wordofgod

Monday, October 21, 2024

6 Things Jesus Teaches Us About the Devil

Disclosure: This post may contain affiliate links, meaning Beautiful Christian Life LLC may get a commission if you decide to make a purchase through its links, at no cost to you.

Do you think you’re seeing a fierce competition during an SEC college football game, a WWE wrestling event, or even the current presidential election?

These are all just sissy stuff when compared to Jesus’ fight against Satan in the wilderness (Matt. 4:1–11). Here are six things Jesus teaches us about the devil in this epic encounter:

1. The devil is real.

The Bible tells us that "Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil" (Matt: 4:1) People should not doubt the existence of Satan. He is indeed real and tried to destroy Jesus in the wilderness to thwart his redemptive work.

2. The devil tries to make us doubt God’s provision.

Jesus had been fasting for forty days and forty nights, and Satan seized upon this opportunity to take advantage of Jesus in his weakened physical state. The devil told him:

“If you are the Son of God, command these stones to become loaves of bread.” (Matt: 4:3)

Notice the first word the devil used: “if.” Satan knew Jesus was the Son of God. The devil hoped his taunts, combined with Jesus’ physical hunger, would cause Jesus to buckle, but that wasn’t going to happen. Jesus had confidence that his Father would provide for all his needs. He came right back at Satan with a Scripture text:

“It is written, 'Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.'" (4:4; see also Deut. 8:3)

Christians also face circumstances in life in which they are weakened and more vulnerable to Satan’s schemes. We must trust God’s word and not allow our doubts, fears, and fleshly desires to lead us into sin. We also need to attend church regularly and be in regular fellowship with the saints so that we may stand strong together against the devil.

3. The devil knows Scripture.

Next, the devil cites Psalm 91:11–12 to entice Jesus to jump off the roof of the temple to test God’s love for his Son (Matt. 4:5–6). Jesus answers Satan right back with Scripture:

“Again it is written, ‘You shall not put the Lord your God to the test.’” (Matt. 4:7; see also Deut. 6:16)

If you think Scripture can’t be twisted for evil purposes, you need look no further than this passage to realize this is one of the major ways Satan attacks Christians. Just as the devil twists God’s command to Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden (Gen. 3:1–5), he repeats the same drill with Jesus in the wilderness. Christians must be equipped with God’s Word like Jesus was so they can stand strong against the devil. Yet, knowing Scripture is not enough; Christians also need to know how to interpret Bible verses in their proper context to employ them effectively against all the devil’s schemes.

4. The devil has great power.

After the devil’s first two failed attempts to get Jesus to obey him rather than God, Satan tempts Jesus to choose worldly power over obedience to his Father.

Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory. And he said to him, “All these I will give you, if you will fall down and worship me.” (Matt. 4:8–9)

Satan shows his great power by first taking Jesus to the pinnacle of the temple and then to a mountaintop. If Satan can do such things, we should never underestimate his power here on earth. Furthermore, we should not be surprised by the evil we see all around us. Still, the devil can only do what God allows him to do (Job 1:12).

5. Jesus has authority over the devil.

We can be confident in the midst of any trial that God is in control and has ultimate power over Satan in all things.

Then Jesus said to him, “Be gone, Satan! For it is written, 'You shall worship the Lord your God and him only shall you serve.'" (Matt. 4:10; see also Deut. 6:13)

Jesus had to pass the test that Adam failed in the garden of Eden (Gen 2:16–17; 3:1–6). He refused to believe the devil’s lies and instead obeyed his Father in all things. Jesus was tempted but did not sin (Heb. 4:15). Satan has power, but Jesus has ultimate power over all creation. When Jesus said, “Be gone, Satan!” the devil had to obey him (Matt. 4:11).

6. The devil is doomed.

Although it may have appeared that the devil triumphed over God at the cross, it was actually the other way around. In that greatest act of evil ever perpetrated against God and man, Jesus conquered sin, death, and the devil with the greatest victory of all time, winning salvation for all who trust in him.

Satan hates God, and he hates you and me. If the devil tried repeatedly to destroy God’s Son, we can be certain he seeks our demise as well. He tries to frighten and tempt Christians and make them think the world can satisfy their needs, when only God can.

If you are in Christ, the devil can never rob you of your right standing before God. He can cause believers to experience great struggles in this life, but only as God allows in his perfect will. Just as the angels rushed in to care for Jesus after he defeated the devil in the wilderness (Matt. 4:11), God cares for his children in ways we cannot always see, but are still real and present all around us (Prov. 5:21; 1 Pet. 5:7).

The devil’s time is short, and his doom is sure. In this time before Jesus’ return, God is patient, "not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance" (1 Pet. 3:9). Take comfort, because Jesus Christ—your captain, your champion, your advocate, your hero—shall never waver in his love for you. He “will sustain you to the end, guiltless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Cor. 1:8).

This article was originally published at corechristianity.com and has been updated since it was first featured at Beautiful Christian Life on September 10, 2018.

Sunday, October 20, 2024

Even Atheists Have Faith

Disclosure: This post contains affiliate links, meaning Beautiful Christian Life LLC may get a commission if you decide to make a purchase through its links, at no cost to you.

Many atheists and skeptics pit faith and reason against each other as if a person who has faith does not use his reason and a person who uses his reason will not need faith. When the New Atheists were all the rage, they made a cottage industry out of pitting the two against each other.

