La Jolla Christian Fellowship -Articles

Section Links

cross Sermons & Articles

cross Sermon Detail Page

cross All Articles

cross Answering the Tough Ones

cross Does God know the future?

cross Is God all powerful?

cross Why trust the Gospel accounts?

Location

627 Genter Street
La Jolla, CA 92037-5423
Phone: 858.454.9636
Fax: 858.454.9682

Articles

ANSWERING THE TOUGH ONES
"Questions Every Good Skeptic Would Ask and Every Good Christian Should Answer"

The following is a series of articles written by our former Associate Pastor Horst Bruenjes, which have appeared in past church newsletters. The articles are based upon the questions asked and answers provided in the books: Letters from a Skeptic, by Gregory A. Boyd and Edward K. Boyd; Answers to Tough Questions, by Josh McDowell and Don Stewart; and Mere Christianity, by C. S. Lewis. Every effort has been made to identify direct quotes from these authors.

The purpose of these articles is to enable web seekers to get a perspective on the Christian response to various important questions frequently asked, as well as to provide a succinct way for Christians, and specifically members of La Jolla Christian Fellowship (First Baptist Church of La Jolla), to answer such questions. The Bible calls all Christians to be: "Always prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have." (1 Peter 3:15, NIV)

Following is a complete list of the articles, with those dated and highlighted with blue links appearing below.

Article #1: Answering the Tough Ones: Introduction (11/18/02)

Article #2: Why has Christianity done so much harm? (2/8/03)

Article #3: Why is the world so full of suffering? (7/10/03)

Article #4: Is freedom worth all the suffering? (9/15/03)

Article #5: Does God know the future? (12/9/03)

Article #6: Why does God create earthquakes and famine? (1/26/04)

Article #7: Why did God create Satan? (4/21/04)

Article #8: Is God all powerful? (6/17/04)

Article #9: Why believe in God in the first place? (8/02/04)

Article #10: Couldn't it all happen by chance? (7/6/05)

Article #11: Why didn't God spare -------? (12/6/05)

Article #12: Why would an all powerful God need prayer? (1/6/06)

Article #13: Why would God care about us little humans? (3/31/06)

Article #14: Why trust the Gospel accounts? (10/9/06)

Article #15: Aren't the Gospels full of contradictions?

Article #16: How can you believe that a man rose from the dead?

Article #17: How can you believe that a man was God?

Article #18: Why does God make believing in Him so difficult?

Article #19: Why do you think the Bible is inspired?

Article #20: Isn't the Bible full of myths and about God's vengeance?

Article #21: What about the "holy books" of other religions?

Article #22: Do all non-Christians go to hell? How could an all-loving God torture people in an eternal hell?

Article #23: Why is Jesus the only way to get to God?

Article #24: How can I be sure it's all true?

#1 Answering the Tough Ones: Introduction
(This article first appeared in the First Baptist Church of La Jolla newsletter INSIDEOUT in August 1999.)

This is the first in a series of articles in which I hope to be able to raise some questions about our faith, and in which I hope to be able to provide some reasoned answers. While many of us are firm in our beliefs, we often are unable to quickly and intelligently provide an answer to challenges or questions others ask about why we believe what we do. Since we are specifically called out to witness to the world the truth of Jesus Christ, we ought not to so readily withdraw and rationalize that since our witness is like " the smell of death" to the lost (2 Corinthians 2:16), we need not bother to "throw pearls before pigs" (Matthew 7:6). It is my prayer that through these articles you will not only become more confident in the faith that you have, but also that you will provide a ready answer to anyone who makes a comment about Christ or Christianity.

"Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have." (1 Peter 3:15, NIV)

In this day and age, we are ever more confronted by scientific advances and revelations, as well as new theories on why we humans behave the way we do or how the universe is constructed. Things that once seemed simple to understand and to accept or reject, now are complex and confusing. A scientific study comes out and tells us that eating eggs is bad for our health, despite numerous generations of our ancestors who have thrived on eating eggs. Then the report comes out saying that it's OK to eat eggs sparingly. Recently I saw a bumper sticker (that modern equivalent of the sages of old) touting: "Egg Twins - 4 X a week is OK," meaning that eating two eggs four times a week won't hurt your health. While it may be easy to see why I shouldn't necessarily accept what is printed on the bumper sticker of a car as wisdom, it's harder to see why a person telling me that eating eggs is wrong is also possibly not wisdom. I'm not a scientist, nor a nutritionist, nor a chemist. How then can I evaluate what someone tells me about eggs, let alone explain to someone else what I choose to believe about eggs?

Regardless of how much we know about a topic factually, we always seem to be able to arrive at some conclusions. It seems that, often, it is not the amount of information about a topic that is important in decison-making. Sort of "don't bother me with the facts, I believe what I want to believe!" Unlike science, philosophy, or other belief systems, Christians have been promised a wise and true counselor to aid them in determining what is true. We need not rely on our own understanding, nor on the "wisdom" of the wise to arrive at truth. Of course, we have to accept the concept that "truth" exists and/or is objectively identifiable, otherwise we could never arrive at any common understanding of reality. While we won't be discussing truth, we will be looking at questions such as: Why do bad things happen to good people? Why does God even allow evil to exist? Why is Jesus the "only way?" What makes the Bible so special? How can I be sure its all true?

#2 Answering the Tough Ones: Why has Christianity done so much harm?
(This article first appeared in the First Baptist Church of La Jolla newsletter INSIDEOUT in September 1999.)

This is the second in a series of articles in which I hope to be able to raise some questions about our faith, and in which I hope to be able to provide some reasoned answers. Some of you may recognize that the title of this series (in capital letters at the top of the web page) is borrowed from a book written by David Dewitt and published in 1980.

Over the last ten years, I have read letters to the editor of the Union-Tribune newspaper from a gentleman who repeats the same message over and over again. Whenever something bad happens, like a bombing in Northern Ireland, a Mid-East conflict, or the war in Kosovo, he will write a letter pointing out that religions are responsible for the conflict and destruction. He also points out, that over the centuries, it is the Christians who have caused so much harm to others, when they should have been busy being peace-makers. Reading his letters, you would come to think that Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin and Pol Pot were all Christians! They certainly caused massive amounts of suffering for humanity, but they certainly were neither religious, nor Christians. Edward K. Boyd (see Gregory A. Boyd and Edward K. Boyd, Letters from a Skeptic, Colorado Springs: Chariot Victor Publishing, 1994, pages 17-18) asked similar questions:

"How could an all-powerful and all-loving God allow the church to do so much harm to humanity for so long? So where was God when Christians were slaughtering the Muslims and Jews - women and children - during the 'holy' crusades? Why would an all-loving God allow the church to take part in something like the Holocaust (at best it looked in the other direction) - and do all these things 'in His name'?"

