Marriage in Job

I was reading through the book of Job the last couple of mornings and a brief observation came to me. Here's a brief recap, staring with the dialog between God and Satan.

Satan: 1:11 But now stretch out your hand and strike everything he has, and he will surely curse you to your face.”

God: 1:12 “Very well, then, everything he has is in your power, but on the man himself do not lay a finger.”

Then Satan went out and wreaked havoc: He took his oxen and donkeys and servants (v14-15), He burned his sheep and servants (v16), He took his camels and servants (v17), He killed his children (v18-19) But Satan did not touch Job or his wife! (see 2:9, 19:7)

Why not?
Could it be that scripture says that husband and wife are “one flesh” (Genesis 2:24)?

Answering Objections to Overture A at Classis

This last weekend I attended our Classis meeting and listened to the deliberation over the issue of Biblical inerrancy regarding our denomination’s position with Creation and Science and recent events. During the deliberation the overture was well presented and introduced with a couple others providing immediate support for at least the sentiment of the overture. The rest of the discussion proceeded and we heard several objections. The following is a list of those basic objections and answers which support the ideas of the original overture presented.

Objection: We drive people away when we take a literal approach to Creation

This objection is extremely subjective and speculative unless backed up by the data to support this. There are many different reasons people are driven away from the church, we can look at two opposing approaches related to the Creation and Science issue. It is true that many people are leaving the church, the alternative explanation is that people are leaving over this issue because they have lost faith and trust in the reliability of scripture because they have so many unanswered or weak questions.

When we look at data, we see studies and polls by George Barna and others by Britt Beemer in association with Answers in Genesis. You can find the results of the study in their resources under the title of “Already Gone”. http://www.answersingenesis.org/assets/pdf/am/v4/n4/already-gone-small.pdf

Objection: There are many interpretations of scripture, why force yours on them

This is a corollary of the previous one, trying to question the approach of the report and its basis in scripture. It seems to be grasping at straws. To answer this it’s important to understand interpretation; every scripture passage has one interpretation (determination of the meaning and intent of the words given by the message giver), but many different applications (how do we use it to understand and shape our beliefs and actions). The next objection is important in interpreting the text.

Objection: Genesis is beautifully poetic and should not be taken as history

There are many different genres of writing throughout scripture. We may say this is written beautifully, thus claim it as poetry, but that is not a true determination of poetry. We need to look at the words, the style and the structure of the writing. http://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j18_3/j18_3_61-62.pdf

Objection: This overture accuses others of not respecting scripture

As one who holds to a Biblical creation model that is not what I believe or promote. However, I have noticed a pattern of this reaction. We certainly don’t make the accusation, but often are accused of that. The reaction of the message receiver is primarily the responsibility of the message receiver. The written word of people in communicating things can be problematic and easily mis-read.

Objection: The Bible addresses the questions of “who and what”, science addresses the “when and how”

This statement is more of an agreement of how we should separate our investigation of God’s creation. This statement is also easily demonstrated as false. Just look at the text of Genesis 1:1, we can quickly find the who (God) and what (heavens and earth). If we look at the rest of that chapter, we can’t escape the when and how, even though there are more unknowns and questions still outstanding. Throughout the first chapter we see indicators of time (when) such as “in the beginning”, “evening and morning”, “the first day”. We get other indicators of time as we look through the rest of scripture; the Bible is uniquely rooted in time and space and history. We also read indicators of the how, such as “and God said” indicating it was created by his word, and also referring to plants, birds, fish and animals “according to their kinds”. It also separates the creation of man from all the other things.

Objection: The NIV translators inserted a word that is not in the original to account when Jesus said that the mustard seed was the smallest of ‘your’ seeds to avoid embarrassment.

I won’t address the motivation issue here, but there are always answers to apparent contradictions in the Bible or between the special revelation (Bible) and general revelation (Creation). This claim is also what many see as part of the problem, when Christians help undermine the trust in the reliability of the Bible. You can go online and find hundreds of these so-called problems through the many skeptic’s sites. But, I’ve seen enough of these to have complete faith that there’s always a reasonable answer to these questions. This one is no different, the secret usually is to look at the text they reference, read it yourself, understand the context, and compare it to other scripture as well. This passage is found in Matthew 13:31-32, the context indicates a man planting seeds in a field. The seeds I found to be smaller than the mustard seed were the Orchid, Begonia, and Petunia; none of these are crops which match the context of field crops that the audience would have had in view.

