The recent NYT bestselling book, The Shack, is an outright attack on Christianity. This book was lent to my wife by a friend, with a good recommendation. She read it and pointed out several things along the way to me. My assessment is that it is an attack on Christianity, a wolf in sheep’s clothing.
This novel repeatedly, and systematically, undermines the God of the Bible, Jesus, the Trinity, and many other core doctrines of the Church. This is not a mere re-interpretation of the Biblical doctrines from scripture in an entertaining way, the statements and claims in the book directly contradict statements in the Bible. Statements about who God is, how we interact with Him, our own Salvation are re-defined into something new and different. It may sound similar, but after you re-define all the terms and relationships, it undermines the Christian worldview. This is not the Jesus of the Bible, the same as Allah is not the God of the Bible.
I have read one book on New Age and listened to a couple CDs; enough to recognize that this is not a Christian book, but a New Age book with the purpose of replacing Christianity in the cultural mainstream. It is a shame that any Christian bookstore or online seller would sell this as a Christian book. It is a shame that any pastor would recommend this book, or even purchase multiple copies for those in his shepherding.
Anyone who reads the Bible on a regular (nearly daily) basis should be able to see right through this story for they are firmly grounded in the Word of God, "thoroughly equipped for every good work". If you are not regularly reading God's Word, you will be more likely to be deceived by the "fine-sounding arguments" and led astray.
Spread the word, this book is as anti-Christian as they come!
Thursday, September 4, 2008
Sunday, July 27, 2008
Preach the Gospel always, if necessary use words
After talking with someone recently about apologetics, they commented that their philosophy was captured in the words of St Francis of Assisi, "Preach the Gospel always, if necessary use words." This is an often repeated phrase and philosophy among Christians today, but is it Biblical?
I was a bit uncomfortable about this approach, as I dug in further, I became more cetain that it is not Biblical, nor is it effective.
In my many years, I have had several discussions with several people regarding faith, the Bible, Jesus, God, etc... but out of all those, there is only one that I can knowingly attribute to 'preaching the gospel without words'. That doesn't mean we shouldn't preach the gospel without words, but it does mean we shouldn't use that as our sole approach.
What's the problem?
Part of the problem is our fallen nature, we all sin, and thus do not give a perfect reflection of the gospel. We all give examples, at times, that turn others away from the gospel, rather than towards it. This phrase can be used to challenge us as Christians to seek to live a better life, striving to keep ourselves from being corrupted by the world. Yet, none of us will live up to this.
Another problem is the Biblical example. Look through the New Testament for sharing the gospel message, by and large they are all using words. Consider Peter sharing with the message with the Jews where 3000 were added to their number that day. Consider Paul sharing the gospel, using the 'unknown god' to trigger an explanation of the God who created heaven and earth, and many others.
The biggest problem is the direct command to preach the gospel in many different scripture passages. Consider this passage in Romans that speaks pretty directly to this:
Our Culture
Please don't accept this philosophy, the more we do this, the harder it is to distinguish Christian behavior from that of our culture. (yet one more reason it doesn't work)
Despite this approach not having Biblical support, and not being very effective, this is exactly what our culture wants us to hear. They want us to hear, "don't tell us about your religion". This goes right in line with the other phrases which seek to silence Christians, "we must tolerate others' beliefs", "we all worship the same god, we just follow different paths", "it's not a salvation issue", "I don't want to be prosletized".
These are all designed to keep us quiet, so we don't preach the gospel. It makes them uncomfortable. To those living without the gospel, they should be uncomfortable when faced with their sin. They don't like to be reminded, yet we have the only message of hope for them.
I was a bit uncomfortable about this approach, as I dug in further, I became more cetain that it is not Biblical, nor is it effective.
In my many years, I have had several discussions with several people regarding faith, the Bible, Jesus, God, etc... but out of all those, there is only one that I can knowingly attribute to 'preaching the gospel without words'. That doesn't mean we shouldn't preach the gospel without words, but it does mean we shouldn't use that as our sole approach.
What's the problem?
Part of the problem is our fallen nature, we all sin, and thus do not give a perfect reflection of the gospel. We all give examples, at times, that turn others away from the gospel, rather than towards it. This phrase can be used to challenge us as Christians to seek to live a better life, striving to keep ourselves from being corrupted by the world. Yet, none of us will live up to this.
Another problem is the Biblical example. Look through the New Testament for sharing the gospel message, by and large they are all using words. Consider Peter sharing with the message with the Jews where 3000 were added to their number that day. Consider Paul sharing the gospel, using the 'unknown god' to trigger an explanation of the God who created heaven and earth, and many others.
The biggest problem is the direct command to preach the gospel in many different scripture passages. Consider this passage in Romans that speaks pretty directly to this:
Romans 10:13-14, "for, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved." How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them?"
Our Culture
Please don't accept this philosophy, the more we do this, the harder it is to distinguish Christian behavior from that of our culture. (yet one more reason it doesn't work)
Despite this approach not having Biblical support, and not being very effective, this is exactly what our culture wants us to hear. They want us to hear, "don't tell us about your religion". This goes right in line with the other phrases which seek to silence Christians, "we must tolerate others' beliefs", "we all worship the same god, we just follow different paths", "it's not a salvation issue", "I don't want to be prosletized".
These are all designed to keep us quiet, so we don't preach the gospel. It makes them uncomfortable. To those living without the gospel, they should be uncomfortable when faced with their sin. They don't like to be reminded, yet we have the only message of hope for them.
Does everyone know what is evil?
My wife asked me this question a while back. I thought about it a little and decided that they must. Some of the big things like murder are very apparent, but what about the rest?
My answer: Yes, absolutely!
My reason: Adam's original sin
We often talk of Adam's 'original sin' being the sin nature that we all inherit from Adam and Eve. But, shouldn't we also consider what else is inherited? Consider the story in Genesis 2-3. God said,
My answer: Yes, absolutely!
My reason: Adam's original sin
We often talk of Adam's 'original sin' being the sin nature that we all inherit from Adam and Eve. But, shouldn't we also consider what else is inherited? Consider the story in Genesis 2-3. God said,
Genesis 2:15-17, "The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. And the LORD God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die."
then later,
Genesis 3:6-7, " When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves."
Also, consider how all this plays into the gospel message of Jesus Christ.
1 Corinthians 2:21-22, "For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive."
So, because of Adam's sin, we inherit three things, 1) sin, 2) death, it's consequence, and 3) the knowledge of good and evil. But, that can all be reversed through faith in God's son, Jesus Christ.
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Branson: The Promise, the Fifth Commandment
Doug Phillips of Vision Forum presented this topic on "The Promise: The Power and Blessing of the Fifth Commandment".
Doug spoke on the fifth commandment, to
Doug spoke on the fifth commandment, to
"Honore you father and mother" - which is the first command with a promise. -Ephesians 6:2
To get the full verse from Deuteronomy 5:16 (the two promises are underlined)
Honor your father and your mother, as the LORD your God has commanded you, so that you may live long and that it may go well with you in the land the LORD your God is giving you.
