Faith vs. Works / blind faith discussed

Our good works are the dancing which follows in response to the Music we hear by faith. First the Music… then the dancing… not the other way ‘round. Our good works are the result, not the cause, of salvation (the Music).

Do you hear the Music of God’s saving grace?

Listen:

Jesus (God the Son) laid down His life on the cross (John 3:14-16) as an act of eternal, unconditional love for every soul (John 12:32), settling, once and for all, our debt of death (Hebrews 10:1-18), which is the consequent of sin [violating the royal law of Love (Lev. 19:18; Deut. 6:5; Matt. 7:12, 22:39; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27) – Rom 3:23, 6:23]. This is how God shows us that He loves us no matter what (1 John 4:9, Romans 5:8). He rose from the dead, defeating death, and He promises eternal life to those who accept it: John 3:14-16; 1 Cor. 15:3-6; 1 John 5:11-13. This is the Music we dance to.

So, every now and then a question comes up about whether we are saved by faith (hearing the music) or by works (dancing even if we don’t hear the music), due to a misinterpretation of James 2:14-16. I’ll type it up, give you some NASB notes, and follow some of the referenced verses.

“14 What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can that faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister is without clothing and in need of daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and be filled,” and yet you do not give them what is necessary for their body, what use is that? 17 Even so faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself. 18 But someone may well say “You have faith and I have works; show me your faith without the works, and I will show you my faith by my works.” 19 You believe that God is one. You do well; the demons also believe, and shudder. 20 But are you willing to recognize, you foolish fellow, that faith without works is useless? 21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar? 22 You see that faith was working with his works, and as a result of the works, faith was perfected; 23 and the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “And Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness,” and he was called the friend of God. 24 You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone. 25 In the same way, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way? 26 For just as the body without the spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead.”

NASB note vv. 14-26: In vv. 14-20, 24, 26 “faith” is not used in the sense of genuine, saving faith. Rather, it is demonic (v. 19), useless (v. 20) and dead (v. 26). It is a mere intellectual acceptance of certain truths without trust in Christ as Savior. James is also not saying that a person is saved by works and not by genuine faith. Rather, he is saying, to use Martin Luther’s words, that a man is justified (declared righteous before God) by faith alone, but not by a faith that is alone. Genuine faith will produce good deeds, but only faith in Christ saves. (For more information on justification see note on Rom 3:21-31).

NASB note vv. 15-16: This illustration of false faith is parallel to the illustration of false love found in 1 John 3:17. The latter passage calls for love in action; this one calls for faith in action.

NASB note v. 18: “You have faith and I have works.” The false claim is that there are “faith” Christians and “works” Christians, i.e., that faith and deeds can exist independently of eachother. “show me your faith without the works.” Irony; James denies the possibility of this.

NASB note v. 21: Apart from its context, this verse might seem to contradict the Biblical teaching that people are saved by faith and not by good deeds (Rom 3:28; Gal 2:16). But James means only that righteous action is evidence of genuine faith—not that it saves, for the verse (Gen 15:6) that he cites (v. 23) to substantiate his point says, “Then he believed in the Lord; and He reckoned it [i.e., faith, not works] to him as righteousness.” Furthermore, Abraham’s act of faith recorded in Gen 15:6 occurred before he offered up Isaac, which was only a proof of the genuineness of his faith. As Paul wrote, the only thing that matters is “faith working through love” (Gal 5:6). Faith that saves produces deeds.

NASB note v. 23: “the friend of God.” This designation (see 2 Chr 20:7) further describes Abraham’s relationship to God as one of complete acceptance.

NASB note v. 24: “not by faith alone.” Not by an intellectual assent to certain truths.

Next up: Romans 3:21-31, Galatians 2:16-21 and 5:6.

Romans 3:21-31

“21 But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, 22 even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe; for there is no distinction; 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus; 25 whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed; 26 for the demonstration, I say, of His righteousness at the present time, so that He would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. 27 Where then is boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? Of works? No, but by the law of faith. 28 For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from the works of the Law. 29 Or is God the God of Jews only? Is He not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, 30 since indeed God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith is one. 31 Do we then nullify the Law through faith? May it never be! On the contrary; we establish the Law.”

NASB note v. 24: “justified.” Paul uses the Greek verb for “justified” 27 times, mostly in Romans and Galatians. It is translated by some form of the English work “justify” 24 times, by “freed” three times (6:7,18,22), by “acquitted” once (1 Cor 4:4) and by “vindicated” once (1 Tim 3:16). The term describes what happens when someone believes in Christ as His Savior: From the negative viewpoint, God declares the person to be not guilty; from the positive viewpoint, He declares him to be righteous. He cancels the guilt of the person’s sin and credits righteousness to him. Paul emphasizes two points in this regard: 1. No one lives a perfectly good, holy, righteous life. On the contrary, “there is none righteous” (v.10), and “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (v.23). “By the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight” (v.20). 2. But even though all are sinners and not sons, God will declare everyone who puts his trust in Jesus not guilty but righteous. This legal declaration is valid because Christ died to pay the penalty for our sin and lived a life of perfect righteousness that can in turn be imputed to us. This is the central theme of Romans and is stated in the theme verse, 1:17 (“the righteousness of God”). Christ’s righteousness (His obedience to God’s law and His sacrificial death) will be credited to believers as their own. Paul uses the word “credited” nine times in ch. 4 alone. “as a gift by His grace.” The central thought in justification is that, although man clearly totally deserves to be declared guilty (vv.9-19), because of his trust in Christ God declares him righteous. This is stated in several ways here: (1) “as a gift” (for nothing), (2) “by His grace,” (3) “through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus” and (4) “through faith” (v. 25).

Galatians 2:16-21

“16 nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified. 17 But if, while seeking to be justified in Christ, we ourselves have also been found sinners, is Christ then a minister of sin? May it never be! 18 For if I rebuild what I have once destroyed, I prove myself to be a transgressor. For through the Law I died to the Law, so that I might live to God. I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me. 21 I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died needlessly.”

NASB note v. 16: A key verse in Galatians (see Introduction: Theological Teaching). Three times it tells us that no one is justified by observing the law, and three times it underscores the indispensable requirement of placing one’s faith in Christ. “justified by faith.” The essence of the gospel message (see Rom 3:20,28; Phil 3:9; see also notes on Rom 3:24,28). Faith is the means by which justification is received, not its basis. “by the works of the Law.” Paul is not depreciating the Law itself, for he cleary maintained that God’s Law is “holy and righteous and good” (Rom 7:12). He is arguing against illegitimate use of the OT Law that made the observance of that Law the grounds of acceptance with God.

NASB note v. 21: “Christ died needlessly.” To mingle legalism with grace distorts grace and makes a mockery of the cross.

Galatians 5:6 “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, but faith working through love.” NASB note: “faith working through love.” Faith is not mere intellectual assent (see James 2:18-19) but a loving trust in God’s grace that expresses itself in acts of love (see 1 Thess 1:3).

Philippians 3:9 “and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith,”. NASB note: “righteousness…from the Law.” See note on v. 6.

Philippians 3:6 “as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to the righteousness which is in the Law, found blameless.” NASB note: “righteousness…in the Law.” Righteousness produced by using the Law as an attempt to merit God’s approval and blessing (cf. v.9)—a use of the Law strongly opposed by Paul as contrary to the gospel itself. “blameless.” In terms of legalistic standards of scrupulous external conformity to the Law. Ichthus: this verse really must be read in its context to understand fully what Paul is talking about here. See Philippians chapter 3.

Jesus’ death did make it obvious that God loves us no matter what (nothing changed – but it was something we had to learn in time) – but that does not mean we no longer strive for excellence. A true interaction with God motivates us toward excellence, because we know He loves us regardless of imperfection. It makes slipping into the muck (made discernable by the Law) seem so utterly pointless.

Matthew 6:13 “And do not lead us into temptation” can also be translated “and do not put us to the test” – “but deliver us from evil.” I point that out because maybe there are others like myself who read that verse and at first think it implies God leads us into temptation (why else would we ask Him not to?) – whereas other verses say God does not lead us into temptation. The temptation (by Satan) of Jesus was a divinely intended test – He was lead into it by the Spirit (Matt 4:1-11). It was Satan who afflicted Job, but God who allowed it, to prove Job’s faith was genuine and not all calamity is God’s judgment. Neither tests resulted in sin, and both show how Satan is under God’s control. God does not tempt to sin, God does not want us to sin (James 1:13; 1 Cor 7:5). Does that mean that where there is sin, God’s sovereignty has stopped (another thought that entered my head)? No. Our freedom to reject love and responsibility to choose love is a built-in part of this grand creation over which God is sovereign. That we choose to reject love, that we choose to sin in His creation, does not equate to His endorsing what we chose – but it does equate to His endorsing “choice”. Without the possibility of rejecting God’s love (at the root of all sin), there is no possibility to choose it. Love must be chosen – it cannot be forced upon us. So Matthew 6:13 is acknowledging God as sovereign – Jesus just as well could have said, “Let us not wander off and get lost in sin – but lead us with the rest of the fold, away from the wolves who won’t come near your rod and staff without consequence.” Of course, Jesus said it much more concisely.

1 Cor 10:13 – “No temptation has overtaken you but such as is common to man; and God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will provide the way of escape also, so that you will be able to endure it.”

Always look for the way of escape – recognize it as provided by God. There is no greater feeling of victory than to overcome temptation by the power of God.

“Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.” – Romans 12:21.

***

Now that that’s settled – I direct your attention to an excerpt of Richard Dawkins’ book “The Selfish Gene” – chapter 11: “Memes: the new replicators” – available on-line – or at least it was at one time:

“Another member of the religious meme complex is called faith. It means blind trust, in the absence of evidence, even in the teeth of evidence. The story of Doubting Thomas is told, not so that we shall admire Thomas, but so that we can admire the other apostles in comparison. Thomas demanded evidence. Nothing is more lethal for certain kinds of meme than a tendency to look for evidence. The other apostles, whose faith was so strong that they did not need evidence, are held up to us as worthy of imitation. The meme for blind faith secures its own perpetuation by the simple unconscious expedient of discouraging rational inquiry.”

Here is note seven of chapter 11 (ibid) titled “Blind faith can justify anything.” –

“I have had the predictable spate of letters from faith’s victims, protesting about my criticisms of it. Faith is such a successful brainwasher in its own favor, especially a brainwasher of children, that it is hard to break its hold. But what, after all, is faith? It is a state of mind that leads people to believe something—it doesn’t matter what—in the total absence of supporting evidence. If there were good supporting evidence then faith would be superfluous, for the evidence would compel us to believe it anyway. It is this that makes the often-parroted claim that ‘evolution is a matter of faith’ so silly. People believe in evolution not because they arbitrarily want to believe it but because of overwhelming, publicly available evidence.

“I said ‘it doesn’t matter what’ the faithful believe, which suggests that people have faith in entirely daft, arbitrary things, like the electric monk in Douglas Adam’s delightful Dirk Gently’s Holistic Detective Agency. He was purpose-built to do your believing for you, and very successful at it. On the day that we meet him, he unshakingly believes, against all the evidence, that everything in the world is pink. I don’t want to argue that things in which a particular individual has faith are necessarily daft. They may or may not be. The point is that there is no way of deciding whether they are, and no way of preferring one article of faith over another, because evidence is explicitly eschewed. Indeed the fact that true faith doesn’t need evidence is held up as its greatest virtue; this was the point of my quoting the story of the Doubting Thomas, the one really admirable member of the apostles.

“Faith cannot move mountains (though generations of children are solemnly told the contrary and believe it). But it is capable of driving people to such dangerous folly that faith seems to me to qualify as a kind of mental illness. It leads people to believe in whatever it is so strongly that in extreme cases they are prepared to kill and die for it without the need for further justification. Keith Henson has coined the name ‘memeoids’ for ‘victims that have been taken over by a meme to the extent that their own survival becomes inconsequential … You see lots of these people on the evening news from such places as Belfast or Beirut’. Faith is powerful enough to immunize people against all appeals to pity, to forgiveness, to decent human feelings. It even immunizes them against fear, if they honestly believe that a martyr’s death will send them straight to heaven. What a weapon! Religious faith deserves a chapter to itself in the annals of war technology, on an even footing with the longbow, the warhorse, the tank, and the hydrogen bomb.”

