The Zimmerman Trial and the Church

In the wake of the Zimmerman trial, I am grieving. For me, the main issue isn’t the outcome of the trial but what it reveals about us – the church. We are deeply divided, and our differing opinions are sincere and passionately held. The division is so deep that we find that we cannot even talk about them, but talk we must!

Our unity as brothers and sisters in our Lord must and do transcend our differences. We have to strive for this unity, as Paul insisted:

·        Be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love. Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace. (Ephes. 4:2-4)

How do we “keep [our] unity?” According to Paul, the emphasis must be on the Gospel:

·        It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, to prepare God's people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ. (Ephes. 4:11-13)

However, speaking the Gospel is not merely the work of the professionals:

·        Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will in all things grow up into him who is the Head, that is, Christ. (Ephes. 4:15)

However, our growth and unity are stunted because we are not speaking to one another. We remain with our own kind and have allowed the media to co-opt the conversation.

Please pray with me that our Lord will pour out upon us a zeal for His concerns and that, above all else, we would seek – more than even our own welfare - that He would be glorified in the midst of His church.

Brian McLaren and Skepticism on Steroids

 

Pastor Brian McLaren reflects the skepticism of the Emergent Church. He claims that, among other things, we cannot ever be certain about our interpretation of Scripture:

• How do “I” know the Bible is always right? And if “I” am sophisticated enough to realize that I know nothing of the Bible without my own involvement via interpretation, I’ll also ask how I know which school, method, or technique of biblical interpretation is right. What makes a “good” interpretation good? And if an appeal is made to a written standard (book, doctrinal statement, etc.) or to common sense or to “scholarly principles of interpretation,” the same pesky “I” who liberated us from the authority of the church will ask, “Who sets the standard? Whose common sense? Which scholars and why? Don’t all these appeals to authorities and principles outside the Bible actually undermine the claim of ultimate biblical authority? Aren’t they just the new pope^? 

McLaren inflates the problems of interpretation, claiming that we can’t really interpret with any degree of certainty without first having a proven method of interpretation.

However, a little common sense plus a handful of experience might shed some light on this “problem.” We engage in easy-to-understand conversation all the time, without a proven system of interpretation. When I ask the attendant to pump me $20 of “regular,” he knows exactly what to do. No confusion; no need for a proven method of interpretation! Why should it be any different when interpreting the Bible?

When I read the “50 mph hour” speed limit sign on the highway, I’d like to believe that it means “65 mph.” However, I know what it means. In fact, this interpretation is further corroborated when the highway patrol tickets me for doing “65.” Interpretation doesn’t pose any significant problems.

Likewise, we have numerous ways to corroborate our interpretation of Scripture. Any one verse has many corroborating verses. We call this “Scripture interpreting Scripture.” Of course, some passages can be difficult to understand (2 Peter 3:15), but this doesn’t mean that much of it isn’t quite plain. Besides, we have many aids – pastors, teachers, commentaries, concordances - to help us understand.

Scripture was also written to be understood. Therefore, Paul instructed that his epistles be taken to other churches and read. Never did Paul insist that a Doctor of Theology be present to provide the definitive interpretation.

There was never any indication that any of the Apostles ever suggested that their listeners first required a proven system of interpretation before they could understand their message. Had McLaren instead written that much of Scripture presents us with interpretative difficulties, many of us would agree. However, he is skeptical about all interpretive conclusions. If only he was equally skeptical about his own conclusion!

Today, it has become fashionable to believe that we cannot be sure of anything regarding the biblical faith, perhaps apart from the requirement to love. McLaren rhetorically asks, “How do ‘I’ know the Bible is always right?” suggesting that none of us can know. One noted theologian wrote:

• Any worldview—atheist, Islamic, Jewish, Christian or whatever—ultimately depends on assumptions that cannot be proved. Every house is built on foundations, and the foundations of worldviews are not ultimately capable of being proved in every respect. Everyone who believes anything significant or worthwhile about the meaning of life does so as a matter of faith. We’re all in the same boat.

However, such a stance is logically self-defeating. If it is true that we believe as we do simply based on blind and baseless faith, then this above statement is also a matter of blind faith, and therefore it disqualifies itself.

More importantly, the Bible disqualifies it! Many verses contend that evidence serves as an incontestable basis for faith:

• Then the LORD said to Moses: "How long will these people reject Me? And how long will they not believe Me, with all the signs which I have performed among them (Numbers 14:11)?