The norm in our culture today is disrespect, not honor. The spirit of the age is 1) Individualism, 2) Egalitarianism, and 3) Dishonor.
He shared the truth about authority and jurisdiction: 1) All authority is given by God, 2) All authority has limitations, except for God (i.e. "obey your parents in the Lord"), 3) Authority has burdens as well as privileges, 4) Those with authority will be accountable to God for their use of authority
He also shared the truth about your parents: 1) God made your parents (His gift to you), 2) God calls you to honor them despite their failures, and 3) Your parents were once sons and daughters.
We should adopt a personal committment to honor, as a guiding principal for life. Gossip is diabolical. Worshiping youth is a principal of Humanism or Paganism; seek wisdom and do not pander to youth. He shared many scripture passages relating to honor. These were pretty rapid-fire so I don't think I capture them all, but here's a list he used:
- John 5:23, honor the Son as you honor the Father
- Romans 9:21, some are made for honor, some for dishonor
- John 8:54, honor is bestowed by someone else (not self)
- Leviticas 19:2, honor older men (your elders)
- Psalm 71:8, let your mouth proclaim honor
- 1 Samuel 2:30, honor and blessing are linked
- Proverbs 15:33, there is no honor with pride
- Romans 13:7, give honor to whom honor is due (not anyone)
- Thessalonians 4:4, possess your body in honor (carry and present yourself well)
- Proverbs 1:7-9
- Hebrews 12:9-10
- Proverbs 6:20-30, honor illuminates the mind
- Proverbs 4:1-4
- Genesis 18:18
- Psalm 103:17-18, no more droopy drawers syndrome
- Acts 2:39
- Proverbs 22:6
- 1 Peter 3:7, God and your children are watching
On dishonor:
- Exodus 21:15, 17, due death for dishonor to father
- Deuteronomy 27:14-26
- Proverbs 30:11-17
- Romans 1:28-31
- 2 Timothy 3:1-5
- Proverbs 20:20
Other:
- Hebrews 13:17
- 1 Timoth 6:1
- Romans 12:10
- 1 Timothy 5:17
Quotes:
Expect hell, fire, and brimstone. Anything you get above this is a bonus.
Branson: What Mean These Stones
This was presented as the closing session by Carl Kerby of Answers in Genesis.
This is in reference to the passage in Joshua (3-4) where the ark and all Israel crossed the Jordan on dry ground and setup stones on the other side as a reminder for generations of what God had done.
He told us that there are 400,000 churches in America, there are organizations, and products, and "Christian everything". But, are we getting more or getting less Christian as a nation? The answer, 'less Christian'. Carl shared some statistics to reinforce that conclusion.
He shared the Barna Research survey results indicating between 70-88% of Christian youth leave the church after age 18.
He shared much other information, but this got me to thinking about the math and population genetics approach similar to what I recently read in "Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome" by Dr. John Sanford. Assuming all Christians marry other Christians, and have two kids who grow up to be Christians (to keep pace/replace themselves) and the failure rate of 88%, each Christian family would need to have 15-17 children. Once you factor in all the other issues, such as fertility, population growth rate, marriage age, age of death, etc... you quickly realize that this is an impossible, loosing battle statistically. It's a good thing God doesn't play by 'statistics' or there would be no hope.
Carl also shared that there is a failure rate of 70% within 5 years for those in ministry.
Things may look bleak, but we are reminded by these stones, that
He is always faithful.
This is in reference to the passage in Joshua (3-4) where the ark and all Israel crossed the Jordan on dry ground and setup stones on the other side as a reminder for generations of what God had done.
He told us that there are 400,000 churches in America, there are organizations, and products, and "Christian everything". But, are we getting more or getting less Christian as a nation? The answer, 'less Christian'. Carl shared some statistics to reinforce that conclusion.
He shared the Barna Research survey results indicating between 70-88% of Christian youth leave the church after age 18.
He shared much other information, but this got me to thinking about the math and population genetics approach similar to what I recently read in "Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome" by Dr. John Sanford. Assuming all Christians marry other Christians, and have two kids who grow up to be Christians (to keep pace/replace themselves) and the failure rate of 88%, each Christian family would need to have 15-17 children. Once you factor in all the other issues, such as fertility, population growth rate, marriage age, age of death, etc... you quickly realize that this is an impossible, loosing battle statistically. It's a good thing God doesn't play by 'statistics' or there would be no hope.
Carl also shared that there is a failure rate of 70% within 5 years for those in ministry.
Things may look bleak, but we are reminded by these stones, that
He did this so that all the peoples of the earth might know that the hand of the LORD is powerful and so that you might always fear the LORD your God. -Joshua 4:24
He is always faithful.
Branson: The Person of Christ
This was presented by Voddie Baucham. We must understand Christ in order to understand the gospel.
Voddie told a story of meeting someone who was reading a New Age book. He asked about Jesus, she shared that she accepted Jesus too. He asked who he was, she responded that Jesus was a great man and a great prophet. (Is that all?)
Jesus is:
Voddie told a story of meeting someone who was reading a New Age book. He asked about Jesus, she shared that she accepted Jesus too. He asked who he was, she responded that Jesus was a great man and a great prophet. (Is that all?)
Jesus is:
- God in the flesh ("I and the Father are one")
- Our only access to God ("no one comes to the Father but by me")
- Jesus will return again and judge the world ("I am going to prepare a place for you")
You can accept him as these three items, or you can quit re-inventing Jesus!
- If you are wrong on Christ, you are wrong on the Gospel (and you are lost)
- If you are wrong on Scripture, you are wrong on the Gospel (and you are lost)
- If you are wrong on the Resurrection, you are wrong on the Gospel (and you are lost)
- Not even Christ has been raised
- Our preaching, and faith, is in vain
- We are mis-representing God, who raised him (I am a liar, false witness, blasphemer)
- Your are still in your sin (our sins are not paid for, we still must live up to the standard of perfection)
- There is no hope (we are dead like dogs, there is nothing after death, no hope, no joy, no heaven)
Matthew 7:1 is the new John 3:16. It is the verse that everyone knows. It is quoted as "Judge not, lest ye be judged". Yet if we read the rest of the passag, it says after we remove the log from our eye, then we remove the spec from our brother's eye. So, in the end we still judge.
It is sinful when we don't judge our brother!
Branson: Biblical Manhood
This was presented by Voddie Baucham. This presentation is based largely on Ephesians 5-6.
It starts with "wives, submit to our husbands"... This is repulsive to our culture.
Some try to avoid the clear meaning by saying that it means "mutual submission", but verse 21 negates that idea. The meaning of the greek word is a military word meaning "to voluntarily submit in rank or order" (not in value, we all have the same value before the Lord). If you look at the whole chapter the basic outline give 3 constrasts (wise-unwise, foolish-understanding, wine-spirit), 3 commands (worship/sing to the Lord, pray/give thanks to the Lord, submit to one another), and 3 context for submitting (wives to husbands, children to parents, slaves to masters). These specific contexts for submitting are also repeated in two other places in scripture.
