By Charles R. Swindoll

2 Corinthians 12:2–10

Remember that suffering is not new. In what is probably the oldest book in the Bible, the book of Job, we read, “For man is born for trouble, as sparks fly upward” (Job 5:7). Now there’s a statement we need to teach our children and grandchildren, starting today. The message they consistently hear is that God has nothing but happiness and success in store for them if they’ll entrust their lives to Him. The Bible never promises that! Amazingly, while scraping sores from his diseased and pain-racked body, Job asked, “Shall we indeed accept good from God and not adversity?” He made that statement in response to his wife’s advice to “curse God and die.” She too was broken from the loss of her children and the misery of watching her husband suffer so terribly. (As a young preacher, I came down too hard on Job’s wife. Now I go easier on her. She was grieving, not blaming. She needed God’s perspective on her pain.) It was when her husband witnessed how deep her grief was that he responded as he did. He wanted her to realize that God is not a heavenly bellboy, delivering only pleasurable and comforting things to our door. He doesn’t exist to make us happy. We exist to bring Him glory.

We live in superficial, skeptical times. When hard times occur you will find scores of newly released titles questioning how a loving God could be so unfair and unjust. It is easy to be confused in one’s understanding of God. But He has not changed. His ways have not been altered. As with Job and Paul, He continues to allow suffering to mold us into humble, useful servants.

Throw one of us in a dungeon and we want to talk to our lawyer! Throw those guys in prison, and the world ends up with Pilgrim’s Progress, or some other magnificent literary work that endures for centuries, putting our suffering back into perspective. Resist the temptation to rethink God just because hard times come. Look deeper. Cling to Him tighter. Refuse to question His motives. He’s doing something great within you. Suffering is nothing new.

Click here for the original post.

Amidst a mob of madmen
She stood frightened and alone
As hate filled voices hissed at him
That she should now be stoned

But in the air around him
Hung a vast and wordless love
Who knows what loom at his lesson
He was in the middle of

At first he faced the fury
Of their self righteous scorn
But then he stooped and at once became
The calm eye of the storm

It was his wordless answer
To their dark and cruel demand
The lifetime in a moment
As he scribbled in the sand

It was silence it was music
It was art it was absurd
He stooped and shouted volumes
Without saying a single word
The same finger
Of the strong hand
That had written ten commands
For now was simply scribbling in the sand

Within the space of space and time
He scribbled in the sand
They came to hear and see as much
As they could understand
Now bound by cords of kindness
They couldn’t cast a single stone
And Jesus and the women found that they were all alone

It was silence it was music
It was art it was absurd
He stooped and shouted volumes
Without saying a single word
The same finger
Of the strong hand
That had written ten commands
For now was simply scribbling in the sand

Could that same finger come
And trace my souls sacred sand
And make some unexpected space
Where I could understand
That my own condemnation pierced
And broke that gentle hand
That scratched the words I’ll never know
Written in the sand

It was silence it was music
It was art it was absurd
He stooped and shouted volumes
Without saying a single word
The same finger
Of the strong hand
That had written ten commands
For now was simply scribbling in the sand

The same finger
Of the strong hand
That had written ten commands
For now was simply scribbling in the sand

Words and Music by Michael Card (2002)

 

By Rich Deem

Copernicus was the Polish astronomer who put forward the first mathematically based system of planets going around the sun. He attended various European universities, and became a Canon in the Catholic church in 1497. His new system was actually first presented in the Vatican gardens in 1533 before Pope Clement VII who approved, and urged Copernicus to publish it around this time. Copernicus was never under any threat of religious persecution - and was urged to publish both by Catholic Bishop Guise, Cardinal Schonberg, and the Protestant Professor George Rheticus. Copernicus referred sometimes to God in his works, and did not see his system as in conflict with the Bible.

By Josh McDowell
Part 1 of 5

[This talk gives] the background for what we’re going to look at in the next few sessions, which will be on the resurrection of Jesus Christ – Fact or Fallacy?

The background for what I am going to share is my own personal testimony where I truly believed that Christianity was a farce. I did not believe it was true. And as a student in the university, I set out to make a joke of Christianity; to explain away the historical reliability of the Bible and to make a joke of the resurrection. Because I concluded that no intelligent person could ever believe that somebody was killed, buried, and literally raised again the third day because it went against what I believed to be true.