Richard Dawkins, this generation’s most famous atheist, repeatedly made such assertions. Faith, he asserts, is “blind trust, in the absence of evidence, even in the teeth of evidence” (The Selfish Gene, p. 212). Elsewhere he writes, “[F]aith is an evil precisely because it requires no justification and brooks no argument” (The God Delusion, p. 308). In an article in The Humanist, he states, “Faith, being belief that isn’t based on evidence, is the principal vice of any religion” (“Is Science a Religion?”). In a 1992 speech, he said, “Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to evade the need to think and evaluate evidence” (From a speech at the Edinburgh International Science Festival, April 15, 1992). Finally, “[Faith] is a state of mind that leads people to believe something—it doesn't matter what—in the total absence of supporting evidence. If there were good supporting evidence, then faith would be superfluous, for the evidence would compel us to believe it anyway” (The Selfish Gene, p. 330).

Dawkins is not alone. Sam Harris, another of the New Atheists, put it this way, “It is time that we admitted that faith is nothing more than the license religious people give one another to keep believing when reasons fail” (Letter to a Christian Nation, p. 67). The late Christopher Hitchens, who among the New Atheists at least had the advantage of knowing how to write well, added his two cents, saying: “Faith is the surrender of the mind, it’s the surrender of reason, it’s the surrender of the only thing that makes us different from other animals. It’s our need to believe and to surrender our skepticism and our reason, our yearning to discard that and put all our trust or faith in someone or something, that is the sinister thing to me…. Out of all the virtues, all the supposed virtues, faith must be the most overrated” (comments made on Penn and Teller television show).

Note that faith is contrasted with evidence, with reason, with the mind. The implication is clear. If you have a brain and know how to use it, you won’t surrender it to faith. All of this is rhetorically powerful, and it appeals to people who want to be considered rational and intelligent. No one wants to be thought a fool, or worse, to be a fool. So, is our only choice the choice between being reasonable and having faith?

No. There is another option, namely, not allowing others to define these terms for us.

If you look at the history of the church, especially during the medieval and Reformation era, you will notice that they speak of faith and reason in a way that is strikingly different from the way our contemporary neighbors speak of these concepts. Reason could be used to speak of a number of things. It could be used to refer to something that humans use: arguments, axioms, laws of logic, etc. It could also be used to refer to something that humans have: their rational faculty that enables them to use the laws of logic. It was thus used to distinguish between kinds of creatures. Angels and men are rational creatures. Trees and tortoises are not.

“Because faith involves assent, it requires the use of reason. A non-rational creature cannot have faith because it cannot give rational assent to testimony.”

These earlier Christian authors argued that rational human beings can have knowledge of things in different ways. I can know that the law of non-contradiction is true, for example, simply by virtue of knowing the meaning of the terms involved. It cannot not be true. One would have to assume it in any attempt to disprove it. It is a self-evident truth. Similarly, I can know that “2+2=4” simply by virtue of knowing the meaning of “2,” “4,” “+,” and “=”.

I can know other things by means of direct experience. I can know that my dog is in my house because I can see him there with my own two eyes. I can know other things by demonstration. I can know that Socrates is mortal if I know that all men are mortal and also know that Socrates is a man. My mind, then, can assent to the truth of a proposition because it is self-evident in itself, because of my own direct experience of it, or because it has been demonstrated to me.

But what about faith? Traditionally, understood, faith had to do with assent based upon testimony. I can use my rational faculties to assent to the truth of a proposition based upon my evaluation of someone else’s testimony to the truthfulness of that proposition. That is how earlier generations of Christians used the word “faith” or “belief.” Given this understanding of the word, is faith opposed to reason or to evidence? Certainly not. In fact, because faith involves assent, it requires the use of reason. A non-rational creature cannot have faith because it cannot give rational assent to testimony. Furthermore, evidence is involved because we have reasons for either accepting or rejecting the testimony of another.

“If we have good reasons for accepting the testimony of someone, it is perfectly rational to believe what he or she says or writes.”

Everybody, including atheists, has faith because everybody, including atheists, assents to the truth of many things based solely on testimony from others. We know the time and place of our birth because we assent to the testimony of our parents and/or the person(s) who filled out our birth certificate. We know what we know about historical people and events because we assent to the testimony of the historians who write the history books. We know what we know about parts of the world we haven’t directly experienced because we assent to the testimony of those who have lived in or visited those places. We know most of what we know about science because we assent to the testimony of the scientists who write the science textbooks. There’s not a scientist alive who has personally carried out and personally verified every scientific experiment ever done to confirm every theory and law that he knows is true. They and we know these things because we believe the testimony of the science textbooks we read or the science professors who told us these things.

If we have good reasons for accepting the testimony of someone, it is perfectly rational to believe what he or she says or writes. Dawkins and other atheists know a lot of things based on the testimony of others. In this, they are no different from any other human beings. They have faith too. There is no conflict between faith and reason. There is conflict about whether we have good reasons for accepting the testimony of the Prophets and Apostles.

This article was originally featured at Beautiful Christian Life on October 6, 2020. To read more content by Dr. Mathison, please visit keithmathison.org where this article was originally published.

Friday, October 18, 2024

Secret Sin Is Never a Secret

Disclosure: This post may contain affiliate links, meaning Beautiful Christian Life LLC may get a commission if you decide to make a purchase through its links, at no cost to you.