Some try to avoid by claiming that the headship of man is the result of the fall (Genesis 3), and Christ restored us and reversed that curse. The problems are that other parts of the curse from our fall are still in effect (women still have pain in child-bearing, we still sweat when we work) and there was male headship before the fall. The new testament states that "death came through one man," not one couple. God held Adam accountable, not Eve.
Some try to avoid by claiming they will only submit when he's worthy of my submission. The problem is, they will never be worthy. We are all sinners, he will never do this perfectly. See 1 Peter 3, which says women should submit so that they may win their husbands over. Women should never tell their husbands, "you need to step up and be a man", this backs them into a corner, if they do it, they've admitted that they failed, if they don't haven't fulfilled their Biblical mandate.
Biblical Manhood:
It starts with "wives, submit to our husbands"... This is repulsive to our culture.
Some try to avoid the clear meaning by saying that it means "mutual submission", but verse 21 negates that idea. The meaning of the greek word is a military word meaning "to voluntarily submit in rank or order" (not in value, we all have the same value before the Lord). If you look at the whole chapter the basic outline give 3 constrasts (wise-unwise, foolish-understanding, wine-spirit), 3 commands (worship/sing to the Lord, pray/give thanks to the Lord, submit to one another), and 3 context for submitting (wives to husbands, children to parents, slaves to masters). These specific contexts for submitting are also repeated in two other places in scripture.
Some try to avoid by claiming that the headship of man is the result of the fall (Genesis 3), and Christ restored us and reversed that curse. The problems are that other parts of the curse from our fall are still in effect (women still have pain in child-bearing, we still sweat when we work) and there was male headship before the fall. The new testament states that "death came through one man," not one couple. God held Adam accountable, not Eve.
Some try to avoid by claiming they will only submit when he's worthy of my submission. The problem is, they will never be worthy. We are all sinners, he will never do this perfectly. See 1 Peter 3, which says women should submit so that they may win their husbands over. Women should never tell their husbands, "you need to step up and be a man", this backs them into a corner, if they do it, they've admitted that they failed, if they don't haven't fulfilled their Biblical mandate.
Biblical Manhood:
- Leads in love: not the Greco-Roman myth of romantic love. Love is an act of the will, that leads to action on behalf of it's object. Men are to love as Christ loves the church, Jesus laid down his life for his bride (the church). There is no excuse for a man to sto loving his wife (an act of the will).
- Leads in the Word: It is the man's job to wash his wife in the Word.
- Leads in righteousness:
- Leads in selflessness: Men should protect their family in Holiness and righteousness, presenting his wife and family pure and unblemished. Men should never be put in a situation to compete with women, that undermines their ability to love and protect. Same with boys and girls. We leave father and mother to cling to his wife.
Branson: The Devolution of Law
This was presented by Doug Phillips of Vision Forum. Psalm 119 is a good summary of this presentation, "Open my eyes that I may see the wonders of your law."
Doug recounted a story from his college years where he was invited to a session which became a 3-hour attack on him and the Bible by his college professors. He did not have answers to all of the questions, but this challenged him to never be without answers like this again. It planted a love for God's law in him.
Today, we are the most Biblically illiterate generation in 500 years, we have substituted everything else for the study of God's Word. (my question: Rather than going to Christian books, etc... why don't we go directly to the Bible?) We are in a battle between Biblical and secular thinking, there are two elements to this battle: 1) Orthodoxy (belief and doctrine) and 2) Orthopraxy (practical outworking of thee beliefs).
It has turned into a battle over the practical application and working of the family; man and woman, parent and child, abortion, divorce, etc... We need to reform the church and the family. The church is the problem, we have backed down or gone soft on God's law. (going back to a previous post, culture = religion externalized) The church has bent to the culture's influence, 'if it is not listed explicitly in the concordance, we are free to do as we please'. This is backwards and eliminates much of what can be plainly deducted from the message in the Bible. We often do not really believe that the Bible has the answer to all of life.
All people worship the Creator (God) or the creature/created things. We either depend on God for all we need, and know, or we depend on our self or others (Humanism).
We have written off the Bible in terms of fathers, mothers, sons, and daughter. We look to our own standards of the culture, rather than looking to the Bible for the standard.
Doug used a pyramid diagram to demonstrate God's laws. At the top are "The Greatest Commandments" (love the Lord your God, love your neighbor as yourself). The next level is the "Ten Commandments", which can all be categorized into one of the two greatest commandments. Then at the lowest level, there is a plethora of "Case Law" all over the Bible of specific, practical application of the other laws. These case laws help us better understand the higher laws better through specific situations.
In all this we should hold the Bible as our standard and be able to say, "Lord, I love your law".
Doug recounted a story from his college years where he was invited to a session which became a 3-hour attack on him and the Bible by his college professors. He did not have answers to all of the questions, but this challenged him to never be without answers like this again. It planted a love for God's law in him.
Today, we are the most Biblically illiterate generation in 500 years, we have substituted everything else for the study of God's Word. (my question: Rather than going to Christian books, etc... why don't we go directly to the Bible?) We are in a battle between Biblical and secular thinking, there are two elements to this battle: 1) Orthodoxy (belief and doctrine) and 2) Orthopraxy (practical outworking of thee beliefs).
It has turned into a battle over the practical application and working of the family; man and woman, parent and child, abortion, divorce, etc... We need to reform the church and the family. The church is the problem, we have backed down or gone soft on God's law. (going back to a previous post, culture = religion externalized) The church has bent to the culture's influence, 'if it is not listed explicitly in the concordance, we are free to do as we please'. This is backwards and eliminates much of what can be plainly deducted from the message in the Bible. We often do not really believe that the Bible has the answer to all of life.
All people worship the Creator (God) or the creature/created things. We either depend on God for all we need, and know, or we depend on our self or others (Humanism).
We have written off the Bible in terms of fathers, mothers, sons, and daughter. We look to our own standards of the culture, rather than looking to the Bible for the standard.
Doug used a pyramid diagram to demonstrate God's laws. At the top are "The Greatest Commandments" (love the Lord your God, love your neighbor as yourself). The next level is the "Ten Commandments", which can all be categorized into one of the two greatest commandments. Then at the lowest level, there is a plethora of "Case Law" all over the Bible of specific, practical application of the other laws. These case laws help us better understand the higher laws better through specific situations.
In all this we should hold the Bible as our standard and be able to say, "Lord, I love your law".
Branson: Life's Ultimate Questions
This was presented by Voddie Baucham. I only have very sparse notes on this one.
This is a comparison in worldviews between Christianity and our culture (Humanism), in how we answer life's ultimate questions.
What's wrong with the world?
