prompt
stringlengths 0
158
| response
stringlengths 14
40.2k
|
|---|---|
What were the emerods God afflicted the Philistines with in 1 Samuel 5?
|
Answer
In 1 Samuel 5—6 (KJV), God afflicts the [Philistines](Philistines.html) with emerods in His anger over their taking the [Ark of the Covenant](ark-of-the-covenant.html) from the Israelites. The word translated “emerods” in the [King James Version](King-James-Version-KJV.html) comes from a root word literally meaning “to swell,” and the Hebrew word translated “emerods” literally means “mound.” This is basically all we know about emerods, but the context has led historians and Bible commentators to conclude that the plague of emerods was actually an occurrence of tumors, boils, or possibly hemorrhoids or “piles.” Most translations of 1 Samuel 5:6 say the affliction was “tumors”; the ISV says “tumors of the groin”; and the Darby translation says “hemorrhoids.”
The emerods were a divine punishment on the Philistines when they defeated the Israelites and captured the Ark of the Covenant on the day that Eli and his sons died. The Philistines brought the Ark to [Ashdod](Ashdod-in-the-Bible.html), one of the Philistine\-controlled cities of Judah. They placed the Ark in their temple next to the statue of [Dagon](who-Dagon.html), their pagan god. When the Philistines rose the next day, they found Dagon’s image on its face before the Ark. They placed the statue upright, only to find it on the floor before the Ark again the next day—this time with its head and both hands broken off. In addition to humiliating the Philistine god, God afflicted the worshipers of Dagon with “emerods,” which could be boils, tumors, or severe, bleeding hemorrhoids (1 Samuel 5:1–6\).
The Philistines realized that their affliction was from the God of Israel, and they rightly associated their suffering with the stolen Ark of the Covenant. But they wrongly assumed a change of location would help. They sent the Ark to [Gath](Gath-in-the-Bible.html), another Philistine city. At Gath, God “smote the men of the city, both small and great, and they had emerods in their secret parts” (1 Samuel 5:9, KJV). The Philistines tried again, sending the Ark on to Ekron, where the same thing happened: “And the men that died not were smitten with the emerods: and the cry of the city went up to heaven” (1 Samuel 5:12, KJV).
We have a couple of other clues as to what the emerods were. The condition was “devastating” to the Philistines and caused “a great panic” in Gath (1 Samuel 5:6, 9\). Verse 12 indicates that Philistines were dying from the emerods. This doesn’t sound much like hemorrhoids, however severe. Then, in 1 Samuel 6:4, we have the additional detail that rats were somehow involved in the plague. It could very well be that God sent bubonic plague to the Philistines, spread by rats and causing boils and death. It is also possible that the rats were not spreading the emerods but simply destroying crops.
After seven months of suffering with emerods (1 Samuel 6:5\), the Philistines called for their priests and diviners and asked what was to be done about the Ark. Their advice was to send the Ark back to Israel with a guilt offering of “five gold tumors and five gold rats, according to the number of the Philistine rulers” (1 Samuel 6:4\). The smarting Philistines made the golden tumors and golden rats, placed the Ark on “a new cart,” and sent the Ark away “with two cows that have calved and have never been yoked” (1 Samuel 6:7\). The cows “went straight up . . . keeping on the road and lowing all the way; they did not turn to the right or to the left” (verse 12\), and thus the Ark was returned to Israel. The Bible doesn’t say when the tumors and rats disappeared from the cities of Philistia.
Interestingly, the pagan priests and prophets of Philistia cited the [plagues of Egypt](ten-plagues-Egypt.html) as a reason to send the Ark back to Israel. They asked their fellow Philistines, “Why do you harden your hearts as the Egyptians and Pharaoh did? When Israel’s god dealt harshly with them, did they not send the Israelites out so they could go on their way?” (1 Samuel 6:6\). Such was the fame of Israel’s God and the demonstration of His power that pagan nations generations later still feared His wrath. The plague of emerods was bad enough—what if it was only the first of ten?
The word *emerods* first appears in the KJV in Deuteronomy 28\. The Lord promised blessings upon the Israelites if they listened to His voice and obeyed His commandments. If they did not, He promised curses upon them, one of which was “the botch of Egypt, and with the emerods, and with the scab, and with the itch, whereof thou canst not be healed” (Deuteronomy 28:27, KJV). The “botch of Egypt” is a reference to the boils with which God plagued the Egyptians during the sixth plague (Exodus 9:9\).
Whether the emerods were hemorrhoids or tumors of the private parts or a symptom of bubonic plague, the lesson is that God does not take lightly the disobedience of men. He is holy, and He did not allow the Philistines to profane the Ark of the Covenant. The Lord alone is God, and Dagon, the impotent god of the Philistines, was no match for His power and glory.
|
What does it mean that the Shulammite had dark skin (Song of Solomon 1:6)?
|
Answer
The [Shulammite](Shulammite-woman.html), the woman Solomon loves, refers to herself as having dark skin: “Do not gaze at me because I am dark” (Song of Solomon 1:6, ESV). In the NASB, she is “swarthy”; in the KJV, she is “black.”
Some have suggested that the Shulammite woman was a dark\-skinned woman, perhaps of African descent. However, a more likely answer is found in the very same verse. Immediately following the mention of the woman as “dark,” we read, “Because the sun has looked upon me” (ESV). In the NIV, it’s clearer what she means: “Because I am darkened by the sun.” And the rest of the verse explains why the Shulammite was in the sun: “My mother’s sons were angry with me / and made me take care of the vineyards; / my own vineyard I had to neglect” In other words, she was forced to work outside in the sun and had not taken care of her skin as she preferred.
In modern Western culture, many women go to great lengths to tan and darken their skin. However, the opposite was true of women in the ancient Near East. Dark or tanned skin was undesirable because it indicated a woman had spent significant time working in the sun, something that servants or poor women did. More affluent women would not labor in the sun; they would stay indoors more or have nicer clothing that covered their skin.
The Shulammite woman did not want to be stared at because of her tanned skin. In Song of Solomon 1:5 we read, “Dark am I, yet lovely, / daughters of Jerusalem, / dark like the tents of Kedar, / like the tent curtains of Solomon.” The tents of [Kedar](Kedar-in-the-Bible.html) were made from the wool of black goats. *The curtains of Solomon* is a difficult phrase to render from the Hebrew text. Many believe the correct understanding is instead “the tents of Salma.” If so, the word picture is fitting. The Salma people lived in the same general region as Kedar and likely also constructed their tents with black wool. Otherwise, the curtains of Solomon were likely purple, the color of royalty, a color that would not fit the description in verse 6\. Regardless, the Shulammite is telling the other women not to think poorly of her because of her tanned skin.
Some have also sought meaning in Song of Solomon 1:6 based on the identity of Shulammite. The term *Shulammite* has been interpreted in different ways. Two of the most likely interpretations are that *Shulammite* means “O perfect one” or that it refers to an area called Shunem (as the LXX chooses). If this latter interpretation is correct, the Shulammite was from Shunem, a village near Jezreel inhabited by the Jews during Solomon’s time. The woman would likely have had an olive complexion, though darker than some due to her working out of doors.
Though the woman in Song of Solomon had some concerns about her appearance, she was clearly loved by Solomon and desired by him. The Song of Solomon offers a great example of how, though imperfect, a man and woman accept and love one another unconditionally and pursue love and intimacy in the context of marriage.
|
What is the belt of truth (Ephesians 6:14)?
|
Answer
The belt of truth is the first piece of the “[full armor of God](full-armor-of-God.html)” to be listed in Ephesians 6:10–17\. The passage begins with the admonition from the apostle Paul to “be strong in the Lord and in the strength of his might.” This is the key to understanding the armor of God. All the pieces of the armor belong to Him and come from Him. Truth, righteousness, the gospel, faith, and salvation—all are gifts of God to His people for their defense. All except “the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God” (verse 17\) are defensive in nature. All are designed to help us “stand against the schemes of the devil” (verse 11\). The belt of truth is the first part of the armor listed because, without truth, we are lost, and the schemes of the devil will surely overpower us.
It is fitting that the belt of truth is the first piece of the whole armor of God. Jesus is “the way, the truth, and the life” (John 14:6\), and it is only through Him that we come to God. Therefore, [truth](what-is-truth.html) is of the utmost importance in the life of a Christian. Without truth, the rest of the armor would be of no use to us because we would not have the Spirit of truth (John 15:26\).
In referring to the whole armor of God, Paul invokes the image of a soldier ready for battle. The belt of a Roman soldier in Paul’s day was not a simple leather strap such as we wear today. It was a thick, heavy leather and metal band with a protective piece hanging down from the front of it. The belt held the soldier’s sword and other weapons. The belt of truth of the spiritual armor holds the sword of the Spirit, linking truth and the Word of God (cf. John 17:17\). The Word of God *is* truth.
Depending on the translation of Ephesians 6:14, we are to fasten the belt of truth around us (ISV), buckle the belt around our waists (NIV), gird our waists with truth (NKJV), or gird our loins with truth (NASB). No matter the wording, we are to actively lay hold of the truth and use it. The belt of truth is a crucial piece of defensive armor guarding our inmost being in the battle against the lies and deceptions of the enemy. Without an understanding of truth, we are left vulnerable to being “carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming” (Ephesians 4:14\). The belt of truth protects us and prepares us for the battle that is part of every Christian’s life.
|
What does it mean to wait on the Lord (Psalm 27:14)?
|
Answer
In the Psalms, Proverbs, and many other books of the Bible, we find commands to wait on the Lord” like this one: “Wait on the LORD: Be of good courage, and he shall strengthen thine heart: Wait, I say, on the LORD” (Psalm 27:14, KJV). Most modern translations use “wait *for* the Lord.” To English readers, the idea of waiting on the Lord might seem like a passive exercise, but a closer study reveals that it’s nothing of the sort.
Patient, confident trust in the Lord is the central idea of the exhortation to wait on the Lord. The entire Psalm 27 is a prayer to God for help. It beautifully illustrates the meaning of waiting on the Lord. Throughout the psalm’s eloquent lines, David expresses authentic faith and courageous trust in God, based on his confident expectation that the Lord will rescue and save him in his time of trouble.
First, we see that we can wait on the Lord by [trusting in Him](trust-God.html). David expressed great confidence in the Lord, who was his light, salvation, and stronghold (Psalm 27:1–2\). This kind of dynamic trust dispels fear and despair: “When the wicked advance against me to devour me, it is my enemies and my foes who will stumble and fall. Though an army besiege me, my heart will not fear; though war break out against me, even then I will be confident” (verses 2–3\).
We can wait on the Lord by [seeking Him](seeking-God.html). David conveyed his trust in the Lord by longing to be with Him, to commune in God’s presence and worship in His temple: “One thing I ask from the LORD, this only do I seek: that I may dwell in the house of the LORD all the days of my life, to gaze on the beauty of the LORD and to seek him in his temple” (Psalm 27:4\). In God’s dwelling place, praising and worshiping the Lord, David felt safe and secure: “For in the day of trouble he will keep me safe in his dwelling; he will hide me in the shelter of his sacred tent and set me high upon a rock. Then my head will be exalted above the enemies who surround me; at his sacred tent I will sacrifice with shouts of joy; I will sing and make music to the LORD” (verses 5–6\).
We can wait on the Lord through [prayer](purpose-of-prayer.html), as David did in eager expectation of deliverance (Psalm 27:7–14\). David asked God for wisdom, direction (verse 11\), and protection (verse 12\), wholly believing he would “see the goodness of the LORD in the land of the living” (verse 13\). Those who wait on the Lord can fully expect Him to fulfill their hope: “Indeed, none who wait for you shall be put to shame” (Psalm 25:3, ESV).
Waiting on the Lord involves the confident expectation of a positive result in which we place a great hope. This expectation is based on knowledge of and trust in God. Those who do not know the Lord will not wait on Him; neither will those who fail to trust Him. We must be confident of who God is and what He is capable of doing. Those who wait on the Lord do not lose heart in their prayers: “This is the confidence we have in approaching God: that if we ask anything according to his will, he hears us” (1 John 5:14\).
Waiting on the Lord renews our strength (Isaiah 40:31\). Waiting on the Lord by trusting, seeking, and praying establishes our faith and brings serenity and stability: “I waited patiently for the LORD; he turned to me and heard my cry. He lifted me out of the slimy pit, out of the mud and mire; he set my feet on a rock and gave me a firm place to stand. He put a new song in my mouth, a hymn of praise to our God. Many will see and fear the LORD and put their trust in him” (Psalm 40:1–3\). As this passage affirms, waiting on the Lord is also a testimony to others who will see our faith and, as a result, put their trust in God.
Waiting on the Lord brings God’s blessings: “Since ancient times no one has heard, no ear has perceived, no eye has seen any God besides you, who acts on behalf of those who wait for him” (Isaiah 64:4; see also 1 Corinthians 1:7\).
Sometimes we might feel as though the Lord does not see or hear us—that He’s not answering our prayers. During these moments, we can put our complete faith and trust in the living God. We can wait on the Lord in eager anticipation, knowing that He is with us and in control of our lives. He will do what He has promised. He will rescue and save us. He is always working for our good, even when we don’t feel Him (Romans 8:28\). Through patient, courageous, active trusting, seeking, and prayer, we can learn to wait on the Lord.
|
What is a whoremonger in the Bible?
|
Answer
The word *whoremonger* in the Bible is a reference to those who associate with prostitutes or who, in general, exhibit wanton sexual behavior. *Whoremonger* is an old\-fashioned word found mainly in the King James Version and the Young’s Literal Translation of the Bible. In modern language, we would say the person is a “fornicator” or “adulterer.” Broadly speaking, a whoremonger is anyone who engages in sexual intercourse outside of marriage.
An example of the word *whoremonger* is found in Ephesians 5:5 in the KJV: “For this ye know, that no whoremonger . . . hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.” Most other translations simply say “immoral person.” The Greek word in this verse is *pornos*, related to [*porneia*](porneia-in-the-Bible.html), from which we get the English word *pornography*. Essentially, all [sexual immorality](sexual-immorality.html) falls into this category, but the word changes depending on the person committing the act and his or her gender. For example, a woman who engages in sexual immorality is called a “whore” (*porne*) in the KJV, but a man who does the same is called a “whoremonger” (*pornos*).
These Greek words are interesting because they draw no distinctions among a) sexual immorality for monetary gain, b) sexual immorality for the sake of lust, and c) sex outside of marriage between two loving partners. This is difficult for us to comprehend because our culture considers paying a stranger for sex to be quite different from a dating couple “going all the way.” We tend to categorize a man who uses a prostitute (and the prostitute herself) entirely differently from a boyfriend and girlfriend [living together](living-in-sin.html). But God classifies both as *porneia*. A man sleeping with his longtime girlfriend is just as much a “whoremonger” as the man picking up prostitutes, according to the Bible.
Unrepentant, continued sexual immorality is an indication that a person is not saved (Ephesians 5:5\). The sexually immoral in the church—those who claim to be saved but who live as whoremongers—must face church discipline, biblically: “Now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister but is sexually immoral. . . . Do not even eat with such people” (1 Corinthians 5:11\). Sexual sin brings serious consequences, and there should not even be a hint of immorality among God’s people (Ephesians 5:3\).
|
Who are the Franciscans?
|
Answer
Franciscans are members of a [religious order](religious-order.html) that follows the teachings of [Francis of Assisi](Saint-Francis-of-Assisi.html), a Catholic friar, mystic, and “saint.” Franciscans are usually Catholic, but there are some Anglicans and Lutherans who also follow the Franciscan Rule.
Franciscans usually add some rules to those of St. Francis, observing some of the teachings of other Franciscans such as St. Clare of Assisi and St. Anthony of Padua. There are several groups within the Franciscan Order, but the word *Franciscans* applies specifically to the First Order, or the “Order of Friars Minor.” These friars are men who depend on charity for their livelihood, owning no property and spending all their time and energy on religious work. This group can trace their beginnings back to Francis himself.
One of the main teachings of Francis was the duty of poverty. Having been inspired by a sermon he heard on Matthew 9:10, Francis spent his life in voluntary poverty as he traveled through the Umbrian Mountains preaching Catholicism. Francis gathered a group of men who believed as he did, and they traveled together.
The Bible does not require a vow of poverty. However, there are many verses on the blessedness of giving and caring for the poor (Proverbs 14:21, 31\). Giving is to be done with a cheerful heart, not under compulsion (2 Corinthians 9:6–7\). The Lord says that “whoever is kind to the poor lends to the LORD, and he will reward them for what they have done” (Proverbs 19:17\).
The Franciscan commitment to charitable work is commendable, but the Bible is clear that no amount of charity can earn a place in heaven. Ultimately, the Franciscans miss the mark in that they promote the false doctrines of [Catholicism](catholicism.html), a works\-based religious system. It is right for us, as Christians, to have empathy for the suffering of others, to view ourselves with humility, and to spend our resources wisely. But no amount of [asceticism](Christian-asceticism-monasticism.html), self\-denial, poverty, or prayers to saints can atone for our sins. Only Jesus saves, and that is by grace through faith (Ephesians 2:8–9\).
|
What is quietism?
|
Answer
Quietism is a system of religious mysticism with its roots in [Hinduism](hinduism.html) and [Buddhism](buddhism.html) but which has also been promoted at times by individuals within the Roman Catholic Church. Quietism teaches that spiritual peace and even perfection can be achieved through the contemplation of God and things divine. The practitioner of quietism seeks to subdue the will and become totally passive, spiritually. Quietism was promoted as a Catholic mode of worship in parts of Western Europe during the late 1600s but was declared a heresy by Pope Innocent XI in 1687\. Quietism turns one’s spirituality inward, favoring silent contemplation, stillness, and passiveness over positive action, singing, praying out loud, etc., so it would be naturally appealing to monks, religious hermits, and other [ascetics](Christian-asceticism-monasticism.html). The aim of quietism is to “quiet” the soul so that it can become one with God and eventually achieve a sinless state.
Influential quietists in history include Madame Guyon, Francois Fénelon, and Miguel de Molinos. Quietism has made inroads into some branches of the evangelical church, too, with the practice of [soaking prayer](soaking-prayer.html) and [centering prayer](centering-prayer.html) and the Charismatic emphasis on listening prayer and the [rhema word](rhema-word.html). Practices related to quietism and the thinking behind those practices are totally unbiblical.
It’s true that, in the Bible, [quietness](be-still-and-know-that-I-am-God.html) and peace are to be desired; they are signs of a healthy spiritual life. David said, “I have calmed and quieted my soul, like a weaned child with its mother” (Psalm 131:2\), and peace is a fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:21\). Waiting on God and submitting to Him are also part of a godly life (Psalm 31:24; 33:20; 37:7\). However, biblical authors never promote the idea of the human soul being “absorbed” into God, and the Bible in no way endorses quietism, as a philosophy or as a religious practice.
One problem with quietism is its exclusive focus on passivity, stillness, and inaction as it pursues a quiet spirituality. The Bible contains plenty of examples of the opposite attitude, telling God’s people to “shout for joy” over their salvation (Psalm 20:5\), sing songs, play instruments, and shout loudly (Psalm 33:1–3\). The response when a soul is near to God is often shouts and songs of joy (Isaiah 12:6\). Furthermore, positive action is constantly shown in the Scriptures as a necessary part of a Christian’s life. Evangelism is very hard to do if one never speaks or interacts with others. Jesus told His disciples to “go” and “make disciples” and “teach” (Matthew 28:16–20\). The apostles’ journeys were full of positive, decisive action and good works. Jesus Himself was a dynamic person—healing and speaking and taking action. Of course, Jesus also spent time in prayer, alone (Mark 1:35\). But prayer to God is not what quietism teaches.
The other, greater problem with quietism is its claim that one can achieve a sinless state by inward contemplation and ridding the soul of all troubling desires. In this way, quietism resembles Buddhism more than Christianity. There is nothing in the Bible to suggest that stilling ourselves can result in a sinless state or union with God or that cultivating a lack of feeling or desire will bring special union with God. Quite the opposite: the Bible clearly says that a sinless state of perfection is not attainable in this world (1 John 1:8\). Biblical meditation is an active study and contemplation of God’s Word, not a passive, mantra\-like giving up of the will. We are justified by faith in Christ, and we are sanctified by the Word of God (John 17:17; Romans 5:1; Hebrews 10:10, 14\), not through mystical experiences, asceticism, or having one’s soul united with the divine.
|
What is progressivism?
|
Answer
Progressivism is a multi\-faceted philosophy advocating progress and change (as opposed to maintaining things as they are). Progressives work toward what they hope will be better conditions, implement what they consider more enlightened ideas, and try new or experimental methods to facilitate change. In politics and religion, progressivism is often called “liberalism.”
Progressivism originated in Western Europe during the Age of Enlightenment. People believed that progress in science, economics, and technology would result in the improvement of the human condition. Gaining empirical knowledge was thought to be foundational to a progressive society. Sociology defines five main ideas, or values, that contributed to progressivism in Western Europe: valuing the past, considering the nobleness of Western thought and civilization, the value of economic and technological growth, the intrinsic value of life on earth, and the use of reason and scholarly/scientific knowledge.
Much of the motive behind progressivism is a desire for [social justice](social-justice.html) and equality, which progressives equate with a departure from barbarism. Progressivism can be used for good or ill. The end of child labor, the rise of free education, and prison reform were all aided by progressivism. But so also were modernism, radical feminism, abortion\-on\-demand, and the gay\-rights movement. Change is not always a change for the better, and what’s called “progress” may in fact be a regress.
Inherent in the philosophy of progressivism is the idea that mankind is naturally progressive; that is, he longs to advance and learn and improve himself and that, when unfettered by oppressive systems, he will continue to improve and grow and become better.
The Bible supports the idea that man is a naturally progressive creature, and that he was indeed created to thirst for knowledge and to expand his own understanding and improve himself. Satan’s temptation in the Garden of Eden is the first proof. Satan told Eve that if she ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil she would become like God, with her eyes opened to knowledge. Satan placed God in the role of “oppressor” holding man back from his full potential (Genesis 3:1–5\). This temptation would not have worked if man had not been a progressive creature. Eve’s failure was that she tried to advance herself through disobedience to God’s command.
Another example of mankind’s tendency toward progressivism is found in the story of the [Tower of Babel](Tower-of-Babel.html). After the flood, mankind tried to build a tower to heaven, and God said, “Behold, they are one people, and they have all one language, and this is only the beginning of what they will do. And nothing that they propose to do will now be impossible for them” (Genesis 11:5\). Again, mankind was seeking progress through disobedience to God’s command, and again we see that progressivism, unheedful of God’s law, leads in the wrong direction. God confused human language to put a stop to man’s proud endeavor, and their monument to “social progress” was halted (Genesis 11:7\).
Because mankind is made in the image of God (Genesis 1:27\), he has the desire and the capacity to create what is progressively good and helpful. But, because of our [fallen, sinful nature](sin-nature.html), we also have the tendency to create what is progressively evil and harmful (see Genesis 6:5\). We have an insatiable appetite for more knowledge as a result of eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and that is our lasting legacy.
Throughout history, God has been mercifully keeping us from fully realizing that legacy. He has worked in many unseen ways and in a few that we can see: by confusing man’s language at the Tower of Babel, by providing the Law for a definition of sin and an understanding of punishment (Exodus 20\), and by providing the Holy Spirit as a guide, dwelling in those who have faith in Christ (John 14:26\).
Political progressives push for socio\-political change, and their interpretation of the Constitution is broad and loose. In the same way, modern religious progressives push for change within the church, and their interpretation of Scripture is just as broad and loose. Many ignore large portions of the Bible in favor of a “[social gospel](social-gospel.html),” a “[historical Jesus](Jesus-seminar.html),” or “gay churches.” The problem with religious progressivism is that God’s Word does not change: “Your word, LORD, is eternal; it stands firm in the heavens” (Psalm 119:89\).
Progress can be good or bad, depending on the direction it’s headed. Becoming progressively godly is good: “The path of the righteous is like the morning sun, shining ever brighter till the full light of day” (Proverbs 4:18\). Becoming progressively ungodly is bad: “Evildoers and impostors will go from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived” (2 Timothy 3:13\). Left to himself, man’s tendency is to slip further downhill; thankfully, the Holy Spirit slows down that negative progressivism: “For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way” (2 Thessalonians 2:7\). When the Antichrist is revealed, “he will speak against the Most High and oppress his holy people and,” quite progressively, “try to change the set times and the laws” (Daniel 7:25\).
|
Is God a megalomaniac?
|
Answer
Megalomania is a mental disorder causing a person to hold exaggerated opinions about his power or abilities. Someone who thinks he is much more important, powerful, or capable than he really is, despite all evidence to the contrary, would be considered a megalomaniac. The same term would apply to a person who causes harm to himself and others because of an obsession with his power or image. Megalomania has two key components, neither of which applies to God: inaccuracy and injury.
Megalomania involves delusion: what the megalomaniac thinks about himself is not, in fact, true. A megalomaniac is the mediocre chess player who accuses everyone who beats him of cheating, because he’s “too smart” to lose fair and square. Adolf Hitler bungled several decisions during World War II as a result of his megalomania. He refused to listen to the advice of his generals, being far too confident in his own abilities. God is not delusional. God’s self\-assessment is true in that He is the only God and He possesses absolute power, sovereignty, and knowledge. So long as God’s claims about Himself are true, He is not expressing megalomania.
A person who believes he is the tallest in a room and refuses to admit otherwise is not a megalomaniac, as long as he actually *is* taller than anyone else present. The current world record holder in the 100\-meter dash is not megalomaniacal for saying he is the “fastest man on earth.” Likewise, when God claims traits such as [omnipotence](God-omnipotent.html) and [omniscience](God-omniscient.html), He’s not expressing megalomania—those are His true attributes. It would be fair to say that “megalomania in the biblical God” is a contradiction in terms, since it’s impossible to overstate God’s power and influence.
Megalomania also involves harm. True megalomaniacs hurt themselves and others. Their disconnection from reality results in actions that are irrational, dangerous, or absurd. Consider again the example of Hitler’s over\-estimating his own military genius. Or of a movie villain like Darth Vader who kills his subordinates for minor failures. God is not capricious or cruel. God’s actions toward humanity are explicitly intended for our benefit. A deity who submits Himself to humiliation and death as the means to forgive our willful sin is hardly harming us. That God expects us to appreciate and respond to this sacrifice is also not megalomaniacal; it’s common sense.
So, the God of the Bible is not a narcissist or an [egomaniac](God-egomaniac.html) or a megalomaniac. God presents Himself exactly as He is and shows tremendous love and concern for us (Romans 5:8\). Neither honesty nor love is characteristic of megalomania.
|
What is Neopaganism?
|
Answer
*Neopaganism / Neo\-Paganism* (literally, “new paganism” or “revived paganism”) is an umbrella term, covering a widely varied set of spiritual practices typically adapted from pre\-Christian or anti\-Christian religions. Neopaganism includes various forms of [New Age](new-age-movement.html) belief, [Wicca](Wicca.html), versions of Greek and Roman polytheism, and Celtic [druidism](what-is-a-druid.html). Prior to the 1960s, these types of beliefs were overwhelmingly underground and seen as countercultural. Changing attitudes toward counterculture and a growing hostility to Christianity have allowed Neopaganism to expand, particularly when blended with other religious concepts.
Though it draws inspiration from ancient history, Neopaganism generally assumes a worldview that is very modern, if not postmodern. The “gods” and “goddesses” of these systems are not necessarily seen as literal beings. Dogma is generally shunned in favor of relativism and have\-it\-your\-way spirituality. Some neo\-pagans take such things seriously on their own merits, holding a sincere belief in whatever truths they claim. Others are motivated by a spiteful distaste for Western, Christian, or traditional attitudes.
Because there are so many flavors of Neopaganism, it is impossible to give a single description of belief that can be applied fairly across the board. The few concepts that nearly all neo\-pagan systems have in common actually result in a less coherent, more diverse collection of views. Among these themes are relativism, inclusivism, and the rejection of creeds.
Neopaganism is overwhelmingly [relativistic](is-truth-relative.html), claiming that truth is subject to each person’s individual reality. This allows for a personally customized approach to spiritual and moral matters. However, relativism also conflicts with a basic principle of logic, the law of non\-contradiction. Two neo\-pagans might have opposite views on whether or not the Greek god Athena literally exists without seeing this as a problem. However, logically, one of these two must be incorrect. The same problem applies to moral and ethical claims.
Inclusivism is another common theme of neo\-pagan religions. Inclusivism is the principle that virtually all religious interpretations are equally valid. Of course, this inclusive attitude is not typically extended toward monotheistic views such as Christianity. Monotheism, in fact, is frequently seen in Neopaganism as one of the few—or the only—unacceptable approaches to spirituality. In theory, Neopaganism is “polytheistic,” although not all practitioners believe in the same set of deities, or any deity at all. As with relativism, inclusivism leads to a problem of contradiction. Completely opposite moral and spiritual ideas cannot both be equally true.
The rejection of creeds or any formal, binding description of belief and practice is known as anti\-creedalism. Within Neopaganism this is simply the practical consequence of relativism and inclusivism. This approach shuns the idea of a “correct” set of beliefs. As a result, even neo\-pagans of nominally identical faiths might have completely different opinions on how to live, think, or discuss those concepts. In keeping with its countercultural and anti\-Christian themes, Neopaganism rejects fixed creeds.
In turning from the one true God to a god or gods of their own making, the neo\-pagans attempt to fill their spiritual longing with vanity, the way ancient Athens was filled with idols (Acts 17:16\). And, like the ancient Athenians, they need to be introduced to the One they would call “the Unknown God” (Acts 17:23\).
|
What is incarnational ministry / incarnational theology, and is it biblical?
|
Answer
A working definition of *incarnational ministry* is “the immersion of one’s self into a local culture and ‘becoming Jesus’ to that culture.” Incarnational ministry seeks to dispense with ministry “from a distance” and embrace ministry “up close and personal”—the love of God and the gospel of Christ are “incarnated” or embodied by the person ministering. Just as the Son of God took on human flesh and came into our world, we should adopt the culture to which we are ministering and “become Jesus” within it. The idea that Christians should represent the incarnated gospel is called incarnational theology. A central tenet of the incarnational ministry concept is “live the good news rather than preach the good news.”
The Christian understanding of the word *incarnation* is that “the [Word became flesh](Word-became-flesh.html) and dwelt among us” (John 1:14\). The very cornerstone of Christian belief is that God the Son—the Word, the second Person of the Trinity—took on human flesh when He entered our world. Incarnational theology understands the term *incarnation* to be applicable to the ministry and mission of the church.
However, overemphasizing incarnation distorts the biblical meaning of the term. In no way can we become incarnate like Christ. Trying to extend the concept of incarnation from John 1:14 to the Great Commission (Matthew 28:19–20\) is unwarranted. Also, the instruction to “be Jesus,” as used by some incarnational ministry advocates, is not biblical. We are to be Christlike. We are followers and learners of Jesus. We are to communicate His love to the world. But the Bible never tells us to be incarnations of Jesus’ actual self.
One major concern with incarnational ministry is the implication that unbelievers should be reached exclusively on a “come follow me” basis. The Bible speaks of “the offense of the cross” (Galatians 5:11\), something that incarnational ministers try to avoid as they “engage” the culture and quietly “show” their faith. There is an inherent danger when personal relationships are elevated to a higher level of ministerial value than preaching the [gospel](gospel-message.html). True believers follow Jesus Christ, not other believers. True believers follow God\-breathed Scripture, not the teachings or lives of men (2 Timothy 3:16\). The gospel message is hindered when it is associated with the human messenger instead of the Person of Jesus Christ. The relational component of ministry is extremely important, but we must never allow the gospel message to be distorted. The [cross](meaning-of-the-cross.html) will be foolishness to some and offensive to others (1 Corinthians 1:23\).
In incarnational ministry, there is an emphasis on being engaged with people and living a life of Christlikeness. These are both biblical mandates. But engaging and immersing in a culture is not the central mission of the church. Doing these things is part of the process of carrying out the central mission of the church, which is to preach the gospel to the ends of the earth. The apostle Paul certainly understood cross\-cultural ministry, and he was willing to be the servant of all (1 Corinthians 9:19–23\), yet the gospel was always paramount: “I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified” (1 Corinthians 2:2\). It is through “the foolishness of preaching” that God saves those who believe (1 Corinthians 1:21\).
|
What is metempsychosis?
|
Answer
Metempsychosis is a concept in Greek philosophy related to [reincarnation](reincarnation.html) and the transmigration of the soul. It is the idea that, when a person dies, his or her soul is transferred into another body, either another human body or the body of an animal. There is nothing biblical about metempsychosis.
The theory of metempsychosis originated with Pythagoras and his teacher, Pherecydes of Syros, but the popularization of the concept is due to its adoption by Plato. According to Plato’s view, there is a fixed number of souls in existence, and those souls transmigrate in and out of human and animal bodies, never being destroyed. These souls sometimes travel to another, immortal realm, before returning to the mortal realm, bringing back knowledge. In Plato’s *Republic*, the soul of a warrior named Er travels to heaven and sees the souls of the dead choosing new bodies. Er sees tame animals choosing to be wild and vice versa, men choosing to be birds, birds choosing to become men, gods choosing to become athletes. Once the soul had made its choice, it drank of the River Lethe and was shot down to earth like a star to be born.
Scholars are not sure whether Plato actually believed in metempsychosis or whether his tales were meant to be allegorical. Metempsychosis is unlike reincarnation in that metempsychosis is based on the desire of the soul for new experiences rather than a result of judgment. In the theory of reincarnation, one’s good or bad actions in life determine the nature of the body assigned in the next life. Metempsychosis fits well with Greek philosophy and mythology as a whole; in the Greek myths, gods often take on a human and animal form to achieve their ends.
The idea of metempsychosis or reincarnation does not exist in the Bible. At times, spiritual beings took the form of men or animals to influence humankind. Satan appeared to Eve as a serpent in order to engineer the fall of man (Genesis 3:1–7\). The holy angels sometimes appeared as men (Mark 16:5\). And it seems that fallen angels once took on the form of men in order to procreate with human women and produce giant, evil offspring called [Nephilim](Nephilim.html) (Genesis 6:1–4\). But none of this can be considered metempsychosis.