I am not prepared to discuss the issue of faith (God) and war. I will have to do a study on that in the near future, especially considering its relevance to the war on terror. But for now I ask you to patiently set it aside.

Tim Keller defines religion as “a set of beliefs that explain what life is all about, who we are, and the most important things that human beings should spend their time doing. For example, some think that this material world is all there is, that we are here by accident and when we die we just rot, and therefore the important thing is to choose to do what makes you happy and not let others impose their beliefs on you. Notice that, though this is not an explicit ‘organized’ religion, it contains a master narrative, an account about the meaning of life along with a recommendation for how to live based on that account of things. … All who say ‘You ought to do this’ or ‘You shouldn’t do that’ reason out of such an implicit moral and religious position,” (2; 15). So if Dawkins’ reasoning on the faith meme is accurate… even he is infected with it.

However, Dawkins fails to note that though Thomas doubted (no doubt the reason Dawkins considers him the most admirable of the apostles) – he was not rejected – he was given the evidence he needed (John 20:27). Dawkins says the other apostles’ faith is held up as worthy of imitation – but that is a false inference. They all thought they were seeing a ghost when Jesus appeared (Luke 24:37). Faith is believing what is promised. What was promised was Jesus’ resurrection. Thomas, like the others, doubted (and didn’t even fully understand) the promise until he saw evidence of its fulfillment. Jesus’ words had the same meaning as if a capable husband said to his doubting wife, “Have a little faith in me.” Her doubting was no blessing to her or to their relationship. Having faith would have blessed her and their relationship. Jesus was not advocating blind faith in incapable people, nor did He withhold evidence from the doubters. In many events recorded in the Bible is a sign given to reassure someone that the message they are receiving is from God.

No where in the Bible is blind faith advocated — we are instructed to test the spirits (to make sure the teacher is not teaching false doctrine) (1 John 4:1), to examine everything (1 Thess. 5:21). If blind faith were truly important, there would be no emphasis on discriminating between true and false teachers.

Faith and reason are not in conflict. The only one capable of certain knowledge is one whom is omniscient (God). All other forms of knowledge are varying degrees of faith (belief that), the stronger forms grounded in good reasoning and good evidence. Just because we are rational beings does not mean our reasoning is always without error — it is a skill/ability that needs exercise, just like an athlete must work to maintain athletic strength and ability. Our intuition is a source of rational knowledge acquired without the effort of reasoning, but (because we are not omniscient God) not an infallible source — good reasoning can fine-tune and sharpen our intuitions (bad reasoning can warp them). You cannot prove the existence of God, you can only weigh the clues… some gleaned intuitively… some arrived at by the use of reason… some revealed by God Himself (God’s being love requires that He has made Himself manifest, and that the evidence is on display). What God reveals of His rational-intuitive self will appeal to both God-given intuition and God-given reason (provided the intuition is not warped and the reasoning is not ‘bad’ — a condition God can heal). And even if you conclude that all the clues point to the existence of God (and reveal the nature of God), that is only intellectual assent (belief that) — more is required of you, due to the nature of God (Love). Your entire heart… faith (belief in)… the highest form of love (worship). This leap of faith is a rational one.

***

Happiness is the inner well-being resulting from being at peace with God.

“The Simple Truth about Happiness” by therapist Bethany A. Marshall leaves unanswered the question philosophers are asking when they ask “What is happiness?” In stating “Happiness is possessing the strength of character to make good choices,” which is “the by-product of good choices made daily, rather than a quick fix,” miss Marshall does not define what constitutes a good choice, nor does she define happiness. If she were to answer that a good choice is one that, when combined with other daily choices of a similar nature, produces a person characterized by happiness, the question “What is happiness?” reemerges.

In the history of philosophy there have been many attempts to define happiness, even to set it as the ultimate good. The question of happiness is one of what really matters, and that we experience a loving relationship with God and eachother is what really matters*. Happiness – a better word for it might be “blessedness” – is not “an emotion often dependent on outward circumstances,”** and it “refers to ultimate well-being and distinctive spiritual joy.”** Another way to describe the state of happiness or blessedness is as the peace of God – “not merely a psychological state of mind, but an inner tranquility based on peace with God”***. Miss Marshall says there is no quick fix toward happiness, but those who get right with God know that this happiness is granted in a defining moment, whereas good choices, rather than being a path to happiness as Marshall argues, are the output of a person who is already at peace with God. True happiness is not earned by good acts, but accepted by faith. Concepts labeled happiness which don’t fit the above definition are rooted in the temporal and so can be diminished by the trials and hardships of this life. Experiencing the not always rewarding feeling produced by Golden Rule^ choices is not the same as the spiritual joy, the inner tranquility, the well-being which motivates those choices even in the midst of adversity.

Even when a person is at peace with God, even when they have the motivation to make Golden Rule^ choices, they may find themselves on miss Marshall’s couch, benefiting from her education in conflict management. Their therapy will prove more successful in the long run, if they maintain a heart-to-heart with God, paid in full.

* See Mark 12:28-31; Deuteronomy 6:5; Leviticus 19:18; Romans 13:8; Galatians 5:14
** Excerpt from study note on Matthew 5:3, Zondervan’s NASB Study Bible, 1999.
*** Excerpt from study note on Philippians 4:7, Zondervan’s NASB Study Bible, 1999.
^ See Matthew 7:12*

Posted in Faith | 1 Comment

Fear — from a biblical perspective.

There are three relevant listings on page 73 in The New Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible’s Universal Subject Guide to the Bible (1990): Fear, Fear, godly, and Fearlessness. I inserted some Zondervan NASB notes.

Fear – anxiety caused by approaching danger
A. Causes of: disobedience (Gen 3:10), impending judgment (Heb 11:7), persecution (John 20:19), events of nature (Acts 27:17, 29), suspicion (Acts 9:26), uncertainty (2 Cor 11:3), final events (Luke 21:26), death (Heb 2:15).
B. Effects of: demoralization (1 Sam 13:5-8), paralysis (Matt 28:4), silent testimony (John 9:22).
C. Instances of: Abraham [Gen 20:11, NASB note: fear of God “Fear” in this phrase has the sense of reverential trust in God that includes commitment to His revealed will (word)], Jacob (Gen 32:11), soldiers (Matt 27:54).

Fear, godly
A. Defined as: hating evil (Prov 8:13), satisfying (Prov 14:27), sanctifying (Ps 19:9), beginning of wisdom (Prov 1:7).
B. Motives to, God’s: majesty (Jer 10:7), holiness (Rev 15:4), forgiveness (Ps 130:4, NASB note: feared Honored, worshiped, trusted and served as the one true God. If God were not forgiving, people could only flee from Him in terror), power (Josh 4:23,24), goodness (1 Sam 12:24), judgment (Rev 14:7).
C. Examples of: Noah (Heb 11:7), Abraham (Gen 22:12), Jacob (Gen 28:16,17), Joseph (Gen 42:18), David (Ps 5:7, “reverence”), Obadiah (1 Kin 18:12), Job (Job 1:8), Nehemiah [Neh 5:15, NASB note: fear of God Those in high positions are in danger of abusing their authority over their subordinates if they forget that they themselves are servants of a superior “Master in heaven” (Col 4:1; cf. Gen 39:9; 2 Cor 5:11)], early Christians (Acts 9:31).

Fearlessness – without fear
A. Source of: believing God’s promises (Num 13:30), challenge of duty (Ex 32:26-29), regard for God’s holiness (Num 25:1-9), believing God (Acts 27:22-26).
B. Exemplified by: Abram (Gen 14:14-16), Jonathan (1 Sam 14:6-14), David (1 Sam 17:34-37 David vs. Goliath), Nehemiah (Neh 4:1-23), Hebrew men (Dan 3:16-30 Daniel and his friends in the fiery furnace), Peter and John [Acts 4:13, NASB note: confidence A certain boldness characterized by the assurance, authority and forthrightness of the apostles (2:29; 4:29; 28:31), and shared by the believers (4:31)], Paul (Acts 21:10-14).

While there do seem to be appropriate causes for fear, just remember that God is much greater than anything you may face in this life.

To fear the Lord is to take Him seriously. The one person in the universe most deserving our respect with reverence (how the word “fear” is meant in the verses below, as we shall soon see) and admiration is God. See my “worship” thread for more on this.

All of the verses in the index below speak positively of fearing the Lord and negatively of lacking the fear of the Lord. Below the index I will supply study notes from Zondervan’s NASB Study Bible (1999) – these will help explain what is meant by “fear” when we “fear the Lord”. Please see the original post for the NASB note on Gen 20:11. You will notice that this new post only refers to verses in the New Testament, as the goal is to show how we still take God seriously and respect Him under the new covenant of grace. God is still as awesome as ever.

It is our relationship to Him which has changed, if we accept it (Hebrews 10:19-25) [why couldn’t it be that way before? – because ideas… even THE Idea (the Word)… take time and experience for minds to digest… see my meme thread for more – to sum it up: to demonstrate to someone (teach them by example) that You love them no matter what (and expect them to do the same for others), there has to be a time before and after that demonstration, when You are not dying on the cross for their sins… …before that You are getting them ready to understand what the sacrifice means (some dude does that out of the blue, you put him in a straight jacket)… after that You are letting it sink in, and giving them plenty of time to accept or reject that You love them no matter what… and that You gave a sufficient demonstration of that – that no one could have done it for You – You had to come to them Yourself, or it would have meant nothing]. If you don’t get it yet – I can’t wait for you to realize how beautiful this is. It beats everything. He exists… and He is Truth and Love beyond anything you’ve lived or will live through in the world… On with the study…

Index of relevant verses in NT by Strong’s # — gleaned from Strong’s concordance’s listings on fear, feared, feareth, and fearing : 2124 Heb 5:7 (NASB: “piety”); 12:28 (NASB: “awe”); 2125 Heb 11:7 (NASB: “reverence”) 5398 Heb 10:26-31; 5399 Matt 10:28; Luke 12:5; Luke 18:2; Acts 10:2,22,34-35; 13:16,26; Rom 11:20; Col 3:22; 1 Pet 2:17; Rev 11:18; 14:7; 15:4; 19:5; 5401 Acts 9:31; Rom 3:18; 13:7; 2 Cor 7:1; Eph 5:21; Phil 2:12; 1 Pet 1:17; 3:2 (NASB: “respectful”); 1 John 4:18. Crosswalk has a free on-line lexicon so you can look these up by Strong’s #. Bob already covered some of the words in his first reply (ty).

Luke 12:5-7 note: fear Him. Respect His authority, stand in awe of His majesty and trust in Him. Verses 6-7 give the basis for trust. [ Ichthus: In keeping with the theme of this thread, it follows that if we fear God, we’ve no reason to fear anything else. See original post on “fearlessness”. ]

Acts 10:34-35 note: God is not one to show partiality. God does not favor an individual because of his station in life, his nationality or his material possessions (see not on James 2:1). He does, however, respect his character and judge his work. This is evident because “in every nation the man who fears Him and does what is right is welcome to Him” (v. 35). Cornelius already worshiped the true God, but this was not enough: He lacked faith in Christ (v. 36) (Ichthus: he does go on to accept Christ).

Romans 3:10-18 note: fear of God. Awesome reverence for God; the source of all godliness (see note on Gen 20:11).

Romans 11:20 note: fear. On the fear of God see note on Gen 20:11; see also Prov 3:7; Phil 2:12-13; Heb 4:1, “be careful”; 1 Pet 1:17.

Philippians 2:12 note: fear and trembling. Not because of doubt or anxiety; rather, the reference is to an active reverence and a singleness of purpose in response to God’s grace.

1 Peter 1:17 note: fear. Not terror, but wholesome reverence and respect for God, which is the basis for all godly living (cf. Prov 1:7; 8:13; 16:6).

1 Peter 3:2 note: chaste and respectful behavior. Their lives are to be marked by a moral purity that springs from reverence toward God.

1 John 4:18 note: no fear in love. There is no fear of God’s judgment because genuine love confirms salvation.

Revelation 15:4 note: Universal recognition of God is taught in both the OT (Ps 86:9; Is 45:22-23; Mal 1:11) and the NT (Phil 2:9-11).

