Friday, September 30, 2011

Examined Christian Faith 'The Final Frontier' Part 1.4 - What is Christianity

Just to set the record straight, I am a fan of science.  I am frequently amazed at some of what science 'discovers', and thankful for some of the benefits of science to humankind.  The field of science is made of some of  the most intelligent and observant people on earth, because that is what science is 'observation'.  Which takes us to considering the universe.  Ever since men have been able to think for themselves, we have been wondering about this universe and how it came to be.  Before I delve into the two different camps, do not fool yourself into thinking that one viewpoint was held long ago, and the other has gradually over a period of recent time taken its position.  No, men have always held two viewpoints on this.  Everyone who has ever thought about it has fallen into one of two camps.  


There are those of the materialist viewpoint or more precisely those who think that it all just happens to exist, that it has always existed.  No one really knows why, it just happened.  Moreover, that this matter, by one in a million chance happened to collide to form our galaxy, and then another something happened to form our sun, and still another to form the planets.  Yet by another fluke, our planet just happened to have the right temperature, and chemical makeup to support life, and then some of this matter on earth that had been floating around forever, just happened to come alive.  Then by another incredibly long chain of events leaving creatures developed into creatures like us, who could think and reason, and have emotions, creatures that also just happened to have an inner voice telling directing each of them to believe in the same concept of right verses wrong. 


Then there is the religious view.  According to those who hold this viewpoint, what is behind the universe, what created the universe is more like a mind then anything else we can describe it as.  It has a purpose and prefers one thing over another.  In addition, it was with this view that it made the universe, for reasons we do not know, but one of the reasons was to create beings like us, who like itself have minds. 


You will also notice that science cannot answer the question, because all science works by experiments, no matter how complicated it is, in the end science is simply a matter of observing what happens when x and y interact.  It does not explain the why it happens to, just that it does.  If like in the “Wizard of Oz” there is, anything behind the curtain is a different question, one that science can never answer.  If you suppose as some do, that some day we will know everything in the universe (I personally do not adhere to that), but I would argue that the questions that we have always asked would still be left unanswered “Why is there a universe?”  “Why does it go on and on as it does?”  “What is the meaning of this?”


However, to understand the answers to that, perhaps we should examine the one thing in the entire universe that we know more about than we can learn by science (the art external observations).  This is my point, anyone who was studying humans from the outside as we do the stars, animals, plants, rocks, etc...  would never guess that we have this law of human nature, this moral law.  He would be observing what we do, so his observations would merely be a reflection of what we did, and the law of human nature is about what we should do. 


The point of this is that in our quest to know if there is a power behind the universe, it would not be one of the things we could observe.  There is only one instant in the entire universe, which we can know weather there is anything more than what can be observed.  Namely our own case, or specifically as it pertains to me, in my case.  As C.S. Lewis said “If there is a controlling power outside of the universe, it would not show itself to us as one of the facts inside the universe, it could not show itself to us as one of the facts inside the universe – no more than the architect of a house could actually be a wall or staircase in that house.”    


The only way in which we should expect it to show itself would be inside ourselves as an influence or a command trying to get us to behave in a certain way.  As troublesome as it is, that is precisely what we do find inside ourselves, we find that moral law.  In the only case where we can get an answer, the answer turns out to be yes.  


Therefore, in the only instant where I can peek behind the curtain, I find that I do not exist on my own, as any external observation would deduce, but rather that I am under a law, that somebody or something wants me to behave in a certain manner.  Therefore, I can logically reason that as I am under an unseen law, all other matter in the universe is under unseen laws as well (as we can observe) but more importantly I should expect to find that there is a power behind those facts, those laws as well.


So the origin of the universe is either matter or something with a mind.  I personally have a difficult time trying to envision a clump of matter giving instructions, or laws.  You know where I am headed with this, but do not jump ahead of me, I am not talking about the God of Christian theology.  All we have been able to conclude so far, by observing the universe and examining what is unseen within each of us, is that there is in fact a ‘Something’ which is directing the universe, and which it shows itself in me, by giving me a law urging me to do the right thing, and making me feel uncomfortable and responsible when I fail to do so.  


Do not deceive yourself into believing that I am going to propose that the ‘Something’ is cuddly like the puppy dog modern American Christian churches are purporting, Quite the opposite, that ‘Something’ should be feared, as the universe while beautiful is not especially a hospitable place for humans, and the moral law that has been placed inside each of us is as hard as nails.  But I get ahead of myself.  It is time for you to decide which view you hold of the universe, but to me, to propose that all of this is just a matter of chance, a one in a billion long-shot, on top another one in a billion long shot, on top of another one and then to suppose that a clump of matter would instill in me a moral code is simply delusional, and denying what your own moral code tells you.  

If you have never read   THE SHACK  is a great place to begin to realize that not everything can be seen.  Desiring to truly understand 'What is Christianity' is not always easy. .


Tuesday, September 27, 2011

Examined Christian Faith 'Benedict Arnold' 1.3

So it would seem to be two really strange things about the human race, 1st that we are haunted by the idea of a behavior that we should practice (you can call it whatever you like, morality, fair play, law of human nature, or just being a decent human being)  and 2nd that we fail miserably at the 1st.  It is strange because what we call the laws of nature are really in fact simply observations of what always happens.  As Isaac Newton observed, if I cut an apple loose from it’s tree, it will fall, it is not because the apple just remembered that it that it should fall, it just happens.  