The Bible teaches that each human soul has one life; after death, the soul faces judgment (Hebrews 9:27\). There is no coming back in another body of any form for any reason. Jesus gives a wise perspective: “I will show you whom you should fear: Fear him who, after your body has been killed, has authority to throw you into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear him” (Luke 12:5\).
|
What are the mandrakes mentioned in the Bible?
|
Answer
In Song of Solomon 7:13 we read, “The mandrakes send out their fragrance, / and at our door is every delicacy, / both new and old, / that I have stored up for you, my beloved.” A mandrake is a short\-stemmed, flowering plant in the nightshade family (and therefore related to the potato). Mandrakes are mentioned in one passage in Genesis and once in [Song of Solomon](Song-of-Solomon.html).
Mandrakes have unusually large, forked roots that sometimes resemble a human body with open arms and legs. In the ancient world, mandrake roots were considered an aphrodisiac and were commonly prepared and eaten as a fertility drug. There are many references to mandrakes in folklore and superstitions in various cultures.
The mention of mandrakes in the Song of Solomon is part of a romantic encounter between Solomon and his new wife. Mandrakes were around them in the countryside, along with grapes, [pomegranates](pomegranates-in-the-Bible.html), and “every delicacy” (Song of Solomon 7:13\). The mandrakes are providing a fragrance, and, given their reputation as an aphrodisiac, are suggestive of intimacy. The entire description in verses 10–13 is of a romantic setting that enhances the desire of the husband and wife for each other.
In this particular scene, the [Shulammite](Shulammite-woman.html) invites King Solomon to join her for a sexual rendezvous out of doors in the early morning: “Let us go early to the vineyards / to see if the vines have budded, / if their blossoms have opened, / and if the pomegranates are in bloom— / there I will give you my love” (Song of Solomon 7:12\). The description of this romantic time is full of beautiful imagery, including the mention of mandrakes in the verses that follow, as the husband and wife enjoy each other among the vineyards.
The one other biblical account to speak of mandrakes is found in Genesis 30\. There, Jacob’s two wives, Rachel and Leah, vie for Jacob’s attention. Rachel wants a child, and Leah wants more children. Leah’s son Reuben finds some mandrakes in the field and gives them to his mother. Leah then trades the mandrakes to Rachel in exchange for the opportunity to sleep with Jacob that night (Genesis 30:14–16\). Rachel, who was as yet childless, accepts the trade, believing that the mandrakes would help her conceive at a later time. Leah sleeps with Jacob that night and becomes pregnant with her fifth son (verse 17\).
|
What are the Four Noble Truths?
|
Answer
The Four Noble Truths are the fundamental beliefs of [Buddhism](buddhism.html). According to tradition, Gautama Buddha’s first sermon after his enlightenment was a description of these concepts. According to Buddhist thought, believing these ideas is not as important as experiencing them. Along with belief in reincarnation (*samsara*) and [*Nirvana*](Nirvana-in-Buddhism.html), the Four Noble Truths shape the thinking of almost all forms of Buddhism. These four concepts, in short, are 1\) the reality of suffering, 2\) the impermanence of the world, 3\) the liberation that comes by eliminating desire, and 4\) the necessity of following the [Eightfold Path](Noble-Eightfold-Path.html).
The First Noble Truth, also known as the principle of *dukkha*, claims that to live is to suffer. In English, this terminology can be confusing, as Buddhism does not claim all experiences are unpleasant. The concept of *dukkha* is more subtle, suggesting ideas such as anxiety, frustration, or dissatisfaction. This is the core belief of Buddhism, and all other beliefs and practices are based on this First Noble Truth. Buddhists believe that *dukkha* explains what is wrong with mankind: suffering caused by having the wrong desires, specifically, the desire for things that are only temporary. This problem is expounded in the Second Noble Truth.
The Second Noble Truth of Buddhism, also known as *anicca* (“impermanence”) or *tanha* (“craving”), states that nothing in the universe is permanent or unchanging. In fact, not even the Self is permanent or unchanging. This is Buddhism’s explanation for why mankind is as we are. Since suffering is caused by desiring what is impermanent, all desires ultimately lead to suffering. Even positive desires perpetuate the cycle of reincarnation and *dukkha*. In order to overcome this, one must understand the Third Noble Truth.
The Third Noble Truth says the only way to be freed from the cycle of suffering, death, and rebirth is by completely eliminating desires for temporal things. Buddhism sees this as the answer to the question “how do we correct what is wrong with mankind?” In practice, the Third Noble Truth calls for eliminating absolutely *all* desires, good, bad, and otherwise. The means to accomplish this is found in the Fourth Noble Truth.
The Fourth Noble Truth is that following the Noble Eightfold Path can eliminate desire. Buddhism’s plan for “how” to correct mankind’s flaws is found here. The Eightfold Path is defined as right views, right intent, right speech, right behavior, right livelihood, right effort, right awareness, and right meditation.
According to Buddhism, one can end the cycle of [reincarnation](reincarnation.html), suffering, and *dukkha* by applying the Four Noble Truths and living out the Noble Eightfold Path. This leads a person to a state completely void of all desire, craving, clinging, or frustration. This state of “nothingness” is known as *Nirvana* and is the Buddhist alternative to heaven. One who attains *Nirvana* ceases to exist as an individual, and stops the *samsara* process of rebirth and re\-death.
As with most major worldviews, not everything about the Four Noble Truths is completely contradicted by the Bible. Misplaced desires are a major source of angst and sin (Romans 13:14; Galatians 5:17\). Mortal life is certainly subject to change, and it is brief (James 4:14\). Also, it’s unwise to invest in things that aren’t permanent (Matthew 6:19–20\). However, in the matters of the eternal state and the process of transformation, the Four Noble Truths deviate drastically from biblical Christianity.
The Bible teaches that God is eternal, and those who are with Him in [heaven](is-Heaven-real.html) will enjoy that state forever (Matthew 25:21; John 4:14; 10:28\). The same eternal consciousness—without the joy—applies to those who choose to reject God (2 Thessalonians 1:9\). Their fate is described as a conscious, personal condition of torment (Luke 16:22–24\). Buddhism teaches that our eternity is either one of endless reincarnation or the oblivion of nonexistence. The Bible says, “People are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment” (Hebrews 9:27\).
Christianity and Buddhism both teach that people need to transform their desires and their behavior, but only Christianity provides a realistic means for how to do this. In Buddhism, one is told to change his desires through self\-directed efforts. Unfortunately, this means one has to have the desire to shed desires, a built\-in conundrum. The Buddhist who desires to rid himself of desire is still desiring something. Buddhism also does nothing to answer how a person can change a heart that is unwilling to change and self\-deceived (Jeremiah 17:9; Mark 9:24\). Christianity provides an answer to both of these problems: a Savior who not only changes what we do (1 Corinthians 6:11\) but what we want to do (Romans 12:2\).
There are many other differences between Buddhist and Christian beliefs. While Buddhism teaches that life is suffering, the Bible says that life is meant to be enjoyed (John 10:10\). Buddhism says the Self needs to be eliminated, while the Bible says that each person is valuable and meaningful (Genesis 1:26—27; Matthew 5:22\) and that the Self persists after death (John 14:3\).
|
Who are the daughters of Jerusalem in Song of Solomon?
|
Answer
The “daughters of Jerusalem” are mentioned seven times in the [Song of Solomon](Song-of-Solomon.html). These persons are obviously female, but who exactly are they?
The most likely identification of the daughters of Jerusalem is that they were the young, unmarried women of Jerusalem, the city where Solomon lived. Some translations say “maidens,” “virgins,” or “young women” instead of “daughters.” A look at this term’s use in the book helps to strengthen this interpretation. In Song of Solomon 1:5 the [Shulammite](Shulammite-woman.html) states, “Dark am I, yet lovely, / daughters of Jerusalem.” In contrast with the “dark” skin of Solomon’s lover, it seems that the daughters of Jerusalem were lighter\-skinned. This may indicate the daughters of Jerusalem were more affluent or worked indoors, since the [Shulammite attributes her dark skin](Shulammite-dark-skin.html) to working in the heat of the sun (verse 6\).
Song of Solomon 2:7 says, “Daughters of Jerusalem, I charge you / by the gazelles and by the does of the field: / Do not arouse or awaken love / until it so desires.” This is an important passage in the book, since the command not to “awaken love” is repeated twice elsewhere. Again, the Shulammite addresses the other women of the area, advising them not to force love until the appropriate time—love comes when it comes. This same command is also seen when the daughters of Jerusalem are mentioned in Song of Solomon 3:5 and 8:4\. The Shulammite is giving her advice to the other girls in town.
In Song of Solomon 3:10–11, the Shulammite again speaks to the young girls of Jerusalem: “Daughters of Jerusalem, come out, / and look, you daughters of Zion. / Look on King Solomon wearing a crown, / the crown with which his mother crowned him / on the day of his wedding, / the day his heart rejoiced.” The context speaks of a royal carriage Solomon had made (verse 9\). Some translations indicate that the interior of Solomon’s carriage was decorated “by the daughters of Jerusalem” (e.g., NASB, ESV, NET, ISV). This may give us an additional clue: the daughters of Jerusalem could be the female household servants of [King Solomon](life-Solomon.html).
Song of Solomon 5:8 also mentions the daughters of Jerusalem, saying, “Daughters of Jerusalem, I charge you— / if you find my beloved, / what will you tell him? / Tell him I am faint with love.” This charge to the daughters of Jerusalem also supports the idea that they were household servants. If they happen to see the king during the day, they are called on to report the status of Solomon’s new wife as being lovesick and wanting to be with him.
Song of Solomon 5:16 ends a description of Solomon with “he is altogether lovely. / This is my beloved, this is my friend, / daughters of Jerusalem.” The Shulammite’s husband is both her lover and her friend, something she declares openly to the young women of the city.
There are several places in the song that are spoken by a group of people in response to what Solomon and the Shulammite say (Song of Solomon 1:4, 11; 5:9; 6:13; et al.). The speakers could very well be the daughters of Jerusalem whom the Shulammite addresses so often.
In the New Testament, Jesus speaks to a group of women whom He calls “daughters of Jerusalem” on one occasion. As Jesus carried His cross to Calvary, many women followed in mourning. He says to them, “Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me, but weep for yourselves and for your children” (Luke 23:28\). Jesus was speaking generally to all the women in the city of Jerusalem and specifically to those near Him.
The daughters of Jerusalem play a small but important role in the Song of Solomon. As the young maidens of the city listened to advice from Solomon’s wife, they received wisdom about romance. If they were indeed servants in Solomon’s household, they would have been a natural audience as they made preparations for the wedding and waited on their new queen.
|
What is axiology?
|
Answer
Axiology is the study of values and how those values come about in a society. Axiology seeks to understand the nature of values and value judgments. It is closely related to two other realms of philosophy: ethics and aesthetics. All three branches deal with worth. [Ethics](philosophy-of-ethics.html) is concerned with goodness, trying to understand what good is and what it means to be good. Aesthetics is concerned with beauty and harmony, trying to understand beauty and what it means or how it is defined. Axiology is a necessary component of both ethics and aesthetics, because one must use concepts of worth to define “goodness” or “beauty,” and therefore one must understand what is valuable and why. Understanding values helps us to determine motive.
When children ask questions like “why do we do this?” or “how come?” they are asking axiological questions. They want to know what it is that motivates us to take action or refrain from action. The parent says not to take a cookie from the jar. The child wonders why taking a cookie from the jar is wrong and argues with the parent. The parent often tires of trying to explain and simply replies, “Because I said so.” The child will stop arguing if he values the established authority (or if he fears the punishment of disobeying). On the other hand, the child may stop arguing simply because he respects his parent. In this example, the value is either authority or respect, depending on the values of the child. Axiology asks, “Where did these values come from? Can either of these values be called good? Is one better than another? Why?”
Innate to humanity is the desire for self\-preservation and self\-continuance. Like the animals, humans seek out food and shelter, and they desire reproduction. But there is another set of things we seek: truth, beauty, love. These are different needs, different values that the animal kingdom does not concern itself with. The Bible tells us the answer to why the need for truth and love and beauty exists. We are spiritual as well as physical beings. We are created in the image of God (Genesis 1:27\). God is higher than the natural world—He is “super\-natural”—and so we are created in the image of what is supernatural. Therefore, we value what is supernatural and intangible. “For in Him we live and move and have our being” (Acts 17:28\). We do not usually think of things like beauty and love as “supernatural,” but by definition they are in that they raise humanity above the rest of nature. Our values are determined by our nature, and our nature has a spiritual dimension.
In *Hamlet*, the title character famously says, “What a piece of work is a man! How noble in reason! how infinite in faculty! in form, in moving, how express and admirable! in action how like an angel! in apprehension how like a god! the beauty of the world! the paragon of animals! And yet, to me, what is this quintessence of dust?” (*Hamlet*, II:ii). This perfectly describes the conundrum that faces us. We are formed in the image of God—we are amazing creatures. And we value that which is higher than our everyday survival needs; we want to touch the Divine. And at the same time, we are dust, subject to decay, both physically and spiritually. What will lift us up, past our natural selves, to attain that which we innately value? When the apostle Paul said, “Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death?” (Romans 7:24–25\), he was drawing a distinction between “me” (the supernatural) and “this body” (the natural). Ultimately, for all of us, the answer is to return to the Source of all value, God. We accept His free gift of salvation, through faith. “Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we now stand. And we boast in the hope of the glory of God” (Romans 5:1–2\).
|
What is heterodoxy?
|
Answer
The word *heterodox* is used to describe something that is not orthodox. *Heterodoxy* is the collective term for opinions or doctrines that vary from orthodoxy, i.e., the official position. Heterodoxy differs from the orthodox view of the church, but the church is not infallible, and something heterodox is not automatically heretical or wrong. At times, heterodox views are more biblical than the prevailing orthodox view.
For example, [Martin Luther’s](95-theses.html) views on salvation by grace through faith stood in direct opposition to Catholic doctrine, and his writings were considered heterodoxy. His ideas challenged the orthodoxy of the time and were a better, more biblical alternative to the established church’s dogma. Luther’s willingness to be heterodox led to the rise of Protestantism, to the printing of the Bible in the common language, and to a more biblical understanding of the gospel. When a doctrine stands in opposition to the Bible, it is called heresy. But orthodoxy and heterodoxy can change, depending on the views of the prevailing religious power. As can be seen in the story of Martin Luther, the biblical view can itself be heterodox, and biblically sound theology, heterodoxy.
Jesus Himself preached heterodox views. The religious leaders of His time taught that full adherence to the Law was possible by self\-righteous self\-effort. It was a religion devoid of mercy, grace, or dependence on God, and Jesus spoke against it (Matthew 9:13\). In fact, Jesus opposed the Pharisees and [scribes](scribes-Jesus.html) at every turn, preaching against their understanding of the Sabbath (Matthew 12:1–8\), decrying their additions to the Word of God (Mark 7:7\), calling them “blind guides” (Matthew 23:24\), and even proclaiming “woes” on them for their stubborn false teaching (Luke 11\).
Like Jesus, we should use the Bible as our guide, rather than prevailing religious opinion or the teaching of any church. Many churches teach what is biblical, but each of us is responsible to know God’s Word individually. Doctrine should never be accepted simply because it is “orthodox”; sometimes the heterodox position is more biblical. We must see that what are taught is indeed true according to the Scripture (Acts 17:11\).
|
How does creationism explain vestigial organs?
|
Answer
*Note: for simplicity, this article uses the terms *created* and [*creationism*](biblical-creationism.html) in reference to special, immediate creation of organisms in their current forms, as opposed to the gradual development of organisms over time from prior forms. Some concepts of creationism involve both divine intervention and macro\-evolution, but, for the sake of brevity, the terms are used as described.*
If animals were created and did not evolve, why do they have vestigial organs? That is, why would God create an animal with parts it doesn’t need? Some organs are referred to as “vestigial” because they are assumed to be a “vestige”—a leftover—from an earlier evolutionary form. The term *vestigial* implies a current lack of use, purpose, or function. Commonly cited examples in human beings of “vestigial” organs are the appendix, the coccyx, and nipples on males. Critics of creationism suggest that these body parts are useless and are more likely the result of a prior biological form than special creation.
The first question to consider is whether the organs in question are actually vestigial. If an organ serves a function, then it’s not vestigial. Actually studying a so\-called vestigial organ frequently shows that it’s not so useless after all.
For years, the human appendix was considered the classic example of a vestigial organ, or at least a body part with poor design. The appendix is sometimes removed, without any noticeable side effects, due to inflammation or tumors. This, supposedly, is evidence that the appendix is a superfluous organ. However, more recent studies have suggested that the role of the appendix is to store beneficial bacteria used to re\-populate the digestive system after illness. Surgical removal is still needed in case of infection, but the organ is not, in fact, without a purpose in the design of the body. (See Martin, L. G., “What is the function of the human appendix? Did it once have a purpose that has since been lost?” *Scientific American*, Oct 21, 1999, www.scientificamerican.com/article/what\-is\-the\-function\-of\-the\-human\-appendix\-did\-it\-once\-have\-a\-purpose\-that\-has\-since\-been\-lost.)
Similarly, the coccyx has often been considered to be vestigial—a stunted leftover of the “tail” our ancestors had (hence, the popular name *tailbone*). But the coccyx is far from useless; in fact, it serves as an important point of connection for various tendons and muscles. It also stabilizes the body when a person is in an upright seated position. The tailbone shows design, and we would have a hard time without it. (See Smallwood, L., M.D., et al., “Coccydynia: An Overview of the Anatomy, Etiology, and Treatment of Coccyx Pain,” *Ochsner Journal*, 2014 Spring; 14(1\): 84–87, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC39630\.)
If the “vestigial” organ seems to provide no actual benefit, the next question is whether there is a compelling reason to include it as part of the body’s structure. Critics of creationism sometimes point to the presence of nipples on males as nonsensical under special creation. Males do not provide milk, so why would they have vulnerable organs that serve no useful purpose? One answer to this is greater efficiency of [design](evidence-intelligent-design.html).
Almost every model of car is available in several different trims or accessory packages. At greater cost, better features can be added—with additional switches, buttons, or dials on the dashboard. It would be expensive and wasteful for the manufacturer to produce a unique dashboard for each set of options. To do so would require a completely different set of tools, machines, and parts for each version, not to mention additional records and quality controls. The most efficient use of the machinery is to make a single dashboard for every car, regardless of the trim, and those without the fancier options will simply have unused holes on the dash capped.
The use of a single template to produce various versions of the same model of car illustrates why males have nipples. The “machinery” that creates the human body, DNA, doesn’t need the added complication of completely different chest designs for males and females. It’s more efficient, less complicated, and less prone to genetic errors to simply have a single “template” for both sexes, though one will develop an additional function for the nipple. What may seem like a waste is actually more efficient than having custom organs for each sex. (For a discussion on a further purpose of the male nipple, see Bergman, J., “Is the human male nipple vestigial?” *Journal of Creation* 15(2\):38–41, Aug 2001, https://creation.com/is\-the\-human\-male\-nipple\-vestigial.)
Many of the organs dismissed as useless by prior generations we now know to have a purpose. And some features make sense from the standpoint of a streamlined genetic code. By and large, those two considerations explain the existence of “vestigial” organs, from the perspective of special creation. Given the wisdom of God, we know there is some purpose to every feature of the body, whether or not we fully understand it (see Psalm 139:14\).
|
What is BioLogos?
|
Answer
BioLogos is the name of an organization that promotes various forms of [theistic evolution](theistic-evolution.html). Their slogan is “science and faith in harmony,” and they seek to show that [science and faith](science-God.html) do not have to be mutually exclusive. One of the central claims of BioLogos is that God began the process of evolution, making Him responsible for origins, but they reject a six\-day literalist interpretation of creation. Based on scientific evidence, i.e., what we can observe of the natural world, BioLogos claims that a six\-24\-hour\-day creation is not the way God intended us to interpret Scripture.
BioLogos does well in reminding everyone, Christian or not, that science does not preclude the miraculous. Arthur C. Clarke, a noted science fiction author, said, “Magic is simply science that we don’t understand yet,” a statement that highlights the limitations of science (a paraphrase of Clarke’s Third Law, from *Profiles of the Future*, Harper and Row, 1973, p. 21\). Just because we don’t understand how God accomplished a miracle does not mean He was unable to accomplish it. Christians believe that God is omnipotent and that He upholds the entire universe by the “word of His power” (Hebrews 1:3\).
Consider the story of Joshua’s army and the sun standing still—a story that many people find utterly unbelievable and scientifically irrational (Joshua 10:13\). In order for the sun to stop, under natural circumstances, the earth would have to stop in its rotation, which skeptics note would destroy all life on the planet. But this is not the only possible explanation of how God performed the miracle. Even if He did stop the earth’s rotation, could not the all\-powerful, all\-wise God have compensated for the lack of rotation and preserved life on earth? Christians do not say, “Based on science, this or that is impossible”; they say, “With God, all things are possible” (Matthew 19:26\).
In our view, BioLogos sometimes exerts too much effort trying to explain the actions of God using natural means, rather than supernatural means. God inhabits the supernatural world, a realm that science is incapable of measuring, testing, or explaining. Science is the study of what is natural—it does not inform us about the supernatural. Some aspects of creation are simply better understood as supernatural events, rather than being given contrived “natural” origins.
Christian theology depends heavily upon supernatural occurrences, and BioLogos accepts the reality of miracles. This includes the virgin birth of Christ, the atonement, the resurrection of Christ, and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. All these doctrines are essential to Christianity and cannot be done away with. Fortunately, BioLogos does not reject the supernatural or the miraculous. According to BioLogos, God can intervene in the natural world and has done so, as recorded in the Bible.
BioLogos also does well in reminding all people, Christian or not, that science is not infallible. Science is subject to interpretation and bias, just as study of the Bible can be influenced by fallible human error. Evolutionists often criticize Christian beliefs for being axiomatic—and not subject to change based on new information—but the science world has its axioms as well.
While we disagree with the conclusions of BioLogos, in particular those related to evolution and the precise nature of God’s role in creation, their views are not incompatible with a high view of Scripture. We reject some of their argumentation on scientific issues but appreciate their acceptance of Scripture and the truths of Christianity.
|
What is the Melchizedek priesthood?
|
Answer
In biblical Christianity, the Melchizedek priesthood is an office that applies only to Christ. [Melchizedek](Melchizedek.html) is introduced in Genesis 14:18 and is described as the king of Salem and “priest of God.” Abram (later Abraham) offers Melchizedek a tithe and is blessed. The name *Melchizedek* is the combination of the Hebrew words for “king” and “righteous,” making Melchizedek a righteous, kingly priest.
In Matthew 22 Jesus debates the Pharisees. In verse 44 Jesus cites Psalm 110:1, stating that the Messiah is David’s “lord” in that verse. Melchizedek is mentioned in the same psalm: “The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind: ‘You are a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek’” (Psalm 110:4\). So the Messiah, David’s lord, was given Melchizedek’s priesthood. Melchizedek is therefore a type of Christ—some commentators say Melchizedek’s appearance to Abraham was actually a [Christophany](theophany-Christophany.html), an early revelation of Jesus Christ.
Much of chapters 6 and 7 of the book of Hebrews is given to explaining why Jesus’ Melchizedek priesthood is superior to that of Aaron. Hebrews 7:23–24 implies that Jesus holds His priestly office eternally, using a Greek word that suggests something that cannot be passed down or changed. Hebrews 7:26 calls this priest “exalted” and sinless. For all of these reasons, Christ alone can fulfill the office of the Melchizedek priesthood (Hebrews 6:20\).
[Mormonism](Mormons.html) holds a different, unbiblical view of the priesthood of Melchizedek. According to Mormon doctrine, the office the Melchizedek priesthood stopped until it was re\-instituted through the ministry of Joseph Smith (*Doctrine and Covenants* 107:1–5\). Mormonism teaches that men may be ordained into this priesthood, through offices such as Apostle, Patriarch, or Elder. The invoking of Melchizedek and, to a lesser extent, Aaron, is used by Mormonism to arrogate priestly authority for their offices.
|
What is the meaning of the foxes in Song of Solomon 2:15?
|
Answer
In Song of Solomon 2:15 the speaker says, “Catch for us the foxes, / the little foxes / that ruin the vineyards, / our vineyards that are in bloom.” It might seem strange that, in the middle of a romantic, tender conversation, the matter of a fox hunt should arise. As with much of the imagery in this beautiful poem, the foxes are symbolic.
Solomon’s readers considered foxes to be destructive animals that could destroy valuable vineyards (cf. Judges 15:4; Psalm 63:10; Ezekiel 13:4\). As the [Shulammite](Shulammite-woman.html) and her beloved verbalize their love for each other, we are suddenly confronted with the need to catch the foxes that spoil the vines. If the blossoming vineyard spreading its fragrance (Song of Solomon 2:13\) refers to the growing romance between the couple, then the foxes of verse 15 represent potential problems that could damage the relationship prior to the marriage (which takes place in chapter 5\). The command, in essence, is “Take preventative measures to protect this love from anything that could harm it.”
In ancient literature, wild animals were often used to represent problems that could separate lovers. For example, Egyptian love songs used crocodiles to picture a threat to romantic love. In Israel, crocodiles were not common, but foxes were.
In the Old Testament, foxes are mentioned in Judges 15\. Samson ties torches to 300 foxes and releases them to destroy the grain fields of the Philistines. In Nehemiah 4:3, the evil Tobiah mocks the rebuilding of Jerusalem’s wall, saying, “What they are building—even a fox climbing up on it would break down their wall of stones!”
Jesus once used the word picture of a fox in a negative way. In speaking of [Herod](Herod-Antipas.html), Jesus said, “Go tell that fox, ‘I will keep on driving out demons and healing people today and tomorrow, and on the third day I will reach my goal’” (Luke 13:32\). Jesus calls Herod a “fox” as a rebuke of that monarch’s crafty and worthless nature.
Song of Solomon 2:15 is a wise and beautiful verse. The vineyards are “in bloom”—the romance is alive and growing and preparing to bear fruit. But there is a need to round up the “foxes”—all potential threats to the relationship must be removed. The foxes are “little”—it’s the little things, the things overlooked, that often spoil things of value. Maintaining a good relationship takes work. The lovers must address potential dangers to their relationship and remove all threats to their love. As they pay attention to the “little things,” the lovers will be free to continue to pursue marriage and sexual intimacy.
|
What does the Bible say about talking too much / being talkative?
|
Answer
The Bible warns us against talking too much or being overly talkative. In fact, the Bible says that a fool can be recognized by his many words (Ecclesiastes 5:3\). Ecclesiastes 10:14 adds that a fool “multiplies words.”
The Bible discourages using an abundance of words where a few would suffice. “Even fools are thought wise if they keep silent, and discerning if they hold their tongues” (Proverbs 17:28\). Those who feel compelled to give utterance to every thought in their heads usually end up in trouble.
Proverbs 10:8 describes the overly talkative person as a “babbling fool” (ESV, NASB), a “prating fool” (NKJV), or a “chattering fool” (ISV) who will come to ruin. Such a person is contrasted with one who is “wise of heart” and who “will receive commandments.” The [antithetical parallelism](antithetical-parallelism.html) of Proverbs 10:19 warns that talking too much naturally leads to sin: “When words are many, transgression is not lacking, but whoever restrains his lips is prudent” (ESV).
The wise person refuses to talk too much. Rather, he fears the Lord, listens to the Lord, and obeys the Lord. He follows the example of Mary, “who sat at the Lord’s feet listening to what he said” (Luke 10:39\). When our mouths are full of our own words, we have little time or interest in God’s words. Talking too much usually means listening too little.
Modern culture offers numerous avenues through which we can express ourselves verbally. Social media, blogs, cell phones, and call\-in radio all enable us to keep up a constant stream of chatter. But how much of our talking is truly edifying or important (see Ephesians 4:29\)? Saying what needs to be said is important, but talking too much easily leads to saying what should not be said.
Restraining our lips is an indication of wisdom and humility. Talkative people often do not take the time between their many words to choose their words carefully. Christians should be aware that talking too much is detrimental to our witness in the world, as James reminds us, “If anyone among you thinks he is religious, and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this one’s religion is useless” (James 1:26\). James later says that [controlling the tongue](taming-the-tongue.html) is one of the hardest things to do, humanly speaking (James 3:2\). In fact, “no human being can tame the tongue” (James 3:7\). Fortunately, we have the Holy Spirit to help us with the task, and here is a helpful prayer: “Set a guard over my mouth, LORD; keep watch over the door of my lips” (Psalm 141:3\).
The apostle Peter is often quoted in the gospels, and it seems that he was a talkative person by nature. In one instance at least, Peter’s verbosity was ill\-advised. On the mount of [transfiguration](transfiguration.html), Peter says to Jesus, “Rabbi, it is good for us to be here. Let us put up three shelters—one for you, one for Moses and one for Elijah.” (He did not know what to say . . .)” (Mark 9:5–6\). Notice that Peter “did not know what to say,” so, of course, he *said* something! It’s just what talkative people do. God quickly silenced Peter by redirecting his focus: “A cloud appeared and covered them, and a voice came from the cloud: ‘This is my Son, whom I love. Listen to him!’” (Mark 9:7\). Peter’s talking had to be replaced with listening.
Just as the overly talkative person displays foolishness, the one who holds his tongue demonstrates knowledge and understanding. “He who has knowledge spares his words, and a man of understanding is of a calm spirit” (Proverbs 17:27\). We can’t gain knowledge if we are constantly talking, but understanding comes from listening and using our words sparingly. “My dear brothers and sisters, take note of this: Everyone should be quick to listen, slow to speak . . .” (James 1:19\).
|
What does it mean to not grow weary in doing good (Galatians 6:9)?
|
Answer
After exhorting the believers in Galatia and warning them of the things they should avoid (Galatians 5:1—6:8\), Paul may have known they would be feeling overwhelmed with the responsibilities of the Christian life. So he encourages them with the words of verse 9: “Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up.”
Paul, perhaps better than anyone else, knew how wearying the spiritual battle can be. He ends his warnings about sin, the works of the flesh, and the deceitfulness of the world by encouraging the Galatians, and all believers, to remember the joyful harvest we will reap if we persevere in doing good. “As we have opportunity,” Paul says in the next verse, “let us do good to all people, especially to those who belong to the family of believers” (Galatians 6:10\).
We all know what it means to do good and not evil. Paul has just summarized the works of the flesh (which are doing evil) and the [fruit of the Spirit](fruit-of-the-Holy-Spirit.html) (which results in doing good) in Galatians 5:19–26\. Doing good involves yielding to the Spirit and exhibiting the fruit He produces—love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self\-control. When these things are dominant in our lives, doing good is the inevitable result.
We need this exhortation to not grow weary in doing good because “the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak” (Mark 14:38\). In view of our own natural weakness and the opposition of evil spirits and evil men, the best intentions for doing good can be easily derailed. Christians often feel there is so much work to be done that we cannot possibly do it all. There are so many needs, so many calls on our time, energy, and finances, and there is often so much ingratitude among those we try to benefit that we can easily become exhausted and disheartened. Doing what’s right is not easy in a fallen world, especially when it seems no one notices and there is little recompense for all our troubles. Is it worth serving the Lord? Paul says, “Yes!”
Growing weary in doing good is an ever\-present danger in the Christian life. But there are things we can do to minimize weariness. Jesus scheduled times of rest, and so should we (Mark 6:31\). Overcommitting ourselves is a primary cause of weariness among Christians. We want so much to contribute and to respond to God’s love by pouring ourselves into ministry for His sake that we risk [burnout](ministry-burnout.html). Discernment is essential. God will provide for each need He wants to fulfill. He is, after all, in charge of it all. Not a sparrow falls without His seeing it (Matthew 10:29\). He will ordain the means to accomplish His ends. Sometimes all He really wants from the overcommitted is for them to quiet their hearts and be still before Him (Psalm 46:10; cf. Luke 10:41\).
Paul points us past our labors to the prize at the end: those who persevere in doing good are promised to reap rewards. When we become disheartened, the comforting presence of the Holy Spirit brings relief and gratitude to our hearts and glory to God. Just like the [sower of seed](sowing-and-reaping.html) must wait for the harvest, the Christian must wait patiently for the rewards that will inevitably come from the Giver of all good things (James 1:17\). We will not give up, because our Lord is faithful. “Always give yourselves fully to the work of the Lord, because you know that your labor in the Lord is not in vain” (1 Corinthians 15:58\).
|
What is the Fundamentalist Church of Latter-Day Saints (FLDS)?
|
Answer
The Fundamentalist Church of Latter\-Day Saints (FLDS) is a splinter group of [Mormonism](Mormons.html) that believes that polygamy is a God\-ordained form of marriage. The FLDS traces its roots all the way back to the original teachings of Joseph Smith. The group is based in Colorado City, Arizona, and has an estimated 10,000 members. The Fundamentalist Church of Latter\-Day Saints is led by self\-proclaimed prophet Warren Jeffs, who is currently in prison serving a life sentence for the sexual assault of a minor.
The founder of Mormonism, [Joseph Smith](Joseph-Smith.html), claimed to have received revelations from God. Among his claims were that men were meant to have multiple wives (*Doctrine and Covenants* 132:61–62\). This was a core distinctive of early Mormon theology and a major point of contention for non\-Mormons. By the late 1800s, polygamy in the Mormon Church was a major political problem, too. Mormon efforts to have Utah admitted as a state of the Union were stonewalled in no small part because of the Mormon belief in [polygamy](polygamy.html).
Between 1890 and 1904, Mormon leadership claimed to have new divine revelations that disavowed plural marriages. Existing polygamous marriages were kept intact, but no new instances of polygamy were to be allowed. This doctrinal change opened the political doors for Utah’s statehood, but it also split the Mormon Church. Some Mormons insisted on following the original revelation of Joseph Smith by participating in polygamy. By the early 1900s, orthodox Mormonism was excommunicating those who insisted on multiple\-wife marriages.
Some of those polygamists rejected by mainline Mormonism banded together in an effort to protect the practice of polygamy. The new group called itself the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter\-Day Saints. But before long even the FLDS began to splinter into other denominations. One such sub\-group is the Apostolic United Brethren, best known today as the sect featured in the reality TV show *Sister Wives*.
As is common with splinter groups, the theology and practices of the Fundamentalist Church of Latter\-Day Saints are subject to change and difficult to describe in accurate detail. Beyond plain dress, a communal lifestyle, arranged marriages, and polygamy, FLDS beliefs are more or less identical to those of mainline Mormonism. Of course, Mormonism of any variety is contradictory to the Bible.
