, the argument is self\-refuting.
Gauvin’s incompetence and utter misunderstanding of the issues at hand is further illustrated in the following paragraph:
On the theory that Christ was crucified, how shall we explain the fact that during the first eight centuries of the evolution of Christianity, Christian art represented a lamb, and not a man, as suffering on the cross for the salvation of the world? Neither the paintings in the Catacombs nor the sculptures on Christian tombs pictured a human figure on the cross. Everywhere a lamb was shown as the Christian symbol\-\-a lamb carrying a cross, a lamb at the foot of a cross, a lamb on a cross. Some figures showed the lamb with a human head, shoulders and arms, holding a cross in his hands\-\-the lamb of God in process of assuming the human form\-\-the crucifixion myth becoming realistic. At the close of the eighth century, Pope Hadrian I, confirming the decree of the sixth Synod of Constantinople, commanded that thereafter the figure of a man should take the place of a lamb on the cross. It took Christianity eight hundred years to develop the symbol of its suffering Savior. For eight hundred years, the Christ on the cross was a lamb. But if Christ was actually crucified, why was his place on the cross so long usurped by a lamb? In the light of history and reason, and in view of a lamb on the cross, why should we believe in the Crucifixion?
Arguments such as that ought not require any commentary for the Christian who has even a basic knowledge of his Bible. Gauvin doesn’t even address the Passover lamb icon of Christianity; surely it is at least worth a mention?
Let’s focus primarily on three points raised by the articles of the Internet Infidels. These are the lack of secular references, the comparison of the legitimate Gospels to Gnostic sources, and the alleged similarities to paganism.
First, let us consider the reference to Jesus by Josephus. Gauvin writes:
In the closing years of the first century, Josephus, the celebrated Jewish historian, wrote his famous work on "The Antiquities of the Jews." In this work, the historian made no mention of Christ, and for two hundred years after the death of Josephus, the name of Christ did not appear in his history. There were no printing presses in those days. Books were multiplied by being copied. It was, therefore, easy to add to or change what an author had written. The church felt that Josephus ought to recognize Christ, and the dead historian was made to do it. In the fourth century, a copy of “The Antiquities of the Jews” appeared, in which occurred this passage: “Now, there was about this time, Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works; a teacher of such men as received the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.”
It is true that it is seldom questioned that this passage from *Antiquities of the Jews* contains some interpolations which have been inserted by later scribes (a very small minority of scholars hold that the entirety of this passage is genuine). But the Internet Infidels apparently hold to the “total interpolation” theory.
What are some of the reasons for accepting this passage as partially genuine, once the clear interpolations have been removed? Perhaps the most important factor leading most scholars to accept the partial authenticity position is that a substantial part of the passage reflects Josephus’ typical language and style. Further, when the clear scribal interpolations are removed, the remaining core passage is coherent and flows well.
A substantial amount of this reference to Jesus is regarded by the majority of scholars as characteristic of Josephus, and only a few phrases are obviously Christian. Moreover, many of Josephus’ phrases are absent from early Christian literature, and phrases or terms that Christians would likely not have used are present. Then there is a phrase that any Christian scribe would have known to be in error (“he gained a following among many Jews and among many of Gentile origin”).
It is interesting that Gauvin neglects to mention the other reference to Jesus in the writings of Josephus – the authenticity of which almost all scholars accept nearly in its entirety:
But the younger Ananus who, as we said, received the high priesthood, was of a bold disposition and exceptionally daring; he followed the party of the Sadducees, who are severe in judgment above all the Jews, as we have already shown. As therefore Ananus was of such a disposition, he thought he had now a good opportunity, as Festus was now dead, and Albinus was still on the road; so he assembled a council of judges, and brought before it the brother of Jesus the so\-called Christ, whose name was James, together with some others, and having accused them as law\-breakers, he delivered them over to be stoned.
The majority of scholars regard this as an authentic passage for reasons such as the following:
1\. There is no textual evidence against this passage. It is found in every single manuscript of the *Antiquities of the Jews*. This also, incidentally, applies to the aforementioned passage.
2\. There is a specific use of non\-Christian terminology. For instance, the designation of James as the “brother of Jesus” contrasts with Christian practice of calling him the “brother of the Lord.” The passage therefore corresponds neither with New Testament nor with primitive Christian usage.
3\. The emphasis of the passage is not on Jesus, nor even James, but on the high priest Annas. There is no praise for either Jesus or James.
4\. Neither this passage nor the larger one connects Jesus with John the Baptist, as would be expected from a Christian interpolator.
Gauvin goes on to argue:
In the “Annals” of [Tacitus](Tacitus.html), the Roman historian, there is another short passage which speaks of “Christus” as being the founder of a party called Christians\-\-a body of people “who were abhorred for their crimes.” These words occur in Tacitus' account of the burning of Rome. The evidence for this passage is not much stronger than that for the passage in Josephus. It was not quoted by any writer before the fifteenth century; and when it was quoted, there was only one copy of the “Annals” in the world; and that copy was supposed to have been made in the eighth century\-\-six hundred years after Tacitus' death. The “Annals” were published between 115 and 117 A.D., nearly a century after Jesus’ time\-\-so the passage, even if genuine, would not prove anything as to Jesus.
This is simply to miss the point. The existence of Jesus was not contested in first\-century Israel, and the negative references to Jesus by Tacitus and others provides powerful evidence that at least Jesus was known to have been a real, prominent figure in the first century. Why did these negative commentators not deny His existence? From where did they derive their information? Moreover, careful enquiry is one of Tacitus’ most famous attributes. His reliability as a historian militates against his having borrowed information uncritically from any source. That Tacitus got his information from Christians is disproven by the negative tone of the reference.
Would Tacitus have been inclined simply to repeat what he was told by people whom he disliked? After all, when reporting on the history and beliefs of the Jews, whom he despised as much as the Christians, it seems fairly obvious from his disparaging descriptions that Tacitus was not inclined to consult the Jews’ “own view” or even that of “Jewish informants.”
Gauvin omits mention of the other early secular references to Jesus, including what is found in the Talmud and in the writings of Lucian, Pliny, Seutonius, Tacitus, and Thallus. But even if we were to assume no first\- or early second\-century secular references to Jesus, we would still have a very powerful case for His existence. Why? Had Jesus’ followers decided to manufacture a mythical Jesus and attribute sayings to Him in an effort to paint Him as someone who claimed Messianic authority, a number of problems arise. First, they certainly seem to have done it in entirely the wrong way. Had their goal been to initiate a new religion, it may have been advisable to frame it in accordance with the expectations of those whom they were seeking to convince. The Jewish concept of a Messiah was a great military leader, who would lead a conquest against their Roman oppressors. Second, modern scholarship is unanimously agreed that the disciples sincerely believed in what they were proclaiming (they were willing to suffer inhumane deaths for it, without renouncing their cause, among other reasons). Third, given that the earliest Christian proclamation following the resurrection was in Jerusalem (where Jesus’ public ministry had been based), they were somewhat limited in terms of the material available for fabrication. Had Jesus’ existence been a fabrication, assuredly they would have preached in Rome or elsewhere, as far away from the eyewitnesses as they could get.
Moreover, consider the situation facing the disciples following the crucifixion. Their leader was dead. And Jews traditionally had no belief in a dying, much less rising, Messiah. In fact, orthodox Jewish beliefs concerning the afterlife precluded anyone rising bodily from the dead to glory and immortality before the general resurrection at the end of the world. Rabbinic interpretation with regard to the prophecies concerning the resurrection of the Messiah was that He would be raised from the dead at the end of time along with all the other deceased saints. It is thus significant that the disciples had no necessary disposition toward a bodily resurrection, for it was counter\-cultural, given the prominent Jewish mentality. This is perhaps why, as John testifies in his account (John 20:9\), that upon discovery of the empty tomb “they still did not understand from Scripture that Jesus had to rise from the dead.” If the disciples had been fabricators of an ideal, they would undoubtedly have posited at best a spiritual resurrection, for a physical and bodily resurrection could have been relentlessly exposed with the presence of a corpse. Instead, they talked of the resurrection of the actual physical body which, if untrue, was an enormous risk to take should the body have ever been detected. Rather, they believed in a literal resurrection because they had witnessed it for themselves. The religious leaders of the day wanted nothing more than to stifle Christianity.
A final reason why Jesus’ followers are unlikely to have fabricated a mythic Jesus concerns His death by crucifixion. According to Jewish law, Jesus’ execution by hanging on a tree showed Him to be a man literally accursed by God (Deuteronomy 21:23\). The crucifixion was undoubtedly a catastrophe to the mindset of the early church, for it had effectively shown that the Pharisees and the Jewish council had been right, and that the disciples had left their homes, families and possessions to follow a heretic, a man literally accursed by God.
**What is an infidel? – Misleading statements**
According to Gauvin:
There were many Gospels in circulation in the early centuries, and a large number of them were forgeries. Among these were the "Gospel of Paul," the “Gospel of Bartholomew," the "Gospel of Judas Iscariot," the "Gospel of the Egyptians," the "Gospel or Recollections of Peter," the "Oracles or Sayings of Christ," and scores of other pious productions, a collection of which may still be read in "The Apocryphal New Testament." Obscure men wrote Gospels and attached the names of prominent Christian characters to them, to give them the appearance of importance. Works were forged in the names of the apostles, and even in the name of Christ. The greatest Christian teachers taught that it was a virtue to deceive and lie for the glory of the faith. Dean Milman, the standard Christian historian, says: "Pious fraud was admitted and avowed." The Rev. Dr. Giles writes: "There can be no doubt that great numbers of books were then written with no other view than to deceive." Professor Robertson Smith says: "There was an enormous floating mass of spurious literature created to suit party views." The early church was flooded with spurious religious writings. From this mass of literature, our Gospels were selected by priests and called the inspired word of God. Were these Gospels also forged? There is no certainty that they were not. But let me ask: If Christ was an historical character, why was it necessary to forge documents to prove his existence? Did anybody ever think of forging documents to prove the existence of any person who was really known to have lived? The early Christian forgeries are a tremendous testimony to the weakness of the Christian cause.
Given that the Gnostics were attributing their "gospels" to prominent key players in the first\-century church such as Peter, Thomas, and Mary Magdalene, one would think that this would give weight to the case that the early church was faithful in attributing their documents to the correct people. Why attribute the gospels to second\-rate people like Mark and Luke? After all, the early church readily affirms that Mark obtains much of his information from Peter, so why not attribute it to Peter if this is all about credibility? There is no mention of any of this in the article. Also, the Gnostic gospels were NOT written to prove the existence of Jesus. The Internet Infidels show absolutely no understanding or appreciation of the background of Gnosticism, nor the relevant agendas behind the documents being propagated. There was not even really any dispute in the early church with respect to the authorship of the four canonical Gospels. To anyone even vaguely familiar with early church history, this argument is hardly convincing.
**What is an infidel? – Claiming “copycat” plagiarism of pagan religions**
One claim which surfaces frequently on the Internet Infidels website is the allegation that Christianity is an adaptation of various pagan religions and mythology, a claim that has long been rejected by the majority of scholars. In view of this allegation, it makes no sense why sincere, monotheistic Jews, entrenched in Palestinian culture, would have borrowed from pagan “mystery religions” and subsequently have gone to their deaths proclaiming what they knew to be an outright conspiracy.
Nonetheless, James Still writes in *The Virgin Birth and Childhood Mysteries of Christ*:
"As time went by it could be seen that the Kingdom of God was delayed. Among the Hellenized Jews and the Greek pagans who were considering conversion to Christianity, this delay posed more questions than answers. Additionally, Greek pagans, from which Christianity was to draw its converts and eventually thrive, were naturally skeptical of any new savior and the heavenly rewards they might promise. These Greeks had to pick and choose among the dozens of mystery cults and gods that had sprung up, each promising riches and eternal bliss in a heavenly afterlife. Jesus had little to offer these Greeks. He was, by all accounts, a mortal Jewish messiah, speaking only to the sons of Abraham and telling them to prepare the way of the Lord who would build a new Jerusalem especially for his chosen people. The Marcan Jesus that was known to his followers during the middle\-to\-late first\-century (before the gospels of Matthew, Luke, and John) shared none of the attributes of the time\-honored moral\-savior deities of Dionysus or Herakles. Jesus’ later\-added attribute of virgin\-birth \[was] necessary if Jesus was to be made acceptable to the pagans of the Hellenized world."
But then, neither of the two birth accounts concerning Dionysus suggest a virgin birth. According to one legend, Dionysus is the product of Zeus and Persephone. Hera becomes insanely jealous and tries to destroy the infant by sending the Titans to kill him. Zeus comes to the rescue, but it is too late. The Titans had eaten everything but Dionysus’ heart. Zeus then takes the heart and implants it into the womb of Semele. In the second legend, Zeus impregnates a mortal woman, Semele, much to the jealousy of Hera. Hera convinces Semele to ask Zeus to reveal his glory to her but because no mortal can look upon the gods and live. Semele is instantly incinerated. Zeus then takes the fetal Dionysus and sews him into his own thigh until his birth. As we can see, no virgin birth takes place, but this is how Dionysus is said to have become a rebirth deity, as he is twice born in the womb.
Richard Carrier makes the case elsewhere that “Horus of Greece is described as first reigning a thousand years, then dying, then being buried for three days, at the end of which time he triumphed over Typhon, the evil principle, and rose again to life evermore.” But Carrier is wrong. The only connection we can make to Horus being resurrected is if we consider the eventual merger of Horus and Osiris. But such a theory is full of contradictions, apparently noticed by the Egyptians since they later altered their beliefs to fix the contradictions. In the Egyptian tale, Osiris is either dismembered by Set in battle or sealed in a chest and drowned in the Nile. Isis then pieces Osiris’ body back together and resurrects Osiris to conceive an heir that will avenge Osiris’ death (although technically Osiris is never actually resurrected, as he is forbidden to return to the world of the living).
The Infidels site is peppered with other such misinformation concerning pagan deities and the frequent allegation that the Christians “borrowed” material from them. Such a claim remains to be proven or even supported by the slightest evidence.
**What is an infidel? – Conclusion**
The Internet Infidels website is merely a repackaging of old conspiracy theories, as well as blatant misinformation and overstatements, almost all of which have long since been abandoned by the consensus of scholarship. Nonetheless, the infidels continue to attract a substantial volume of internet traffic. In history there is little that is certain, but there is also a level of skepticism that makes the task of the historian impossible. Moreover, the thesis that the early church borrowed material from ancient pagan religions and that Jesus never existed requires a selective skepticism about which sources are reliable and how others are to be properly interpreted. In the end, if the Internet Infidels are right in their contention that Jesus never lived, it makes Christianity a much more incredible phenomenon than if He did live. As the psalmist correctly testifies, “The fool has said in his heart, ‘There is no God’” (Psalm 14:1\).
|
What is the Anglican Church, and what do Anglicans believe? |
Answer
The roots of the Anglican, or English, Church go back as far as the 2nd century, but the church traces its current structure and status back to the reign of King Henry VIII, who ruled from 1509 to 1547\. The events that led to the formation of the state Anglican Church are a curious mix of ecclesiastical, political, and personal rivalries. Henry petitioned Pope Clement VII for an annulment of his marriage with Catherine of Aragon but was denied. When Protestant Thomas Cranmer became Archbishop of Canterbury, Henry saw his chance to bypass the Pope’s authority and get what he wanted. In 1531, Henry compelled the English clergy to accept him as head of the [church in England](Church-of-England.html). In 1532, Henry forced the national convocation to agree in *The Submission of the Clergy* that they would not promulgate any papal bull in England without the king’s consent. In 1534, Henry led Parliament to pass a series of laws depriving the Roman Catholic Church of any authority in England. *The Act of Supremacy* declared the king to be “the supreme head of the church in England,” thus giving Henry the same legal authority over the English church that the Pope exercised over the Roman Catholic Church.
The English church didn’t assert total independence from Rome until Henry VIII’s reign, and Henry himself made little true reform in the church. The true English Reformation began during the short reign of Henry’s son Edward VI and was spearheaded by Cranmer. There had been aspects of ecclesiastical independence throughout England’s history. The Saxon church, founded by Saint Augustine in 597, was under papal direction, but not without resistance. The various tribes of England had never fully submitted to Roman occupation, and when the Roman Legion was withdrawn, the Saxon church continued on an independent course. In 664, King Oswey of Northumbria called the Synod of Whitby to merge the Saxon and Celtic churches nominally under the Roman Catholic Church. The long history of English resistance laid the groundwork for Henry’s acts in the sixteenth century.
The doctrine of the Anglican Church is an interesting mix of Catholicism and Protestant Reformation theology. The Apostles’ Creed and Nicene Creed are authoritative declarations of belief for the Anglican Church and are typically recited in worship services. Interestingly, the church does not require individuals to agree with or accept all the statements of those creeds but encourages its members to join in the process of discovery. The [39 Articles](39-Articles-42-Articles.html), developed in the reign of Elizabeth I, laid out the Protestant doctrine and practice of the Anglican Church, but were deliberately written to be so vague that they were open to various interpretations by Protestants and Catholics. As in the Catholic Church, the celebration of the Eucharist is central to the worship service, along with the communal offering of prayer and praise through the recitation of the liturgy. In all liturgical churches, there is a danger of allowing the form of religious ceremony (Isaiah 29:13\) to replace the personal application of faith (Psalm 51:16\-17\). This was a key point of contention by the Puritans and others who ultimately left the Anglican Church. Thomas Shepherd, who was expelled from the Anglican Church in 1630 for non\-conformity, was a spiritual giant who was concerned that people distinguish between the work of grace in genuine conversion and the religious pretense that was common within the church. (Shepherd was one of the pivotal men in the founding of Harvard College and became a mentor of [Jonathan Edwards](Jonathan-Edwards.html), who was mightily used of God in the [Great Awakening](First-Second-Great-Awakening.html).)
The Anglican Communion has 80 million members worldwide in 38 different church organizations, including the Episcopal Church. The Archbishop of Canterbury is the recognized spiritual head of the church, though each church organization is self\-governing under its own archbishop. In addition to those churches, the Continuing Anglican Communion, established in 1977, is composed of churches which share the historic Anglican faith but reject the changes in the Episcopal Book of Common Prayer as well as the ordination of women and gays/lesbians to the clergy, and have thus severed their ties with the main church. The Anglican Church in North America, formed in 2009, has broken ties with the Anglican Communion over the issue of homosexuality and does not recognize the Archbishop of Canterbury as their leader. Joining the Anglican Church in North America are the Church of Nigeria, the Church of Uganda, the Episcopal Church of South Sudan, the Sudan Episcopal Church, and others.
|
What is Dare 2 Share? |
Answer
[Dare 2 Share (D2S)](http://www.dare2share.org/) is a non\-denominational youth ministry that trains teens to share the message of Jesus Christ with others of their generation. Dare 2 Share understands that many students leave the church after high school. With that in mind, the organization is convinced the answer lies in changing the focus of youth ministry from “reactive and entertainment\-based to Great Commission\-driven and Scripture\-based.” This is accomplished via impactful and high energy training conferences held nationally. Dare 2 Share also provides evangelism and discipleship training resources for students and youth group leaders. Many of their resources are available free of charge.
Dare 2 Share teaches teens to use the G\-O\-S\-P\-E\-L acronym to remember the core message of salvation. It helps teens share the life\-changing gospel with their friends.
G – God created us to be with Him (Psalm 100:3\).
O – Our sins separate us from God (Romans 3:23\).
S – Sins cannot be removed by good deeds (Romans 5:8\).
P – Paying the price for sin, Jesus died and rose again (Romans 5:8\).
E – Everyone who trusts in Him alone has eternal life (John 3:16\).
L – Life with Jesus starts now and lasts forever (John 10:28\).
The [Dare 2 Share statement of faith](http://www.dare2share.org/about/statement-of-faith/) is biblically solid. In summary, Dare 2 Share believes that the Bible is inspired by God and that God exists as a Trinity. They believe in the deity of Jesus Christ, His virgin birth, His death upon the cross and subsequent resurrection, and that salvation is only available through Him. They also affirm the eternal life of the saved and eternal punishment of the lost, and that Jesus will return personally and visibly to the earth.
The ministry began in 1991, but really took off following the 1999 Columbine High School shootings in Littleton, Colorado. Greg Stier, the founder of Dare 2 Share, was a local pastor, and the tragedy served as the pivotal turning point in his career. He resigned from the pastorate and began to pursue Dare 2 Share full\-time. He is now the president and also speaks at the Dare 2 Share conferences.
In addition to information about the organization itself, the Dare 2 Share website has links to free resources such as webinars, devotions, articles, evangelism instruction, and the like. There are various materials for sale, as well, such as conference curriculum, books, audio CDs, t\-shirts, and accessories. We recommend the Dare 2 Share app as a helpful resource for teens to understand the Great Commission and how to share their faith with their friends.
Dare 2 Share is a Bible\-believing organization with a mission of engaging teens in sharing the Christian message via age\-appropriate training and resources.
|
What is the blasphemy challenge? |
Answer
The “blasphemy challenge” is an internet\-based project started in December 2006 which invites young people to submit videos to Youtube or other video internet hosts, in which they record themselves blaspheming or denying the existence of the Holy Spirit. The first 1001 users who took the blasphemy challenge were sent a DVD of Flemming’s film “The God Who Wasn’t There.” Celebrity atheists such as Christopher Hitchens, Daniel Dennett, and Penn Jillette participated in the project. Behind the project is the Rational Response Squad, a group of atheists founded by Brian Sapient and Rook Hawkins.
Key to the motive behind the challenge, is the Rational Response Squad’s view of the so\-called [unpardonable sin](unpardonable-sin.html), specifically [blasphemy against the Holy Spirit](blasphemy-Holy-Spirit.html) (see Mark 3:28\-29 and Matthew 12:30\-32\). Users who took the challenge, therefore, saw themselves as crossing a point of no return, and would "accept the consequences" if the Christian God does indeed exist.
While blaspheming the Holy Spirit is a sin, the “blasphemy challenge” fails to understand what precisely is THE blasphemy of the Holy Spirit/unpardonable sin. Denying the existence of the Holy Spirit is not the unpardonable sin. Saying certain words that are insulting towards the Holy Spirit is not THE blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. Biblically speaking, THE blasphemy of the Holy Spirit was witnessing Jesus perform a miracle and attributing that power to Satan instead of the Holy Spirit. This specific blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, the unpardonable sin, cannot be committed today. The only unpardonable sin today is dying in hard\-hearted rejection of the salvation that is available through Jesus Christ. God can and will forgive any sin, but His offer of forgiveness is only available in this life.
To summarize, the blasphemy challenge is essentially a statement that a person is so confident God does not exist that he or she is willing to “risk it all” by committing a sin the Bible says God will not forgive. The problem is that the Rational Response Squad misunderstands what the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit was, and underestimates the extent of God’s love, mercy, grace, and forgiveness. As ridiculous, dangerous, and unwise as the blasphemy challenge is, participants are not committing an unforgivable sin. God can and will forgive the blasphemy challenge, just as He will forgive any other sin. [Got Forgiveness](got-forgiveness.html)?
Romans 1:21\-22 describes the Rational Response Squad quite accurately: “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...”
|
Can/should a Christian who is a virgin marry someone who is not a virgin? |
Answer
The ideal situation for Christian marriage is, of course, when both parties are virgins, having understood that marriage is the only place in God’s eyes for sexual relations. But we don’t live in an ideal world. Many times, a person raised in a godly home and saved from childhood wishes to marry someone who was saved in his or her 20s or 30s and who brings to the Christian marriage a past lived according to worldly standards. While God puts our sins as far from us as the east is from the west when we come to Him in repentance and faith in Christ (Psalm 103:12\), people have long memories and forgetting someone’s past may not be easy. The inability to forgive and forget the past mistakes of one of the marriage partners will definitely influence the marriage negatively.
Before entering a marriage with someone with a sexual past, it’s crucial to understand that salvation and forgiveness of sin are given to us by grace. "By grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, that no one should boast" (Ephesians 2:8\-9\). When we begin to understand what it means to be truly forgiven, we begin to see through God’s eyes how much He must love us, and that helps us forgive others. To forgive is to let go of the other person’s past and see him or her as a new creation (2 Corinthians 5:17\). Christ died for his/her sin, and the potential spouse now has to decide if the memory of that sin can be lived with. This is where doctrine moves from the theoretical to the practical.
In matters of forgiveness, it always helps to see our own pasts in God’s eyes. Sexual sin is certainly grievous to God, but so are lying, cheating, bad thoughts, drinking/smoking too much, impatience, pride, and unforgiveness. Who among us is without sin and can “cast the first stone”? Before coming to Christ, each of us is “dead in transgressions and sins” and is made alive only by God’s grace (Ephesians 2:1\-5\). The question is can we forgive others as Christ forgave us? Completely and from the heart? Being able to do so is a mark of a true Christian. Jesus said if we don’t forgive, neither will God forgive us (Matthew 6:14\-15\). He did not mean that forgiving others is a way of procuring God’s forgiveness, which we know is by grace alone, but that a forgiving heart is a sign of the presence of the Holy Spirit in the heart of a true believer. Continued unforgiveness is a sign of a hard, unregenerate heart.
Before entering into a marriage with a non\-virgin, much thought, prayer, and introspection are in order. James 1:5 tells us that if we seek wisdom, God will grant it freely to all who ask. Speaking with a godly pastor and being involved in a Bible\-teaching church will help in the decision\-making process. Some churches have excellent pre\-engagement classes. Also, talking freely and openly with the potential mate about these things may reveal things in both parties’ pasts that need to be addressed and forgiven.
Marriage is a challenge in the best of circumstances and takes a lot of work to make it successful. Both partners need, and deserve, to be loved unconditionally. Ephesians 5 describes the roles of both husband and wife in marriage, but the passage begins with the overriding principle for both: “Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ” (Ephesians 5:21\). Willing sacrifice and the strength to choose to be a servant to the betterment of the marriage are the marks of a maturing spiritual man and woman who honor God. Wisely choosing a spouse based upon biblical qualities is important, but of equal importance are our own ongoing spiritual growth and our surrender to God’s will in our lives. 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, despite their pasts, they will be able to build their marriage into a God\-honoring union that delights them both.
|
Is public confession necessary for salvation (Romans 10:9-10)? |
Answer
Romans 10:9\-10 is used by many well\-meaning Christians in an endeavor to bring someone to faith in Christ. “If you confess with your mouth, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved.”
This passage should not be understood to mean that we are saved by means of an audible profession of faith. We know that salvation is by grace through the gift of faith (Ephesians 2:8\-9\), not by words we speak. Therefore, as with all Scripture, context is of critical importance if we are to properly understand Romans 10\.
At the time of the writing of the [book of Romans](Book-of-Romans.html), for a person to accept Christ and confess Him as Lord typically resulted in persecution and, ultimately, death. At that time, to embrace Christ and confess Him as Lord, knowing that persecution was sure to come, was an indication of true salvation and the work of the Holy Spirit. Outward professions of faith are rare when one’s life is at stake, and no more so than in the early church. The phrase “you will be saved,” is not intended to reveal a condition for salvation by the public confession of a creed, but rather a definite fact that no one facing death would confess Christ as Lord unless indeed he or she was saved.
In Romans 10:10, we read, “For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved.” The original Greek carries the idea of “confirming” with the mouth what has taken place in the heart and being thankful for it.
Romans 10:13 says, “Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.” Verse 14, however, indicates that [calling upon the Lord](call-upon-the-name-of-the-Lord.html) is the privilege of those who are already redeemed: “How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in?” Further, verse 12 says, “For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek – for the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him.” Clearly, the phrase “richly blesses all who call on him” cannot be speaking of salvation, as those who “call” already “believe,” according to verse 14\.
To conclude, Romans 10:9\-10 is not establishing public confession as a prerequisite for salvation. Rather, it is asserting that, when someone trusted Christ and subsequently confessed Him as Lord, knowing that persecution was sure to come, that individual gave evidence of genuine salvation. Those who are saved will confess Christ as Lord because He has already instilled faith in their hearts. As with baptism and all good works, public confession is not the means of salvation; it is the evidence of salvation.
|
What is the best evidence/argument for intelligent design? |
Answer
Modern scientific insight has revealed startling evidence for intelligent design from various disciplines, from biology to astronomy, from physics to cosmology. The purpose of this article is to summarize some of the major arguments.
**What is the best evidence/argument for intelligent design? – From Biology**
In recent years, William Dembski has pioneered a methodology which has become known as the “explanatory filter,” a means by which design can be inferred from the phenomena of nature in particular living organisms. The filter consists of a sequence of three yes/no questions that guide the decision process of determining whether a given phenomenon can be attributed to an intelligent causal agency. Based upon this filter, if an event, system or object is the product of intelligence, then it will:
1\. Be contingent
2\. Be complex
3\. Display an independently specified pattern
Thus, in order to be confident that a given phenomenon is the product of intelligent design, it cannot be a regularity that necessarily stems from the laws of nature, nor can it be the result of chance. According to Dembski, the explanatory filter highlights the most important quality of intelligently designed systems, namely, specified complexity. In other words, complexity alone is not enough to indicate the work of an intelligent agent; it must also conform to an independently specified pattern.
Among the most compelling evidence for design in the realm of biology is the discovery of the digital information inherent in living cells. As it turns out, biological information comprises a complex, non\-repeating sequence which is highly specified relative to the functional or communication requirements that they perform. Such similarity explains, in part, Dawkins’ observation that, “*The machine code of the genes is uncannily computer\-like.*” What are we to make of this similarity between informational software—the undisputed product of conscious intelligence—and the informational sequences found in DNA and other important biomolecules?
**What is the best evidence/argument for intelligent design? – From Physics**
In physics, the concept of cosmic [fine tuning](fine-tuning-argument.html) gives further support to the design inference. The concept of cosmic fine tuning relates to a unique property of our universe whereby the physical constants and laws are observed to be balanced on a “razor’s edge” for permitting the emergence of complex life. The degree to which the constants of physics must match precise criteria is such that a number of agnostic scientists have concluded that, indeed, there is some sort of transcendent purpose behind the cosmic arena. British astrophysicist Fred Hoyle wrote, “A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super intellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question.”
One example of fine tuning is the rate at which the universe expands. This value must be delicately balanced to a precision of one part in 1055. If the universe expanded too quickly, matter would expand too quickly for the formation of stars, planets, and galaxies. If the universe expanded too slowly, the universe would quickly collapse before the formation of stars.
Besides that, the ratio of the electromagnetic force to gravity must be finely balanced to a degree of one part in 1040. If this value were to be increased slightly, all stars would be at least 40% more massive than our sun. This would mean that stellar burning would be too brief and too uneven to support complex life. If this value were to be decreased slightly, all stars would be at least 20% less massive than the sun. This would render them incapable of producing heavy elements necessary to sustain life.