However, the law of morality is a different matter entirely, it does not mean that this is what humans do; in fact, many humans choose to ignore the law completely, and none of us follows it all of the time.  The law of gravity tells you what an apple will do if you cut it loose from its tree, but the law of human nature tells you what humans should and should not do.  It is the only law that seems to have something outside of it beyond the actual facts and there is no explaining it away.


I was having this very conversation with a friend of mine, and it occurred to me that his example is one we have all shared.  If I am in a parking lot looking for a place to park my car (picture Black Friday at a busy shopping mall) I respond completely different to the person who is parked in a stall because they got there before me, and the person who cuts me off to sneak into the parking spot I had been waiting for.  They are both an inconvenience to me; however, while I am not angry with the first man, I am furious with the second.  


Or perhaps this explains it better, if once I am inside the shopping mall and I accidentally trip over another shopper and hurt my arm, I may be upset for a second, before I realize it was a mistake, however I would be really ticked off at a teenager who stuck out his leg in an attempt to trip me (which I nimbly jumped over).  That’s the strange thing, because the person who actually hurt me, I am not angry with, yet I am boiling at the one who actually did me no harm.


Alternatively, from the American viewpoint, think back to our own Revolutionary War and Benedict Arnold.  He was handsomely rewarded by the British for his betrayal of this fledgling country, yet once he was in England, he was treated like the jackal that he was; because while they paid him for his service, even they were repulsed by his behavior. 


Therefore, it would seem that decent behavior is not behavior that is useful to us or that does not cause us harm, and it is certainly not behavior that pays.  What is it?  It is being content with what you are paid for a job, when you might have made three times the amount, taking a test honestly when you have a chance to cheat, respecting a woman when she says no, when you want to make love to her, keeping promises that you would rather not, and telling the truth even it the truth may hurt you.  The law of morality does not concern itself with what is best for society, because really why should I care what is best for society except when it pays me personally? 


That is what we are left with.  The law of human nature, the law of morality is that ‘you should be unselfish.  Not that you are unselfish, or even that you like being unselfish, just that you should be’.  In fact, it is an idea that we cannot get out of our minds.  It is not a statement about how we want others to behave for our own convenience, for actions that we call  unfair are not the same as that which we find inconvenient, frequently they are the exact opposite.  We are left with no option other then to conclude that in regards to the law of right and wrong, good and evil, that there is something beyond the normal facts of our behavior, none of us made it, but it is definitely a real law that presses on us constantly to obey.

For a really good book that can explain all of this in manner far beyond my humble skills, I again recommend Timothy Keller's  The Reason For God


You will have noticed that I have not yet addressed the issue of ‘God’, especially not in the Christian context (I will get there). What I am concerned with at this point is understanding what we can observe as evidence for what we can not.   Think about the law of human nature and what it tells you about the universe we live in.  

Which is where we will head next.

Friday, September 23, 2011

Examined Christian Faith 'Buts' 1.2 - What is Christianity

Well that didn’t take long.  I have received several emails’ raising a couple of questions to my previous post.  Please keep in mind that this is not a book, rather it is a lack of a better analogy a series of letters to myself.  Nevertheless, I appreciate the correspondence, and it has made me a ware of the fact as I have stated  that all clear thinking is based on the two points mentioned in my prior post , I need to  assure myself that before I move forward that the foundation that those two point’s build is in fact solid.  Therefore, I must address a couple questions that were raised.  The objections came in two basic areas, which I have summarized as follows.  ‘Isn’t what I call the Law of Human Nature (Moral Law) simple a herd instinct that has developed just like our other instincts over the years?  ‘ And ‘Isn’t what I call the Law of Human Nature (Moral Law) something that is taught to us by our parents, family, society, etc.?’  Let’s take a look at those ‘Buts’


I will begin by responding to the first inquiry ‘Isn’t what I call the Law of Human Nature (Moral Law) simple a herd instinct that has developed just like our other instincts over the years?’  I would be a complete fool to deny that we as humans have a herd instinct, but that is not what I meant by the Moral Law.  I as well as you know what it is feels like to feel prompted by instinct for food, shade, sexual instinct, motherly love, and on occasions sometimes we even feel a desire to help another.  There is no doubt that all of those desires are due to herd instinct.  However, feeling a desire to help is quite different then feeling that you should help, weather you want to or not.  

It is actually fairly simple to visualize.


If you do not know, I live in Hawaii.  Oahu is a small island surround by a massive ocean. Needless to say, if you live here, you spend a fair amount of time at the beach.  Imagine that I am at the beach and I hear someone caught in a riptide crying for help.  At that moment I will feel two desires, the first the desire to help (due to the herd instinct) the second a very strong desire to keep out of danger (self-preservation).  Interestingly, I will also discover inside myself a third ‘thing’, which tells me that I should follow my impulse to attempt a rescue, and to ignore or suppress my self-preservation desire.  It does not take much thought to realize that that third ‘thing’ that decides which of the two desires should be encouraged, cannot be either of the two desires, as they are opposing desires.


Another way to look at the fact that Moral law is not just one of our instincts is that if two instincts are in conflict, and there is nothing else in the creatures mind except for those two impulses, then obviously the stronger of the two must always win.  Nevertheless, at preciously those moments when we are most aware of ‘Moral Law’ it always instructs us to chose the weaker of the two instincts.  In the above example, if you are like me, you probably want to be safe, much more than you want to go swimming into a riptide to save a drowning man.  However, the Moral Law tells you to do it anyway.  It is that third ‘thing’ that drives us to chose to act to make the weaker of the two instincts stronger than it really is. 