“Who can understand his errors? Cleanse me from secret faults. Keep back your servant also from presumptuous sins; let them not have dominion over me: Then shall I be upright, and I shall be innocent from the great transgression.” (Psalm 19:13-14)

There is nothing secret about secret sin when it comes to the all-seeing eyes of the Lord. The Scriptures are full of warnings against committing secret sin, thinking that private actions are not that serious or that they hurt no one else. One of the most distressing accounts in the Bible is the sin of Achan. In his heart he coveted and stole a beautiful Babylonian garment that God had forbidden him to take. The account is scary. No one knew about it, and Achan assumed he was getting away with what seemed to be a private matter as he buried Jericho’s plunder in the earth.

Achan’s secret sin made all of Israel liable to God’s judgment.

But God’s omniscient eyes saw everything and he would not advance Israel forward in the conquest of Canaan until the sin was dealt with. Yes, in a painful exposure, God held all of Israel accountable for the sin of Achan as he pulled the secret sins of his heart out for everyone to see and then exercised a righteous judgment. We shouldn’t miss this point, Achan’s secret sin made all of Israel liable to God’s judgment. Does anyone still think our private sin causes no one else harm, as we hear today?

The story of Achan is meant to trouble us, for who doesn’t have secret sin in their lives? It is meant for the reader to ask who can stand before the omniscient eyes of the Lord. Who has not coveted in his heart? Who refuses to forgive, from the heart? Who has not made a covenant with their eyes to look upon no worthless thing? Who is among us who has clean hands and a pure heart?

When God’s says, “Be sure your sin will find you out,” he is telling us that he will not allow his children to continue in willful, blatant, secret sin. And when Jesus condemned the hypocrisy of the Pharisees, he expressed that though their outward actions might receive the praise of people, “God knows their hearts.” This is a great problem for everyone.

The problem with secret sin is its sheer power over our lives.

The effect of Achan’s exposure must have caused great fear for Israel that day. Does God really see everything that is happening in the human heart? And will God hold such secret sin accountable? And why is Achan’s sin singled out and not mine? The effect of the exposure should have made all Israel take seriously how much God hates the sin of the human heart, even of our inmost fallen desires, and cry to the Lord for mercy. It was a lesson to Israel: sin must be atoned for, even those dark sins of the human heart that no one ever sees. There is not a single sin when it comes to the holiness of God that, done in isolation, doesn’t hurt others. Most importantly, all sin originating from the human heart is an affront to God’s holy and righteous character.

The problem with secret sin is its sheer power over our lives. Maybe the reader feels hopeless to overcome what has been a longtime captivity to a particular sin. Are you struggling with secret sin, dear reader? What shall one do with feels discouraged and disgusted with the seeming lack of help over the desires of the human heart?

Like David, we need to humbly cry out to God to forgive and cleanse us from all secret sin.

But David offers us remarkable hope even for the problem of secret sin in our lives. David recognized that behind his actual sins of adultery and subsequent murder was a terrible problem that began internally. He lusted and desired something that God had not given him. But what was he to do before the holy, all seeing face of God? The law made no provision for his forgiveness in these sins, his outward sins earned him the judgment of stoning, like Achan. But the beauty of David’s words in Psalm 19 come with a plea to all of us to ask God to forgive and cleanse us from all secret sin.

We must begin where David did:

Lord, I have been completely ignorant to the prevalence of sin in my heart. I lack to ability to see my secret faults, and like Israel before the sin of Achan, I have not taken seriously your holiness or considered how my secret sin has hurt others. Would you please forgive all of my hidden faults. And would you provide me the strength that would restrain such willful sins in me. Yes, Lord, with regard to the sin of my heart, I am completely cast upon your mercies for grace, mercy, and strength, that these sins would not rule over me. Keep me from all hypocrisy that I would lead a blameless life, for all secret sins deny your righteousness. Cover my shame and bring me not into judgment for which I am worthy. Cover me and forgive me with the blood of Christ.

The Lord will give grace and help in time of need—this is his promise to his children.

This is the kind of humility and cry that the Lord promises to answer. He will give grace and help in time of need—this is his promise. And the best of news will follow: The Lord promises that he will cover our shame and take away our judgment. He has published sweet words of gospel to his children, that instead of requiring the shame and judgment that we deserve, the Lord will supply a great provision for us.

Though we are no better than Achan and deserve the same treatment, he made someone else to become sin for us that we might become the righteousness of God in him (2 Cor. 5:21).” Yes, the Lord Jesus Christ promises to cleanse us of all sin, even the secret sins of our hearts. This is the truth that certainly changes lives.

This article is adapted from “Your Secret Sin Is Never a Secret” at Abounding Grace Radio.

Wednesday, October 16, 2024

2 Ways Jesus Cares for Us with His Gentleness

Disclosure: This post may contain affiliate links, meaning Beautiful Christian Life LLC may get a commission if you decide to make a purchase through its links, at no cost to you.

Have you ever considered the gentleness of Jesus? Isaiah prophesied about this very thing:

“Behold my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen, in whom my soul delights; I have put my Spirit upon him; he will bring forth justice to the nations. He will not cry aloud or lift up his voice, or make it heard in the street; a bruised reed he will not break, and a faintly burning wick he will not quench; he will faithfully bring forth justice.” (Isa. 42:1-3)

Jesus knows we are fragile reeds.

