CHRISTOLOGY: The Deity of Christ
· Apologetics may be simply defined as the defense of the Christian faith. It's the icing and not the cake, which is the gospel.
· Our purposes are to utilize apologetics for evangelism.
· Having said that, there are two scriptures that are crucial as we go to approach a person or persons to share the gospel:
· 1 Corinthians 3;6 I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.
· 7 So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase. Keep in mind that we're not warring against flesh & blood/Eph. 6, and that it's God's job to change the heart, not ours. Secondly, 2 Timothy 2;24-26: 24 And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient,
· 25 In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;
· 26 And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.
· Christology is the study of the person and work of Jesus Christ. The confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God, which Peter was the first to make (Matthew 16:16), is the heart of the Christian faith. It is this confession that makes one a Christian, and all Christian theology attempts to understand what it means to make this confession.
·
· The first major theological decision that the church ever made was to confirm that Jesus is the Son of God. He was declared to be of one essence with God the Father and the Holy Spirit (this was decided upon by the Council of Nicea, AD 325). But this belief forced upon the church, formed another question: How could one person be both God and man?
·
· To answer this question, the church developed the doctrine of the Incarnation. The way to that doctrine was paved with controversy. There were theologians who emphasized the deity of Christ at the expense of his humanity (a belief called docetism), while others emphasized his humanity at the expense of his deity (adoptionism). Some claimed that the Son only seemed to have a human body, or that while he had a true body and soul, the divine logos took the place of the human spirit. There were theologians who claimed that the man Jesus, as he grew in virtue, was elevated to divine sonship and so was “adopted” into the Godhead, perhaps when he was baptized or at the Resurrection. The church rejected all such explanations. It also rejected all attempts to resolve the problem by suggesting that Jesus was both a divine person and a human person (Nestorianism) or, alternately, that the human and divine nature were fused in one nature (monophysitism).
·
· Jesus proved to be God in three ways:
· 1)Fulfillment of prophecy, over 300 fulfilled
·
· BIBLE READING: Isaiah 53:1-12
· KEY BIBLE VERSE: He was wounded and crushed for our sins. He was beaten that we might have peace. He was whipped, and we were healed! All of us have strayed away like sheep. We have left God’s paths to follow our own. Yet the LORD laid on him the guilt and sins of us all. (Isaiah 53:5-6)
This chapter in Isaiah speaks of the Messiah, Jesus, who would suffer for the sins of all people. Such a prophecy is astounding! Who would believe that God would choose to save the world through a humble, suffering servant rather than a glorious king? The idea is contrary to human pride and worldly ways. But God often works in ways we don’t expect. The Messiah’s strength is shown by humility, suffering, and mercy.
·
· How could an Old Testament person understand the idea of Christ dying for our sins (our transgressions and iniquities)-actually bearing the punishment that we deserved? The sacrifices suggested this idea, but it is one thing to kill a lamb, and something quite different to think of God’s chosen servant as that Lamb. But God was pulling aside the curtain of time to let the people of Isaiah’s day look ahead to the suffering of the future Messiah and the resulting forgiveness made available to all mankind.
· BIBLE READING: Luke 2:21-40
· KEY BIBLE VERSE: Lord, now I can die in peace! As you promised me, I have seen the Savior you have given to all people. He is a light to reveal God to the nations, and he is the glory of your people Israel! (Luke 2:29-32)
·
· The Jews were well acquainted with the Old Testament prophecies that spoke of the Messiah’s blessings to their nation. They did not always give equal attention to the prophecies saying that he would bring salvation to the entire world, not just the Jews (see, for example, Isaiah 49:6). Many thought that Christ had come to save only his own people. Luke made sure his Greek audience understood that Christ had come to save all who believe, Gentiles as well as Jews.
· BIBLE READING: Luke 7:18-35
· KEY BIBLE VERSE: John’s two disciples found Jesus and said to him, “John the Baptist sent us to ask, ’Are you the Messiah we’ve been expecting, or should we keep looking for someone else?’ ” At that very time, he cured many people of their various diseases, and he cast out evil spirits and restored sight to the blind. Then he told John’s disciples, “Go back to John and tell him what you have seen and heard-the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cured, the deaf hear, the dead are raised to life, and the Good News is being preached to the poor. And tell him, ’God blesses those who are not offended by me.’ ” (Luke 7:20-23)
·
· 2) Sinless life=1 Peter 1;19 He paid for you with the precious lifeblood of Christ, the sinless, spotless Lamb of God. Luke 23;14 and he announced his verdict. "You brought this man to me, accusing him of leading a revolt. I have examined him thoroughly on this point in your presence and find him innocent. ;15 Herod came to the same conclusion and sent him back to us. Nothing this man has done calls for the death penalty. Hebrews 4;15 This High Priest of ours understands our weaknesses, for he faced all of the same temptations we do, yet he did not sin.
· 3) miraculous life=Gospel of John=2=water to wine, healing of nobleman's son, healing of lame man in 5, multiplication of loaves in 6, 9 the healing of the blind man,11= resurrection/resuccitation of Lazarus, no other religious leader in the past has accomplished these kinds of miracles, esp. w/ the proof we have for them.
· The truth of Christianity rests on the truth & truthfulness of Jesus Christ. Who is He? What did He say about Himself? What separates Jesus from a host of others such as Buddha, Confucius, Hare Krishna, and the Dali Lamma? Answers to these questions make a difference not only when one chooses a worldview, but to whom ultimate allegiance & worship is to be rendered. Therefore, based on the premise that the biblical records are presenting a reliable portrait of Jesus Christ, we will seek to discover "who" Jesus claimed to be while at the same time placing emphasis on rationality(non-contradictory)of the incarnation of the Son of God.
· Regarding the divine nature of Jesus, this is the very characteristic that separates Him from the rest of religious leaders; Buddah, Mohammed, Joseph Smith and the rest.
· None of them either claimed to be divine or demonstrated being divine. This makes Christianity unique, this is the very thing that caused Christianity to rise above the pagan religions of the first, second, and third century. While they were still dealing w/ mythological content, we were dealing w/ history.
· What are the Critics saying about Christ?
· Bertrand Russell(1872-1970) was an English logician and philosopher. He called Jesus cruel & inhumane for teaching the doctrine of hell & eternal punishment. This quote from Him is very indicative of what many people cross the country and in the world believe about Jesus," When I tell you why I am not a CHristian I have to tell you two different things: first, why I do not believe in God & immortality; and secondly, why I do not think that Christ was the best & wisest of all men, although I grant him a very high degree of moral goodness. I do not believe that one can grant the superlative(passsing all others in quality)wisdom or the superlative goodness of Christ as depicted in the gospels.
· So he's denying what the gospels say; he's saying he was a good man but He's not wise like God is in any sense of the Word. This mentality is very prevalent, the Jesus Seminar/higher critics and secular humanism of people you talk to on the street hold to it as well.
· Others say:
· Jesus was a good man but not sinless (Secular Humanism) He tried to change people, He helped the poor and tried to help those in the Middle East but He's not God. They always stop short of the divine question. In fact humanism says that God is out-moded/a thing of the past because today man is modernistic. We have science/technology so, get rid of the deity question. See the communist manifesto for that. He was a wise man but not God(unusual wise person).
· You can have the Christ consciousness like Confucius and Krishna had, this is the tennant of the New Age movement.
· He never claimed to be the Son of God (Arianism/Jehovah's Witnesses). These guys will take you through all kinds of scriptures and show you how He talked of Himself as being a man. Ultimately they don't take you to the divine passages. (Islam) He couldn't be God because God can't have a Son. They think God had a son in a procreative/biological way. We're talking about a relationship that denotes a member of the Godhead; Father, Son, Holy Spirit, which is a functionality.
· Some say He should be categorized w/ the rest of those who claimed to be God( Rev. Moon, David Koresh, Charles Manson who claimed to be Messiah or God in some way, we would call these people insane). Most of them are in prison, did prison, or are dead. Manson's in prison and Moon has served prison.
· Notice the scriptures that Paul gives, the first is 2 Cor. 11;4 For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him. What Paul is saying is that the Corinthian church was submitting to doctrines and teachings that were not scripturally sound. There's all these different doctrines of Jesus coming along and you're just buying whichever one comes along. He warns us here against another Jesus, we need to know the true Jesus.
· Galatians 1; 8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. He goes on in ;9 repeating the phrase. Where's the gospel in scripture? 1 Corinthians 15;1-10, John 3;16. Christ came, died on the cross, buried and raised and revealed Himself to many and ascended to the right hand of the Father=the essential gospel message. He will forgive sins.
· Why is it important?
· 1. If Jesus is not God there are several implications that follow: He's a liar.
· A. He said He was the only way to salvation, Jn. 14;6/Acts 4=there's no other name by which we must be saved.
· Man has a moral obligation to worship & obey. So if He demands worship and He is God, we ought to render to Him ultimate allegiance and obedience. If we're not rendering ultimate worship to the ultimate, we've got a problem. But if we're rendering worship to something that's not the ultimate, we also have a problem. What do you give to the person who has everything? You give Him worship. People don't understand that He wasn't just a man.