God has consistently revealed through scripture that He has given each individual a will to choose good or evil. He consistently guides, encourages and prods His people to choose doing good over doing evil. Through Jesus Christ, God incarnate, we know that He is a God of love. Being a God of love also means that He has given us freedom to choose. Without freedom to choose to love Him, (or to choose Jesus Christ as our Savior) we would just be robots - preprogrammed to act a certain way. We were created to be able to choose love and with the potential to choose the opposite - evil. If we were robots, then God could be held accountable for our actions. He would be the cause of the evil in the world. But whatever God does, the Bible says, is good.

So what about those Old Testament passages where God seems to instigate destruction? Does that mean He does not love His creation? Exodus 34:6-7 provides a clue to the answer. God is loving, merciful, gracious, etc. but not stupid. After, He is righteous and punishes those who sin against Him. We may wonder why He directed or allowed the Israeli's to slaughter those standing in their way, but you can be sure God did not direct or allow it out of a sense of mischievousness or because He is sadistic. God loved Adam and Eve, but drove them out of the Garden of Eden for their misbehavior. God loved the Israeli's, but allowed them to be taken into captivity for their disobedience. God loved Ninevah and was ready to destroy it because of its disobedience, but sent Jonah to preach repentance. We disobey God a lot and deserve to be punished, but He has sent Jesus to rescue us from our sins.

We have a free will, and the freedom to reject God and to do evil. Evil does not come from God, it is in opposition to God. When God punishes nor allows His creation to be punished, He does so like a father disciplining his children. Disciplining in this sense (even as severe as told about in scripture), is not the same as being or doing evil. Whenever someone uses the Christian name and does evil, we should question if they indeed are Christian.

Christianity is a relationship with God, it is not a religion. It involves individuals, real people who have a saving and transforming relationship with Jesus Christ, and not with institutions such as the church. Genuine Christianity does not go against the will of God, nor does it seek to destroy God's creation. Only people can be Christians, not institutions. While people make up the church, God has promised to judge individuals, not the church. We need to distinguish between "genuine Christianity" and the "Christian church." Just because the two may share the same name, doesn't mean that they have anything else in common.

#3 Answering the Tough Ones: Why is the world so full of suffering?
(This article first appeared in the First Baptist Church of La Jolla newsletter INSIDEOUT in October 1999.)

This is the third in a series of articles. The last article dealt with our freedom to choose and with the hard fact of God's "tough love." We made the point that God is not evil, nor does he allow evil to flourish unchecked. Through Jesus, God has initiated an end to evil, and through those who believe in Jesus, a powerful force against evil in the mean time. When the freedom to choose results in so much pain and suffering for the innocent, how can God still be considered as loving, especially when there is so much suffering in the world?

"Why is the world so full of suffering?"

How can an all-loving God allow an innocent child to be raped and brutally murdered? How can an all-loving God let His believers be slaughtered in a school in Colorado, and believing parents be left with a painful void in their lives? Wouldn't we be justified in being angry at God in such situations? Job, David in the Psalms, and Jeremiah all cry out to God in bewilderment and anger. But God isn't threatened by our anger, fears or doubts. (I am indebted to Gregory A. Boyd for the logical flow of this argument. See Gregory A. Boyd and Edward K. Boyd, Letters from a Skeptic, Colorado Springs: Chariot Victor Publishing, 1994.)

To have freedom of choice also means that we must be responsible for our actions. We can use our freedom to help others or we can use our freedom to hurt others. To be free means that we are also morally responsible for our actions - to God and to others. How sincere would our love for God be if He preprogrammed us to love Him? The price of true love, in this case, is the danger of making wrong choices. To be free to love also means to be free to make mistakes.

So why doesn't God intervene when we make the wrong choice? Would we be free if every time we make a wrong choice God steps in and prevents us from making it? I gave my children monetary allowances as they were growing up. They were told they were free to spend it as they wished. If every time they wanted to spend "their" allowance on something I did not approve of and I stepped in and prevented them from spending it, would it really be their money? Of course not, it would just still be my money. To be truly free, our freedom must be irrevocable. God must have a "hands off" policy in place. God created free individuals who can do what they please, not predetermined instruments who only end up doing what He wants.

The terrible suffering people inflict on each other in this world is a necessary possibility if we are to experience true love for each other. To be allowed to choose good over evil means that evil may be expressed at some time. Christians have a justification for fighting evil, immorality, corruption and social ills. We don't condone wrong-doing by claiming this is God's will, nor do we assume that everything that happens is condoned by God.

#4 Answering the Tough Ones: Is freedom worth all the suffering?
(This article first appeared in the First Baptist Church of La Jolla newsletter INSIDEOUT in November 1999.)

This is the fourth in a series of articles. The last article dealt with the difficult issue of why God allows suffering to occur in the world. Remember, God has provided a way to deal with suffering by calling upon His name, and by accepting Jesus Christ as our Savior. Peter eloquently expressed a similar viewpoint in 1 Peter 4:12-19. Remember also, that God loves us and wants no one to perish.

"Is freedom worth all the suffering?"

Is freedom worth it to allow someone like Pol Pot, Stalin or Hitler to kill millions of good people? Is this good management or wisdom on God's part? We enjoy the freedom to choose, but we do not like to see the pain or killing which occurs in the world. Hitler's freedom to choose good over evil is no solace to those who experienced Dachau, Auschwitz or Treblinka!

Again, Gregory Boyd provides some food for thought on the matter. According to his way of thinking, there are four points to consider. First, the risk inherent in freedom must be proportional to the potential for good. If I have the freedom to love one person only, then I have the freedom to hurt one person only. If I have the freedom to love a little, then I can hurt a little. If I can love a lot, then I can hurt a lot. Consider then, if we have such an incredible amount of potential to commit evil, then we must have an equally incredible amount of potential to do good, or to love. For every "Hitler," there is an angel of mercy, a "Mother Teresa" if you will.
Is it all worth it? If you think of a terrible tragedy or of a horrible situation you might be inclined to think that it is not worth it. You may even come to think that God is a poor manager of things.

The second point is that for love to be truly meaningful, it must be real - alive! When we love, we are sometimes hurt. People reject us, kids rebel, loved ones die, etc. But we continue to love anyway. To never have loved and lost is never to have loved at all. If someone never really loved, that person would never suffer, and never have really lived. The same is true for God, but on a much greater scale. Should God not have created a world where love could occur, because of the risk of suffering? It is not for the sake of freedom that God created the world, but for the value of love. Freedom is only the means to an end.

Third, the risk inherent in creation is not primarily for humans. Rather, God through His creation has taken the greater risk. The Bible shows us many instances where God suffers for His creation, from its rejection of Him. He suffers from the poor choices of those whom He loves, and He suffers because He loves. The Book of Hosea is one example where God's pain for His people is expressed. He continually calls them back to a faithful relationship with Him. God so loved the world that He was willing to go to a great extent so that we could have an eternal relationship with Him. "On the cross of Calvary, God took upon Himself all the sin of the world, and all the pain and punishment that sin produces. He didn't have to do it. He did it out of love..."