Humanism's answers: 1) Insufficient education: (anger management, harrassment, etc...) or 2) Insufficient governance: (we need more rules to control others and let them know what's wrong). There are currently more law students today than lawyers. Who is going to govern the governors?
Christianity's answer: sin (we are fallen and cursed by sin and evil in this world, only Jesus Christ is the answer.)
Who am I?
Humanism's answer: We are the product of millions of years of death and struggle and random chance, we are incomplete (in progress).
Christianity's answer: We are the crowning glory of the Creation of Jesus Christ, created in God's image.
Why do we exist?
Humanism's answer: to onsume and enjoy, (reflected by "I want to give my kids more than I had")
Christianity's answer: to glofiy God, the Creator.
This is a comparison in worldviews between Christianity and our culture (Humanism), in how we answer life's ultimate questions.
What's wrong with the world?
Humanism's answers: 1) Insufficient education: (anger management, harrassment, etc...) or 2) Insufficient governance: (we need more rules to control others and let them know what's wrong). There are currently more law students today than lawyers. Who is going to govern the governors?
Christianity's answer: sin (we are fallen and cursed by sin and evil in this world, only Jesus Christ is the answer.)
Who am I?
Humanism's answer: We are the product of millions of years of death and struggle and random chance, we are incomplete (in progress).
Christianity's answer: We are the crowning glory of the Creation of Jesus Christ, created in God's image.
Why do we exist?
Humanism's answer: to onsume and enjoy, (reflected by "I want to give my kids more than I had")
Christianity's answer: to glofiy God, the Creator.
Branson: Why Believe the Bible
This was presented by Voddie Baucham. It was from is book, "The Ever-Loving Truth", and 8-week study course in exposatory apologetics.
1 Peter 3:15, "Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have."
Voddie told a story where he went to speak at a college campus and answered questions from many students. The Christian host group was amazed at his ability to answer so many questions with ease. He told them that there are really only about seven categories of questions that people will ask. If you know those well, you can answer any question, they're all about the same thing, but may be asked in many different ways.
1 Peter 3:15, "Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have."
Voddie told a story where he went to speak at a college campus and answered questions from many students. The Christian host group was amazed at his ability to answer so many questions with ease. He told them that there are really only about seven categories of questions that people will ask. If you know those well, you can answer any question, they're all about the same thing, but may be asked in many different ways.
- Theology proper (the nature of God, his existence, the Trinity, etc...)
- Christology (Jesus Christ, his life, death, etc...)
- Revelation (Bible, contradictions, souces, apparent contradictions, etc...)
- Creation (time, content, evolution, intelligent design, etc...)
- Evil and Suffering (what happened to the world, why is there suffering...)
- Exclusivity (relation to other religions, claims that Christianity is the only way...)
John 1 and Colossians 1 can help answer every question about Christology. 2 Timothy and 2 Peter 1 for questions about the Bible. Genesis 1, Colossians 1, John 1 about Creation. There is much overlap.
Why the Bible? Voddie started with bad answers which appeal to external authority.
- It's how I was raised. He compared this to a bad chess move, where an expert can say I will beat you in 4 moves. We need to say what we belive about the Bible, and why we believe it.
- I tried it and it worked for me. Another variation is that it "changed my life". The reason it's bad is that anyone can claim the same thing for a number of other beliefs. It isn't true because it works, it works because it's true.
Voddie summarized his answer by this statement, as an expository message from 2 Peter 1:12-21:
"It is a reliable collection of historical documents, written by eyewitnesses,
during the lifetime of other eyewitnesses, they reported supernatural events, that
took place to fulfill specific prophecies, and claim their writings are of
divine origin."
It is a reliable collection of historical documents
The Bible is made up of 66 books, by 40 authors, in 3 languages, from 3 continents over 1500+ years.
written by eyewitnesses
The authors were ones who saw the events and recorded them accurately, first-hand. (See Luke 1 prolog). 1 John talks about that which was seen, heard, and touched.
during the lifetime of other eyewitnesses
1 Corinthians 15 talks about other eyewitnesses (500, most of who are still alive) at least 251 (<50%)>
Some critics claim conspiricy or mis-copying over time, comparing to the game of telephone (whisper message around the cirle, it comes back to the originator distorted from the original). The problem is that the Bible is not translated from translations, we always go back to the original. These both have three layers of problems.
- Manuscript problem: 6000 original manuscripts, we can use to confirm we have accuracy in translation, comparisons to discern the originals. Some as early as 120 AD, very close to the actual events (compare to other ancient documents, hundreds+ years)
- Early translations: The originals were translated early into other languages, Syriac, Coptic, etc... which can be compared to the the originals.
- Church fathers: In the first few centuries the church fathers quoted the scriptures a lot, they can reproduce all but 11 verses with these early quotes.
Those who claim conspiricy that early, over-zealous monks changed things, have a huge set of hurdles to overcome, making it impossible. They would have had to track down all 6000 originals, snuck in changed the manuscript, and got out without being caught. They would have had to remember all the changes they made. Then they would have had to track down all the other translations into other languages, understood the language, made the same changes in all those copies. Then they would have to track down all the writings of the church fathers and make the same changes there.
they reported supernatural events
They reported God's voice, miracles, healing, waling on water, resurrection...
that took place to fulfill specific prophecies
Over 600 prophecies about Jesus and his life, all were fulfilled. Consider Psalm 22 (My God, my God, why have you forsaken me). This was written 1000 years before Jesus' death.
claim their writings are of divine origin
It is trustworthy, it is confirmed by coroborating evidence. Some want it to be proven scientifically before believing, but it is not a scientific question (it can't be repeated, it can't be tested, it can't be touched, seen, heard, anymore), it is a question of history and should be evaluated by the evidentry method. It must be 1) consistent internally (see above 66 books, 40 authors, 1500 years...) and 2) coroborated by other external sources.
Verse 21, "prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke
from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit."
Branson: The Most Asked Questions about Creation, Evolution, and Genesis
This was presented by Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis.
1) Is there evidence for an infinite God?
Jesus is an obvious evidence, God revealed himself to us on earth, though people still rejected him. DNA is another evidence, its design, its a blueprint for life and human beings.
2) Who made God?
If we follow this through with a super-God made God, then we must continue forever with a super-super-God who made the super-God, etc... Once there is evidence for God, we must agree that he is not made, but eternally existing.
3) Does the age of the earth matter?
He presented information on chronologies in the Bible tracing back only a few thousand years. If we deny the age of the earth, we deny the Bible. We put death before sin. Without the millions of years, evolution falls on it's face, everything becomes impossible.
4) Is there evidence the earth is young?
All the age measuring methods (100s of processes that show changes over time) indicate, through extrapolating rates back in time, that the earth is younger than what secular scientists claim. Another example is radiometric dating of some wood found burried in a layer of basalt; the basalt dated to 45 million years old, yet the wood inside it dated to 45 thousand years old.
5) Where did Cain get his wife?