Ways in which fearing God dispels irrational fears:

I. Healthy guilt/fear versus unhealthy guilt/fear: 2 Samuel 6:9 “So David was afraid of the Lord that day; and he said, ‘How can the ark of the Lord come to me?’” Zondervan NASB Study Bible note: “David’s anger was accompanied by fear—not the wholesome fear of proper honor and respect for the Lord (1 Sam 12:24; Josh 24:14) but an anxiety arising from acute sense of one’s own guilt (Gen 3:10; Deut 5:5).” That sort of conviction (guilt) is healthy. But there is guilt which is not healthy (an oversensitive, fallible conscience) – and for that, see 1 John 3:18-20.

“A guilty conscience that precedes sincere repentance is the conviction of the Holy Spirit. A guilty conscience following sincere repentance is condemnation that is not coming from God.” — Beth Moore.

II. “Fear not – for I am with you.” Those who have just given their hearts to God in a courageous leap of faith are very vulnerable to spiritual warfare and deception. Your mind may be flooded with doubts and fears… do not be overwhelmed, but see it as being tested by fire – a character-building opportunity to trust in God’s strength and truth. Calvary Chapel (your nearest one can be found by searching the web-site) has a handy free pamphlet that leads you through the Bible in a year – with a good study Bible (there are also free Bible study tools on-line; use Google.com to find them), that is an excellent way to get started on grounding your faith in solid doctrine. Remember these verses and stick close to God: Matthew 12:43-45/Luke 11:24-26 (after the initial change, you must rely on God’s living in your heart, a constant awareness of Him, to maintain the change). Rom 8:15,31; 2 Tim 1:7, Ps 118:6,18.

III. God is fair. Perhaps you are (or may become, if you don’t read and understand this) afraid you have committed “the unforgivable sin”? Here’s a short study on that: Job 2:9, Lev 24:10-16; Matt 12:30-32. Zondervan NASB note on Matt 12:31 “blasphemy against the Spirit shall not be forgiven. The context (vv. 24,28,32) suggests that the ‘unpardonable sin’ was attributing to Satan Christ’s authenticating miracles done in the power of the Holy Spirit (see note on Mark 3:29).” Note on Mark 3:29 “whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness. Jesus identifies this sin in v.30 (cf.v.22)—the teachers of the law attributed Jesus’ healing to Satan’s power rather than to the Holy Spirit.” Please note that the leaders’ motivation was not devotion to God, but maintaining status quo (John 11:48). Note that throughout the Gospels, Jesus’ challengers did not deny the reality of the (object lessons) of the miraculous signs He performed on the Sabbath, nor the fact that He did cast out demons – but took offense to Jesus’ not following the letter of the law in His challenge for them to follow instead the spirit of it – they took offense to His correcting them. They were basically saying, “It is not the Holy Spirit who empowers the miracles performed by our enemy, but since someone supernatural must be empowering them — it is the ruler of the demons who empowers them,” – how else would they be able to reject His message, which is equivalent to the message of the Holy Spirit? They, the ones most qualified to “recognize”, could not have seen more evidence of the Holy Spirit than that – God did everything He could to get the message through to them… there is nothing more He could have done without violating their free will. That is what they were rejecting – that is why it cannot be forgiven. It’s not that He stopped loving them. It’s that they rejected that love.

The unpardonable sin is not to be confused with “sin leading to death” (1 John 5:16-17 note: “In the context of this letter directed against Gnostic teaching, which denied the incarnation and threw off all moral restraints, it is probable that the ‘sin leading to death’ refers to the Gnostics’ adamant and persistent denial of the truth and to their shameless immorality. This kind of unrepentant sin leads to spiritual death. Another view is that this is sin that results in physical death. It is held that, because a believer continues to sin, God in judgment takes his life [cf. 1 Cor 11:30-32 note: ‘disciplined. As God’s redeemed children we are disciplined—just as a human father disciplines his child—so that we might repent of our sins (cf. 2 Cor 7:10) and grow in grace (2 Pet 3:18; Heb 12:7-11)’]. In either case, ‘sin not leading to death’ (v.17) is of a less serious nature.” But, after all is said and done – God knows the heart of a man… whether or not he was given a fair enough chance… and what to do about it. God is just (fair), and because of that, you have reason both to revere and to take comfort in Him (1 John 1:9-10, Ps 23:4).

Unlike the Ramones song – God does not take His love away from you. If you are not experiencing it, it is because you have rejected it, or believe the lie that it is conditional (or that He doesn’t exist). Believe the Truth. He loves you like nobody else can… and (speaking from experience) He knows how to get your attention… but, ultimately… it’s up to you to accept Him. You are only (Melville’s) Ishmael by choice. You can also be a son by choice. Granted – He already knows what you will choose. When you enter into His kingdom, it will feel like He has taken you out of the slums (consider the current condition of your mind) and is showing you around unimaginable beauty, as if you are a distinguished guest… and you will be. But you will be home. Come as you are, a prodigal son… He is the only one who can get rid of all your garbage and heal all your gangrenous open sores.

IV. He calms the storm. If you feel like you are losing control of your mind, for whatever reason:

1. God, who is omniscient, omnipotent, and ever-present (including in your mind), can make it stop or at least slow down to something less freakish – but you must ask Him first. This may seem like blackmail if you don’t want to ask God for help (but you do want help), but it really is up to you. No one else you talk to about it can do anything to help you (and may just think you’re crazy… and, in a sense, your experience definitely counts as ‘abnormal’… and they may stick you in the hospital–you don’t have to become dependent on meds), besides praying for you. This (your salvation) is between you and God. Just remember, when He gives you back a sense of control, do not change your mind about God, like Pharoah kept doing (Ex 7-14), and bring it on yourself all over again (or way worse, Matt 12:43-45) – and do not keep what you have learned to yourself (like the Gnostics do – see “Against Gnosticism” and “Illumination vs. Gnosis”). Ezekiel 3:8-9.
2. If you would like to know more about miracles and other spiritual gifts, see my most recent reply in “Illumination versus Gnosis” – and my “Signs” thread. Gnosis (whether or not it manifests as at least one of you understands it — accompanied by dissociation and delusion) is not God’s will for your mind – and He can make that stop, too (dissociation and delusion)… if you ask. Spiritual gifts and miracles do not have to be disturbing – but they often are at first, especially if you are a stranger to God.
3. If you think Satan is causing your experience (seeing as it is unpleasantly uncontrollable), and that scares you out of your wits, not only because Satan is scary (to those who are not God and are not trusting God, and believe Satan exists), but because you don’t even believe Satan exists, and that you even considered it makes you feel like you’re losing your mind – trust God, and He will give you the weapons of warfare (Eph 6:10-20). Know that if Satan has anything to do with it – it is not without God’s permission (research the testing of Job and tempting of Jesus).
4. If you doubt God exists in order to trust Him – take a leap of faith, and see what happens. You’ve lost control of your mind – what else do you have to lose? He will catch you.
5. If you’re worried you have the wrong concept of God, and so are trusting in what is not God when you trust in God (and you are understandably afraid of entrusting your mind to what is not God) – He hears you, and will help you come to know Him. It’s all in the Word – crack open your dusty Bible. All of my posts are a result of doing just that. See “Biblical criticism and interpretation” for starters.
6. If this has never happened to you, and you’d like to keep it that way… take a preemptive leap of faith and you’ll avoid the whole mess (He’ll prepare you for any spiritual gift or miracle you experience, rather than springing it on you unexpectedly). I know, it seems like blackmail… but it’s no different than saying “avoid risky behavior and only put good stuff into your body if you value your life.” The storm only happens to those who have willfully ingested copious amounts of bad memes. It’s a natural (spiritual) consequence – they practically signed up for it.
7. If you wish God would prove Himself to you (just shy of Armageddon), even if it really freaks you out – ask. And so that you know how to recognize Him when He does show Himself to you – fully research it in His Word. Perhaps He is waiting until you’ve read the entire Bible before He shows you? It is to your advantage. You don’t want to be freaked out.
8.  Studying apologetics never made anyone lose their mind, and genuine faith is never a blind leap.

Remember the key word: ask. Matthew 7:7. Revelation 3:20.

Here’s something kinda interesting on Matthew 7:7, btw…

Ask starts with “A”. Seek starts with “S”. Knock starts with “K”.

Put it all together: A. S. K.

ASK. He’s already right there, anyway.

Posted in Problem of Evil & Hell | Leave a comment

Jesus’ Claims to Divinity

I:

When Jesus said “I AM” (John 6:35; 8:12; 9:5; 10:7,9; 10:11,14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1,5; Matt 27:43; Mark 14:62; John 8:24,28,58; 13:19; Rev 1:8, 17-18) – that was a direct claim of divinity. God told Abraham (edit, lol: Moses!…thanks, Glen) to say that he was sent by ‘I AM’ (Ex 3:14). The Jews listening to Jesus understood His claim (John 8:43-59) and were going to stone Him for blasphemy.

In claiming to be “I AM” (the one God) Jesus is claiming to be the only God there is, which rules out ordinary humans (He mentions the ordinary human Abraham specifically in John 8:58… keep reading). Keep in mind that one has to pick between these two contradictory criticisms: 1) Jesus claimed divinity in the sense that we can all be divine and 2) Jesus implied He was not God, in pointing out He believes there is only one God (Tunis’ claim – see III. and IV., and the Abrahamic Covenant thread). The reality is that Jesus claimed He is the only God there is (keep reading). If you think God cannot take physical form, you have a lot of explaining to do about theophany in the Old Testament (a small sampling: Gen 11:5; 18:1, 13, 17, 20, 22, 26, 33; 32:24; Ex 33:18-23; Num 11:25; 12:5; 14:10; Josh 5:13 – and that’s if you don’t count sound waves and thoughts). The captain/Captain of Joshua 5:13 might be an angel, rather than a theophany (not that God cannot take the form of an angel – as was the case when He wrestled with Jacob, see Gen 32:24-32 and Hosea 12:3-4). If God is the Captain… reminds me of Dead Poets Society… Oh Captain, my Captain!

II:

In my Abrahamic Covenant thread, I wrote: “In claiming to be ‘I AM’ (Ex 3:14) of the Jews, Jesus was claiming to be the God who made and keeps the Abrahamic Covenant (John 6:35; 8:12; 9:5; 10:7,9; 10:11,14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1,5; Matt 27:43; Mark 14:62; John 8:24,28,58; 13:19; Rev 1:8, 17-18).” But I left out the part (see I.) where the Jews showed they understood His claim by attempting to stone Him for blasphemy (John 8:43-59).

One translation of “Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh” (transliteration of the Hebrew name) reads “I will be”. That led me to this site:
http://theory.standford.edu/~oldham/church/ehyeh-asher-ehyeh/index.html An excerpt:

Exodus 3.14 is the thesis statement for Exodus, but the impact of the verse is frequently lost when reading in English rather than in the more ambiguous and meaningful Hebrew. At the beginning of Exodus 3, God appears to Moses in the burning bush (3.2). Moses questions which god He is, that is, “‘What is your name?’” (3.13). God replies with a profound reply, defining Himself: Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh

No humans know the exact meaning of this name—much less how to translate it into English or Japanese or any other language. We do know that the Hebrew word “Ehyeh” has an imperfect aspect meaning it has not yet been completed, it might already be completed, or might be completed in the future. Thus, even when frequently translated as “I am who I am,” there is a sense that God acts, not just that God is. It can also be translated as “I was who I was” and “I will be who I will be”, emphasizing the past or the future.

The two different instances of “Ehyeh” need not have the same tense: “I am who I was” and “I will be who I was” both connote God as unchanging. “I am who I will be” indicates God is defined by how He continues to act in this world.

The slightly more liberal translation “I will be what tomorrow demands” returns us to the theme of Exodus. Despite four hundred thirty years of captivity in Egypt, God has not forgotten the Hebrew people nor has He stopped acting in the world. Not only will He continue to act in the world, He will ensure all the needs of the Hebrew people will be satisfied.

Thus, whenever I see the Lord’s name in the Bible or its shortened form “I am”, I remember that not only has God declared He still acts in the world but He ensures He will satisfy all our needs.

