Standard

Posted by

Posted on

February 19, 2015

Posted under

Uncategorized

What is Ash Wednesday?

Ash Wednesday is the day which begins the season of Lent (more on that in a later answer) and is observed by those who follow the liturgical church calendar. Typically the church calendar is followed by Catholics, Lutherans, Anglicans and Episcopalians, though in recent years more and more Protestant groups have also begun to observe Ash Wednesday and Lent.

Ash Wednesday is described as a day of penitence set aside in remembrance of one’s own sin and mortality. Ash Wednesday begins the observer’s preparation for the Holy Week and Easter. On Ash Wednesday the observer usually attends a special church service during which the minister marks each person’s forehead with ashes while quoting Genesis 3:19, “For dust thou art and unto dust thou shalt return.” The imposition of ashes is a reminder of the individual’s guilt before God and the consequences of that guilt, death. Many also keep Ash Wednesday as a day of fasting. Ash Wednesday begins Lent with the reminder of sin and leads the observer to an extended time of penitence and contrition.

Ash Wednesday is a tradition taken from the practices of some churches beginning in the 400’s AD. Ash Wednesday nor it’s equivalent is found anywhere in the pages of the Bible. Biblical examples of people tearing their clothes and covering themselves with ashes can be found, but these were not part of a ritual observance. The ashes found in the Bible are ashes of deep sorrow, often at times of extreme loss. While observing Ash Wednesday is not forbidden in the Bible, it does carry with it some troubling theological assumptions.

Ash Wednesday and Lent are closely associated with penitence for sin. Penitence is usually something greater than sorrow for sin and is different from repentance. Penitence is closelu associated with penance and typically communicates some activity being done by the sinner to show his sorrow or to make amends for the wrong done. The performance of some religious act as an expression of sorrow is not in line with the Biblical gospel nor is it the response to sin called for by the gospel. The Bible commands repentance for sin, turning to God for salvation, without any effort or works on the part of the sinner. Instead, the Bible teaches that a gospel which requires some personal act of obedience for salvation is in fact a false gospel (Galatians 1:8-9).

Is it a sin to participate in Ash Wednesday? Just as the Bible does not prescribe its observance, so the Bible does not forbid its observance. If one feels compelled to observe Ash Wednesday and Lent, he needs to carefully examine his own mind and practice to ensure the observation does not include theological assumptions and practices contrary to the simple message of the gospel. Jesus is God the Son who died on the cross to pay the punishment for sin in place of men. Jesus has been restored to life and is now reigning in heaven, just as the Bible foretold, and completely pardons those those who will believe Him. Those who trust Him and none else for salvation, will be saved. Liturgical observances may be helpful reminders of Biblical truth, but they do not replace or supplement the work of Jesus on the cross.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

February 16, 2015

Posted under

Christianity, Church, The Bible

How was it decided what books were included in the New Testament?

From the very beginning of the church, the groups and people who received letters from the apostles recognized those writings as inspired by God. This was true of both the Old and New Testament. Prior to Jesus, the writings of the prophets were received as the Word of God. After Jesus the writings of the apostles were received as the Word of God. The individual churches who received a particular writing knew it was from God. Those writings were then passed around among the churches. In fact, several books of the Bible were not written to individual churches but to entire people groups or several churches in a particular region (for example, Matthew, Mark, John, Colossians, Hebrews, James, John, Peter, Jude, Revelation). Some letters were written to individuals, which were then shared with a single church and then passed on to other churches. (such as, Luke, Acts, Timothy, Titus, Philemon, 2 & 3 John).

The churches recognized these letters as inspired by God from the very beginning. This is made plain in 2 Peter 3:16. Peter says that Paul’s writings are sometimes hard to understand, and those who are unstable twist Paul’s Words, just like they do the other Scriptures. Peter considers Paul’s writings the Word of God, even though they are at times difficult to understand. In Paul’s letter to Timothy he quotes the gospel of Luke and declares it is Scripture. In 1 Thessalonians Paul claims his writings are the Word of God. The apostles knew they were writing God’s Word and they knew that other writings of the apostles were inspired Scripture.

