On this blog we have been posting answers to questions submitted at La Croix Church over the course of a six-week series called "The Problem with God." We received nearly 200 questions. Like the others, today's post came anonymously from someone in our congregation. Though it's not a question, it is an interesting observation.
This is not a question, but a confession from a former atheist. Atheists want to believe they... are too smart to believe and boast of their intelligence and demean believers to increase their pride. But in reality, atheists are trying to overcome their greatest fear…that maybe Christians are right. That is why they work so hard to convince the world there is no God. If NO ONE believes then there could not possibly be a God. The truth is atheists do not have anything to believe in. There is no other reason for life…this world…or anything if you do not believe in God. The truth is atheists live a life of fear and sadness without knowing why!
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Confession from a former Atheist
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Rob's Problem with God
My problem with God was that he wasn't doing things the way I wanted things done, or wasn't waving the wand and making the outcomes I wanted happen. He was calling me to something better for me but at the cost of something really comfortable, numbing or short-term pleasurable for me. My problem with God was that he wanted to be God rather than letting me be God.
It took a long time of trusting and being patient enough to see the blessing of obedience before I came to realize that life is so much better when I let him assume the God role. It may not look better in the worldly sense (e.g. I make a lot less money now than I did as an engineer), but it is incredibly better. Peace, joy, and a certainty of being loved and forgiven even in the midst of difficulty beat the crud out of material stuff.
For far too long in my life I believed in the concept of God...I believed things about God. Many of the questions we've addressed on the blog, while good and honest, deal with God as a concept. Only in the last ten years or so have I come to believe in God and believe God as a person. I have encountered a loving, compassionate, Savior who cares so much more about us than we even care about ourselves. I hope you encounter and come to know this person, too.
Friday, February 22, 2008
Testing
Q: Why would God ever test us?
A: Why not? Just because God tests us does not mean that he is unloving or not concerned about us. It is the very opposite. He tests us because he cares about us. He tests us because he loves. He tests us because he is more concerned about our character than he is our comfort. Don’t get me wrong God is not against comfort necessarily, but he is absolutely more concerned about transforming us into the very image of Christ. Theologian’s call this process sanctification, which basically is a fancy word for the process of becoming like Christ.
James 1:2-4 says, “Consider it pure joy, my brothers, whenever you face trials of many kinds, because you know that the testing of your faith develops perseverance. Perseverance must finish its work so that you may be mature and complete, not lacking anything.”
When we are tested or when we go through difficult times our character is formed in the fire of those experiences, which in turn produces perseverance and perseverance leads us towards wholeness or completeness in Christ. The Bible says, “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect” (Matthew 5:48). The word perfect is actually “teleos” which literally means “complete”. God wants us to be complete in him, so “how is that possible?” We are made perfect through these times of testing and trial.
It is important to distinguish between testing and tempting. Sometimes people get confused with whether or not God tempts us or test us. The Bible clearly tells us that God never tempts us (James 1); however, over and over again in the Scripture we are told that God tests his people. It is Satan that tempts and God who tests.
We assume that God is testing us because he needs to know whether we are going to be faithful or not. God is sovereign and does not need to test us to know whether or not we will be faithful. God is already aware of what we are going to do. He knows what we are going to do (fore-knowledge), but does not determine what we are going to do (free-will).
Testing is more about us. It is about revealing to us who we really are and what we are going to be about. Are we truly going to follow God with our lives? We are tested by God many times to prove to ourselves that we can be faithful. If we make the right choice one time, then we can make the right choice another time. It builds our confidence for living God’s way.
So the next time you feel like you are being tested, or going through trials ask this question: “Lord, what are you trying to teach me?”
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Peter's Faith
A: Actually, Peter spent about three years with Jesus prior to the Garden of Gethsemane event you mention; and that event happened just hours before Peter’s denial. While this question has some of the timeline facts of Peter’s life with Christ amiss, I chose to answer it because of what I perceive to be the underlying question, “Why does Peter sometimes show flashes of faith and then fall flat on his face at other times?”
First let me say that I love how the Gospels are honest about Peter’s struggles with faith. At one moment he’s jumping out of the boat in faith, only to sink in the water from wavering faith. He believes Jesus Is the Son of God, but then feels the need to jump in and try to fix things himself.
I love these stories because they ring true to us, and also because they show Christ’s posture toward us when our faith slips at times. He immediately offers a hand up from the water and, after the resurrection, he restores Peter from his three-fold denial. As I’ve written in other posts, Christians sometimes underestimate the power of the Holy Spirit in our lives. One of the main things the Bible says that the Holy Spirit does is witness to the truth of Jesus Christ. It is that witness that deepens our faith. After receiving the Spirit on Pentecost, Peter shows incredible courage through beatings, imprisonment and even execution.
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Slavery
Q: Where is God’s guidance about slavery? Nowhere in the Old or New Testaments does it say that slavery is a bad thing. It actually seems to encourage / guide slavery ownership in various verses. Wouldn’t this have been a great commandment? “Thou shalt not have slaves.” What a lot of suffering this may have eliminated through history.
A: This is an important question especially since we are witnessing the return of slavery in some parts of the world. I’ll attempt to answer this in reverse order.
First, it is no coincidence that the abolition of slavery was spearheaded in history by Christian activists. My family last weekend watched for the second time the movie, “Amazing Grace” that tells the story of William Wilberforce, the British politician who led the fight against slavery. I highly recommend the movie. It’s not only inspiring but it shows how deeply ingrained the ugly institution was and that it was people of deep faith who destroyed it. Wilberforce’s anti-slavery bill passed in 1807; it would take an additional 55 years and a civil war for it to be outlawed in America. The abolitionist movement and the Underground Railroad in the US were led by Christians as well. Where did they get this conviction to fight slavery? The Bible.
The person asking this question is correct in noting that...
there isn’t a commandment outlawing slavery. Its antislavery message takes a subtle, subversive approach. That subtlety is lost to us when we read the Bible, but it is there. It takes an understanding of the cultural conditions surrounding it. For much of world history, slavery was thoroughly accepted socially. Any call to end slavery would have been seen as revolutionary and would have been violently opposed. It could be argued that if the early Christians had taken an anti-slavery stance, the movement would have been stomped out. But, the message is there, just below the surface.
First, it must be noted that there is no scripture that explicitly blesses the institution of slavery or encourages the owning of slaves.
Second, there are verses that don’t hide the antislavery message. Consider a couple of these verses from the New Testament:
Were you a slave when you were called? Don’t let it trouble you--although if you can gain your freedom, do so. For he who was a slave when he was called by the Lord is the Lord's freedman; similarly, he who was a free man when he was called is Christ’s slave. You were bought at a price; do not become slaves of men. 1 Cor. 7:21-23
There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. Galatians 3:28
These are radical statements for that day and time. Add to this the whole Exodus story of Moses freeing the Hebrew slaves from Egypt and you find a deep anti-slavery bent. Because of passages like these, slave owners didn’t want their slaves owning Bibles or going to church to hear such scriptures read. They considered the message too dangerous.
