THE CHRISTIAN FAITH DOES NOT ONLY FEEL RIGHT; IT IS RIGHT

It is not enough to preach what we should believe. We must also preach the rationale for believing in Jesus. This is what the Apostles did throughout the Book of Acts. Apollos was no exception:

·       When he [Apollos] arrived, he greatly helped those who through grace had believed, for he powerfully refuted the Jews in public, showing by the Scriptures that the Christ [the Messiah] was Jesus. (Acts 18:27-28; ESV; Also 17:2-4; 28:23-24)

How had Apollos “greatly helped those who through grace had believed?” He “refuted the Jews in public, showing by the Scriptures that the Christ [the Messiah] was Jesus.” He provided proof from the Hebrew Scriptures, demonstrating that Christians didn’t have to close their minds off to the evidences in order to believe. Instead, Apollos showed that the evidences favored faith.

We too need to know why we believe, not just what we should believe. Moses had this very concern when he was talking with God in the midst of the burning bush:

·       Then Moses answered, “But behold, they will not believe me or listen to my voice, for they will say, ‘The LORD did not appear to you.’” (Exodus 4:1)

Moses correctly understood that the Israelites would have to be convinced about the “why” question. They needed evidence, and God was prepared to provide that evidence:

·       The LORD said to him, “What is that in your hand?” He said, “A staff.” And he said, “Throw it on the ground.” So he threw it on the ground, and it became a serpent, and Moses ran from it. But the LORD said to Moses, “Put out your hand and catch it by the tail”—so he put out his hand and caught it, and it became a staff in his hand— “that they may believe that the LORD, the God of their fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has appeared to you.” Again, the LORD said to him, “Put your hand inside your cloak.” And he put his hand inside his cloak, and when he took it out, behold, his hand was leprous like snow. Then God said, “Put your hand back inside your cloak.” So he put his hand back inside his cloak, and when he took it out, behold, it was restored like the rest of his flesh. “If they will not believe you,” God said, “or listen to the first sign, they may believe the latter sign. If they will not believe even these two signs or listen to your voice, you shall take some water from the Nile and pour it on the dry ground, and the water that you shall take from the Nile will become blood on the dry ground.” (Exodus 4:2-9)

God had provided Moses with a set of three miraculous proofs instead of telling him to tell the Israelites, “Just believe.” In fact, blind belief in not to be found in the Bible. Neither is it ever required. Instead, Jesus directed His disciples to not believe without confirmatory evidence:

·       If I am not doing the works of my Father, then DO NOT BELIEVE me; but if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me and I am in the Father.” (John 10:37-38)

We need to be assured that the Christian faith not only feels right, but that it is right!

WE CANNOT SEPARATE DOING FROM BELIEVING AS MANY WANT TO DO

In the Myth of Certainty, Daniel Taylor makes the absurd claim that:

• “Faith in God, then, is not a belief system to defend but a life to live out!”

Taylor is half-right. Christianity is a “life to live out.” However, we cannot live this life out without instructions and the rationale or reasons to believe in these instructions – the Word of God.

For Jesus, bearing fruit – living the life – had to begin with embracing the Word of life. In His Parable of the Sower, Seeds and Soils, He highlighted the primacy of His Word for bearing fruit in His conclusion:

• “As for that in the good soil, they are those who, hearing the word, hold it fast in an honest and good heart, and bear fruit with patience.” (Luke 8:15; ESV)

In order to bear, they first had to hear and then adhere:

• “Take care then how you hear, for to the one who has, more will be given, and from the one who has not, even what he thinks that he has will be taken away… My mother and my brothers are those who hear the word of God and do it.” (Luke 8:18, 21) 

According to Jesus, loving Him and living out the life He prescribed wasn’t possible without keeping His Word:

• “If you love me, you will keep my commandments.” (John 14:15)

Therefore, for the Christian, love isn’t a matter of living a “virtuous” life but rather, through faith, the life that He had commanded. Therefore, Jesus parting words commissioned His Apostles to “to observe all that I [Jesus] have commanded you.”

