prompt
stringlengths 0
158
| response
stringlengths 14
40.2k
|
|---|---|
What is the Logos?
|
Answer
*Logos* is the Greek term translated as “word,” “speech,” “principle,” or “thought.” In Greek philosophy, it also referred to a universal, divine reason or the mind of God.
In the New Testament, the Gospel of John begins, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life, and the life was the light of men” (John 1:1\-4\). Here it is clear that the “Word” or Logos is a reference to Jesus Christ.
John argues that Jesus, the Word or Logos, is eternal and is God. Further, all creation came about by and through Jesus, who is presented as the source of life. Amazingly, this Logos came and lived among us: “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 1:14\).
John’s Gospel begins by using the Greek idea of a “divine reason” or “the mind of God” as a way to connect with the readers of his day and introduce Jesus to them as God. Greek philosophy may have used the word in reference to divine reason, but John used it to note many of the attributes of Jesus. In John’s use of the Logos concept, we find that
\-Jesus is eternal (“In the beginning was the Word”)
\-Jesus was with God prior to coming to earth (“the Word was with God”)
\-Jesus is God (“the Word was God.”)
\-Jesus is Creator (“All things were made through him”)
\-Jesus is the Giver of Life (“In him was life”)
\-Jesus became human to live among us (“the Word became flesh and dwelt among us”)
Further, the opening of John’s Gospel carries a striking resemblance to Genesis 1:1\.
“**In the beginning**, God *created the heavens and the earth*” (Genesis 1:1\).
“**In the beginning** was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. *All things were made through him…*” (John 1:1\).
(The corresponding theme of “light” is also used in both Genesis 1 and John 1\.)
*Logos* is used in many ways, yet in John’s Gospel *Logos* is a clear reference to Jesus, the God who both created us and lived among us. *Logos* became a theological term important to Christians in the early church and remains a concept of significant influence today.
|
What is a synagogue?
|
Answer
A synagogue is a Jewish building designed for worship (similar to a modern church building). Though some Jewish traditions claim synagogues existed “from the time of Moses,” history notes that the practice of meeting in synagogues emerged during the period of Israel’s Babylonian captivity. During this time, the Jewish temple was unavailable for worship, requiring an alternative gathering place for dispersed Jews who desired to gather for prayer and communal worship.
By the time of Jesus and the New Testament period, synagogues had become a common local fixture. The New Testament mentions synagogues over 60 times, largely in connection with the ministry of Jesus and the apostles. On the Sabbath, local Jews would meet for prayer and Scripture reading. On one occasion, Jesus read from the prophet Isaiah during a synagogue gathering. Luke 4:16\-21 records
*And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up. And as was his custom, he went to the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and he stood up to read. And the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was given to him. He unrolled the scroll and found the place where it was written,
“The Spirit of the Lord is upon me,
because he has anointed me
to proclaim good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives
and recovering of sight to the blind,
to set at liberty those who are oppressed,
to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”
And he rolled up the scroll and gave it back to the attendant and sat down. And the eyes of all in the synagogue were fixed on him. And he began to say to them, “Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing.”*
Many synagogue customs can be observed in these verses. First, the meeting took place on the Sabbath (Saturday). Second, Jesus stood to read. Third, He read from a scroll. Even today, scrolls are found in synagogues and are used for weekly readings (see also Acts 15:21\). When finished with His reading, Jesus sat down to teach, another synagogue tradition.
Paul and the other apostles would use the synagogue as a launching point for missionary activities. Upon arriving in a new community, Paul would show up at the synagogue and request to speak. He definitely had the credentials to open many doors (Acts 22:3\). He would then present Jesus as the Messiah and begin his local outreach. This sometimes resulted in many people believing in Jesus. Acts 14:1 records, “Now at Iconium they entered together into the Jewish synagogue and spoke in such a way that a great number of both Jews and Greeks believed.” In one case, a synagogue ruler was baptized (Acts 18:8\). At other times, Paul’s practice of teaching in the synagogue led to much persecution.
Historically, the synagogue has continued to play an essential role in the practice of Judaism. After the destruction of the Jewish temple in A.D. 70, worship could no longer take place in the temple, making the synagogue the central place of worship.
The synagogue has served as an important fixture in Judaism and early Christianity. Its importance during the time of Jesus and the apostles provided one of the key ways the gospel spread in the earliest years of the church.
|
What is the Shema?
|
Answer
*Shema* (“hear”) is the Hebrew word that begins the most important prayer in Judaism. It is found in Deuteronomy 6:4, which begins with the command to “Hear.” The whole Shema prayer, which includes verses 4\-9, is spoken daily in the Jewish tradition:
*Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might. And these words that I command you today shall be on your heart. You shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise. You shall bind them as a sign on your hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes. You shall write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates.*
Later Jewish tradition developed a three\-part Shema prayer that also included Deuteronomy 11:13–29 and Numbers 15:37–41\. Tradition states these three parts cover all aspects of the Ten Commandments.
The Shema prayer was so influential and important that Jesus used it as the beginning of His answer to the “greatest commandment” question in Mark 12:28–30:
*And one of the scribes came up and heard them disputing with one another, and seeing that he answered them well, asked him, “Which commandment is the most important of all?” Jesus answered, “The most important is, ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’ The second is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.*
When Jesus began His answer with the Shema prayer, He acknowledged the Lord God as most important and that complete devotion to Him is the most important of the commandments. It is no surprise that the scribe replied this way in verses 32–33:
*You are right, Teacher. You have truly said that he is one, and there is no other besides him. And to love him with all the heart and with all the understanding and with all the strength, and to love one’s neighbor as oneself, is much more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices.*
Even today, Christians can look to the words of the Shema as a wonderful expression that the Lord is the one true God. As we acknowledge His lordship, our response remains to “hear” Him, love Him with all our heart, soul, and might, and love our neighbor as ourselves.
|
What is secularism?
|
Answer
Essentially, secularism says that man does not need God. It can be defined as “a system of doctrines and practices that disregards or rejects any form of religious faith and worship. Its primary objective is the total elimination of all religious elements from society.” Secularism, also known as secular humanism, teaches that there are no objective or absolute truths defining right and wrong. In essence, to secularize something is to make it worldly and unspiritual. Its intent is to deprive something of its religious character, its spiritual influence and significance.
Secularism permeates all facets of our society: education, government, the criminal justice system, the news media, the entertainment industry, etc. Secularists believe that man is the measure of all things, that morals are man\-centered, not God\-centered. Therefore, no one is entitled to determine right from wrong, and morality is best determined by what is good for today’s culture. Secularists do not believe that mankind can have a set of permanent values such as are taught in the Bible. Secularism pays lip service to tolerance and diversity, yet many times secularists are intolerant of those who look to the Bible as God’s standard for morality.
When the things of God are removed from schools, courtrooms, and congressional hallways, it naturally leads to a deterioration of personal morality. The acceptance of situational ethics does away with moral absolutes and dictates that there are no limits, no values, no real standards.
The more our nation embraces secularism, the more it becomes like ancient Israel, where “everyone did what was right in his own eyes” (Judges 17:6; 21:25\). When the mindset is “if it feels good, do it!” wickedness, perversion, and sin become the norm. In a completely secularized society, marriage is disparaged, morality is mocked, and human life is devalued.
The truth is that, left to his own devices, man always descends to a lower level. Following the Bible’s precepts lifts us to a higher moral plane (Deuteronomy 4:7\-8; 10:12\-13; Proverbs 14:34\). However, man has hardened his heart against God (John 12:40; Romans 1:18\-22\). We have sown to the wind and are in danger of reaping the whirlwind (Hosea 8:7\).
Even the church is being impacted by secularism. Many churches are dealing less and less with the moral conduct of its membership for fear of offending them. After all, accommodating a wayward member is much easier than correcting him. However, the church cannot allow itself to become secularized. Jesus taught that, though we are *in* the world, we’re not *of* the world (Romans 2:2; James 4:4; 1 John 2:15\).
Secularism promotes the idea that religion is nothing but a relic of the past. But the truth is, God exists, and we do need Him. Despite the claims of secular humanism, the Bible is God’s truth (John 17:17\). As believers living in a secular society, we must “become blameless and harmless, children of God without fault in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation, among whom you shine as lights in the world” (Philippians 2:15, NKJV).
|
What does it mean that Satan masquerades as an angel of light?
|
Answer
Darkness and light are metaphors for evil and good. If anyone sees an angel of light, it will automatically seem to be a good being, for the correlation of evil with darkness, and of good with light, is a powerful archetype in human history. In the Bible, light is a spiritual metaphor for truth and God’s unchanging nature (James 1:17\). It is repeatedly used in the Bible to help us understand that God is wholly good and truthful (1 John 1:5\). When we are “in the light,” we are with Him (1 Peter 2:9\). He exhorts us to join Him in the light (1 John 1:7\), for giving us light was His purpose (John 12:46\). Light is the place where love dwells and is comfortable (1 John 2:9\-10\). God has created light (Genesis 1:3\), dwells in the light (1 Timothy 6:16\) and puts the light in human hearts so that we can see and know Him and understand truth (2 Corinthians 4:6\).
So, when 2 Corinthians 11:14 tells us that “Satan disguises himself as an angel of light,” it means that Satan capitalizes on our love of the light in order to deceive. He wants us to think that he is good, truthful, loving, and powerful – all the things that God is. To portray himself as a dark, devilish being with horns would not be very appealing to the majority of people. Most people are not drawn to darkness, but to light. Therefore, Satan appears as a creature of light to draw us to himself and his lies.
How can we discern which light is of God and which light is of Satan? Our minds and hearts are easily confused by conflicting messages. How can we make sure we are on the right path? Psalm 119 says, “Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path” (verse 105\) and “The unfolding of your words gives light; it imparts understanding to the simple” (verse 130\). The words of God have power. Just as God’s voice spoke physical light into existence, it can speak spiritual light into our hearts. Exposure to His voice – in His Word – will help us recognize the difference between the good light of God and that which is counterfeit.
Satan presents sin to us as something pleasing and beautiful to be desired, and he presents false teaching as enlightening and life\-changing. Millions follow his deceptions simply because they do not know God’s truth. Isaiah 8:20\-22 describes the darkness that results from ignoring the Word. The people of Israel have been seeking truth by consulting mediums, deceived by Satan’s lie. Isaiah says, “To the teaching and to the testimony! If they will not speak according to this word, it is because they have no dawn. They will pass through the land, greatly distressed and hungry. And when they are hungry, they will be enraged and will speak contemptuously against their king and their God, and turn their faces upward. And they will look to the earth, but behold, distress and darkness, the gloom of anguish. And they will be thrust into thick darkness.”
Darkness is a result of attempting to find truth without the Word of God. Sadly, as Isaiah says, when people do not have the “dawn,” they wander in darkness and often become angry at God, refusing to come to Him for help. This is why Satan’s masquerade as an angel of light is so effective. It turns white to black and black to white and gets us believing that God is the liar, that God is the source of darkness. Then, in our distress, we focus our hatred towards the only One who can save us.
|
Who were the Bereans in the Bible?
|
Answer
The Bereans were residents of the city of Berea in Macedonia. Paul and Silas preached to them during Paul’s second missionary journey. The account of Paul and Silas in this location is recorded in Acts 17:10\-15\. It reads,
*The brothers immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea, and when they arrived they went into the Jewish synagogue. Now these Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica; they received the word with all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so. Many of them therefore believed, with not a few Greek women of high standing as well as men. But when the Jews from Thessalonica learned that the word of God was proclaimed by Paul at Berea also, they came there too, agitating and stirring up the crowds. Then the brothers immediately sent Paul off on his way to the sea, but Silas and Timothy remained there. Those who conducted Paul brought him as far as Athens, and after receiving a command for Silas and Timothy to come to him as soon as possible, they departed.*
These Bereans exhibited several positive characteristics that marked their response to the gospel message. First and foremost, the Bereans were “more noble” because of their willing reception of the Word of God. Unlike the unbelieving Thessalonian Jews, the Bereans were eager to hear the teaching of Paul and Silas.
Second, the Bereans examined what they heard by comparing it to the Old Testament Scriptures. The fact that they honestly listened and conducted further personal research led many Bereans to faith in Jesus as the Messiah. This expansion of Christianity was not limited to those within the synagogue, but also extended to many Greek men and women in Berea.
Third, the Bereans guarded Paul’s safety. When Paul’s enemies arrived from nearby Thessalonica, the Berean believers protected Paul by getting him out of the region. They did not turn him over to his enemies or disassociate from him as the Jews from Thessalonica might have expected.
Fourth, the Bereans continued to grow in their faith. After Paul’s departure, Silas and Timothy remained in Berea. Why? The Bible does not explicitly say, but one reason was probably to give the Berean Christians a chance to obtain further instruction in the Christian faith.
Later in the book of Acts, we are given further insight into the faithfulness of at least one Berean man. When Paul decides to return for additional ministry in Macedonia despite the tremendous persecution he had recently faced, one of the men who chose to accompany him was from Berea: “There he spent three months, and when a plot was made against him by the Jews as he was about to set sail for Syria, he decided to return through Macedonia. Sopater the Berean, son of Pyrrhus, accompanied him” (Acts 20:3\-4\). Sopater, likely a Gentile Christian, continued to assist [Paul (and Timothy)](Paul-and-Timothy.html) in ministry long after Paul’s first visit to Berea.
In summary, the Bereans have long been seen as a positive example of how a person or community should respond to biblical teaching. We are called to eagerly learn from God’s Word and, no matter who the teacher is, to investigate new teaching in comparison with the Bible. The practice of the ancient Bereans is a model for all who desire to grow spiritually today.
|
What can we learn from the tribe of Manasseh?
|
Answer
Israel’s twelve tribes were named for Jacob’s children or, in the case of [Manasseh](Manasseh-in-the-Bible.html) (and Ephraim), his grandchildren. After Jacob wrestled with Him all night, God renamed Jacob “Israel,” which means “you have struggled with God and men and have overcome” (Genesis 32:22–30\). The name Israel represents not only the modern\-day country but also, originally, Jacob’s offspring to whom God promised a great nation whose “descendants will be like dust of the earth . . . spread out to the west and to the east, to the north and to the south” (Genesis 28:14\).
Jacob’s grandson, for whom the tribe was named, was born in Egypt to Joseph and his wife, Asenath, daughter of the priest Potiphera. Joseph named his firstborn “Manasseh” because God had made him “forget all my trouble and all my father’s household” (Genesis 41:51\).
This tribe provides us with many lessons; chief among them are messages about free will, obedience, faith, and the nature of God.
Early on, we learn that Manasseh is frequently referred to as the “half\-tribe” of Manasseh. This designation highlights the choice made by some of the tribe to reside east of the River Jordan (Numbers 32:33; Joshua 13: 29–31\). They believed the Transjordan was the more suitable land to raise their flocks. The rest of the tribe settled west of the Jordan, in Canaan, following Joshua’s command to enter and possess the Promised Land. As is evident throughout Scripture, God endows His children with the freedom to choose.
Exercising free will can lead to undesirable or even disastrous results, especially if we disobey God or make selfish choices. Manasseh learned this lesson—painfully—when they failed to obey God’s command to destroy the Canaanites. Part of this failure was due to a lack of faith that God would give them strength to overcome a seemingly unconquerable foe. Manasseh illustrates other human failings as well, such as greed and covetousness. The (half) tribe of Manasseh desired more land because they were “a numerous people.” They may have had the numbers, but they were unwilling to follow Joshua’s exhortation to clear “the land of the Perizzites and Rephaites” (Joshua 17:12\-18\).
On the other hand, the tribe of Manasseh at times exhibits faithfulness to God. Gideon, who would later become one of Israel’s best judges, questioned God when called to “save Israel out of Midian’s hand.” One of Gideon’s objections was that his “clan is the weakest in Manasseh, and I am the least in my family” (Judges 6:15\). Gideon required proof from God—twice—before he acted (Judges 6:36–40\). Once convinced of God’s will, Gideon moved forward with 32,000 troops to conquer the Midianites. But then God told Gideon that he had too many troops for the job, and God reduced his corps to a mere 300 men. Following God’s lead, this paltry force routed the enemy. The battle proved God was with Gideon and the half\-tribe of Manasseh.
Other interesting lessons emerge. One is that God is just. Zelophehad, great\-great\-grandson of Manasseh, had no sons and died in the desert before entering the Promised Land. His daughters petitioned Moses, asking that the practice of male inheritance be changed so they could receive their deceased father’s property. After consulting with the Lord, Moses agreed and developed rules designed to keep property within a family (Numbers 27:1–11\).
|
What does the Bible say about animal/pet euthanasia?
|
Answer
While the Bible nowhere explicitly addresses animal / pet euthanasia, there are definitely some biblical principles that apply. In Genesis 1:26 God declares, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” Essentially, as the highest order of created beings on the earth, humanity has full authority over all other creatures on the planet. While having [dominion over the animals](dominion-over-animals.html) includes the right to kill animals for food (Genesis 9:2\), it goes far beyond that. We are caretakers/stewards of God’s creation. We are all, in a sense, to be shepherds over the creatures that share this planet with us.
The Bible makes it clear that we are to treat animals with dignity, respect, and mercy. Proverbs 12:10 states, “A righteous man cares for the needs of his animal.” The responsibility to be merciful to animals exempted man from the command to not work on the Sabbath day: “If one of you has . . . an ox that falls into a well on the Sabbath day, will you not immediately pull him out?” (Luke 14:5\). The Bible also indicates that when an animal is a threat to people or other animals, it should be put to death (Exodus 21:28\-35\).
With these principles in mind, a biblical practice of animal / pet euthanasia can be developed. We are to be merciful to animals, and we have the authority to end the lives of animals. So, if euthanizing an animal would be a merciful act, there is absolutely nothing wrong with it. If we see an animal suffering, with no hope of recovery, the most merciful thing we could do is quickly and as painlessly as possible end its life. We are also free to do everything we can to preserve an animal’s life. But, again, when the time comes, and the most reasonable and merciful thing to do is to euthanize the animal or pet, it is absolutely a decision God has given us the authority to make. Figuratively speaking, sometimes the only way to get an animal out of the “pit” it has fallen into is to end its life.
|
What can we learn from the tribe of Ephraim?
|
Answer
Israel’s [twelve tribes](twelve-tribes-Israel.html) were named for Jacob’s children or, in the case of [Ephraim](Ephraim-in-the-Bible.html) (and Manasseh), his grandchildren. Ephraim was born in Egypt to Joseph’s wife, Asenath. Joseph named his second\-born son “Ephraim” because “God has made me fruitful in the land of my suffering” (Genesis 41:52\). When Jacob gave his blessing to his grandsons Ephraim and Manasseh, he chose to bless the younger Ephraim first, despite Joseph’s protests. In doing so, Jacob noted that Ephraim would be greater than Manasseh (Genesis 48:5–21\).
Throughout the Old Testament, the name *Ephraim* often refers to the ten tribes comprising Israel’s Northern Kingdom, not just the single tribe named after Joseph’s son (Ezekiel 37:16; Hosea 5:3\). The Northern Kingdom, also referred to as “Israel,” was taken into captivity by the Assyrians in 722 BC (Jeremiah 7\). The Southern Kingdom, also known as Judah, was conquered by the Babylonians nearly 140 years later (586 BC).
We learn from the tribe of Ephraim (and the other tribes) about our human essence, who we are as people. The history of the early Israelites reflects our universally flawed and sinful nature. As the book of Romans says, “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23\).
There are several specific events regarding the tribe of Ephraim that we can learn from. While God gifted the tribe as warriors and valiant fighters (1 Chronicles 12:30\), Ephraim failed to follow God’s order to remove the Canaanites from the Promised Land (Exodus 23:23–25; Judges 1:29; Joshua 16:10\).
During the time of the judges, the Ephraimites became angry with Gideon because he had not initially called for their help in battling the Midianites (Judges 8:1\). Gideon wisely displayed godly kindness and extolled the tribe’s commitment and willingness to serve the Lord, thus diffusing what could have become an ugly situation (Judges 8:2–3\).
However, ugliness did arise later, and again it can be linked to Ephraim’s pride, jealousy, and self\-centeredness. When Jephthah chose to fight (and defeat) the Ammonites without the aid of the proud Ephraim warriors, a civil war erupted, and 42,000 warriors from Ephraim were killed. As Jesus said in His [Sermon on the Mount](sermon-on-the-mount.html), we are to seek first the kingdom of God (Matthew 6:33\). Do not seek glory for yourself; all honor and glory always belong to God, not to man.
Often, God chooses to use us in a manner less glamorous or spectacular than we would like. Do we pout? Do we yearn for glory? Do we control our pride and jealousy and accept God’s will? Many of us, like the Ephraimites, have difficulty learning those lessons well. God says that we should accept what happens to us as His will, regardless of how good or bad those circumstances seem to us (1 Thessalonians 5:16–18\).
Other lessons of Ephraim complete the picture of the wide range of human behavior. We see Ephraim turning away from God and doing wicked things (Isaiah 28:1–3\), yet we also find the tribe recognizing the need to repent and obey by following the prophet Oded’s instructions (2 Chronicles 28:12\).
The biggest lesson from the history of Ephraim is that God loves us as the Perfect Father despite our failings. He is patient and merciful beyond our understanding. He hears our cries of anguish, disciplines and guides us, knows our moments of repentance, and yearns for us to be in perfect communion with Him (Jeremiah 30:22; 31:18–20\).
|
What is lasciviousness?
|
Answer
Lasciviousness refers to the practice of debauchery, lewdness, or licentiousness. In a word, to be lascivious is to be [lustful](what-is-lust.html). Lasciviousness was condemned not only by Jesus, but also by Jude and the apostles Peter and Paul. Interestingly, the word *lasciviousness* is not used in the more modern Bible translations, but is found in the older versions such as the American Standard Version, Young’s Literal Translation, and the King James Version.
The King James Version translates Mark 7:22–23 this way: “Thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, **lasciviousness**, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness: All these evil things come from within, and defile the man.” The NIV renders the same passage like this: “For from within, out of men’s hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, **lewdness**, envy, slander, arrogance and folly. All these evils come from inside and make a man ‘unclean.’” The NIV replaces “lasciviousness” with “lewdness.” The NLT uses the words “lustful desires.”
Other passages in the New Testament including this word are 1 Peter 4:3; 2 Corinthians 12:21; Ephesians 4:19; Galatians 5:19; and Jude 1:4\.
*Lasciviousness* also means “excessive indulgence in sensual pleasures.” It’s having a complete disregard for the integrity and honor of others. Examples of such behavior include that of the people of Sodom and Gomorrah (2 Peter 2:6–7\) and [false teachers](false-teachers.html) who promise freedom but who are themselves “slaves of depravity” (2 Peter 2:2, 18–19\). Also, Paul used the word *lasciviousness* in reference to sexual excess (Romans 13:13; 2 Corinthians 12:21; Galatians 5:19\). Jesus’ words recorded in Mark 7:22 have the same implication.
Lascivious behavior may include the way we dress, when our goal is to appear sexy or sensual. Lasciviousness also encompasses viewing sexually explicit media. This would include salacious magazines, movies, and television, as well as outright [pornography](pornography-Bible.html). Numerous studies have shown that pornography is highly addictive, and countless marriages have been destroyed as a result of it. It has also been determined that many child molesters, sexual predators, and even murderers have been influenced by such material.
Lascivious behavior is prevalent in the work environment where both men and women work in close proximity. Though sexual harassment laws have helped curtail unwanted advances from fellow\-workers, flirting, suggestive touching, and inappropriate language are commonplace.
Without question, today’s postmodern society encourages men and women to be “sexy,” but we must understand that Christians are to be virtuous. In his letter to the church in Corinth, the apostle Paul said, “Run from sexual sin! No other sin so clearly affects the body as this one does. For sexual immorality is a sin against your own body. Don’t you realize that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit, who lives in you and was given to you by God? You do not belong to yourself, for God bought you with a high price. So you must honor God with your body” (1 Corinthians 6:18–20, NLT). As followers of Jesus, our focus is to be holy in spirit and in body.
It’s important to understand that those who indulge in lasciviousness are putting their souls in dire jeopardy. Paul makes this abundantly clear in his letter to the Galatians: “When you follow the desires of your sinful nature, the results are very clear: sexual immorality, impurity, **lustful pleasures**, idolatry, sorcery, hostility, quarreling, jealousy, outbursts of anger, selfish ambition, dissension, division, envy, drunkenness, wild parties, and other sins like these. Let me tell you again, as I have before, that anyone living that sort of life will not inherit the Kingdom of God” (Galatians 5:19–21, NLT).
|
What does the Bible mean when it speaks against haughty eyes?
|
Answer
The word *haughty* is defined by Merriam\-Webster as “blatantly and disdainfully proud.” The word is always used in the Bible in the evil sense of “arrogant, disdainful and setting oneself above others”; it is often set in contrast to being humble.
In Proverbs 6:16\-19 is a list of “six things that the Lord hates, seven that are an abomination to Him.” The first one listed is “haughty eyes,” followed by such things as a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, a false witness, and feet quick to run to evil. Haughty eyes are said to be sin in Proverbs 21:4, along with a proud heart. To have haughty eyes is to have an arrogant demeanor; it’s an overall attitude of one’s heart that causes one to scorn or “look down on” others. The haughty person sets himself above others, and ultimately above God.
When we are haughty, we become the center of our universe; everything revolves around us. There is little, if any, concern for what others think and no consideration of the will of God. Pride, haughtiness, is the trunk of the tree from which all other sins sprout. When we are at the center of our world, then nothing that we want is unlawful to us.
God is resistant to haughtiness. Over and over in Scripture, we read that God brings down the haughty and the proud (2 Samuel 2:28; Psalm 18:27; Isaiah 2:11, 5:15; Ezekiel 16:50\). Twice in Proverbs, we read that haughtiness precedes destruction (16:18, 18:12\). The New Testament is clear on the dangers of arrogance, warning repeatedly against it. Both James and Peter warn that God actively opposes the proud (James 4:6, 1 Peter 5:5\).
None of us are immune to pride. The Bible tells us of otherwise good people who were brought down in one way or another by pride. The godly king Uzziah was struck with leprosy because, in arrogance, he tried to take the place of the priest and burn incense before the Lord (2 Chronicles 26:16\). Similarly, Hezekiah’s pride in his possessions eventually brought the discipline of God on him (2 Chronicles 32:25\). Peter’s prideful statement that he would never forsake Jesus (Matthew 26:33\-35\) was found to be false when he denied Him (Matthew 26:69\-75\).
The danger of pride is the reason for the many exhortations to humility in Scripture. Meditation on some key passages can fight the tendency we all have toward pride. First Corinthians 4:7 tells us that all we have is a gift, for which we should be thankful. Both 1 Peter 5:6 and James 4:6 encourage humility by saying that God gives grace to the humble. Isaiah 66:2 goes so far as to say that humility in the heart of a person actually draws God’s attention. Humility of heart gives us a proper perspective. A proud heart – haughty eyes, if you will – renders a person intractable. Such a person is resisted by God.
|
What is topical preaching?
|
Answer
Topical preaching is preaching that is centered on a specific topic. It is often contrasted with expositional preaching. Topical preaching looks at what the Bible says about a certain subject whereas expositional preaching looks at what a certain passage in the Bible means and how it applies to our lives today. Most pastors will preach at least some topical sermons, while some focus almost exclusively on them. Whether this model is good or bad probably has more to do with how it is used than anything else. Topical preaching can be quite effective, but there are inherent limitations that must be understood if it is to be used properly.
Sermons can be generally grouped in four types: textual, topical, textual\-topical, and expository. Some have observed that the labels do not necessarily fit well, especially as there is overlap between the types. Generally speaking, a textual sermon follows the structure of the text of Scripture, allowing the word flow to provide the sermon points. A topical sermon is organized around a thought, with the sermon points developed by the speaker and supported by proof texts. A topical\-textual sermon merges the two, allowing the sermon points to flow either from the text or the thoughts of the speaker. An expository sermon follows the text of Scripture, and then seeks to draw out the full meaning of it. The goal of each type of sermon is to apply the Word of God to the lives of the hearers.
In topical preaching, the speaker has the freedom to address issues being faced by his hearers. If the need is a better understanding of sin, a series can be presented to address various aspects and results of sin. When done well, this type of preaching will give a broad\-spectrum view of what the Bible says on a given topic. By focusing on issues in this way, people can develop a biblical understanding of any subject matter. Another benefit of topical preaching is unity of thought. People are able to follow the logical progression of thought, which often helps them remember what they have heard. This method lends itself well to the natural talents of a speaker, because the thoughts come from his own heart.
While topical preaching allows the speaker to develop quality sermons, it also has a number of dangers. If it is the only method used, the speaker can easily get trapped in the rut of only preaching on those topics that are of interest to him or those which are easily developed in a message. Likewise, the audience can become acclimated to “comfortable” or “exciting” messages, turning away from teaching that doesn’t fit that model. A strict adherence to topical preaching will result in a stunted understanding of the whole counsel of God, even though certain subjects will be well understood. In some cases, a speaker may be tempted to think more of his own ideas than “rightly dividing the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15\).
For these reasons, many pastors alternate between topical and textual or expository messages. The topical messages allow them to address current issues in society or the life of the church, while the textual and expository messages build on the “big picture” of whole books in the Bible. Both are essential in encouraging balanced growth in the Christian life. How a sermon is organized isn’t nearly as important as ensuring it is biblical and applicable. A topical message can be just as scriptural as an expository one, and an expository message can be just as interesting as a topical one. [Warren Wiersbe](Warren-Wiersbe.html), in his book Preaching and Teaching with Imagination, relates the exasperation of a pastor who said, “My preaching sounds like a commentary! I’m dull! I have all the biblical facts but there’s no life! What should I do?” This pastor, who had the biblical information right, needed help learning how to communicate it to people. According to Wiersbe, “People think in pictures and respond with their hearts as well as their heads.”
Regardless of the type of message, if it is firmly grounded in Scripture and applied to life with vivid word pictures, it will accomplish the goal and draw people to follow Christ more closely.
|
What is naturalism?
|
Answer
Naturalism is the belief that all that exists in the universe is physical, material matter. There is no soul; we are just a complex collection of neurons. There is no Creator; there is evolution. And experiences like pain, pleasure, beauty, and a sense of self do not really exist. They are merely physiological reactions.
The philosophy of naturalism leads to several incomplete ways of thinking about the world. One of the most important concerns is the philosophy of *telos*, or purpose. The Christian worldview holds that the purpose of a thing must be given to it by a higher authority. Since naturalism teaches there is no higher authority (no deity), it deduces that mankind, creation, and individuals have no purpose in life.
Evolution, which the vast majority of naturalists believe, both supports the idea of having no purpose and tries to skirt around it. Naturalists believe that evolution explains how life on Earth came to be without the work of a supernatural element. But evolution also tries to return a sense of purpose to that life. Instead of mankind having an existential, spiritual purpose, evolution proposes that it is our genes which have a purpose—to propagate and multiply their genetic signature into the cosmos. This is not a true "purpose," however. Genes survive and multiply when and if conditions are right for them to do so. The "purpose" embodied by "survival of the fittest" comes down to dumb luck as much as any other element of evolution.
Naturalism, with its insistence that there is no soul, no mind, and no self, also teaches that there is no choice. Like the hurricane caused by the flap of a butterfly’s wings a half a world away, every impulse we have, every action we take, every word we say is determined by the events that came before. Whether or not we are controlled by our genes' drive to reproduce, we are incapable of choosing our beliefs, our worldview, or our favorite flavor of ice cream. This fatalistic philosophy becomes a problem in the realm of ethics; if our actions are out of our control, can criminals be held responsible for their crimes? It also reveals the hypocrisy of evolutionists who spew vitriol on creationists; if prior events determine our beliefs, how can theists be blamed for believing in God?
*Naturalism* also refers to a fairly benign methodology of research. Scientists, both atheistic and Christian, use naturalism to discover more about our world. It is the general assumption that everything has a physical or natural explanation, and investigating the natural elements will reveal that explanation. This is an advance on the pagan religions that taught that sex rituals would ensure a healthy harvest or that a black cat could cause bad luck. And it’s a rejection of the "God of the gaps" argument that says God is only involved in those things we cannot see or explain. The naturalistic methodology instead posits that, if we can’t explain something, we just haven't found the answer yet. It’s still an incomplete worldview, however. There is sufficient evidence that life could not have begun without outside interference. We can discover our world through the scientific method while still acknowledging the activity of a Creator.
It is true that our actions and beliefs are largely influenced by events we have been exposed to. That’s why God exhorts us to meditate on His Word (Deuteronomy 11:18\) and keep our thoughts on things above (Colossians 3:2\). The Bible also teaches that we have a distinct soul and spirit (Hebrews 4:12\) and that mankind has a specific purpose (Genesis 1:26\-31\). In the end, naturalism is just a fancy way to deny the existence of God (Psalm 14:1\).
|
What is natural law?
|
Answer
When Thomas Jefferson wrote, "We hold these truths to be self\-evident…" he was referring to natural law. Natural law is the universal standard that directly reflects human nature; natural law can be determined by careful consideration of the human condition, regardless of cultural influences. Jefferson considered the equality of man, and life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (purpose and livelihood) to be born directly from the nature of humanity.
The concept of natural law has evolved and will continue to do so. Plato hinted at it when he wrote of the ultimate, perfect forms that nature attempts to reflect. Aristotle believed there was a common law that applied to all of nature, and governments would do well to attempt to live by it, even if they had to resort to not governing at all. The Stoics taught that the universe was ruled by a divine or eternal law, and "natural law" was mankind’s guidance for living according to that divine law.
Cicero believed natural law comes directly from God. He defined it as "the safety of citizens, the preservation of states, and the tranquility and happiness of human life." Natural law supported the health and well\-being of society because it was only in a healthy, peaceful society that individuals could achieve "happiness"—contentment and purpose. Cicero’s definitions influenced the legal system of the Roman Empire and the American Revolution, with its belief that even the monarchy of Great Britain were subject to whatever law profited the kingdom as a whole. Thomas Hobbes' interpretation was not so civic\-minded. He believed natural law was more individual and based on personal survival and prosperity. The primary purpose of society is to avert war, Hobbes said, because war harms individuals.
If developed properly, civil law (also known as "positive law") is derived from natural law. Where natural law is vague (citizens should be safe), governments must develop more specific standards (violent criminals will be prosecuted). In an ideal world, everyone would be internally ruled by natural law. Government would be all but unnecessary, and all humanity would be willingly subject to universal standards.
The problem, obviously, is that mankind is unable to agree on the definition of natural law and has no hope of agreeing on how it should be enforced. Hobbes said the fulfillment of natural law was protection of the individual, Cicero said it was support of the state, and Jefferson said it was life and liberty—despite the fact that he owned slaves.
In truth, natural law is given by Him who created nature, and most philosophers have looked to God for the definition. The Bible does support the idea of natural law, but not in the way most think.
Paul spoke of natural law in Romans 2:14\-15: "For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them." God made His law evident in the hearts of all mankind. But, because we live in a fallen world with a sin nature, we are incapable of completely knowing what God’s law is, and we cannot follow it (Romans 7:14\-25\). Therefore, God gave us His revealed law, inspiring the prophets and the writers of the Bible to explain how to live according to the natural law that we catch glimpses of, but can never really grasp.
The natural law God gave to humanity is fairly similar to what most cultures would include in their mores: procreate (Genesis 1:28\) and respect life (Genesis 9:5\-6\). But we are more than biological life forms. As "new creations," made in the image of God, we understand that God’s law isn’t life, liberty, or the pursuit of happiness. And it’s not the safety of citizens, the perseveration of states, or peace. It is this: love God, love others (Matthew 22:37\-40\). If that love entails personal harm (Matthew 5:27\-30\), removal of contentment (Matthew 5:39\-42\), dissension in the family (Matthew 19:29\), or even loss of life (Matthew 10:39\), we are to welcome it. Our spiritual nature is greater than our physical nature, and our spiritual natural law trumps even physical life.
|
What should we learn from the story of the rich man and Lazarus in Luke 16?
|
Answer
Luke 16:19\-31 contains the account of a very rich man who lived a life of extreme luxury. Laid outside the gate of this rich man’s house, however, was an extremely poor man named [Lazarus](Lazarus-in-the-Bible.html) who simply hoped “to eat what fell from the rich man’s table” (v. 21\). The rich man was completely indifferent to the plight of Lazarus, showing him no love, sympathy, or compassion whatsoever. Eventually, they both died. Lazarus went to heaven, and the rich man went to hell. Appealing to “Father Abraham” in heaven, the rich man requested that Lazarus be sent to cool his tongue with a drop of water to lessen his “agony in this fire.” The rich man also asked Abraham to send Lazarus back to earth to warn his brothers to repent so that they would never join him in hell. Both requests were denied. Abraham told the rich man that if his brothers did not believe in Scripture, neither would they believe a messenger, even if he came straight from heaven.
There is some question as to whether this story is a true, real\-life account or a parable, since two of its characters are named (making it unique among parables). Parable or not, however, there is much we can learn from this passage:
First of all, Jesus teaches here that heaven and hell are both real, literal places. Sadly, many preachers shy away from uncomfortable topics such as hell. Some even teach “universalism” – the belief that everyone goes to heaven. Yet Christ spoke about hell a great deal, as did Paul, Peter, John, Jude, and the writer of Hebrews. The Bible is clear that every person who has ever lived will spend eternity in either heaven or hell. Like the rich man in the story, multitudes today are complacent in their conviction that all is well with their soul, and many will hear our Savior tell them otherwise when they die (Matthew 7:23\).