Because it says it so much better, I’ll share this rather lengthy explanation from the book, Hard Sayings of the Bible, which comments on Paul’s words in Ephesians 6 about slaves and masters…
“The master is to treat slaves appropriately in the light of knowing that in reality both he and they are slaves of the same heavenly Master (Eph 6:9). After all, even Paul calls himself a slave of Jesus Christ. This part of Paul’s teaching is revolutionary. It was unheard of to call a social superior to respect and respond to a call to duty toward social inferiors. In fact, one could say that Paul brings the masters down to the level of their slaves and makes them treat their slave as a brother or sister. This implication in Ephesians becomes quite explicit in Philemon. Paul’s strategy, then, is to elevate the inferior and to abase the superior by pointing to their relationship to Jesus Christ as the context for all other relationships in their lives…
In the social world of Paul’s day slavery was an accepted institution. There was also a genuine fear of slaves. In Rome slaves were prohibited from wearing distinctive clothing for fear that they would discover how numerous they were and start a revolt. Slaves all over the Roman world were under the total control of their masters. If a master wished, he could have a slave executed (or kill the slave himself). While this was frowned on if there was no reason for it, it was not outside of the master’s rights. It was just as today a person can demolish their house if they wish, even though their neighbors may think it a stupid and wasteful act. A slave in the first century was property.
Given this context, what would it look like if Christianity were believed to be calling slaves to disobedience? Christianity was already viewed as a subversive form of thought. It rejected the traditional gods (which made it seem treasonous to city and country, for worship of the traditional gods was a major expression of patriotism) and did not allow any compromises in this matter. It rejected many of the “normal” forms of recreation (drinking bouts, use of prostitutes and the like). It formed its members into “secret societies” (at least in the eyes of pagan observers), and in those societies it was rumored master and slave ate the same food at the same table and that wives were present along with their husbands. In other words, first-century social decorum was not observed in the church. Notice that in the New Testament there is no separation of religious duty according to social status. Every member is spiritually gifted, whatever their social status. Any person can become an elder, not just freeborn males. Every member of the church is called to the same obedience to Christ, slave or free, male or female.
So Paul (and other New Testament writers) calls the social inferiors, including slaves, to obedience. This both reassured the Roman society and made the real reason for persecution clear. Christian slaves should be more obedient slaves than other slaves; for they knew that the “pay” in heaven would be good. If their masters persecuted them, it should be for their faith and nothing else. Christianity was not subversive in the sense of stirring up rebellion. At the same time, it raised the slave to a new status of an equal human being before Christ. After all, in the eyes of the church slavery was just a job, and what job or social status one had on earth did not matter. (Jesus did not have a great social status at any time in his life either, and he died a most shameful death, an executed slave’s death.) If the job was done “as a slave of Christ” the reward was equal, whether one was a human slave or a human master. Paul’s strategy was thus that of producing an expression of the kingdom of God in the church, not that of trying to change society.
What was the result of this strategy? The church never adopted a rule that converts had to give up their slaves. Christians were not under law but under grace. Yet we read in the literature of the second century and later of many masters who upon their conversion freed their slaves. The reality stands that it is difficult to call a person a slave during the week and treat them like a brother or sister in the church. Sooner or later the implications of the kingdom they experienced in church seeped into the behavior of the masters during the week. Paul did in the end create a revolution, not one from without, but one from within, in which a changed heart produced changed behavior and through that in the end brought about social change. This change happened wherever the kingdom of God was expressed through the church, so the world could see that faith in Christ really was a transformation of the whole person.
Did Paul believe in slavery? Yes, indeed. He believed that all Christians are all equally slaves of Jesus Christ and that that is the one social relationship that has permanent value.”
Is the New Testament Accurate?
Q: Since Constantine created the counsel that put the Bible together, how can we know the New Testament is accurate and or complete?
A: These are doubts raised by the Dan Brown book, The Da Vinci Code. The book is filled with historical errors and misinformation. Let me make a couple points.
First, it is true that the newly converted Roman emperor called the Council of Nicea in 325 AD. He did so at the request of bishops and he did not, as Brown alleges, control the Council or sway its outcome. First, the books we now know as the New Testament were in use and widely circulated in the Christian community some 200 years before this Council. Also, Nicea didn’t approve the list of books. That was done at the Synod of Hippo in 393 and later ratified by the entire church at the Council of Carthage in 397. Constantine was long dead by then.
Second, history reveals broad consensus in the early church about...
what books should and should not be included in the canon of scripture. Rigorous standards were used to insure that the books were accurate representations of the life and teachings of Jesus and the early apostles. The early church councils that approved the books had something we don’t have: unity and consensus. The leadership of the entire church across the world came together and unanimously approved the books that make up the New Testament. (Can you image getting together a representative group of Christian leaders from around the world today? First, you could never get them all together and second, you couldn’t get them to all agree!) Yet, that is exactly what happened in the early ecumenical councils. For that and a number of other reasons, we can be most confident that the New Testament is accurate and complete.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Can a Christian Support the War?
Q: With the current war in Iraq and the war on terrorism, am I as a Christian supposed to support the war effort (troops, politicians, & the overall war effort)?
A: I'm not sure why I choose to take the hairy political issues. First it's abortion, now the war. Next, someone will ask who to vote for, and my head just might explode. Until then, what shall we say about the war? I feel there are two ways that a Christian can approach the war in Iraq (or any war, for that matter).
The first way is pacifism. The pacifist Christian gets his/her foundation from Matthew 5:39, which reads, "Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also." Those words come straight from the mouth of Jesus, so there must be some credence given to them. However, one will also note that Jesus resorted to what appeared to be violence when he drove the moneychangers from the Temple, turning over their tables and using a whip (we don't know that He use the whip on people). Regardless, the pacifist take is one way to approach war.
Another way that many Church fathers (St. Augustine and Thomas Aquinas) and theologians (Immanuel Kant and Paul Tillich) have looked at war is through the lens of the Just War Theory. This theory states that a war is justified if it meets certain conditions, and that there are certain actions within a war that are justified. The criteria for going into war (jus ad bellum) are:
Just cause: The cause must be just, and can therefore include taking back things that were taken or punishing those that have done wrong.
Comparative justice: Recognizing that there is suffering on all sides of a war, the injustice suffered by one side must far outweigh that suffered by the other.
Legitimate authority: Only those that are legitimately in authority may use deadly force or wage war.