• After his suffering, he presented himself to them and gave many convincing proofs that he was alive. He appeared to them over a period of forty days and spoke about the kingdom of God. (Acts 1:3)

God does not tell His people to “just believe.” Instead He has provided many unassailable proofs for our faith. This doesn’t mean that we don’t struggle with doubts and uncertainties. Nor does it mean that these struggles are opposed to the faith and must be suppressed. Nor does it mean that God cannot bring great good out of such struggles. He certainty does!

However, Emergents place too much emphasis on the journey and the search and minimal emphasis on the object or end of the search – certainty and assurance regarding God’s truth claims. Emergents normalize and idealize the journey at the expense of the cognitive rest at the end of the journey.

Faith had been such a struggle for me – someone weak in faith and rich in skepticism. It tormented me that I couldn’t find the peace in believing, which others seemed to have found. I therefore would have welcomed the Emergent message that certainty isn’t possible. It would have given me a sense of peace in knowing that I was okay and not a “Christian” misfit. Fortunately, I found little encouragement that skepticism would be my ultimate “resting place.”

Instead, I learned that joyously living the Christian life is not possible without a high degree of certainty. I needed to know that God loved me with a love that transcended understanding (Eph. 3:16-19) and that He had forgiven and cleansed me from all of my sins. I needed the God-confidence often mentioned in Scripture:

• Therefore, brothers and sisters, since we have confidence to enter the Most Holy Place by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way opened for us through the curtain, that is, his body, and since we have a great priest over the house of God, let us draw near to God with a sincere heart and with the full assurance that faith brings, having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience and having our bodies washed with pure water. (Hebrews 10:19-22) 

We require confidence in order to draw close to our Savior and to know that He has drawn close to us. As long as I doubted His love, I could not feel grateful towards Him. Instead, I felt contempt for Him, not knowing with certainty that He truly loved me.  And whenever I felt condemned by my feelings, I felt that God was also condemning me. I needed to know that He wasn’t condemning me and that my feelings were only that –feelings. And that is the very place where Scripture comforted me:

• Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus (Rom. 8:1)

I therefore can totally embrace Paul’s prayer for the church:

• I pray that you, being rooted and established in love, ¹⁸ may have power, together with all the Lord’s holy people, to grasp how wide and long and high and deep is the love of Christ,  and to know this love that surpasses knowledge—that you may be filled to the measure of all the fullness of God. (Eph. 3:17-19)

Having the knowledge of God and His love for us isn’t an option. Without this knowledge, we will not be “filled to the measure of all the fullness of God.” Without this confidence, we will not be able to persevere:

• So do not throw away your confidence; it will be richly rewarded. You need to persevere so that when you have done the will of God, you will receive what he has promised. (Heb. 10:35-36; Jer. 7:7)

Without confidence in the promises of God, I wasn’t able to persevere. Even having this confidence, I struggle. However, without it, I couldn’t even begin to struggle.

Paul associated rejoicing with knowing:

• We also glory in our sufferings, because we know that suffering produces perseverance. (Rom. 5:3)

Without this knowledge - this confidence - we cannot glory in suffering. We can only glory in the midst of suffering because we are confident that God has a glorious purpose for it (Rom. 8:28). Lacking this confidence, I suffered additionally from obsessive and crippling ruminations.

Also, without confidence in Scripture and the fact that we can reliably interpret it, we will not continue with it. Instead, it’s inevitable that we will embrace another source of authority or meaning and become indistinguishable from the surrounding culture. In McLaren’s latest book, A New Kind of Christianity, he poignantly shows us the consequences of his skepticism towards Scripture:

• I need to say again that nowhere in the Hebrew Scriptures do I find anything as horrible as Theos [God].  Yes, I find a character named God who sends a flood that destroys all humanity except for Noah’s family, but that’s almost trivial compared to a deity who tortures the greater part of humanity forever in infinite eternal conscious torment.

How then can we grow in confidence regarding and God’s promises? I can tell you how our Savior slowly and painfully grew me. However, I think it is better to remind you of a simple principle – we can’t do it on our own! I used to think that I could maintain and unilaterally grow my faith. However, He has shown me that I can’t. Instead, He must do the grunge work in our lives:

• This inheritance is kept in heaven for you, who through faith are shielded by God’s power until the coming of the salvation that is ready to be revealed in the last time. (1 Peter 1:4-5)

• Such confidence we have through Christ before God.  Not that we are competent in ourselves to claim anything for ourselves, but our competence comes from God. (2 Cor. 3:4-5; John 15:4-5)

I wish I could boast that my faith will never fail me, but it does and it will. Consequently, my hope is in God alone to keep and restore me. I praise His holy Name!