Now on to the second general objection ‘Isn’t what I call the Law of Human Nature (Moral Law) something that is taught to us by our parents, family, society, etc.?’  We of course learn a great many things as we are growing up, language, math, writing and even the rule of decent behavior.  But while most of these are merely conventions (what language do I speak,  do I drive on the right or left hand side of the road, do I shake your hand  or bow, what type of clothes do I wear) some like mathematics are real truths.  The question then becomes which class does the ‘Law of Human’ nature belong?


The are two obvious reasons why it belongs to the same class as mathematics (Real Truths).  The first I addressed in my previous post, that though there are differences between the moral ideas of one time and another, or from one country to another; the differences are not nearly as significant as most people want to imagine.  In fact, when you look closely at them you will see the same law running through all of them.  However, those mere conventions can and do vary greatly from one time and one country to another. 


The other reason is this.  When you consider the morality of one people (country, time, culture) to another, do you believe that the morality of one is better or worst than the other?  Now stop and think about that for a second; because if no set of moral ideas were more real, or better than the other, there would be no reason to compare say the civilized morality to a savage morality or Christian morality to a terrorist morality.  If decent behavior simply meant that every nation, every person could do what he or she approves of, there would be no sense in saying that any nation or any one person had ever been more correct in their approval than any other person.  But we do not hold that to be true, in fact, all of us do believe that some moralities are better than others are.  Now here’s the rub, the moment you say that one set of moral ideas is better than another; you are, in fact, measuring them both against a standard.  Saying that one of them conforms to that standard better than the other.  However, the standard that measures the two is something different from either of them.   

Like it or not, you are comparing them both with some ‘Real Morality’.  

 Max Lucado's examination of the Beatitudes may just be the inspiration you need The Applause of Heaven




Wednesday, September 21, 2011

Examined Christian Faith 'Law of Human Nature' 1.1 - What is Christianity

What is Christianity?  How to explain what I am about to undertake?  Or even why I am doing so?  Where most of those who believe as I do see no need to explore the questions, no reason to  ponder the deep underlying currents that drive our beliefs;  I am compelled to do otherwise.  I do not fully understand the reasons myself, so I doubt that I can explain it to you.  It is just something I must do.  I must understand why I believe what I believe, because if I do not understand the basis of my faith, how can I be the witness that I am called to be?  I am probably the least qualified person I know to attempt such an undertaking, and I do not suppose that I will answer every question that others may have.  Just the ones I have, the ones that connects all of the dots in my heart and mind.  Just the ones that explain why and what I believe to be the truth. 


I believe that this is an exercise that everyone needs to undertake in their life; to paraphrase Socrates’ "The unexamined life is not worth living."  into “The unexamined faith is not faith at all”, for when the first sign of trouble, hardship, or opposition comes, and it will; faith unexamined is faith abandoned.  Oh you may appear to return to it at a later point, but inside, where it matters most, you know the truth, that your faith is only your faith as long as it gives you what you want. 


How long will this take, “only my father knows”.  


Part 1.1  Laws. 


It seems to me that there are two laws that govern our world, ‘the law of nature’ and ‘the law of human nature’.  Some may think they are the same, but I would disagree.  The ‘law of nature’ means things like gravity, heredity, biology, chemistry, etc., while the ‘law of human nature’ is really the law of right and wrong.  It is the ‘law of human nature’ where I begin my pursuit.  The reason is actually quite simple, all creatures, all matter including man, must obey the ‘law of nature’.  That a rock or a man could choose to obey the law of gravity or choose not to, is not an option. However a person may choose to either obey the ‘law of human nature’ or not.


To visualize this, all one has to do is imagine a body supported in mid air, if you remove the support, the body has no option about falling, be it a rock or a human; the law of nature is shared by all things.  However the ‘law of human nature’ is peculiar only to humans.  We can either choose to obey it, or not to.  But it is a law that is not shared with any other thing on earth, no animals, no plants, or any inorganic thing.  It applies to humankind, and humankind alone. 

What is the ‘law of human nature’?  It is the law of decent behavior, of right and wrong.  One may deny that the law exist, that there is no real right and wrong, but the person who says this will soon prove themselves to be blind or mistaken.  For while he may use that excuse when he breaks a promise to you, if you try to break on to him, he will be screaming the loudest that it is unfair.  The simple act of arguing with someone is in itself proof of this law, because to quarrel with someone means that you are attempting to show that they are wrong, if there is not some sort of agreement about what is right and wrong, then there would be no  point in arguing.

It does not matter what society, what culture, or what time period you look at, the same core belief of morality exist. Compare the Romans, Egyptians, Hindus, Chinese, Greeks, or the Waodani, they all held the same essential belief of right and wrong.  Yes, there will be differences between the details, as in how many wives a man may have, but they all agree you do not take another man’s wife; the core tenant of right and wrong has existed in all of them.  

Try to imagine a country where it is admirable to betray your friends, to steal from others is praised, where lying is a good thing, where murder is exalted,   Countries and cultures may have different views in regard to what people should be unselfish towards (family, friends, co-workers, countrymen, or everyone) but they have always agreed that you should not put yourself before others.  That the selfish man is the most detested man. 