This story also illustrates that once we cross the eternal horizon, that’s it. There are no more chances. The transition to our eternal state takes place the moment we die (2 Corinthians 5:8; Luke 23:43; Philippians 1:23\). When believers die, they are immediately in the conscious fellowship and joys of heaven. When unbelievers die, they are just as immediately in the conscious pain, suffering, and torment of hell. Notice the rich man didn’t ask for his brothers to pray for his release from some purgatorial middle ground, thereby expediting his journey to heaven. He knew he was in hell, and he knew why. That’s why his requests were merely to be comforted and to have a warning sent to his brothers. He knew there was no escape. He was eternally separated from God, and Abraham made it clear to him that there was no hope of ever mitigating his pain, suffering, or sorrow. Those in hell will perfectly recollect missed opportunities and their rejection of the gospel.
Like many these days who buy into the “prosperity gospel,” the rich man wrongly saw his material riches as evidence of God’s love and blessing. Likewise, he believed the poor and destitute, like Lazarus, were cursed by God. Yet, as the apostle James exhorted, “You have lived on earth in luxury and self\-indulgence. You have fattened yourselves in the day of slaughter” (James 5:5\). Not only do riches not get one into heaven, but they have the power to separate a person from God in a way that few other things can. Riches are deceitful (Mark 4:19\). It is certainly not impossible for the very rich to enter heaven (many heroes of the Bible were wealthy), but Scripture is clear that it is very hard (Matthew 19:23\-24; Mark 10:23\-25; Luke 18:24\-25\).
True followers of Christ will not be indifferent to the plight of the poor like the rich man in this story was. God loves the poor and is offended when His children neglect them (Proverbs 17:5; 22:9, 22\-23; 29:7; 31:8\-9\). In fact, those who show mercy to the poor are in effect ministering to Christ personally (Matthew 25:35\-40\). Christians are known by the fruit they bear. The Holy Spirit’s residence in our hearts will most certainly impact how we live and what we do.
Abraham’s words in verses 29 and 31 referring to “Moses and the Prophets” (Scripture) confirms that understanding the revealed Word of God has the power to turn unbelief into faith (Hebrews 4:12; James 1:18; 1 Peter 1:23\). Furthermore, knowing Scripture helps us to understand that God’s children, like Lazarus, can suffer while on this earth—suffering is one of the many tragic consequences of living in a sinful and fallen world.
The Bible says our earthly lives are a “mist that appears for a little while and then vanishes” (James 4:14\). Our earthly sojourn is exceedingly brief. Perhaps the greatest lesson to learn from this story, then, is that when death comes knocking on our door there is only one thing that matters: *our relationship with Jesus Christ*. “What good will it be for a man if he gains the whole world, yet forfeits his soul?” (Matthew 16:26; Mark 8:36\). Eternal life is only found in Christ. “God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life” (1 John 5:11\-12\). The truth is, if we wish to live apart from God during our time on earth, He will grant us our wish for eternity as well. As one pastor aptly said, “If you board the train of unbelief, you will have to take it all the way to its destination.”
|
What is Easter Monday?
|
Answer
Easter Monday, also known as Bright Monday, Renewal Monday, Wet Monday, and Dyngus Day, is the Monday immediately after Easter Sunday. It is observed by many Christian groups, but primarily by the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic traditions. It marks the beginning of Easter Week (Roman Catholic) / Bright Week (Eastern Orthodox).
Different cultures observe Easter Monday very differently. For some, Easter Monday is a solemn remembrance of Christ’s death and resurrection marked by an outdoor procession. For others, there are Easter egg\-rolling competitions. For still others, siblings and/or spouses wake each other up by pouring buckets of water on each other (hence the name “Wet Monday”). And others celebrate with a large gathering and a polka festival (Dingus Day).
Some of these observances have more Christian symbolism in them than others, but none of them are explicitly biblical. The Bible does not say anything about what happened on Easter Monday, the day after Jesus’ resurrection. The Bible does not instruct followers of Jesus Christ to observe Easter Monday, so there is no obligation to celebrate it. As with many holidays, there is nothing wrong with observing some cultural traditions, but it is important to not allow traditions to detract from the message of the gospel.
**Easter Monday Calendar:**
2024 — April 1
2025 — April 21
|
Does God love me?
|
Answer
The question of whether God loves us – personally and individually – is common. Surrounded by the conditional love of finite humanity, we cannot easily comprehend that God would love us. We know our faults. We know that God is perfect and sinless. We know that we are not. Why would God, who is infinite and holy, love us, who are finite and sinful? And yet the great truth of the gospel is that He does! Time and again, Scripture reminds us of God’s love for us.
To begin with, God created mankind in His own image. And He did so with great care and concern. He “formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being … the Lord God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribs and closed up the place with flesh. Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man” (Genesis 2:7, 21\-22\). There’s an intimacy here between God and mankind. With the rest of creation, God merely spoke and it was. Yet God took time in forming man and woman. He gave them dominion over the earth (see Genesis 1:28\). God related directly to Adam and Eve. After the Fall, the couple hid from God when He came “walking in the garden in the cool of the day” (Genesis 3:8\). It was not abnormal for them to speak with God; it was abnormal for them to hide.
Relationship with God was broken after the Fall, but His love remained. Immediately following God’s pronouncement of curses on the sinful couple, Scripture paints another loving image of God. “The Lord God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife and clothed them. And the Lord God said, ‘The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and also take from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.’ So the Lord God banished him from the Garden of the Eden to work the ground from which he had been taken” (Genesis 3:21\-23\). God’s action here is not vindictive or punitive; it is protective. God clothed Adam and Eve to hide their shame. He drove them out of Eden to protect them from further harm. God acted out of love. Then, God’s plan of redemption and restoration begins to unfold—a plan not designed after the Fall, but *before creation* (1 Peter 1:20\). God loves humankind so much that He chose to create us even knowing the heartache it would cause Him to redeem us.
There are many verses that demonstrate God’s love. We can see His tenderness in Old and New Testament alike. David and other psalmists were particularly articulate regarding God’s love. Just look at Psalm 139\. Song of Solomon is another great picture of love. God’s love is even evident in the history of the Israelites, as He continually preserved a remnant and pled with His people to obey and live. God is seen as just, but also merciful. He is tender. He is jealous for His people, desirous that relationship be restored.
Sometimes we look at the Old Testament and think that God only loves people as a nation, not as individuals. But it is important to remember that Ruth, Hagar, David, Abraham, Moses and Jeremiah were all individuals. God stepped into each of their lives and loved them individually. This love becomes obvious in the person of Jesus.
God took on human flesh in order to redeem us (see Philippians 2:5–11\). He entered our world as a baby born to an unassuming family in a very humble way (He spent His first night in a manger where animals were kept). Jesus was raised by earthly parents and was submissive to them. During His public ministry, He often associated with society’s outcasts. He showed compassion for the sick. He healed. He listened to people. He blessed the children. He also taught us about God’s love. Luke 13:34 records Jesus crying, “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing!” This speaks God’s heart desire that people would return to Him. He longs for us. Not to punish us, but to love us.
Perhaps the greatest picture of God’s love is Jesus’ passion and crucifixion. Paul reminds us, “You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly. Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous man, though for a good man someone might possibly dare to die. But God demonstrates His own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us” (Romans 5:6\-8\). Jesus’ work on the cross was a clear, unmistakable declaration of love. And this love is unconditional. We were in our worst state when Christ died for us. “As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins … But because of His great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions – it is by grace that you have been saved” (Ephesians 2:1, 4\-5\).
This salvation has made abundant life possible. “The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy,” Jesus said. “I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full” (John 10:10\). God is not stingy. He wants to lavish His love on us. “Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death,” Paul proclaims in Romans 8:1\-2\.
Remember, Paul was formerly an enemy of Christ. He vehemently persecuted Christians. He lived by the letter of the law rather than through an understanding of God’s love. Paul, if he even thought of God’s love, probably felt that God could not love him apart from rule\-following. Yet, in Christ, he found God’s grace and accepted God’s love. One of his greatest articulations of God’s love is this: “If God is for us, who can be against us? He who did not spare His own Son, but gave Him up for us all – how will He not also, along with Him, graciously give us all things? … Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall trouble or hardship or persecution or famine or nakedness or danger or sword? … No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through Him who loved us. For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 8:31\-32, 35, 37\-39\).
So the simple answer is, “yes.” Yes, God loves you! As hard as it may be to believe, it is the truth.
Other Scriptures about God’s love for you:
**1 John 4:8** – “ … God is love”
**Ephesians 5:1\-2** – “Follow God’s example, therefore, as dearly loved children and walk in the way of love, just as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us as a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God.”
**Ephesians 5:25\-27** – “Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless.”
**John 15:9\-11** – “As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you. Now remain in my love. If you obey my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have obeyed my Father’s commands and remain in his love. I have told you this so that my joy may be in you and that your joy may be complete.”
**1 John 3:16a** – “This is how we know what love is: Jesus Christ laid down his life for us.”
|
What is the definition of anathema?
|
Answer
*Anathema*, as used in the New Testament, comes from the Greek *ana’thema*, meaning “a person or thing accursed or consigned to damnation or destruction.” Used only six times in the Bible, the word *anathema* is usually translated as “accursed,” “cursed,” or “eternally condemned” in the more modern translations. Young’s Literal Translation, the American Standard Version, and the King James Version transliterate it as “anathema.”
The NIV translates Romans 9:3 as “For I could wish that I myself were **cursed and cut off from Christ** for the sake of my brothers, those of my own race.” Here, the meaning conveyed has to do more with one being consigned to eternal condemnation. It carries with it the idea of complete separation from Christ and His salvation.
Another example of the use of the word *anathema* is Galatians 1:8–9\. The American Standard Version (1901\) renders this passage as “But though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach unto you any gospel other than that which we preached unto you, let him be **anathema**. As we have said before, so say I now again, if any man preacheth unto you any gospel other than that which ye received, let him be **anathema**.” In the NIV, the words “eternally condemned” replace “anathema.”
Another use of the word anathema has to do with placing an oath or a vow upon oneself. For example, in Acts 23:12 we read of certain Jews who had “banded together, and **bound themselves under a curse**, saying that they would neither eat nor drink till they had killed Paul” (ASV). These Jews had determined that Paul was to be killed and believed it was their duty to put him away. As such, they “anathematized” themselves or, as the NIV renders it, “bound themselves with an oath” to fast until they had done the deed.
*Anathema* is also used in conjunction with the word *maranatha*, found only in 1 Corinthians 16:22: “If anyone does not love the Lord, he is to be accursed. Maranatha” (1 Corinthians 16:22, NASB, 1995 Update). *Maranatha* expresses the hope of Christ’s second coming. Other modern versions translate this passage as “If anyone does not love the Lord—a curse be on him. Come, O Lord!” 1 Corinthians 16:22, NIV). The word *anathema* is related to the Old Testament Hebrew word *haram* or *herem*, which was often used in referencing the total annihilation of idolatrous people or nations (Numbers 21:2–3; Joshua 6:17\). *Haram* sometimes pertained to a person or object forever devoted to God (Leviticus 27:21\).
Generally speaking, most Bible scholars agree that the word *anathema* is best understood to mean that which is to be accursed, condemned, or destroyed. When the Lord says something is “anathema,” it is a serious matter.
|
What is God like?
|
Answer
Every culture in the history of the world has had some concept of what God is like. Some have assumed that God is in control of the weather and have made images of a storm god throwing lightning bolts around (Baal worship in Canaan). Some have assumed that God is very powerful, and so they worshiped the most powerful thing they could see, the sun (Ra worship in Egypt). Others have assumed that God is everywhere and therefore have worshiped everything (pantheism in Stoic philosophy). Some have assumed that God is unknowable and have turned to agnosticism or, just to cover their bases, have worshiped “An Unknown God” (Acts 17:23\).
The problem with each of these assumptions is that they only get part of the picture of who God is. Yes, God is in control of the weather, but He is also in control of so much more. He is powerful, but much more powerful than the sun. He is everywhere, but He also transcends everything. And, thankfully, while there are some things we don’t understand about God, He is knowable. In fact, He has revealed everything we need to know about Him in the Bible. God *wants* to be known (Psalm 46:10\).
Norman Geisler and Frank Turek, in their book *I Don’t Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist*, state the following:
\- Truth is discovered, not invented. It exists independent of anyone’s knowledge of it. (Gravity existed prior to Newton.)
\- Truth is transcultural; if something is true, it is true for all people, in all places, at all times. (2\+2\=4 for everyone, everywhere, at every time.)
\- Truth is unchanging even though our *beliefs* about truth change. (When we began to believe the earth was round instead of flat, the *truth* about the earth didn’t change, only our *belief* about the earth changed.)
Therefore, as we try to ascertain what God is like, we are simply trying to discover truths already there.
First, God exists. The Bible never argues for God’s existence; it simply states it. The fact that God *is* should be self\-evident through the works He has created (Psalm 19:1\-6\). Genesis 1:1 says, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” This is a simple yet powerful statement. The universe includes time, space, matter, and energy, so that all discernible elements in the universe came into being by God’s decree. Albert Einstein’s Theory of General Relativity states that all time, space, and matter had a definite, simultaneous beginning. What has a beginning has a cause. That is the law of causality, and the fact of God easily explains the ultimate cause. God is the creator of all that is, and so we know something else about Him: He is almighty (Joel 1:15\), He is eternally self\-existent (Psalm 90:2\), and He exists above and beyond all of creation (Psalm 97:9\).
The same God who made all things also controls those things. He is sovereign (Isaiah 46:10\). He who creates an item owns it and has power to utilize it as he sees fit. The ultimate cause has ultimate authority. In Isaiah 44:24 God presents Himself as the One “who has made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens, who spread out the earth by myself.” The next verse says that He “overthrows the learning of the wise and turns it into nonsense.” This is obviously a God with power to do as He pleases.
God is spirit (John 4:24\) and cannot be represented by any created thing; in fact, the attempt to create such a representation is blasphemous (Exodus 20:4\-6\). God is unchanging (Malachi 3:6\). God is all\-knowing (1 John 3:20\) and all\-present (Psalm 139:7\-13\). He is holy and glorious (Isaiah 6:3\). He is just (Deuteronomy 32:4\) and will justly judge all sin and unrighteousness (Jude 1:15\).
The judgment of God highlights another truth about what He is like: He is a moral being. C. S. Lewis, in *Mere Christianity*, makes the case that, just as there exists observable laws of nature (gravity, entropy, etc.), there are also observable laws of morality. He writes, “First, that human beings, all over the earth, have this curious idea that they ought to behave in a certain way, and cannot really get rid of it. Secondly, that they do not in fact behave in that way. They know the Law of Nature; they break it. These two facts are the foundation of all clear thinking about ourselves and the universe we live in.” Despite varied ideas about what constitutes right and wrong, there is a universal belief that right and wrong *exist*, and this is a reflection of the God who made us (Genesis 1:26; Ecclesiastes 3:11\).
When Jesus entered our world, He showed us the Father (John 14:7\-9\). Through Jesus, we understand that God seeks to save the lost (Luke 19:10\). He is compassionate (Matthew 14:14\), He is merciful (Luke 6:36\), and He is forgiving (Matthew 9:1\-8\). At the same time, Jesus shows us that God will judge unrepentant sin (Luke 13:5\) and that God is angry with those who live falsely and refuse to acknowledge the truth (Matthew 23\).
Most of all, Jesus showed us that God is love (1 John 4:8\). It was in love that God sent His Son into the world (John 3:16\). It was in love that Jesus died on the cross for sinners (Romans 5:8\). It is in love that He still calls sinners to repentance to experience the grace of God and to be called the children of God (1 John 3:1\).
|
What is the human soul?
|
Answer
The Bible is not perfectly clear as to the nature of the human soul. But from studying the way the word *soul* is used in Scripture, we can come to some conclusions. Simply stated, the human soul is the part of a person that is not physical. It is the part of every human being that lasts eternally after the body experiences death. Genesis 35:18 describes the death of Rachel, Jacob’s wife, saying she named her son “as her soul was departing.” From this we know that the soul is different from the body and that it continues to live after physical death.
The human soul is central to the personhood of a human being. As George MacDonald said, “You don’t have a soul. You are a Soul. You have a body.” In other words, personhood is not based on having a body. A soul is what is required. Repeatedly in the Bible, people are referred to as “souls” (Exodus 31:14; Proverbs 11:30\), especially in contexts that focus on the value of human life and personhood or on the concept of a “whole being” (Psalm 16:9\-10; Ezekiel 18:4; Acts 2:41; Revelation 18:13\).
The human soul seems to be distinct from the heart (Deuteronomy 26:16; 30:6\) and the spirit (1 Thessalonians 5:23; Hebrews 4:12\) and the mind (Matthew 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27\). The human soul is created by God (Jeremiah 38:16\). It can be strong or unsteady (2 Peter 2:14\); it can be lost or saved (James 1:21; Ezekiel 18:4\). We know that the human soul needs atonement (Leviticus 17:11\) and is the part of us that is purified and protected by the truth and the work of the Holy Spirit (1 Peter 1:22\). Jesus is the great Shepherd of souls (1 Peter 2:25\).
Matthew 11:29 tells us that we can turn to Jesus Christ to find rest for our souls. Psalm 16:9\-10 is a Messianic psalm that allows us to see that Jesus also had a soul. David wrote, “Therefore my heart is glad, and my whole being rejoices; my flesh also dwells secure. For you will not abandon my soul to Sheol, or let your holy one see corruption.” This cannot be speaking of David (as Paul points out in Acts 13:35\-37\) because David’s body did see corruption and decay when he died. But Jesus Christ’s body never saw corruption (He was resurrected), and His soul was not abandoned to Sheol. Jesus, as the Son of Man, has a soul.
There is often confusion about the human spirit vs. the human soul. In places, Scripture seems to use the terms interchangeably, but there might be a subtle difference. Otherwise, how could the Word of God penetrate “even to dividing soul and spirit” (Hebrews 4:12\)? When the Bible talks about man’s spirit, it is usually speaking of an inner force which animates a person in one direction or another. It is repeatedly shown as a mover, a dynamic force (e.g., Numbers 14:24\).
It has been said that there are only two things that last: the Word of God (Mark 13:31\) and the souls of men. This is because, like God’s Word, the soul is an imperishable thing. That thought should be both sobering and awe\-inspiring. Every person you meet is an eternal soul. Every human being who has ever lived is a soul, and all of those souls are still in existence somewhere. The question is, where? The souls that reject God’s love are condemned to pay for their own sin, eternally, in hell (Romans 6:23\). But the souls who acknowledge their own sinfulness and accept God’s gracious gift of forgiveness will live forever beside still waters with their Shepherd, wanting for nothing (Psalm 23:2\).
|
What is the heart?
|
Answer
First, we’ll state the obvious: this article is not about the heart as a vital organ, a muscle that pumps blood throughout the body. Neither is this article concerned with romantic, philosophical, or literary definitions.
Instead, we’ll focus on what the Bible has to say about the heart. The Bible mentions the heart almost 1,000 times. In essence, this is what it says: the heart is that spiritual part of us where our emotions and desires dwell.
Before we look at the human heart, we’ll mention that, since God has emotions and desires, He, too, can be said to have a “heart.” We have a heart because God does. David was a man “after God’s own heart” (Acts 13:22\). And God blesses His people with leaders who know and follow His heart (1 Samuel 2:35; Jeremiah 3:15\).
The human heart, in its natural condition, is evil, treacherous and deceitful. Jeremiah 17:9 says, “The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?” In other words, the Fall has affected us at the deepest level; our mind, emotions and desires have been tainted by sin—and we are blind to just how pervasive the problem is.
We may not understand our own hearts, but God does. He “knows the secrets of the heart” (Psalm 44:21; see also 1 Corinthians 14:25\). Jesus “knew all men, and had no need that anyone should testify of man, for He knew what was in man” (John 2:24\-25\). Based on His knowledge of the heart, God can judge righteously: “I, the LORD, search the heart, I test the mind, Even to give every man according to his ways, According to the fruit of his doings” (Jeremiah 17:10\).
Jesus pointed out the fallen condition of our hearts in Mark 7:21\-23: “From within, *out of men’s hearts*, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly. All these evils come *from inside* and make a man unclean.” Our biggest problem is not external but internal; all of us have a heart problem.
In order for a person to be saved, then, the heart must be changed. This only happens by the power of God in response to faith. “With the heart one believes unto righteousness” (Romans 10:10\). In His grace, God can create a new heart within us (Psalm 51:10; Ezekiel 36:26\). He promises to “revive the heart of the contrite ones” (Isaiah 57:15\).
God’s work of creating a new heart within us involves testing our hearts (Psalm 17:3; Deuteronomy 8:2\) and filling our hearts with new ideas, new wisdom, and new desires (Nehemiah 7:5; 1 Kings 10:24; 2 Corinthians 8:16\).
The heart is the core of our being, and the Bible sets high importance on keeping our hearts pure: “Above all else, guard your heart, for it is the wellspring of life” (Proverbs 4:23\).
|
What does it mean to be spiritually dead?
|
Answer
To be spiritually dead is to be separated from God. When Adam sinned in Genesis 3:6, he ushered in death for all humanity. God’s command to Adam and Eve was that they could not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. It came with the warning that disobedience would result in death: “And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, ‘You may surely eat of every tree of the garden, but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.’” The phrase “you shall surely die” could be literally translated “dying you shall die.” This signifies a continuous state of death that began with spiritual death, continues throughout life as a gradual degradation of the body, and culminates in physical death. The immediate spiritual death resulted in Adam’s separation from God. His act of hiding from God (Genesis 3:8\) demonstrates this separation, as does his attempt to shift blame for the sin to the woman (Genesis 3:12\).
Unfortunately, this spiritual – and eventual physical – death was not confined to Adam and Eve. As the representative of the human race, Adam carried all of humanity into his sin. Paul makes this clear in Romans 5:12, telling us that sin and death entered the world and spread to all men through Adam’s sin. Additionally, Romans 6:23 says that the wages of sin is death; sinners must die, because sin separates us from God. Any separation from the Source of Life is, naturally, death for us.
But it is not just inherited sin that causes spiritual death; our own sinfulness contributes. Ephesians 2 teaches that, before salvation, we are “dead” in trespasses and sins (verse 1\). This must speak of spiritual death, because we were still “alive” physically before salvation. While we were in that spiritually “dead” condition, God saved us (verse 5; see also Romans 5:8\). Colossians 2:13 reiterates this truth: “And you, who were dead in your trespasses . . . God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses.”
Since we are dead in sin, we are completely unable to trust God or His Word. Jesus repeatedly claims that we are powerless without Him (John 15:5\) and that we cannot come to Him without God’s enabling (John 6:44\). Paul teaches in Romans 8 that our natural minds cannot submit to God, nor please Him (verses 7\-8\). In our fallen state, we are incapable of even understanding the things of God (1 Corinthians 2:14\).
The act of God whereby He makes us alive from spiritual death is called regeneration. Regeneration is accomplished only by the Holy Spirit, through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. When we are regenerated, we are made alive together with Christ (Ephesians 2:5\) and renewed by the Holy Spirit (Titus 3:5\). It is like being born a second time, as Jesus taught Nicodemus in John 3:3, 7\. Having been made alive by God, we will never truly die – we have eternal life. Jesus said often that to believe in Him is to have eternal life (John 3:16, 36; 17:3\).
Sin leads to death. The only way to escape that death is to come to Jesus through faith, drawn by the Holy Spirit. Faith in Christ leads to spiritual life, and ultimately to *eternal* life.
|
Is there anything I can do to guarantee myself a long life?
|
Answer
“‘Honor your father and mother’—which is the first commandment with a promise—‘that it may go well with you and that you may enjoy long life on the earth’” (Ephesians 6:2–3\). In this passage, the apostle Paul is quoting from the Ten Commandments, Exodus 20:12 specifically: “Honor your father and your mother, so that you may live long in the land the LORD your God is giving you.” This represents the only instance of God connecting long life as a reward for something we do. Is this promise of long life for honoring your parents true? And, if so, why is honoring your parents so highly valued to God that He rewards it with long life?
First, yes, the promise is true, but not in a universal sense. There are people who honored their parents but died young. And there are people who did not honor their parents but lived a long life. Therefore, it is a principle that is generally true. If you honor your parents, God will, generally speaking, reward you with a long life. However, this promise does not override other decisions we make that impact how long we live. For example, if a man honors his parents, but then decides to commit suicide, the act of suicide “negates” the reward of long life. The same can be said of those who engage in reckless and dangerous activities. God’s reward of long life for honoring parents does not miraculously make you immune from serious injury or death.
Again, the reward of long life for honoring your parents is a general principle, not a universal truth. God considers the way a child treats his/her parents so important that He usually rewards those who honor their parents with long life. Solomon urged children to respect their parents (Proverbs 1:8; 13:1; 30:17\). Jeremiah 35:18–19 describes how God blessed the Rechabites for obeying their father. Disobedience to parents is a trait of those who rebel against God (Romans 1:30; 2 Timothy 3:2\). This brings us to the second point. Why is honoring your parents so highly valued to God that He rewards it with long life?
There are at least two reasons for the value God places on honoring your parents. First, God entrusts parents with the responsibility to raise their children in a godly manner. The task of parenting is not easy. It is painful, stressful, expensive, and often unappreciated. For a child to not recognize, and be grateful for, the sacrifices parents make on his/her behalf is an affront to the position of authority and value God has given to parents. It is similar to how we are to respond to the government (Romans 13:1–7\). If God has placed us under authority, to rebel against that authority is to rebel against God Himself.
The second reason God desires us to honor our parents is because our relationship with our earthly parents is an illustration of our relationship with our Heavenly Father. For example, Hebrews 12:5–11 compares the discipline a child receives from parents to the discipline believers in Christ receive from God. Just as our parents are our biological progenitors, God is our Creator. We are children of God and children of our parents. To dishonor our parents is to distort the picture of what our relationship with our Heavenly Father is to be.
Do you want to live a long life? Honor your parents. Why? Because God placed you under their authority and guidance, and because your attitude toward your parents is illustrative of your attitude toward God. While this reward is not universal—and while it does not override every other decision you make—it is still generally true. If you want to live a long life, honor those who gave you life in the first place.
|
How do I know the Bible is not just mythology?
|
Answer
That the Bible originated in the mind of God makes it not only unique among all books, it is unique among all the treasures on earth. President Abraham Lincoln appropriately referred to the Bible as “the best gift God has given to man.” Indeed it is. It reveals God’s eternal plan of redeeming the fallen human race. Yet even though billions of copies of it have been distributed throughout the world, many continue to question its truth. Is the Bible a book of mythology, or is it the true, inspired Word of God? This question is of the greatest importance to every person, whether they know it or not.
Many religious texts claim to convey a divine message. The Bible, however, stands alone in that *God left absolutely no room for doubt as to whether or not this is His written Word*. If anyone undertakes an honest effort to examine the facts, he will find the Bible most assuredly has God’s signature all through it. The very same mouth that spoke all of creation into existence also gave us the Bible.
Unlike mythology, the Bible has a historical framework. Its characters are real people living in verifiable locations during historical events. The Bible mentions Nebuchadnezzar, Sennacherib, Cyrus, Herod, Felix, Pilate, and many other historical figures. Its history coincides with that of many nations, including the Egyptian, Hittite, Persian, Babylonian, and Roman empires. The events of the Bible take place in geographical areas such as Canaan, Syria, Egypt, Mesopotamia, and others. All this certifiable detail refutes the idea that the Bible is mere mythology.
Unlike mythology, the Bible has many confirmations in sciences such as biology, geology, astronomy, and archaeology. The field of biblical archaeology has absolutely exploded in the last century and a half, during which time hundreds of thousands of artifacts have been discovered. Just one example: at one time, skeptics used the Bible’s references to the Hittite civilization as “proof” that the Bible was a myth. There was never any such people as the “Hittites,” according to the science of the day. However, in 1876, the first of a series of discoveries was made, and now the existence of the ancient Hittite civilization is well documented. Archaeology continues to bolster the Bible’s historicity. As Dr. Henry M. Morris has remarked, “There exists today not one unquestionable find of archaeology that proves the Bible to be in error at any point.”
Unlike mythology, the Bible is written as history. Luke wrote his Gospel as “an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us . . . just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses.” Luke claims that he had “carefully investigated everything from the beginning” and so wrote “an orderly account . . . so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught” (see Luke 1:1\-4\). Did Luke include miracles in his account? Yes, many of them. But they were miracles verified by eyewitnesses. Two thousand years later, a skeptic might call Luke’s account a “myth,” but the burden of proof rests with the skeptic. The account itself is a carefully investigated historical document.
Unlike mythology, the Bible contains an astounding number of fulfilled prophecies. Myths do not bother with prophecy, but fully one third of the Bible is prophecy. The Bible contains over 1,800 predictions concerning more than 700 separate subjects found in over 8,300 verses. The Old Testament contains more than 300 prophecies concerning Jesus Christ alone, many with amazing specificity. Numerous prophecies have already been fulfilled, and they have come to pass precisely as foretold. The mathematical odds of someone making this number of predictions and having every one of them come to pass are light\-years beyond the realm of human possibility. These miraculous prophecies could only be accomplished with the supernatural guidance of Him who sees the end from the beginning (Isaiah 46:9\-10\).
Unlike mythology, the Bible has transformed a countless number of lives. Yet many people allow the views of others—who have never seriously studied the Bible—to shape their own opinions. Each of us needs study it for ourselves. Put it to the test. Live by the Bible’s precepts and experience for yourself the dynamic and transforming power of this amazing Book. Apply its teachings on forgiveness and see how it can mend a broken relationship. Apply its principles of stewardship and watch your financial situation improve. Apply its teaching on faith and feel a calming presence in your heart even as you navigate through a difficult trial in your life. The Bible works. There is a reason Christians in various countries around the world risk their lives daily to expose others to the life\-giving truth of this remarkable Book.
Ultimately, many who reject God and His revealed Word do so because of pride. They are so invested in their personal beliefs that they refuse to honestly weigh the evidence. To accept the Bible as true would require them to think seriously about God and their responsibility to Him. To accept the Bible as true might require a change of lifestyle. As Erwin Lutzer stated, “The truth is, few people have an open mind, especially about matters of religion. . . . Thus, perverted doctrines and prejudices are easily perpetuated from one generation to another.”
Millions die every year having bet their eternal souls that the Bible is not true, hoping against hope that it is nothing but a book of mythology, and that God does not exist. It is a risky gamble, and the stakes are very high. We urge everyone to read the Bible with an open mind; let it speak for itself, and may you find that God’s Word is truth (John 17:17\).
|
How can I be saved?
|
Answer
This simple, yet profound, question is the most important question that can be asked. *"How can I be saved?"* deals with where we will spend eternity after our lives in this world are over. There is no more important issue than our eternal destiny. Thankfully, the Bible is abundantly clear on how a person can be saved. The Philippian jailer asked Paul and Silas, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” (Acts 16:30\). Paul and Silas responded, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved” (Acts 16:31\).
**How can I be saved? Why do I need to be saved?**
We are all infected with sin (Romans 3:23\). We are born with sin (Psalm 51:5\), and we all personally choose to sin (Ecclesiastes 7:20; 1 John 1:8\). Sin is what makes us unsaved. Sin is what separates us from God. Sin is what has us on the path to eternal destruction.
**How can I be saved? Saved from what?**
Because of our sin, we all deserve death (Romans 6:23\). While the physical consequence of sin is physical death, that is not the only kind of death that results from sin. All sin is ultimately committed against an eternal and infinite God (Psalm 51:4\). Because of that, the just penalty for our sin is also eternal and infinite. What we need to be saved from is eternal destruction (Matthew 25:46; Revelation 20:15\).
**How can I be saved? How did God provide salvation?**
Because the just penalty for sin is infinite and eternal, only God could pay the penalty, because only He is infinite and eternal. But God, in His divine nature, could not die. So God became a human being in the person of Jesus Christ. God took on human flesh, lived among us, and taught us. When the people rejected Him and His message, and sought to kill Him, He willingly sacrificed Himself for us, allowing Himself to be crucified (John 10:15\). Because Jesus Christ was human, He could die; and because Jesus Christ was God, His death had an eternal and infinite value. Jesus’ death on the cross was the perfect and complete payment for our sin (1 John 2:2\). He took the consequences we deserved. Jesus’ resurrection from the dead demonstrated that His death was indeed the perfectly sufficient sacrifice for sin.
**How can I be saved? What do I need to do?**
“Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved” (Acts 16:31\). God has already done all of the work. All you must do is receive, in faith, the salvation God offers (Ephesians 2:8\-9\). Fully trust in Jesus alone as the payment for your sins. Believe in Him, and you will not perish (John 3:16\). God is offering you salvation as a gift. All you have to do is accept it. Jesus is the way of salvation (John 14:6\).
Have you, in faith, received Jesus Christ as your Savior because of what you have read here? If so, please let us know by clicking 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.
|
What does it mean to be dead to sin (Romans 6:11)?
|
Answer
The phrase “dead to sin” comes from Romans 6:11: “In the same way, count yourselves **dead to sin** but alive to God in Christ Jesus.” Here, the contrast is made that to be “dead to sin” is to be “alive to God in Christ Jesus.” Those who have come to faith in Jesus are no longer to allow sin to control their lives. Instead, we offer ourselves to God to serve His purposes.
Paul expands on this concept in Romans 12:1\-2: “Therefore, I urge you, brothers and sisters, in view of God’s mercy, to offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God—this is your true and proper worship. Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will.” The phrase “living sacrifice” is a paradox—sacrifices do not “live”; they die. But it’s a good summation of the Christian life, as we are dead to sin and alive to God. The emphasis here is on living a different life as a result of God’s salvation. We no longer follow the pattern of the world but live according to God’s will.
To be dead to sin does not mean we are sinless. Paul made clear that he continued to struggle with temptation and sin: “For I do not do the good I want to do, but the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it” (Romans 7:19\-20\). If Paul could call himself the “worst of sinners” (1 Timothy 1:16\), then we should certainly expect to continue our conflict with sin until we reach heaven.
To be dead to sin means we no longer need to be controlled by our sin nature. Romans 6:17 teaches that “though you used to be slaves to sin, you have come to obey from your heart the pattern of teaching that has now claimed your allegiance.” Before Christ, we are “slaves” to sin. Now we have a new Master. Sin continues to exist, but we are no longer dominated by it.
As Christians, we have God’s Spirit within us to empower us. However, we still face temptation and must strive to stand against sin. We can live “dead to sin” as we follow Christ, knowing that our Lord will one day remove the curse of sin altogether (Revelation 22:3\).
|
Is saying 'OMG' or words like geez still taking the Lord’s name in vain?
|
Answer
The idea of “taking the Lord’s name in vain” is first found in Exodus 20 when Moses receives the Ten Commandments. The third commandment states, “You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain, for the LORD will not hold him guiltless who takes his name in vain” (Exodus 20:7\). What does this mean? How does it apply to terms like *OMG* and *geez*?
Taking the Lord’s name in vain is to speak of God with irreverence or disrespect. Many have traditionally understood the exclamation “Oh my God!” to be sinful because it has nothing to do with a proper, reverent use of God’s name.
The same principle is true when a person uses an acronym such as *OMG* or a word like *geez* (the first syllable of Jesus’ name) or *gosh* (a modified form of *God*). If the intended meaning is to be disrespectful toward God and His name, the word should not be used. However, some people use *OMG* without any thought of its connection to God’s name, and that’s what makes this question difficult.
We could all use the reminder that our words carry meaning. As people who follow Christ, we care deeply about helping others and honoring God. We must ask ourselves, “Do these words help others and honor God?” If we are honest, we will probably admit that words such as *gosh* do not. It may not be easy to change a long\-standing habit, but we must seek to speak words that build up one another (1 Thessalonians 5:11\) and honor the Lord.
James 3:9\-10 speaks of the tongue as a powerful part of the body: “With it we bless our Lord and Father, and with it we curse people who are made in the likeness of God. From the same mouth come blessing and cursing. My brothers, these things ought not to be so.” Our goal is to be consistent in our use of words, so they would serve as a blessing to God and to others.
Paul wrote, “And whatever you do, in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him” (Colossians 3:17\). This stands as our basis for evaluating terms such as *OMG* and *geez*. Does using these words give “thanks to God the Father”? If not, begin working to remove these words from your conversations and texts in order to honor God “in word and deed.”
|
What is the cause of the recent plague of child molestation incidents?
|
Answer
If you have not already, please read our article on [pedophilia](pedophilia.html). While the Bible does not contain a detailed ranking of the wickedness of various sins, child molestation is surely near the top of the list. There is perhaps no more cruel, perverted, and loathsome sin than child molestation. Jesus consistently expressed compassion for children and anger toward anyone who would harm them (Matthew 19:14; Luke 17:1\-2\). While no sin is unforgivable, the evil of child molestation can only come from a warped and debauched heart and mind.
But the question at hand is what is the cause of the recent plague of child molestation incidents. Sadly and disturbingly, it does seem that child molestation is becoming more common. Given scandals involving Roman Catholic priests, Protestant leaders, man\-boy love societies, and incidents involving parents, teachers, pastors, coaches, etc., the word “plague” is an apt description. While there is no way to give a conclusive answer or find a universal cause of this child molestation plague, there are definitely biblical principles which apply.
First, modern society is increasingly accepting of behaviors that the Bible declares to be sinful, immoral, and unnatural. While there is an enormous difference between child molestation and sexual acts involving consenting adults, the fact that society accepts behavior such as homosexuality allows people to consider far worse perversions of what God intended sex to be. And that leads to another question: why is society increasingly tolerant of aberrant behavior?