· Isaiah 44...Son of God refers to position not origin, the little Greek word for born one is never used of Him
· He's called the heir, the Lord/Curios is what translated the Hebrew word for Yahweh
· He's called the Lord of Glory, the Holy one=108 times the bible says He's the Holy One of Israel
· 44 is a very critical issue as it relates to the deity of Christ, that is, He's called the first and the last
· ;6 the word Yahweh is used twice in this verse and the redeemer is called the Yahweh of hosts=Lord Saabaoth means hosts or armies
· Because of the statement, beside me there is no God. So now I know the statment I am the first and the last, beside me there is no God is a statment of deity.
· In chapter forty-eight verse twelve=the first and the last. ;13=the creator, thru ;16 shows that He's both the sent one as well as the creator. ;17=I am the Lord God, the last twenty-seven chapters of Isaiah are critical as to who the Messiah is & His deity.
· Take this and go to Revelation chapter one and see how the bible in the NT takes these quotations & applies them directly to Yeshua/to Jesus.
· ;17 this is that vision of the resurrected Christ. You see that there's no doubt about it that He's our Lord Jesus Christ. And He makes a clear statement=I am the first and the last.
· In 2;8=first and last. And then at the end of Rev. at the last chapter ;13, if it's the first and last letter of the Greek alphabet, and He's called the Word, the revelation from God, then everything there is to be said, He is. He's the first word and the last word. He's all there is that God has ever said. The statement is really dealing w/ the finality of God's revelation, that Jesus is God in human flesh, a final revelation that's complete & sufficient for all the fullness of God dwelled in Him in bodily form. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, now if you put a period there, you don't have a strong OT connection, although some certainly powerful statements but, the first and the last gives that Isaiah 44 and 48 connection.
· Now notice ;16, the point of using this verse is to confirm that the person talking is in fact, Yeshua/Jesus. Now we've already mentioned that in Isa. 44;6 He's called the Lord of Hosts/the Redeemer/Yahweh, not adonai=earthly lord, it's Yahweh, the name of our God.
· It's been said that there are several arguments to prove the deity of Christ, His names are just one of them. We have His attributes and His abilities. Technically speaking, divine attributes are not possessed by man. We point this out because you'll get some books in a Christian bookstore and it will talk about the attributes of God & they will say some of the attributes are love, righteous, faithful, while we aren't what God is, yet we manifest some of the characteristics. When you speak strictly of the attributes of God, you speak of what man is not and cannot be. Some tv evangelists have claimed to be God, it's a miracle God didn't strike them dead. It's important to ask yourself as you look @ these attributes to ask yourself if these belong to Jesus Christ?
· God is eternal, man is not; Isa. 9;6=everlasting Father. Now a lot of people who are a part of the Jesus only group, who believe that Jesus and the Father are one and the same, use this verse to say that Isa. 9;6 calls Him the Father. No, what it means is that He's the Father of the Ages, what it means is He's the source controlling all of time, it's dealing w/ His providential role, it's not saying He's the Father. 9;6 describes Him as being eternal.
· In 1 John 5;11=eternal life is the possession of JC, He is eternal.
· Now a second attribute of God that's unlike man is that He's unchangeable. Malachi 3;6=6 For I am the Lord(Yahweh), I change not; Now from man's perspective, it might look like He changed. It says at the time of the flood, it says that the Lord repented when He saw the wickedness of man. He hasn't changed, because one of His principles is to judge sin. The Lord changed His mind, we think, because man sinned, no He knew man would sin, the change of mind was in accord w/ the change of the course of action God will take. Up until that time, He's patient. At that time, He's no longer patient, but brings the judgment & righteously so. So His character doesn't change. What's interesting in that passage that if the bible didn't say that, & that He didn't judge the world, then we could argue that He does change. But His character is always consistent w/ Himself. Hebrews 1;8-12 He is unchangeable. In some of your theological books that you might read, this is usually called immutability. Chapter 13, and Hebrews is one of the best books to read on the person & work of JC, esp. from a Jewish point of view. 13;8 This makes a connection because here, at the last chapter, he deals w/ the immutability of the Lord, which he mentioned in the first chapter. The unchangeable Christ.
· Now some of the next three attributes are what people fight over in the Christian world at the time of our Lord becoming man. There are a lot of good men that are discussing these things. The root question here is when Jesus became a man, what characteristics of His divine attributes did He not have? Historic Christianity teaches that He never stopped being God. All during His earthly ministry when He willing humbled Himself as a man, He was still God in human flesh. All the fullness of God dwelt in Him. Watch very carefully the tricky wording of some bible teachers today that indicate the fullness of God didn't occur until the ressurection. Some of the word of faith teachers teach that Jesus became a sinner, descended into hell, was tortured, punished, & became born again & then became the fullness of God in human flesh & we can do the same through the new birth. Ken Hagin/Ken Copeland/and Fred Price. And many of the things they say look/sound good but that's pure heresy. He never stopped being God ever. Phillipians 2;5-11 is the key passage on the Kenosis(emptying) of Christ, what we believe He did is He layed aside the exercise of His divine attributes. It didn't mean that He permanently did it because on certain occasions He clearly revealed it. It only took one look in the garden of Gethsemene and the entire priestly soldiers fell over backwards like dominos. He said to a fig tree be withered and it was. During a storm on the Sea of Gallilee, He rebuked it the bible said, the same word for rebuking a demon, and immediately the sea was calm, it wasn't gradual. Now the disciples who were expert fishermen, knew those winds didn't just subside, and worshipped Him saying truly you are the Son of God.
· Omnipresence is our next one. How is Jesus omnipresent when He had a physical body located in the land of Israel, He never really went more than 200 mi. from His home, how can He be omnipresent? At the same time that He walked the hills of Judea, He was filling the universe w/ His presence. And there's where we have a total inability from the human perspective to understand. In Matthew 18;20=two or three are gathered=what do they mean? According to the law in Deuteronomy in order for a word of which you say is to be established, there needs to be two or three witnesses to confirm it. What He's saying is whenever two or three are gathered together in My name to witness what that brother says, I'm there in the midst of it/the authority of Christ is there. In Chapter 28, after His resurrection, He makes this statement; ;20 I am w/ you alway, even unto the end of the world. Do you believe the Lord Jesus is with you right now? Col. 3;11=Christ is all(everything that you'd possibly need in Christianity), and in all=meaning in every person/His omnipresence. We speak about Jesus coming into your heart. According to John 14, not only does Jesus come, but also the Holy Spirit and the Father. Jesus said We'll all abide in you. We'll make our abode in you. When you honor the Son you honor the Father. It's interesting in Revelation at the church of Laodicea, Christ is on the outside of the door of the church knocking. Saying if any man/singular, apparently the church gets so bad in the end time, that Jesus has been pushed outside and His invitation is to anyone in there. According to Revelation 12, satan won't be kicked out until the tribulation period. He's omnipresent, right now @ the throne of God in the physical body which He was resurrected in.
· He's also omniscient. Some good bible teachers say that while He was on earth He didn't know. Why do they say this? For one passage alone," No man knows the day nor the hour, neither the angels nor the Son of man". Let me ask you a question, is there anything that God knows that He chooses not to know? Our sin! He knows them but He chooses not to remember them. So Jesus could choose not to remember the day of His return, while on earth, so He could relate to His disciples. Remember that in Col. 2;3 it says that in Him are hid all the treasures of wisdom & knowledge. The bible says that Jesus grew in wisdom & knowledge in favor w/ God & man. Well then He didn't know everything, did He? Begin @ John 2;3-5 , by the way the word commit and the word believe in the previous verse are exactly the same, He knew what was in man=omniscience. In Mark 2 Jesus heals this paralytic man, in ;6 there were scribes reasoning in their hearts and in ;8 He knows what they're thinking.
· He's not only omniscient but, omnipotent, there isn't anything He can't do. God can do anything consistent w/ His nature. He's not going to alter who He is in order to please our fanciful ideas. Phillipians 3 spe77aks about His power to give us a resurrected body like His. 3;20-21= He is able even to subdue all things unto himself. JW's teach that He can't do that, only the Father does & then eventually He surrenders all things to the Father, who's the only one that can do that. But yet here's a clear verse saying He can and will do that. Our Lord is able to do all things unto Himself. In Rev. 1;8=the almighty/the omnipotent one, there isn't anything He cannot do. One of the things that makes God Himself and not man is that He's perfect. Totally complete & sufficient in Himself needing nothing. Col. 1;19=all the fullness dwell. In the Gr. text Father is not written=italics. All the fullness was pleased to dwell in Him. 2;9-10, all Christians are filled up in Him. When you have Jesus, that's all you need. Are sufficiency is of the Lord. You don't need pastors, the church has grown up without them. As well as bibles, no printing press unitl 1450 A.D. That's why we can do church anywhere.