You’ll notice that this passage touches upon two things: first, our fragility and second, our Savior’s gentleness. Indeed, we are the “bruised reed” mentioned in these verses. We are bruised by sin, which weakens all our faculties. We are just like that tall, limp blade of grass blowing to and fro in the wind. Scripture often compares our plight to that of a flower that is thriving one moment and dead the next.

Elsewhere, Scripture describes our weak condition by saying we are “dust” (Ps. 103:14). In that same verse, however, the psalmist also tells us that God knows we are weak and frail and fragile; therefore, he is kind and gentle with us. Isaiah is saying the same thing—for though we are a bruised reed, Jesus will not break us. He will not crush us. He will not stomp us out. He is gentle. Here are two ways Jesus cares for us with his gentleness:

1. Jesus bears our weaknesses for us.

How does Jesus show this gentleness to us? By being broken for us. By being crushed in our place. We are so delicate that we could never hope to take the harsh blow that God’s justice requires, so Jesus took it for us. Because of this, he is well aware of our sinful condition and how needy we are. Thus, he sweetly invites us, saying, “Come to me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest” (Matt. 11:28). He will never give us more than we can bear. He always takes our frailty into account when apportioning to us our lot.

Think upon the great and good gentleness of your Savior today, friends. As you feel overburdened, remember that Jesus has already taken the heaviest burden off you—your sin.

2. Jesus is restoring us.

And now that he has done this, he continually—day by day—is sanctifying you and strengthening you by his grace. He is healing your bruised condition. He is making you fit for heaven. This is the other wonderful thing about this passage, something implicit that we might not pick up at first glance: even more than not breaking us, Jesus is restoring us. Hear the words of the seventeenth-early eighteenth-century minister Matthew Henry (1662-1714):

He will not break the bruised reed, but will strengthen it, that it may become a cedar in the courts of our God. He will not quench the faintly burning wick, but blow it up into a flame.

This article was originally published at Beautiful Christian Life on March 10, 2021.

Tuesday, October 15, 2024

Is It Reasonable to Trust the Gospel Narratives?

ESV® Bible (The Holy Bible, English Standard Version®) copyright © 2001 by Crossway Bibles, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers. ESV Text Edition: 2007.

Disclosure: This post may contain affiliate links, meaning Beautiful Christian Life LLC may get a commission if you decide to make a purchase through its links, at no cost to you.

The existence of God was never a grave issue for me. It was taken for granted in our house but he was an unknown God. I knew neither his Word nor his saving ways. I knew him from general, natural revelation. I knew, in my conscience, the natural law. I knew that murder and stealing were wrong. No one had to tell me these things. I knew that I was going to give an account to God but, like most pagans, I hoped that my good deeds, as I thought of them, would outweigh the bad I had done. As I came to faith, as I came to begin to see the greatness of my sin and misery, how I had been redeemed from all my sins and misery, and how I ought to be thankful to God for such redemption (Heidelberg Catechism 2), I came to see not only that I had not reasoned my way to faith (the blindness of sin prevents that) but also that there are reasons for faith.

The textual history of the Scriptures is quite impressive as compared to other ancient texts.

Before my conversion, one of the principal objections, prejudices really, that I assumed against the Christian faith was the reliability of the Scriptures. Like everyone else who assumed the Modern, Enlightenment-fueled narrative, I assumed that pre-modern texts were unenlightened and unreliable. It seemed to me that the entire faith hinged on the gospels and the resurrection. Paul himself said so:

Now if Christ is proclaimed as raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain. We are even found to be misrepresenting God, because we testified about God that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise if it is true that the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. If in Christ we have hope in this life only, we are of all people most to be pitied. (1 Cor. 15:12-19)

Either Christ has been raised or he has not. Either the gospel narratives are true or they are not. Is it reasonable to trust the gospel narratives? Yes. It is true that the Scriptures are quite ancient. Years after my conversion I came to learn that the textual history of the Scriptures is quite impressive as compared to other ancient texts.

The Hebrew (and Aramaic) Scriptures were well preserved in fair copies. There are text-critical issues in the Old Testament, but they do not materially affect the reliability of the historical narratives. The modern criticism of the Old Testament rests mainly on assumptions about how the world must work, i.e., that the supernatural events recorded in the Scriptures could not have happened as recorded. Could is a funny word. Who says? That the world is such (i.e., closed), that God could not have spoken from nothing into nothing to make all that exists, is an a priori. That is essentially a religious conviction, not science. The theory that the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Old Testament) must have had multiple authors also rests on assumptions. That the prophets could not have been written when they were supposed to have been written is another a priori assumption. The traditional Christian explanation for these matters accounts for the particulars more satisfactorily than the critical account, which seems to be more anxious to satisfy the skepticism of Moderns than it does about finding the truth.

Either the gospel narratives are true or they are not.

The question of the Christian faith turns on the gospels. We have four canonical gospels. Until the Modern period, the testimony of the early church had lead the church to think that the gospels were quite early. The Modern consensus has tended, however, to start with Mark and to orbit the gospels, as it were, chronologically, around AD 70. The traditional account, however, leads us to think that Matthew was rather earlier than AD 70 and that Mark was written under Claudius in the early 40s.