Right intention: Force may only be used in a truly just cause, such as righting a wrong. Material gain is not right intention.
Probability of success: If you can't win, if the cause is futile, you should not engage.
Last resort: All other peaceful and viable options must be attempted and exhausted first.
Proportionality: The anticipated benefits of waging a war must be proportionate to the harms that are expected.
Once in a war, there are a couple of other considerations that must be kept in mind to keep it a just war (jus in bello):
Distinction: The acts of war should be directed at the enemy combatants, and not at civilians.
Proportionality: The force used must equal to the wrong endured and to the good that may come.
Military necessity: The minimum force necessary should be used.
Now, you may be thinking after reading all of this philosophic rigmarole, "Just tell me if I should support this war, already!" I'm sorry, but I really can't do that. There are certain things that I can give a definitive answer for, but unfortunately this isn't one of them. What I would recommend is that you read through the criteria for a just war, pray, and decide for yourself. Also, I would recommend highly that you DO support the troops that are serving. They are doing their American duty to serve and protect us. If the Administration makes decisions that you don't agree with, don't blame the troops for it. They deserve our support.
Friday, February 15, 2008
Mormonism
Q: What is the right approach or response to Mormon boys that come to your door in the freezing weather at 7:00pm? What is the most simple straight-forward response?
A: To answer your first question, I think you have to prayerfully consider the situation and make a decision. It is important that we give an account for our faith in Jesus Christ and that we are ready in season and out of season to do so; however, that does not mean that we have to always invite the Mormon missionary into our home. It may be that on a particular night it is not right for you to do so. I would say that to always shy away from them is not the best approach. I believe God place people in our path for a reason. If God has placed Mormon missionaries in your path, maybe the Lord wants you to engage them on some level. Maybe the Lord wants you to learn more about the Mormons and what they believe so that you can have an intelligent conversation with them that might lead to a fruitful exchange.
Hospitality is a big deal to God. I think that it is important that we open our doors to people simply to show Christ’s love. I also think that through us following this model God will open opportunities for us to share Christ with the people who are visiting our home.The difficulty I have found with inviting Mormons or Jehovah’s Witnesses into my home is that they have a very clear agenda and very strong convictions that what they believe is absolutely right. This poses a problem for any real dialog or openness to new ideas. In other words, they are probably not real interested in what you have to say. I realize that this is an assumption on my part, but this is based on my experience and interaction with both groups.
A Mormon missionary is well versed in the Bible and the Book of Mormon, so if you are going to have a discussion with them, it is important that you don’t enter into that conversation lightly. I would encourage you to read a little about Mormonism before you invite them into your home. They are extremely sharp and know their material. It is amazing to me that they know the Bible better than a lot of Christians. I suspect this is a great opportunity for you to learn more about Mormonism and also about your own faith in Jesus Christ.
Mormonism is a cult and by definition they have taken the truths of Christianity and twisted them to fit there agenda. There are tons of books written on and about Mormonism. A recent booklet entitled, The Mormon Mirage: Seeing Through the Illusion of Mainstream Mormonism might be a nice little read in order to better understand the differences. I would also encourage you to go to http://www.equip.org/ and simply search the word Mormon or Mormonism.
Here is a short excerpt from Hank Hanegraaff’s treatment of Mormonism:
“The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints was birthed back in the 1800s by an alleged vision in which two celestial personages appeared to Joseph Smith and claimed that all existing churches were wrong, that all their creeds were an abomination and that all their professors were corrupt. According to this vision Smith was chosen to restore - not reform - a church that, in his view, had disappeared from the face of the earth. The Mormon doctrines that evolved from this vision compromise, confuse, and contradict the nature of God, the authority of Scripture and the way of salvation. In fact, while Christians believe that they're going to stand before God dressed in the spotless robes of Christ's righteousness, Mormons contend that they're going to appear before heavenly Father dressed in fig leaf aprons holding good works in their hands. According to the Latter-Day Saints just about everybody qualifies for heaven. The world's vilest people will make it into what's called the telestial heaven. Lukewarm Mormons and religious people are typically going to enter a terrestrial heaven; and temple Mormons are going to make it to a celestial heaven. Only those who are sealed in secret temple rituals will make it to the third level of the celestial kingdom and then become gods of their own planets. These and many other doctrinal perversions are why we exclude Mormonism from rightly being called Christian.”
Tough Decision
Q: When your child is in relationship with a non-Christian and going to marry him—when they are living together. Does God want us, as parents, to “attend” when all we can see is destruction and abuse?
A: Disclaimer: This answer is my opinion only. This situation is extremely complicated and probably volatile. I am going to assume that your child is an “adult” in the eyes of the law. Once a child is out of the home and on their own the role of the parent changes significantly. The parent(s) become more of a guide-by-the-side or advice-giver than director. This transition is extremely difficult for many parents.
We want to control and protect our children from making mistakes. Any good parent would want to do this for their child. All we can do as parents is to raise our children to love God and love people as the Bible instructs us to do. After the child is “of age” they must make their own choices and live with the blessings or the consequences of those decisions. This is really hard to do.
As the parent you have wisely determined that being “yoked” with someone who is not a follower of Jesus Christ is a bad idea. You have also noticed that “living together” before marriage is also not a good idea. All of these assessments are correct. The problem is what can you do about it?
I would get down on my knees everyday with my spouse and pray earnestly for my child. If you are doing this, keep doing it. Pray that God would soften their hearts and bring conviction, repentance, and restoration.
As to whether or not to attend the wedding, this can only be you and your spouse’s decision. It is something that must be bathed in prayer and wise counsel. Whatever you choose to do will have enormous impact on the relationship. I do have a few questions that might help you and your spouse process this decision a little more:
-What will be accomplished if you and your spouse do not attend the wedding?
-How can you be the light of Christ in your child’s poor decisions and darkness?
I have no agenda in asking these particular questions other than trying to help you make the right choice. I would say that to make the decision to isolate or remove a relative from your life must be done with great care; especially, when it is one of your children. You might be the only picture of goodness, hope, joy, and love that your child will see for a while because of poor choices. You might be the only representation of Jesus for her and how you respond to her lifestyle will have great impact. It is possbible to love and care for someone even when that person is living far from God--it is just really hard to do. If you need to process this situation a little more I am absolutely available, simply call the church and we can set up a time to meet.
Thursday, February 14, 2008
Wicca and Christianity
Q: Do you know about Wickens (sic)? A girl in the hospital told me she was a good wicken (sic)? She believes in God, Jesus and that he arose from the dead for us. She also believes in many other Gods, such as God of Nature, God of Animals… I believe she is not a Christian because she believes in more Gods, but I believe she is because she believes in God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit. She says there are good Wicken (sic) and bad Wicken (sic).