· He's incomprhensible , He's past finding out. He's greater than our knowledge can discern. In Isa. 9;6 it says His name shall be called Wonderful, the Heb. word=incomprehensible/too difficult to understand. It's important for us to understand this nature of God. We'll be learning about Him throughout all eternity. Isa. 55;8-9 He's giving us a comparison there. In church history there's two doctrines about God that kind of fight each other, you need a balance there. There's what we call the transcendence of God=how great He is. And the other is the emmanence of God=how He's identified w/ that which He's created. He's transcendant=greater than anyone can possibly fathom, & yet He's small enough to live within my heart. And those two battle. Now sometimes when you and I in wanting to pray to God, we want to know that He's as close as our breath & our friend, He's the friend that sticks closer than a brother. So the compassionate, High Priest that He is, comforts us when we're really going through hard times as though He's right there in the room. But we have to keep in mind the emmanence of God because if we keep focusing on how He's like me, it will confuse you as to who He really is. He's also the transcendent God=greater than anything I could ever imagine. The name it and claim it movement is an offense to the transcendence of God. The greatness of God is what I need so I don't lay my total confidence upon myself. Romans 11 says He's way past finding out.
· Misunderstanding the title," Son of Man"
· Excerpts from "the Case for Christ"=Lee Strobel
· "Karen Armostrong, the former nun who wrote the best-seller A History of God, said it seems that the term "Son of Man"simply stressed the weakness and mortality of the human condition, so by using it, Jesus was merely emphasizing that He was a frail human being who would one day suffer and die." If that's true, that doesn't sound like much of a claim to deity."
· Contrary to popular belief, "Son of Man" does not primarily refer to Jesus' humanity. Instead it's a direct allusion to Daniel 7;13-14=13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.
· 14 And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.
· So look at what Jesus is doing by applying the term 'Son of Man' to himself, he continued. This is someone who approaches God himself in his heavenly throne room and is given universal authority and dominion. That makes 'Son of Man' a title of great exaltation, not of mere humanity."
· The man sharing w/ Lee Strobel is Dr. Craig Blomberg, author of The Historical Reliability of the Gospels. He's considered widely to be one of the country's foremost authorities on the biographies of Jesus=the four gospels.
· "Later I came upon a comment by another scholar whom I would soon interview for this book, Wiliam Lane Craig, who has made a similar observation. "Son of Man" is often thought to indicate the humanity of Jesus, just as the reflew expression "Son of God" indicates His divinity. In fact, just the opposite is true. The Son of Man was a divine figure in the Old Testament book of Daniel who would come at the end of the world to judge mankind and rule forever. Thus, the claim to be the Son of Man could in effect be a claim to divinity.
Sunday, July 27, 2008
Sunday, July 20, 2008
Christian Apologetics Class #2 Arguments for Creation over Evolution
Christian Apologetics Class #2 Arguments for Creation over Evolution
· The Hebrew word Bara is used of God's operation of the world only rarely, as in: Ps. 104;30, Amos 4;13, Gen. 1;1,21, 27, 2;3-4, 5;1-2, 6;7, Deut. 4;32, Ps. 89;11, 12, 148;5, Isaiah 40;26, 42;5, 43;1, 7, 45;8, 12, and Malachi 2;10.
· The Greek word ktisis refers to creation in Mk. 10;6, 13;19, Rom. 1;20, 1 Cor. 11;9, Eph. 3;9, Col. 1;16, 1 Tim. 4;3, and Revelation 3;14, 4;11, and 10;6.
· God's Ongoing Creation: Some uses of bara & ktisis do refer to God's continuing work or providence. God did not cease to relate to the world he had created. He continually sustains it's very existence.
· Psalm 104;30=30 Thou sendest forth thy spirit, they are created: and thou renewest the face of the earth.Here create(bara) is used, not of the initial generation of life, but of it's continual regeneration. The context speaks of God causing "the grass to grow for the cattle, and plants for the man to cultivate" in ;14=14 He causeth the grass to grow for the cattle, and herb for the service of man: that he may bring forth food out of the earth; It is He who in ;10 You make the springs pour water into ravines, so streams gush down from the mountains. And in ;20 0 You send the darkness, and it becomes night, when all the forest animals prowl about. It is God who continually provides food for all living things(v.27-28)27 Every one of these depends on you to give them their food as they need it.
· 28 When you supply it, they gather it. You open your hand to feed them. So we see the repeated emphasis on God's preservation of his world.
· Amos 4;13=13 For, lo, he that formeth the mountains, and createth the wind, and declareth unto man what is his thought, that maketh the morning darkness, and treadeth upon the high places of the earth, The LORD, The God of hosts, is his name. Bara here seems to be used of God's work in his creation, not simply of his original work of creation. The word maketh which is often used interchangeably w/ the word create (cf. Gen. 1;26, 27, 2;18) is used in other texts to describe God's continual providence.
· Other descriptions ; In numerous ways, the Bible presents God at work. In addition to creating & making, he is "doing" and "causing" the operations of nature. He sustains it (Heb. 1;3), holds it together (Col. 1;17), causes it to have being (Rev. 4;11), produces life in it Ps. 104;14. He is the continual cause of it's existence. There would be no reality of creation, past or present, were it not for God.
· Comparing Creation and Providence. God's dual work of creating & preserving the world are often presented in the same passage, even the same verse. Notice these revealing contrasts.
· God produces and yet produces. Genesis 1;1 says God created the heavens and the earth and later he is at work through the land producing vegetation in ;11 11 Then God said, "Let the land burst forth with every sort of grass and seed-bearing plant. And let there be trees that grow seed-bearing fruit. The seeds will then produce the kinds of plants and trees from which they came." And so it was. The first was an act of origin; the second was one of operation. Both are the work of God.
· God rested and yet is at work. Genesis 2;3 declares that God rested from his original work of creating. But Jesus affirmed that God is always at work in John 5;17.
· God laid foundations of earth and yet is making it productive. Ps. 104;5 declares that God set the earth on it's foundations. A few verses later God is bringing forth food from the earth in ;14. The first is a work of originating, the second of operating. God does both.
· God brought the world into being and yet keeps it in being. In Acts 17;24 the scriptures teach that God made the world. A couple of verses later it says in him we live and move and have our being, in ;28. God is both the past cause of its becoming and also the present cause of it's being.
Scriptures already shown declare that God's acts are necessary both for the world coming to be as well as for it continuing to be. There are several ways this may be stated that highlight nuances of the distinction:
· God brought the universe from nothing, and he keeps it from returning to nothing.
· God is the beginning cause and conserving cause of all that exists.
· God was active in life's production, and he is active in it's reproduction.
· God was operative in the generating of the world, and he actively governs it. Providence refers most specifically to God's governance of all that exists and occurs.
· God was involved in making the universe, and he is involved in caring for it.
· God is responsible for originating and operating the cosmos.
· Scientific Importance: Until after the lifetime of Darwin, the developers of modern science were creatonists, in that they believed in the supernatural origin of the universe & of life. Their number includes:
· Johann Kepler(1571-1630), celestial mechanics, physical astronomy
· Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), hydrostatics
· Robert Boyle(1627-1691) chemistry, gas dynamics
· Nicholas Steno(1638-1687) stratigraphy
· Isaac Newton(1642-1727), calculus, dynamics
· Michael Faraday(1791-1867), field theory
· Charles Babbage(1792-1871), computer science
· Louis Agassiz(1807-1873), glacial geology, ichthyology
· James Simpson(1811-1870), gynecology
· Gregor Mendel(1822-1884), genetics
· Louis Pasteur(1822-1895), bacteriology
· William Kelvin(1824-1907), energetics, thermodynamics
· Joseph Lister(1827-1912), antiseptic surgery
· James Clerk Maxwell(1831-1879), electrodynamics, statistical thermodynamics
· William Ramsay(1852-1916), isotopic chemistry
· In addition to these founders of scientific and mathematical fields were their forerunners, who also held to supernatural creation. Their number included Roger Bacon(1220-1292), Nicolaus Copernicus(1473-1543), and Galileo Galilei(1564-1642).
The Turn to Naturalism. After Darwin(1809-1882) published On the Origin of Species in 1859, the scene changed radically.
· The Hebrew word Bara is used of God's operation of the world only rarely, as in: Ps. 104;30, Amos 4;13, Gen. 1;1,21, 27, 2;3-4, 5;1-2, 6;7, Deut. 4;32, Ps. 89;11, 12, 148;5, Isaiah 40;26, 42;5, 43;1, 7, 45;8, 12, and Malachi 2;10.
· The Greek word ktisis refers to creation in Mk. 10;6, 13;19, Rom. 1;20, 1 Cor. 11;9, Eph. 3;9, Col. 1;16, 1 Tim. 4;3, and Revelation 3;14, 4;11, and 10;6.
· God's Ongoing Creation: Some uses of bara & ktisis do refer to God's continuing work or providence. God did not cease to relate to the world he had created. He continually sustains it's very existence.