– Jeffrey D. Oldham

The Zondervan NASB Study Bible note on Exodus 3:12 points out that “The Hebrew word translated ‘I will be’ is the same as the one translated ‘I AM’ in v. 14.” It also notes that in v. 14, “I AM” is not completed by “be there” as “I will be” is completed by “be there” in v. 12. It refers us to 34:5-7 for “the Lord’s proclamation of the meaning and implications of His name” (NASB). Jesus was claiming all the meaning and implications of the Lord’s name in saying “I AM”. I didn’t say it before, so I’ll say it now: the Jews showed they understood His claim by attempting to stone Him for blasphemy (John 8:43-59)

Jesus’ words in context:

Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am.

– Jesus (John 8:58)

“In the Greek, the words [ I am ] are solemnly emphatic and echo Exodus 3:14,” (NASB, 6:35). “Jesus did not say ‘I was’ but ‘I am,’ expressing the eternity of His being and His oneness with the Father (see 1:1). With this climactic statement Jesus concludes His speech that began with the related claim, ‘I am the Light of the world’ (v.12),” (NASB, 8:58). “The Jews could not interpret Jesus’ claim as other than blasphemy, for which stoning was the proper penalty (Lev 24:16),” (NASB, 8:59). Of course – God claiming to be God is not blasphemy… but the Jews did not recognize Jesus as God.

A repeat from I. — Keep in mind that one has to pick between these two contradictory criticisms: 1) Jesus claimed divinity in the sense that we can all be divine and 2) Jesus implied He was not God, in pointing out He believes there is only one God (Tunis’ claim – see III. and IV., and the Abrahamic Covenant thread). The reality is that Jesus claimed He is the only God there is (keep reading). If you think God cannot take physical form, you have a lot of explaining to do about theophany in the Old Testament (a small sampling: Gen 11:5; 18:1, 13, 17, 20, 22, 26, 33; 32:24; Ex 33:18-23; Num 11:25; 12:5; 14:10; Josh 5:13 – and that’s if you don’t count sound waves and thoughts). The captain/Captain of Joshua 5:13 might be an angel, rather than a theophany (not that God cannot take the form of an angel – as was the case when He wrestled with Jacob, see Gen 32:24-32 and Hosea 12:3-4). If God is the Captain… reminds me of Dead Poets Society… Oh Captain, my Captain!

Neither Jesus nor Paul introduced a ‘new kind of god’ – and that Jesus is God was not a “later development” (no one has claimed that the incarnation is presented as a systematic doctrine in the NT, but as a doctrine it is rooted there) – keep reading…

III.

“Son of God” is a Messianic title indicating the deity of Jesus Christ. His own claims (to deity): Matt 11:27; 26:59-66; 27:41-44; Mark 2:1-12 (Jesus does what only God can do: forgive sins); 14:61-64 (“Blessed One” is God; again more accusation of blasphemy – the Jews understood what He was claiming); John 5:17-47; 6:25-51; 7:16-31; 8:54-59; 10:22-39 (more accusation of blasphemy); 14:8-11; 17:1-5, 20-24; 19:7 (more accusation of blasphemy); also God’s word: Matt 17:1-8; Mark 1:9-11. The opinion of His disciples and others (concerning His deity): Matt 4:3; 8:29; 16: 13-20; 27:50-54; Mark 1:21-27 (Holy One of God); 3:11; 5:1-13; Luke 1:31-35; 4:34 (Holy One of God); 23:47 (“innocent” or “The Righteous One” … essentially equivalent to “the Son of God”); John 1:1, 14, 29-34, 43-51; 6:66-69 (Holy One of God); 11:23-27 (after raising Lazarus, the whole of the Sanhedrin are plotting His death: vv. 47-54); 20:28; Acts 2:22-36; 7:54-60; 9:17-22; 10:34-43; Rom 1:1-4; Eph 1:20-23; Phil 2:5-11 (vv. 6-11 may have been an early Christian hymn); Col 1:15-20; Heb 1; 1 John 1:1-4; 2:22-25; 4:9-16.

“Son (of God) (Matt 11:27) Jesus claims a unique relationship to God. The parent-child picture says that His relationship to God is something like that. ‘Sons of/children of’ is a common Hebrew idiom. It conveys the idea of shared nature or characteristics. ‘So when the New Testament says that Jesus is ‘the Son of God’ it is stating that Jesus shared the characteristics and nature of God Himself. He was claiming to be really and truly divine’ (John Drane),” (p. 561, Zondervan’s Handbook to the Bible, 1999).

IV.

Please note (regarding reference to ‘later development’), before reading the following, that no one knew who Constantine was when the New Testament books were being written…

‘God with us’—the incarnation
Dick France

One of the more puzzling things about the New Testament is the way its writers suggest, and occasionally say openly, that Jesus, a young carpenter from an obscure village who was executed in his early 30s, was also God. Not just ‘a god’, but God, the one true God of the Old Testament, present in human form.

They do not often say this in so many words. John’s Gospel begins by telling us that ‘the Word’ (a title for Jesus, as becomes clear in the Gospel) ‘was God’, and that this Word ‘became flesh and lived among us’ (John 1:1,14). At the end of the same Gospel the apostle Thomas, who notoriously refused at first to believe that Jesus had risen from the dead, hails him as ‘My Lord and my God’ (John 20:28).

In a few other places in the New Testament Jesus appears to be called ‘God’ (e.g. Acts 20:28; Romans 9:5; 2 Thessalonians 1:12; Titus 2:13; Hebrews 1:8; 2 Peter 1:1; 1 John 5:20), though it is intriguing that in all these cases there is some question about the right reading of the text or the Greek words can be understood in a different way. This sort of language apparently did not yet come easily to the writers.

But these apparently direct statements that Jesus is God are only the tip of a huge theological iceberg. After all, the people who wrote the New Testament books were Jews, brought up from childhood to believe that there is only one God and that to speak of any human being in divine terms was blasphemy. No wonder phrases like ‘Jesus is God’ did not trip easily off their tongues. But in many other more subtle ways that belief comes to light all over the New Testament books.

Jesus often referred to Himself as the Son of God, and to God as in a unique sense His Father (e.g. Matthew 11:25-27; 24:36) and the Gospel writers tell us that God Himself described Jesus in this way (Mark 1:11; 9:7). His followers took up the theme: for instance, Jesus is called the Son of God 22 times in five short chapters of 1 John, and John says he wrote his Gospel so that his readers might believe that Jesus is the Son of God (John 20:31).

Such language from a Jew is not just politeness: no one else was ever described in this way, and no one else had dared to address God simply as ‘Abba’ (Father) as Jesus did (Mark 14:36). Sayings such as ‘I and the Father are one’ (John 10:30), ‘whoever has seen me has seen the Father’ (John 14:9), and ‘I am in the Father and the Father in me’ (John 14:10-11) take us far beyond the ordinary worshipper’s sense of belonging to God. This is a unique family relationship; Father and Son share the same divine nature.

In Luke 1:35 the title ‘Son of God’ is linked with Jesus’ virgin birth. Although the title does not depend on Jesus’ being born of a virgin (after all, John, who stresses the title most, never mentions the virgin birth), the two ideas fit comfortably together (see ‘The virgin birth’).

Sometimes Jesus claimed to do things that only God can do, such as forgiving sins (Mark 2:5-12), judging (Matthew 7:21-23; 25:31-36), or giving life (John 5:25-29). Paul and John took this even further in the extraordinary claim that it was through Jesus that the world was created—and that means that He must be older than the universe! (John 1:1-4; 1 Cor 8:6; Col 1:15-17). The New Testament writers associated Jesus so closely with God that they saw no problem in applying to Him Old Testament texts that were in fact about God (e.g. Romans 10:9-13; Hebrews 1:8-12).

Already within the New Testament there is evidence that Christians had begun to worship Jesus and pray to Him (Acts 7:59; 9:10-17; 1 Cor 1:2; Rev 5:8-14, etc.). Paul, writing to the Greek-speaking Christians in Corinth, preserves the prayer ‘Our Lord, come’ in the Aramaic form Maranatha, which shows that this was already by the mid-50s a familiar formula from the early Aramaic-speaking churches (1 Cor 16:22). Remember that these were Jewish people, praying to a man whom they had seen executed only a few years earlier, and you realize how amazing it is.

There are a few places in the New Testament where the language used to express Jesus’ divine nature and authority is so exalted that they are thought to be echoes of hymns or creeds which were already in use in the church’s worship. Chief among these are Philippians 2:6-11; Colossians 1:15-20; Hebrews 1:2-3, and of course John 1:1-18. To read these passages carefully is to gain a thrilling impression of how Jesus’ followers had come to understand who He was within not much more than a generation after His life, death, and resurrection. They speak of Him not just as a man whose life began at Bethlehem in the days of Herod, but a son who has been from the beginning, who shared the Father’s glory before the world began (John 17:5,24), and whose life on earth was only a temporary ‘interruption’ of His heavenly glory.

This is what later came to be formulated as the ‘doctrine of the incarnation’ (which means literally the ‘enfleshing’, taking up the language of John 1:14). It is not presented to us in the New Testament as a systematic doctrine. Rather we share the exhilarating experience of Jesus’ first Jewish followers as they tried to make sense of the man they knew, and gradually came to realize who He really was.

But in their different ways they have left for us a rich source for theological discovery, and in their writings are all the raw materials for the fully developed Christian doctrine of the Son of God who ‘for us and for our salvation came down from heaven, and was incarnate of the Virgin Mary, and was made man’.

Perhaps Matthew expresses the truth most appropriately when he reminded his readers that the name Immanuel, the name of the virgin’s son, means simply ‘God with us’ (Matthew 1:23).

Matthew 14:33 “And those who were in the boat worshiped Him, saying, ‘You are certainly God’s Son!’”

Posted in Apologetics | Leave a comment

The Abrahamic Covenant — Backbone of the Gospel

In “Eternity in their Hearts,” Don Richardson talks about the backbone of Christianity, the Abrahamic Covenant, made by God to Abraham 4,000 years ago and recorded in Genesis 12:1-3. Dr. Ralph Winter, director of the United States Center for World Mission in Pasadena, California, explains that everything before Genesis 12 is just introduction and that the main theme does not get underway until God utters “the promise” or “the promises” to Abraham. This theme, this promise, is the backbone of Christianity because it explains the motivation behind everything occurring in this narrative which is now 4,000 years in the making.

Richardson explains that the Great Commission (Matthew 28:18-20; Acts 1:8) is not an after-thought of Jesus, but is a continuation of the Abrahamic Covenant, and that He had been preparing His disciples for it for the length of His ministry.

So, there are three points I want to flesh out in this thread, which are made in three different chapters of Richardson’s book (which I strongly recommend you purchase, as it covers how God has prepared minds in other cultures for His message – truly fascinating and eye-opening). 1. Jesus’ Great Commission of all Christians is rooted in and is a continuance of the Abrahamic Covenant. 2. A central goal of Jesus’ ministry was preparing the apostles’ minds to understand the all-peoples perspective of the Abrahamic Covenant and the Great Commission. 3. After Jesus’ ascension, it took a while, but the apostles did eventually grasp and accept the all-peoples perspective of the Abrahamic Covenant and the Great Commission.

1. Jesus’ Great Commission of all Christians is rooted in and is a continuance of the Abrahamic Covenant.

Genesis 12:1-3…

The top line: “I will make you into a great nation, and I will bless you; I will make your name great, and you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse.”

The bottom line: “. . .AND ALL PEOPLES ON EARTH WILL BE BLESSED THROUGH YOU.”

Zondervan NASB Study Bible note on vv.2-3: “In various ways and degrees, these promises were reaffirmed to Abram (v.7; 15:5-21; 17:4-8; 18:18-19; 22:17-18), to Isaac (26:2-4), to Jacob (28:13-15; 35:11-12; 46:3) and to Moses (Ex 3:6-8; 6:2-8). The seventh promise (Ichthus: all-peoples) is quoted in Acts 3:25 with reference to Peter’s Jewish listeners (see Acts 3:12)—Abram’s physical descendants—and in Gal 3:8 with reference to Paul’s Gentile listeners—Abram’s spiritual descendants.”