A: It sounds to me like this person is a bit confused. I have read that this generation of young people are some of the most spiritual ever. But that doesn't mean that it is a significantly Christian generation...
Many people today seem to have a smorgasbord mentality when it comes to their spirituality - they pick and choose what they like from various belief systems, and leave behind that which doesn't appeal to them. It sounds like that's what this girl has done. She likes the idea of the Christian God, but maybe doesn't like the lifestyle (I'm simply making guesses) or something about the Wiccan set of beliefs appeals to her, so she latches on to that, too. Unfortunately, or fortunately, it's not that easy. When you have contradictory belief systems, one of them by definition has to be right and the other wrong. They can't both be right, just like someone can't be a bachelor and married at the same time.
Some of the contradictions / problems with Wiccan, in light of Christian beliefs:
*Wicca is a pantheistic religion, which means that God is in all of nature and cannot be separated from it. Christianity believes that God created all of nature, but is not integrated into it. As a result of this pantheism, the Wiccan believes that humanity participates in God and is God. Again, Christianity does not believe that mankind is God, but a separate entity created by Him.
*Wiccans believe that although all of nature and creation is God, there can be various realities and beliefs within God as humanity participates in God. This is even true if those various realities contradict each other. This is a logical absurdity.
*Wiccans believe in a God and Goddess, which are the male and female aspects of the Absolute One, a genderless deity. The High Preist of the coven (group of witches) is considered the incarnation of the God, and the High Preistess is considered the incarnation of the Goddess. Christianity believes in one God, manifested in three persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Jesus Christ is the only incarnation of God.
*Magic is a central component in Wicca. Magic is condemned in the Bible (Leviticus 19:26, 31; 20:6; Deuteronomy 18:9-14; 2 Kings 23:24; et al).
*While Wiccans believe in reincarnation, Hebrews 9:27 tells us that each person is appointed to die once (not twice, nor thrice).
*Karma is also held in high regard to Wiccans, as seen by their belief that if you do evil, it will return to you three-fold, and the same will be true if you do good. The Christian foundation is built on grace, not on what you do to earn good things happening to you.
*The Wiccan crede is: "And it harm none, do what you will." Basically, as long as you don't harm anyone, do whatever you want. The question is: Who defines harm? My reality as a part of God might be different from yours, so my definition of harm might be different. So if I were to come over and punch you really hard in the nose, you would probably cry, "Foul!" But my reality might be telling me that it is not really causing harm, so I can do it if I want to. That's a big problem with relative truth.
So this girl believes in God/Jesus/the Holy Spirit. The Bible says that the devil believes, too. This mental assent to a truth is not all it takes to be a Christian. It is a faith in that truth, and that truth alone.
For more information on this topic, go here: http://www.sdmin.org/soundingboard/199806.htm
Unbelieving Children
A: If your child is open to discussions or reading, you can have conversations along the lines of what you’ve seen on this blog. For instance, there is a lot of data that clearly refutes the issue of the Bible changing with each translation. If your child is not open to these kind of conversations, forcing them is of little help; I know from experience. So then, what do we parents do?
As difficult as it is, I think we follow the lead of the father in the Parable of the Prodigal Son. We allow them to be people with free will and make choices, even if they are bad. I’m not saying we abdicate our position as parents, but that position changes with the age of our children; as one person said to me, “we remain responsible to our children, but no longer responsible for them.” The father let his child go his own way, even with a blessing he didn’t deserve. Then each day, as he went on living his life and working and relating with his other children, he eagerly watched the horizon, ready to embrace his child when the child came to his senses.
For us, I think that looks like daily prayer; by us and by our friends and family. Not the kind of prayer that demands the next thing that happens or that we say to be THE thing that turns our child around, but the kind that is for the long haul. The hard part, especially in our society, is often the child comes over the hill not because of coming to his senses, but just to take more from us. That’s hard, and tough love may be called for. But continue to pray as an act of love to that child, regardless of outcomes.
Then, we live out our faith. We live consistently with Christ’s principles. I found that I was pushing Jesus, but living my life and treating my child with anger, bitterness, fear and frustration. Jesus doesn’t do that. So we find safe, appropriate places to properly deal with our junk, and then we deal with our kids like Christ-centered parents. Easy to say, tough to do, but I think like a lot of things, the hard route is the right one.
Remember, teens and young adults are looking to form their own identity and break away from parental influences. This may be as much about or more about you and your child than God and your child. For more information and encouragement, you may want to check out www.family.org.
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Denominations
Q: If Christianity is Christianity - how do we deal with those of other denominations who are convinced that theirs is the only correct belief system?
A: I went on a summer mission trip years ago when I was in college. I remember something that the director said that I thought was profound. I think it applies here. He said...
"In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity." Basically, what that means is:
* There are certain things that are non-negotiables in the Christian faith. Some of these are that Jesus is the only way to God; that He died a substitutionary death for us for our sin; that God exists in three persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; and that the Bible is the inspired Word of God. This list is far from exhaustive. We believe that, in order to call oneself a Christian, there must be a belief in and a trust placed in these essential truths. If someone believes something else, then historic Christianity would probably say that that person is not a Christian, but something else.
* There are also certain things that are negotiables: how to baptize (dunking or sprinkling, infant or believer), how to take Communion (intinction or wafer, wine or juice), what songs we should use in worship (hymns or contemporary worship songs or secular music), what version of the Bible to use (KJV, NIV, NRSV, NLT), and so on. These are not really essential to having a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. Because of that, we can show each other some liberty to believe differently than what we believe in those areas. It shouldn't affect how we view that person's relationship with God.
* In either of the above areas, there should always be charity shown. Charity is an old word for love. We should always be loving, no matter the circumstance. The problem seems to come when we find that we differ in our beliefs with others, whether it be in negotiables or non-negotiables. Too often we - as Christians - respond with vitriol, scorn, and pride. We look down on and argue with others who believe differently, instead of loving them despite our differences, as Jesus would do. Would Jesus refuse to hang out with someone because they believed differently? Those are exactly the people He did hang out with. As a result of us not modeling Jesus, those who don't consider themselves to be followers of Christ / Christians see this infighting and ask, "Why would I want to be a part of that? They can't even get along with each other." That's a problem.
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
The Christian and suffering
Q: I believe that I am a Christian. I pray, I go to church, I teach kids about God, but bad things keep happening to me all the time. Why is that?
A: Becoming a Christian doesn’t exempt us from suffering. Jesus said, “In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world.” In this saying he promises two things: that we will experience suffering and that his life brings ultimate meaning to it and victory over it.