Genesis 5:4 states that Adam and Eve had other sons and daughters, therefore Cain married a sister. God did forbid marriage of close relatives, but that was nearly 2500 years after Cain married. We can understand this need through the deterioration of the genome (perfect DNA in the beginning, accumulating mutations over time). The restriction was put in place to prevent birth defects and keep harmful mutations from becoming fixed in our genome.
6) How did Noah fit all the species of animals on the ark?
Part of this is the wrong question, the key word being "species". Our definition and categorization of species today is different, and more finely defined than what God said to Noah. He told Noah that he would send 2 of each kind, etc... to be on the ark. We see this kind earlier in Genesis during the Creation week stating that each would produce after their own kind. Therefore, there were likely much fewer kinds than species. Another factor is that God could have sent two younger (thus smaller) of each kind, not needing as much space in the ark.
1) Is there evidence for an infinite God?
Jesus is an obvious evidence, God revealed himself to us on earth, though people still rejected him. DNA is another evidence, its design, its a blueprint for life and human beings.
2) Who made God?
If we follow this through with a super-God made God, then we must continue forever with a super-super-God who made the super-God, etc... Once there is evidence for God, we must agree that he is not made, but eternally existing.
3) Does the age of the earth matter?
He presented information on chronologies in the Bible tracing back only a few thousand years. If we deny the age of the earth, we deny the Bible. We put death before sin. Without the millions of years, evolution falls on it's face, everything becomes impossible.
4) Is there evidence the earth is young?
All the age measuring methods (100s of processes that show changes over time) indicate, through extrapolating rates back in time, that the earth is younger than what secular scientists claim. Another example is radiometric dating of some wood found burried in a layer of basalt; the basalt dated to 45 million years old, yet the wood inside it dated to 45 thousand years old.
5) Where did Cain get his wife?
Genesis 5:4 states that Adam and Eve had other sons and daughters, therefore Cain married a sister. God did forbid marriage of close relatives, but that was nearly 2500 years after Cain married. We can understand this need through the deterioration of the genome (perfect DNA in the beginning, accumulating mutations over time). The restriction was put in place to prevent birth defects and keep harmful mutations from becoming fixed in our genome.
6) How did Noah fit all the species of animals on the ark?
Part of this is the wrong question, the key word being "species". Our definition and categorization of species today is different, and more finely defined than what God said to Noah. He told Noah that he would send 2 of each kind, etc... to be on the ark. We see this kind earlier in Genesis during the Creation week stating that each would produce after their own kind. Therefore, there were likely much fewer kinds than species. Another factor is that God could have sent two younger (thus smaller) of each kind, not needing as much space in the ark.
Branson: Learning How to Think Biblically
This was presented by Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis. The main message was that when we start with God's word, we can explain.
Ken started with Romans 1:20, it is the Intelligent Design verse in the Bible. Yet, it is not enough. If we back up to verse 17, we are reminded that it takes faith, "The righteous will live by faith." Faith comes from hearing, hearing from the foolishness of preaching.
There is everything we can do, yet there is nothing we can do. In the end, God works faith in others, yet He uses us to bring his word to others. When we challenge others in the Battle for our culture, we cannot throw down your sword (God's Word).
Others have the wrong starting point. Our approach is presuppositional (we start with God and the Bible), others start without God. We need to see them change their starting point. They are dead in their trespess and sin.
The culture war is a war over starting points (history, religions, etc...) We think Biblically and seek to explain everything we see with Biblical glasses.
Ken started with Romans 1:20, it is the Intelligent Design verse in the Bible. Yet, it is not enough. If we back up to verse 17, we are reminded that it takes faith, "The righteous will live by faith." Faith comes from hearing, hearing from the foolishness of preaching.
There is everything we can do, yet there is nothing we can do. In the end, God works faith in others, yet He uses us to bring his word to others. When we challenge others in the Battle for our culture, we cannot throw down your sword (God's Word).
Others have the wrong starting point. Our approach is presuppositional (we start with God and the Bible), others start without God. We need to see them change their starting point. They are dead in their trespess and sin.
The culture war is a war over starting points (history, religions, etc...) We think Biblically and seek to explain everything we see with Biblical glasses.
Branson: Culture War
Culture War was presented by Voddie Bauham. The main message was Neutrality is NOT and option.
He read through Acts 4. (The Acts of the apostles should be called the Acts of the Holy Spirit). Peter and John were poor pastors (gold and silver we do not have) who healed a man. The Priests and Sadducees were annoyed, they were in power, yet Peter and John were preaching to the people. The Sanhedrin sought to marginalize Peter and John because they had been "with Jesus, they were ordinary, unschooled men (meaning they hadn't been trained the way the Sanhedrin had, thus less qualified). This does not mean they were illiterate (see the other books of the Bible they wrote).
There are three philosophies that you must accept to avoid being marginalized in our culture:
He read through Acts 4. (The Acts of the apostles should be called the Acts of the Holy Spirit). Peter and John were poor pastors (gold and silver we do not have) who healed a man. The Priests and Sadducees were annoyed, they were in power, yet Peter and John were preaching to the people. The Sanhedrin sought to marginalize Peter and John because they had been "with Jesus, they were ordinary, unschooled men (meaning they hadn't been trained the way the Sanhedrin had, thus less qualified). This does not mean they were illiterate (see the other books of the Bible they wrote).
There are three philosophies that you must accept to avoid being marginalized in our culture:
- Religious Relativism: meaning we all worship the same God, there are many paths to the same destination.
- New Tolerance: This is not the old tolerance of Voltair (You have the right to believe what want, and me to believe differently. I will defend your right to the death). This is the new tolerance: every belief is equal, we don't even get to disagree. We cannot tell others that they could be wrong.
- Philosophic Pluralism: There are no absolutes, what's true for you may not be true for me.
Saying "Jesus is Lord" was a crime punishable by death in Rome, it was denying that "Ceasar is Lord". Neutrality is not an option. Religious relativism violates the law of non-contradiction (something cannot be A and not A at the same time in the same way). Christianity has a God, Buddahism has no God. Mulsims kill those who don't worship their God.
The Sanhedrin told Peter and John not to preach in Jesus name anymore. How did they respond? A) "I'll be silent and witness with my lifestyle" B) "You just wait until we get more Godly men on the Sanhedri" C) "If only Tiger Woods would be saved" (God wouldn't become cool, Tiger would become uncool), D) "Wait until there are more of us", E) None of the above, their response was to pray for boldness. See v 29-30
"Now, Lord, consider their threats and enable your servants to speak your word
with great boldness. 30Stretch out your hand to heal and perform miraculous
signs and wonders through the name of your holy servant Jesus."
In this Culture war, all those on Jesus side will be persecuted. Neutrality is not an option. We need the warrior's mentality, the battle is the Lord's.
Branson: Jerusalem and Athens
Jerusalem and Athens: The Battle for Christian Culture was presented by Doug Phillips of Vision Forum.