**What is the best evidence/argument for intelligent design? – From Cosmology**
With modern discoveries in the field of cosmology, the concept of a definitive beginning of the cosmos has been demonstrated almost beyond question. The [Kalam](kalam-cosmological-argument.html) argument states that:
1\. Everything which begins to exist has a cause apart from itself
2\. The universe began to exist
3\. Therefore, the universe has a cause apart from itself
Today we have abundant data that the universe had a beginning. Given the Law of Causality, there must be an uncaused first cause existing outside of space and time. This first cause, being uncaused, must be eternal. Observations of the nature of the effect lead to the conclusion that the first cause must be intelligent and powerful enough to bring space, matter and even time itself into being.
**What is the best evidence/argument for intelligent design? – Conclusion**
This article is but a brief overview of some of the key elements involved in the design inference. The purpose is to demonstrate the wide body of support for intelligent design from a large range of disciplines, including biology, physics and cosmology.
|
Are there errors in the Qur'an (Koran)? |
Answer
Though Muslims often argue for the divine origin of the [Qur’an](what-is-the-Quran.html) on grounds that “no error, alteration, or variation” has touched its copies since its inception, such a view does not accurately represent the facts. While it is indeed correct to say that the Qur’an of today is a nearly perfect copy of its seventh\-century counterpart, the notion that these copies reflect the exact words as handed down by Muhammad is becoming increasingly problematic.
Historical sources prove that there were several different texts circulating in Syria, Iraq and Armenia prior to the final revision produced by Uthman. Zaid, Muhammad’s long\-time secretary, was called in by Uthman to oversee the final and definitive authorized version of the Qur’an. All other copies of the Qur’an were then burned so that there could be no challenge to the authorized text. It remains to be answered why Uthman would have had to produce an authorized version of the Qur’an, if indeed the Qur’an had been perfectly preserved from the beginning!
To quote Alfred Guillaume, one of the best\-known non\-Muslim scholars on Islam:
“Only the men of Kufa refused the new edition, and their version was certainly extant as late as A.D. 1000\. Uthman’s edition to this day remains the authoritative word of God to Muslims. Nevertheless, even now variant readings, involving not only different readings of the vowels but also occasionally a different consonantal text, are recognized as of equal authority one with another!”
When one compares the different transmitted versions of the Qur’an, it becomes evident that there are, in fact, variants among them. While these variants usually involve differences in individual letters, vowels or diacritical marks, the Muslim claim of perfect unity in the copies of the Qur’an is incorrect.
Moreover, since part of the Islamic claim is that God has been giving revelations to mankind throughout history, including the Psalms of David and the four Gospels, one wonders why it is claimed that Allah miraculously preserved the Qur’an in infallible copies, whereas Allah was apparently singularly incapable of accomplishing the same feat with the previous revelations.
Let us weigh the validity of the claim at hand. Just how excellent is the literary quality? Ali Dashti, himself a committed Shiite Muslim, wrote, “The Qur’an contains sentences which are incomplete and not fully intelligible without the aid of commentaries; foreign words, unfamiliar Arabic words, and words used with other than the normal meaning; adjectives and verbs inflected without observance of the concord of gender and number; illogical and ungrammatically applied pronouns which in rhymed passages are often remote from the subjects. These and other such aberrations in the language have given scope to critics who deny the Qur’an’s eloquence. . . . To sum up, more than 100 Qur’anic aberrations from the normal rules and structure of Arabic have been noted” (G. Allen \& Unwin, 1985, p. 47\). With all the linguistic “aberrations” and instances of incorrect grammar, the Qur’an can hardly claim to be flawless.
**Are there errors in the Qur’an? – What about fulfilled prophecy?**
Islamic apologists make the claim that the Qur’an predicts Muslims would be victorious at home and abroad (Surah 30:1\-5\). But this can hardly be utilized as an argument for a divine origin. The prediction that Muslims would be militarily victorious (especially when one considers Muhammad’s overwhelming military force) is not very impressive.
Not only is the time between these predictions and their subsequent fulfillment almost nil, but some argue the prediction of Islamic victory is better understood as a pre\-battle victory speech from Muhammad to boost the morale of his troops.
Islamic prophecy does not even come close to the level of the prophecies in the Bible, many of which were written hundreds of years in advance, such as the prediction that Jesus would be born in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2\).
**Are there errors in the Qur’an? – What about scientific insights?**
In *A Brief Illustrated Guide to Understanding Islam*, Islamic apologist I. A. Ibrahim argues:
“The Qur’an, which was revealed fourteen centuries ago, mentioned facts only recently discovered or proven by scientists. This proves without doubt that the Qur’an must be the literal word of God, revealed by him to the Prophet Muhammad, and that the Qur’an was not authored by Muhammad or by any other human being.”
How valid is this claim? First, conformity to science is not proof of divine inspiration. As modern scientists will admit, scientific models are constantly changing, so they are not an absolute gauge for what is true or false. Second, there are some highly suspect scientific statements in the Qur’an which are ignored by modern Islamic apologists. For example, Surah 23:14 makes the claim that human beings are formed from a clot of blood. Surah 18:86 claims that the sun sets in a spring of murky water. Clearly, even if the claims with respect to scientific insights were valid, the above statements would immediately falsify any such notion of divine inspiration.
**Are there errors in the Qur’an? – Are there historical inaccuracies?**
While the list of historical inaccuracies and anachronisms is vast, one has been selected for discussion here. Surah 20 relays the incident of the golden calf. In Surah 20:85\-88, 95 we read:
“He \[Allah] said, ‘We have tempted thy people since thou didist leave them. The Samaratin has led them into error.’ Then Moses returned…and we cast them \[(gold) ornaments], as the Samaritan also threw them, into the fire.’ (Then he brought out for them a Calf, a mere body that lowed; and they said, ‘This is your god, and the god of Moses, whom he has forgotten.’)…Moses said, ‘And thou, Samaritan, what was thy business?’”
Now, let us consider this for just a moment. How can a Samaritan have led the Israelites astray at the time of Moses (approx 1400 B.C.) when the city of Samaria was founded by King Omri about 870 B.C.? The Samaritans did not exist until after the exile of the Northern Kingdom of Israel and the resettlement of the area under King Sargon II in 722 B.C. with non\-Israelites who then adopted a syncretism (mixture) between the religion of the Jews and their own polytheistic background. The Samaritans did not exist until 530 years after Moses. By this mistake alone, the Qur’an can be rendered unreliable and certainly not an inerrant work of God.
**Are there errors in the Qur’an? – Conclusion**
Having outlined just a handful of many problems and difficulties pertaining to the Qur’an as a divinely inspired work, we are all but forced to reject the Islamic claim that the Qur’an represents an error\-free word of God to humanity. When a similar standard is applied to the Bible, the result is self\-vindicating, for the Bible emerges flawless.
|
What is the meaning of the word hallelujah? |
Answer
The word *hallelujah* is most familiar in the context of the “Hallelujah Chorus” from Handel’s *Messiah*. *Hallelujah* is a Hebrew word meaning “praise ye YAH (Yahweh).” *Hallelujah*, as a transliteration, appears four times in the NIV and NASB (Revelation 19:1–6\)—it takes the form “alleluia” in the King James Version. In modern parlance, both *hallelujah* and *alleluia* mean “praise the Lord,” a phrase that appears, in English, over fifty times in the Old Testament and once in the New Testament.
The word *hallelujah* in Revelation 19 is used in heaven, where a great multitude has gathered before the throne in the immediate presence of God Himself. It is the [wedding supper of the Lamb](marriage-supper-Lamb.html). The enemies of God have been overthrown, and the gospel has triumphed. In a victory celebration, all heaven renders praise, a song of thanksgiving uttered by all holy beings united. Reasons for this glorious outpouring of praise are God’s righteous victory over His enemies (Revelation 19:1–3\), His sovereignty (verses 4–6\), and His eternal communion with His people (verse 7\). The sound of the outpouring of praise and worship is so overwhelming that the apostle John can only describe it as “like a great multitude, like the roar of rushing waters and like loud peals of thunder” (verse 6\).
So great is the rejoicing by God’s people at the wedding feast of the Bridegroom (Christ) and the [bride](bride-of-Christ.html) (the church) that *hallelujah* is the only word grand enough to express it. Handel’s version of the great chorus in heaven, as glorious as that music is, is only a feeble foreshadowing of the magnificence that will be expressed by the heavenly chorus as we sing, “Hallelujah, for the Lord God omnipotent reigns!”
|
What is presuppositional apologetics? |
Answer
Presuppositional apologetics is an approach to apologetics which aims to present a rational basis for the Christian faith and defend it against objections by exposing the logical flaws of other worldviews and hence demonstrating that biblical theism is the only worldview which can make consistent sense of reality.
Presuppositional apologetics does not discount the use of evidence, but such evidences are not used in the traditional manner—that is, an appeal to the authority of the unbeliever’s autonomous reason. Presuppositional apologetics holds that without a Christian worldview there is no consistent basis upon which to assume the possibility of autonomous reason. When the materialist attempts to refute Christianity by appeal to deductive reason, he is, in fact, borrowing from the Christian worldview, hence being inconsistent with his stated presuppositions.
The presuppositional approach to apologetics calls for the Christian and non\-Christian to engage in an internal examination of their respective worldview and thus determine whether or not they are internally consistent. The essence of presuppositional apologetics is an attempt to demonstrate that the non\-Christian’s worldview forces him to a state of subjectivity, irrationalism, and moral anarchy.
Since the unbeliever’s worldview is objectively false, by necessity it contains demonstrable contradictions (e.g., he makes moral judgments, but he cannot account for moral absolutes without the Christian/theistic worldview). The believer, within the Christian framework, can account for things like rationality, logic, uniformity of nature, morality, science, etc., because the Christian worldview conforms to a transcendent reality.
In summary, the presuppositional apologist engages in an internal critique of a given worldview in order to demonstrate that it is arbitrary, inconsistent within itself, and lacks the preconditions for epistemology. The presuppositional apologist can thus take a given value which is held by the unbeliever and demonstrate to him that if his own worldview were true, that very belief would be incoherent and/or meaningless. Presuppositional apologetics seeks to prove Christianity with reference to the impossibility of the contrary. In other words, unless the Christian worldview is presupposed—whether at a conscious or subconscious level—there is no possibility for proving anything.
|
What is the New Atheism? |
Answer
The early 21st century has seen secularism and atheism promoted throughout the Western world with an ever\-increasing vigor and militancy. This has led to the emergence of the “new atheists,” notable members of which include best\-selling authors such as Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett, Richard Dawkins, and Christopher Hitchens.
The contention of the new atheists is, obviously, that there is no God. Adherents to the philosophy of new atheism believe that blind, natural forces are responsible for all of reality that we perceive. The new atheists do not restrict themselves to a passive disbelief. Rather, they are actively engaged in admonishing others to follow suit, to declare their non\-belief in God, and to take the necessary steps to rid the world of religious belief and practice. As outspoken atheist Richard Dawkins puts it in *The God Delusion*, “I do everything in my power to warn people against faith itself.”
An ironic feature of the new atheism is its strong faith in the inferiority of having faith. The new atheists erroneously redefine "faith" as an "irrational belief in the absence of evidence." This misrepresentation of the nature of faith is absurd, for faith is not essentially a strong belief in some*thing*, but rather the ground of Christian faith is believing in some*one*—God. A.W. Tozer said, “Faith rests upon the character of God, not upon the demonstration of laboratory or logic.” When one has faith in the character of a person, e.g. a mother or an aircraft pilot, one no longer needs to be skeptical or require strong evidence in respect to any service that he or she renders.
When it comes to *things*, Christians correctly approach the subject looking for strong evidence, while accepting that some matters may be beyond our current understanding. Indeed, many faith\-filled scientists have been at the cutting edge of the scientific enterprise and test the evidence using thorough methods and techniques. The new atheists believe that empirical science is the only path to understanding reality. However, this is erroneous, since the very concept of "[scientism](scientism.html)" (the view that science is the only way to gain knowledge) is not itself subject to any scientific experiment and ultimately distills to a faith. Faith, far from being an "irrational belief in the absence of evidence," is a decision to reckon as true something that is not visible. Scientism is a metaphysical concept. Thus, the new atheists require faith of some description, even if not in God. Scientism is self\-refuting, and thus should not be believed. Scientism could be summed up as the belief that “empirical science is the only way to be sure about anything.” Of course, we might well then ask, “What was the scientific experiment that established that empirical science is the only way to be sure about anything?”
In contrast, theism is aligned with the reality of a transcendent God. Biblical theism is based around a set of sensible concepts, one of which is that there is no such thing as an atheist. Clearly the atheists have faith of a sort, if only in their power to influence others to join their atheistic pursuits. Romans 1:19–20 declares plainly that all men do know God exists because God has clearly revealed that knowledge to them through the evidence of creation. Those who deny God are doing so out of the rebellion of a darkened heart (Romans 1:21\). The self\-described atheist may imagine himself to be an intellectual, but God has pronounced, “The fool says in his heart ‘there is no god’” (Psalm 14:1; 53:1\).
|
How can I recover from heartbreak? |
Answer
The dictionary defines *heartbreak* as “crushing grief, anguish, or distress.” In today’s world, the term *brokenhearted* usually describes someone who has suffered a failed relationship or loss of a loved one. A search of the internet makes it appear as though almost all heartbreak comes from divorce or being dropped by a lover. But a broken heart may be brought on by a myriad of causes such as disappointment in a child’s lifestyle, loss of possession, loss of job, etc. Whatever the cause, the pain of a broken heart can be enormous.
Worldly advice for handling the pain may include writing an angry letter and tearing it up, going on a shopping spree, getting a makeover, drinking wine, eating chocolate, taking medication, etc. Some would advocate the power of positive thinking. The most common "cure" is time. The world’s focus is on feelings, but God looks at the heart (1 Samuel 16:7\). While the non\-Christian may sense a waning in intensity of heartbreak, only a Christian can experience complete recovery because only the Christian has access to the power of the Spirit of God who alone “heals the brokenhearted and binds up their wounds" (Psalm 147:3\).
The events in Job’s life may be the earliest biblical record of heartbreak. In one day Job lost his children, almost all worldly possessions, his health, and his means of livelihood. What was Job’s response? "Then Job arose and tore his robe and shaved his head and fell on the ground and worshiped. And he said, ‘Naked I came from my mother’s womb, and naked shall I return. The LORD gave, and the LORD has taken away; blessed be the name of the LORD'" (Job 1:20\-21\). Job grieved. Yet, he worshiped God and remained faithful. Although he had doubts as to God’s goodness in these terrible events, through the trial he grew closer to God through God’s revelation of Himself (Job 42:1\-5\). Job learned what all believers can learn through heartbreak—God is faithful and good and trustworthy.
David, a man after God’s own heart, suffered many heartbreaking circumstances. Each time, he recovered and was an even stronger man of God. Psalm 34 gives an example of how David overcame heartbreak by calling on the Lord. Notice the first step: "I sought the Lord, and he answered me and delivered me from all my fears" (Psalm 34:4\). David knew "the Lord is near to the brokenhearted and saves the crushed in spirit" (Psalm 34:18\). Finally, he expressed a confidence in the love of God that every believer should have: "Many are the afflictions of the righteous, but the Lord delivers him out of them all" (Psalm 34:19\).
One might ask in a moment of despair, "He may have helped David, but does God care about me?" The answer is He absolutely does! "He who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all, how will he not also with him graciously give us all things?" (Romans 8:32\). What a comfort to know that God "will never leave you nor forsake you" (Hebrews 13:5\). God is always near to comfort the believer. "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies and God of all comfort, who comforts us in all our affliction" (2 Corinthians 1:3\-4\). God, who cannot lie, has promised to go through our trials with us. "When you pass through the waters, I will be with you; and through the rivers, they shall not overwhelm you; when you walk through fire you shall not be burned, and the flame shall not consume you" (Isaiah 43:2\).
God never failed one of His people when they cried out to Him, and He will not fail the heartbroken Christian who cries out to Him today. He may not always answer exactly in the way we would like, but He answers according to His perfect will and timing and, while we are waiting for the answer, His grace is sufficient (2 Corinthians 12:9\).
Finally, those who belong to Christ and are enduring heartbreak must know that God loves them and that His love is unconditional. Imagine the grief God the Father endured as He witnessed the crucifixion of His Son on the cross. What amazing love! That same God is there to comfort the brokenhearted and restore the joy of their salvation.
|
What does the Bible say about managing/controlling emotions? |
Answer
What would humans be like if we never became emotional, if we were capable of controlling emotions at all times? Perhaps we would be like Mr. Spock on *Star Trek*, as his responses to all situations seem to be purely logical, never emotional. But God created us in His image, and God’s emotions are revealed in the Scriptures; therefore, God created us as emotional beings. We feel love, joy, happiness, guilt, anger, disappointment, fear, etc. Sometimes our emotions are pleasant to experience and sometimes not. Sometimes our emotions are grounded in truth, and sometimes they are “false” in that they are based upon false premises. For example, if we falsely believe that God is not in control of the circumstances of our lives, we may experience the emotions of fear or despair or anger based on that false belief. Regardless, emotions are powerful and real to the one feeling them. And emotions can be helpful indicators of what is going on in our hearts.
That being said, it is important that we learn about managing emotions rather than allowing our emotions to manage us. For example, when we feel angry, it is important to be able to stop, identify that we are angry, examine our hearts to determine why we are angry, and then proceed in a biblical manner. Out\-of\-control emotions tend not to produce God\-honoring results: “Human anger does not produce the righteousness that God desires” (James 1:20\).
Our emotions, like our minds and bodies, are influenced greatly by the fall of mankind into sin. In other words, our emotions are tainted by our sin nature, and that is why they need controlling. The Bible tells us we are to be controlled by the Holy Spirit (Romans 6; Ephesians 5:15–18; 1 Peter 5:6–11\), not by our emotions. If we recognize our emotions and bring them to God, we can then submit our hearts to Him and allow Him to do His work in our hearts and direct our actions. At times, this may mean God simply comforts us, reassures us, and reminds us we need not fear. Other times, He may prompt us to forgive or to ask for forgiveness. The psalms are an excellent example of managing emotions and bringing our emotions to God. Many psalms are filled with raw emotion, but the emotion is poured out to God in an attempt to seek His truth and righteousness.
Sharing our feelings with others is also helpful in managing emotions. The Christian life is not meant to be lived alone. God has given us the gift of other believers who can share our burdens and whose burdens we share (Romans 12; Galatians 6:1–10; 2 Corinthians 1:3–5; Hebrews 3:13\). Fellow believers can also remind us of God’s truth and offer new perspective. When we are feeling discouraged or afraid, we can benefit from the encouragement, [exhortation](definition-exhortation.html), and reassurance other believers provide. Often, when we encourage others, we ourselves are encouraged. Likewise, when we are joyful, our joy usually increases when we share it.
Allowing our emotions to control us is not godly. Denying or vilifying our emotions is not godly, either. We should thank God for our ability to feel emotion and steward our emotions as a gift from God. The way to manage our emotions is to grow in our walk with God. We are transformed through the renewal of our minds (Romans 12:1–2\) and the power of the Holy Spirit—the One who produces in us self\-control (Galatians 5:23\). We need daily input of scriptural principles, a desire to grow in the knowledge of God, and time spent meditating on God’s attributes. We should seek to know more of God and share more of our hearts with God through prayer. Christian fellowship is another important part of spiritual growth. We journey with fellow believers and help one another grow in faith as well as in emotional maturity.
|
Did the Israelites in the book of Exodus cross the Red Sea or the Reed Sea? |
Answer
Moses’ song of praise after the crossing of the Red Sea contains this line: “Pharaoh’s chariots and his army he has hurled into the sea. The best of Pharaoh’s officers are drowned in the Red Sea” (Exodus 15:4\). This is one of over twenty Old Testament verses dealing with the Exodus that mention the Red Sea. There has always been a question, though, about the accuracy of translating these verses with “Red Sea” instead of “Reed Sea.”
The Hebrew word *suph*, whose root is thought to be of Egyptian origin, meant “reed,” especially the papyrus. So the Hebrew phrase *yam suph* can be translated “Sea of Reeds” or “Reed Sea” or even “Papyrus Marsh.” Is this phrase, commonly translated “Red Sea,” in fact referring to what today is known as the Red Sea or is it some other body of water? More importantly, are the liberal scholars correct in saying *yam suph* refers to a marshy area near the Rea Sea or some small, shallow lake nearby? These questions are crucial because, if the Israelites escaped Egypt without God’s miraculous intervention, then the Bible contains exaggerations and lies.
When we look at the various passages of Scripture where the term *yam suph* is used, it becomes clear that it is indeed referring to the large body of water: “The waters were divided, and the Israelites went through the sea on dry ground, with a wall of water on their right and on their left” (Exodus 14:21–22\). The “wall of water” on each side of the Israelites certainly suggests depth. Later, “the sea went back to its place. . . . The water flowed back and covered the chariots and horsemen—the entire army of Pharaoh that had followed the Israelites into the sea. Not one of them survived” (verses 27–28\). There can be no doubt about what Moses is communicating here. Red Sea or Reed Sea, it was deep enough to destroy the entire Egyptian army. All the credit for this miraculous event is given to the Lord (Exodus 15:3\), and it is referenced often in Scripture as an example of God’s great power (Joshua 2:10; Nehemiah 9:9; Psalm 106:9–12; 136:13–14\).
Exodus 14 clearly describes a supernatural event involving a deep body of water that Israel [crossed on dry ground](parting-Red-Sea.html) and that later drowned the Egyptians. Whether the Israelites called it the Red Sea or the Reed Sea, the only way to look at that chapter and see a shallow lake or marshy area is to have a preconceived bias against the miraculous. Exodus gives us a clear understanding that the body of water the Israelites crossed was large and deep. The Red Sea surely fits that description.
In support of “Red Sea” being the correct translation and the correct body of water is the Greek Septuagint (LXX) from 200 BC. This is the earliest translation of the Hebrew Bible known, and the words *yam suph* are consistently translated with the Greek words *eruthros thalassa* or “Red Sea” (see Acts 7:36; Hebrews 11:29\). In Exodus 2:3 and 5, the translators of the LXX used *hélos* to refer to a marshy, reedy area. But when it came time to translate *suph* in the context of the exodus through the sea, they chose a different phrase (*eruthros thalassa*), which specifically means “Red Sea.” The translators of the LXX obviously understood Moses to be referring to the Red Sea, not some other body of water.
When the LXX is quoted in the New Testament, the biblical writers, under inspiration of the Holy Spirit, retained the Greek words meaning “Red Sea” (not “Reed Sea”). One example is in Stephen’s sermon in Acts 7:36\. Also, Hebrews 11:29 says, “By faith the people passed through the Red Sea as on dry land; but when the Egyptians tried to do so, they were drowned.” These New Testament passages provide strong proof that “Red Sea” is the correct translation.
Further evidence that *yam suph* can indeed refer to the Red Sea comes from 1 Kings 9:26\. There we see King Solomon building a fleet of ships on the shore of the Rea Sea/Reed Sea in the land of Edom—hardly practical if that body of water were merely a marshy area or small, shallow lake.
Even if we choose the translation “Reed Sea” over “Red Sea,” there are several possible bodies of water near Egypt that the Israelites could have crossed. Some scholars point to the Gulf of Suez or the Gulf of Aqaba (both are extensions of the Red Sea) as possible crossing sites. Moving north of the Gulf of Suez is the Bitter Lakes region, and north of that is Lake Timsah. Other scholars have suggested a body of water in the Nile Delta region.
Regardless of the way the words *yam suph* are translated, the Bible is clear that God supernaturally parted a large body of water so the Israelites could cross on dry land, and, when the Egyptian army attempted to follow, He destroyed them in an overwhelming flood.
|
How should Christian parents respond if a child has a learning disability? |
Answer
It seems that today more and more parents in the western world are saying, “My child has a learning disability!” In western society more and more children are being identified as having ADD, ADHD, or being diagnosed as afflicted with autism or some sort of mental condition that makes them unable to relate to others or develop “normally.” This is a scary reality, and believers are not exempt from these things. How should believers respond when faced with these issues?
The only lasting formula for responding to the issues of living in our fallen world is to choose to walk by faith. That sounds very trite and over\-simplified for parents who are desperately searching for answers, but for the believer, it is the only answer. In fact, for the believer the hope of God’s grace through faith is the one true foundation we can stand on when our child is in crisis and we cannot fix things with a kiss and a band aid.
If a child breaks a leg or an arm, a trip to the hospital corrects the break. It is not left to heal on its own and be a lifelong issue that the child must deal with. It is our calling as parents to nurture our children in the Lord in every aspect of their lives, not for our convenience, but for their spiritual good. So if a child has a learning disability or has trouble maintaining attention or behaving appropriately due to being autistic or to having some mental disability, we do not leave that child to flounder. Rather, we do as much as we can with as much love as we can for as long as we can without regard to the cost. There are resources available through organizations dedicated to research and support for each disability. A great deal more is known about how children learn than ever before, and much more help is available now than ever before. For some there is only the help and comfort of church and family to come alongside with resources and practical help. That means we reach out and do not isolate ourselves from God’s people. The “one another” commands are a great resource in time of need (1 Corinthians 12:25; Galatians 6:2; 1 Thessalonians 5:11; 1 Peter 3:8\).
Conditions such as autism are not a reflection on us as parents or the result of something we did or did not do, nor are they something we somehow deserve. Just as no one “deserves” cancer, no child or parent deserves autism or mental retardation. The child with a disability is just as precious to the Lord as any other child (Matthew 19:14\). In this world, there is no rhyme or reason why one child is afflicted and another is not. We live in a fallen world and the infirmity of the flesh can manifest itself in devastating ways. It is God’s amazing grace alone that overcomes the sad realities of a world tainted by sin. Indeed, one wonders how those who are not believers cope with these issues without the grace of God in their lives.
So the believer responds to their child’s learning disability with faith and puts that faith into action, bathing that child with love and acceptance at every opportunity. We enlist family, the church family, and every other resource available to help. We ask others to pray for us and help us through this time, all the while understanding that none of this is out of God’s control.
We can ask, “Why my child, Lord?” and “Why would a loving God allow this?” That is normal and natural and the answer is that God uses the details of this earthly life to demonstrate His provisions and grace and, ultimately, to glorify Himself. As believers, we are given a higher calling and a greater resource (1 Corinthians 1:26\-30\). The Apostle Paul declares that God displays His might and power through men and there is no unrighteousness in His purpose (Romans 9:14\-23\). We may not understand, but He will use the details of our lives to build in us His good and His glory. Therefore, when undeserved suffering comes to our children, the correct response of believing parents is to use God’s resources to stand by faith and leave the rest in His hands.
|
What is the meaning of the term Shiloh? |
Answer
The word *Shiloh* appears 33 times in the Old Testament, and all but one usage refer to a city in Ephraim, about 24 miles north of Jerusalem. Joshua, Eli, and Samuel were all associated with Shiloh, and the tabernacle was located there for a long time.
One verse in the Bible mentions *Shiloh* as part of a messianic prophecy. Genesis 49:10 says,
“The scepter shall not depart from Judah,
Nor a lawgiver from between his feet,
Until Shiloh comes;
And to Him shall be the obedience of the people” (NKJV).
This verse is part of [Jacob’s](life-Jacob.html) blessing of his 12 sons in which he portrays the future history of each son and each of the 12 tribes of Israel.
The blessing on Judah and his tribe contains several elements:
• Judah’s descendants would be strong and receive praise and honor from the other tribes of Israel (Genesis 49:8\). This was fulfilled in David, a strong and mighty warrior and king, and ultimately by the [Messiah](what-does-Messiah-mean.html), who came from the line of Judah.
• The tribe of Judah is likened to a lion, both young and old (Genesis 49:9\). Again, this blessing has its ultimate fulfillment in Jesus Christ, the “Lion of the tribe of Judah” (Revelation 5:5\).
• The tribe of Judah would experience prosperity and peace and health (Genesis 49:11\). This is likely a prophecy concerning the [millennium](millennium.html). That will be a time of peace (Micah 4:2–4; Isaiah 32:17–18\), joy (Isaiah 61:7, 10\), comfort (Isaiah 40:1–2\), and no poverty or sickness (Amos 9:13–15; Joel 2:28–29\).
In Genesis 49:10, we find the reference to Shiloh. “Shiloh” (as translated by the NASB and NKJV) is someone predicted to come from the tribe of Judah. Other translations give this person’s title as “he to whom \[the ruler’s staff] belongs” (NIV), “Shiloh \[the Messiah, the Peaceful One]” (AMP), and “he whose right it is” (CSB). Prior to Shiloh’s coming, the tribe of Judah would continue to maintain power and strength, signified by the scepter—the symbol of authority and rule of law. This began in David, who was of the tribe of Judah, and continued to the Babylonian captivity. But, notably, the first governor of Judah after the captivity ended was [Zerubbabel](Zerubbabel-in-the-Bible.html), who was of the tribe of Judah.
*Shiloh* is best interpreted as the Messiah. It is the Messiah who has the true right to take the throne and hold the scepter (John 18:36–37; Psalm 2:7–9\). It is the Messiah who, at His second coming, will have the people’s obedience (Daniel 7:13–14; Isaiah 2:2\). It is the Messiah, the [Lion of Judah](lion-tribe-Judah.html), who will rule the whole world (Revelation 11:15\) and preside over a time of unprecedented blessing and peace on earth (Isaiah 11:6–13; Micah 4:1–5\).
|
What is the biblical way to lead a child to Christ? |
Answer
There are three basic elements involved in leading a child to a saving relationship with Christ: prayer, example, and age\-appropriate instruction. We lead a child to Christ through the diligent application of all three elements from the time before the child is born.
The importance of prayer in the process of evangelizing children cannot be overstated. From the time of conception, parents should be seeking God’s wisdom for themselves and grace for their unborn child. God has promised to give wisdom liberally to all who ask Him (James 1:5\), and His wisdom in all aspects of parenting is essential, but nowhere is it more important than in spiritual matters. Ephesians 2:8\-9 tells us that salvation is by grace through the gift of faith, so our prayers for our children’s salvation should be centered upon seeking that gift of faith for them. We should pray for the Holy Spirit to draw our children to God from their earliest days and to sustain them through a life of faith and service to God until they are safely secure in heaven for all eternity (Ephesians 1:13\-14\). We should pray that God will draw us to Himself and become a reality in our lives so that we can be good role models for our children.