It seems that there is no option other then to accept that there is in fact a real Right and Wrong, and none of us are very good at keeping the ‘law of human nature’.  Maybe I should simply say that at least no one I know is; because like it or not, this year, or this month and much more likely today, we failed to practice  the type of behavior we expect from others.  When it is pointed out to me  (even if only by my own conscience) I myself have come up with thousands of excuses as to why I failed.  It does not matter if it is a good excuse (not very often), rather that they offer more proof at how deeply we believe in ‘the law of human nature’.  If we did not believe in a real right and wrong, there would be no reason why I would need to make an excuse.   

The truth is that the law of human nature is pressing on us so much at all times, that we cannot bear to admit that we are breaking it, so rather than fact the fact, we attempt to shift the blame.  Yet it occurs to me that it is only for our poor behavior, our rotten actions, our short temper, our sins (if you care to use the word) that we delegate the responsibility to something or someone else. 


All clear thinking about ourselves and the universe we live in is based on these two points. 
 

  1. Human beings all over the earth, regardless of time, place, or culture have this idea that they should behave in a certain manner, and try as we may to deny it, we cannot shake it. 
  2. That none of us in fact behave in the way we think we should.  All of us know the ‘Law of Human Nature" and none of us keep it.  

If you are so inclined, a good place to begin your examination of what you believe may be The Reason for God



Tuesday, September 20, 2011

What of those who haven't heard of Jesus? The Christian Answer

In John 14:6 Jesus declared, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.” Jesus’ words make it clear that He alone has brought God’s gift of salvation to the world. But do His words also mean that everyone who hasn’t heard of Him will be condemned to hell?


Abraham lived long before Christ. When he told Isaac that God would provide a sacrifice, his words were strikingly prophetic, but he could not possibly understand their true significance. He knew nothing about the Lamb of God who would die on a cross nearly 2,000 years later. People like Abel, Enoch, Noah, Job, Melchizedek, Abraham, Sarah, and Jacob never heard the gospel, yet Hebrews 11:13 leaves no doubt that they are all in heaven.


No one in Old Testament had a clear understanding of the role that Jesus Christ would someday play in atoning for sin. But 2,000 years before the gospel was revealed, the faith of Old Testament believers was already “credited to them as righteousness” (Genesis 15:6; Psalm 106:31; Galatians 3:6).


Faith in God always involved confidence that God would somehow provide for the forgiveness of sins. Faith always anticipated the coming of Christ and His sacrifice on our behalf. Old Testament believers offered sacrifices as an expression of their faith.  By themselves, sacrificial offerings could never take away sin.  When they were offered in faith, however, God accepted them because they pointed to Jesus Christ, the one sacrifice worthy to atone for all the sins of the world (Hebrews 10:1-17 ).


One of the most amazing missionary stories of the 20th century was the martyrdom of five young missionaries (including Jim Elliot and Nate Saint) in Ecuador and the conversion of the Auca Indians.  The first convert from the Auca tribe was a young woman named Dayuma.  Remarkably, Dayuma was predisposed to accept the gospel because of her father’s influence.  Although he had never heard the name of Jesus, he spoke out against the blood feuds that were an Auca way of life.  Unlike the others of his tribe, he was deeply conscious of his sinful nature and knew that he and his people needed forgiveness.  He told Dayuma that some day God would send a messenger to the Aucas to tell them the way of salvation.  Like Old Testament believers, Dayuma’s father was still living by faith when he died ( Hebrews 11:13 ). The witness of his life implies that he would have been overjoyed to hear the gospel, but he died before missionaries came.


Does the Bible give us grounds for insisting that Dayuma’s father is any different in God’s eyes than the believers of the Old Testament?   Clearly, Dayuma’s father, like Abraham, would face eternal damnation apart from Christ’s shed blood.   Apparent, too, is the deep spiritual need of those, like the Auca people, who live in fear and spiritual darkness.   The fact that Christ is the only way to God places on us the responsibility to make Him known to all.


Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles asked:
for, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”  How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? Romans 10:13-14


But there isn’t a passage of Scripture that proves that God looks upon Dayuma’s father differently than He looked upon Old Testament believers who had only a faint idea of the nature of coming redemption.   The apostle Paul had this issue in mind when he wrote the first chapters of Romans, declaring that God has revealed Himself in creation “The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them.  For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.”  Romans 1:18-20 and in human conscience  “All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law.  They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.) This will take place on the day when God judges people’s secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares.  Romans 2:12-16 


The gospel clearly states that each individual will be judged according to his response to these two revelations of God.  To those who respond positively, God gives more knowledge—as He did to the Ethiopian eunuch and the Roman centurion, Cornelius (see Acts 8,10 ).  Those who are lost will be judged according to their response to the spiritual light they have received ( Hebrews 4:12-13). 


I believe that God will extend His grace to Dayuma’s father on the basis of Christ’s shed blood, just as He did to Enoch, Melchizedek, Job, Abraham, and Sarah—people who had only the faintest intimation of the means by which God would provide for their redemption. In the final analysis, we must leave this matter in God’s keeping.  He is both just and loving.  We can be assured that the Judge of all the earth will do right.