In history, the battle between the culture of Jerusalem and Athens was a battle between Biblical thinking and pagan thinking. This is parallel to our culturl battle today, we can learn from the past. The antithesis of Hebrew and Greek culture today is the same antithesis of Humansim and Christianity. Today there is a revival of paganism, the icons of our culture are music, tatoos and body modification.
All men worship the Creator or the Creature. There are no other choices, we all worship. 1 Peter 3:15 tells us to always be ready to give an answer for the hope that we have. It doesn't say we need all the facts before we do that, nor does it say you need to take the Bible out in your discussions.
Everything falls into one of two categories: theology or history. Our view of history is a reflection of our views of God. Nothing is insignificant. If that is not so, why are humanists spending so much time and effort trying to re-write history.
Faith and Reason are not in conflict. The substance of faith is evidence, a good testimony. All knowledge is found in Christ, Colossians 2:2-4
The history of Greek culture falls into two periods, the first 1300-331 BC which was the Classical Greek period. The second from 323-31 BC, was the Helenistic Greek period. The later was when the Hebrews began synchretism with paganism, which in history was always followed by judgement of the Hebrews. In the end it comes down to whether man (the creature) or God (the Creator) is the measure of all things. Over 2000 years of tension, the strength and progress of church can be traced by the influence of Hellenic thinking/Hebrew synchretism. This is a negative/reverse corelation.
The religious worldview of Greek paganism is:
In history, the battle between the culture of Jerusalem and Athens was a battle between Biblical thinking and pagan thinking. This is parallel to our culturl battle today, we can learn from the past. The antithesis of Hebrew and Greek culture today is the same antithesis of Humansim and Christianity. Today there is a revival of paganism, the icons of our culture are music, tatoos and body modification.
All men worship the Creator or the Creature. There are no other choices, we all worship. 1 Peter 3:15 tells us to always be ready to give an answer for the hope that we have. It doesn't say we need all the facts before we do that, nor does it say you need to take the Bible out in your discussions.
Everything falls into one of two categories: theology or history. Our view of history is a reflection of our views of God. Nothing is insignificant. If that is not so, why are humanists spending so much time and effort trying to re-write history.
Faith and Reason are not in conflict. The substance of faith is evidence, a good testimony. All knowledge is found in Christ, Colossians 2:2-4
The history of Greek culture falls into two periods, the first 1300-331 BC which was the Classical Greek period. The second from 323-31 BC, was the Helenistic Greek period. The later was when the Hebrews began synchretism with paganism, which in history was always followed by judgement of the Hebrews. In the end it comes down to whether man (the creature) or God (the Creator) is the measure of all things. Over 2000 years of tension, the strength and progress of church can be traced by the influence of Hellenic thinking/Hebrew synchretism. This is a negative/reverse corelation.
The religious worldview of Greek paganism is:
- Statism: The state/government can solve your problems, compared to the government is there to protect and is limited.
- Civil Virtue: The idolization of the Greek hero (i.e. superman)
- Humanism
Greek Paganism is practiced through:
- Worship of the body (original olympics were held in the nude)
- Worship of youth (elderly are de-valued, i.e. the youth are our future)
- Worship of the individual
- Worship of the State (Plato's Republic: the state took all the children 10 yrs+ to tain them.) As a homeschool family, I can more clearly see this happening quickly in our culture today.
- The Superhero idolized
- Deification of athletes
and, moral perversion naturally followed.
Branson: A Family Vision of Victory
This was a presentation by Doug Phillips of Vision Forum.
Doug always packs a lot of information, it's hard to keep up while taking notes. In this presentation he is helping us defend the Biblical family.
2009 will be focused on Charles Darwin, it is his 200th birthday and the 150th year since publishing his book "On the Origin of the Species". It is also the 500th birthday of John Calvin. No two individuals have had greater impact than these two men. Doug spent some time traveling to Scotland to inquire about or spiritual fathers. John Calvin was primarily responsible for influencing a man of influence in Scotland.
The Family Vision of Victory means:
Doug always packs a lot of information, it's hard to keep up while taking notes. In this presentation he is helping us defend the Biblical family.
2009 will be focused on Charles Darwin, it is his 200th birthday and the 150th year since publishing his book "On the Origin of the Species". It is also the 500th birthday of John Calvin. No two individuals have had greater impact than these two men. Doug spent some time traveling to Scotland to inquire about or spiritual fathers. John Calvin was primarily responsible for influencing a man of influence in Scotland.
Deuteronomy 32:7, "Remember the days of old; consider the generations long past. Ask your father and he will tell you, your elders, and they will explain to you."The key issue is generational continuity. We are confronted with paganism everywhere, we are in a state of warfare, now. Hebrews 11:7 reminds us of the faith of Noah, every time we take a stand we condemn the world. We fathers must pass on our faith to our children; Jesus commanded Peter to feed his sheep; the first sheep we are given are our children.
The Family Vision of Victory means:
- We must have a passion for our progeny: America is in a population decrease except for #1 Muslims, and #2 Bible-believing, homeschooling, Christian parents
- Return to Biblical manhood and womanhood: we are getting a poor example from tv and Hollywood, we need to look to the Bible for our model.
- Return to the authority and sufficiency of Scripture: Do fish know they are wet? no, likewise people surrounded by our culture do not know they are influenced by evil. Fathers are at home changing diapers, while women are dying in Iraq defending our country; this is upside down!
- Intense Discipeship in preparation for spiritual combat: Nehimiah called families, sons, and daughters. In 1970 40% of households were married couples with children, in 2005 it was only 22%.
In Scottland, there was a great reformation because of a return to the purity and authority of Scripture. There was great courage, vision, and sacrifice.
Quotes to remember:
Culture = Religion externalized - it will be reflected in culture, we can't reform Hollywood.
Our history is that of Christ looking over our fathers!
Branson: Genesis and the Secularization of America
I just got home from the conference in Branson yesterday. I did not have Internet access there, so my posts on the conference have been delayed.
In these posts I may not capture the entire content of the talk, but will share a few items and thoughts based on my notes from the talks.
Genesis and the Secularization of America was presented by Ken Ham
Ken explained how America is being secularized. He shared some Barna Research survey results: 70% of those who grew up in a Christian home walk away in their college years. Only 9% of born again teenagers are certain of absolute truth, 57% say there is more than one way to heaven.
Ken shared his information on the interpretation of day in the Bible and how it relates to the meaning of day in Genesis 1. Day can have several meanings, it is used 2301 times, but we only question its meaning in Genesis. It is used 410 times with day + number, 38 times with evening and morning with out day, 23 times with evening and morning with day, and 52 times night with day. Many Christian leaders do not accept day as a 24-hour day, when they do that they are basically accepting that man's word is infallible, and God's Word is not.
He also shared some survey results done by AIG that will be published later this year. The suvey was targeted to 20-29 year olds from conservative churches. When do young people start to have doubts about their faith, and start questioning what they are taught? The two largest categories were 40% middle school and 43% high school. We need to be providing answers to these questions earlier to keep from loosing our children.