In sharp contrast to mainline Mormonism, however, the FLDS has been a repeated target of law enforcement. Accusations of pedophilia and spousal abuse are added to the charge of polygamy, which is still illegal in the U.S. The Fundamentalist Church of Latter\-Day Saints has also been accused of misogyny and racism by various political groups. Most mainline Mormons, and even more fundamentalist groups such as the Apostolic United Brethren, take great pains to dissociate themselves from the FLDS. This is similar to the way most Christian denominations make an effort to separate themselves from groups such as the [Westboro Baptist Church](Westboro-Baptist-Church.html).
|
What is biblical literalism?
|
Answer
Biblical literalism is the method of interpreting Scripture that holds that, except in places where the text is obviously [allegorical](allegorical-interpretation.html), poetic, or figurative, it should be taken literally. Biblical literalism is the position of most evangelicals and Christian fundamentalists. It is the position of Got Questions Ministries as well. (See [“Can/Should we interpret the Bible as literal?”](Bible-literal.html))
Biblical literalism goes hand\-in\-hand with regarding the Word of God as inerrant and inspired. If we believe in the doctrine of biblical inspiration—that the books of the Bible were written by men under the influence of the Holy Spirit (2 Timothy 3:16–17; 2 Peter 1:20–21\) to the extent that everything they wrote in the Bible was exactly what God wanted to say—then a belief in biblical literalism is simply an acknowledgement that God wants to communicate to us via human language. The rules of human language then become the rules of interpreting Scripture. Words have objective meaning, and God has spoken through words.
Biblical literalism is an extension of the literalism that we all use in everyday communication. If someone enters a room and says, “The building is on fire,” we don’t start searching for figurative meanings; we start evacuating. No one stops to ponder whether the reference to “fire” is metaphorical or if the “building” is an oblique reference to 21st\-century socio\-economic theories. Similarly, when we open the Bible and read, “The Israelites went through the sea on dry ground, with a wall of water on their right and on their left” (Exodus 14:22\), we shouldn’t look for figurative meanings for *sea*, *dry ground*, or *wall of water*; we should [believe the miracle](miracles-literal.html).
If we deny biblical literalism and try to interpret Scripture figuratively, how are the figures to be interpreted? And who decides what is and is not a figure? [Were Adam and Eve real people?](Adam-and-Eve-story.html) What about Cain and Abel? If they are figurative, where in Genesis can we start saying the people are literal individuals? Any dividing line between figurative and literal in the genealogies is arbitrary. Or take a New Testament example: did Jesus really say to love our enemies (Matthew 5:44\)? Did He say it on a mountain? Was Jesus even real? Without a commitment to biblical literalism, we might as well throw out the whole Bible.
If biblical literalism is discarded, language becomes meaningless. If “five smooth stones” in 1 Samuel 17:40 doesn’t refer to five aerodynamic rocks, then what in the world did David pick out of the stream? More importantly, if words can mean anything we assign to them, there are no genuine promises in the Bible. The “place” that Jesus said He is preparing for us (John 14:3\) needs to be literal, or else He is speaking nonsense. The “cross” that Jesus died on needs to be a literal cross, and His death needs to be a literal death in order for us to have salvation. Hell needs to be a literal place—as does heaven—if we are to have anything to be saved from. Jesus’ [literal resurrection](bodily-resurrection-Jesus.html) from a literal tomb is as equally important (1 Corinthians 15:17\).
To be clear, biblical literalism does not ignore the dispensations. Commands given to Israel in the theocracy do not necessarily apply to the New Testament church. Also, biblical literalism does not require that *every* passage be concrete and not figurative. Idioms, metaphors, and illustrations are all a natural part of language and should be recognized as such. So, when Jesus speaks of His flesh being “food” in John 6: 55, we know He is speaking figuratively—“food” is an obvious metaphor. We follow the rules of language. We are alert to metaphors and the signals of similes, *like* and *as*. But unless a text is clearly intended to be figurative, we take it literally. God’s Word was designed to communicate, and communication requires a literal understanding of the words used.
|
What is the meaning of the ankh symbol?
|
Answer
In ancient Egyptian mythology, the [ankh](https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&site=imghp&tbm=isch&q=ankh+symbol) was a symbol of [eternal life](what-is-eternal-life.html). The shape of the ankh resembles a capital *T* with a loop connected to the top. The ankh could also be described as a cross with the top arm replaced by an upside\-down teardrop shape. In hieroglyphics, the ankh is frequently seen being carried, through the loop, in the hands of Egyptian gods and goddesses. The ankh symbol was later adopted by the [Coptic Christian Church](Coptic-Christianity.html) as the *crux ansata*, meaning “cross with a handle.”
Archaeologists are unsure of the origins of the ankh symbol or what it was meant to represent. Some theories are that the ankh is a stylized sandal strap, the path of the sun on the horizon, or a combination of three\-element\-male and one\-element\-female genitals. Others suggest that the ankh was meant to portray a kind of knot or bow, and in earlier depictions of the ankh the longer bottom segment is two separate parts. Hand mirrors were frequently formed using this shape, and the Egyptian word *ankh* not only meant “life,” but also “mirror.”
As with other symbols, the ankh is commonly used by those who have no clue what it means but who find it pretty. In modern times, the ankh has been associated with the [vampire](vampires.html) fantasy genre because of its connotations of eternal life. It has also been popular with [Goth subculture](Christian-goth-gothic.html), likely because of the ankh’s fancied connection to vampires and its assumed “dark” implications. When used for deliberately symbolic purposes, the ankh is typically a reference to [religious pluralism](religious-pluralism.html), suggesting that all spiritual approaches equally lead to “life.”
The Bible’s teaching is that eternal life is only offered through faith in the sacrifice and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Jesus said, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6\).
|
How can I be ready to be caught up in the rapture?
|
Answer
The [rapture](rapture-of-the-church.html) is coming, and we should all make sure we are ready for it. Being ready for the rapture is much simpler than you may think. In short, you must receive Jesus Christ as your Savior. The rapture is for believers.
Here is a clear prophecy of the rapture of the church: “According to the Lord’s word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever. Therefore encourage one another with these words” (1 Thessalonians 4:15–18\). Note that Paul is writing to believers concerning those who are “in Christ” and thus have the promise of resurrection. Those who are saved are ready for the rapture.
The unsaved are not ready for the rapture. In fact, that day of the Lord (which begins with the rapture) will come upon the unsaved “like a thief in the night” (1 Thessalonians 5:2\). Those who are left behind in the rapture will be those who do not have the Spirit of Christ dwelling within them. Believers are ready: “You, brothers and sisters, are not in darkness so that this day should surprise you like a thief” (1 Thessalonians 5:4\).
The children of God are ready for the rapture because of their faith. They are the five wise virgins in [Jesus’ parable](parable-ten-virgins.html) who have their lamps trimmed and burning and full of oil—a picture of the Holy Spirit (Matthew 25:1–13\). Unfortunately, faith will be lacking in most of the people on earth; the time before Jesus’ coming will be characterized by spiritual coldness and unbelief. Jesus spoke of His return and asked, rhetorically, “When the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on the earth?” (Luke 18:8\).
Are you ready for the rapture? Jesus knows His own, and He will come for them (John 10:14; 14:1–3\). The only way you will be left behind in the rapture is if you have not received Christ as your Savior. If you are not saved, then today is the day of salvation (2 Corinthians 6:2\). Do not delay another moment. Trust Christ now.
|
Is Song of Solomon an allegory of God’s love for Israel and/or Christ’s love for the Church?
|
Answer
An [allegory](Bible-allegory.html) is a literary work in which the characters and events are symbolic of a deeper moral or spiritual truth. [*The Pilgrim’s Progress*](The-Pilgrims-Progress.html) and *The Holy War* by John Bunyan are famous allegories. The Song of Solomon is often interpreted as an allegory by both Jewish and Christian scholars. Jews have seen it as an allegory of God’s love, while Christians have often viewed the book as an allegory of Christ’s love for the Church. The book is lyric, poetic, and rich in symbolism, but can it properly be called an allegory?
Because of the romantic and even sexual nature of the book’s contents, many have sought a different way to understand its message. However, an allegorical approach is unnecessary to understanding the intended meaning of the [Song of Solomon](Song-of-Solomon.html). The straightforward approach to the Song of Solomon shows it is a love poem written by Solomon regarding a woman he loves. The book includes many intimate details regarding the love between a man and a woman; those details are cloaked in symbolism, but chapter 4 is obviously a poetic description of the consummation of a marriage on the wedding night. There is no need to allegorize this, since its presentation of connubial love is completely consistent with the Bible’s other teachings regarding marriage.
In the poem the wedding takes place prior to the consummation of sexual relations between the lover and his beloved (Song of Solomon 3:6–11\). The wedding night is symbolically described in 4:1—5:1, and then 5:2–8:4 addresses the maturing of the marriage relationship. The beloved concludes, “Many waters cannot quench love; / rivers cannot sweep it away” (Song of Solomon 8:7\).
There is nothing in the book to suggest it’s anything but a lyrical presentation of what actually took place between King Solomon and his true love. There are no supernatural events or apocalyptic beasts; there is nothing that must be understood as allegorical, and there is no need to spiritualize the text.
A major concern with an allegorical approach to the Song of Solomon is that the meaning of the allegory is debatable. The lover is usually seen as God or Christ, with the beloved as either God’s people (Israel) or the Church. While the Church is called the bride of Christ (Ephesians 5; Revelation 19:7\), this does not mean the bride in the Song of Solomon must be seen from this perspective. The Church did not exist at the time the Song of Solomon was composed. Unless speaking prophetically, the book cannot refer to the Church.
Could Solomon have written the book as an allegory of God’s love for the Jewish people? God loves Israel (Hosea 3:1\), but this does not require the Song of Solomon to be an allegory about Israel. There may be applications relevant to God’s love for His people, but this is different from interpreting the book as an allegory.
The Song of Solomon can be read and interpreted just as it was written, as a love poem. It offers an intimate look of the growth, joy, and maturation of love between a man and woman. It can thus offer much insight for married life today. The Song of Solomon can also be seen as an illustration of God’s love for His people, but it is not an allegory, per se.
|
What are revellings in the Bible?
|
Answer
The word *revellings* (“noisy partying” or “carousing”) is found in two places in the King James Version of the Bible. Galatians 5:19–21 includes revellings in the list of the works of the flesh. First Peter 4:3 mentions revellings as part of the lifestyle of “pagans,” meaning those who do not know God and who live as though He does not exist. More modern versions of the Bible translate the Greek word for “revellings” as “revelries” (NKJV), “orgies” (NIV, ESV), “wild celebrations or partying” (ISV), and “carousing” (NASB). The original Greek word, *komos*, carries the connotation of “letting loose.” When people “go wild,” they are engaging in “revellings.”
In Galatians 5, Paul warns the churches of Galatia to put away all “works of the flesh,” including sexual sins, sins of hateful attitudes toward others, and the sins of “drunkenness” and “revellings.” Those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. In contrast, Paul lists the [fruit of the Spirit](fruit-of-the-Holy-Spirit.html)–love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self\-control. Those who have come to Christ in faith for forgiveness of sins have the Holy Spirit within them, and He is the planter and cultivator of divine fruit. Those without Christ and the Spirit exhibit the works of the flesh, including drunken revellings.
Does this mean that all parties are off limits? Not at all. But parties characterized by [gluttony](gluttony-sin.html), [immoderate drinking](sin-alcohol.html), lewdness, or out\-of\-control behavior of any kind are antithetical to the work of the Holy Spirit. The Christian avoids “revellings.” He sees the works of the flesh as less and less appealing and the fruit of the Spirit more and more desirable. The heart, once touched by the Spirit, no longer enjoys the works of the flesh as it did before, and the longing for such works diminishes. Paul’s sober warning that those who indulge in the works of the flesh will not inherit the kingdom of God should not be taken lightly.
The apostle Peter takes up the same theme in his first letter. He makes it clear that revellings and other fleshly sins are characteristic of past behavior. Those who now follow Christ have a different lifestyle. “You have spent enough time in the past” doing that, he says (1 Peter 4:3\). Now your former party\-mates “are surprised that you do not join them in their reckless, wild living” (verse 4\). And that’s what “revellings” are—reckless and wild.
The line is drawn between the behavior of a Christian and that of a non\-Christian. Christ calls us to “to say ‘No’ to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self\-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age” (Titus 2:12\).
|
What is inculturation?
|
Answer
In religious contexts, especially within the [Roman Catholic Church](Roman-Catholicism.html), inculturation refers to the adaptation of church doctrine and ritual to unreached or non\-Christian cultures. In Catholicism, inculturation involves the adaptation of the [liturgy](liturgy-liturgical.html) to different cultures and the tolerance of various pagan practices that are deemed part of the traditional culture. But inculturation is not an exclusively Catholic practice. Any time the gospel is presented in a new culture, the matter of inculturation must be addressed.
When the apostle Paul tried to evangelize the Greeks in Athens, he was involved in inculturation to a certain extent (Acts 17:22–33\). Paul began by noting that the Greeks had an altar dedicated to “the unknown god” at which they worshiped. In this way Paul related to the Greeks and their culture. From there he moved to the truth about their “unknown” deity, proclaiming the reality of the God who created them and provided for their salvation. Paul also quoted some philosophers of the day (Acts 17:28\) in order to further bolster his message.
Paul’s inculturation or [contextualization](contextualization.html) of the gospel began with taking the Greeks’ understanding that there was a God, although they did not know Him, and building on that limited knowledge. Paul tapped in to the universal knowledge of God’s existence (Romans 1:19–20\) and explained that God is the Creator (Acts 17:24\), that He is self\-sufficient (verse 25\), and that He ordains the means for men to come to the knowledge of Him (verses 26–27\). He went on to explain God’s providence in the matter of salvation and then went to the heart of the matter—the future judgment of the world through Jesus Christ, who was resurrected from the dead, and the need for all men to repent (verses 30–31\). When the Greeks heard about the resurrection, the results were mixed: some of them mocked, some put him off until later, and some believed (verses 32–34\).
The elements of Paul’s message on [Mars Hill](Mars-Hill.html) point to some essential truths regarding inculturation. First, Paul used something in their own culture to open the door of their minds and hearts. He then related that open door to the gospel of Jesus Christ. But most importantly, the inculturation did not require compromise. The gospel did not change, although Paul’s presentation of it did. Paul boldly proclaimed the eternal truths of the gospel, and he did so without apologizing or softening the message. There are some hard truths contained in the message of salvation by faith alone in Christ alone, and many will reject those truths immediately. Some will procrastinate until it is too late. But the elect of God will rejoice at the truth of the gospel and embrace it and follow Christ.
Understanding that God ordains the means to save those He has foreordained is a crucial component in the process of inculturation (Romans 8:29–30\). Efforts to make the gospel “relatable” to the various cultural experiences of sinful men and women should never result in watering down its hard truths or changing it in such a way as to blunt its message. Inculturation becomes wrong when it involves a toleration of sin. Idolatry is always wrong, no matter what culture practices it, and it should not be made part of the gospel message in order to gain a wider hearing. No amount of inculturation will keep some from seeing the message of the cross as foolishness, but “to us who are being saved it is the power of God” (1 Corinthians 1:18\).
|
Why is there an entire book of the Bible dedicated to romantic love?
|
Answer
Some people believe that the subject matter of the [Song of Solomon](Song-of-Solomon.html)—romantic love—is not a very noble theme. Some try to allegorize the book in order to provide it with a “higher” or more “spiritual” purpose. But what is “low” or “unspiritual” about the love between a husband and wife? The Song of Solomon is dedicated to the theme of romantic love. The Lord knows we need to see how love should look between a husband and wife.
Of course, Solomon had more than one wife. In fact, “he had seven hundred wives of royal birth and three hundred concubines” (1 Kings 11:3\). While it is uncertain how old Solomon was when he composed his Song of Songs, his emphasis on one true love leads many scholars to suspect that Solomon was writing of his relationship with his first wife, before the sinful [multiplication of wives](Solomon-wives-concubines.html) occurred.
An overview of the contents of the Song of Solomon reveals many important aspects of romantic love. For example, there is a proper time and place for romantic love to begin to grow (Song 2:7\). Romantic love involves a longing between a man and woman (1:2–4\), mutual admiration (1:12—2:7\), and a desire to be together (3:1–5\). Also, romantic love includes sexual expression, and the appropriate context for sexual intimacy is within marriage (3:6—5:1\).
After the wedding, couples face many different situations, and it is important for them to keep the romantic love alive. Couples will face occasional indifference to each other or time apart from each other (5:2–8\), followed by renewed displays of love—a rekindling of the romance (5:9–16\). Also important is communication within marriage. Chapter 7 focuses on improvement in this area, followed by an increase in intimacy (chapter 8\).
Romantic love and intimacy in a God\-honoring marriage is an important goal for all couples. God presents love as something to be desired: “Many waters cannot quench love; / rivers cannot sweep it away. / If one were to give all the wealth of one’s house for love, / it would be utterly scorned” (Song of Solomon 8:7\). True love [endures](love-always-perseveres.html). It overcomes adversity. Nothing is worth giving up on godly love. Love is priceless.
In today’s society marriage is often ridiculed or broken or redefined, but the principles found in the Song of Solomon offer a godly perspective on the importance of marriage, romantic love, communication between husband and wife, and the value of a marriage that endures.
|
Is the Bible true?
|
Answer
Logic requires that there is only [one objective “truth”](is-truth-relative.html) for any specific claim. Contradictory claims cannot be equally true. For example, the statements “the hamster is in its cage” and “the hamster cage is empty” cannot both be true simultaneously. This evaluation of truth applies to spiritual matters just as well as logical or physical matters. It’s reasonable to claim that the Bible is true in a way that excludes all other statements. Examining the Bible in the same way we would any other text, we can confidently say that it is, in fact, true.
The Bible not only encourages readers to examine their own beliefs (1 John 4:1\), but it also commends those who check spiritual claims for truth (Acts 17:11\). The Bible makes claims on the basis of history and eyewitnesses (Luke 1:1–4; 2 Peter 1:16\), connects belief to visible evidence (John 20:30–31\), and ties biblical ideas to the observable world (Psalm 19:1; Romans 1\). Jesus overtly claimed to represent an exclusive truth (John 18:37; 14:6\). So the Bible is clearly meant to be interpreted as true, and exclusively true (John 17:17\).
Where we can check biblical claims against verifiable truth, the Bible proves itself accurate. History, [archaeology](archaeology-Bible.html), science, and philosophy have shown Scripture to be factual and consistent. This correspondence between various forms of evidence is a major advantage the Bible has over the scriptures of any other faith system. In many cases, it has been the deciding factor in converting skeptics and nonbelievers to faith in Christ.
Whether or not the Bible is true is a separate question from whether or not a particular passage is “literal.” It’s reasonable to say that a phrase or statement is true, even if the truth is not presented in literal terms. For example, if a person says during a heavy rain, “It’s raining cats and dogs,” the statement is true—it’s just not literal. Idiomatic phrases are meant to be interpreted. The same principle applies to John’s words about Jesus: “Look, the Lamb of God!” (John 1:36\). Of course, a person might ask for clarification, and be told, based on Old Testament passages, that Jesus isn’t *literally* a wooly farm animal, but that He’s the fulfillment of the Law and the divinely chosen sacrifice to redeem the world. The figurative nature of John’s statement doesn’t make his statement untrue, simply metaphorical. It’s good to remember that the Bible is comprised of sixty\-six separate books, and each of them often contains different types of literature and a mixture of literal and figurative language.
More so than with any other religious text, we have assurance that the Bible is true. The combination of internal consistency, connection to evidence, and relevance to our experience makes the Bible unique among books. Like many religious works, the Bible claims to be true (2 Timothy 3:16\). Unlike any other religious work, the Bible emphatically supports that assertion.
|
Why do Daniel and Revelation give varying counts of 1,260, 1,290, and 1,335 days for the tribulation?
|
Answer
The books of [Daniel](Book-of-Daniel.html) and [Revelation](Book-of-Revelation.html) are often studied together, because their prophecies concerning the end times dovetail with each other nicely. Both books mention a certain number of days during the tribulation: Daniel mentions 1,290 days and 1,335 days; Revelation mentions 1,260 days, for a total “discrepancy” of 75 days (1,335 – 1,260 \= 75\).
Daniel 12:11–12 says, “From the time that the daily sacrifice is abolished and the abomination that causes desolation is set up, there will be 1,290 days. Blessed is the one who waits for and reaches the end of the 1,335 days.”
Revelation 11:3 says, “And I will appoint my two witnesses, and they will prophesy for 1,260 days, clothed in sackcloth.”
Both of these prophecies deal with specific time periods associated with the seven\-year tribulation.
Another verse in Daniel establishes the length of two time segments in the tribulation: “\[The prince who is to come] will confirm a covenant with many for one ‘seven.’ In the middle of the ‘seven’ he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And at the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him” (Daniel 9:27\). The “prince who is to come” is the [Antichrist](what-is-the-antichrist.html) or the “beast” of Revelation.
According Daniel 9:27, the tribulation begins with the signing of a peace treaty between the Antichrist and Israel, intended to be for one “seven,” that is, a set of seven years. But the “seven” is divided into halves: midway through the seven years, the Antichrist breaks the treaty and sets up in the temple a [sacrilegious](sacrilege-sacrilegious.html) object (the [“abomination that causes desolation”](abomination-desolation.html)). The phrase “in the middle” indicates that the first half of the tribulation lasts for 3½ years (1,260 days, using a “prophetic year” of 360 days). Likewise, the second half of the tribulation lasts another 1,260 days (another 3½ years), for a total of seven years.
Revelation 11:3 specifically mentions 1,260 days, which corresponds exactly with Daniel’s prophecy of the abomination of desolation. In Revelation, we have an added detail: [two divinely appointed witnesses](two-witnesses.html) will preach and perform miracles for half of the tribulation—the first half, according to the chronology of Revelation. These two witnesses are killed at the midpoint of the tribulation; their bodies will lie in the streets for three and a half days as the world celebrates their demise; then they will be resurrected and taken up to heaven (Revelation 11:7–13\).
The 1,260 days of the second half of the tribulation begins as the Antichrist breaks the treaty, occupies the third Jewish temple, and sets up a profane and sacrilegious object of worship. This 1,260\-day period ends when the Antichrist is defeated at the battle of Armageddon upon Jesus’ return to earth. At that time, the tribulation will be at an end.
Daniel 12:11 mentions 1,290 days, however, which is 30 days more than the second half of the tribulation. Different ideas have been put forward to explain what happens in those 30 extra days. One likely theory is that the land of Israel will be rebuilt in that month after the devastation it endured during the tribulation.
Then, according to Daniel 12:12, there will be an extra 45 days, on top of the extra 30 days, after which something else will happen. Daniel does not say explicitly what will happen, but he says those who remain until the end of that segment (1,335 days after the breaking of the treaty and 75 days after the end of the tribulation) will be “blessed.” The blessing here is entry into the [millennial kingdom](dispensation-of-Millennial-Kingdom.html). What will take place during those 45 days? Very likely, this is when the judgment of the Gentile nations, described in Matthew 25:31–46, will take place. In this judgment, also called the [judgment of the sheep and the goats](parable-sheep-goats.html), the Gentiles are judged for their treatment of Israel during the tribulation. Did they aid Jesus’ “brothers and sisters” (Matthew 25:40\), or did they turn a blind eye to the Jews’ troubles or, worse yet, aid in their persecution?
So, those who survive the tribulation and survive the sheep and goat judgment will enter the millennium. This is a blessing, indeed.
In summary, here is the timeline as we see it:
• Sometime after the rapture of the church, the Antichrist enters a treaty with Israel. This begins the seven\-year tribulation.
• At the midpoint of the tribulation (1,260 days later), the Antichrist breaks the treaty, desecrates the temple, and begins to persecute the Jews.
• At the end of the tribulation (1,260 days after the desecration of the temple), Jesus Christ returns to earth and defeats the forces of the Antichrist.
• During the next 30 days (leading up to 1,290 days after the desecration of the temple), Israel is rebuilt and the earth is restored.
• During the next 45 days (leading up to 1,335 days after the desecration of the temple), the Gentile nations are judged for their treatment of Israel.
• The dispensation of the millennium begins, and it will last for 1,000 years (Revelation 20:3, 5–6\).
|
What is Christianophobia?
|
Answer
The word *Christianophobia* literally means “fear of Christians.” But, just as very few people are genuinely afraid of homosexuals (the literal meaning of [*homophobia*](Christians-homophobic.html)), so are very few people actually fearful of Christians. Usually, *Christianophobia* refers to the state of being hateful or spiteful to Christians. A Christianophobe hates or despises Christians and/or what they stand for.
The existence of Christianophobia should not be surprising. Jesus Himself predicted the world’s hatred for Christians: “If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you” (John 15:18–19\). Christians are called not to conform to the world but to be transformed into the image of Christ (Romans 8:29; 12:1–2\). The unbelieving world hates what it does not understand and, therefore, will hate those who follow Christ.
Few would admit an actual emotional hatred for Christians. And, admittedly, the hatred that Christians endure in most of the world is relatively mild. But the Christianophobia in the world today is simply a foretaste of what is to come. As the world increasingly turns away from God, the hatred of God’s people will increase exponentially.
Examples of Christianophobia in the world today:
(1\) In much of the Muslim world, Christians are subject to extreme [persecution](Christian-persecution.html). In many instances, the choice is to convert to Islam, flee, or die.
(2\) In much of the Western world, Christians are looked down upon, mocked or ridiculed, and marginalized.
(3\) It is becoming clear that Christians who desire to live by their convictions will be ineligible for certain careers. For example, opposition to gay marriage is absolutely a biblical position. If a Christian stands firm in biblical convictions, any career that might possibly touch gay marriage is becoming off limits. Christian bakers, florists, venue owners, and government officials are being fined and even jailed for attempting to live by biblical convictions.
(4\) Christian beliefs are being presented in an extremely biased manner. A belief that homosexuality is sinful is presented as hatred for homosexuals. A belief that abortion is wrong is portrayed as hatred for women. Christians proclaiming the biblical way of salvation are declared to be intolerant, even hostile, toward other beliefs. Christians desiring to train their children in a biblical worldview are seen as guilty of brainwashing.
Christianophobia is real, it is increasing, and, according to the Bible, it will get much worse as the end times approach. Ultimately, Christianophobia is satanically driven. Satan hates God, and, as the “god” of this world, he controls the evil world system that hates God and His followers (2 Corinthians 4:4\). Thankfully, Christians have nothing to fear. Followers of Christ are overcomers (Romans 8:37\). Greater is He (God) who is in us (Christians) than he (Satan) who is in the world (1 John 4:4\).
|
What does the Bible say about being stubborn / stubbornness?
|
Answer
“Stubborn as a mule” is a well\-known idiom. The Bible actually mentions mules in relation to their stubbornness in Psalm 32:9: “Do not be like the horse or the mule, which have no understanding but must be controlled by bit and bridle.” When it comes to following God’s commands, we should not be stubborn or obstinate or intractable. We must not turn our heads away and “stiffen the neck.” We must learn to yield and be pliable in His hands. It’s not our wish for God to use the bit and bridle on us.
The Bible records instances of stubborn, mule\-like behavior of human beings on occasion. In the Old Testament, Pharaoh was famously stubborn (Exodus 7:13–14\), but his recalcitrance did himself and his nation no good. But stubbornness was also displayed later by the nation of Israel, God’s chosen people, who rebelled against God over and over, turning away from His love and protection. In fact, the Hebrew word translated “stubborn” means “turned away, morally obstinate, rebellious, and backsliding.”
The Old Testament relates the sad history of the Jews who stubbornly turned their backs on God, forgot His works, disobeyed His laws, and followed strange gods. In Deuteronomy 9, Moses recounts Israel’s stubbornness concerning the [golden calf](golden-calf.html) they made at Mount Sinai. At that time God had told Moses, “I have seen this people, and behold, it is a stubborn people” (Deuteronomy 9:13, ESV). God’s anger was so great that He had considered destroying the people completely for their stubborn, stiff\-necked ways (verse 14\).
God considers stubbornness so great a sin that He included what seems today to be an overly harsh punishment for a stubborn and rebellious son. If a son refused to obey his parents, would not respond to discipline, and led a dissolute life, the parents were to bring him to the elders of his city and “all the men of his town are to stone him to death. You must purge the evil from among you. All Israel will hear of it and be afraid” (Deuteronomy 21:21\). Stubbornness and defiance of God and His ordained authority is a serious offense, one that can spread like poison throughout a community. The Mosaic Law against stubbornness was designed to stop that spread.
In the New Testament, we see more examples of stubbornness. When Jesus healed a man with a withered hand on the Sabbath, the Pharisees’ hardness of heart grieved and angered Jesus. Instead of praising the Lord for His healing power and acknowledging their Messiah, the Pharisees’ rebellious hearts caused them to try to kill Him (Mark 3:1–6\). As [Stephen](life-Stephen.html) was closing his speech before the Sanhedrin, he upbraided them for their foolhardy stubbornness: “You stiff\-necked people! Your hearts and ears are still uncircumcised. You are just like your ancestors: You always resist the Holy Spirit!” (Acts 7:51\).
When Paul preached to the Jews in Corinth, they continued to reject the message of salvation through Jesus Christ. For three months Paul reasoned with them in their synagogue, but “some of them became obstinate; they refused to believe and publicly maligned the Way” (Acts 19:9\). As a result, Paul took the disciples and left the rejecters of the good news in their stubbornness and unbelief.
Unfortunately, this is the fate that awaits all those who persist in rejecting Christ. God will eventually turn them over to the hardness of their hearts and no longer plead with them. The sad result of such mulish obstinance is made clear in Romans 2:5: “Because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath against yourself for the day of God’s wrath, when his righteous judgment will be revealed.”
|
Does hell exist?
|
Answer
Yes, [hell](hell-real-eternal.html) exists, according to the Bible. *Note: in the remainder of this article, we will use the term* hell *to mean, broadly, “place of conscious torment after death.” We realize that hell is technically different from the lake of fire, but we will allow our [other articles](sheol-hades-hell.html) to describe the differences.*
The Bible speaks of the reality of hell in the same terms as the reality of heaven (Revelation 20:14–15; 21:1–2\). The concept of a real, conscious, forever\-and\-ever existence in hell is just as biblical as a real, conscious, forever\-and\-ever existence in [heaven](is-Heaven-real.html). Trying to separate them is simply not possible from a biblical standpoint.
Despite the Bible’s clear teaching of both heaven and hell, it is not unusual for people to believe in the reality of heaven while rejecting the reality of hell. In part, this is due to wishful thinking. It’s easier to accept the idea of a “nice” afterlife, but damnation isn’t quite so appealing. This is the same mistake human beings often make when it comes to substance abuse, dangerous behaviors, and so forth. The assumption that we will get what we want overrides the unpleasant (but rational) view that things might not end well.
Rejection of the existence of hell can also be blamed on inaccurate assumptions about what hell is. Hell is frequently imagined as a burning wasteland, a dungeon full of cauldrons and pitchforks, or an underground city filled with ghosts and goblins. Popular depictions of hell often involve a flaming torture chamber or a spiritual jail where evil things reside—and where good things travel to battle evil. This version of hell does not exist. There is a real place called hell, but it is not the [Dante’s *Inferno*](Divine-Comedy-Dantes-Inferno.html) image most people think of. Certain details about hell are given in the Bible, but those details do not match the popular myths.
The Bible actually gives very few particulars about hell. We know that it was originally intended for demonic spiritual beings, not people (Matthew 25:41\). The experience of being in hell is compared to burning (Mark 9:43; 9:48; Matthew 18:9; Luke 16:24\). At the same time, hell is compared to darkness (Matthew 22:13\) and associated with intense grief (Matthew 8:12\) and horror (Mark 9:44\).
In short, the Bible tells us only what being in hell is “like”; it does not explicitly say what hell is or how exactly it functions. What the Bible does make clear is that hell is real, eternal, and to be avoided at all costs (Matthew 5:29–30\).
|
What is pedagogy?
|
Answer
Pedagogy is the discipline of study related to the field of education and teaching methods. The word is derived from the Greek *paidagogia*—“to lead a child”—which was, in turn, taken from *paidagogos* or “teacher of boys.” In the Greco/Roman culture, a *paidagogos* was a slave responsible for the education of boys. *Paidagogos* is mentioned three times in the Bible, in 1 Corinthians 4:15 and Galatians 3:24 and 25; in those verses, the word is translated as “tutor” (NASB), “guardian” (NIV), or “schoolmaster” (KJV). The Law was our *paidagogos* to lead us to Christ (Galatians 3:24\).
There are myriad theories as to the most effective method of pedagogy, and new methods are being developed every year. The Bible does not dictate a formal teaching method, but through direct instruction and inference, we can discover what God deems important about teaching.
First of all, learning is the responsibility of several different parties. In Exodus 18:17–23 and 2 Chronicles 17:7, the nation’s leader and his representatives set up the education system. But learning is also the responsibility of the student (Ezra 7:10\), and parents (Proverbs 1:8\) and God (Psalm 25:4–5\) see that teaching is done.
The Bible illustrates several different teaching tools used in pedagogy, including music (Deuteronomy 31:19\), parables (Mark 4:2\), and information saturation (Deuteronomy 11:19\). Good teachers recognize who needs the basics and who can go deeper into the material (Hebrews 5:12–13\). And, using Jesus as an example, teachers can know how to alter their information and their delivery depending on whether they’re addressing a large crowd (Matthew 5\), a formal education setting (Matthew 21:23–27\), or a small group (Matthew 13:10–17\).
Jesus was the perfect teacher, a master of pedagogy. Our Lord used illustrations (Luke 7:31–32\), object lessons (Matthew 6:28\), current events (Luke 13:4–5\), and stories (Matthew 13\). He utilized lecture and discourse (Matthew 24\), engaged His students in dialogue (John 3\), asked rhetorical questions (Luke 18:8\), dispensed proverbs (Luke 7:45\), and turned questions around to force His hearers to formulate an answer (Mark 10:18\). He preached and taught; He modeled and corrected. He gave “homework” and followed up on it (Matthew 9:13; 12:7\). He appealed to the text of Scripture (Mark 12:26\) and to the emotions, conscience, and intellect of man (Matthew 11:18; John 8:7; Mark 12:37\). He was unafraid to use hyperbole (Matthew 5:29\), metaphor (John 9:5\), and provocative language (Luke 13:32\). Always, Jesus had the best interests of His hearers at heart; always, the subject of His teaching was the absolute truth of God.