To learn more about Jim Elliot and the Auca tribe watch one of two movies  “ End of the Spear” or the documentary “Beyond the Gates of Splendor



Sunday, September 18, 2011

Worship for the 'Me' Christiian Church

Okay a slight pun on a serious subject.  How many of us have silently sung this to ourselves in our everyday life?  There is always a grain of truth in humor, and perhaps to prevent you from actually being this kind of person you could do worst then to read Falling Upwards: A Spiritualy for the Two Halves of Life

Saturday, September 17, 2011

Blue Skies and Deep Valleys - Christian Life

Jesus tells you to count the costs.  Because the day that you put your trust in Jesus Christ, you enter into a battle - warfare that will last for the rest of your life.  Why?  Because not only is there a God who loves you and has a plan for your life, there is also a devil who hates you, and fiercely opposes God's plan.  

Most are surprised to find that the true authentic Christian life is a battleground and not a playground. And that is why the apostle Paul said, "You therefore must endure hardship as a good soldier of Jesus Christ." 2Timothy 2:3


I bring this up because most of what is preached in America today is some version of a watered-down gospel; which is really no gospel at all.  This diluted version of the true gospel promises forgiveness, but rarely tells you of the need to repent of your sin.  It's a gospel that promises peace and plenty, but never warns of persecution.  It's a gospel that says God wants you to be healthy and wealthy, and never have any problems to speak of.  It's a gospel that says you can so wrap yourself in God's favor that there will always be a parking space available for you at the mall, especially during the holidays.  It’s also what many in America expect when they raise their hand to accept Christ,  and honestly it’s the only reason they claim to be Christian. 

However, that is not the gospel of the New Testament.  While I wasn’t there (regardless of what my daughter thinks), nevertheless I am fairly certain, the last thing on Paul's mind was, "How can I find a great parking space?"  He had other objectives that gripped his heart and soul.  So what is the point of what I’m talking about?  That God wants you to be sick, poor, and miserable?  That He doesn't want you to be happy?  No, that's not my point.

I believe that joyfulness will come as you really follow the Lord.  But it is a byproduct - a fringe benefit of belonging to Christ.  The essence of the Christian life is knowing God and walking with Him.  It's about praising Him when the sky is blue and also when it's filled with clouds or choked with smoke.  It's about walking with the Lord through thick and thin, even if it means you have to walk through that deep valley, following God’s will and pressing on through every heartache and trial that happens to come your way.

For a real life lesson pick up  "The Devil in Pew Number Seven"
It is the amazing, true saga of relentless persecution, one family’s faith and courage in the face of it, and a daughter whose parents taught her the power of forgiveness.

Friday, September 16, 2011

When the Rain Comes into the Christian's life

Former British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli summed up life in this pessimistic way: "Youth is a blunder. Manhood is a struggle. And old age a regret."  Jesus, Himself made it clear that storms will enter every life.  But it is through these storms, hardships and tribulations that we will enter God's kingdom.

"And when they had preached the gospel to that city and made many disciples, they returned to Lystra, Iconium, and Antioch, strengthening the souls of the disciples, exhorting them to continue in the faith, and saying, 'We must through many tribulations enter the kingdom of God”  Acts 14:21–22 

That’s probably not a passage we want to write in calligraphy on a plaque and hang by our front door. However it is one we need to keep close to our heart, least when trials come we run away.

We would rather the passage read, "Through many days of perpetual happiness, we enter the kingdom of God." Some who call themselves Christians actually believe that to be the truth, but that isn't Scripture, and that isn't life.  Trials and tribulations will come, Job said it best: "Man who is born of woman is of few days and full of trouble" Job 14:1

In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus told a story about two men who built two homes. One of the builders erected his home on shifting sand, while the other built his home on a stable rock foundation.  Then the storms came, with wind and driving rain hitting both of those houses—hard!  The house that had been built on sand collapsed and fell in upon itself, while the one built on the rock stood firm.  The obvious moral of the story is to build your life on a foundation that will last, like the one we find in the pages of God's Word.

But there’s  a key application we choose to miss. The storm came to both lives. The wind blew on both houses. The rain poured on both buildings.  The man who was wise and carefully chose a stable foundation got pounded with the same hurricane-force winds as the man who foolishly took shortcuts and didn't bother to plan ahead.

No one is exempt from experiencing storms in life.  Good things will happen to us, as well as tragic and inexplicable things.  Every life will have its share of pain.  As much as we wish to believe otherwise, none of us gets an extended vacation beyond the reach of human suffering and tragedy.

I understand Disraeli's pessimism quoted above, however the Christian has another answer:  God is in control of the life of the Christian and can actually bring good out of bad.

That is what the Bible teaches, and that is what I know to be true. That's not to say that God will make bad into good, because bad is bad.  But it is to say that good can come out of bad.  As Romans 8:28 affirms: "And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose".  It doesn’t say it will work out how you want it to, but rather for the good.  

Life is a journey and, as finite beings who live moment to moment, we can't see around the corner, never mind the next bump in the road. We can't discern God's ultimate purposes.  But we can know this:  He is watching and caring - in control and loving us with an everlasting love.

A good place to start is Timothy Keller's book "The Prodigal God"


Thursday, September 15, 2011

A Christian Confronting Evil

“All it takes for evil to triumph in the world is for good men to do nothing.”  Edmond Burke


Many people are familiar with the above quote by Edmond Burke.  Whenever a great cause against injustice is begun, these words are invoked.  Burke's statement assumes the following three premises:


1. Good and evil exist in the world

2. There is an ongoing battle between the forces of darkness and light.

3. Either by your action or your inaction, you are on one side or the other.


This battle between good and evil has been played out so often in the movies that it now evokes images of the good guys getting ready to go to war with the bad guys.  Somehow lost, is that evil must be confronted on a daily basis, and confronted personally, it isn’t great armies that confront evil, it is one person making a decision, one person choosing to stand for what is right, one person willing to put themselves at risk to engage what God declares evil. 