Richardson muses, “We sense immediately that the God who would speak such words is no petty tribal god. He is a God whose plans are both benign and universal, spanning all ages and cultures. If He retaliates against enemies of Abraham, it is not just to protect Abraham, but also to keep the enemies from extinguishing a fire kindled to warm the whole world!”

Richardson points out that Old Testament events are not limited to the Israelites/Hebrews/Jews:

1. Abraham himself bore witness to Canaanites, Philistines, Hittites and, rather negatively, to Egyptians.
2. Joseph was a son of Abraham who made up for his forefather’s lack of a clear witness to the Egyptian nation! Joseph blessed Egyptians in truly amazing ways.
3. The spies who entered Jericho before it was destroyed became a blessing to Rahab, a Canaanite harlot, and her family.
4. Naomi, a daughter of Abraham, was a blessing to two Moabite women, Ruth and Orpah.
5. Moses became a blessing to Jethro, his Midianite father-in-law.
6. King David caused even his enemies, the Philistines, to acknowledge God’s greatness.
7. The prophet Elijah was a blessing to a Sidonian widow in Zarephath.
8. The prophet Elisha, likewise, was a blessing to Naaman, a Syrian.
9. Jonah, however reluctantly, became a blessing to the Gentile population of Nineveh.
10. King Solomon was a blessing to the Sabaean “Queen of the South.”
11. Daniel and his three colleagues, Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego, were a blessing to Babylonians.
12. Esther and her uncle Mordecai were a blessing to the entire Persian Empire.
13. Ezekiel, Jeremiah, Ezra, Nehemiah and other prophets declared the Word of the Lord to various Gentile nations.

Ichthus: I’m going to add one more (and I’m sure there’s more):
14. In addition to Rahab (see #3) and Ruth (see #4), both Gentile women, in the genealogy of Jesus, there is Tamar, also a Gentile woman, and Bathsheba, “thought to have come from among the Hittites (see 2 Sam 11:3),” (Richardson). Zondervan NASB Study Bible (1999) note on Matthew 1:3 says that “Bathsheba was probably an Israelite (1 Chr 3:5) but was closely associated with the Hittites because of Uriah, her Hittite husband. By including these women (contrary to custom) in his genealogy, Matthew may be indicating at the very outset of his Gospel that God’s activity is not limited to men or the people of Israel.”

Ichthus: see also Isaiah 2:2-4; 56:3,6-7; Zech 2:11; 8:20-23; Micah 4:1-5. “There are also more than 300 declarative passages in the Old Testament which amplify God’s oath-sealed promise to bless all nations on Earth (see, for example, Ps. 67 and Isa. 49:6),” (Richardson).

“Moving forward now to the New Testament, do we find God still adhering to His ancient commitment to both the top and bottom lines, or drifting from it?” (Richardson). See Galatians 3:8, 14, 16, 19, 29. “We Christians have generally failed to appreciate the fact that Paul and the other apostles saw the Abrahamic Covenant as basic to everything Christ came to accomplish,” (Richardson). See Acts 3:22-26; Eph 3:6; Rom 16:25-26; Col 1:25-27; Rom 15:8-9; Rev 5:9-10; 7:9; 10:11; 11:9; 13:7; 14:6 [“God will pursue His ancient purpose to the very end,” (Richardson).]

But “do the four Gospels reveal that [ Jesus ] manifested awareness of the covenant as foundational to His ministry? Read on…

2. A central goal of Jesus’ ministry was preparing the apostles’ minds to understand the all-peoples perspective of the Abrahamic Covenant and the Great Commission.

For warm-up, see Luke 1:54-55, 72-73,78 [“references to people ‘living in darkness’ and in ‘the shadow of death’ were commonly understood by Jews as designating Gentiles, see Matt 4:15-16,” (Richardson)]; 2:30-32; 3:4,6,8-9.

In claiming to be “I AM” (Ex 3:14) of the Jews, Jesus was claiming to be the God who made and keeps the Abrahamic Covenant (John 6:35; 8:12; 9:5; 10:7,9; 10:11,14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1,5; Matt 27:43; Mark 14:62; John 8:24,28,58; 13:19; Rev 1:8, 17-18).

Jesus honored the Gentile region of Galilee with His first public sermons. “Mathew, one of Jesus’ disciples, recorded this fact as a fulfillment of the prophet Isaiah’s comment about ‘Galilee of the Gentiles’: ‘The people living in darkness have seen a great light: on those living in the land of the shadow of death a light has dawned’ (Matt 4:15-16; see also Isa 9:1-2). / ‘Large crowds form Galilee, the Decapolis, Jerusalem, Judea and the region across the Jordan followed’ Him, Matthew comments (4:25). ‘News about Him spread all over Syria, and people brought to Him all who were ill…and He healed them’ (v.24).” (Richardson)

“Consider, for example, how compassionately Jesus exploited the following encounters with Gentiles and Samaritans to help His disciples think in cross-cultural terms … Surely Jesus’ example of compassion for a Roman centurion (Matt 8:5-13), a Syrophoenician mother (Matt 15:21-28; Mark 7:26-30), a Samaritan leper (Luke 7:11-19), a Gadarene demoniac (Matt 5:1-20), a Syrian general like Naaman and the widow of Zarephath (Luke 4:23-30), the men of Nineveh who repented (Matt 12:41), and the people of Sodom and Gomorrah who perished without a clear call to repentance (Luke 10:13)—must now prove sufficient to melt prejudice from their hearts, replace that prejudice with ‘peoples consciousness,’ and send them on their way to the ends of the earth!” (Richardson). Ichthus: Richardson also mentions Jesus’ parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:30-34), Jesus’ mention of the “Queen of the South” (Matt 12:41-42), Jesus’ driving out the moneychangers from the Court of the Gentiles, defending our right to have our spiritual need represented in it (Matt 21:12; Mark 11:17-18; Isa 56:7; Jer 7:11), Jesus’ parables which are world-centered (all peoples), not just Israel-centered (see pp. 165-172, and see also Matt 13:24-30,33, 36-43; 21:18-20, 33-43; Deut 32:21; Rom 10:19; Mark 12:12), Jesus’ run-in with Jewish leaders trying to pit Him against Gentiles (Matt 22:17; Luke 21:24; 20:26), when Greeks sought audience with Jesus at a feast at Jerusalem (John 12:32), and his defense of Mary’s anointing Him (Mark 14:9).

“Meanwhile Jesus, though still ministering blessings to Jews on every hand (as required by the ‘top line’ of the Abrahamic Covenant), kept informing His disciples that they themselves must shortly minister to Gentiles as well. Once, for example, He sent them out on a training mission explaining that although at the moment He was sending them, not to Gentiles or Samaritans, but to ‘the lost sheep of Israel,’ later they would be ‘brought before governors and kings as witnesses to them and to the Gentiles!’ (Matt 10:5-6,18, emphasis added). / Jesus most likely placed this temporary restriction upon His disciples, not to encourage disregard for Gentiles and Samaritans, but because His disciples were still spiritually and mentally unprepared to undertake a cross-cultural mission,” (Richardson).

“Elsewhere Jesus forewarned His disciples that the end of the age could not happen until the gospel had first been ‘preached to all nations’ (Mark 13:10),” (Richardson). Ichthus: see also Matthew 24:14.

“The crucifixion, meanwhile, took place in that same ‘region of Moriah’ where Abraham—1,900 years before—once stood prepared to offer his son, the innocent Isaac, at God’s command. This time, however, there was no ‘ram caught in a thicket’ to take the place of the innocent Son. Instead, the ancient prophecy—‘in the mountain of the Lord it will be provided’—was fulfilled. / And Jesus was that provision. John, one of His disciples, later realized the significance of what happened that day, and wrote: ‘Jesus Christ, the Righteous One,…is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world’ (1 John 2:1-2). / This, then, was the first of the blessings which Abraham’s singular Descendant would share, not only with Jews like John, but with ‘the whole world’!” (Richardson)

Jesus explained it all to his bewildered disciples, after His resurrection, but before His ascension. “‘Then He opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures. He told them, ‘This is what is written: The Christ will suffer and rise form the dead on the third day, and repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. You are witnesses of these things’” (Luke 24:45-48). But He still has not commanded them to go.

“And here is the wording of the command which the Abrahamic Covenant had already foreshadowed for 2,000 years, and which Jesus for three long years had been preparing His disciples to receive: ‘All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I will be with you always, to the very end of the age’ (Matt 28:18-20).” (Richardson)

“Still later, moments before He ascended back into heaven from the Mount of Olives (near Bethany), He added a further promise: ‘You will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses…’ Then followed Jesus’ famous formula for the exocentric progression of the gospel: ‘…in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth’ (Acts 1:8).” (Richardson)

Richardson’s cliff-hanger to the chapter reads, “Jesus’ all-out effort to change 11 clannish Jews into cross-cultural apostles floated belly-up in defeat, until… Ah, but let us not get ahead of our story!”

3. After Jesus’ ascension, it took a while, but the apostles did eventually grasp and accept the all-peoples perspective of the Abrahamic Covenant and the Great Commission.

“Hundreds of millions of Christians think that Luke’s Acts of the Apostles records the 12 apostles’ obedience to the Great Commission. Actually it records their reluctance to obey it,” (Richardson).

Of the filling with the Spirit on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2), the audience being the Jews of the Diaspora (the scattering), returning from “at least 15 different regions of the Near and Middle East…gathered in Jerusalem for a feast called Pentecost,” Richardson writes, “Seen in the context of Jesus’ ministry and His clearly articulated plans for the whole world, the bestowal of that miraculous outburst of Gentile languages (despite a common knowledge of Hebrew and/or Aramaic) could have only one main purpose: to make crystal clear that the Holy Spirit’s power was and is bestowed with the specific goal of evangelization of all peoples in view!”

Jerusalem down (Acts 5:28; 6:7) – the rest of the world to go.

“By the end of the seventh chapter of the book of Acts we find, however, that all of the apostles and their thousands of converts are still clustered in Jerusalem. … God’s solution was very simple, if painful: He scattered the Christians through persecution”–but “even persecution could not dislodge the apostles from home base” (Richardson) (see Acts 8:1). It was Philip (not the apostle, see Acts 6:1-5), a “layman”, who had broken Samaritan ice for the apostles (namely, Peter and John; see Acts 8:25). And it was Philip, the layman, who witnessed to the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:25-40) who was reading Isaiah 53:7 (but see also the “strongly cross-cultural directive found in” Isaiah 18:2,7). “…in Acts 9:32 to 11:18, we find Peter again following in Philip’s footprints…” and God sets him up with a Roman centurion named Cornelius (Acts 10-11:18). Peter’s words in Acts 10:43, spoken to Cornelius’ and his family, sum it up well: “All the prophets testify about Him that everyone [the word “everyone” is unqualified] who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins through His name” / “And at that moment the Holy Spirit overwhelmed Peter’s wistful Gentile audience just as He overwhelmed believing Jews on the day of Pentecost and outcasts of Samaria who were awakened first by deacon Philip’s ministry,” (Richardson). Peter had to defend himself to his Jewish-Christian critics (Acts 11:1-18) – and it looks like they finally started to understand. But apparently Peter had only partially-digested this lesson, as he and Paul have a disagreement concerning legalism, in Galatians 2:11-21.

But, for a number of possible reasons, the apostles suffered “headquarters fever” – sending out Barnabas as a deputy to Antioch. It was for the purpose of filling in where the other apostles were lacking that Jesus converts Saul/Paul (Acts 9) for the cause (Acts 13:2-3; Gal 2:6-7,9). At least the first apostles were not opposed to sending out others in obedience to the Great Commission, even if they themselves found it hard to do.

“Paul and Barnabas were fully assured that Gentiles who believe become ‘heirs together with Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus…and are no longer foreigners and aliens, but fellow citizens with God’s people and members of God’s household…a dwelling in which God lives by His Spirit’ (Eph 3:6; 2:19,22).” (Richardson) / “Paul would even dare to say, as he wrote later in his epistles, that in Christ ‘there is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female…[but those who believe] are all one in Christ Jesus’ (Gal 3:28). For Christ ‘has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility’ (Eph 2:14). See also Acts 13:46-47; 14:27.