Good teaching illustrates how the past applies to the present (Matthew 13:52\) and is able to whittle down concepts to their main idea (Matthew 22:34–40\). Proper lessons do not burden students with unnecessary requirements that aren’t relative (Matthew 23:13–29\). Good lessons also don’t include false information (Hebrews 13:9\) but teach the student how to verify the information (Matthew 12:33\). They also focus on what is true as opposed to what the audience wants to hear (2 Timothy 4:3\). When necessary, teaching includes rebuking the student (Proverbs 1:23\), but the good teacher always takes an interest in the personal needs of the students (Matthew 4:23\).
The Bible has quite a bit to say about teachers themselves. Pedagogues should be experts in their field (Mark 1:22\) but willing to be corrected if it means ensuring they’re teaching the right thing (Acts 26:24–28\). They shouldn’t lord their position over others (Mark 12:38\), although they do have authority over their students (Luke 6:40\). Good teachers are kind and gentle, not resentful or argumentative (2 Timothy 2:23–25\) and are ready to teach anyone who is willing to learn (Luke 2:46–47\). Good teachers teach with wisdom (Colossians 1:28; 3:16\), practice what they teach (Romans 2:21; Titus 2:6–7\), and aren’t afraid to teach the truth, even if it’s hard to accept (John 6:60\). The best teachers instruct others how to pass on the truth they’ve been taught, so the cycle of pedagogy continues (Titus 2:3–5\).
Pedagogy is important because teaching is a serious calling that comes with great responsibility and accountability (James 3:1\). Teaching is a [spiritual gift](gift-of-teaching.html) (1 Corinthians 12:28\) and one that is a requirement for a Christian leader (1 Timothy 3:2\). Christian teachers base their information on Scripture (2 Timothy 3:16\) because they recognize the difference between human teachings and God’s truth (Colossians 2:22\). Because of their position and responsibility, good teachers in the church are worthy of double honor (1 Timothy 5:17\).
What the Bible says about pedagogy is related to the integrity of the information and the teachers, not a complicated system to define the most effective teaching practices into a formal standard. Pedagogical theories aren’t necessarily wrong, and they may give teachers helpful information on reaching people who have different learning styles. The Bible’s guidance is simpler: know your material, care about your students, be creative, and live with kindness and integrity. The rest is just tools.
|
What is onanism?
|
Answer
*Onanism* is yet another English word that has its roots in the Bible. The term itself comes from a character in the [book of Genesis](Book-of-Genesis.html). Onanism, also called coitus interruptus, is the “interrupting” of sexual intercourse—specifically, the purposeful withdrawal of the penis from the vagina before ejaculation occurs. Onanism is synonymous with the “withdrawal method” of birth control; however, within Judaism, onanism is given a broad definition, encompassing withdrawal (coitus interruptus), masturbation, and any other “improper emission of seed.”
In patriarchal societies of the ancient Near East, the uninterrupted passing on of land and property from father to son was extremely important. It was so important that the Mosaic Law outlined the requirements for levirate marriage: if a married man died childless, his brother (or another family member) was obliged to marry the widow and sire a son who could inherit the dead man’s property and carry on the man’s name (Deuteronomy 25:5–10\). The practice of levirate marriage was understood and accepted by the Israelites far earlier than the giving of the Law, and we have an example of it in Genesis 38; that’s where we find the story of Onan and his onanism.
Judah’s son Er was killed by God for his evil lifestyle, and, since Er had not fathered a son, Er’s wife, Tamar, followed the tradition of levirate marriage and married his next\-oldest brother, Onan. Onan was willing to have sex with Tamar, but he wasn’t willing to sire a son with her—a son who would not legally be his and who would take away his chance of inheriting his dead brother’s property. So, in the midst of sexual relations with Tamar, Onan withdrew and “spilled his semen on the ground” (Genesis 38:9\). In this way Onan ensured he would not provide a child to Tamar, even though it was his “duty” to do so (verse 8\). Genesis 38:10 says, “What he did was wicked in the LORD’s sight; so the LORD put him to death also.”
The word *onanism* is, therefore, an eponym, since it is derived from the personal name of an individual. Onan’s action of “spilling his seed” rather than impregnating his wife is now called “onanism.” Historically, there has been a great amount of confusion about Onan’s sin. Contrary to what some teach, his sin was not masturbation. Nor is Genesis 38 teaching that the withdrawal method of birth control is sinful. No, the sin of Onan was his greedy, selfish refusal to sire a son on behalf of his brother. Onan was of the tribe of Judah, the kingly tribe and the tribe of the Messiah. In fact, Tamar, the woman wronged by Onan, is listed in the genealogy of Christ (Matthew 1:3\). God had a vested interest in Tamar’s children and Judah’s grandchildren.
Is onanism a sin? The true crime of Onan was refusing to sire a son on his brother’s behalf, which doesn’t really apply to modern culture, anyway. The debate over masturbation has been [thoroughly discussed](masturbation-sin.html) elsewhere. Onanism for the purposes of [birth control](birth-control.html) is fine biblically but not very effective physically—effectiveness rates vary from 96 to 73 percent. Therefore, the question of onanism’s morality does not really apply to us today.
|
Why did Jesus fast?
|
Answer
[Fasting](fasting-Christian.html) is a practice found throughout Scripture. A fast in the Bible is usually a voluntary, total abstinence from food for a set time for the purpose of devoting oneself to seeking God. Fasting denies our flesh what it wants so that we can focus more clearly on strengthening our spirits.
It doesn’t seem that Jesus fasted often. In fact, His critics condemned Him for “eating and drinking” (Matthew 11:19\). There is only one recorded instance in Scripture of Jesus fasting. This fast immediately followed His baptism (Matthew 3:13\), which inaugurated Jesus’ public ministry. Matthew 4:1–2 says that Jesus was led by the Holy Spirit into the wilderness to fast for forty days and nights. During that time of fasting, Jesus was repeatedly [tempted](Jesus-temptations.html) by the devil. This testing time prepared Him for the three\-year ministry that would change the world.
During those forty days, when Jesus’ flesh was at its weakest, He endured relentless temptation from Satan. Satan offered Him alternatives to God’s plan, compromises that would satisfy His natural desires, and attacks upon His very identity as the Son of God (Matthew 4:3\). Jesus used the Word of God, not His own strength, to defeat those temptations and remain victorious over sin. He demonstrated for us that fasting can strengthen us spiritually when we use it to draw closer to God.
After Jesus’ fast, the devil left Him and “angels came and attended him” (Matthew 4:11\). Luke 4:14 concludes the account of this testing time by saying, “Jesus returned to Galilee in the power of the Spirit.” He had conquered temptation and was ready to embrace the purpose for which the Father had sent Him. He would not rely on His humanity to perform miracles, deliver the oppressed, or defeat death. Fasting was a way to declare mastery over His human nature so that He would live every moment directed by the “power of the Spirit” (Luke 10:21\). He set the example for us who “are not in the realm of the flesh but are in the realm of the Spirit” (Romans 8:9\). If the Son of God did not rely on His flesh to live in obedience to God, then we can’t either.
|
What is Christmastide?
|
Answer
Christmastide is another name for the [Christmas season](Christmas-true-meaning.html), which is part of the liturgical calendar, the schedule of events or holidays that hold religious significance to Christians. Christmastide begins on Christmas Eve at sunset, which is the ending of Advent. Christmastide lasts twelve days and ends on the 5th of January. It is followed by the Epiphany season, or Epiphanytide.
For the Christian, Christmastide is a celebration of the birth of Jesus Christ, and there are many traditions associated with the season. Buildings and homes are often decorated with [nativity scenes](Christmas-nativity.html), Christmas trees, and ornaments encouraging a spirit of joy and cheer. Gifts are exchanged to commemorate the gifts given to the infant Jesus by the three wise men from the East (Matthew 2:1–12\). Christmas carols are sung, usually on Christmas Eve, during a candlelit service. Christmastide is perhaps the most beautiful and beloved of Christian traditions. Trees and ornaments are typically taken down on the 6th of January, which is [Epiphany, or Three Kings’ Day](three-kings-day-epiphany.html). If the decorations are not taken down on that day, tradition says they should be left up until February 2, or Candlemas, which celebrates the presentation of the infant Jesus in the temple.
During Christmastide, the prophecies of Christ’s birth are read (Isaiah 9:1–6; Isaiah 52:7–10\), along with the narratives of His birth as recorded in the Gospels. In [liturgical](liturgy-liturgical.html) churches, there is a calendar of readings for each day of Christmastide. No matter how it is celebrated, the subject of Christmastide is always the birth of the Savior, Jesus Christ. “For unto us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace” (Isaiah 9:6\).
|
What is cultural Christianity?
|
Answer
Cultural Christianity is religion that superficially identifies itself as “Christianity” but does not truly adhere to the faith. A “cultural Christian” is a [nominal believer](nominalism.html)—he wears the label “Christian,” but the label has more to do with his family background and upbringing than any personal conviction that Jesus is Lord.
Cultural Christianity is more social than spiritual. A cultural Christian identifies with certain aspects of Christianity, such as the good works of Jesus, but rejects the spiritual aspects required to be a biblically defined Christian. Some people consider themselves “Christians” because of family background, personal experience, country of residence, or social environment. Others identify as “Christian” as a way of declaring a religious affiliation, as opposed to being “Muslim” or “Buddhist.” Famed scientist and atheist Richard Dawkins refers to himself as a “cultural Christian” because he admires some of the ceremonial and philanthropic aspects of Christianity. Dawkins is not born again; he simply sees “Christianity” as a label to use.
In free nations, the gospel is often presented as a costless addition to one’s life: just add churchgoing to your hobbies, add charitable giving to your list of good deeds, or add the cross to the trophies on your mantle. In this way, many people go through the motions of “accepting Jesus” with no accompanying surrender to His lordship. These people, who do not “abide in Christ,” are cultural Christians. They are branches that hang around [the True Vine](true-vine.html) but have no true attachment (see John 15:1–8\).
There was no such thing as cultural Christianity in the days of the early church. In fact, to be a Christian was to more than likely be marked as a target of persecution. The very term *Christian* was coined in the city of Antioch as a way to identify the first followers of Christ (Acts 11:26\). The first disciples were so much like Jesus that they were called “little Christs” by their detractors. Unfortunately, the term has lost meaning over the years and come to represent an ideology or a social class rather than a lifestyle of obedience to God.
Cultural Christianity is not true Christianity. A true Christian is one who has received Jesus Christ as personal Lord and Savior (John 1:12\). Christ’s death and resurrection has been appropriated to that person as his or her substitute for sin (Romans 10:8–10; 2 Corinthians 5:21\). The Holy Spirit [indwells](indwelling-of-the-Holy-Spirit.html) that person (Romans 8:9\). “Receiving” Christ is far more than a mental acknowledgment of truth. Satan acknowledges the identity of the Son of God (Mark 5:7\). The faith that saves us also changes us (see James 2:26\). Jesus said that anyone who wishes to become His disciple must “deny himself, take up his cross daily, and follow me” (Luke 9:23\). While we cannot earn salvation by sacrifice or good works, a lifestyle transformation and desire to please the Lord are direct results of being “born again” (John 3:3\).
The following are some identifying marks of cultural Christianity:
• Denying the inspiration of Scripture or parts of Scripture (2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Peter 1:21\).
• Ignoring or downplaying true repentance as the first step toward knowing God (Matthew 4:17; Acts 2:38\).
• Focusing on Jesus’ love and acceptance to the exclusion of His teaching on hell, obedience, and self\-sacrifice (Matthew 4:17; 23:33; Mark 9:43; Luke 12:5\).
• Tolerating or even celebrating ongoing sin while claiming to know God (Romans 1:32; 1 Corinthians 5:1–2; 1 John 3:9–10\).
• Redefining scriptural truths to accommodate culture (Numbers 23:19; Malachi 3:6\).
• Understanding Jesus to be primarily a social reformer, rather than God in the flesh who is the sacrifice for our sin (Matthew 10:34; Mark 14:7\).
• Claiming God’s promises while ignoring the requirements included with them (Psalm 50:16; Jeremiah 18:10\).
• Denying or minimizing Jesus’ claim that He is the only way to God (John 3:15–18; 14:6\).
• Performing enough religious activity to gain a sense of well\-being without a true devotion to Jesus (Galatians 5:16–17; Romans 8:9\).
• Talking much about “God” in a general sense, but very little about Jesus Christ as Lord (John 13:13; 14:6\).
• Seeing protection and blessing as goals to be achieved, rather than byproducts of a love relationship with God (Mark 12:30; Deuteronomy 11:13–17\).
• Choosing a church based upon any or all of the above (Revelation 3:15–17\).
Jesus’ warning in Matthew 7:21–23 should be a wake\-up call to cultural Christianity: “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’”
|
What is apocalypticism?
|
Answer
Apocalypticism is the belief that this world will end, usually in dramatic fashion as foretold in some prophecy. As a description of end\-times beliefs, widely varied types of apocalypticism are found in different religious traditions. Even within a specific sect, there can be significant differences of opinion over details of the coming apocalypse and when it will occur.
Apocalypticism is a very broad term, so many religious systems fit within it. Most interpretations of Islam and Christianity would be considered apocalyptic. These faiths predict a definite end to the world, with a major upheaval followed by drastic changes to the state of the earth, if not the entire universe. Religious systems that do not believe in any definitive “end” to the world, such as Buddhism or Hinduism, are decidedly non\-apocalyptic.
At the same time, there are interpretations of prophecy even within Christianity, such as preterism, which are themselves non\-apocalyptic.
The Greek term *apokalypsis*, from which we get our English word *apocalypse*, literally means “unveiling.” The last book of the New Testament canon is the [book of Revelation](Book-of-Revelation.html), which describes the end times. The first words of this book in Greek are *Apokalypsis Iēsou Christou*, meaning “The Revelation of Jesus Christ.” The historical influence of this biblical book transformed the term *apocalypse* from an “uncovering” into a synonym for catastrophic change or the end of the world. Today, stories or situations set after some global upheaval are called “post\-apocalyptic.”
Apocalypticism has always taken on many forms, whether spiritual, natural, or technological. Most of these are short\-lived. Interest in the supposed end of the [Mayan Calendar in 2012](2012-Mayan-prophecy.html) is a recent example. The Y2K scare at the turn of the century is an example of technological apocalypticism. More recent apocalyptic fads include the [Blood Moon](blood-red-moon.html) phenomenon and fears over the effects of the Large Hadron Collider. Fictional apocalypticism usually reflects the anxieties of that era. This fear was nuclear war in the 1960s and a worldwide pandemic or global warming in the 1990s. Books and movies of those decades reflect those fears.
The Bible’s approach to the end times is a unique and fairly involved topic. The Got Questions website has a large collection of [articles](questions_end-times.html) with more specifics on prophetic topics, including the end of the world.
|
What is the transmigration of souls?
|
Answer
The transmigration of souls is also called [reincarnation](reincarnation.html), and it is closely linked to the idea of karma. Reincarnation and karma are both religious concepts of Hinduism and Buddhism, though certain aspects of both differ based on the religious tradition. The transmigration of souls is the belief that, after death, the soul or spirit migrates to another physical or metaphysical state.
Transmigration depends on [karma](karma.html), the belief that one’s actions in life, good and bad and morally ambiguous, when taken as a whole and weighed in the balance, will determine the nature of one’s next existence. There are typically thought to be four types of existence: the human kingdom, the animal/plant kingdom, the infernal kingdom, and the celestial kingdom. The infernal kingdom is similar to the Christian idea of hell or the Catholic concept of [purgatory](purgatory.html)—a place of torment and punishment or cleansing, and the celestial kingdom mirrors the Christian heaven—a place of bliss and reward. The idea of karma is that, if a person lives a good life, he will go to a “higher” plane of existence and, if the sum of his acts in life is negative, he will descend to a “lower” plane.
The transmigration of souls, reincarnation, and similar concepts are common in many cultures around the world, and these beliefs have had a powerful impact on their societies. The [caste system](Casteism-caste-system.html) in India, for example, is a direct result of the belief in karma. Those born poor, in the lowest caste, must remain in that caste in order to be purged of the bad karma that landed them there in the first place. They exist in poverty, without chance for a better life, trying to live a good life in the hope that their next existence will be better. Even if their next existence is better, it will likely be many lifetimes before the celestial kingdom can be attained.
The idea of the transmigration of souls contains a grain of truth. According to the Bible, a person’s soul does “migrate” to another state after death; however, the Bible specifies that this only happens once, and then the person is judged by God and sent either to heaven or hell (Hebrews 9:27\). There is no second chance to get to heaven and no transmigration to another body.
According to the concept of karma and the transmigration of the soul, there is no Savior. Judgment is impersonal and cold, is based on the sum of one’s actions, and there is no forgiveness. According to the Bible, Jesus Christ offers forgiveness and heaven to anyone, rich or poor, no matter what bad or good actions they have done (1 Timothy 1:12–14\). Righteousness is a gift, and salvation comes by the power of God to those who have faith in what Christ has done (Romans 1:16\). The Christian gospel takes the focus off of man’s achievements and places the burden of salvation on God’s shoulders.
The [gospel message](gospel-message.html) is humbling but also freeing, as we see that even the best, most moral person cannot achieve the perfection that is necessary to dwell in God’s presence (1 Timothy 6:16; Isaiah 33:14; Hebrews 12:29\). God wants us with Him, so He provides the Way (John 14:6\). Sadly, too many refuse to take this free gift, instead making the futile attempt to reach heaven by good actions. False religious beliefs like the transmigration of souls and karma encourage millions onto the wrong path.
|
What is Thomism?
|
Answer
Thomism is the system of philosophy developed by [Thomas Aquinas](Saint-Thomas-Aquinas.html), a Catholic scholar. Aquinas harmonized the philosophy of Aristotle with Christian theology, creating a system that became among the most influential in history. Aquinas’ philosophy was popular during his lifetime. After his death, a small minority of Catholic leaders condemned his teachings as heresy. Their efforts reduced the popularity of his work, but only temporarily.
In response to the [Reformation](Protestant-Reformation.html), the Catholic Church heavily endorsed the work of Aquinas, including Thomism, elevating it to a status second only to the Bible itself. Other philosophical systems today disagree with Thomism on many points, but Thomism remains a dominant philosophical worldview.
Thomism is strongly grounded in reason, specifically in opposition to “blind faith.” It holds the laws of non\-contradiction and causality as the fundamental principles of reality. According to Thomism, most of nature and theology can be apprehended through observation and reason. That which can be known by reason, accordingly, should be used to judge what is known only by faith. Thomism recognizes, however, that certain truths are only knowable by special revelation.
Thomism is also empiricist, meaning it teaches that observations and experiences are necessary for knowledge. It claims that we cannot argue for God’s existence on the basis of direct experience; we can only argue for God by interpreting what we see, feel, and understand. This philosophy rejects the Rationalist claim that pure logic or reasoning—without any observations or empirical data—can be used to draw reliable conclusions.
Thomism also approaches knowledge of God via “negative theology.” This is the belief that it is necessary for human beings to apprehend God through metaphors and analogies. Since God is unique, [transcendent](God-transcendent.html), and infinite, He is necessarily beyond our full comprehension. In order to at least partly comprehend God, we must use figurative or analogous terms relevant to our experiences. This approach also implies that portions of Scripture can be interpreted figuratively, depending on the context.
The correspondence theory of truth is a core part of Thomism. This is the idea that “truth” can be defined as conforming to some external, objective reality. Thomism supposes both empiricism and objective realism, which both claim our senses are useful and that the world can be understood more or less as it actually is. Thomism also teaches a fusion of the body and soul, which differs in many ways from classical dualism.
Thomism poses a distinction between “essence” and “existence.” It posits that God alone is absolute and all other things are finite and imperfect. Therefore, only God has an essence identical to His existence. He is the one and only pure expression of essence, substance, and existence. For all other things, their “what” (essence) is different from their “is” (existence). This also means that evil does not exist, in and of itself, except as a lack of “good.” Something is evil insofar as it violates its purpose, or the “cause” of its existence.
According to Thomism, all living things possess some type of soul, but humans alone have an immortal, “rational” soul. Our ability to use reason, per this philosophy, is a supernatural quality that other forms of life do not possess.
Thomism is also the source of Aquinas’ “[Five Ways](Five-Ways-Thomas-Aquinas.html),” which are introductory means to argue for the existence of God. These are the first mover argument, the [first cause argument](cosmological-argument.html), the contingency (necessity) argument, the [ontological (perfection) argument](ontological-argument.html), and the [teleological (design) argument](teleological-argument.html). These are often misunderstood, and assumed to be Aquinas’ best and strongest case for the Christian God. In truth, the “Five Ways” are merely meant to be basic principles to introduce the concept of Christian theism on rational grounds.
|
Does heaven exist?
|
Answer
Few people object to the existence of [heaven](is-Heaven-real.html) on moral grounds. The idea of a rewarding afterlife appeals to most people, particularly since most are convinced they’ll find themselves there (Matthew 7:13–14\). Some disbelieve in heaven on spiritual grounds, believing instead in reincarnation or simply oblivion after death. The Bible describes a real, eternal, and aware eternity after death for all people. For those who have trusted in Christ, this state of being is without sickness, death, or pain in the presence of God (Revelation 21:1–4\).
Objections to the existence of heaven, on spiritual or religious grounds, are best answered by comparing the truth claims of each faith. Such an effort is beyond the scope of this article.
A more common objection to heaven has less to do with spirituality and more to do with popular culture. Many people turn away from the idea of heaven as a land of fluffy clouds, harps, white robes, and so forth. Others dislike the idea of a never\-ending church service. Neither of these views of heaven is a biblically supported concept, so correcting misconceptions is key to removing these particular objections to the existence of heaven.
The Bible affirms that heaven, defined as “the place where God dwells,” does indeed exist. In the Bible, the term *heaven* generally refers to areas beyond the earth. These areas can be the air, outer space, or the realm of God (often called the “highest heaven”). According to the Bible, after the return of Christ, believers will live with God in a New Jerusalem on a reformed Earth. The “heaven” Christians are promised is a restored garden of Eden, not a wispy cloud and a golden instrument.
While we don’t know exactly what heaven will be like, the Bible suggests that it won’t be static or boring (Revelation 21:23–24\). Yes, heaven exists. And, according to the Bible, it will be the most glorious place imaginable.
|
How can I show appreciation to my pastor?
|
Answer
Showing appreciation for your [pastor](senior-pastor.html) is a good thing. He needs to be appreciated, and, what’s more, he needs to *know* he’s appreciated. There’s a difference. If your appreciation for your pastor is never expressed, then it’s hard for him to know that you actually harbor good feelings about him. Many churches observe the month of October as “Pastor Appreciation Month,” and this can be a helpful prompt to sharing encouragement. October is as good a month as any to love on your pastor—but your appreciative words and actions shouldn’t be limited to one month out of the year.
Showing appreciation to your pastor is commended in Scripture. “Now we ask you, brothers and sisters, to acknowledge those who work hard among you, who care for you in the Lord and who admonish you. Hold them in the highest regard in love because of their work” (1 Thessalonians 5:12–13\). The job of a pastor (literally, a “shepherd”) is to teach the Word of God, show the love of God, and lead the children of God on earth. Pastors should be held in “the highest regard.” In fact, a good teaching pastor is “worthy of double honor,” according to 1 Timothy 5:17\.
There are many ways to show appreciation to your pastor. A simple word of encouragement, verbal or written, is always nice. Send a card. Write a note. Include some cookies with the note. Give your pastor a special plaque or certificate. Find out what is his favorite food or place to eat; then invite him and his family over for that food or give him a gift card to that restaurant. Enroll him in a “pie of the month club”—the church ladies commit to baking a different kind of pie each month and delivering it to your pastor. Give him tickets to see his favorite sports team. Give him a gift he can use long\-term: a book he’s been wanting, a dry cleaning certificate, a gasoline card, car wash coupons, a necktie. Send your pastor and his family on a vacation, or just a weekend getaway. Schedule a special service and plan on testimonies from the congregation to honor your pastor. Collect photos and memorabilia and put together a scrapbook for your pastor, covering the time of his ministry thus far. Or use those photos to create a video. Have the Sunday school children draw pictures and present them to your pastor in a special ceremony. Remodel his office.
Probably the best way to show appreciation to your pastor is to follow his instructions to follow Jesus. News of the church’s fidelity to Christ was all that the apostle John needed to be encouraged: “I have no greater joy than to hear that my children are walking in the truth” (3 John 1:4\). Nothing will make your pastor happier than for you to “grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” (2 Peter 3:18\).
Your pastor needs your [encouragement](Bible-encouragement.html), so show your appreciation for him and his work. Hebrews 13:17 is a clear instruction to honor your pastor, and it gives the reasons why: “Have confidence in your leaders and submit to their authority, because they keep watch over you as those who must give an account. Do this so that their work will be a joy, not a burden, for that would be of no benefit to you.” Your pastor watches out for your spiritual well\-being. Will you make his job a “burden” or a “joy”? Give him some joy today, and send some appreciation his way.
|
What is historicism?
|
Answer
In philosophy, historicism is an approach to history that assigns a particular meaning to an event according to that event’s context within the arc of history. In some cases, this results in viewing historical change as a power in and of itself. Historicism can be as extreme as claiming that certain changes are “historically inevitable,” as though history were a force on par with gravity or magnetism. In most cases, however, the term *historicism* simply refers to a careful interpretation of events with a mind to their cultural, historical, and political contexts.
In theology, historicism is an approach to eschatology and prophecy in general. In historicism biblical prophecies are interpreted as representative of literal historical events. Historicism looks at the whole of Bible prophecy as a sweeping overview of church history, from Pentecost to the end times. This approach involves interpreting symbols or figures in the Bible as metaphors for actual events, nations, or persons of history. Historicism was especially popular during the [Reformation](Protestant-Reformation.html), when it was used to suggest that the Catholic Church was part of the end\-times apostasy, with the pope as the [Antichrist](what-is-the-antichrist.html).
Historicism is distinguished from other views of eschatology: idealism (the events of Revelation are entirely symbolic of the cosmic struggle between good and evil); [preterism](preterist.html) (the events of Revelation were fulfilled in AD 70\); and [futurism](futurist-Revelation.html) (the events of Revelation await a future, end\-times fulfillment during the tribulation and beyond). Historicism falls between preterism and futurism in its approach: according to historicism, most of Revelation is symbolic of persons and events in world history. The book of Revelation was prophecy when John wrote it, according to historicists, but most of the book has already been fulfilled in our day.
Here are some examples of how historicism usually interprets events in Revelation: the seven churches in Revelation 2–3 are symbolic of seven ages of church history, starting with the apostolic church (the church of Ephesus) and ending with the modern\-day, lukewarm church (the church of Laodicea). The seals in chapters 4—7 represent the decline and fall of the Roman Empire. The “little scroll” given to John in chapter 10 is a picture of the Protestant Reformation. The beasts of chapters 12 and 13 represent Catholicism and the papacy. Other passages in Revelation are linked to the invasion of the Huns, the spread of Islam, and the rise of the modern missionary movement.
Historicism has varied applications to the concepts of a [rapture](rapture-of-the-church.html), tribulation, and second coming of Christ. In some cases, historicism has been abused by those attempting to predict a specific date for the return of Jesus, such as the [Millerites](Millerites.html) in 1844 and [Harold Camping](Harold-Camping-family-radio.html) in 1994 and 2011\. As one would expect, all such attempts at pinpointing the return of Christ have failed, and they will continue to fail (see Matthew 24:36\).
Historicism, so popular with the Reformers, remained a dominant perspective on eschatology through the 19th century. However, due to its nebulous interpretation method (no two historicists agree on what symbols go with what historical events) and the fact that John’s original readers could not have understood the [book of Revelation](Book-of-Revelation.html) in a historicist manner, the historicist view is not widely held today.
|
What is spiritual awareness?
|
Answer
Broadly speaking, spiritual awareness is the consciousness of spiritual matters. Because *spiritual awareness* is such a vague term, it’s difficult to know whether everyone who speaks of spiritual awareness has the same thing in mind. To some, it is a connection to one’s own soul; to others, it’s getting in touch with the divine through the stimulation of the pineal gland in the brain; and to others, it’s the knowledge of what’s happening in the incorporeal, spiritual realm all around us.
There is no doubt that the spiritual realm is real (Matthew 17:18\). Spiritual awareness can be a good thing or a bad thing, depending on the spirit in question and the motive of the person seeking the awareness. Connection to evil spirits is not beneficial. Unfortunately, evil spirits often present themselves as beings of light and knowledge, and “even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light” (2 Corinthians 11:14\). Psychics and “ghost\-hunters” often have a spiritual awareness of what [demonic forces](demons-Bible.html) are doing, but this is not a good thing because the demons’ goal is to lie and delude. The serpent in the garden tempted Eve with knowledge or “awareness” of things that were beyond her comprehension. When she told the serpent that she and Adam would die if they ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, the serpent (Satan) said, “You will not surely die. For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil” (Genesis 3:4–5\). The serpent promised a type of spiritual awareness that only brought Eve harm.
Jesus, of course, had spiritual awareness. Jesus “knew all people. He did not need any testimony about mankind, for he knew what was in each person” (John 2:24–25\). Jesus knew the hypocrisy of those who came to entrap Him (Mark 12:15\) and had all knowledge of the spiritual forces at work in the world (Luke 22:31\). As an apostle of Jesus, Peter was given the ability to see the spiritual condition of Simon the sorcerer in Samaria: “I see that you are full of bitterness and captive to sin,” Peter rightly concluded (Acts 8:23\).
All believers should possess a certain amount of spiritual awareness. We have been removed from the kingdom of darkness and placed into the kingdom of light (Colossians 1:13\). Our spiritual eyes have been opened to the reality of our sinful condition, the grace of God, and the lies of the enemy. We know the love of God; we experience the comfort of the Holy Spirit. We understand that we are in a [spiritual battle](spiritual-battle.html) (Ephesians 6:12\) and that Satan has a plan. “We are not unaware of his schemes” (2 Corinthians 2:11\).
Our spiritual awareness is the result of Christ’s redemption. In Christ, we have a whole new perspective: “Since, then, you have been raised with Christ, set your hearts on things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God. Set your minds on things above, not on earthly things. For you died, and your life is now hidden with Christ in God” (Colossians 3:1–3\). We know there is more to life than what we can see, hear, and touch; our existence is not limited to the material realm. “God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth” (John 4:24\). There is a spiritual reality, and God’s children are aware of it.
|
What is the Peshitta?
|
Answer
The Peshitta is a collection of Aramaic manuscripts of the Bible. Aramaic was the most common “shared language” among people of the Near East and Middle East for many centuries. This includes the years immediately before and after the earthly ministry of Jesus. For this reason, the Peshitta was an important early translation of the Bible, widely distributed and widely used. The earliest available manuscripts date to the AD 400s.
The Peshitta is the primary text used in Syriac churches, which use the Aramaic language during religious services. These churches are often accused of holding to [Nestorianism](Nestorianism.html), though that description is often disputed.
Based on manuscript and language evidence, scholars are overwhelmingly convinced that the Peshitta dates from well after the time period of Jesus and the apostles. The Peshitta’s language obscures certain types of metaphor or wordplay. This is common in translated texts but is abnormal in an original manuscript. The particular dialect of Aramaic used in the Peshitta is from an era later than that of Jesus. For these reasons among others, it is certain that the New Testament was not originally written in Aramaic, but in Greek.
Some groups, such as the Assyrian Church of the East, believe in a concept known as [“Peshitta Primacy,” or “Aramaic Primacy.”](Aramaic-Primacy.html) This is the position that the Peshitta represents the original writings and the Greek manuscripts are translations from that Aramaic text. This idea is mostly the result of claims made by Assyrian Church member George Lamsa. Most scholars believe that Lamsa confused then\-modern Syraic language with ancient Aramaic, as they are very similar, leading to his mistaken conclusion.
|
What is a séance?
|
Answer
The word *séance* comes from a French verb meaning “to sit,” and the word is often used in the French language to refer to a session where people gather together, seated, to enjoy a show or some other entertainment. In English since the mid\-19th century, the word has become specifically associated with the [occult](occult.html). A séance is a small gathering of people, among them a spiritualist or medium, who are attempting to contact the spirits of the dead. Oddly enough, people at séances do not always sit.
Séances are nothing new. The practice of attempting to communicate with the dead is by no means particular to modern Western culture. The Old Testament mentions mediums and spiritists (1 Samuel 28:3; 2 Chronicles 33:6; Isaiah 8:19; 19:3\), and the New Testament also mentions occult practices (Acts 8:9\). Throughout the Bible, the practice of communication with the spirits of dead people is strictly forbidden (Leviticus 19:31; Galatians 5:20\).
The one example in the Bible of someone holding a “séance” is in 1 Samuel 28\. King Saul, in desperation, hired the [medium of Endor](witch-of-endor.html) to contact the departed spirit of Samuel on his behalf. Amazingly, the séance was a success—Samuel appeared to the witch, who shrieked in fright and surprise (verse 12\). The medium’s reaction to seeing Samuel indicates that she normally relied on trickery or was expecting a “familiar spirit” to deliver its deceitful message. But, in this case, God allowed Samuel to be summoned, and Samuel even chided Saul for “bringing me up” (verse 15\).
Satan is “the father of lies” (John 8:44\) who “masquerades as an angel of light” (2 Corinthians 11:14\). This makes a séance a serious thing and spiritually dangerous. Satan and his demons delight in fooling people. A séance provides them with a golden opportunity to impersonate a departed loved one and speak lies to the living. A medium, someone who claims to be a channel of communication between the earthly world and the spirit world, is either relying on illusion and sleight\-of\-hand to make a living, or he or she is in contact with a familiar spirit—which is a demon or unclean spirit bent on deception.
Since the Bible forbids contacting the dead, we should have nothing to do with séances. Trying to receive communication from a spirit is not a parlor game or trifling diversion. Personal, demonic forces are real, and they actively wish us harm (John 8:44; 1 Peter 5:8\). Instead of dabbling in the occult, we should put on the [full armor of God](full-armor-of-God.html) and take our stand against the powers of darkness (Ephesians 6:11\).
|
Do demons exist?
|
Answer
The Bible speaks of [demons](demons-Bible.html) as real, actual beings. However, Scripture’s depiction of demons is very different from the popular concept of them. The Bible describes demons as powerful but limited and ultimately defeated creatures. They are [angels who followed Satan](fallen-angels.html) in rebellion against God (Revelation 12:3–4\). The Bible doesn’t give many details about demons, but what it provides is enough to dispel typical myths.