Fourth, if this short life is all there is, and there is only a complete end to our existence, then it may not be worth it for life's victims. But if Christianity is true, then this life is only a prelude (an introduction) to the eternal life we are to live. For many people, this life is filled with nothing but pain and suffering. But with an eternal perspective, this life is but a mere speck in a vast ocean (James 4:14). Jesus died on the cross so that we may have eternal life with Him in heaven. In 1 Corinthians 2:9, Paul helps us to understand that from the standpoint of Auschwitz, heaven is incomprehensibly beautiful; so much so, that we can easily forget the pains of this life! Romans 8:18 also promises us that the life in heaven is incomprehensible to us here on earth.

If there is no heaven, then all the sufferings of this world - its tears, cries, hurts, the anguish of dying children - all go unanswered. Life, then, is just a cruel joke, a tragic comedy of immense proportion for all of us. All our hopes, dreams, anticipations will be for nothing. Everything will pass away. Life's a pain, and then we die. Yet many of us feel in our hearts that "the best is yet to come!" Humans over the ages have tenaciously held onto the belief that this world is not all there is. The Bible resonates with the proclamation that there is a happy ending possible.

#5 Answering the Tough Ones: Does God know the future?
(This article first appeared in the First Baptist Church of La Jolla newsletter INSIDEOUT in December 1999.)

This is the fifth in a series of articles. The last article dealt with the value of the God-given freedom for us to choose to love, as well as the risks inherent in having the freedom to choose. We remember that with all the pain and suffering we might come in contact with, God shares in that suffering and more so since He has a whole world to care about!

"Does God know the future?"

If God is all-knowing, why did He just not look ahead and see the complications which this freedom to love could cause? More importantly, if God knows every person's heart before they are born, why did He just not allow only the right people to exist? This way we could still have the freedom to choose, but with only good people to do the choosing there would be no wrong choices, no suffering. Then there would be no risk involved. Besides, isn't God in complete control?

The issue of the degree or scope of God's foreknowledge is currently being hotly debated by theologians. Does God know everything that will happen before it does, or is there some element of mystery - an open end - the possibility for a surprise choice? Can God be both totally in control (possess absolute power over everything), yet at the same time allow things to happen that are not fore-ordained (be surprised)?

In the discussion of this topic, it is easy to get lost in the rhetoric and one has to be careful to keep the various terms in their proper place (i.e. used in accordance with their meaning). For example, one can have foreknowledge, but not be able to do anything about what is known (no power). Alternately, one can possess complete power over things, but not know what will happen next (no foreknowledge). Having foreknowledge and having power are two different things. Although God possesses both, it does not imply that his having foreknowledge equates with the exercise of His power with respect to what is known by Him. Likewise, having complete power means that He can choose to withhold the exercise of that power, choose not to exercise foreknowledge, otherwise God would be limited and not be all-powerful. The power to do something also implies you have the power not to do something. But does this same relationship exist with respect to foreknowledge?

The traditional Christian position is that God does fore know the free actions of everybody before they act in the future. This divine foreknowledge must not be confused with determinism or fatalism (that there is no free choice). Every human being has individual responsibility in moral decision-making and will be judged according to the choice made. God knows what you may choose, but He does not necessarily will you to choose it. God knows what is possible as well as actual, but He did not cause it. God's will is that every person have eternal life with Him, and He has exercised His power through Christ to make eternal life available to everyone, yet only those who choose to accept Christ will inherit eternal life. Gods knows in advance all those who will choose Christ, but He does not exercise His power to cause them to choose Christ.

Alternately, some believe that this traditional Christian position is based upon a misconception of what God's omniscience (His knowing everything) consists of. Although God knows all of reality, it would be wrong to assume that He also knows what has yet to happen (what isn't real yet). A decision isn't made, and isn't real until it exists. If we don't make a particular decision, then it does not exist. There is nothing to know until we make it there to be known. With this view, God can't fore know the good or bad decisions of the people He creates until He creates them and they, in turn, create their decisions.

God creates people and He knows that some will choose to do good and others will choose to do evil. He gives every person the opportunity to choose to do good, but knows that some won't. In fact, every person makes a wrong choice at one time or another. God has revealed His good will to us, given each of us a conscience, a sense of right and wrong, and He also forgives us when we make the wrong choices. God so loved His creation - us - that He provided a way for us to pay for our wrong choices before we were even born. He predestined (pre-determined) that those who chose to accept His way (through Christ) would receive eternal life just as if they never had done anything wrong.

Does any of this imply that God is not in control or that God won't know how it is all going to end? The concerns about the "openness of God" may be a misperception. It may not be as important for God to know every detailed choice that we might make in advance (He may choose to ignore this), but rather that we choose to accept His offer of paying for those wrong choices so that we will end up in the right place. Just as it is not important which sins we committed, but rather that we turn from our sins; so too it may not be important for God to know in advance which choices we make, but rather that we will accept His offer of forgiveness through Christ.

#6 Answering the Tough Ones: Why does God create earthquakes and famines?
(This article first appeared in the First Baptist Church of La Jolla newsletter INSIDEOUT in January 2000.)

This is the sixth in a series of articles. The last article dealt with the question of whether God knows all that will happen in the future. The traditional position is that He does to the smallest detail, however, some theologians are coming to believe that God allows an open-end to some choices. They feel that, although God has determined what will ultimately happen in the end, He has allowed Himself to be surprised by the individual choices people make. If God is all powerful, then He can determine what He will allow and what He won't allow. Possessed with the power to know the future or to ignore it does not imply that God can't know the future. In the Bible, God frequently asks questions of people and even seems to change His mind (see Exodus 32:14; 1 Samuel 15:11; Jeremiah 18:7-10, 20:19 for example). If everything was fixed then God couldn't change His mind and that would raise the question about God being all-powerful again.

"Why does God create earthquakes and famine?"

Edward Boyd once asked: "If God is all powerful and created the entire universe and everything in it, then He must have also created all the natural evils that arise which are not the consequences of anyone's decision? If God directly creates everything, then He must also create earthquakes, famines, floods, diseases like AIDS, deformed babies, etc.? Surely we can't blame someone's free will decision for these? If God is all-loving why isn't He more careful with His creation?"

Just because there is no human will directly responsible for natural disasters does not necessarily mean that God is directly responsible for them or for causing them.

Gregort Boyd, Edward's son, answered these questions in the following manner. First, most of the pain and suffering in the world is caused by humans, not by nature. And even the pain from natural disasters would be minimized or eliminated if humans were what God wanted them to be. For example, with famines if we "loved our neighbors as ourselves" no one would have to starve. There is enough food in the world to feed eeveryone, just look at how much we Americans throw away each week. Famines can come from wars (human initiated), or from floods (even when people know better than to live in flood plains) where the distribution process is disrupted. Much of the "natural disasters" arise from evil hearts or apathy (with respect to the environment).

Second, since creation is something less than God, it possesses certain limitations or imperfections. A good deal of what we call "evil" may just be a recognition of those limitations. For example, any created thing must possess a limited set of characteristics which rules out the possibility of it possessing other characteristics incompatible with these. This can lead to some unfortunate circumstances. The air you breathe must be thin enough to get into your lungs, but that means it must allow you to fall through it when you stumble. The water that you need to drink must be dense enough so you don't breathe it, and so on. Indeed, every positive feature of any created entity is a potentially negative feature in certain circumstances. The limitations of reality go hand in hand with the definiteness of reality. It's not evil, it's just the way things are.