Our example as children of God provides the best visual model of the relationship with Christ we wish our children to have. When our children see us on our knees daily, they perceive that prayer is a regular part of life. When they see us continually in the Scriptures, studying, feeding and meditating on God’s Word, they realize the importance of the Bible without our having to say a word. When they perceive that we not only know God’s Word, but endeavor to live it out in practical ways every day, they come to understand the power of the Word in a life lived in its light. Conversely, if a child sees that mom or dad has a Sunday “persona” which differs drastically from the person they see every day, they will be quick to spot the hypocrisy. Many children have been ‘turned off’ to church and to Christ by two\-faced role models. This is not to say that God can’t overrule our faults and failures, but we must be ready to confess them to God, admit our failures to our children, and make every effort to “walk the talk.”
Furthermore, providing age\-appropriate instruction in spiritual matters is crucial to leading a child to Christ. There are myriads of children’s books and resources such as children’s Bibles, children’s Bible story books and music for all age levels to read, sing and memorize. Relating every aspect of a child’s life to spiritual truth is also an important part of spiritual training. Every time a child sees a flower or a sunset or a bird, there is ample opportunity for parents to relate the beauty and wonder of God’s creative power (Psalm 19:1\-6\). Whenever our children feel safe and secure in our love, we have the opportunity to relate to them how much greater the love of their heavenly Father is. When they are hurt by others, we can explain the reality of sin and the only cure for it—the Lord Jesus Christ and His sacrifice on the cross for us.
Finally, sometimes an inordinate amount of importance is placed on getting a child to “say the prayer” or “walk the aisle” as evidence of his/her decision to trust Christ as Savior. While these moments can be valuable in cementing in a child’s mind when and how he/she came to Christ, salvation is the Spirit’s work in a heart. True salvation results in a life of progressive sanctification and discipleship, and this must be communicated as well.
|
What is the Episcopal Church, and what do Episcopalians believe? |
Answer
The Episcopal Church, USA (ECUSA) is the official organization of the Anglican Communion in the United States. Most of the earliest Colonists to America were Anglican Puritans, and the Anglican Church became the established church of Virginia, Maryland, New York, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia during the Colonial Period. After the American Revolution, the Anglican Church in America formed an independent body in 1789 and called itself the Protestant Episcopal Church. On their website, the ECUSA is described as a “middle way between Roman Catholic and Protestant traditions.” Like the Catholic Church, the Episcopal Church upholds the sacraments as essential to salvation, and like Protestant churches, it denies the supremacy of the Pope as the Vicar of Christ on earth.
The word *Episcopal* comes from the Greek word that is usually translated “bishop” and points to the church’s understanding that a bishop is the primary ruler of the church. Under the episcopal form of government, the bishop’s authority is equal to that of the apostles and follows a line of succession by the laying on of hands in ordination. Priests come under the authority of the bishops and are responsible for the teaching and administration of the local churches. Throughout the history of the ECUSA, their doctrine and practice have been generally in line with that of the Anglican Church.
Over the years, the Episcopal Church has gradually accepted changes that have strained its ties with the Anglican Communion and have even resulted in schisms. In 1873, the Reformed Episcopal Church was formed over disagreements about the freedom to worship with non\-Anglicans. In 2006, Jefferts Schori was elected as the Presiding Bishop of the ECUSA, the first woman to hold that office. That election strained ties with the Anglican Communion, as no other church body recognizes the ordination of women as bishops. Bishop Schori has made history in other ways, as well. While the Bishop of Nevada, she allowed for the blessing of same\-sex unions in her diocese. When openly gay Bishop Gene Robinson was examined for qualification to continue in ministry, Bishop Schori voted to confirm him. At the 2009 meeting of the House of Bishops, over which Schori presided, that body voted that “any ordained ministry” should be open to gay and lesbian members as long as they were in a committed relationship. As a result of these positions on homosexuals in the church, nearly 700 dissenting parishes have formed the Anglican Church in North America, which has been recognized in full communion by the Anglican Churches of Nigeria and Uganda, which represent about 1/3 of all Anglicans worldwide. Several dioceses have also severed ties or threatened to sever ties with the ECUSA over that same issue.
Though there may be genuine disciples of Christ within the Episcopal Church, it seems that the general characteristic of the church is like the people that Ezekiel ministered to: “My people come to you, as they usually do, and sit before you to listen to your words, but they do not put them into practice. With their mouths they express devotion, but their hearts are greedy for unjust gain. Indeed, to them you are nothing more than one who sings love songs with a beautiful voice and plays an instrument well, for they hear your words but do not put them into practice” (Ezekiel 33:31\-32\).
|
What are the different English Bible versions? |
Answer
Depending on how one distinguishes a different Bible version from a revision of an existing Bible version, there are as many as 50 different English versions of the Bible. The question then arises: Is there really a need for so many different English versions of the Bible? The answer is, of course, no, there is no need for 50 different English versions of the Bible. This is especially true considering that there are hundreds of languages into which the entire Bible has not yet been translated. At the same time, there is nothing wrong with there being multiple versions of the Bible in a language. In fact, multiple versions of the Bible can actually be an aid in understanding the message of the Bible.
There are two primary reasons for the different English Bible versions. (1\) Over time, the English language changes/develops, making updates to an English version necessary. If a modern reader were to pick up a 1611 King James Version of the Bible, he would find it to be virtually unreadable. Everything from the spelling, to syntax, to grammar, to phraseology is very different. Linguists state that the English language has changed more in the past 400 years than the Greek language has changed in the past 2,000 years. Several times in church history, believers have gotten “used” to a particular Bible version and become fiercely loyal to it, resisting any attempts to update/revise it. This occurred with the Septuagint, the Latin Vulgate, and more recently, the King James Version. Fierce loyalty to a particular version of the Bible is illogical and counterproductive. When the Bible was written, it was written in the common language of the people at that time. When the Bible is translated, it should be translated into how a people/language group speaks/reads at that time, not how it spoke hundreds of years ago.
(2\) There are different translation methodologies for how to best render the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek into English. Some Bible versions translate as literally (word\-for\-word) as possible, commonly known as formal equivalence. Some Bible versions translate less literally, in more of a thought\-for\-thought method, commonly known as [dynamic equivalence](dynamic-equivalence.html). All of the different English Bible versions are at different points of the formal equivalence vs. dynamic equivalence spectrum. The New American Standard Bible and the King James Version would be to the far end of the formal equivalence side, while paraphrases such as The Living Bible and The Message would be to the far end of the dynamic equivalence side.
The advantage of formal equivalence is that it minimizes the translator inserting his/her own interpretations into the passages. The disadvantage of formal equivalence is that it often produces a translation so woodenly literal that it is not easily readable/understandable. The advantage of dynamic equivalence is that it usually produces a more readable/understandable Bible version. The disadvantage of dynamic equivalence is that it sometimes results in “this is what I think it means” instead of “this is what it says.” Neither method is right or wrong. The best Bible version is likely produced through a balance of the two methodologies.
Listed below are the most common English versions of the Bible. In choosing which Bible version(s) you are going to use/study, do research, discuss with Christians you respect, read the Bibles for yourself, and ultimately, ask God for wisdom regarding which Bible version He desires you to use.
[King James Version (KJV)](King-James-Version-KJV.html)
[New International Version (NIV)](New-International-Version-NIV.html)
[New American Standard Bible (NASB)](New-American-Standard-Bible-NASB.html)
[New King James Version (NKJV)](New-King-James-Version-NKJV.html)
[English Standard Version (ESV)](English-Standard-Version-ESV.html)
[New Living Translation (NLT)](New-Living-Translation-NLT.html)
[Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB)](Christian-Standard-Bible-CSB.html)
[New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)](New-Revised-Standard-Version-NRSV.html)
[New Century Version (NCV)](New-Century-Version-NCV.html)
[What is *The Voice* translation of the Bible?](The-Voice-translation.html)
[New English Bible (NEB)](New-English-Bible-NEB.html)
[American Standard Version (ASV)](American-Standard-Version-ASV.html)
[Good News Bible (GNB) / Today’s English Version (TEV)](Good-News-Bible-GNB.html)
[Amplified Bible (AMP)](Amplified-Bible-AMP.html)
[Today’s New International Version (TNIV)](Todays-New-International-Version-TNIV.html)
[New English Translation (NET)](New-English-Translation-NET.html)
[Lexham English Bible (LEB)?](Lexham-English-Bible-LEB.html)
[Revised Standard Version (RSV)](Revised-Standard-Version-RSV.html)
[Contemporary English Version (CEV)](Contemporary-English-Version-CEV.html)
[God’s Word Translation (GW)](Gods-Word-Translation-GW.html)
[Common English Bible (CEB)](Common-English-Bible-CEB.html)
[What is the Recovery Version of the Bible?](Recovery-Version-Bible.html)
[New International Readers Version (NIrV)](New-International-Readers-Version-NIrV.html)
[Easy\-To\-Read Version (ERV)](Easy-to-Read-Version-ERV.html)
[Complete Jewish Bible (CJB)](Complete-Jewish-Bible-CJB.html)
[Bible in Basic English (BBE)](Bible-Basic-English-BBE.html)
[Berean Standard Bible (BSB)](Berean-Standard-Bible-BSB.html)
[21st Century King James Version (KJ21\)](21st-Century-King-James-Version-KJ21.html)
[What is the Modern King James Version (MKJV)?](Modern-King-James-Version-MKJV.html)
[What is the Modern English Version (MEV)?](Modern-English-Version-MEV.html)
[World English Bible (WEB)](World-English-Bible-WEB.html)
[Revised English Bible (REB)](Revised-English-Bible-REB.html)
[Jerusalem Bible (JB)](Jerusalem-Bible-JB.html)
[New American Bible (NAB)](New-American-Bible-NAB.html)
[What is the J. B. Phillips translation of the Bible?](J-B-Phillips-translation.html)
[The Living Bible (TLB)](The-Living-Bible-TLB.html)
[The Message (MSG)](The-Message-MSG.html)
[Pure Word Bible (PWB)](Pure-Word-Bible-PWB.html)
[Young’s Literal Translation (YLT)](Youngs-Literal-Translation-YLT.html)
[Wycliffe Bible](Wycliffe-Bible.html)
[Tyndale Bible](Tyndale-Bible.html)
[Coverdale Bible](Coverdale-Bible.html)
[Matthew Bible](Matthew-Bible.html)
[Great Bible](Great-Bible.html)
[The Bishops' Bible](Bishops-Bible.html)
[Douay\-Rheims Version (DRV)](Douay-Rheims-Version-DRV.html)
[What is the Luther Bible?](Luther-Bible.html)
[Geneva Bible](Geneva-Bible.html)
[What is the First Nations Version (FNV)?](First-Nations-Version-FNV.html)
[What is the *Legacy Standard Bible* (LSB)?](Legacy-Standard-Bible-LSB.html)
|
What is the New International Version (NIV)? |
Answer
The *New International Version* (NIV) was conceived in 1965 when, after several years of study by committees from the Christian Reformed Church and the National Association of Evangelicals, a trans\-denominational and international group of scholars met at Palos Heights, Illinois, and agreed on the need for a new translation in contemporary English. Their conclusion was endorsed by a large number of church leaders who met in Chicago in 1966\. Responsibility for the version was delegated to a self\-governing body of fifteen biblical scholars, the Committee on Bible Translation, and in 1967, the New York Bible Society undertook the financial sponsorship of the project. In 1973 the New Testament was published. The first printing of the entire Bible was in 1978\. Additional changes were made in 1983\. Versions based on the NIV are the *New International Version – UK* (NIVUK) and the *New International Reader’s Version* (NIrV), an “easier to read and understand” version of the NIV. In 2005, a significant revision of the NIV, known as the *Today’s New International Version*, was published by Zondervan. The TNIV’s primary change from the NIV is a more gender\-inclusive translation of certain terms. Because of its controversial gender inclusiveness, the TNIV was the subject of a great deal of criticism from the evangelical world and went out of print in 2009\.
In March 2011, the publisher of the NIV, Zondervan, issued a new edition, the *2011 New International Version*. This edition replaced the 1984 NIV, which will no longer be published. Like its predecessor, the TNIV, the 2011 NIV was translated using gender\-neutral translation rules, resulting in the replacement of gender\-specific words (e.g. man, woman, he, she, son, daughter) with gender\-neutral words (e. g. person, they, child). In many cases these replacements are made even when the original language clearly intends a specific gender. The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, which reviewed the 2011 NIV, issued a statement saying they could not recommend the 2011 NIV because of "over 3,600 gender\-related problems" that were previously in its critique of the TNIV. It is crucial to understand that from 2011 on, the NIV will not be the same NIV the world has known and loved since 1984\. When purchasing a Bible, “NIV” will now mean the 2011 NIV. Previously printed copies of the 1984 NIV will be sold out and no longer available. When an author quotes a Bible passage in a book and notes it as coming from the NIV, it will probably be the 2011 NIV.
**New International Version \- Translation method**
The translation of each book of the Bible was assigned to a team of scholars, and the work was thoroughly reviewed and revised at various stages by three separate committees. The lead committee submitted the developing version to stylistic consultants for their suggestions. Samples of the translation were tested for clarity and ease of reading by various groups of people. The committee held to certain goals for the NIV: that it be an “accurate, beautiful, clear, and dignified translation suitable for public and private reading, teaching, preaching, memorizing, and liturgical use.” The NIV is known especially as a "thought for thought" or “dynamic equivalence” translation rather than a “word for word” translation.
**New International Version \- Pros and Cons**
Probably the greatest strength of the *New International Version* is its readability. The NIV is rendered in smoothly flowing and easy\-to\-read English. One weakness of the NIV is that it occasionally delves into interpretation rather than strict translation. In the NIV, some passages are translated with more of a “this is what the translator thinks the text means” instead of “this is what the text says.” In many instances, the NIV likely has a correct “interpretation” but that misses the point. A Bible translation should take what the Bible says in the original languages and say the same thing in the new language, leaving the interpretation to the reader with the aid of the Holy Spirit. The greatest ‘con’ of the 2011 NIV, of course, is the inclusion of gender\-neutral language and the necessity of interpreting rather than translating in order to present a more culturally sensitive or politically correct version.
**New International Version \- Sample Verses**
John 1:1, 14: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” “The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.”
John 3:16: “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 8:58: "I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!"
Ephesians 2:8\-9: “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast.”
Titus 2:13: “while we wait for the blessed hope—the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ.”
|
What is the King James Version (KJV)? |
Answer
In 1604, [King James I of England](King-James.html) authorized a new translation of the Bible into English to be started. It was finished in 1611, just 85 years after the first translation of the New Testament into English appeared (Tyndale, 1526\). In the preface to the 1611 edition, the translators of the *Authorized Version*, or *King James Version*, state that is was not their purpose “to make a new translation . . . but to make a good one better.” The *King James Version* quickly became the standard for English\-speaking Protestants. Its flowing language and prose rhythms have had a profound influence on the literature of the past 400 years.
**King James Version \- Translation method**
The King James translation was done by 47 scholars, all of whom were members of the Church of England. In common with most other translations of the period, the New Testament was translated from the [Textus Receptus](Textus-Receptus.html) (Received Text) series of the Greek texts. The Old Testament was translated from the [Masoretic](Masoretic-Text.html) Hebrew text, while the Apocrypha was translated from the Greek Septuagint (LXX), except for 2 Esdras, which was translated from the [Latin Vulgate](Latin-Vulgate.html). In 1769, the Oxford edition, which excluded the [Apocrypha](apocrypha-deuterocanonical.html), became the standard text and is the text which is reproduced almost unchanged in most current printings.
**King James Version \- Pros and Cons**
For nearly 400 years, and through several revisions of the original, the King James Version has been deeply revered by English\-speaking peoples worldwide, not only for the precision of the translation from the original languages, but for the beauty and majesty of the style, which has greatly influenced literature for centuries.
Unfortunately, much avoidable dissension among Christians occurs about the use of the *King James Version*. While many people claim that the KJV is the only “true” translation, rarely are they actually in possession of the 1611 *Authorized Version* of the KJV. Rather, they have the more readable 1769 version. The difference between the two becomes clear when comparing passages from the two versions. For example, 1 Corinthians 13:1\-3 in the 1611 version is as follows:
“Though I speake with the tongues of men \& of Angels, and haue not charity, I am become as sounding brasse or a tinkling cymbal. And though I haue the gift of prophesie, and vnderstand all mysteries and all knowledge: and though I haue all faith, so that I could remooue mountaines, and haue no charitie, I am nothing. And though I bestowe all my goods to feede the poore, and though I giue my body to bee burned, and haue not charitie, it profiteth me nothing.”
The 1769 version, on the other hand, is much more readable and understandable:
“Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.”
Furthermore, in addition to the more readable character of the 1769 edition, further translations into modern English have proved invaluable for millions. Modern translations such as the *New King James Version*, the *Modern King James Version*, and the *21st Century King James Version* have removed the confusing “thee’s” and “thou’s” and “\-eth” verb endings, while still remaining true to the texts and retaining the beauty of the language.
**King James Version \- Sample Verses**
John 1:1,14 – “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.”
John 3:16 – “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”
John 8:58 – “Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.”
Ephesians 2:8\-9 – “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.”
Titus 2:13 – “Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.”
|
What is the New American Standard Bible (NASB)? |
Answer
The *New American Standard Bible* (NASB), first released in 1971, evolved from the *American Standard Version* (ASV) of 1901\. The ASV, in turn, was the American version of the *Revised Version* (RV) of 1885, also called the *English Revised Version* (ERV). While preserving the literalness of the ASV, the NASB sought to use the grammatical constructions and diction of contemporary English. Special attention was given to verb tenses to give the English reader a rendering as close as possible to the sense of the original Greek and Hebrew texts.
The NASB was updated in 1977 and again in 1995\. The most recent update is the NASB 2020\. In each case, the updates were published to reflect modern English usage and incorporate the most recent scholarship on the original languages and manuscript discoveries. The 1971 NASB was widely considered the most accurate English Bible translation. The *New American Standard Bible* update of 2020 carries on the tradition of accuracy and readability. Another translation, the [Legacy Standard Bible](Legacy-Standard-Bible-LSB.html) (2021\), also updates the 1995 edition of the NASB.
**New American Standard Bible \- Translation Method**
The *New American Standard Bible* is known for its “[formal equivalence](formal-equivalence.html)” (word\-for\-word) translation. The goal of the NASB is to provide a literal translation that is accessible and accurate. Archaic words like *thee* and *thou* were updated back in 1995\. In modernizing the English for 2020, the NASB also incorporated the following:
• The use of “gender\-accurate” language. Many passages address a group of Christians as “brothers,” but when the group clearly includes women as well as men, the NASB 2020 adds the words *and sisters* in italics. This is different from “gender\-neutral” language, which ignores gender\-specific contexts in favor of a gender\-neutral term.
• Updates to words and phrases that could be misunderstood due to changes in meaning during the past twenty\-five years.
• Retranslations of verses with difficult syntax or vocabulary.
• Avoidance of the *let us* construction when the speaker is making an appeal to action. This prevents the misinterpretation of *let us* to mean “allow us.”
The NASB 2020 update continues the NASB’s tradition of literal translation of the original Greek and Hebrew without compromise. Changes in the text have been kept within the strict parameters set forth by the Lockman Foundation’s Fourfold Aim—that the finished product be true to the original manuscripts, grammatically correct, understandable, and give the Lord Jesus Christ His proper place of honor.
**New American Standard Bible \- Pros and Cons**
Probably the greatest strength of the *New American Standard Bible* has always been its literalness. The NASB seeks to take what was originally said in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek and say the same thing in English. The primary downside to this method is that it sometimes results in the English not being as smooth and free\-flowing as it could be. Overall, though, the *New American Standard Bible* is an excellent Bible translation. The update of 2020 is a welcome addition to the NASB family of Bibles.
**New American Standard Bible \- Sample Verses**
John 1:1, 14 – “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. . . . And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.”
John 3:16 – “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish, but have eternal life.”
John 8:58 – “Jesus said to them, ‘Truly, truly I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am.’”
Ephesians 2:8–9 – “For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not a result of works, so that no one may boast.”
Titus 2:13 – “looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus,”
|
What is the New King James Version (NKJV)? |
Answer
Commissioned in 1975 by Thomas Nelson Publishers, 130 respected Bible scholars, church leaders, and lay Christians worked for seven years to create a completely new, modern translation of Scripture, yet one that would retain the accuracy, purity and stylistic beauty of the original *Authorized Version* or *King James Version*. According to Thomas Nelson, the translators were unyieldingly faithful to the original Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic texts, applying the most recent research in archaeology, linguistics, and textual studies. The NKJV was published in three stages: New Testament in 1979, the New Testament and the Psalms in 1980, and the complete Bible in 1982\.
**New King James Version \- Translation method**
Although the NKJV uses substantially the same Hebrew and Greek texts as the original KJV, it indicates where more commonly accepted manuscripts differ. The *New King James Version* also uses the [Textus Receptus](Textus-Receptus.html) ("Received Text") for the New Testament, just as the *King James Version* had used. The translators have also sought to follow the principles of translation used in the original KJV, which the NKJV revisers call "complete equivalence" in contrast to "dynamic equivalence" or “thought\-for\-thought” used by many other modern translations, such as the *New International Version*.
**New King James Version \- Pros and Cons**
The strength of the *New King James Version* is in how it updates the archaic language of the KJV while maintaining much of its beauty and eloquence. The *New King James Version* is very literal in its rendering, resulting in a very good “word\-for\-word” translation. The weaknesses of the *New King James Version* are (1\) its use of the Textus Receptus instead of more modern manuscript compilations and (2\) its commitment to “complete equivalence,” which can sometimes result in the concepts behind the literal words not being communicated adequately.
**New King James Version \- Sample Verses**
John 1:1,14 – “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.”
John 3:16 – “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.”
John 8:58 – “Jesus said to them, ‘Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.’”
Ephesians 2:8\-9 – “For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast.”
Titus 2:13 – “looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ,”
|
Should a Christian play with Ouija boards? |
Answer
The modern Ouija board was created in the late 1800s as interest in [spiritualism](spiritualism.html) grew. A Ouija board, also called a spirit board or talking board, is simply a game board that has the alphabet, numerals, and “yes” and “no” printed on its face. A planchette, or pointer, is used to spell out words and answer simple questions. Supposedly, the Ouija board named itself—when asked what the makers should call it, the board spelled out “o\-u\-i\-j\-a,” which the board then interpreted to mean “good luck.”
Many people see Ouija boards as harmless entertainment. Others believe Ouija boards are magic tools, portals to other dimensions, or divining oracles that allow spirits of the dead to communicate with the living. They are often considered to be communication gateways to those who have “passed over,” and those who sit around a Ouija board are participating in a séance. Of course, this is based on the supposition that spirits, or [ghosts](ghosts-hauntings.html), exist in the first place and that they can, or even want to, communicate with the world of the living.
The Bible does not mention Ouija boards specifically, but it does have a few things to say about divination and attempting to contact the dead:
Leviticus 19:31 – “Do not turn to mediums or seek out spiritists, for you will be defiled by them. I am the LORD your God.”
Deuteronomy 18:10–12 – “Let no one be found among you who . . . practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead. Anyone who does these things is detestable to the LORD.”
Isaiah 8:19 – “When men tell you to consult mediums and spiritists, who whisper and mutter, should not a people inquire of their God? Why consult the dead on behalf of the living?”
Galatians 5:19–20 – “The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft. . . . I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.”
Occultists will insist that the Ouija boards work by allowing spirits to move the pointer in answer to queries. Scientists have yet to prove that the pointer is moved by anything other than the living people touching the pointer. In fact, spirits of the dead seem to get extremely confused when participants are blindfolded, at which point the Ouija board suddenly ceases to work correctly.
“Playing” with a Ouija board is engaging in occultism and definitely not an option for a Christian. Seeking wisdom apart from God, especially when it involves calling upon [familiar spirits](familiar-spirits.html) or the spirits of the departed, is clearly forbidden in the Bible. No matter how innocent Ouija boards may seem, playing with Ouija boards can be an opening for demons to invade our hearts and minds. Satan is a liar (John 8:44\), and he masquerades as an angel of light (2 Corinthians 11:14\). The enemy of our souls has fooled many people into thinking they are communicating with spirits of friends or family members, when in fact they are in contact with demons.
Playing with Ouija boards should be avoided as one should avoid a physical threat: “Your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour” (1 Peter 5:8\). The scriptural example for dealing with items that pertain to the occult (books, music, jewelry, occult games, Ouija boards, and other occult objects) is to confess involvement with them as sin and burn the items (see Acts 19:18–19\).
|
Should Christians go to nightclubs? |
Answer
To put it bluntly, nightclubs are part of the world which is controlled by Satan. They are designed for the purpose of giving oneself over to sinful desires. Nightclubs exist primarily for two purposes: drinking alcohol and meeting members of the opposite sex, most often with sexual activity in mind. Yes, there are music and dancing, but primarily singles in particular go clubbing to drink and meet someone. Nightclubs are of the world, and, while Christians are to be in the world, we are not to be of it. Being of the world means to be interested in and desiring those things that appeal to the sinful nature.
Paul, speaking to Christians, addresses the issue of worldly practices in Ephesians 4:17\-24, "So I tell you this, and insist on it in the Lord, that you must no longer live as the Gentiles do, in the futility of their thinking. They are darkened in their understanding and separated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them due to the hardening of their hearts. Having lost all sensitivity, they have given themselves over to sensuality so as to indulge in every kind of impurity, with a continual lust for more. You, however, did not come to know Christ that way. Surely you heard of him and were taught in him in accordance with the truth that is in Jesus. You were taught, with regard to your former way of life, to put off your old self, which is being corrupted by its deceitful desires; to be made new in the attitude of your minds; and to put on the new self, created to be like God in true righteousness and holiness." Here Paul describes those who exclude God and give themselves over to sensuality for the practice of every kind of impurity with greediness.
Obviously, God does not desire us to give ourselves over to sin so easily and willfully. Notice what God says here, "put off your old self, which is being corrupted by its deceitful desires." It’s interesting to note that God says when we give ourselves over to our sin nature, we are being deceived by our desires. Satan is a master counterfeiter. In other words, Satan presents something that appears on the surface to be attractive. The lure of clubbing is that it is very enjoyable, fun, and exciting. What we don’t see are the consequences because Satan keeps the sensual attraction at the forefront of our minds. Sex, alcohol, and drugs—all found in most nightclubs—are very destructive, both physically and spiritually. God has a place for sex where it is the most enjoyable—in monogamous marriage, where there are no STDs, HIV, guilt, aloneness—and those who don’t believe God in this are short\-changing themselves.
God desires for us to be righteous and holy because He created us to be that way. The benefits of living the life that God intended far exceed the petty, short\-lived thrills that this world offers. Many who are or used to be in the nightclub lifestyle say the same thing—there is no joy, there is no fulfillment; there is only emptiness. Only God can fulfill our needs and give us the joy and happiness we all seek. Clubbing offers nothing more than a very cheap imitation. There is no lasting joy to be found in nightclubs, only temptation to sin.
Such places are most especially not for Christians. Aside from the obvious temptations, there is the issue of our Christian witness in the world. When unbelievers see a professing Christian engaging in a sinful lifestyle, Christ is maligned and demeaned. We are to let our lights shine before men so they see our good works and glorify our Father who is in heaven (Matthew 5:16\). It’s hard to see how the light of our new life in Christ can shine in a nightclub. Even if the Christian is not indulging in the sinful activities, the witness he or she presents to the watching world by just being there is destructive and must be avoided.
|
Should Christians recycle? |
Answer
Recycling involves processing materials into new products to avoid wasting the raw materials. Recycling cuts down on water pollution due to drainage from landfills. Recycled materials are brought to recycling centers, sorted, cleaned and reprocessed into new materials. Common recyclables include paper, glass, plastic, and metal. The process of recycling trash, especially for Western nations that produce millions of tons of trash each year, is very likely a good idea. The politics of recycling have people lining up on both sides, each as adamant in their beliefs as the other and each with a barrage of evidence to support their claims. Pro\-recyclers claim the benefits of saved energy and trees, cleaner air and water, and the reduction of the presence of hazardous materials in the environment. Critics dispute the economic benefits of recycling and point to the loss of jobs in logging, mining, and other industries connected with first\-time production which cannot be offset by jobs in the recycling industry.
From a Christian perspective, we know that we are called to be good stewards of the earth. God created the earth and gave man dominion over it (Genesis 1:26\-28; Psalm 8:6\-8\), and we are to be responsible caretakers of it. Christians should be concerned about clean air, clean water, and the preservation of natural resources to the best of our ability. But Christians understand that the Bible tells us the earth is temporary. No amount of recycling or “thinking green” will forestall the end that God has planned for the earth. Despite all the best plans of men to preserve the planet, there will come a time when the earth and all He has created will be destroyed. “The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the earth and everything in it will be laid bare” (2 Peter 3:10\). The earth itself is winding down in preparation for that cataclysmic event, one that will cause man’s destructive behaviors toward the environment to pale in comparison. Romans 8:20\-22 speaks of a creation which groans in anticipation of the time when it will be set free from the bondage to the principle of decay. This is the end we should be looking to and planning for and which should make our evangelistic efforts all the more urgent. Soda cans can be recycled; people cannot. Therefore, our greatest efforts should be toward saving souls, not the planet.
In the end, whether or not to recycle is a matter of conscience and should not to be viewed legalistically. Christians who feel it’s important to recycle should certainly do so. Those who don’t are free not to. But as with all things, recycling should not divide Christian believers from each other (Luke 11:17\). Care and concern for one another far outweighs care and concern for the environment.
|
What is the Reformed Church, and what do they believe? |
Answer
There are two main branches within the Reformed Church family tree in America: Dutch Reformed and German Reformed. Both branches represent churches that separated from the [Roman Catholic Church](Roman-Catholicism.html) as part of the [Protestant Reformation](Protestant-Reformation.html) in Europe. The Dutch Reformed branch can be traced back to the Dutch settlers who gathered in New Amsterdam in 1628\. The German Reformed branch was started by German immigrants who settled around Philadelphia in the early 1700s. These two branches have much in common, yet have remained distinct throughout their history.
The Dutch Reformed Church maintained ecclesiastical ties to Holland until 1819, when they were incorporated as the Reformed Protestant Dutch Church. In 1867, the name was changed to the [Reformed Church in America](Reformed-Church-America-RCA.html). The Reformed Church in America has over 300,000 members and is a founding member of the National Council of Churches and the World Council of Churches. According to the church website, the church seeks “to strike a balance between accepting people the way they are and encouraging them to live by Christian standards of fidelity, forgiveness, and growth.”
The [Christian Reformed Church](Christian-Reformed-Church.html), with 268,000 members currently, was formed in 1857 when several congregations in Michigan split from the Dutch Reformed Church over a perceived lack of solid doctrine and biblical practice. Abraham Kuyper was a key leader in building the new denomination, helping them focus on the lordship of Jesus Christ over all of life (Ephesians 1:22\). A key distinctive is to “take on the world for Christ—using Christian schools, institutions, and organizations to make God’s redemptive and recreating work a reality in the marketplace, city hall, and factory.” Cornelius Plantinga, Reformed theologian and president of Calvin Theological Seminary, writes, “Our accents lie more on the sovereignty of God, on the authority of Scripture, on the need for disciplined holiness in personal Christian life, and finally, on Christianity as a religion of the Kingdom.”