Child molestation and other perversions are becoming increasingly accepted because society has, for the most part, rejected the Christian worldview. The conventional wisdom is that humanity is not created in the image of God. Rather, humanity is the result of billions of years of the random processes of evolution. God is not the objective standard of morality. Rather, God is supposedly the invention of weak\-minded people who are unable to accept the fact that everything in this world is meaningless.
There is also the possibility of demon possession as an explanation in some cases. Perhaps a sin so evil and twisted could only come from the minds of the most evil creatures, Satan and his horde of demons. Satan knows the damage that—apart from the miraculous healing of God—molestation does to a child. If Satan can destroy someone’s life during childhood, there is simply less work for him and his demons to do later. Satan desires to “devour” (1 Peter 5:8\) and “steal, kill, and destroy” (John 10:10\). What better way than by attacking the most vulnerable and impressionable of people?
The rejection of the Christian worldview and the acceptance of a secular, naturalistic worldview leaves us with no absolute standard by which to declare child molestation to be evil. For generations, we have told people they are nothing but animals, so we should not be surprised if they begin to act like animals. If there is no absolute moral standard, then the “boundaries” people push are imaginary ones. Ultimately, child molestation is a result of people denying God and living their lives however they want.
The Bible speaks of godless individuals who “suppress the truth,” saying, “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. . . . Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth about God for a lie. . . . Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. . . . They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, slanderers, God\-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil . . . they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy. Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them” (Romans 1:18\-32\).
|
What is false guilt, and how can I avoid it?
|
Answer
Scripture is clear that all humanity is guilty before a holy God. Romans 3 teaches us that there is no person who is righteous and that in the face of a perfect law, all mouths are shut and the whole world lies under judgment (verse 19\). Furthermore, John tells us that if we try to say we aren’t guilty of sin, not only do we ourselves lie, but we make God out to be a liar. Guilt in and of itself is not a bad thing; it’s a fact of our fallen existence.
However, when it comes to *feeling* guilty, we must distinguish between false guilt and true guilt. It is normal to have feelings of guilt when we do something wrong—this is true guilt. But it is also possible to be innocent of something yet *feel* guilty about it—this is false guilt.
The major difference between false guilt and true guilt is their respective origins. False guilt has at least two possible points of origin: ourselves and the devil. One of the names of the devil in Scripture is “the accuser” (Revelation 12:10\). It is a fitting name, as he can and does accuse us to our own minds and consciences. Satan will bring to mind our most horrible sins and cause us to focus on them rather than on God’s forgiveness.
Another possible source of false guilt is our own conscience. The Bible speaks of a “weak conscience” and defines it as a mistaken belief that something innocent is actually sinful (see 1 Corinthians 8:7\-13\). A weak conscience, then, is basically an uninformed conscience. A person who does not apprehend the freedom he has in Christ may consider things to be sinful which are not sinful at all, and his “weak” conscience can easily produce false guilt.
Then there are those who convince themselves that they’re somehow on permanent “probation” before God. They think that if they’re good enough—if they continually perform at a lofty standard—they’ll earn God’s grudging acceptance. It’s an easy pit to fall into. It can happen when we are more aware of our sin than we are of God’s grace.
True guilt, on the other hand, originates with the Holy Spirit. There are two places in Scripture where this is very clear. Hebrews 12 discusses the “chastisement” or “discipline” of the Lord. The true guilt a believer feels over his sin might be the chastisement of God on a child He loves. His love will not allow us to sin habitually, so He brings conviction. Then, in 2 Corinthians chapter 7, Paul writes about a previous letter he’d sent that apparently caused great distress. In verse 8, he says, “Even if I made you grieve with my letter, I do not regret it.” Paul recognized his letter caused the church “grief,” but he identifies their feelings as true guilt. They *felt* guilty because they were, in fact, *guilty*.
The cure for true guilt is not just a commitment to “do better.” As C. J. Mahaney says in his excellent little book, *The Cross\-Centered Life*, “It’s impossible to resolve issues of yesterday by doing better tomorrow.” No, getting rid of true guilt requires godly sorrow leading to repentance (2 Corinthians 7:10\). Once the sin has been repented of, the result is a rejoicing in the grace of God.
False guilt can result in depression and spiritual paralysis. Someone suffering from false guilt may feel that God has given up on him and despair of ever being sanctified. False guilt tends to be very “me\-centered,” rather than God\-centered. The tendency is to think we’ll never be good enough and focus on our shortcomings.
The cure for false guilt is the gospel. If you’re a Christian, start by confessing any known sin. The promise of God in 1 John 1:9 is for believers: “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.” Remember that, once a sin has been forgiven, it’s forgiven for good. God separates our sin from us “as far as the east is from the west” (Psalm 103:12\).
Also, focus on the grace of God. God’s grace is free, it’s based on Christ’s work on your behalf, and it’s greater than your sin (Romans 5:20\). Meditate on Romans 8:1, “There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.” Preach the gospel to yourself every day, spending time in passages such as Romans 3:19\-26 (especially verse 24\); Psalm 103:8\-13; Romans 4:7\-8; Ephesians 1:3\-11; and Romans 5:6\-11\. Meditate on the cross and all it means to you; never think of your sin without also remembering the cross and the grace of God displayed in it.
Finally, in addition to Scripture, let these words from John Newton’s poem “In Evil Long I Took Delight” sink into your soul:
*“Thus while His death my sin displays in all its blackest hue,
Such is the mystery of grace, it seals my pardon, too!
With pleasing grief and mournful joy my spirit now is filled,
That I should such a life destroy yet live by Him I killed.”*
|
What is Reformation Day?
|
Answer
Reformation Day is a Protestant religious holiday celebrated on October 31\. It recognizes the day German monk Martin Luther nailed his [95 Theses](95-theses.html) to the door of the Wittenberg Church in 1517\. This act is commemorated as the official starting point of the [Protestant Reformation](Protestant-Reformation.html).
Officially, Reformation Day has been commemorated since 1567\. Exact dates for the holiday varied until after the two hundredth celebration in 1717 when October 31 became the official date of celebration in Germany and later expanded internationally.
Within the Lutheran tradition, Reformation Day is considered a lesser holiday and is officially named “The Festival of the Reformation.” Most Lutheran churches (and others who celebrate this day) commemorate it on the Sunday prior to October 31\.
The impact of Martin Luther and the Protestant Reformation has been enormous on global Christianity. In contrast to the extra\-biblical traditions and works\-based practices of Roman Catholicism, Luther called the Church back to the good news of salvation by grace alone through faith alone (Ephesians 2:8\-9\).
Luther believed the Word of God was the supreme authority for the Christian faith, rather than tradition or papal decrees. In the process of bringing the Scriptures to the common person, Luther translated the Bible into German, published numerous books and sermons of biblical teachings, and composed numerous hymns based on biblical themes. Many of his hymns are still sung today.
Luther was brought to trial before the church, and the court attempted to force him to recant. Luther’s response is often quoted: “I cannot choose but adhere to the Word of God, which has possession of my conscience; nor can I possibly, nor will I even make any recantation, since it is neither safe nor honest to act contrary to conscience! Here I stand; I cannot do otherwise, so help me God! Amen.”
From Germany, the Protestant Reformation expanded through Europe, influencing the work of [John Calvin](John-Calvin.html) in Geneva, [Ulrich Zwingli](Ulrich-Zwingli.html) in Zurich, and [John Knox](John-Knox.html) in Scotland. The Reformation Luther led also sparked the Anabaptist (free church) movement and the English Reformation. These movements, in turn, influenced the spread of Christianity to the Americas and throughout the world where European exploration took place. South Africa, India, Australia, and New Zealand all felt the impact of Luther’s hammer in Wittenberg.
Robert Rothwell has noted, “Today, Luther’s legacy lives on in the creeds and confessions of Protestant bodies worldwide. As we consider his importance this Reformation Day, let us equip ourselves to be knowledgeable proclaimers and defenders of biblical truth. May we be eager to preach the Gospel of God to the world and thereby spark a new reformation of church and culture.”
Reformation Day remains a central rallying point for all of those who choose to follow Christ by faith according to His Word. The holiday commemorates the actions of a man who was willing to stand against the ideas of his day and to present God’s Word as our guide for salvation (John 3:16\) and Christian living.
|
Is baptism the New Covenant equivalent of circumcision?
|
Answer
Circumcision was the physical sign of the covenant God made with Abraham. Although the initial covenant was made in Genesis 15, circumcision wasn’t commanded until Genesis 17 – at least 13 years later, after Ishmael was born. At that time, God changed Abram’s name from Abram (“exalted father”) to Abraham (“father of a multitude”), a name that anticipated the fulfillment of God’s promise. The covenant was made with Abraham and later to Isaac and Jacob and to all their descendants.
Baptism is, in some sense, the sign of the New Covenant God makes with His Church. Jesus commanded baptism in the Great Commission: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 28:19\). Baptism is the outward sign of an inward change. It represents rebirth in Christ.
Many Reformed traditions have made a very close parallel between circumcision and baptism and have used the Old Testament teaching on circumcision to justify the baptism of infants. The argument goes like this: since infants born into the Old Testament Jewish community were circumcised, infants born into the New Testament church community should be baptized.
While there are parallels between baptism and circumcision, they symbolize two very different covenants. The Old Covenant had a *physical* means of entrance: one was born to Jewish parents or bought as a servant into a Jewish household (Genesis 17:10\-13\). One’s spiritual life was unconnected to the sign of circumcision. Every male was circumcised, whether he showed any devotion to God or not. However, even in the Old Testament, there was recognition that physical circumcision was not enough. Moses commanded the Israelites in Deuteronomy 10:16 to circumcise their *hearts*, and even promised that God would do the circumcising (Deuteronomy 30:6\). Jeremiah also preached the need for a circumcision of the heart (Jeremiah 4:4\).
In contrast, the New Covenant has a *spiritual* means of entrance: one must believe and be saved (Acts 16:31\). Therefore, one’s spiritual life is closely connected to the sign of baptism. If baptism indicates an entrance into the New Covenant, then only those devoted to God and trusting in Jesus should be baptized.
True circumcision, as Paul preaches in Romans 2:29, is that of the heart, and it is accomplished by the Spirit. In other words, a person today enters a covenant relationship with God not based on a physical act but on the Spirit’s work in the heart.
Colossians 2:11\-12 refers to this type of spiritual circumcision: “In him you were also circumcised, in the putting off of the sinful nature, not with a circumcision done by the hands of men but with the circumcision done by Christ, having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through your faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead.” This circumcision does not involve the cutting of the body; it is a cutting away of our old nature. It is a spiritual act and refers to nothing less than salvation, effected by the Holy Spirit. Baptism, mentioned in verse 12, does not *replace* circumcision; it *follows* circumcision—and it is clearly a spiritual circumcision that is meant. Baptism, therefore, is a sign of inward, spiritual “circumcision.”
This passage also specifies that the new life, represented by baptism, comes “through your faith.” This implies that the one being baptized has the ability to exercise faith. Since infants are not capable of exercising faith, they should not be candidates for baptism.
Someone born (physically) under the Old Covenant received the sign of that covenant (circumcision); likewise, someone born (spiritually) under the New Covenant (“born again,” John 3:3\) receives the sign of that covenant (baptism).
|
Who was Pontius Pilate?
|
Answer
Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea from A.D. 26\-36, serving under Emperor Tiberius. He is most known for his involvement in condemning Jesus to death on a cross.
Outside of the four Gospels, Pontius Pilate is mentioned by [Tacitus](Tacitus.html), Philo, and Josephus. In addition, the “Pilate Stone,” discovered in 1961 and dated c. A.D. 30, includes a description of Pontius Pilate and mentions him as “prefect” of Judea. Pilate is also mentioned in the apocryphal writings, but these were all written at much later dates.
In the Bible, Pontius Pilate is mentioned solely in connection with the trials and crucifixion of Jesus. The Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) portray Pilate as reluctant to crucify Jesus. Pilate calls the charges against Jesus “baseless” (Luke 23:14\) and several times declares Jesus to be not guilty: “What crime has this man committed? I have found in him no grounds for the death penalty” (Luke 23:22\).
Pilate’s conscience was already bothering him when his wife sent him an urgent message concerning Jesus. The note begged him, “Don’t have anything to do with that innocent man, for I have suffered a great deal today in a dream because of him” (Matthew 27:19\).
John’s Gospel offers some more detail of the trial, including an additional conversation between Pilate and Jesus. Jesus acknowledges Himself as a king and claims to speak directly for the truth. Pilate responds with the famous question, “What is truth?” (John 18:38\). The question intentionally communicated multiple meanings. Here was a situation in which truth was compromised in order to condemn an innocent man. Pilate, who is supposedly seeking the truth, asks the question of the One who is Himself “the way, the truth, and the life” (John 14:6\). A human judge, confused about the truth, was about to condemn the Righteous Judge of the world.
In the end, Pilate sought a compromise. Knowing Jesus had been handed over by the religious leaders out of envy, he appealed to the crowds at the Passover, asking which “criminal” should be set free, Jesus or Barabbas? The leaders convinced the crowd to cry out for Barabbas (Matthew 27:20–21\). Giving in to political pressure, Pilate authorized both the flogging and crucifixion of Jesus: “Wanting to satisfy the crowd, Pilate released Barabbas to them. He had Jesus flogged, and handed him over to be crucified” (Mark 15:15\).
Pilate had the charge against Jesus posted on the cross above Jesus’ head: “THIS IS JESUS, THE KING OF THE JEWS” (Matthew 27:37\). As soon as Jesus died, Joseph of Arimathea asked Pilate for the body of Jesus in order to bury Him, and Pilate granted the request (John 19:38\). The last glimpse we have of Pontius Pilate is when he assigns guards for Jesus’ tomb (Matthew 27:64\-66\).
Pontius Pilate’s brief appearance in Scripture is full of tragedy. He ignored his conscience, he disregarded the good advice of his wife, he chose political expediency over public rectitude, and he failed to recognize the truth even when Truth was standing right in front of him. When given an opportunity to evaluate the claims of Jesus, what will we decide? Will we accept His claim to be the King, or will we follow the voice of the crowd?
|
What is God?
|
Answer
A. W. Tozer wrote, “’What is God like?’ If by that question we mean ‘What is God like in Himself?’ there is no answer. If we mean ‘What has God disclosed about Himself that the reverent reason can comprehend?’ there is, I believe, an answer both full and satisfying.”
[Tozer](A-W-Tozer.html) is right in that we cannot know what God is with respect to Himself. The book of Job declares, “Can you discover the depths of God? Can you discover the limits of the Almighty? They are high as the heavens, what can you do? Deeper than Sheol, what can you know?” (Job 11:7–8\).
However, we can ask what God has revealed about Himself in His Word and in creation that “the reverent reason” can grasp.
When Moses was directed by God to go to the Egyptian Pharaoh and demand the release of the Israelites, Moses asked God, “Behold, I am going to the sons of Israel, and I will say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you.’ Now they may say to me, ‘What is His name?’ What shall I say to them?” (Exodus 3:13\).
The answer God gave Moses was simple, yet very revealing: “God said to Moses, ‘I AM WHO I AM’; and He said, ‘Thus you shall say to the sons of Israel, “I AM has sent me to you”’” (Exodus 3:14\). The Hebrew text in verse 14 literally says, “I be that I be.”
This name speaks to the fact that God is pure existence, or what some call pure [actuality](actuality-potentiality.html). Pure actuality is that which IS with no possibility to not exist. Put another way, many things can have existence (e.g., human beings, animals, plants), but only one thing can be existence. Other things have “being” but only God is Being.
The fact that God alone is Being leads to at least five truths about what God is – what type of being God is.
First, God alone is a self\-existent being and the first cause of everything else that exists. John 5:26 simply says, “The Father has life in Himself.” Paul preached, “He is not served by human hands, as if He needed anything, because He Himself gives all men life and breath and everything else” (Acts 17:25\).
Second, God is a necessary being. A necessary being is one whose nonexistence is impossible. Only God is a necessary being; all other things are contingent beings, meaning they could not exist. However, if God did not exist, then neither would anything else. He alone is the necessary being by which everything else currently exists – a fact that Job states: “If He should determine to do so, If He should gather to Himself His spirit and His breath, All flesh would perish together, And man would return to dust” (Job 34:14–15\).
Third, God is a personal being. The word personal in this context does not describe personality (e.g., funny, outgoing, etc.); rather, it means “having intent.” God is a purposeful being who has a will, creates, and directs events to suit Him. The prophet Isaiah wrote, “I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is no one like Me, declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times things which have not been done, saying, ‘My purpose will be established, And I will accomplish all My good pleasure’” (Isaiah 46:9–10\).
Fourth, God is a triune being. This truth is a mystery, yet the whole of Scripture and life in general speaks to this fact. The Bible clearly articulates that there is but one God: “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one” (Deut. 6:4\). But the Bible also declares that there is a plurality to God. Before Jesus ascended to heaven, He commanded His disciples: “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 28:19\). Notice the singular “name” in the verse; it does not say “names,” which would convey three gods. There is one name belonging to the three Persons who make up the Godhead.
Scripture in various places clearly calls the Father God, Jesus God, and the Holy Spirit God. For example, the fact that Jesus possesses self\-existence and is the first cause of everything is stated in the first verses of John: “All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. In Him was life” (John 1:3–4\). The Bible also says that Jesus is a necessary being: “He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together” (Colossians 1:17\).
Fifth, God is a loving being. In the same way that many things can exist but only one thing can be existence, people and other living things can possess and experience love, but only one thing can be love. First John 4:8 makes the simple ontological statement, “God is love.”
What is God? God is the only one who can say, “I be that I be.” God is pure existence, self\-existent, and the source of everything else that possesses existence. He is the only necessary being, is purposeful/personal, and possesses both unity and diversity.
God is also love. He invites you to seek Him and discover the love He has for you in His Word and in the life of His Son Jesus Christ, the one who died for your sins and made a way for you to live with Him for eternity.
|
What is progressive sanctification?
|
Answer
The word translated “sanctification” in most Bibles means “separation.” It is used in the New Testament, according to *Vine’s Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words*, of the separation of the believer from evil, and it is the result of obedience to the Word of God. Progressive sanctification is what gradually separates the people of God from the world and makes them more and more like Jesus Christ.
Sanctification differs from justification in several ways. Justification is a one\-time work of God, resulting in a declaration of “not guilty” before Him because of the work of Christ on the cross. Sanctification is a process, beginning with justification and continuing throughout life. Justification is the starting point of the line that represents one’s Christian life; sanctification is the line itself.
Sanctification is a three\-stage process – past, present, and future. The first stage occurs at the beginning of our Christian lives. It is an initial moral change, a break from the power and love of sin. It is the point at which believers can count themselves “dead to sin but alive to God” (Romans 6:11\). Once sanctification has begun, we are no longer under sin’s dominion (Romans 6:14\). There is a reorientation of desires, and we develop a love of righteousness. Paul calls it “slavery to righteousness” (Romans 6:17\-18\).
The second stage of sanctification requires a lifetime to complete. As we grow in grace, we are gradually – but steadily – changing to be more like Jesus (2 Corinthians 3:18\). This occurs in a process of daily spiritual renewal (Colossians 3:10\). The apostle Paul himself was being sanctified even as he ministered to others. Paul claimed that he had not reached perfection, but that he “pressed on” to attain everything Christ desired for him (Philippians 3:12\).
The third and final stage of sanctification occurs in the future. When believers die, their spirits go to be with Christ (2 Corinthians 5:6\-8\). Since nothing unclean can enter heaven (Revelation 21:27\), we must be made perfect at that point. The sanctification of the whole person—body, soul, and spirit—will finally be complete when the Lord Jesus returns and we receive glorified bodies (Philippians 3:21; 1 Corinthians 15:35\-49\).
God’s work in sanctification involves all three members of the Trinity. God the Father is constantly at work in His children “to will and to work for His good pleasure” (Philippians 2:13\). He changes our desires, making us want to please Him, and He empowers us to do so. Jesus earned our sanctification on the cross and, in essence, has become our sanctification (1 Corinthians 1:30\) and the “perfecter of our faith” (Hebrews 12:2\). The Holy Spirit is the primary agent of our sanctification (1 Corinthians 6:11; 2 Thessalonians 2:13; 1 Peter 1:2\), and He is the one who produces in us the fruit of sanctification (Galatians 5:22\-23\).
Our role in sanctification is both passive and active. Passively, we are to trust God to sanctify us, presenting our bodies to God (Romans 6:13; 12:1\) and yielding to the Holy Spirit. “It is God’s will that you should be sanctified” (1 Thessalonians 4:3\), and God will have His way.
Actively, we are responsible to choose to do what is right. “Each of you should learn to control his own body in a way that is holy and honorable” (1 Thessalonians 4:4\). This involves putting to death the “misdeeds of the body” (Romans 8:13\), striving for holiness (Hebrews 12:14\), fleeing immorality (1 Corinthians 6:18\), cleansing ourselves from every defilement (2 Corinthians 7:1\), and making every effort to supplement our faith (2 Peter 1:5\-11\).
Both the passive role and the active role are necessary for a healthy Christian life. To emphasize the passive role tends to lead to spiritual laziness and a neglect of spiritual discipline. The end result of this course of action is a lack of maturity. To emphasize the active role can lead to legalism, pride, and self\-righteousness. The end result of this is a joyless Christian life. We are to pursue holiness, but it is God who empowers us to do so. The end result is a consistent, mature Christian life that faithfully reflects the nature of our holy God.
John makes it clear that we will never be totally free from sin in this life (1 John 1:8\-10\). Thankfully, the work God has begun in us He will finish (Philippians 1:6\).
|
What does the Bible say about being a lesbian?
|
Answer
Some are under the assumption that, while the Bible condemns gay sex between men, it nowhere condemns being a lesbian/lesbianism. Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 mention men having sex with other men, but say nothing of women having sex with other women. In the Sodom and Gomorrah account in Genesis 19, the men of the cities wanted to gang rape other men. First Corinthians 6:9 mentions effeminate men, very likely referring to homosexuals, but does not mention lesbians. So, does the Bible in fact condemn male homosexuality, but not lesbianism?
Romans 1:26\-27 puts this invalid assumption to rest: “Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. **Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones**. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion” (emphasis added). Clearly, this passage puts lesbianism on equal ground with male homosexuality. Lesbianism is described as women exchanging natural relations (with men) for unnatural relations (with women). According to the Bible, being a lesbian is just as sinful as being a homosexual male.
There’s an implication in Romans 1:26 that lesbianism is even worse than male homosexuality. Notice the phrase “even their women.” The text seems to suggest that it is more common for men to engage in sexual depravity, and when women begin to do it, that is a sign things are getting really bad. Men usually have much stronger sex drives than women, and so are more prone to sexual deviancy. When women commit unnatural sexual acts, then the degree of immorality has truly become shameful. Lesbianism is evidence of people being given over to “the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another” (Romans 1:24\).
|
Who were the Ammonites?
|
Answer
Throughout the early history of Israel, we find references to the Ammonite people. Who were they, where did they come from, and what happened to them? The Ammonites were a Semitic people, closely related to the Israelites. Despite that relationship, they were more often counted enemies than friends.
Lot, Abraham’s nephew, was the progenitor of the Ammonites. After Abraham and Lot separated (Genesis 13\), Lot settled in the city of Sodom. When God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah because of their wickedness, Lot and his daughters fled to the hill country on the southern end of the Dead Sea. Probably thinking they were the only people left on the earth, Lot’s daughters got him drunk and had incestuous relations with him to produce children (Genesis 19:37\-38\). The older daughter had a son named Moab (“from father”), and the younger gave birth to Ben\-Ammi (“son of my people”). The Ammonites, descendants of Ben\-Ammi, were a nomadic people who lived in the territory of modern\-day Jordan, and the name of the capital city, Amman, reflects the name of those ancient inhabitants.
In the time of Moses, the fertile plains of the Jordan River valley were occupied by the Amorites, Ammonites and Moabites. When Israel left Egypt, the Ammonites refused to assist them in any way, and God punished them for their lack of support (Deuteronomy 23:3\-4\). Later, however, as the Israelites entered the Promised Land, God instructed them, “When you approach the territory of the people of Ammon, do not harass them or contend with them, for I will not give you any of the land of the people of Ammon as a possession, because I have given it to the sons of Lot for a possession” (Deuteronomy 2:19\). The Israelite tribes of Gad, Reuben, and half of Manasseh claimed the Amorite territory bordering that of the Ammonites.
The Ammonites were a pagan people who worshiped the gods Milcom and Molech. God commanded the Israelites not to marry these pagans, because intermarriage would lead the Israelites to worship false gods. Solomon disobeyed and married Naamah the Ammonite (1 Kings 14:21\), and, as God had warned, he was drawn into idolatry (1 Kings 11:1\-8\). Molech was a fire\-god with the face of a calf; his images had arms outstretched to receive the babies who were sacrificed to him. Like their god, the Ammonites were cruel. When [Nahash the Ammonite](Nahash-the-Ammonite.html) was asked for terms of a treaty (1 Samuel 11:2\), he proposed gouging out the right eye of each Israelite man. Amos 1:13 says that the Ammonites would rip open pregnant women in the territories they conquered.
Under King Saul’s leadership, Israel defeated the Ammonites and made them vassals. David continued that sovereignty over [Ammon](Ammon-in-the-Bible.html) and later besieged the capital city to solidify his control. After the split of Israel and Judah, the Ammonites began to ally themselves with the enemies of Israel. Ammon regained some sovereignty in the seventh century B.C., until Nebuchadnezzar conquered them about a hundred years later. Tobiah the Ammonite (Nehemiah 2:19\) was possibly a governor of the region under Persian rule, but the inhabitants were a mix of Ammonites, Arabs, and others. By New Testament times, Jews had settled in the area, and it was known as [Perea](Perea-in-the-Bible.html). The last mention of Ammonites as a separate people was in the second century by Justin Martyr, who said they were very numerous. Sometime during the Roman period, the Ammonites seem to have been absorbed into Arab society.
|
Why do so many Christians not have a consistently biblical worldview?
|
Answer
A biblical worldview is one’s total conception of the world from a biblical standpoint. It’s a Christian’s basic belief system about the meaning of life, the nature of God, the source of truth, and other foundational concepts. Yet many Christians’ worldview is not biblically consistent. They may approach some issues from a biblical viewpoint, but not every issue.
There are many possible reasons why some Christians fail to have a consistently biblical worldview:
1\) They lack knowledge of what the Bible says. They do not know the Word. If someone doesn’t know what the Bible says about the sanctity of human life, for example, it will be difficult for him or her to form a biblical view on the subject. For the uninformed, education is the key.
2\) They reject what the Bible says on certain issues. The Barna Group conducted a survey asking questions about the Bible to determine if people truly believed what the Bible said. The results were startling: only 4 percent did. Professed Christians did not fare much better. If a professed Christian does not believe what the Bible says, it will be impossible for him to have an authentic biblical worldview. For those who are contrary, repentance is the key.
3\) They are more concerned with what the world thinks of them than what God thinks. “Fear of man will prove to be a snare” (Proverbs 29:25\). A believer who views the world from a biblical standpoint recognizes that he is not of the world. Jesus said, “If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you” (John 15:19; 17:14\). When a believer starts making compromises with the world’s way of thinking, he loses focus on God’s perspective. For those who are fearful, courage is the key.
4\) They are lukewarm in their commitment to Christ. Like the church of Laodicea, they are “neither cold nor hot” (Revelation 3:15\), unwilling to take a stand for Christ. For the lukewarm, commitment is the key.
5\) They are influenced by the lies of the world. From the time of Adam and Eve, Satan has used his ability to deceive and confuse (Genesis 3:1\-6; Revelation 12:9\). A powerful tool in Satan’s arsenal is the idea that the Bible is a book of myths, that it’s full of errors and not to be trusted. Satan wishes to convince people that the Bible is no longer relevant; its laws and principles are obsolete. Many in the church have been influenced by such thinking. For the deceived, discernment is the key.
6\) They are swayed by their circumstances and doubt God’s promises. In Matthew 14, when Peter stepped out of the boat to walk on the water, he was demonstrating a biblical worldview: Jesus is the source of all power. However, when Peter focused on the storm\-tossed sea, his worldview shifted: maybe the waves are more powerful than Jesus. For the doubting, faith is the key.
To have a consistently biblical worldview we must go back to the Bible and take hold of the promises God has made to us, for the world offers us nothing (Luke 9:25; John 12:25; Matthew 6:19\).
|
How can I overcome my fear of the end of days?
|
Answer
The best way to overcome a fear of the end of days is to be spiritually prepared for it. First and foremost, you must have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ in order to have eternal life (John 3:16; Romans 10:9\-10\). Only through Him can you receive forgiveness of sin and have eternity with God. If God is your Father, there’s really nothing to worry about (Luke 12:32\).
Second, every Christian should live a life worthy of the calling we have in Christ. Ephesians 4:1\-3 teaches, “Walk in a manner worthy of the calling to which you have been called, with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” (ESV). Knowing Christ and walking in His will go a long way towards diminishing fear of any kind.
Third, Christians are told what will happen in the end, and it’s encouraging. First Thessalonians 4:13\-18 notes,
*But we do not want you to be uninformed, brothers, about those who are asleep, that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope. For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep. For this we declare to you by a word from the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord. Therefore encourage one another with these words* (ESV).
Rather than fear the future, we are called to anticipate the future with joy. Why? In Christ, we will be “caught up” to meet Him and we “will always be with the Lord.”
Further, Scripture says we do not need to fear Judgment Day: “By this is love perfected with us, so that we may have confidence for the day of judgment, because as he is so also are we in this world. There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear. For fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not been perfected in love” (1 John 4:17\-18, ESV).
The apostle Peter reveals that, even if our future holds suffering, we need not fear: “But even if you should suffer for righteousness' sake, you will be blessed” (1 Peter 3:14, ESV). Peter and many other early believers endured much hardship and even death because of their faith in Christ. Suffering is not to be feared; it is a blessing when it is borne for the name of Jesus.
Those who do not know Christ do not have the promise of peace for the future. For them, there is a real concern because they have not settled the issue of where they will spend eternity. Those who do know Christ do not fear the end of days. Instead, we strive to live a life worthy of our calling, live with confidence, suffer patiently, anticipate Jesus’ return, and rest in the knowledge that our times are in His hands (Psalm 31:15\).
|
Should we read other books, or just the Bible?
|
Answer
The Bible teaches that we should meditate on the words of God (Psalm 1:2\). It also teaches that, “whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, [think about these things](think-about-these-things.html)” (Philippians 4:8\). In other words, other books that encourage holy living can be helpful in our walk with Christ. Commentaries, Bible studies, devotional literature—there are many writings that can deepen our understanding of Scripture.
Further, other books are helpful for many practical areas of life. From medical information to car repair, information we need for daily living can be found in books.
Third, some fiction is useful for both learning and enjoyment. As long as the book honors the Lord, a novel can communicate truth, just as Jesus did in His parables. First Corinthians 10:31 teaches, “So, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.” This is the standard for the believer. If a particular book is read for the glory of God, then there is a legitimate reason for reading it.
Fourth, some books can help us to better understand and reach out to those who do not know Christ. The Bible is clear we are called to make disciples of all nations (Matthew 28:18\-20\). Books helpful in this cause could include language study, cultural analysis, and even the religious works of other religions. While much care should be exercised with this last category, it is helpful to be acquainted with the literature of other cultures in order to more effectively communicate the truths of the Bible.
Of course, there are some books that Christians should *not* read. Certainly, books that “call evil good and good evil” (Isaiah 5:20\) should be avoided. Also, books with gratuitous descriptions of immorality or bloodshed are not worthwhile, especially if they include graphic images or pornography. Such books are part of “the unfruitful works of darkness” (Ephesians 5:11\), which Paul calls “shameful” (Ephesians 5:12\).
Finally, it should be clear that the Bible is the most important book and should receive highest priority among Christians. Other books can be beneficial and include truth, but only the Bible is “God\-breathed” and inspired (2 Timothy 3:16\-17\). Sometimes, Paul appealed to other writings (Acts 17\) when communicating Christ to others, but the vast majority of his references are to the inspired writings of the Old Testament.
We are called to study the Bible: “Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15\). This requires much time in Scripture.
Jesus Himself serves as our greatest example. When He was tempted, how did He respond? Three times He appealed to the Word of God (Matthew 4:1\-11\). Other books can help in our walk with God, yet they must never distract from our commitment to the Word of God.
|
What is Israelology?
|
Answer
Israelology is the area of theological study specifically focused on what the Bible teaches about Israel. The key author on this issue in recent years has been Arnold Fruchtenbaum, Ph.D., founder of Ariel Ministries. His primary focus is to display what the fullness of Scripture teaches regarding the land and people of Israel. Dr. Fruchtenbaum specifically rejects replacement theology (the belief that the Church has replaced the Israel of the Old Testament). As he notes, only dispensationalism, “with its clear distinction between Israel and the Church, can, in fact, provide a systematized biblical doctrine of Israel.”
Fruchtenbaum’s work is often embraced by those holding to dispensationalism and largely rejected by those who do not. However, the study of Israelology offers much insight for all believers. For example, Israelology shows how both the Church and Israel have a role now. The Church is called, as the early apostles and Christians were, to share the gospel message with the Jewish people as one of the many nations included in the Great Commission (Matthew 28:18\-20\).
Also, our view of Israel informs our view of the Mosaic Law of the Old Testament. Israelology examines how the early church dealt with the practice of Judaism and advocated the reading and studying of the Old Testament Scriptures.
A final, important result of the study of Israeology is a deeper respect for contemporary Jewish people. Growing anti\-Semitism in parts of the world often casts Israel in a highly negative light. However, a proper, biblical view of Israel notes God’s high view of Israel and its future. Christians are called to show love to the people of Israel and to pray for them (Psalm 122:6\).
Israelology is an often\-neglected study among Christians, perhaps because of preconceived beliefs related to the end times or replacement theology. However, all Christians are called to study to show themselves approved (2 Timothy 2:15\). Our study must include what the Bible teaches about Abraham’s people and the land God promised them (Genesis 12:1\-3\).
|
What is the menorah?
|
Answer
The menorah is a lampstand with longstanding tradition in both the Bible and the history of Judaism. The word itself is a transliteration of a Hebrew word. It was first mentioned in Exodus 25:31\-39:
*Make a lampstand of pure gold and hammer it out, base and shaft; its flowerlike cups, buds and blossoms shall be of one piece with it. Six branches are to extend from the sides of the lampstand\-three on one side and three on the other. Three cups shaped like almond flowers with buds and blossoms are to be on one branch, three on the next branch, and the same for all six branches extending from the lampstand. And on the lampstand there are to be four cups shaped like almond flowers with buds and blossoms. One bud shall be under the first pair of branches extending from the lampstand, a second bud under the second pair, and a third bud under the third pair\-six branches in all. The buds and branches shall all be of one piece with the lampstand, hammered out of pure gold. Then make its seven lamps and set them up on it so that they light the space in front of it. Its wick trimmers and trays are to be of pure gold. A talent of pure gold is to be used for the lampstand and all these accessories.*
The original menorah was designed for use in the tabernacle in the wilderness before Israel entered the Promised Land. After the conquest of Canaan, it remained in the tabernacle (Joshua 18:1\) and was later used in the temple Solomon built.
The design of the menorah was quite significant. It included a shaft complemented with three branches on each side; thus, it held a total of seven lamps. Each cup included an intricate design. The menorah was made of one piece of hammered gold weighing one talent. Scholars debate the exact weight of a “talent of pure gold.” First\-century Jewish historian Josephus said that the menorah in his time was approximately 100 pounds. If this was the size of the talent used in Exodus, it would represent an enormous sum of money. To give a general idea, 1 gram of gold is currently worth about $57\.35\. One hundred pounds of gold would be worth $2,603,690\.00\. Certainly, in any period of history, a talent of gold would have had tremendous value. One commentator mentions a talent of gold as worth 20 years’ wages for a common laborer in the first century.
According to the Mosaic Law, the menorah was lit every evening and cleaned every morning (Exodus 27:21\). It burned fresh olive oil.
Today, the menorah continues to be one of the best\-known symbols of Judaism. It is a common fixture in local synagogues. A nine\-candle version is used in association with the Jewish holiday of Hanukah. Additionally, those involved in reconstructing items for a future Jewish temple have made menorahs reflecting the design given to Moses.
|
When can a doctrine be considered truly biblical?
|
Answer
A doctrine can only be considered truly biblical when it is explicitly taught in the Bible. An issue could be unbiblical (opposed to the teachings of the Bible), [extra\-biblical](extrabiblical.html) (outside of or not mentioned in the Bible), biblically based (connected to the teachings of the Bible), or biblical.
An unbiblical doctrine is any teaching that stands opposed to the Bible’s clear teaching. For example, a belief that Jesus sinned is unbiblical. It stands in direct contrast to what the Bible teaches in many places, including Hebrews 4:15: “We have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet he did not sin.”
An extra\-biblical doctrine would be any teaching that is not directly taught in the Bible. It can be either good or bad. For example, voting in a democratic election is a positive practice, but it is not explicitly commanded in the Bible. To observe certain holidays is often neither good nor bad: “One person considers one day more sacred than another; another considers every day alike. Each of them should be fully convinced in their own mind” (Romans 14:5\). Any teaching about the observance of Lent, for example, is extra\-biblical.
Other teachings can be based on biblical principles, yet not directly taught in the Bible. For example, smoking is never mentioned in the Bible. Yet we can assert that the practice should be avoided, based on 1 Corinthians 6:19\-20, “Your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you. . . . You are not your own, for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body.” When a biblical principle applies, we can confidently teach it as a biblically based doctrine.