Because of the way in which the New Testament was written and distributed, there were times when false letters claiming to be apostolic were passed around the church. Because the writings of the apostles were sent to churches spread across widespread regions of the Roman empire some churches did not receive copies of certain books until decades after the books had been written. At that later point, and often without apostolic oversight, churches and groups of churches had to be able to decide between the true Biblical books and those which were false. To help make this determination, the church identified several criteria to identify genuine Biblical books.

First, the book had to have apostolic authority. For a book to be Scriptures it was to have been written by an apostle or under the direct supervision of an apostle. Second, the book could not contradict books already recognized as Biblical. Third, everything contained in the writing had to be true. Nothing inspired by God would contain errors or fraudulent claims. Any book found to be erroneous was rejected as not genuine Scripture. Last, the book had to have already been accepted by the church. A writing that was not recognized in any church as Biblical could not suddenly be elevated to be upheld as Biblical. The writing had to be accepted as Biblical by those who received it before it could be accepted as Biblical by the church at large.

At no point in history did anyone have an official meeting with all the possible books in front of them and decide if those books were going to be considered as Biblical. History tells us a few specific books of the Bible were not recognized by all the church until later and after much consideration. Many false books were rejected by the church, on the local and regional levels. In the end the formation of the New Testament was not the result of men deciding which books belonged, but of God moving holy men to write His Word. The churches that received His Word recognized the marks of authentic, Divine truth and acknowledged such writings to be the Bible.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

February 13, 2015

Posted under

Genesis

Who are the sons of God in Genesis 6?

Genesis 6:1-4 says, “And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years. There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.”

The identification of the sons of God referred to in this passage is very difficult. The Bible gives us no definite information on which to reach a firm conclusion. We may never know for certain what is the right answer. However, a plausible guess can be offered. When faced a difficult Biblical question with limited Biblical information to build from, search for an answer that is most reasonable, includes the least amount of unprovable conjecture and best lines up with what is known from other, clear, teachings in the Bible.

After Adam and Eve sinned, they had two sons, Cain and Abel. In a fit of rage, Cain killed Abel and was driven into a distant land called Nod because of his rebellion against God. Cain married and had kids and the kids had kids and so forth. After Cain was driven out, Adam and Eve had another son named Seth. Seth and his family apparently stayed in the region with Adam and Eve. A major part of Seth’s family remained faithful and obedient to God while Cain’s family continued in rebellion against God.

During the days of Noah the entire world was divided into two population groups, those who worshiped God and those who didn’t. It is my opinion that the males of Seth’s family who continued to worship God were called the sons of God.  Adam lived for nearly a thousand years after being created by God in the garden of Eden. Those of Adam’s family that stayed with him and continued to worship God might very reasonably be called the children of God. Those who did not might very well have been called the children of men.

What about the phrase, “the same became mighty men . . . men of renown”? Some have connected the statement about giants in the earth with the men of renown born as a result of the coupling of the sons of God and daughters of men. However, Genesis 6:4 does not say that. The verse says there were giants on the earth and also the descendants of the sons of God and daughters of men became men of renown. The men of renown need not be gigantic beings or some sort of demigod. The mighty men are nothing more than the great men of the pre-flood days, probably those mentioned in Genesis 4.

I think the sons of God were the obedient descendants of Seth. As the world’s population increased, the descendants of Seth and the descendants of Cain began to mingle and intermarry, thus the sons of God married the daughters of men.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

February 11, 2015

Posted under

Christianity, Current Events

Comments

1 Comment

Were the Crusades Christian?

Last week when making a point about the distortion of religions, our President claimed the crusades were undertaken in the name of Christ. The claim repeated by Mr. Obama is one that has been repeated many times by many people and will be repeated many times over again. Were the crusades Christian?

The crusades were an ostensibly Christian undertaking, claiming to be in the name of Christ. The crusades did not take place in a religious vacuum. The crusades took place in a socio-political environment in which the Roman Catholic church was tightly interwoven with numerous national governments. Church and state were not separated and were, in fact, nearly inseparable. Despite the claims, to say the crusades were Christian has as much merit as saying the Seattle Seahawks NFC victory was Christian. Christian claims and Christian participation do not a Christian event make.