Objection: We don’t want to go back to Galileo

This is an empty straw man argument and doesn’t deserve much space. For those interested in more details about that controversy, you can find an article at http://creation.com/the-galileo-twist.

Objection: a quote from John Calvin was read indicating his support for scientific investigation, implying his support for free inquiry of scientific scholarship

John Calvin through his commentaries and other writings support a similar view of Creation and the timeline espoused by the overture. Here’s an example from Calvin, “For it is too violent a cavil to contend that Moses distributes the work which God perfected at once into six days, for the mere purpose of conveying instruction.” Also, “They will not refrain from guffaws when they are informed that but little more than five thousand years have passed since the creation of the universe.”

Objection: We need to take an approach in Article 2 of the Belgic Confession that shows both general and special revelation as equal

Let’s take a look at the Belgic Confession, article 2. It does start with “We know him by two means” naming the two as “first, by the creation” and also “second, he makes himself known to us more openly by his holy and divine Word”. This does indicate that both are God’s revelation, but when we run into a situation that seems to contradict between the two, we should side with the one that more openly reveals God to us. That shows the two are equal in truth, but when it comes to man’s understanding, God’s Word takes primacy. Next, let’s not forget about Article 7 The Sufficiency of Scripture which says, “everything one must believe to be saved is sufficiently taught in it.” And that “the teaching is perfect and complete in all respects. Therefore, we must not consider human writings…equal to the divine writings. Read the whole article at the CRC web site, http://www.crcna.org/pages/belgic_articles1_8.cfm.

Do Muslims share in the plan of salvation?

Through my wife, I recently heard of a quote from Pope Paul VI, which claims that Muslims share in the same plan of salvation as Christians. Let's take just a quick look, here it is:

"The plan of salvation includes those who acknowledge the creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; those who profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day." -Pope Paul VI in "Lumen Gentium"

I'll try to be very brief in my response and let you be the judge, based on two quotes. One from the Bible, and one from the Quran. Here's the one from the Bible:

Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. 2This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, 3but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world. -1 John 4:1-3

and from the Quran:

O people of the scripture, do not transgress the limits of your religion, and do not say about GOD except the truth. The Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, was a messenger of GOD, and His word that He had sent to Mary, and a revelation from Him. Therefore, you shall believe in GOD and His messengers. You shall not say, "Trinity." You shall refrain from this for your own good. GOD is only one god. Be He glorified; He is much too glorious to have a son. To Him belongs everything in the heavens and everything on earth. GOD suffices as Lord and Master. -Surah 4:171

and

GOD will say, "O Jesus, son of Mary, did you say to the people, `Make me and my mother idols beside GOD?' " He will say, "Be You glorified. I could not utter what was not right. Had I said it, You already would have known it. You know my thoughts, and I do not know Your thoughts. You know all the secrets. "I told them only what You commanded me to say, that: `You shall worship GOD, my Lord and your Lord.' I was a witness among them for as long as I lived with them. When You terminated my life on earth, You became the Watcher over them. You witness all things. -Surah 5:116-117

The Quran claims that Jesus is not the son of God, he has no divinity, he is merely a great prophet or apostle. The Bible claims that anyone who does not accept Jesus Christ's divinity is antichrist.

Iowa Judicial Retention

My take on the upcoming vote for judicial retention of the Supreme Court judges in Iowa. This was a response to an email discussion, but summarizes my reasoning around this issue and basic response to the objections I've heard. While you could claim that I'm taking some of these scripture passages out of context they reflect a concise, but rough, idea of the basis for my thinking.

All three Supreme Court judges voted the unanimously on the homosexual “marriage” opinion last year.
I agree that we should vote NO on retention of these judges because of the procedural issue of “legislating form the bench”. More importantly for me is that we vote NO because of their vote on the moral issue of the ruling. We, as Christians, should vote based on our world view. That being a Biblical world view, based on God’s law being the highest, over-riding law. When judges, end even elected officials, make rulings that are so directly against God’s law, we will have injustice in the land.