• “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you.” (Matthew 28:19-20)

Clearly, this is not Taylor’s commission!

INTERPRETING JESUS' TEACHINGS

Context is king. Take Jesus' words from Matthew 10:

* “Beware of men, for they will deliver you over to courts and flog you in their synagogues, and you will be dragged before governors and kings for my sake, to bear witness before them and the Gentiles."

From these two verses, it would seem that we should allow ourselves to be persecuted for Christ's sake rather than to flee persecution, but this would not be the correct interpretation. A few verses later, we read:

* "When they persecute you in one town, FLEE to the next.” (Matthew 10:17-18, 23 ESV)
There verse show that in order to understand Jesus' teaching, we must understand them in context. For another example:

* And Jesus cried out and said, "Whoever believes in me, believes not in me but in him who sent me."

From this verse in John 12, it seems that we shouldn't believe in Jesus but in the Father alone. However, two verses later, Jesus makes it clear that we should believe in Him:

* "I have come into the world as light, so that whoever believes in me may not remain in darkness.” (John 12:44, 46)

How then should we interpret the first verse? It seems likely, by observing the rest of Jesus' teachings, that when we trust in Jesus, we do not trust in Jesus ALONE, but also in the Father.

VERY OFTEN, WE CANNOT TAKE HIS TEACHINGS LITERALLY.

Once again, we find that understanding Jesus requires us to understand the entire context. Sometimes, we have to take into account the entire context of ALL of His teachings:

* "And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites. For they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may be seen by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you.” (Matthew 6:5-6)
To just read the immediate context, it would seem that Jesus means to prohibit all public prayer. However, when we observe Jesus' entire ministry, we find that He often prayed publicly.
How then are we to understand His admonition to pray in secret? We need to understand the immediate context where we find that Jesus' concern is our motivation to be seen by men rather than God.

Well, how are we to serve God? In this regard, Jesus said many perplexing things:

* “But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you. (Matthew 6:3)

How can we prevent one hand from knowing what the other is doing? We can't! Instead, once again, we have to interpret this verse in light of the principle of performing our righteous deeds to please God and not to impress man.

It's primarily about our motives not our actions. Are we able to give secretly without seeking the approval of others. If we find that we are not, we need to humble ourselves by confessing our sin. In fact, we find that human pride is often Jesus' main concern.

EXAGGERATION (HYPERBOLE) TO MAKE A POINT

Likewise, Jesus commands us to cut off our hands and to pluck out our eyes rather than sin and enter hell:

“If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell. And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body go into hell.” (Matthew 5:29-30)

Can we stop sinning if we pluck out our eyes (or even pray only in private)? No! Sin arises out of the heart not out of our hands or our eyes, as Jesus taught elsewhere (Matthew 15:19). Then why pluck out our eyes? I think that Jesus was teaching that, because of the overriding worth of going to heaven, instead of hell, if plucking out our eyes would insure heaven, such a sacrifice would be well worth it.

AWARENESS OF PARALLEL VERSES

Some verses are very perplexing until we take into account how Jesus expressed the same thought elsewhere, for example:

* "If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple.” (Luke 14:26)

Of course, this verse seems to contradict a lot of biblical principles like honoring our parents. However, this problem is easily resolved when we observe a parallel teaching from Matthew:

* “Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me, and whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.” (Matthew 10:37)

It is a matter of our priorities. Jesus must be our highest priority, even above ourselves and our family.