Biblical doctrines, then, are teachings explicitly taught in the Bible. Examples of these include God’s creation of the heavens and earth (Genesis 1:1\), the sinfulness of all people (Romans 3\), the virgin birth of Jesus (Matthew 1:20\-25; Luke 1:26\-38\), the physical death and literal resurrection of Jesus (1 Corinthians 15:3\-11\), salvation by grace alone through faith alone (Ephesians 2:8\-9\), the inspiration of Scripture (2 Timothy 3:16\-17\), and many others.
Problems occur when people confuse these categories. For example, to teach that the virgin birth is an optional doctrine that Christians are free to believe or not believe is to reject a core teaching of the Bible. It presents a biblical doctrine as non\-essential. Then there are those who present extra\-biblical teachings as if they were biblical doctrines. A person’s opinions and preferences are given the weight of God’s law; this happens sometimes in matters of clothing, music style, and food choice. When we “teach as doctrines the commandments of men” (Mark 7:7\), we become like the Pharisees whom Jesus strongly condemned.
Our goal must be to speak clearly and firmly when Scripture is plain. In extra\-biblical matters, we must be careful to avoid dogmatism. As many have said, in the essentials unity; in the non\-essentials, diversity; in all things, charity.
|
Does the Bible say anything about a black Pope in relation to the end times?
|
Answer
The idea of there being a black Pope in the end times does not come from the Bible, but rather from the visions of Saint Malachy in the 12th century. In approximately A.D. 1139, Saint Malachy received a vision in which it was revealed to him that there would be 112 more Popes, with the last one being the “black Pope.” Interestingly, the current Pope, Francis I, is Pope number 112 after Saint Malachy’s vision (although the count of Popes varies somewhat). Some see a connection between Pope Francis I and the color black due to Francis I being a Jesuit, and Jesuits traditionally wearing black cassocks. So, is Pope Francis I, the 112th Pope, going to be the black Pope?
Biblically speaking, there is absolutely no connection between a black Pope and the end times. The Bible does not even mention the papacy. The idea of a supreme leader over the entire Christian church is not found in the Bible. There may be an end\-times prophecy about the city of Rome (Revelation 17:9\), as Rome is the city on seven hills. Some interpret the whore/beast of Babylon as the Roman Catholic Church and believe that in the end times the Roman Catholic Church will actually welcome the coming of the Antichrist. Some hold that the black Pope will be the one who leads the Roman Catholic Church into this apostasy. Again, let it be said, the Bible does not say anything about Popes in general or an end\-times Pope in particular.
There is also the question of what Saint Malachy’s vision of a black Pope means in regards to the use of the word “black.” Some believe it refers to an evil nature; thus, the last Pope will be an evil Pope. Others believe that it refers to skin color; thus, someone of African descent will be elected Pope. In recent papal elections, several African candidates have been considered. Whatever the case, even if someone of black/African descent is some day elected Pope, it does not necessarily have any bearing on the end times. Instead of studying purported visions and wild conspiracy theories, our focus should be on what the Bible actually says about the signs of the end times.
|
What is moral absolutism?
|
Answer
Moral absolutism is the philosophy that mankind is subject to absolute standards of conduct that do not change with circumstances, the intent of the acting agent, or the result of the act. These standards are universal to all humanity despite culture or era, and they maintain their relevance whether or not an individual or a culture values them. It is never appropriate to break a law that is based on one of these absolutes. Moral absolutism does not dictate *which* acts are moral or immoral, however, merely that absolute morality does exist.
Moral absolutism is the main category of deontological ethics. Deontology bases an act’s morality on its adherence to rules. While all categories of deontological ethics hold that absolute morality does exist, not all of them believe that morality lies in the act alone, as moral absolutism teaches. Kantian ethics (or duty ethics) is the other significant form of deontology and says that an act is moral if it is done deliberately and with the right motives. Contemporary deontology says that doing harm is only allowable if it is for a greater good. And the non\-aggression principle bases morality on force; a person may only use force or cause harm when defending against an aggressor.
The absolutes in moral absolutism come by their authority in several different ways. *Natural law theory* says that human nature inexorably reveals some things as absolutely right or wrong. For instance, torturing innocents is absolutely wrong, and any reasonable contemplation of human nature would agree. *Contractarianism* teaches that morality is determined by a mutual, voluntary agreement between parties. The contract can be a legal document outlining the responsibilities of the parties involved or the assumed civil duties a citizen takes on in exchange for the benefits of living in a society. *Divine command theory* asserts that the morality of an action is dictated by God. Only God can determine the rules, and we are obligated to follow every word that applies to us.
The Bible teaches moral absolutism in spirit, if not in specifics. We are to look to God’s Word, not our own judgment, to know what right and wrong behavior looks like. But because God’s creation reflects His character, it’s inevitable that men seeking wisdom would occasionally stumble upon His truths.
God has placed in our hearts a standard of right and wrong that, if followed, would result in our being blessed (Romans 2:14–15\). But our fallen nature and bent to sin cloud our conscience. Therefore, the Bible admonishes us to ask God for wisdom (James 1:5\). Psalm 119:59 says, “I considered my ways and turned my feet to Your testimonies.” Consideration of human nature shows us our inability and our need for God: “If Your law had not been my delight, then I would have perished in my affliction” (Psalm 119:92\).
God has set in place certain standards, and it is sin to break those standards. Psalm 24:1 testifies to God’s authority: “The earth is the LORD’s, and all it contains; the world, and those who dwell in it.” He set the absolutes of our morality in His Word: “You shall therefore obey the LORD your God, and do His commandments and His statutes which I command you today” (Deuteronomy 27:10\). The divine command theory of moral absolutism comes the closest to what the Bible teaches.
Discussing the philosophy of ethics from a secular, humanistic viewpoint is an interesting intellectual exercise, but the simple fact is that fallen man cannot discover truth and goodness without God. As in Abraham’s case, there is only one way that we can be moral: “Then he believed in the LORD; and He reckoned it to him as righteousness” (Genesis 15:6\).
|
What is virtue ethics?
|
Answer
Virtue ethics is one of the main categories of [normative ethics](normative-ethics.html). It teaches that moral behavior is directly linked to a virtuous life. An act cannot be ethical if it is performed by a corrupt character, and a virtuous person will naturally perform virtuous acts.
Unlike other secular schools of thought, virtue ethics explains exactly what is needed to perform a morally upright act. To be virtuous, a person will develop three specific characteristics, named using three Greek words. *Arête* is excellence in character that naturally exemplifies goodness, honesty, self\-control, and other virtues. *Phronesis* is moral or practical wisdom that knows the right course to take in any circumstance. *Eudaimonia* is a bit different. It isn’t an internal characteristic, but a good, flourishing life. Virtue ethics teaches that, by careful living, a person can develop all three qualities, thus embodying a character that is naturally moral, although external forces may damage or destroy *eudaimonia*.
The Bible certainly promotes the development of an excellent, virtuous character. We have the example of Noah, “a righteous man, blameless in his time” (Genesis 6:9\). Job 1:1 describes Job as “blameless, upright, fearing God and turning away from evil.” And Luke 1:6 says Zacharias and Elizabeth were “both righteous in the sight of God, walking blamelessly in all the commandments and requirements of the Lord.” But the Bible also teaches that no one is perfect. “All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23\). And we cannot rely on ourselves to act properly, “for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure” (Philippians 2:13\).
The entire book of Proverbs is dedicated to the acquiring of *phronesis*. Proverbs 8:11 says, “For wisdom is better than jewels; and all desirable things cannot compare with her.” However, wisdom is not something we can develop on our own. Wisdom is a gift from the Lord (Proverbs 2:6\) and actually begins with reverence for the Lord (1:7\).
Secular theories of ethics place a great amount of importance on happiness. Not giddy joy, but well\-being and a fulfilled life. The pursuit of *eudaimonia* implies that the good life is necessary for a virtuous character. The Bible says otherwise. Romans 5:3–5 says, “We also exult in our tribulations, knowing that tribulation brings about perseverance; and perseverance, proven character; and proven character, hope; and hope does not disappoint, because the love of God has been poured out within our hearts through the Holy Spirit who was given to us.” In other words, trials develop virtue. Jesus said, “In the world you will have tribulation” (John 16:33\), and maybe that’s a good thing, if the hard times are what God uses to build our character. We can never be completely virtuous, and we cannot develop a virtuous character on our own (Hebrews 10:10\). But virtue ethics is not far off when it says ethical behavior flows from a virtuous character. As Luke 6:43–45 says,
*For there is no good tree which produces bad fruit, nor, on the other hand, a bad tree which produces good fruit. For each tree is known by its own fruit. For men do not gather figs from thorns, nor do they pick grapes from a briar bush. The good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth what is good; and the evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth what is evil; for his mouth speaks from that which fills his heart.*
|
Does God killing people make Him a murderer?
|
Answer
The Old Testament records God killing multitudes of people, and some people want to believe this makes Him a murderer. The misconception that “killing” and “murder” are synonymous is partially based on the King James mistranslation of the sixth commandment, which reads, “Thou shalt not kill” (Exodus 20:13\). However, the word *kill* is a translation of the Hebrew word *ratsach*, which nearly always refers to intentional killing without cause. The correct rendering of this word is “murder,” and all modern translations render the command as “You shall not murder.” The Bible in Basic English best conveys its meaning: “Do not put anyone to death without cause.”
It is true that God has intentionally killed many people. (God never “accidentally” does anything.) In fact, the Bible records that He literally wiped out entire nations including women, children, cattle, etc. In addition to that, God killed every living creature upon the face of the earth with the exception of eight people and the animals on the ark (Genesis 7:21\-23; 1 Peter 3:20\). Does this make Him a murderer?
As already stated, to kill and to murder are different things. Murder is “the premeditated, unlawful taking of a life,” whereas killing is, more generally, “the taking of a life.” The same Law that forbids murder permits killing in self\-defense (Exodus 22:2\).
In order for God to commit murder, He would have to act “unlawfully.” We must recognize that God is God. “His works are perfect, and all His ways are just. A faithful God who does no wrong, upright and just is He” (Deuteronomy 32:4; see also Psalm 11:7; 90:9\). He created man and expects obedience (Exodus 20:4\-6; Exodus 23:21; 2 John 1:6\). When man takes it upon himself to disobey God, he faces God’s wrath (Exodus 19:5; Exodus 23:21\-22; Leviticus 26:14\-18\). Furthermore, “God is a just judge, and God is angry with the wicked every day. If \[man] does not turn back, He will sharpen His sword; He bends His bow and makes it ready” (Psalm 7:11\-12\).
Some would argue that executing the innocent *is* murder; thus, when God wipes out whole cities, He is committing murder. However, nowhere in Scripture can we find where God killed “innocent” people. In fact, compared to God’s holiness, there is no such thing as an “innocent” person. All have sinned (Romans 3:23\), and the penalty for sin is death (Romans 6:23a). God has “just cause” to wipe us all out; the fact that He doesn’t is proof of His mercy.
When God chose to destroy all mankind in the Flood, He was totally justified in doing so: “Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually” (Genesis 6:5\).
During the conquest of Canaan, God ordered the complete destruction of entire cities and nations: “But of the cities of these peoples which the LORD your God gives you as an inheritance, you shall let nothing that breathes remain alive, but you shall utterly destroy them: the Hittite and the Amorite and the Canaanite and the Perizzite and the Hivite and the Jebusite, just as the LORD your God has commanded you” (Deuteronomy 20:16\-17\).
Why did God give such a command? Israel was God’s instrument of judgment against the Canaanites, who were evil, almost beyond what we can imagine today: “Every abomination to the LORD which He hates they have done to their gods; for they burn even their sons and daughters in the fire to their gods” (Deuteronomy 12:31\). Their utter annihilation was commanded to prevent Israel from following their ways: “Lest they teach you to do according to all their abominations which they have done for their gods, and you sin against the LORD your God” (Deuteronomy 20:18; also Deuteronomy 12:29\-30\).
Even in the dire judgments of the Old Testament, God offered mercy. For example, when God was about to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah, God promised Abraham that He would spare the whole city in order to save ten righteous people there. Though God did destroy those cities (ten righteous people could not be found), He saved “righteous Lot” and his family (Genesis 18:32; Genesis 19:15; 2 Peter 2:7\). Later, God destroyed Jericho, but He saved Rahab the harlot and her family in response to Rahab’s faith (Joshua 6:25; Hebrews 11:31\). Until the final judgment, there is always mercy to be found.
Every person dies in God’s own time (Hebrews 9:27; Genesis 3:19\). Jesus holds the keys of death (Revelation 1:18\). Does the fact that everyone experiences physical death make God a “killer”? In the sense that He *could* prevent all death, yes. He allows us to die. But He is no murderer. Death is part of the human experience because we brought it into the world ourselves (Romans 5:12\). One day, as John Donne put it, “Death shall be no more; death, thou shalt die.” God, in His grace, has conquered death for those who are in Christ, and one day that truth will be fully realized: “The last enemy to be subdued and abolished is death” (1 Corinthians 15:26\).
God is faithful to His word. He will destroy the wicked, and He holds “the unrighteous for the day of judgment, while continuing their punishment” (2 Peter 2:9\). But He has also promised that “the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 6:23b).
|
What is consequentialist ethics / consequentialism?
|
Answer
Consequentialism is a theory of [normative ethics](normative-ethics.html). It holds that an act is only moral or ethical if it results in a good conclusion. This is in contrast to deontology, which teaches morality is based on duty; virtue ethics, which holds that morality is based on a good character; and ethical relativism, which asserts morality is based on whatever you want it to be based on.
Consequentialism is a slippery theory and has led to a great many arguments about the specifics. After all, a person can "aim" his actions with the intent of causing a specific result, but the outcome is out of his hands, for the most part. Are we to believe that *every* moral action must be followed by a good outcome in order to be considered truly “moral”? What if someone fights nobly for a good cause, but fails in the end? Are the goodness of the cause and the nobility of the fight negated by a bad outcome?
If morality is based on “a good consequence,” then we must ask, "What is ‘good’?" Which is better, to gain pleasure or avoid harm? What is more important, filling a need or filling a preference? The secular worldview can give no clear answer.
To try to narrow down the definition of “good,” philosophers also discuss the question "good for whom?" A leaky roof is a burden for a homeowner but good for the roofer. A college acceptance letter means another student was rejected. Would it be better to improve the welfare of the acting agent or a bystander? Or society at large?
Some consequentialists admit that the *intention* of the acting agent may have something to do with the morality of the act. But then we must determine who has the authority to judge whether the intention was appropriately considered—the acting agent? a neutral third party? a system of laws? "Actual" consequentialists dismiss the entire discussion of the “almost” consequentialists and insist that morality is based solely on the actual effect; "almost" only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades.
The Bible speaks of consequentialism, but not by name, and not in the way that secular philosophy considers. The Bible says people ought to act morally; that is, they should follow God’s law and the guiding of His Spirit in their hearts. And the Bible also teaches a certain end effect of morality.
Consequentialism in God’s economy comes in the form of *telos*. *Telos* means "purpose," and it informs all of God’s laws. His Word is not arbitrary. The entire history of mankind is filled with the story of God’s purposes for us.
"This book of the law shall not depart from your mouth, but you shall meditate on it day and night, so that you may be careful to do according to all that is written in it; for then you will make your way prosperous, and then you will have success" (Joshua 1:8\).
“‘For I know the plans that I have for you,’ declares the LORD, ‘plans for welfare and not for calamity to give you a future and a hope’" (Jeremiah 29:11\).
"Those who love Your law have great peace, and nothing causes them to stumble" (Psalm 119:165\).
Morality does have a consequence, and it should inform our decision to perform moral acts. But the consequences are not some nebulous, unknowable, uncontrollable happenstance. God created morality for a purpose: "Nevertheless the righteous will hold to his way, and he who has clean hands will grow stronger and stronger" (Job 17:9\).
|
What is deontological ethics / deontology?
|
Answer
Deontology or deontological ethics is the study of moral duty and is one of the major categories of [normative ethics](normative-ethics.html). It teaches that ethical behavior starts with an established, defined duty. An act, then, is ethical if it adheres to duty. There is some discussion, however, as to who dictates duty and whether ethical behavior is based strictly on adherence to rules or if the will of the acting agent has a role.
**Moral absolutism** is unique in secular ethics in that it is the only school of thought that places the standard for morality outside of the judgment of the acting agent. Also, the standard is not dependent on the situation or the outcome of the action. Moral absolutism is based on one of three possible authorities:
*Natural Law* \- Natural law theory is the philosophy that everything in nature is subject to a particular way of acting that will best enable it to fulfill that nature. The law as it applies to humanity is based on human nature and can be determined by carefully considering that universal nature of mankind which is independent of culture and era. Ironically, although natural law is supposedly derived from the universality of human nature, philosophers can’t agree on what the key points of natural law should be. They usually include life, procreation, and some kind of personal fulfillment.
*Contractual Agreements* \- Two of the most basic rules in society are that individuals will not harm each other and individuals will not lie. Contractarianism is the belief that a contract or promise automatically gives moral weight to the actions necessary to fulfill that contract. The "contract" may be a voluntarily agreed\-upon list of obligations or the assumed responsibilities of a citizen in a society.
*Divine Command* \- The divine command theory states that an action’s morality is based on its adherence to the command of God. An act can only be ethical if it obeys God’s law, and the Word of God overrides any other law, custom, or inclination.
**Kantian duty** was developed by [Immanuel Kant](Immanuel-Kant.html), who didn’t feel that fulfilling a duty was a sufficient standard for morality. Kant believed a moral act must be accomplished deliberately and for the specific intent of fulfilling that duty. To accidentally drop a sandwich in front of a beggar or to donate money as a tax write\-off are not ethical acts—the first because it was not deliberate, the second because it was not done with [altruistic](Bible-altruism.html) motives.
Philosophers have also added qualifiers to deontology. *Contemporary Deontology* teaches that, even if an act is performed out of duty, it cannot be ethical if it causes harm to another—unless that harm will bring about a greater good. The *Non\-Aggression Principle* is similar, insisting that violence is only allowed in self\-defense.
What deontological ethics does right is that it takes the standard of morality out of humanity’s hands and places it in something with absolute authority. Unfortunately, deontologists then argue about the source of that authority. The Bible is clear: God created us with the purpose of having communion with Him (John 15:14\-15\). To that end, He has given us standards that will lead us into fulfilling our purpose. "Morals" and "ethics" are human words for godly righteousness that reflects the character of God while recognizing His sovereignty and glory. The categories of deontology are just snapshots of God’s rule.
Biblically, the whole concept of obedience out of duty is a little off\-center. The Bible doesn’t give duty as the motivation for right behavior. Exodus 20:6; Deuteronomy 5:10; Joshua 22:5; John 14:15; 2 John 1:6 and eleven other verses associate *love for God* with obedience. Righteousness, then, isn’t about duty or obligation; it’s an expression of our love for God.
Still, there are similarities between biblical teaching and deontological ethics. Natural law theory allows for God placing His law in our hearts. Romans 2:14\-15 says, "For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them..." However, five chapters later, Paul states that human nature alone cannot lead us to obey God’s rule: "For I joyfully concur with the law of God in the inner man, but I see a different law in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin which is in my members" (Romans 7:22\-23\). Relying on conscience or instinct can only take us so far in determining what is good. Natural law is insufficient. We must go directly to God and His Word to get the full picture (Psalm 25:4\).
The Bible also contains shades of contractarianism. Numbers 30:2 says, "If a man makes a vow to the LORD, or takes an oath to bind himself with a binding obligation, he shall not violate his word; he shall do according to all that proceeds out of his mouth." And Romans 13:1\-7 admonishes us to obey the civil authorities, pointing out that the authorities are there to make sure society acts ethically. So, Christians are obliged to be good citizens. The Bible also condemns foolish oaths. Leviticus 5:4 says a person who swears an oath without thinking about the consequences is still responsible for the outcome. Instead, Jesus suggests we embody such good character that we won’t need to make oaths (Matthew 5:33\-37\).
The Bible definitely supports the idea behind divine command theory. The Logos—the logical Word—created the world; John 1:3 says, "All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being." This same Creator has revealed His law to us: “He has showed you, O man, what is good. And what does the LORD require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God” (Micah 6:8\). We have the promise of wisdom for the asking (James 1:5\) and Scripture, which is "God\-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work" (2 Timothy 3:16\).
The Bible also supports Kant’s inclusion of motive as part of the moral standard. Mark 12:41\-44 tells the story of the widow who gave her last coins to the temple treasury. Jesus praised her for the spirit of her sacrifice. Deuteronomy 30:2 encourages God\-followers to "return to the LORD your God and obey Him with all your heart and soul according to all that I command you today." To “return” and offer heartfelt obedience would require a deliberate act of the will. This doesn’t mean that every moral act needs to be intentional, however. Luke 6:43\-45 suggests that ethical acts arise from the natural behavior of a virtuous person. It’s unlikely that such a person would be cognizant of every one of God’s laws he obeys throughout the course of a day.
Deontology is one of several theories of ethics that attempt to narrow the definition of an ethical act into secular, humanistic terms. This doesn’t work because "good" and "right" and moral value cannot come from fickle, fallen mankind without absorbing the qualities of fickleness and fallenness. Fortunately, we don’t have to rely on ourselves; God has told us what is good, and the righteousness of Christ is the standard of all morality.
|
What is ethical relativism?
|
Answer
The term "ethical relativism" encompasses a number of different beliefs, but they all agree that there are no universal, permanent criteria to determine what may or may not be an ethical act. God granted no divine command, and human nature displays no common law. Consequences have no bearing because each person or society may interpret the “rightness” of each consequence differently.
Ethical relativism teaches that a society’s ethics evolve over time and change to fit circumstances. *Ethics* refers to a corporate determination of what is right or appropriate versus what is wrong or inappropriate. This is as opposed to *morals*, which refers to an individual’s determination of right and wrong. Morality and ethics do not always align; someone may consider it morally wrong to eat meat but also believe it is unethical for a government to force others to be vegetarian. Or a parent may agree with the state’s law that prohibits underage drinking but may allow his own child to take a sip of champagne at a family function.
There are several facets of ethical relativism, which states that universal truth is either a myth or impossible to determine, but at the same time admits that ethical behavior does exist. The various views within ethical relativism stem from different opinions on whether ethics are based on culture, careful analysis of the world, or personal opinion.
**CULTURAL RELATIVISM**
[Cultural relativism](cultural-relativism.html) is often held by anthropologists who want to analyze a culture without bringing in their own biases. Cultural relativism says that "right" and "wrong" should only be considered within the context of the culture and environmental influences of a society. If a society says something is good, then it is good for them. Cultural relativism does not judge any given system of ethics.
Cultural relativism leads some anthropologists to decry missionary activity among indigenous peoples. The thinking is that a culture should be left undisturbed and that evangelizing a lost tribe is tantamount to destroying the culture. Some will even defend practices such as cannibalism and headhunting in the name of cultural relativism—who are we to say that another culture is wrong? We don’t eat people, and they do; it’s all relative.
The Bible allows for differences in culture. In Acts 15:19\-20, James exhorted the Jewish believers in the church to stop loading unnecessary burdens on the new Gentile converts. The Gentiles did not have to give up their cultural identity and become “Jewish.” In Christ, they were all one. “For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile \- the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him” (Romans 10:12\). At the same time, the Bible presents a standard of righteousness that extends to all cultures, everywhere. Murder is always wrong, even if a particular culture says it isn’t. So, there may be aspects of a culture which can be embraced and even celebrated by a believer in Christ, and there are other aspects which need to be abandoned (if the Bible calls them sinful). Culture does not dictate truth; God does.
**[PRAGMATIC ETHICS](pragmatic-ethics.html)**
Pragmatism is the belief that the “rightness” of an action is determined by the practical consequences of that action. Pragmatism asks the question “Does it work?” Pragmatic ethics says that, if something “works” for society, then it is good. And ethics need to change as new discoveries are made and logical theories are put into practice. Prohibition is a classic example. American society went from accepting alcohol to making it illegal to accepting it again. Banning alcohol was found to be impractical, so the ethics of the nation changed. Currently, laws such as legalizing marijuana and gay marriage are passing in states which not so long ago would never have considered such things. At the same time, medical discoveries have put more and more pressure on the tobacco industry. Changes in law reflect changes in perception of what will be best for the society at large as well as what is practical.
Self\-adjustment of a society’s ethics is normal—clothing styles, which reflect ethics, have changed many, many times in the last hundred years. And it’s good for a culture to correct its ethics, as the West has done with slavery. The Bible records how the ethics of Jewish Christians changed when Peter discovered that the church is free from Jewish kosher laws (Acts 10:9\-15\).
But ethics without a firm foundation are useless for anything other than reflecting the beliefs of a particular people group at a certain time. God calls us to know the truth (John 8:32\) and worship Him in truth (John 4:24\). It is foolish to base choices of right and wrong only on pragmatism. The easiest way to do something may be efficient and therefore pragmatic, but the easiest way may not be the best way. Also, trying to determine morality based on consequences is unwise. For one thing, we cannot foresee all the results of an action; we can only guess. Only God knows the end from the beginning (Isaiah 46:10\). For another thing, some good actions may have a bad result, and vice versa. What of the bank robber who is never caught? Is his crime “right” because he experienced the “good result” of becoming rich? Or what of the fireman who dies rescuing a child? Is his sacrifice “wrong” because it had the “impractical” result of his death? Consequences do not define truth; Scripture does.
**MORAL RELATIVISM**
[Moral relativism](moral-relativism.html) basically says that the morality of an act depends entirely on the opinion of the acting agent. So, each individual has the right to determine morality for himself. Of course, with seven billion opinions as to what is "moral," morality quickly loses its significance altogether.
Proverbs 16:25 says, "There is a way which seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." Moral relativism—the way that seems right to a man—leads to death. The period of the judges in the Old Testament was one of the most chaotic, tumultuous times in the history of Israel. The reason for the chaos is stated explicitly: “In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as he saw fit” (Judges 17:6; 21:25\). In other words, it was a time of rampant moral relativism. With no established authority, each individual became a law unto himself. The sad results are documented in Judges, especially chapters 17\-21\. Individuals do not decide truth; God does.
But believers are still called to make judgment calls, and for that we need wisdom (Proverbs 3:13\). Hebrews 5:12\-14 says that spiritual maturity leads us to "discern good and evil." This does not mean that we judge morality by our own opinion. It means we judge it based on God’s Word that lives in us (Hebrews 4:12\).
Grounding ethics in God’s Word will ensure their relevance beyond the lifespan of the host culture. Ethics should be more than an indicator of a society’s present personality. They should reflect God’s eternal wisdom in guiding how we can live together and honor Him. Ethics based on human wisdom are foolish, fickle, and fleeting (Proverbs 14:12\). When humanity fell, the standards by which we live also fell. We "exchanged the truth of God for a lie" (Romans 1:25\). But God’s Word doesn’t change (1 Peter 1:24\-25\).
|
What is the Jesus drug (dimethyltryptamine)?
|
Answer
Dimethyltryptamine, also known as DMT, is a naturally occurring psychedelic compound. Like other psychedelic drugs, when ingested, dimethyltryptamine produces “trips” or hallucinations. What is unique about dimethyltryptamine is that the hallucinations it produces are remarkably consistent. People who take dimethyltryptamine as a psychedelic drug consistently report clear, detailed visions of encounters with strange beings in another dimension. Depending on the person’s worldview, the beings are identified as either aliens or angels/demons. Visions like these also occur with other psychedelic drugs, but with nowhere near the consistency of dimethyltryptamine.
Why is dimethyltryptamine referred to as the “Jesus drug” or the “God drug”? For at least two reasons: (1\) some people who have taken dimethyltryptamine believe they encountered God and/or Jesus during their hallucinogenic vision, and (2\) after experiencing a DMT\-induced vision, some people have drastically changed their lives. Some even appear to have become dedicated Christians, crediting a dimethyltryptamine “trip” with opening their eyes to spiritual realities. So, is there any truth to this “Jesus drug” phenomenon?
The physical and spiritual aspects of human beings are closely intertwined. The spiritual impacts the physical and vice\-versa. It is possible that a psychedelic drug such as dimethyltryptamine could temporarily give a person greater access to the spiritual world. God’s strong warnings about sorcery ([*pharmakeia*](pharmakeia-in-the-Bible.html)), mediums, witchcraft, etc., make it clear that such activities do indeed have spiritual implications (Leviticus 19:31; Galatians 5:20; Revelation 9:21\). Contacting the spirit world through psychedelic drugs and/or sorcery appears to be possible; therefore, God strictly prohibits it.
What about the “positive” effects of some dimethyltryptamine experiences? It is strange that participating in something God forbids would result in a person coming to God through faith in Jesus. If it has happened, it is only because God intervened and overruled the effects of the drug. But it would definitely be a case of the ends *not* justifying the means.
Yes, we should be aware of the spiritual reality that surrounds us. However, using the “Jesus drug” or any other drug is not the proper method of spiritual growth and awareness. A psychedelic “trip” is not the path to God. Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life (John 14:6\), and God’s Word is the light for our path (Psalm 119:105\).
|
What is the Christian community?
|
Answer
People often refer to the “Christian community,” but what is it? The term can encompass all Christians in general: people sometimes speak of the “Christian community” as a particular demographic, akin to the “rural demographic” or the “college\-educated demographic.” Other times, *Christian community* can refer to a formal denomination or the following of a particular Christian leader. *Christian community* can also refer to the camaraderie of Christians who fellowship together and have relationships with one another. Based on their shared attitudes and beliefs, Christians feel a sense of “community” with each other.
For some, “the Christian community” refers to networks of churches or Christian organizations. Others view megachurch pastors, bestselling authors, musicians, or other Christian celebrities as voices of the Christian community. The media often promotes this perspective, quoting a well\-known pastor, for example, as if he speaks for all Christians.
The Bible’s original word for “[church](what-is-the-church.html)” is *ekklesia*, Greek for “called\-out assembly” or “gathering.” This word took on the meaning of “all Christians” in some contexts and of “local gatherings of believers” in other places. When a person trusts in Jesus for salvation, he or she becomes part of the universal body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12:27\). Smaller groups of believers come together in [local churches](universal-local-church.html) to worship God, to grow in their understanding of God’s Word, and to live out their lives in Christ in community.
Acts 2:42–47 reveals that the original “Christian community” was known primarily for its devotion to the apostles’ teachings, to fellowship, to prayer, and to loving one another. Jesus Himself had promoted this sense of community: “By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another” (John 13:35\). A Christian community is marked by the way people treat each other, and the local church should strive to model Christlike attitudes.
The Bible instructs believers on how a Christian community can love one another (1 John 4:12\). Believers are called to encourage one another (Hebrews 3:13\), “spur” one another to love and good works (Hebrews 10:24\), serve one another (Galatians 5:13\), instruct one another (Romans 15:14\), honor one another (Romans 12:10\), be patient with one another and forgive one another (Ephesians 4:32\), bear one another’s burdens (Galatians 6:2\), and speak the truth to one another (Ephesians 4:25\). The local church is the place where the Christian community can put these callings into practice.
Simply put, the Christian community is composed of those who love Jesus and [fellowship](Christian-fellowship.html) with each other. When the world sees the church in action, they should see the true love of Jesus and perhaps find themselves attracted to Christ, too.
|
Who was Saint Augustine of Hippo in church history?
|
Answer
Saint Augustine was a philosopher and theologian who had a profound effect on both Protestant and Catholic theology. He was born Augustine Aurelius in A.D. 354, in Thagaste (in what is now Algeria), during the Roman occupation of that region. The son of a Christian mother and a pagan father, he developed a strong interest in rhetoric and philosophy, and he left home in his late teens to study in Carthage. Although his childhood had a heavy Christian influence, Augustine did not follow Christian teachings or practices, but rather lived a hedonistic lifestyle. While in Carthage, he associated with other young men who boasted of sexual exploits, and he himself began a long\-term affair with a woman. At the age of 20 or 21, he began to teach rhetoric, and by the age of 30 he was one of the premier academicians in the Latin world, teaching rhetoric at the imperial court in Milan, where he took another lover, having left the first.
While in Carthage, still as a young man, Augustine left the Christian church to follow the Manichaean religion. [Manichaeism](Manichaeism.html) was a syncretistic form of Gnosticism which taught a dualistic view of good and evil. Creation was seen as flawed and under the equal influences of light and darkness. While in Carthage, Augustine began to move away from this school of thought, and he left it entirely while in Milan.
In Milan, at the urging of his mother, Monica, Augustine converted to Christianity and was baptized in A.D. 387\. He subsequently left his teaching position and returned to his native Thagaste where he was ordained into the priesthood, becoming a well\-known preacher. Just a few years after his return, he was ordained as the Bishop of Hippo, in Africa. He lived a mostly monastic life until his death in A.D. 430 at the age of 76\.
Augustine was a prolific writer. He is best known for his *Confessions*, a personal account of his life, and [*City of God*](City-of-God.html), written to encourage Christians after the sack of Rome by the Visigoths in A.D. 410\. He remains one of the most influential thinkers in history. His ideas of memory and the nature of time formed the framework for our modern understanding of those concepts, including the theological idea that God exists outside of time, in eternity.
Augustine, who was himself heavily influenced by the works of Virgil, Cicero, and Aristotle, also exerted an influence on secular philosophers, such as [Kierkegaard](Soren-Kierkegaard.html) and Nietzsche. Also, his works strongly affected the ideologies of such church figures as [Thomas Aquinas](Saint-Thomas-Aquinas.html) and [Bernard of Clairvaux](Bernard-of-Clairvaux.html). Later, Reformation leaders such as [Martin Luther](Martin-Luther.html) and [John Calvin](John-Calvin.html) looked to Augustine for inspiration. Many modern Reformed theologians still look to him as a key source for their own writings. Much of Reformed doctrine, especially in relation to predestination, original sin, the bondage of the will, and [efficacious grace](efficacious-grace.html), has been attributed to the work of Augustine.
Paradoxically, Roman Catholicism has also gleaned much from Augustine’s writings, so much so that he is sometimes called “the Father of Roman Catholicism.” His contributions to Catholic doctrine include the necessity of [infant baptism](infant-baptism.html), the [perpetual virginity of Mary](perpetual-virginity-Mary.html), and the [real presence](real-presence.html) of Christ in the Eucharist. He was never officially canonized but was accepted as a saint early on by consensus. He is considered the patron saint of brewers, printers, theologians, and those with sore eyes. Catholics observe August 28 as his feast day.
Among his other influential views, Augustine pioneered the idea of two aspects of the Church: visible and invisible. He also advanced the doctrine of a just war to defend innocents and preserve peace. For both Protestants and Catholics, it is impossible to measure Augustine’s effect on church history.
|
What is pragmatic ethics?
|
Answer
Pragmatic ethics is one of the three main schools under the umbrella of ethical relativism. Ethical relativism teaches that right and wrong, good and bad, are relative to the situation, circumstances, or personal conviction. Cultural relativism is another school of relativism, but it is less an ethical framework than a tool for anthropologists to use to remind themselves that other cultures have different social mores. Moral relativism teaches that morality is merely the following of any ethical framework—one is as good as another. Pragmatic ethics takes a more aggressive approach, insisting that mankind is responsible for determining the best ethical system possible, which will be refined as new discoveries are made.
Pragmatic ethics is the philosophy of ethics most championed by atheists and evolutionists. It combines the worldview of materialism (the supernatural does not exist) with the methodology of science in an attempt to develop a code of behavior for mankind. "Pragmatic" refers to the belief that we should use what works and alter or discard what doesn’t. Pragmatic ethics does hold that absolute/universal truth exists. But it also teaches that the imperfect human intellect will never recognize truth; all we can do is endeavor to get as close as possible. Practically speaking, then, pragmatic ethics is relativistic.
**PRAGMATIC ETHICS \- THE WORLDVIEW**
The worldview of atheistic materialism directly relates to the theory of pragmatic relativism. If everything in the universe is physical and the supernatural does not exist, then the spiritual has no effect on the physical world we experience. This means no God, but it also means no human soul, no afterlife, no thought, no feeling, and no consciousness. If we appear to feel or think something, it is merely a physiological reaction to stimuli.
The philosophical application of this is that humanity’s value, identity, and character have no innate worth and are not imbued by a Creator. We are simply physical beings interacting with the world. We are defined by the effect our actions have on other physical entities. Ethics takes on a great importance, then, since ethics is the standard by which we (should) interact with the world around us.
**PRAGMATIC ETHICS \- THE METHODOLOGY**
Although it isn’t widely known, one of the key beliefs of most scientists is fallibilism. Fallibilism is the stance that mankind is incapable of knowing when we have come upon the truth. The truth may exist, and we may even believe the truth, but we will never know for sure when or if we do. Yet it is still our duty to seek the truth. We do this is by guessing (hypothesizing), experimenting, and then seeing if our guess was correct.
Fallibilism applies to ethics, too. Truth about human behavior may exist—an absolute standard we are meant to follow. But we will never know if we have discovered that truth. And so our duty is to observe and contemplate which actions lead to the best results for humanity. With continued effort and experimentation, we might come closer to knowing how to live.
**PRAGMATIC ETHICS \- THE SHORTFALLS**
Pragmatic relativism doesn’t work for several reasons. First, it purports to strive toward truth while completely rejecting God. God is truth. He is the I AM—the essence of existence. Of course, mankind has done this since the Garden of Eden—searched for truth outside of God. The tragedy of pragmatic relativism is that it acknowledges many biblical truths (e.g., truth does exist, finite humans cannot fully understand truth, and mankind is responsible to live according to a truth we don’t know) while completely ignoring the fact that Truth came down and walked among us (John 1:1; 14:6\). It’s like a lizard lying in a desert, willing to accept that light and heat are realities and knowing that his little lizard brain will never fully understand them, but refusing to believe that there is a sun.