Deuteronomy 16:18-20, “appoint judges… and they shall judge the people fairly. … Follow justice and justice alone…”

Proverbs 9:10, “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.”

This issue isn’t about the objections that many people claim. Some say we shouldn’t vote them all out because we’d have to start from scratch, but 1 Corinthians 6:4 says, “…appoint as judges even men of little account in the church!”

It’s not about changing the process; it’s not about sending a message to other judges;
it’s about the specific ungodly actions and ruling of these judges according to God’s standard. Using them to send a message to others would be just as unjust as the actions they took. We’re holding them accountable for their actions, within the existing process.

God defines what marriage is, the civil government can’t re-define it; they can only recognize and reward it.

The Biblical Application of the Death Penalty

I recently preached a sermon on Numbers 35 and the Cities of Refuge. One of the themes in this passage is the application of the sixth commandment, “you shall not murder”. As you read through this passage, it is clear that this is a strong case, and application, of the death penalty, at least in the case of murder.

 

 

In this passage, we see the main theme and process when someone in Israel kills another, they must quickly flee to a city of refuge in order to receive protection and to be ensured a trial. Then we get the rules for judging between murder, and accidental killing, then the penalties for each. Toward the end we get the reason for all of this, to ensure the only true justice; His!

 

Starting in verse 16 it says, “he is a murderer; the murderer shall be put to death.” And verse 17, “he is a murderer; the murderer shall be put to death.” And verse 18, “he is a murderer; the murderer shall be put to death.” Verse 19 says, that the “avenger of blood shall put the murderer to death; when he meets him, he shall put him to death.” And verse 21, “that person shall be put to death; he is a murderer. The avenger of blood shall put the murderer to death when he meets him.” That is 6 times that it is repeated that the murderer is to be put to death.

 

Then in verse 29, we are reminded that we just heard how the killer was to be judged. It says, “These are to be legal requirements for you throughout the generations to come, wherever you live.” In verse 30 we start seeing the rules to ensure justice as it reminds us that “no one is to be put to death on the testimony of only one witness.” But we go right back to the insistence on the death penalty, in verse 32, there is no substitute, it says, “Do not accept a ransom for the life of a murderer, who deserves to die. He must surely be put to death.”

 

Those are the cold, hard facts. Guilt is determined in a very objective, black and white manner. The penalty is clear, there are no options.

 

Most people misunderstand the death penalty, and the reasons for it.

• Some think the reason is life-for-life in terms of bringing redemption to the family who lost a loved one; but this is only a partial reason which doesn’t satisfy, another life only adds to the loss.
• Some think the reason is the extremeness of the penalty is to deter the potential criminal from the crime; this seems reasonable and pragmatic, but even where the penalty is in play, people still murder, so it’s not entirely effective.

The real reason is given in the end of the chapter, verse 33 says, “bloodshed pollutes the land, and atonement cannot be made for the land on which blood has been shed, except by the blood of the one who shed it.” We are brought back and reminded of the first murder, where Cain killed his brother Able, and God says to him in Genesis 4:10, “Your brother’s blood cries out to me from the ground.”

 

To understand this better, we look at to David we tells us, “Against you, you only, have I sinned and done what is evil in your sight”. And we look when Moses writes of Noah when he gets off the ark after the flood and God makes a covenant with him in Genesis 9. God tells Noah in verse 6 that “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed” then he continues and gives the reason, “for in the image of God has God made man.” When we kill another, we destroy His image! God takes that seriously, that is why “bloodshed pollutes the land” and tells us the ultimate reason, to protect God’s image, God’s holiness, to “not defile the land…where I dwell.” from verse 34.

 

To summarize: The death penalty is put in place not to reconcile man to man, but to maintain God’s holiness, from pollution, and from destroying His image in each of us. When we fail to use God’s law for justice in determining the guilt of the murderer, and fail to implement His judgment, then the cry of the land grows stronger for our injustice and our defiling God’s land.