We know from the work of Ned Stonehouse and others that each of the gospel writers has a theological agenda and that John is the most overtly theological and least concerned about historical chronology. The synoptics (Matthew, Mark, Luke) may have had a common source (the so-called Q) or perhaps not. Luke presents himself as being particularly concerned about historical accuracy and so I have always found him to be. His Greek is elegant, even elevated (as compared to John’s). Luke was a scholar. Whenever his work has been criticized as inaccurate Luke has always been vindicated. I believe all the gospels, but Luke was a skilled historical-theologian. He gets the details right.

The difference of quality between the Gnostic gospels and the canonical gospels is plain to any sensible person.

Consider the neo-Gnostic argument that the Scriptures. It is alleged that the canonical gospels were arbitrarily selected out of a huge number of competing gospels. This simply is not true, and Charles Hill has documented that it is not true. See the resources below. The earliest evidence we have is that the Gnostic imitations of the canonical gospels, acts, epistles, and apocalypse are later and derivative. The earliest witnesses tell us that the canonical gospels are the earliest and most accurate witnesses to the life of Christ. The difference of quality between the Gnostic gospels and the canonical gospels is plain to any sensible person. The Gnostic Gospel of Thomas, in which the neo-Gnostics put so much store, has Jesus going about in the second century. That is just silly and reveals that the gospel of Thomas is bogus.

The same is true of the so-called Gospel of Judas, about which the critics also made such a fuss. It too is a second-century Gnostic re-telling of the story, this time with Judas as the hero. Like most of the other Gnostic texts, it focuses on the gaps in the canonical gospels. It seeks to turn the canonical story on its head. It is obviously a late, Gnostic rebuttal to the canonical gospels. There is a reason we are not hearing much about the alleged bombshell anymore: it was a dud. This has been my experience with Scripture generally. The critics come at it, on the basis of unstated assumptions about how the world works and about what is possible and attack its reliability. Yet, Scripture always survives the attacks. This is particularly true of the gospels.

The gospels are more reliable than most other ancient texts.

Over the years the question I have asked myself is this: is it reasonable to stake so much on the gospels? As I keep translating and reading the gospels, the answer is yes. They hold up to scrutiny. They are more reliable than most other ancient texts. They have a better textual witness than comparable ancient texts. We have an amazing wealth of textual witnesses to the canonical gospels. Where other ancient texts might have only a handful of fair copies, the textual witness to the canonical gospels is very rich indeed. The textual variants affect no doctrinal teaching and raise no serious question about the reliability of the canonical gospels.

My day job requires me to read texts critically, even those texts with which I am personally sympathetic. The Gnostic gospels require me to suspend my critical faculties, to accept absurdities. That is not true with the canonical gospels. It is not as though there are no issues with the canonical gospels. The Gospel of John arranges some events differently, with a different attitude toward chronology than do the synoptics. All the gospels are theological, but John is especially theological in his orientation. Even so, each of the gospels is remarkably sober and careful in its handling of the story.

There is no comparison between the Gnostic gospels and the canonical gospels when it comes to the intrinsic qualities of the narrative. Where the Gnostic gospels are bent on making Judas or Satan into the hero, the canonical gospels do not spare the apostles from criticism. They do not speculate. When I read the Martyrdom of Polycarp, I must distinguish the fairly sober elements of the narrative from those aspects that are embellishments added in a sometimes desperate attempt to make Polycarp into a Christ-figure. The redactors did not trust their story. The canonical gospels, however, do not embellish. They trust their subject and story to carry the day and to persuade the reader.

The gospels and Paul appeal boldly to contemporary eye-witness testimony.

There are a few extra-canonical witnesses to the existence of Jesus, but the demand that we find something outside the witness of the canonical Scriptures assumes what it has to prove, that the canonical scriptures are themselves unreliable. We should be very glad to have a similar wealth of carefully written accounts of other ancient figures about whose existence there is little doubt. From the canonical gospels and from the extra-canonical logia (sayings attributed to Jesus outside of the canon) and from the testimony of the early church, we know far more Jesus than we do about other figures. We know something of his interior life, what he did, what he said, where he was, how he died (and why) and that he was raised on the third day. The gospels and Paul appeal boldly to contemporary eye-witness testimony. Were the risen Jesus a fiction or sham, that would be a risky tactic. They did so because it was true. Everything they recorded—and more—happened, and it happened so they said it did.

Read the gospels slowly and carefully for yourself. Do they strike you as fantastic, as straining credulity, as hyperbolic? The gospel writers did not ask us to believe things that they had not described with striking honesty. They did not have to shade the story or to make the disciples heroic because the story was true. The realism is deeply impressive.

We were not present at the resurrection of Jesus so we must rely on someone else’s record.

Is it reasonable to believe that Jesus of Nazareth was, that he went about teaching, healing, and sometimes even raising the dead? Is it credible to think that at the death of Jesus tombs broken open and people who were dead came forth? (Matt 27:52) and that he himself was raised from the dead? Those are extraordinary claims and easily falsified. In the hands of less credible authors, the opening of the tombs would have been front and center. It is the sort of thing that grabs attention and sells books, but Matthew was not about clicks and sales. He includes this extraordinary part of the story almost in passing. It is true that the Enlightenment movements declared that such things were not possible, but that is an a priori. The Enlightenment philosophers thought a great lot of things we know not to be true.

I was not present at the resurrection of Jesus so I must rely on someone else’s record. Of course, we do this all the time. So we look for credible accounts of the present and the past. One of the reasons I am a Christian is because the gospels read like real, careful history because they themselves are credible.