Pragmatism gets some things right, like the fact that ethics and right behavior are directly related to truth. Psalm 15:2 speaks of the man who "walks with integrity, and works righteousness, and speaks truth in his heart." Scripture also agrees that mankind will never discover truth with our limited intellect (called a “darkened understanding” in Ephesians 4:18\). John 14:16\-17 teaches that truth only comes from God: "I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may be with you forever; that is the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see Him or know Him, but you know Him because He abides with you and will be in you." And John 15:26 says we cannot understand the truth about God incarnate without the leading of the Spirit.
But the Bible differs from pragmatic relativism in that God teaches that mankind *can* know truth—with help. Absolute truth exists, and it is knowable. Psalm 51:6 says, "Behold, You desire truth in the innermost being, and in the hidden part You will make me know wisdom." Proverbs 3:3 agrees: "Do not let kindness and truth leave you; bind them around your neck, write them on the tablet of your heart." In addition, we are to worship in truth (John 4:24\), discern truthfulness in our leaders (Matthew 7:15\-20\), and be characterized by truth (John 17:17; Ephesians 6:14\).
Romans 1:18\-32 explains why pragmatists refuse to acknowledge God’s truth. "For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened…For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen" (vs. 21, 25\). When men refuse the truth of God, whether that truth is a warning that forbidden fruit will bring certain death or God’s very existence, they reject God’s sovereignty over them. With God’s guidance flouted, something must take its place—"the creature" of verse 25\. In the case of pragmatic relativists, that "creature" is mankind—the base, physical, material part of man. Not even the heart or soul of man, because that would be too close to God, but arms and legs and neural synapses. The search for truth is futile in their case; 2 Timothy 3:2, 7 says that people who seek truth apart from God are "lovers of self …always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth."
|
What are spirit guides?
|
Answer
If you do an internet search for “spirit guides,” you get a variety of responses, including statements like these:
“Spirit guides are incorporeal beings that are assigned to us before we are born that help nudge and guide us through life.”
“Some may be highly ascended masters (such as Jesus), and others might be your average spirit who just happens to be a master in a certain area.”
“An ancestral guide is one who can claim some sort of kinship with you, such as your dear Aunt Tillie who died when you were ten.”
“A typical spirit guide is archetypical, symbolic or representative of something else.”
“A true spirit guide is an evolved being who has agreed to support your spiritual evolution. Real spirit guides are wise, compassionate and often amusing.”
The general idea is that there exist benevolent spirits who desire to help people or “guide” them through life. Belief in spirit guides is commonly associated with New Age, pagan, and spiritualistic belief systems. The term *spirit guide* is not always used, as they are also called “ascended masters” or “unseen helpers.” Automatic writing, dream states, hypnotism, and meditation are all practices related to spirit guides. Also terms such as *magic circles*, *centering*, *iridology*, *crystals*, *self\-actualization*, and *positive affirmation* are often associated with spirit guides. The goal of contacting a spirit guide is usually to discover some secret wisdom and rise to a higher level of consciousness.
Despite the claims of New Age practitioners, spirit guides are anything but benevolent. They are not the spirits of dear, departed loved ones, nor are they ascended masters who have crossed over some mystical plane. They are what the Bible calls “[familiar spirits](familiar-spirits.html)” (Leviticus 20:27, NKJV). They don’t announce their evil nature but portray themselves as beneficial. Second Corinthians 11:14–15 says, “Even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. So it is no surprise if his servants, also, disguise themselves as servants of righteousness.” Satan’s lies are most effective when they look and sound like the truth, when they seem helpful. Spirit guides are actually demonic spirits who masquerade as helpers in order to trap and destroy people with false teachings and occult practices.
According to spirit guides, man’s purpose is to be transformed through spiritual awareness, realize his inner divinity, and connect with the cosmos. According to the Bible, man’s purpose is to glorify God and be conformed to His image. Spiritualism teaches that man is inherently good, with unlimited potential for power and advancement. The Bible says that man is inherently sinful, and no one is truly good. Spirit guides assert that truth is relative and there are many paths to God. The Bible declares that God is truth, and Jesus Christ is the only way to a right relationship with Him. Spirit guides represent a worldview that is diametrically opposed to what the Bible says.
In the Bible, God warned His people repeatedly about the dangers of dabbling in the spirit world. Leviticus 19:31 says, “Give no regard to mediums and familiar spirits; do not seek after them, to be defiled by them.” Deuteronomy 18:11–12 says that those who consult with familiar spirits are an abomination to God. In 1 Chronicles 10:13 we read that King Saul died because he “asked counsel of one that had a familiar spirit, to enquire of it; and enquired not of the Lord.” We are told in 1 John 4:1, “Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world.”
How do you escape these spiritual enemies? By resisting them through faith in God (James 4:7\). God is greater than any spirit (1 John 4:4\), and He alone is able to deliver from their power. Jesus exercised authority over unclean spirits, commanding them to come out of people (Matthew 17:18; Mark 5:8–9\), and they had to obey. Paul wrote in Ephesians 6:10–18 that we must put on God’s armor and use His strength to battle our spiritual enemies. This can only be done by someone who has received God’s salvation through Jesus Christ. Confession and repentance is the starting point. “If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness” (1 John 1:9\).
|
What does it mean to kick against the pricks?
|
Answer
“It is hard for you to kick against the pricks” was a Greek proverb, but it was also familiar to the Jews and anyone who made a living in agriculture. An [ox goad](oxgoad-Bible.html) was a stick with a pointed piece of iron on its tip used to prod the oxen when plowing. The farmer would prick the animal to steer it in the right direction. Sometimes the animal would rebel by kicking out at the prick, and this would result in the prick being driven even further into its flesh. In essence, the more an ox rebelled, the more it suffered. Thus, Jesus’ words to Saul on the road to Damascus: “It is hard for you to kick against the pricks.”
Of the better\-known Bible translations, the actual phrase “kick against the pricks” is found only in the King James Version. It is mentioned only twice, in Acts 9:5 and Acts 26:14\. The apostle Paul (then known as Saul) was on his way to Damascus to persecute the Christians when he had a blinding encounter with Jesus. Luke records the event: “And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? It is hard for thee to kick against the pricks” (Acts 26:14 KJV). Modern translations have changed the word *pricks* to *goads*. All translations except the KJV and NKJV, omit the phrase altogether from Acts 9:5\.
The conversion of Saul is quite significant as it was the turning point in his life. Paul later wrote nearly half of the books of the New Testament.
Jesus took control of Paul and let him know his rebellion against God was a losing battle. Paul’s actions were as senseless as an ox kicking “against the goads.” Paul had passion and sincerity in his fight against Christianity, but he was not heading in the direction God wanted him to go. Jesus was going to goad (“direct” or “steer”) Paul in the right direction.
There is a powerful lesson in the ancient Greek proverb. We, too, find it hard to kick against the goads. Solomon wrote, “Stern discipline awaits him who leaves the path” (Proverbs 15:10\). When we choose to disobey God, we become like the rebellious ox—driving the goad deeper and deeper. “The way of the unfaithful is hard” (Proverbs 13:15\). How much better to heed God’s voice, to listen to the pangs of conscience! By resisting God’s authority we are only punishing ourselves.
|
What is Nibiru?
|
Answer
Nibiru is the name given to a large planetary object that is supposedly going to crash into Earth at some point in the not\-so\-distant future. This event is commonly known as the Nibiru cataclysm. Some link the idea of Nibiru with the Mayan calendar’s “reset” date of December 21, 2012\. Some believe Nibiru is what the Bible refers to as “Wormwood” (Revelation 8:10\-11\). Is there any truth to the Nibiru cataclysm / end of the world theory?
First, we’ll look at Revelation 8:10\-11, since this passage is cited by some believers in the Nibiru cataclysm. It reads, “The third angel sounded his trumpet, and a great star, blazing like a torch, fell from the sky on a third of the rivers and on the springs of water—the name of the star is Wormwood. A third of the waters turned bitter, and many people died from the waters that had become bitter.” Many Bible interpreters believe this passage refers to some kind of interplanetary object, likely a meteor or comet, crashing into Earth. While this sounds similar to the Nibiru idea, the object the Bible describes is much smaller. If a planet\-sized object were to crash into Earth, it would do far more than poison the waters. It would very likely destroy the entire planet. So, no, what the Bible refers to as “Wormwood” is not the same thing as Nibiru.
All reputable astronomers and planetary scientists dismiss the idea of a planet\-sized object crashing into Earth in the foreseeable future. While ancient Babylonian mythology contains some parallels to the Nibiru concept, the modern Nibiru theory was invented by a woman in the 1990s after she was supposedly contacted by extraterrestrials called Zetas. She has since predicted the arrival of Nibiru multiple times. As each of her cataclysmic predictions fails to occur, she simply adjusts the date. The origin of the Nibiru theory is yet another reason to reject it.
The idea of a Nibiru cataclysm is not supported by the Bible or by science. Like the Mayan prophecy and other end\-of\-the\-world theories, the Nibiru idea is a result of irrational fear and biblical ignorance. The Bible gives a great deal of information about what will happen in the end times. While the idea of a space object crashing into Earth has biblical support, the Bible also makes it clear that the world will not end due to Nibiru or anything else impacting Earth. The world will end when God makes all things new: “Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away…” (Revelation 21:1\).
|
What is the philosophy of ethics?
|
Answer
The philosophy of ethics is the study of the nature of the cosmos and the proper response of humanity to that nature. Philosophers analyze metaphysical theory, such as the existence of God, the responsibility of people to others, and the influence of biological impulses, and they try to determine what gives authority to morality and what ethical behavior looks like. "Ethics" usually refers to the actions of a group, and "morality" of an individual, but the two words are often used interchangeably.
In its investigation of ethical actions, the philosophy of ethics is divided into three main branches. *Metaethics* discusses the nature and origin of ethics. *Normative ethics* tries to develop frameworks by which actions can be judged. And *applied ethics* sets standards of behavior for different applications.
**METAETHICS**
[Metaethics](metaethics.html) is the most esoteric and least practical branch of the philosophy of ethics. It is the study of ethics itself. What’s important in metaethics is not “what is ethical?” but “what is ethics?” It debates the use of language in ethics, what gives ethics authority, and whether ethics actually exist.
*Metaethical Language*
Philosophers admit that the sentence structure that describes a *moral* characteristic is essentially the same as the structure that describes a *physical* characteristic. "Violence is wrong" sounds the same as "bananas are yellow." Cognitivism teaches that the sentences sound alike because they are alike; both articulate an understanding of reality. Ethics do exist, and we can use language to describe them (although the view expressed may be mistaken—violence may be acceptable, and the banana may be purple). Non\-cognitivists say that descriptive moral statements do not describe real moral characteristics because morality does not exist. Instead, these statements express the feelings or wishes of the speaker.
*Discovery of Ethics*
If ethics do exist, how do we determine what is ethical? Some say through intuition. Others, through careful consideration of the human condition. Still others insist we learn morality through divine revelation.
*Authority of Ethics*
Who is it that determines what is moral? "Mind\-dependence" teaches that ethics is created by thought—whether of man or of God. Realists say that all ethical acts can be reduced to a physical truth about the universe, independent of man and God.
*Subjectivity and Universality*
If morality gets its authority from a person or a group of people, then it follows that ethics are subjective—they can change for the situation or individual. If, however, morality gets its authority from the natural world or a supernatural force, then all of mankind is subject to the same law, and ethics are universal.
**NORMATIVE ETHICS**
[Normative ethics](normative-ethics.html) is more practical than metaethics. It seeks to use truth and reality to develop a framework by which an act can be analyzed and judged as either ethical or unethical. Normative ethics is not usually used as a personal pre\-determinant for action. It’s a tool to identify the morality of actions.
*Deontology*
[Deontology](deontology.html) says that an act is moral if it follows a law or rule. It could be natural law—universally binding upon all humans by virtue of their existence in the cosmos. The law could be a contract that was entered into willingly. Or the law could be the word of God. Kantian ethics, developed by [Immanuel Kant](Immanuel-Kant.html), insists that it is not enough to follow a law. One must do so willingly and with good intentions.
*Consequentialism*
[Consequentialism](consequentialism.html) says an act is good if it results in a good situation. An act is bad if it results in a bad situation. Consequentialists then try to determine what a "good situation" actually entails, who should benefit from the good, who should determine the good, and the relevancy of good intentions.
*Ethical Relativism*
[Ethical relativism](ethical-relativism.html) disagrees with deontology, saying ethics are not universal. It also disagrees with consequentialism, insisting that merely striving for a "good" outcome is not actually helpful in determining how to act. Instead, ethical relativism says that morality is different for different people, cultures, and situations. What’s right in one situation may not be right in another.
*Virtue Ethics*
Aristotle and many of the ancient Greeks thought it best to take our eyes off the action and place them on the acting agent. [Virtue ethics](virtue-ethics.html) says that an act is good if it is performed by a virtuous person. If someone has a good character, wisdom about the world, and a fulfilled life, he will naturally act ethically in all he does.
**APPLIED ETHICS**
[Applied](applied-ethics.html) ethics is the most practical of the branches of ethics. It is ethical theory applied to different fields of human interest. Careful consideration is given to the work people do and the situations in which they find themselves. The result is a list of standards to follow.
*Fields of Applied Ethics*
The fields of applied ethics are fluid, changing depending on the philosopher and the times. Business ethics tries to balance corporate health with employee rights and community interest. Professional ethics compares the needs of the professional with the needs of the client. Biomedical ethics considers such issues as euthanasia, living wills, and universal health care. Organizational ethics shows what a group values beyond the requirements of law. [Social ethics](social-ethics.html) debates whether people are primarily citizens of their nation or citizens of the world. Environmental ethics tries to balance the needs of the environment with the wants and needs of mankind. Sexual ethics considers homosexuality, polygamy, and prostitution. Cybernetics is a relatively new field, investigating the ethical repercussions of information propagation and the internet.
*Decision Ethics*
When a rule or law does not address a situation, we need a method to determine how we should act. Normative decision ethics suggests we choose a normative school and apply that to our actions. Ethical characteristics method says to decide which virtue is most important to us, and let that virtue inform us. Casuistry says to compare our situation with another and use that as guidance.
**BIBLICAL ETHICS**
Much of the Bible is the story of God’s work in human history and our response. The correct response to God’s work is biblical ethics.
*Biblical Metaethics*
The Bible is clear that language is meant to express truth (Proverbs 12:17\). It also says that Scripture tells us what is ethical (2 Timothy 3:16\-17\) and that morality is universal (Matthew 5:17\-18\).
*Biblical Normative Ethics*
The Bible doesn’t talk about relativity, but it does distinguish between ethics and the practical laws used in different circumstances to fulfill those ethics. An ethic would be to love others (Mark 12:30\). A law that expresses that ethic would be to not steal (Exodus 20:15\). In addition, we are to develop such a character that ethical behavior comes naturally (John 16:13\)—shades of virtue ethics. Consequentialism comes into play not so much because we are to aim for a good outcome, but because the laws God gives us are informed by His good intentions for us (Joshua 1:8\).
*Biblical Applied Ethics*
The Bible does address proper behavior in different human fields. Much of Leviticus is dedicated to the practical application of ethics. And the New Testament covers both normative schools (2 Timothy 3:16\), ethical character (1 Corinthians 13:12\), and casuistry (all of Jesus’ parables).
In considering the philosophy of ethics, Ecclesiastes 12:11\-14 might apply:
*The words of the wise are like goads, their collected sayings like firmly embedded nails—given by one shepherd. Be warned, my son, of anything in addition to them. Of making many books there is no end, and much study wearies the body.
Now all has been heard; here is the conclusion of the matter: Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the duty of all mankind. For God will bring every deed into judgment, including every hidden thing, whether it is good or evil.*
|
What is metaethics?
|
Answer
There are three main divisions in the philosophy of ethics. [Applied ethics](applied-ethics.html) is the most practical—it identifies wrong and right actions in various fields of human interest. [Normative ethics](normative-ethics.html) doesn’t speak to specific actions, but it does try to develop a working framework by which actions can be deemed ethical or unethical. Metaethics is the study of ethics itself. It delves into the language, nature, motivation, and source of morality.
The two main schools of metaethics are cognitivism and non\-cognitivism. Cognitivism studies the language of ethics. A statement that describes a moral characteristic (“war is bad”) has the same sentence structure as a statement about an object’s physical characteristics (“trees are leafy”). Cognitivism claims that this similarity is valid, because moral statements do describe moral conditions of things (although the judgment expressed in the statement may be wrong—war may not be bad, trees may have lost their leaves). Non\-cognitivism insists that moral statements cannot describe true characteristics, because morality isn’t real. There is no [moral truth](moral-truth.html) to which language can refer. So, however much like a physical description it may resemble, a moral statement can only express emotion, preference, or some other subjective viewpoint.
Cognitivism has further divisions. Given that language can describe real moral qualities (even if those qualities are in error), what is the nature of morality? Is it objective or subjective? Moral realism asserts that morality is real and objective. Moral statements are not based on opinion, and they either can be reduced to a simple fact about the natural world or are given to us by a supernatural being or force. Anti\-realism rejects this theory, saying that morality is mind\-dependent—it is given value by the choice of a mind. That mind may be an individual, as in individual subjectivism; an entire society, as in cultural relativism; or God, as in Divine Command Theory.
Non\-cognitivism also gives several options. If moral statements do not communicate a real quality of an action, then what are they? Emotivism says they are emotions or preferences. Prescriptivism says they are subtle commands, expressing what the speaker wishes to happen in regard to a situation. Norm\-expressivism is like emotivism but insists moral statements represent the feelings of a community. And quasi\-realism teaches that, although moral statements do not express any real quality, it’s best that we pretend they do.
There are many other arguments in metaethics. What drives someone to act ethically in the first place? Are complex ethical qualities like courage as useful as basic qualities like goodness? And how much of reality can our limited intellects really understand? At what point does the desire for hard evidence give way to "it seems right"?
The Bible is actually very specific about the metaethical use of language. In Genesis 1 God spoke, and His words became reality—not wish or preference or hope, but hard rock and fuzzy badgers. And we are not called to wish, we are called to speak truth (Proverbs 12:17; Zechariah 8:16\). God created language to express fact.
Of course, the Bible is equally adamant that morality is objective. Second Kings 17:37 and Matthew 5:17\-18 speak to the permanence of ethics. God gives the law (Exodus 20:1\). Our thoughts are too limited to discern or create ethical concepts (Isaiah 55:9\). Our ways only lead to death (Proverbs 14:12\). We cannot fully know what is right by inferring ethics from nature or intuition; we need the Word of God (2 Timothy 3:16\-17\).
Using human intellect alone to try to determine the nature of language and truth and morality is futile. As Ecclesiastes 12:12\-14 says, "…the writing of many books is endless, and excessive devotion to books is wearying to the body. The conclusion, when all has been heard, is: fear God and keep His commandments, because this applies to every person. For God will bring every act to judgment, everything which is hidden, whether it is good or evil."
|
What is applied ethics?
|
Answer
Applied ethics is the most practical of the three divisions of the philosophy of ethics. The most esoteric is [metaethics](metaethics.html), which is the study of the terms and basis of ethics. The next is [normative ethics](normative-ethics.html), which is the attempt to develop a comprehensive framework against which actions can be judged. Applied ethics is the actual application of ethical theory for the purpose of choosing an ethical action in a given issue.
Applied ethics is usually divided into various fields. *Business ethics* discusses ethical behavior in the corporate world, while *professional ethics* refers directly to a professional in his field. *Biomedical* and *environmental ethics* delve into health, welfare, and the responsibilities we have towards other people and our environment. *Organizational ethics* defines what a group values in relation to its stated goal. *International ethics* tries to determine if a nation’s primary responsibility is to itself as a sovereign entity or to the world community at large. *Sexual ethics* speaks to issues such as homosexuality and polygamy, while *cyberethics* tries to get a handle on issues in the Information Age.
Although these groupings can be convenient, we still need some kind of a judgment system on which to base our actions. *Normative ethics* endeavors to provide frameworks to determine if an act is ethical, but even the most developed theory is not always practical, and the average person is unfamiliar with the different schools, anyway. Another option is to determine which *ethical characteristic* is most valuable. Standard choices are personal welfare, the common good, individual rights, justice and need, and personal virtue. The third method, *casuistry*, compares a current situation to one that has already been analyzed. The more similar the situations, the more likely moral guidance will be found.
The Bible has much to say about how to determine an ethical course of action. Second Timothy 3:16\-17 tells us where to find ethical standards: "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work." Scripture tells us to follow the Holy Spirit’s leading (John 14:26\), obey governing authorities (Romans 13:1\), exemplify the character of God (Galatians 5:22\-23\), and most importantly, love God and love others (Matthew 22:34\-36\).
Although the Bible does not categorize ethics, it does speak to each of the different fields. For instance, the Bible tells businesses to treat both employees and customers fairly (Leviticus 25:43; Proverbs 11:1\). And it speaks to environmental issues in regard to the land (Leviticus 25:3\-5\) and animals (Proverbs 12:10\). Significantly, the Bible prescribes the same behavior in all venues; honesty, for example, is always appropriate. We are expected to follow biblical standards in every situation.
Applied ethics may be the most practical division of the philosophy of ethics, but the study of right and wrong outside of the relevance of God is merely intellectual calisthenics. As Ecclesiastes 12:11\-14 says,
*The words of wise men are like goads, and masters of these collections are like well\-driven nails; they are given by one Shepherd. But beyond this, my son, be warned: the writing of many books is endless, and excessive devotion to books is wearying to the body. The conclusion, when all has been heard, is: fear God and keep His commandments, because this applies to every person. For God will bring every act to judgment, everything which is hidden, whether it is good or evil.*
|
What is a heathen?
|
Answer
The word *heathen* is an older translation of the Hebrew word *goyim* in the Old Testament. The word *goyim* literally meant “nations” and could refer broadly to all the nations of the world. In other contexts, the word was used to distinguish other nations from Israel, the people of God (Joshua 23:7; 1 Kings 11:2\). In such cases, the “heathen” were non\-Jewish idolaters who did not know the one true God.
In the New Testament, the corresponding word is *ethne*, the source of our English word *ethnic*. It is the word used in Matthew 28:19 when Jesus commands His followers to make disciples of all “nations.” He taught that each people group needs to hear the gospel and accept it to receive eternal life.
The word *heathen* is found more than 140 times in the King James Version of the Bible. Through the years, *heathen* has lost its original biblical meaning of “not Jewish.” Today, *heathen* means “pagan” or “unbeliever,” or it is used to describe sinful or irreligious activity in general. Many times, people use the word *heathen* today to refer to the culture of a people, without regard to religion; the word has taken on the connotation of “barbaric” or “uncivilized.” Nations with regressive technology or a lack of economic development, for example, might be considered part of “heathendom.” We are glad to say that modern translations of the Bible use the more accurate rendering “nations” to refer to people groups.
Certainly, God has created all people and loves each person perfectly. In fact, Jesus came to provide the opportunity for salvation for every person of every nation. We are not to view those of other people groups critically or negatively, but with a desire to share the love of Christ with them. In addition, a person can live in a non\-Christian culture yet deeply love Jesus. Many people have come to faith in Jesus in cultures that some would call “heathen.”
Our goal is to share Christ’s love with all the nations (Matthew 28:18\-20\) and to show respect to all, even if they oppose our message. God is in the process of redeeming people from all over the world. John had a glimpse of the multicultural crowd that will be in heaven one day: “There before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and in front of the Lamb. They were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands. And they cried out in a loud voice: ‘Salvation belongs to our God, who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb’” (Revelation 7:9\-10\).
|
I am a new Christian. What is the next step?
|
Answer
Congratulations! If you are a new believer, you have just experienced the beginning of your new, eternal life (John 3:16; 10:10\). Your sins have been forgiven and you have been given a fresh start (Romans 4:7\). You have now been given inexpressible, glorious joy (1 Peter 1:8\-9\).
In addition to the wonderful blessings of knowing Christ, you are probably thinking, “Now what? What is the next step?” The Bible offers some important principles for those who have begun a relationship with God.
**First, as a new Christian, begin reading the Bible.** There are many translations and numerous places to start. While there is no perfect translation, we recommend you choose a Bible that is easy for you to understand and is faithful to the original text of the Bible. To sample some of today’s popular translations, you can go to websites such as BibleGateway.com or YouVersion.com. We recommend that you begin your reading with the Gospel of John or one of the other Gospels to read for yourself what Jesus taught and did during His time on earth. Other articles on GotQuestions.org will help you answer the practical questions you have about God and spiritual issues. The Bible teaches, “Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15\).
**Second, as a new Christian, begin praying.** Prayer is simply talking with God. Many believe prayer must include a formal set of words that can only take place during a church service. However, the Bible teaches us to pray without ceasing (1 Thessalonians 5:17\). We are instructed to praise God day and night. If we desire to know God more deeply, we must communicate with Him regularly.
Throughout each day, you can give thanks to God, ask Him to answer your daily needs, and pray on behalf of others. It’s also important to pray together with others who follow Christ, encouraging each other, praising God, and seeking answers to everyone’s requests. For ideas on how to pray, you can begin with the Lord’s Prayer (Matthew 6:9\-13\).
**Third, as a new Christian, be baptized.** Baptism symbolizes your new life in Christ and proclaims that you are now committed to Jesus. Even Jesus was baptized (Luke 3:1\-22\), and He calls His followers to also be baptized. Baptism was practiced by the very first followers of Jesus in Acts 2:41\.
Usually, the leaders of a local church perform baptism. A local church pastor or church leader should be glad to speak with you about baptism if you express your interest.
**Fourth, as a new Christian, build friendships with other Christians.** The Christian life is designed to be enjoyed with others. Jesus invested much of His ministry with 12 disciples as His closest friends. He likewise calls us to live in community with one another. The New Testament has over 50 “one another” verses that refer to loving one another, serving one another, encouraging one another, and praying for one another. Each of these commands requires relationships with other Christians.
Fellowship with other believers is one of the purposes of a local church. If there’s a Bible\-teaching church in your area, it’s a great place to get involved. If you live in a community without a church, you will need to pray for God to open opportunities for you to meet other Christians in your area.
**Fifth, as a new Christian, help others.** As you begin your new life as a Christian, you will find a new love inside you giving you a desire to help others. The Holy Spirit will lead you in ways to help. You might serve the poor in your community, assist a neighbor with yard work, or visit a sick friend in the hospital. The Spirit will clearly call you to show God’s love (1 John 3:17\-18\).
**Sixth, as a new Christian, tell someone about your faith.** Becoming a Christian is not a secret; it’s a celebration! Tell all who will listen about Christ’s work in your life. In some cases, other people will come to faith in Jesus through the example you share. Just before Jesus ascended to heaven, He commanded His disciples to make disciples of all the nations (Matthew 28:18\-20\). Today, Christians are still called to share the hope within us with others (1 Peter 3:15\-16\).
Finally, these are simply helpful tips on how to grow in your new faith; they are *not* a list of requirements to become a Christian or to stay a Christian. You have been saved by grace through faith, apart from any works of your own (Ephesians 2:8\-9\). God started the work in you, and He promises to finish it (Philippians 1:6\). God bless you as you continue to mature in your faith!
|
What does it mean to walk in the light?
|
Answer
To “walk in the light” is a common metaphor within Christian culture. It is often taken to mean “acting correctly” or even “living openly.” Biblically, however, the phrase has the idea of relinquishing sin by following Jesus.
The only Old Testament occurrence of this precise phrase is in Isaiah 2:5, “O house of Jacob, come and let us walk in the light of the Lord.” The Psalms contain similar phrases (56:13; 89:15\), as does Isaiah (9:2; 50:10\-11; 59:9\).
In the New Testament, “walking in the light” is directly related to following Jesus, who said, “I am the light of the world. He who follows me shall not walk in darkness, but have the light of life” (John 8:12\). While this verse does not directly say, “Walk in the light, i.e., Jesus,” it does pointedly warn of doing the opposite; therefore, those who follow Jesus are “walking in the light.”
To “walk” is, in short, to live one’s life. One’s lifestyle or way of life can be considered a “walk.” The word also indicates progress. Walking is related to growth; it is taking steps toward maturity. “Light” in the Bible can be a metaphor for life, happiness, righteousness, or understanding. The Bible is clear that light comes from the Lord God, the “Father of the heavenly lights” (James 1:17\). He is the opposite of evil. Putting it all together, “walking in the light” means “growing in holiness and maturing in the faith as we follow Jesus.”
The apostle John repeatedly used the “light” metaphor in relation to the Messiah. For example, he writes that Jesus is “the true light that gives light to every man” (John 1:9\). In 1 John 1:7 he says, “If we walk in the light as He \[God] is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin.” In verse 5, John says that God’s very nature is light. Jesus, then, is the conduit or provider of light to the world.
Our Christian duty is to live in the light God gives: “Now you are light in the Lord. Walk as children of light” (Ephesians 5:8\). When we walk in the light, we cannot walk in darkness. Sin is left in the shadows as we let our light “shine before men” (Matthew 5:16\). It is God’s plan for us to become more like Christ (1 Thessalonians 4:3\).
“Walking in the light” means we consider Jesus as “the light” in this world, and we “walk” in that light by following His precepts, living in His power, and growing in His grace.
|
What is normative ethics?
|
Answer
The philosophy of ethics is the study of how humans act and why they act the way they do. [*Metaethics*](metaethics.html) is the study of the terms and metaphysical considerations of ethical concepts, and is usually too esoteric and academic to actually be useful. [*Applied ethics*](applied-ethics.html) is at the other end of the spectrum; it is relevant discussion about the morality of specific actions in such fields as medicine, business and government. *Normative ethics* is the study of ethical frameworks. It’s the attempt to develop guidelines that do not list ethical actions but can judge if an action is ethical according to a given system. Several systems of ethics have been developed over the years:
**DEONTOLOGICAL ETHICS**
[Deontology](deontology.html) is the study of moral duty. It teaches that ethical behavior starts with an established duty. An act, then, is ethical if it adheres to that duty. The authority of the duty is independent of both the situation and the outcome of the action. Three possible sources give duty its authority: natural law (the general guidelines of behavior common to every person), contractual responsibilities (voluntary or assumed obligations), or God (Divine Command Theory). "Kantian deontology" was developed by [Immanuel Kant](Immanuel-Kant.html), who felt that the reluctant or accidental fulfillment of a duty couldn’t truly be considered ethical. He taught that an action must be performed for the deliberate purpose of completing a duty and with a voluntary, gracious spirit.
**CONSEQUENTIALIST ETHICS**
[Consequentialism](consequentialism.html) is a school that almost takes the acting agent out of the process, replacing it with the end result of an action. An act can only be ethical if the condition it produces is good. On this, most consequentialists agree. But there is much they can’t agree on: What is good? Good for whom? Who determines good? And does it matter that none of us can know the ultimate results of our act before we act? Consequentialism is so confusing that even adherents agree that we cannot use it to inform our action; instead, we should rely on rules and instinct.
**ETHICAL RELATIVISM**
The definition of ethics does not demand that right and wrong be immutable. That is, in theory, ethics may change for time, place, and circumstance. [Ethical relativism](ethical-relativism.html) takes full advantage of this theory. [Cultural relativism](cultural-relativism.html) says a person’s actions should be compared to the general morals of the acting agent’s society, not to the morals of the observer. [Pragmatists](pragmatic-ethics.html) believe that ethics should evolve, just like the study of science, as new discoveries and observations are made about our world. Moral relativism teaches that everyone must develop his or her own idea of ethical behavior and follow that.
**VIRTUE ETHICS**
[Virtue ethics](virtue-ethics.html) says that ethical behavior flows naturally from a virtuous character. Specific laws are unnecessary, and bad consequences are not a factor. To that end, mankind’s responsibility is to develop a character that embodies excellence, wisdom, and a fulfilled life. In a way, virtue ethics combines the three previous schools. The duty of deontology could be construed as the manifestation of excellence; a fulfilled life would be a noble consequence; and pragmatists claim to rely on wisdom about their world.
**CHRISTIAN ETHICS**
Unlike the other normative ethical schools, [Christian ethics](Christian-ethics.html) answers the questions. It identifies truth (God), outlines the basis of ethics (principles found in the Bible), and even lists some universal laws that apply directly to the unchanging truth.
The problem with manmade ethics is that they start with a false assumption of truth and try to build from there. Deontology says ethics are based on obligation, without basing that obligation on God’s truth. Consequentialism says that "good" is truth, but then can’t define what "good" is. Relativism says we cannot know the truth. And virtue ethics claims that we can work to embody truth ourselves. Only Christian ethics says that truth exists (Psalm 51:6\), truth is knowable (Proverbs 3:3\), and we will need help from the Creator of truth to find it (John 14:16\-17\). It is foolish to base a standard of behavior on our feeble notions of the truth of the cosmos when the Truth Himself is willing to guide us (John 14:6\).
|
Who was Nero?
|
Answer
Born Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus in December of AD 37, Nero became the fifth emperor of Rome. Nero, along with Rome’s first four emperors—Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, and Claudius—made up what is called the Julio\-Claudian dynasty. Nero was adopted by his great uncle Claudius to become his successor, and upon Claudius’s death in AD 54 Nero became the youngest emperor at age 16\. His reign lasted nearly fourteen years, until AD 68 when he committed suicide at the age of 30\.
Nero took the throne approximately two decades after Christ was crucified. Although still in its infancy, Christianity was spreading rapidly during this time. In fact, approximately fourteen of the New Testament’s twenty\-seven books were written in whole or in part during Nero’s emperorship. Also during Nero’s reign the apostle Paul was confined to house arrest in Rome (AD 60—63\), where he wrote Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon. Nero was the “Caesar” to whom Paul appealed for justice during his trial in Caesarea (Acts 25:10–12\).
The early years of Nero’s rule were marked by an enhancement of the cultural life of the Roman Empire. Thanks to the guidance of his advisers, namely the Praetorian Prefect Burrus and the famous Roman philosopher Seneca, Rome maintained a stable government during his early years. Nero loved the arts and was an accomplished singer and musician. He also enjoyed athletic competitions and took part in many chariot races, even winning a race in the Olympic Games at Greece.
Nero’s legacy, however, is not a pleasant one. Although his regime began with mildness and idealism, it ended with cruelty and tyranny. He began murdering anyone who became an obstacle to him; his victims include his own wife and mother as well as his step\-brother Britannicus—Emperor Claudius’s biological son. In July of 64, the Great Fire of Rome broke out and lasted for six days. Of Rome’s fourteen districts, only three escaped damage from the fire. Some historians believe Nero may have been responsible for the fire, although his involvement is not clear. What is clear is that Nero deflected the focus from himself by blaming the fire on the Christians, many of whom he tortured and killed. The historian [Tacitus](Tacitus.html) describes these atrocities: “Covered with the skins of beasts, \[Christians] were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as nightly illumination when daylight had expired.” Nero’s use of Christians as human torches to light his evening garden parties is well documented. Ultimately, it is the brutality inflicted on the early Christians for which Nero is best remembered.
The end of Nero’s reign was filled with strife. Tension among Roman leaders ultimately became so great that the Praetorian Guard transferred their loyalty from Nero to Galba, leading the Senate to declare Nero a public enemy. Nero was forced to flee Rome, and he later took his own life. Having no heir to succeed him, Nero was the last of the Julio\-Claudian dynasty. Nero’s death was followed by a brief period of civil war, which was then followed by the rise and fall of four emperors in a single year, a chaotic period of Roman history known as “The Year of the Four Emperors.”
|
Who were the Anakim / Anakites?
|
Answer
The Anakim/Anakites were a formidable race of giant, warlike people (Deuteronomy 2:10, 21; 9:2\) who occupied the lands of southern Israel near Hebron before the arrival of the Israelites (Joshua 15:13\). The Anakim’s ancestry has been traced back to Anak, the son of Arba (Joshua 15:13; 21:11\), who at that time was regarded as the “greatest man among the Anakim” (Joshua 14:15\).
The name “Anakim” most likely means “long\-necked,” i.e., “tall.” The Hebrews thought them to be descendants of the Nephilim, a powerful race who dominated the pre\-Flood world (Genesis 6:4; Numbers 13:33\). When the twelve Israelite spies returned from exploring the Promised Land, they gave a frightening report of “people great and tall” whom they identified as the sons of Anak (Deuteronomy 9:2\). The Israelites, seized with fear and believing themselves to be mere “grasshoppers . . . in their sight” (Numbers 13:33\), rebelled against God (Deuteronomy 1:26\-28\) and refused to enter the land God had promised them.
The Israelites were exhorted by Moses (Deuteronomy 1:19\) not to fear the Anakim, but they refused to trust God’s promises (Deuteronomy 1:32\-33\). As a result, God became angry (Deuteronomy 1:34\-39\) and prohibited the “evil generation” from entering the Promised Land; Joshua and Caleb were the only exceptions (Deuteronomy 1:35\-36\). Because of their fear of the Anakim and their rebellion against God, the children of Israel were forced to wander for another 38 years in the wilderness.