The Hyper-Grace Gospel vs. the Need to Confess and Repent

Some pastors are preaching an unbiblical, “hyper-grace” message. Theologian Michael Brown summarizes it this way:

• ·        One of the foundational doctrines of the hyper-grace message is that God does not see the sins of his children, since we have already been made righteous by the blood of Jesus and since all of our sins, past, present and future, have already been forgiven. That means that the Holy Spirit never convicts believers of sin, that believers never need to confess their sins to God, and that believers never need to repent of their sins, since God sees them as perfect in his sight. 

It also means that there is no reason to confront professing believers with their sins. However, this avoidance is not Scriptural. There are many verses that directly call us to judge and to confront sin. Jesus certainly taught this, even regarding the brethren:

·         “If your brother or sister sins, go and point out their fault, just between the two of you. If they listen to you, you have won them over.” (Mat. 1815)

According to Jesus, unrepented sin is so serious that, if not resolved, it should come before the entire church. If not resolved there, the unrepentant one should be put out of the church until he repents.

This hardly needs saying, since there are many verses that require us to correct the brethren (James 5:20; Gal. 6:1-3). Peter confronted his brethren, Ananias and Saphira, regarding their lies. Sin is so serious that God took their lives (Acts 5) as a result. Paul explained that because some brethren had taken the Lord’s Supper in an “unworthy manner,”

·         Many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep [died]. (1 Cor. 11:30)

Sin is a great offense to our Lord. Peter expressed the Lord’s consternation to Simon – the Book of Acts claims that he had believed - after he had merely asked to purchase a spiritual gift from the Lord:

·         Peter answered: “May your money perish with you, because you thought you could buy the gift of God with money! You have no part or share in this ministry, because your heart is not right before God.  Repent of this wickedness and pray to the Lord in the hope that he may forgive you for having such a thought in your heart.  For I see that you are full of bitterness and captive to sin.” (Acts 8:20-23)

Interestingly, instead of telling Peter off, Simon responded positively:

·         Then Simon answered, “Pray to the Lord for me so that nothing you have said may happen to me.” (Acts 8:24)

We tend to regard the sin-focus as something negative, and so it is noteworthy that Simon seemed to respond appropriately.

However, Peter’s response raises a key controversy. For the hyper-grace camp - they claim that since Christ has forgiven us once-and-for-all (Heb. 8:12; 10:14) - sin is no longer an issue. However, according to Peter, it was very much an issue with Simon. Peter directed him to “repent of this wickedness” so that God “may forgive you.” Evidently, sin still is an issue along with forgiveness.

This is not an easy theological issue. For one thing, Scripture often talks about our sin as if it has been utterly resolved. The Book of Hebrews, citing Jeremiah’s revelation about the New Covenant (Jer. 31:31-34), claims that forgiveness is a done-deal, an eternally settled matter:

·         “For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more.” (Heb. 8:12)

·         For by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy…Then he adds: “Their sins and lawless acts I will remember no more.” (Heb. 10:14, 17; Rom. 8:1)

According to these verses and others, the price for our sins has been completely paid on the cross, and therefore, there is no longer a basis for any charges against us (Col. 2:14; Eph. 2:15). How then can we require anything further – confession, repentance or even obedience – from those who have been eternally forgiven!

There are also many other considerations that seem to bolster this hyper-grace message. Along with forgiveness, there are also many other aspects of our salvation that seem to be matters that have been eternally and decisively settled. For one thing, we are already in possession of eternal life:

• “Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life.” (John 5:24; 3:16)

However, this isn’t the entire picture. It also seems that eternal life is granted gradually through a process:

• Fight the good fight of the faith. Take hold of the eternal life to which you were called when you made your good confession in the presence of many witnesses…In this way they will lay up treasure for themselves as a firm foundation for the coming age, so that they may take hold of the life that is truly life. (1 Tim. 6:12, 19) 

This seems like a contradiction. Either we are already in possession of eternal life or we’re not and, consequently, have to work to obtain it. We find this same tension in Scripture’s discussion of  “salvation.” On the one hand, we have already been saved, while other verses indicate that we are being saved:

• Watch your life and doctrine closely. Persevere in them, because if you do, you will save both yourself and your hearers. (1 Tim. 4:16)

Paul seems to be writing to Timothy as if he is not already, thoroughly saved, yet he assures Titus that we already have been saved:

• He saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit. (Titus 3:5)

Is there any way to reconcile these verses? On the one hand, salvation and eternal life are settled matters. They are settled in heaven, even before the creation of the world (2 Tim. 1:9-10). However, from a material perspective, there is work that has to be done by our Lord to prepare us for our inheritance. It is like being an heir to a fortune. The fortune is guaranteed, but certain provisions or steps must be taken before the heir can receive it. Already, we are co-heirs with Christ (Rom. 8:17), but we haven’t yet received all that has been promised.

We observe this same principle at play in other areas. While we have already been redeemed by the blood of Christ (Eph. 1:7), we are still awaiting redemption:

• “We ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption to sonship, the redemption of our bodies.” 

Although we have already been redeemed, we are still awaiting the “redemption of our bodies.” Likewise, although we have already been adopted as sons (Gal. 4:6-7; Rom. 8:16-17), we continue to await the fullness of adoption and all that has been promised in this regards.

How does this “already but not yet” principle pertain to forgiveness? The same way! While we have already been forgiven (Luke 7:47; Col. 1:13; 2:13), forgiveness is also a process and a necessary part of our Christian life.

Throughout our earthly lives, Jesus and His Spirit intercede for us (Rom. 8:26; 8:34; Heb. 7:25; 1 John 2:1). This suggests that even though forgiveness has been utterly accomplished on the cross, it must still be applied to our lives.

Forgiveness is applied, not only through intercession but also through confession of our sins. In order to be forgiven, confession is mandatory:

• If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. (1 John 1:8-9)

How can confession be mandatory, if our sins have already been totally forgiven? Although the issue of forgiveness has been utterly settled from a divine perspective, it still needs to be applied in the material world as a necessary part of the process. We are heirs, but the transfer of our inheritance requires preparation.

We encounter this very same “dilemma” as we contemplate our eternal security in Christ. On the one hand, it is guaranteed (Rom. 8:38-39). On the other hand, we must endure to the end in faith, as many verses indicate (Mat. 10:22; Col. 1:22-23; Heb. 3:14; 6:11-12). Can we be confident that we are going to be saved in the end in light of these conditional verses? Absolutely! How can this be? Our Lord’s work – His process – is guaranteed:

• Being confident of this, that he who began a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus!!! (Phil. 1:6; Rom. 8:28)

Many aspects of our lives are unsettled, but our Lord’s work is not! What He has determined, He will do! What He has promised, He will keep!

This brings us to a final and troubling verse about the need to forgive. If we don’t forgive, we will not be forgiven as our Lord warned:

• “For if you forgive other people when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive others their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins.”

This makes salvation and forgiveness seem very conditional. However, once again, our Lord guarantees the process. He will work in us to convict us, chasten us, and to bring us to forgiveness. As John assures us:

• No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God’s seed remains in them; they cannot go on sinning, because they have been born of God. (1 John 3:9; 3:3; 5:18)

Consequently, we will not continue in unforgiveness. Our Lord will make it absolutely repugnant to us.

The hyper-grace folks understand the heavenly, eternal perspective. However, they have ignored the earthly, material perspective or process. As a result, they ignore Jesus’ warning against the price of unforgiveness. They ignore John’s assertion that God’s children will not continue in the practice of sin and the absolute necessity to confess our sins to receive forgiveness and cleansing. Consequently, the hyper-grace people preach a highly defective message.

Thinking Rightly about God

What we think and believe are so central to our lives, affecting the way we feel, act, and how we relate to others. More than anything else, our beliefs about God are determinative. Just consider the words of God through the Prophet Jeremiah:

·         This is what the Lord says: “Let not the wise boast of their wisdom or the strong boast of their strength or the rich boast of their riches, but let the one who boasts boast about this: that they have the understanding to know me, that I am the Lord, who exercises kindness, justice and righteousness on earth, for in these I delight,” declares the Lord. (Jer. 9:23-24).

For instance, if we do not know that God is kind to us, we might believe that every misfortune is for the delight of a sadistic god. Such a belief will transform our entire life and the way we treat others. If God is sadistic, then there is no reason why we shouldn’t be sadistic!

It is important to understand our hardships from the point view of a God who loves us so that He is working every painful circumstance for good (Rom. 8:28) to make us more like Jesus (2 Cor. 4:10-11).