This article by historical theologian R. Scott Clark is adapted from “Why I am a Christian” at heidelblog.net and was originally featured at Beautiful Christian Life on March 15, 2021. Click here to read the entire post, which addresses common objections to the Christian faith.

Monday, October 14, 2024

3 Wrong Reasons to Leave Your Local Church — and 5 Right Reasons to Stay

Disclosure: This post may contain affiliate links, meaning Beautiful Christian Life LLC may get a commission if you decide to make a purchase through its links, at no cost to you.

In recent years I have noticed the growing trend of people who leave their local church without any reflection as to whether their departure is a sinful one. To be sure, there are legitimate reasons to leave a local church. That’s what makes this article difficult to write; it’s not an easy task to get to the motivations of why people do what they do.

As a pastor, I have always believed that people should never feel forced to stay in a church where they are struggling. Departures may come for a variety of different reasons. Church leadership has to guard itself from cult-like behavior in seeking to put straight jackets on their members. I cannot imagine a more oppressing church environment than one that makes its members feel forced to stay in membership because the threat of discipline hangs over their head for departure. This creates a bunch of joyless servants in Christ’s kingdom and has a deadening effect on the whole congregation.

It does happen that even though people leave their local church for foolish reasons, they may flourish well elsewhere.

A wise elder once compared a disgruntled churchgoer to a plant that did not grow in his kitchen window. He cared for that plant, watered that plant, faithfully tended to the plant, but it always looked tattered and wilted. One day the next-door neighbor offered to take the plant with the hope that it would do well, and the man, rather reluctantly, offered the plant to the neighbor. After a short time the neighbor celebrated how well the plant was doing—it was vibrant, green, and producing new leaves. I’ve had to submit to this truth of Christian ministry more than a few times, humbling my own pride and recognizing that sometimes, though people leave for foolish reasons, they may flourish well elsewhere. That’s ultimately what we want for the sheep anyway.

Such a reality, however, does not excuse sinful departures from a local church. Pastors know all too well that when people come into their church sinfully running from their former church, it’s just a matter of time before the same problems resurface. The heart of the matter has not been dealt with. Further, it may be that a former church has neglected disciplining a member for unrepentant sin. As that member jumps to another local church—often unreconciled and bitter—and as this member celebrates the new church as the next best thing since sliced bread, the new church will soon realize how damaging the former church’s neglect is upon their own congregation. But that’s for another article.

In my experience, rarely does anyone sit down with their pastor and express their concerns when they want to leave.

With these things in mind, it’s important to think through what unbiblical departure from the local church looks like. Why do people leave the local church today? It would be one thing if a church is failing to preach the Word of God, is compromised on some point of doctrine, worship, or an article of the Christian faith, or there is some significant spiritual abuse by the leadership that is not properly being dealt with. These are legitimate reasons to speak with church leadership and depart the local church to a more faithful church in an honorable, Christ-like manner. But, sadly, doctrinal conviction and spiritual integrity in the truth are not at the top of the list when it comes to church departures in our day.

In my experience, rarely does anyone sit down with their pastor and express their concerns when they want to leave. The days are gone of honorable departures and the leadership is often left with reports from other church members, often family members, that so and so is gone, was unhappy in some general way with the church, and is now attending the church down the street. This has become so common place that we rarely ask any more if such a rogue departure from the local church offends God.

3 Areas of Sinful Departure

Having served as a pastor for almost twenty years, I would categorize three areas of ungodly departure from the local church.

First, family commitments are placed over spiritual commitments to the kingdom of God. Jesus warned about this problem frequently in his earthly ministry. For instance, if the husband and wife are not on the same page spiritually, or are divided themselves over the ministry of the local church, a culture of dissatisfaction and complaining can easily be fostered in the home. Once this critical spirit infiltrates the children’s hearts, the children may end up having little value for the church or the faith altogether. This all hits a breaking point in the teenage years and beyond, especially if the children walk away from the church or attend another church.

Family conflict, strife, and division in the home produce one of the greatest reasons for ungodly church departure. While there may be legitimate reasons for a family to find another church, often, in these scenarios, the church is blamed for failing to minister to the family’s needs and unbiblical departure follows. Family is put first over the kingdom of God.

A second reason has to do with stylistic preference. Many people base their church attendance on questions of music quality, formality, programs, and a rated quality of friendliness among the people. They have approached the church as consumers and forget that the purpose of Christian ministry is reconciliation with God—a place of ministering the righteousness of Christ to the weary. People are willing to sacrifice what is most needful for their spiritual life and depart a faithful church due to stylistic preferences, easily accepting false forms of worship.

A third reason for sinful departure has to do with conflict due to sin in one’s personal life, or with another believer in the church, or with the church itself. Unresolved conflict that results in a lack of forgiveness or bitterness in the heart are common recipes for sinful departure from a church. There is no shortage of scenarios that produce this conflict, but the inability to forgive and sacrificially love hinders one’s ability to receive the means of grace. Sinful departures are common when conflicts remains unresolved, although the true reasoning is rarely made known. Departures like this often come with superficial charges and petty reasoning. The heart of the matter is never really made known and the leadership is left in the dark as to the true reason for the departure.