· Psalm 104;30=30 Thou sendest forth thy spirit, they are created: and thou renewest the face of the earth.Here create(bara) is used, not of the initial generation of life, but of it's continual regeneration. The context speaks of God causing "the grass to grow for the cattle, and plants for the man to cultivate" in ;14=14 He causeth the grass to grow for the cattle, and herb for the service of man: that he may bring forth food out of the earth; It is He who in ;10 You make the springs pour water into ravines, so streams gush down from the mountains. And in ;20 0 You send the darkness, and it becomes night, when all the forest animals prowl about. It is God who continually provides food for all living things(v.27-28)27 Every one of these depends on you to give them their food as they need it.
· 28 When you supply it, they gather it. You open your hand to feed them. So we see the repeated emphasis on God's preservation of his world.
· Amos 4;13=13 For, lo, he that formeth the mountains, and createth the wind, and declareth unto man what is his thought, that maketh the morning darkness, and treadeth upon the high places of the earth, The LORD, The God of hosts, is his name. Bara here seems to be used of God's work in his creation, not simply of his original work of creation. The word maketh which is often used interchangeably w/ the word create (cf. Gen. 1;26, 27, 2;18) is used in other texts to describe God's continual providence.
· Other descriptions ; In numerous ways, the Bible presents God at work. In addition to creating & making, he is "doing" and "causing" the operations of nature. He sustains it (Heb. 1;3), holds it together (Col. 1;17), causes it to have being (Rev. 4;11), produces life in it Ps. 104;14. He is the continual cause of it's existence. There would be no reality of creation, past or present, were it not for God.
· Comparing Creation and Providence. God's dual work of creating & preserving the world are often presented in the same passage, even the same verse. Notice these revealing contrasts.
· God produces and yet produces. Genesis 1;1 says God created the heavens and the earth and later he is at work through the land producing vegetation in ;11 11 Then God said, "Let the land burst forth with every sort of grass and seed-bearing plant. And let there be trees that grow seed-bearing fruit. The seeds will then produce the kinds of plants and trees from which they came." And so it was. The first was an act of origin; the second was one of operation. Both are the work of God.
· God rested and yet is at work. Genesis 2;3 declares that God rested from his original work of creating. But Jesus affirmed that God is always at work in John 5;17.
· God laid foundations of earth and yet is making it productive. Ps. 104;5 declares that God set the earth on it's foundations. A few verses later God is bringing forth food from the earth in ;14. The first is a work of originating, the second of operating. God does both.
· God brought the world into being and yet keeps it in being. In Acts 17;24 the scriptures teach that God made the world. A couple of verses later it says in him we live and move and have our being, in ;28. God is both the past cause of its becoming and also the present cause of it's being.
Scriptures already shown declare that God's acts are necessary both for the world coming to be as well as for it continuing to be. There are several ways this may be stated that highlight nuances of the distinction:
· God brought the universe from nothing, and he keeps it from returning to nothing.
· God is the beginning cause and conserving cause of all that exists.
· God was active in life's production, and he is active in it's reproduction.
· God was operative in the generating of the world, and he actively governs it. Providence refers most specifically to God's governance of all that exists and occurs.
· God was involved in making the universe, and he is involved in caring for it.
· God is responsible for originating and operating the cosmos.
· Scientific Importance: Until after the lifetime of Darwin, the developers of modern science were creatonists, in that they believed in the supernatural origin of the universe & of life. Their number includes:
· Johann Kepler(1571-1630), celestial mechanics, physical astronomy
· Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), hydrostatics
· Robert Boyle(1627-1691) chemistry, gas dynamics
· Nicholas Steno(1638-1687) stratigraphy
· Isaac Newton(1642-1727), calculus, dynamics
· Michael Faraday(1791-1867), field theory
· Charles Babbage(1792-1871), computer science
· Louis Agassiz(1807-1873), glacial geology, ichthyology
· James Simpson(1811-1870), gynecology
· Gregor Mendel(1822-1884), genetics
· Louis Pasteur(1822-1895), bacteriology
· William Kelvin(1824-1907), energetics, thermodynamics
· Joseph Lister(1827-1912), antiseptic surgery
· James Clerk Maxwell(1831-1879), electrodynamics, statistical thermodynamics
· William Ramsay(1852-1916), isotopic chemistry
· In addition to these founders of scientific and mathematical fields were their forerunners, who also held to supernatural creation. Their number included Roger Bacon(1220-1292), Nicolaus Copernicus(1473-1543), and Galileo Galilei(1564-1642).
The Turn to Naturalism. After Darwin(1809-1882) published On the Origin of Species in 1859, the scene changed radically.
Apologetics Class #1 Arguments for the Existence of God
Apologetics Class #1 Arguments for the Existence of God
· Apologetics can be defined as the reason for the hope that lies within us.
· 15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:1 Peter 3;15
· Apologetics may be simply defined as the defense of the Christian faith. The simplicity of this definition, however, masks the complexity of the problem of defining apologetics. It turns out that a diversity of approaches has been taken to defining the meaning, scope, and purpose of apologetics.
· There are differing kinds of apologetics systems such as Classical Apologetics, Evidential Apologetics, Experiential Apologetics, Historical Apologetics, and Presuppositional Apologetics.
· Our purposes are not to learn theory but some different approaches for defending the Christian faith.
· For example: if a God exists, miracles are possible, indeed the greatest miracle of all, creation, is possible.
· Confirmed historical evidence substantiates the truth. The New Testament documents are shown to be historically reliable.
· Classical apologists turn to evidences showing that God has revealed himself in the Bible and incarnated himself in Jesus.
· Evidentialists, on the other hand, think the case for Christianity can be most effectively presented using evidences for creation, for the historicity of Jesus and especially his resurrection, and other evidences in one ‘cumulative case’ for Christianity.
· Some Christians appeal primarily, if not exclusively, to experience as evidence for the Christian faith. Some appeal to religious experience in general. Others to special religious experiences, mystical experiences & others identify what they believe are particularly supernatural conversion experiences.
· Historical apologists believe that the truth of Christianity, including the existence of God, can be proven from the historical evidence alone. The earliest apologists, including "Tertulian, Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, and Origen", defended the historicity of Christianity.
· Cosmological Argument for the existence of God is the argument from cause & effect. As everything that exists must have an adequate cause, so an all-powerful and intelligent God is an adequate cause to explain the universe. The scripture identifies that "cause" as the creative power of God(Gen. 1;1; Rom. 1;19,20 & Ps. 94;9)
· Teleological Argument for the Existence of God says God is proven by the order & useful arrangement in the universe. The orderly world in which we live clearly demonstrates that a great mind was behind it's arrangement. The scriptures identify God as that great intelligence. Primary reference is Ps. 94;9 but also Heb. 3;4.
· Ontological Argument=the word ontological comes from the root "being" and is a deductive arugment that only indicates the probable existence of God. It reasons that the idea of a perfect and infinite Being cannot be derived from a finite & imperfect human being. Therefore, a perfect & infinite Being who exists must have placed the idea in mankind. Primary reference is Heb. 3;4 & Rom. 2;15.
· Anthropological Argument for the existence of God says that the existence of man as a moral and intellectual being is an argument for the existence of a moral & intelligent being called God. This is true because man was created in the image & likeness of God(Gen. 1;26), and even after the Fall he has the law of God written in his heart(Rom. 2;15). Application: So today, Christians ought to be careful to reflect the character of God in their lives & not become a stumbling block to the gospel.
· Likewise, William Lane Craig has developed the cosmological and teleological proofs into complex arguments combining philosophical reasoning with scientific evidence. Craig is perhaps best known for his articulation of the kalâm cosmological argument, a philosophical proof for God’s existence based on the premise that the universe cannot exist without a beginning.
· For our purposes tonight, I want us to understand that a person's worldview/belief system/spiritual belief provides answers for four categories: Origin, Meaning, Morality, and Destiny.
· We'll be discussing at least one example of all four this evening.
· Let's begin w/worldview subject #1- Origin: God makes sense of the origin of the universe;Typically atheists have said that the universe is eternal.
· Discoveries in astronomy & astro-physics have rendered that theory less likely.
· Evolutionary theory presents the big-bang creation scenario w/ the idea that nothing existed prior to big-bang.
· So the question lends itself to ask how can something come from nothing. It's impossible and that points itself to a cause that is a force or a being that exists outside of our natural world, beyond the universe, that brought the universe into being.
· The power would have to be that which is outside of time, space, therefore being immaterial, changeless, & enormously powerful. These qualities are already some of the central attributes of what believers ascribe to God.
· 2) God makes sense out of the complex order in the universe. It's been shown that there had to be 50 constants/physical quantities given in the big-bang that if they were altered in one part to 100,000,000 x 3, the universe could not have permitted the existence of life.
· The ratio between the weak force & the gravitational force has to be a certain proportion in comparison to the ratio of the mass of the neutron & the electron, for example.
· The odds against a life permitting universe are too numerous to be calculated.
· It makes more sense to say that the universe exists as the result of intelligent design, w/ the source of the origin not being an impersonal force, but a personal, intelligent creator, God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, we cannot have come here by accident.
· Let's continue w/ worldview subject #2-Meaning:
Complaints or Contentment?