But in my investigation, there were several intellectual conclusions I came to first and then after that, placed my trust in Christ as Savior and Lord. One was this, I came to the conclusion that I could hold the Bible, the Old and New Testament, in my hand and say, “It is historically accurate and it is historically reliable”. We did four sessions on the scriptures and their historical accuracy, but that was the first conclusion I came to as a non-Christian that this book is accurate and true. The second conclusion I came to was that the resurrection of Jesus Christ, as much as I did not want to believe it, was an historical fact. In other words, it did take place in history. I tried my best to refute that, but I couldn’t. The third conclusion I came to is that Jesus Christ truly was God incarnate, God taken on human flesh, that He lived as a man, He was crucified, buried, raised again and ascended to heaven and sent the Holy Spirit. Those were three of many conclusions that I had when I set out to make a joke of Christianity. In these sessions now, we’re going to look at just some of the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus Christ. And I like to call this Fact or Fiction – Farce or Fact.

Now the basis of the resurrection and the importance of it is given by the apostle Paul. In 1 Corinthians 15, verses 13 to 17, Paul wrote, ‘But if there is no resurrection of the dead, not even Christ has been raised and if Christ has not been raised then our preaching is vain. Your faith also is vain. Moreover, we are even found to be false witnesses of God because we witnessed against God that He raised Christ, whom He did not raise, if in fact, 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 worthless’. What the apostle Paul does here is base everything that Christ taught, lived and died for upon the resurrection. That’s why it is so crucial to study it and come to understand it.

The skeptic, Dr. David Frederick Strauss, made this point about how critical the resurrection is as a skeptic, not a believer. He said, ‘The resurrection is a touchstone, not of only the life of Jesus, but of Christianity itself’. He says, ‘It touches Christianity to the quick and is decisive for the whole view of Christianity’.

Everything that Jesus taught, lived, and died for depended upon one thing: His resurrection, His burial, His ascent – His resurrection and then His ascension. My conclusion was, if I can show that Christ did not rise from the dead then my case was one against Christianity, but I was not able to do it and I’m going to share with you some of the reasons why in these sessions that we will have together.

Click here for the full article.

By Kenneth Samples
Part 4 of 4

What is the best explanation for how the human soul comes into being?

The Bible presents human beings as a unity of body and soul (Matthew 10:28). But just how did God bring about the origin of the human soul? Is there a specific position on this issue that holds greater explanatory power than another? Or is this profound topic an inexplicable mystery?

In part three of this series I explored the position of traducianism, the view that human beings derive both their bodies and souls from their parents through procreation. In this final article I will examine the viewpoint known as creationism.

What is Creationism?

Not to be confused with the doctrine of how God brought about the origin of the cosmos, creationism (or creatianism) is the view that each individual human soul is directly created by God ex nihilo (out of nothing) before being united with the body. This perspective postulates that the soul is created pure but is subsequently corrupted along with the body through the process of conception. The exact timing of the soul’s implantation in the body is debated, though many would argue in favor of the time of physical conception.

Biblical and Theological Support for Creationism

As I mentioned in my previous discussion of traducianism, Scripture does not address the topic of the soul’s origin in any formal or explicit way. Therefore, inferences and implications from Scripture must be drawn carefully and weighed accordingly.

1. Scripture appears to distinguish between the origin of man’s soul and body (Ecclesiastes 12:7; Isaiah 42:5; Zechariah 12:1; Hebrews 12:9).
2. The position of creationism seems more in keeping with the pure spiritual nature of the soul.
3. One of creationism’s strongest appeals is that it also preserves the soul as a simple, indivisible substance.
4. The creationism view seems to safeguard the sinless nature of Jesus Christ’s human soul better than does traducianism.

Concerns and Criticisms of Creationism

1. None of the biblical arguments are clinching or determinative in their support of creationism.
2. Creationism seems to have a much harder time explaining the transmission of original sin among humanity than does traducianism.
3. The position of creationism may serve to detract from man’s unity of body and soul.

In evaluating the positions of traducianism and creationism, important theological issues, such as the image of God and original sin, certainly impact the analysis.

Though creationism stands as the official position of the Roman Catholic Church, historic Christianity has never collectively issued an official orthodox position concerning the human soul’s origin. Believers would do well to carefully put all aspects of the Christian worldview to the test.

For a discussion of the human soul and the various positions concerning its origin, see the Evangelical Dictionary of Theology edited by Walter A. Elwell (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1984), s.v. “Soul.”

For more about the historic Christian view of human nature, see my book, A World of Difference: Putting Christian Truth-Claims to the Worldview Test, especially chapter 10.

Dear Friends,

When Luke wrote the story of the gospel to Theophilus, he declared that his purpose was to set forth in order those things that are surely believed among us. He said that he wanted Theophilus to know the certainty of the things in which he had been instructed.