Yes, the Crusades claimed Christianity for their support. No, the Crusades were not at all a Christian undertaking. Historically, nations have long claimed Biblical and Divine support of their cause in war. During the Civil War the Union and Confederacy both claimed God was supporting their cause. In the World Wars Americans claimed Divine support. In First Gulf War and the war on terror, America claimed Divine support. These claims do not prove any of those wars were Christian undertakings. Nothing in the Bible teaches an army of church men are to march into Palestine and drive out its conquerors, just as nothing in the Bible teaches America was to drive Al-Qaeda out of Afghanistan.

At this point someone will protest that God told Moses, Joshua, Saul and David to conquer the land of Canaan and to wipe out entire populations. This claim is true, but Israel is not the church. The scope of this article does not allow time to go into the specifics of the Old Testament, God’s commands to Israel and God’s working in the world during that time. One recognition is vitally important to understanding how God’s command to Israel have no bearing on the crusades. The church and Israel are not the same in function, purpose, relationship to the world or governance. Israel in the Old Testament was a nation, acting as an autonomous government among the many nations of the world. The church is not and never has been a nation. The church is not a federal agency with its own army, justices and legislatures that imposes its will by force and fiat on those who resist. The church is something very different and distinct from a nation. The church has no authority to declare war. No true church will claim Jesus’ support of violence, murder and barbarism and no genuine Christian can claim Christ’s example for brutality, assault and bloodshed.

The crusades were not Christian in any way. They may or may not have been just (that’s a separate discussion), but they were not Christian. Christian is that which follows the teachings of Jesus Christ as recorded in the New Testament. Anything contrary to the New Testament is not Christian. Anything not built on the clear teaching of the New Testament cannot claim to be Christian. Only that which is defined in the New Testament as Christian behavior can legitimately be called a Christian endeavor.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

February 6, 2015

Posted under

Sin

How do I know if something is sin?

The Bible tells us what things are sin. 1 John 3:4 says, “sin is the trangression of the law.” Sin is anything which breaks God’s law. To know God’s law, then you have to read the Bible. In the Bible God tells exactly what He commands people to do and what He commands people not to do.

To understand the commands of God, one has to read the Bible. The Bible was written to be understood by normal people. Scripture was not written to make sense only to those who have special training or advanced degrees. It was not written to make sense only to those who know the secret code to unlocking its hidden meanings. The Bible was written to be understood by everybody. The words do not contain hidden meanings. Work will often be necessary to understand what is being taught but the words of the Bible mean what words usually mean. Do not read it looking for hidden meanings or waiting for some internal impulse to give significance to the words.

When going to the Bible to learn God’s commands, there is a lot of territory to cover. Despite the length of the Bible, God’s laws are not difficult to understand or figure out. Two passages should guide ones thinking about sin. First, Matthew 22:37-38 says, “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all your heart, and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and great comandment.” Most important in understanding what is sin is how we think about God. God is to be the most important in your life. Nothing- not self, desires, plans, friends, family, job or any other thing- is to be more important than God. If something displeases God or becomes more important to you than God, that thing is a sin.

Second, Romans 13:9-10, “If there be any other commandment, it is briefly summed up in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. Love works no ill to his neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.” After considering if something is pleasing to God or is more important to you than God, sin is considering self as more important than others. If something is harmful to someone else then, that thing is certainly a sin. An important distinction needs to be made. What others like and what is actually good for them is not always the same thing. Kids like ice cream and might want to eat ice cream at every meal. They might also cry and complain and tell you how bad it makes them feel to have to eat green beans, but a good parent is going to make them eat what is good for them not what makes them feel good for a little while. That which keeps the law does what is genuinely good for others and does not do anything which harms another.

If you want to know if something is a sin ask yourself two questions, does this action show that God is most important to me and does this do any injury to another person.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

February 4, 2015

Posted under

Genesis, Origins

Have they found Noah’s ark?

Nope. Thanks for asking and reading.