Instead, we have a perverse tendency to think that God is trying to make us sin through the hardships. The Book of James tries to correct this tragic thinking:

·         When tempted, no one should say, “God is tempting me.” For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone; but each person is tempted when they are dragged away by their own evil desire and enticed. Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death. (James 1:13-15)

For God to coerce us to sin is “evil,” according to James. He insists that God is above such a thing. There is no evil in Him! Yes, God brings hardships and hardships heighten temptations. However, God’s purposes aren’t evil, and He does not coerce us to sin. Instead, His purposes are loving and righteous. He wants us to see our sin and to humble us in the process.

God certainly allowed me to get stuck in the traffic-jam, and this tempted me to get angry. God even knew that I’d get angry and sin. However, he meant this for good to humble me and to make me more like Jesus. Nevertheless, despite God’s intentions and knowledge that I would sin, it was still I who sinned!

Moses had explained to Israel how this humbling process was necessary:

·         Remember how the Lord your God led you all the way in the wilderness these forty years, to humble and test you in order [for you] to know what was in your heart, whether or not you would keep his commands.  He humbled you, causing you to hunger and then feeding you with manna, which neither you nor your ancestors had known, to teach you that man does not live on bread alone but on every word that comes from the mouth of the Lord. (Deut. 8:2-3)

God had humbled Israel for their own good so that they’d cling to His every word! However, He didn’t cause them to sin. Instead, Israel had to take responsibility their sins, confess them, to repent and return to their God. God intended that Israel would be so humbled that they would no longer trust in themselves and their own judgment but instead trust in God’s Word! There could be no humbling if Israel had been convinced that it was God who caused them to sin and rebel. Instead, this belief would just cause bitterness! I too am humbled by my failures, not by a failure imposed upon me!

Likewise, James counsels us to take full responsibility for our sins rather than to say, “God made me do it.” We do this in many ways. We might say, “The devil made me do it” or “The Fall deprived me of my freewill and moral responsibility. Therefore, I am not guilty.” Others justify themselves by claiming, “God made me this way. So it must be okay!” Others stake their defense on nurture or nature:

·         “This is just the way I am,” or “I was traumatized as a child.”

Although these excuses might contain some truth, they do not relieve us of the responsibility for our behavior. James places the onus entirely on us:

·         Each person is tempted when they are dragged away by their own evil desire and enticed. (James 1:14)

To believe otherwise usually means relying on a defective understanding of God – “God made me do it!” While blaming God for our misfortunes and failures might feel good temporarily, in the long run, it creates alienation from both God and society.

If we do not learn to accept full responsibility for our lives, we will not succeed anywhere – on the job, in the marriage, raising our children, or with God. The only way that my wife and I can be restored is through truth – the full acceptance of our responsibility for wrong-doing and confession.

This is just one illustration of how important it is to think correctly about God and also ourselves. However, this same principle can be applied to every doctrine of the Bible:

·         Grace and peace be yours in abundance through the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord. His divine power has given us everything we need for a godly life through our knowledge of him... (2 Peter 1:2-3)

We need to pray that God will teach us to think correctly, especially about Him!

To Love is to Speak about Sin

It is not fashionable to confront others about their sins. It can even be dangerous as two street preachers recently learned as they preached sin at a gay pride event in Seattle.

Consequently, many want to keep the message positive – sanitized of anything negative. Sin is negative, but sin is inseparable from the Gospel. The Gospel of salvation is not complete without mention of what we have been saved from! Without an understanding of sin and punishment, the Gospel will seem meaningless, perhaps even foolish. Grace has no meaning apart from an awareness of our need for grace. Besides, if we don’t see our need for forgiveness, the idea that God will forgive us is offensive.

When the church was most Spirit-empowered, there was no hesitation to confront the sinner with his sin. In his first evangelistic sermon, Peter pulled no punches:

• “Therefore let all Israel be assured [in light of the miraculous and biblical attestation] and of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Messiah.”

Why didn’t Peter keep the message positive? Why did he have to mention “Jesus, whom you crucified?” That would only turn off his audience or even send them into a violent rage, wouldn’t it? No! Instead, they were convicted of their sin, as Peter’s next words indicate:

• When the people heard this, they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the other apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?” Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off—for all whom the Lord our God will call.” With many other words he warned them; and he pleaded with them, “Save yourselves from this corrupt generation.” Those who accepted his message were baptized, and about three thousand were added to their number that day.