While Edmond Burke’s quote is known by the masses, however, less well known even to Christians, is this passage:


“The Son of God appeared for this purpose: That He might destroy the works of the devil.” 1John3:8


As Christians, Christ calls us to confront evil in the world.  We can choose not to, but if we choose not to, are we not in fact choosing the side of evil? 


As Christians, the question is: How are we to confront evil in the world.  My example from the Bible for how to do that is probably not the example you would be expecting; because you probably do not know the background information that sets the scene (thus understanding the culture of the bible is important).  Nevertheless, I think it is a prime example of how Christ Himself models confronting evil.


As Jesus prepares to begin his final journey, His walk to Jerusalem to be crucified on the cross we find the beginning passage: 


When Jesus came into the region of Caesarea Philippi, He asked His disciples, saying, “Who do men say that I, the Son of Man, am?”  Matthew 16:13


Caesarea Philippi?  Why Caesarea Philippi?  Jesus did nothing by coincidence, nothing by happenstance, there was a reason that He chose to take his disciples all the way up to Caesarea Philippi.  However to understand it you must know about Caesarea Philippi. 


During the times of Old Testament, the city of Dan was built in the same area.  In I Kings 12:28-29, King Jeroboam made two golden calves and set them in Bethel and Dan.  At Caesarea Philippi, there is a massive wall of rock that is well over 100 feet straight up and about 500 feet wide.  By the time of Christ, at this massive rock face the Greeks offered sacrifices to the goat god, Pan and created a place for idol worship at the mouth of a cave from which flowed one of the three streams that form the Jordan River.  Now called Banais in the country of Lebanon, the rock face of the cave had alcoves carved into it where idols of the gods were placed.  In Jesus's day, it was known as the Rock of the Gods.  Further reinforcing the site’s attraction for worship, Herod the Great built the city of Caesarea Philippi on top of this enormous rock along with a temple dedicated to Emperor Augustus, who had given him the town.  Following Herod’s death, it was enlarged and rededicated by King Philip to honor the Caesar in Rome.  Caesar considered himself a god and King Philip was eager to worship him as such.


Caesarea Philippi was a center of Greek-Roman culture, a city known for its pagan worship, with the prestigious status as the capital city of Herod Philip’s domain, and with a very significant Gentile population.  A city and temple that was built on top of this massive wall of rock for one purpose, to give honor to these false gods, Caesar and Pan.  It was here that Jesus chose to bring His disciples, to ask them this important question:

"But who do you say that I am?”  Simon Peter replied, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”  And Jesus answered him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah!  For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.  And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.  Matthew 16:15-18


Try to imagine Jesus standing before this massive rock of pagan worship, as he speaks with Peter (the rock).  Jesus does not do the "holy huddle.”  He does not retreat into the four walls of a nice safe church to keep evildoers out.  No, Jesus calls His disciples out into the heart of the pagan culture, to the very gates of hell itself.  


How are we to confront evil in the world?  Jesus is calling you to go out into this pagan culture, to the very gates of hell itself, and be ambassadors for Christ.  To stand up, for what God declares good, to do, not just say.



“You are the light of the world. A city set on a mountain cannot be hidden.”  Matthew 5:14

If you desire to get an understanding of Biblical times, places, and customs, try this bible. 
NIV Archaeological Study Bible: An Illustrated Walk Through Biblical History and Culture 

Wednesday, September 14, 2011

Christian Small Compromises - Rubber Tube (part 4 of 4)

A compromise is an adjustment of valid conflicting claims by mutual parties, who have some value of each other.  This means that both parties must  agree upon some fundamental principle which serves as a base for their deal.

It is only in regard to concrete items (a detail, a single item, not a universal quality), that one may compromise.  For instance, you may bargain with a someone over the price you want to receive for your car, and agree on a sum somewhere between your asking price and his offer. The mutually accepted basic principle, in such case, is the principle of trade, namely: that the buyer must pay the seller for his product.

But if you wanted to be paid and the alleged buyer wanted to obtain your car for nothing, no compromise, agreement or discussion would be possible, only the total surrender of one or the other.  There can be no compromise between a property owner and a burglar; offering the thief a single teaspoon of your silverware would not be a compromise, but a total surrender - the recognition of his right to your property.  Even more: the partial victory of an unjust claim, encourages the claimant to try further; the partial defeat of a just claim, discourages and paralyzes the victim.

There can be no compromise on basic principles. There can be no compromise on moral issues. There can be no compromise on matters of knowledge, of truth, or of rational conviction.  Contrary to the belief of its advocates, compromise [on basic principles] does not satisfy, but dissatisfies everybody; it does not lead to general fulfillment, but to general frustration; those who try to be all things to all men, end up by not being anything to anyone, just ask any politician.

On issues of basic principles, regarding morality, matters of knowledge, truth, and  rational conviction there are always two sides: one side is right and the other is wrong, however the middle is always evil.  The individual who is wrong still retains some respect for truth, if only by accepting the responsibility of his choice.  But it’s the man in the middle, the deceitful one who blanks out the truth in order to pretend that no choice or values exist, 'who is willing to sit out the course of any conflict, willing to cash in on the blood of the innocent or to crawl on his belly to the guilty,  the one who dispenses justice by condemning both the thief and the victim to jail, who solves conflicts by ordering the thinker and the fool to meet each other halfway.  