Gregory Koukl
Does God owe us a perfect world? Your answer to that question will determine your ability to be content in this life. Greg discusses how two different responses to the untimely death of a teenager reveals two contrasting views prevalent the Christian world today...and which of them more closely reflects the biblical perspective.
· Some of you might have heard of a tragedy here on the West Coast recently. A teenager snow-boarding in the Angeles Crest Mountains was lost for ten days. When they found Jeff Thornton over a week ago he was alive--shaken and frostbitten, some broken bones, but alive--and apparently in good shape. It was a great victory, front page news. Search parties had tracked him in the snow over difficult terrain and finally found him. They got him to the hospital and all seemed well. A week later, though, Jeff Thornton was dead. Thornton was from a small, religious farm community here in California named Brawley. While the boy was lost, the town prayed, as is often the case when tragedy strikes. By the way, have you noticed that nobody ever raises any questions about separation of church and state in cases like these? Classrooms are filled with prayer when personal tragedy strikes with no hint of impropriety. You'll even see appeals to pray on the evening news. "Please pray," news anchors say, or "Our prayers are with you." This happens with every major catastrophe we've faced as a country. It's interesting that nobody balks at this. In this particular case, the community was alive with prayer. Sure enough, the prayers were answered when the young boy was found. But then there was a turn-around. A week or so later, as a result of complications of gangrene, frostbite, exposure, shock, and broken bones, the young man died. [As an aside, isn't it interesting that when a young person dies like this we use the term "untimely" to describe it? It was an "untimely" death at an "untimely" age. We use the word because we believe the person died before his time. To put it more precisely, he died before his appointed time. Isn't this a tacit admission that their life had purpose, a purpose that was beyond what that individual intended--a grander purpose, a transcendent purpose which was not fulfilled because he was cut down early in life? Responses like this are spontaneous, bearing testimony to something we know deep down inside--there is a God, and He has established a purpose for each individual, a purpose that is not fulfilled when someone is struck down "before his time."] This morning I read the headlines in the LA Times : "Stunned Town Mourns Snow-Boarder's Death." Fifteen hundred people attended the memorial service for Jeff that was held at the high school. The main thing that struck me about this account was the different ways people responded to this tragedy. Some were thankful to God that they had been given ten extra days with Jeff Thornton. Others were angry at God because He gave the boy back just to take him away again. God was either gracious or cruel, depending on who you asked. His mother, choking back the tears, thanked her son's friends for their prayers and thanked the members of the search-and-rescue team that refused to give up the search. Then she told the crowd, "Imagine my joy when my baby was found alive. We shared precious moments, but I didn't know those moments wouldn't last. I want to thank God for giving me back my son, if just for a short time." The pastor, Reverend Scott Peterson, agreed: "Through the grace of God, the prayers of his friends, and the hard work of the search-and-rescue team, Jeff was brought back alive to his mother." Tuesday night at a private service, members of the football team other students reflected on the death of their friend, Jeff Thornton. One 15-year-old coed had a different take on the tragedy. "It's just not fair. Not fair! That God gave him back to us and then took him away again. A lot of kids don't understand it at all." Isn't it interesting, the contrast here? Each response represents two fundamentally different views of God's role in the world. Both had the boy for just a short period of time, returned to them back from the dead, as it were. Jeff's mother thanked God for giving her son back to her for ten more days. The 15-year-old coed said God was unfair to give Jeff back for a short time and then take him home again. These two contrasting responses show us two different expectations about God. Maybe the young lady's response was just a function of grief. I don't know for sure, but I suspect it goes much deeper than that. Could the co-ed's grief have been greater than Jeff's mom's? Something else is going on. This 15-year-old student seemed to have the view that I hear echoed even by what many consider to be mature Christians. When hard times hit they say, "What happened? Why did God allow this?" They are not just expressing emotion or grief. They are genuinely stunned that God would allow evil to touch their lives like this. God hasn't kept His part of the bargain. Each reaction betrays a particular view of God. One view is that God aids us as we maneuver through the contingencies of a fallen world. When He helps us as we navigate through life we thank Him for His grace. We consider anything God might do on our behalf an added benefit to us--a gracious, unmerited favor. Jeff Thornton's mom was like this. Though her son was eventually going to die, the fact that he was able to spend a week with his family-- talking with his mother, sharing his last moments with his friends-- was seen by her as a gift of God, a special work of grace in the midst of tragedy. The second view--the co-ed's--is that God owes us something like a perfect world. We have a divine right to happiness, fulfillment, and prosperity. If we don't get them, God has not fulfilled His end of the bargain. If God lets us have something good for a moment and then takes it away, it's "not fair" because, on this view, we deserved the good thing to begin with. We deserved the best. We deserve heaven on earth, and we've been cheated. A lot of Christians think this way. It's one of the serious flaws of the so-called faith/prosperity movement. They're looking for heaven's rewards and heaven's perfection right here on earth. They're expecting God to protect them, as a divine obligation, from the contingencies of living in a fallen world. When God gives them something wonderful, that's par for the course. When everything is going smoothly, that's the way it ought to be. It's owed them. People like this are not excessively thankful for things, and they complain when they don't get what they want. Two completely different ways of viewing things. I guess you can guess which one I think is biblical. It's the first one. This is why we're not just encouraged but commanded to give thanks in all things. It emphasizes the fact that everything we have, "every good and perfect gift comes down from the Father of lights, in whom there is no variation or shifting shadow." (James 1:17) This is why, in humility, we give thanks for whatever joys we are given in this fallen world. It explains why we give thanks when we get a son back before his ultimate homecoming-- if only for a couple of days-- instead of blaming God for not letting him stay longer.
· Continuing on, our #3 worldview category is Morality: (OMV)=Objective Moral Values
· An opening statment could be; God makes sense out of objective moral values in the world. If God does not exist, then it seems that objective moral values don't exist. Objective moral values=are true whether everyone believes them or not.
· For example, if the Nazis had won WWII & either exterminated or brain washed anybody that disagreed w/ them, anti-Semiticism would still be objectively wrong, even if the Nazis convinced everybody it was right.
· I think one of the best arguments for the existence of God is the presence of evil in the world. One way I can demonstrate that is to ask the non-Christian that raises this question, do you believe there is evil in the world? They must believe it because that's what prompts the question they are raising. Then I ask them to tell me, as a non-Christian, where it comes from. Secondly, tell me where good came from. Thirdly, tell me how you distinguish between good and evil. Those are very thorny problems of which the Christian only has to answer one, but the non-Christian has to answer three.
· If God doesn't exist, then many OMV's don't exist. The common evolutionary atheist will tell you that moral values are just the by-products of Socio-biological evolution/the means by which the selfish gene propagates itself or else they're simply expressions of personal taste, like saying," I like broccoli" or "the news".
· So then we should bring up examples like, what if someone likes killing innocent people or rape? So if God doesn't exist, it's realistic that there are no OMV's, only subjective ones.
· Dr. Ravi Zacharias said, in his book,"the Real Face of Atheism", in every society, no matter what the cultural underpinnings, there is a code of "oughtness". While the specifics vary from culture to culture, in each case, those specifics are rooted in a prior set of beliefs as to what ought to be. One common agreement emerges: That wherever one finds an "oughtness", it is always linked together w/ a believed purpose in life. Purpose and oughtness are helplessly bound, and any effort to sever them meets w/ individual discord & societal disruption. The result is anarchy.
· Consider a watch. Any description of its goodness or badness is bound up w/ what a watch is supposed to do. The story is an old one, but the point it makes is worthy of repitition. On his way to work every day, a man walked past a clockmaker's store. He would ritualistically stop outside & synchronize his watch w/ the clock that stood in the window of the clockmaker's shop. Observing this routine, the clockmaker one day struck up a conversation w/ the man & asked him what kind of work he did. The man timidly confessed that he worked as the timekeeper at the nearby factory & that his malfunctioning watch necessitated daily readjustment. Since it was his job to ring the closing bell every day @ 4 pm, he synchronized his watch w/ the clock every morning to guarantee precision.
· The clockmaker, even more embarassed than the timekeeper, said," I hate to tell you this, but my clock doesn't work very well either, and I have been adjusting it to the bell that I hear every afternoon from the factory @ 4 pm! How does he know the right time when the only recourse is to a poorly functioning watch that is in turn corrected by a faulty clock? What happens to a society that does not know which way to turn to gain an understanding of right & wrong?
· There's no reason to deny that OMV's do exist. Somethings like torturing innocent people, child abuse, rape, & murder are objectively wrong. While love, sacrifice, equality are objectively good. If an atheist says he doesn't believe in God, ask him," do you think the inquisition was a good thing? That it's morally neutral to persecute people because of their religious beliefs & then burn them at the stake? To wage war among nations because of religious prejudice?" People will intuitively recognize that, if they're being honest w/you. Many times it takes some creative listening to find out what the real issue is w/ an individual, as well as some real praying and humbly asking the HS to intercede on their behalf.