Well, I guess that wasn’t quite long enough of an answer, so let me elaborate. Noah’s ark is the large ship built by Noah according to the commands of God given in Genesis 6. This massive vessel was at least 450 feet long, 150 feet wide and fifty feet tall. Noah, his family and the animals with them floated across the waters throughout the year long flood. (The Bible does not teach a 40 day flood, but 40 days of catastrophic rain. From the time Noah got on the ark to the time he got off was over one year.) As the flood waters began to go down, the ark landed in the mountains of Ararat. Not Mt. Ararat, but the mountains plural. Somewhere in the range then identified as the Ararat mountains was the arks resting place. Presumably the ark rested in the Zagros mountain chain that runs north to south along the eastern Iran border into western Turkey. The ark has never been found.

The absence of the ark or archeological evidence of an ark does not disprove the validity of the flood account. The mountains where the ark might have landed are very rugged and snowcapped. A thorough archaeological search throughout that region is impossible at this time. Even if an expedition could be mounted, the possibility of finding the ark is very low. Being a large wooden vessel, there is no reason to assume that the wood did not rot and waste away. How many wooden houses can be found today that have been abandoned for 100 years? It is very unlikely that a wooden boat would survive nearly 4,500 years. Besides this, When Noah and his family left the ark, it would not be unreasonable for them to scavenge wood from the ark to build homes. As the families grew and expanded, the ark would have provided a ready supply of wood for construction, cooking and heat. It is not unreasonable to assume the ark was dismantled and put to other uses as Noah’s family began to rebuild after the destruction of the flood. The ark has not been found and there is no reason to expect it will be.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

January 30, 2015

Posted under

Life Questions

Comments

2 Comments

What about Karma?

Karma is the idea that what goes around comes around. Karma is tossed out in casual conversation, especially at times when a bad person has something bad happen to him. Karma is a concept that comes from Buddhist teaching and stresses personal responsibility for actions with an emphasis on cause and effect. Karma is the mystical application of “for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction” to behavior. What happens to one today the was earned by past behavior. One teacher said it this way, “Your world today is just a reflection of your past.” Karma teaches that thoughts and actions are powerful. They carry energy that ripples across the universe and that will eventually echo back to the person who committed them. Karma is akin to the common proverb, “what goes around comes around.” In the eastern religions Buddhism and Hinduism karma is also a reflection of past lives. A person who was bad in past lives may face greater suffering in this life. All wrongs must be atoned for in life and in the end, everything must balance out.

The Bible does not teach Karma. People do not have multiple tries at life and not all wrong will be punished during a person’s lifetime. Actions have consequences, but nowhere does the Bible teach that good in this life will come to those who do good or that evil in this life will come to those who do evil. Instead, the Bible teaches Divine judgment on sin. The Bible teaches that sin has awful consequences. Some of those consequences will be felt in life, but the consequences of sin will be felt most severely after this life. In the end judgment or blessing does not find it’s primary basis in the behavior of the individual. Judgment and blessing is based on the person’s relationship with God. He who has turned to Jesus for forgiveness and salvation will never suffer punishment for the wrong he does. He who has not accepted Jesus as Savior will be punished for all his sin and the good he has done will one day be revealed to be worthless. The Bible doctrine of punishment and reward is a doctrine of eternal judgment or eternal joy based only on a person’s saving faith.

This may seem very unfair. Why are those who ask Jesus to save them absolved from all consequences of their sin? How is it justice for God to ignore all the wrong done by certain people? God remains a righteous judge because He provided a substitute who stepped in and suffered the full punishment of sin. Jesus’ death was more than a horrible injustice done by man to the perfect Son of God. Jesus’ death on the cross was the act of God by which God the Son took the place of mankind and endured in His own body the full and just wrath of God on sin. Jesus paid the complete penalty of sin, spiritual death and physical death, so those who will trust Him for salvation will not suffer eternal consequences themselves. The Bible does not teach a version of karma. The Bible teaches Divine justice which will punish all sin. Either one will suffer the eternal punishment of his sin in his own body or he will in this turn to Jesus to have all guilt and sin removed. The Bible teaches divine mercy which provided a legal substitute and offers that substitute freely to all who will rely on Him for forgiveness.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

January 27, 2015

Posted under

Christian living, Church

Why is Church Attendance Important?