You could even argue that becoming a Christian increases our likelihood of suffering because now there is the added dimension of persecution because of our faith. (Not that we in America face anything closely resembling the persecution our brothers and sisters in Christ face in other parts of the world!) Think of all the suffering the first disciples faced, the hardships of the Apostle Paul, the tens of thousands of martyrs who died for their faith. Bad things happened to them, didn’t they? Yet, they rejoiced. They even sang when falsely imprisoned. Why? The resurrected Christ dwelt in their hearts!
Within this question is a hint that...
“if I do the right things, things should go well for me.” I’m not saying the person who asked this question is practicing their faith with an ulterior motive in mind, but the reality is some do approach God from a position of bargaining. “I’ll join a church, go to small group, pay my tithes, keep my kids in church, God, as long as you bless me and make my life comfortable and rewarding! God, I’ll do my part if you’ll do yours!” When something has really gone well for you, have you ever heard someone say, “You must be living right?” That is not a biblical notion. God’s blessings come to us as a gift, not because we’re living right. Now, don’t get me wrong: Right living has its rewards (the satisfaction of doing the right thing, the joy of obedience, etc.). But, we should serve God out of gratitude and love; not for what we might get in return.
Think of it this way. Let’s say that becoming a Christ follower meant you supernaturally entered a trouble free zone. You never got sick, you always had an abundance financially, your car never broke down, your kids got straight A’s … you get the picture. Now, under those circumstances, how many would become Christians? Just about everyone … and for all the wrong reasons. They’d be mercenaries, not disciples.
Jesus suffered. We will suffer. Jesus’ suffering was redeemed. Our suffering will be redeemed.
Where did Cain get his wife?
Q: How could all the races of the world come from one man and one woman? Did Cain and Abel marry their sisters?
A: If people are asking questions about the Bible, this one is sure to come up. The Bible doesn’t tell us, so it is speculation. Here are a couple options:
The Talmud (a history of commentary on the law by Jewish rabbis) tells us that Cain and Able were both born with twin sisters, who married the other brother. Yes, that is incest by later standards but, given the circumstances, it was necessary in the beginning.
In his book, The Science of God, Gerald Schroeder offers an interesting alternative view. He speculates that since Genesis says Adam was “made,” not “created” (meaning he was made out of something already existing), that the earth by this time was filled with...
hominids – pre-human creatures. When God announces His punishment on Cain for killing his brother, Genesis 4:15 says Cain “will be a restless wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds [him] will kill [him].” That suggests that there are other people in the world besides Cain, his parents and siblings. Schroeder suggests these are hominids, pre-human beings who may or may not have had spirit breathed into them by God as had happened when Adam was made. Again, this is speculation but it has biblical warrant in the language of Genesis. Interestingly, this would reconcile some aspects of evolutionary theory with the biblical account of creation. He does a much better job of describing this, so I suggest getting his book if you want to dig deeper.
Dinosaurs!
Q: Where do dinosaurs come into God’s creation?
A: Ah yes, the ultimate FAQ – the dinosaur question! Several people asked the question in different ways.
Since the Bible’s main objective is to tell the story of God’s history of redemption (and not the history of our planet), it is not obligated to cover material that is irrelevant to the development of that story. In all likelihood, dinosaurs were extinct long before Adam & Eve. That doesn’t mean the Bible is completely silent on the matter. Genesis 1:21 tells about Day 5 of creation and mentions the taninim gedolim. It gets translated a number of different ways. Gedolim meant “big” and taninim was a category of animal. This word is used elsewhere in the Old Testament and it is always a...
reptile. So, you could translate this verse, “And God created the big reptiles…” Since the author is mentioning animals only known to people at the time of writing, it would have been inconsistent in his writing style to mention something they would not have been familiar with. But, it is a hint; and perhaps that’s all it is.
Underlying the dinosaur question, often, is the notion that their existence somehow proves the Bible wrong. The existence of dinosaurs is only a problem if you are a “young earth creationist,” meaning you interpret from Genesis that the earth is only about 6,000 years old. That is a minority position within the Christian community. Old Earth Creationists believe the earth is millions of years old, though the story of God’s redemption of the world spans the past 6000. There are also “theistic evolutionists,” those who believe in God and accept the theory of evolution. Folks in these latter two camps have no trouble reconciling dinosaurs and the Bible.
Predestination
A: This question is loaded with several questions, but I’ll try to keep it brief. I don’t believe in predestination as some do (we call these folks Calvinists because this thinking traces back to John Calvin), but let me answer it as they would. Calvinists would say those predestined to believe in and follow Christ (i.e. be a “Christian") couldn’t say, “so why be a Christian?” or they wouldn’t be predestined. They believe that if you are predestined you cannot, under your own free will, resist God’s grace. They would say it’s the same as saying “Roger is predestined to be a football player, so he said ‘what the heck’ and became a baseball player.” If he became a baseball player then he wasn’t predestined to be a football player.
Now I think what you’re really asking is why not go out and do whatever you want to do because either you were predestined or you weren’t. Why be moral, why praise God, why pray, why evangelize if people are either in or out prior to anything they decide themselves? Good questions, actually; but a Calvinist would say “because God commanded these things and you must not really be predestined if you don’t do what God commands.” They don’t mean be perfect, but commit yourself to God, serving, evangelizing, following God’s precepts, and asking for his forgiveness.
As I said, I am not a Calvinist. I don’t believe we are predestined in the sense that God said, “that one, that one, not those three, that one…” I think God foreknows what everyone will choose, but he doesn’t choose it for them. God sees time all at once; he sees the future like we see the past. Do you and I know it sleeted yesterday? Yes. Does that mean we made it sleet yesterday? No. It’s the same with God and the future. He allows our free will in choosing. The Romans passage you mention says that for those God foreknew (those he knew would choose him, but didn’t cause them to choose him) he predestined to become like his Son. It is the outcome that was predestined. It’s like a bus that is going to St. Louis. The destination is predestined, who gets on the bus is not…though God would know in advance who gets on the bus because he’s outside of time. But each person still decides for himself or herself.
God the Scapegoat
A: In the Old Testament, there was a practice of assigning the guilt and sin of everyone in the community to a spotless lamb or goat and then sacrificing it or sending it off into the wilderness. It is where we get our term “scapegoat” and it foreshadowed what Jesus would do on the cross. Your question points to the reality that God still serves as the scapegoat today; God is often blamed for the mess of our fallen and sinful world. Since Pastor Ron preached on this subject, I refer you to his message “Where was God.”
However, I want to address the particulars of your question.
Jesus is the best revelation we have of God (the Book of Hebrews emphasizes this). Look at what Jesus did and said; he healed, he reached out to the social outcasts and “sinners” to eat meals with them and ask them to follow him. He said that his desire was to have us experience abundant life, joy and peace. He poured out the Holy Spirit on believers that we might grow in love, joy and peace among others. He pointed to forgiveness as the only sure cure for bitterness and commanded us to do it because he knows it frees our hearts.