· Worldview #4 is are final subject for this evening, Destiny:
· Though you forget the way to the Temple, There is one who remembers the way to your door; Life you may evade, but death you shall not, You shall not deny the stranger. T.S. Eliot
· To be, or not to be--that is the question; ...To die, to sleep; To sleep, perchance to dream. Ay, there's the rub; For in that sleep of death what dreams may come, When we have shuffled off this mortal coil, Must give us pause. William Shakespeare, Hamlet
· The subject of death has been addressed by a majority of the great thinkers because it is the last "enemy" & the one common experience we're all forced to face. It is the great human equalizer.
· Any worldview that does not know the origin of human beings and cannot give our reason for being, certainly must remain silent on our destiny, or at best, argue for nothingness.
Hitler and Mother Teresa
Gregory Koukl
What kind of God would allow a Hitler to go to heaven if he believed in Jesus and a Mother Teresa to go to hell if she didn't?
"You're saying that Hitler and Mother Teresa would both suffer the same fate before God if they didn't believe in Jesus?" The words echoed over the radio airwaves as the host of "Religion on the Line" on ABC's L.A. affiliate station patiently waited for me to answer. I knew the question was coming, but I had no tidy theological retort that would put the ball back into his court. Someone once said that if you word the question right, you can win any debate. The question that evening was a classic case in point. The host might as well have asked, "Do you still beat your wife?" Simply answering "yes" or "no" wouldn't do. At the root of this discussion is the issue of Jesus as the only way to salvation. It is one of the biggest stumbling blocks of Christianity to those who are sincerely interested in leading moral lives and working hard to mitigate the impact of evil in the world. To make Jesus the sole issue of salvation seems to ignore the obvious difference between people of conscience and others who are entirely without scruples. Does that make sense? Radical Surgery Required Let me give an analogy that may add perspective. All things being equal, it's good to practice healthy living. People who eat their vegetables, get proper rest, exercise sensibly, and don't smoke or drink to excess, generally reap the benefits of longevity and vitality. Those who don't, get sick. But what if all things aren't equal? What if there's a hidden element, a terminal disease quietly sucking life out of the body? Healthy living does nothing to avert the underlying disease. In that case, the undisciplined junk food addict and the diligent athlete suffer the same fate. The silent tumor breaks its silence; the grave claims them both. There's a parallel to this in the spiritual realm. On the one hand, it's good to live righteously. Holy living contributes to spiritual health. Those who continually practice sin eventually suffer its consequences. There's another side to the equation, however, a crucial element too often ignored. Our most valiant attempts at goodness are met with failure because a deep-seated malignancy sucks the life from our efforts. No matter how hard we try, each of us is dying from a spiritual disease no amount of righteous living can heal. The sad truth is this: Ultimately, no person lives completely right. Sure, they're capable of doing good things, sometimes phenomenal things. Even a dying patient can have healthy eating habits. But good works, like good meals, cannot restore vitality to a diseased patient; they can only maintain it. Restoration must come through surgery. At first glance, it seems unfair that God wouldn't consider all the good we've done. Think about it, though. When was the last time you received a letter from the D.A. congratulating you for not holding up a bank or shooting your neighbor? Obedience to the law is expected. A year of good behavior doesn't cancel out a year of lawbreaking, evening up the record. Every person, from the greatest to the least, has broken God's law. That makes them guilty, and guilty people must seek God's surgery: forgiveness. Agreed, some need more forgiveness than others--sometimes much more, just as a disease can ravage one body more violently than another. But every person is fatally stricken, nonetheless. Ever Heard of the Ten Commandments? Have you read the Ten Commandments recently? Take a quick inventory by asking yourself these questions. Have you ever given allegiance to anything else over God in your life or used anything as an object of worship or veneration? Have you ever used God's name in a vain or vulgar fashion? Have you worshipped God on a regular basis? Have you even once disobeyed or dishonored your parents? Have you murdered anyone, or even had harsh thoughts about someone (see Matthew 5:22)? Have you had sex with someone other than your spouse, or even thought about it (see Matthew 5:28)? Have you taken something that wasn't yours? Have you lied? Have you simply wanted something that wasn't yours? Sound tough? It is. This is God's Law. These are God's requirements. Even in grammar school, 60% is a flunking grade, yet who among us has not violated each of these commandments many times? Reducing the Ten Commandments to only two doesn't help. Jesus said, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind," and "You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets" (Matthew 22:37-40). Even the best of us violate these two laws daily. Whenever you're tempted to trust in your own ability to please God, take a good look at the standard, God's Law, then look at your own score card. To use Paul's words, each of us is "shut up under sin" (Gal. 3:22). Our mouths have been closed, and we all have become accountable to God (Romans 3:19). Saved by our own goodness? The Law gives us no hope. Try this calculation. If you sinned only ten times a day from your tenth birthday to your sixtieth--and keep in mind we're not just talking about rape, pillage, and murder, but the full range of human moral failing, including heart attitudes and motives--what would your rap sheet look like? You would have amassed 182,500 infractions of the law. What judge in his right mind would turn you loose with a record like that? Ghandi vs. Al Capone The worst of us tend to whitewash our own contribution to evil. Al Capone said, "I have spent the best years of my life giving people the lighter pleasures, helping them have a good time, and all I get is abuse, the existence of a hunted man." [1] By contrast, Ghandi--a man utterly committed to a life of virtue--was not so optimistic. Towards the end of his life he lamented, "It is an unbroken torture to me that I am still so far from him whom I know governs every breath of my life and whose offspring I am. I know it is because of the evil passions within me that keep me so far from him; yet I can't get away from them." C.S. Lewis captured this contrast with these words: "When a man is getting better he understands more and more clearly the evil that is still left in him. When a man is getting worse, he understands his own badness less and less....Good people know about both good and evil: bad people do not know about either." [2] If Lewis is right, then the One who is most holy sees sin most clearly. The One who is perfectly righteous understands the full tragedy of even the most "trivial" breach of goodness. God's purity is without flaw, so He sees sin as it really is. That's why He is not so inclined to dismiss our moral imperfections with a "boys will be boys" mentality. Hitler and Mother Teresa Could Adolph Hitler and Mother Teresa suffer the same fate? No and yes. No, because they'd answer for different crimes and, as such, their judgment would be different. Just as there are degrees of sin (see John 19:11), there are degrees of punishment. Jesus said Sodom would fare better than Capernaum in the day of judgment (Matthew 11:24), though each would be condemned. Yes, because each person must ultimately answer for his own sins--Hitler for his, Mother Teresa for hers, you and I for ours. Unless, of course, Jesus is allowed to answer for them. That is the good news: Jesus, though rich, for our sake became poor, that we through His poverty might become rich (2 Cor. 8:9). To stay alive physically, first cure the disease, then keep fit to maintain your health. To experience spiritual well-being, God must do surgery on the root problem, sin. Living righteously afterwards secures our spiritual vitality, but it can never cure our disease. Only Jesus can do that.
A Good Reason for Evil
·
· Apologetics can be defined as the reason for the hope that lies within us.
· 15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:1 Peter 3;15
· Apologetics may be simply defined as the defense of the Christian faith. The simplicity of this definition, however, masks the complexity of the problem of defining apologetics. It turns out that a diversity of approaches has been taken to defining the meaning, scope, and purpose of apologetics.
· There are differing kinds of apologetics systems such as Classical Apologetics, Evidential Apologetics, Experiential Apologetics, Historical Apologetics, and Presuppositional Apologetics.
· Our purposes are not to learn theory but some different approaches for defending the Christian faith.
· For example: if a God exists, miracles are possible, indeed the greatest miracle of all, creation, is possible.
· Confirmed historical evidence substantiates the truth. The New Testament documents are shown to be historically reliable.
· Classical apologists turn to evidences showing that God has revealed himself in the Bible and incarnated himself in Jesus.
· Evidentialists, on the other hand, think the case for Christianity can be most effectively presented using evidences for creation, for the historicity of Jesus and especially his resurrection, and other evidences in one ‘cumulative case’ for Christianity.
· Some Christians appeal primarily, if not exclusively, to experience as evidence for the Christian faith. Some appeal to religious experience in general. Others to special religious experiences, mystical experiences & others identify what they believe are particularly supernatural conversion experiences.
· Historical apologists believe that the truth of Christianity, including the existence of God, can be proven from the historical evidence alone. The earliest apologists, including "Tertulian, Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, and Origen", defended the historicity of Christianity.
· Cosmological Argument for the existence of God is the argument from cause & effect. As everything that exists must have an adequate cause, so an all-powerful and intelligent God is an adequate cause to explain the universe. The scripture identifies that "cause" as the creative power of God(Gen. 1;1; Rom. 1;19,20 & Ps. 94;9)
· Teleological Argument for the Existence of God says God is proven by the order & useful arrangement in the universe. The orderly world in which we live clearly demonstrates that a great mind was behind it's arrangement. The scriptures identify God as that great intelligence. Primary reference is Ps. 94;9 but also Heb. 3;4.
· Ontological Argument=the word ontological comes from the root "being" and is a deductive arugment that only indicates the probable existence of God. It reasons that the idea of a perfect and infinite Being cannot be derived from a finite & imperfect human being. Therefore, a perfect & infinite Being who exists must have placed the idea in mankind. Primary reference is Heb. 3;4 & Rom. 2;15.