I think that we have a distorted view of love. Perhaps instead of enabling, the most loving thing we can do is to “cut [them] to the heart?” The results argue in favor of this.

Peter also informed his “cut” audience that they had to “Repent and be baptized.” However, people tend to think that they are good and deserving. Therefore, they think that there is nothing they need to repent from. Oprah claims:

• A mistake we humans make is believing that there is only one way…There are many paths to what you call God…There couldn’t possibly be just one way…Do you think that if you never heard the name of Jesus but lived with a loving heart…you wouldn’t get to heaven?...Does God care about the heart or if you call His Son ‘Jesus?’”  

Oprah, as do many other Western gurus, believes that God knows that we are basically good people who possess a “loving heart.” Result – the loving heart enters heaven!

Therefore, our preaching has to first demonstrate that we are not entitled by our allegedly “loving heart” to any of God’s blessings. As long as we think we are entitled, grace can no longer be grace but a payment that we deserve from God by virtue of our goodness (Rom. 4:1-12).

In his next sermon, Peter once again pounds his listeners about their sin:

• The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the God of our fathers, has glorified his servant Jesus. You handed him over to be killed, and you disowned him before Pilate, though he had decided to let him go.  You disowned the Holy and Righteous One and asked that a murderer be released to you.  You killed the author of life, but God raised him from the dead. (Acts 3:13-15)

Quite a heavy indictment! We don’t know the fruitage of this sermon, because Peter was immediately whisked away to court. However, before he was grabbed, he preached the only solution for their sin and guilt:

• Repent, then, and turn to God, so that your sins may be wiped out, that times of refreshing may come from the Lord. (Acts 3:19)

Peter understood faith (3:16). However, it seems that he wanted to emphasize the flip side of the faith coin – repentance. Faith and repentance are inseparable. In order to turn to the Savior – our new life - in faith, we automatically turn from the old life of sin. It is impossible to turn to God without also turning away from something else at the same time! Peter understood that in order to turn to the light, it was imperative to turn from the darkness, and the Jewish people needed to know that they were in darkness, even though they were children of the covenant.

Even before the Sanhedrin, he confronted the leadership with their sin:

• “It is by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified but whom God raised from the dead, that this man stands before you healed. Jesus is ‘the stone you builders rejected, which has become the cornerstone (Psalm 118:22).’” (Acts 4:10-11)

Peter was filled with the Holy Spirit. Consequently, he feared God and not men. I think that we need to always pray and examine ourselves. We need to ask God to reveal to us whether we are unduly concerned about the opinions of others at the expense of the opinions of our Lord. Peter brought this message home on his next visit to the Sanhedrin:

• “We must obey God rather than human beings!  The God of our ancestors raised Jesus from the dead—whom you killed by hanging him on a cross.  God exalted him to his own right hand as Prince and Savior that he might bring Israel to repentance and forgive their sins. (Acts 5:29-31)

According to Peter, even the Sanhedrin had to repent in order to receive the mercy of God. One pastor told me that Israel had their own covenant and therefore didn’t need Jesus. However, the entire New Testament demises such a notion. According to Peter, Jesus’ death and resurrection are essential to the forgiveness of all sins, not simply Gentile sins!

Stephen was also filled with the Spirit, but this didn’t lead him to preach a kinder and gentler gospel. He devoted a lengthy sermon (Acts 6 and 7) to show his self-righteous opposition what great sinners they were:

• “You stiff-necked people! Your hearts and ears are still uncircumcised. You are just like your ancestors: You always resist the Holy Spirit! Was there ever a prophet your ancestors did not persecute? They even killed those who predicted the coming of the Righteous One. And now you have betrayed and murdered him— you who have received the law that was given through angels but have not obeyed it.” (Acts 7:51-53)

In order to make his point, Stephen rehearsed the rebellious history of Israel, made plain by Scripture. With this he was preaching to the choir and the choir was listening. He was building a bridge to his ultimate point – that his protagonists were “just like your ancestors!”

All of this doesn’t mean I’m ready to wade into the midst of a gay pride event with a bullhorn. However, it does mean that preaching sin cannot be separated from the Gospel. Stephen’s sermon also suggests that it might be difficult to preach sin and repentance without first having established a beachhead – areas of agreement.

Peter’s and Stephen’s listeners all shared the same Scriptures. This made the accusation of sin easier than it would be at the gay pride rally. I think that this means that we must be in prayer about how and when we speak about sin, but not whether we will speak about it.