To understand the importance of church attendance, one must understand the purpose of church. Many different ideas are held about what going to church accomplishes. Some think church is to make people feel closer to God. Others think it is about learning to be a better person. Many think church is to teach people how to do what is right. Changing the world, being part of a community and having sins forgiven are other reasons given for being a part of a church. These are all benefits of going to church, but they are not the purpose of church. The church was designed by God for Christians to help them be like Jesus and to give them the tools needed to serve Him in the world. The church is for those who have trusted Jesus for salvation.

Those who are not saved are not commanded to go to church. Frankly, church is going to seem weird and very boring to those who have never turned to Jesus for salvation. Attending church is important for those who are saved, but going to church will not bring salvation. A person can be saved without every having attended a church in his entire life life. A person can attend church faithfully every week for his entire life and never be saved. The church does not save, weekly attendance at church does not save, nor will keeping a special day set apart for the Lord save a person. Church attendance is important as a right response to salvation.

Church attendance is an act of obedience on the part of the Christian. This act of obedience is a little bit more difficult because it is something that requires repeated observance and regular interaction with people who are still far less than perfect. Unlike being baptized, attending church is not a one time event that barely interrupts regular life. Church attendance requires a regular pattern of doing something whether you feel like it or not. Church attendance requires a commitment to a group of people that will offend one another, wound each other and do sinful things to one another.

The sinfulness of the people in church does not justify not attending. Nowhere in the New Testament does church attendance presuppose a perfect church. In fact, an honest reading of the New Testament reveals that church attendance presupposes an imperfect church filled with sinners. The churches in the New Testament were attended by liars, adulterers, narcissists , gossips, divisives, cowards, idlers, complainers, false teachers and stubborn rebels, just to name a few. The church always has been and always will be filled with sinful people of all varieties. Being around perfect people, or people just like ourselves is never the purpose of church attendance.

To get around to answering the question, church attendance is important for several reasons. First, regular attendance at church is commanded for every Christian. The simplest place to show this from is in Hebrews 10:25 where believers are instructed to not forsake the assembly. Church attendance is the obligation of every child of God. Second, church is necessary for growth in Christ. The New Testament has no conception of a mature Christian that is not a part of a church. Instead, every Christian in the New Testament is understood to be a part of a church. The stay at home Christian does not exist in the New Testament. Third, church attendance is the only avenue for obedient service to the body of Christ. The New Testament is full of commands instruction Christians how to treat one another. The New Testament is full of commands to serve the local body of Christ. These commands cannot be obeyed apart from the regular gathering with other believers. Last, the church assembly is the gathering of God’s children whom He loves. Those who love God will love God’s children. (1 John 4:20-21) Ignoring, forsaking and avoiding God’s children cannot possibly be defined as love for the brethren. Church attendance will the natural response of all those in Christ who love His children.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

January 23, 2015

Posted under

Uncategorized

What about visits to heaven?

This week the visit to heaven genre of books has gained a lot of attention. Alex Malarkey, the central figure in the story of The Boy who Came Back from Heaven, wrote an open letter to publishers, retailers, marketers and buyers in which he recanted the tale of his journey to heaven and apologized for his part in propagating the book. On the other end of the spectrum is the recent announcement that Don Piper’s book 90 Minutes in Heaven is going to be made into a movie.

Near death experiences are nothing new, nor is it novel to write a book about one’s experience with the afterlife. These kinds of things have been popular in America for decades, and cycles of such experiences and popularization of subsequent tales can be traced back much farther. What is a person supposed to think about these stories? How should one respond to a pastor’s claims to have visited heaven? How should a child’s claims of seeing heaven be evaluated?

The question of whether or not the person experienced something is neither here nor there. A person’s experience, especially experience in the middle of a traumatic situation, does not define truth. The person may have seen something and experienced something. His perceptions do not define reality. Truth is defined and evaluated by the Bible. (For a powerful illustration of this, consider Peter’s comparison of his experience and the reliability of the Bible in 2 Peter 1:16-21.)