But what about deformed babies, they are not explained by these limitations? To the third point then. If the Bible is correct (and I believe it is), human free wills are not the only free wills which have been created. The universe is inhabited by numerous spiritual free beings as well. They are spiritual and not physical like we are, and may not have to adhere to the laws of physics like we do. They are called "angels" and "demons," and also called "principalities" and "powers" which gives much more of an impression of a spiritual force than embodied entities. Some of those free spiritual wills have chosen to do evil and are in a state of war against God and everything that is good. This earth is their battlefield, we are constantly under siege. There is a power of pure evil which now affects everything and everybody on earth. The Creator is not the only influence any longer. That is why we can both have such incredible beauty on earth as well as nightmarish situations!

Being in the middle of a battlefield, all sorts of terrible things can happen. In such a situation, every good thing can be turned to an evil use, every person can become a potential weapon or a victim. Romans 8 attests to the chaos that is this world. We do not know how demonic forces tamper with nature, the Bible is silent on that account, but we do know that the good things God has created can be spoiled or despoiled to create havoc, chaos, pain and suffering. God is good, God is love, God does not create chaos or deformities. As those who are aligned with God in the battle against evil, we need to persevere through all the trials and tribulations that the "principalities" can throw at us. With God's help, through Christ, we will prevail and celebrate with Him the new birth, the new creation that is yet to come!

#7 Answering the Tough Ones: Why did God create Satan?
(This article first appeared in the First Baptist Church of La Jolla newsletter INSIDEOUT in February 2000.)

This is the seventh in a series of articles. The last article dealt with the question of why God, as Creator, would create natural disasters such as earthquakes and famines. We looked at the difference between human-initiated natural disasters (such as when a war creates a disruption in the supply system and people starve) and the natural limitations from being created (such as being air-breathing beings who are unable to "breathe" water). We also looked at the reality of ungodly spiritual impacts (such as deformed babies, etc.) as a result of the earth being under spiritual attack by evil. Evil is not an abstract concept, but a real force in the world and capable of much mischief and damage to God's creation. God will win this "cosmic battle" in the end, and these "temporary" setbacks are insignificant when we take in the scope of eternity as a perfected creature. Already we are saved, but not yet are we transformed.

Why did God create Satan?

To some, the idea that there are demons and angels - invisible creatures - at work in the world seems pretty far-fetched and hard to accept. This sounds more like a Star Trek or Star Wars plot than reality. Why would God create Satan in the first place? If God created him to be so good, even with his freedom to make bad choices, how come he made such a bad choice and does so much evil? The same applies to humans. If we were created to be so good in the first place, how come everyone who was originally created good turned out so bad? Isn't God still to blame for our nature - after all - He created us? Isn't it possible then, that those who have been saved, once they go to heaven, can also fail like Satan did?

The longer we live the stranger the universe becomes. Once there were only four elements - fire, water, air, and bile. Then came atoms and molecules, quasars, quarks, and things named "charm," "strange force," etc. First the earth was the center of the universe, then the sun. First the stars were "hung" in the sky, now they travel ever outward into space (eventually to reverse direction and crash in on themselves as some scientists believe). A lot of this is unseen, but none-the-less real as the chair and table in your home. We can't see radio or television waves, but that does not make them any less real. So to think in terms of invisible beings is no more strange than to think in terms of visible ones. I believe that there are good reasons for believing in such non-physical beings. I believe in the authority of Jesus and in that of the Bible. If these testify about invisible spiritual beings, then I would be hard pressed to come up with evidence to the contrary. As the Psalmist wrote, we are truly "fearfully and wonderfully" made (Psalm 139:14).

Earlier we looked at the proposition that true love requires true freedom of choice. The greater the possibility of love, the greater the possibility of evil. But that does not imply that love must be forever something tenuous. The more we choose something, the more we become that something. We become more like the decisions we make. We are all in the process of forming our identities by the decisions we make. The more decisions we make in a particular direction, the more momentum we gain to go in that direction (I am indebted to Dr. Gregory Boyd for this train of thought as presented in his book: Letters from a Skeptic, Chariot Victor Publishing: Colorado Springs, 1994). People aren't born bitter and hateful, they gradually become that way. A sweet, joyful person who repeatedly experienced hurt feelings and dwelled in anger, eventually can become that crusty old man or woman with a hard heart. It may take years, but there is a gradual transformation. All that God wanted that person to be has been undone by time, consumed by an increasing hate or anger. What started as a choice became the person's nature. It's much like a snowball running down the hill, gathering ever more bulk - one snowflake, one choice at a time - until it has so much momentum it is hard to stop.

Satan (or Lucifer) was someone who had great potential in heaven, a great potential to love God. But somewhere, with a small decision, Satan made a bad choice, and instead of repenting and turning from the bad choice, he kept on making bad choices until it was too late to change. Satan began heading in the wrong direction, ever downhill and he can't stop now. Individual people, groups or societies and humanity in general have likewise made choices and many are on a downward spiral. Not only that, but we have so much downward momentum that we cannot on our own turn things around and make them like they used to be. We need a new start, a clean slate! That's what Jesus is all about, God's way of getting us back on the right track.

C. S. Lewis (in his book Mere Christianity, Simon & Schuster: New York, 1996, page 177) put it this way: "God meant what he said. Those who put themselves in His hands will become perfect, as He is perfect - perfect in love, wisdom, joy, beauty, and immortality. The change will not be completed in this life, for death is an important part of the treatment. How far the change will have gone before death in any particular Christian is uncertain." By accepting God's free gift of reconciliation, we put ourselves in His hands. Through our moment by moment walk with Jesus, God restores us to what He wanted us to become. Satan knows about Jesus, but his heart is as hard as Pharaoh's, unable to turn on his own and unwilling to let God turn him around.

#8 Answering the Tough Ones: Is God All Powerful?
(This article first appeared in the First Baptist Church of La Jolla newsletter INSIDEOUT in March 2000.)

This is the eighth in a series of articles. The last article dealt with the question of why God created Satan. Along with the other heavenly beings such as angels, Satan was created to love and serve God. The point that we made before was that to truly love you must be truly free to choose to love. Having this choice poses the possibility that you would choose to not love. Making a series of like choices build on themselves, making it increasingly harder for someone to change direction on their own. That is, what I believe, happened to Satan - having made the wrong choices, he has "hardened his heart" against God and now refuses to repent. We are given the same choices to do good or evil, and if we repent, God has promised to restore us through Jesus Christ. But God won't force Jesus "down our throats;" He loves us too much to do that.

Is God all powerful?

With all this talk of free will by humans, angels and demons you may be wondering what good does it even do to believe in God? It almost seems like we are being asked to believe in a God who can't do anything but love us. Where is His power? God may be all loving, but is He in control?