After one of the church councils wherein Peter affirms, lesson learned, that “We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are” (Acts 15:9-11) and James adds that “[Peter] has described to us how God at first showed His concern by taking from the Gentiles a people for Himself” (v.14), continuing with “The words of the prophets are in agreement with this, as it is written: ‘After this I will return and rebuild David’s fallen tent…that the remnant of men may see the Lord, and all the Gentiles who bear my name’” (vv.15-17), –“it is possible that some of the original apostles, Palestine-bound—at least until that conference—finally began to open their eyes at this point to the possibilities of ministry among faraway Gentiles.” (Richardson) Richardson gives examples of how far certain apostles (John, Peter, Thomas, Andrew) ventured out, and some possible factors which may have contributed to their out-reaching.

Richardson’s conclusion to the book includes, “We hold in our hands the possibility of bringing God’s 4,000-year-old promise to final fruition.” (Ichthus: refer to Mark 13:10, Matthew 24:14 and 2 Peter 3:9.)

Posted in Apologetics | Leave a comment

Illumination vs. Gnosis

From Lewis Sperry Chafer’s “Major Bible Themes” (revised by John F. Walvoord) (Zondervan, 1974):

C. Special Revelation (p. 32-33)

Throughout the history of man, God has given special revelation. Many instances are recorded in the Word of God of His speaking directly to man as He did in the Garden of Eden or to the prophets of the Old Testament or the apostles of the New Testament. Some of this special revelation was recorded in the Bible and forms the only authoritative and inspired record that we have of such special revelation.

Upon completion of the sixty-six books in the Bible, special revelation in the ordinary sense seems to have ceased. No one has ever been able successfully to add one verse to the written Scriptures a normative statement of truth. Apocryphal additions are clearly inferior and without the inspiration which has attended all writing of Scripture itself.

In place of special revelation, however, a work of the Spirit has especially characterized the present age. As the Spirit of God illuminates or casts light upon the Scriptures, this is a legitimate form of the present tense revelation from God in which the teachings of the Bible are made clear and applied to individual life and circumstances. Coupled with the work of illumination is the work of the Spirit in guidance as general scriptural truths are applied to the particular needs of an individual. While both guidance and illumination are genuine works of God, they do not guarantee that an individual will perfectly understand the Bible or in all cases will understand accurately God’s guidance. Thus, while illumination and guidance are a work of the Spirit, they do not possess the infallibility of Scripture as they are being received by fallible human beings.

Apart form this work of the Spirit of God, however, in revealing what Scripture means, there is no real understanding of truth as stated in 1 Corinthians 2:10. The truth of the Word of God needs to be revealed to us by the Spirit of God, and we need to be taught by the Spirit (1 Cor 2:13). According to 1 Corinthians 2:14, “The natural man receives not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness to him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.” Accordingly, the Bible is a closed book, as far as its real meaning is concerned, to one who is not a Christian and not taught by the Spirit. It also requires on the part of the individual student of Scripture a close fellowship with God in which the Spirit of God is able to reveal His truth.

Zondervan NASB Study Bible note on 1 Cor 2:14 natural man. Described in Jude 19 as one who is “worldly-minded” (cf Rom 8:9). The non-Christian is basically dominated by the merely physical, worldly or natural life. Because he does not possess the Holy Spirit, he is not equipped to receive appreciatively truth that comes from the Spirit. Such a person needs the new birth (John 3:1-8; Titus 3:5-6).

From “Breaking the Da Vinci Code” by Darrell L. Bock, Ph.D. (Thomas Nelson, 2004), pp 161-162:

In short, Jesus’ resurrection is the collision of death with life, and life wins! But this is not an abstract engagement of life with death, or a depiction of everyone’s life and death. It is the power of God working creatively to renew life in One who had died but made certain claims about God, Himself, and life. Jesus preached that the kingdom of God came with and through Him. That kingdom involves in part a presence and rule of God that bring such order to living that life can become what it was designed to be. Jesus claimed that as the Son, He must return to the Father so that God could give the Sprit to those who embraced what Jesus was saying. A reading of John 14-16 explains that promise. Jesus called this kingdom teaching a mystery, not in the sense of secrets for insiders, because Jesus preached that message openly in the streets and in the countryside. He often preached and then said, “Let the one who has ears to hear, hear.” The mystery is for those who will hear it. It is a secret lost for those who will not listen.

Jesus also said, “I have come that they might have life, and have it abundantly” (John 10:10 NET). In all of this Jesus was bringing a kind of decoding to the mystery of life, life lived consciously in the presence of God. That does not mean that every question about why things happen receives an answer. Nor does it mean that life becomes problem free or less enigmatic. It does mean life begins to make sense because Jesus gives access and understanding to what real life is.

Part of decoding that mystery involves understanding who we are without God and appreciating why we need God. Theologians use the word sin to describe our problem. It is not a popular word in our culture. I often suggest that to see what it means, we just need to read the daily newspaper. Most of us, if we are honest, understand that often we act and react in ways that are destructive to ourselves and others. Sin is not about pointing a finger at others; sin is about understanding who we are and what our tendencies are when we free ourselves from accountability to the living, Creator God. There may be no greater truth more often denied than that sin lives powerfully in our world—and we are powerless in ourselves to deal with it.

. . .

The way out of the mysterious darkness that encumbers life when we live it independently of God is to take the path God shows through the code breaker, Jesus. The way out includes admitting our need for God and for forgiveness. We were created to be dependent upon God. The way out is to acknowledge [Ichthus: by faith] what God has said about us through the message of Jesus’ work for us, that is, through the provision for forgiveness and life that Jesus made through His own sacrifice and death for us.

Such faith is open to God’s leading, direction, and instruction that come through Jesus and the messengers He instructed. Those closest to Jesus have told us Jesus’ story. That is why to understand the code breaker and the real code, we must read their story, for their story is our story.

ibid pp. 67-68:

Third, this entire teaching [found in Apocalypse of Peter 82:17-83:15] is a mystery; it is unique revelation that Peter has received from Jesus. This is the most basic characteristic of these texts. They are filled with mysteries now revealed, and only insiders have access to and can appreciate these mysteries. These insiders have “the knowledge,” the gnosis.

This point stands in some contrast to the view of revelation in the texts that are now a part of the Bible. These biblical texts are recorded and given openly for all to consider. Before the New Testament existed as documents, these respected Christian writings were read to the congregations. They held no claim to “insider” knowledge as the Gnostic-like texts did. Revelation was presented for all to consider, accept, or reject, while setting forth the benefits and consequences of such a deliberation. Neither was there dualism between pure knowledge and the creation as inherently corrupt. God’s creation was good, although creation suffered from the fallenness of sin and its destructive effects. Knowing God meant seeing oneself the way God did and sensing the need for Him, not just getting access to secret knowledge.

ibid pp 81-12:

As we have seen in many of these texts [Apocalypse of Peter 70:20-71:5; 76:27-34, Testimony of Truth 31:24-32:2], the issue is possession of secret knowledge, the gnosis. Jesus is merely a conduit to this higher knowledge. More important, no authority can challenge that revelation, which comes directly to a member of the group. The difference from more traditional Christians is that the role of the already extant, major texts of the faith is relativized and weakened. Also relativized is the importance of Jesus’ unique work for humanity that dealt with the issue of sin from within.

The issue is not merely to know or understand the problem and have a proper, abstract conception of God, but to have been changed so that one can deal with the problem on the basis of having come into a meaningful relationship with God. Spirituality is about more than having right perception; it is about having a realistic perception about God and oneself while being able to respond with openness to God and His leading.

This Gnostic group understood that the means to salvation was the knowledge brought to them by the heavenly Revealer-Savior, whom they associated with the heavenly Supreme Father, the Pleroma of the upper world. That Father was different from the Father of this earthly, physical world with its Demiurge. Again, in contrast to the documents now found in the New Testament, this God was too great to be intimate with his followers. He might give light, but that light came through others. Contact with God was indirect. The light from God triggered a light within individuals that led to knowledge, with knowledge being the key to deliverance.

ibid pp. 71-72:

From “What Heresy?” published in Books and Culture (Nov-Dec 2003)… Frederica Matthewes-Green:

There is such a thing as self-deception, and confusion can bloom in unfamiliar spiritual realms. Though such experiences are indisputably beyond words, after we have them we try to talk about them. We want to share them with others, and we want to check whether we simply flipped out. Say that it’s like going to Paris. Everyone takes a photo of the Eiffel Tower. When we get home, we compare them; some snapshots are fuzzy and some from funny angles, but we can recognize them as depicting the same thing. The snaps don’t capture the reality; nothing can; but they’re OK as records.

The Creeds are photos everyone agreed on. They are minimal and crisply focused, not fancied-up. They are not a substitute for persona experience, but a useful guide for comparison, for discernment. If someone’s snap shows King Kong climbing up the Tower, we can say, “Hey, you’re off base there. Something’s messing with your head.” If Kong is wearing a lei and a paper party hat we might say, “Aw, now you’re just making stuff up.”

That’s what early Christians said to the Gnostics. The problem wasn’t the insistence that we directly experience God. It was that the Gnostics’ schemes of how to do this were so wacky. Preposterous stories about creation, angels, demons, and spiritual hierarchies multiplied like mushrooms. (Even some Christians, like Origen and Clement of Alexandria, dabbled in these fields.) The version attributed to Valentinus, the best-known Gnostic, is typical. Valentinus supposedly taught a hierarchy of spiritual beings called “aeons.” One of the lowest aeons, Sophia, fell and gave birth to the Demiurge, the God of the Hebrew Scriptures. This evil Demiurge created the visible world, which was a bad thing, because now we pure spirits are all tangled up in fleshy bodies. Christ was an aeon who took possession of the body of the human Jesus, and came to free us from the prison of materiality.

“Us,” by the way, didn’t mean everybody. Not all people have the divine spark within, just intellectuals; “gnosis,” by definition, concerns what you know. Some few who are able to grasp these insights could be initiated into deeper mysteries. Ordinary Christians, who lacked sufficient brainpower, could only attain the Demiurge’s middle realm. Everyone else was doomed. Under Gnosticism, there was no hope for salvation for most of the human race.

More from Chafer/Walvoord’s Major Bible Themes (Zondervan, 1974): from pp. 122-123: “C. The Results of the Filling of the Spirit / 2. One of the important ministries of the Spirit is that of teaching the believer spiritual truth. Only by the guidance and illumination of the Spirit can a believer understand the infinite truth of the Word of God. As the Spirit of God is necessary in revealing the truth concerning salvation (John 16:7-11) before a person can be saved, so the Spirit of God also guides the Christian into all truth (John 16:12-14). The deep things of God, truth that can be understood only by a Spirit-taught man, are revealed to one who is walking by the Spirit (1 Cor 2:9-3:2).”

For all interested in doing a Bible study on this topic:

“Inspiration of the Scriptures” p 103-104 USGB
A. Expressed by: “Thus saith the Lord” (Jer 13:1); “The word of the Lord came” (1 Kin 16:1); “It is written” (Rom 10:15); “As the Holy Spirit saith” (Heb 3:7); “According to the Scripture” (James 2:8); “My words in thy mouth” (Jer 1:9).
B. Described as: Inspired by God (2 Tim 3:16); Moved by the Holy Spirit (2 Pet 1:21); Christ-centered (Luke 24:27; 2 Cor 13:3).
C. Modes of: Various (Heb 1:1); Inner impulse (Judg 13:25; Jer 20:9); A voice (Rev 1:10); Dreams (Dan 7:1); Visions (Ezek 11:24,25).
D. Proofs of: Fulfilled prophecy (Jer 28:15-17; Luke 24:27-45); Miracles attesting (Ex 4:1-9; 2 Kin 1:10-14); Teachings supporting (Deut 4:8; Ps 19:7-11).
E. Design of: Reveal God’s mysteries (Amos 3:7; 1 Cor 2:10); Reveal the future (Acts 1:16; 1 Peter 1:10-12); Instruct and edify (Mic 3:8; Acts 1:8); Counteract distortion (2 Cor 13:1-3; Gal 1:6-11.
F. Results of Scripture: Unbreakable (John 10:34-36); Eternal (Matt 24:35); Authoritative (Matt 4:4,7,10); Trustworthy (Ps 119:160); Verbally accurate (Matt 22:32, 43-46; Gal 3:16); Sanctifying (2 Tim 3:16,17); Effective (Jer 23:29; 2 Tim 2:15).