Demons are referred to by several alternate names, including “unclean spirits” and “evil spirits.” Some of the false gods that received human sacrifices are described as actual demons (2 Chronicles 11:15; Deuteronomy 32:17\). Since demons are fallen angels, they possess the same level of power and influence as angels. However, Scripture seems to indicate that God has limited their abilities (2 Thessalonians 2:6–7\). The Bible indicates that not all afflictions are due to demonic influence (Matthew 10:1; Luke 8:2\). The vast majority of demonic influence is spiritual, not physical.
Popular culture frequently depicts demons in monstrous form. This includes drooling fangs, sharp claws, leathery wings, and so forth. Or they are portrayed as shadows or ghosts. None of these have any biblical basis at all. In fact, the Bible never physically describes any fallen angel. As is the case with angels, demons are spiritual creatures with a primarily spiritual influence, so they are unlikely to have any set physical appearance. If they choose to take on a physical appearance, it actually makes more sense for them to choose something inviting rather than scary (2 Corinthians 11:14\).
So, demons are literal, actual beings. The demons described in the Bible exist. However, the oft\-portrayed horror\-movie and Halloween versions do not.
|
What does the Bible say about visualization?
|
Answer
Visualization is the process of forming mental images. Often, visualization involves envisioning events or situations that don’t exist or that have not happened yet. Visualization can be spiritually healthy or spiritually unhealthy, depending on the situation and the reasons for the visualization.
A basketball player may visualize himself making a difficult basket, or a skier may picture herself navigating a slope before she starts downhill. Musicians, actors, writers, and other artists may use visualization to create a picture in their minds before writing it down or acting it out. Everyone uses visualization to some extent. We picture what we want to eat before we make or buy the food. We picture what we want to wear before we put it on. We imagine conversations happening before they happen. Visualization is a way we prepare ourselves before taking action. There is nothing unbiblical about the tendency for humans to visualize in this way. In fact, it is wise to consider outcomes before taking action (Luke 14:28\).
However, modern self\-help gurus often promote visualization as a means to alter reality and get what you want. Through a technique they call “creative visualization,” they promise everything from financial success to a better love life based on the power of the human mind to “materialize” one’s thoughts, “attract” success, and “create” a preferred reality. This is nothing but New Age humanism that relies on a nonexistent power of the mind, and it is completely unbiblical. This type of visualization is related to the false teachings of the [law of attraction](secret-law-attraction.html), the [power of positive thinking](power-positive-thinking.html), and [Word of Faith](Word-Faith.html). The human mind has no power to create reality or reshape the world to one’s liking, no matter how focused the thoughts or clear the visualization. God alone creates, and every good and perfect gift comes from Him (James 1:17\).
Rather than chase after empty promises of worldly success through visualization, we should totally rely on the Lord our God. “Do not be anxious about anything, but in every situation, by prayer and petition, with thanksgiving, present your requests to God” (Philippians 4:6\).
|
Who was Apollonius?
|
Answer
Apollonius is a name given to many famous figures of ancient Greek history. Its most legitimate connection to the Bible is from its shortened form: Apollos. [Apollos](who-Apollos.html) is one of the earliest Christian leaders named in the Bible (1 Corinthians 16:12\).
Critics, in an attempt to discredit the Bible, occasionally claim that Apollonius of Tyana, who lived in the first century AD, was an inspiration for Jesus or Paul or some other biblical figure. However, texts about Apollonius of Tyana were not written until more than a century after Apollonius’s death. The author of those texts, Philostratus, had never met Apollonius or anyone who was alive when Apollonius was alive. The story of Apollonius overflows with excessive and spectacular miracles. Other historical sources do not mention anything about Apollonius that support the tales of him, unlike Jesus, whose life and influence are referenced in multiple objective historical sources.
Also significant is that everything we know of Apollonius comes from this single source, Philostratus, who was paid to write his work. A Roman official planned to build a temple to Apollonius, and he hired Philostratus to write about him prior to the temple’s dedication. This is in sharp contrast to the authors of the New Testament, who were persecuted and punished for what they wrote.
Even more illuminating, the stories of Apollonius were recorded some 150 years after the earthly life of Jesus. If one of these figures is a shabby copycat, clearly it is Apollonius, not Jesus.
|
Do angels exist?
|
Answer
The Bible speaks of [angels](angels-Bible.html) as real, actual beings. However, Scripture’s depiction of angels is very different from the popular concept of them. The Bible describes angels as vastly powerful, intimidating, and mysterious creatures. They serve God for specific reasons and do not seem to be wandering or random creatures. While we don’t have a great deal of information about angels in the Bible, what’s available is enough to correct many common misconceptions.
The word *angel* comes from the Greek word *aggelos* (or *angelos*), which most literally means “messenger.” In Old Testament Hebrew, these beings are called *mal’ak*, which means the same thing, “messenger.” Communication seems to be the primary function of angels in the Bible. Most references to angels involve their delivering some news or command on behalf of God. They are occasionally depicted as protecting certain people (Daniel 6:20–23\) or nations (Daniel 12:1\). However, there is no direct biblical support for the concept of a “[guardian angel](guardian-angels.html)”—a single spiritual entity assigned to a specific person for purposes of protection or guidance—although such beings may exist.
In modern times, common depictions of angels include things like halos, [feathery wings](angels-wings.html), blond hair, harps, and white robes, or chubby infants with tiny wings and shining eyes. In reality, the Bible gives no general physical description of angels. Only a few specific types of beings, such as [cherubim](cherubim.html) and [seraphim](seraphim.html), are given direct visual details (Isaiah 6:2–6; Ezekiel 1:4–28\). Some angels, such as those at the ascension, are described as wearing white (Acts 1:10\). Scripture indicates that angels can take on a mundane human form (Genesis 19:1–4\).
That being said, most people in Scripture who encounter angels react with fear. Almost every time an angel appears to someone, the angel’s first words are, “Don’t be afraid!” (Luke 1:13, 30; 2:10; Matthew 28:5\). Their presence can be so overwhelming that even apostles such as John had to be warned not to worship them (Revelation 19:9–10\). This makes sense, given the level of power ascribed to angels by the Bible. As spiritual beings created to serve God, angels are not so much “cute” as they are powerful and otherworldly.
Looking at the Bible, we can say that angels are literal beings. Biblical angels exist. The cartoonish versions of angels so often seen in movies and commercials, however, do not.
|
What is biogenesis?
|
Answer
The term *biogenesis* refers to the production of life from already\-living matter or organisms. This is in contrast to [*abiogenesis*](abiogenesis-definition-theory.html), which refers to the production of life from non\-living matter. Natural abiogenesis has never been observed, nor are there any generally accepted models for how it could occur. Biogenesis, on the other hand, is routinely observed at all levels of life. When a bacteria divides, a plant produces seeds, or a mammal gives birth, biogenesis is occurring.
Biogenesis is also different from [creation *ex nihilo*](creation-ex-nihilo.html), which refers to God’s forming something supernaturally out of nothing (Genesis 1:1\). In biogenesis, living creatures form more of their own kind, with possible slight variations, through a natural process. In creation ex nihilo, God produces something that never existed in any form or in any components. Biogenesis is also a separate concept from creation *ex materia*, where God forms existing materials into something completely different. When God created [Adam](Adam-and-Eve-questions.html) out of dust (Genesis 2:7\), this was an example of life arising through an *ex materia* process.
Despite how obvious biogenesis may seem now, it was only accepted by the scientific community at large about 150 years ago. Ancient cultures believed that inanimate materials such as straw and meat would transform into mice and flies, respectively. Later, it was believed that this kind of spontaneous generation only occurred in simpler organisms such as bacteria. It wasn’t until Louis Pasteur experimentally proved spontaneous generation false, in the 1860s, that the scientific community fully accepted biogenesis as the only natural source of living things.
|
Who was Chloe in the Bible?
|
Answer
There is little known about Chloe in the Bible. Only one verse mentions her name—1 Corinthians 1:11, which says, “My brothers and sisters, some from Chloe’s household have informed me that there are quarrels among you.” What we know from the verse is that Chloe was a Christian woman living in Corinth and that she was an acquaintance of the apostle Paul. Because Paul simply refers to her by her first name, Chloe, it is likely she was well known to the believers of that area, possibly a householder.
Paul addresses quarreling within the Corinthian church, and it was “Chloe’s people” who had reported those quarrels to the apostle. These reports were not idle gossip—they were an attempt to get Paul’s assistance in resolving a problem within the church. In the next verses, the source of the quarrel is revealed: the people were divided over whom they should follow for spiritual leadership. Some were saying “I follow [Paul](life-Paul.html),” others were saying “I follow [Peter](life-Peter.html) (or Cephas),” and still others were saying “I follow [Apollos](who-Apollos.html)” or “I follow Christ.” Thus the Corinthian Christians were segmenting themselves unnecessarily. Paul responds by reminding them that Christ is not divided and that Jesus’ is the name under which all believers are saved and baptized (1 Corinthians 1:12–16\). He finishes by saying that Christ had appointed him, Paul, to preach the gospel, but “not with wisdom and eloquence, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power” (verse 17\).
In response to the concerns of Chloe’s household, Paul points out that Christ is the one who saves and that the power of the gospel is His power (Romans 1:16\). Paul, Peter, and Apollos were all preaching Christ’s message. Believers should always follow Christ as the Shepherd, rather than getting caught up in following men, whose “eloquent words” often create competition one with another. There should be no quarreling or quibbling over who baptized whom or what preacher is more gifted. The eloquence or wisdom of a man is not the point of the gospel—Christ’s work on the [cross](meaning-of-the-cross.html) is what saves and redeems us. It is Christ’s name that we are baptized in, and it is Christ who is “the power of God and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength” (1 Corinthians 1:24–25\).
Chloe and those of her household were insightful enough to perceive that divisions were occurring. The tendency of the Corinthian church to elevate men above God needed to be addressed, and so they wrote to Paul asking for his help. In seeking the assistance of the proper authority in the church (in their case, an [apostle](what-is-an-apostle.html)), Chloe and her household were peacemakers (see Matthew 5:9\).
|
Who was the Pharaoh of the Exodus?
|
Answer
Most people associate the Egyptian ruler forced to free enslaved Israelites with the name *Ramses*, also spelled *Ramesses* or *Rameses*. Films such as *The Ten Commandments*, *The Prince of Egypt*, and *Exodus: Gods and Kings* have all made that assumption regarding the biblical book of Exodus. The Bible itself gives no name for this Pharaoh. Ultimately, his exact identity is irrelevant. The anonymity might even be deliberate: Egyptian monarchs were famously invested in how they would be remembered. Obscurity would be an ironic judgment on a such a ruler (see Psalm 83:3–4; Proverbs 10:7\).
Identifying the Egyptian head of state who interacted with [Moses](life-Moses.html) is more than challenging. History and archaeology offer a dizzying combination of clues, possibilities, and problems. Simply estimating the date of Israel’s release is easier said than done, and, even then, comparing it to the reigns of Egyptian rulers is not enough. Ancient Egyptian history is notoriously erratic and unreliable. Archaeologists note how Egyptian records often overlap, contain contradictory dates, and leave out major historical events. This is especially true of records of events unflattering to a Pharaoh.
Reliable information from that era is relatively scarce and subject to interpretation. Even determining which dynasty ruled over the Jewish slaves is a thorny puzzle and more complex than simply comparing Egyptian records to non\-Egyptian records. To harmonize the book of Exodus, Egyptian history, and secular archaeology, it’s necessary to be open\-minded about potential dates for the events recorded in all three sources.
The challenges of ancient historical research make it impossible to say for certain which Pharaohs are described in the book of Exodus. At the same time, available evidence supports the biblical exodus as a real, historical event. That is to say, a literal reading of Exodus is *plausible*, though specific events are unlikely to be *provable*. The open questions involve details that are not crucial to either the truth or overall message of what’s recorded in the Bible.
Assumptions used to date the exodus greatly influence theories about which Pharaoh was involved. The two leading theories are c. 1446 BC and c. 1225 BC, known respectively as the “early” and “late” dates. The early date, 1446 BC, derived from a semi\-literal reading of 1 Kings 6:1 and Judges 11:26 and is the most\-often accepted date among biblical scholars. Minority voices suggest options such as an interim date or even an entirely new approach to Egyptian chronology.
The late date for the exodus, 1225 BC, suggests the timeline of 1 Kings 6:1 is symbolic, perhaps representing generations as a multiple of 12\. Some archaeological evidence supports this late view, including the evidence of conquest in the cities of Canaan. The general alignment of these theories implies that Pharaoh Seti I drove Israel into deeper slavery, and Rameses II was the Pharaoh defeated in the days of Moses.
Yet *Rameses* is recorded in Exodus as the name of a *city* (Exodus 1:11\). Notably, the Pharaoh who ruled in the early chapters of Exodus was dead by the time Moses returned to free Israel (Exodus 2:21–23\). Thus, some who hold to a “late” exodus suggest Rameses II may have been Israel’s early oppressor, and his son, Merneptah, would have ruled during the exodus itself.
The 1446 BC date would align Exodus’ early events with the time of Thutmose I or his father Amenhotep I, either of whom are considered capable of issuing a decree to murder infants (Exodus 1:16–21\). This dating would place Moses’ life in the same general timeframe as Hatshepsut, effectively a female Pharaoh, who may have been the one to adopt him from the Nile (Exodus 2:5–6\). Hatshepsut’s co\-regent and eventual rival was Thutmose III, who apparently resented her influence and would have had good reason to banish Moses at the first opportunity (Exodus 2:14–15\).
Staying with mainstream Egyptian chronology would make Amenhotep II, seventh Pharaoh of the Eighteenth Dynasty, the ruler who was forced to let God’s people go. Egyptian history indicates a sudden lack of military action by Amenhotep II beginning in 1446 BC, a fact that would be consistent with the loss of nearly the entire army at the Red Sea (Exodus 14:28\). Ancient records also claim Amenhotep’s successor, Thutmose IV, was not the “true” heir—which would be true if Amenhotep’s firstborn son and “legitimate” heir died during the tenth [plague](ten-plagues-Egypt.html) (Exodus 11:4–5; 12:29\).
For those reasons, biblical interpreters are most likely to identify Amenhotep II as the Pharaoh of the exodus. That opinion is hardly universal, however, and by no means free of challenges.
Some scholars argue for tweaks in our understanding of Hebrew history, changing the presumed [date of the exodus](date-of-the-Exodus.html) to a time between the “early” and “late” options, such as the 1300s BC. According to one such theory, the infamous Pharaoh Tutankhamun—pop culture’s “King Tut,”—could have been the one confronted by Moses and defeated by God’s miracles.
Some archaeologists have suggested that the mainstream view of Egyptian chronology is greatly inaccurate. They point to various anomalies and inconsistencies, which can be easily explained by adjusting the dates of the Egyptian dynasties by as much as several hundred years. While this view is not accepted by most Egyptologists, it is it not entirely dismissed.
If the dates of the Egyptian dynasties are shifted, Neferhotep I emerges as a possible Pharaoh of the exodus. Neferhotep was a ruler during the Thirteenth Dynasty, and his predecessor, Amenemhat III, had no surviving sons. Amenemhat’s childless daughter, Sobekneferu (possibly the princess of Exodus 2:5–10\), marked the sudden end of the Twelfth Dynasty. Neferhotep’s reign is associated with the Ipuwer Papyrus, a record of an era of calamity within Egypt (see Exodus 3:19–20\). Further, he was succeeded by his brother, Sobkhotpe IV, rather than by his son, Wahneferhotep (see Exodus 11:4–5; 12:29\). Notably, Neferhotep did not leave behind mummified remains, perhaps indicating that he was a victim of the incident at the Red Sea (Exodus 14:28\). Soon after his reign, a people group known as the Hyskos conquered much of Egypt, consistent with what would happen to a nation newly weakened by the decimation of its army (see Exodus 12:31–36\).
The most popular theory is that Amenhotep II was the Pharaoh of the exodus, but no theory is ironclad. All have their weaknesses and unanswered questions, as well as relative advantages and supportive evidence.
It’s important to note that these varied possibilities are not, themselves, the only extrabiblical evidence supporting the book of Exodus. Dated within the broad sweep of centuries during which the exodus might have occurred, numerous discoveries stand out. Depending on dating assumptions, any or all of these could be directly associated with the exodus of Israel from Egypt:
• Mud\-and\-straw bricks are featured in some pyramids (Exodus 5:7–18\), a fact congruent with writings and other evidence of Asiatic people enslaved in Egypt.
• Objects described as rods or staffs, used by court advisors, which look like snakes, have been discovered (Exodus 7:10–12\).
• The Ipuwer Papyrus depicts a time of trouble in Egypt:
“Plague stalks through the land and blood is everywhere… Nay, but the river is blood… gates, columns and walls are consumed with fire… the son of the high\-born man is no longer to be recognized…The stranger people from outside are come into Egypt… Nay, but corn has perished everywhere.”
• Archaeologists have discovered evidence of a large slave town, Kahun, which shows evidence of hasty desertion, including the abandonment of household possessions and implements (Exodus 12:30–34, 39\).
• This same area, Kahun, is the site of mass infant burials (Exodus 1:16\).
• Cities in Canaan show evidence of warfare consistent with the conquests depicted in books such as Joshua.
Who, then, was the Pharaoh of the exodus? It was unlikely to have been Rameses, despite Hollywood’s fondness for that figure. Most likely, it was Amenhotep II, the seventh Pharaoh of the Eighteenth Dynasty. But it might also have been Neferhotep I of the Thirteenth Dynasty, or, less probably, Tutankhamun. There isn’t enough detail to positively identify that ruler, and that may have been God’s plan all along (see Psalm 9:5–8; 109:15\). There is ample evidence, however, to trust what’s depicted in the book of Exodus as truth.
|
Why did Noah get drunk after the flood?
|
Answer
According to Genesis 9:20–21, at some point after the flood, Noah planted a vineyard, produced wine, and became [drunk](is-getting-drunk-a-sin.html). Not only did he become drunk, but he was naked inside his tent. What followed was the [sin of Ham](curse-Ham-Canaan.html) (and possibly Canaan). This is an uncomfortable episode in [Noah’s life](life-Noah.html), but it serves as a reminder that even those saved by the grace of God are prone to sin (Genesis 8:21\). It’s also a powerful warning about how just one careless decision can destroy the reputation of even the most godly man or woman. That’s especially true when it comes to drinking. Although the Bible says that wine is good for cheer (Psalm 104:15\), it also warns that it can be dangerous, especially for those in positions of authority (Proverbs 31:4\).
What the Bible doesn’t specify is “why” Noah became drunk. There are several possibilities, although none of them change the responsibilities of the people involved. Noah was responsible for his own actions, as were his sons. This includes Ham, who seems to have reacted with ridicule instead of compassion toward his inebriated father (Genesis 9:22\).
One possibility is that Noah was haunted by his experiences during the flood and chose to over\-consume wine and get drunk in order to ease his pain. Attempting to avoid negative feelings is one of the major reasons people abuse [alcohol](sin-alcohol.html) today. The strain of trying to rebuild a shattered world, on top of the horrific loss of human life, would doubtless have been a heavy burden to bear.
Another potential answer is that Noah’s drunkenness was inadvertent and caused by old age. That is, Noah might have become drunk accidentally. After the [flood](global-flood.html), mankind began aging much more rapidly. It’s possible that Noah was feeling his age more than he knew and wasn’t able to hold as much wine as he once did. This is a key danger of alcohol—it takes judgment to know when to stop, but good judgment is exactly what alcohol tends to erode.
Another option is that Noah became drunk because he wasn’t experienced with large quantities of alcohol. Grapes existed before the flood, so man would have had the ability to press grapes before Noah entered the ark. But, according to the Bible, Noah was the first to plant a vineyard (Genesis 9:20\). Common sense suggests that a cultivated vineyard will produce significantly more fruit, juice, and wine than wild vines. Noah may well have had access to more wine than he’d ever had before. Possibly, he carelessly consumed more than he had in the past, resulting in his drunken state.
Ultimately, we can’t say for sure exactly why Noah became drunk. Scripture often leaves out details that are ultimately irrelevant to our relationship to God. The exact sequence of events leading to Noah’s stumble isn’t given in the Scriptures. What we do see is enough for us to understand the history of Noah’s sons and to be warned about the power of what we put into our bodies.
|
Who was Nathanael in the Bible?
|
Answer
Nathanael, whose name is spelled *Nathaniel* in popular modern usage, was one of the disciples called by Jesus (John 1:43\). Nathanael was from Cana in Galilee (John 21:2\) and was brought to Jesus by his friend, [Philip](Philip-in-the-Bible.html), who also became one of Jesus’ disciples. Nathanael was one of the first to express belief in Jesus Christ as the Son of God (John 1:49\). His name means “God has given” in Hebrew. Interestingly, Nathanael is only mentioned in the Gospel of John; the other three gospels identify him as “[Bartholomew](Bartholomew-in-the-Bible.html).”
The call of Philip and Nathanael to discipleship is recorded in the first chapter of John, beginning in verse 43\. Jesus went to Galilee and found Philip first, who then went to Nathanael, his friend. Philip told Nathanael that he had found “the one Moses wrote about in the Law, and about whom the prophets also wrote—Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph” (John 1:45\). Nathanael was skeptical and said, “Nazareth! Can anything good come from there?” (verse 46\). This skepticism was understandable; at that time Nazareth was an obscure little hill town, remote and of no consequence. It was not sophisticated or glamorous, quite the opposite—it was not a place that anyone expected the Messiah to come from. Despite his skepticism, Nathanael followed Philip to meet Jesus. When the Lord saw Nathanael coming toward Him, He said, “Here truly is an Israelite in whom there is no deceit” (verse 47\). Nathanael accepted this description as true and wondered how Jesus knew his character, having never met him before. Jesus explained: “I saw you while you were still under the fig tree before Philip called you” (verse 48\). Nathanael then immediately recognized Jesus as the Christ, calling him the “Son of God” and the “king of Israel” (verse 49\).
It has been speculated that there was something in Nathanael’s mind or actions under the fig tree that caused Jesus to refer to him as “an Israelite in whom there is no deceit.” This would help explain Nathanael’s amazement, as simply having seen Nathanael under the fig tree does not necessarily denote spiritual foresight or anything miraculous. It is obvious that Jesus’ mention of “no deceit” triggered amazement in Nathanael; it points to the fact that Jesus knew his thoughts.
Jesus responds to Nathanael’s statement of faith with a prophecy: “You believe because I told you I saw you under the fig tree. You will see greater things than that” (John 1:50\). Then Jesus prophesies that Nathanael will see angels ascending and descending on the Son of Man (verse 51\). This is a reference to the story of [Jacob’s ladder](Jacobs-ladder.html) in Genesis 28\. But instead of ascending and descending on a ladder as they did in Jacob’s dream, the angels will ascend and descend on the Son of Man—meaning that Jesus Himself will be the final, efficacious connection between God and humanity (see Hebrews 9:12; 10:10\).
|
What does the Bible say about love?
|
Answer
The Bible has a great deal to say about love. In fact, the Bible says that “love is of God” and “God is love” (1 John 4:7–8\); in other words, love is a fundamental characteristic of who God is. Everything God does is impelled and influenced by His love.
The Bible uses several different words for “love” in the Hebrew and Greek, interchanging them depending on context. Some of these words mean “affectionate love”; others indicate “friendship”; and still others, “erotic, sexual love.” There is also a distinct word for the type of love that God displays. In the Greek, this word is [*agape*](agape-love.html), and it refers to a benevolent and charitable love that seeks the best for the loved one.
The Bible gives many examples of love: the caring provision of [Boaz for Ruth](Ruth-and-Boaz.html); the deep friendship of [David and Jonathan](David-and-Jonathan.html); the poetic, passionate love of [Solomon and the Shulamite](Song-of-Solomon.html); the enduring commitment of [Hosea to Gomer](Hosea-marry-prostitute.html); the fatherly love of Paul for Timothy and John for the church; and, of course, the sacrificial, saving love of Christ for the elect.
*Agape*, the benevolent, selfless love that God shows, is mentioned often in the New Testament, including in the “love chapter,” 1 Corinthians 13\. There, love’s characteristics are listed: love is patient and kind; love doesn’t envy, boast, or dishonor others; love is not proud or self\-seeking; love is not easily angered, doesn’t keep a record of wrongs, and doesn’t delight in evil; rather, love rejoices with the truth; love always protects, trusts, hopes, and perseveres; love never fails (1 Corinthians 13:4–8\). Of the greatest of God’s gifts, faith, hope, and love, “the greatest . . . is love” (verse 13\).
The Bible says that God was motivated by love to save the world (John 3:16\). God’s love is best seen in the sacrifice of Christ on our behalf (1 John 4:9\). And God’s love does not require us to be “worthy” to receive it; His love is truly benevolent and gracious: “God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us” (Romans 5:8\).
The Bible says that, since true love is part of God’s nature, God is the source of love. He is the initiator of a loving relationship with us. Any love we have for God is simply a response to His sacrificial love for us: “This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins” (1 John 4:10\). Our human understanding of love is flawed, weak, and incomplete, but the more we look at Jesus, the better we understand true love.
The Bible says that God’s love for us in Christ has resulted in our being brought into His family: “See what great love the Father has lavished on us, that we should be called children of God! And that is what we are!” (1 John 3:1\). Just as the father in the parable showed love to his prodigal son (Luke 15:11–32\), so our Heavenly Father receives us with joy when we come to Him in faith. He makes us “accepted in the Beloved” (Ephesians 1:6, NKJV).
The Bible says that we are to love others the way that God loves us. We are to love the family of God (1 Peter 2:17\). We are to love our enemies—that is, we are to actively seek what is best for them (Matthew 5:44\). Husbands are to love their wives as Christ loves the church (Ephesians 5:25\). As we show benevolent, selfless love, we reflect God’s love to a lost and dying world. “We love because he first loved us” (1 John 4:19\).
The Bible says that our love for God is related to our obedience of Him: “For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not burdensome” (1 John 5:3; cf. John 14:15\). We serve God out of love for Him. And God’s love for us enables us to obey Him freely, without the burden of guilt or the fear of punishment.
First John 4:18 says that “perfect love drives out fear” (this is again the word *agape*). The dismissal of the fear of condemnation is one of the main functions of God’s love. The person without Christ is under judgment and has plenty to fear (John 3:18\), but once a person is in Christ, the fear of judgment is gone. Part of understanding the love of God is knowing that God’s judgment fell on Jesus at the cross so we can be spared. Jesus described Himself as the Savior: “God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him” (John 3:17\). The very next verse reminds us that the only person who must fear judgment is the one who rejects Jesus Christ.
The Bible says that nothing can separate the believer from the love of God in Christ (Romans 8:38–39\). God’s love does not wax and wane; it is not a fickle, emotional sensation. God’s love for sinners is why Christ died on the cross. God’s love for those who trust in Christ is why He holds them in His hand and promises never to let them go (John 10:29\).
|
What is Kemetic spirituality / Kemetism?
|
Answer
Kemet (or KMT) is the native name of ancient Egypt, and Kemetic spirituality or Kemetism is a neo\-pagan religious movement that seeks to restore ancient Kemetic/Egyptian religious practices. Kemetic spirituality attracts those of African descent, as it provides a cultural and religious connection to the spirituality of lost societies of African ancestry, but it is practiced by many races around the world, and the approach of adherents is varied. Kemetic spirituality is sometimes called Neterism or Egyptian Neo\-paganism.
The worship of Egyptian deities such as Thoth, Ma’at, and Ra, the sun god, is an ingredient of Kemetic spirituality, and private altars are common in the homes of Kemetics. Food offerings and prayers are made daily at these shrines. Kemetism sometimes incorporates elements from [Wicca](Wicca.html), [New Age](new-age-movement.html) thinking, and [yoga](Christian-yoga.html).
Ancient Egypt features prominently in the Old Testament as a nation that worshiped false deities, some of which may have been related to actual demonic presences (Daniel 10:13, 20\). Of course, the Bible condemns the worship of gods other than Yahweh (Exodus 20:3, 23; 23:13, 24\). Idolatry caused a continual rift between God and His people because they had a tendency to accept the gods of neighboring nations and worship them alongside the Lord, despite clear instructions to the contrary (Numbers 33:52\).
Modern\-day [idolatry](idolatry-definition.html) such as practiced in Kemetism may be baffling to Christians, but it shows that “there is nothing new under the sun” (Ecclesiastes 1:9\). Kemetic spirituality revives the old failed gods of Egypt, props up their images, and worships them again. Kemetic spirituality is a false way that does not honor the true God and cannot provide salvation (John 14:6\).
|
What is ietsism, and what do ietsists believe?
|
Answer
Ietsism (literally “something\-ism”) is the belief that there is “something” that exists beyond the material realm, but that “something” remains undefined and unknowable. Because ietsism is another form of [agnosticism](agnosticism.html), it is not compatible with the Christian faith. Ietsists do not subscribe to any one set of beliefs completely. They believe in a spiritual realm, and they acknowledge that there could be some kind of god. They even leave open the possibility that we ourselves are gods, like Eastern philosophy teaches. But ietsists don’t want to say they know for sure about anything spiritual.
Many people appreciate and respect Christianity and may even attend a church or apply certain Christian principles because they need to spiritually connect somewhere. But that does not make them Christians. There are some ietsists who fit this description. The call themselves Christians due to cultural reasons, but they do not hold to the fundamentals of the Christian faith.
Ietsism does not subscribe to any belief system. A Christian must know what he believes. Saving faith is based on hearing and understanding the Word of God (Romans 10:17\). To become a Christian, one must have sincere faith in the Son of God and Savior, Jesus Christ. It’s not enough to believe in a nebulous “something” or to be “fairly sure” that “maybe” there’s a god. Hebrews 4:14 says, “Since we have a great high priest who has ascended into heaven, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold firmly to the faith we profess.” There’s nothing nebulous or unsure about the firmness of our faith.
The agnostic element of ietsism is one thing that makes it incompatible with biblical Christianity. God requires faith: “Without faith it is impossible to please God” (Hebrews 11:6\). And the object of our faith is God’s Son, Jesus Christ: “Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God’s wrath remains on them” (John 3:36\).
Another trait of ietsism that distances it from biblical Christianity is its acceptance of all forms of spirituality. Ietsists can dabble in [astrology](astrology-Bible.html), [crystal healing](Bible-crystals.html), and [occult phenomena](occult.html) and still be good ietsists. The Bible clearly teaches that in order to get to God, we must go through Jesus Christ. He is the only way (John 14:6; Acts 4:12\).
|
What is a Gypsy?
|
Answer
The word *Gypsy* refers to a member of an ethnic group called the Romani, or Romany. The Romani are descendants of people from northern India, originating there about 1,000 years ago. They are related to the Dom people, who came from the same area but separated from the Romani. The Romani or Gypsies are a nomadic people who migrated to many places around the globe, including Asia, Eastern Europe, and the Americas. The most concentrated populations of Gypsies today are in Turkey and Central, Eastern, and Southern Europe, in such places as Spain and southern France. They live and travel in recognizable wagons.
Gypsies are predominantly Roman Catholic, though some practice forms of Eastern Orthodoxy, Protestantism, or Islam. Gypsies believe in God, whom they call *Del*, and Satan, whom they refer to as *beng*. Traditionally, Gypsy culture is steeped in [superstition](superstitions.html), holding to belief in charms, amulets, curses, bad luck, and ghosts. Gypsies practice many rituals, and, as happens in many religions, most of their rituals are related to appeasing or warding off spirits in an attempt to control fate. The Gypsies tend to mix pagan religion with Christian thought. For example, when a Gypsy dies, his family asks forgiveness for anything bad he may have done, but this is done for fear that the dead person will come back and [haunt](ghosts-hauntings.html) the living. Forgiveness, according to the Bible, is something given to the living by God through Christ (1 John 1:9\) and is not associated with fear. In fact, those who have received Christ’s forgiveness no longer need to fear condemnation (Romans 8:1; 1 John 4:18\). The idea of the dead coming back to haunt the living for not praying for their forgiveness is not a biblical idea at all. Romani or Gypsies also believe in reincarnation, which is not in step with Christian doctrine, and they practice fortune telling, which is the same as being a medium or practicing sorcery, activities forbidden in the Bible (Leviticus 20:27; Galatians 5:20\).
Gypsy or Romani women are held to very high standards of purity. Virginity is absolutely required before marriage, and the lower half of a woman’s body is considered unclean because of menstruation. Pregnant women are also considered unclean, and if a woman gives birth in her family’s home, she will render the home impure. After a woman gives birth, anything the new mother touches must be destroyed. This focus on external and ceremonial uncleanness is characteristic of many legalistic religions. The Bible teaches that, because of man’s sin, we are all unclean before God (Romans 3:10–11, 23\). The remedy for our spiritual pollution is not to make rules for ourselves but to seek the Savior (Romans 7:24–25; 1 Corinthians 6:11\).
|
What does the Bible say about terrorism?
|
Answer
The Bible doesn’t directly address the topic of terrorism, at least not the type of terrorism we think of in the modern world. True “terrorism” is an attempt to incite fear, shock, and panic in a target population through the use of [violence](Bible-violence.html). The goal of acts of terrorism is to bully a government or culture into cooperating with the demands of the terrorists. In some cases, the carnage is inflicted for its own sake or as a punishment or an act of revenge.
Many of the weapons used in modern terror attacks did not exist in biblical times, such as explosives, chemical weapons, and firearms. News of an attack would travel slowly in ancient times and only by oral or written descriptions. The ability to inflict sudden, catastrophic damage combined with the rapid spread of news—especially in graphic pictures and videos—has made terrorism as we know it today possible. These capabilities did not exist in biblical times, and so neither did modern\-style terrorism. However, Old Testament statements about Israel’s responsibilities during war, scriptural comments about those who target the innocent, and the general sense of Christian morality all speak against what we would today define as “terrorism.”
Ancient armies were far more likely to deliberately target innocents; in fact, the idea of avoiding women and children during war was all but unheard of in the ancient Near East. However, Israel was given explicit instructions for warfare that greatly humanized their military operations. Soldiers were given the option to return home if they were newly married, afraid, or otherwise unready for warfare. They were not encouraged to suicidally throw themselves into battle (Deuteronomy 20:5–8\). Israel was commanded to offer peace—and with it a warning—to a city prior to any attack (Deuteronomy 20:10\). This procedure not only left room for peace, but it gave non\-combatants an opportunity to flee prior to the battle.