God is able to do whatever He wills in the way in which He wills it. God does not choose to do anything contrary to His nature of wisdom and holy love. God does not choose to do everything by his own immediate agency; He freely uses angelic and human agents to carry out His will. Although God determines some things to come to pass unconditionally (Isaiah 14:24-27), most events in history are planned conditionally, through the obedience of people or their permitted disobedience to divine precepts (2 Chronicles 7:14; Luke 7:30; Romans 1:24). In any case, God's eternal purposes for history are not frustrated, but fulfilled in the way He chose to accomplish them (Ephesians 1:11). [For more information on the preceding, see the Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, edited by Walter A. Elwell, Baker Books: Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1984, pages 457-458.]

God has all the power and will continue to have all the power. When He created free creatures, God conditionally restrained Himself voluntarily. By giving us some small free will, He voluntarily gave up some power over us. In essence, He has "lent" us some power, which He no longer uses - conditionally - for this very short period of time we are on earth. God is still in control since He alone determined how much freedom to grant, and He alone has the power to take it all back when He wants to do so. That is why God can never, and will never, lose the "cosmic battle" with Satan. Only those who have deluded themselves into thinking that they can be "like god" will be surprised when He calls an end to the way things are on earth.

God allows us to make our own decisions, we are free to choose to "drink and drive." But it is not God's purpose that we choose to "drink and drive" and kill a little child in a car accident. No, we are morally responsible for our actions and will be held accountable for them. God did not will us to have the accident, nor did He will that the child should die. We can choose to live and behave responsibly, with the added benefit that this pleases God. In a sense, we are currently "on probation" with eternal life ahead of us. The evil which we encounter is not purposed by God, but comes from individual decisions, which God has temporarily surrendered control over. But evil cannot wrest control from God, God has the last word.

Believing in Christ as Savior grants a person all the fullness of life God intended them to have, and no evil in the world can take that away (Romans 8:35). Not even death can touch those who accept Christ!

#9 Answering the Tough Ones: Why Believe in God in the First Place?
(This article first appeared in the First Baptist Church of La Jolla newsletter INSIDEOUT in June 2000.)

This is the ninth in a series of articles. The last article asked the question: "Is God all powerful?" We found that God's strength and power includes doing what He wants to do, when He wants to do it, and how He wants to do something. God is great enough to limit Himself - conditionally restrain himself - for a period of time. In the end, though, He has determined what will happen and what will happen is that He wins! Any delusion on our part that God is not in ultimate control will result in a sad ending for us indeed.

Why believe in God in the first place?

Some of you, as readers, may start to think that all of this sounds like a game. It may seem that much of what I have offered so far is a bunch of excuses for God not acting in an all-loving manner. If God exists, then why is it not more obvious? Maybe my faith is wrongly placed if I have to go through all these "gymnastics" to explain God's behavior. I can come up with many reasons why we can't see "the man in the moon," but eventually I'll have to entertain the notion that he doesn't exist.

Many people have come to believe and accept the notion that there may be a "higher power" existing in our world, but cannot come to believe that this is in the form of a personal being. A being who is all powerful or who even cares at all about human beings. And even if such a power existed, how could we even begin to know anything about such a being?

Why believe in God? I feel that there are many reasons, some of them come from the "head," and others from the "heart." Some are intellectual, cognitive, rational and thinking reasons, while others are intuitive, emotional and hard to explain in words. Some are easy to explain and understand, and others are hard and difficult to express to another person. I like Greg Boyd's approach - any argument for God must be easily understood, straight forward and explainable in non-technical language. Not everyone is a philosopher or has followed a theological course of study at a Seminary or Bible College.

The essence of the argument for a personal God's existence comes from the personal nature of people. We are personal beings possessing a mind that is aware of itself, a mind that is rational at its core, a heart that is free and can choose to love, a heart that is morally responsible for its choices, and a soul which longs for meaning and significance. To be fully human means that we have consciousness, rationality, love, morality and meaning.

Given the above, then, we have to admit that either we live in a universe (our environment) which is compatible with these attributes, or we do not live in such an environment. Either our environment makes these attributes intelligible and answers them, or it does not. For example, we get hungry and there is food, we get thirsty and there is drink, we have a sex drive and there is sex. So given the kind of world we live in, we can understand why we hunger, thirst, and desire sex. Our environment "answers" our drives and thereby makes sense of them.

Consequently, does our environment answer the basic human attributes we pointed out earlier? Unless our environment is ultimately personal - possesses self-awareness, is rational, loving and has meaning (is purposeful) - then our environment does not answer to our human attributes. Unless their is a personal God who is the ultimate reality within our environment, then we humans can only be viewed as absurd, irrational, "freaks of nature;" for everything that is essential to us is actually out of place in our universe. Human beings, then, are completely unexplainable and we can ask how "Mother Nature" could have developed something so absurd, so out of sync with itself?

As Greg Boyd stated: "Are we the product of a cruel, sick, cosmic joke? If, for example, we instinctively assume that reality should be rational and that reasoning gets us closer to the truth (and science seems to say that this assumption is valid), but in the end nature is irrational." there can be, then, no higher power. If we instinctively assume that love is a reality and that it is the only ideal worth dying for, but "Mother Nature" seems indifferent, loveless, brutish - nothing more than a chemical process - then love is reduced to nothing noble, just a change in hormone level. The same is true for meaning and purpose. If we instinctively hunger for it and we strive to provide some purpose for our living, and the universe is ultimately purposeless, then all we are is "dust in the wind" (Ecclesiastes 3:20). Ultimately, everything is meaningless (Ecclessiates 1:2).

So, unless the ultimate source of everything is personal, as personal as we are, our existence is hard to explain and even harder to accept! C. S. Lewis put it this way: "If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning: just as, if there were no light in the universe and therefore no creatures with eyes, we should never know it was dark." That is why Christians proclaim Jesus as the "light" of the world. He both opens our eyes to the higher reality and provides a purpose for our existence.

#10 Answering the Tough Ones: Couldn't it all be by chance?
(This article first appeared in the First Baptist Church of La Jolla newsletter INSIDEOUT in July 2000.)

This is the tenth in a series of articles. The last article asked the question "Why believe in God in the first place?" I brought up the point that whatever we believe, it must be explainable in simple terms. However, that did not imply that our belief is not complex. The reality is that our belief is not something we invented, but rather, God's revelation of certain facts of Himself to us. This is "...not neat, not obvious, not what you expect." as C. S. Lewis has said. If God offered us a universe like we expected it to be, then we would not be capable of believing Him. But offering us a universe which is unexpected does not imply that the universe is without order. The main point of the last article was that the order in our universe points to the existence of God. In fact, our very existence makes no sense unless there is an ultimate source for everything.

Couldn't it all be by chance?

Why could this universe not have come about by accident? Does not science point to a universe which evolved, with our minds and morality only a part of our natural drive to survive? The universe is an immense place and how can we assume that we are such an important element in it? Perhaps we are just a by-product of it.