Quote to remember:
In these posts I may not capture the entire content of the talk, but will share a few items and thoughts based on my notes from the talks.
Genesis and the Secularization of America was presented by Ken Ham
Ken explained how America is being secularized. He shared some Barna Research survey results: 70% of those who grew up in a Christian home walk away in their college years. Only 9% of born again teenagers are certain of absolute truth, 57% say there is more than one way to heaven.
Ken shared his information on the interpretation of day in the Bible and how it relates to the meaning of day in Genesis 1. Day can have several meanings, it is used 2301 times, but we only question its meaning in Genesis. It is used 410 times with day + number, 38 times with evening and morning with out day, 23 times with evening and morning with day, and 52 times night with day. Many Christian leaders do not accept day as a 24-hour day, when they do that they are basically accepting that man's word is infallible, and God's Word is not.
He also shared some survey results done by AIG that will be published later this year. The suvey was targeted to 20-29 year olds from conservative churches. When do young people start to have doubts about their faith, and start questioning what they are taught? The two largest categories were 40% middle school and 43% high school. We need to be providing answers to these questions earlier to keep from loosing our children.
Quote to remember:
Remember in the study Bibles, the text is the commentary
on the notes.
Defending Your Faith Conference
Next week my family and I will be attending the Defending Your Faith Conference in Branson, Missouri, sponsored by Answers in Genesis. I have good intentions of blogging each day from there to capture and share some key thing I learn. For more information on the conference you can check out the web site at http://www.answersingenesis.org/events/branson-2008.
Humans, pinnacle of evolution?
Most people in our culture hold to the concept that humans are at the top of the food chain. Christian have a reason for making this assertion, however, the evolutionist doesn't. On what basis would an evolutionist believe that humans are better than penguins?
In a discussion I had with an evolutionist a few years ago, the evolutionist objected to the statement that he believes humans are evolved from apes. He said that we aren’t evolved from apes, but both apes and humans are evolved from an ape-like ancestor. This answer really does little to nothing to change the picture.
However, if we think like an evolutionist, we begin to open our eyes to understand that humans are not more evolved than apes, nor are apes more evolved than humans, but we are both more evolved than our ape-like ancestor. We are simply evolved in different directions than the other based on our environment. We can then, extrapolate that back through the entire evolutionary tree and affirm that we are no more or less evolved than gnats, or bats, or cats. All biological organisms alive today are equally evolved.
Therefore, why would we be so arrogant as to claim that we are the highest organism? This furthers the purposelessness of the evolutionary worldview. The idea that humans are more evolved than others is borrowed capital, built on top of the Biblical worldview. Only Biblical history has a consistent claim to humans being the crowning achievement, created in the image of God. (Genesis 1:26-28, Hebrews 2:7)
In a discussion I had with an evolutionist a few years ago, the evolutionist objected to the statement that he believes humans are evolved from apes. He said that we aren’t evolved from apes, but both apes and humans are evolved from an ape-like ancestor. This answer really does little to nothing to change the picture.
However, if we think like an evolutionist, we begin to open our eyes to understand that humans are not more evolved than apes, nor are apes more evolved than humans, but we are both more evolved than our ape-like ancestor. We are simply evolved in different directions than the other based on our environment. We can then, extrapolate that back through the entire evolutionary tree and affirm that we are no more or less evolved than gnats, or bats, or cats. All biological organisms alive today are equally evolved.
Therefore, why would we be so arrogant as to claim that we are the highest organism? This furthers the purposelessness of the evolutionary worldview. The idea that humans are more evolved than others is borrowed capital, built on top of the Biblical worldview. Only Biblical history has a consistent claim to humans being the crowning achievement, created in the image of God. (Genesis 1:26-28, Hebrews 2:7)
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
What is your hope?
Let's make a comparison. When we speak of our hope in the future, what do we work for, or what do we hope for after death, in the final judgement? OK, not all religions believe in a final judgement, but let's compare Islam and Christianity. What is the final state that we seeking?
The Muslim's hope?
The way I understand salvation in terms of the Quran, one works their life in living up to the standard set by Allah, outlined by the five pillars among other practices. Islam claims to be more than Christianity, more than religion in that their scope is beyond just belief, into many prescribed practices to please Allah. On judgement day, they seek to pass judgement in Allah's will through the balance of good deeds weighing heavier than their bad deeds. If they pass that judgement (no one knows Allah's will for sure) their reward or promise is: an afterlife of pleasure. Filled with 70 companions purified, feasts, etc...
The Christian's hope?
For the Christian, they do not earn their salvation. They do not have to worry about if they did enough good deeds to out-weigh ther bad deeds. They simply believe in God's Son, Jesus Christ, who justified them through his death on the cross. Their sins ('bad deeds') are wiped clean! God set the punishment for sin, as death; we can't make up for a murder simply by doing 100 hours, or days, or years of community service. No amount of community service will make up for the life that was eliminated. By faith in Jesus Christ, he completely covers (and pays the penalty for) our bad deeds so we may receive our reward. The promise for the Christian is: an afterlife with the abscense of evil and suffering, in the presence of God.
The Muslim's hope and promise seems to be one of 'delayed gratification', putting the burden on one self. This does not seem very consistent to me. Is having more than 4 wives a bad deed or not? Why can't they have more than 4 wives on earth, but they can in the gardens of paradise? To me, it's either evil, or it's not.
The Christian's hope is more consistent, it doesn't involve a double standard. It provides a true reward, not just a temporal pleasure or escape.
Which promise or reward is better? Which one is lasting?
The Muslim's hope?
The way I understand salvation in terms of the Quran, one works their life in living up to the standard set by Allah, outlined by the five pillars among other practices. Islam claims to be more than Christianity, more than religion in that their scope is beyond just belief, into many prescribed practices to please Allah. On judgement day, they seek to pass judgement in Allah's will through the balance of good deeds weighing heavier than their bad deeds. If they pass that judgement (no one knows Allah's will for sure) their reward or promise is: an afterlife of pleasure. Filled with 70 companions purified, feasts, etc...
The Christian's hope?
For the Christian, they do not earn their salvation. They do not have to worry about if they did enough good deeds to out-weigh ther bad deeds. They simply believe in God's Son, Jesus Christ, who justified them through his death on the cross. Their sins ('bad deeds') are wiped clean! God set the punishment for sin, as death; we can't make up for a murder simply by doing 100 hours, or days, or years of community service. No amount of community service will make up for the life that was eliminated. By faith in Jesus Christ, he completely covers (and pays the penalty for) our bad deeds so we may receive our reward. The promise for the Christian is: an afterlife with the abscense of evil and suffering, in the presence of God.
The Muslim's hope and promise seems to be one of 'delayed gratification', putting the burden on one self. This does not seem very consistent to me. Is having more than 4 wives a bad deed or not? Why can't they have more than 4 wives on earth, but they can in the gardens of paradise? To me, it's either evil, or it's not.