“Word” / E: Agency of, to: / Illuminate p. 215 USGB: Psalm 119:120

Hebrew # 1847, Greek # 1922

Illumination/illumine:
Ps 18:28
Ps 105:39
Rev 21:23; 22:5

1 John 2:27 Zondervan NASB Study Bible note: have no need for anyone to teach you. Since the Bible constantly advocates teaching (Matt 28:10; 1 Cor 12:28; Eph 4:11; Col 3:16; 1 Tim 4:11; 2 Tim 2:2,24), John is not ruling out human teachers. At the time when he wrote, however, Gnostic teachers were insisting that the teaching of the apostles was to be supplemented with the “higher knowledge” that they (the Gnostics) claimed to possess. John’s response was that what the readers were taught under the Spirit’s ministry through the apostles not only was adequate but was the only reliable truth. teaches you. The teaching ministry of the Holy Spirit (what is commonly called illumination) does not involve revelation of new truth or the explanation of all difficult passages of Scripture to our satisfaction. Rather, it is the development of the capacity to appreciate and appropriate God’s truth already revealed—making the Bible meaningful in thought and daily living. all things. All things necessary to know for salvation and Christian living.

Deut 29:29 (“secret things” meaning the future and all that is beyond the grasp of human understanding); 30:11-13 (God’s revelation – in this case, the covenant – is not beyond human understanding, unlike what certain Gnostics would say about gnosis… see Rom 10:6-10).

Illuminated:
Heb 10:26-32  enlightened

Enlightened (with life) 1 Sa 14:27,29
Enlightened (with true “knowledge” of the true God) Job 33:30; Is 53:11
Enlightened (lightning) Ps 97:4

Eph 1:8; Heb 6:4

Insight: Dan 5:11,14 (enlightenment, understanding); 9:22; 12:10; 1 Chr 26:14; Prov 12:8; Mark 6:52; Eph 1:8

Light: John 12:35-50; 1 John 1:5-10

Illumination, spiritual (p. 99, USGB)
The Gospel enlightens…John 1:9
Enlightened at conversion…Heb 6:4
Enlightenment in Christian truth…Eph 1:18
Enlightened (have truth disclosed to oneself) by Holy Spirit…John 16:13-16
Enlightened by God…1 Cor 4:5; John 14:26; 14:16-31
Searches thoughts: Ps 19:12; 139:23-24; Heb 4:12-13

Enlightenment, spiritual (USGB)
Source of: From God (Ps 18:28: “illumines” – see Ps 27:1; KJV says “enlighten”); Through God’s Word (Ps 19:8); By prayer (Eph 1:18); by God’s ministers (Acts 26:18, see NASB note).
Degrees of: Partial now (1 Cor 13:9-12); Hindered by sin (1 Cor 2:14 and all of chapter 2); Complete in heaven (Is 60:19).

Knowledge without Love (grace):
Darkness is ignorance (Heb 6:4) and death (1 Cor 13:12-13).

A quote from p. 82 of “Breaking the Da Vinci Code” (Nelson Books, 2004) by Darrell L. Bock, Ph.D. –

The Gnostic believers in contemporary direct revelation complained about the authority of the bishops in the other Christian groups. The debate centered on who defined and spoke for the Christian faith. … Heracleon, a Gnostic commentator on John’s gospel, in Fragment 13 as recorded by Origen in his Commentary on John 10.33, compared these other, non-Gnostic Christians to Levites shut out from mystery.

Now you can begin to see what the early Christians found heretical. Gnosticism rejected the body and saw it as a prison for the soul; Christianity insisted that God infuses all creation and that even the human body can be a vessel of holiness, a “temple of the Holy Spirit.” Gnosticism rejected the Hebrew Scriptures and portrayed the God of the Jews as an evil spirit; Christianity looked on Judaism as a mother. Gnosticism was elitist; Christianity was egalitarian, preferring “neither Jew nor Greek, male nor female, slave nor free.” Finally, Gnosticism was just too complicated. Christianity maintained the simple invitation of the One who said, “Let the little children come to me.” Full-blown science-fiction Gnosticism died under its own weight.

Pagels does not endorse this aspect of Gnosticism. But the Gnostics would not endorse her version either. They did not think of these elaborate schemes as mythopoeic (which is how Neo-Gnostics describe them), but as factual. Your salvation depended on getting it right, and Gnostics argued with each other much as theologians do today. Some claimed that the body was so evil you had to give up sex; others said the body was so illusory it didn’t matter what you did with it. A well-meaning postmodernist who murmured “You’re both right” would be reviled for not grasping what’s at stake.
– Frederica Matthewes-Green in “What Heresy?” (Books and Culture, Nov-Dec 2003).

I’m putting this in quotes because it is important and takes the conversation in a different direction –

1. A member of ILP has claimed that the higher mysteries (higher gnosis, I suppose) cannot be communicated in words – therefore higher gnosis is useless, like tongues without interpretation (1 Cor 13:1; 14:15-19).

2. The teachings of Christian Gnosticism are not sound doctrine, therefore “gnosis” should be stamped out (1 John 4:1-6). See original post, and the “Against Gnosticism” thread.

3. Gnosis is a counterfeit of certain gifts and manifestations of the Holy Spirit (2 Cor 11:13-15), as well as illumination/enlightenment, which is an important ministry of the Holy Spirit (see above, and the original post).

Three strikes – gnosis is out.

For further study into the spiritual gifts, ministries, effects and manifestations of the Holy Spirit, see: Acts; Rom 12:3-8; 1 Cor 1:7; 12-14; 2 Cor 12:12; Eph 3:7-8; 4:7-16; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 4:10-11. Unlike gnosis (which is false and not from God), spiritual gifts are free gifts of grace, not earned, and not ways of earning God’s unearnable favor (grace) (as demonstrated in His substitutionary death and resurrection).

There are also ‘fruits of the Spirit’ – of which love is one (1 Cor 12:31; Gal 5:22). Spiritual gifts are given to individuals to serve the common good of the body (church). Fruits of the Spirit are the effect the spirit has on the character of the individual. Gnosis is neither a spiritual gift, nor a fruit of the spirit… it is from man, not God. According to Christian Gnostics, you must be initiated into secret gnosis, and if you are not intellectually capable of such initiation, you are hopeless. This is not in line with God’s freely-given, unearnable love (grace) – and Jesus’ words which speak against keeping His light under a basket, and for shining before all humanity (Matt 5:14-16; 10:26-27; 28:19; Luke 8:16; 11:33; John 18:20; Acts 1:8). See the “Against Gnosticism” thread and the original post of this one.

Hidden truths (see my Mystery thread) are not bad if they point to something good and are available for the inspection of everyone. Of course, as regards the moments we no longer have access to, or do not yet have access to (we only have access to the present moment) – those are like gift-wrapped presents. Wouldn’t want to spoil the surprise. But if one of us gets to see it – we all get to see it, or at least hear about it (in the case of a prophet who has received the future). Some things we just do not have the mental capacity to understand (at least not yet) – but if someone tells you to believe something that contradicts what God has already revealed (and tells you to keep it “hush hush”) – if you walk into that trap, you’re signing your own spiritual death warrant.

Posted in Against Gnosticism | Leave a comment

Differing, changing concepts of gods/God — unchanging God.

I. Some have argued that the God of today is not jealous like the God of Old Testament times (see “The Jealousy of God”). Such folks have argued that the God of today is a different God from the God of Old Testament times. But the argument can only refer to concepts of God which change as we learn more about God, as God is unchanging, and there is only one God. God is a jealous God, during both Old and New Testament times – still is, and always will be. That means that if you screw up your relationship with God, or do something to come in between God and someone else – God’s jealousy is the expected result. That will never change.

II. Some have also argued that it is okay to name a current god or goddess with the name of a god or goddess found in the Old Testament, even though the Old Testament god or goddess had a filthy reputation for receiving child sacrifices (and other muck), because the god or goddess of today is a different god or goddess from the god or goddess found in the Old Testament (so its name’s reputation doesn’t matter, because it is just a name, and not the actual god or goddess – or so the argument goes). In this case, the god or goddess being referred to admittedly doesn’t even exist, or has changed so much that it can’t even be considered the same being (although – would you not say the memories of your childhood self are ‘your’ memories, though you admittedly are no longer a child?). If there is any being at all being worshiped, it is not unchanging God – therefore it is not love, truth, or life. Rather, it is a counterfeit, and thus inferior, and will not bring us unity with God, who is love, truth, and life – it will bring the opposite: disunity with God… apathy, deception, and death (ultimately spiritual, but let us not forget the children who were sacrificed). The same is true now of counterfeits, that was true of them in Old Testament times (minus, perhaps, the child sacrifices). But it cannot be said that the gods or goddesses of today are the same or different from the gods or goddesses of Old Testament times, because counterfeits (IF representing real beings) are not perfect and unchanging like God, so there is no standard by which to measure one’s concepts. The only thing you can conclude with certainty is that your concepts do not represent God. It is interesting to note, however, that the gods and goddesses (counterfeits) of the Old Testament had interchangeable names… could be substituted in place of eachother… unlike the Genuine Article, for which there is no substitute. Do you ever feel replaceable, like anybody could do your job? God doesn’t see you that way – and that’s the last thing the counterfeits (IF representing real beings) want you to realize. The real God totally rejected the religious practices (which included child sacrifice) of those who worshiped counterfeits (see “Against gods, goddesses, and sycretism”).

There is also the question of why one would give a filthy name to that which one worships… which is probably answered with the same answer to why one would prefer to worship a counterfeit, rather than the real God… the real, unchanging source of love, truth, and life. Time to wake up and smell the vomit. Or, no, I meant roses…

Posted in Apologetics | Leave a comment

The Jealousy of God

The question this study sought to answer was whether or not God’s jealousy (Ex 20:5) contradicts His being love (1 John 4:8) if love is not jealous (1 Cor 13:4). I discover that it is really a question of semantics. I use Zondervan’s NASB Study Bible.

Exodus 20:5 “You shall not worship them or serve them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God…”

NASB note: jealous God. God will not put up with rivalry or unfaithfulness. Usually His “jealousy” concerns Israel and assumes the covenant relationship (analogous to marriage) and the Lord’s exclusive right to possess Israel and to claim her love and allegiance. Actually, jealousy is part of the vocabulary of love. The “jealousy” of God (1) demands exclusive devotion to Himself (see 34:14; Deut 4:24; 32:16,21; Josh 24:19; Ps 78:58; 1 Cor 10:22; James 4:5), (2) delivers to judgment all who oppose Him (see Deut 29:20; 1 Kin 14:22; Ps 79:5; Is 42:13; 59:17; Ezek 5:13; 16:38; 23:25; 36:5; Nah 1:2; Zeph 1:18; 3:8) and (3) vindicates His people ( see 2 Kin 19:31; Is 9:7; 26:11; Ezek 39:25; Joel 2:18; Zech 1:14; 8:2). In some of these passages the meaning is closer to “zeal” (the same Hebrew word may be translated either way, depending on the context.)

Ichthus: the Hebrew word (for jealous/zeal) is listed in Strong’s Hebrew concordance as #7067 – there are free on-line lexicons (both Greek and Hebrew… one is at crosswalk.com) if you care to look it up using Strong’s number.

Does the above passage contradict the passages below?

1 Corinthians 13:4: “Love is patient, love is kind and is not jealous; love does not brag and is not arrogant,” and 1 John 4:8: “The one who does not love does not know God, for God is love.”

The Greek word being used for “jealous” in 1 Cor 13:4 is listed in Strong’s as #2206. The New King James Version translates “jealous” (#2206 – I know… “jealous” is not Greek… but I do not have the transliterated word available… sorry) as “envy” in that verse (as well as a few others). In 2 Cor 11:2, where Paul says, “For I am jealous for you with a godly jealousy,” jealous is listed in Strong’s as #2206 and jealousy as #2205. The New King James version also uses the words ‘jealous’ and ‘jealousy’ in that verse. It should also be noted that the New King James Version translates “love” as “charity” in 1 Cor 13. The Strong’s number is 26. This Greek word is translated as “love” elsewhere in the Bible in the King James Version – many verses, including Romans 5:5,8.