Where in any of the revelation of Jesus do you find him making people sick, bitter or joyless? Nowhere.
Friday, February 8, 2008
Monotheism--One God
Q: The Ten Commandments…Thou shalt have no other gods before me…so is God acknowledging there are other gods?
A: I can understand at first glance that maybe someone could come to the conclusion that God is acknowledging that there are other gods; however, I think it is important to understand a little of the history of the Ancient Near East.
Israel was unique in the ANE exclusively because they maintained that there is only one God. This position is known as monotheism. Israel was unique because at that time the ANE was riddled with societies that believed in multiple gods. This position is known as polytheism.
The reason I mention this is to provide some context to the question. God was not necessarily acknowledging that there were others gods, as much as he was saying to all the people in the ANE and the world that there is only one God, the God of Israel. In other words, all those “gods” people were worshiping were not really gods at all because there is only one God.
Many people in the ANE participated in all kinds of idol worship and many of the “gods” people worshiped were simply created out of wood or metal. The God of the Bible is not a created object. The Bible is clear that God is the one and only God and all should recognize this fact and worship him.
The Uniqueness of Jesus
Q: I have a very difficult time believing that the ONLY way to God is through Jesus Christ.
A: This is more of a statement than a question, but there are a lot of questions wrapped up in it. We live in a time in history when certainty and truth is not a high priority. Our world and culture are regularly questioning and challenging the foundations that at one time where simply accepted. I actually think this is a good thing on some levels, because people are asking questions and wanting more information. It’s good to see people considering faith and spirituality more and more.
We live in a culture that struggles with the word “only” or any absolute. In this world, truth is relative to the person. In other words, whatever you think is true - is true. The problem with this approach to understanding the world, in my opinion, is that the person becomes the center of the world. The person gets to determine what truth is no matter how dysfunctional or disturbing. If a person wants to think or believe that flying airplanes into office buildings is a good thing then “poof” it is a good thing.
Believing that Jesus Christ is the only way to God is most defiantly a foundational truth and teaching of the Bible and the Church. However, when the backdrop to this foundational truth is relativism or some kind of mix-and-match theology people will naturally begin to question the certainty of the Bible’s position.
It takes faith to believe in Jesus Christ and I don’t think it takes any less faith to believe that Jesus is the ONLY way to God. It seems arrogant for one particular religion to make such a claim and I understand why someone might think this about Christianity. However, Christianity is not trying to be arrogant or even exclusive in the sense that they are trying to keep people out; like some kind of religious country club. The Church is simply trying to state what we believe and what it clearly communicated in God’s Word.
I think that the word “only” is what really gets people tripped up. I like to think about it in terms of the uniqueness of Jesus Christ. The thing that makes Christianity different then other religions is Jesus Christ. He is the uniqueness. I realize that this word gets translated in all kinds of ways in various circles, but the fact still remains that Jesus was not trying to be exclusive or exclusionary—if anything Jesus was trying to be the most inclusive person ever to live on this earth. He wants all people to believe in him and find eternal life. Jesus is the difference when compared to other religions or other thoughts on God. He is the unique factor that sometimes gets misrepresented by people who are searching.
The Bible tells us that Jesus is the way to God. He is the uniqueness of our faith. He is not the great excluder. He wants all people to come to him and believe so that they might have eternal life.
Why do you have a very difficult time believing that the ONLY way to God is through Jesus Christ?
Thursday, February 7, 2008
Why Parables?
Q: Why did Jesus (who was obviously “different” – doing miracles and healing) speak in parables (and then had to explain to the disciples)? Did he not want the “masses” to understand his message?
A: This is a great question – because it is one that the disciples, themselves, asked Jesus in Matthew 13:10. Jesus answered them by saying, “You are permitted to understand the secrets [mysteries] of the Kingdom of Heaven, but others are not. To those who listen to my teaching, more understanding will be given, and they will have...
...an abundance of knowledge. But for those who are not listening, even what little understanding they have will be taken away from them. That is why I use these parables, for they look, but they don’t really see. They hear, but they don’t really listen or understand.” (Matt. 13:11-13 NLT)
One important thing to realize is the timeframe in which so many of Jesus’ parables were told. Because many of the established leaders of ‘religion’ at that time were turning against Him, Jesus was forced to move His ministry from the synagogue to the seashore. In doing so, He was speaking out in the open where everyone could come and listen – not just those who wanted to hear his teachings and grow closer to Him – but also those who were His adversaries and wanted to find condemning evidence to use against him.
It’s not like Jesus is hiding the truth from some people, but not from others. He’s not intentionally trying to pull one over on the “masses”. What He is telling us in the above verses is that some people can understand spiritual truth and some people cannot. Many of the people that were listening to his teachings were not, in fact, hearing him. Their hearts were hardened; they were prideful; their spiritual condition was poor. On them, the parable was lost. These adversaries heard a great story, nothing more.
Yet there were many others listening to him, who were hearing. They were humble; they were anxious to hear what Jesus was teaching; to them, the teachings were made clear.
In his commentary on the book of Matthew, Michael Green says, “It may seem unfair, but that is life. If you do not use your muscles you eventually lose the use of them. If you do use them, they increase in size and strength. It is the same at the spiritual level. The parables bring light for those who look for it, and for those who do not the darkness intensifies.”
In addition, Jesus used parables because it is a fantastic storytelling technique. Per Webster’s – a parable is a “short, simple story teaching a moral lesson.” These simple, short stories hold our attention and are very easy to remember. They are also easy to relate to and cause us to spend some time reflecting.I do want to make it clear, that Jesus DID want the masses to understand His teachings. Even those with hardened hearts and closed minds can come around full circle to the promise in Luke 11:9: “And so I tell you, keep on asking, and you will receive what you ask for. Keep on seeking, and you will find. Keep on knocking, and the door will be opened to you.” His desire is that everyone would turn to Him and pursue an understanding of the truths found in His Word.
Scientology...
Q: Is Scientology a Christian religion? What do they believe?
A: Scientology is not a Christian religion. Before I tell you what they believe, I want to give a brief description of what we, as Christians, believe and the basis of Christianity. Then, when I get to...
...the beliefs of Scientology, it will be very apparent that the two don’t connect.
Christianity is founded on the person of Jesus Christ: his teachings, ministry, death and resurrection. The word “Christ” means that He is the anointed one (it’s not Jesus’ last name...{smile}). Jesus came to Earth, fulfilled Old Testament laws and prophecies, died on a cross, and physically rose from the dead. He performed a lot of miracles that are recorded in the Gospels – with eye witness accounts.