The German Reformed Church was formed in 1725 near Philadelphia and eventually took the name Reformed Church in the US (RCUS). One of the great leaders of this church was Philip Schaff, who was a highly respected writer and editor. His works on church history and the [Apostolic Fathers](Apostolic-Fathers.html) are still widely used today, more than 100 years after his death. In 1934, the RCUS merged with the Evangelical Synod of North America to form the United Church of Christ. A sizable group of churches rejected that merger and formed a reorganized church retaining the name RCUS.
Reformed theology is a body of doctrine that is taught by many different churches, including Presbyterian and some Baptist churches. This body of doctrine reflects the teachings of the Protestant reformers Ulrich Zwingli and John Calvin and is also referred to as [Calvinism](calvinism.html). The [Synod of Dort](Synod-of-Dort.html) (1618\) was called to answer the teachings of Arminianism and summarized Calvinist doctrine in five points: 1\) Total Depravity of Man, 2\) Unconditional Election, 3\) Limited Atonement, 4\) Irresistible Grace, 5\) Perseverance of the Saints. These five points are often referred to by the acronym “TULIP.” Reformed theologians have added a great deal of knowledge to the church at large and are generally respected for their solid scholarship.
|
What is the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur)? |
Answer
The Day of Atonement (Leviticus 23:27\-28\), also known as Yom Kippur, was the most solemn holy day of all the Israelite feasts and festivals, occurring once a year on the tenth day of Tishri, the seventh month of the Hebrew calendar. On that day, the high priest was to perform elaborate rituals to atone for the sins of the people. Described in Leviticus 16:1\-34, the atonement ritual began with Aaron, or subsequent high priests of Israel, coming into the holy of holies. The solemnity of the day was underscored by God telling Moses to warn Aaron not to come into the Most Holy Place whenever he felt like it; he could only come on this special day once a year, lest he die (v.2\). This was not a ceremony to be taken lightly, and the people were to understand that atonement for sin was to be done God’s way.
Before entering the tabernacle, Aaron was to bathe and put on special garments (v. 4\), then sacrifice a bull for a sin offering for himself and his family (v. 6, 11\). The blood of the bull was to be sprinkled on the ark of the covenant. Then Aaron was to bring two goats, one to be sacrificed “because of the uncleanness and rebellion of the Israelites, whatever their sins have been” (v. 16\), and its blood was sprinkled on the ark of the covenant. The other goat was used as a scapegoat. Aaron placed his hands on its head, confessed over it the rebellion and wickedness of the Israelites, and sent the goat out with an appointed man who released it into the wilderness (v. 21\). The goat carried on itself all the sins of the people, which were forgiven for another year (v. 30\).
The symbolic significance of the ritual, particularly to Christians, is seen first in the washing and cleansing of the high priest, the man who released the goat, and the man who took the sacrificed animals outside the camp to burn the carcasses (v. 4, 24, 26, 28\). Israelite washing ceremonies were required often throughout the Old Testament and symbolized the need for mankind to be cleansed of sin. But it wasn’t until Jesus came to make the “once for all” sacrifice that the need for cleansing ceremonies ceased (Hebrews 7:27\). The blood of bulls and goats could only atone for sins if the ritual was continually done year after year, while Christ’s sacrifice was sufficient for all the sins of all who would ever believe in Him. When His sacrifice was made, He declared, “It is finished” (John 19:30\). He then sat down at the right hand of God, and no further sacrifice was ever needed (Hebrews 10:1\-12\).
The sufficiency and completeness of the sacrifice of Christ is also seen in the two goats. The blood of the first goat was sprinkled on the ark, ritually appeasing the wrath of God for another year. The second goat removed the sins of the people into the wilderness where they were forgotten and no longer clung to the people. Sin is both propitiated and expiated God’s way—only by the sacrifice of Christ on the cross. Propitiation is the act of appeasing the wrath of God, while expiation is the act of atoning for sin and removing it from the sinner. Both together are achieved eternally by Christ. When He sacrificed Himself on the cross, He appeased God’s wrath against sin, taking that wrath upon Himself: “Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God’s wrath through him!” (Romans 5:9\). The removal of sin by the second goat was a living parable of the promise that God would remove our transgressions from us as far as the east is from the west (Psalm 103:12\) and that He would remember them no more (Hebrews 8:12; 10:17\). Jews today still celebrate the annual Day of Atonement, which falls on different days each year in September\-October, traditionally observing this holy day with a 25\-hour period of fasting and intensive prayer. Jews also often spend most of the day in synagogue services.
|
What is the New Living Translation (NLT)? |
Answer
**New Living Translation \- History**
The goal of the *New Living Translation* (NLT) is a translation of the Bible into a clear, readable form of modern English. The *New Living Translation* was completed and published by Tyndale House in 1996\. Soon after the publication of the first edition, the NLT Bible Translation Committee began a further review and revision of the translation. Their goal was "to increase the level of precision without sacrificing the text’s easy\-to\-understand quality." The Second Edition of the NLT (also called the NLTse) was released in 2004\. It reflects a translation style that is slightly less dynamic than the first edition in many places, yet it still retains natural contemporary English. The second edition also brought a poetic format to many passages, especially that of the prophetic writing in the Old Testament. Another minor revision was completed in 2007 with minor textual and footnote changes. For most of 2008 and 2009, the NLT has consistently averaged a 4th\-spot ranking in Bible sales (based upon both unit sale and dollar sales) according to the Christian Booksellers Association. However, in July 2008, the NLT gained the \#1 spot in unit sales, unseating the NIV for the first time in over two decades.
**New Living Translation \- Translation Method**
Originally starting out as an effort to revise *The Living Bible*, a paraphrased version of the Bible, the project evolved into a new English translation from the best Hebrew and Greek texts. The *New Living Translation* is based on the most recent scholarship in the theory of translation. The challenge for the translators was to create a text that would make the same impact in the life of modern readers that the original text had for the original readers. In the *New Living Translation*, this is accomplished by translating entire thoughts (rather than just words) into natural, everyday English. The NLT follows a combination of formal equivalence (word\-for\-word) and dynamic equivalence (thought\-for\-thought) methods of translation.
**New Living Translation \- Pros and Cons**
The *New Living Translation* is easy to read and easy to understand. It is written in quality and contemporary English. However, when it goes more toward dynamic equivalence and less toward formal equivalence, the NLT sometimes goes astray, interpreting rather than translating.
**New Living Translation \- Sample verses**
John 1:1,14 – “In the beginning the Word already existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was God. So the Word became human and made his home among us. He was full of unfailing love and faithfulness. And we have seen his glory, the glory of the Father’s one and only Son.”
John 3:16 – “For this is how God loved the world: He gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life.”
John 8:58 – “Jesus answered, ‘I tell you the truth, before Abraham was even born, I Am!’”
Ephesians 2:8\-9 – “God saved you by his grace when you believed. And you can’t take credit for this; it is a gift from God. Salvation is not a reward for the good things we have done, so none of us can boast about it.”
Titus 2:13 – “while we look forward with hope to that wonderful day when the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, will be revealed.”
|
What is the English Standard Version (ESV)? |
Answer
**English Standard Version – History**
The *English Standard Version* (ESV) is a revision of the 1971 edition of the *Revised Standard Version*. The first edition was published in 2001 by Crossway Bibles, a division of Good News Publishers. The *ESV Study Bible*, also published by Crossway Bibles, was published in October 2008\. It uses the ESV translation and adds extensive notes and articles based on evangelical Christian scholarship. Under noted theologian [J. I. Packer](J-I-Packer.html), who served as general editor, the translators sought and received permission from the National Council of Churches to use the 1971 edition of the RSV as the English textual basis for the ESV. Difficult passages were translated using the [Masoretic Text](Masoretic-Text.html) of the Hebrew Bible, the [Dead Sea Scrolls](dead-sea-scrolls.html), and other original manuscripts.
**English Standard Version – Translation Method**
The stated intent of the translators was to produce a readable and accurate translation that stands in the tradition of Bible translations beginning with English religious reformer William Tyndale in 1525–26 and culminating in the *King James Version* of 1611\. Examples of other translations in this genre are the *Revised Version* (1881–85\), the *American Standard Version* (1901\), and the *Revised Standard Version* (1946–1971\). In their own words, they sought to follow a literal word\-for\-word translation philosophy. To that end, the translators sought as far as possible to capture the precise wording of the original text and the personal style of each Bible writer, while taking into account differences of grammar, syntax, and idiom between current literary English and the original languages. The result is a translation that is more literal than the *New International Version*, but more fluent and colloquial than the *New American Standard Bible*.
**English Standard Version – Pros and Cons**
The *English Standard Version* receives complaints from both sides. Some say it is too literal. Others say it is too dynamic. Often, criticism from both sides of an argument indicates that something has achieved a good balance between the two.
**English Standard Version – Sample verses**
John 1:1, 14 – “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.”
John 3:16 – “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.”
John 8:58 – “Jesus said to them, ‘Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.’"
Ephesians 2:8\-9 – “For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.”
Titus 2:13 – “waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ.”
|
What is the Christian Standard Bible (CSB)? |
Answer
**Christian Standard Bible – History**
The motive for the Christian Standard Bible translators to produce another English translation was two\-fold: first, the translators saw the need for each new generation of English speakers to have a translation that reflects changes in the English language; second, the translators wanted a modern translation grounded in theologically conservative ideology without regard to liberal cultural trends. After several years of preliminary development, Holman Bible Publishers assembled an international team of 100 scholars from many denominations, all of whom were committed to biblical inerrancy. Outside consultants contributed valuable suggestions from their areas of expertise. A New Testament was published in 2001, with the whole Bible following in 2004\. Originally, the CSB was the Holman Christian Standard Bible, or HCSB. The text was updated and the word *Holman* was dropped from the name in 2017\.
**Christian Standard Bible – Translation Method**
Using original Greek ([Nestle\-Aland](Nestle-Aland-Greek-New-Testament.html)) and Hebrew texts, the Christian Standard Bible used the optimal equivalence approach to translation; this method seeks to combine the best features of formal equivalence (word\-for\-word) and dynamic equivalence (thought\-for\-thought). In places where a literal rendering might be unclear, a more dynamic translation is given. The CSB has chosen to use the balance and beauty of optimal equivalence for a fresh translation of God’s Word that is both faithful to the words God inspired and “user friendly” to modern readers. At the same time, in keeping with a long line of Bible publications, the Christian Standard Bible has retained a number of features found in traditional Bibles, including traditional theological vocabulary and traditional name and place name spellings. The CSB also features extensive footnotes to help the reader understand the original biblical language or how it was translated.
**Christian Standard Bible — Pros and Cons**
Some claim the Christian Standard Bible is too literal (formal equivalence), and some say it is too free (dynamic equivalence). This likely means that, for the most part, the translators of the CSB succeeded in their goal of optimal equivalence. In a handful of instances, the CSB has opted for a more gender\-neutral rendering of some biblical wording (e.g., replacing *man* with *everyone* in Romans 3:4\).
**Christian Standard Bible – Sample Verses**
John 1:1, 14 – “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The Word became flesh and dwelt among us. We observed his glory, the glory as the one and only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.”
John 3:16 – “For God loved the world in this way: He gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life.”
John 8:58 – “Jesus said to them, ‘Truly I tell you, before Abraham was, I am.’"
Ephesians 2:8–9 – “For you are saved by grace through faith, and this is not from yourselves; it is God’s gift—not from works, so that no one can boast.”
Titus 2:13 – “while we wait for the blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ.”
|
What does it mean to dress modestly? |
Answer
The biblical instruction to “dress modestly” is found in 1 Timothy 2:9\. As a [pastoral epistle](pastoral-epistles.html), 1 Timothy is a letter of instruction and encouragement written by the apostle Paul to Timothy, who was overseeing the church in Ephesus. Paul calls for “petitions, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving \[to] be made for all people . . . that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness” (1 Timothy 2:1\). He talks about God’s desire for “all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth” (1 Timothy 2:4\). He describes Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross and His mediatorial work between God and mankind (1 Timothy 2:5–6\). Then he writes, “Therefore I want the men everywhere to pray, lifting up holy hands without anger or disputing. I also want the women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, adorning themselves, not with elaborate hairstyles or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God.” These commands for behavior and appearance are linked to worship of God and to public witness.
First Peter 3:1–4 gives similar instructions: “Wives, in the same way submit yourselves to your own husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives, when they see the purity and reverence of your lives. Your beauty should not come from outward adornment, such as elaborate hairstyles and the wearing of gold jewelry or fine clothes. Rather, it should be that of your inner self, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is of great worth in God’s sight.” Peter also gives instructions to husbands regarding being considerate of their wives, who are “heirs with you of the gracious gift of life, so that nothing will hinder your prayers” (1 Peter 3:7\).
At the core of dressing modestly is reverence for God. Rather than seek to garner attention through appearance, godly women are to seek to [glorify God](glorify-God.html). Of course, this same principle also applies to men. Both women and men are called to honor God in all aspects of their lives, including in how they dress. Instead of focusing on a societally impressive exterior, believers are to grow in godly character. Rather than be known for their clothing or hair style, they should be known for how they honor God. Jesus told His followers, “You are the light of the world. A town built on a hill cannot be hidden. Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. In the same way, let your light shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven” (Matthew 5:14–16\).
Modesty also has to do with respect for others. Our outward appearance does communicate things to the watching world. When believers are overly concerned about externals—flaunting wealth or beauty or flashing cultural status symbols—the world misunderstands who God is. When we dress in “respectable apparel,” with modesty (in an unassuming, humble, reverent, respectful way), we better demonstrate the truth of God. We better demonstrate that our worth is in Him, not in the things the world pursues.
Our appearance also affects fellow believers. First Corinthians 10:31–33 says, “So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God. Do not cause anyone to stumble, whether Jews, Greeks or the church of God—even as I try to please everyone in every way. For I am not seeking my own good but the good of many, so that they may be saved.” We should be cognizant of how our choice of apparel affects our sisters and brothers in Christ, and we should be willing to lay down our own rights for the sake of their spiritual maturation when necessary (1 Corinthians 10:23–33; Romans 14\). We should not purposefully encourage others to sin.
Dressing modestly often requires us to check our [motives](Bible-motives.html). Are we dressing a particular way to draw attention to ourselves? To feel superior to others? To engender jealousy in others? To incite lust? Out of idolatry? If so, we need to check our hearts and possibly change our clothes. It’s also important to consider the cultural and situational context. For example, in the United States, it would be immodest to wear a ball gown to serve at a soup kitchen. But the same gown might be appropriate at a charity fundraising event. Our clothes should demonstrate a right understanding of God, a right understanding of ourselves, and respect for the people we are around.
Proverbs 31:30 gives this wisdom: “Charm is deceptive, and beauty is fleeting; but a woman who fears the Lord is to be praised.” May our clothing choices be grounded in glorifying God and focusing on that which is of eternal worth (Matthew 6:19–21\).
|
What is common grace? |
Answer
The doctrine of common grace pertains to the sovereign grace of God bestowed upon all of mankind regardless of their [election](unconditional-election.html). In other words, God has always bestowed His graciousness on all people in all parts of the earth at all times. Although the doctrine of common grace has always been clear in Scripture, in 1924, the Christian Reformed Church (CRC) adopted the doctrine of common grace at the Synod of Kalamazoo (Michigan) and formulated what is known as the “three points of common grace.”
The first point pertains to the favorable attitude of God toward all His creatures, not only toward the elect. “The Lord is good to all; he has compassion on all he has made” (Psalm 145:9\). Jesus said God causes “his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous” (Matthew 5:45\) and God “is kind to the ungrateful and wicked” (Luke 6:35\). Barnabas and Paul would later say the same thing: “He has shown kindness by giving you rain from heaven and crops in their seasons; he provides you with plenty of food and fills your hearts with joy” (Acts 14:17\). In addition to His compassion, goodness, and kindness, God also sheds His patience upon both the elect and the non\-elect. While God’s patience for His own is undoubtedly different from His patience with those whom He has not chosen, God still exercises “longsuffering” toward those whom He has not chosen (Nahum 1:3\). Every breath that the wicked man takes is an example of the mercy of our holy God.
The second point of common grace is the restraint of sin in the life of the individual and in society. Scripture records God directly intervening and restraining individuals from sinning. In Genesis 20, God restrained Abimelech from touching Sarah, Abraham’s wife, and affirmed it to him in a dream by saying, “Yes, I know you did this with a clear conscience, and so I have kept you from sinning against me. That is why I did not let you touch her” (Genesis 20:6\). Another example of God restraining the wicked hearts of evil men is seen in God’s protection of the land of Israel from being invaded by the pagan nations on their border. God commanded the men of Israel that three times a year they would leave their plot of land to go and appear before Him (Exodus 34:23\). To ensure the protection of God’s people from invasion during these times, even though the pagan nations surrounding them desired their land year\-round, God promised that “no one will covet your land when you go up three times each year to appear before the Lord your God” (Exodus 34:24\). God also restrained David from taking revenge on Nabal for scorning the messengers that David sent to greet Nabal (1 Samuel 25:14\). Abigail, Nabal’s wife, recognized God’s grace when she pleaded with David not to seek vengeance against her husband, “since the Lord has kept you, my master, from bloodshed and from avenging yourself with your own hands…” (1 Samuel 25:26\). David acknowledged this truth by responding, “As surely as the Lord, the God of Israel, lives, who has kept me from harming you…” (1 Samuel 25:34\).
This second point of common grace not only includes God’s restraining of evil, but also His sovereignly releasing it for His purposes. When God hardens the hearts of individuals (Exodus 4:21; Joshua 11:20; Isaiah 63:17\), He does so by releasing His restraint on their hearts, thereby giving them over to the sin that resides there. In His punishment of Israel for their rebellion, God gave “them over to their stubborn hearts to follow their own devices” (Psalm 81:11\-12\). The passage of Scripture best known for speaking of God’s releasing of restraint is found in Romans 1 where Paul describes those who suppress the truth by their wickedness. God “gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another” (Romans 1:28\).
The third point of common grace as adopted by the CRC pertains to “civic righteousness by the unregenerate.” This means that God, without renewing the heart, exercises such influence that even the unsaved man is enabled to perform good deeds toward his fellow man. As Paul said of a group of unregenerate Gentiles, they “do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law” (Romans 2:14\). The necessity of God restraining the hearts of the unredeemed becomes clear when we understand the biblical doctrine of [total depravity](total-depravity.html). If God did not restrain the evil that resides in the hearts of all men, hearts which are “deceitful and desperately wicked” (Jeremiah 17:9\), humanity would have destroyed itself centuries ago. But because He works through common grace given to all men, God’s sovereign plan for history is not thwarted by their evil hearts. In the doctrine of common grace, we see God’s purposes stand, His people blessed, and His glory magnified.
|
What does the Bible say about ethnocentrism? |
Answer
Ethnocentrism is the belief that one’s particular ethnic group is superior to all others and all other ethnic groups are to be subjectively measured in relation to one’s own. It is a system of belief that leads to extreme pride and lack of concern for others. Since race is often a part of ethnicity, ethnocentrism is usually related to racism, which has been a plague on humanity for centuries. There is no place among God’s people for the ethnocentric attitudes that lead to racism. Such attitudes are contrary to Scripture and displeasing to God.
Biblically, ethnocentrism is sin. All men and women are made in the image of God (Genesis 1:26–27; 9:6\), although that image is corrupted by sin. God does not show partiality or favoritism (Deuteronomy 10:17; Acts 10:34\). Jesus did not lay down His life for a particular race, culture, or tribe, but by His death He “purchased men for God from every tribe and language and people and nation” (Revelation 5:9\). The Scriptures tell us that Jesus came to save the world, both Jews and Gentiles. Paul bears this out by saying, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:28\) and “There is no Greek or Jew, circumcised or uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave or free, but Christ is all, and is in all” (Colossians 3:11\).
Jesus superseded all barriers of race, culture, and ethnicity with His death on the cross. Paul wrote of the uniting of Jew and Gentile in Ephesians 2:14: “For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility.” Ethnocentrism, whether based on historical grudges, erroneous assumptions, or overt human pride, is wholly contrary to God’s Word. We are commanded to love one another as He has loved us (John 13:34\), and such a command precludes any discrimination based on race, ethnicity, or culture.
|
What does the Bible say about ancestor worship? |
Answer
Ancestor worship involves religious beliefs and practices consisting of prayers and offerings to the spirits of dead relatives. Ancestor worship is found in many cultures all across the world. Prayers and offerings are made because it’s believed the spirits of ancestors live on in the natural world and are thus able to influence the futures and fortunes of the living relatives. Ancestors’ spirits are also thought to act as mediators between the living and the Creator.
Death was not the sole criterion for being worshiped as an ancestor. The person must have lived a moral life with great social distinction in order to attain that status. Ancestors are believed to influence the lives of later generations by blessing or cursing them, in essence acting as gods. So praying to them, presenting them with gifts, and making offerings are done to appease them and gain their favor.
Evidence of ancestor worship has been found at sites in the Near East in Jericho dating to the 7th century before Christ. It existed in ancient Greek and Roman cultures as well. Ancestor worship has had its greatest influence on Chinese and African religions and is found in Japanese and Native American religions where it’s better known as ancestor reverence.
What does the Bible say about ancestor worship? First, the Bible tells us that the spirits of the dead go to either heaven or hell and do not remain in the natural world (Luke 16:20\-31; 2 Corinthians 5:6\-10; Hebrews 9:27; Revelation 20:11\-15\). The belief that spirits continue to reside on earth after death and influence the lives of others is not scriptural.
Second, nowhere in the Bible are we told that the dead act as intermediaries between God and man. But we are told that Jesus Christ was given that role. He was born, lived a sinless life, was crucified for our sins, buried in a grave, resurrected by God, seen by a multitude of witnesses, ascended into heaven, and sits now at the right hand of the Father where He intercedes on the behalf of those who have placed their faith and trust in Him (Acts 26:23; Romans 1:2\-5; Hebrews 4:15; 1 Peter 1:3\-4\). There is only one Mediator between God and man, and that is God’s Son, Jesus Christ (1 Timothy 2:5\-6; Hebrews 8:6, 9:15, 12:24\). Only Christ can fill that role.
The Bible tells us in Exodus 20:3\-6 that we are not to worship any god other than the Lord God. Furthermore, since diviners and sorcerers were thought to be able to contact the dead, they were also expressly forbidden by God (Exodus 22:18; Leviticus 19:32, 20:6, 27; Deuteronomy 18:10\-11; 1 Samuel 28:3; Jeremiah 27:9\-10\).
Satan has always sought to supplant God, and he uses lies about worshiping other gods and even ancestors to try to lead people away from the truth of God’s existence. Ancestor worship is wrong because it goes against God’s specific warnings about such worship, and it seeks to replace Jesus Christ as the Divine Mediator between God and mankind.
|
What is feng shui? |
Answer
Feng shui, which literally means “wind\-water,” is an ancient Chinese system of aesthetics believed to use the laws heaven and earth (astronomy and geography) to help one improve life by receiving positive “[qi](Qi.html)” or energy flow. Feng shui has a long and complex history as to its uses, techniques, and instruments—particularly prior to the invention of the magnetic compass. The goal of feng shui as practiced today is to situate the human\-built environment on spots with good qi. The "perfect spot" is believed to be a location and an axis in time. The discovery and use of energy forces are also foundational in the Chinese martial arts such as kung fu. Also part of feng shui is the Chinese philosophy of yin yang, the theory of the effect of opposing forces on human existence. Many natural dualities—dark and light, female and male, low and high—are viewed in Chinese thought as manifestations of yin and yang. The most popular use of feng shui in the West is in the areas of interior decoration of rooms and homes and exterior design of buildings.
The forms and methods of feng shui are too varied and complex for a complete description, but an important element to consider, for the Christian, is the fact that ancient Chinese feng shui has been reinvented by [New Age](new-age-movement.html) practitioners and incorporated into their practices. While many people dismiss feng shui as superstitious nonsense and pseudoscience, others can and do become so enamored of the philosophy that it exerts enormous influence on their life decisions, even going to the extreme of using it for healing purposes in place of modern medicine. For Christians, the question is whether we believe that harmony, peace, and order in life can be achieved by manipulating elements and external “forces” around us. The Bible tells us that our heavenly Father is the source of peace which is available only through faith in Jesus Christ (Romans 5:1\). In fact, no amount of appealing to inanimate forces will produce tranquility and harmony if our lives are out of sync with the Savior. It is only through Him that we can have the peace of God which “passes all understanding” (Philippians 4:4\-7\).
Christians should be aware that some of the principles of feng shui, including the “I Ching,” are based on Taoist philosophy used to determine which area of a home is positive/negative and/or how decor and furniture should be arranged. While Christians may incorporate principles of feng shui into their decorating plans, despite the dubious value such principles have, Christians should never do so with the goal of feng shui, which is the manipulation of their environment to produce in their lives those things that only Christ provides. To do so is to border on idolatry. For the Christian, there is no such thing as the “perfect spot” on earth, because our home is not in this world and the kingdom of God is not this life in this place (John 18:36; 1 Corinthians 7:31\). Rather, Christians should be concerned with glorifying God in their homes by submitting their thoughts, words, and deeds to Him and endeavoring to grow in Christ\-likeness. Only then can we hope to achieve the peace and harmony that eludes so many today.
|
What is the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)? |
Answer
**New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition — History**
What began as the *Revised Standard Version* in 1952 led to the *New Revised Standard Version* of 1989\. The NRSV was available in three versions: the NRSV, containing the Old and New Testaments; the *NRSV Common Bible*, which included the Apocryphal/Deuterocanonical books; and the *NRSV Catholic Edition*, containing the Old Testament books in the order of the Latin Vulgate. There were also anglicized editions of the NRSV, which modified the text slightly to be consistent with British spelling and grammar. The latest edition from the Society of Biblical Literature of the National Council of Churches is the New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition (NRSVUE), published in 2021\.
**New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition — Translation Method**
Both the NRSV and NRSVUE are intended to take advantage of manuscript discoveries made since the printing of the *Revised Standard Version*. The NRSV translators chose to eliminate archaic language such as the pronouns *thee* and *thou*. They also made the controversial decision to translate some gender\-specific words using more gender\-neutral wording in places where gender was not seen to be an issue, e.g., “people” in place of “mankind.” The goal of the translators was to be “sensitive to the danger of linguistic sexism arising from the inherent bias of the English language towards the masculine gender” (Introduction, New Revised Standard Version, Oxford University Press, 1989\). So, for example, the NRSV expanded gender\-specific phrases such as *brothers* into *brothers and sisters*.
The NRSVUE takes the avoidance of “linguistic sexism” even further and attempts to correct the other perceived biases of earlier editions. As a result, the NRSVue claims to offer “clearer, more direct, and inclusive language, and increased cultural sensitivity absent of the unintended biases of prior versions” (https://www.zondervan.com/p/nrsvuebible, accessed 9/26/23\). So, for example, the NRSVUE changes the wording of Matthew 4:24 from “demoniacs, epileptics, and paralytics” (NRSV) to “people possessed by demons or having epilepsy or afflicted with paralysis.” The regulations for the “sin offering” in Leviticus 6:25 (NRSV) become rules for the “purification offering.” And where the NRSV refers to “sodomites,” the NRSVUE has “men who engage in illicit sex” (1 Timothy 1:10\). All total, the NRSVUE made more than 20,000 revisions.
**New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition — Pro’s and Con’s**
The publishers of the *New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition* are careful to say that their work is not a new translation, only a new edition. The fact that the NRSVUE has a Catholic version (including the Apocrypha), is “gender\-inclusive,” and softens terms related to homosexuality prevents it from being adopted by many conservative and evangelical Christians.
**New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition — Sample Verses**
John 1:1,14 — “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. . . . And the Word became flesh and lived among us, and we have seen his glory, the glory as of a father’s only son, full of grace and truth.”
John 3:16 — “For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life.”
John 8:58 — “Jesus said to them, ‘Very truly, I tell you, before Abraham was, I am.’”
Ephesians 2:8–9 — “For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God—not the result of works, so that no one may boast.”
Titus 2:13 — “while we wait for the blessed hope and the manifestation of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ.”
|
What is the New Century Version (NCV)? |
Answer
**New Century Version – History**
The *New Century Version* of the Bible is a revision of the *International Children’s Bible*, which was aimed at young readers and those with low English reading and vocabulary skills. The ICB is written at a 3rd\-grade level and is both conservative and evangelical in tone. The ICB was revised somewhat to be a bit more sophisticated (reading level grade 5\) and was dubbed the *New Century Version*. This revised version was first published in 1991\. Recently, the NCV text was combined with notes containing advice on teenage issues to form *The Youth Bible* and was updated in 2007\. Thomas Nelson also publishes a version called *NCV Clean*, which contains the New Testament plus the books of Psalms and Proverbs.
**New Century Version – Translation Method**
According to Thomas Nelson, Inc., the publisher of the *New Century Version*, the translation process of the NCV was guided by a commitment to be faithful to the manuscripts in the original languages. A team composed of the World Bible Translation Center and fifty additional, highly qualified and experienced Bible scholars and translators was assembled. The team included people with translation experience on such accepted versions as the *New International Version*, the *New American Standard Bible*, and the *New King James Version*. The most recent scholarship and the best available Hebrew and Greek texts were used, principally the third edition of the [United Bible Societies’ Greek text](United-Bible-Societies-Greek-New-Testament.html) and the latest edition of the *Biblia Hebraica*, along with the Septuagint.
**New Century Version – Pros and Cons**
The fact that the *New Century Version* is a revision of a Bible translation that was designed for children has likely hindered its acceptance among adults. While there is nothing "childish" about the NCV, and while there is nothing wrong with an adult reading a Bible that was designed for children, the stigma remains. Overall, the *New Century Version* is an excellent Bible translation, with a good balance of dynamic and formal equivalence.
**New Century Version – Sample Verses**
John 1:1, 14 – “In the beginning there was the Word. The Word was with God, and the Word was God. The Word became a human and lived among us. We saw his glory—the glory that belongs to the only Son of the Father—and he was full of grace and truth.”
John 3:16 – “God loved the world so much that he gave his one and only Son so that whoever believes in him may not be lost, but have eternal life.”
John 8:58 – “Jesus answered, ‘I tell you the truth, before Abraham was even born, I am!’”
Ephesians 2:8\-9 – “I mean that you have been saved by grace through believing. You did not save yourselves; it was a gift from God. It was not the result of your own efforts, so you cannot brag about it.”