In order for something to evolve or to possess a "drive," there must exist a force behind such a process or "drive." And since an effect cannot be greater than its cause, doesn't this imply that the fact humans (the effect) are personal mean that the cause (the force) must also be personal? The process cannot be pure chance, because there must be some correspondence between our minds and reality when we think about reality. We can only come to understand physical reality if the physical universe is "mind-like," as Greg Boyd has stated. The universe's realities were discovered - existed before we even thought about them. Whatever we have come to believe about the universe's structure was not imposed on it by us, but rather has been come to be known by us.

Chance cannot produce mathematical formulas which explain the universe. Chance cannot produce people that possess minds that can know and work out mathematical formulas. A simpler way to state this is to say that if our minds are simply a chemical reaction, than any truth we discover amounts to nothing more than a chemical signature in our brains. No matter how complex they may be, chemical reactions are all alike, and anything a genius would have discovered would be nothing more than a chemical "burp!"

We instinctively know that reality is more than a series of chemical reactions. Our minds can comprehend physical aspects of the world because the world is rational - physical realities exist. Possessing a rational mind, then, is not something by chance, there must be some rational force behind it. Likewise, morality is not simply a matter of chance. If it was, then there would be no objective reference point. Morality would only say something about the way we feel and not about the way things are. If you can say that the deranged man who mutilated a girl was "wrong" for doing so, then you must mean more than that you just don't like how it feels. You must "feel" that his deed contradicts the way things ought to be. Are you making a claim about the way the universe is, not about the way you are? Did not the man violate some moral law in the universe? Chance, mere chemical reactions, can be no more moral than it can be rational. I believe that the force behind the universe is not only rational, but moral as well.

I cannot believe in a universe which has produced creatures that have longings, which nature itself will not fulfill. Where did our longing for something that never existed, and that never could exist come from? "The characteristics of being a person, and the longings that come from being a person, require that the ultimate cause and context of personhood is personal." That, as Greg Boyd put it, is the only rational assumption to be made about the "force." One of the enduring longings of people about the universe (and about their very existence) is to come to know the force behind it all.

I came to believe in God not just as a result of consistently drawing out the implications of what each of us believes about ourselves and the world around us. My belief is not a theory which I just happen to hold on to as being true, it is more than that, it is a relationship. When I came to believe in God, I also came to trust in the sacrifice of Jesus Christ as the only way in which I could be made right with the "moral force" of the universe. My faith in God opened up for me a new universe, one which brought me fulfillment, a new outlook on life, and an enthusiasm for a life together with the Creator! Is it pure chance that so many other people have found the same thing over the last several thousand years?

#11 Answering the Tough Ones: Why didn't God spare ----------?
(This article first appeared in the First Baptist Church of La Jolla newsletter INSIDEOUT in August 2000.)

This is the eleventh in a series of articles. The last article asked the question "Couldn't it all be by chance?" What reasons exist that would explain the universe, and everything in it, as a result of chance? Chance is based upon probability; the probability that this or that may occur x% of the time. It is true that the sky could have been green or red or orange as well as blue. But regardless of the color, there is a force, a drive, a reason behind the sky being the color it is. Chance cannot produce the complexities of this universe and have all the elements work so harmoniously with one another. We instinctively know that reality is more than just chance occurrence of random events. Nature does not answer the "longings" for something which never did exist or cannot exist. One of the enduring "longings" of people about the universe and their existence is to get to know the force behind it all. I have come to believe that God is behind all of reality and that He has revealed this fact to all of us.

Why didn't God spare -------?

If our concepts of the universe and its creator are based upon notions of rationality and morality, then how can we come to understand these characteristics of God? For example, if God is personal and interested in each of us, how could He let us "dangle" for so long, allow us to suffer the brunt of so many bad things that have occurred? It would have been very easy for God to have allowed Satan to die as a child and prevented the death of so many millions of innocent people in Russia in the 1930's. One bad person removed, so that millions might live!

Then too, where was God when those dire circumstances called upon Him for relief and relief did not come? The prayers and tears of the mother over her child being led to an unjust death - did God hear them? Where was His personal concern? Why was He silent then? How many faithful Christians have cried to God to spare this or that loved one, only to be met with silence and the loss of that person? Why didn't God spare my brother, my sister, my father, my mother, my husband, my wife, my -----? He could have spared so much pain.

Even if someone has reached an intellectual conclusion regarding the death of a loved one, this does not minimize or assuage the reality that a dear, loved one was lost! It is even understandable to "rage" in such circumstances. Some people will block out their feelings of loss, of being abandoned, and some will bury their feelings deeply, while others will carry a grudge for a long time. What happens with those feelings and what results from our feeling so abandoned? "To what end?" as Pastor Brian would say of this type of behavior.

Believers and non-believers are hurt and feel abandoned, but as Christians, we receive something special and more valuable than an answer to the question "why?" We receive healing and love from the Lord. In the face of constantly feeling alone, abandoned and of little worth, Jesus' voice speaks across the ages in Scripture and in prayer. He demonstrated that each one of us is "lovable and infinitely precious in His eyes." He said that he would never leave us of forsake us, and that he would be with us to the end of time! His is an unconditional love for us. In the face of our loss, God wants to be the cure.

Being filled with the unconditional love of Jesus, Greg Boyd was led to write: "...unconditional love is the only life source for the soul and the only medicine for its wounds. An intellectual answer could never do that." In Ephesians 3:19, Paul wrote about a love that surpasses all understanding. Christ, if you allow yourself to trust in him, will show his beauty of love - grace, tenderness, and a gentle strength that no mere mortal can match. Christ brings an understanding to the heart which no mind can comprehend, and a true love which comes from his compassion for us, and an understanding which embraces our hurts and fears.

The Gospels tell us that Jesus suffers as we suffer, and that such is the manner of his healing. No matter how bad we feel, Jesus understands us and is with us. He is not far, far away on some remote galaxy not able to care about our hurts, but close by, even next to us, when we need him. He's there beside us as we walk through the desolation of our situation. Reminding us that there is more to life than that what we see in a fleeting moment.

The God I believe in is an awesome God. He is the only God I know that knows firsthand the pain a parent feels at the loss of a child, or the loss you or I may feel. There is no other religion which proclaims a God such as this! A God who meets us right in the middle of the hell-on-earth that we may have not even created. As Greg Boyd has stated, only Gospels dare to proclaim a god born in a shabby, dirty stable; who lived a life befriending the outcasts of society (the lepers and prostitutes) whom no one else would befriend, and who himself would suffer a horrible death for doing the right thing. Jesus plumbed the nightmarish depths of being human, and only the Gospels make sense of this contradictory world, where something can be both beautiful and ugly at the same time.

Since I'm not God, I don't know why He did not answer the fervent prayers of those in distress. But if it weren't for sin and if it weren't for spiritual warfare, we would have never known these painful situations. Yet, what is more important than any attempt at understanding God's action or inaction is the reality expressed through the life of Jesus; that God was with each person going through the pain. God was suffering as my brother suffered and as I suffered. He offers a profound healing to each of us and to all who were involved. I allowed Christ to come into my life and to begin the healing process. If he can do it for me, He can certainly do it for you. God is not interested in merely "sparing" someone, He's interested in full restoration!