· Anthropological Argument for the existence of God says that the existence of man as a moral and intellectual being is an argument for the existence of a moral & intelligent being called God. This is true because man was created in the image & likeness of God(Gen. 1;26), and even after the Fall he has the law of God written in his heart(Rom. 2;15). Application: So today, Christians ought to be careful to reflect the character of God in their lives & not become a stumbling block to the gospel.
· Likewise, William Lane Craig has developed the cosmological and teleological proofs into complex arguments combining philosophical reasoning with scientific evidence. Craig is perhaps best known for his articulation of the kalâm cosmological argument, a philosophical proof for God’s existence based on the premise that the universe cannot exist without a beginning.
· For our purposes tonight, I want us to understand that a person's worldview/belief system/spiritual belief provides answers for four categories: Origin, Meaning, Morality, and Destiny.
· We'll be discussing at least one example of all four this evening.
· Let's begin w/worldview subject #1- Origin: God makes sense of the origin of the universe;Typically atheists have said that the universe is eternal.
· Discoveries in astronomy & astro-physics have rendered that theory less likely.
· Evolutionary theory presents the big-bang creation scenario w/ the idea that nothing existed prior to big-bang.
· So the question lends itself to ask how can something come from nothing. It's impossible and that points itself to a cause that is a force or a being that exists outside of our natural world, beyond the universe, that brought the universe into being.
· The power would have to be that which is outside of time, space, therefore being immaterial, changeless, & enormously powerful. These qualities are already some of the central attributes of what believers ascribe to God.
· 2) God makes sense out of the complex order in the universe. It's been shown that there had to be 50 constants/physical quantities given in the big-bang that if they were altered in one part to 100,000,000 x 3, the universe could not have permitted the existence of life.
· The ratio between the weak force & the gravitational force has to be a certain proportion in comparison to the ratio of the mass of the neutron & the electron, for example.
· The odds against a life permitting universe are too numerous to be calculated.
· It makes more sense to say that the universe exists as the result of intelligent design, w/ the source of the origin not being an impersonal force, but a personal, intelligent creator, God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, we cannot have come here by accident.
· Let's continue w/ worldview subject #2-Meaning:
Complaints or Contentment?
Gregory Koukl
Does God owe us a perfect world? Your answer to that question will determine your ability to be content in this life. Greg discusses how two different responses to the untimely death of a teenager reveals two contrasting views prevalent the Christian world today...and which of them more closely reflects the biblical perspective.
· Some of you might have heard of a tragedy here on the West Coast recently. A teenager snow-boarding in the Angeles Crest Mountains was lost for ten days. When they found Jeff Thornton over a week ago he was alive--shaken and frostbitten, some broken bones, but alive--and apparently in good shape. It was a great victory, front page news. Search parties had tracked him in the snow over difficult terrain and finally found him. They got him to the hospital and all seemed well. A week later, though, Jeff Thornton was dead. Thornton was from a small, religious farm community here in California named Brawley. While the boy was lost, the town prayed, as is often the case when tragedy strikes. By the way, have you noticed that nobody ever raises any questions about separation of church and state in cases like these? Classrooms are filled with prayer when personal tragedy strikes with no hint of impropriety. You'll even see appeals to pray on the evening news. "Please pray," news anchors say, or "Our prayers are with you." This happens with every major catastrophe we've faced as a country. It's interesting that nobody balks at this. In this particular case, the community was alive with prayer. Sure enough, the prayers were answered when the young boy was found. But then there was a turn-around. A week or so later, as a result of complications of gangrene, frostbite, exposure, shock, and broken bones, the young man died. [As an aside, isn't it interesting that when a young person dies like this we use the term "untimely" to describe it? It was an "untimely" death at an "untimely" age. We use the word because we believe the person died before his time. To put it more precisely, he died before his appointed time. Isn't this a tacit admission that their life had purpose, a purpose that was beyond what that individual intended--a grander purpose, a transcendent purpose which was not fulfilled because he was cut down early in life? Responses like this are spontaneous, bearing testimony to something we know deep down inside--there is a God, and He has established a purpose for each individual, a purpose that is not fulfilled when someone is struck down "before his time."] This morning I read the headlines in the LA Times : "Stunned Town Mourns Snow-Boarder's Death." Fifteen hundred people attended the memorial service for Jeff that was held at the high school. The main thing that struck me about this account was the different ways people responded to this tragedy. Some were thankful to God that they had been given ten extra days with Jeff Thornton. Others were angry at God because He gave the boy back just to take him away again. God was either gracious or cruel, depending on who you asked. His mother, choking back the tears, thanked her son's friends for their prayers and thanked the members of the search-and-rescue team that refused to give up the search. Then she told the crowd, "Imagine my joy when my baby was found alive. We shared precious moments, but I didn't know those moments wouldn't last. I want to thank God for giving me back my son, if just for a short time." The pastor, Reverend Scott Peterson, agreed: "Through the grace of God, the prayers of his friends, and the hard work of the search-and-rescue team, Jeff was brought back alive to his mother." Tuesday night at a private service, members of the football team other students reflected on the death of their friend, Jeff Thornton. One 15-year-old coed had a different take on the tragedy. "It's just not fair. Not fair! That God gave him back to us and then took him away again. A lot of kids don't understand it at all." Isn't it interesting, the contrast here? Each response represents two fundamentally different views of God's role in the world. Both had the boy for just a short period of time, returned to them back from the dead, as it were. Jeff's mother thanked God for giving her son back to her for ten more days. The 15-year-old coed said God was unfair to give Jeff back for a short time and then take him home again. These two contrasting responses show us two different expectations about God. Maybe the young lady's response was just a function of grief. I don't know for sure, but I suspect it goes much deeper than that. Could the co-ed's grief have been greater than Jeff's mom's? Something else is going on. This 15-year-old student seemed to have the view that I hear echoed even by what many consider to be mature Christians. When hard times hit they say, "What happened? Why did God allow this?" They are not just expressing emotion or grief. They are genuinely stunned that God would allow evil to touch their lives like this. God hasn't kept His part of the bargain. Each reaction betrays a particular view of God. One view is that God aids us as we maneuver through the contingencies of a fallen world. When He helps us as we navigate through life we thank Him for His grace. We consider anything God might do on our behalf an added benefit to us--a gracious, unmerited favor. Jeff Thornton's mom was like this. Though her son was eventually going to die, the fact that he was able to spend a week with his family-- talking with his mother, sharing his last moments with his friends-- was seen by her as a gift of God, a special work of grace in the midst of tragedy. The second view--the co-ed's--is that God owes us something like a perfect world. We have a divine right to happiness, fulfillment, and prosperity. If we don't get them, God has not fulfilled His end of the bargain. If God lets us have something good for a moment and then takes it away, it's "not fair" because, on this view, we deserved the good thing to begin with. We deserved the best. We deserve heaven on earth, and we've been cheated. A lot of Christians think this way. It's one of the serious flaws of the so-called faith/prosperity movement. They're looking for heaven's rewards and heaven's perfection right here on earth. They're expecting God to protect them, as a divine obligation, from the contingencies of living in a fallen world. When God gives them something wonderful, that's par for the course. When everything is going smoothly, that's the way it ought to be. It's owed them. People like this are not excessively thankful for things, and they complain when they don't get what they want. Two completely different ways of viewing things. I guess you can guess which one I think is biblical. It's the first one. This is why we're not just encouraged but commanded to give thanks in all things. It emphasizes the fact that everything we have, "every good and perfect gift comes down from the Father of lights, in whom there is no variation or shifting shadow." (James 1:17) This is why, in humility, we give thanks for whatever joys we are given in this fallen world. It explains why we give thanks when we get a son back before his ultimate homecoming-- if only for a couple of days-- instead of blaming God for not letting him stay longer.
· Continuing on, our #3 worldview category is Morality: (OMV)=Objective Moral Values
· An opening statment could be; God makes sense out of objective moral values in the world. If God does not exist, then it seems that objective moral values don't exist. Objective moral values=are true whether everyone believes them or not.
· For example, if the Nazis had won WWII & either exterminated or brain washed anybody that disagreed w/ them, anti-Semiticism would still be objectively wrong, even if the Nazis convinced everybody it was right.
· I think one of the best arguments for the existence of God is the presence of evil in the world. One way I can demonstrate that is to ask the non-Christian that raises this question, do you believe there is evil in the world? They must believe it because that's what prompts the question they are raising. Then I ask them to tell me, as a non-Christian, where it comes from. Secondly, tell me where good came from. Thirdly, tell me how you distinguish between good and evil. Those are very thorny problems of which the Christian only has to answer one, but the non-Christian has to answer three.
· If God doesn't exist, then many OMV's don't exist. The common evolutionary atheist will tell you that moral values are just the by-products of Socio-biological evolution/the means by which the selfish gene propagates itself or else they're simply expressions of personal taste, like saying," I like broccoli" or "the news".
· So then we should bring up examples like, what if someone likes killing innocent people or rape? So if God doesn't exist, it's realistic that there are no OMV's, only subjective ones.