5 Reasons to Stay in Your Local Church

With these things in mind, here are five reasons to encourage churchgoers to be faithful members in their local church:

1. Your church faithfully ministers the Word of God and the gospel to you and your family. The leadership is properly overseeing the ministry and cares to see you reconciled with God and comforted in the glorious salvation of Jesus Christ. Further, the leadership demonstrates sincere love for the sheep—they visit the needy and care for the spiritual life of the congregation. If the ministry of the Word and sacrament and the shepherding care of the congregation is the priority of your church, you have found a rare gem in this present age.

2. Your church cares to see you grow in holiness and is willing to discipline you if you fall into sin. In Protestant churches, discipline has always been the third mark of a true a faithful church. A church that loves you will care for your spiritual well-being by demonstrating shepherding care through the oversight of your soul.

3. God calls you to be sincere in your love for the body of Christ. It’s been commonly said that we don’t choose the people who sit next to us in the pew, but God does. Love requires, in response to the gospel, that we invest in the lives of those who are often most difficult and unattractive to us. It’s one of the saddest things to witness someone throw away their entire local church family for selfish reasons. Is our love sincere and absent of hypocrisy? This is an important question when it comes to church membership.

4. God calls you to be a servant. This means that the sacrificial love that imitates Christ calls me to forgive one another and become servants in the local church where God has placed us. This call alone helps us to check our motivations for involvement in the local church. Are we sacrificially loving our neighbors as Christ has in giving his life for us?

5. God calls you to be his witnesses, especially in the body of Christ. As the body of Christ is full of struggling sinners, each one of us called to encourage one another, and speak of what the Lord has done for us. The ministry is not just about you, it’s also about your neighbor. God chooses to show his love for our neighbor through the very testimonies of his grace in our lives.

Sunday, October 13, 2024

4 Important Things to Remember If You Are a Doubting Believer

Disclosure: This post may contain affiliate links, meaning Beautiful Christian Life LLC may get a commission if you decide to make a purchase through its links, at no cost to you.

Fifteen to twenty years ago, prominent figures in the missional movement began saying things like, “Our churches have to be safe places for doubters,” or “You should feel like you can come to our church with all of your doubts.” I always felt somewhat uncomfortable whenever I heard these statements—not because I think that our churches shouldn’t be safe place for people to express doubts, but because it seemed as if many were confusing the idea of doubt with the idea of unbelieving skepticism.

It is important to recognize that Scripture does not identity doubt with unbelieving skepticism. In fact, the most serious believers may have prolonged periods in which they struggle with doubt—a fact that the Gospel writers unfold in the account of John the Baptist’s doubts about the identity of Jesus while in prison.

During his earthly ministry, Jesus made the shocking assertion, “Among those born of women there is not a greater prophet than John the Baptist.” Christ praised John as having been “the burning and shining lamp” (John 5:35)—as one who poured himself out for the spiritual well-being of others. John’s ministry was marked by his selfless motivation to see Jesus exalted: “He must increase; I must decrease” (John 3:30). John likened himself to the friend of the bridegroom, who, upon hearing the voice of Christ, rejoiced that the Bridegroom had come (John 3:29).

John had the unique privilege of standing and pointing to the Redeemer in the flesh and declaring, “Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). John joyfully encouraged his own disciples to leave him in order to follow after Jesus, when Christ began his ministry. John was content to exist for the glory and exaltation of Jesus (John 1:35-37). However, after Herod had locked John up in prison as retribution for rebuking him for his sexual immorality (Luke 3:19-20), John began to have doubts.

Here are four important things to remember if you are a doubting believer.

1. Even John the Baptist began to have doubts.

There are two possible explanations for these doubts. Either John was struggling with the suffering that he was enduring and couldn’t square it with the prophecies of the Messiah that he read about in the Old Testament prophets; or John was doubting the identity of Jesus because he wasn’t fulfilling John’s Old Testament expectation that the Messiah would come bringing salvation and judgment.

John knew the prophet Isaiah had predicted that when Messiah came he would come “to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to those who are bound” (Isa. 61:1) This was, in fact, part of Jesus’ first sermon preached in the synagogue in Nazareth about himself (Luke 4:16-21). But now John was in prison for his testimony to Christ, and Jesus was even then delivering John from his imprisonment.

Believers may begin to doubt Jesus’ identity and God’s promises on account of his or her circumstances in life and inability to square those circumstances with what Scripture teaches. This is often a cause for doubts to arise in the hearts of even the most mature believers. So much of the Christian life is learning to walk through circumstances in which God has placed us when they seem contrary to what God has promised us in his word. We go back to the word to be strengthened in faith, even when we can’t square our circumstances with God’s promises.

2. John remembered God’s promises in Scripture.

John also knew that the Old Testament prophets made clear that “the Day of the Lord” (yom Yahweh) would bring both judgment and salvation. However, now that Jesus had come into the world, there only seemed to be blessing and restoration. John had proclaimed a message and had administered a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. John’s message included the prediction of both salvation and judgment. John had said the following to the religious leaders in Israel:

“I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. His winnowing fan is [emphasis added] in His hand, and He will thoroughly clean out His threshing floor, and gather His wheat into the barn; but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire” (Matt. 3:11-12 NKJV).

Jesus is both the One who came into the world to baptize the hearts of his people with his purifying Spirit and the One who will cast the wicked into hell on the Day of Judgment. However, John was only seeing and hearing about the healing and redeeming grace of Jesus. While in prison, John doubted the identity of Christ, because he was expecting the righteous judgment and indignation of God to accompany the gracious redemption of God. John couldn’t understand that the prophets had spoken about two comings of the Messiah.