#12 Answering the Tough Ones: Why would an all powerful God need prayer?
(This article first appeared in the First Baptist Church of La Jolla newsletter INSIDEOUT in September 2000.)

This is the twelfth in a series of articles. The last article asked the question: "Why didn't God spare ---?" In that article, we explored one of the most difficult questions people ask regarding God. It is a difficult question because it is so personal and so touching. The loss of a loved one is difficult under any circumstances and even Christians sometimes struggle with why their particular loved one was not spared by God. The reality of our world is that people die for any number of reasons. As Christians, we have a special relationship with God that not only brings us through the pain and suffering of abandonment, but actually offers to bring us beyond merely coping with a loss on to a path of restoration. We have a God who knows and understands the pain we feel, and He cares enough about each one of us to have provided Jesus as a way to deal with such a loss. He is close by at all times for us and we can reach Him through prayer.

Why would an all powerful God need prayer?

If God is all powerful, all wise, all good and so concerned about us, and He has already done so much for us through Christ, why would we still need to pray to Him? Does prayer even work, or for that matter, could it ever work? If He already is doing as much as He can for us, why would we need to pray? Are we asking Him to care more or to do more than He can? If He already knows everything, why would we need to let Him know our feelings or what we need? So if we can't tell Him more than He already knows, if we can't give Him more power than He already has, and if we can't inspire Him to do more than He already does - what's the point of prayer? Isn't it all a waste of time?

Our relationship with God is not like that of an ATM machine - we need money and we push a few buttons and out comes the cash! When we have a relationship with someone we strive to communicate with them, talk to them. This is what prayer is, talking with God. Notice I did not say "talking to God." A relationship is a two-way street and talking also involves listening. Our relationship is also not one of only listening to God. Our relationship with God is to be faith-filled and loving, not transactional - talking to Him only when we need something. The main function of prayer is to talk, to listen and to "be in the presence" of Him.

From Scripture we know that God wants us to pray, that we are to be persistent and that He answers our prayers (Luke 18:1-8). As in any loving relationship, one party listens to the other and responds. The more persistent we are, the more the other party understands the importance of our request. But persistence is not mindless repetition, nor consistent nagging. Neither a parrot's frequent repetition of a phrase nor the endless repetition of a broken phonograph record is an example of persistence. Persistence has genuine caring behind it. Persistence is also not a sole passive act, rather we continue to do everything we can to affect change.

Does God ever change His mind then? We dealt with this issue earlier, but recall Jonah and the city of Nineveh (Jonah 3:10). For God to be supreme, we cannot force Him into a corner and allow Him only to behave the way we want Him to. God calls the shots and if He wants to make things conditional, then He may do so. In such a case, God does not truly "change His mind" as if He originally determined to do one thing and nothing else, but rather He allows us to make a free choice. If Nineveh's inhabitant's hearts were hardened against a loving and caring God and then they did not repent, then it would not be God's choice that they resisted (recall 2 Peter 3:9). So I think we can safely say that prayer could work.

At this point you may be thinking, "Okay, prayer could work, but that does not mean it actually does work!" There are some intriguing studies being done now by doctors to test the efficacy of prayer. Preliminary results found that there was a correlation between being prayed for (whether you knew it or not) and healing. But it may be difficult to verify this correlation as a true cause and effect relationship. For example, I believe that it is a documented fact that in the 24 hours before their death, 80% of people had drunk a glass of water. So there is a correlation between drinking water and dying. But you can easily see that it was not the water that caused the death. There are just too many other variables involved and finding the relationship between them and death is another matter. Can it be the same with petitionary prayers?

Remember the ATM example? If God automatically answered every prayer, then we could verify that prayer works. But would this not defeat the whole purpose of prayer? The purpose of prayer is to facilitate our relationship with God and faith in Him. It takes faith to pray and faith to see the answer to prayer. But why are some prayers not immediately answered?

If you think about the spiritual warfare analogy and God as the supreme commander, you may begin to see this relationship. We are a very small part of the universe and our prayers (messages to the commander) flow in a steady stream to Him and may even compete with one another. Then too there are all the circumstances that exist in the universe, as well as their consequences. God is able to receive all of this and process it, whereas we are not. Since He loves us and cares for us we have to trust that He will make the best decision for us in the long run. So, sometimes a request is granted and sometimes it is not. But lacking the bigger perspective, we do not understand why one prayer is granted and the other isn't. That is why Paul wrote that "we now see through a very dark glass."

As you walk in faith and humbly pray with all manner of requests and concerns, you will find that God is faithful to answer prayer. We also pray in praise to God when we have seen Him act. There are millions of people who can testify to the fact that God answers prayer! If we understand that He really does care for us, then our faith will carry us through those difficult times. God has called to us to join Him in relationship. He has done His part and continues to do His part in keeping the relationship going. But He also asks us to do our part as well. If God has provided us with a car, we can hardly blame Him for it stalling when it runs out of gas.

#13 Answering the Tough Ones: Why would God care about us little humans?
(This article first appeared in the First Baptist Church of La Jolla newsletter INSIDEOUT in February 2001.)

This is the thirteenth in a series of articles. The last article asked the question: "Why would an all powerful God need prayer?" In that article, we explored the reasoning behind the need to pray to God even though He is all powerful and all knowing. Is it because there are limits to what He can do? We learned that God is not like an ATM machine - put in your request and out comes the answer. Rather, we have a relationship with God through Jesus Christ and prayer is not just a one-sided way to ask for things. God desires a relationship with us, one in which we also listen to Him. God cares deeply about each one of us, so much that He will do what is best for us, even when we cannot understand why.

Why would God care about us little humans?

For much of the last two thousand years, people thought they were the center of the universe - literally and figuratively. Everything in nature seemed to evolve around them and it was easy to believe that God cared about people - all people. But over the last several hundred years, science has shown us that the universe is far larger than we ever thought and, more so, that we do not appear to be at the center of everything that exists. Even if we were created by God, some will say, it seems that we were more an accident of nature than an important part of the design! Is there anything we know about or from God that would indicate why we should think of ourselves as important to Him and His plans for the universe?

If someone focuses on the "nature" of things, it is easy to see how one can end up equating being "small" with being "unimportant." A person may assume that being small in a physical sense means that one cannot be large (important) in a spiritual sense. But just because elephant babies are larger than human babies does not mean they are more important than human babies. Nor does it mean that the planet Jupiter, which is 100 times larger than earth, is more important than the earth. Physical size has little to do with importance.

If you accepted the earlier arguments that God is a personal being, who has personal characteristics, then the fact that those personal characteristics (moral convictions, love, reason, etc.) are reflected in humans can not imply that we are an "accident" of nature. To reflect attributes of the divine, however imperfect, does not negate their importance. In other words, while we are not gods because we have the ability to love, neither is love unimportant because we have the ability to love. Our imperfect moral convictions or love suppose the existence of a perfect moral standard or love. How else would we know if our love was imperfect, if it were not for the existence of a perfect standard? If God is not the ultimate in perfect love or moral conviction, then who is above God that is more perfect? God, by definition, is the perfect being and none other exist over Him.