Israel was not encouraged to go out of their way to attack civilians instead of soldiers, as modern terrorism does. And the Israelites were frequently reminded that their limited, one\-time\-only orders to attack were based on the wickedness of their enemy, not their own superiority (Deuteronomy 9:4–6\).
The Bible also expresses a strong condemnation for the shedding of innocent blood. Over and over, the Scriptures condemn those who use violence against the helpless and inoffensive (Deuteronomy 27:25; Proverbs 6:16–18\). Those who use common terrorist tactics such as attacking non\-combatants and trying to inspire terror are also rebuked (Jeremiah 7:6; 19:4; 22:3, 17\). Even on a small scale, using ambush tactics in order to kill those one hates is treated as murder (Deuteronomy 19:11\).
This theme is continued in the New Testament, where Christians are explicitly told not to use bloodshed in an attempt to defend Christ (Matthew 26:52\). Attempts to violently overthrow or influence the government are also off\-limits (Romans 13:1\). Rather, Christians are to overcome evil through good (Romans 12:21\).
All in all, terrorism is simply incompatible with a biblical worldview. Opposition to terrorism is expressed both in the Old and New Testaments. The principles apply both to nations and to individual people. The Bible does not explicitly address the 21st\-century concept of terrorism, but it clearly condemns everything about it.
|
Who was Eve in the Bible?
|
Answer
Eve in the Bible was the wife of Adam, the first man that God created. Eve was the mother of Cain and Abel and Seth and “other sons and daughters” (Genesis 4:1–2, 25; 5:4\). Eve was the first woman, the first wife, and the first mother in the world.
The name *Eve* comes from the Hebrew word *chavâh*, which means “the living” or “life.” She was called “Eve” because she was the mother of all living (Genesis 3:20\). God created her after allowing Adam to see that he did not have among the animals a suitable companion—that is, there was no other creature like himself. So God created Eve as Adam’s counterpart. Eve was made in God’s image, just as Adam was (Genesis 1:27\).
God gave a command to Adam (who relayed it to Eve) while he was living in the garden of Eden. God’s command was not to eat of a tree called “the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil” because, He warned, on the day they ate of that tree, they would surely die (Genesis 2:17\). The Bible doesn’t tell us how long Adam and Eve lived in the garden without incident, but at some point Eve gave into the temptation to eat from the forbidden tree. She was deceived by the serpent (1 Timothy 2:13–14\) who, it is generally believed, was a creature used by Satan. The serpent sowed doubt in Eve’s mind by asking her whether God had really meant what He said in forbidding eating the fruit from the tree (Genesis 3:1\). Then, the serpent fed Eve a lie: “You will not certainly die. . . . For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil” (Genesis 3:4–5\). Eve took some of the fruit and ate it and then gave some to her husband, Adam, who also ate. Adam and Eve immediately understood what they had not previously understood—their eyes were opened to both good and evil. But God had not lied—death came as a result of Eve and Adam’s disobedience.
Death came to the whole human race as a result of what Eve was tricked into doing and Adam’s subsequent choice to sin. Two specific curses were given to Eve and all her daughters. First, God multiplied Eve’s pain in childbearing. Second, God pronounced that the relationship between man and woman would be characterized by conflict (Genesis 3:16\). These two curses have been proved true in every woman’s life throughout history. No matter how many medical advances we achieve, childbearing is always a painful and stressful experience for a woman. And no matter how advanced and progressive society becomes, the relationship between man and woman remains a power struggle, a battle of the sexes, full of strife.
Eve was the mother of all the living and also the first to experience these specific curses. However, Eve will be redeemed along with Adam because of the second Adam, Christ, who was without sin (Romans 5:12–14\). “For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. . . . ‘The first man Adam became a living being’; the last Adam, a life\-giving spirit” (1 Corinthians 15:22, 45\).
|
Who was John Mark in the Bible?
|
Answer
John Mark, often just called Mark, is the author of the [gospel of Mark](Gospel-of-Mark.html). He was a believer in the early church mentioned directly only in the book of Acts. John Mark is first mentioned as the son of a woman named Mary (Acts 12:12\), whose house was being used as a place for believers to gather and pray. Later, Mark is mentioned as a companion of Barnabas and Paul during their travels together (Acts 12:25\). John Mark was also Barnabas’ cousin (Colossians 4:10\).
John Mark was a helper on Paul and Barnabas’ first missionary journey (Acts 13:5\). However, he did not stay through the whole trip. John Mark deserted Paul and Barnabas in Pamphylia and left the work (Acts 15:38\). The Bible does not say why Mark deserted, but his departure came right after a mostly fruitless time in [Cyprus](Cyprus-in-the-Bible.html) (Acts 13:4–12\). Only one conversion is recorded in Cyprus, but there had been strong demonic opposition. It’s likely that the young John Mark was discouraged at the hardness of the way and decided to return to the comforts of home.
Some time later, after [Paul](life-Paul.html) and [Barnabas](life-Barnabas.html) had returned from their first journey, Paul expressed a desire to go back to the brothers in the cities they had previously visited to see how everyone was doing (Acts 15:36\). Barnabas agreed, apparently upon the provision that they take John Mark with them. Paul refused to have Mark on the trip, however, citing Mark’s previous desertion. Paul thought it best not to have a quitter with them; they needed someone more dependable. Paul and Barnabas had a “sharp disagreement” about John Mark (verse 39\) and wound up separating from each other and going on separate journeys. Barnabas took John Mark with him to Cyprus, and Paul took Silas with him through Syria and Cilicia to encourage the believers in the churches in those areas (Acts 15:39–41\).
Barnabas, the “son of encouragement” (Acts 4:36\), desired to forgive John Mark’s failure and to give him another chance. Paul took the more rational view: pioneering missionary work requires dedication, resolve, and endurance. Paul saw John Mark as a risk to their mission. Luke, the writer of Acts, does not take sides or present either Paul or Barnabas as being in the right. He simply records the facts. It’s worth noting that, in the end, two groups of missionaries were sent out—twice as many missionaries were spreading the gospel.
John Mark sails off to Cyprus with his cousin Barnabas, but that is not the end of his story. Years later, he is with Paul, who calls him a “fellow worker” (Philemon 1:24\). And near the end of Paul’s life, Paul sends a request to Timothy from a Roman prison: “Get Mark and bring him with you, because he is helpful to me in my ministry” (2 Timothy 4:11\). Obviously, John Mark had matured through the years and had become a faithful servant of the Lord. Paul recognized his progress and considered him a valuable companion.
John Mark wrote the gospel that bears his name sometime between AD 55 and 59\. There could be a veiled reference to [John Mark](Mark-fled-naked.html) in Mark 14:51–52\. In that passage a young man, roused from sleep on the night that Jesus was arrested, attempts to follow the Lord, and the mob who had Jesus in custody attempts to seize him. The young man escapes and flees into the night. The fact that this incident is only recorded in Mark’s gospel—and the fact that the young man is anonymous—has led some scholars to surmise that the fleeing young man is actually John Mark.
|
What is libertinism?
|
Answer
A libertine is a person who rejects moral boundaries and lives “at liberty” from constraint. The result is that the libertine usually lives a profligate, dissolute life. Libertinism is a disregard of authority or a rejection of moral boundaries. Libertinism typically involves pursuing personal desires without consideration of [ethics](Christian-ethics.html) or social mores. The term *libertine* almost always refers to a male who is sexually promiscuous and disinterested in [monogamy](monogamy-Bible.html).
A libertine can also be a freed slave, and that is how the word *libertine* is used in Acts 6:9 in the King James Version. As the deacon [Stephen](life-Stephen.html) was working miracles and preaching in Jerusalem, “there arose certain of the synagogue, which is called the synagogue of the Libertines . . . disputing with Stephen” (Acts 6:9\). This “synagogue of the Libertines” was comprised of Jews who had been former captives, either as prisoners of Roman wars or as slaves of some kind, but had been freed. The NIV translates the phrase “[Synagogue of the Freedmen](Synagogue-of-the-Freedmen.html).”
The term *libertine* was used by Reformer John Calvin to describe his political enemies. Calvin was both the religious and political leader in Geneva, and he set up a system of moral rules by which the Genevans would be governed. Those who rejected Calvin’s prohibitions against immorality, drunkenness, cursing, etc., were labeled “libertines,” since they felt they ought to have the freedom (liberty) to act under moral codes of their own choosing. Over time, the concept of libertinism evolved from a reference to rejection of a particular authority into a general rejection of all moral authority.
Beginning in the 17th century, the philosophy of libertinism was expressed in subversive works of poetry, art, and fiction, often involving [pornography](pornography-Bible.html). Typically, these works were anti\-religious, anti\-government, and/or hedonistic in nature.
In less common use, the terms *libertine* and *libertinism* have been applied to those who reject traditional religious dogma. However, such religious libertines prefer the term *freethinker*, which does not connote licentiousness and is less subject to confusion. The one aspect consistent with all uses of the term *libertine* is the rejection of a prevailing or established code or codes in favor of personal freedom and independent thought.
Libertinism’s lack of moral restraints makes it diametrically opposed to biblical Christianity. “If you live according to the flesh, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live” (Romans 8:13\). The Bible warns against unrestrained behaviors as explicitly pagan (1 Peter 4:3\) and as the hallmark of false teaching (2 Peter 2:2\). Spiritually, those who refuse to control their desires are under God’s judgment (Romans 1:26\), as opposed to those who have their desires controlled by Christ (Galatians 5:24\).
The Bible notes that unchecked desires don’t give us “liberty”; they actually enslave us (Titus 3:3\). Addiction and pleasure\-seeking become their own chains. Even non\-Christian, libertine thinkers have noted the same thing. Oscar Wilde’s famous novel *The Picture of Dorian Gray* shows how the unrestrained pursuit of pleasure destroys a man’s soul and spirit. Despite being written by a renowned hedonist, this story poignantly captures the futility and ultimate disaster of the libertine lifestyle.
|
Is the divorce rate among Christians truly the same as among non-Christians?
|
Answer
We’ve all heard the claim: “Christians are just as likely to [divorce](God-hates-divorce.html) as non\-Christians.” This statement is often attributed to a 2008 study by the Barna Research Group that indicated that those who identified as Christian were just as likely as non\-Christians to be divorced. This study was also broken down into subcategories by religious denomination, showing Baptists and non\-denominational Protestants leading the way in divorce. The claim that the divorce rate among Christians equals that of non\-Christians builds upon the common assumption that 50 percent of all marriages end in divorce. But, according to the latest research, those statements about the divorce rate, among Christians in particular, are untrue.
Harvard\-trained social researcher and author Shaunti Feldhahn, in her book *The Good News About Marriage* says that the data reveals a different story about the divorce rate. Feldhahn states that the “50 percent” figure was not based on hard data; rather, the number came from projections of what researchers *thought* the divorce rate would become after states passed no\-fault divorce laws. “We’ve never hit those numbers. We’ve never gotten close,” she writes. According to her study, the overall divorce rate is around 33 percent.
Partnering with George Barna, Feldhahn reexamined the data pertaining to the divorce rate among Christians and found that the numbers were based on survey\-takers who identified as “Christian” rather than some other religion. Under that broad classification, respondents were as likely as anyone else to have been divorced. The “Christian” category included people who profess a belief system but do not live a committed lifestyle. However, for those who were active in their church, the divorce rate was 27 to 50 percent *lower* than for non\-churchgoers. [Nominal Christians](nominalism.html)—those who simply call themselves “Christians” but do not actively engage with the faith—are actually 20 percent *more* likely than the general population to get divorced.
Dr. Brad Wilcox, director of the National Marriage Project, states that “‘active conservative protestants who attend church regularly are actually 35% less likely to divorce than those who have no religious preferences” (quoted by Stetzer, Ed. “The Exchange.” *Christianity Today*. “Marriage, Divorce, and the Church: What do the stats say, and can marriage be happy?” Feb. 14, 2014\. WEB. Oct. 26, 2015\). In her studies, Feldhahn found that 72 percent of all married people were still married to their first spouse. And of those marriages, four out of five are happy.
Putting it all together, what these findings tell us is that religion itself cannot insulate us from the stresses that pull at the fabric of our marriages. But there’s definite good news regarding divorce rates and Christians: contrary to what’s been reported for years, the divorce rate is *not* 50 percent; it’s more like 30 percent. And then we find that people who keep God at the center of their home and family stay married at far greater rates, and even thrive within those marriages. One of the reasons for this is that those whose first commitment is to the lordship of Jesus put fewer expectations upon their spouses to meet emotional needs that only God can meet. The lessening of unrealistic [expectations](Bible-expectations.html) gives marriages a stronger foundation upon which to withstand difficult times.
Although 1 Peter 2:7 is speaking of the church in general, the words also echo the truths revealed in the statistics on Christian marriages: “The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone.” When Jesus is the cornerstone of our homes and marriages, we can weather the storms (see Matthew 7:24\).
|
Is there any truth to the chemtrail conspiracy?
|
Answer
The Bible does not mention chemtrails, of course. But there are more and more people talking about them, so it is good to at least address the issue. When a jet aircraft engine burns fuel, it produces waste in the form of heat and various gases, including water vapor. Since the exhaust comes out at a high temperature, the water vapor remains in gaseous state and is normally invisible to the naked eye. However, at high altitudes, low pressure and ambient air temperature cool the vapor quickly, creating a line of visible condensation—artificial clouds behind the engine. This visual effect is known as a “contrail,” shorthand for “condensation trail.”
According to conspiracy theorists, however, these lines of condensed water vapor in the sky are actually dangerous chemicals being deliberately sprayed on the populations below. Such claims presume that these lines in the sky are chemical trails, or “chemtrails,” not contrails. Some theorize that the chemicals in chemtrails are for environmental or pest control, similar to the reason farm crops are dusted from smaller aircraft. Others fear the purpose of the chemtrails is more sinister. In all cases, the chemtrail controversy assumes a secret attempt to spread chemicals via aircraft, using the contrail effect as a cover.
As with all pseudo\-scientific [conspiracy theories](conspiracy-theories.html), chemtrail enthusiasts have a litany of facts that they feel support their view. For example, conspiracy theorists note that the trails often appear in regular patterns. Lines may be non\-existent one day and then be numerous the next. Sometimes one aircraft leaves a contrail while others flying in the same general area do not. More efficient modern engines, the theorists claim, should leave little or no trail.
A careful examination of the facts does not support the chemtrail controversy. Aircraft are routed into particular flight lanes by air traffic control, which is why trails frequently appear in evenly spaced patterns. Atmospheric conditions such as humidity and pressure have a major impact on the formation of contrails, exactly as they influence the formation of natural clouds. This not only explains daily changes in trail formation but why aircraft flying a few thousand feet apart might produce different levels of contrail, no matter how efficient the engine.
There are other, even more problematic scientific points to consider regarding the chemtrail controversy. Normal contrails form at a distance behind the engine as the water vapor cools. This phenomenon is evident in photos of aircraft flying at high altitude. Chemicals being sprayed would not leave this gap, and the heat and pressure of a jet aircraft’s wake would likely ruin any complex chemical structure. Biological agents would be killed by either the heat needed to vaporize them, the cold of the upper atmosphere, or the shock of rapid cooling. Any agent dispersed in the upper atmosphere would drift miles away and dissipate to the point of nonexistence by the time it got to the ground.
Even worse for chemtrail conspiracy theorists are the problems inherent with any vast, far\-reaching conspiracy. The chemtrail theory would require cooperation and secrecy among tens of thousands of people in different areas. This would extend from high\-ranking government officials all the way down to ground crews, pilots, and so forth. It’s simply implausible that so many unsupervised people could keep something like that quiet for long, if at all.
This conspiracy theory, like most, fails to account for simpler means to achieve sinister ends. If the government wanted to spread chemicals over its citizens, there are much quieter, more covert, and less complex ways to do it. For example, ground\-based spraying would be cheaper, less susceptible to loose lips, and more effective, since the chemicals would be much closer to a target population.
Unfortunately, the kind of paranoid pseudo\-science evidenced in the chemtrail theory is a regular feature of human society. We shouldn’t give it more attention or worry than it deserves (2 Timothy 2:23\). The Bible calls on Christians to fact\-check what they hear (Acts 17:11\), apply reasonable skepticism (1 Thessalonians 5:21\), and avoid buying into ideas simply because they are what we want to hear (2 Timothy 4:3\). Despite the fears and claims of an uninformed few, there is no truth to the chemtrail controversy.
|
Should a Christian pay into Social Security and/or accept Social Security payments?
|
Answer
For those living in the United States, Social Security [taxes](taxes-Bible.html) (part of the FICA taxes) are required deductions from one’s paycheck. Many other countries have very similar programs. These funds are used, in theory, to provide a financial safety net for the elderly. Once a person reaches a certain age, he or she is eligible to receive payments from Social Security. Thus, Social Security is a basic form of socialized retirement; everyone pays into the system, and everyone is paid from it. Those with less income pay much less in proportion than those with more income, and they receive a larger benefit (in proportion to their working income) than those with more, as well.
Whether or not a Christian chooses to accept Social Security payments is entirely up to him. If a person objects to the system on moral or fiscal grounds, there is no biblical mandate that he take the money. That being said, one would hope such a Christian would take a lesson from passages such as Matthew 25:14–28 and at least pass what’s offered along to some worthy cause. Whether a person takes the funds or not is simply a question of his interaction with the Holy Spirit.
Paying Social Security taxes, on the other hand, isn’t quite as flexible, though it’s certainly less popular. One of Christ’s most famous statements was in regards to taxes, in Matthew 22:15–22\. The Pharisees and Herodians tried to trip up Jesus in front of a crowd by asking whether or not it was “lawful” to pay tribute money to Caesar (ESV). With this question, they pitted Jewish hatred for Roman taxation against Roman hostility against lawbreakers. Rather than give the answer many of us wish He had—“no, don’t pay taxes to Caesar”—Jesus explicitly said the taxes ought to be paid.
Other New Testament passages command believers to submit to [governmental authority](Bible-government.html), even if there are limits to our obedience (Romans 13:1–7; Acts 5:28–29\). In fact, in Romans, Paul explicitly says we are to pay taxes to whom we owe taxes. And, like it or not, the laws of the United States require the payment of Social Security taxes, at least for the majority of US workers.
Our responsibility to pay the Social Security tax doesn’t necessarily mean such taxes are fair or responsible or effective. Nor does it mean taxation is unfair or immoral. What it means is that, biblically speaking, Christians have an obligation to pay required Social Security taxes so long as we’re subject to the government of the United States. One’s personal opinion on whether or not the current tax system is the right way to care for the elderly is irrelevant.
Americans who object to those taxes have relatively powerful options, compared to others in the world. [Voting](Christians-vote.html) and contact with elected officials are means to change tax laws. Since paying taxes isn’t immoral in and of itself, and we’re given clear direction to do so in the Bible, Christians ought to pay them until such time as they are no longer required.
|
What is a cowboy church?
|
Answer
“Cowboy Church” is simply an approach to church with an emphasis on cowboy culture. Cowboy churches desire to reach those in the cowboy community (often those involved in the pro rodeo circuit) and hold worship services with a decidedly Western flavor. There have been cowboy churches for the past 50 years or so, but they became more popular and plentiful in the 1970s. Cowboy church is more of a trend or approach to ministry than an organized movement. Cowboy churches minister to a unique segment of society, much like biker churches and trucker churches do. A cowboy church may belong to a fellowship of similar churches: the American Federation of Cowboy Churches (AFCC) is one affiliation that has a thoroughly orthodox statement of faith.
Cowboy churches might collect the offering in a hat or cowboy boot and baptize converts in a horse trough. And, of course, the music has a country western style. In a similar vein, other churches in the US also focus on a particular people group—Korean churches, Spanish\-speaking churches, [Messianic Jewish](Messianic-Judaism.html) churches, Filipino churches, etc.
There is nothing wrong with believers within a culture or subculture worshiping together in a culturally specific manner. Of course, the [gospel](what-is-the-gospel.html) transcends culture (Colossians 3:11\), and the gospel message is what is most important. A cowboy church that preaches and teaches the gospel would be a good place for believers to gather and worship. A cowboy church—or any church—that denies the gospel or ignores the Bible or that focuses on being a quasi\-religious social organization should be avoided. As with any local church, a cowboy church should be checked out for doctrinal soundness and fidelity to Christ.
Some might argue against the idea of cowboy church on the basis that there are to be no divisions in the Body of Christ (1 Corinthians 1:13; Galatians 3:26–29\). It is true that in Christ we are all one body, but there is no problem with a church seeking to minister to a particular subculture. The important thing is that the church holds to the essential truths of the Christian faith and does not exclude anyone who doesn’t fit into their particular subculture.
|
What is listening prayer?
|
Answer
The Bible speaks often of prayer, but it does not mention “listening prayer” as a type of prayer to practice. The idea of “listening prayer” is to spend some time *talking* to the Lord and the rest of the time *listening* to His response. Or, sometimes, the listening comes first and the prayer second. Listening prayer is based on the concept of prayer as two\-way communication—we talk, and God talks.
Proponents of listening prayer point to verses such as Psalm 46:10 (“Be still, and know that I am God”) and John 10:27 (“My sheep listen to my voice”) to assert that the Bible teaches listening prayer. Some even use Jesus’ words in John 7:16 (“My teaching is not my own. It comes from the one who sent me”) to claim that Jesus Himself engaged in listening prayer, and that’s the reason He knew what to teach.
We should point out that in none of the passages mentioned above is “listening prayer” mentioned. In fact, no kind of prayer is mentioned at all. Trying to use these verses to teach the modern concept of listening prayer goes beyond what the text of Scripture says.
But going beyond what Scripture says is what listening prayer is really all about. The practitioner of listening prayer seeks “new revelation” from God on a daily basis and about the most mundane things: don’t eat the sushi today, follow the man with the red scarf, withdraw your money from the bank, etc. Listening prayer involves receiving “inspiration” from the Holy Spirit and new, specific messages from God.
It’s hard to overemphasize the dangers inherent in believing that one is receiving “inspired” messages from the Spirit. Scripture is inspired and therefore authoritative (2 Timothy 3:16\). But the “nudges,” “feelings,” intuitions, and random thoughts a person has while meditating cannot be put on the same level as Scripture. To assume that the voice a person hears in his mind is the voice of God is to leave the door wide open for self\-delusion and even demonic deception.
To practice listening prayer, people are told to “clear their minds” (something the Bible never tells us to do) and spend concentrated time listening for “God’s voice.” The divine message may come through images in their minds, through words, through ideas, through physical sensations, or through “gut feelings.” The goal of listening prayer is to “think God’s thoughts with Him,” “discover God’s specific truth,” and “receive new revelation.” This type of subjectivity bypasses the objective, written Word of God as our [sole rule](sole-authority-faith-practice.html) for faith and practice. The passive receptivity of listening prayer has more to do with New Age and occult practice than with biblical prayer.
[Biblical prayer](effective-prayer.html), as opposed to listening prayer, follows the biblical instructions concerning prayer. We are to pray in faith (James 1:6\), in direct address to God (Matthew 6:9\), in Jesus’ name (John 14:13\), offered with reverence and humility (Luke 18:13\), with perseverance (Luke 18:1\), and in submission to God’s will (Matthew 6:10\). The Bible refers to prayer as beseeching the Lord (Psalm 118:25\); pouring out one’s soul to the Lord (1 Samuel 1:15\); crying out to heaven (2 Chronicles 32:20\); and kneeling before the Father (Ephesians 3:14\). The Bible never instructs us to empty our minds and listen for special words of revelation from God. God expects us to open our Bibles and study what He has said there. The Bible is the Word of God and is [sufficient](sufficiency-of-Scripture.html) for our needs (see Revelation 22:18\).
|
What is a levirate marriage?
|
Answer
A levirate marriage is literally a “marriage with a brother\-in\-law.” The word *levirate*, which has nothing to do with the tribe of Levi, comes from the Latin word *levir*, “a husband’s brother.” In ancient times, if a man died without a child, it was common for the man’s unmarried brother to marry the widow in order to provide an heir for the deceased. A widow would marry a brother\-in\-law, and the first son produced in that union was considered the legal descendant of her dead husband.
We see a couple of examples in the Bible of levirate marriage. The first is the story of Tamar and Onan in Genesis 38\. Tamar had been married to Er, a son of Judah. Er died, leaving Tamar childless (Genesis 38:6–7\). Judah’s solution was to follow the standard procedure of levirate marriage: he told Er’s brother Onan, “Sleep with your brother’s wife and fulfill your duty to her as a brother\-in\-law to raise up offspring for your brother” (verse 8\). Onan was more than willing to sleep with Tamar, but, unfortunately, he had no desire to have a child with her: “Onan knew that the child would not be his; so whenever he slept with his brother’s wife, he spilled his semen on the ground to keep from providing offspring for his brother” (verse 9\). In other words, Onan was taking selfish advantage of levirate marriage. He wanted sex with his sister\-in\-law, but he purposefully avoided impregnating her. God called Onan’s actions “wicked” and killed him (verse 10\).
Levirate marriage became part of the Law in Deuteronomy 25:5–6\. There, the Israelites are commanded to care for women whose husbands died before they had children. An unmarried brother of the deceased man bore a responsibility to marry his sister\-in\-law: God called it “the duty of a brother\-in\-law” (Deuteronomy 25:5\). God’s purpose for levirate marriage is stated: “The first son she bears shall carry on the name of the dead brother so that his name will not be blotted out from Israel” (verse 6\). In ancient Israel the passing on of the family name and the inheritance within a tribe were vitally important (see Numbers 36:7 and 1 Kings 21:3\).
Another example of levirate marriage in the Bible is the story of [Ruth and Boaz](Ruth-and-Boaz.html). Ruth’s first husband died without leaving a child (Ruth 1:1–5\). Later, Ruth met a rich landowner named Boaz in Bethlehem, and he happened to be a relative of Ruth’s late husband (Ruth 2:20\). Ruth asked Boaz to be her “[kinsman\-redeemer](kinsman-redeemer.html)”; that is, to marry her and preserve the land her husband had owned (Ruth 3:9\). Boaz agreed but informed Ruth that there was one other relative of nearer kin; the obligation to marry Ruth and redeem her land fell on him first (verse 12\). As it turned out, the nearer relative officially transferred his right of redemption to Boaz, clearing the way for Boaz to marry Ruth and “maintain the name of the dead with his property” (Ruth 4:5\).
In Matthew 22, Jesus is confronted by the Sadducees with a convoluted question based on the Law’s requirement of levirate marriage: “Moses told us that if a man dies without having children, his brother must marry the widow and raise up offspring for him. Now there were seven brothers among us. The first one married and died, and since he had no children, he left his wife to his brother. The same thing happened to the second and third brother, right on down to the seventh. Finally, the woman died. Now then, at the resurrection, whose wife will she be of the seven, since all of them were married to her?” (Matthew 22:24–28\). Jesus cuts through the hypothetical and teaches the reality of the resurrection (verses 29–32\).
Levirate marriage has fallen out of favor in modern Judaism and is more or less an extinct practice today. But its existence among the ancient Israelites, even before the Law of Moses, shows the importance placed on continuing the family line and preserving one’s divinely appointed inheritance.
|
Why do men have nipples?
|
Answer
The presence of nipples on males seems strange, given that males do not produce milk. Are these [vestigial organs](vestigial-organs.html)? Remnants of evolution? Examples of poor design? Actually, there are a couple of good reasons men have nipples. One is related to sexual stimulation, and the other is simple efficiency.
This may come as a surprise to some, but both male and female nipples contain a large supply of nervous tissue—both male and female nipples are very sensitive to touch. The female breast does more than produce milk—it is an important part of a woman’s experience of sexual pleasure. But the male nipple has just as many nerve endings as the female nipple and is as equally sensitive to manual stimulation. So, one of the reasons that men have nipples is for sexual pleasure. God designed the male body to respond pleasurably to touch in certain areas, and the nipple is one of those areas.
The other reason that men have nipples is based on efficiency of design. The same principle that explains unused features in many modern automobiles explains the similar design of male and female breasts. When purchasing a car, you will notice there are often several different options available for the same model. A higher price tag provides additional features. Those features typically add switches, buttons, or dials to the dashboard. More basic models without the advanced features don’t need the extra switches and buttons, so it would be understandable if basic models were built without the extra (unused) holes in the dashboard.
However, manufacturing different dashboards for the same model of car would be very inefficient. Making two, three, or fifty different dashboards in order to accommodate all the possible combinations of features would require two, three, or fifty different streams of production. Instead of multiplying the size and expense of dashboard production, it’s more efficient to simply design *one* dashboard that can accommodate *all* possible features. For those models with fewer options, unused spaces on the dash can be plugged with blank caps.
Biologically speaking, this is why men have nipples even though men don’t naturally produce milk. God designed both sexes with a feature only one needs for milk production. The biological equivalent to patterns and factories is our genetic code, contained in our DNA. Instead of adding further complexity—and the increased risk of damage or error—it is more efficient to leave nipples as a common attribute of males and females, even though they are not needed for lactation in men.
Observations of human embryos support this idea. Male and female fetuses have identical form (but different chromosomes) for the first few weeks after conception. Early in gestation, the fetus begins to produce either male or female hormones, which guide its growth from that point forward. Nipples are formed prior to this process, very much like the dashboard of a car is manufactured before it’s installed and before it requires specific trim.
Men have nipples for two reasons: a single chest design makes the genetic code simpler, more efficient, and less prone to error; and nipples are an aid to sexual pleasure. God’s design of the human body is wise beyond imagination (Psalm 139:14\).
|
What does the Bible say about world missions?
|
Answer
The Bible does not use the phrase “world missions,” but God is certainly missions\-minded (Luke 19:10\), and His love extends to all the world (John 3:16\). The salvation of all nations is a concern for every Christian, based on at least three factors presented in Scripture:
First, world missions is important because God is the Creator of all people; second, God cares about all people equally; and, third, God desires all people to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth about Jesus Christ (1 Timothy 2:4\). Because of God’s attitude toward the people of the whole world, we know that world missions—the evangelization of all the people of the world—is a worthy goal. God sent His Son into the world to fulfill this prophecy: “The people walking in darkness have seen a great light; on those living in the land of deep darkness a light has dawned” (Isaiah 9:2\).
World missions has its foundation in Jesus’ command to His disciples to go into all the world and “make disciples of all nations” (Matthew 28:19\). This is exactly what the disciples endeavored to do. In Syrian Antioch, Paul and Barnabas were “set apart” by the Holy Spirit and called for a special work (Acts 13:2\). That work was to evangelize Cyprus and Asia Minor.
Eventually, Paul’s [missionary work](missionary-journeys-Paul.html) took him to Europe. Always, Paul strived to be a pioneer in world missions: “It has always been my ambition to preach the gospel where Christ was not known, so that I would not be building on someone else’s foundation” (Romans 15:20\). Paul preached the gospel “from Jerusalem all the way around to Illyricum” (verse 19\); he had plans to go to Spain (verse 24\), and he eventually made it to Rome. The book of Acts showcases the missionary fervor of the early church and emphasizes the necessity of world missions.
God does not show partiality to one race or nation above another (Acts 10:34–35\). The Bible says that, without Christ, we are all in the same spiritual condition: all have fallen short of God’s glory and are under Adam’s curse. Everyone—every race, every person, every nationality—needs to hear the gospel. Everyone needs the righteousness of God that comes through faith in Jesus Christ. “How . . . can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? And how can anyone preach unless they are sent?” (Romans 10:14–15\). The offer of grace is extended to all; God cares about all people equally.
We should pursue world missions because God desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth (1 Timothy 2:4\). The offer of salvation is made to “whosoever will” (Revelation 22:17, KJV). “Is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles too? Yes, of Gentiles too” (Romans 3:29\). Revelation describes the new, heavenly city of Jerusalem as a place where all nations will walk in the light of the Lamb and where the glory of all nations will dwell (Revelation 21:22–27\). God cares about all nations, and representatives of all nations will be present in heaven.
The angel gave the Bethlehem shepherds “good news that will cause great joy for all the people” (Luke 2:10\). When we support world missions, when we share the good news of the redemption that is in Jesus Christ, we glorify God, who says, “How beautiful on the mountains are the feet of those who bring good news, who proclaim peace, who bring good tidings, who proclaim salvation” (Isaiah 52:7\).
|
Is it wrong to be nostalgic / have nostalgia?
|
Answer
Nostalgia is an acute sentimental longing for the past, either one’s own past or a past time in history. Usually, the feeling of nostalgia is accompanied by (or brought on by) the belief that the world was better in a bygone era or that a previous time in one’s life was superior to one’s current situation. A yearning for “the good old days” is a nostalgic feeling, and it’s a normal feeling to have sometimes. In the [book of Ecclesiastes](Book-of-Ecclesiastes.html), Solomon addresses the comparing of past with present: “Say not, ‘Why were the former days better than these?’ For it is not from wisdom that you ask this” (Ecclesiastes 7:10\). Is Solomon saying that nostalgia is unwise or that being nostalgic is wrong? If so, why?
What [Solomon](life-Solomon.html) seems to be addressing in Ecclesiastes 7:10 is not the feeling of nostalgia per se but the foolish attitude it can sometimes foster. Sometimes we all feel that the past was better in some way than the present. Especially during times of trial, it’s easy for us to remember ourselves as happier or more fulfilled than we are currently. But we tend to have selective memories. Every day has its trouble (Matthew 6:34\). Things weren’t quite as rosy as we paint them to be in retrospect.
When a person allows a feeling of nostalgia to consume him, it can lead to all kinds of unhelpful and unfruitful behavior. Living in the past is a form of losing touch with reality. We are called to “make the best use of the time, because the days are evil” (Ephesians 5:16\) and to be waiting for the good future God has promised, diligently doing good and seeking peace (2 Peter 3:11–14; Romans 2:7\). To dwell on the past or obsess over former days is to yearn for something we can never attain, and that can only end in heartbreak. Better than dwelling in a nostalgic, half\-true picture of the past is focusing on God’s work in the present and His rock\-solid [promises](promises-of-God.html) for the future. We have a home in heaven, where, as David puts it, there is “fullness of joy” and “pleasures forevermore” in the presence of God (Psalm 16:5–6, 11\).