· Dr. Ravi Zacharias said, in his book,"the Real Face of Atheism", in every society, no matter what the cultural underpinnings, there is a code of "oughtness". While the specifics vary from culture to culture, in each case, those specifics are rooted in a prior set of beliefs as to what ought to be. One common agreement emerges: That wherever one finds an "oughtness", it is always linked together w/ a believed purpose in life. Purpose and oughtness are helplessly bound, and any effort to sever them meets w/ individual discord & societal disruption. The result is anarchy.
· Consider a watch. Any description of its goodness or badness is bound up w/ what a watch is supposed to do. The story is an old one, but the point it makes is worthy of repitition. On his way to work every day, a man walked past a clockmaker's store. He would ritualistically stop outside & synchronize his watch w/ the clock that stood in the window of the clockmaker's shop. Observing this routine, the clockmaker one day struck up a conversation w/ the man & asked him what kind of work he did. The man timidly confessed that he worked as the timekeeper at the nearby factory & that his malfunctioning watch necessitated daily readjustment. Since it was his job to ring the closing bell every day @ 4 pm, he synchronized his watch w/ the clock every morning to guarantee precision.
· The clockmaker, even more embarassed than the timekeeper, said," I hate to tell you this, but my clock doesn't work very well either, and I have been adjusting it to the bell that I hear every afternoon from the factory @ 4 pm! How does he know the right time when the only recourse is to a poorly functioning watch that is in turn corrected by a faulty clock? What happens to a society that does not know which way to turn to gain an understanding of right & wrong?
· There's no reason to deny that OMV's do exist. Somethings like torturing innocent people, child abuse, rape, & murder are objectively wrong. While love, sacrifice, equality are objectively good. If an atheist says he doesn't believe in God, ask him," do you think the inquisition was a good thing? That it's morally neutral to persecute people because of their religious beliefs & then burn them at the stake? To wage war among nations because of religious prejudice?" People will intuitively recognize that, if they're being honest w/you. Many times it takes some creative listening to find out what the real issue is w/ an individual, as well as some real praying and humbly asking the HS to intercede on their behalf.
· Worldview #4 is are final subject for this evening, Destiny:
· Though you forget the way to the Temple, There is one who remembers the way to your door; Life you may evade, but death you shall not, You shall not deny the stranger. T.S. Eliot
· To be, or not to be--that is the question; ...To die, to sleep; To sleep, perchance to dream. Ay, there's the rub; For in that sleep of death what dreams may come, When we have shuffled off this mortal coil, Must give us pause. William Shakespeare, Hamlet
· The subject of death has been addressed by a majority of the great thinkers because it is the last "enemy" & the one common experience we're all forced to face. It is the great human equalizer.
· Any worldview that does not know the origin of human beings and cannot give our reason for being, certainly must remain silent on our destiny, or at best, argue for nothingness.
Hitler and Mother Teresa
Gregory Koukl
What kind of God would allow a Hitler to go to heaven if he believed in Jesus and a Mother Teresa to go to hell if she didn't?
"You're saying that Hitler and Mother Teresa would both suffer the same fate before God if they didn't believe in Jesus?" The words echoed over the radio airwaves as the host of "Religion on the Line" on ABC's L.A. affiliate station patiently waited for me to answer. I knew the question was coming, but I had no tidy theological retort that would put the ball back into his court. Someone once said that if you word the question right, you can win any debate. The question that evening was a classic case in point. The host might as well have asked, "Do you still beat your wife?" Simply answering "yes" or "no" wouldn't do. At the root of this discussion is the issue of Jesus as the only way to salvation. It is one of the biggest stumbling blocks of Christianity to those who are sincerely interested in leading moral lives and working hard to mitigate the impact of evil in the world. To make Jesus the sole issue of salvation seems to ignore the obvious difference between people of conscience and others who are entirely without scruples. Does that make sense? Radical Surgery Required Let me give an analogy that may add perspective. All things being equal, it's good to practice healthy living. People who eat their vegetables, get proper rest, exercise sensibly, and don't smoke or drink to excess, generally reap the benefits of longevity and vitality. Those who don't, get sick. But what if all things aren't equal? What if there's a hidden element, a terminal disease quietly sucking life out of the body? Healthy living does nothing to avert the underlying disease. In that case, the undisciplined junk food addict and the diligent athlete suffer the same fate. The silent tumor breaks its silence; the grave claims them both. There's a parallel to this in the spiritual realm. On the one hand, it's good to live righteously. Holy living contributes to spiritual health. Those who continually practice sin eventually suffer its consequences. There's another side to the equation, however, a crucial element too often ignored. Our most valiant attempts at goodness are met with failure because a deep-seated malignancy sucks the life from our efforts. No matter how hard we try, each of us is dying from a spiritual disease no amount of righteous living can heal. The sad truth is this: Ultimately, no person lives completely right. Sure, they're capable of doing good things, sometimes phenomenal things. Even a dying patient can have healthy eating habits. But good works, like good meals, cannot restore vitality to a diseased patient; they can only maintain it. Restoration must come through surgery. At first glance, it seems unfair that God wouldn't consider all the good we've done. Think about it, though. When was the last time you received a letter from the D.A. congratulating you for not holding up a bank or shooting your neighbor? Obedience to the law is expected. A year of good behavior doesn't cancel out a year of lawbreaking, evening up the record. Every person, from the greatest to the least, has broken God's law. That makes them guilty, and guilty people must seek God's surgery: forgiveness. Agreed, some need more forgiveness than others--sometimes much more, just as a disease can ravage one body more violently than another. But every person is fatally stricken, nonetheless. Ever Heard of the Ten Commandments? Have you read the Ten Commandments recently? Take a quick inventory by asking yourself these questions. Have you ever given allegiance to anything else over God in your life or used anything as an object of worship or veneration? Have you ever used God's name in a vain or vulgar fashion? Have you worshipped God on a regular basis? Have you even once disobeyed or dishonored your parents? Have you murdered anyone, or even had harsh thoughts about someone (see Matthew 5:22)? Have you had sex with someone other than your spouse, or even thought about it (see Matthew 5:28)? Have you taken something that wasn't yours? Have you lied? Have you simply wanted something that wasn't yours? Sound tough? It is. This is God's Law. These are God's requirements. Even in grammar school, 60% is a flunking grade, yet who among us has not violated each of these commandments many times? Reducing the Ten Commandments to only two doesn't help. Jesus said, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind," and "You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets" (Matthew 22:37-40). Even the best of us violate these two laws daily. Whenever you're tempted to trust in your own ability to please God, take a good look at the standard, God's Law, then look at your own score card. To use Paul's words, each of us is "shut up under sin" (Gal. 3:22). Our mouths have been closed, and we all have become accountable to God (Romans 3:19). Saved by our own goodness? The Law gives us no hope. Try this calculation. If you sinned only ten times a day from your tenth birthday to your sixtieth--and keep in mind we're not just talking about rape, pillage, and murder, but the full range of human moral failing, including heart attitudes and motives--what would your rap sheet look like? You would have amassed 182,500 infractions of the law. What judge in his right mind would turn you loose with a record like that? Ghandi vs. Al Capone The worst of us tend to whitewash our own contribution to evil. Al Capone said, "I have spent the best years of my life giving people the lighter pleasures, helping them have a good time, and all I get is abuse, the existence of a hunted man." [1] By contrast, Ghandi--a man utterly committed to a life of virtue--was not so optimistic. Towards the end of his life he lamented, "It is an unbroken torture to me that I am still so far from him whom I know governs every breath of my life and whose offspring I am. I know it is because of the evil passions within me that keep me so far from him; yet I can't get away from them." C.S. Lewis captured this contrast with these words: "When a man is getting better he understands more and more clearly the evil that is still left in him. When a man is getting worse, he understands his own badness less and less....Good people know about both good and evil: bad people do not know about either." [2] If Lewis is right, then the One who is most holy sees sin most clearly. The One who is perfectly righteous understands the full tragedy of even the most "trivial" breach of goodness. God's purity is without flaw, so He sees sin as it really is. That's why He is not so inclined to dismiss our moral imperfections with a "boys will be boys" mentality. Hitler and Mother Teresa Could Adolph Hitler and Mother Teresa suffer the same fate? No and yes. No, because they'd answer for different crimes and, as such, their judgment would be different. Just as there are degrees of sin (see John 19:11), there are degrees of punishment. Jesus said Sodom would fare better than Capernaum in the day of judgment (Matthew 11:24), though each would be condemned. Yes, because each person must ultimately answer for his own sins--Hitler for his, Mother Teresa for hers, you and I for ours. Unless, of course, Jesus is allowed to answer for them. That is the good news: Jesus, though rich, for our sake became poor, that we through His poverty might become rich (2 Cor. 8:9). To stay alive physically, first cure the disease, then keep fit to maintain your health. To experience spiritual well-being, God must do surgery on the root problem, sin. Living righteously afterwards secures our spiritual vitality, but it can never cure our disease. Only Jesus can do that.
A Good Reason for Evil
·
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