Titus 2:13 – “We should live like that while we wait for our great hope and the coming of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ.”
|
Should Christians go to parties? |
Answer
The short answer to this question is “it depends on the party.” Parties are popular because they are fun opportunities to get together with friends, meet new people, and to relax and enjoy one another’s company. As human beings, we are designed to be social creatures. We live in groups, work in groups, and socialize in groups. So when we desire to party, we are responding to the need for human interaction, fun, and relaxation. This is normal and natural.
For Christians, the desire for human interaction has the added dimension of wanting and needing fellowship. The Greek word translated “fellowship” in the New Testament is koinonia, which means “partnership, participation, social interaction, and communication.” The important concept for Christian fellowship is “partnership.” The Bible tells us we have been called into fellowship (partnership) with Christ (1 Corinthians 1:9\), with the Father (1 John 1:3\), and with the Holy Spirit (Philippians 2:1\). John tells us that, as believers, we have fellowship with one another by virtue of the blood Jesus shed for us on the cross (1 John 1:7\). Paul adds the idea that to fellowship with Christ is to partake of His suffering (Philippians 3:10\). We are also warned that we are not to have fellowship with evil (1 Corinthians 10:20\). Just as light and darkness are incompatible, so there should be no fellowship between Christians and sin.
The problem with the question “should Christians go to parties?” is that the “parties” being asked about are almost always not “fellowship parties.” There is no reason to even ask the question regarding parties that are focused on Christian fellowship. No, this question is almost always in regards to parties that involve alcohol, drugs, and/or sex. Certainly, there are non\-Christians who can party innocently, but a party that involves things that are immoral and/or illegal must be avoided. As believers, we are to guard ourselves against temptation, remembering that “bad company corrupts good character” (1 Corinthians 15:33\). Further, attending parties where sinful activities occur—even if we don’t participate in them—weakens our witness and brings reproach on the name of Christ (Romans 2:24\)."Everyone who confesses the name of the Lord must turn away from wickedness" (2 Timothy 2:19\).
There are those who might see going to parties as an opportunity to share Christ with unbelievers, and while we are to be ready with an answer for the hope within us at all times, that presupposes unbelievers at a party are interested in the gospel. Rarely does such an opportunity arise at a party where drinking, drug use, and sexual activity are occurring. Therefore, while Christians should take every opportunity to fellowship with other believers, we must be discerning about opening ourselves up to temptation or anything that would compromise our life in Christ and our witness to a watching world.
|
What is the American Standard Version (ASV)? |
Answer
The *Revised Version, Standard American Edition of the Bible*, more commonly known as the *American Standard Version* (ASV), is a version of the Bible that was published by Thomas Nelson \& Sons in 1901\. By the time its copyright was renewed in 1929, it had come to be known at last by its present name, the *American Standard Version*. It is derived from the *English Revised Version* (1881\-1885\). In 1928, the International Council of Religious Education (the body that later merged with the Federal Council of Churches to form the National Council of Churches) acquired the copyright from Nelson and renewed it the following year. The ASV was the basis of four revisions. They were the *Revised Standard Version* (1946\-1952/1971\), the *Amplified Bible* (1965\), the *New American Standard Bible* (1963\-1971/1995\), and the *Recovery Version* (1999\). The ASV was also the basis for Kenneth N. Taylor’s Bible paraphrase, *The Living Bible*, which was published in 1971\. The *American Standard Version* has passed into antiquity, and with the expired copyright, into the public domain.
**American Standard Version \- Translation method**
The ASV relies on the translation method known as formal equivalence or word\-for\-word translation. The New Testament texts used in the ASV of 1901 were the Westcott\-Hort and Tregelles Greek texts. The 2015 edition of the ASV New Testament follows the [Nestle\-Aland](Nestle-Aland-Greek-New-Testament.html), 28th edition. Using primarily the [Masoretic Text](Masoretic-Text.html) for the Old Testament, the name of God (the [tetragrammaton](YHWH-tetragrammaton.html) *YHWH*) is consistently rendered “Jehovah” in the ASV, rather than “LORD” as it appears in the *King James Bible*. This made the ASV the favorite of the [Jehovah’s Witnesses](Jehovahs-Witnesses.html) and is the basis of their *New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures*, translated by members of their group and published by the [Watchtower Society](Watchtower-Bible-Tract-Society.html). Other changes from the RV to the ASV included (but were not limited to) substituting *who* and *that* for *which* when referring to people, and *Holy Spirit* in place of *Holy Ghost*. Page headings were added, and footnotes were improved.
**American Standard Version \- Pros and Cons**
The ASV is not in wide use today, primarily due to its having been replaced, and improved upon, with the *New American Standard Bible*. In its time, the *American Standard Version* was a very good translation of the Bible into English. Its occasional use of archaic language was a drawback, along with its sometimes sacrificing readability in favor of strict literalness.
**American Standard Version \- Sample Verses**
John 1:1, 14 – “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us (and we beheld his glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father), full of grace and truth.”
John 3:16 – “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have eternal life.”
John 8:58 – “Jesus said unto them, ‘Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was born, I am.’”
Ephesians 2:8\-9 – “for by grace have ye been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not of works, that no man should glory.”
Titus 2:13 – “looking for the blessed hope and appearing of the glory of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;”
|
What is the New English Bible (NEB)? |
Answer
Published in 1970 by the Oxford University Press and the Cambridge University Press, the *New English Bible* (NEB) was a fresh translation of the Bible into modern English directly from the original Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic texts (with some Latin in the Apocrypha). In 1935, near the time when the copyright to the *English Revised Version* —a late 19th\-century British revision of the *King James Version of 1611* —was due to expire, the Oxford University Press and the Cambridge University Press, who held the ERV copyright, began investigations to determine whether a modern revision of the ERV text was necessary. In May of 1946, it was determined that a new translation should be undertaken in order to produce a Bible with thoroughly "modern English." Work began soon thereafter, and the New Testament was published in 1961 with the whole Bible appearing in 1970\. It was significantly revised and re\-published in 1989 as the *Revised English Bible*.
**New English Bible \- Translation method**
Three committees of translators and one committee of literary advisers were enlisted and charged with the task of producing the *New English Bible*. Each of the three translation committees was responsible for a different section of the Bible. For the Old Testament, the translators primarily made use of the [Masoretic Text](Masoretic-Text.html), also using the [Dead Sea Scrolls](dead-sea-scrolls.html), the [Samaritan Pentateuch](Samaritan-Pentateuch.html), the Greek [Septuagint](septuagint.html), and other ancient manuscripts. For the New Testament, the NEB translators relied on a large body of texts including early Greek New Testament manuscripts, early translations rendered in other languages, and the quotations of early Christian writers and speakers. The form of translation of the NEB was according to the principle of dynamic equivalence—a thought\-for\-thought as opposed to word\-for\-word translation. The *New English Bible* was produced primarily by British and European scholarship for a British audience. However, directly following the Second World War, the English of Great Britain and Europe began to be influenced by foreign idiom, especially that of the Americans. For this reason, passages found in the NEB could be understood by a large body of English\-speaking individuals.
**New English Bible \- Pros and Cons**
The *New English Bible* never gained wide acceptance, either in the United Kingdom or the United States. While it is an adequate translation, there was nothing “special” about it that would attract people to use it as their primary Bible. The NEB chose in some places to move away from how a certain verse traditionally read, causing many people to reject it due to its lack of familiarity.
**New English Bible \- Sample Verses**
John 1:1, 14 – “WHEN ALL THINGS BEGAN, the Word already was. The Word dwelt with God, and what God was, the Word was. So the Word became flesh; he came to dwell among us, and we saw his glory, such glory as befits the Father’s only Son, full of grace and truth.”
John 3:16 – “God loved the world so much that he gave his only Son, that everyone who has faith in him may not die but have eternal life.”
John 8:58 – “Jesus said, 'In very truth I tell you, before Abraham was born, I am.'”
Ephesians 2:8\-9 – “For it is by his grace you are saved, through trusting him; it is not your own doing. It is God’s gift, not a reward for work done. There is nothing for anyone to boast of.”
Titus 2:13 – “looking forward to the happy fulfilment of our hopes when the splendour of our great God and Saviour Christ Jesus will appear.”
|
What is the Baptist Church, and what do Baptists believe? |
Answer
[First Baptist, Second Baptist](First-Baptist-Second-Baptist-Church.html), [American Baptist](American-Baptist-Church.html), [Southern Baptist](Southern-Baptist-Convention.html), [General Baptist](Baptist-General-Conference.html), [Independent Baptist](Independent-Baptists.html), [Primitive Baptist](Primitive-Baptists.html) – the list goes on and on. Just who are these groups, and where did they all come from? Do they believe the same things or get along with each other? Depending on whom you ask, the Baptist church can be the oldest of all traditions, or a newcomer hanging on the coattails of the Reformation. It can be the standard\-bearer of old\-time, orthodox doctrine or the breeding ground of heresy. The truth is that the answer depends on whether you are examining a particular group or the fundamental doctrines of that group. Each Baptist group can trace its history to a particular starting point as an organization, but the roots go back to the very beginning of the Christian faith.
Tracking down the origins of the Baptist Church in general is an exercise in ancient church history. From the days of the apostles, there was one Church of Jesus Christ, with a single body of doctrine taught by the apostles. The various local churches preached repentance and confession of sins, along with baptism by immersion as an outward sign of the new life in Christ (Romans 6:3\-4\). Under the authority of the apostles themselves as to doctrine, each church was independently governed by the leaders God placed in them. There was neither denominational hierarchy, nor distinction of “us/them” within the various churches. In fact, Paul soundly rebuked the Corinthians for such divisions (1 Corinthians 3:1\-9\). When disputes over sound doctrine arose, the apostles declared God’s teaching based on the words of the Lord and the Old Testament Scriptures. For at least 100 years, this model remained the standard for all churches. Thus, the characteristics that defined the earliest churches are the same that most Baptist churches identify with today.
Starting around A.D. 250, with the intense persecutions under Emperor Decius, a gradual change began to take place as the bishops (pastors) of certain notable churches assumed a hierarchical authority over the churches in their regions (e.g., the church of Rome). While many churches surrendered themselves to this new structure, there was a substantial number of dissenting churches who refused to come under the growing authority of the bishops. These dissenting churches were first called “Puritans” and are known to have had an influence as far as France in the 3rd century. As the organized church gradually adopted new practices and doctrines, the dissenting churches maintained their historical positions. The consistent testimony of the church for its first 400 years was to administer baptism to only those who first made a profession of faith in Christ. Starting in A.D. 401, with the fifth Council of Carthage, the churches under the rule of Rome began teaching and practicing infant baptism. As a result, the separatist churches began re\-baptizing those who made professions of faith after having been baptized in the official church. At this time, the Roman Empire encouraged their bishops to actively oppose the dissenting churches, and even passed laws condemning them to death. The re\-baptizers became known as Anabaptists, though the churches in various regions of the empire were also known by other names, such as Novatianists, Donatists, Albigenses, and Waldenses.
These Anabaptist congregations grew and prospered throughout the [Holy Roman Empire](Holy-Roman-Empire.html), even though they were almost universally persecuted by the Catholic Church. By the Reformation, Martin Luther’s assistants complained that the Baptists in Bohemia and Moravia were so prevalent, they were like weeds. When John Calvin’s teachings became commonly known, many of the Waldenses united with the reformed church. Menno Simons, the founder of the Mennonites, organized the scattered community of Dutch Baptist churches in 1536\. From this point on, the various Anabaptist churches gradually lost their ancient names and assumed the name “Baptist,” though they retained their historic independence and self\-rule. The first English Baptist church was founded in 1612 by Thomas Helwys and John Murton, who had come under the influence of the Dutch Puritans in Amsterdam. This group became known as General Baptists, for their Arminian belief in general atonement. Another English Baptist church was formed after a schism from Henry Jacob’s congregation in London in 1633\. This group held a Calvinistic theology of particular atonement and became the main influence in the English [Particular Baptist](Particular-Baptists.html) movement.
The first Baptist church in America was founded by Roger Williams in 1638\. During the colonial and federal periods, the Baptist churches prospered and spread, while being only loosely organized as a fellowship. The first clear national organization was the General Missionary Convention of the Baptist Denomination in 1814\. This was called by Luther Rice to address the need of raising funds and workers to carry out the missionary mandate in foreign countries. Some Baptist churches resisted this missionary emphasis and became known as Primitive Baptists. When the Civil War broke out, the Baptists in the North and the South broke their fellowship and formed separate denominations. Today, there are at least 65 different Baptist associations or denominations in the United States. Some retain a strict autonomy for the local church, while others have more of a denominational structure. Some have very conservative views of doctrine and practice, while others are quite progressive and liberal. Even within some groups there is a wide divergence of practice, so it is hard to pin down exactly what they believe.
The Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) is a denomination comprised of over 16 million members in over 42,000 churches in the United States. Individual church membership is typically a matter of accepting Jesus Christ as personal Savior and submitting to believer’s baptism by immersion. The SBC is considered to be an evangelistic, mission\-minded church with a generally conservative doctrine which focuses on the fact that Jesus died for our sin, was buried, and then rose from the grave and ascended to heaven. Unlike some other denominations, the churches in the SBC generally identify themselves as independent, autonomous congregations which have voluntarily joined together for mutual support.
The American Baptist Church, USA, has roughly 1\.3 million members and was formerly known as the Northern Baptist Convention, which formed after the split with the Southern Baptists. A key distinctive of the American Baptists is the freedom of the individual churches to have differing beliefs. The denomination’s unity is based on functional cooperation rather than doctrinal agreement. This practice led to a split in 1932, which resulted in the formation of the [General Association of Regular Baptist Churches](Regular-Baptist-Church.html) (GARBC). The GARBC holds a conservative doctrine and emphasizes evangelism and missionary work.
The name “Baptist” has come to mean many things to many people, and so can sometimes cause confusion. As with any other church, the name above the door isn’t as important as what is taught within. As we examine any church, we would do well to follow the example of the Berean believers in Acts 17:11, who “searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so” (KJV).
|
What is the Good News Bible (GNB) / Today’s English Version (TEV)? |
Answer
The *Good News Bible*, also known as the *Good News Translation* and *Today’s English Version*, was first published as a full Bible in 1976 by the American Bible Society as a “common language” Bible. It was conceived because of a need in Africa and the Far East for a version of the Bible that was friendly to non\-native English speakers. In 1979, the [Apocryphal/Deuterocanonical Books](apocrypha-deuterocanonical.html) were added to the *Good News Bible* and published as *Good News Bible: Today’s English Version with Deuterocanonicals/Apocrypha*. In 1992, the translation was revised with inclusive language. It is described by the publishers as a clear and simple modern translation that is faithful to the original Hebrew, Koine Greek, and Aramaic texts.
**Good News Bible \- Translation method**
The translation style of the *Good News Bible* is dynamic equivalence. That is, the meaning of the Hebrew and Greek is expressed in a "thought for thought" translation rather than "word for word." The GNB is written in a simple, everyday language, with the intention that everyone can appreciate it, and so is often considered particularly suitable for children and for those learning English. Included in the *Good News Bible* are introductions to each book of the Bible.
**Good News Bible \- Pros and Cons**
Overall, the *Good News Bible / Today’s English Version* is a very good and accurate translation. It is easy to read and uses understandable modern English. If it has a general flaw, it does seem that the GNB is a little too dynamic in places, causing some of its renderings to be significantly different from what is said in the original languages. There is one particularly poor translation, however: "What the Law could not do, because human nature was weak, God did. He condemned sin in human nature by sending his own Son, **who came with a nature like man’s sinful nature**, to do away with sin" (Romans 8:3\). Romans 8:3 in the GNB/TEV essentially says that Jesus had a sinful nature, which obviously goes against many other Scriptures in the New Testament, even within the *Good News Bible* itself.
**Good News Bible \- Sample Verses**
John 1:1, 14 – “In the beginning the Word already existed; the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The Word became a human being and, full of grace and truth, lived among us. We saw his glory, the glory which he received as the Father’s only Son.”
John 3:16 – “For God loved the world so much that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not die but have eternal life.”
John 8:58 – “‘I am telling you the truth,’ Jesus replied. ‘Before Abraham was born, I Am.’”
Ephesians 2:8\-9 – “For it is by God’s grace that you have been saved through faith. It is not the result of your own efforts, but God’s gift, so that no one can boast about it.”
Titus 2:13 – “as we wait for the blessed Day we hope for, when the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ will appear.”
|
What is the Amplified Bible (AMP)? |
Answer
The *Amplified Bible* was the first Bible project of The Lockman Foundation, in conjunction with Zondervan. The first full edition of the *Amplified Bible* was published in 1965\. It is largely a revision of the *American Standard Version* of 1901, with reference made to various texts in the original languages. The *Amplified Bible* was published in six stages: Gospel of John (1954\); New Testament (1958\); Old Testament Volume Two (Job\-Malachi) (1962\); Old Testament Volume One (Genesis\-Esther) (1964\); Complete Bible (1965\); Updated Edition (1987\).
**Amplified Bible \- Translation method**
The *Amplified Bible* attempts to take both word meaning and context into account in order to accurately translate the original text from one language into another. The *Amplified Bible* does this through the use of explanatory alternate readings and amplifications to assist the reader in understanding what Scripture really says. Multiple English word equivalents to each key Hebrew and Greek word clarify and amplify meanings that may otherwise have been concealed by the traditional translation method.
**Amplified Bible \- Pros and Cons**
The *Amplified Bible* can be a valuable study tool, as the different “alternate” renderings can give additional insight into the meaning of a text. The problem is the words the AMP gives alternate renderings for CAN mean those things, but do not mean ALL of those things. The fact that a word can have different meanings does not mean that every possible meaning is a valid rendering each time the word occurs. Also, it being based on the *American Standard Version* results in some of its wordings sounding archaic.
**Amplified Bible \- Sample Verses**
John 1:1, 14 – “In the beginning \[before all time] was the Word (Christ), and the Word was with God, and the Word was God Himself. And the Word (Christ) became flesh (human, incarnate) and tabernacled (fixed His tent of flesh, lived awhile) among us; and we \[actually] saw His glory (His honor, His majesty), such glory as an only begotten son receives from his father, full of grace (favor, loving\-kindness) and truth.”
John 3:16 – “For God so greatly loved and dearly prized the world that He \[even] gave up His only begotten (unique) Son, so that whoever believes in (trusts in, clings to, relies on) Him shall not perish (come to destruction, be lost) but have eternal (everlasting) life.”
John 8:58 – “Jesus replied, I assure you, most solemnly I tell you, before Abraham was born, I AM.”
Ephesians 2:8\-9 – “For it is by free grace (God’s unmerited favor) that you are saved (delivered from judgment and made partakers of Christ’s salvation) through \[your] faith. And this \[salvation] is not of yourselves \[of your own doing, it came not through your own striving], but it is the gift of God; Not because of works \[not the fulfillment of the Law’s demands], lest any man should boast. \[It is not the result of what anyone can possibly do, so no one can pride himself in it or take glory to himself.]”
Titus 2:13 – “Awaiting and looking for the \[fulfillment, the realization of our] blessed hope, even the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Christ Jesus (the Messiah, the Anointed One).”
|
What is the Today’s New International Version (TNIV)? |
Answer
The *Today’s New International Version* was published in 2005 by Zondervan, while the rights to it are held by Biblica, a non\-profit that uses revenue gained from Bible sales to translate and distribute Bibles in indigenous languages all over the world. *Today’s New International Version* was designed to reflect the *New International Version*, while clarifying and updating passages and words to provide a more timely, contemporary English rendition for a new generation of Bible readers. The TNIV is the work of the Committee on Bible Translation (CBT), a group of thirteen evangelical scholars who also translated the NIV. In September 2009, it was announced that the TNIV would be discontinued and that it will be replaced by a future revision of the NIV text. That future version, the *2011 New International Version*, was released to the public in March 2011 and received much of the same criticism regarding its “gender neutral” language as the TNIV. The 2011 NIV has replaced the 1984 NIV, which has been used and loved by Christians the world over for over 25 years, but which will no longer be available.
**Today’s New International Version \- Translation method**
While adhering to the translation method known as dynamic equivalence (thought\-for\-thought as opposed to word\-for\-word), the *Today’s New International Version* also attempted to incorporate improvements that reflect contemporary English terms. For example, the "sixth hour" is accurately translated as "noon" in the modern understanding of time (Mark 15:33\). Generally, the TNIV retains gender\-accurate, masculine terminology for references to God. There are passages in the TNIV, however, in which the contemporary English rendition used to refer to men and women has been translated to accurately reflect the original language, context, and understanding. Where the NIV previously used "he," "man," or "men" to indicate all people, the TNIV, in many cases, renders these passages as "person," "people," or other terminology that reflects the meaning of the original language. The CBT felt that these updates do not impose upon or change the doctrinal impact of Scripture. So, for example, in Paul’s letter to Titus, referring to God’s saving grace, the TNIV renders 2:11 this way: "For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all people."
Other passages rendered gender\-neutral, however, have been the cause of concern among evangelical leaders. One example is found in Hebrews 2:17 \- “For this reason he had to be made like his brothers in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest ...”(NIV), while the *Today’s New International Version* translates “brothers” as “brothers and sisters.” A “Statement of Concern” over the TNIV, outlining misgivings of over 100 evangelical leaders, includes the following comment on this verse:
Did Jesus have to become like his sisters "in every way" in order to become a "high priest in service to God"? All the Old Testament priests were men, and surely the high priest was a man. This text does not quite proclaim an androgynous Jesus (who was both male and female), but it surely leaves open a wide door for misunderstanding, and almost invites misunderstanding. Meditate on that phrase "in every way" and see if you can trust the TNIV.
Other notable changes are that “Christ” has regularly been rendered as “Messiah,” and “saints” has often been replaced with terms such as “God’s people” or “believers.” Other textual updates in the *Today’s New International Version* reflect simple revisions in punctuation, copy\-editing details, and treatment of footnotes.
**Today’s New International Version \- Pros and Cons**
Like the NIV, the biggest strength of the TNIV is its readability. The original Hebrew and Greek are rendered in modern, understandable, and natural\-sounding English. The most significant weakness of the *Today’s New International Version* is its gender\-inclusivity. While, despite what the conspiracy theorists claim, the TNIV is not an attempt to de\-masculinize God; often, the TNIV’s gender\-inclusive renderings are not necessary. In fact, sometimes they are misleading. While we do not question the motives of the TNIV translation committee, we have serious reservations about some of their decisions. It is likely best that the TNIV was discontinued.
**Today’s New International Version \- Sample Verses**
John 1:1, 14– “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only \[Son], who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.”
John 3:16 – “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 8:58 – “’Very truly I tell you,’ Jesus answered, ‘before Abraham was born, I am!’"
Ephesians 2:8\-9 – “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast.”
Titus 2:13 – “while we wait for the blessed hope—the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ.”
|
What is the New English Translation (NET)? |
Answer
The *New English Translation* is a free online English translation of the Bible, sponsored by the Biblical Studies Foundation (aka Bible.org). In November 1995, twenty biblical scholars, working directly from the best currently available Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts, began work on a digital version of a modern English translation to be accessible over the Internet and on CD\-ROM without cost for the user. The *New English Translation* claims to be non\-sectarian and evangelical. The first edition, made available in November 2005, may be downloaded free of charge and is also available in printed editions. The first edition comprises the Protestant [canon](canon-Bible.html), while the [apocryphal/deuterocanonical](apocrypha-deuterocanonical.html) books are undergoing translation and will be used in some future editions. A Chinese translation team is currently at work on a new translation which incorporates the *New English Translation’s* notes in Chinese, making them available to an additional 1\.5 billion people. Parallel projects involving other languages are also in progress.
**New English Translation \- Translation Method**
Like the [*New International Version*](New-International-Version-NIV.html) (NIV), the method of translation adopted for the *New English Translation* is that of dynamic equivalence, or thought\-for\-thought, as opposed to strict word\-for\-word translation. The translation is most notable for its availability on the Internet, the immense number—nearly 61,000—of lengthy footnotes, and its open copyright permitting free downloads and use for ministry purposes. Many of the notes are included to help the reader see the decisions and choices that went into the translation, including those produced by the translators while they worked through the issues and options confronting them, thus providing transparency for users. Additionally, The NET Bible is the first Bible ever to be beta\-tested on the Internet. In this beta\-testing process, all working drafts of the *New English Translation* were posted on www.bible.org for public review and comment. The purpose was not to achieve a consensus translation, but to be accountable, to be transparent, and to request that millions of people provide feedback on the faithfulness and clarity of the translation as well as on the translators’ notes. Numerous suggestions and comments were received from scholars, professors, lay Bible students, and Christians who speak English as a second language. By creating a translation environment that is responsible both to the world’s scholars and to lay readers, the NET Bible was read, studied, and checked by more eyes than any other Bible translation in history.
**New English Translation \- Pros and Cons**
Overall, the *New English Translation* is a very good Bible translation. Its free availability and unlimited usage is something other translations should learn from. The NET sometimes is a little too dynamic in its renderings, delving into interpretation rather than simple translation. At the same time, the NET is more formal than most of the other English Bible translations that are considered dynamic.
**New English Translation \- Sample Verses**
John 1:1, 14 – “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was fully God. Now the Word became flesh and took up residence among us. We saw his glory – the glory of the one and only, full of grace and truth, who came from the Father.”
John 3:16 – “For this is the way God loved the world: He gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life.”
John 8:58 – “Jesus said to them, ‘I tell you the solemn truth, before Abraham came into existence, I am!’”
Ephesians 2:8\-9 – “For by grace you are saved through faith, and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God; it is not from works, so that no one can boast.”
Titus 2:13 – “as we wait for the happy fulfillment of our hope in the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ.”
|
How can I not go to hell? |
Answer
Not going to hell is easier than you think. Some people believe they have to obey the Ten Commandments for their entire lives to not go to hell. Some people believe they must observe certain rites and rituals in order to not go to hell. Some people believe there is no way we can know for sure whether or not we will go to hell. None of these views are correct. The Bible is very clear on how a person can avoid going to hell after death.
The Bible describes hell as a terrifying and horrible place. Hell is described as “eternal fire” (Matthew 25:41\), “unquenchable fire” (Matthew 3:12\), “shame and everlasting contempt” (Daniel 12:2\), a place where “the fire is not quenched” (Mark 9:44\-49\), and “everlasting destruction” (2 Thessalonians 1:9\). Revelation 20:10 describes hell as a “lake of burning sulfur” where the wicked are “tormented day and night forever and ever.” Obviously, hell is a place we should avoid.
Why does hell even exist, and why does God send some people there? The Bible tells us that God “prepared” hell for the devil and the fallen angels after they rebelled against Him (Matthew 25:41\). Those who refuse God’s offer of forgiveness will suffer the same eternal destiny of the devil and the fallen angels. Why is hell necessary? All sin is ultimately against God (Psalm 51:4\), and since God is an infinite and eternal being, only an infinite and eternal penalty is sufficient. Hell is the place where God’s holy and righteous demands of justice are carried out. Hell is where God condemns sin and all those who reject Him. The Bible makes it clear that we have all sinned (Ecclesiastes 7:20; Romans 3:10\-23\), so, as a result, we all deserve to go to hell.
So, how can we not go to hell? Since only an infinite and eternal penalty is sufficient, an infinite and eternal price must be paid. God became a human being in the Person of Jesus Christ (John 1:1, 14\). In Jesus Christ, God lived among us, taught us, and healed us—but those things were not His ultimate mission. God became a human being so that He could die for us. Jesus, God in human form, died on the cross. As God, His death was infinite and eternal in value, paying the full price for sin (1 John 2:2\). God invites us to receive Jesus Christ as Savior, accepting His death as the full and just payment for our sins. God promises that anyone who believes in Jesus (John 3:16\), trusting Him alone as the Savior (John 14:6\), will be saved, i.e., not go to hell.
God does not want anyone to go to hell (2 Peter 3:9\). That is why God made the ultimate, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice on our behalf. If you want to not go to hell, receive Jesus as your Savior. It is as simple as that. Tell God that you recognize that you are a sinner and that you deserve to go to hell. Declare to God that you are trusting in Jesus Christ as your Savior. Thank God for providing for your salvation and deliverance from hell. Simple faith, trusting in Jesus Christ as the Savior, is how you can avoid going to hell!
Have you made a decision for Christ because of what you have read here? If so, please click on the “I have accepted Christ today” button below.
If you have any questions, please use the question form on our [Bible Questions Answered](Bible-Questions.html) page.
|
Should all pronouns referring to God be capitalized? |
Answer
Many people struggle with this question. Some, believing it shows [reverence for God](reverence-for-God.html), capitalize all pronouns that refer to God. Others, believing the “rules” of English style should be followed, do not capitalize the deity pronouns. So, who is right? The answer is neither. It is neither right nor wrong to capitalize or not capitalize pronouns that refer to God. It is a matter of personal conviction, preference, and context. Some Bible translations capitalize pronouns referring to God, while others do not.
In the original languages of the Bible, capitalizing pronouns referring to God was not an issue. In Hebrew, there was no such thing as upper\-case and lower\-case letters. There was simply an alphabet, no capital letters at all. In Greek, there were capital (upper\-case) letters and lower\-case letters. However, in all of the earliest copies of the Greek New Testament, the text is written in all capital letters. When God inspired the human authors of Scripture to write His Word, He did not lead them to give any special attention to pronouns that refer to Him. With that in mind, it follows that God is not offended if we do not capitalize pronouns that refer to Him.
If you capitalize pronouns that refer to God to show reverence for His name, fantastic! Continue doing so. If you capitalize pronouns that refer to God to make it more clear who is being referred to, great! Continue doing so. If you are not capitalizing pronouns that refer to God because you believe proper English grammar/syntax/style should be followed, wonderful! Continue following your conviction. Again, this is not a right vs. wrong issue. Each of us must follow his/her own conviction and each of us should refrain from judging those who take a different viewpoint.
|
What is the Nazarene Church, and what do Nazarenes believe? |
Answer
The Church of the Nazarene is a denomination in the Wesleyan\-Holiness tradition. The roots of the Nazarene Church go back to the teachings of [John Wesley](John-Wesley.html), as well as to various elements of the [Holiness movement](Holiness-movement.html) of the 19th century. Today there are about 1\.8 million members in the Church of the Nazarene, making it the largest of the Holiness movement denominations.
The full history of the Nazarene Church is woven with threads from many sources, but the primary ones will be identified here. In 1895 Phineas Bresee and others formed a church in Los Angeles, California, which they named the Church of the Nazarene. This church was organized as the “first of a denomination that preached the reality of entire sanctification received through faith in Christ.” [Entire sanctification](entire-sanctification.html) is the idea that the soul of the believer attains such a work of the Spirit that it loses its desire to participate in acts of sin. Most churches within the Methodist movement taught some form of this doctrine, but, until the Nazarenes came along, none had formalized it and made it a distinctive of their organization.