Nostalgia, the longing emotion, is not sinful—no emotion on its own is sinful. But nostalgia can tempt us to dwell in the past and make us ineffective in the present. Soldiers for Christ do not get “entangled in civilian pursuits,” and this is exactly what happens when we get too wrapped up in asking “why can’t things just be as they used to be?” (see 2 Timothy 2:4\). Paul did not waste time reliving “the good old days”; rather, he said, “One thing I do: Forgetting what is behind and straining toward what is ahead, I press on toward the goal” (Philippians 3:13–14\). We, too, should engage the present and look forward to the future. We have “a living hope” and “an inheritance that can never perish, spoil or fade . . . kept in heaven for you” (1 Peter 1:3–4\).
|
What is a spiritual harvest and how can I achieve one?
|
Answer
Throughout the Bible, the harvest carries spiritual significance. It is used in parables (Luke 8:4–8\) and as a metaphor for spiritual growth and health (2 Corinthians 9:10; James 3:18\). The harvest has always been a beautiful and important part of life on earth, the time when the year’s work bears fruit and the people are fed. It is symbolic of bounty, health and abundance. Israel celebrated the time of the harvest with a feast, appropriately called the Feast of Harvest (Exodus 23:16\).
Jesus spoke of a spiritual harvest waiting to be reaped. As Jesus traveled, “he saw the crowds, \[and] he had compassion for them, because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd. Then he said to his disciples, ‘The harvest is plentiful, but the laborers are few; therefore pray earnestly to the Lord of the harvest to send out laborers into his harvest’” (Matthew 9:36–38\). Here, Jesus referred to the many souls needing to be brought to repentance and faith as a harvest waiting to be realized.
Jesus used the same metaphor of a spiritual harvest in Samaria. After talking to the [woman at the well](woman-at-the-well.html), Jesus told His disciples, “Don’t you have a saying, ‘It’s still four months until harvest’? I tell you, open your eyes and look at the fields! They are ripe for harvest” (John 4:35\). In the days following this statement, many of the Samaritans became believers in Christ (verse 41\). Jesus saw the spiritual harvest of souls awaiting in that village.
A spiritual harvest is the result of God’s work in the heart of man. It is clear from the [parable of the seed and the sower](parable-sower.html) that some people’s hearts are good soil; when the Word of God is sown there, the person accepts it and continues to mature (Luke 8:9–15\). There is nothing we can do to change the soil—that is God’s job (Ezekiel 36:26\). However, we can be faithful to sow the seed, help the plants to grow, or reap the harvest. The process of spiritual growth and maturity, from the heart’s regeneration to the recognition of faith, is often a long journey. In fact, the Bible indicates that the sower, the tender, and the reaper are likely to be different people at different times (John 4:35–38; 1 Corinthians 3:6–9\).
Just like the physical growth of a field, the spiritual growth of people is a natural, organic process, overseen by God Himself. If we don’t see anyone getting saved, it can be discouraging, but we need to remember that sowing is just as important as reaping. Some of us are sowers and may never see the result of our labor. That is why our focus should be on pleasing the One who sent us into the field rather than on controlling the rate of growth or the amount we reap.
God’s laborers in the spiritual harvest of souls are promised great reward for their faith and perseverance (James 1:12; 1 Peter 5:4; 2 Timothy 4:8; Hebrews 11\). This applies to all aspects of our spiritual lives, including witnessing and seeing people saved and growing in the Lord, which is the spiritual harvest we all long to see. Sometimes we don’t see it. Nonetheless, believers are exhorted with these words: “Let us not grow weary of doing good, for in due season we will reap, if we do not give up” (Galatians 6:9\) and “A harvest of righteousness is sown in peace by those who make peace” (James 3:18\) and “Those who go out weeping, carrying seed to sow, will return with songs of joy, carrying sheaves with them” (Psalm 126:6\).
Jesus told us to pray to the Lord of the harvest for more laborers (Matthew 9:38\). We should pray about all aspects of the spiritual harvest process, including the preparation of the soil. We can ask God to change people’s hearts. “The Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth” (2 Timothy 2:24–25\). God will use us in His fields, each according to our gifts and the need of the moment, as we trust Him.
|
Is there anything wrong with cartoon portrayals of biblical accounts?
|
Answer
There is nothing in the Bible stating that drawings or cartoons of Christian stories or Bible stories are wrong. Jesus loved [little children](Jesus-and-children.html), and it is children who most benefit from cartoon portrayals of Bible characters. It is hard to imagine, given what we know of Jesus, that a drawing or cartoon of Daniel in the lions’ den, Paul’s shipwreck, or Jesus feeding the five thousand would be offensive to the Lord—especially when the purpose of such cartoons is to help educate children about the Bible.
Some people object to cartoon portrayals of Bible stories based on the Bible’s prohibition against making [graven images](graven-image.html) (Leviticus 26:1\). However, this command relates to objects of worship, not artwork. The Bible does not say that respectful depictions of God or biblical characters in art are wrong. God actually commanded that the veil in the tabernacle be “woven with an artistic design of cherubim” (Exodus 26:31\), so drawings of angels are not sinful. For centuries, people have been telling one another stories that illustrate biblical and moral truths; Jesus told parables. In oral storytelling the hearer gets a mental picture of the characters described. Cartoons or visual portrayals of Bible stories are just a modern version of this time\-honored tradition.
Others caution that cartoon portrayals of Bible characters can be confusing to children who may associate cartoons with fictional stories. If a child grows up learning that cartoons and comic books are "not real," then he or she may indeed have trouble discerning the truth that a Bible story *is* real when depicted in a cartoon or comic book format. This concern is valid, and Bible teachers should make sure their young students know the Bible story is true and that the cartoons are simply illustrations.
As with most things, the heart is God’s main concern (Psalm 51:17; 1 Samuel 16:7\). Whatever we do that does not come from faith, the Bible says, is sin (Romans 14:23\). So, if watching a cartoon about Christian history or Bible stories bothers a person’s conscience, for whatever reason, to that person it is sin. But if someone else is okay with visual depictions of Bible stories and has no objections from conscience, for that person it is not sin.
In reaching people with the gospel and teaching children the stories of the Bible, we use a variety of tools. One of those tools might be cartoon illustrations of Bible characters and events.
|
If God hates abortion, why does He allow miscarriages?
|
Answer
[Miscarriages](miscarriage-Bible.html) are sometimes allowed by God for His own purposes. There is an important distinction to be made between a naturally occurring miscarriage and the deliberate ending of a human life in [abortion](abortion-Bible.html). Although pregnancy loss is known in the medical world as a “spontaneous abortion,” it has nothing to do with induced abortion or abortion\-on\-demand. One is unplanned (from the human perspective); the other is purposeful. One is based on God’s authority over life and death; the other is a human usurpation of divine authority.
A common form of miscarriage is an ectopic pregnancy. An ectopic pregnancy occurs when a fertilized egg implants anywhere other than the uterus. Such pregnancies cannot proceed normally. Although the egg is fertilized and the embryo has grown to a certain degree, it can never fully develop, except in rare circumstances. The fertilized egg has often implanted in a Fallopian tube, in an ovary, or in the cervix. None of those locations are designed to support a growing life, and the pregnancy will end in miscarriage or in some cases through surgical intervention to protect the health of the mother.
Removal of an ectopic pregnancy, even through medical intervention, is not the same thing as abortion. An induced abortion ends the life of a growing baby who would otherwise develop to a stage where he or she could survive outside the womb. If left alone, a pre\-born child in the womb continues to grow and develop. Abortion brings that life to a premature end. In an ectopic pregnancy, by contrast, the fertilized egg will likely never develop to a stage where the baby can survive outside the mother. The embryo usually dies on its own. The remains are either expelled naturally or removed by a doctor. In some cases, the growth of an ectopic pregnancy causes severe bleeding, pain, or life\-threatening conditions that require surgical removal of the embryo.
In this broken, sin\-dominated world, God has allowed many things He does not like. Miscarriages, ectopic pregnancies, and birth defects are among them. Wars, natural disasters, illness, death, crime, and all other manifestations of sin are allowed to remain for a time. They are all part of sin’s curse on this fallen world. While God does control everything, He still allows what He hates to accomplish what He desires (see Isaiah 46:9–11\).
Jesus gave us a glimpse into the mind of God when He responded to a question about a man born blind. Asked whose sin caused the man to be born sightless, Jesus answered, “It was not that this man sinned, or his parents, but that the works of God might be displayed in him” (John 9:3\). In that instance, the “works of God” resulted in a miraculous healing whereby many believed in Christ. God allows other difficult situations as well in order to bring about a greater good (Proverbs 19:21\). Since God is the creator of all life, He alone can take that developing life without being a murderer. When human beings interrupt God’s creative work through abortion, we usurp a power that belongs only to the Creator (Psalm 139:13–16\).
Only God can bring eternal good from situations that are not good (Romans 8:28\). We don’t have the power to do that. We did not start that tiny heart beating, create the blood that is flowing through the fetus’s veins, or preordain the days of a child’s life as God has done. Therefore, when human beings induce an abortion, we are destroying God’s creative work without His permission. However, when God chooses, through miscarriage, to take a child’s life early, He has the right to do so. It is His child, His work, His masterpiece (Ephesians 2:10; Mark 10:14\).
|
What exactly is an unbeliever?
|
Answer
A “believer” is a child of God, [born again](born-again.html) by faith in Jesus Christ (see Acts 2:44\); and an “unbeliever” is someone who does not believe in Jesus. In the New Testament, the Greek word *apistou* is translated “unbeliever.” Its adjective form literally means “not faithful,” and it describes someone lacking in Christian faith.
There is a clear distinction throughout Scripture between those who follow Christ and those who do not follow Him. The word *unbeliever* was understood to represent everything opposed to Christian faith and godliness. In 2 Corinthians 6:14–15, Paul writes, “Do not be bound together with unbelievers; for what partnership have righteousness and lawlessness, or what fellowship has light with darkness? Or what harmony has Christ with Belial, or what has a believer in common with an unbeliever?” The understanding was that those who had come to faith in Christ were in the process of being transformed into the image of Jesus (Romans 8:29\). The further along they were in this process, the fewer similarities they had with unbelievers.
In regards to salvation, the word *believe* always implies far more than mental agreement with truth (John 3:16; 14:1; 1 John 3:23; Acts 8:37\). Satan and the demons know more than any of us the facts about Jesus, the meaning of His death and resurrection, and the truth of Scripture (James 2:19\). To believe for salvation (Romans 10:10\) requires more than that. A believer is one who has transferred ownership of his life and future to the lordship of Jesus. Jesus said, “You are my friends if you do what I command you” (John 15:14\). So a believer, in the biblical sense, is one who has responded to God’s calling and chosen Jesus as the Lord of his or her life. A believer looks to Jesus alone for salvation from sin and hell (John 14:6; Matthew 10:28; Romans 10:13\). By the same token, an unbeliever is someone who has not allowed Jesus to be the Lord of his or her life. Religious\-sounding words may have been spoken, but if the heart has not changed, it is not saving faith (Matthew 7:21–23\). The person claiming salvation while lacking evidence of the transforming power of the Holy Spirit is still functionally an unbeliever.
When Scripture compares believers with unbelievers, it highlights the lifestyle differences. Believers are to be known by their love (John 13:35\), their holiness (1 Peter 1:15\), and their desire to be like Christ (Ephesians 4:15\). According to the whole of Scripture, it is not possible to be a true believer and continue the ungodly lifestyles that warranted God’s wrath in the first place (Ephesians 5:5–7\). This is due to the fact that salvation results in a new nature (2 Corinthians 5:17\). Just as a fish cannot remain on land for long due to its nature, so born\-again hearts cannot remain in sin for long due to their [new nature](new-creation.html).
First John 3:6 spells it out quite clearly: “No one who lives in him keeps on sinning. No one who continues to sin has either seen him or known him.” Then verses 8–10 clarify it even further: “The one who does what is sinful is of the devil, because the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil’s work. No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God’s seed remains in them; they cannot go on sinning, because they have been born of God. This is how we know who the children of God are and who the children of the devil are: Anyone who does not do what is right is not God’s child, nor is anyone who does not love their brother and sister.”
“Without faith it is impossible to please God” (Hebrews 11:6\); therefore, unbelievers cannot please God. They are still dead in their transgressions and sins (Ephesians 2:1\). Unbelievers still bear the full weight of all their sin, and the “wrath of God remains on them” (John 3:36\). They must be reconciled to God through Christ (Romans 5:10\). Faith makes all the difference. Only through faith and surrender to the lordship of Jesus Christ can unbelievers become believers.
|
What are Chreasters?
|
Answer
*Chreasters* is a slang term used in some Christian circles to refer to people who only attend church twice a year, at Christmas and Easter. The word *Chreaster* is a portmanteau word (or a blend) that combines the words *Christmas* and *Easter*.
Every church has its Chreasters, whether or not they’re called “Chreasters.” Attendance usually swells at the annual Christmas service and Easter Sunday; pastors plan on those two services as being the best attended of the year.
Of course, there’s nothing wrong with attending church at Christmastime and Easter, and a church should welcome all its visitors, no matter how often they attend (or don’t attend). The problem comes in some of the misconceptions that a Chreaster may harbor. For example, the Chreaster may be a [nominal Christian](nominalism.html) with a false sense of security about his salvation, based on his showing up at church twice a year. If the Chreaster thinks of Christianity as primarily an expression of cultural values rather than as a life\-changing, dynamic relationship with Christ, he may be trying to “maintain” his Christianity though periodic visits to church.
Or, the Chreaster may think he’s a good enough person without church (a proud thought that contradicts Romans 3:10\); or he may only go twice a year to please his wife (pleasing one’s wife is not a bad thing, but there are better motivations for church attendance). There’s also the underlying assumption that Christmas and Easter are “holier” days than the rest of the calendar, even though the Bible teaches that all days are equally holy (Romans 14:5\). If the Chreaster claims to be a believer, he is ignoring the biblical command not to forsake the gathering of believers to worship God (Hebrews 10:25\). If the Chreaster is an unbeliever, then he needs to be saved (Acts 17:30\).
We are not saved by church attendance. However, [church attendance](church-attendance.html) is important for the believer in Christ. A relationship with the Father naturally leads to the desire to fellowship with the Father’s children on a regular basis (see 1 John 5:1\). The need for fellowship, acceptance of accountability, and worship of the Lord, so foundational to regular church attendance, is lost on the Chreaster.
|
Why does it matter that Jesus rose from the dead?
|
Answer
The [resurrection of Jesus Christ](resurrection-Christ-important.html) is one of the foundations upon which Christianity is built (1 Corinthians 15:3–4\). The virgin birth (Isaiah 7:14; Matthew 1:18, 25; Luke 1:27\), the deity of Christ (1 John 4:15, 5:5; John 10:30\), Jesus’ atonement for sin (Romans 5:10–11; 2 Corinthians 5:21\), and His crucifixion are non\-negotiable truths, without which Christianity could not exist. Jesus’ resurrection from the dead was the crowning achievement that forever separates Him from any other religious leader who has ever been or will ever live. No other religious figure in history has ever prophesied His own death and resurrection—and then accomplished it.
The fact that Jesus rose from the dead matters because it fulfilled prophecy. Jesus prophesied His resurrection (Mark 8:31\), and so did the Old Testament (Psalm 16:10–11; Isaiah 53:12\). Roman rule brought crucifixion as a particularly heinous form of capital punishment. Many people were crucified for their crimes and for insulting Caesar. So the facts of Jesus’ crucifixion and burial are not necessarily outstanding, as many suffered the same fate. However, the bodies of those other people are still in their graves. Jesus’ tomb is empty (Luke 24:24\). If Jesus never rose from the dead, there would be no compelling reason to believe that He is who He said He is. But the fact is that He did rise again, confirming His claim to be God (Matthew 27:63; 28:6\).
The fact that Jesus rose from the dead also matters because our [justification](justification.html) hinges on it. “He was delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our justification” (Romans 4:25\). A dead Savior cannot save, but we have a living Savior who justifies us and makes intercession for us (see Hebrews 7:25\).
The fact that Jesus rose from the dead is fundamental to our faith. First Corinthians 15 is a detailed explanation of the importance of Jesus’ resurrection. Verse 14 states, “And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith.” In fact, “if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins” (verse 17\), and believers who have died are “lost” (verse 18\).
Jesus rose from the dead, and Paul presents that event as the only thing that gives us hope in this life. Christ was the first to permanently rise from the dead (1 Corinthians 15:20\), clearing the way for a future resurrection for all who believe (verses 22–23\). Jesus’ claim that He has the power to grant eternal life is to be trusted because He Himself [conquered death](Jesus-Christ-conquered-death.html) (Romans 8:11; John 3:16–18; 10:28\).
|
What is Passover?
|
Answer
Passover (*Pesach* in Hebrew) is a Jewish festival celebrating the exodus from Egypt and the Israelites’ freedom from slavery to the Egyptians. The Feast of Passover, along with the Feast of Unleavened Bread, was the first of the festivals to be commanded by God for Israel to observe (see Exodus 12\). Commemorations today involve a special meal called the Seder, featuring unleavened bread and other food items symbolic of various aspects of the exodus.
Passover is one of the most widely celebrated Jewish holidays. Along with *Shavuot* (the [Feast of Weeks](Feast-of-Weeks.html) or Pentecost) and *Sukkot* (the [Feast of Tabernacles](Feast-of-Tabernacles.html)), Passover is one of the three “pilgrimage” festivals in Scripture, during which the Jews were commanded to travel to Jerusalem and observe the feasts together. Passover takes place in the spring, during the Hebrew month of Nisan. In Western countries, Passover is celebrated in early\- to mid\-April and is always close to Easter.
The [book of Exodus](Book-of-Exodus.html) tells of the origin of Passover. God promised to redeem His people from the bondage of Pharaoh (Exodus 6:6\). God sent Moses to the Egyptian king with the command that Pharaoh “let my people go” (Exodus 8:1\). When Pharaoh refused, God brought [ten plagues](ten-plagues-Egypt.html) on the land of Egypt. The tenth and worst of the plagues was the death of all the firstborn in Egypt.
The night of the first Passover was the night of the tenth plague. On that fateful night, God told the Israelites to sacrifice a spotless lamb and mark their doorposts and lintels with its blood (Exodus 12:21–22\). Then, when the Lord passed through the nation, He would “pass over” the households that showed the blood (verse 23\). In a very real way, the blood of the lamb saved the Israelites from death, as it kept the destroyer from entering their homes. The Israelites were saved from the plague, and their firstborn children stayed alive. From then on, every firstborn son of the Israelites belonged to the Lord and had to be redeemed with a sacrifice (Exodus 13:1–2, 12; cf. Luke 2:22–24\).
The children of Israel in Egypt followed God’s command and kept the first Passover. However, none of the Egyptians did so. All through Egypt, behind the unmarked, bloodless doorways of the Egyptians, the firstborn children died at midnight (Exodus 12:21–29\). “There was loud wailing in Egypt, for there was not a house without someone dead” (verse 30\). This dire judgment finally changed the Egyptian king’s heart, and he released the Israelite slaves (verses 31–32\).
Along with the instruction to apply the Passover lamb’s blood to their doorposts and lintels, God instituted a commemorative meal: fire\-roasted lamb, bitter herbs, and unleavened bread (Exodus 12:8\). The Lord told the Israelites to “observe this rite as a statute for you and for your sons forever” (Exodus 12:24, ESV), even when in a foreign land.
To this day, Jews all over the world celebrate the Passover in obedience to this command. Passover and the story of the exodus have great significance for Christians also, as Jesus Christ fulfilled the Law, including the symbolism of the Passover (Matthew 5:17\). Jesus is our Passover (1 Corinthians 5:7; Revelation 5:12\). He was killed at Passover time, and the Last Supper was a Passover meal (Luke 22:7–8\). By (spiritually) applying His blood to our lives by faith, we trust Christ to save us from death. The Israelites who, in faith, applied the blood of the Paschal lamb to their homes become a model for us. It was not the Israelites’ ancestry or good standing or amiable nature that saved them; it was only the blood of the lamb that made them exempt from death (see John 1:29 and Revelation 5:9–10\).
|
Who is the beast of Revelation?
|
Answer
During the future [tribulation period](tribulation.html), the world will be ruled by a godless man presiding over an evil governmental system. The Bible associates this end\-times ruler with a terrible beast in Revelation and in Daniel.
In Revelation 13 John sees a nightmarish vision of a dragon and two beasts. The first beast comes out of the sea and receives power from the dragon, or Satan. This beast is a true monstrosity: “It had ten horns and seven heads, with ten crowns on its horns, and on each head a blasphemous name. The beast I saw resembled a leopard, but had feet like those of a bear and a mouth like that of a lion” (Revelation 13:1–2\). Daniel’s vision of the beast is similar in many ways to John’s (Daniel 7:7–8, 19–27\). Studying both [Daniel](Book-of-Daniel.html) and [Revelation](Book-of-Revelation.html) in tandem is profitable.
In Revelation, the term *beast* refers to two related entities. Sometimes “the beast” refers to the end\-times’ empire. The seven heads and ten horns indicate that the beast will be a coalition of nations that rises to power to subdue the earth under Satan’s control. Later references to “the beast” in Revelation picture an individual—the man who is the political leader and head of the beastly empire.
The beast will receive a deadly wound and be healed of it (Revelation 13:3\). He will exert authority over the whole world and demand worship (verses 7–8\). He will wage war against God’s people, and he will prevail against them for a time (Revelation 13:7; Daniel 7:21\). However, the beast’s time is short: according to Revelation 13:5 and Daniel 7:25, he will only be permitted absolute authority for forty\-two months (three\-and\-a\-half years).
We believe that the beast in Revelation is the [Antichrist](what-is-the-antichrist.html), the one who will “oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God” (2 Thessalonians 2:4\). He is also called “the man of lawlessness” and “the man doomed to destruction” (2 Thessalonians 2:3\). In Daniel’s vision, the Antichrist is the “little horn” that rises from the head of the terrifying beast (Daniel 7:8\).
When the Lord returns in judgment, He will defeat the beast and destroy his empire (Revelation 19:19–20; cf. Daniel 7:11\). The beast will be cast alive into the lake of fire. The [identity](antichrist.html) of the individual who will become the beast of Revelation is not yet known. According to 2 Thessalonians 2:7, this man will be revealed only when God removes the restraining influence of the Holy Spirit from the earth.
It is interesting to compare the differing biblical visions of the kingdoms of the world. In Daniel 2, King Nebuchadnezzar dreams of the kingdoms of the world as “a large statue—an enormous, dazzling statue, awesome in appearance” (Daniel 2:31\). The prophet Daniel later sees a vision of the same kingdoms, except he sees them as hideous beasts (Daniel 7\). In John’s vision of the final worldly kingdom, the empire is portrayed as a grotesque and misshapen beast. These passages present two very different perspectives on the kingdoms mankind builds. Man sees his creations as imposing monuments and works of art fashioned of valuable metals. However, God’s view of the same kingdoms is that they are unnatural monsters. And the beast of Revelation will be the worst of them all.
|
Who are the seed of Abraham?
|
Answer
The question “who are the seed of [Abraham](life-Abraham.html)?” can be answered several ways, and it is important to make some distinctions. There is the Seed of Abraham (*Seed* being singular); there is the seed of Abraham *physically* (descendants of Abraham according to the flesh); and there is the seed of Abraham *spiritually* (those who, like Abraham, have faith in God).
The (singular) Seed of Abraham is Christ, as Galatians 3:16, quoting Genesis 12:7, says, “The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. Scripture does not say ‘and to seeds,’ meaning many people, but ‘and to your seed,’ meaning one person, who is Christ.” The passage goes on to explain that an inheritance was promised to Abraham’s Seed (Christ) apart from the Law. Later, the Mosaic Law was introduced, but it did not annul the [promises made to Abraham](Abrahamic-covenant.html) or to Abraham’s Seed (Christ).
Just as Abraham believed God and his faith was counted as righteousness (Genesis 15:6\), so are all today who believe in God’s Son justified apart from the Law. In this way, Abraham is the “father” of all who believe (Romans 4:11–17\). “If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise” (Galatians 3:29\).
Of course, the seed of Abraham can also refer to the Hebrew people who descended from Abraham through Isaac. Still more broadly, the seed of Abraham could include Arabs, who trace their lineage through Ishmael. This is the physical seed of Abraham. The spiritual seed of Abraham (believers in Jesus Christ) is comprised of people of all nationalities and ethnicities.
The Jewish religious leaders of the first century took pride in that they were Abraham’s seed. They saw their physical connection to Abraham as a guarantee of God’s favor. This attitude kept them from seeing their need for repentance of the heart—and brought condemnation from [John the Baptist](baptism-of-John.html), who warned them to repent. Anticipating their fallback argument that they were the seed of Abraham, John said, “Do not think you can say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father.’ I tell you that out of these stones God can raise up children for Abraham” (Matthew 3:9\).
Jesus dealt with the same issue later. In speaking to the unbelieving Jews, Jesus emphasized their need to receive His words as truth and obey His commands. They replied, “We be Abraham’s seed” (John 8:33, KJV). Jesus then rebukes them for plotting ways to murder Him; their stubborn response was again, “Abraham is our father” (verse 39a). At this, Jesus makes a distinction between the physical seed of Abraham and the true, spiritual seed of Abraham: “If you were Abraham’s children . . . then you would do what Abraham did” (verse 39b). The conversation heats up as the Jews for a third time reference their connection to Abraham: “Are you greater than our father Abraham?” they ask Jesus (verse 53\). Jesus provokes them further: “Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad” (verse 56\). The Jews’ are incredulous that Jesus would claim to be a contemporary of Abraham, and that’s when Jesus brings the exchange to a climax with a claim to [full deity](deity-of-Christ.html): “Very truly I tell you, . . . before Abraham was born, I am!” (verse 58\). In a fury, the Jews attempted to stone Jesus (verse 59\), again proving that being the physical seed of Abraham is not enough—they had to be born again (John 3:3\).
Paul sums up the difference between the seeds of Abraham in Romans 2:28–29: “A person is not a Jew who is one only outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. No, a person is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a person’s praise is not from other people, but from God.”
|
If God is omnipresent, then what is special about being in the presence of God?
|
Answer
The Bible teaches that God is [omnipresent](God-omnipresent.html). Everywhere we can go (and everywhere we can’t), God is there. David writes, “Where can I go from your Spirit? Where can I flee from your presence? If I go up to the heavens, you are there; if I make my bed in the depths, you are there. If I rise on the wings of the dawn, if I settle on the far side of the sea, even there your hand will guide me, your right hand will hold me fast” (Psalm 139:7–10\).
Paul also taught the fact of God’s all\-encompassing presence: “He is not far from any one of us. ‘For in him we live and move and have our being’” (Acts 17:27–28\). Jonah tried in vain to flee from God’s presence (Jonah 1:3\); he found that, no matter where he went, God was there waiting for him. So there is a sense in which we are *always* in God’s presence.
But there is another sense in which we can either be in or out of [God’s “presence.”](presence-of-God.html) In this sense, the presence of God can refer to His divine blessing and embracing love. The children of God are promised to experience everlasting joy in God’s presence: “You will fill me with joy in your presence, with eternal pleasures at your right hand” (Psalm 16:11; cf. Psalm 21:6; 46:4\). But those who reject the gospel “will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might” (2 Thessalonians 1:9; cf. Matthew 22:13 and Revelation 22:15\).
The presence of God can also refer to a place of honor. It is a privilege to stand in the presence of a king (Proverbs 22:29\). The angel Gabriel had that honor, saying to Zacharias, “I stand in the presence of God, and I have been sent to speak to you and to tell you this good news” (Luke 1:19\). The queen of Sheba said to Solomon, “How happy your people must be! How happy your officials, who continually stand before you and hear your wisdom!” (1 Kings 10:8\).
Additionally, the presence of God can refer to the demonstration of overwhelming glory and heavenly majesty. When Isaiah had his vision of God on His throne, he described the seraphim as being unable to view God’s glory directly (Isaiah 6:2\), and Isaiah was convinced of his own destruction in the face of such holiness (verse 5\). The presence of God is a fearsome thing for sinful man to approach (1 Samuel 6:20\).
The presence of God can also refer to a unique revelation of God to humanity. The Lord told Moses to consider the tabernacle (and later the temple) as the place where He chose to reveal Himself; thus, the tabernacle was where to find God’s presence (Deuteronomy 19:17\). Earlier, Moses had encountered God’s presence at the burning bush (Exodus 3:4–5\). David spoke of God’s presence at Sinai: “The earth quaked; The heavens also dropped rain at the presence of God; Sinai itself quaked at the presence of God” (Psalm 68:8, NASB).
We sometimes make a distinction between the all\-pervading presence of God (His omnipresence) and the [*manifest* presence](manifest-presence.html) of God. God’s manifest presence is the result of His overt and unmistakable interaction with us. When Israel camped at Sinai, God had been there all along, of course. But when they saw the fire and heard the trumpet and experienced the earthquake, they were in the *manifest* presence of God. The Bible describes the event as God’s “descending” to Sinai and “meeting” with the children of Israel (Exodus 19:17, 20\). They were in the presence of God in a special way. As God used physical, earthly means of communicating with His people, they got the point that God was there and that they were in His presence.
At certain times in history, God has needed to manifest His presence; otherwise, His people would not have realized He was there. Jacob, after a fitful night in Bethel, awoke from his dream and said, “Surely the LORD is in this place, and I was not aware of it” (Genesis 28:16\). He was “surely” in God’s presence, yet he didn’t even know it.
|
Who was Zacchaeus in the Bible?
|
Answer
Zacchaeus in the Bible was a man whose life\-changing encounter with Jesus was recorded by Luke (Luke 19:1–10\). Zacchaeus was one of the head [tax collectors](Bible-tax-collectors.html) in the region of Jericho, and the Bible says he was a rich man. Jewish tax collectors like Zacchaeus were scorned by their countrymen for a couple of reasons: one, they were known for cheating the taxpayers; and, two, they worked for Rome. The other Jews saw Jewish tax collectors as collaborators with the enemy—traitors to their own people.
Zacchaeus wanted to see Jesus as the Lord passed through town, but, because Zacchaeus was a short man, he could not see over the thronging crowd. Knowing that Jesus would pass by a certain sycamore tree, Zacchaeus ran ahead and climbed the tree, figuring he could see Jesus passing below. This action is interesting. First, Zacchaeus did not think himself important enough for Jesus to notice. Second, he wanted to see Jesus anyway. Like an eager fan going to extreme measures to catch a glimpse of a movie star who he knows will not notice him, Zacchaeus climbs a tree just to get a glimpse of Jesus passing by. To the complete astonishment of Zacchaeus and the crowd, Jesus stopped under the tree, looked up, and said, “Zacchaeus, come down immediately. I must stay at your house today.”
Zacchaeus was overjoyed, but the crowd grumbled because Zacchaeus was a tax collector, and they could not understand why Jesus would choose to associate with such a man—a [“sinner”](Jesus-friend-of-sinners.html) as they called him (Luke 19:7\). Zacchaeus, however, was so affected by the incident that he stood up and declared, “Look, Lord! Here and now I give half of my possessions to the poor, and if I have cheated anybody out of anything, I will pay back four times the amount” (verse 8\). Jesus happily proclaimed that salvation had come to Zacchaeus’ house, and that even the tax collector was now “a son of Abraham” (verse 9\)—a reference to Zacchaeus’ faith because those who have the faith of Abraham can truly be called the sons of Abraham (Galatians 3:7\). Then Jesus responded to those who had murmured against Him, saying, “For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost” (Luke 19:10\). As Jesus said elsewhere, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick” (Matthew 9:12\).
|
What does it mean to be wise as serpents and harmless as doves (Matthew 10:16)?
|
Answer
In sending out the [Twelve](twelve-apostles-disciples-12.html), Jesus said to them, “Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves” (Matthew 10:16, KJV). The NIV says, “shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.”
Jesus was using similes (figures of speech that compare two unlike things) to instruct His disciples in how to behave in their ministry. Just before He tells them to be wise as serpents and harmless as doves, He warns them that they were being sent out “like sheep among wolves.”
The world, then as now, was hostile to believers—not *incidentally* hostile, but *purposefully* hostile. Wolves are intentional about the harm they inflict upon sheep. In such an environment, the question becomes: “How can we advance the kingdom of God effectively without becoming predatory ourselves?” Jesus taught His followers that, to be Christlike in a godless world, they must combine the wisdom of the serpent with the harmlessness of the dove.
In using these similes, Jesus invokes the common proverbial view of serpents and doves. The serpent was “subtle” or “crafty” or “shrewd” in Genesis 3:1\. The dove, on the other hand, was thought of as innocent and harmless—doves were listed among the “clean animals” and were used for sacrifices (Leviticus 14:22\). To this very day, doves are used as symbols of peace, and snakes are thought of as “sneaky.”
Most people don’t mind having their character compared to a dove’s purity and innocence. But some people recoil at the image of a serpent, no matter what the context. They can never see a snake in a good light, even when used by Jesus as a teaching tool. But we should not make too much of the simile. We cannot attach the evil actions of [Satan](Satan-serpent.html) (as the serpent) with the serpent itself. Animals are not moral entities. The creature itself cannot perform sin, and shrewdness is an asset, not a defect. This is the quality that Jesus told His disciples to model.
The serpent simile stands in Jesus’ dialogue without bringing forward any of the serpent’s pejoratives. It is a basic understanding in language that, when a speaker creates a simile, he is not necessarily invoking the entire potential of the words he has chosen—nor is he invoking the entire history and tenor of the linguistic vehicle. Rather, the speaker is defining a fresh relationship between the two things. A quick look at Matthew 10:16 shows that Jesus was invoking only the *positive* aspects of the serpent. There is no hint of His unloading Edenic baggage upon His disciples. He simply tells them to be wise (and innocent) as they represented Him.
When Jesus told the Twelve to be as wise as serpents and harmless as doves, He laid down a general principle about the technique of kingdom work. As we take the gospel to a hostile world, we must be wise (avoiding the snares set for us), and we must be innocent (serving the Lord blamelessly). Jesus was not suggesting that we stoop to deception but that we should model some of the serpent’s famous shrewdness in a positive way. Wisdom does not equal dishonesty, and innocence does not equal gullibility.
Let us consider Jesus as exemplar: the Lord was known as a gentle person. Indeed, Scripture testifies that He would not even quench a smoking flax (Matthew 12:20\). But was He always (and only) gentle? No. When the occasion demanded it, He took whip in hand and chased the moneychangers out of the temple (John 2:15\). Jesus’ extraordinarily rare action, seen in light of His usual mien, demonstrates the power of using a combination of tools. This “dove\-like” Man of Innocence spoke loudly and clearly with His assertiveness in the temple.