Gregory Boyd put it this way: "The gist of all this...is that if we imperfect beings are morally outraged at the injustices which exist in our world, must not the Creator be infinitely more outraged? If we hurt, out of love and moral conviction, for those whom we know suffer in our world, must not the Creator hurt infinitely more?" It seems impossible, then, to suppose that the basis for our personal characteristics (i.e. God) doesn't care about us. This means that God must know you perfectly - more than you know yourself; that God must love you perfectly - more than you love yourself; and that God cares about your suffering perfectly - more than you care about it yourself.

Once a person understands this, then they easily begin to inquire about who God is and what is our relationship to be with Him. What does He want from me? What does He want me to do? Personal questions that follow naturally from our understanding of a personal God. And if God is so personal, so perfectly loving, and so caring, then He will seek to bring about the greatest possible good for His creation. And that is exactly what history has taught us that he has done! Anything less would not be perfect.

Christ is the one who reveals exactly what God did for each of us. God himself became a man - one of us - and suffered death on the cross in order to correct for all the evil which His creation has inflicted on itself. What He has done and is doing is to bring us into an eternal relationship with Him. This fits reason, but there is also a tremendous amount of historical evidence to support it. Reason and history came together in the person of Jesus Christ as Lord.

Article #14: Why trust the Gospel accounts?
(This article first appeared in the First Baptist Church of La Jolla newsletter INSIDEOUT in May 2002.)

This is the fourteenth in a series of articles. The last appeared in February 2001 and asked the question: "Why would God care about us little humans?" The long absence of this column was due to several factors, not the least of which was having to take Greek and Hebrew at the seminary. I don't think it will be hard to pick up where we left off though, but in case you missed the earlier articles let me know and I'll get you a copy or copies.

In the last article, we explored the reasoning behind the shift in human thinking ads a result of the development of various scientific discoveries. Up until about the time of the Reformation, we thought we were the center of the universe, that the earth was in fact the center of all creation. Then we found out that the sun was the center of our universe and that ours was just one of many "universes." We, not so suddenly, began to think of ourselves as insignificant in God's creation. While some felt that this made us just another part of nature, noting special, the writer of Psalm 8 in verses 3-4 pondered on the same issue, only to conclude that because God made us, we were special in His eyes. Being "small" in creation did not mean being unimportant. As we reflect God's characteristics of love, reason, moral convictions, etc. we witness to a creator and not an accident of nature. Furthermore, God revealed His love and concern for us through Jesus Christ. With Jesus Christ we have been given access to God as never before, and a model of perfection to follow, and it is the Old Testament that pointed towards this reality, with the New Testament Gospels directly witnessing to God's saving plan for human history.

So why trust the Gospel accounts?

Many people find it hard to accept the Gospel accounts of Jesus' ministry on earth for various reasons: Aren't there contradictions in the Gospel accounts? How can we be sure that the story hasn't been changed over the centuries by copyists? Were they even written by the evangelists? It seems to take a great leap of faith to accept the Gospel accounts and to believe that Jesus is who the Gospels claim he is!

Setting aside the issue of the inspiration of the Bible as God's Word for the time being and treating the Gospels as any other historical document, we can arrive at certain conclusions. Using the same criteria any historian would use to analyze any historical document, we would focus our attention on both internal and external evidence for the validity of the Gospels. In this way, we would end up trusting the documents only to the degree they meet the historical criteria. It's not a matter of accepting the Gospels on sheer "blind faith."

We would want to ask questions about what we find in the documents, as well as what we find out about the documents in the real world. Greg Boyd gave us some questions to use in our analysis: Was the writer an eyewitness or does he/she know what they are talking about? Does the document contain specific, even irrelevant detail? Does it contain self-damaging information? Is it reasonably self-consistent? Is there evidence of the addition of legend in the document? Would the authors have a motive for fabricating the account? Do other sources confirm the material? Does archeology support or contradict the document? Could people living at the time of the events described falsify the information and would they have a motive for doing so?

If a document claims to be an eyewitness account or to be based on eyewitnesses it would be valued more than one written on hearsay. Also, firsthand materials are full of details, some of which don't seem to be important in the story. If the document casts a negative image on the author or the "heroes" in the story, then that is a good indication that the author/s valued truth in writing. Although different perspective on a single event may include some minor discrepancies, there is a coherence to truth, which a fabrication would lack. The fish in fish stories tend to grow over time and may suggest a later time of writing than the actual event. If the author had nothing to gain, or possibly something to lose by writing the account, its trustworthiness would increase. If a document's account can, to an extent, be confirmed by other sources outside of the document, then its credibility increases. A document's trustworthiness is increased by archeological evidence, and decreased by contrary information. If people existed at the time of the incident who could have exposed the document's account as a fabrication, had a motive for doing so, but never did, this increases the trustworthiness of the document (although one would have to argue that the event would have to be significant enough to warrant notice - Plato breaking a tooth would not have gotten someone's attention - unless perhaps he had died from it).

The Gospel according to Luke tells us (Luke 1:1-4) that he is using eyewitness sources and that he is attempting to write an orderly and truthful account of the things he is recording. Matthew and mark imply that their accounts are from eyewitnesses (they do not say so explicitly), but John tells us he is an eyewitness. The Gospels are full of irrelevant details - read John 20:1-8, where information such as the day of the week, what time of the day it was, who went into the tomb first, etc. is mixed with important information about what happened to Jesus. The Gospels are also full of self-damaging details such as the testimony of women when their testimony was not admissible as evidence in Jesus' time, or the bad light in which the disciples are portrayed. If the Gospel was fabricated, the author would at least wanted his "heroes" to appear heroic. All the Gospels present a consistent portrait of Jesus and what he did, and as four individual accounts, there is a great deal of similarity. The Gospels do not have any of the trademarks of legend stories, or ancient mythology even with the supernatural events described.

Why would the disciples and apostles have lied about Jesus? They were persecuted for believing in the information they provided - what would they have gained by fabricating the story? There are other numerous sources which mention or attest to the Gospel information - such as from Tacitus (ca. 55-129), Suetonius and Pliny (early second century), Josephus (ca. 37-97), Thallus (mid-first century), as well as ancient Jewish writings against the Christians (found in the Talmud). At present, there appear no archeological findings which conclusively refute any biblical account, but there are many conclusive findings which substantiate biblical accounts. Finally, the Jewish leaders of Jesus' time viewed Christianity as a bothersome "cult" and would have loved to see it stamped out. This would have been easy to do if the Gospels were fabricated, or if Jesus' body would have been brought out and displayed publicly. The only claim that surfaced was that Jesus did what he did through trickery or the power of Satan.

In the face of history, one must make a decision. Either Jesus is a demonic charlatan who tricked people into thinking he was the Messiah, or he was the person the disciples said he was. It's a matter of weighing the evidence. What do you think?