In 1907 a general conference was called to draw together the various independent groups that were part of the Holiness movement. The result was the merger of the Church of the Nazarene and the Association of Pentecostal Churches of America. The merged body was named the Pentecostal Church of the Nazarene. In 1908 more groups joined the merger: the Holiness Association of Texas, the Pennsylvania Conference of Holiness Christian Churches, and the Holiness Church of Christ. The Pentecostal Church of Scotland and the Pentecostal Mission joined in 1915\. In 1919 the church dropped the name “Pentecostal” because of the rise of the modern [tongues](gift-of-tongues.html) movement within Pentecostalism.
From the very beginning, the focus of the Nazarene Church has been personal holiness for believers. According to the Church of the Nazarene website, the goal of the Nazarenes is that all believers “experience a deeper level of life in which there is victory over sin, power to witness and serve, and a richer fellowship with God, all through the filling of the Holy Spirit.” In contrast to modern [Pentecostalism](Pentecostals.html), which teaches that the evidence of Spirit baptism is speaking in tongues, the Nazarene Church teaches that the evidence of Spirit baptism is the fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22–23\).
Following the Arminian doctrine of Wesley, the Nazarene Church teaches that a person can renounce his or her salvation and walk away from a saving relationship with Christ. In rejecting [eternal security](eternal-security.html), Nazarenes have no assurance of salvation. As a result, there is a real emphasis on working to maintain a right relationship with God within the Nazarene tradition.
The Church of the Nazarene is an evangelistic, missions\-minded body that takes their relationship with God seriously and desires to share the gospel with the world around them.
|
What is the Contemporary English Version (CEV)? |
Answer
**Contemporary English Version \- History**
Published by the American Bible Society, the *Contemporary English Version* has the goal of uncompromising simplicity. Also known as the *Bible for Today’s Family*, the CEV is written at a fourth grade reading level, making it appropriate for children and adults with limited English skills. In 1991, the 175th anniversary of the American Bible Society, the CEV New Testament was released. The CEV Old Testament was released in 1995\. In 1999, the Apocryphal/Deuterocanonical books were published. An Anglicized version was produced by the British and Foreign Bible Society, which includes metric measurements for the Commonwealth market.
**Contemporary English Version \- Translation Method**
The *Contemporary English Version* translators used the dynamic equivalence (thought\-for\-thought as opposed to word\-for\-word) translation method. The CEV uses gender\-sensitive language for humanity but not for the Godhead. The translators also attempted to simplify certain archaic\-sounding words into more modern parlance. For example, Exodus 20:14 renders “Do not commit adultery” to “Be faithful in marriage.” The *Contemporary English Version* is not, as some have assumed, a revision of the *Good News Bible*, which is also published by the American Bible Society. Rather, it is a fresh translation with a lower reading level, making it more accessible to more people around the world.
**Contemporary English Version \- Pros and Cons**
The *Contemporary English Version* is easy\-to\-read and easy\-to\-understand. It is written in quality and contemporary English. However, when it goes more toward dynamic equivalence and less toward formal equivalence, the CEV sometimes goes astray, interpreting rather than translating. Some view the *Contemporary English Version* as more of a paraphrase than a translation, but that is likely inaccurate, as the CEV is far more literal to the text than the true paraphrases, the *Living Bible* and the *Message*.
**Contemporary English Version \- Sample verses**
John 1:1, 14 – “In the beginning was the one who is called the Word. The Word was with God and was truly God. The Word became a human being and lived here with us. We saw his true glory, the glory of the only Son of the Father. From him all the kindness and all the truth of God have come down to us.”
John 3:16 – “God loved the people of this world so much that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who has faith in him will have eternal life and never really die.”
John 8:58 – “Jesus answered, "I tell you for certain that even before Abraham was, I was, and I am."
Ephesians 2:8\-9 – “You were saved by faith in God, who treats us much better than we deserve. This is God’s gift to you, and not anything you have done on your own. It isn’t something you have earned, so there is nothing you can brag about.”
Titus 2:13 – “We are filled with hope, as we wait for the glorious return of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ.”
|
What is the GOD’s WORD Translation (GW)? |
Answer
**GOD’s WORD Translation \- History**
Completed in 1995, the *GOD’s WORD Translation* (GW) is an English translation of the Bible by the God’s Word to the Nations Society. GW had its beginnings with a New Testament translation titled *The New Testament in the Language of Today: An American Translation*, published in 1963 by Lutheran pastor and seminary professor William F. Beck (1904–1966\). In 1982, work on a revision was begun by Phillip B. Giessler, a pastor from Cleveland, Ohio, and his committee. This yielded another NT translation released in 1988 and titled *New Testament: God’s Word to the Nations* (GWN). In 1992, earlier work was abandoned and a new translation was begun, this time based on the best Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic manuscripts currently available. In early 1994 the translation was renamed *GOD’s WORD* prior to being turned over to World Bible Publishers for publication in March 1995\. In 2008 rights to *GOD’s WORD* were acquired by Baker Publishing Group.
**GOD’s WORD Translation \- Translation Method**
The *GOD’s WORD Translation* uses the translation method known as “closest natural equivalence” which seeks to combine dynamic equivalence (thought for thought) with finding equivalent English ways of expressing the meaning of the original text. This procedure, the translators contend, ensures that the translation is faithful to the meaning intended by the original writer. Closest natural equivalence seeks to avoid the awkwardness and inaccuracy associated with word\-for\-word translation, and avoids the loss of meaning and oversimplification associated with thought\-for\-thought translation. Another consideration for the translators was readability, so they used common English punctuation, capitalization, and nearly perfect English grammar to express the text in clear, natural English. The *GOD’s WORD Translation* is printed in an open, single column format that enhances readability.
**GOD’s WORD Translation \- Pros and Cons**
The *GOD’s WORD Translation* sometimes does a good job at rendering words/phrases how they would be rendered if the Bible was being translated into English for the first time today. With a 400\+ year history of English Bible translations, new translations are often rendered a certain way because that is how the translators are used to reading/hearing it. The *GOD’s WORD Translation* seeks to avoid this, and should be commended for this effort. However, sometimes in its goal of “closest natural equivalence,” the *GOD’s WORD Translation* strays a little too far from the literal meaning of the text, interpreting rather than translating.
**GOD’s WORD Translation \- Sample verses**
John 1:1, 14 – “In the beginning the Word already existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was God. The Word became human and lived among us. We saw his glory. It was the glory that the Father shares with his only Son, a glory full of kindness and truth.”
John 3:16 – “God loved the world this way: He gave his only Son so that everyone who believes in him will not die but will have eternal life.”
John 8:58 – “Jesus told them, ‘I can guarantee this truth: Before Abraham was ever born, I am.’”
Ephesians 2:8\-9 – “God saved you through faith as an act of kindness. You had nothing to do with it. Being saved is a gift from God. It’s not the result of anything you’ve done, so no one can brag about it.”
Titus 2:13 – “At the same time we can expect what we hope for—the appearance of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ.”
|
How can I quit smoking? |
Answer
Many Christians who have been heavy smokers for years can readily empathize with the plight of anyone trying to quit smoking and can fully understand the struggle experienced by those who desire to quit. Quitting is certainly not easy, but it can be done. Many two\-pack\-a\-day smokers are now smoke\-free and can attest to the fact that it can be done when we turn the matter over to God and rely on His strength and power.
There are numerous reasons why quitting the smoking habit is a good idea for everyone but especially for Christians. If a Christian is unsure of why to quit smoking and unsure as to whether or not it constitutes sin, our article entitled “[What is the Christian view of smoking? Is smoking a sin?](smoking-Christian-sin.html)” would be a good place to start. The reasons outlined in the article should provide ample motivation to a smoker who is still unsure whether or not to quit. Those who have determined to quit smoking should understand that, humanly speaking, stopping smoking is one of the most difficult things to do. Research has shown that nicotine is very addictive, even more addictive than heroin, some say.
But the addictive nature of nicotine need not discourage us. Paul tells us, “[I can do all things through Christ](I-can-do-all-things-through-Christ.html) who strengthens me” (Philippians 4:13, NKJV). Even though it is difficult, and full withdrawal may take time before one no longer desires cigarettes, as Christians we are to look to God from whom our help comes. We set our hearts on things above and pray the Lord will give us the strength to gain the victory in this trial. Some people leave the Lord out in their attempt to overcome bad habits, and that is a huge mistake. Prayer helps in these types of situations, and we are invited to take our problems directly to the throne of God and to Him who can solve them (Hebrews 4:16\).
Relying on the power of the Holy Spirit does not necessarily mean that medical stop\-smoking aids cannot be used as well. Many have received great help through patches, gums, pills, etc. After prayer and consultation with a doctor, if God gives you peace about using a medical stop\-smoking aid, there is no biblical reason why you cannot.
God has declared that His grace is sufficient (2 Corinthians 12:9\). Where we are weak, He is strong. Our desire for cigarettes will be reduced as we grow and gain strength in the Lord. The power of God will work within us to alleviate the pressure to smoke, all to His glory. God will give us the strength to put Christ first and ourselves last. In this we will find that what we give up will be more than compensated by what we gain.
Being immersed in the Word of God is essential for the Christian who desires to quit smoking. Here are some verses to memorize and meditate on—verses that have helped others gain the victory over a smoking [addiction](addiction-Christian.html):
John 8:32, “Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”
John 8:36, “So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.”
1 Corinthians 6:19–20, “Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your bodies.”
Hebrews 12:1–2, “Since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses, let us throw off everything that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles. And let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us, fixing our eyes on Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of faith.”
Romans 13:14, “Clothe yourselves with the Lord Jesus Christ, and do not think about how to gratify the desires of the flesh.”
1 Corinthians 9:27, “I strike a blow to my body and make it my slave so that after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified for the prize.”
Matthew 19:26, “With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”
John 15:5, “I am the vine; you are the branches. If you remain in me and I in you, you will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing.”
Ephesians 4:22, “You were taught, with regard to your former way of life, to put off your old self, which is being corrupted by its deceitful desires.”
Philippians 4:13, “I can do all this through him who gives me strength.”
|
What does the Bible say about success? |
Answer
If you were to ask a random person on the street, how do you think he or she would define *success*? People would probably give lots of different answers. One might say success is being wealthy. Another might define *success* as having a good family and kids. Still another might say success is being healthy and enjoying a long life. For every ten people asked, you may find twenty different ideas of success!
When it comes to understanding what the Bible says about success, it is helpful to see how the Bible addresses some of the definitions of *success* that people in our world have.
When it comes to having [lots of money](Bible-wealth.html), the Bible says that God is the one who makes someone wealthy. Proverbs 22:2 states, “Rich and poor have this in common: The Lord is the Maker of them all.” Note that the writer doesn’t say, “Maker of both.” Rather, he says, “Maker of them all.” The declaration here is that God is the giver of all things to all people.
When it comes to the skills and abilities that lead to success in various fields, we see the same emphasis in the Bible—God is the giver. Consider 1 Corinthians 4:7, “For who makes you to differ from anyone else? What do you have that you have not received?” The implication in these questions is that our abilities and skills come from God.
How about the issue of influence and power? In John 19:11, after Pilate tells Jesus that he has the power to free Him or crucify Him, Jesus replies, “You would have no power over me if it were not given to you from above.” So even earthly authority, by which some measure success, is a gift from God.
These are just a few verses declaring that every thing, every ability, and every position is God’s gift. John the Baptist summarizes in John 3:27, “A man can receive only what is given him from heaven.” If any person can do anything defined as “successful,” it is only because God has given him or her that ability.
What is more, the things we may consider marks of success may not be what God views as valuable. In 1 John 2:15–17, things in this world are put in perspective:
“Do not love the world or anything in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For everything in the world—the cravings of sinful man, the lust of his eyes and the boasting of what he has and does—comes not from the Father but from the world. The world and its desires pass away, but the man who does the will of God lives forever.”
This passage covers everything in this world that we might be tempted to think gives success. If we are loving these things and pursuing them, thinking joy and satisfaction are found in them, we will find them to be empty. The gain of this world is not a true mark of success.
God defines *success* quite simply. In John 17:3, Jesus declares, “Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.” Psalm 16:11 states, “You have made known to me the path of life; You will fill me with joy in Your presence, with eternal pleasures at your right hand.” In Luke 10:20, Jesus says, “Do not rejoice that the spirits submit to you, but rejoice that your names are written in the book of life.” From these passages we can deduce that ultimate success is being saved and knowing God. “Eternal life” in John 17:3 isn’t just a length of time but a quality of life. [Eternal life](what-is-eternal-life.html) is awesome because we are known by God and are in His presence, where there is fullness of joy. We are not to rejoice because of our abilities, victories, and possessions in this world. True success in which we rejoice is overcoming this world, being saved, and going to be with Jesus in heaven.
God measures success differently than the world does. Jesus said, “It is the one who is least among you all who is the greatest” (Luke 9:48; cf. Mark 9:35\). Wealth, skill, and influence are irrelevant to true, eternal success. Biblical success that pleases and glorifies God is being known by Him and knowing and serving Him through faith in Jesus Christ and His gospel.
|
What is the New International Reader’s Version (NIrV)? |
Answer
The *New International Reader’s Version* (NIrV) was a new Bible version developed to enable early readers to understand God’s message. Begun in 1992 and co\-sponsored by the International Bible Society and Zondervan Publishing House, the *New International Reader’s Version* is a simplification of the *New International Version* (NIV), today’s most popular translation of the Bible. The NIrV was designed to make the Bible clear and understandable to early readers and can be read by a typical fourth grader. For this reason, it is also of value to the millions for whom English is a second language.
**New International Reader’s Version \- Translation method**
According to the publishers, the *New International Reader’s Version* intends to be distinguished by five fundamental characteristics—readability, understandability, compatibility with the NIV, reliability, and trustworthiness. It serves as a natural stepping stone to the NIV when the time is right. The translation method is the same as the NIV, dynamic equivalence (thought for thought as opposed to word for word). The *New International Reader’s Version* translates the Bible from the original Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic manuscripts, but in the process, lowers the reading level by simplifying the words and shortening the sentence length. The result is an accurate translation that is readable and understandable by more people, regardless of their English proficiency.
**New International Reader’s Version \- Pros and Cons**
The greatest strength of the *New International Reader’s Version* is its understandability. Most Bible translation scholars rate the NIrV as the easiest\-to\-understand English Bible translation. Sadly, the fact that the NIrV is designed for those of a low reading level has prevented many people from adopting it because they do not want others to know that their reading ability is below average. This should not be. Especially with reading the Bible, pride should never get in the way of understanding. A weakness of the NIrV is the freedom it often takes in how words and phrases are rendered. In going for understandability and simplicity, the text sometimes interprets instead of translates.
**New International Reader’s Version \- Sample Verses**
John 1:1, 14 – “In the beginning, the Word was already there. The Word was with God, and the Word was God. The Word became a human being. He made his home with us. We have seen his glory. It is the glory of the one and only Son. He came from the Father. And he was full of grace and truth.”
John 3:16 \- "God loved the world so much that he gave his one and only Son. Anyone who believes in him will not die but will have eternal life.”
John 8:58 \- "What I’m about to tell you is true," Jesus answered. "Before Abraham was born, I am!"
Ephesians 2:8\-9 – “God’s grace has saved you because of your faith in Christ. Your salvation doesn’t come from anything you do. It is God’s gift. It is not based on anything you have done. No one can brag about earning it.”
Titus 2:13 – “That’s how we should live as we wait for the blessed hope God has given us. We are waiting for Jesus Christ to appear in all his glory. He is our great God and Savior.”
|
What is apophatic theology? |
Answer
Apophatic theology (also known as [negative theology](negative-theology.html)) is an attempt to describe God by what cannot be said of Him. Many of the terms used to describe God’s attributes have within them an apophatic quality. For example, when we say God is infinite, we’re also saying is that God is not finite (i.e., not limited). Another example would be describing God as a spirit being, which is just another way of saying that God is not a physical being.
In church history, the apophatic method was popular among theologians such as [Tertullian](Tertullian.html), [St. Cyril of Jerusalem](Cyril-of-Jerusalem.html) and the Cappodocian Fathers. The most influential proponent of apophatic theology was Pseudo\-Dionysius (who was quoted many times in the [*Summa Theologica*](Summa-Theologica.html) by Thomas Aquinas). Apophatic theology is also prevalent in Eastern Orthodox Christianity and is seen as superior to positive (or cataphatic) theology. Because of God’s transcendence, it is thought, further knowledge of God must be gleaned from a direct experience of Him. This leads to mystical approaches to attaining a knowledge of God.
Much of this seems to evolve from the debate between God’s immanence and His transcendence. God’s immanence sees God as intimately involved with His creation and taking a keen interest in the lives of people. To protect against an over\-emphasis on God’s immanence, there are those who want to stress God’s transcendence, His "wholly otherness." But truth is not an "either/or" proposition in this case, but a “both/and” proposition. God is both immanent and transcendent. In His transcendence, it is appropriate to speak of what God is not (apophatic theology). We must also keep in mind that Christianity is a revealed faith and that, despite God’s transcendence, God condescended to reveal Himself to mankind. Therefore, we can make positive statements about God—that He is loving, gracious, and merciful. Such statements need to be seen analogically. In other words, we can understand what goodness and love and mercy mean, but when applied to God, they are understood to be applied in perfection, i.e., they are applied analogically, from the lesser (us) to the greater (God).
|
Who were the Samaritans? |
Answer
The [Samaritans](what-is-a-Samaritan.html) occupied the country formerly belonging to the tribe of Ephraim and the half\-tribe of Manasseh. The capital of the country was [Samaria](Samaria-in-the-Bible.html), formerly a large and splendid city. When the ten tribes were carried away into captivity to Assyria, the king of Assyria sent people from Cutha, Ava, Hamath, and Sepharvaim to inhabit Samaria (2 Kings 17:24; Ezra 4:2\-11\). These foreigners intermarried with the Israelite population that was still in and around Samaria. These “Samaritans” at first worshiped the idols of their own nations, but being troubled with lions, they supposed it was because they had not honored the God of that territory. A Jewish priest was therefore sent to them from Assyria to instruct them in the Jewish religion. They were instructed from the books of Moses, but still retained many of their idolatrous customs. The Samaritans embraced a religion that was a mixture of Judaism and idolatry (2 Kings 17:26\-28\). Because the Israelite inhabitants of Samaria had intermarried with the foreigners and adopted their idolatrous religion, Samaritans were universally despised by the Jews.
Additional grounds for animosity between the Israelites and Samaritans were the following:
1\. The Jews, after their return from Babylon, began rebuilding their temple. While Nehemiah was engaged in building the walls of Jerusalem, the Samaritans vigorously attempted to halt the undertaking (Nehemiah 6:1\-14\).
2\. The Samaritans built a temple for themselves on “[Mount Gerizim](mount-Gerizim.html),” which the Samaritans insisted was designated by Moses as the place where the nation should worship. Sanballat, the leader of the Samaritans, established his son\-in\-law, Manasses, as high priest. The idolatrous religion of the Samaritans thus became perpetuated.
3\. Samaria became a place of refuge for all the outlaws of Judea (Joshua 20:6\-7; 21:21\). The Samaritans willingly received Jewish criminals and refugees from justice. The violators of the Jewish laws, and those who had been excommunicated, found safety for themselves in Samaria, greatly increasing the hatred which existed between the two nations.
4\. The Samaritans received only the five books of Moses and rejected the writings of the prophets and all the Jewish traditions.
From these causes arose an irreconcilable difference between them, so that the Jews regarded the Samaritans as the worst of the human race (John 8:48\) and had no dealings with them (John 4:9\). In spite of the hatred between the Jews and the Samaritans, Jesus broke down the barriers between them, preaching the gospel of peace to the Samaritans (John 4:6\-26\), and the apostles later followed His example (Acts 8:25\).
|
What does the Bible say about applied kinesiology? |
Answer
Applied kinesiology, or muscle testing, is a method developed in 1964 for the purpose of diagnosing medical conditions, detecting energy imbalances, elucidating nutritional deficiencies and allergies, and determining prescribed therapies. Applied kinesiology is a form of alternative or naturopathic medicine. According to the handbook *Applied Kinesiology Muscle Response in Diagnostic Therapy and Preventive Medicine*, the practitioner of applied kinesiology claims to evaluate five body systems—nervous, lymphatic, vascular, cerebrospinal, and “meridian.”
The primary diagnostic procedure in applied kinesiology is the muscle test. In a typical session, a patient is asked to hold his arm parallel to the floor for the test. The practitioner will then pull or push the arm down while checking the degree of muscle resistance by the patient while the patient holds certain foods, vitamins, herbs, supplements, etc., in his other hand. Supposedly, if the patient is holding or thinking about something bad or negative, there will be weakness in his arm, and his resistance will be less. The arm will be easily pushed downward or will give way suddenly. Conversely, if the patient is holding or thinking about something good or positive, the resistance will be greater because the patient is stronger while holding the item.
George J. Goodheart invented applied kinesiology in 1964\. He combined elements of psychic philosophy, Chinese Taoism, and ancient Eastern practices with D. D. Palmer’s chiropractic theory. He combined the concept of “innate intelligence” with the Eastern religious concept of energy, ch’i, and the concept that muscles can indicate the condition of body organs via the ch’i’s meridians. He is reported to have developed a series of elaborate charts showing the relationship between certain organs and zones of the body as well as to specific nutrients and herbs. According to Goodheart, the information on the charts was at least partly derived through psychic powers.
Proponents of applied kinesiology claim to be able to diagnose disease, discover areas of weakness, pinpoint chemical imbalances, detect allergies, discern nutritive values of foods, and find toxic influences and reactions using Goodheart’s methods. Practitioners of applied kinesiology have also branched out into other areas, claiming to be able to detect whether someone is telling the truth, has a personality disorder or emotional problem, and whether someone or something is inherently good or evil. Information related to past lives can supposedly be discovered using these methods. Some have even claimed the ability to communicate with plants or other forces of nature. Behavioral kinesiology, an extension of applied kinesiology, uses muscle testing for determining basically everything in one’s life, such as music selections, paint colors, dietary choices, and relationship decisions. Touch for Health, a layperson’s version of applied kinesiology, moves even more deeply into the psychic realm. Its claim is that life energy can be regulated and manipulated by mental power alone. This is the New Age practice of visualization. Touch for Health incorporates the belief that "we are one with the universe" and that mental power enables us to tap into the life force that surrounds and permeates us.
Credible scientific studies of applied kinesiology conducted by major universities and written up in respected, peer\-reviewed medical journals scarcely exist. This is possibly due to the fact that few scientists or licensed medical doctors take its claims seriously. One double\-blind study was conducted to evaluate the claims of applied kinesiology and was published in the June 1988 issue of the *Journal of the American Dietetic Association*. The study specifically tested three experienced applied kinesiologists who evaluated athletes for four nutrients: thiamine, zinc, vitamin A and ascorbic acid. The results obtained by the three practitioners were assessed for reliability as compared to each other’s findings, standard laboratory tests assaying for nutrient status, and computerized testing of the actual strength of muscle contraction. Statistically speaking, the results were dismal for applied kinesiology. The testers did not agree with each other, failed to discern true nutrient differences, and could not even truly judge real differences in muscle strength. The abstract concludes that "the results of this study indicated that the use of applied kinesiology to evaluate nutrient status is no more useful than random guessing."
In another double\-blind study published in the March 1981 issue of the *Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry*, pages 321\-323, applied kinesiology failed to distinguish a test substance from a placebo. Many studies have shown that applied kinesiology results are not reproducible. One large review of applied kinesiology studies published in *Chiropractic and Osteopathy* concluded that "the few studies evaluating unique AK procedures either refute or cannot support the validity of AK procedures as diagnostic tests. The evidence to date does not support the use of \[manual muscle testing] for the diagnosis of organic disease or pre/subclinical conditions." In short, no study has ever shown any legitimate physical model showing how it works based on the known and accepted laws of physical anatomy. No government\- or university\-sponsored scientific studies are currently available that demonstrate that applied kinesiology is safe, effective or accurate.
According to a recent Time/CNN poll, about 30 percent of Americans have resorted to some form of "unconventional therapy," "half of them within the past year." This trend is giving the New Age movement its best opportunity for converting our culture. Many holistic health modalities, including applied kinesiology, incorporate pantheistic/occult philosophy, and spiritual experience that can entice an unsuspecting and vulnerable patient. This can lead to perverted thinking about God that is directly contrary to what the Bible teaches.
While it is true that applied kinesiology is not directly addressed in the Bible, we are called upon to exercise wisdom and prudence in regard to those specific issues about which the Bible is silent. While life forces or ch’i has not been proven by science, they are a well\-recognized feature of paganism. The manifestation of these life forces, whether in ancient paganism, modern occultism, or parapsychological research, has invariably been accompanied by altered states of consciousness, psychic phenomena, and contact with spirits. Those who have delved into such forces are usually completely involved in the pagan/occult world. Association with and participation in such practices are specifically prohibited in the Bible (Leviticus 19:31; 20:6, 27; Deuteronomy 18:1; Isaiah 8:19\).
Applied kinesiologists believe in an inner power, an “innate intelligence,” which is said to be connected to the "universal intelligence"(God) through our nervous systems. This theory operates within the context of pantheism: all reality is God. God is impersonal but conscious energy; therefore, all reality is a manifestation of spiritual energy. And if this energy can be released, man will be both healed and mystically enlightened to his true divinity. The actual manifestations of this energy (e.g., healings) have convinced many that New Age pantheism must be true (which provides a motive for satanic forces to manifest such healings).
The Bible teaches that God is personal, that He desires an intimate relationship with us (John 1:12; 14:6; 3:16\), that He loves us, and that He acts or intervenes on behalf of those who call upon His name. Throughout the Bible are records that God enters into individual covenants, responds to specific prayers of individuals, and delivers specific messages. In turn, we are called to develop a personal relationship with God through Jesus Christ. That relationship is dependent on God’s grace, not on any works that we do (Ephesians 2:8\-9\).
The biblical worldview of God is that while God is certainly omnipresent (Psalm 139:7\-16\), He is also transcendent and not part of the creation (Acts 17:24\-25; 1 Kings 8:27\). A belief in God’s omnipresence is not synonymous with the belief that God is in everything and everything is in God. God is clearly not in everything and does not approve of everything. There is undoubtedly a realm of darkness, idolatry, and the demonic that we are instructed to avoid (Ephesians 5:11; 1 Peter 5:8\). As followers of Christ, we are called to walk in the light, distinct in how we live (1 Thessalonians 5:5\).
Given the disparity between these biblical teachings and the underlying New Age philosophies of applied kinesiology, applied kinesiology cannot be considered to be consistent with the Bible. For Christians, Colossians 2:8 provides the best advice concerning applied kinesiology and all other pseudoscientific practices that incorporate New Age philosophies: “See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ."
|
What was the Sanhedrin? |
Answer
The term *Sanhedrin* is from a Greek word that means “assembly” or “council” and dates from the Hellenistic period, but the concept is one that goes back to the Bible. In the Torah, God commands Moses: “bring me seventy of Israel’s elders who are known to you as leaders and officials among the people. Have them come to the Tent of Meeting, that they may stand there with you" (Numbers 11:16\). Also, in the sixteenth chapter of Deuteronomy, we read in verse 18, “You shall appoint for yourselves judges and officers in all your towns which the Lord your God is giving you, according to your tribes and they shall judge the people with righteous judgment.” The land was divided up among the tribes, and in those areas where tribes had their presence, there were towns and villages, and in every town and every village there was to be a court. If there were 120 men as heads of families, they had a local court there called a Sanhedrin. In smaller towns where there were not 120 men as heads of families, there were either three judges, if the town was very small, or seven judges who sat as a court, both judge and jury, in all legal matters.
The Great Sanhedrin was the supreme court of ancient Israel, made up of 70 men and the high priest. In the Second Temple period, the Great Sanhedrin met in the Temple in Jerusalem. The court convened every day except festivals and on the Sabbath. The Sanhedrin as a body claimed powers that lesser Jewish courts did not have. As such, they were the only ones who could try the king or extend the boundaries of the Temple and Jerusalem, and were the ones to whom all questions of law were finally put. The last binding decision of the Sanhedrin was in 358, when the Hebrew calendar was adopted. The Sanhedrin was dissolved after continued persecution by the Roman Empire. Over the centuries, there have been attempts to revive the institution, such as the Grand Sanhedrin convened by Napoleon Bonaparte.
In the New Testament, the Sanhedrin is best known for their part in the series of mock trials that resulted in the crucifixion of Jesus. The Sanhedrin began with an informal examination of Jesus before Annas, the acting high priest (John 18:12\-14, 19\-23\), followed by a formal session before the entire Sanhedrin (Matthew 26:57\-68\). There the decision was made to turn Jesus over to the Roman authorities to be tried and crucified.
|
Who is the Queen of Heaven? |
Answer
The phrase *queen of heaven* appears in two passages of the Bible, both in the book of Jeremiah. The first passage deals with the things the Israelites were doing that provoked the Lord to anger. Entire families were involved in idolatry. The children gathered wood, and the men used it to build altars to worship false gods. The women were engaged in kneading dough and baking cakes of bread for the “Queen of Heaven” (Jeremiah 7:18\). This title referred to Ishtar, an Assyrian and Babylonian goddess also called [Ashtoreth](who-Ashtoreth.html) and Astarte by various other groups. She was thought to be the wife of the false god [Baal](who-Baal.html), also known as [Molech](who-Molech.html). The motivation of women to worship Ashtoreth stemmed from her reputation as a fertility goddess, and, as the bearing of children was greatly desired among women of that era, worship of this “queen of heaven” was rampant among pagan civilizations. Sadly, it became popular among the Israelites as well.
The second passage that refers to the queen of heaven is Jeremiah 44:17\-25, where Jeremiah is giving the people the word of the Lord which God has spoken to him. He reminds the people that their disobedience and idolatry has caused the Lord to be very angry with them and to punish them with calamity. Jeremiah warns them that greater punishments await if they do not repent. They reply that they have no intentions of giving up their worship of idols, promising to continue pouring out drink offerings to the queen of heaven, Ashtoreth, and even going so far as to credit her with the peace and prosperity they once enjoyed because of God’s grace and mercy.
It is unclear where the idea that Ashtoreth was a “consort” of Yahweh originated, but it’s easy to see how the blending of paganism that exalts a goddess with the worship of the true King of heaven, Yahweh, can lead to the combining of God and Ashtoreth. And since Ashtoreth worship involved sexuality (fertility rites and temple prostitution), the resulting relationship, to the depraved mind, would naturally be one of a sexual nature. Clearly, the idea of the “queen of heaven” as the consort or paramour of the King of heaven is idolatrous and unbiblical.