During the conquest of Canaan, Joshua expelled the Anakim from the hill country, and Caleb finally drove them out of Hebron completely. However, a small remnant found refuge in the cities of [Gaza](Gaza-in-the-Bible.html), [Gath](Gath-in-the-Bible.html), and [Ashdod](Ashdod-in-the-Bible.html) (Joshua 11:22\). Many Bible scholars speculate that the Anakim’s descendants were the Philistine giants David encountered (2 Samuel 21:15\-22\), including Goliath of Gath (1 Samuel 17:4\-7\).
|
Why can’t I stop sinning? Please help!
|
Answer
Every believer has, at one time or another, lamented his or her inability to stop sinning. While we tend to think the problem stems from weakness in ourselves, the inability to stop sinning usually indicates a deficiency in our understanding of God’s strength. When we do not understand His power to save, forgive, and cleanse us from all unrighteousness (1 John 1:9\), we can get caught in a destructive cycle of sin, guilt, and fear, which leads to a lack of joy in our salvation, which leads to more sin.
In Psalm 51:12, David pleads with God, “Restore to me the joy of your salvation and grant me a willing spirit, to sustain me.” He wrote this after he had fallen into the grievous sins of adultery and murder. It is interesting to notice that he asks God for a return of the joy of his salvation. Joy is key in our victory over sin. It is also important that we understand that God sustains us “with a willing spirit.” God takes joy in saving us, and we take joy in being saved.
God has saved us willingly, to display His grace, love, and strength. Our salvation does not depend on how much or how little we sin, how much or how little we evangelize or repent or do good works, how loving or unloving we are, or anything else about us. Our salvation is entirely a product of God’s grace, love, and purpose (Ephesians 2:8–9\). This is important to understand, because (ironically) believing that we are responsible to keep the law leads inevitably to the inability to stop sinning.
Paul explains this in Romans 7:7–10\. When we understand a law, like “do not covet,” our sin nature inevitably rebels against that law, and we covet. This is the plight of man—it is simply how we are. The law aggravates our sin nature. John Bunyan illustrates this truth in [*The Pilgrim’s Progress*](The-Pilgrims-Progress.html). In the Interpreter’s House, Christian sees a very dusty room that had never been swept. First, a man with a broom tries to clean the floor, but the broom’s only effect is to raise choking clouds of dust. The more he sweeps, the more the dust is stirred up; this is a picture of the law, Bunyan says, which cannot clean a sinful heart but only stirs up the sin. However, Christian watches as the broom is set aside and a young girl sprinkles the whole room with water. After that, the room is quickly cleaned; this is a picture of the gospel of grace and its ability to purify the heart. The grace of God can do what the law could never do: cleanse us from sin.
So, the way to stop sinning is *not* to add more rules. God knew this. In fact, He gave us the law so that we would be aware of our sin and turn to Him (Romans 3:19\-20; Galatians 3:23\-26\). The law is good. It is a reflection of God’s nature and His perfection. But it was not given to us for our salvation. Christ fulfills the law for us (Matthew 5:17\).
When we disagree with God and hang onto the idea that we must fulfill the law, we lose our joy in salvation and set ourselves up for failure. We labor under a terrible burden. We feel pressured to do something to secure salvation, but, at the same time, our sin nature renders us unable to obey the law. The more we focus on the law, the more our sin nature rebels. The more our sin nature rebels, the more frightened we become that we are not saved. The more frightened and joyless we become, the more tempting sin’s promise of happiness is.
The only way to break the cycle and stop sinning is to accept the fact that we cannot stop sinning. This may seem contradictory, but if a person does not stop trying to save himself, he will never rest in the knowledge that God has saved him. The joy of salvation comes from accepting the fact that God’s grace covers us, that He will change us and conform us to the image of Christ, and that it is His work, not ours (Romans 8:29; Philippians 1:6; Philippians 2:13; Hebrews 13:20\-21\). Once this reality is truly grasped, sin loses its power. We no longer feel the impulse to turn to sin as a means of temporary relief from anxiety, because the anxiety and pressure has been relieved once for all by Christ (Hebrews 10:10, 14\). Then, the good works we accomplish in faith are done because of love and joy rather than out of fear or duty.
“The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, my beloved brothers, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that in the Lord your labor is not in vain” (1 Corinthians 15:56\-58, ESV).
|
What did Paul mean when he said he had fought the good fight?
|
Answer
In 2 Timothy 4:7, Paul says, “I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith.” This well\-known and oft\-quoted passage is quite significant in that this epistle was Paul’s last before his martyrdom in A.D. 67\. It is a deeply moving affirmation of his unwavering faith and unyielding love for the gospel of Jesus Christ (Galatians 1:4; Galatians 2:20; Philippians 1:21\).
“I have fought the good fight” is also significant for believers today because it serves as a stark reminder that the Christian life is a struggle against evil—within ourselves and in the world (John 15:9; Romans 8:7; James 4:4\). Earlier in this same epistle, Paul reminded Timothy to “endure hardship as a good soldier of Jesus Christ” (2 Timothy 2:3\).
The Greek word *agonizomai*, translated “fought,” means literally “to engage in conflict.” The word was used in the context of competing in athletic games or engaging in military conflict. Considering that Paul was chained to a Roman soldier when he wrote this epistle, it would have been easy for him to make such an analogy. In fact, he had known many Roman soldiers and during his imprisonment had won a number of them to Christ, some of them members of the Praetorian Guard (Philippians 1:13\).
Our battle is not with flesh and blood “but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places” (Ephesians 6:12\). The Christian life is a fight in that Christians face a never\-ending struggle against evil—not an earthly military campaign, but a spiritual battle against Satan. This is why we must “take up the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day” (see Ephesians 6:13\-18\).
Without question, the apostle Paul was the consummate warrior, never quitting, never flagging in his zeal for the Lord (Philippians 3:14\-15\). He knew where lay the source of his strength (Philippians 4:13; 2 Corinthians 12:9\). His campaign to spread the gospel of Christ began on the Damascus Road (Acts 9:3\) and eventually took him across the ancient world on four missionary journeys. He had witnessed of Christ before Felix and Agrippa, the legates and officials of Rome (Acts 23:26; Acts 26:1\). He contended with false teachers and false brethren within the church (2 Corinthians 11:13; Galatians 1:7; Galatians 2:4\).
Paul’s “good fight” included an astonishing series of dangers and indignities (2 Corinthians 11:23\-33\). Even in these he proclaimed his victory in Christ: “Yet in all these things we are more than conquerors through Him who loved us” (Romans 8:37\).
Paul’s life and ministry provide for us a powerful example for modeling Christ today. Not only did he “fight the good fight,” but he also “finished the race” and “kept the faith” (2 Timothy 4:7\). Paul knew that his death was near (verse 6\) but had no regrets. After Jesus took control of his life (Acts 9:15\-16\), Paul had lived life to the fullest, fulfilling all that Jesus had charged and empowered him to do (Ephesians 3:6; 2 Timothy 4:17\). He had a remarkable sense of fulfillment and contentment with his life (Philippians 4:11\-13; 1 Timothy 6:6\-8\).
As believers today, we can have no greater sense of fulfillment than to know, as Paul did, that we have fully accomplished all that the Lord has called us to do (Matthew 25:21\). May we “fight the good fight” and “be watchful in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill \[our] ministry” (2 Timothy 4:5\).
|
Is handing out gospel tracts a good evangelism method?
|
Answer
Any method that results in people hearing/reading and understanding the biblical gospel is a good evangelism method. Gospel tracts are small booklets that present the gospel, usually based on a specific theme. The theme may be a holiday, a timely issue, a movie or TV show, a book series, a musician, etc. – there are gospel tracts on virtually every topic imaginable. The goal of a gospel tract is to get the gospel of salvation of Jesus Christ into peoples’ hands in an interesting and easy\-to\-read format. While the precise origin of gospel tracts is uncertain, there are records of them as early as the 13th century A.D. Gospel tracts were popularized during the Protestant Reformation, and the invention of the printing press made mass\-production of tracts much easier and faster. The most well\-known gospel tract is likely “The Four Spiritual Laws” written by [Bill Bright](Bill-Bright.html) of [Campus Crusade for Christ](Campus-Crusade-Christ-Cru.html).
Gospel tracts can be a very effective method of evangelism. Again, if the biblical gospel is presented in a clear and understandable manner, God will use it (Isaiah 55:11\). Any time God’s Word goes forth, it is powerful and effective (Hebrews 4:12\). People who are not otherwise effective communicators can overcome such a weakness by use of a gospel tract. Gospel tracts are an excellent choice when you simply do not have time to stop and witness to someone. Gospel tracts can be left in strategic locations for people to pick up later and read.
There are perhaps two primary weaknesses/issues with gospel tracts. First, there are several prominent gospel tract publishers who produce tracts in which the gospel is not as clear as it should be. Some of the pseudo\-Christian cults are well known for having tract ministries. Before you consider handing out a gospel tract, read it closely and do some research on its publisher. Make sure that the gospel is clearly presented. If the tract endorses a website or other source of information, ensure that the message presented there is biblical.
Second, some people rely entirely on gospel tracts and purposefully avoid directly sharing the gospel with others. Giving someone a gospel tract is easier than personally sharing the gospel. While there are definitely many situations where giving a gospel tract is entirely appropriate, there are other situations where only a personal gospel presentation will suffice. We are all to be ready, willing, and able to share the gospel (Matthew 28:19\-20; Acts 1:8; 1 Peter 3:15\). Gospel tracts can be an important and valuable aspect of sharing the gospel, but it should not be the sole means of our outreach.
|
What does the Bible say about honesty?
|
Answer
Honesty is truthfulness. An honest person has the habit of making accurate, trustworthy statements about life, self, others and God. An honest person represents himself just as he is and tells others the truth about themselves. Honesty is not “expressing everything that goes through your mind.” That’s transparency, and a person can be honest without being transparent. However, no one can be consistently honest without a commitment to the truth. Honesty will, at times, hurt someone’s feelings, but that does not mean that dishonesty is preferable.
Dishonesty is reproved in Scripture. God does not accept a person who “practices deceit” (Psalm 101:7\), and Jeremiah 9:5 says of a wicked society, “Everyone deceives his neighbor, and no one speaks the truth; they have taught their tongue to speak lies; they weary themselves committing iniquity.” Speaking the truth, or honesty, is a mark of healthy human interaction.
A person who knows the truth but (for whatever reason) says differently is a liar. The Bible emphasizes the importance of making true statements about God. To purposely misrepresent God is a serious offense. A liar is defined, first and foremost, as someone who denies that Jesus is the Christ (1 John 2:22\). “Trusting in lies” is consistent with forgetting God (Jeremiah 13:25\). And those who claim to know God but contradict Him, add to His words, or refuse to follow or accept His commands are also called liars (1 John 2:4; 5:10; Proverbs 30:6\).
Honesty as a character quality is a sign of the Spirit’s work in a person’s soul. God cannot lie (Hebrews 6:18\); therefore, His presence in a person gives rise to truthfulness. God’s people are honest.
Humankind is not naturally honest (Psalm 116:11\). Dishonesty has worldly rewards–lying can often bring financial gain, power, or temporary satisfaction. But the rewards come at a price. Dishonesty leads to more and more wickedness (Proverbs 17:4\). Lying to fulfill worldly desires ultimately results in the loss of everything a person has, including his life. Hell’s inhabitants will include “all liars” (Revelation 21:8\). “What good is it for a man to gain the whole world, yet forfeit his soul?” (Mark 8:36\).
While it is sometimes tempting to lie, misrepresent ourselves, or downplay uncomfortable truths in an effort to avoid conflict, dishonesty is never good for relationships. Speaking dishonest words in order to avoid conflict is flattery (Psalm 12:2\). Again, at times honesty will hurt the feelings of others. It’s inevitable. Remember the words of the wise: “Wounds from a friend can be trusted, but an enemy multiplies kisses” (Proverbs 27:6\). A friend is willing to wound with the truth; sweet words, if lies, are the enemies of our soul.
That said, honesty should always be accompanied by gentleness. An honest person is motivated by love, not by an obsession with relaying accurate information (Proverbs 19:22\). Above all, the honest person is concerned with telling the truth about God and fostering the spiritual growth of other people (Ephesians 4:29\). Those who follow Jesus, the Truth (John 14:6\), will speak the truth in love (Ephesians 4:15\).
|
What is a chakra?
|
Answer
A chakra is a spiritual “power point” used in Yoga and Eastern mysticism. The word *chakra* describes one element in a highly complex system of thought about the energies of the body.
The following terms are associated with the chakra. The definitions reflect beliefs held by many Hindus, Buddhists and practitioners of Yoga:
**Prana** – life energies found in parts of the body, also called “subtle winds.”
**Subtle body** – similar to a soul, this is a body of energy containing the chakras.
**Nadis** – energy channels, or meridians, that run like veins through the subtle body and serve as conduits for the prana. The central Nadi runs alongside or inside the spine and is associated with the central nervous system.
**Chakras** – the points of energy on the surface of the subtle body. Located along the *Sushumna* or the central Nadi. This and two other primary Nadis run through the core of the body, twining around one another and penetrating the chakras. In some traditions, each chakra is a central hub for thousands of Nadi. Each chakra is associated with a mantra “seed\-syllable” (usually a Sanskrit word), and often with a particular color and deity.
The chakra, or chakras, play a role in certain types of medicine. Acupuncture, for example, and other types of Chinese medicine claim to use body energies and meridians to promote healing. Whether or not chakras exist, many people have found acupuncture to provide relief from pain. So, there may be a physical benefit to acupuncture independent of the spiritual philosophy behind it.
The real danger of belief in the chakras is in the spiritual overtones connected to it. The chakras are central to a meditation technique known as Kundalini, which literally means “that which is coiled.” Kundalini is also the name of a goddess. The belief is that Kundalini is a divine force which resides at the base of the spine and, when “awakened,” travels up the spine (the central Nadi) and through each chakra until it reaches the crown of the head. Along the way, this uncoiling “goddess” brings spiritual awareness to the individual. When it reaches the uppermost chakra, this force is said to generate an ineffable, highly mystical experience.
People who have engaged in this type of meditation will testify both to its power and its danger. One Christian woman describes her pre\-Christ experience with mantra meditation:
“Mantra meditation is so very seductive because it generates a very powerful, seemingly supernatural experience that can make one feel as if they are actually encountering ‘God.’ The first meditation I ever did at age 20 left me utterly convinced that I had experienced the presence of God. In hindsight, I believe that this encounter truly was supernatural. The Bible tells us that Satan himself can masquerade as an angel of light (2 Cor 11:14\). So I ask you: would Satan be so bold as to actually pretend to be God? Of course he would. He’s no gentleman. It’s not like he would say to himself, ‘Well, that would be deceitful, I can’t do that!’ More like this: ‘That’s deceitful \- awesome!! I wonder how many times I could trick people into thinking they’re encountering God before somebody starts to catch on?’ And Satan was more than happy to give me an ‘experience’ if it would turn me away from the one true God.” She goes to describe the frightening after\-effects of this experience. (Listen to her story here: [http://solasisters.blogspot.com/2010/01/fighting\-for\-faith\-interview.html](http://solasisters.blogspot.com/2010/01/fighting-for-faith-interview.html))
The spiritual experience achieved through this type of meditation is undeniably real, and it may feel like a connection to the divine, but it is not of God. The Bible says that we should reject spiritual messengers who claim to be from God but speak “a different gospel” (Galatians 1:8\). And the message of Eastern mysticism is contrary to the gospel. The gospel tells us that God reached down to save humanity, but Eastern mystics assert that man can, via various techniques involving chakras and Nadi, attain a godlike state or connect with the divine. Belief in chakras is a deception that Satan uses to lead people away from the grace of the Lord. Spiritual enlightenment does not come through chakras but through a relationship with the true God (Psalm 36:9\).
|
What does the Bible say about art?
|
Answer
The first mention of art in the Bible is in Exodus 31\. God is instructing Moses to create a tent for the ark of the covenant, and God mentions several artisans whom He has chosen to create “artistic designs” to beautify the tent. God says, “In the hearts of all who are skillful I have put skill.” We learn two things about God’s view of art in this passage: He likes it, and He is the source of it. He wants man to create beautiful things, and their skill in doing so is from Him.
Later, in 1 Kings 6, we see Solomon creating a temple for the Lord. In verse 4, “artistic frames” were made for the house. This reinforces the fact that God does desire beauty and likes to be surrounded by it. If Solomon did not think that God was glorified by beauty, he would never have taken the trouble to create “artistic” window frames. Again, in Song of Solomon, the beauty of the bride is compared to “the work of the hands of an artist” (7:1\). God is the creator; He is the artist whose hands create beauty. It follows that any beauty we create is glorifying to God, our creator.
That said, it is important to define beauty. Art that is created to shock or horrify, or to glorify or elicit sin (violence, lust, greed) cannot be called “beautiful.” It is still “art” but not art that glorifies God. Using Exodus 31:3 as a guide, art that glorifies God should exhibit “skill, ability, and . . . craftsmanship” (BSB). Art that models God’s handiwork will be creative, intelligent, and well\-crafted. It will have value.
God will not put in an artist’s heart to make things that will elicit sinful responses in others (Mark 9:42\). He will not lead a person to create that which contradicts His nature. Artisans who create idols may be skillful (Isaiah 40:19\), but they’re using their skill to pervert God’s glory, not honor it. This doesn’t mean that all art has to be like the Sistine Chapel, however, or that it can only depict biblical subjects like Jesus on the cross or the disciples in a boat. God dwells in “the perfection of beauty” (Psalm 50:2\), and His holiness is beautiful (1 Chronicles 16:29 and Psalm 29:2\). In creating God\-glorifying art, the artist’s goal should be to lift the soul of man toward heaven and to illumine in new ways the multi\-faceted beauty of God’s holiness, power, and grace.
There are literally millions of ways artists can depict God’s glory. Their creativity and the skill that God has placed in the artists’ hearts, heads, and hands will guide them to create art that will help us transcend the ugliness and pollution of this world. Whatever their medium—paint, pencil, textiles, marble, metal, drama, music, etc.—artists share a common mission and are a special and valuable part of God’s kingdom.
|
What is blasphemy?
|
Answer
To blaspheme is to speak with contempt about God or to be defiantly irreverent. Blasphemy is verbal or written reproach of God’s name, character, work, or attributes.
Blasphemy was a serious crime in the law God gave to Moses. The Israelites were to worship and obey God. In Leviticus 24:10–16, a man blasphemed the name of God. To the Hebrews, a name wasn’t just a convenient label. It was a symbolic representation of a person’s character. The man in Leviticus who blasphemed God’s name was stoned to death.
Isaiah 36 tells the story of Sennacherib, king of Assyria, and his attempt to demoralize Jerusalem before he attacked. After pointing out Assyria’s many victories, he says, "Who of all the gods of these countries have been able to save their lands from me? How then can the LORD deliver Jerusalem from my hand?" (Isaiah 36:20\). Sennacherib committed blasphemy by assuming Israel’s God was equal to the false gods of the surrounding nations. The king of Judah, Hezekiah, points out this blasphemy in his prayer to God, in which he asks that God deliver them for the purpose of defending His own honor (Isaiah 37:4, 17\). And that’s exactly what God did. Isaiah 37:36\-37 explains, "Then the angel of the LORD went out and put to death a hundred and eighty\-five thousand in the Assyrian camp. When the people got up the next morning—there were all the dead bodies! So Sennacherib king of Assyria broke camp and withdrew. He returned to Nineveh and stayed there." Later, Sennacherib was murdered in the temple of his god Nisroch (Isaiah 37:38\).
Followers of God are also responsible to make sure their behavior doesn’t incite others to blaspheme God. In Romans 2:17\-24, Paul scolds those who claim to be saved through the law and yet still live in sin. Using Isaiah 52:5, Paul tells them, “God’s name is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you” (verse 24\). In 1 Timothy 1:20 Paul explains that he had abandoned two false teachers to Satan so they would “be taught not to blaspheme”; thus, promulgating false doctrine and leading God’s people astray is also a form of blasphemy.
Jesus spoke of a special type of blasphemy—[blasphemy against the Holy Spirit](blasphemy-Holy-Spirit.html)—committed by the religious leaders of His day. The situation was that the Pharisees were eyewitnesses to Jesus’ miracles, but they attributed the work of the Holy Spirit to the presence of a demon (Mark 3:22\-30\). Their portrayal of the holy as demonic was a deliberate, insulting rejection of God and was unforgivable.
The most significant accusation of blasphemy was one that happened to be completely false. It was for the crime of blasphemy that the priests and Pharisees condemned Jesus (Matthew 26:65\). They understood that Jesus was claiming to be God. That would, indeed, be a reproach on God’s character—if it wasn’t true. If Jesus were just a man claiming to be God, He would have been a blasphemer. However, as the Second Person of the Trinity, Jesus could truthfully claim deity (Philippians 2:6\).
Fortunately, Jesus forgives even the sin of blasphemy. Paul was a blasphemer (1 Timothy 1:13\) and tried to make others blaspheme (Acts 26:11\). Jesus’ own brothers thought He was insane (Mark 3:21\). All repented, and all were forgiven.
Blasphemy, by definition, is both deliberate and direct. That being the case, a believer in Jesus Christ will not/cannot commit blasphemy. Even so, we should be careful to reflect God’s holiness and never misrepresent the glory, authority, and character of God.
|
What is the significance of Mount Moriah in the Bible?
|
Answer
Mount Moriah in Old City Jerusalem is the site of numerous biblical acts of faith. It is also one of the most valuable pieces of real estate and one of the most hotly contested pieces of real estate on earth. This is a profoundly sacred area to Christians, Jews, and Muslims. Sitting atop Mount Moriah today is the Temple Mount, a 37\-acre tract of land where the Jewish temple once stood. Several important Islamic holy sites are there now, including the Dome of the Rock – a Muslim shrine built thirteen hundred years ago – and the Al\-Aqsa Mosque.
Mount Moriah’s history begins in Genesis. In the twenty\-second chapter, God commands Abraham, “Take now your son, your only son, whom you love, Isaac, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains which I will tell you” (Genesis 22:2\). The place God led Abraham was Mount Moriah. Abraham didn’t fully understand what God was asking him to do in light of God’s previous promise to establish an everlasting covenant with Isaac (Genesis 17:19\); nonetheless, he trusted God and by faith offered Isaac as a sacrifice. Of course, God intervened and spared Isaac’s life by providing a ram instead. Abraham thereafter called this place “The LORD Will Provide. And to this day it is said, ‘On the mountain of the LORD it will be provided’” (Genesis 22:14\). Because of Abraham’s obedience on Mount Moriah, God told Abraham that his “descendants will take possession of the cities of their enemies, and through your offspring all nations on earth will be blessed because you have obeyed me” (vv. 17, 18\).
About a thousand years later at this very location, King David bought the threshing floor of [Araunah the Jebusite](Araunah-the-Jebusite.html) and built an altar to the Lord so that a “plague may be held back from the people” (2 Samuel 24:18, 21\). After David’s death, his son King Solomon built a glorious temple on the same site. Solomon’s temple lasted for over four hundred years until it was destroyed by King Nebuchadnezzar’s armies in 587/586 B.C.
Seventy years later the temple was rebuilt on the same site by the Jews who returned to Jerusalem following their Babylon captivity. Around the first century, King Herod made a significant addition to this structure, which then became known as Herod’s Temple. It was this temple that Jesus cleansed (John 2:15\).
However, in A.D. 70, the Roman armies led by Titus, son of the Emperor Vespasian, once again destroyed the temple. All that remains of the Temple Mount of that era is a portion of a retaining wall known as the “Western Wall” or the “Wailing Wall.” It has been a destination for pilgrims and a site of prayer for Jews for many centuries.
The God who first called Abraham to Mount Moriah still has plans for that place. The Bible indicates that a third temple will be built on or near the site of Solomon’s temple (Daniel 9:27\). This would seem to present a problem given the political obstacles that stand in the way: the religious activities on the Temple Mount are currently controlled by the Supreme Muslim Council (the Waqf). Yet nothing can put a wrinkle in God’s sovereign plans. Thus, Muslim control of this area simply fulfills the prophecy of Luke 21:24 that “Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.”
|
Who was Absalom in the Bible?
|
Answer
Absalom was the third son of King David, by his wife Maacah. The bulk of Absalom’s story is told in 2 Samuel 13\-19\. He had a strong influence on his father’s reign.
The first recorded event defining Absalom’s life also involved his sister [Tamar](Tamar-Bible.html) and half\-brother [Amnon](Amnon-in-the-Bible.html). Tamar was beautiful, and Amnon lusted after her. When Tamar rebuffed Amnon’s advances, he arranged, through subterfuge, to have her come to his house, where he raped her. After the rape, Amnon put Tamar out of his house in disgrace. When Absalom heard what happened, he took his sister in to live with him. For the next two years, Absalom nursed a hatred of his half\-brother. Then, using some subterfuge of his own, Absalom invited Amnon to his house for a party. During the festivities, in the presence of David’s other sons, Absalom had his servants kill Amnon in cold blood.
Out of fear of his father, Absalom ran away to Geshur, where he stayed for three years. During that time, Scripture says that David “longed to go out to Absalom,” but we’re never told that he actually did anything to reconcile the relationship. David’s general, [Joab](Joab-in-the-Bible.html), was ultimately responsible for bringing Absalom back to Jerusalem. However, even then, Absalom was not permitted to enter David’s presence, but had to live in a house of his own. He lived this way, presumably never contacting or being contacted by his father, for two years. Finally, once again by way of Joab’s intercession, the two men get back together, and there is a small measure of reconciliation.
Unfortunately, this peace did not last. Possibly resenting his father’s hesitancy to bring him home, Absalom began to stealthily undermine David’s rule. He set himself up as judge in Jerusalem and gave out promises of what he would do if he were king. After four years of this, he asked to go to Hebron, where he had secretly arranged to have himself proclaimed king.
The conspiracy strengthened, and the number of Absalom’s followers grew steadily, such that David began to fear for his own life. David gathered his servants and fled Jerusalem. However, David left behind some of his concubines and a few informers as well, including [Zadok](Zadok-in-the-Bible.html) and Abiathar the priests and his adviser [Hushai](Hushai-in-the-Bible.html).
Upon entering Jerusalem as king, Absalom sought to solidify his position, first by taking over David’s house and sleeping with his concubines, considered an unforgivable act. Then he laid plans to immediately pursue and attack David’s forces, but the idea was abandoned owing to the advice of Hushai. This delay allowed David to muster what troops he had at Mahanaim and mount a counterattack to retake the kingdom.
David himself did not take part in the counterattack, having been persuaded by his generals to remain behind. He did give explicit instructions to the generals to “deal gently” with Absalom, in spite of his treason. Scripture makes the point that all the troops heard David’s orders concerning Absalom. However, the orders were disobeyed. As Absalom was riding under some trees, his long hair became entangled in the branches, and he was unhorsed. Joab found Absalom suspended in mid\-air and killed him there. Thus, the rebellion was quelled, and David returned to Jerusalem as king.
David mourned deeply over his son, so much so that it affected the morale of the army. His grief was so great that their victory seemed hollow to them, and they returned to the capital in shame rather than triumph. It was not until he was rebuked by Joab that David was restored to a measure of kingly behavior.
Much has been said about David’s neglect of Absalom in this sad incident. It is possible that parental responsibility is a lesson we can take from this episode, but Scripture does not expressly teach it here. We do know that David did nothing about Amnon’s rape of Tamar, although he knew about it. If David had avenged Tamar, would Absalom have taken it upon himself to mete out justice? And what was the impact on Absalom’s soul of carrying hatred for Amnon for so long? We don’t know the answers to those questions, but it seems that David’s inaction had a deleterious effect in Absalom’s life.
What we can say with certainty, however, is that pride goes before a fall (Proverbs 16:18\). Absalom’s self\-promotion led to nothing. Also, God is sovereign. God foiled Absalom’s plan to overthrow his father’s kingdom (see 2 Samuel 17:14\). All events are settled in eternity, and nothing, not even the Absaloms of the world, can thwart the power of God to do as He pleases in history.
|
What can we learn from the tribe of Zebulun?
|
Answer
Zebulun is one of Israel’s twelve tribes. In the time of Moses, Zebulun was divided into three clans: the Seredites, the Elonites, and the Jahleelites, named after Zebulun’s sons (Numbers 26:26\). The tribes were named for Jacob’s children (or grandchildren, in the cases of Ephraim and Manasseh).
Jacob’s tenth son, [Zebulun](Zebulun-in-the-Bible.html), was the youngest of six sons borne by Leah. When Zebulun was born, Leah said, “God has presented me with a precious gift. This time my husband will treat me with honor, because I have borne him six sons” (Genesis 30:20\). Zebulun means “dwelling” or “honor.”
Zebulun was one of six tribes chosen to stand on [Mount Ebal](mount-Ebal.html) and pronounce curses (Deuteronomy 27:13\). By means of these curses, the people promised God they would refrain from certain behaviors. For example, one curse says, “Cursed is the man who carves an image or casts an idol – a thing detestable to the Lord” (Deuteronomy 27:15\). Another states, “Cursed is the man who withholds justice from the alien, the fatherless or the widow” (Deuteronomy 27:19\). Still another: “Cursed is the man who does not uphold the words of this law by carrying them out” (Deuteronomy 27:26\). In all, Zebulun helped deliver twelve admonishments of this sort (Deuteronomy 27:15\-26\).
Upon entering the Promised Land, Zebulun failed to drive out the Canaanites living in Kitron and Nahalol, although Zebulun did subject them to forced labor (Judges 1:30\). This was incomplete obedience to God’s clear command to drive out all the inhabitants of the land (Numbers 33:52\). Not responding fully to God’s Word, as Zebulun demonstrated, is a trait to which we all can relate. How often do we choose to follow our own paths for various reasons, many of which may not be in concert with God’s wishes?
Later, Zebulun returned to God and followed His commands. They participated in the battles led by Deborah and Barak, and they fought valiantly (Judges 4:6; 5:18\). The judge Elon was a Zebulunite (Judges 12:11\). During the kingdom years, Zebulun joined David at Hebron to transfer Saul’s kingdom to David (1 Chronicles 12:23, 33, 40\). This, too, provides insight into our behavior. While at times we turn away from God, His love for us, and ours for Him, draws us back into communion with Him and compliance with His will.
Zebulun’s territory was located in what later became known as Galilee, in Northern Israel. Moses’ blessing on the tribe was that they would prosper in their overseas dealings with Gentile nations (Deuteronomy 33:18\-19\). Isaiah prophesied, “In the past \[God] humbled the land of Zebulun . . . but in the future he will honor Galilee” (Isaiah 9:1\). Isaiah’s prediction is Messianic: Galilee (including Zebulun) would be honored as the first to hear Christ’s preaching, and this would more than compensate for their humiliation at the hands of the Assyrians centuries before.
Numerous verses in the Bible, especially in the Psalms, extol God for His unfailing patience, love, and faithfulness. Indirectly, Zebulun’s history reminds us that God is always present when we return to Him. No matter how battered or bruised we may be or how ashamed we may feel about past transgressions, God can still use us.
|
What did Paul mean when he said he had finished the race?
|
Answer
“I have finished the race” is the second clause of three within a passage written by the apostle Paul to Timothy: “I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith” (2 Timothy 4:7\). The apostle wrote these words near the end of his life. These three statements reflect Paul’s struggles in preaching the gospel of Christ and his victory over those struggles.
In the 1st century, the Romans celebrated both the Olympic Games and the Isthmian Games. Competitors would spend up to ten months in arduous physical training. Because the Corinthians were very familiar with these events, Paul used the games as an analogy for a believer’s life of faithfulness. He wrote the church in Corinth saying, “Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but only one gets the prize? Run in such a way as to get the prize. Everyone who competes in the games goes into strict training. They do it to get a crown that will not last; but we do it to get a crown that will last forever” (1 Corinthians 9:24\-25\). Paul’s exhortation is that believers should be as focused and dedicated as those ancient runners in the games. Our motivation in serving Christ is much higher; we “run” not for a temporary crown, but for an eternal one.
In his letter to Timothy, Paul is not commending himself for having “run the full distance” (TEV); rather, he is simply describing what the grace of God had enabled him to do. In the book of Acts, Paul says these powerful words: “I consider my life worth nothing to me, if only I may finish the race and complete the task the Lord Jesus has given me—the task of testifying to the gospel of God’s grace” (Acts 20:24\).
So, by declaring “I have finished the race,” Paul is telling Timothy that he had put every effort into the work of proclaiming to all the gospel of salvation. He had completed the course set before him; he had left nothing undone. He was ready to cross the finish line into heaven.
In a race, only one runner wins. However, in the Christian “race,” everyone who pays the price of vigilant training for the cause of Christ can win. We are not competing against one other, as in athletic games, but against the struggles, physical and spiritual, that stand in the way of our reaching the prize (Philippians 3:14\).
Every believer runs his own race (1 Corinthians 9:24\). Each of us is enabled to be a winner. Paul exhorts us to “run in such a way as to get the prize,” and to do this we must set aside anything that might hinder us from living and teaching the gospel of Christ. The writer of Hebrews echoes the words of Paul: “Lay aside every weight, and the sin which so easily ensnares us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, looking unto Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith” (Hebrews 12:1\-2\).
May we be diligent in our “race,” may we keep our eyes on the goal, and may we, like Paul, finish strong.
|
What did Paul mean when he said he had kept the faith?
|
Answer
“I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith” (2 Timothy 4:7\). This is one of the better\-known and most\-quoted passages of the apostle Paul. These words written just before Paul’s death are a powerful affirmation of his unyielding love and undying faith in Jesus and the gospel message (Galatians 1:4; 2:20; Philippians 1:21\).
The word translated “kept” means “to keep by guarding, to watch over.” The Greek word for “faith” is *pistis*, which has to do with a conviction based on hearing (cf. Romans 10:17\). Paul’s trust in Jesus never wavered. His faith was as solid on the day of his death as it had been the moment he first believed on the Damascus road (Acts 9:3\). He was firm in his faith in the midst of the mob’s violence (Acts 16:22; 2 Corinthians 11:25; 1 Thessalonians 2:2\). He stood uncompromising before the dignitaries Felix (Acts 22:10, 22\), Festus (Acts 25:9\), and Agrippa (Acts 25:26\). He boldly confronted Peter when that apostle showed signs of compromising the teachings of Christ (Galatians 2:11\-16\).
The expression “I have kept the faith” has two possible meanings. One is that Paul had faithfully declared the gospel and guarded its truth, keeping its message unadulterated. Elsewhere, Paul called this the “pattern of sound teaching” and encouraged Timothy to “keep” it as well (2 Timothy 1:13; cf. 1 Timothy 6:20\).
The other possible meaning of “I have kept the faith” is that Paul had fulfilled his divine appointment in this world, viz., that he would be Jesus’ messenger to the Gentiles (Acts 9:15; 22:21\). When Jesus commissioned Paul, He was clear that the appointment would mean much suffering (Acts 9:16\). But Paul gladly accepted the summons and never wavered in his commitment, trusting that he would soon experience “an eternal glory” (2 Corinthians 4:17\).
Keeping the faith is never easy. Without question, Satan sought to derail Paul’s work by opposing him far and wide. There were Galatian legalists, Colossian Gnostics, and Judaizers at every turn. There were forged letters (2 Thessalonians 2:2\). There were slanderous attacks on his integrity, his personal appearance, and his unpolished speech (2 Corinthians 10:10; 2 Corinthians 1:6\). Not to mention the physical beatings he took (2 Corinthians 11:23\-27\). He was truly “hard pressed on every side” (2 Corinthians 4:8\). Paul’s faith was the victory: “I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that He is able to keep that which I have committed unto Him against that day” (2 Timothy 1:12\). What God had committed to Paul, Paul committed back to God. And through it all, Paul looked forward to the moment when he would hear the Lord say, “Well done, good and faithful servant!” (Matthew 25:21\).
As believers in Christ, we, too, should “keep the faith.” What has God called you to do? Do it with all your might (Colossians 3:23\). Just as Paul “longed for His appearing” and anticipated receiving the “crown of righteousness” (2 Timothy 4:8\), so should we serve the Lord and faithfully fulfill His plan for our lives.
|
If Adam and Eve hadn’t sinned, introducing death into creation, wouldn’t the world have gotten overpopulated?
|
Answer
When God first created Adam and Eve, when they were still in the Garden of Eden, He charged them to be "fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth" (Genesis 1:28\). When He cursed Eve in Genesis 3:16, He told her He would greatly multiply pain in childbirth. Both passages imply that it would have been possible for Adam and Eve to have children in Eden (although there is no indication they did). If death had not entered the world, and if all of Adam and Eve’s descendants had followed God’s admonishment, eventually, the world would have been filled. But would it have been overpopulated?
This is one of those questions that usually come from a deeply entrenched modern mindset. Fear of pollution and famine and unemployment permeates our world. Almost one third of our land mass is desert. It is very likely that, in *our* world, if fertility rates were untainted by sin, and if no one ever died, the world would indeed become overpopulated.
However, the question does not concern Adam and Eve in a *fallen* world but in a perfect, sinless world—a creation imbued both with eloquent natural law and God’s miraculous power. Imagine an unfallen world with no desert, no wilderness, no unproductive land at all. Imagine a sinless creation producing many times more than our fallen world ever could. Imagine unfallen, sinless man wisely overseeing the earth’s resources and living in a charitable harmony with each other. Such a world would be completely foreign to us.
Eventually, however, the perfect, sinless world would have been filled. What then? To assume that an unfallen world could slide into something less than ideal is to doubt God’s sovereignty and creative power. He told Adam and Eve to fill the earth, and He would have had a plan once that was accomplished. Perhaps He would have simply stopped births. Or allowed the people to colonize other planets. Or just made Earth bigger.