If you look up #2205 (jealousy) in the concordance or lexicon, it says it can be used in a favorable or unfavorable sense. To me this says there is good jealousy and bad jealousy. For an example of good jealousy, see my “Get to know Mom by osmosis” thread. I think this is the godly jealousy referred to in Ex 20:5 and 2 Cor 11:2. An example of the ungodly jealousy would be the suspicious spouse who is jealous without cause… I believe this is the jealousy referred to in 1 Cor 13:4. Take care.

Posted in Apologetics | Leave a comment

God loves us.

1a. Argument: Those of us who believe God would love or does love us believe so because we need to believe God would love or does love us, or we just think of ourselves as loveable – or evangelists told us, or we were raised that way.

1b. Consider this: Have you ever had to meet someone new and wondered whether they will like you? If so — did their “ability to like” have anything to do with whether or not you needed them to like you or considered yourself loveable or somebody else told you they would like you, or your mom raised you to believe they would like you (say it’s your grandpa or somebody)? Consider this, too: Why do we not phrase the question using the word “love” instead of “like” when we are talking about meeting a new ‘human’ – but we feel comfortable using the word “love” when we are talking about God? Why don’t we ask… Would God like me if He met me? Perhaps it is the subconscious awareness that He already knows you, and is free from social pretense. And where did that come from?

2a. Assumption: If God hates – then God does not love.

2b. Consider this: Is hate the opposite of love? Or is it rather apathy that is the opposite of love? If we didn’t hate certain things, then we couldn’t, in truth, love certain other things. You can hate certain ‘doings’ of a person, but overall love them despite the things they do which you hate. See Matthew 6:24 and 1 Kings 18:21. Consider this as well: what does God hate – or put the question another way – why does God hate? Review the verses you quoted (Ned) and I’ll give you some more to review (pardon if some of these you already mentioned): Deut. 12:31; 16:22; Ps. 5:5; 11:5; 45:7; Prov. 6:16; 8:13; Is. 1:14; 61:8; Jer. 12:8; 44:4; Hosea 9:15; Amos 5:21; 6:8; Zech. 8:17; Mal. 1:2-3; 2:16; Rom. 9:13; Heb. 1:9; Rev. 2:6. That’s all the verses I could find on God’s hate in my concordance – compare with the verses I found on God’s love at the end of this thread (yes, there are other words for hate, and ways of expressing it… there are also other words for love, and ways of expressing it). You will (re)discover that God hates: abominable acts like child sacrifice (in fire), worshiping and burning sacrifices to man-made artifacts (gods/idols) (read this satire: Jer. 10) (it is like going up to Mom with a ventriloquist dummy and saying, “Mom, you’ve been great, but now I want to be this dummy’s son,”), evil and doing iniquity/evil, loving violence, wickedness, haughty eyes, lying (including perjury and lying against another), shedding innocent blood, devising wicked plans, running rapidly to evil, spreading strife, pride, arrogance, perverting the truth, empty religious ritual, mistreating prisoners of war, when the beloved of His soul roars against Him, unfaithfully combining empty religious ritual in worship of God with the worship of other “gods” (it’s like cheating on your spouse while maintaining an empty sexual relationship with them), arrogance (in success) of self- and “god”-reliance (“god”-reliance is self-reliance, because the gods were man-made), devising evil in one’s heart against another, Esau (in the sense that He did not choose him – we can talk more about that if you like), divorce, being so filthy your clothes are covered with “wrong”/violence (see Mal. 3:5). So — “WHY” does God hate? – because He loves. He hates that which mucks up Love. If we do not walk with the Source of Love, we get something… that isn’t Love.

There is a buzz-phrase that says (if I remember correctly) “Love the sinner, not the sin.” You could reverse it and say, “Hate the sin, not the sinner.” However, a few of those “hate” verses show God hating the person. You must ask yourself: what makes the man? Is a person equal to what he does? In a sense, he is. Galatians 2:20: “I have been crucified with Christ, it is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me.” To be “born again” – to be made new – you must first go through a kind of death… we must become like little children. We have to see with new eyes, or we will never see.

Check out Ezek. 18:23; 18:32; 33:11; 2 Peter 3:9.

Does the reality of suffering mean God hates us? Perhaps it is when we are suffering that we truly learn (if we accept) and reflect to others how much He really does love us and is the only source of strength to overcome – consider Luke 23:34 and Acts 5:41-42, and Acts 7:60. Suffering can push us away from or draw us closer to God.

Does punishment or judgment mean God hates us? No — the Lord disciplines His children/beloved: Ezekiel 16, Hosea 9:15, Rev. 3:19, Job 5:17, Ps. 94:12, 1 Cor. 11:32, Mark 10:21, Prov. 3:11-12, Heb. 12:5-11, Ps. 89:32-33, Jer. 16:5, Psalm 119:71-72; Job 2:10; Isaiah 35:4; Psalm 30:5; Psalm 51:8. God’s love is not different from His desiring that we turn away from sin (repentance, obedience to the royal law of Love). When we say “God loves you” — it includes that He will shape you and mold you — discipline you into a true disciple. It includes that He hates sin, because sin gets in the way of Love.

The cross, rather than being a “single instance” or “one occasion” of love (though it did necessarily take place in time, and so John can refer to it in the past tense), was an expression of unconditional, eternal, infinite love. See Romans 5:5-11. Love is a divine attribute (1 John 4:8) – God is eternal (Deut. 33:27, Is. 9:6, Eph. 3:11, 1 Tim. 1:17, Heb. 9:14, Rev. 14:6), God is love, therefore love is eternal (1 Cor. 13). If that love is not available for everyone, these verses make no sense: 1 Tim. 1:13-16, Acts 10, Acts 13:47, Luke 2:32, Luke 5:31-32, Hebrews 10:1-18.

Most importantly, God wants us to love each other. The best way we can ever worship God (Matthew 25:35-46; 26:10) is by loving each other – that is His royal law [James 2:8 NASB note: The law of love (Lev. 19:18) is called “royal” because it is the supreme law that is the source of all other laws governing human relationships. It is the summation of all such laws (Matt 22:36-40; Rom 13:8-10, Gal. 5:14)]. He hates it when we do not love each other (see 2b). Would an unloving God command this:

“You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” (NASB note says that in Matthew 5:43-48, Jesus corrects a misinterpretation of this Leviticus 19:18 verse – the misinterpretation was made by the stricter Pharisaical school of Shammai.) In Matt. 22:39, Mark 12:31 and Luke 10:27, Jesus combines the Shema (Deut. 6:5) with the royal law “to show that love for neighbor is a natural and logical outgrowth of love for God,” (NASB note).

“In everything, therefore, treat people the same way you want them to treat you, for this is the Law and the Prophets.” (Matthew 7:12)

Verses on God’s love (this index only includes all verses which use the word love in its various forms, according to Strong’s concordance, based on the KJV translation – this index does not include all verses which show God’s love in action, and does not include all the verses in this thread):

Deut. 4:37; 7:7-9, 13; 10:15, 18; 23:5; 33:3; 2 Sam. 12:24; 1 Kin. 10:9; 2 Chr. 2:11; 9:8; Ps. 11:7; 17:7; 25:6; 26:3; 33:5; 36:7, 10; 37:28; 40:10, 11; 42:8; 45:7; 47:4; 48:9; 51:1; 63:3; 69:16; 78:68; 87:2; 88:11; 89:33, 49; 92:2; 99:4; 103:4; 107:43; 119:88, 149, 159; 138:2; 143:8; 146:8; Prov. 8:17; 15:9; Is. 43:4; 48:14; 63:7, 9; Jer. 9:24; 16:5; 31:3; 32:18; Eze. 16:8; Hos. 2:19; 3:1; 9:15; 11:1, 4; 14:4; Zeph. 3:17; Mal. 1:2; 2:11; Mark 10:21; Jn 3:16, 35; 5:20; 10:17; 11:3, 5, 36; 13:1, 23, 34; 14:21, 23; 15:9-17; 16:27; 17:23, 24, 26; 19:26; 20:2; 21:7, 20; Rom. 5:5, 8; 8:35, 37, 39; 9:13; 2 Cor. 5:14; 9:7; 13:11, 14; Gal. 2:20; 5:22; Eph. 2:4; 3:19; 5:2, 25; 6:23; 2 Thess. 2:16; 3:5; 1 Tim. 1:14; Titus 3:4; Heb. 1:9; 12:6; 1 Jn 2:15; 3:1, 16, 17; 4:7-12, 16, 19; 5:3; Rev. 1:5; 3:9, 19.

Posted in Apologetics | Leave a comment

Why Worship?

Since worshipping humans, not to mention things existing in nature or carved by humans, or beings of the imagination which don’t even exist, would be a sign of – “off”ness – why worship God? Why isn’t the desire to worship itself a universal sign of “off”ness?

What is worship? Where does the desire/need to worship come from (weakness of character – sheep mentality?)? What inside us motivates us to worship someone/something? Has God ever stopped us from worshipping Him (has He ever said that the desire to worship Him is “off”?), or from worshipping Him in a certain way that He considered “off” (and then showed us an acceptable way?)?

I don’t think there is a conflict of interest (all by itself) in believing “exactly what soothes your existential worries and offers a validating meaning in the meaninglessness” if you take out the part about meaninglessness. I mean — if you automatically rule out as untrue anything that would soothe your existential worries, yadda yadda yadda — if you automatically rule out the possibility of meaning — isn’t that a conflict of interest (in more ways than one)?

Adopted children seek their biological parents to answer the question “How am I supposed to be?” We seek out our spiritual Creator (in whatever way ‘filling the void’ manifests, be it space exploration, Buddhism, or going straight to the source: God) to answer the same question, on a higher level. To say we can give spiritual birth to ourselves (“phoenix rising from the ashes”) is as practical as saying we can give natural birth to ourselves. He is that which completes us, He is the missing piece of the puzzle.

Reverential respect and admiration at it’s highest form is worship. The person or object you show the most respect and admiration is the person or object you worship (think really quick: who is that person in your life?). That person should be the person most worthy of respect and admiration, who has the most influence on you and most challenges you: God. You show respect in the same ways you show someone that you like or love them. How you honor humans by showing them reverential respect and admiration, and how you ask them for help, and all other forms of discourse with them, differs from how you communicate with an invisible God (free from social pretense).

The way we have worshipped has changed over the ages. God set up many ways of worship for the purpose of distinguishing Himself from the false gods and detestable ways of worshipping them. People are humbled and feel a need to worship when faced with the presence of God, and He has given us acceptable ways of doing so. If you are really interested, read the Old Testament. Hebrews and Romans are good New Testament sources for how things have changed since the Old Testament. John 15:15

I think one of the best ways to worship God is to follow His command to love eachother.

Posted in Apologetics | 1 Comment

Get to know Mom by osmosis?

For a long time I have wondered “Why is there only one way to heaven?” I lost faith over questions like that. I walked away and became an atheist – I stopped asking “which way” and started asserting “death is just a sleep from which we never wake up”. I thought I would never have faith again, but I was wrong. He found me. The amazing things He did in my life were enough to “tide me over” – and once the old unanswered questions began to wash up on the shore once more – He began to answer them.

You don’t learn the contents of a book by osmosis. You have to read it. You don’t get to know your Mom… your best friend… your dog… by getting to know a tree or a rock or a statue – or a book about somebody else. The best way to get to know a person is by spending some time with them – not some person who, for example, has an intimate knowledge of their media persona. A good start, if you’ve never even met a person and you want to get to know them, is by reading their autobiography, how they have affected the world, what they’ve had to say to the world. That way, when you go to meet them for the first time, you’ll be able to recognize them (and be equipped with good talking points!). You don’t want second-hand rumors, you don’t want best guesses – that is, IF you want the truth, and IF you want to get to know them deeply (as deeply as He wants you to know Him – and that’s ‘deepest’). If you don’t want to know – you are nearly a phantom already, dying from apathy – but God can save you yet.

The way I see it, being that God exists and is revealing Himself to man, then every religion/philosophy except (if any) one is just giving their best guess about the way things are. (Before I was saved, I would have said every last one of them is just making stuff up.) God found me and led me back to where we left off (my bookmark was in James chapter 2, by the way…)… and I’ll never leave His side again.

Posted in Apologetics | Leave a comment