The Bible tells of nine people, other than Jesus, who died and were restored to life. Not one of these individuals gives a single detail about what they saw. Not one single word is recorded about what these people experienced after their death. That should tells us a lot about the validity of the modern stories of heavenly visits.

The most significant example of one who went to heaven and returned is the Apostle Paul. Paul is a very informative example because he was the apostle who penned the largest portion of the New Testament. More than any other man, Paul was responsible for the growth of the Christian church. He taught the church things that had not been understood before. By the power of the Holy Spirit Paul led the church into new and uncharted territory. If anyone was to have an experience of heaven and tell the church about it, Paul would be the one we would expect to give a powerful and authoritative account of his experiences. The entirety of what Paul said about his heavenly experience can be read in a few seconds, “How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.” (2 Corinthians 12:4) Out of thirteen books written by Paul, he mentions his visit to heaven only one time. Paul only mentions the event because circumstances forced him to do so. He did not return from heaven and write a book all about it. He did not go on tour proclaiming the glories of what he saw. Paul returned from heaven and the only thing he ever said about it was that he could not say anything about it. The consistent response of those in the Bible who went to heaven looks nothing like the modern day practice.

These visits should be viewed with deep suspicion. The people involved do not respond as those in the Bible did. The details given in the books disagree widely from author to author and disagree significantly with what the Bible tells about heaven. These kinds of books elevate the experiences of individuals to an importance equal, or nearly so, to the truths of the Bible. Instead of relying only on the Word of God for instruction on heavenly things, many people are being turned aside to follow fanciful tales. We would all love to know more about what is and what will be, but speculation and imaginations offer nothing profitable. The Bible is enough and can be trusted to teach everything necessary for reaching heaven and living a life pleasing to God.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

January 21, 2015

Posted under

Uncategorized

What does the Bible say about mediums?

For reasons utterly incomprehensible to me, mediums, fortune tellers and prognosticators continue to be popular forms of entertainment for many people. I imagine most who are fascinated with these individuals do not actually believe the fortune teller can reveal previously unknown truths, unveil the future or talk to dead people. Nor am I so naive as to think all treat such professions as just frivolous fun. Some take fortune tellers very seriously, believing they offer a spiritual insight into things hidden from the rest of mankind. Despite the lighthearted way they are often viewed, mediums are not a laughing matter.
The Bible does speak about those who attempt to talk to the dead, to spirits or to read the future by mystical and magical means. Leviticus 19:31 forbids turning attention to wizards (speakers to the dead) and those who have familiar spirits. Deuteronomy 18:10 forbids using divination (talking to spirits to gain knowledge), magic, wizardry and witchcraft. In the Old Testament these activities are directly associated with idol worship. The Old Testament views the use of mediums and fortune tellers as part of the worship of false gods. One who visits a medium is participating in idolatry.
The New Testament is not silent on this topic. The book of Acts offers several examples of sorcery and divination. In every example such behavior is presented as incompatible with Christianity. Galatians 5 and Revelation 21 both teach that those those who regularly participate in the activities of sorcery, which includes mediums and fortune tellers, have no part in heaven. One who goes to see a fortune telling is practicing behavior that is contrary to Christianity. A further disturbing connection about oracles is found in 1 Corinthians 10:20, “The things which the Gentile sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils.” The offerings to idols were actually offerings to demons. In otherwords, participation in idolatry is participation in devil worship! Since psychics were a part of idolatry, those who participate with them are taking part in demonic activity.
Very few involved with mediums and fortune tellers intend to participate in idolatry and demon worship. The intention may be to jut have a good time, make a few silly phone calls or spend a few bucks to see what a gypsy and crystal ball will say. Despite the flippancy of many participants, the Bible declares they are following demonic paths. The participants in such activities have a part, however unwittingly, in activity of a demonic nature. Spiritualists are a part of a major spiritual battle. Treating this kind of activity as entertainment is like treating the war on terror as a lighthearted family comedy.