In any compromise between food and poison, it is only death that can win.  In any compromise between good and evil, it is only evil that can profit.'  In that transfusion of blood which drains the good to feed the evil, the compromiser is the transmitting rubber tube . . .' Ayn Rand
“What are the consequences of small compromises? “   You become the small transmitting rubber tube. 

Radical: Taking Back Your Faith from the American Dream 

Tuesday, September 13, 2011

Christian Small Compromises - Good verses Evil (part 3 of 4)

All evil is sin, all sin is wrong, all wrong is bad, but not all bad is evil. Ponder that statement for a few moments, before you read any further.  Because the true nature and direction of your heart is defined by your willingness to not only accept that truth, but to act on it.  In the eyes of man, there is a very small difference between bad and evil, to us they are simply different sides of the same window; but when looked at through the eyes of God, the chasm that separates the two is as wide as east is from the west.


We may look at something and think nothing of it, see no evil, only a poor decision.  We may also look at something and declare it good and hold it up as a model for others to aspire towards.  Conversely, we may prescribe to an idea that something is wrong when in fact it is not.  However, in all three situations, the truth is that each is evil.  We do not determine what is evil, God has.  In the above three examples, the life of the person living without Christ, In God’s eye is evil; the person who has pulled himself up by his bootstraps and is now successful but has made money his god, is evil;  and the person who speaks up about an absolute right and wrong applying to everyone, who is then labeled bigot or worst, is viewed completely different though God’s eyes. 


So what is evil?  In simplest terms, evil is to good as cold is to heat.  Heat is a form of energy.  The lack of heat energy we experience as cold.  Similarly, evil is a privation of good.  What is evil?  Not fulfilling God's will.


1. Stealing something is a sin but it is not evil; habitually robbing people is evil.
2. An act of adultery is a sin but it is not evil; divorce is evil.
3. Lying is a sin but it is not evil; slandering others is evil.
4. Murdering someone is a sin but is not always evil; it was the intent that makes it evil.
5. Wanting what is your neighbors, is a sin but it is not evil; always seeking to outdo your neighbor is evil.
6. Failing to respect and honor your parents is a sin but it is not evil, rejecting your parents is evil.
7. Using God’s name in vain is a sin, but it is not evil; blaspheming God with your actions is evil.
8. Not keeping a day to honor God is a sin, but it is not evil; living a live devoid of God is evil.
9. Valuing money over your time is a sin, but it is not evil; making money the focus of your life is evil. 


We often think of sin as the things we should not have done. Evil is not just a life of  commission, evil is also a life of omission.  One Commentary describes it as the sin of "knowledge without practice". This person's "faith" is empty if she only offers well-wishes to the cold and hungry person.  When you know the right thing to do and have the means, then you offer the coat or food; to do nothing is a sin. Paul was guilty of it, saying, "the good that I want to do I do not do" (Rom. 7:16) However being a Christian is characterized as doing what we are positively called to do.


10. When you fail to do, what you know is right, it is a sin, yet it is not evil; when you chose a lifestyle that perpetuates not doing what God has called you to do, that is evil. 


The difference between each of  the 10 examples is that one is an event, an occurrence; the other is a lifestyle pattern. Sin is a recognized inward focused action that can be repented from and refocused outward.  On the other hand, evil does not recognize itself, it sees it in others but is blind to itself, and thus is never repented.  


“If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him!”   Matthew 7:11  


What is evil?  Not fulfilling God's will.  It begins with compromise….

The Christian Atheist: Believing in God but Living As If He Doesn't Exist 

Monday, September 12, 2011

Christian Small compromises - Right from Wrong (part 2 of 4)

If you are expecting a list of what is right and what is wrong, you are going to be disappointed, you going to have to work harder than that.  To truly understand right from wrong you must understand what makes it right or wrong and why. 


By the beginning of this century, over 2800 major corporations were mandating that their employees take training in tolerance.  Almost overnight the person who dares make a moral judgment is an outcast, and is frequently greeted with a remark such as, “What gives you the right to say that?  You’re a bigot.  Who do you think you are?”


The truthfulness of what one says is no longer the issue.  One’s right to speak the truth is jeopardized by “positive tolerance”.  The Bible is not quoted much in public anymore because its content is regarded as bigoted and anti-multiculturalism.  Multiculturalism has also changed.  It is no longer confined to racial issues.  It now is the application of tolerance in such a way that all cultures are equal in belief, values, lifestyle and truth claims.  If you deny this, you are regarded a bigot.  


When all values, truth claims and beliefs are equal, you lose the ability to choose right from wrong.  This is because if all views are equal, then it does not matter which one you choose.  They have no substance and they are inconsequential.  One’s beliefs have nothing to do with the real world of cause and effect.  We see this clearly in the lives of most American Christians today.  Today there is no connection between belief and behavior.  There is a gaping chasm between what Christian’s profess to believe and those same Christian’s behavior.


The idea of an absolute right and wrong is terrifying and does not fit into our tolerant society, and increasingly it does not fit into the churches of America.  Tolerance is easier, and immunity is certainly easier then repentance.


What is right and what is wrong?  In able to make a compromise, you must first know what is right and wrong, however to have an ethical code that distinguishes the difference between right and wrong, you must first know the truth; because ethics cannot operate without truth.