Miracles: How they by themselves can’t Save

Here’s a common atheist challenge:

• If God wants me to believe in him, her, or it – and your Bible says that God wants me to believe - then God, if he exists, should provide it. But there isn’t any evidence. If God would just appear before me, then I’ll believe in him. 

There are several problems with this argument. For one thing, we all already have enough evidence, so much of it that we are “without excuse” when we refuse to believe (Rom. 1:18-20).

For another thing, even if God did appear to our atheist friend, he still wouldn’t believe. Miracles alone cannot produce a willing heart. This can only come from the Holy Spirit (Eph. 2:8-9; John 6:37-45; 2 Tim. 2:24-26).

There are many illustrations of this principle. After Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead after four days in the tomb, some believed. However, others would not even consider the message of this miracle – that it was evidence that God the Father was working through the Son. Instead, they formed a huddle to plan to put both Jesus and the evidence of Lazarus to death (John 11:47-48).

How could they do this in light of such incontestable evidence? Several friends have admitted that they have had such evidence but turned their back on it. During one unguarded moment, a friend confessed:

• Danny, I used to be just like you, carrying my little Bible wherever I went.

I asked her what had happened since then, because she had become antagonistic towards the biblical faith. She explained:

• I came out of a liberal church. In fact, my father was the pastor. Every summer we’d go to church camp with several other churches. But the last time, things were very different. While my father was explaining the procedures to the campers, a couple of girls went up front to ask for prayer. This type of thing never happened! We didn’t pray and didn’t much believe in it. However, my father felt compelled to pray for them, but soon he was confronted by most of the campers who came to him for prayer.

But it didn’t stop there. During this week, we were literally bombarded with miracles. We saw all sorts of visions, experienced healings, and shed many tears of joy. No one could doubt what was happening. After camp was over, most of us found Bible studies and Christian home fellowships. I lasted about six months.

“Well, what happened then,” I asked. For a while, she was speechless:

• Well, I guess it just fizzled out? It was over.

How tragic! It is understandable that the excitement would abate, but not the memory, not the evidence of the presence of God. I was reminded of Jesus’ parable about the different soils and how one soil received the seed with joy, but the cares of life became weeds that suffocated the seeding (Mat. 13).

Jesus taught another parable about two men who died. The poor man Lazarus went to be with the Lord in “Abraham’s bosom.” The rich man went to a place of torment, from where he pleaded with Abraham to send Lazarus to warn his brothers about such a horrible fate, which also awaited them. He reasoned that if they saw Lazarus risen from the dead, they would believe and avoid such a horror. Abraham’s answer is illuminating:

• “He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’”

Miracles alone cannot save or even convince of the truth. The heart believes what it wants to believe, even in the face of all the evidence in the world.

We marvel that others do not believe. We marvel that others can believe that everything – biological diversity, DNA, life, the cell, the fine-tuning of the universe, the immutable and elegant laws of physics, consciousness – just evolved out of nothing. We therefore argue to the point of exasperation, hoping that our skeptical friend will see the light of the evidence. But we find that there is absolutely no move at all!

However, we shouldn’t be surprised. This is the very thing about which Scripture has repeatedly warned us:

• Opponents must be gently instructed, in the hope that God will grant them repentance leading them to a knowledge of the truth, and that they will come to their senses and escape from the trap of the devil, who has taken them captive to do his will. (2 Tim. 2:25-26)

Even after we have done everything evangelistically we are required to do, God must then “grant them repentance.” If He doesn’t bring about this heart change, there cannot be salvation.

Even the most perfect of arguments cannot win the skeptic apart from God granting salvation. Jesus had the best arguments, and He was crucified! I we believe that we have the life-changing arguments – and they may be excellent ones – we will become frustrated when the skeptic simply refuses to give them the weight they deserve.

We must be prepared to provide the reasons why we believe ( 1Peter 3:15), but we must also remember that we are very limited. We can plant the seed, but only God can give it growth.

Atheistic Communism and Genocide

As the West continues to move in a more totalitarian direction – bigger government, control, spying on its citizens, political correctness as the membership card, social group-think - I think that it would do us well to examine the possible implications of such a move. Ironically, these moves are justified in the name of creating a more progressive society.