We believe that there is only one God in all existence who made the universe and created man and woman in His image. We also believe in God as Trinity – not three Gods – but one God who is the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
Christianity is the only religion in the world that teaches salvation through grace…all other religions teach that we must do some sort of good to achieve the right to be in the presence of God. In other words, our belief is that there is nothing we can do to earn our way to heaven. We are able to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven by faith in what Christ did for us on the cross.
As Christians, we also believe that once an individual comes to know Christ (“is born again”; “saved”) – they are filled with the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit actually indwells their body and they are changed, allowing them to experience a true, living relationship with God.
All that being said…here is the core belief system of Scientologists, taken directly from their writings:
“Man is an immortal, spiritual being. His experience extends well beyond a single lifetime. His capabilities are unlimited, even if not presently realized—and those capabilities can be realized. He is able to not only solve his own problems, accomplish his goals and gain lasting happiness, but also achieve new, higher states of awareness and ability. In Scientology, no one is asked to accept anything as belief or on faith. That which is true for you is what you have observed to be true.”
A religion with no truths and no belief system, that elevates each individual to be their own god…is definitely not compatible with Christianity.
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
Does God cause illness?
Q: How do we explain to a loved one that God is not the one who makes them sick, bitter or have no joy?
A: It is all in knowing the character of God. The teaching of Jesus that best contrasts the work of God with the work of the devil is John 10:10. “The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full.” If the scene of the accident has the fingerprints of death, disease and destruction all over it, you can be sure it is not of God. No where in the Gospels do we see Jesus going about distributing illness. We only see healing disease. No where do we see him oppressing someone with hardship or suffering. We see him tenderly alleviating suffering and bringing encouragement to the downtrodden. If you want to know what God is like, look at Jesus. Study the gospels. There you will see that God is good … all the time!
Why does God intervene only some times?
Q: Why would God choose to intervene in some cases and not in others, i.e. sickness, poverty, etc.?
A: In the teachings of the New Testament there is this tension between “the already” and “the not yet.” Jesus said, “The Kingdom of heaven is among you.” Yet, he also instructed us to pray, “your Kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.” In his first coming, Jesus inaugurated the Kingdom of Heaven. But, he did not culminate it. The Kingdom of God is seen wherever people are submitted to the King. We pray for a healing, let’s say, and sometimes God graciously grants our prayers. Other times, the person gets worse and dies. The reality is that all people in this world will eventually die. The Kingdom is not fully here yet. When Jesus returns he will establish his Kingdom in all its glory. Then, “the kingdoms of this earth will become the kingdoms of our Lord and of his Christ.” There will neither be sickness or sorrow or pain. A new heaven and a new earth will be created will replace the old. Until then, we wait and live in the land of the already/not yet. We see glimpses of what is to come, but only glimpses. A miracle of healing is a signpost of what is to come. So, while it may appear God doesn’t intervene now, he will most definitely intervene later!
Why did the Father allow Jesus to die?
Q: A couple of weeks ago you spoke about a group of people who sacrificed their first born child as an offering – and that sounds so awful to us, but God sacrificed His son for us and we think it’s a noble, worthy cause?? Why would a father do that to his child? And I guess Jesus had a choice, but did he really have a choice – a little bit of guilt there – taking on the sin of the world? Why would he allow his son to go through that? He is supposed to be a loving God. The other people who did it were monsters for it, but God is love?
A: There is a world of difference between the two. As you already point out, Jesus had a choice. He said, “No one takes my life from me. I lay it down on my accord.” “The good shepherd lays down his life for...
...the sheep.” “Greater love has no one than this; that a man lay his life down for his friends.” In Galatians Paul said, “the son of God loved me and gave himself up for me.”
God, the Father, gave his son as a gift to the world. The son, as a gift to us, offered himself as the Lamb of God, taking away the sins of the world. Jesus said, “I and the Father are one.” To say that the Father did this to Jesus misses the key point that the Father, through his son, took the cross upon himself. They are one.
God allowed his son to go through the agonies of the cross because of his love for us. The penalty for sin is death. That is what God established in the garden and throughout history. Sin is a serious matter. Just as prison time is required for some crimes, blood is required for sin. Justice demanded that our blood be shed. Mercy meant Jesus shed his blood on our behalf. The One sacrificed for the many that the many could be saved.
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
Why Bother Living?
A: A subtle distinction; death does not bring us closer to God – resurrection in Christ allows us to come fully into the presence of God. We will see him not like through the bottom of a Coke bottle (or Pepsi bottle…whatever your preference of bottle), but clearly. However, that truth does not render our present life meaningless or useless. I suppose if God only made us to lay around and do nothing on earth, and then we would lay around and do nothing in heaven, this question would be a tougher one to answer. But God has a plan for our life; he has imbued our lives with purpose.
Also, a similar question is something like this, “If running the 100 at the Olympics gets us closer to a gold medal, why practice sprinting on a track?” The answer is preparation for what our ultimate destination is. Just like God was trying to teach the Israelites how to be his people in the desert before they entered the Promised Land, he is teaching us how to be his here and now before we enter eternity.
Grace and Judgment Day
A: The Bible says that Christ died for the forgiveness of our sins. If we believe in Christ and accept that grace, then we are forgiven and on judgment day we will be found in Christ, washed clean and without sin. However, it is still a judgment day, because for those who have rejected Christ and, in so doing, stand before God without Christ, they will be judged on the basis of the law. Have they been perfect and upheld the law in every way; not just the 10 commandments, but the summary of those commandments - loving the Lord with all their heart, soul, mind and strength and loving others as themselves? Judgment day will separate the wheat from the chaff, but remember that outside of Christ’s gracious atonement for our sins, we are all chaff.
God will ask us to give an account of what we’ve done with what he has given us. It will not be for condemnation, but for a true reckoning of how we lived our lives under his grace and love. I suppose it would be something like this: on graduation day there are those who graduate and those who don’t, but a secondary question is – what grades did you get? (That’s a pretty iffy example, because graduation doesn’t come by grace…but hopefully you get the point).
Monday, February 4, 2008
Alcohol, Drugs, and Teenagers
Q: What about substances in the world and God? Biblically, I know that we, as Christians, are supposed to lead by example and that we are to always be in our “right/sober” mind. But why is this? If I am responsible with my actions and don’t put myself or others in danger, why is this so bad? I know in the bible it says to obey the law of the land in all aspects unless it goes against the morals of Christianity. Of course under-age drinking and smoking marijuana are both against the law. But I don’t understand how the government can allow me to choose who is going to be the next leader of our country but they won’t let me go out and have a beer or hang out in my house and smoke a plan (sic) that grows in the dirt. I understand that the majority of people under the drinking age would not be responsible after drinking and some people may not be responsible after smoking marijuana, but how is it right to put these restrictions on me and judge me without even knowing me? I pray; I spend time with God and I am trying to do so more often. I also know that it says in 1 Peter 4:7 to be sober in spirit for the purpose of prayer. But I think this is pointed more toward clearing our minds for prayer and to not be distracted. I have prayed after drinking and I have prayed after smoking. My prayer is sometimes more sincere after smoking than it is sober.