There is no queen of heaven. There has never been a queen of heaven. There is most certainly a King of Heaven, the Lord of hosts. He alone rules in heaven. He does not share His rule or His throne or His authority with anyone. The idea that Mary, the mother of Jesus, is the queen of heaven has no scriptural basis whatsoever. Instead, the idea of Mary as the queen of heaven stems from proclamations of priests and popes of the Roman Catholic Church. While Mary was certainly a godly young woman greatly blessed in that she was chosen to bear the Savior of the world, she was not in any way divine, nor was she sinless, nor is she to be [worshiped](worship-saints-Mary.html), revered, venerated, or [prayed to](prayer-saints-Mary.html). All followers of the Lord God refuse to be worshiped. Peter and the apostles refused to be worshiped (Acts 10:25–26; 14:13–14\). The holy angels refuse to be worshiped (Revelation 19:10; 22:9\). The response is always the same: “Worship God!” To offer worship, reverence, or veneration to anyone but God is nothing short of idolatry. Mary’s own words in her “[Magnificat](Magnificat.html)” (Luke 1:46–55\) reveal that she never thought of herself as “immaculate” or deserving of veneration; on the contrary, she was relying on the grace of God for salvation: “And my spirit rejoices in God my Savior.” Only sinners need a savior, and Mary recognized that need in herself.
Furthermore, Jesus Himself issued a mild rebuke to a woman who cried out to Him, "Blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you" (Luke 11:27\), replying to her, "Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it." By doing so, He curtailed any tendency to elevate Mary as an object of worship. He could certainly have said, “Yes, blessed be the Queen of Heaven!” But He did not. He was affirming the same truth that the Bible affirms—there is no queen of heaven, and the only biblical references to the “queen of heaven” refer to the goddess of an idolatrous, false religion.
|
What is the Bible in Basic English (BBE)? |
Answer
**Bible in Basic English \- History**
The *Bible in Basic English* was translated by Professor Samuel Henry Hooke (1874\-1968\), an English scholar and Professor Emeritus of Old Testament Studies at the University of London. The BBE was printed in 1965 by Cambridge Press in England. Published without any copyright notice and distributed in America, this work fell immediately and irretrievably into the public domain in the United States.
**Bible in Basic English \- Translation Method**
In an effort to simplify the text, Professor Hooke and his team limited the vocabulary to C. K. Ogden’s Basic English vocabulary of 850 words which is said to be able to give the sense of anything which may be said in English. One hundred words that were helpful to understand poetry were added, along with 50 "Bible" words.
**Bible in Basic English \- Pros and Cons**
The *Bible in Basic English* strives to simplify the Bible so that more people worldwide can read and understand the text. By using the Basic English vocabulary, this goal is accomplished. The BBE is certainly straightforward and simple. However, the restrictive nature of the Basic English vocabulary presents two problems. First, the narrow limits of the word list make it difficult to keep the BBE completely parallel to the Greek and Hebrew. Second, the beauty of the poetry of other versions such as the *New King James Version* and *New American Standard Bible* is lost in the BBE, as are the subtle shades and nuances of the language that make the Bible rich in expression and meaning.
**Bible in Basic English \- Sample verses**
John 1:1, 14 – “From the first he was the Word, and the Word was in relation with God and was God. And so the Word became flesh and took a place among us for a time; and we saw his glory—such glory as is given to an only son by his father—saw it to be true and full of grace.”
John 3:16 – “For God had such love for the world that he gave his only Son, so that whoever has faith in him may not come to destruction but have eternal life.”
John 8:58 – “Jesus said to them, ‘Truly I say to you, Before Abraham came into being, I am.’”
Ephesians 2:8\-9 – “Because by grace you have salvation through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is given by God: Not by works, so that no man may take glory to himself.”
Titus 2:13 – “Looking for the glad hope, the revelation of the glory of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ;”
|
What is the Complete Jewish Bible (CJB)? |
Answer
The *Complete Jewish Bible* was translated by David H. Stern, an Israel\-based Messianic Jewish theologian. Published in 1998 by Jewish New Testament Publications, the CJB claims to be “Jewish in manner and presentation.” The names of the books are Jewish along with their English names (if different). Semitic names are used for people and places. It also incorporates Hebrew and Yiddish expressions that Stern refers to as “Jewish English.”
**Complete Jewish Bible \- Translation method**
The *Complete Jewish Bible* Old Testament is a paraphrase of the 1917 Jewish Publication Society version of the Tanakh (also known as the [Masoretic Text](Masoretic-Text.html)). The New Testament is an original translation from the ancient Greek. The CJB is a free translation, with Yiddish and modern Jewish cultural expressions. Stern claims his purpose for producing the *Complete Jewish Bible* was "to restore God’s Word to its original Jewish context and culture as well as be in easily read modern English."
**Complete Jewish Bible \- Pros and Cons**
Restoring the “Jewishness” of the Bible is a good thing. The Bible was written predominantly by Jews and to a Jewish audience. The *Complete Jewish Bible* should be commended for recognizing those facts. Overall, the CJB is a good and accurate translation of the Bible. It does tend to be very “free” in its renderings, sometimes interpreting instead of translating.
**Complete Jewish Bible \- Sample Verses**
John 1:1, 14 – “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The Word became a human being and lived with us, and we saw his Sh'khinah, the Sh'khinah of the Father’s only Son, full of grace and truth.”
John 3:16 – “For God so loved the world that he gave his only and unique Son, so that everyone who trusts in him may have eternal life, instead of being utterly destroyed.”
John 8:58 – “Yeshua said to them, ‘Yes, indeed! Before Avraham came into being, I AM!’”
Ephesians 2:8\-9 – “For you have been delivered by grace through trusting, and even this is not your accomplishment but God’s gift. You were not delivered by your own actions; therefore no one should boast.”
Titus 2:13 – “while continuing to expect the blessed fulfillment of our certain hope, which is the appearing of the Sh'khinah of our great God and the appearing of our Deliverer, Yeshua the Messiah.”
|
What is the 21st Century King James Version (KJ21)? |
Answer
Published in 1994 by Deuel Enterprises, Inc. (Gary, South Dakota), the *21st Century King James Version* of the Bible seeks to preserve the sacred message and beautiful language of the *King James Version* while making it easier to read and understand for the modern reader. Edited by William D. Prindle of Deuel Enterprises, the updates relied on the scholarship, skill, and dedication of the original translators of the KJV, which have stood the test of time for four centuries. A revised edition with the Apocrypha (but without lectionary markings) appeared in 1998 as the *Third Millennium Bible*.
**21st Century King James Version \- Translation method**
The *21st Century King James Version* (KJ21\) is based on the *King James Version* (KJV) of A.D. 1611\. It is not a new translation, but a careful updating to eliminate obsolete words by reference to the most complete and definitive modern American dictionary, the *Webster’s New International Dictionary, Second Edition*, unabridged. Spelling, punctuation, and capitalization have also been updated. Words which are either obsolete or archaic, and are no longer understood by literate Bible readers, have been replaced by carefully selected current equivalents. All language relating to gender and theology in the *King James Version* remains unchanged from the original. Also included are the cross references from the original KJV, plus many more.
**21st Century King James Version \- Pros and Cons**
The *21st Century King James Version* has never gained traction in the Christian community, largely due to the fierce loyalty many KJV users have to the 1611 "authorized" *King James Version*. This is sad, as the KJ21 is indeed a much more readable and understandable English translation of the Bible than the KJV. The *21st Century King James Version* fulfills its goal of updating the archaic language of the KJV while staying as close as possible to the original KJV.
**21st Century King James Version \- Sample Verses**
John 1:1, 14 – “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us (and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only Begotten of the Father), full of grace and truth.”
John 3:16 – “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”
John 8:58 – “Jesus said unto them, ‘Verily, verily I say unto you, before Abraham was, I am!’”
Ephesians 2:8\-9 – “For by grace are ye saved through faith, and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God—not by works, lest any man should boast.”
Titus 2:13 – “looking for that blessed hope and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ,”
|
What does it mean to take the Lord’s name in vain? |
Answer
Although many people believe taking the Lord’s name in vain refers to using the Lord’s name as a swear word, there is much more involved with a vain use of God’s name. To understand the severity of taking the Lord’s name in vain, we must first see the Lord’s name from His perspective as outlined in Scripture. The God of Israel was known by [many names and titles](names-of-God.html), but the concept embodied in God’s name plays an important and unique role in the Bible. God’s nature and attributes, the totality of His being, and especially His glory are reflected in His name (Psalm 8:1\). Psalm 111:9 tells us His name is “holy and awesome,” and the [Lord’s prayer](Lords-prayer.html) begins by addressing God with the phrase “hallowed be your name” (Matthew 6:9\), an indication that a [reverence for God](reverence-for-God.html) and His name should be foremost in our prayers. Too often we barge into God’s presence with presumptuous “to\-do lists” for Him, without being mindful of His holiness, His awesomeness, and the vast chasm that separates our nature from His. That we are even allowed to come before His throne is due only to His gracious, merciful love for His own (Hebrews 4:16\). We must never take that grace for granted.
Because of the greatness of the name of God, any use of God’s name that brings dishonor on Him or on His character is taking His name in vain. The third of the [Ten Commandments](Ten-Commandments.html) forbids taking or using the Lord’s name in an irreverent manner because that would indicate a lack of respect for God Himself. A person who misuses God’s name will not be held “guiltless” by the Lord (Exodus 20:7\). In the Old Testament, bringing dishonor on God’s name was done by failing to perform an oath or vow taken in His name (Leviticus 19:12\). The man who used God’s name to legitimize his oath, and then broke his promise, would indicate his lack of reverence for God as well as a lack of fear of His holy retribution. It was essentially the same as denying God’s existence. For believers, however, there is no need to use God’s name to legitimize an oath as we are not to [take oaths](vows-God.html) in the first place, letting our “yes be yes” and our “no be no” (Matthew 5:33\-37\).
There is a larger sense in which people today take the Lord’s name in vain. Those who name the name of Christ, who pray in His name, and who take His name as part of their identity, but who deliberately and continually disobey His commands, are taking His name in vain. Jesus Christ has been given the [name above all names](Jesus-name-above-all-names.html), at which every knee shall bow (Philippians 2:9\-10\), and when we take the name “Christian” upon ourselves, we must do so with an understanding of all that signifies. If we profess to be Christians, but act, think, and speak in a worldly or profane manner, we take His name in vain. When we misrepresent Christ, either intentionally or through ignorance of the Christian faith as proclaimed in Scripture, we take the Lord’s name in vain. When we say we love Him, but do not do what He commands (Luke 6:46\), we take His name in vain and are possibly identifying ourselves to be among those to whom Christ will say, “I never knew you. Away from me” in the day of judgment (Matthew 7:21\-23\).
The name of the Lord is holy, as He is holy. The name of the Lord is a representation of His glory, His majesty, and His supreme deity. We are to esteem and honor His name as we revere and glorify God Himself. To do any less is to take His name in vain.
|
Why did Jesus allow the demons to enter the herd of pigs? |
Answer
The story of Jesus casting the [legion of demons](demon-Legion.html) into a herd of pigs is found in Matthew 8:28–34; Mark 5:1\-20; and Luke 8:26–39\. Only Matthew mentions the more prominent of the [two demoniacs](one-two-demoniacs.html) involved. Demoniacs were persons whose minds came under the control of an evil spirit or spirits. That such phenomena were especially prominent during the days of Christ’s earthly ministry is consistent with Satan’s efforts to counteract God’s program. It also allows us to witness the spiritual warfare in which our Savior was constantly engaged. Demons knew exactly who Jesus was—"Son of God"—and were aware of their ultimate doom (Matthew 8:28\-29\).
As Jesus was traveling in the hilly region east of the Jordan River, the path of this man who was controlled by demons and lived among the tombs crossed that of Jesus. Because of the physical strength the demons gave the man, he was able to break and throw off the chains with which people tried to bind him. When the demons begged Jesus to let them go into a herd of pigs, He gave them permission. They entered the pigs, rushed down the steep bank into the lake, and were drowned. Jesus thereby made known His authority and thwarted whatever evil purpose the demons had.
Why the demons begged to be allowed to enter the swine is unclear from the account. It could be because they didn’t want to leave the area where they had been successful in doing their mischief among the people. Perhaps they were drawn to the unclean animals because of their own filthiness. The demons may have made this strange request because it was their last chance to avoid confinement in the Abyss, the place of confinement to which evil spirits are doomed (Revelation 9:1\-6\). Whatever their reasoning, it is clear from the account that demons had little power of their own and were unable to do anything without Jesus’ permission. As Christians, we can take comfort in the knowledge that the forces of the enemy of our souls are under the complete control of God and can only act in ways He allows.
The Bible doesn’t explain to us Jesus’ reasoning, but displaying His sovereign power over demons could be one reason why Jesus sent them into the pigs. If the pigs’ owners were Jews, Jesus could have been rebuking them for violating Mosaic law which forbids Jews from eating or keeping unclean animals such as swine (Leviticus 11:7\). If the swineherds were Gentiles, perhaps Jesus was using this miraculous event to show them the malice of evil spirits under whose influence they lived, as well as displaying His own power and authority over creation. In any case, the owners were so terrified to be in the presence of such spiritual power that they made no demand for restitution for the loss of their property and begged Jesus to leave the region. The people were awe\-struck but unrepentant—they wanted no more of Jesus Christ. This shows the hardness of their hearts and their desire to remain in sin. The healed demoniac, on the other hand, demonstrated the true faith and repentance of a changed heart and begged to be allowed to follow Jesus. Perhaps the unmistakable difference between the saved and the unsaved was an object lesson for the disciples and all who witnessed the event. Jesus sent the healed man away, giving him a commission that he joyfully obeyed: "Go home to your family and tell them how much the Lord has done for you, and how he has had mercy on you" (Mark 5:17\-20\).
|
What is The Living Bible (TLB)? |
Answer
**The Living Bible \- History**
First published in 1971, *The Living Bible* (TLB) is a version of the Bible created by Kenneth N. Taylor, the founder of Tyndale House, a major Christian publishing company. *The Living Bible* is not a translation of the Bible; it is a paraphrase. (See Translation Method.) In 1962, *Living Letters*, Taylor’s paraphrase of the epistles, became available. *The Living Bible* was very popular in the 1970s and was, in fact, the best\-selling book in America in 1972 and 1973\. By 1997, 40 million copies of *The Living Bible* had been sold. In the late 1980s, Taylor and his colleagues at Tyndale House Publishers invited a team of 90 Greek and Hebrew scholars to participate in a project of revising the text of *The Living Bible*. After many years of work, the result was an entirely new translation of the Bible. It was published in 1996 as the [*Holy Bible: New Living Translation*](New-Living-Translation-NLT.html).
**The Living Bible \- Translation Method**
Dr. Taylor employed the method of paraphrasing to create *The Living Bible*. While direct translation involves using a thought\-for\-thought or a word\-for\-word recreation of the text from original Greek and Hebrew manuscripts, paraphrasing uses the “in other words” method of restating a previously translated manuscript, in this case the [*American Standard Version* of 1901](American-Standard-Version-ASV.html). Paraphrasing is essentially rewording the text with the intention of making it clearer and more easily understood. Taylor never intended for his paraphrase to be used as the reader’s only source of biblical knowledge, or as the primary text for scholars. Rather, his goal was to put the basic message of the Bible into modern language that could readily be understood by the typical reader without a theological or linguistic background.
**The Living Bible \- Pros and Cons**
As with any paraphrase, putting the Bible "in your own words" runs the risk of enabling your own biases, thoughts, and preferences to influence what the Bible says. This is impossible to avoid. The primary problem of any paraphrase of the Bible is that it inputs far too much of a person’s opinion of what the Bible says, instead of simply stating what the Bible says. There is nothing inherently wrong with a paraphrase, as long as users of the paraphrase understand exactly what it is \- not a Bible translation, but rather an interpretation/commentary on what the Bible says.
**The Living Bible \- Sample verses**
John 1:1\-2, 14 – “Before anything else existed, there was Christ, with God. He has always been alive and is himself God. And Christ became a human being and lived here on earth among us and was full of loving forgiveness and truth. And some of us have seen his glory – the glory of the only Son of the heavenly Father.”
John 3:16 – “For God loved the world so much that he gave his only Son so that anyone who believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.”
John 8:58 – “Jesus: ‘The absolute truth is that I was in existence before Abraham was ever born!’”
Ephesians 2:8\-9 – “ Because of his kindness, you have been saved through trusting Christ. And even trusting is not of yourselves; it too is a gift from God. Salvation is not a reward for the good we have done, so none of us can take any credit for it.”
Titus 2:13 – “looking forward to that wonderful time we have been expecting, when his glory shall be seen – the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ.”
|
What did Jesus mean when He said it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to get into heaven? |
Answer
There are several different schools of thought on what Jesus was referring to in saying it was easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to gain eternal life (Matthew 19:24; Mark 10:25; Luke 18:25\). The Persians expressed the concept of the impossible by saying it would be easier to put an elephant through the eye of a needle. The camel was a Jewish adaptation (the largest animal in Israel was a camel).
Some theorize that the needle Jesus was speaking of was the Needle Gate, supposedly a low and narrow after\-hours entrance found in the wall surrounding Jerusalem. It was purposely small for security reasons, and a camel could only go through it by stripping off any saddles or packs and crawling through on its knees. The problem with this theory is there is no evidence such a gate ever existed. Beyond that, what sane camel driver would go through such contortions when larger gates were easily accessible?
Others claim that the word translated “camel” (Greek: *kamelos*) should actually be “cable” (Greek: *kamilos*). Then the verse would read that it is easier for a cable (or rope) to go through the eye of a needle. To believe this, however, brings up more problems than it solves, namely casting doubt on the inerrancy and inspiration of Scripture.
The most likely explanation is that Jesus was using hyperbole, a figure of speech that exaggerates for emphasis. Jesus used this technique at other times, referring to a “plank” in one’s eye (Matthew 7:3\-5\) and swallowing a camel (Matthew 23:24\).
Jesus’ message is clear—it is impossible for anyone to be saved on his own merits. Since wealth was seen as proof of God’s approval, it was commonly taught by the rabbis that rich people were blessed by God and were, therefore, the most likely candidates for heaven. Jesus destroyed that notion, and along with it, the idea that anyone can earn eternal life. The disciples had the appropriate response to this startling statement. They were utterly amazed and asked, “Who then can be saved?” in the next verse. If the wealthy among them, which included the super\-spiritual Pharisees and scribes, were unworthy of heaven, what hope was there for a poor man?
Jesus’ answer is the basis of the gospel: "With man this is impossible, but not with God; all things are possible with God" (Matthew 19:26\). Men are saved through God’s gifts of grace, mercy, and faith (Ephesians 2:8\-9\). Nothing we do earns salvation for us. It is the poor in spirit who inherit the kingdom of God (Matthew 5:3\), those who recognize their spiritual poverty and their utter inability to do anything to justify themselves to a holy God. The rich man so often is blind to his spiritual poverty because he is proud of his accomplishments and has contented himself with his wealth. He is as likely to humble himself before God as a camel is to crawl through the eye of a needle.
|
What is the Revised Standard Version (RSV)? |
Answer
**Revised Standard Version – History**
The *Revised Standard Version* (RSV) is an English translation of the Bible published in the mid\-20th century. It traces its history to William Tyndale’s New Testament translation of 1525\. The RSV is an authorized revision of the *American Standard Version* of 1901 and is one of four translations that have the ASV as its basis. In 1928, the copyright to the ASV was acquired by the International Council of Religious Education (ICRE), which formed a panel of 32 scholars and charged them with the task of revising the ASV. In 1950, the ICRE merged with the Federal Council of Churches to form the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the USA. The former ICRE became the new Council’s Division of Christian Education, and the NCC became the official sponsor of the RSV. In 1957, at the request of the Episcopal Church in the United States of America, the Deuterocanonical books were added to the RSV. Minor modifications to the RSV text were authorized in 1959 and completed for the 1962 printings.
In 1965, the *Revised Standard Version* Catholic Edition was published with a revised edition published by Ignatius Press in 2006\. In 1971, the RSV Bible was re\-released with the Second Edition of the Translation of the New Testament. In 1982, *Reader’s Digest* published a special edition of the RSV that was billed as a condensed edition of the text. In 1989, the National Council of Churches released a full\-scale revision to the RSV called the New *Revised Standard Version*. It was the first major version to use gender\-neutral language, and drew even more criticism from conservative Christians than did its 1952 predecessor. The RSV remains a favorite translation for many Christians. However, RSV Bibles are hard to find, except in second\-hand shops and churches that used it, because the NCC prefers to print the New *Revised Standard Version*.
**Revised Standard Version – Translation Method**
The RSV translation panel used the 17th edition of the [Nestle\-Aland Greek text](Nestle-Aland-Greek-New-Testament.html) for the New Testament and the traditional Hebrew Masoretic Text for the Old Testament. In the Book of Isaiah, they sometimes followed readings found in the newly discovered Dead Sea Scrolls. The translation method utilized in the RSV is described as a combination of formal (word for word) and dynamic (thought for thought) equivalence. The translators of the RSV reverted to the use of the Tetragrammaton (YHWH), used the archaic pronouns and verbs (thee, thy, hast, hath, etc.)—but only for God and not for humans—and followed the latest Greek text available, where earlier versions relied on the Textus Receptus.
**Revised Standard Version – Pros and Cons**
Overall, the *Revised Standard Version* was a good English Bible translation in its time. The RSV, though, can no longer be said to be a modern English translation. While it is more "modern" than the KJV, it does not read as English is spoken today. The RSV is a good balance between formal equivalency and dynamic equivalency, more so than its successor, the NRSV.
**Revised Standard Version – Sample Verses**
John 1:1, 14 – “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth; we have beheld his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father.”
John 3:16 – “For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.”
John 8:58 – “Jesus said to them, ‘Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.’”
Ephesians 2:8\-9 – “For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God—not because of works, lest any man should boast.”
Titus 2:13 – “awaiting our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ.”
|
What was the role of the Holy Spirit in the Old Testament? |
Answer
The role of the Holy Spirit in the Old Testament is much like [His role in the New Testament](Spirit-today.html). When we speak of the role of the Holy Spirit, we can discern four general areas in which the Holy Spirit works: 1\) regeneration, 2\) indwelling (or filling), 3\) restraint, and 4\) empowerment for service. Evidence of these areas of the Holy Spirit’s work is just as present in the Old Testament as it is in the New Testament.
The first area of the Spirit’s work is in the process of regeneration. Another word for regeneration is “rebirth,” from which we get the concept of being “born again.” The classic proof text for this can be found in John’s gospel: “Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again” (John 3:3\). This begs the question: what does this have to do with the Holy Spirit’s work in the Old Testament? Later on in His dialogue with Nicodemus, Jesus has this to say to him: “You are Israel’s teacher…and do you not understand these things?” (John 3:10\). The point Jesus was making is that Nicodemus should have known the truth that the Holy Spirit is the source of new life because it is revealed in the Old Testament. For instance, Moses told the Israelites prior to entering the Promised Land that “The LORD your God will circumcise your hearts and the hearts of your descendants, so that you may love him with all your heart and with all your soul, and live” (Deuteronomy 30:6\). This circumcision of the heart is the work of God’s Spirit and can be accomplished only by Him. We also see the theme of regeneration in Ezekiel 11:19\-20 and Ezekiel 36:26\-29\.
The fruit of the Spirit’s regenerating work is faith (Ephesians 2:8\). Now we know that there were men of faith in the Old Testament because Hebrews 11 names many of them. If faith is produced by the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit, then this must be the case for Old Testament saints who looked ahead to the cross, believing that what God had promised in regard to their redemption would come to pass. They saw the promises and “welcomed them from a distance” (Hebrews 11:13\), accepting by faith that what God had promised, He would also bring to pass.
The second aspect of the Spirit’s work in the Old Testament is indwelling, or filling. Here is where the major difference between the Spirit’s roles in the Old and New Testaments is apparent. The New Testament teaches the permanent indwelling of the Holy Spirit in believers (1 Corinthians 3:16\-17; 6:19\-20\). When we place our faith in Christ for salvation, the Holy Spirit comes to live within us. The apostle Paul calls this permanent indwelling the “guarantee of our inheritance” (Ephesians 1:13\-14\). In contrast to this work in the New Testament, the indwelling in the Old Testament was selective and temporary. The Spirit “came upon” such Old Testament people as Joshua (Numbers 27:18\), David (1 Samuel 16:12\-13\) and even Saul (1 Samuel 10:10\). In the book of Judges, we see the Spirit “coming upon” the various judges whom God raised up to deliver Israel from their oppressors. The Holy Spirit came upon these individuals for specific tasks. The indwelling was a sign of God’s favor upon that individual (in the case of David), and if God’s favor left an individual, the Spirit would depart (e.g., in Saul’s case in 1 Samuel 16:14\). Finally, the Spirit “coming upon” an individual doesn’t always indicate that person’s spiritual condition (e.g., Saul, Samson, and many of the judges). So, while in the New Testament the Spirit only indwells believers and that indwelling is permanent, the Spirit came upon certain Old Testament individuals for a specific task, irrespective of their spiritual condition. Once the task was completed, the Spirit presumably departed from that person.
The third aspect of the Spirit’s work in the Old Testament is His restraint of sin. Genesis 6:3 would seem to indicate that the Holy Spirit restrains man’s sinfulness, and that restraint can be removed when God’s patience regarding sin reaches a "boiling point." This thought is echoed in 2 Thessalonians 2:3\-8, when in the end times a growing apostasy will signal the coming of God’s judgment. Until the preordained time when the “man of lawlessness” (v. 3\) will be revealed, the Holy Spirit restrains the power of Satan and will release it only when it suits His purposes to do so.
The fourth and final aspect of the Spirit’s work in the Old Testament is the granting of ability for service. Much like the way the spiritual gifts operate in the New Testament, the Spirit would gift certain individuals for service. Consider the example of [Bezalel](Bezalel-and-Oholiab.html) in Exodus 31:2\-5 who was gifted to do much of the artwork relating to the Tabernacle. Furthermore, recalling the selective and temporary indwelling of the Holy Spirit discussed above, we see that these individuals were gifted to perform certain tasks, such as ruling over the people of Israel (e.g., Saul and David).
We could also mention the Spirit’s role in creation. Genesis 1:2 speaks of the Spirit “hovering over the waters” and superintending the work of creation. In a similar fashion, the Spirit is responsible for the work of the new creation (2 Corinthians 5:17\) as He is bringing people into the kingdom of God through regeneration.
All in all, the Spirit performs much of the same functions in Old Testament times as He does in this current age. The major difference is the permanent indwelling of the Spirit in believers now. As Jesus said regarding this change in the Spirit’s ministry, “But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you” (John 14:17\).
|
What is the Easy-to-Read Version (ERV)? |
Answer
The Easy\-to\-Read Version of the Bible, published in 1989 by the World Bible Translation Center—founded in 1973 in Arlington, Texas—was initially prepared to meet the special needs of the deaf and was first published by Baker Book House as *The English Version for the Deaf*. The first\-draft work on *The English Version for the Deaf* was done by WBTC’s in\-house translators who are Greek and Hebrew scholars and deaf\-language consultants. The *Easy\-to\-Read Version* has also recently undergone a major revision to better meet the needs of its target audience and evangelistic outreach (via ministries to prisons, the homeless, or children) as well as those with limited English. The revised text is also more suitable for oral reading, since many who understand spoken English are not literate.
**Easy\-to\-Read Version \- Translation method**
The revision of the *English Version for the Deaf* into the *Easy\-to\-Read Version* was not a translation as such, but rather a reworking of the EVD for the hearing population. The WBTC enlisted English stylists to smooth the text and an ecumenical panel of New Testament scholars to review the edited drafts and make suggestions. There were very few changes in content. Most of the changes involved a move toward more standard English style, i.e., less redundancy, and a more complex sentence structure. According to the WBTC: “Besides improving the English style, the revised *Easy\-to\-Read Version* reflects a better understanding of many passages. This has been made possible, in part, by the greatly expanded resources now available to our translators. Also, these translators have benefited from their involvement in over 30 different language projects. As they compared the drafts of these translations with the original texts, they often noted how the same passages were translated in the *Easy\-to\-Read Version*, resulting in many improvements. In addition, the *Easy\-to\-Read Version* has benefited from input from numerous outside scholars who have served as consultants in the process of evaluating WBTC’s translations.”
**Easy\-to\-Read Version \- Pros and Cons**
The *Easy\-to\-Read Version* is very aptly named, as it is definitely easy to read. For that, the ERV is to be commended. It is a good thing to have the Bible translated so that those who struggle with English can understand it. While the Bible is very deep in what it proclaims, the wording usually does not need to be complicated. The primary weakness of the ERV would be that sometimes its renderings are so simplified that they do not fully communicate the message that was in the original languages. The ERV is definitely on the "dynamic equivalence" side of Bible translations, which is not necessarily a bad thing. It does, however, open the door for interpretation to be done instead of strict translation.
**Easy\-to\-Read Version \- Sample Verses**
John 1:1, 14 – “Before the world began, the Word was there. The Word was there with God. The Word was God. The Word became a man and lived among us. We saw his glory—the glory that belongs to the only Son of the Father. The Word was full of grace (kindness) and truth.”
John 3:16 – “Yes, God loved the world so much that he gave his only Son. God gave his Son so that every person that believes in him would not be lost, but have life forever.”
John 8:58 – “Jesus answered, ‘I tell you the truth. Before Abraham was born, I AM.’”
Ephesians 2:8\-9 – “I mean that you are saved by grace. And you got that grace by believing. You did not save yourselves. It was a gift from God. No! You are not saved by the things you have done. So no person can boast {that he saved himself}.”
Titus 2:13 – “We should live like that while we are waiting for the coming of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ. He is our great hope, and he will come with glory.”
|
Who were the Herodians? |
Answer
At the time of Jesus, there were certain groups—the Pharisees, the Herodians, and the Sadducees—that held positions of authority and power over the people. Other groups were the Sanhedrin, the scribes, and the lawyers. Each of these groups held power in either religious or political matters. The Herodians held political power, and most scholars believe that they were a political party that supported King Herod Antipas, the Roman Empire’s ruler over much of the land of the Jews from 4 B.C. to A.D. 39\. The Herodians favored submitting to the Herods, and therefore to Rome, for political expediency. This support of Herod compromised Jewish independence in the minds of the Pharisees, making it difficult for the Herodians and Pharisees to unite and agree on anything. But one thing did unite them—opposing Jesus. Herod himself wanted Jesus dead (Luke 13:31\), and the Pharisees had already hatched plots against Him (John 11:53\), so they joined efforts to achieve their common goal.