In His more typical moments, Jesus showed that He was as wise as a serpent in the way He taught. He knew enough to discern the differences in His audiences (a critical skill), He used the story\-telling technique to both feed and weed (Matthew 13:10–13\), and He refused to be caught in the many traps that His enemies laid for Him (Mark 8:11; 10:2; 12:13\).
Jesus showed that He was as harmless as a dove in every circumstance. He lived a pure and holy life (Hebrews 4:15\), He acted in compassion (Matthew 9:36\), and He challenged anyone to find fault in Him (John 8:46; 18:23\). Three times, Pilate judged Jesus to be an innocent man (John 18:38; 19:4, 6\).
The apostle Paul also modeled the “wise as serpents, harmless as doves” technique. Paul lived in dove\-like innocence in good conscience before God (Acts 23:1\) and learned to deny his carnal desires so as not to jeopardize his ministry (1 Corinthians 9:27\). But Paul also displayed serpent\-like shrewdness when he needed it. He knew his legal rights and used the legal system to his advantage (Acts 16:37; 22:25; 25:11\). He also carefully crafted his speeches to maximize the impact on his audience (Acts 17:22–23; 23:6–8\).
In Matthew 10:16, Jesus taught us how to optimize our gospel\-spreading opportunities. Successful Christian living requires that we strike the optimal balance between the dove and the serpent. We should strive to be gentle without being pushovers, and we must be sacrificial without being taken advantage of. We are aware of the unscrupulous tactics used by the enemy, but we take the high road. Peter admonishes us, “Live such good lives among the pagans that, though they accuse you of doing wrong, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day he visits us” (1 Peter 2:12\).
|
How do the elements of the Passover Seder point to Christ?
|
Answer
The Seder is the traditional dinner that Jews partake of as part of [Passover](what-is-Passover.html). The annual Passover commemoration is celebrated by nearly the entire Jewish community, bonding families and communities to their Jewish roots. Each year Jewish people, religious and nonreligious, celebrate the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob by gathering and experiencing the Passover Seder.
The Hebrew word *Seder* means “order.” The Passover meal has a specific order in which food is eaten, prayers are recited, and songs are sung. Each item on the Passover plate has a specific historical meaning related to the exodus of the Jews from Egypt and their freedom from slavery. But 1 Corinthians 5:7 identifies Jesus Christ as our Passover; thus, the Seder carries a New Testament meaning related to Jesus the Messiah.
In the Seder, there are several strong symbols of Christ. One is the shank bone of a [lamb](Passover-Lamb.html), which reminds the participants of the feast of God’s salvation. During the tenth plague, God instructed the Israelites to daub their doorposts and lintels with the blood of a spotless lamb so that the Lord would “pass over” their homes and preserve the lives within (Exodus 12:1–13\). This is a symbol of salvation in Egypt, but it is also a picture of Jesus who was and is the “Lamb of God” (John 1:29\). His sacrifice preserves the lives of all who believe. The instructions for the original Passover specified that the lamb’s bones could not be broken (Exodus 12:46\), another foreshadowing of Christ’s death (John 19:33\).
Another symbol of Christ on the Seder plate is the *matzoh*, or unleavened bread. As the Jewish people left Egypt, they were in great haste and therefore had no time to allow their bread to rise. From then on, Passover was followed by the week\-long Feast of Unleavened Bread (Deuteronomy 16:3\). There are some fascinating things about the *matzoh* that provide a remarkable picture of the Messiah:
For example, the *matzoh* is placed in a bag called an *echad*, which means “one” in Hebrew. But this one bag has three chambers. One piece of *matzoh* is placed into each chamber of the bag. The *matzoh* placed in the first chamber is never touched, never used, never seen. The second *matzoh* in the bag is broken in half at the beginning of the Seder; half of the broken *matzoh* is placed back in the *echad*, and the other half, called the *Afikomen*, is placed in a linen cloth. The third *matzoh* in the bag is used to eat the elements on the Seder plate.
The word *echad* is used in Genesis 2:24 (the man and his wife will become “*echad*,” or “one” flesh). The word also appears in Numbers 13:23 when the spies returned from Canaan with an *echad* cluster of grapes. In both cases, the word *echad* refers to a complex unity of one. Many Jews consider the three *matzohs* to represent Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. But they cannot explain why they break “Isaac” in half or why they place half of the middle *matzoh* back in the *echad* and keep the other half out, wrapped in a cloth.
The meaning of the Seder’s ritual of the *matzohs* is understood with clues from the New Testament. The Trinity is pictured in the *matzohs*. The first *matzoh* that remains in the bag throughout the Seder represents *Ha Av*, the Father whom no man sees. The third *matzoh* represents the *Ruach Ha Kodesh*, the Holy Spirit who dwells within us. And the second *matzoh*, the broken one, represents *Ha Ben*, the Son. The reason the middle *matzoh* is broken is to picture the broken body of Christ (1 Corinthians 11:24\). The half put back in the *echad* represents Jesus’ divine nature; the other half, wrapped in a linen cloth and separated from the *echad* represents Jesus’ humanity as He remained on earth.
The linen cloth that wraps half of the second piece of *matzoh* suggests Jesus’ burial cloth. During the Seder, this linen cloth with the Afikomen inside is hidden, and after the dinner the children present look for it. Once the Afikomen is found, it is held as a ransom. Again, we see that these rituals point to Christ: He was fully God yet fully human; He was broken for us; He was buried, sought for, and resurrected; and His life was given a ransom for many (Mark 10:45\). Jesus is the completion of the [New Covenant](new-covenant.html) of Jeremiah 31:31, and the Passover Seder rituals bear that out.
Also, the *matzoh* used for the Passover Seder must be prepared a certain way. Of course, it must be [unleavened](unleavened-bread.html)—leaven is often equated with sin in the Scriptures, and Jesus is sinless. Second, the *matzoh* must be striped—Jesus’ “stripes” (His wounds) are what heal us spiritually (Isaiah 53:5\). And, third, the *matzoh* must be pierced—Jesus was nailed to the cross (Psalm 22:16\).
The other elements of the Seder plate are traditional reminders of the Israelite enslavement to the Egyptians. They are as follows:
Vegetable (*Karpas*) – This element, usually parsley, is dipped in salt water and eaten. The *karpas* pictures the [hyssop](hyssop-Bible.html) that was used to apply the blood of the Passover lamb to homes of the Israelites in Egypt. In the New Testament, hyssop was used to give the Lamb of God vinegar when Jesus said He thirsted (John 19:29\). The salt water represents the tears shed during the bitter years of slavery and the Red Sea that God split during the exodus.
Bitter Herbs (*Maror*) – The eating of “bitter herbs” is commanded in Exodus 12:8\. In modern times, this is usually horseradish, one of the bitterest herbs. The *maror* reminds the Jews that they were unable to offer sacrifice and worship to God, and that was bitterer than the slavery of Egypt.
Charoset (*haroseth*) – Charoset is a mixture of apples, nuts, wine, and spices. It represents the mortar the Israelites used in the constructing buildings during their slavery to the Egyptians. Of all the elements of the Seder, charoset alone is sweet, and this is a reminder of the hope of redemption.
Hard\-boiled or Roasted Egg (*Baytzah*) – Traditionally, hard\-boiled eggs were eaten by mourners, and the egg is eaten during the Seder to remind participants that they are always in mourning for the loss of their temple. The fact that the egg is roasted evokes the roasting of the sacrifice on the altar of the temple.
There are also four cups of wine used at various points during the Seder. Each of these glasses of wine has a name: the first glass is the “cup of sanctification.” The second is the “cup of judgment.” The third is the “cup of redemption.” And the fourth is the “cup of praise.” At the [Last Supper](Last-Supper.html), Jesus took the first cup and promised His disciples that the next time He drank the fruit of the vine with them would be in the kingdom (Luke 22:17\). Later in the Seder, Jesus took the third cup—the cup of redemption—and used that cup as a symbol of the New Covenant in His blood (Luke 22:20\). Thus Jesus fulfilled the Passover symbolism and infused the whole feast with a new meaning.
In Exodus 6:6, the Lord God promised His people that He would save them from slavery: “I am the LORD, and I will bring you out from under the yoke of the Egyptians. I will free you from being slaves to them, and I will redeem you with an outstretched arm and with mighty acts of judgment.” The phrase “with an outstretched arm” is repeated throughout the Old Testament in connection with Passover remembrances: Deuteronomy 4:34; 7:19; 9:29; 26:8; 2 Kings 17:36; Psalm 136:12; Jeremiah 32:21\. Can it be coincidence that, in the New Testament, the Messiah had both of His arms outstretched as He freed us from sin and brought us salvation?
|
How big is heaven?
|
Answer
The word for “heaven” in the Old Testament is the Hebrew word *shameh* or *shamayim*, which refers to the sky, the lofty arch above the world where clouds move, and beyond that the place where the planets and stars exist. In the New Testament, the word *heaven* is a translation of the Greek *ouranos*, which means “the sky” and “the abode of God” and, by extension, “an eternal realm of happiness and glory.” The sky in its vastness is a metaphor for the vastness and loftiness of God. It is the best earthly representation of the place where God lives.
How big is [heaven](is-Heaven-real.html)—how big is the place where God lives? We know that God Himself is infinite. Heaven and earth cannot contain Him. In terms of time, there is no beginning or end to His years (Psalm 102:27\); in terms of His kingdom, His reign will have no end (Luke 1:33\); in terms of His character, He is unchanging (Hebrews 1:12; James 1:17\). God created the heavens and the earth (Genesis 1:1\). Of God’s creation of the stars, Isaiah says, “Lift up your eyes on high and see: who created these? He who brings out their host by number, calling them all by name, by the greatness of his might, and because he is strong in power not one is missing” (Isaiah 40:26\).
Scientists have not even been able to chart the size of the known physical universe. There is a photo called the XDF (eXtreme Deep Field) that was put together from images taken by the Hubble Space Telescope over the course of ten years. It shows a vast number of galaxies, each comprising billions of stars like our sun. Our sun is 93 million miles away from the earth. And the galaxies are very, very far apart—Andromeda, the closest galaxy to our own, is 2\.2 million light years away. To give an idea of how far that is, a shuttle traveling at 18,000 miles per hour would need 37,200 years to travel *one* light year. The universe is absolutely huge—and God created it all.
So, how big is heaven? We don’t know exactly. The Bible doesn’t give any linear measurements. When John had his vision of heaven, he wrote, “There before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and before the Lamb” (Revelation 7:9\). So heaven is at least big enough for the innumerable multitude—and we can assume that there will be no crowding in heaven.
|
Who was Philip in the Bible?
|
Answer
There are four different men named Philip mentioned in the Bible. Phillip was the name of two of King Herod the Great’s sons by different wives (Luke 3:1 and Matthew 14:3\). The other two Philips in the Bible were servants of Christ and instrumental in the early church: Philip the disciple and apostle of Christ, and Philip the evangelist.
The disciple named Philip was, along with Peter and Andrew, from Bethsaida in Galilee (John 1:44; 12:21\). Jesus called Philip, who had been a disciple of John the Baptist’s (John 1:43\), and then Philip went and found Nathanael and told him about Jesus. Nathanael also became Jesus’ disciple. The Bible does not contain much biographical detail about Philip or any of the other disciples, but John records several times when Philip spoke to Jesus.
Philip’s first recorded act as a disciple of Jesus was to go and tell his friend Nathanael. Later, Philip was approached by some Gentiles, more specifically, Greeks from Bethsaida who asked Philip to introduce them to Jesus (John 12:20–22\). Philip was the disciple who calculated the amount of money it would take to feed the 5,000 (John 6:7\). After the Last Supper, Philip requested that Jesus show them the Father, leading to Jesus’ statement, “Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father” (John 14:8–9\). The last time the Bible mentions the disciple Philip is as one of those gathered in Jerusalem to pray after the Lord’s ascension (Acts 1:13\). Tradition states that Philip went to Phrygia (in modern\-day Turkey) as a missionary and was martyred there in Hierapolis.
The other Philip is usually distinguished from the disciple of the same name by calling him “Philip the evangelist” or “Philip the deacon.” It is often assumed that this Philip was one of the seventy\-two men whom Jesus sent out in Luke 10:1, although the Bible doesn’t make that connection. We do know that Philip was one of the original seven deacons selected to serve in the Jerusalem church (Acts 6:5\). Philip had a heart for evangelism, and, when the “great persecution” arose in Acts 8:1, Philip left Jerusalem to become an evangelist in Samaria (Acts 8:5–12\). After the church in Samaria was started, Philip was used by the Holy Spirit to bring the gospel to an Ethiopian eunuch, a member of the court of Candace, the Ethiopian queen. Philip found the eunuch sitting in his chariot, reading Isaiah and trying to make sense of the prophet’s words. Philip offered to explain, and the eunuch invited him to come up and sit with him. In the end, the eunuch was saved and baptized (Acts 8:26–39\). Immediately following the baptism, the Spirit of the Lord carried Philip away to Azotus, where he continued to preach the gospel in the towns from there to Caesarea (Acts 8:40\).
Twenty years later, Philip the evangelist is mentioned again, still in Caesarea (Acts 21:8–9\). Paul and Luke and others were traveling to Jerusalem, and they stopped at Philip’s home in Caesarea. They stayed with Philip for several days. Philip had four unmarried daughters at that time, all of whom had the gift of prophecy. That is the last time the Bible mentions the evangelist Philip.
|
Is listening to Christian heavy metal music wrong?
|
Answer
There are many people who enjoy heavy metal music that Christian metal bands produce. There is nothing inherently wrong with any [music](Bible-music.html) produced by committed Christians who desire to communicate biblical truth—Christian heavy metal music deals with the dark themes of death, pain, and spiritual warfare from a Christian perspective.
While there are some who feel that the heavy, rhythmic bass, frenetic percussion, and high decibel levels of metal music have a negative effect on a person’s spiritual self, that is a controversial view without evidence. Unless the lyrics celebrate sin, the music itself is not sinful. This applies to Christian heavy metal music as well as to [country](Christian-country-music.html), jazz, [rap](Christian-rap-music.html), pop, reggae, bluegrass, etc.
The problem with Christian heavy metal music is sometimes one of association. In the hands of the unsaved world, heavy metal almost always embraces death and pain and suicide and drugs and anger (metal is very rarely “happy music”). Believers have to be careful not to get sucked into the culture of nihilism and antisocialism that metal usually promotes. While it is true that pain and death are a part of life, the key to overcoming those things is not anger or suicide or revenge. The answer is the gospel of Jesus Christ (Romans 1:16\). There is nothing in the Bible that praises or glorifies death in the least, so neither should our music. Lyrics that violate biblical guidelines or celebrate or exalt sinful conduct are not appropriate for Christians.
With any kind of music, including Christian heavy metal, we must ask, “Is the [music glorifying Christ](Christian-music.html), or does it glorify anger, lust, demonism, or some other sinful thing?” The style of the music is really irrelevant. It’s what the music communicates to our hearts and minds that matters, either through lyrics or even through the notes and instruments themselves. No style of music is actually “wrong”; it’s what the musicians do with the music that makes it either “right” or “wrong.”
Regardless of the genre of music one listens to, the believer is to exalt Christ. Philippians 4:8 gives us the description of what should be on our minds: “Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things.” If heavy metal produced by Christian musicians falls under this description, then whether or not you listen to it is simply a matter of musical taste.
|
What does it mean to take every thought captive (2 Corinthians 10:5)?
|
Answer
In speaking of our [spiritual warfare](spiritual-warfare.html), Paul says that we take every thought captive and subject all thinking to Christ Jesus. Here are the apostle’s words: “We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ” (2 Corinthians 10:5\).
The primary point in this section of 2 Corinthians is that we are in a spiritual warfare. What leads up to the statement that we take every thought captive is important. In verse 3 Paul states that though we walk in [the flesh](the-flesh.html) we do not war after the flesh. That is, we do not rely on human ingenuity or manmade plans to bring the victory. The flesh is powerless against the wiles of the devil. In verse 4 Paul mentions the “strongholds” or the “fortresses” that are destroyed by God’s power. These strongholds are the philosophies, arguments, and “proud opinions” mentioned in verse 5\.
Without question, there are many human thoughts that need to be taken captive. Numerous ungodly philosophies hold people in bondage, and those spiritual “fortresses” need to be demolished. The systems of thought that war against us are “arrogant obstacles” (NET), “lofty opinions” (ESV), and “sophisticated arguments and every exalted and proud thing” (AMP) that prevent people from knowing God. In our day, these systems of human thought include the theory of evolution, secular humanism, existentialism, the cults, the occult, and false religions. How many people are held captive by the idea that they are the products of chance in a godless universe? How many spiritual prisoners labor under the requirements of Allah and await freedom in Christ? We must take captive *every* thought and make it obedient to Christ. “If the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed” (John 8:36\).
False religion and secular philosophy have created thinking that has imprisoned the minds of millions. It is a true spiritual battle: “The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel that displays the glory of Christ, who is the image of God” (2 Corinthians 4:4\). Any idea, opinion, or worldview that asserts that Christ is unnecessary is reflective of the devil’s pride. Such thoughts must be taken captive and made obedient to Christ. Those who know the truth must confront error with the weapon we’ve been given, the [sword of the Spirit](sword-of-the-Spirit.html), which is the Word of God (Ephesians 6:17\).
Our weapons in the spiritual battle are not carnal but mighty through God. As we are transformed by the renewing of our minds (Romans 12:2\), we engage the battle against pretense and arrogant philosophy in the world. Trusting Christ and rightly dividing the Word of God (2 Timothy 2:15\), we take every thought captive, pull down the strongholds, and, by the grace of God, set the captives free.
|
What does the Bible say about false accusations?
|
Answer
Regarding false accusations, the psalmist says, “For they do not speak peace, but against those who are quiet in the land they devise words of deceit” (Psalm 35:20\). This is an accurate description of the motives and results of false accusations. People [lie](Bible-lying-sin.html) about the innocent in order to stir up trouble. This happens on every level of society, from the halls of your local high school to the halls of the Pentagon. People accuse others falsely as a revenge tactic or power play or when they think they have something to gain. There is no need to state that this behavior is unbiblical in the extreme.
The command against making false accusations is one of the [Ten Commandments](Ten-Commandments.html) (Exodus 20:16\). According to Mosaic Law, someone who accused another person falsely was to receive an ironic punishment: “The judges shall inquire diligently, and if the witness is a false witness and has accused his brother falsely, then you shall do to him as he had meant to do to his brother. So you shall purge the evil from your midst” (Deuteronomy 19:18–19\). The Law also specified that the punishment of a false witness was to be carried out without pity (Deuteronomy 19:21\); it is a serious thing in God’s eyes to make a false accusation.
The folly of making a false accusation is illustrated in the [book of Esther](Book-of-Esther.html). A man named Haman, a nobleman in the court of King Ahasuerus, devised a plot to frame a Jew named Mordecai and have him hanged on a gallows fifty cubits high. Haman sought to ensure Mordecai’s death by means of false accusations. Haman devised this plot because he hated Jews, and he especially hated Mordecai because Haman was jealous of a favor Mordecai had received from the king. But Haman’s plot was found out, and the punishment for Haman’s treachery was poetic justice—he was hung on the very gallows he had constructed for Mordecai (Esther 5:9–14; 6:4\).
Those who make false accusations are under God’s judgment (Psalm 5:6\). As followers of Christ, we can expect that people will sometimes make false accusations against us, but hear Jesus’ encouragement: “Blessed are you when people . . . falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven” (Matthew 5:11–12\). No matter what others say about us falsely, we rely on God’s Word: “Though the arrogant have smeared me with lies, I keep your precepts with all my heart. Their hearts are callous and unfeeling, but I delight in your law” (Psalm 119:69–70\).
Jesus Himself faced false accusations from the Pharisees and their followers. Isaiah prophesied this when he said of the Messiah, “He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth; like a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and like a sheep that before its shearers is silent, so he opened not his mouth” (Isaiah 53:7\). Even Pilate, the Roman governor who oversaw Jesus’ sentence, knew that Jesus had done nothing wrong, but he pandered to the Jews and allowed the false accusations to stand (Matthew 27:22–26\).
According to the Mosaic Law, those who falsely accused the Son of God should have been themselves crucified. Instead, Jesus looked down at the soldiers and the rulers who were scoffing at Him and dividing up His clothing, and He said, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do” (Luke 23:34\). This was an indication that the Mosaic Law had been fulfilled by Jesus’ sacrifice and that a new law of forgiveness and mercy through faith in the Lamb of God was now in place for all who would believe in Him. “For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ” (John 1:17; cf. 3:16\).
|
What does the Holy Spirit do?
|
Answer
The Bible is quite clear that the [Holy Spirit](who-Holy-Spirit.html) is active in our world. The book of Acts, which sometimes goes by the longer title of “The Acts of the Apostles,” could just as accurately be called “The Acts of the Holy Spirit through the Apostles.” After the apostolic age, there have been some changes—the Spirit does not inspire further Scripture, for example—but He continues to do His work in the world.
First, the Holy Spirit does many things in the lives of believers. He is the believers’ Helper (John 14:26\). He indwells believers and [seals](Holy-Spirit-seal.html) them until the day of redemption—this indicates that the Holy Spirit’s presence in the believer is irreversible. He guards and guarantees the salvation of the ones He indwells (Ephesians 1:13; 4:30\). The Holy Spirit assists believers in prayer (Jude 1:20\) and “intercedes for God’s people in accordance with the will of God” (Romans 8:26–27\).
The Holy Spirit regenerates and renews the believer (Titus 3:5\). At the moment of salvation, the Spirit baptizes the believer into the Body of Christ (Romans 6:3\). Believers receive the new birth by the power of the Spirit (John 3:5–8\). The Spirit comforts believers with fellowship and joy as they go through a hostile world (1 Thessalonians 1:6; 2 Corinthians 13:14\). The Spirit, in His mighty power, fills believers with “all joy and peace” as they trust the Lord, causing believers to “overflow with hope” (Romans 15:13\).
Sanctification is another work of the Holy Spirit in the life of a believer. The Spirit sets Himself against the desires of the flesh and leads the believer into righteousness (Galatians 5:16–18\). The works of the flesh become less evident, and the fruit of the Spirit becomes more evident (Galatians 5:19–26\). Believers are commanded to “be filled with the Spirit” (Ephesians 5:18\), which means they are to yield themselves to the Spirit’s full control.
The Holy Spirit is also a gift\-giver. “There are different kinds of gifts, but the same Spirit distributes them” (1 Corinthians 12:4\). The [spiritual gifts](spiritual-gifts-survey.html) that believers possess are given by the Holy Spirit as He determines in His wisdom (verse 11\).
The Holy Spirit also does work among unbelievers. Jesus promised that He would send the Holy Spirit to “convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment” (John 16:8, ESV). The Spirit testifies of Christ (John 15:26\), pointing people to the Lord. Currently, the Holy Spirit is also restraining sin and combatting “the secret power of lawlessness” in the world. This action keeps the rise of the Antichrist at bay (2 Thessalonians 2:6–10\).
The Holy Spirit has one other important role, and that is to give believers wisdom by which we can understand God. “These are the things God has revealed to us by his Spirit. The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God. For who knows a person’s thoughts except their own spirit within them? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God” (1 Corinthians 2:10–11\). Since we have been given the amazing gift of God’s Spirit inside ourselves, we can comprehend the thoughts of God, as revealed in the Scripture. The Spirit helps us understand. This is wisdom from God, rather than wisdom from man. No amount of human knowledge can ever replace the Holy Spirit’s teaching (1 Corinthians 2:12–13\).
|
What is Binitarianism?
|
Answer
Binitarianism is the belief that the one true God exists as two Persons (the Father and the Son). Binitarianism is distinguished from [Trinitarianism](trinitarianism.html) (God exists as three Persons) and Unitarianism (God exists as only one Person). It is also distinguished from bitheism (the belief in two gods). Binitarianism has never been a popular view of God and is held by a small number of groups today.
Binitarianism teaches that the Holy Spirit is actually just another name for Jesus—more to the point, that Jesus is simply the Spirit incarnate. The claim is based on the misreading of a passage in the non\-canonical [“The Shepherd of Hermas”](Shepherd-of-Hermas.html) and on Romans 8:9, which says, “You, however, are not in the realm of the flesh but are in the realm of the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ” (cf. 1 Peter 1:10–11\). Here, the “Spirit of God” seems to be equated with the “Spirit of Christ”; if the “Spirit of Christ” is simply another name for Jesus, as Binitarianism contends, then there is no third Person of the Godhead.
A better way to understand Romans 8:9 is that the Holy Spirit is called the “Spirit of Christ” because He is sent by Christ (John 15:26\), He testifies of Christ (John 15:26\), He comes in the name of Christ (John 14:26\), and He seals believers in Christ (Ephesians 1:13\). The fact that the Son sends the Spirit from the Father shows that all three Persons of the Trinity are distinct.
The [Trinity](Trinity-Bible.html) is a great mystery, and even the most learned Bible scholars cannot adequately explain it. However, the Bible, specifically the New Testament, teaches that the one true God exists as three Persons (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit). The Bible also teaches that it was the Son who became incarnate, not the Father or the Spirit. Thus, Binitarianism is not biblical.
Below is the best symbol for the Trinity we are aware of (click to expand):
[](img/trinity.svg)
|
What does the Bible say about voyeurism?
|
Answer
The Bible does not directly address the subject of voyeurism. Voyeurism is a sexual fetish that involves watching other people engaging in private behaviors such as undressing or participating in sexual activity. Voyeurism also often includes secretly videotaping or photographing the person being watched without his or her knowledge or consent. The voyeur usually observes from a secret vantage point or uses a hidden camera to capture illicit images. Some people consider viewing pornography or even looking at photos of other people on social media sites to be voyeuristic activity, but voyeurism, strictly speaking, is the act of secretly watching or filming people in real life as they undress or engage in sexual activity.
Voyeurism is sinful for at least two reasons: first, it is invasive and disrespectful to the person being watched. The Bible commands people to treat others with respect, justice, and kindness (Micah 6:8; Zechariah 7:9; Galatians 5:22\). Voyeurism is a violation of this command—the voyeur treats other people as objects. Second, voyeurism falls under the category of unlawful or immoral sexual behavior. [Lust](what-is-lust.html) is on the same level, spiritually, with adultery. When we look at another person with “lustful intent,” we have already committed adultery with him or her in our hearts (Matthew 5:28\).
Secretly looking at the nakedness of another person (not one’s spouse) is wrong. Stealing of any kind—even stealing someone’s privacy—is sin. Voyeurism is a work of [the flesh](the-flesh.html) and a product of sinful desire. The Bible tells us to choose a different path for our lives: “Clothe yourselves with the Lord Jesus Christ, and do not think about how to gratify the desires of the flesh” (Romans 13:14\).
|
What sort of spiritual boundaries should we set in our lives?
|
Answer
Every one of us puts up emotional and mental [boundaries](boundaries-biblical.html) in the interest of self\-protection, and mental wellness professionals agree that boundaries are healthy. Spiritual boundaries are similarly beneficial to our spiritual well\-being. There should be clear boundaries to govern the beliefs we hold and how we put those beliefs into practice.
Not having spiritual boundaries can lead to theological confusion and the misbehavior that comes with it. The Bible tells us that the spiritually immature are “tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of people in their deceitful scheming” (Ephesians 4:14\). How can we avoid being deceived by the schemes of [false teachers](false-teachers.html)? Study the Word (2 Timothy 2:15\), obey the Word (Psalm 119:33\), and set spiritual boundaries.
Here are some guidelines for setting spiritual boundaries:
*Set spiritual guidelines concerning doctrine.* It is vital for our spiritual health that we not give heed to false teachings. To have proper spiritual boundaries, we must know the truth—we must study the Word of God and commit to following it. “Follow the pattern of the sound words that you have heard from me, in the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus” (2 Timothy 1:13\). We must also screen out the lies: “Have nothing to do with godless myths and old wives' tales; rather, train yourself to be godly” (1 Timothy 4:7\). The church of Ephesus did a good job at setting spiritual boundaries concerning doctrine: “You have tested those who claim to be apostles but are not, and have found them false” (Revelation 1:2\). The churches of Pergamum (Revelation 2:14\) and Thyatira (Revelation 2:20\) were not so good at doctrinal discernment.
*Set spiritual guidelines concerning companions.* Our choice of [friends](Bible-friends.html) is important in our spiritual walk (Amos 3:3\). The Bible gives us guidance about the type of person we should be seeking as a friend. Our close friends should exhibit godly wisdom: “Walk with the wise and become wise, for a companion of fools suffers harm” (Proverbs 13:20\). Our close friends should be self\-controlled: “Do not make friends with a hot\-tempered person, do not associate with one easily angered” (Proverbs 22:24\). Our close friends should be willing to tell us the truth, even when it hurts: “Wounds from a friend can be trusted, but an enemy multiplies kisses” (Proverbs 27:6\). This isn’t about being holier\-than\-thou; it’s about being wise in selecting close associates, knowing that “iron sharpens iron” (Proverbs 27:17\).
*Set spiritual guidelines concerning morality.* What we choose to do with our bodies has an impact on our spiritual health (1 Corinthians 6:9–10\). For this reason, we are told to “run from anything that stimulates youthful lusts” (2 Timothy 2:22, NLT) and “do not think about how to gratify the desires of the flesh” (Romans 13:14\). Samson failed to set spiritual boundaries in this regard, and he lost his hair, his eyes, and his freedom as a result (Judges 16\).
*Set spiritual guidelines concerning idolatry.* An [idol](idolatry-modern.html) is anything that replaces God in our hearts or prevents us from giving God His due glory, and the world is full of idols. We must make a conscious decision to reject what would damage our fellowship with Christ. We must learn to say with the psalmist, “Whom have I in heaven but you? And earth has nothing I desire besides you” (Psalm 73:25\). God promises rewards for those who set spiritual boundaries to keep the idols out: “Come out from them and be separate, says the Lord. Touch no unclean thing, and I will receive you” (2 Corinthians 6:17\).
Setting spiritual boundaries entails discernment: “I will not look with approval on anything that is vile. I hate what faithless people do; I will have no part in it” (Psalm 101:3\). It involves having the foresight to see where a particular path will lead and choosing appropriately: “Do not set foot on the path of the wicked or walk in the way of evildoers. Avoid it, do not travel on it; turn from it and go on your way” (Proverbs 4:14–15; cf. Proverbs 22:3\). It requires commitment: “Choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve. . . . But as for me and my household, we will serve the Lord” (Joshua 24:15\).
Physical boundaries are important—putting a fence around a high\-voltage area is a good idea. But spiritual boundaries are much more important. The health of our souls is at stake. Being protected from spiritual danger is every bit as important as staying physically safe.
|
Is ISIS a sign of the end times?
|
Answer
Many Christians wonder if the rise of ISIS (the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria), also known as ISIL (the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant) and IS (Islamic State), is a sign of the end times. ISIS has attracted a lot of attention due to its brutal tactics in gaining and maintaining control over territory in Iraq and Syria and its terrorism in other parts of the world (most notably the November 2015 Paris and June 2016 Orlando attacks).
ISIS’s murder of Middle Eastern Christians has been particularly heinous. The way ISIS has been beheading Christians (and other victims) reminds many of Revelation 20:4, which predicts the manner of execution the Antichrist will use during the tribulation; “Also I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus and for the word of God.” And, of course, the fact that ISIS is attempting to establish its Islamic caliphate so close to the borders of Israel is a definite matter of concern.
There is no biblical prophecy that explicitly predicts the rise of ISIS. The Bible prophesies an increase in wars and rumors of wars (Matthew 24:6\), and Jesus declared that persecution will be the experience of anyone who seeks to follow Him (John 15:18–20\). Further, Second Timothy 3:1–4 could be seen as a fitting description of ISIS in many ways: “There will be terrible times in the last days. People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self\-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God.”
But these passages do not specifically predict ISIS. Rather, they inform us what the end times will be like. As a result, we should not be surprised by the rise of ISIS. The world is going to get worse *before* the end times, and then the world will get exponentially worse *during* the end times (see Revelation 6–18\).
Is ISIS a definite sign of the end times? No. Is ISIS a possible sign of the end times? Yes. Could the actions of ISIS lead to a greater conflict that fulfills one of the [end\-times wars](world-war-3.html) prophesied in the Bible? Yes. But, presently, the world is united against ISIS. Does that unity set the stage for a global government, as predicted in Scripture? Could the world’s being united against a great evil like ISIS eventually lead to the rise of the greatest evil the world will ever see, the [Antichrist](what-is-the-antichrist.html)?
Ultimately, we will have to wait and see what role, if any, ISIS plays in the end times. At this time, ISIS is simply proof of what the Bible says about how evil humanity can become without Christ (Jeremiah 17:9; Romans 3:10–18\).
|
What does it mean to vex / be vexed?
|
Answer
The word *vex* means “to disturb, trouble, or provoke.” To be vexed is to be frustrated, annoyed, or exasperated. A vexed person feels some serious irritation. To vex someone is to drive him from patience to impatience or to harass or goad her to the limit of endurance.
In the Bible, there are some examples of people being vexed. One is Samson, who was vexed by his lover, [Delilah](Samson-and-Delilah.html). Delilah was treacherous and allied with Samson’s enemies, the Philistines. The Philistines knew that there was some secret source to Samson’s great strength, and they paid Delilah to find out what it was. Delilah tried several times to elicit the secret from Samson, but he was not forthcoming. Delilah did not give up but kept up the verbal barrage: “She pressed him hard with her words day after day, and urged him, \[until] his soul was vexed to death” (Judges 16:16, ESV). The NIV translates Samson’s annoyance as “he was sick to death of it.”
Another person in the Bible who was said to be vexed was [King Ahab](Ahab-and-Jezebel.html). When Ahab asked Naboth to sell his vineyard, Naboth refused, saying, “The Lord forbid that I should give you the inheritance of my ancestors” (1 Kings 21:3\). Because of this, the king went home “vexed and sullen” (verse 4\). Here, the word *vexed* communicates Ahab’s resentment and anger at not getting what he wanted. Eventually, his vexation led him to kill Naboth and take his vineyard by force.
[Job](life-Job.html) was vexed by his well\-meaning friends (Job 19:2\). The Israelites were commanded not to vex (as in harass) the foreigners who lived among them (Exodus 22:21\). Fathers are not to vex their children or dishearten them (Colossians 3:21\). And God promises to vex the ungodly who oppose the Messiah (Psalm 2:5\).
|
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.