We are living in a day of great spiritual confusion. When Paul wrote to the Ephesians he spoke of how God had placed pastors and teachers in the church for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, and for the building up of the body of Christ. The purpose was to bring them into spiritual maturity that they would not be carried away with every wind of doctrine and slight cunning of men who lie in wait to deceive. These are days when there are many winds of doctrine blowing through the church. The greatest defense against deception is a solid foundation in the Word.

This is what we seek to develop through our studies in the Scriptures. We are dedicated to bringing you the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help us God. This is why we offer to you the studies in the Scriptures at near our costs, as we are wanting to make the Word of God available to all. We want you to build your spiritual house on the rock solid Word of God so that it will be able to withstand the fiercest storms

May God bless you as you study the Word.

In His love,

Pastor Chuck Smith
twft.org

By David Grabbe

¹The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John, ²who testifies to everything he saw—that is, the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ. Revelation 1:1-2

The book itself tells us, right at the beginning, what it is about, but because of the way it is translated into English, we can read right over it and miss the book’s own declaration of its contents. We are immediately told that this book contains the revelation of Jesus Christ. This phrase is the title of the book. But what does “revelation” mean? It is the Greek noun apocalypsis, which is why this book is often called the “book of the Apocalypse.” This noun comes from the verb apocalupto, which literally means “to take away the veil,” such as when a painting or statue has its covering taken away. Even though apocalypsis is most often translated “revelation,” the best equivalent word in English is “unveiling.”

In common usage, when someone refers to the “Apocalypse,” or describes an event as being “apocalyptic,” he is usually talking about widespread devastation or ultimate doom. Mel Gibson recently produced and directed a movie entitled Apocalypto, which portrayed the end of the Mayan civilization—and it was a very bloody end.

Using “apocalypse” this way derives from the content of the book of Revelation, not from the word’s Greek meaning. Simply, apocalypsis and apocalupto refer to “taking away a veil” or “unveiling” rather than to cataclysmic events. However, in this specific instance of apocalypse, of a veil being taken away (when Jesus Christ returns), widespread devastation will in fact occur as this present age closes with wars and disasters.

In the Greek New Testament, apocalypsis appears in two senses. When used figuratively, it has the sense of “bringing someone to knowledge,” as in the English phrase “remove the veil of ignorance.” For example, when we say that a mystery is unveiled, we mean that the veil of ignorance is lifted so that the matter can be plainly understood. In terms of the book of Revelation, this is the sense that most interpreters and readers recognize in it. They see it as the unveiling of prophetic events to understanding.

However, when apocalypsis is used in a literal sense, it refers to “the visible appearance of one previously unseen,” as a woman shrouded by a veil is revealed when her covering is removed. In Revelation’s case, as the book of the Unveiling, apocalypsis literally refers to the visible appearance of One who is now hidden from human sight, and that One is, of course, Jesus Christ.

The New Testament consistently supports the literal sense of apocalypsis rather than the figurative, and that the “revelation of Jesus Christ” is not limited to His testimony or to His unlocking of prophecy. Instead, the “revelation of Jesus Christ” is, in fact, an advance record of His visible appearance in glory, to overthrow the spirit and human rulers of this world and to establish His Kingdom on earth.

A key to effective Bible study is to let the Bible interpret itself. Another key is to let the Bible’s usage of a word determine its meaning rather than to rely solely on what it means in secular Greek or Hebrew. Apocalypsis appears in eighteen places in the New Testament, and in ten of those places—including Revelation 1:1—it is used literally, referring to a person or a thing. In every case, it denotes the “visible appearance” or “unveiling” of that person or thing, confirming how it should be understood in Revelation 1:1.

Adapted from What Is the Book of Revelation?

Click here for the original post.

Dr. Hugh Ross launched his career at age seven when he went to the library to find out why stars are hot. Physics and astronomy captured his curiosity and never let go. At age seventeen he became the youngest person ever to serve as director of observations for Vancouver’s Royal Astronomical Society. With the help of a provincial scholarship and a National Research Council (NRC) of Canada fellowship, he completed his undergraduate degree in physics (University of British Columbia) and graduate degrees in astronomy (University of Toronto). The NRC also sent him to the United States for postdoctoral studies. At Caltech he researched quasi-stellar objects, or “quasars,” some of the most distant and ancient objects in the universe.