Ultimately, the question of the unfallen world being overpopulated leads to fanciful and surreal considerations. It’s akin to asking, “If Adam and Eve had not sinned, could their perfection have caused something bad to happen?” As we know, it’s *sin* that causes bad things to happen, not righteousness; given that overpopulation would be a bad thing, it would not have been caused by perfection. God is perfect and sovereign and all\-powerful, and His creation was "very good" (Genesis 1:31\). In His foreknowledge, God even factored in the fall of mankind, and His plan of redemption was already in place (Revelation 13:8\). This fact alone makes the concept of a sinless, overpopulated world entirely academic.
|
What is Jesus Camp?
|
Answer
*Jesus Camp* is a documentary released in 2006, directed by Heidi Ewing and Rachel Grady. It features [Pentecostal](Pentecostals.html) children’s pastor Becky Fischer and her Charismatic children’s camp “Kids on Fire School of Ministry” that was operated in North Dakota. *Jesus Camp* follows Pastor Fischer and a few of the kids before, during, and after the camp. Commentary is provided by liberal Christian radio host Mike Papantonio, who gives a counter view to that of the [dominionist](dominion-theology.html) campers and their families.
*Jesus Camp* begins with a brief prologue wherein Papantonio expresses concern about what fundamentalists are teaching their children. Then the movie shows scenes from a “Changing the World Through Prayer Conference” being held in a church in Missouri. At the conference, Becky Fischer preaches about how kids need to be committed to serving God and how sin has shifted the nation away from God. She then leads children and adults in a session of [praying in tongues](praying-in-tongues.html) and being [slain in the Spirit](Spirit-slain.html). Pastor Fischer explains to the filmmakers that she wishes to instill in kids a commitment to impact society for Jesus on par with how Muslim madrasahs stir up passion in their students.
*Jesus Camp* then introduces a few of the kids. They are homeschooled and very well spoken. The homeschooling scenes focus on creationism and the repercussions of taking God out of public school. A nine\-year\-old girl prays over her bowling shot and then gives a woman a tract. Another girl, a ten\-year\-old dancer, says she tries to make sure she dances for God and not her flesh.
While the children pack for the “Kids on Fire” camp (the “Jesus Camp” of the documentary’s title) and travel to North Dakota, Pastor Fischer and her team pray over the camp’s facilities and equipment. Once camp begins, Fischer’s sermons to the campers are entertaining enough to keep the kids’ attention, but they concentrate on sin—that of the kids and of the nation. One boy gives a sermon about how they are the generation that must take back America for Jesus. Another speaker gives a message on abortion and how the kids’ influence is needed to make it illegal again. At one point, a camp counselor brings out a cardboard cutout of then\-President George W. Bush, and the kids are instructed to pray for him and his responsibility to replace the recently resigned Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor. (Critics mistakenly claim the kids are worshiping Bush.) Many sermons at the camp culminate in sessions of uncontrollable weeping and praying in tongues.
The *Jesus Camp* film then cuts to Papantonio, who warns that fundamentalists will take over the government. A voiceover then announces that Judge Samuel Alito, who many believe to be pro\-life, is confirmed to replace Justice O’Connor.
After finishing “Jesus Camp,” the boy who preached is filmed visiting New Life Church in Colorado Springs, where he watches then\-pastor Ted Haggard condemning homosexuality and encouraging his congregation to impact the nation. (The documentary was released about seven months before Haggard was accused of drug use and sexual relations with a male prostitute.) Several of the kids from camp go to Washington, D.C., where, with adults, they sing and pray over the U.S. Supreme Court and quietly protest abortion. This portion of the film ends with an interview with the children, who talk of being trained for a spiritual battle, of living without fear, and of the glory of martyrdom.
While reviewing film from the camp, Pastor Fischer expresses her pride in the passion the kids convey. She grants an interview to Papantonio—he pushes separation of church and state, while she defends teaching kids biblical truth and its application in the world. The *Jesus Camp* film ends with Pastor Fischer explaining her motivation—to bring the world to a saving relationship with Jesus. In the final scene, Fischer pulls her car into a carwash (a distorted depiction of baptism?) as a speaker on the radio encourages his listeners to fight liberalism. Then the curtain covering the carwash exit, containing two stop signs, pulls away to the side.
The *Jesus Camp* film is fairly balanced, as a documentary should be. The adults and children come across as authentic and sincere, and Pastor Fischer is pleased with her on\-screen portrayal while aware of the unflattering angle emphasized in the editing. Reaction to *Jesus Camp* has been mixed. As filmmaker Heidi Ewing said, “It was like people were watching two different movies.” Many viewers accuse Pastor Fischer of brainwashing and indoctrination; the campground where “Kids on Fire” was held was so vandalized by protestors that the owners refuse to host her camp again. Others who watched the movie said it strengthened or renewed their commitment to follow Christ. Due to the controversy, Kids on Fire has been rebranded as “Kids in Ministry International.”
Despite what some critics have claimed, the subjects of *Jesus Camp* do not represent mainstream evangelicalism. Becky Fisher and the ministry she leads are part of the [Charismatic movement](Charismatic-movement.html) and intentionally extend the Charismatic experience to children. The kids are taught to pray in tongues, be slain in the Spirit, cast out demons, and mourn for the sins of the nation. They are also trained to believe it is their responsibility to grow into an army of God that will reclaim America and make it a Christian nation again.
Several criticisms directed at Becky Fischer and her training programs are valid. First, as the *Jesus Camp* movie makes clear, she teaches erroneous Charismatic doctrine to children. Speaking in tongues, exorcising demons, and healing are overemphasized. Emotional, ecstatic experiences are valued to an unhealthy extent. Also, the Bible does not teach that the way to transform society is for Christians to seize control of secular political entities. Fischer’s most troubling message, however, is that children must “take back America for God” because adults are “too fat and lazy” to fast and pray (her words, although she may have intended them as hyperbole and self\-deprecation). Yes, abortion and rejecting God are national sins, but those burdens should not be placed on the shoulders of nine\-year\-olds to the point that they weep uncontrollably every night. There is no instance in the Bible where children were made to feel responsible for mourning and redeeming the sins of adults—not even when God told a young Samuel about Eli’s sons’ sin in 1 Samuel 3\. We are to teach children about God, about their place in God’s plan, and how to live a life for Christ in a fallen world.
*Jesus Camp* is an eye\-opening film that documents the beliefs of a segment of Pentecostalism and how those beliefs impact society. If nothing else, the film underscores the dangers of Charismatic excess and the importance of sound biblical theology (2 Timothy 1:13\).
|
What does the Bible say about reading or writing fiction?
|
Answer
The Bible is the Book of Truth. God exhorts us to speak truth and reject lies. Given the Bible’s emphasis on truth, where does fiction fit in? Is writing fiction—by definition, a made\-up story—a lie? Is it sinful to create and distribute something that is untrue? Should we read fiction? After all, 1 Timothy 1:4 tells us to avoid myths and fables.
Actually, 1 Timothy 1:4 is warning the church against getting involved in controversy over extra\-biblical conjecturing. A church’s teaching ministry should be based on the Word of God, not on the ideas, philosophies, and imaginations of men. Speculation over the existence of the [angel Raphael](angel-Raphael.html) or the color of Samson’s hair is unprofitable; dogmatism on such subjects is even worse. However, the Bible has no command against reading or writing fiction.
In fact, the Bible itself contains fiction. By that, we do *not* mean that the Bible is untrue. We mean that the Bible sometimes uses literature that would fall into the category of fiction to relate truth; stated otherwise, the Bible contains examples of storytelling. In 2 Samuel 12:1–4, Nathan the prophet tells David a *fictional* story of a man whose only lamb was stolen and killed. When the hypothetical crime incites David’s rage, Nathan reveals the story is an allegory for David’s affair with Bathsheba. Other notable fictitious stories in the Bible include Jotham’s fable (Judges 9:7–15\) and Ezekiel’s allegory (Ezekiel 17:1–8\). The greatest storyteller of all is Jesus. Every one of His parables in the Bible is a fictional story. Each one reveals a spiritual truth, but in *form* they are fiction.
To write fiction such as the Bible contains, to reveal a spiritual truth, rightly follows Jesus’ example. John Bunyan’s [*The Pilgrim’s Progress*](The-Pilgrims-Progress.html) is a work of fiction, yet it is one of the most biblically based books ever written. Many of C. S. Lewis’s stories are fictional allegories that reveal spiritual truths. Bunyan anticipated that his work would receive criticism because of his use of “feigned” (fictional) words. His defense was that fiction can be a vehicle of truth: “Some men, by feigned words as dark as mine, / Make truth to spangle, and its rays to shine!” There is no conflict between the Bible and fiction as a genre.
Does this mean that every fictional story a Christian writes, reads, or watches must, at its core, have a Christian message? No. A worthwhile story does not have to be overtly Christian, although the Bible does give us some things to consider in our fiction. Colossians 3:1–2 reminds us to set our minds on things above. Philippians 4:8 explains what those things are—the true, honorable, right, pure, and lovely. *The Lord of the Rings* is often used as an example of non\-Christian fiction from a Christian author. J. R. R. Tolkien actually despised Christian allegory—including that of his good friend C. S. Lewis. He wrote the Middle Earth books as an allegory of war and the downside of technological advancement with no intended spiritual message. It was inevitable, however, that his beliefs saturated his story, filling the plots with such biblical values as courage, unity of purpose, and self\-sacrifice.
The Bible allows for the use of fiction. Of course, whether the fictional stories are spiritual allegory, historical fiction, or simple entertainment, Christian authors still need to apply biblical guidelines and Christian readers need to exercise [biblical discernment](spiritual-discernment.html). Ephesians 4:29 says, “Let no unwholesome word proceed from your mouth, but only such a word as is good for edification according to the need of the moment, so that it will give grace to those who hear.” A few verses later, Paul admonishes, “There must be no filthiness and silly talk, or coarse jesting” (Ephesians 5:4\). Writers of fiction need to remember that, even if they intend their fiction as pure entertainment, all stories contain an element of teaching. And the Bible says that teaching is a spiritually serious endeavor (James 3:1\), no matter what the medium.
|
Why is marital infidelity so destructive?
|
Answer
Marital infidelity, or unfaithfulness, occurs when a partner in a marriage goes outside the marriage to engage in a sexual relationship with someone else. Most everyone understands that marital infidelity is not good; many surveys reveal that close to 90 percent of Americans, Christian or not, believe marital infidelity to be wrong. However, statistically speaking, between 30 and 50 percent of Americans will cheat on their spouses. There are a number of reasons for people engaging in adultery, but there is no justification for sin, and its destructive nature must be acknowledged.
Marital infidelity does not lead to happiness. God designed sex to be enjoyed within a committed marital relationship; to remove sex from that context is to pervert its use and severely limit its enjoyment. Sexual contact involves a level of intimacy not possible in any other human relationship. When God brought Adam and Eve together in marriage, He established the “one flesh” relationship. Genesis 2:24 tells us that a man should leave his family, join to his wife, and become “one flesh” with her. This idea is carried through the New Testament as well; we see it in Jesus’ words in Matthew 19:5 and Mark 10:7\. Paul elaborates on the “one flesh” idea in 1 Corinthians 6:12–20\. He says that when a man has sex with a prostitute, they have become “one body” (verse 16\). It’s clear that there is something special about the sexual relationship; it is not simply a biological function.
Marital infidelity is highly destructive to a marriage because two people becoming “one flesh” involves more than just physical intimacy. During sex, there is a sharing of emotions as well as bodies. The Old Testament euphemism for sexual intercourse has to do with “knowing” one another—a significant word. During sex, the most intimate of human encounters, a person can be said to truly “know” someone else. The level of trust required for this act makes one extremely vulnerable, and this is one reason why sex should be limited to the marital relationship. Marriage allows for vulnerability without fear; each spouse is protected by the other’s commitment and the stability inherent in a covenantal relationship. To violate that trust through infidelity is devastating to the individual and to the marriage. It is the betrayal of a confidence, the breaking of a vow, the shattering of security, and the severing of a union.
Marital infidelity is not an automatic death knell for a marriage. Reports say that 60 to 75 percent of couples who have experienced a betrayal stay together. However, this does not mean that these relationships are healed or that the trust and commitment have been regained. In many cases, a couple stays together after marital infidelity not because they’re happy together but because they’re afraid of the alternative. However, there are other couples who commit to the hard work of dealing with the problem, identifying weaknesses, and correcting mistakes. Such couples have an excellent chance not only of staying together but of coming through the process with a strong, happy, fulfilling marriage.
It is important to remember that marital infidelity, like all sins, can be forgiven. The adulterer or adulteress is not beyond the reach of God’s grace (Isaiah 59:1\). As the sinner repents and God forgives, the betrayed partner is also obliged to forgive. Jesus said that, if we do not forgive the sins of others, our own sins will not be forgiven (Matthew 6:15\). To “[forgive and forget](forgive-forget.html)” is not instinctive, and it’s not easy. The road to restoration will be long and painful. But God’s grace is always sufficient.
|
What is the sea of glass mentioned in Revelation 4:6 and 15:2?
|
Answer
Twice in the book of Revelation, John mentions a “sea of glass” near the throne of God. John does not elaborate much about what this sea of glass actually is. Is it water that looks like glass? Is it smooth or rough like broken glass? Does it move like the waves of the sea, or is it stationary? As we know it, the sea is a dynamic, moving force, but “glass” gives the impression of stillness. How can a sea be made of glass? What is John talking about?
Revelation 4:6 says, “Before the throne there was as it were a sea of glass, like crystal.” And Revelation 15:2 says, “I saw what appeared to be a sea of glass mingled with fire.” In neither verse does John say that he saw a literal sea of glass; rather, he says, “There was *as it were* a sea of glass” and “I saw *what appeared to be* a sea of glass.” The words of comparison make a big difference. It is one thing to say you were struck by lightning; it is quite another thing to say you *feel as if* you were struck by lightning.
Apparently, what John saw was impossible to describe – it was so different from anything he had seen that he was compelled to describe it using a contradictory statement. Expressing the inexpressible may demand an oxymoron. Whatever John saw, it obviously had qualities both of the sea and of glass. Perhaps it had the sea’s motion and expanse and glass’s transparency and purity. Add to that the words “crystal” and “mingled with fire,” and chances are that John was trying to convey the vivid brilliance, vast expanse, and lucid purity of what he saw.
Daniel’s vision of four beasts. Ezekiel’s vision of wheels with eyes. John’s vision of a sea of crystalline glass. Any time the prophets described visions of the spiritual world, they were forced to use metaphorical language, and that can be confusing. Finite human language cannot fully describe infinite things. The human mind is too limited to apprehend all the realities of the spiritual realm. But we have this confidence: the prophets and apostles wrote under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and the words they chose are the best possible communication. Daniel, Ezekiel, and John faithfully described what they saw, and we must faithfully attempt to “decode” their descriptions. For now, we see “through a glass darkly,” and, to a certain degree, the “sea of glass” and other heavenly verities will remain mysteries – until we see them for ourselves with glorified eyes and minds.
|
Who are the Shakers?
|
Answer
The Shakers, formally the United Society of Believers in Christ’s Second Appearing, are a Christian cult that combines elements of Quakerism and Charismatic worship practices. Their beliefs can be hard to codify, as all congregants are allowed to prophesy and all prophecies are considered inspired.
**History:** The Shakers broke off from the Religious Society of Friends (the Quakers) in 1747 in England. The more informal name is a contraction of "shaking Quakers," as they were heavily influenced by French Charismatics who had fled to England to avoid persecution. The first Shakers were Jane and James Wardley, former Quakers who claimed to have received a divine command to start the one true church. Ann Lee became a devout convert and joined their group. While in England, the Shakers were often incarcerated for disturbing the peace (often in other church services) and persecuted for their beliefs. Ann and eight of her followers immigrated to America in 1774 to escape the persecution. Six years later, they absorbed the members of a failed revival and announced that the millennium had begun.
When the Revolutionary War began, many Shakers were arrested due to the group’s English background, belief in pacifism, and refusal to take oaths. Despite the opposition, membership increased through proselytizing, adoption, and accepting indentured children. Many were drawn to the Shakers’ utopian ideals, communal living, and leadership opportunities for women. Their numbers reached 6,000 at one point, but membership later declined in large part due to an insistence on celibacy and laws prohibiting adoption by religious organizations. As of 2011, there were only three known Shakers in America. Several former Shaker communities have become museums.
**Beliefs:** The Shakers held four basic beliefs: celibacy (they taught that sexual intercourse is the root of sin), Christian communion, confession of sin, and separation from the world. The Quaker influence was seen in the form of pacifism, the rejection of ordained clergy, and the practice of “Spirit\-led” worship. Shakers also preached the importance of repentance since the millennium was imminent.
The most influential Shaker leader, Ann Lee, had lost four children as infants and claimed to have received messages from God saying that sex was evil. As a result, abstinence was required in the church as preparation for heaven, where there will be no marriage. Shaker belief was uniquely gender\-equal; the wife was subject to her husband, but if she had no husband, she was equal in every way to men (Ann Lee’s husband left her shortly after their arrival in America). This gender\-neutrality was also reflected in the Shaker belief that God is both male and female. Jesus was seen as the male manifestation of God and the leader of the first Christian Church. The Holy Spirit is Christ, who is separate from Jesus. Mother Ann Lee was the female manifestation of God, the second coming of Christ, the leader of the second Christian Church, and the Bride of Jesus. Shakers believed salvation was based on obedience through four historical dispensations: circumcision in the time of the Patriarchs, the Mosaic Law, the way of the cross, and following God in the new kingdom.
**Worship style:** As the Shakers were Charismatic, their services included much prophesying and speaking in tongues. They also danced and shook. Anyone, regardless of gender, class, or education, could preach or prophesy. Music was especially important in Shaker worship, and revelations could take the form of new songs. Ecstatic dancing and spontaneous speaking in tongues were later standardized and developed into hymns and dances which Shakers performed regularly. Shaker music has influenced such modern artists as Aaron Copland, R.E.M., Weezer, and Joel Cohen.
**Lifestyle:** The Shakers lived together in communities removed from worldly influences. Each community was ruled by two men and two women. They were strictly celibate; men and women lived in segregated dormitories, coming together during the day to worship and work. Even the work was usually segregated. Their emphasis on community over family as the primary social unit resulted in much suspicion among outsiders. Conversely, their simplicity, self\-reliance, productivity, and craftsmanship were highly respected.
**Art and architecture:** Today, Shakers are perhaps better known for their inventions and woodworking than for their religion. Their designs were part of a greater architectural movement known as Craftsman or Arts and Crafts which emphasized strong lines, high\-quality workmanship, and natural materials. Shaker\-made furnishings are beautiful, functional and unostentatious. Shaker inventions include the circular saw, the clothespin, the modern broom, and many other items we still use today.
**Conclusion:** Theologically, the Shakers are a legalistic cult developed by a deceived, emotionally wounded woman. Their practice of communal living was not sinful, just unnecessary. Their equating of sex with sin, however, is decidedly unbiblical. Shaker worship practices are unbiblical insofar as they are influenced by heretical belief. Jesus is the Christ. The Holy Spirit is not. Ann Lee was not the second coming of Christ, and she was not the female manifestation of God. The Holy Spirit would never influence someone to prophesy contrary to Scripture.
The most important contributions of the Shakers to society are beautiful furniture, mechanical devices, and architecture. The theological beliefs of the Shakers should be avoided.
|
Who were the Edomites?
|
Answer
The Edomites were the descendants of Esau, the firstborn son of Isaac and the twin brother of Jacob. In the womb, Esau and Jacob struggled together, and God told their mother, Rebekah, that they would become two nations, with the older one serving the younger (Genesis 25:23\). As an adult, Esau rashly sold his inheritance to Jacob for a bowl of red soup (Genesis 25:30\-34\), and he hated his brother afterward. Esau became the father of the Edomites and Jacob became the father of the Israelites, and the two nations continued to struggle through most of their history. In the Bible, “Seir” (Joshua 24:4\), “Bozrah” (Isaiah 63:1\) and “Sela” (2 Kings 14:7\) are references to Edom’s land and capital. Sela is better known today as Petra.
The name “[Edom](Edom-in-the-Bible.html)” comes from a Semitic word meaning “red,” and the land south of the Dead Sea was given that name because of the red sandstone so prominent in the topography. Esau, because of the soup for which he traded his birthright, became known as Edom, and later moved his family into the hill country of the same name. Genesis 36 recounts the early history of the Edomites, stating that they had kings reigning over them long before Israel had a king (Genesis 36:31\). The religion of the Edomites was similar to that of other pagan societies who worshiped fertility gods. Esau’s descendants eventually dominated the southern lands and made their living by agriculture and trade. One of the ancient trade routes, the King’s Highway (Numbers 20:17\) passed through Edom, and when the Israelites requested permission to use the route on their exodus from Egypt, they were rejected by force.
Because they were close relatives, the Israelites were forbidden to hate the Edomites (Deuteronomy 23:7\). However, the Edomites regularly attacked Israel, and many wars were fought as a result. King Saul fought against the Edomites, and King David subjugated them, establishing military garrisons in Edom. With control over Edomite territory, Israel had access to the port of Ezion\-Geber on the Red Sea, from which King Solomon sent out many expeditions. After the reign of Solomon, the Edomites revolted and had some freedom until they were subdued by the Assyrians under Tiglath\-pileser.
During the Maccabean wars, the Edomites were subjugated by the Jews and forced to convert to Judaism. Through it all, the Edomites maintained much of their old hatred for the Jews. When Greek became the common language, the Edomites were called Idumaeans. With the rise of the Roman Empire, an Idumaean whose father had converted to Judaism was named king of Judea. That Idumaean is known in history as King Herod the Great, the tyrant who ordered a massacre in Bethlehem in an attempt to kill the Christ child (Matthew 2:16\-18\).
After Herod’s death, the Idumaean people slowly disappeared from history. God had foretold the destruction of the Edomites in Ezekiel 35, saying, “As you rejoiced over the inheritance of the house of Israel, because it was desolate, so I will deal with you; you shall be desolate, [Mount Seir](mount-Seir.html), and all Edom, all of it. Then they will know that I am the Lord” (Ezekiel 35:15\). Despite Edom’s constant efforts to rule over the Jews, God’s prophecy to Rebekah was fulfilled: the older child served the younger, and Israel proved stronger than Edom.
|
Why is the idea of eternal damnation so repulsive to many people?
|
Answer
In the shifting winds of modern cultures, the idea of everlasting torment and damnation is difficult for many people to grasp. Why is this? The Bible makes it clear that hell is a literal place. Christ spoke more about hell than He did of heaven. Not only Satan and his minions will be punished there; *everyone* who rejects Jesus Christ will spend eternity right along with them. A desire to reject or revise the doctrine of hell will not mitigate its flames or make the place go away. Still, the idea of eternal damnation is spurned by many, and here are some reasons for it:
*The influence of contemporary thought.* In this postmodern era, many go to great lengths to assure no one is offended, and the biblical doctrine of hell is considered offensive. It is too harsh, too old\-fashioned, too insensitive. The wisdom of this world is focused on this life, with no thought of the life to come.
*Fear.* Never\-ending, conscious punishment devoid of any hope is indeed a frightening prospect. Many people would rather ignore the source of fear than face it and deal with it biblically. The fact is, hell should be frightening, considering it is the place of judgment originally created for the devil and his angels (Matthew 25:41\).
*A flawed view of God’s love.* Many who reject the idea of eternal damnation do so because they find it difficult to believe that a loving God could banish people to a place as horrific as hell for all eternity. However, God’s love does not negate His justice, His righteousness, or His holiness. Neither does His justice negate His love. In fact, God’s love has provided the way to escape His wrath: the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross (John 3:16\-18\).
*A downplaying of sin.* Some find it shockingly unfair that the recompense for a mere *lifetime* of sinning should be an *eternal* punishment. Others reject the idea of hell because, in their minds, sin isn’t all that bad. Certainly not bad enough to warrant eternal torture. Of course, it is usually our *own* sin that we downplay; *other* people might deserve hell—murderers and the like. This attitude reveals a misunderstanding of the universally heinous nature of sin. The problem is an insistence on our own basic goodness, which precludes thoughts of a fiery judgment and denies the truth of Romans 3:10 (“There is no one righteous, not even one”). The egregiousness of iniquity compelled Christ to the cross. God hated sin to death.
*Aberrant theories.* Another reason people reject the concept of eternal damnation is that they have been taught alternative theories. One such theory is universalism, which says that everyone will eventually make it to heaven. Another theory is annihilationism, in which the existence of hell is acknowledged, but its eternal nature is denied. Annihilationists believe that those who end up in hell will eventually die and cease to exist (i.e., they will be annihilated). This theory simply makes hell a temporary punishment. Both these theories are presented as viable options to the biblical teaching on hell; however, both make the mistake of placing human opinion over divine revelation.
*Incomplete teaching.* Many contemporary pastors who *do* believe in the doctrine of hell consider it simply too delicate a subject to preach on. This further contributes to the modern denial of hell. Congregants in churches where hell is not preached are ignorant of what the Bible says on the subject and are prime candidates for deception on the issue. A pastor’s responsibility is “to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints” (Jude 1:3\), not pick and choose what parts of the Bible to leave out.
*Satan’s ploys.* Satan’s first lie was a denial of judgment. In the Garden of Eden, the serpent told Eve, “You will not surely die” (Genesis 3:4\). It is still one of Satan’s main tactics. “The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers” (2 Corinthians 4:4\), and the blindness he produces includes a denial of God’s holy decrees. Convince the unsaved that there is no judgment, and they can “eat, drink and be merry” with no care for the future.
If we understand the nature of our Creator, we should have no difficulty understanding the concept of hell. “\[God] is the Rock, His works are *perfect*, and all His ways are *just*. A faithful God who *does no wrong, upright and just is He*” (Deuteronomy 32:4, emphasis added). His desire is that no one perish but that all come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9\).
To contradict the Bible’s teaching on hell is to say, essentially, “If *I* were God, I would not make hell like that.” The problem with such a mindset is its inherent pride—it smugly suggests that we can improve on God’s plan. However, we are not wiser than God; we are not more loving or more just. Rejecting or revising the biblical doctrine of hell carries a sad irony, which one writer put this way: “The only result of attempts, however well meaning, to air\-condition hell is to assure that more and more people wind up there.”
|
How can I recognize and understand biblical symbolism?
|
Answer
The language of the Bible is rich with metaphor. The biblical writers used familiar, everyday objects to symbolize spiritual truth. Symbols are quite common in the poetic and prophetic portions of the Bible. By its very nature, poetry relies heavily on figurative language; when Solomon calls his bride “a [lily](lily-of-the-valley.html) among thorns” (Song of Solomon 2:2\), he is using symbols to declare the desirability and uniqueness of the Shulamite. Prophecy, too, contains much figurative imagery. Isaiah often used trees and forests as symbols of strength (e.g., Isaiah 10:18\-19; 32:19\). Daniel saw “a goat with a prominent horn between his eyes” who “came from the west . . . without touching the ground” (Daniel 8:5\), and we interpret this as a kingdom (Greece) and its king (Alexander the Great) who speedily conquered the world.
Jesus’ teaching was full of symbolism. He presented Himself as a Shepherd, a Sower, a Bridegroom, a Door, a Cornerstone, a Vine, Light, Bread, and Water. He likened the kingdom of heaven to a wedding feast, a seed, a tree, a field, a net, a pearl, and yeast. There are dozens, if not hundreds, of other symbols in the Bible.
Note that a literal interpretation of the Bible allows for figurative language. Here’s a simple rule: if the *literal* meaning of a passage leads to obvious absurdity, but a *figurative* meaning yields clarity, then the passage is probably using symbols. For example, in Exodus 19:4, God tells Israel, “I carried you on eagles’ wings.” A literal reading of this statement would lead to absurdity—God did not use real eagles to airlift His people out of Egypt. The statement is obviously symbolic; God is emphasizing the speed and strength with which He delivered Israel. This leads to another rule of biblical interpretation: a symbol will have a non\-symbolic meaning. In other words, there is something real (a real person, a real historical event, a real trait) behind every figure of speech.
Here are a few symbols used in the Bible:
**Old Testament**
**Walk with God:** To "walk" with someone is to live in fellowship and harmony with him. Since God can only live in a way that reflects His holy character, to "walk with God" is to live according the path He has laid out, to obey Him.
*Genesis 5:22; 6:9; Deuteronomy 10:12; Joshua 22:5; 1 Kings 8:23; Micah 6:8*
**Dust, stars, sand:** The Bible often uses these metaphors to represent the number of descendants God promised to Abraham. This would include Abraham’s *physical* descendants (Jews and Arabs) as well as Abraham’s *spiritual* progeny (those who live by faith, Galatians 3:7\).
*Genesis 13:16; 15:5; 26:4; 28:14; 32:12; Exodus 32:13; Isaiah 48:19; Jeremiah 33:22; Hebrews 11:12*
**Flowing with milk and honey:** God often referred to Canaan as "a land flowing with milk and honey." An abundance of milk and honey was symbolic of lush, fertile farmland, plenty of water, and rich grass for dairy animals and flowers for bees. Milk and honey were two of the most prized foods in Old Testament times, and a land "flowing" with them would be very desirable.
*Exodus 3:8; 17; 13:5; 33:3; Leviticus 20:24; Numbers 13:27; 14:8; 16:13, 14; Deuteronomy 6:3; 11:9; 26:9, 15; 27:3; 31:20; Josh. 5:6; Song of Solomon 4:11; 5:1; Isaiah 7:22; Jeremiah 11:5, 32:22; Ezekiel 20:6, 15*
**Circumcised hearts:** Physical circumcision was the sign of the covenant between God and His chosen people, the Jews. It was, of course, an external alteration. What God really wanted, though, was an internal alteration—a *spiritual* circumcision, as it were. To have one’s *heart* circumcised was to fully identify with Him. It is not enough to obey His Word on the outside; we must be characterized by His Word on the inside.
*Deuteronomy 10:16; 30:6; Jeremiah 4:4; 2:28\-29*
**Cedars of Lebanon:** In Israel, large trees were hard to come by and very valuable. The [cedars in Lebanon](cedars-of-Lebanon.html) grow up to 130 feet tall with trunks up to eight feet in diameter. They were valued for their resin, which Egyptians used in mummification, and wood, which was used to build ships. The cedars are used symbolically in the Bible to represent strength and stature or pride.
*Judges 9:15; 2 Kings 19:23; Psalm 29:5; 72:16; 104:16; Song of Solomon 5:15; Isaiah 2:13; 14:8; 37:24; Hosea 14:5\-6; Zechariah 11:1*
**Hearts of stone or flesh:** A heart of stone is emblematic of a spiritually dead heart that cannot respond to God’s grace. God promises to remove our heart of stone and replace it with a living, loving heart that can follow Him.
*Ezekiel 11:19; 36:26*
**Ephraim and Judah:** In the divided kingdom, the ten tribes in the north were many times collectively called “Ephraim” after the most prominent tribe living there. The tribes in the south were often referred to as “Judah” after the most prominent southern tribe. This particular figure of speech, in which a part is substituted for the whole, is called metonymy.
*Isaiah 7:9, 17; 9:21*
**New Testament**
**Ramah and Rachel:** Ramah was a small town about five miles from Jerusalem. Rachel was one of Jacob’s wives buried near Bethlehem (Genesis 35:19\). Ramah mourning and Rachel weeping in the book of Jeremiah are symbols of the sadness experienced when Judah was conquered by Babylon and sent into exile. Matthew quotes Jeremiah and furthers the metaphor, applying it to Herod’s massacre of the babies in Bethlehem. Ramah becomes a symbol of Bethlehem, and Rachel becomes a symbol of the grieving mothers there.
*Jeremiah 31:15; Matthew 2:18*
**Shaking the dust off one’s feet:** In New Testament times, a devout Jew would shake the dust off his feet when he left a Gentile city to symbolically cleanse himself of ungodly practices. Jesus told His disciples to do the same if a Jewish household or village rejected the message of the Messiah.
*Matthew 10:14; Mark 6:11; Luke 9:5*
**Whitewashed tombs:** A whitewashed tomb is a stone crypt that is clean and well kept on the outside but filled with bones and death. Jesus used this image as a symbol to represent hypocrites—religious people who do not follow God in their hearts.
*Matthew 23:27; Luke 11:44*
**Capstone:** A capstone is one of the top stones on a wall. Metaphorically, it is the finishing touch or the crowning achievement. Jesus used this symbol of Himself.
*Mark 12:10; 1 Peter 2:6\-7*
**Slave/servant of Christ:** The New Testament writers use the idea of being a slave or servant of Christ to symbolize our responsibility to do the will of Christ and not be self\-serving. It is sometimes juxtaposed with its alternative of being a slave to sin; a believer is set free from sin and is now led by the Spirit. An indentured servant, after fulfilling his obligation to his master, could volunteer to stay and serve his master for life—a picture of how we serve Christ willingly.
*Romans 1:1; Galatians 1:10; Colossians 1:7; 1 Timothy 4:6; Titus 1:1; James 1:1; 2 Peter 1:1; Jude 1:1; Revelation 1:1*
**Animals**
**Serpent:** Snakes are mentioned many times in the Bible, and never in a positive light. In Genesis and Revelation, the serpent symbolizes Satan. The serpent of Eden is described as crafty—an idea Jesus reiterates in Matthew 10\. In Hebrew, the noun for “serpent” is related to the verb for “divining and fortune\-telling.”
*Genesis 3:1, 14; 49:17; Numbers 21:6; Deuteronomy 32:33; Job 26:13; Psalm 58:4; 91:13; 140:3; Proverbs 23:32; 30:19; Isaiah 14:29; 65:25; Matthew 10:16; 23:33; Luke 10:19; Revelation 12:9, 14, 15; 20:2*
**Lion:** Lions in the Bible can represent power. A lion devours prey and lies down without fear. The Bible compares God (Hosea 5:14\), Jesus (Revelation 5:5\), and even Satan (1 Peter 5:8\) to a lion.
*Genesis 49:9; Numbers 23:24; 24:9; Deuteronomy 33:20, 22; 1 Chronicles 12:8; Job 4:10, 11; 10:16; 28:8; 38:39; Psalm 10:9; 91:13; 104:21; Proverbs 19:12; Ecclesiastes 9:4; Isaiah 5:29; 11:6, 7; Jeremiah 2:15, 30; 4:7; 12:8; Ezekiel 1:10; 19:2, 3; 19:6; Daniel 7:4; 2 Timothy 4:17; Revelation 4:7; 9:17; 10:3*
**Dog:** Dogs in Bible times were not cherished family pets. They were mongrels who ran wild and scavenged. Jews often referred to Gentiles as "dogs"—not a complimentary epithet. Jesus’ interaction with the Syro\-Phoenician woman in Matthew 15 shows how He ministered to the "dogs" and the children, both.
*Exodus 11:7; Deuteronomy 23:18; 1 Samuel 17:43; 24:14; 2 Samuel 16:9; Job 30:1; Psalm 22:20, 16; 59:6; 68:23; Proverbs 26:11; 26:17; Ecclesiastes 9:4; Isaiah 56:11; Jeremiah 15:3; Matthew 7:6; 15:27; Philippians 3:2; Revelation 22:15*
**Sheep:** Sheep are herd animals who are amazingly dependent on a shepherd for their well\-being. And they are the animal most used by God to symbolize His followers. Jesus is the Good Shepherd, and we are the sheep who recognize His voice, follow Him, and rely on Him for our safety and provision.
*Numbers 27:17; 1 Kings 22:17; 2 Chronicles 18:16; Psalm 23:1; 44:11, 22; 49:14; 74:1; 78:52; 95:7; 119:176; Isaiah 53:6, 7; Jeremiah 23:1; 50:6; Ezekiel 34:11, 12; 34:17; Matthew 9:36; 10:6; 26:31; John 10:11, 16, 26*
We interpret the Bible literally, but this this does not mean we ignore symbols and metaphorical language. God’s written communication to the world is a richly textured literary masterpiece and makes full use of the tools of language, including symbolism, metaphor, simile, and motif.
|
Who was Deborah in the Bible?
|
Answer
Deborah was one of the judges of Israel during a time of oppression. She is called a prophetess and the wife of Lappidoth. The Lord spoke through her as she held court under a tree called “the Palm of Deborah” in Ephraim. The Lord also used her to set her people free and defeat the king of Canaan. Deborah’s story is found in Judges, chapters 4 and 5\.
Deborah was Israel’s only female judge. Some scholars have suggested that her position as judge was itself a judgment on the weak\-willed men of Israel. Because Israel’s men were unfit to judge, God chose a woman for the job, partly to shame the men who should have taken the leadership. Other commentators believe that Deborah’s role as judge was a sign of God’s comforting presence in the midst of His oppressed and downtrodden people.
When Deborah became judge, the Israelites had been subjugated for 20 years by Jabin, king of Canaan. The commander of Jabin’s army was named [Sisera](Sisera-in-the-Bible.html), and he had 900 iron chariots – formidable weapons against Israel’s foot soldiers (Judges 4:3\). The Israelites were treated very cruelly by Sisera and his army, and Israel’s spirits were very low. Deborah describes the hardship of living under Jabin and Sisera this way: “The highways were abandoned, and travelers kept to the byways. The villagers ceased in Israel; they ceased to be” (Judges 5:6\-7\). In other words, people feared to leave their homes; traveling was very dangerous.
God’s word comes through Deborah to a man of Naphtali named Barak. The message is that he will lead the revolt against Sisera. Barak’s response is, “I’ll only go if Deborah goes with me” (Judges 4:8\). Everyone was afraid of Sisera, including Barak. Deborah agrees to accompany Barak, but she also prophesies that the honor for the victory would belong to a woman, not to Barak (Judges 4:9\).