The Christian's hope is more consistent, it doesn't involve a double standard. It provides a true reward, not just a temporal pleasure or escape.
Which promise or reward is better? Which one is lasting?
Monday, June 30, 2008
We shouldn't compare?
Recently, while I was speaking, a man in the audience made the assertion that, "We shouldn't make comparisons with other religions, we should just preach the Gospel"
While, I understand his sentiment, I disagree. Why?
Comparison is a powerful teaching tool!!!
When I attended college, one of my professors used the approach of "compare and contrast" on many of the tests. This was very effective because you had to think and understand more deeply in order to explain what was the same and what was different.
Often people think they understand the Gospel or passages in the Bible, but when pressed by other ideas, they are unsure of how to defend or explain their belief. If you don't know the difference between how Christians and Muslims understand 'mercy', you may be led astray by fine sounding arguments. (see Colossians 2:2-4)
Much of the New Testament consists of Paul and others defending Christianity and the Gospel against other ideas and religions. Christianity and other religions, as a whole, are mutually exclusive, despite some similarities.
While, I understand his sentiment, I disagree. Why?
Comparison is a powerful teaching tool!!!
When I attended college, one of my professors used the approach of "compare and contrast" on many of the tests. This was very effective because you had to think and understand more deeply in order to explain what was the same and what was different.
Often people think they understand the Gospel or passages in the Bible, but when pressed by other ideas, they are unsure of how to defend or explain their belief. If you don't know the difference between how Christians and Muslims understand 'mercy', you may be led astray by fine sounding arguments. (see Colossians 2:2-4)
Much of the New Testament consists of Paul and others defending Christianity and the Gospel against other ideas and religions. Christianity and other religions, as a whole, are mutually exclusive, despite some similarities.
Thursday, May 22, 2008
What about marriage?
I have a couple thoughts on the whole marriage issue and civil union debate. I think there are fundamental questions that need to be addressed or determined. I put my disclaimer on this for lack of time to fully research or document, it's just a thought.
Origin of Marriage (religion or government?)
The Biblical picture would indicate that marriage is a religious institution or origin. Marriage is a religious union between man and woman as ordained and joined by God. (see Mark 10:7-9), also referring back to Genesis where God made them male and female in his image. This also refers to the married couple becoming ONE. This also points a bit to Ephesians 5 where it compares (maybe equivalent) husband and wife to Jesus and church.
In some quick searches on the Internet (google/wikipedia/others) most attribute the origin of marriage to human invention and politely pass off or ignore the "recorded history" of the Bible in Genesis indicating prior institution than what they indicate by 'man'.
If this is truly the case (that marriage origin is religious, and not a human/civil invention) then I would get the picture that God originated marriage, then humans (civil government) recognized the value chose to encourage it through civil recognition, and granting additional civil rights and benefits.
Who has the right to re-define marriage?
If that is the picture, then civil government, really has no right to re-define a religious institution, such as marriage. The church really has no right to re-define it either, since it was clearly instituted by God (not religious leaders such as Pharisees, Elders, Apostles, etc...) They do not own it, but must either define their own, or try to hijack this wonderful religious institution.
There are all sorts of implications and options that one could take from verifying and understanding this. If you have thoughts about what this would mean (positive or negative implications), please comment.
Origin of Marriage (religion or government?)
The Biblical picture would indicate that marriage is a religious institution or origin. Marriage is a religious union between man and woman as ordained and joined by God. (see Mark 10:7-9), also referring back to Genesis where God made them male and female in his image. This also refers to the married couple becoming ONE. This also points a bit to Ephesians 5 where it compares (maybe equivalent) husband and wife to Jesus and church.
In some quick searches on the Internet (google/wikipedia/others) most attribute the origin of marriage to human invention and politely pass off or ignore the "recorded history" of the Bible in Genesis indicating prior institution than what they indicate by 'man'.
If this is truly the case (that marriage origin is religious, and not a human/civil invention) then I would get the picture that God originated marriage, then humans (civil government) recognized the value chose to encourage it through civil recognition, and granting additional civil rights and benefits.
Who has the right to re-define marriage?
If that is the picture, then civil government, really has no right to re-define a religious institution, such as marriage. The church really has no right to re-define it either, since it was clearly instituted by God (not religious leaders such as Pharisees, Elders, Apostles, etc...) They do not own it, but must either define their own, or try to hijack this wonderful religious institution.
There are all sorts of implications and options that one could take from verifying and understanding this. If you have thoughts about what this would mean (positive or negative implications), please comment.
Saturday, March 8, 2008
Dr Robert Carter of visits Pella, IA
Plans are in progress to bring Dr. Robert Carter from Creation Minstries International to speak in the Pella and Des Moines area. Dr. Carter's background is in genetics and marine biology. Here are some of the events that will be taking place while he is in town April 6-13.
Here is a map of the events.
KCWN and WHO Radio interviews
Sunday, April 6:
Here is a map of the events.
KCWN and WHO Radio interviews
Sunday, April 6:
- Tracy CRC
- Covenant Reformed Church, Pella: 11:00 Sunday School presentation
- Third Church, 708 E 13th Pella, IA: 6:00-7:15 "Jesus, Genesis, Evolution, and the Gospel"
Monday, April 7:
- Oskaloosa Christian, Oskaloosa: 8:30: brief student address
- Pella Community Center, 712 Unition, Pella: 7:00-8:30 "What Darwin Didn't Know"
Tuesday, April 8:
- PEACE Homeschool, Liberty E-Free Church: 10:00-11:30
- Central College Intervarsity Fellowship: 4:30-6:00 "Q&A with Dr. C"
- Pella Community Center, 712 Unition, Pella: 7:00-8:30 "Genetics and Genesis"
Saturday, April 12:
- Pastors Breakfast (other ministry leaders welcome), Pella Excit-A-Bowl: 7:30, "Q&A with Dr. C"
Sunday, April 13:
- Grimes United Methodist Church, Grimes, IA: 8:00, 9:15, 10:30
All events sponosred by the Pella Creation Task Force. For more information contact, CreationTaskForce@gmail.com or 641-780-4839.
Please check back to this page for updates as the events get closer.
Tuesday, January 1, 2008
Creation\Evolution: The Key Issue
The key issue that causes concern for me and many other Christians is not over how animals change or the geological or astronomical forces in effect, it is the authority of man over God and the key basis that the Bible gives for our salvation. The scriptures point out that death was the result of sin, Adam sinned and passed that sin and death to all his descendants, thus we all deserve death. But God gave us a way to escape eternal death by sending his Son to pay the penalty of death for us on the cross and giving us His gift of grace and eternal life. Any system of thought, or interpretation of data, that puts physical death before physical sin undermines this message and puts the Gospel message in the realm of fairy tale. Likewise, anything that takes away Jesus’ real death and real resurrection undermines this same message. So far, everything that I’ve seen from evolution puts death before Adam and before sin.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)