In a recent survey when asked to give the definition of ‘truth’, only 4 out of 7000 Christians could do it.


Now it’s your turn ‘What is truth?’


According to Webster’s Dictionary, Truth is that which conforms to fact or reality.  Or another definition is: “Truth is that which has fidelity to an original.  (faithful to an original reference point)”


There are two models of truth.  


God establishes absolute truth (absolutism) and man determines truth (relativism).  A Christian believes in absolutism.  God’s moral principles are grounded upon His absolute truth.  What is absolute truth?  It is true for all people, in all places, at all times.  It is constant and unchanging.  It has an objective basis outside of self.  God and His Word are an unchanging reference point external to us.  


Right from wrong is nothing less than the revelation of God’s righteous character.  Something is right or wrong because it is true of God.  For example the Bible states in the 10 commandments “You shall not murder?”  The reason is because God is life.  He is the source and giver of life.  The command flows from and is the expression of God’s very Person and nature.  

Thus, it is the character of God that is the basis for discerning right from wrong.  Right and wrong do not change, because God’s character does not change.  God’s commands are not for Him, but for us.  They are for our good.  They are to protect us and to provide for us.  They are the safeguard of love, like an umbrella, if you remove yourself from obedience; you remove yourself from protection and provision.  God’s moral absolutes flow from His love to us.  He is trustworthy and He wants to provide for us and protect us.


The more you know of God’s character, the better you understand right from wrong.  If however you need a cheat sheet might I suggest this as a general guideline.  As a culture, we tend to be an instant gratification society, and by instant I am not talking about in a minute or two, I am talking about right this second.  Like those who live solely in the secular world, Christians today tend to make choices that are based upon immediate return.  However, there is a paradox associated with moral choices: most right choices have immediate “negative” consequences (sacrifice, planning, delayed gratification, self-denial, peer disapproval, etc.) while most wrong choices have immediate “positive” consequences (temporal pleasure, peer acceptance, false sense of freedom, etc.)


Nevertheless, in the long run, there is a total reversal of consequences.  Wrong choices bear more and more bitter fruit and right choices produce ongoing well-being.  The reason for that truth is the character of God.  This is a moral universe ruled by a holy God.  Therefore, the universe is built upon delayed gratification, not indulgence.


The most dangerous person in America now is the Bible-believing Christian who does not flinch from saying there is such a thing as right and wrong for everybody. 

Next Good verses Evil

Sunday, September 11, 2011

Christian Small Compromises - Who Determines what is Right and Wrong, Good and Evil? (part 1 of 4)

Small compromises, that is the question posed to my bible study group, “What are the consequences of small compromises?   The short answer is that you become a small transmitting rubber tube (wait for part 4).  However it begs the larger question, compromising on what?  What are we compromising on when we compromise on our commitment to live for God and to obey Him in all things?  Is it a compromise between right and wrong?  Or a compromise between good and evil?  Is there a difference?  For that matter who determines what is right and wrong, good and evil? 


The problem with the question is that it scratches at the surface, but that is how American Christians like it.  Let us just scratch at the dirt that is on the surface, because to actually use a spade and unearth what lies beneath, might just convict us, we might not be as holy as we want to assume ourselves to be.  If we scratch at the surface, we can go home at night, feeling smug and safe in our conviction that we are good, nice people.  However, if we look deeper we might not like what we see.


Aren’t you glad I am not in your bible study group?  I have never been one of those let’s play it safe type of guys; no, I am more of the, in for a penny, in for a pound kind of guy.  So over the next couple of postings I am going to peel layers off of this onion so to speak and look at the question "What are the consequences of small compromises”? 

The difference is, that we need to take a look at everything the question is inferring, that we know who decides what is right and wrong, good and evil, that we know what right and wrong is, that we know what good and evil is, and perhaps most importantly that we understand what a compromise is.  I do not think that the modern American Christian understands any of what the question infers.  Oh, I think we appreciate the question in the grand scale, as in – ‘Hitler was evil, Jesus was good’; but in our day-to-day lives, we miss the point of the question.  Moreover, if we do not understand the question how can we answer it?  


I am going to address briefly the first point in this posting, to be followed by an examination of the other points of consideration. 


Who determines what is right and wrong, good and evil?   


Now before you take the easy way out, stop and think about your answer.  Because the answer you are about to say means that your own personal opinion does not matter, that like it or not good and evil are determined outside of yourself.  That what you may think is personally acceptable is in fact evil; which says what about yourself?   

This is not a question to fail to give serious thought to, this is not a question to say one thing to and do the opposite.  Really think about your answer, only answer it when you are 100% positive of your answer.  Because once you take that step there is no going back, once you accept that it is not you who decides right and wrong, good and evil, then you are accountable to someone for everything you say, think and do.  How you not only answer that question but live it in your life determines life or death. 


If you believe the following three passages are the truth then you have your answer.  


“The earth is the LORD’s, and everything in it,  the world, and all who live in it;   for he founded it on the seas and established it on the waters. “  Psalms 24:1-2


“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.  He was with God in the beginning.  Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.  In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind.  The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.  “John 1:1-5


“In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.”  Genesis 1:1


Because Christians do not believe humans made themselves or occurred "naturally”, we do not believe we are free to do whatever suits us.  Because God is the author of life, He and He alone determines the standards of behavior for those members of His creation.  Right and wrong, Good and Evil, the issue is already decided, if you like it or not.

The Christian Atheist: Believing in God but Living As If He Doesn't Exist