When the time came for battle, God again spoke through Deborah, who prompted Barak to marshal his forces. The Israelites came against the army of Sisera, and God granted the victory. The mighty Sisera himself was brought down by the hand of a woman, just as Deborah had said. As the commander rested after the battle, a woman named Jael drove a tent peg through his head.
Who was Deborah in the Bible? We can see that God’s power is what matters, regardless of the instrument He chooses to use. Man or woman, strong or weak, confident or hesitant – all are strong when they are moved by God’s Spirit and filled with His strength. We can also see in Deborah a picture of God’s tender care for His people. As a mother cares for her children, so Deborah led and nurtured Israel (Judges 5:7\).
|
What does the Bible say about lying?
|
Answer
The Bible is clear that lying is a sin and is displeasing to God. The first sin in this world involved a lie told to Eve. The Ten Commandments given to Moses includes: “You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor” (Exodus 20:16\).
In the early church, Ananias and Sapphira lied regarding a donation in order to make themselves look more generous than they really were. Peter’s rebuke is stern: “Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit?” (Acts 5:3\). God’s judgment was sterner: the couple died as a result of their sin of lying (Acts 5:1–11\).
Colossians 3:9 says, “Do not lie to each other, since you have taken off your old self with its practices.” Lying is listed in 1 Timothy 1:9\-11 as something practiced by the lawless. Furthermore, liars will be among those judged in the end (Revelation 21:8\). In contrast, God never lies (Titus 1:2\). He is the source of truth. “It is impossible for God to lie” (Numbers 23:19\).
Jesus called Himself the way, the truth, and the life (John 14:6\), and He expects those who follow Him to be people of truth. The truth is to be expressed in love (Ephesians 4:15\), offering hope to those seeking redemption from the lies of the world.
For an explanation of the instances in the Bible in which lying appears to be acceptable, please see our "[Is it ever right to lie?](right-to-lie.html)" article.
|
What is a bondservant / bond-servant?
|
Answer
A bondservant is a slave. In some Bibles the word *bondservant* is the translation of the Greek word *doulos*, which means “one who is subservient to, and entirely at the disposal of, his master; a slave.” Other translations use the word *slave* or *servant*.
In Roman times, the term *bondservant* or *slave* could refer to someone who voluntarily served others. But it usually referred to one who was held in a permanent position of servitude. Under Roman law, a bondservant was considered the owner’s personal property. Slaves essentially had no rights and could even be killed with impunity by their owners.
The Hebrew word for “bondservant,” *‘ebed*, had a similar connotation. However, the Mosaic Law allowed an indentured servant to become a bondservant voluntarily: “If the servant declares, ‘I love my master and my wife and children and do not want to go free,’ then his master must take him before the judges. He shall take him to the door or the doorpost and pierce his ear with an awl. Then he will be his servant for life” (Exodus 21:5\-6\).
Many prominent men of the Old Testament were referred to as servants. God spoke of Abraham as His servant (Genesis 26:24; Numbers 12:7\). Joshua is called the servant of the Lord (Joshua 24:29\), as are David (2 Samuel 7:5\) and Isaiah (Isaiah 20:3\). Even the Messiah is called God’s Servant (Isaiah 53:11\). In all of these instances, the term *servant* carries the idea of humble nobility. Being God’s servant is an honorable position.
During the time of Jesus and the first\-century church, as much as one third of the Roman population were slaves, and another third had been slaves earlier in life. It was common for freeborn men and women to work side\-by\-side with slaves as street sweepers, dockworkers, doctors, teachers, and business managers. Convicted criminals became bondservants of the state and usually died working in the mines or on galleys.
Historical records reveal that it was not unusual for Jews to own slaves during the New Testament period. Because slavery was a familiar part of the culture, Jesus sometimes referred to slaves and owners in His parables (e.g., Matthew 25:14\-30 and Luke 12:41\-48\). Also, Jesus taught that the greatest in God’s kingdom would have to become “the servant of all” (Mark 9:35\). Such a concept was unthinkable to a Roman citizen, who prided himself in his freedom and would never identify himself as a bondservant. But Jesus’ kingdom is not of this world (John 18:36\), and the selfish values of earth are of no consequence in heaven.
Throughout the New Testament, the word *bondservant*, *slave*, or *servant* is applied metaphorically to someone absolutely devoted to Jesus. Paul, Timothy, James, Peter, and Jude all describe themselves as “bondservants of Christ” (Romans 1:1; Philippians 1:1; James 1:1; 2 Peter 1:1; Jude 1:1, NKJV).
Believers today should still consider themselves bondservants or slaves of Christ (1 Corinthians 7:22; Ephesians 6:6; 2 Timothy 2:24\). He is our Lord, and our allegiance is due to Him alone. As bondservants, we renounce other masters (Matthew 6:24\) and give ourselves totally to Him (Matthew 16:24\).
Being a bondservant of Christ is not drudgery. His “burden is light” (Matthew 11:30\). Also, we have this promise: “Now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves to God, the benefit you reap leads to holiness, and the result is eternal life” (Romans 6:22\).
|
What does the Bible say about peace?
|
Answer
Peace is something everyone wants, yet few seem to find. What is peace? It can be defined as “tranquility, harmony, or security.” Depending on the situation, it could mean “prosperity” or “well\-being.” Various forms of the word *peace* are found 429 times in the King James Version of the Bible. There are different types of peace, including false peace, inner peace, peace with God, and peace with man.
In the Old Testament, the primary Hebrew word for “peace” is *shalom*, and it refers to relationships between people (Genesis 34:21\), nations (1 Kings 5:12\), and God with men (Psalm 85:8\). Peace is a desired status in each of these arenas, and *shalom* is often tied to a covenant or a promise kept. A familiar friend (literally, “friend of my peace” in Psalm 41:9\) is one with whom you would be at ease, a trusted companion. “Peace” was the standard greeting (1 Samuel 25:6\), still used in many cultures today.
Peace is directly related to the actions and attitudes of individuals; but it is ultimately a gift from God (Isaiah 45:7; Leviticus 26:6; John 14:27\). The presence of peace indicates God’s blessing on man’s obedience (Isaiah 32:17; Malachi 2:5\) and faith (Isaiah 26:3\). There is no peace for the wicked (Isaiah 48:22\).
As valuable as peace is, it is not surprising to find that it is sometimes counterfeited. Empty promises of peace can be used to manipulate others. Deceitful men speak words of peace while secretly planning evil (Obadiah 1:7\). The Antichrist will confirm a treaty, producing a temporary peace which he will then abruptly shatter as he reveals his true colors (Daniel 9:27\). False teachers proclaim peace when God is actually proclaiming judgment (Ezekiel 13:10\-16\). In Jeremiah’s day, the religious leaders dealt only with the symptoms of the national problems, without addressing the sinful root of the crisis. These false prophets declared everything was well between God and Israel: “Peace, peace,” they said, when there was no real peace (Jeremiah 6:14\).
In the New Testament, the primary Greek word for “peace” is *eirene*, and it refers to rest and tranquility. A key focus of peace in the New Testament is the advent of Jesus Christ, as announced by the angels in Luke 2:14 (“Peace on earth . . .”). Isaiah had predicted the Messiah would be the Prince of Peace (Isaiah 9:6\), and He is called the Lord of peace in 2 Thessalonians 3:16\. It is through Christ’s work of justification that we can have peace with God (Romans 5:1\), and that peace will keep our hearts and minds secure (Philippians 4:7\).
God commands us to seek peace (Psalm 34:14; Matthew 5:9\). We should “make every effort to do what leads to peace” (Romans 14:19\). Of course, there will be some people who do not desire peace, but we are still to do our utmost to be at peace with them (Romans 12:18\).
Believers have an obligation to “let the peace of God rule” in their hearts (Colossians 3:15\). This means we have the choice either to trust God’s promises (letting His peace rule) or to rely on ourselves and reject the peace He offers. Jesus gave His disciples peace based on the truth that He has overcome the world (John 14:27; 16:33\). Peace is a fruit of the Spirit, so, if we are allowing the Spirit of God to rule in our lives, we will experience His peace (Galatians 5:22\-23\). To be spiritually minded brings life and peace, according to Romans 8:6\.
The world will continue to have wars and interpersonal conflicts until Jesus comes to establish true, lasting peace (see Isaiah 11:1\-10\), but God will give His peace to those who trust Him. Jesus took the chastisement of our peace (Isaiah 53:5\) and has made it possible for us to have peace with God. Once His peace rules in our hearts, we are able to share that peace with others; we become publishers of peace (Isaiah 52:7\) and ministers of reconciliation (2 Corinthians 5:18\).
|
What is Christian dominionism?
|
Answer
*Dominionism*, or *Christian Dominionism* is a term coined by social scientists and popularized by journalists to refer to a subset of American Christianity that is conservative, politically active, and believes that Christians should, and eventually will, take control of the government. The term is sometimes used as a “catch\-all” by bloggers to describe any politically active Christian, but not every conservative, politically minded Christian is a Dominionist.
Christian Dominionists believe that God desires Christians to rise to power through civil systems so that His Word might then govern the nation. The belief that “[America is a Christian nation](Christian-nation.html)” is sometimes called “soft dominionism”; the idea that God wants only Christians to hold government office and run the country according to biblical law is called “hard dominionism.”
[Dominion theology’s](dominion-theology.html) beliefs are based on Genesis 1:28, which says, "Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and **have dominion** over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth" (emphasis added).
This verse is taken by Christian Dominionists as a divine mandate to claim dominion over the earth, physically, spiritually, and politically. However, this is taking a large step away from the text, which only says to have dominion over the creatures of earth, and to “subdue” the earth. It is likely that this verse simply means for humanity to a) multiply and expand over the face of the earth instead of staying in one place and b) keep and take care of all other living things. There were no political entities in Genesis 1\.
However, dominion theology goes even further with this verse, leading to two other philosophies: Christian Reconstructionism and Kingdom Now theology. Christian Reconstructionism is an intellectually high\-minded worldview, most popular among the more conservative branches of Christian faith. Reconstructionism says that dominion will be achieved by each Christian excelling in his or her individual field (Christian artists taking dominion of the art world, Christian musicians taking dominion of the music world, Christian businessmen taking dominion of the business world, etc., until all systems and fields are “subdued”).
[Kingdom Now theology](kingdom-now.html), most popular among Charismatic and Pentecostal groups, focuses on taking dominion of the earth by way of spiritual battle. Kingdom Now adherents believe that long ago Satan stole the “keys of spiritual dominion” when he deceived Adam and Eve. Then, when Christ gave the “keys of the kingdom” to Peter in Matthew 16:19, it was a sign that dominion had been returned to man. Now it is our job to “take back” what is rightfully ours – that is, to claim dominion over the earth and spiritually subdue it for Christ. Proponents of Kingdom Now theology believe that the capturing of this dominion includes having Christians in political office, plus a return of spiritual power, manifested by signs, miracles, and healing. Kingdom Now theology is taught in the book *When Heaven Invades Earth* by Bill Johnson of Bethel Church.
While many well\-meaning Christians are attracted to these philosophies, Christian Dominionism and its offshoots are unbiblical. Although these systems of thought are nominally based on biblical principles, both Christian Reconstructionism and Kingdom Now theology veer away from the heart and message of the gospel. It is understandable that Christians, troubled by abortion and the general moral chaos of a relativistic society, want to take control of the culture and steer it back towards sanity. But holding to Dominionism is not a biblically viable option.
In a way, the disciples were of a “kingdom now” mindset. They thought that Jesus was going to immediately usher in the kingdom and wipe out Roman rule (see Luke 19:11\). But that wasn’t what Jesus was about then, and it isn’t what He is about now. We belong to a heavenly kingdom that is not of this world (John 8:23\). We are seeking another home, a city “with foundations” (Hebrews 11:10, 14; 13:14\). The world is passing away (1 Corinthians 7:31; 1 John 2:17; Colossians 3:2\-5\).
It is right and good to want to see justice done and biblical principles upheld (Psalm 33:5; Amos 5:15; Micah 6:8\). And we are to do everything as unto the Lord (1 Corinthians 10:31\). We are salt and light (Matthew 5:13\-16\), and it is perfectly reasonable for Christians to hold jobs in government and all other areas of society. But “bringing the kingdom of heaven to earth” is not our commission. Our commission is to tell people about the wonderful news that, despite the sick, sinful condition of our souls, God has provided salvation by sacrificing His own Son on our behalf (Romans 5:6\-8\). By grace, through faith, we become citizens of a perfect world that will last eternally (Ephesians 2:8\-9\). Our job is to “rescue those who are perishing; to hold back those stumbling towards slaughter” (Proverbs 24:11\). Christian Dominionism seeks to perfect this world by political clout, but it is the Spirit who must bring change (Zechariah 4:6\). One day, Jesus will bring His kingdom to earth, in justice and true righteousness, and it will signify the end of this world’s system.
|
Is God a cosmic killjoy?
|
Answer
Sometimes we may imagine God as a task master, a dictator opposed to fun or pleasure. We may envision Him as a grimacing judge with a gavel, readily pointing out faults and stifling any sense of joy we have. We might see God as a cosmic killjoy. What a sad—and unbiblical—picture of God! A cold, disagreeable sourpuss is not the God of the Bible. When we study Scripture and come to understand God’s character, we see that He is not in any sense a cosmic killjoy. In fact, He is the one who restores us and gives us true joy.
Jesus declares, “The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full” (John 10:10\). Life “to the full” does not sound like a gift from a killjoy. Throughout the Bible, we see depictions of what a life\-to\-the\-full life might look like. One great example is the life of Jesus Himself. His first miracle was performed at a wedding feast (John 2\). Children flocked to Him—and we know that children will shun a grump (Mark 10:13\-16\). In Luke 7:34 Jesus gives a glimpse of His joy: “The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and you say, ‘Here is a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and “sinners.”’” Jesus was not joyless; in fact, He exhibited *too much* joy, as far as His critics were concerned. He participated in life and was not abstemious.
God Himself takes pleasure in things. Zephaniah 3:17, for example, says that God delights in us and sings over us. God delights in His obedient children (Deuteronomy 30:9\). He delights to show mercy (Micah 7:18\).
God created the human body with the capacity to experience pleasure. God’s design includes taste buds—and enough flavorful foods to satisfy any palate. God designed the human eye and enough colors to dazzle the mind. God designed the sexual organs, with their myriad of nerve endings, so that a married couple can enjoy the pleasure of their love. In other words, pleasure was God’s idea; He is anything but a killjoy.
The Old Testament is filled with instructions for celebrations and festivals. While the feasts served as important reminders of God’s faithfulness and provided glimpses of who the Messiah would be, they were also times of outright celebration. A cosmic killjoy would not institute such feasts.
Sometimes, as Christians, we get the idea that being joyful means reading the Bible, meditating, or serving. So we end up thinking God isn’t a killjoy per se, but maybe He expects us to have “fun” with things that really aren’t all that fun. This is wrong on two levels. First, we certainly can and do experience joy in reading the Bible and serving others. Also, joy is not found in those activities exclusively. God created us to experience fellowship, recreation, and creativity. We were made to delight in being His children, in using the skills He has given us, and in welcoming the pleasures He offers. The *Westminster Shorter Catechism* has it right in its very first answer: “Man’s chief end is to glorify God and to enjoy him forever.”
However, we should be careful not to love pleasure for pleasure’s sake. We must realize that God is opposed to certain types of “pleasure.” The sad truth is that we live in a fallen world where God’s best for us is often perverted. Many activities that our society deems pleasurable are not pleasing to God (see Galatians 5:19\-21; Colossians 3:5\-10; and 1 Corinthians 6:12\-17\). God does not condone promiscuous sex or drunkenness, for example. As a result, some call God a killjoy. However, these “pleasures” of the world are not in fact healthy for us or conducive to long\-term joy. They are the “pleasures of sin for a season” (Hebrews 11:25\). They are false friends that quickly abandon us and leave us empty and longing. So, rather than killing our fun, God is protecting us and providing what is truly best for us. In this way He is much like an earthly parent who provides boundaries for his children. A parent may be called a killjoy for limiting the amount of candy his children consume, but that boundary will ultimately benefit them.
Also, it is important to keep in mind that the purpose of our lives is not to be a joyride. Our lives have deep meaning. We were created to delight in God (Psalm 37:4\), and we appreciate the good things He provides. But our focus in on the Giver, not the gift.
God is not a killjoy; He is the creator of joy. His Spirit produces it in our lives (Galatians 5:22\). Because He is the source of joy, any pursuit of pleasure apart from God is idolatry. For our own well\-being, God opposes our grasping after the worldly, temporary joy that sin promises. Sometimes we must put aside instant gratification in order to invest in the greater joy of God’s kingdom. “You will fill me with joy in your presence, with eternal pleasures at your right hand” (Psalm 16:11\).
|
Is God opposed to pleasure?
|
Answer
Some people imagine God as a cruel task master opposed to all fun or pleasure. To them, He is the God of all\-seriousness or the God of rules. But this is not an accurate, biblical picture of God.
God created us with the ability to experience pleasure. Several Scriptures speak of our delight and pleasure (for example, Psalm 16; Proverbs 17:22; and Proverbs 15:13\). The beauty of creation and the diversity of humanity show us God’s creative palette. Many people find pleasure in spending time out of doors or in relating with those of different personalities. This is good and proper. God wants His creation to be enjoyed.
In the Bible, we see God Himself take pleasure in things. Zephaniah 3:17, for example, says that God delights in us and sings over us. God also instituted multiple celebrations and festivals in the Old Testament. To be sure, these feasts had a didactic element, but they were also celebrations. Scripture speaks of having joy – Philippians and the Psalms are two places where we see plenty of it. Jesus declares, “The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full” (John 10:10\). Life “to the full” sounds like a pleasurable experience.
God’s design of the human body reveals that pleasure is part of His plan. Taste buds and other sensory organs are proof that God is not opposed to pleasure. Why does food taste so good? Why is the scent of roses pleasing? Why is a back [massage](massage-therapy.html) enjoyable? Because God wanted it that way. Pleasure was God’s idea.
Sometimes we think that, when Christians talk about pleasure or joy, they mean being joyful in reading their Bibles, meditating, or serving. We certainly do take pleasure in those things but not to the exclusion of other activities. God also created us for fellowship with others and for recreation. We were made to delight in being His children, in using the talents He bestows and in participating in the pleasures He offers.
It is also wise to distinguish between the different types of “pleasure” in this world. We live in a fallen world where God’s best for us is often perverted. Just because society deems an activity pleasurable does not mean it is pleasing to God (see Galatians 5:19\-21; Colossians 3:5\-10; and 1 Corinthians 6:12\-17\). When we consider these “pleasures” of the world, we find that they are not in fact healthy for us or conducive to long\-term pleasure. The prodigal son reveled in sin until the money ran out; then he found that the pleasures of sin are fleeting (Luke 15:11\-17\). They are false friends that leave us empty and longing.
It is also important to realize that the purpose of our lives is not pleasure. [Hedonism](hedonism-hedonist.html) is a false philosophy. We were created to delight in God (Psalm 37:4\) and accept with gratitude the good things He provides. More importantly, we were created to have a relationship with God.
No, God is not opposed to pleasure. He is opposed to pleasure usurping His place in our lives. Sometimes we are called to forgo the pleasure of the moment in order to invest in the greater pleasure of God’s kingdom. We won’t be disappointed. For those who seek Him and His righteousness, God has “eternal pleasures” in store (Psalm 16:11\).
|
Is “do unto others as you would have them do unto you” a biblical statement?
|
Answer
Yes, the statement “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” is biblical. It comes from Matthew 7:12, often called the [Golden Rule](Golden-Rule.html). In that verse, Jesus gives a timeless principle: “So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.”
The conventional phrasing of the Golden Rule is “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” Different Bible translations might word the command a bit differently, but it remains a basic ethical principle for Christians:
“Do to others whatever you would like them to do to you” (NLT).
“Whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them” (ESV).
“In everything . . . treat people the same way you want them to treat you” (NASB1995\).
“Treat others as you want them to treat you” (CEV).
Jesus’ statement is in the context of a lesson about loving our enemies. Jesus took the conventional *quid pro quo* method of treating people and turned it on its head (see Matthew 5:38–48\). Rather than doing to others what they have done to us or giving them what they may deserve, we are to treat them the way we want them to treat us.
Jesus said the rule that we should do unto others as we would have them do unto us “sums up the Law and the Prophets,” and that means the Golden Rule has always been basic to the Bible’s message. Jesus simply crystalized the message into a notable precept. Later in Matthew, when asked to identify the greatest commandment, Jesus responded, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments” (Matthew 22:37–40\).
The night of His arrest, Jesus said to His disciples, “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another” (John 13:34–35\). One way to show love is to do unto others as we would have them do unto us.
Doing unto others as you would have them do to you recognizes that humans often prioritize their own interests. By laying down this maxim, Jesus compels us to step beyond our little world and look out for others. The command to “do unto others” encapsulates God’s commandments toward people. It’s not about individual preferences (“I like chocolate ice cream, so I’ll buy it for others”) but about godly virtues (“I want to be treated kindly, so I’ll treat others kindly”). The Golden Rule encourages obedience to God and fosters [empathy](Bible-empathy.html) for others.
It is worth noting that the “do unto others” rule is a principle for life, not a means of salvation. If viewed as the latter, it becomes a burdensome task that cannot be accomplished. God’s perfect standard can only be met in Christ, the Perfect Man. Only when we trust in Christ do we have both the freedom and the power to carry out the Golden Rule.
|
How would it impact the Christian faith if it was discovered that aliens exist?
|
Answer
First, let it be said, we do not believe that [aliens](aliens-UFOs.html) exist. The Bible gives us no reason to believe that there is life elsewhere in the universe; in fact, the Bible gives us several key reasons why there cannot be. However, that has not stopped theologians, astronomers, and science fiction fans and writers through the years from contemplating the “what ifs” long and hard. The debates have narrowed down where the problems would arise, *if* the existence and discovery of extraterrestrial life could be proved.
Those who contemplate the existence of aliens and the impact their existence would have on the Christian faith commonly discuss the identity and work of Jesus. God sent His only begotten Son, [God incarnate](God-incarnate.html), to save mankind and redeem creation. Does that redemption include life on other planets? Or would God have manifested Himself on those other planets, as well (in the manner of Aslan in [Narnia](Chronicles-of-Narnia.html))? Does “only begotten” mean “only physical representation”? Or is it more limited, referring only to the human species?
Another consideration: would an otherworldly, sentient, advanced life form sin and need redemption in the same way we do? Human life is in the blood (Leviticus 17:11\). Where is the life of these hypothetical aliens? And what would have to be sacrificed to save them? Could the shedding of Jesus’ human blood save silicon\-based glass creatures whose sin was melting and reforming themselves into unnatural shapes?
Another topic of discussion concerning the existence of aliens and Christianity is what it means to be made in the [“image of God.”](image-of-God.html) Since God has no physical body, we take this to mean a reflection of God’s non\-physical aspects—rationality, morality, and sociability. Would aliens, if they exist, embody the same characteristics?
One issue rarely broached is the impact of young earth creationism on the discovery of alien life. It is conceivable, if highly unlikely, that the geological pyrotechnics that took place during the global flood could have spewed a bacteria\- or lichen\-tainted stone all the way to Mars where it found shelter in a misty canyon. But any life form more complicated or farther out would be much harder to harmonize with a literal reading of Genesis 1\. Could demons have taken trees and shrubs and rodents and bugs to another planet with an environment similar to Earth’s? Possibly. But without the Spirit’s blessing of life, it’s unlikely any of it would have survived. Parallel creations? Maybe. The Bible does not mention them.
Considering what we know about space and life and the world as the Bible portrays it, we already have an explanation for so\-called alien activity on Earth. Reports of “close encounters” describe the ethereal, transient, deceptive, and malevolent. Accounts also record that encounters with supposed aliens can be stopped by a real, authentic call to Jesus. Everything points to the activity of demons, not extraterrestrials. In fact, it is plausible that the “powerful delusion” spoken of in 2 Thessalonians 2:11 will involve an [alien\-abduction theory](alien-deception.html) to explain away the rapture.
The “discovery” of alien life would have no effect on genuine Christianity. The Bible stands as written, no matter what secular theories are advanced or discoveries are claimed. The Bible says the earth and mankind are unique in God’s creation. God created the earth even before He created the sun, moon, or stars (Genesis 1\). Yes, there are strange and inexplicable things that take place. There is no reason, though, to attribute these phenomena to aliens or UFOs. If there is a discernable cause to these events, it is spiritual or, more specifically, demonic in origin. In the final analysis, all conjecturing about what would happen to our faith if aliens were proved to be real is interesting but unhelpful; it should never be allowed to descend into the “foolish and stupid arguments” that we are warned against (2 Timothy 2:23\).
|
What is the balm of Gilead?
|
Answer
A balm is an aromatic, medicinal substance derived from plants. Gilead was an area east of the Jordan River, well known for its spices and ointments. The "balm of Gilead" was, therefore, a high\-quality ointment with healing properties. The balm was made from resin taken from a flowering plant in the Middle East, although the exact species is unknown. It was also called the “balsam of Mecca.” Myrrh is taken from a similar plant—*Commiphora myrrha*. The Bible uses the term “balm of Gilead” metaphorically as an example of something with healing or soothing powers.
"Balm of Gilead" has three references in the Bible. In Genesis 37:25, as Joseph’s brothers contemplated how to kill him, a caravan of Ishmaelites passed by on their way to Egypt from Gilead. In their cargo were “spices, balm, and myrrh.” Jeremiah 8 records God’s warning to Judah of what Babylon would do to them. Upon hearing the news, Jeremiah laments, "Is there no balm in Gilead?" (verse 22\). His question is a poetic search for hope—a plea for healing. Then, in Jeremiah 46:11, as God describes an impending judgment on Egypt, He taunts them: "Go up to Gilead and obtain balm, O virgin daughter of Egypt! In vain have you multiplied remedies; there is no healing for you!"
These scriptural references to the balm of Gilead have inspired many literary and cultural allusions, including references in “The Raven” by Edgar Allan Poe and movies such as *The Spitfire Grill*. Notably, "There Is a Balm in Gilead" is an African\-American spiritual that compares the healing balm to the saving power of Jesus—the one true treatment that never fails to heal our spiritual wounds.
|
How should a Christian view logic?
|
Answer
Logic is the science of deriving truth through the analysis of facts either directly (deductively) or indirectly (inductively). Logic takes given presuppositions, analyzes relationships, compares them with other known factors, and arrives at a conclusion that identifies a previously unknown fact. Logic is math with ideas instead of numbers. It is a way of identifying the relationships between ideas.
Logic appears to be one of the natural laws God put into place at the creation of the universe. Then, God created mankind with a mind and the ability to reason. Being a creation of God, logic is a good thing which, when used properly, can point us toward God. Unfortunately, it is easy to use logic incorrectly.
The science of logic deals with the relational formulae of ideas. Like numbers in math, ideas can be plugged into formulae that show their relationships with other ideas. It is beneficial to understand the basics of these formulae. Modern arguments are often saturated with emotion, which can stymie conversation and preclude a useful resolution. Passion can impede the path to truth. Often, truth is hidden by what is known as fallacy—argumentation based on false logic and erroneous reasoning. Fallacy is a bullying tactic, and it doesn’t lend itself to profitable discussion.
Logic in a practical sense includes both the formulae and the facts. The formulae provide the relationships, but there must be basic ideas available for the formulae to analyze. Although relativism chips away at even the most basic assumptions, most people still rely on empirical evidence—data they accumulate through their senses. Most people are confident making statements such as "I exist" and "the table exists." Logic takes such data and derives further truth. "Anything that has a beginning must have been made by something else" is a logically deduced statement. Further analysis leads to more complex truths, such as “[God exists](argument-existence-God.html).”
Unfortunately, many debaters inadvertently fall into fallacy because they do not start at the beginning. That is, they allow a pre\-conceived, unproved notion to stand in for a fact. Evolutionists start with naturalistic evolution as the basis for their arguments because they do not accept the possibility of miracles. Many religions reject that Jesus is the God\-man because they start with Gnosticism (the physical is evil; the spiritual is good). Secularists who insist that religion is an instinctive response to the fear of death start with the assumption that God does not exist.
The truth is, most people are not going to be significantly influenced by logic to believe something contrary to their convictions. Usually, sentiment trumps logic. And, although neither Jesus nor the apostles were strangers to logic, it was not their primary tool. When Peter says to be "ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you" (1 Peter 3:15\), he didn’t mean to start with the [ontological argument](ontological-argument.html) for the existence of God. He meant to be ready with the story of our own relationship with God and the hope that has come from it. Someone who bases his beliefs on emotion will not be able to track a logical conversation. Logic in the hands of a trained apologist is a powerful tool. But equally convincing is the "empirical evidence" of the Christian life. We are “the light of the world” (Matthew 5:14\); the darkness may not like the light, but it cannot deny its existence. “In your teaching show integrity, seriousness and soundness of speech that cannot be condemned, so that those who oppose you may be ashamed because they have nothing bad to say about us” (Titus 2:7\-8\).
|
What is the Feast of Purim?
|
Answer
The Feast of Purim is a Jewish holiday in celebration of the deliverance of the Jews as recorded in the book of Esther. It is also known as the Feast of Lots (*Purim* being the Hebrew word for “lots”). The feast is not mentioned in the New Testament, although scholars believe the unnamed feast of John 5:1 could be Purim.
In Esther, Haman, prime minister to the Persian King Ahasuerus, is insulted by the Jewish leader Mordecai, who refused to bow to Haman. Haman convinces the king that all Jews are rebellious and must be destroyed. To set the date of the genocide, Haman uses lots, or *purim*. Unbeknownst to Haman, Ahasuerus’s queen, Esther, is a Jew and Mordecai’s niece. Esther appeals to Ahasuerus for her people’s lives. The king cannot revoke the decree to attack the Jews, but he does issue a new decree allowing the Jews to defend themselves. As a result, Haman and his family are executed, and the Jews kill 75,000 would\-be attackers. To memorialize the victory, Mordecai institutes the Feast of Purim to be celebrated every year (Esther 9:26\-32\).
Like Hanukah, the Feast of Purim has developed into more of a national holiday than a religious one, although it starts with specific prayers and a reading of the book of Esther. The celebration also involves giving gifts of food to friends, charity to the poor, and a big meal. When the book of Esther is read, the audience joins in, cheering when Mordecai’s name is mentioned, and shouting and making noise when Haman’s is. Wooden noisemakers called *ra’ashan* or “graggers” help with drowning out the name of Haman. Consuming alcohol is usually part of the event, and it’s said one should drink until "Cursed is Haman!" sounds the same as "Blessed is Mordecai!" There are also music, dancing, parades, and people dressing in costume.
The idea of celebrating a deliverance has extended to smaller communities and even individual families. Jewish towns and families who experience miraculous deliverance from persecution have been known to enact their own annual celebration, called a “local Purim” or “personal Purim.” Often, Jewish and Messianic Jewish communities will open their Feast of Purim to the public.
|
Why is encouragement so important according to the Bible?
|
Answer
“But encourage one another daily, as long as it is called Today, so that none of you may be hardened by sin’s deceitfulness,” Hebrews 3:13 tells us. First Thessalonians 5:11 says, “Therefore encourage one another and build each other up, just as in fact you are doing.” Throughout the Bible we see instructions to encourage one another and verses that are meant to encourage us. Why is encouragement emphasized in the Bible? Primarily because encouragement is necessary to our walk of faith.
Jesus told His followers, “In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world” (John 16:33b). Jesus did not shy from telling His followers about the troubles they would face. In fact, He told them the world would hate them (John 15:18\-21; see also Matthew 10:22\-23 and 2 Corinthians 2:15\-16\). But Jesus’ grim forecast was tempered with cheer; He followed His prediction of trouble with a sparkling word of encouragement: He has overcome the world. Jesus is greater than any trouble we face.
Without encouragement, hardship becomes meaningless, and our will to go on wanes. The prophet Elijah struggled with discouragement (1 Kings 19:3\-10\), and so do we. It is important to remember that “our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against . . . the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms” (Ephesians 6:12\). This truth makes encouragement all the more important. It is not just that we face the world’s displeasure; we are caught in the crosshairs of a spiritual battle. When we are encouraged in Christ, we have strength to put on our spiritual armor and remain steadfast (see Ephesians 6:10\-18\).
Even in places where Christians do not experience overt persecution or hatred, we all know that life can be difficult. Discouragement is not an uncommon human experience. At times, recognizing that there is meaning in the seemingly inconsequential things we do seems next to impossible. We may want to give up. Yet He who calls us is faithful, and He gives us the power to be faithful, too (1 Corinthians 1:9\).
A man in the early church named Joseph was given the nickname “Barnabas,” which means “Son of Encouragement” (Acts 4:36\). What a blessing Barnabas was to the believers of his day! Through the encouragement of Barnabas, the apostle Paul was first accepted by the church in Jerusalem (Acts 9:27\). Through the encouragement of Barnabas, Mark was given a second chance after an abject failure (Acts 13:13; 15:39\).
Encouragement makes it easier to live in a fallen world in a holy way. Encouragement makes it easier to love as Jesus loved (see John 13:34\-35\). Encouragement gives hope (Romans 15:4\). Encouragement helps us through times of discipline and testing (Hebrews 12:5\). Encouragement nurtures patience and kindness (see 1 Corinthians 13:4\-7 and Galatians 5:22\-26\). Encouragement makes it easier to sacrifice our own desires for the advancement of God’s kingdom. In short, encouragement makes it easier to live the Christian life.
Without encouragement, life would soon feel pointless and burdensome. Without encouragement, we can be overwhelmed by the very real pains of our lives. Without encouragement, we feel unloved. Without encouragement, we begin to think that God is a liar or is unconcerned with our welfare. So, the Bible tells us to encourage one another, to remind each other of the truth that God loves us, that God equips us, that we are treasured, that our struggles are worth it.
Encouragement from the Bible gives us the will to carry on. It is a glimpse of the bigger picture. It can prevent burn\-out. It can save us from believing lies (“sin’s deceitfulness”). Encouragement helps us experience abundant life (see John 10:10\).
Proverbs 16:24 says, “Pleasant words are a honeycomb, sweet to the soul and healing to the bones.” God’s Word is full of encouragement. Pleasant words, indeed.
|
What does the Bible say about satire and/or sarcasm?
|
Answer
Sarcasm is the use of irony (saying one thing while meaning another) or other rhetorical devices in a biting, hurtful way. There is a difference between sarcasm and satire, although they are related. Satire is the use of irony or ridicule to expose foolishness, but without the “bite” of sarcasm. Satire is gentler; sarcasm is more derisive and sneering.
The question is, is satire or sarcasm ever appropriate? This would be easy enough to resolve if not for the fact that God uses satire in several places in Scripture. For example, Paul’s words in this passage:
“You are already filled, you have already become rich, you have become kings without us; and indeed, I wish that you had become kings so that we also might reign with you. For, I think, God has exhibited us apostles last of all, as men condemned to death; because we have become a spectacle to the world, both to angels and to men. We are fools for Christ’s sake, but you are prudent in Christ; we are weak, but you are strong; you are distinguished, but we are without honor. To this present hour we are both hungry and thirsty, and are poorly clothed, and are roughly treated, and are homeless; and we toil, working with our own hands; when we are reviled, we bless; when we are persecuted, we endure; when we are slandered, we try to conciliate; we have become as the scum of the world, the dregs of all things, even until now.” (1 Corinthians 4:8\-13\)
Is Paul’s language ironic here? Absolutely. Was it hurtful? Intentionally so. Yet, because his intent was to lead the stubborn Corinthians to the truth, it can still be considered loving. In fact, Paul followed this passage with, “I do not write these things to shame you, but to admonish you as my beloved children” (1 Corinthians 4:14\).
The Corinthians would not have considered Paul’s language intentionally cruel. Instead, they would have recognized Paul was using rhetoric to make a point. The Corinthians felt superior to Paul, casting judgment on him. So he calls them spiritual kings and says, ironically, that God considers His apostles “scum” and “dregs.”
The passage sounds sarcastic. It says one thing while meaning another in a way that makes the hearers look foolish. But Paul’s method was not meant as a personal insult. The goal was to grab the readers’ attention and correct a false way of thinking. In other words, Paul’s words are satirical, but not sarcastic. They are spoken in love to “beloved children.”
Other passages in the Bible that use satire include Isaiah’s ridicule of idol\-makers (Isaiah 40:19\-20\), God’s taunting of Egypt (Jeremiah 46:11\), and Elijah’s gibes directed at the prophets of Baal (1 Kings 18:27\). Jesus Himself used satire in the form of hyperbole when He told His hearers to “take the plank out of your own eye” (Matthew 7:5\).
Therefore, we can say that irony is fine; irony is a figure of speech that can bring attention and clarity to a situation. Sometimes, irony can be painful because the truth it reveals is convicting. Satire, which uses irony to gently deride and prompt needful change, can be appropriate on occasion; we have examples of satire in Scripture.
Sarcasm, on the other hand, is not appropriate. Sarcasm has at its core the intent to insult or to be hurtful with no corresponding love or wish for well\-being. Instead, the goal of sarcasm is to belittle the victim and elevate the speaker. Jesus warned against such harsh, unloving words in Matthew 5:22\. Our words should be helpful and edifying, even if they are uncomfortable to the hearer.
We should speak the truth with loving intent (Ephesians 4:15\), avoiding “foolish talk or coarse joking” (Ephesians 5:4\). We should speak in such a way that the hearer will understand our motivation. And we should never be malicious or cruel. Carefully worded irony may be fitting, but malicious sarcasm is not.
|
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.