UNDERSTANDING JESUS FROM THE CONTEXT OF THE ENTIRE BIBLE

Some Christians believe in absolute pacifism and non-violence based upon a literal reading of His Sermon on the Mount. Often in support of this position they cite:

* "You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.” (Matthew 5:38-39)

I had wrestled with these verses for a long time, especially as a substitute teacher. Should I allow my students to insult and even lay their hands on me? Was this Jesus' intention? I didn't want to violate His will but allowing these violent students to have their way seemed so unreasonable. It would also be a betrayal of those who hired me and would bring disrepute upon my faith.
However, I also became convinced that such an interpretation would also violate Jesus' intent. I first had to decide whether or not Jesus' teaching was meant to correct the Mosaic Covenant or the current understanding of this Covenant.

I found that the principle of an "eye for an eye" wasn't at all barbaric. Instead, this judicial principle required that penalties had to match the crimes:

* “Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe. "When a man strikes the eye of his slave, male or female, and destroys it, he shall let the slave go free because of his eye. If he knocks out the tooth of his slave, male or female, he shall let the slave go free because of his tooth.” (Exodus 21:24-27)

Besides, I eventually perceived that Jesus never criticized the Old Testament (Matthew 5:16-19). Instead, He always quoted it affirmatively. Consequently, it became obvious that the Sermon on the Mount was not an indictment of the Mosaic legal system but of our personal behaviors.
It seems likely that Jesus was taking aim at those who invoked an "eye for an eye" to justify taking personal revenge. If this is so, then Jesus was teaching:

* It is better to allow yourself to be defrauded and insulted rather than to take revenge.
Actually Jesus endorsed self-defense in cases where legal recourse wasn't possible (Matthew 24:43-44).

Interpretation is complex but vital work. I cannot hope to do justice to this subject in a brief essay. Consequently, we are instructed to meditate on His Word day and night. There is no substitute for this. Nor is there any greater blessing (Psalm 1; Joshua 1:8).

BEING HUMBLED

‎ 

Humbling is always painful. Humbling shows us that we aren't the good and sufficient people we want to be. However, we need the humbling. As I am humbled, I marvel, all the more, at my Savior who loves me and provides for me despite my unworthiness.

 The Apostle Peter was also humbled. He had denied the Lord three times. The Lord appeared to him a third time by the Sea of Galilee as they were fishing and miraculously filled their net with 153 fish. After eating, He asked Peter three times if he loved Him. This disturbed Peter, probably because it reminded him of his humbling threefold denial of Jesus.

Peter was humbled, but humility was a necessary ingredient for his glorious calling - "Feed My sheep."

But with such a calling comes more brokenness and glory - martyrdom, as our Lord had promised Peter:

* “Truly, truly, I say to you, when you were young, you used to dress yourself and walk wherever you wanted, but when you are old, you will stretch out your hands, and another will dress you and carry you where you do not want to go." (This he said to show by what kind of death he was to glorify God.) And after saying this he said to him, "Follow me." (John 21:18-19; ESV)

I want to follow Him, but I have learned that I do not have what it takes, but my Lord does. If He can grow His most fragrant roses with manure, He can use us!

9/11, PARIS, BRUSSELS….

Amanda Marcotte, a politics writer for Salon, wrote, in the wake of the Brussels attacks:

• But one thing is absolutely certain: It is a good thing that we in the United States have a grown-up in charge. http://www.salon.com/2016/03/22/we_need_adult_leaders_brussels_attack_is_a_sobering_reminder_of_how_important_it_is_to_have_grown_ups_in_office_not_cruz_or_trump/

It seems like Marcotte has forgotten that it was this same “grown-up” who had made it possible for ISIS to secure droves of American weaponry, destabilized Libya, Egypt, Syria, and Iraq, making them breeding grounds for Islamic terrorists and has done almost nothing to stop their genocidal attacks on non-Muslims in Africa and the Middle East.

Marcotte’s analysis is also “grown-up”:

• These situations are too complex to be dumbed down to a bunch of bigotry towards Muslims, the vast majority of whom have no relationship to terrorism. This is an election year, and these attacks should serve as important reminder of how critical it is to have a grown-up in the Oval Office.