The first appearance of the Herodians in Scripture is Mark 3:6, "Then the Pharisees went out and began to plot with the Herodians how they might kill Jesus." Jesus had been doing miracles, which caused some of the people to believe in Him for salvation, and that threatened the power and position of the Pharisees, the Sadducees, and the Herodians. The Herodians again joined with the Pharisees to challenge Jesus, to see if they could trap Jesus in His words by a trick question, to either discredit Him or to get Him to stop preaching (Matthew 22:16\).
Jesus regarded the two groups as in unity against Him and warned His followers against them. "‘Be careful,’ Jesus warned them. ‘Watch out for the yeast of the Pharisees and that of Herod’" (Mark 8:15\). Yeast in this context is false teaching, the rejection of Jesus as the Messiah, and hypocrisy. Many scholars believe that the Herodians looked to Herod as a messiah, a savior of sorts who would put the Jewish land in favor with the Roman Empire and bring blessings to them. Jesus’ presentation of Himself as the Messiah was a threat to the Herodians' attempt to make Herod the influential political power in the land.
In the future, the Bible tells us that many will be deceived by the antichrist and will view the antichrist as a "messiah." He will be a political leader as well as a false religious leader, and he will promise peace and prosperity through his political programs. The Herodians at the time of Jesus were also focused on political goals rather than the eternal goals that Jesus proclaimed. They thought Herod might bring temporary peace politically. But Jesus came to bring us eternal salvation, by dying on the cross to pay for our sins. The lesson we learn from the error of the Herodians is that we are not to trust in man, as they trusted in Herod (Psalm 118:8\). We are to put our trust in the Lord Jesus and let His will be done in our lives and on the earth.
|
What is the Jerusalem Bible (JB)? |
Answer
The *Jerusalem Bible* (JB or TJB) is a Roman Catholic translation of the Bible which first was introduced to the English\-speaking public in 1966\. As a Roman Catholic Bible, it includes not only the [deuterocanonical](apocrypha-deuterocanonical.html) books, but numerous notes and introductions, although for the most part they appear to be only marginally influenced by RCC doctrine. In 1943, Pope Pius XII issued an encyclical letter on biblical studies in which he gave permission for an English version to be done by Roman Catholics on the basis of the Greek and Hebrew texts rather than upon the Latin Vulgate, as was traditional up to that time. The Jerusalem Bible derives its name and its character from an earlier French version, called *La Bible de Jérusalem*. This French version, published in 1956 and revised 1961, was prepared by the faculty of the Dominican Biblical School in Jerusalem, on the basis of the Hebrew and Greek. The *Jerusalem Bible* was translated from the French version. In 1985, the English translation was completely updated. This new translation—known as the *New Jerusalem Bible* (NJB)—was freshly translated from the original languages and not tied to any French translation (except indirectly, as it maintained many of the stylistic and interpretive choices of *La Bible de Jérusalem*).
**Jerusalem Bible \- Translation method**
The translation from the Hebrew and Greek is literal with the notes and introductions reflecting the "[higher criticism](redaction-higher-criticism.html)" approach. This method led the translators to come to some unfortunate conclusions, notably that the Pentateuch was not written by Moses (a theory discredited by Jesus Himself in Mark 12:26\). The translators adopted a “mid\-Atlantic” method of translating syntax in order for it to sound neither overwhelmingly British nor particularly American in nature. The famous author of the “Lord of the Rings” series, J.R.R. Tolkien, contributed to the translation of the book of Jonah. Tolkien also consulted on one or two points of style and criticized some contributions of others.
**Jerusalem Bible \- Pros and Cons**
Overall, the *Jerusalem Bible* and the *New Jerusalem Bible* are good English translations of the Bible. Very little Roman Catholic "influence" is seen in the translation. The "higher critical" approach the translators took is troubling, but actually makes very little impact on the translation itself. With Roman Catholicism and theological liberalism as the foundation, though, the *Jerusalem Bible* and the *New Jerusalem Bible* should not be used as a primary Bible translation.
**Jerusalem Bible \- Sample Verses**
John 1:1, 14 – “In the beginning was the Word: the Word was with God and the Word was God. The Word became flesh, he lived among us, and we saw his glory, the glory that he has from the Father as only Son of the Father, full of grace and truth.”
John 3:16 – “For this is how God loved the world: he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life.”
John 8:58 – “Jesus replied: In all truth I tell you, before Abraham ever was, I am.”
Ephesians 2:8\-9 – “Because it is by grace that you have been saved, through faith; not by anything of your own, but by a gift from God; not by anything that you have done, so that nobody can claim the credit.”
Titus 2:13 – “waiting in hope for the blessing which will come with the appearing of the glory of our great God and Saviour Christ Jesus.”
|
What does the Bible say about extreme fighting? |
Answer
Mixed martial arts, or MMA, has exploded in popularity over the last twenty\-five or so years. That’s new enough that misunderstanding still surrounds the sport. In simplistic terms, an MMA contest involves one\-on\-one combat: a physical fight. Unlike boxing or pure wrestling, MMA involves a wide variety of techniques and situations. This includes anything from kicks and punches to takedowns, joint locks, and chokes. The sport is exhibited in the Ultimate Fighting Championship, or UFC, as well as other leagues such as Invicta, Bellator, and Absolute Championship Akhmat. Christians are divided over whether MMA is appropriate for entertainment, let alone participation.
The basic philosophy of competitive mixed martial arts (MMA) is not extremely different from other [contact sports](sports-Christian.html). It involves collisions, competition, the risk of injury, physically imposing one’s will on another person, and so forth. Likewise, there are rules and restrictions. Competitors are willing participants who know what to expect. Of course, no sport, including MMA, should be allowed to compromise a person’s Christian witness. This is not unique to combat sports. Yet it’s especially sensitive regarding a genre not fully understood by most mainstream citizens. Christians are not obligated to avoid MMA at all costs, but neither can they partake without prayerful, careful understanding.
Aspects of modern MMA can be contradictory to Christian faith. Modern fight promotions can degrade into bitter, derogatory exchanges between scheduled fighters. Some leagues use “ring girls”: nearly naked women holding signs indicating the current round. Fighters and promoters may speak and act in deeply offensive ways. Some spectators are drawn to MMA by a hope of seeing mayhem or gore. Participants can be pressured into unhealthy practices such as extreme weight loss or using [performance\-enhancing drugs](Bible-steroids.html). Of course, those flaws are not unique to combat sports. Concerns about inappropriate advertising, revealing clothing, physically violent acts, elements of deception or deceit, and risk of injury can be applied to baseball, football, soccer, track, car racing, and so forth. Insofar as those sports can exist without those flaws, the same can be said of MMA.
Other objections to mixed martial arts are the result of misinterpretation or bias. The first hurdle faced is the word *fight*. Yet there is an enormous difference between an MMA event and schoolyard fights or bar brawls. A similar distinction exists between competing in a track meet and fleeing from the police. Or between “stealing” the ball from an opponent during a basketball game and stealing one from a gym bag on the playground. Knocking someone to the ground on a football field is different from tackling someone at the grocery store.
When both parties agree to rules, when the intent is not vengeance or mayhem or killing, and when the event is supervised, then it’s a sport. What happens in a football or hockey game can be extremely violent. The same acts, done to someone unaware and walking down the street, would be immoral and criminal. Given these stipulations, games involving combat can be legitimate contact sports.
Many believers are uncomfortable with the idea of violence in any format or for any reason. Yet Scripture does not advocate for total pacifism. In fact, the Word speaks of God giving people martial prowess (Psalm 144:1\). The concept of training, practicing, and competing in combat techniques is compatible with a biblical worldview. In fact, training in MMA provides less lethal methods of [self\-defense](self-defense.html); these are more merciful than the use of weapons.
A related complaint is that combat sports such as boxing or MMA are intended to “hurt the other guy.” This is false in any meaningful sense. The goal of MMA competition is not to physically injure the other person—it’s to win according to the rules. In MMA, those rules exist to prevent serious injury or maiming. No legitimate MMA leagues sponsor “no rules” events; the rules that exist are explicitly to protect the health of the competitors.
Mixed martial arts are obviously more dangerous than sports such as swimming or jai alai. Yet, to many people’s surprise, MMA is not significantly riskier than other sports. In fact, while minor cuts and bruises are much more common in MMA, the risk of life\-threatening or crippling injury is less than in other combat sports. It’s even lower than in some non\-combat [extreme sports](extreme-sports.html). In a boxing match, for instance, competitors throw punches at each other’s heads and upper bodies for round after round. They can be knocked nearly unconscious and allowed to continue. The typical boxer or kickboxer, after a 15\-round fight, looks like he’s been in a car accident. MMA fights are stopped the instant a competitor is disabled. The typical MMA match lasts less than a few minutes, and in many cases both competitors could walk out of the arena without anyone knowing they’d been participating in a “combat” sport.
Football players deliberately hit opponents hard enough to knock them off their feet, as do hockey and rugby players. They smash, push, and drive into others with force and intent. Collegiate wrestlers deliberately impose pain and restraint on their opponent. Physically “violent” acts happen in water polo, field hockey, and so forth. All such acts come with risk of injury. But the intent is not to cause serious harm or death. There is certainly intent to deliver discomfort and psychological pressure. MMA is no different, in the sense that the goal is to “win,” while rules are in place to avoid dire consequences.
Without question, sports like MMA are human\-on\-human “combat.” That alone makes some people uncomfortable. Choosing not to partake is perfectly fine in the context of someone’s own spiritual walk. With mixed martial arts, as with any activity, each Christian needs to make up his own mind as to whether it’s compatible with his own spiritual life. Other believers should make room for those personal determinations. Those who ask, “Would Jesus punch someone in the face?” well\-meaning as such questions may be, need to consider the same perspective for all sports. Would Jesus run at full speed into a smaller man, blast him to the ground, and take what he was carrying? That’s American football, which itself makes some Christians uncomfortable for all the reasons given so far.
In the Bible, God “wrestles” with Jacob (Genesis 32:22–28\). This was clearly combative; the result was a substantial injury to Jacob (Genesis 32:31–32\). David praised God for helping him become a better warrior (Psalm 144\). And David’s training wasn’t for entertainment or recreation—it had lethal intent (1 Samuel 18:7\). Jesus did not command total pacifism; He advocated reasonable use of armed self\-defense (Luke 22:36–38\). In summary, the Bible does not give any hard\-and\-fast reason why a Christian cannot enjoy or participate in [martial arts](martial-arts-Christian.html) or the sport of mixed martial arts (MMA).
Few people call American football or rugby “un\-Christian” because the sport involves running into people and knocking them down. Tackling someone on the street out of revenge or in a fit of anger is not “sport.” Likewise, a backyard brawl or bar fight is not the “sport” of mixed martial arts. What happens in the ring, in a controlled environment, is neither morally nor materially equivalent to the type of violence the Bible prohibits in the life of a Christian (1 Timothy 3:3; Titus 1:7\). That doesn’t make MMA acceptable for all believers at all times, but Scripture does not entirely preclude the sport.
|
How should a Christian respond to bullying? |
Answer
Although we do not find the word *bullying* in the Bible, we do find the word *brutish*, a synonym of the brutal thuggery associated with thieves, assassins, and savage beasts (Psalm 49:10; Proverbs 12:1; Isaiah 19:11\). The Hebrew and Greek words translated “brute” or “brutish” mean “stupid, foolish, and irrational, as cattle.” We can derive from this that those who bully are acting as cattle or other beasts incapable of rational thought. It is, unfortunately, not uncommon to see this type of abhorrent behavior in fallen man—even in the church—in both males and females throughout all life stages.
The Bible does not speak specifically about bullies or bullying, but there are many biblical principles that apply to the issue. First, it is important to understand what bullying is. A simple definition would be "using superior strength or power to intimidate people." Bullies are those who prey on people they perceive as weaker and threaten them with harm, or actually harm them, in order to get their own way. Obviously, bullying is not godly. Christians are called to love others and to look out for those who are weaker, not to intimidate or manipulate people (James 1:27; 1 John 3:17–18; Galatians 6:9–10\). It being evident that Christians should not be bullies, how should Christians respond to bullying?
Generally, there are two situations in which a Christian may need to respond to bullying: when he is the victim of bullying and when he is a witness to bullying. When being bullied, a right response might be turning the other cheek, or it might be self\-defense. When Jesus spoke of "turning the other cheek" in Matthew 5:38–42, He taught us to refrain from retaliating to personal slights. The idea is not to return an insult with an insult. When someone verbally abuses us, we do not return his affront with insults of our own. When someone tries to assert his position of power to intimidate us or force us into a certain behavior, we can resist his manipulation without being manipulative in return. In short, bullying a bully is not biblical and, quite frankly, not useful. It is, however, advisable to report the bully to proper authorities. It is not wrong for a child in school to alert his teacher about bullies. It is not wrong for a person to report a con artist to the police. Such actions may help prevent the bully from harming others. Even when we do not retaliate on a personal level, we can still utilize social systems of justice.
In other cases, particularly if the bullying is physical, self\-defense may be appropriate. The Bible does not advocate total pacifism. God’s instructions to Israel in Exodus 22 and Jesus’ instruction to His disciples to get a sword in Luke 22 are informative. Christians are to be loving and forgiving, but not permissive of evil.
When a Christian observes bullying, it may be appropriate to step in and help prevent the attack against the victim. Each situation will be different, and many times stepping in will add to the problem, but often it takes just one person to stand up on behalf of a weaker party in order to stop the bullying and prevent it in the future. Certainly, a Christian could talk with a victim of bullying after the incident and help the victim with any needs, including assistance in reporting the incident.
God’s wisdom is necessary in all instances of confronting bullying. Those who follow Christ have the Holy Spirit living within them. He helps us to understand God’s Word and can guide us and equip us to obey God in whatever situation we find ourselves.
We also need to consider our thoughts and attitudes toward bullies. It is easy to demonize bullies and think of them as hateful people. However, this is not a godly attitude. Every human being is born a sinner, and we all need salvation in Jesus (Romans 3:23; 6:23\). At the very least, we should pray that the bully would have a change of heart and know God’s salvation (1 Timothy 2:1–4\). Many times, though, bullies act the way they do out of their own hurt. Perhaps they were bullied in the past. Perhaps they feel insecure, and the only way they can feel acceptable to themselves is by belittling others. We can empathize with their hurt and extend God’s compassion, love, and grace to them while also maintaining solid boundaries to address their wrong behavior. Whether bullying is driven by past hurt or simply the sin nature, God is the one who can bring healing, restoration, and change. It is always appropriate to pray for both bullies and their victims. Similarly, when we are the victim of bullying, we can go to God with our hurt and seek His reassurance and healing.
Romans 12:17–21 says, "Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everyone. If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: 'It is mine to avenge; I will repay,' says the Lord. On the contrary: 'If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.' Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good."
God has shown us incredible mercy. We should show this to others in the way we behave—by not bullying, by standing up to defend the weak, by being willing to forgive, by preventing bullying as best we can through appropriate social channels, and by praying for those who bully and who are bullied. The love and grace of God are enough to heal every wound.
|
Will we be able to see all three members of the Trinity in Heaven? |
Answer
Before considering if we will actually be able to see God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, we need to establish that they are three Persons. Without delving too deeply into the doctrine of the [Trinity](Trinity-Bible.html), we need to understand that the Father is not the same Person as the Son, the Son is not the same Person as the Holy Spirit and the Holy Spirit is not the same Person as the Father. They are not three Gods. They are three distinct Persons, yet they are all the one God. Each has a will, can speak, can love, etc., and these are demonstrations of personhood. They are in absolute perfect harmony consisting of one substance. They are coeternal, coequal and co\-powerful. If any one of the three were removed, there would be no God.
So in heaven, there are three Persons. But will we be able to actually see them? Revelation 4:3\-6 gives us a description of heaven and the throne that is occupied by God and by the Lamb: “the one sitting there had the appearance of jasper and carnelian… a rainbow resembling an emerald encircled the throne. Before the throne… a sea of glass, clear as crystal.” Since God dwells in “unapproachable light” and is one “whom no one has seen or can see” (1 Timothy 6:16\), God is described in terms of the reflected brilliance of precious stones. First Corinthians 2:9 says, “No eye has seen, no ear has heard, no mind has conceived what God has prepared for those who love him.” Because of God’s holiness, it may be that we will never be able to look upon His face, but again, this is speculation.
Revelation 5:6 tells us that in heaven, the Lamb stands in the center of the throne and there are descriptions of Him clothed in brilliant white. Since the Lamb represents Christ Jesus, and we know that human eyes have beheld Him after His resurrection and glorification, it seems reasonable to conclude that in heaven, we will be able to look upon our Lord and Savior.
The Holy Spirit, by the very nature of His being, is able to move at will and take various forms. When Jesus was baptized, the Holy Spirit descended on Him in the form of a dove (Matthew 3:13\-17\). At Pentecost, the Holy Spirit was accompanied by a loud rushing noise and was seen as tongues of fire (Acts 2:1\-4\). It may not be possible to see the Holy Spirit unless He chooses to manifest Himself in some form, but that is speculation.
Mere mortals do not have the ability to grasp the wonders of heaven—it is entirely beyond our comprehension. Whatever heaven is like, it will far exceed our wildest imaginings! All we know is that we will be worshiping our great God and full of wonder that He died to save sinners.
|
I am a Mormon. Why should I consider becoming a Christian? |
Answer
Anyone from any religion—or no religion at all—who asks, “Why should I consider becoming a Christian?" should consider the claims of Christianity. For a Mormon asking this question, the differences between the tenets of biblical Christianity and LDS philosophy should be the primary area of inquiry. If the Bible is the Word of God (both Joseph Smith and [Brigham Young](Brigham-Young.html) believed this), then the foundational beliefs of Mormonism and the Latter\-day Saints (if those beliefs are reliable) should be consistent with what the Bible teaches. However, there are inconsistencies, and we will look at four areas of discrepancy between Mormonism and the Bible.
1\) A Mormon who is considering becoming a Christian should understand that Mormonism teaches dependence on extra\-biblical sources. The Bible teaches that it is sufficient for instruction in Christian living (2 Timothy 3:16\) and that God specifically cursed anyone who claimed authority to add to what God had already revealed in the Bible. In other words, God pronounced His written revelation complete (Revelation 22:18–19\). Therefore, there is no reason for God to write more. A God who writes His Book, says it’s complete, and then later realizes He forgot something either didn’t plan for the future or didn’t know enough to write everything the first time. Such a god is not the God of the Bible. Yet Mormonism teaches that the Bible is only one of four authoritative sources, the other three being the [Book of Mormon](book-of-Mormon.html), [Doctrine and Covenants](Doctrine-and-Covenants.html), and [The Pearl of Great Price](Pearl-of-Great-Price.html). These three came from a single man who declared them to be God\-inspired despite their being contrary to the Bible, the first and only truly inspired text. To add additional material to Scripture and call it inspired is to contradict God.
2\) A Mormon who is considering becoming a Christian should understand that Mormonism promotes a lesser god. Mormonism teaches that God has not always been the Supreme Being of the universe (Mormon Doctrine, p. 321\) but attained that status through righteous living (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 345\). Yet who defines *righteous*? That standard can only come from God Himself. So, the teaching that God became God by meeting a predetermined standard originating from God is a contradiction. Additionally, a god that is not eternal and self\-existent is not the God of the Bible. The Bible teaches that God is eternally self\-existent (Deuteronomy 33:27; Psalm 90:2; 1 Timothy 1:17\) and He is not created but the Creator Himself (Genesis 1; Psalm 24:1; Isaiah 37:16; Colossians 1:17–18\).
3\) A Mormon who is considering becoming a Christian should understand that Mormonism teaches an inflated view of humanity that is completely inconsistent with biblical teaching. Mormonism teaches that any human can also become a god (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 345–354; Doctrine \& Covenants 132:20\). Yet the Bible teaches repeatedly that we are all inherently sinful (Jeremiah 17:9; Romans 3:10–23; 8:7\) and that God alone is God (1 Samuel 2:2; Isaiah 44:6, 8; 46:9\). Isaiah 43:10 records God’s own words: “Before me no god was formed, nor will there be one after me.” How Mormonism can assert that men will become gods in the face of such overwhelming scriptural evidence is a testimony to the depth of man’s desire to usurp God’s place, a desire born in the heart of Satan (Isaiah 14:14\) and passed on by him to Adam and Eve in the Garden (Genesis 3:5\). The desire to usurp the throne of God—or to share it—characterizes all who are of their father the devil, including the Antichrist, who will act on the same desire in the end times (2 Thessalonians 2:3–4\). Throughout history, many false religions have played upon the same desire to be God. But God declares there is no God but Him, and we dare not contradict Him.
4\) A Mormon who is considering becoming a Christian should understand that Mormonism teaches that we are capable of earning our salvation, contrary to Scripture (Articles of Faith, p.92; 2 Nephi 25:23\). Although we will certainly live differently because of our faith, it is not our works that save us, but only the grace of God through the faith He gives to us as a free gift (Ephesians 2:4–10\). This is simply because God accepts only His own perfect righteousness. Christ died on the cross to exchange His perfection for our sin (2 Corinthians 5:21\). We can only be made holy in God’s sight through faith in Christ (1 Corinthians 1:2\).
Ultimately, faith in a false Christ leads to a false salvation. Any salvation that is “earned” is a false salvation (Romans 3:20–28\). We simply cannot be worthy of salvation on our own merits. If we cannot trust God’s Word, then we have no basis for trust at all. If we can trust God’s Word, then we must recognize that His Word is consistent and reliable. If God could not or did not preserve His Word accurately, then He would not be God. The difference between Mormonism and Christianity is that Christianity declares a God who is eternally self\-existent, who set a perfect and holy standard that we cannot live up to, and who then, out of His great love, paid the price for our sin by sending His Son to die on the cross for us.
If you are ready to place your trust in the all\-sufficient sacrifice of Jesus Christ, you can speak the following words to God: “Father God, I know that I am a sinner and am worthy of your wrath. I recognize and believe that Jesus is the only Savior. I place my trust in Jesus alone to save me. Father God, please forgive me, cleanse me, and change me. Thank you for your wonderful grace and mercy!”
Have you placed your full trust in Jesus Christ as your Savior because of what you have read here? If so, please click on the “I have accepted Christ today” button below.
If you have any questions, please use the question form on our [Bible Questions Answered](Bible-Questions.html) page.
|
Is the Church of God in Christ (COGIC) a good, biblical church? |
Answer
The Church of God in Christ (COGIC) is an historically African\-American Holiness\-Pentecostal church. The church has congregations in nearly 60 countries around the world. With a membership of over 5 million in 2007, it is the largest African\-American and largest Pentecostal church in the United States. The Church of God in Christ (COGIC) was formed in 1897 by a group of Baptists, most notably Charles Price Jones (1865–1949\) and Charles Harrison Mason (1866–1961\), who broke fellowship with the Baptists over the doctrine of Holiness. Mason became associated with a group of men who would become the early African\-American leaders of the Holiness movement in the late 19th century.
An examination of the statement of faith from COGIC’s official homepage reveals that the group holds to many of the traditional doctrines of Christianity such as the inspiration and infallibility of Scripture, the triune nature of God, repentance and faith in Christ for the remission of sins, the rapture of the church, and regeneration of the Spirit necessary for salvation. However, other doctrines held by COGIC are at odds with traditional, biblical Christianity: [healing](healing-Bible.html) of the body in answer to believing prayer; the [baptism of the Holy Spirit](receive-Holy-Spirit.html) in response to prayer separate from salvation; and the ability to live a completely [holy and separated life](sinless-perfection.html) in the present world. We contend that these beliefs are unbiblical, as explained in the articles on the Got Questions site linked above.
There is no doubt the COGIC churches and headquarters are involved in many wonderful ministries, to the African\-American community in particular, including global outreach, prison ministry, urban outreach and health/wellness. But, as with all groups in the Holiness and Pentecostal movements, they adhere to some teachings which depart from Scripture. We do not question the faith of COGIC members, nor do we doubt the sincerity of their love for Jesus Christ. Due to some important doctrinal differences, though, we cannot endorse COGIC churches.
|
Is it necessary to fully understand the Gospel to go to heaven? |
Answer
In one sense, the gospel message is very simple to understand: *Jesus died and rose again so that we can be saved*. The basic facts of the gospel are easy enough to grasp. But in another sense the gospel message is one of the deepest of divine truths ever revealed to mankind: *Jesus died and rose again so that we can be saved*. The implications of those facts and the underlying theology of God are profound enough to keep even the most astute theologians pondering for a lifetime. When it comes to salvation, how thorough of an understanding is required before faith can truly be called “faith”?
It is undeniable that saving faith involves a certain level of understanding. That understanding is made possible through the preaching of the gospel (Matthew 28:18–20\) accompanied by the work of the Holy Spirit in the heart (Acts 16:14\). Paul delineates the process that leads to a proper understand of the gospel: preaching, which leads to hearing, which leads to believing, which leads to calling on the Lord for salvation (Romans 10:14\). The “hearing” implies understanding; if the preaching is not understood, then it is not truly “heard.”
The content of the preaching that must be understood is the gospel. From the very beginning, the apostles’ message stressed the death and resurrection of Christ (Acts 2:23–24\). This message is “of first importance: 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 Cephas, and then to the Twelve” (1 Corinthians 15:3–4\). This passage contains the [basic elements of the gospel](gospel-message.html), which centers on the Person and work of Christ: Jesus died for our sins, and He rose again from the dead. No one is saved without an understanding of this truth—and a reliance on it.
Each facet of the gospel message is important. Obscure the understanding of any element of the gospel, and faith dissolves: if we don’t understand that Jesus is the perfect Son of God, then His death is of no account, insofar as our salvation is concerned. If we don’t understand that Jesus died, then we logically won’t understand the resurrection. If we don’t understand the *reason* He died (for our sins), then we might view ourselves as guiltless and therefore not needing a Savior. If we don’t understand that [Jesus rose again](Jesus-rose-again.html), then we miss the fact of a living Savior, and our faith is dead (1 Corinthians 15:17\).
The Bible gives examples of those who had attained a certain amount of spiritual knowledge but were still unsaved. It was after they understood the essentials of the gospel that these individuals trusted Christ and were born again. The Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:26–39\), Cornelius (Acts 10\), Apollos (Acts 18:24–28\), and the twelve men in Ephesus (Acts 19:1–7\) all had religious backgrounds, but the moment of salvation only came when they put their faith in Christ—and they had to hear and understand the content of the gospel first.
However, in order to be saved, it is not necessary to understand *everything* the gospel entails. In fact, understanding the fullness of all the gospel entails is impossible, this side of glory. We strive, paradoxically, “to know this love that surpasses knowledge” (Ephesians 3:19\). But we will never fully understand the riches of God’s grace: “Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! / How unsearchable his judgments, / and his paths beyond tracing out!” (Romans 11:33\).
For example, we don’t need to understand the hypostatic union in order to be saved. Quoting the definition of *propitiation* is not needed for salvation. Neither is a working knowledge of justification, redemption, or progressive sanctification required for entrance into heaven. Knowledge of these things comes with time and study of the Word, but they are not necessary to be grasped at the moment one is saved. It is doubtful that the [thief on the cross](thief-on-the-cross.html) understood much about soteriology when he turned to the Lord and said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom” (Luke 23:42\).
The gospel message is simple enough for a child to understand. Jesus made a point of declaring that salvation is available to the [little ones](Jesus-and-children.html): “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these” (Mark 10:14\). Praise the Lord, the gospel of Jesus Christ can be understood by children. Also, to those who are mentally incapable of understanding the gospel, we believe God extends His grace.
So, to go to heaven, we must “believe in the Lord Jesus Christ” (Acts 16:31\). That is, we trust in the sacrifice of the Holy One of God who died in our place and rose again the third day. To those who believe in Jesus’ name, God gives “the right to become children of God” (John 1:12\). The gospel is as simple—and as profound—as that.
|
How should a Christian view the idea of auras? |
Answer
Auras are believed to be subtle energy fields or fields of light emanating from human beings, as well as all living things, surrounding them like a bubble. It is claimed that the human aura indicates the spiritual, physical, and emotional state of a person via the color, depth, and strength of the aura. The colors are interpreted as indicating a feeling, experience, state of health, or quality possessed by the owner. Reading or scanning a person’s aura is allegedly done by some psychics and also by those in some areas of alternative healing therapies. Auras are allegedly seen through clairvoyance, a paranormal ability to see the non\-material realm. It is thought that people either have innate supernatural abilities to see auras or can develop psychic powers to see them. Belief in auras is an integral part of the occult, particularly among New Age teachings, Wicca, or witchcraft, all of which are condemned in Scripture as abhorrent to God. The Bible strongly condemns spiritism, mediums, the occult, and psychics (Leviticus 20:27; Deuteronomy 18:10\-13\).
As with all New Age teachings, there is no biblical basis for belief in auras. There are some who actually believe that the Bible supports a belief in auras and point to Exodus 34 and Matthew 17 as scriptural proof. However, even the most cursory read\-through of these passages makes it clear that what was witnessed was the glory of God. In the Exodus passage, Moses had just come down the mountain after spending 40 days and nights with God, and the glory of God was still reflected in his face. The Matthew passage is the account of Jesus’ transfiguration. Both passages are specific to divine encounters and have nothing to do with a personal energy field.
Some people claim that the halos around Jesus, His disciples, and various saints and angels in paintings represent their auras. It is believed that painting halos was first done in ancient Greece and Rome, and then borrowed by Christians in the early years of the church and during the Middle Ages for paintings of angels and the saints. Greek artists brought the halo technique into India during the reign of Alexander the Great, and Buddhist artists adopted it in their depictions of Buddha and Buddhist saints. Halos in paintings are pictorial representations of the spiritual power or status of a figure; there is no evidence that they signify a belief in auras by the artists. Therefore, the claim that halos in paintings are related to auras is unfounded. Furthermore, depiction of halos is part of cultural views and the artist’s imagination. As with auras, there is no biblical basis for a belief in halos.
The Bible does not speak of halos or auras, but it does speak of light in many places, especially of Jesus Christ as “the light of the world” (John 8:12\) and of Satan as one who can disguise himself as an “angel of light” (2 Corinthians 11:14\). Consequently, we know that there are the true light and a counterfeit light. God says about Jesus, “In him was life, and that life was the light of men” (John 1:4\). Christians are to live as “children of light” (Ephesians 5:8\), knowing that they “are sons of the light and sons of the day” (1 Thessalonians 5:5\). Since “God is light, and in him there is no darkness at all” (1 John 1:5\), one should reject the false light of the aura, a belief rooted in occultism, and rather seek the true light of Jesus Christ. “For God, who said, ‘Let light shine out of darkness,’ made his light shine in our hearts to give us the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ” (2 Corinthians 4:6\).
|
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.