Not all of Hugh’s discoveries involved astrophysics. Prompted by curiosity, he studied the world’s religions and “holy books” and found only one book that proved scientifically and historically accurate: the Bible. Hugh started at religious “ground zero” and through scientific and historical reality-testing became convinced that the Bible is truly the Word of God! When he went on to describe for others his journey to faith in Jesus Christ, he was surprised to discover how many people believed or disbelieved without checking the evidence.

Hugh’s unshakable confidence that God’s revelations in Scripture and nature do not, will not, and cannot contradict became his unique message. Wholeheartedly encouraged by family and friends, communicating that message as broadly and clearly as possible became his mission. Thus, in 1986, he founded science-faith think tank Reasons To Believe (RTB). He and his colleagues at RTB keep tabs on the frontiers of research to share with scientists and nonscientists alike the thrilling news of what’s being discovered and how it connects with biblical theology. In this realm, he has written many books, including:

1. The Fingerprint of God
2. The Creator and the Cosmos
3. Beyond the Cosmos
4. The Genesis Question
5. A Matter of Days
6. Creation as Science
7. Why the Universe Is the Way It Is
8. More Than a Theory.

Between writing books and articles, recording podcasts, and taking interviews, Hugh travels the world challenging students and faculty, churches and professional groups, to consider what they believe and why. He presents a persuasive case for Christianity without applying pressure. Because he treats people’s questions and comments with respect, he is in great demand as a speaker and as a talk-radio and television guest.

Having grown up amid the splendor of Canada’s mountains, wildlife, and waterways, Hugh loves the outdoors. Hiking, trail running, and photography are among his favorite recreational pursuits—in addition to stargazing. Hugh lives in Southern California with his wife, Kathy, and two sons.

For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.

Robert Jastrow (1925-2008), God and the Astronomers, p. 116 (1978)

Hat tip to apologetics315.com

By Kenneth Samples
Part 6 of 12

The study of logic doesn’t teach you to think—people do that intuitively and naturally. Rather instruction in logic teaches you to order your thinking. Logic is typically defined as “the principles of correct reasoning.” Mastery of these principles helps a person to consistently order their thinking so they can arrive at truthful, rational conclusions. Known as the “father of logic,” famous Greek philosopher Aristotle (384-322 BC) was the first to systematize the principles of logic. He referred to logic as a “tool” or “instrument” that helps one arrive at truth.

Logic is used to prove (or verify) things through the use of arguments. (By arguments, I don’t mean verbal fights.) An argument consists of two essential parts: (1) a claim (or conclusion), and (2) support for the claim (or premises) in the form of reasons, evidence, or facts. A good argument (sound or cogent) requires that the premises genuinely support the conclusion—a necessary connection called an inferential relationship must exist. A breach in this relationship results in a breakdown or failure of the argument to prove the conclusion. Fallacies (errors in reasoning) describe various types of breakdowns in the premise(s)-conclusion relationship.

ARGUMENT = CLAIM + SUPPORT

Since the conclusion of an argument is only as good as the premises that support it, it’s critical that the premises genuinely backup the central claim being made. I came up with the following acrostic to serve as a guideline to help keep a person’s reasoning on the logical T-R-A-C-K:

True support: All premises must be factually true or intellectually acceptable. In some cases premises are generally accepted as true rather than actually demonstrated to be so.

Relevant support: The premises must be connected and readily applicable to the conclusion. Many informal fallacies fall into the irrelevant premise category.

Adequate support: The premises must provide enough support—sufficient in number, kind, and weight—to justify the conclusion. Sometimes one premise is enough, but other arguments require numerous premises.

Clear support: The premises must possess clarity, thus avoiding vagueness, ambiguity, and grammatical error. Thinking and speech should form a unity.

Knowledgeable support: The premises must qualify as knowledge (justified, true belief), avoiding unwarranted presumption and vulnerability to possible counter evidence.

Paying careful heed to the principles of logic makes our arguments and viewpoints rational and ultimately persuasive. It behooves us as Christians to excel in our thinking. Sound reasoning not only helps remove obstacles to faith in Jesus Christ, but it also—especially when combined with a winsome spirit—exemplifies Christian virtue. Careful thinking brings honor and glory to our Creator and Lord (Romans 12:2).

Remember, a mind made in the direct image of an infinite and eternal God (Genesis 1:26-27) is all the more a terrible thing to waste!

For more about the importance of logic and critical thinking, see my book A World of Difference: Putting Christian Truth-Claims to the Worldview Test. For a great handbook in dealing with logical fallacies, see Attacking Faulty Reasoning: A Practical Guide to Fallacy-Free Arguments by T. Edward Damer.

Click here for the original post.