However, Brussels, Paris, 9/11, and the San Bernadino attacks weren’t carried out by the Amish, the Buddhists, or the New Agers. They have been consistently carried out by the likes of Al Qaeda, Al Nusra, ISIS, Boko Haram, Islamic Jihad, and countless other Islamic groups, all screaming “Allah Akbar” and crediting the Koran for their inspiration. Their youthful volunteers are attracted because they understandably see in these groups the true teachings of Muhammad, and they are right. Here are just several of the hundreds of verses on violent Jihad:

• Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not."

• Quran (3:151) - "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah [like Trinitarians], for which He had sent no authority".

• Quran (4:74) - "Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward." 

• Quran (4:89) - "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks."

Evidently, Marcotte is not very disturbed by these horrific attacks:

• Brussels is still there and still beautiful. Brussels and Paris survived the frigging Nazis, but Trump would have you believe that these cities will be torn to the ground because of attacks orchestrated by scattered, stateless terrorist organizations.

I’m sure that the families of the deceased do not feel like Marcotte. They are perturbed by those who fail to understand their loss and what the future holds in light of the growing number of Muslims who want to incorporate their nation into a Caliphate. In short, they are not “grown-up.”

Marcotte is convinced that the real Islam has little to do with the hundreds of jihadic Koranic verses:

• What he refuses to do, however, is conflate the beliefs of a relatively small number of terrorists with Islam as a whole, because, unlike Cruz or Trump, Obama is a grown-up.

According to Marcotte, the real Islam is “grown-up” and grownups do not try to take over the world through sex-slavery and violent Jihad. However, if she could point to one sizeable Islamic minority that is not trying to impose sharia or start a violent separatistic movement, she might have a point. If she name one Islamic country where non-Muslims live as equals with Muslims, there might be a morsel of hope for a peaceful resolution. However, Marcotte is such a “grown-up” that she need not bother herself with such trifling issues.

FAITH IN AN UNPROVABLE MULTIVERSE

Along with other physicists, MIT physicist Alan Lightman affirms that the apparent fine-tuning of the universe for life is bewildering:

·       If the values of some of the fundamental parameters of our universe were a little larger or a little smaller, life could not have arisen. For example, if the nuclear force were a few percentage points stronger than it actually is, then all the hydrogen atoms in the infant universe would have fused with other hydrogen atoms to make helium, and there would be no hydrogen left. http://winteryknight.com/2015/06/28/mit-physicist-alan-lightman-on-fine-tuning-and-the-multiverse/

The is just one instance of the many physical law constants that are precisely calibrated for life. One physicist has calculated its probability as one chance out of ten followed by one hundred zeros – an impossible probability. Lightman therefore reasons:

·       If such conclusions are correct, the great question, of course, is why these fundamental parameters happen to lie within the range needed for life. Does the universe care about life? Intelligent design is one answer. Indeed, a fair number of theologians, philosophers, and even some scientists have used fine-tuning and the anthropic principle as evidence of the existence of God. For example, at the 2011 Christian Scholars’ Conference at Pepperdine University, Francis Collins, a leading geneticist and director of the National Institutes of Health, said, “To get our universe, with all of its potential for complexities or any kind of potential for any kind of life-form, everything has to be precisely defined on this knife edge of improbability…. [Y]ou have to see the hands of a creator who set the parameters to be just so because the creator was interested in something a little more complicated than random particles.”

Lightman observes that the theory of a multiverse is not evidentially-based but faith-based:

·       The… conjecture that there are many other worlds… [T]here is no way they can prove this conjecture. That same uncertainty disturbs many physicists who are adjusting to the idea of the multiverse. Not only must we accept that basic properties of our universe are accidental and uncalculable. In addition, we must believe in the existence of many other universes. But we have no conceivable way of observing these other universes and cannot prove their existence. Thus, to explain what we see in the world and in our mental deductions, we must believe in what we cannot prove.

Lightman’s observations point to the fact that those who reject ID do not do so based upon science or evidence but upon an ideological/faith commitment.