This also had been the claim of atheistic communist regimes. However, genocide reached unprecedented levels under these regimes. Wikipedia claims:

• Mass killings occurred under some Communist regimes during the twentieth century with an estimated death toll numbering between 85 and 100 million.

The human toll has been unbelievably high. While Western civilization is very ready to remember the fascist Third Reich – they will not call them what they had called themselves (“National Socialists”) – they are very ready to downplay the communist atrocities. However, I think that it is important to revisit these and to ask “why.”

Many historians have tried to explain the almost uniform horrors that had been committed by atheistic communism. According to Rudolph Joseph Rummel, the communist genocides were a product of absolute power and Marxism.

• "Of all religions, secular and otherwise," Rummel positions Marxism as "by far the bloodiest – bloodier than the Catholic Inquisition, the various Catholic crusades, and the Thirty Years War between Catholics and Protestants. In practice, Marxism has meant bloody terrorism, deadly purges, lethal prison camps and murderous forced labor, fatal deportations, man-made famines, extrajudicial executions and fraudulent show trials, outright mass murder and genocide." He writes that in practice the Marxists saw the construction of their utopia as "a war on poverty, exploitation, imperialism and inequality – and, as in a real war, noncombatants would unfortunately get caught in the battle. There would be necessary enemy casualties: the clergy, bourgeoisie, capitalists, 'wreckers', intellectuals, counterrevolutionaries, rightists, tyrants, the rich and landlords. As in a war, millions might die, but these deaths would be justified by the end, as in the defeat of Hitler in World War II. To the ruling Marxists, the goal of a communist utopia was enough to justify all the deaths."

What we believe determines how we behave. The cognitive/belief conditions in the West seem to be ripe for these kinds of atrocities. There is the necessary identification of the “good guys” and the “bad guys,” those who need to be eliminated from any public influence – the “religious bigots,” the “homophobes,” the Wall Street” folks, anyone who is opposing the dawning of the new age, a sexually free, guiltless society.

Just recently, the military – they had placed Catholics and Evangelicals on their list of terrorist organizations along with Al Qaeda – threatened Christians with court marshal if they tried to proselytize.

It is common today to regard the Stalinist purges as merely the product of Stalin’s alleged mental illness and not the ideas of atheistic communism. However, the evidence tends to argue that he was merely following in Marxist-Leninist footsteps:

• Robert Conquest stressed that Stalin's purges were not contrary to the principles of Leninism, but rather a natural consequence of the system established by Vladimir Lenin, who personally ordered the killing of local groups of class enemy hostages. Alexander Yakovlev, architect of perestroika and glasnost and later head of the Presidential Commission for the Victims of Political Repression, elaborates on this point, stating that "The truth is that in punitive operations Stalin did not think up anything that was not there under Lenin: executions, hostage taking, concentration camps, and all the rest." Historian Robert Gellately concurs, saying: "To put it another way, Stalin initiated very little that Lenin had not already introduced or previewed." Said Lenin to his colleagues in the Bolshevik government: "If we are not ready to shoot a saboteur and White Guardist, what sort of revolution is that?"

According to this world view, the “bad guys” stand against progress and the common good. In his book, The End of Faith, Sam Harris writes that “Some propositions are so dangerous that it may even be ethical to kill people for believing them.” “Kill people?” His obvious contempt for Christianity makes us wonder whether he has us in mind, as many atheists in the past have had and have gladly acted upon their contempt. However, it is safe to say that we are not the only “bad guys”:

• In The Lost Literature of Socialism, literary historian George G. Watson saw socialism as conservative, a reaction against liberalism and an attempt to return to antiquity and hierarchy. He states that the writings of Friedrich Engels and others show that "the Marxist theory of history required and demanded genocide for reasons implicit in its claim that feudalism, which in advanced nations was already giving place to capitalism, must in its turn be superseded by socialism. Entire nations would be left behind after a workers' revolution, feudal remnants in a socialist age, and since they could not advance two steps at a time, they would have to be killed. They were racial trash, as Engels called them, and fit only for the dung-heap of history."

Judging from the extreme and inflammatory language coming from our U.S. administration and those closely associated, it seems that they have a very clear idea of the identity of the regressive “bad guys.” We are the “homophobes,” the “hate-mongers,” the “bigots” – those who are prejudicially denying others their “human rights.” We are the enemy, and we know, only too well, the fate of the “enemies” of national socialism and atheistic communism. Who will be “fit…for the [next] dung-heap of history?" A warning to the revolutionary: The revolution also has a venerable history of turning against its own!