I am not trying to justify under-age beer drinking and pot smoking. I am trying to educate myself on things that I have been taught were wrong but I don’t quite have an understanding of why they are wrong. Is it ignorant for me to continue these things and even think that they might be able to be okay with God or is it ignorant for others to believe what they have been told to believe without doing any research?
A: You have a lot of questions to contend with here: drinking, obedience to authorities, drugs, etc. I will do my best to cover all of them.
First of all, if you consider the government to be inconsistent with laws doesn't give you license to pick and choose which ones you want to obey. For a while I have had a difficult time with the fact that out government sends 18 year-olds to war but won't let them buy a beer. But, these are the laws that the authorities have put into place, and the Bible - as you pointed out - is pretty clear that we need to obey those authorities. So while I agree with you that there are inconsistencies there, obedience is still required on our part. I don't like that the IRS comes knocking every year, but it doesn't mean I don't have to pay my taxes (doggone it!).
But why are they against the law? You asked: I understand that the majority of people under the drinking age would not be responsible after drinking and some people may not be responsible after smoking marijuana, but how is it right to put these restrictions on me and judge me without even knowing me? It is ridiculous to expect the government to go out and survey each individual to find out what they can and can not handle, which it sounds like you are advocating by saying that they need to know you before putting restrictions on you. What the government tries to do is make laws to protect the individuals in that jurisdiction. They are looking out for the greater good. And the fact of the matter is that alcohol and drugs do affect the majority of people, and oftentimes in harmful ways. You started with the premise that you are responsible with your actions and don't put yourself and others in danger. That is a faulty premise because when you start drinking/doing drugs, you become less and less responsible with your actions. Your judgments are affected by the drugs in your system. So while you might feel like you are starting out responsibly, your responsibility decreases.
A side story: I have alcoholism in my family. Do you think my family members went out and said, "Hmmm, I think I'll become an alcoholic/drug addict. That would be cool."? Of course not. They started out 'drinking responsibly,' but as they went along, their responsibility went down in a hurry.
Another thing to take into consideration is your stage of life. As a teenager, a few things are true of your development. First, your brain is still developing. Your frontal lobes, which control self-control and judgment, are still developing and will be until your mid-20's. This says that a teenager doesn't make the best judgment calls (like choosing to drink or do drugs because it's not hurting anyone). That could be part of the reason for the laws as we have them. And second, because it is still developing, the teenage brain is more susceptible to the negative affects of alcohol, particularly on memory and learning. Studies have shown negative cognitive effects in those who have used/abused alcohol, even weeks after they have stopped using. Maybe the law is there and the command from God is there to protect you (and your brain).
The Bible does talk a lot about being sober-minded and self controlled. As a matter of fact, drunkenness and self-control are for all intents and purposes contrasted in Galatians 5 in the discussion of the acts of the sinful nature (drunkenness) and the fruit of the Spirit (self-control). I could go into exposition on each of the verses in the Bible that cover drunkenness/soberness/self-control. But rather than do that, I will try to summarize with a question that I think can be derived from many of the verses: Which would you prefer to be controlled by, the alcohol/drugs or the Holy Spirit? That seems to be the distinction made throughout Scripture.
Saturday, February 2, 2008
Suffering
Q: Why do the innocent suffer?
Read More......
Friday, February 1, 2008
The Trinity
Q: The concept of the Trinity is difficult for me to understand. Can you explain it in simple terms?
A: First, I would say join the club. Trying to understand the Trinity completely is extremely difficult, if not impossible. The Trinity is a mystery on some levels. I don’t believe that we will ever fully understand the Trinity this side of Heaven. However, I do believe...
that God has revealed himself to us in this way. We worship a God that is truly three in one.Hebrews 1:3a says, “The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word.” The word “being” or person is the English rendering of the Greek word hupostasis {hoop-os'-tas-is}. The sense of the word is best described as “substance.” In other words, The Son is the exact substance of God. This word is significant because it helps us understand the relationship between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. All three are unique yet contain the same substance; hence, three in One.Here’s an example:1. Water is a good example for understanding the substance question. If you freeze water, its still water; it’s just frozen. In a similar way, God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit are of the same substance, yet distinct.I know there are other examples that might help us understand the Trinity better. I would encourage people to post other examples that they have heard or seen that could possibly be helpful so that we all can learn a little more.The Trinity is one of the unique doctrines of the church that is vital to understanding the God we worship. Christians do not worship three gods. We worship one God who has revealed himself to us in three distinct beings. The Trinity is simple, yet complex all at the same time. However, this is how God has chosen to reveal himself to us, so we must ask for wisdom in order to understand better. Will we fully understand the Trinity in this life? I doubt it. Can we understand it better each day? Absolutely!
God's Name?
Q: My problem with God is his name. I grew up “in the church” and “God” was someone that I had to be good for. “God” became like a parent who only paid attention to me if I was “bad”. I am glad God has many names. I need a new name for God.
A: I realize this is not a question per se, but for some reason I was drawn to your statement. Your problem is pretty common. People have bad experiences all the time and sometimes those experiences color our ...
view or understanding of God. It is true that there are many names used for the God of the Bible. The truth is that no name will ever fully capture the fullness of God.
One name commonly used by follows of Christ to refer to God is the name--Father. I tend to like this name a lot because it helps me understand that no matter my situation or circumstance God will always be as close as a Father. He is the perfect Father without a doubt. I think one of the reasons I relate to this name, Father, is because I guess on some levels I have always longed for a closer relationship with my earthly Father. I don’t know if you can relate to this at all? I know of people who have had retched fathers and it is terribly difficult for them to refer to God as Father. However, to completely eliminate this name for God is to in some way lose an aspect of how God has revealed himself to us. The one thing I say to people that struggle with this name for God is that God wants to redeem and heal the brokenness that inhibits someone from experiencing him as Father.I only use the “Father” example to make the point that the names we use matter, and that if certain names are left out because of our difficult experiences or family history we run the risk of losing an important aspect or attribute of God.You said you needed another name for God. What name would you use? Would you use multiple names? Would these names reflect the revealed nature and character of God found in the Old and New Testaments?Lastly, God is not a cosmic cop waiting around to give us a ticket when we mess up. I recently read a book called “The Deity Formally Known as God” by Jarrett Stevens. I would encourage you to read it. He does a really great job with describing who God is and who God is not. Thanks for the question/statement!