When the Old Testament prophets spoke of the salvation and judgment of God that would accompany the Redeemer’s coming, they were speaking about the two appearances of the Messiah. They, of course, saw through a glass darkly. It is not altogether clear whether they understood that they were speaking of a first and second coming of the Christ.

They were like artists painting a picture of several mountain ranges—as if they were close together. When one looks at a picture or a painting of mountains, the ranges often appear to be together in the same spot. However, when one visits the location of the mountain ranges, one quickly realizes that they are separated by many miles. They only appear to be connected. So also with the Old Testament prophets’ predictions about the work of the Redeemer in his first and second coming.

3. Jesus defended John.

Though he had doubts, John wasted no time in seeking to quench them. He sent some of his disciples to Jesus to ask him about his ministry. The example of John teaches us to distinguish between doubt and unbelieving skepticism. John had made the largest and most confident confessions about the identity of Jesus. Then, in a moment of weakness, he sent disciples to Jesus to ask him, “Are you the coming One, or do we look for another?”

Jesus honored John for the way in which he had faithfully prepared the way for his Messianic ministry, by responding to John’s question in three ways: First, Jesus performed more miraculous signs of his Messianic ministry (Luke 7:21); then, he appealed to the Old Testament prophetic witness to his ministry (Luke 7:22); and, finally, he issued a public defense of John and the ministry he carried out as his forerunner (Luke 7:24-35).

Geerhardus Vos explained the significance of Jesus’ defense of John when he wrote:

It is a satisfaction to know that Jesus Himself appreciated and honored His forerunner and gave expression to this feeling on more than one occasion…Even in the hour of weakness, when John’s own faith had begun to waver and he had sent to Jesus his doubting inquiry, our Lord took pains to defend him from the unjust suspicion, as if any selfish motive had inspired the doubt, thus shielding the nobility of his character, because it was precious to Himself and because He could not suffer that others should think meanly of it. There is to us something unspeakably touching in this loyal gratitude to a faithful servant on the part of Him who had Himself come to serve all others. And we may rest assured that, whatever modern judges may say, John has received his reward and experienced the truth of that other saying of our Lord: “If any man serve me, him will the Father honor.[1]

4. “Doubt is not the same as unbelief.”

So what are we to conclude about the place of doubt in the life of believers? Rev. Eric Alexander of the Church of Scotland summarizes the difference between doubt and skeptical unbelief:

Doubt is not the same thing as unbelief. Unbelief is an act of the will that refuses to trust and obey Christ. Doubt is often asking questions or voicing uncertainty; and, it may well be from the standpoint of faith. And doubt which is smothered or ignored can often be the precursor of many problems in Christian experience. Doubt which is confessed and faced and fought through can be a growing thing in someone’s Christian experience. It is not the same thing as unbelief or skepticism…’a healthy understanding of doubt should go hand in hand with a healthy understanding of faith.

Should our churches be safe places for those with doubts? Absolutely. Our churches should be places where men and women—like John the Baptist—recognize their need for the Savior and confess, face, and fight through their doubts in order to grow in their Christian experience. Though we should never attempt to pass doubt off as something virtuous, we should also not fail to see that the Savior loves to show his kindness and restorative grace to doubting believers as they fight through those doubts.

This article is adapted from "The Doubting Believer" at feedingonchrist.org and was originally published at Beautiful Christian Life on July 12, 2018.

Monday, October 21, 2024

1. The devil is real.

2. The devil tries to make us doubt God’s provision.

3. The devil knows Scripture.

4. The devil has great power.

5. Jesus has authority over the devil.

6. The devil is doomed.

Related Articles:

Recommended:

Sunday, October 20, 2024

Related Articles:

Recommended:

Friday, October 18, 2024

Achan’s secret sin made all of Israel liable to God’s judgment.

The problem with secret sin is its sheer power over our lives.

Like David, we need to humbly cry out to God to forgive and cleanse us from all secret sin.

The Lord will give grace and help in time of need—this is his promise to his children.

Related Articles:

Recommended:

Wednesday, October 16, 2024

Jesus knows we are fragile reeds.

1. Jesus bears our weaknesses for us.

2. Jesus is restoring us.

Related Articles:

Recommended:

Tuesday, October 15, 2024

The textual history of the Scriptures is quite impressive as compared to other ancient texts.

Either the gospel narratives are true or they are not.

The difference of quality between the Gnostic gospels and the canonical gospels is plain to any sensible person.

The gospels are more reliable than most other ancient texts.

The gospels and Paul appeal boldly to contemporary eye-witness testimony.

We were not present at the resurrection of Jesus so we must rely on someone else’s record.

Related Articles:

Recommended:

Monday, October 14, 2024

It does happen that even though people leave their local church for foolish reasons, they may flourish well elsewhere.

In my experience, rarely does anyone sit down with their pastor and express their concerns when they want to leave.

3 Areas of Sinful Departure

5 Reasons to Stay in Your Local Church

Related Articles:

Recommended:

Sunday, October 13, 2024

1. Even John the Baptist began to have doubts.

2. John remembered God’s promises in Scripture.

3. Jesus defended John.

4. “Doubt is not the same as unbelief.”

Related Articles:

Recommended: