Tuesday, April 28, 2009
10 Questions Every Intelligent Christian Should Answer
In answering these questions, I would first like to point out that I hold no advanced degrees in philosophy, science or theology. I am just a guy who with an undergraduate degree who can think critically (which is who the video presumed I was). I would also like to point out that the answers to these questions are based upon a Christian worldview. It is not my attempt to defend my worldview or argue for its supremacy while insulting any other as delusional and imaginary. Rather, these are the “weird rationalizations” we Christians must make to dismiss these supposedly difficult to answer questions. It is up to you to judge whether these answers are logical, rational and consistent. To be quite honest though, the questions were quite easy to answer. I guess that the author of this video never really took the time to find the answers to these questions from a Christian perspective. But it is easier to hear only what you want to hear rather than think about what you believe. Or at least that is the accusation this video backhandedly levels against Christianity.
1. Why won’t God heal amputees?
Why won’t he make apples taste like oranges? Why won’t he make the sky turn yellow on leap years? Why won’t he turn crabgrass into chili? The question itself is flawed. How could anyone possibly know why a being, who is completely other and transcendent, does anything he does? I don’t mean to say that we shouldn’t seek out answers to our questions (as I will try to do below), but they should at least be legitimate questions. I also am not arguing that God wouldn’t or couldn’t heal an amputee, but rather it is his prerogative whether he does so or not. He does not answer to us and we are not in a position to accuse him of failure given our own inadequacies. As Paul says, “But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’” (Rom 9.20). Does not the potter have the right to do what he pleases to the pot he creates? And if the ideal of God is infinitely good and just and wise, is it absurd for us to trust in his wisdom, justice, and goodness? This ideal of God (who I would argue to be the God of the Bible) is greater than any of our questions. God, through the prophet Isaiah, puts it very well,
“‘For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,’ declares the Lord. ‘As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.’”
What this means is that we are not nearly as important or as smart as we think we are. We are small and to say that we are not is ignorant and foolish. Just look up on a clear night and try to count the stars. If you can’t do that, try to imagine how big and distant those stars and galaxies are. The Bible says that he determines the number of stars and calls them each by name (Ps 147.4). And we have the audacity to say that we don’t approve of the job he is doing; and we post tiny little videos on YouTube and build websites saying that God should be healing certain people in certain ways because we think that it is a good idea.
Nevertheless, the question has been asked and I will attempt to give it some sort of answer if I can:
The first step is to define the nature and function of God’s miraculous interventions. Primarily, since the question has to do with physical healings, that will be the focal point of biblical examples. However, these principles can be applied to other miraculous occurrences like turning water into wine at a wedding (John 2.1-11) or feeding five thousand people with five loaves of barley bread and two sardine like fish (Matt 14.13-21). This should also give insight into the answers given in questions 4 and 7 which also concern miracles.
Miracles, or signs as they are sometimes called, function as a tool bringing about the revelation of larger truths concerning God. A miracle is an act of “special revelation” (revelation to specific people at specific times). A genuine miracle is an unusual event, accomplishing some useful work, and revealing the purpose and power of God in humanity’s redemption. This is both spiritual and physical redemption since The Fall in Genesis 3 affected humanity both spiritually and physically. Miracles are not a freak exhibition of power, nor are they a magic act meant to dazzle or impress. Particularly, as Jesus performed miracles, they were accompanied many times by a sermon or parable that gave insight into the significance of the miraculous act. Thus, within the context of the teachings we can understand the purposes of the divine healings and vise versa.
In relation to nature, miracles are of two kinds: (1) those in which the natural laws are intensified or augmented, and (2) those in which the natural order is reordered. The former is the type of miracle demonstrated by such things as a man living in the belly of a fish for 3 days and the latter is the type of miracle displayed in events like divine healings. This is based upon the idea that things in this world have different natures which includes their causal dispositions to affect other things in certain ways. This is called the causal disposition theory of natural law. What this means is that things tend to interact with other things in certain ways unless prevented from doing so by some other thing. Natural laws are necessary truths about what causal dispositions are possessed by various natural kinds of things. On this theory, an event that is naturally necessary must and does actually occur, since the natural propensity will automatically issue forth in the event if it is not impeded. By the same token, a naturally impossible even cannot actually occur. Thus it would be wrong to define a miracle as a naturally impossible event. Rather, a miracle is an event that results from causal interface with a stronger (or supernatural) propensity that reorders the typical disposition. This however is an arguable point that does not prove the occurrence of miracles, but gives a rational for the belief in their possibility. Given a God who created the universe, who conserves the world in being, and is capable of acting freely, the idea of the miraculous is plausible. Additionally, even if it is only epistemically plausible that such a transcendent, personal God exists, then it is equally plausible that he has acted miraculously in the universe. For if a transcendent, personal God exists, he could cause events in the universe that could not be produced by causes within the universe. And if this God is a loving and gracious God, then it is likely that he has indeed done so.
So, now we understand that miracles are not a contradiction to natural law, but a reordering of it; and now we know that miracles, by nature are used by God to reveal his presence, power and purpose for humanity in redemption. Then why won’t God heal amputees? It would be useful and merciful for God to initiate cell and tissue growth in an appendage that does not typically have a disposition to regenerate into another arm or leg. He gave that ability to alligators and lizards. So why does he not do so for us as human beings? Of course we don’t need an arm or a leg to survive, think critically, or function as a productive member of society. But lacking one, two, three, or even four limbs doesn’t help matters either. Yet we also know that genuine healings are not random acts of benevolence either. The miracles recorded in the Bible give us insight into God’s plan of redemption. They show us the significance of the cross and the impact of salvation by showing us metaphorically our sinful state (i.e. blind, deaf, & dead), and the work of Jesus to restore us as God’s new creation (2 Cor 5.17). A great biblical example of this is John 9.
In John 9 we learn of a beggar who was born blind and Jesus restores his sight. As he is questioned by the religious professionals, his insight as to who Jesus is grows, and the understanding of the educated, moral, religious people becomes more clouded and skewed. The whole episode shows the reader how God’s wisdom and glory function as he performs miracles (Jn 9.3). There must have been countless cases of people born blind. Even today, this is not uncommon. And yet, as the man says, “Nobody has ever heard of opening the eyes of a man born blind” (9.32), at least not until then. Similarly, no amputees, to my knowledge, have ever been healed either. At least up until this point. Why? What if God, in his wisdom, has chosen not to heal any amputees because there has not been a case (in all the millions of cases) where he feels it necessary to reveal himself and his redemptive purpose in that context? What made the account in John’s gospel so unique was that, like all genuine miracles, it was a specific occurrence, for a specific person, at a specific time to reveal a specific message and insight. Maybe God does not want to reveal these things to us yet. He is God and what he wants to demonstrate and reveal to us, is his prerogative. That is why we pray for healings and do not demand them of God.
“‘For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,’ declares the Lord. ‘As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.’”
What this means is that we are not nearly as important or as smart as we think we are. We are small and to say that we are not is ignorant and foolish. Just look up on a clear night and try to count the stars. If you can’t do that, try to imagine how big and distant those stars and galaxies are. The Bible says that he determines the number of stars and calls them each by name (Ps 147.4). And we have the audacity to say that we don’t approve of the job he is doing; and we post tiny little videos on YouTube and build websites saying that God should be healing certain people in certain ways because we think that it is a good idea.
Nevertheless, the question has been asked and I will attempt to give it some sort of answer if I can:
The first step is to define the nature and function of God’s miraculous interventions. Primarily, since the question has to do with physical healings, that will be the focal point of biblical examples. However, these principles can be applied to other miraculous occurrences like turning water into wine at a wedding (John 2.1-11) or feeding five thousand people with five loaves of barley bread and two sardine like fish (Matt 14.13-21). This should also give insight into the answers given in questions 4 and 7 which also concern miracles.
Miracles, or signs as they are sometimes called, function as a tool bringing about the revelation of larger truths concerning God. A miracle is an act of “special revelation” (revelation to specific people at specific times). A genuine miracle is an unusual event, accomplishing some useful work, and revealing the purpose and power of God in humanity’s redemption. This is both spiritual and physical redemption since The Fall in Genesis 3 affected humanity both spiritually and physically. Miracles are not a freak exhibition of power, nor are they a magic act meant to dazzle or impress. Particularly, as Jesus performed miracles, they were accompanied many times by a sermon or parable that gave insight into the significance of the miraculous act. Thus, within the context of the teachings we can understand the purposes of the divine healings and vise versa.
In relation to nature, miracles are of two kinds: (1) those in which the natural laws are intensified or augmented, and (2) those in which the natural order is reordered. The former is the type of miracle demonstrated by such things as a man living in the belly of a fish for 3 days and the latter is the type of miracle displayed in events like divine healings. This is based upon the idea that things in this world have different natures which includes their causal dispositions to affect other things in certain ways. This is called the causal disposition theory of natural law. What this means is that things tend to interact with other things in certain ways unless prevented from doing so by some other thing. Natural laws are necessary truths about what causal dispositions are possessed by various natural kinds of things. On this theory, an event that is naturally necessary must and does actually occur, since the natural propensity will automatically issue forth in the event if it is not impeded. By the same token, a naturally impossible even cannot actually occur. Thus it would be wrong to define a miracle as a naturally impossible event. Rather, a miracle is an event that results from causal interface with a stronger (or supernatural) propensity that reorders the typical disposition. This however is an arguable point that does not prove the occurrence of miracles, but gives a rational for the belief in their possibility. Given a God who created the universe, who conserves the world in being, and is capable of acting freely, the idea of the miraculous is plausible. Additionally, even if it is only epistemically plausible that such a transcendent, personal God exists, then it is equally plausible that he has acted miraculously in the universe. For if a transcendent, personal God exists, he could cause events in the universe that could not be produced by causes within the universe. And if this God is a loving and gracious God, then it is likely that he has indeed done so.
So, now we understand that miracles are not a contradiction to natural law, but a reordering of it; and now we know that miracles, by nature are used by God to reveal his presence, power and purpose for humanity in redemption. Then why won’t God heal amputees? It would be useful and merciful for God to initiate cell and tissue growth in an appendage that does not typically have a disposition to regenerate into another arm or leg. He gave that ability to alligators and lizards. So why does he not do so for us as human beings? Of course we don’t need an arm or a leg to survive, think critically, or function as a productive member of society. But lacking one, two, three, or even four limbs doesn’t help matters either. Yet we also know that genuine healings are not random acts of benevolence either. The miracles recorded in the Bible give us insight into God’s plan of redemption. They show us the significance of the cross and the impact of salvation by showing us metaphorically our sinful state (i.e. blind, deaf, & dead), and the work of Jesus to restore us as God’s new creation (2 Cor 5.17). A great biblical example of this is John 9.
In John 9 we learn of a beggar who was born blind and Jesus restores his sight. As he is questioned by the religious professionals, his insight as to who Jesus is grows, and the understanding of the educated, moral, religious people becomes more clouded and skewed. The whole episode shows the reader how God’s wisdom and glory function as he performs miracles (Jn 9.3). There must have been countless cases of people born blind. Even today, this is not uncommon. And yet, as the man says, “Nobody has ever heard of opening the eyes of a man born blind” (9.32), at least not until then. Similarly, no amputees, to my knowledge, have ever been healed either. At least up until this point. Why? What if God, in his wisdom, has chosen not to heal any amputees because there has not been a case (in all the millions of cases) where he feels it necessary to reveal himself and his redemptive purpose in that context? What made the account in John’s gospel so unique was that, like all genuine miracles, it was a specific occurrence, for a specific person, at a specific time to reveal a specific message and insight. Maybe God does not want to reveal these things to us yet. He is God and what he wants to demonstrate and reveal to us, is his prerogative. That is why we pray for healings and do not demand them of God.
2. Why are there so many starving children in the world?
The reason that there are so many starving children in the world is because we have all failed. As Christians we have failed to “look after the orphan and the widow in their distress” (James 1.27). Tyrants and warlords have become world leaders and we have ignored the cries of the oppressed. The western church has taken its wealth and affluence and has become gluttonous. A local church today will spend a million dollars on a sound system, and only send one or two people with only a couple thousand dollars on a long term mission. As Christians, we have the greater responsibility to do more about such things and we have failed. Additionally, it is not just Christians who are at fault (although we ought to bear the majority of the blame). How much money do we spend on coffee, junk food, television, music, sports, porn, etc., each year? Billions, maybe even trillions of dollars. And how much do we send to starving women and children in Sudan or Darfur? It might as well be nothing.
My point though is not to make everyone feel bad about how much money we spend on lattes every day. Rather, my point is to show that the problem is our fault, not God’s. Could God drop a pot roast from the sky for every starving family in the world? Sure. But if he did, would we repent of our selfish and gluttonous apathy? No. The problem is real and children are starving, but it is our fault, not God’s. Does God care about these children? Yes. And he has called us and continues to call us to do something about it. But we haven’t been listening. One of the sickest things we tend to do as human beings is look at our condition and blame God for our mess. Adam did it in the garden when he blamed God for giving him a woman who would feed him forbidden fruit (Gen 3.12). And we do it by looking at the twisted and crooked world we have made and say there can’t be a God because he wouldn’t let there be any consequences for our sins. But even though this truly breaks the heart of God, we go on and carry on as we have before. The author of Ecclesiastes writes,
“Again I looked and saw all the oppression that was taking place under the sun:
I saw the tears of the oppressed—and they have no comforter;
Power is on the side of their oppressor—and they have no comforter.” Eccl 4.1-2
Is our failure to carry out God’s justice and mercy the fault of God or ourselves? It is ours and that is truly an “inconvenient truth”. He told us what we need to do for these people. But in our wickedness, we looked upon our own failure and blamed God. I don’t see how this is proof that God does not exist. The logic of such a conclusion is murky and convoluted. To say that we have ignored the suffering and oppression of these children, thus there is no God, makes no sense. And yet that is the conclusion of the well educated and thoughtful individuals who produced this video. This would lead me to the conclusion that this video is not trying to uncover truth or try to understand the other side of the issue. Rather this video is pushing an agenda regardless if it is or isn’t true or helpful to anyone. And such motivations are harmful and deceptive which is far more dangerous than being “delusional”—it is pathological and unconscionable.
My point though is not to make everyone feel bad about how much money we spend on lattes every day. Rather, my point is to show that the problem is our fault, not God’s. Could God drop a pot roast from the sky for every starving family in the world? Sure. But if he did, would we repent of our selfish and gluttonous apathy? No. The problem is real and children are starving, but it is our fault, not God’s. Does God care about these children? Yes. And he has called us and continues to call us to do something about it. But we haven’t been listening. One of the sickest things we tend to do as human beings is look at our condition and blame God for our mess. Adam did it in the garden when he blamed God for giving him a woman who would feed him forbidden fruit (Gen 3.12). And we do it by looking at the twisted and crooked world we have made and say there can’t be a God because he wouldn’t let there be any consequences for our sins. But even though this truly breaks the heart of God, we go on and carry on as we have before. The author of Ecclesiastes writes,
“Again I looked and saw all the oppression that was taking place under the sun:
I saw the tears of the oppressed—and they have no comforter;
Power is on the side of their oppressor—and they have no comforter.” Eccl 4.1-2
Is our failure to carry out God’s justice and mercy the fault of God or ourselves? It is ours and that is truly an “inconvenient truth”. He told us what we need to do for these people. But in our wickedness, we looked upon our own failure and blamed God. I don’t see how this is proof that God does not exist. The logic of such a conclusion is murky and convoluted. To say that we have ignored the suffering and oppression of these children, thus there is no God, makes no sense. And yet that is the conclusion of the well educated and thoughtful individuals who produced this video. This would lead me to the conclusion that this video is not trying to uncover truth or try to understand the other side of the issue. Rather this video is pushing an agenda regardless if it is or isn’t true or helpful to anyone. And such motivations are harmful and deceptive which is far more dangerous than being “delusional”—it is pathological and unconscionable.
3. Why does God demand the death of so many innocent people in the Bible?
In order to answer this question, first it is important to point out a flawed presupposition within the question itself. The question presupposes that the people are “innocent”. According to the Christian worldview, every one is a sinner (Christian and non-Christian) and that the consequence of sin is death (Rom 3.23, 6.23). What this means is that when we stand opposed to God and his righteousness, his justice will be satisfied. This is demonstrated first in Genesis 3 after our first parents, Adam and Eve sinned and God made atonement for their sin with the sacrifice of an animal with which he made garments of skin as clothes to cover their nakedness and shame (Gen 3.21). It is also demonstrated by the sacrificial system of the Old Testament (Lev 4.1-6.7). And finally, it finds fulfillment in Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross which atoned for the sins of humanity, even those outside the covenantal community of Israel (1 Jn 2.2).
What some might argue is that this makes the God of the Bible a bloodthirsty and wicked being and thus should be rejected as an ideal God. But this is a poor conclusion given all the evidence provided. Rather, it makes God out to be just and holy, and ultimately merciful and gracious. God is life (Jn 14.6) and rightly supposing that the opposite of life is death, and given that sin is opposition to God’s being and character either in act, disposition, or state; it follows that the consequence of opposing a holy God is the fulfillment of his justice, which is death. This does not mean that God does not value life. If that were the case then God would not value himself. Instead he values life higher than we ever could by not allowing death to consume the life he has imparted (Gen 2.7). The ultimate demonstration of this is found within the substitutionary death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Here, as Paul writes, “God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God” (2 Cor 5.21). God’s love for human life (not just physical life but also eternal life) was so great that he sent God the Son to die and suffer in our place, satisfying his justice and imputing his own righteousness onto us (Rom 3.25). Therefore, being that God’s justice must be maintained, the fact that he took our place when he did not have to, reveals very practically his attributes of grace and mercy. In a sense, God demands the death of the sinner and then provides himself as the recipient of his own wrath (Mk 15.34).
Therefore, to answer the question directly, it is God’s justice that demands the death of so many guilty people in the Old Testament who violated his Law. But it is also by his grace and mercy that he provides for his people a means of atonement that spares their physical life in the covenantal sacrifices of the Old Testament which are fulfilled by Jesus in the New Testament. Thereby, in the Old Testament the sins of the rebellious child or the person who violated the Sabbath are atoned for by sacrifice and their lives are spared.
But you might ask, what about God’s commands to slaughter entire races and clans of people. Is God genocidal? If you were to look at the ways of these people and look at their war tactics, you would find that they were a far more evil people than the worst terrorist groups of our day. They practiced incest and child prostitution as forms of worship. They would make child sacrifices to their false gods and attack Israel’s women and children in war while avoiding battles with the men. In short, these were not good, innocent people. And they were not people you would want in the land you were about to inhabit.
In conclusion, the question should not be, “Why does God demand the death of these people?” Rather, a more informed question would be, “Why does God allow any one to live?” And what I would argue for is something John Calvin called “common grace”. God is good and patient as to let us enjoy his provision of life. He lets us know love and peace and justice among ourselves, even apart from God and his covenant relationship. We marry and have children. We enjoy the seasons and the changing of the seasons. We enjoy the wisdom to know the difference from right and wrong, justice and injustice. We enjoy being the image bearers of God creatively and relationally. And all of this is provided even for those who would reject the God who gave these gifts. This is true both for those in the Old Testament and the New Testament. God is the same yesterday, today and forever (Heb 13.8).
What some might argue is that this makes the God of the Bible a bloodthirsty and wicked being and thus should be rejected as an ideal God. But this is a poor conclusion given all the evidence provided. Rather, it makes God out to be just and holy, and ultimately merciful and gracious. God is life (Jn 14.6) and rightly supposing that the opposite of life is death, and given that sin is opposition to God’s being and character either in act, disposition, or state; it follows that the consequence of opposing a holy God is the fulfillment of his justice, which is death. This does not mean that God does not value life. If that were the case then God would not value himself. Instead he values life higher than we ever could by not allowing death to consume the life he has imparted (Gen 2.7). The ultimate demonstration of this is found within the substitutionary death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Here, as Paul writes, “God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God” (2 Cor 5.21). God’s love for human life (not just physical life but also eternal life) was so great that he sent God the Son to die and suffer in our place, satisfying his justice and imputing his own righteousness onto us (Rom 3.25). Therefore, being that God’s justice must be maintained, the fact that he took our place when he did not have to, reveals very practically his attributes of grace and mercy. In a sense, God demands the death of the sinner and then provides himself as the recipient of his own wrath (Mk 15.34).
Therefore, to answer the question directly, it is God’s justice that demands the death of so many guilty people in the Old Testament who violated his Law. But it is also by his grace and mercy that he provides for his people a means of atonement that spares their physical life in the covenantal sacrifices of the Old Testament which are fulfilled by Jesus in the New Testament. Thereby, in the Old Testament the sins of the rebellious child or the person who violated the Sabbath are atoned for by sacrifice and their lives are spared.
But you might ask, what about God’s commands to slaughter entire races and clans of people. Is God genocidal? If you were to look at the ways of these people and look at their war tactics, you would find that they were a far more evil people than the worst terrorist groups of our day. They practiced incest and child prostitution as forms of worship. They would make child sacrifices to their false gods and attack Israel’s women and children in war while avoiding battles with the men. In short, these were not good, innocent people. And they were not people you would want in the land you were about to inhabit.
In conclusion, the question should not be, “Why does God demand the death of these people?” Rather, a more informed question would be, “Why does God allow any one to live?” And what I would argue for is something John Calvin called “common grace”. God is good and patient as to let us enjoy his provision of life. He lets us know love and peace and justice among ourselves, even apart from God and his covenant relationship. We marry and have children. We enjoy the seasons and the changing of the seasons. We enjoy the wisdom to know the difference from right and wrong, justice and injustice. We enjoy being the image bearers of God creatively and relationally. And all of this is provided even for those who would reject the God who gave these gifts. This is true both for those in the Old Testament and the New Testament. God is the same yesterday, today and forever (Heb 13.8).
4. Why does the Bible contain so much scientific nonsense?
To answer this question I will limit myself to the three examples given by the video: The creation of the universe in 6 days, the universal flood, and the account of Jonah in the belly of a whale. There are of course many other miraculous stories that this video would have also dismissed as “scientific non-sense” with no actual investigation or thought. However, since the video had questions about these three events, then that is where I will limit my investigation.
It is important to note here that Creationism is not contradictory to modern science. In fact, the Biblical mandate to "subdue" the earth (Genesis 1:28) requires us to understand it, which is what science is all about. "Creation Science" is simply the practice of science with the assumption and acknowledgement that there is a creator God, versus the now standard operating assumption of naturalism (that nature is "all there is").
6 Day Creation:
Young Earth advocates, such as the Institute for Creation Research (ICR), believe in a literal reading of the Genesis account. Each day was a 24-hour day comparable to a modern day, and plants and animals were created directly by God in a mature functional state. The earth was created as a home for mankind. Adam, the first man, may have appeared about 20 years old when created. God could have created the world in an instant, but took six days to do so, followed by a day of rest, as a pattern for us to follow (it is interesting that the seven-day work week has been followed almost exclusively throughout history, yet has no astronomical basis, unlike the month or year, for example). By examining the various genealogies found in the scriptures, it is estimated that the creation must have taken place somewhere between six and fifteen thousand years ago. The most famous Biblical chronology is that of Bishop James Ussher who in 1650 determined the date of creation to be 4004 B.C. Modern creationists are willing to acknowledge the possibility of gaps in the genealogies, pushing this date back some (I personally would agree with the latter position of 13,000-15,000 years).
Evidences that the geologic column was formed quickly, supporting a young Earth viewpoint include:
• Fossilized trees that extend vertically through multiple ages of rock strata (called polystrate fossils).
• All soils become populated with living things such as plants and worms, which leave a record. However, many strata layers do not show signs of this activity, implying they were not at the surface for very long.
• In many cases there is lack of a layer of soil between adjacent strata layers.
• In an unconformity between adjacent rock formations, the lower rock layers have been tilted and eroded. By tracing unconformities laterally through information from outcrops or oil wells, they can be resolved into an area where the layers or formations were either not deposited or not tilted or eroded, indicating that the unconformity does not represent a significant time lapse. Application of this technique can be extended to show that "the majority of the fossiferous column resolves into a single, continuous depositional sequence" (Morris).
• In some places entire rock layers can be seen bending, implying they were soft and not very old when uplifted.
• In some places the contact between adjacent rock beds (of totally different rock types, such as shale and sandstone) is very sharp, which would not be expected if the lower surface had been exposed to the effects of erosion for a long period of time.
• In many rock layers in many locations, surface features seen on the top surface of the lower bed must have been covered quickly to be preserved, such as animal tracks and ripple marks formed by water moving over the surface.
These points are abbreviated and not exhaustive, but nevertheless, they point to a rather young earth with the formation of the different sedimentary layers being a rapid geological event. There are many other documented scientific studies and observed “anomalies” that point to a rather young geological history (roughly 13,000-15,000 years).
Biblically, the created world was a paradise until Adam and Eve disobeyed God. God cursed the creation because of this sin (Gen 3:14-19). Along with physical death, the general process of decay known as the Second Law of Thermo-dynamics was introduced at this time. A consequence of this law is that the universe will eventually die a heat death (the entire universe will be at the same temperature). Genesis chapters 6-9 describe how all of mankind became wicked, except for one man named Noah and his family. God sends a flood to destroy all living things except for a remnant of eight people and representative animals saved on a large boat called the ark, which are to later repopulate the earth. This flood scoured the earth down to its basement rocks, and created the geologic column.
In regards to the theories of evolution, no one, including creation scientists, disputes that so-called "micro-evolution" (variation within a type of organism) caused by natural selection occurs and may be responsible for the large number of species found within a type. Almost all touted evidences for evolution are of this category (like Darwin's finches, the "peppered moth", or bacteria that become resistant to antibiotics). However, it is important to note that "micro-evolution" is a misnomer, as it implies that "a little" evolution is taking place. In actuality, NO evolution is taking place, as no increase in complexity (such as the development of a new organ) is being generated, but merely the emphasis of some already present traits over others. Large scale change of one type of organism into another, so-called "macro-evolution", is beyond the ability of mutation coupled with natural selection to produce. Evolutionists acknowledge this is a "research issue". Even non-creation scientists (such as Denton and Behe) have written books giving the hard scientific facts that document why this is impossible. The "geologic column", which is cited as physical evidence of evolution occurring in the past, is better explained as the result of a devastating global flood which happened about 5,000 years ago, as described in the Bible (Which supports the second event the video questions). Even evolutionists acknowledge that the fossil record is one of "fully-formed abrupt appearance" and "stasis" (that is, no change over time). The belief that the atoms of a "Big Bang" eventually produced people ALL BY THEMSELVES (that is, without any intelligent guidance) is contrary to the well-proven Second Law of Thermodynamics, and the fundamentals of Information Theory. The universe is known to be "running down" yet evolution postulates it is "building up". “Atoms to people” evolution is much more a "religious belief" than a scientific fact. There is no reason not to believe that God created our universe, earth, plants, animals, and people just as described in the book of Genesis!
Global Flood:
There is much evidence for a global flood including evidence from geology, archaeology, ancient legends, catastrophism trademarks, biblical consistency, evidence of Noah’s ark, and from Jesus Christ Himself. The worldwide flood, the biblical story and the evidence fit together perfectly. In general, the credibility of the worldwide flood story in the Bible is supported by unrelated facts that support the truth of the Bible. In recent years, much archaeological evidence has been found that supports the truth of many facts documented in the Bible. Also, Jesus, God in the flesh, completely supported the truth of the Old Testament and quoted it often.
The climate in the pre-flood era was different than after the flood. The climate was warm and moderate, which was favorable to plant and animal life from pole to pole. Evidence of high concentrations of bones found all over the globe is consistent with what would be expected from a tropical, lush, pre-flood environment and a catastrophic worldwide flood. Some of these areas include Agate Nebraska, a cave of San Ciro in Sicily, ossiferous fissures in England and Western Europe, including the Rock of Gibraltar and Santenay in central France.
The only possible explanation for most fossils is rapid deposition from a catastrophic event. The worldwide flood is the only satisfactory explanation for the evidence. The uniformitarianism philosophy that was made popular by evolutionists 150 years ago cannot explain the fossil evidence. Additional evidence that completely supports catastrophism and recent deposition are discoveries in the polar-regions where animals are left standing with undigested food in their stomachs. Oceanographers took core samples of sediments in the Gulf of Mexico that included fossils shells from one-celled plankton called foraminifera and made an interesting discovery. They discovered that at locations in the core samples that represent thousands of years ago, the salinity in the water was suddenly reduced based upon the shells locked-in permanent record of the conditions. This reduction in salinity could only be caused by a huge fresh water deluge.
There is much archaeological evidence confirming the Flood of Noah. There is a tablet in Babylon on which one of the Babylonian kings mentions his enjoyment in reading the writings of those who lived before the Flood. Another Babylonian tablet gives an interesting confirmation. Noah was the tenth generation from Adam according to the Bible, and this Babylonian tablet names the ten kings of Babylon who lived before the Flood. Another tablet names all the kings of Babylon, and after the first ten there are the words: “The Deluge came up. . .” Stories of the Noachian Flood have been found in almost every civilization in the world. Dr. Aaron Smith of the University of Greensboro collected a complete history of the literature on Noah’s Ark. He found 80,000 works in 72 languages about the flood. About 70,000 of them mention the wreckage of the Ark. But, I guess this evidence is all simply scientific nonsense and has no basis in fact. It makes you wonder how much research and thought went behind these “faith shattering” questions that an intelligent Christian isn’t supposed to be able to answer rationally.
Jonah’s Whale Tale:
First of all we may justifiably point out that the Bible does not speak of a whale.
The book of Jonah merely mentions ‘a great fish’ (Jonah i, 17), and although the English
version in Matthew xii, 40 uses the word ‘whale,’ the Greek original has kÁtoj, which is a general word meaning a huge sea-monster. Now it cannot be doubted that there are several enormous sea-creatures which may be able to swallow a full-grown man easily enough.
Moreover it may be observed that the narrowness of throat applies only to the true whale which is at home in the Arctic seas but is not found in the Mediterranean. There is another species of the same order, the sperm whale or cachalot, which is actually found in the Mediterranean and which could doubtless swallow a man. Ambrose John Wilson in the Princeton Theological Review of 1927 mentions a case analogous to that of Jonah. A member of the crew of a whaling ship in the vicinity of the Falkland Islands was swallowed by a large sperm whale which had been harpooned, his boat being upset by a lash of its tail. The whale was killed and dissected and on the third day the missing sailor was found inside the stomach of the animal, doubled up and unconscious. A bath of sea water soon revived him, but the skin of his face, neck and hands, exposed as it had been to the action of the gastric juice, was bleached to a deadly whiteness and never recovered its natural appearance; otherwise his health was not affected by this terrible ordeal.1 In another American periodical, Bibliotheca Sacra, G. Macloskie, of Princeton University, has taken the trouble to demonstrate how even the true whale may be able to rescue a man from drowning. He points out that, as the whale is an air-breathing animal, it has to expel from its mouth cavity all superfluous water immediately after having received its food. Now if any other air-breathing creature should get mixed with its food and be carried by the influx of water between the monster’s jaws, the intruder would be transferred from the water in which it was drowning into the air supply of the whale itself. It could not enter the whale’s stomach because of the narrow inlet, but it might reach the great laryngeal pouch, which starts from below and in front of the larynx and runs down the front of the neck on to the chest. It has thick, elastic walls, and a cavity quite large enough to receive a human body, and to supply it with air for breathing.
The video dismisses the accounts supported by this evidence as figments or delusions of the imagination and not confirmation of the inspired words of an all knowing God whereby primitive people wrote about primitive ideas. Well within the doctrine of Verbal Plenary Inspiration, it is feasible that the authors of these accounts were documenting what they saw, experienced, or were shown and detailed them in such ways as could be understood by their contemporaries and themselves. It makes more sense to discuss Adam being “formed from the dust of the earth,” with the breath of God blown into his nostrils to make him into a “living being” (Gen 2.7) as opposed to an explanation of carbon molecules being assembled and reassembled by a supreme being converting a carbon based geological thing into a carbon based biological thing; at least within a theological frame work. The important thing to realize is that the Bible is not a scientific text. When we read it and interpret it as such, then we misuse the text and ignore the function of the book. Don’t misunderstand me, I believe that every word of the Bible is true and flawless (Prov 30.5). But you can’t get apple juice from a grape—it will only give you grape juice. The Bible doesn’t give us insight into performing open heart surgery; it doesn’t tell us how gravity works; it doesn’t teach us about ecosystems and food chains. The Bible is not exhaustive nor is it all inclusive. God orchestrated the writing of the Bible and its content to serve the specific function of revealing his work and plan of redemption. Does this make it any less true? No. Does it give us cause to evaluate what it says in a way that may be counter intuitive to our own personal paradigm? Absolutely.
It is important to note here that Creationism is not contradictory to modern science. In fact, the Biblical mandate to "subdue" the earth (Genesis 1:28) requires us to understand it, which is what science is all about. "Creation Science" is simply the practice of science with the assumption and acknowledgement that there is a creator God, versus the now standard operating assumption of naturalism (that nature is "all there is").
6 Day Creation:
Young Earth advocates, such as the Institute for Creation Research (ICR), believe in a literal reading of the Genesis account. Each day was a 24-hour day comparable to a modern day, and plants and animals were created directly by God in a mature functional state. The earth was created as a home for mankind. Adam, the first man, may have appeared about 20 years old when created. God could have created the world in an instant, but took six days to do so, followed by a day of rest, as a pattern for us to follow (it is interesting that the seven-day work week has been followed almost exclusively throughout history, yet has no astronomical basis, unlike the month or year, for example). By examining the various genealogies found in the scriptures, it is estimated that the creation must have taken place somewhere between six and fifteen thousand years ago. The most famous Biblical chronology is that of Bishop James Ussher who in 1650 determined the date of creation to be 4004 B.C. Modern creationists are willing to acknowledge the possibility of gaps in the genealogies, pushing this date back some (I personally would agree with the latter position of 13,000-15,000 years).
Evidences that the geologic column was formed quickly, supporting a young Earth viewpoint include:
• Fossilized trees that extend vertically through multiple ages of rock strata (called polystrate fossils).
• All soils become populated with living things such as plants and worms, which leave a record. However, many strata layers do not show signs of this activity, implying they were not at the surface for very long.
• In many cases there is lack of a layer of soil between adjacent strata layers.
• In an unconformity between adjacent rock formations, the lower rock layers have been tilted and eroded. By tracing unconformities laterally through information from outcrops or oil wells, they can be resolved into an area where the layers or formations were either not deposited or not tilted or eroded, indicating that the unconformity does not represent a significant time lapse. Application of this technique can be extended to show that "the majority of the fossiferous column resolves into a single, continuous depositional sequence" (Morris).
• In some places entire rock layers can be seen bending, implying they were soft and not very old when uplifted.
• In some places the contact between adjacent rock beds (of totally different rock types, such as shale and sandstone) is very sharp, which would not be expected if the lower surface had been exposed to the effects of erosion for a long period of time.
• In many rock layers in many locations, surface features seen on the top surface of the lower bed must have been covered quickly to be preserved, such as animal tracks and ripple marks formed by water moving over the surface.
These points are abbreviated and not exhaustive, but nevertheless, they point to a rather young earth with the formation of the different sedimentary layers being a rapid geological event. There are many other documented scientific studies and observed “anomalies” that point to a rather young geological history (roughly 13,000-15,000 years).
Biblically, the created world was a paradise until Adam and Eve disobeyed God. God cursed the creation because of this sin (Gen 3:14-19). Along with physical death, the general process of decay known as the Second Law of Thermo-dynamics was introduced at this time. A consequence of this law is that the universe will eventually die a heat death (the entire universe will be at the same temperature). Genesis chapters 6-9 describe how all of mankind became wicked, except for one man named Noah and his family. God sends a flood to destroy all living things except for a remnant of eight people and representative animals saved on a large boat called the ark, which are to later repopulate the earth. This flood scoured the earth down to its basement rocks, and created the geologic column.
In regards to the theories of evolution, no one, including creation scientists, disputes that so-called "micro-evolution" (variation within a type of organism) caused by natural selection occurs and may be responsible for the large number of species found within a type. Almost all touted evidences for evolution are of this category (like Darwin's finches, the "peppered moth", or bacteria that become resistant to antibiotics). However, it is important to note that "micro-evolution" is a misnomer, as it implies that "a little" evolution is taking place. In actuality, NO evolution is taking place, as no increase in complexity (such as the development of a new organ) is being generated, but merely the emphasis of some already present traits over others. Large scale change of one type of organism into another, so-called "macro-evolution", is beyond the ability of mutation coupled with natural selection to produce. Evolutionists acknowledge this is a "research issue". Even non-creation scientists (such as Denton and Behe) have written books giving the hard scientific facts that document why this is impossible. The "geologic column", which is cited as physical evidence of evolution occurring in the past, is better explained as the result of a devastating global flood which happened about 5,000 years ago, as described in the Bible (Which supports the second event the video questions). Even evolutionists acknowledge that the fossil record is one of "fully-formed abrupt appearance" and "stasis" (that is, no change over time). The belief that the atoms of a "Big Bang" eventually produced people ALL BY THEMSELVES (that is, without any intelligent guidance) is contrary to the well-proven Second Law of Thermodynamics, and the fundamentals of Information Theory. The universe is known to be "running down" yet evolution postulates it is "building up". “Atoms to people” evolution is much more a "religious belief" than a scientific fact. There is no reason not to believe that God created our universe, earth, plants, animals, and people just as described in the book of Genesis!
Global Flood:
There is much evidence for a global flood including evidence from geology, archaeology, ancient legends, catastrophism trademarks, biblical consistency, evidence of Noah’s ark, and from Jesus Christ Himself. The worldwide flood, the biblical story and the evidence fit together perfectly. In general, the credibility of the worldwide flood story in the Bible is supported by unrelated facts that support the truth of the Bible. In recent years, much archaeological evidence has been found that supports the truth of many facts documented in the Bible. Also, Jesus, God in the flesh, completely supported the truth of the Old Testament and quoted it often.
The climate in the pre-flood era was different than after the flood. The climate was warm and moderate, which was favorable to plant and animal life from pole to pole. Evidence of high concentrations of bones found all over the globe is consistent with what would be expected from a tropical, lush, pre-flood environment and a catastrophic worldwide flood. Some of these areas include Agate Nebraska, a cave of San Ciro in Sicily, ossiferous fissures in England and Western Europe, including the Rock of Gibraltar and Santenay in central France.
The only possible explanation for most fossils is rapid deposition from a catastrophic event. The worldwide flood is the only satisfactory explanation for the evidence. The uniformitarianism philosophy that was made popular by evolutionists 150 years ago cannot explain the fossil evidence. Additional evidence that completely supports catastrophism and recent deposition are discoveries in the polar-regions where animals are left standing with undigested food in their stomachs. Oceanographers took core samples of sediments in the Gulf of Mexico that included fossils shells from one-celled plankton called foraminifera and made an interesting discovery. They discovered that at locations in the core samples that represent thousands of years ago, the salinity in the water was suddenly reduced based upon the shells locked-in permanent record of the conditions. This reduction in salinity could only be caused by a huge fresh water deluge.
There is much archaeological evidence confirming the Flood of Noah. There is a tablet in Babylon on which one of the Babylonian kings mentions his enjoyment in reading the writings of those who lived before the Flood. Another Babylonian tablet gives an interesting confirmation. Noah was the tenth generation from Adam according to the Bible, and this Babylonian tablet names the ten kings of Babylon who lived before the Flood. Another tablet names all the kings of Babylon, and after the first ten there are the words: “The Deluge came up. . .” Stories of the Noachian Flood have been found in almost every civilization in the world. Dr. Aaron Smith of the University of Greensboro collected a complete history of the literature on Noah’s Ark. He found 80,000 works in 72 languages about the flood. About 70,000 of them mention the wreckage of the Ark. But, I guess this evidence is all simply scientific nonsense and has no basis in fact. It makes you wonder how much research and thought went behind these “faith shattering” questions that an intelligent Christian isn’t supposed to be able to answer rationally.
Jonah’s Whale Tale:
First of all we may justifiably point out that the Bible does not speak of a whale.
The book of Jonah merely mentions ‘a great fish’ (Jonah i, 17), and although the English
version in Matthew xii, 40 uses the word ‘whale,’ the Greek original has kÁtoj, which is a general word meaning a huge sea-monster. Now it cannot be doubted that there are several enormous sea-creatures which may be able to swallow a full-grown man easily enough.
Moreover it may be observed that the narrowness of throat applies only to the true whale which is at home in the Arctic seas but is not found in the Mediterranean. There is another species of the same order, the sperm whale or cachalot, which is actually found in the Mediterranean and which could doubtless swallow a man. Ambrose John Wilson in the Princeton Theological Review of 1927 mentions a case analogous to that of Jonah. A member of the crew of a whaling ship in the vicinity of the Falkland Islands was swallowed by a large sperm whale which had been harpooned, his boat being upset by a lash of its tail. The whale was killed and dissected and on the third day the missing sailor was found inside the stomach of the animal, doubled up and unconscious. A bath of sea water soon revived him, but the skin of his face, neck and hands, exposed as it had been to the action of the gastric juice, was bleached to a deadly whiteness and never recovered its natural appearance; otherwise his health was not affected by this terrible ordeal.1 In another American periodical, Bibliotheca Sacra, G. Macloskie, of Princeton University, has taken the trouble to demonstrate how even the true whale may be able to rescue a man from drowning. He points out that, as the whale is an air-breathing animal, it has to expel from its mouth cavity all superfluous water immediately after having received its food. Now if any other air-breathing creature should get mixed with its food and be carried by the influx of water between the monster’s jaws, the intruder would be transferred from the water in which it was drowning into the air supply of the whale itself. It could not enter the whale’s stomach because of the narrow inlet, but it might reach the great laryngeal pouch, which starts from below and in front of the larynx and runs down the front of the neck on to the chest. It has thick, elastic walls, and a cavity quite large enough to receive a human body, and to supply it with air for breathing.
The video dismisses the accounts supported by this evidence as figments or delusions of the imagination and not confirmation of the inspired words of an all knowing God whereby primitive people wrote about primitive ideas. Well within the doctrine of Verbal Plenary Inspiration, it is feasible that the authors of these accounts were documenting what they saw, experienced, or were shown and detailed them in such ways as could be understood by their contemporaries and themselves. It makes more sense to discuss Adam being “formed from the dust of the earth,” with the breath of God blown into his nostrils to make him into a “living being” (Gen 2.7) as opposed to an explanation of carbon molecules being assembled and reassembled by a supreme being converting a carbon based geological thing into a carbon based biological thing; at least within a theological frame work. The important thing to realize is that the Bible is not a scientific text. When we read it and interpret it as such, then we misuse the text and ignore the function of the book. Don’t misunderstand me, I believe that every word of the Bible is true and flawless (Prov 30.5). But you can’t get apple juice from a grape—it will only give you grape juice. The Bible doesn’t give us insight into performing open heart surgery; it doesn’t tell us how gravity works; it doesn’t teach us about ecosystems and food chains. The Bible is not exhaustive nor is it all inclusive. God orchestrated the writing of the Bible and its content to serve the specific function of revealing his work and plan of redemption. Does this make it any less true? No. Does it give us cause to evaluate what it says in a way that may be counter intuitive to our own personal paradigm? Absolutely.
5. Why is God such a huge proponent of slavery in the Bible?
For the answer to this question I will defer to a great and exhaustive article on www.pleaseconvinceme.com . The author deals with the answer to this question better than I ever could and I find no fault with his position.
6. Why do bad things happen to good people?
Why do good things happen to good people? Why do good things happen to bad people? Why do bad things happen to bad people? Is it all just random chance? Is it all without purpose or end? Is it fate? Is it karma? Is it perception of what is good and what is bad? What is bad for one could be good for another. Some guy getting laid off may mean that the single mother does not.
Also, from a biblical worldview, there is no such thing as a “good person” (Ps 14.1-3, 53.1-3; Eccl 7.20; Rom 3.12). Christian and non-Christian are all equally guilty of sin and all are equally deserving of nothing but wrath and punishment for our crimes (see answer to question 3). That is why Christianity is not a religion based on morality or being a good person. Good people die and wake up in hell. Rather, what Christians aspire for is the grace of God provided through the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross. That is the only atonement for our rebellion and dysfunction as God’s creatures.
Even so, there are happenings in our world that are tragic and they do happen to what we would call innocent people. And the question of why is timeless and fundamental to understanding our condition. When God created the world, he created it to be very good (Gen 1.31). Therein, he gave man and woman dominion over it and there was order and harmony (Gen 1.26, 28; 2.15). However, we became arrogant and proud and sinned. We decided that there was wisdom and life apart from God and what we found was confusion and death. God cursed humanity and declared,
“To Adam he said, ‘Because you listened to your wife and ate from the tree about which I commanded you, ‘You must not eat of it,’ Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat of it all the days of your life. It will produce thorns and thistles for you and you will eat the plants of the field. By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return.” Gen 3.17-19.
What this means is that because of sin, life is a struggle and the world in which we live is working against us. We will fight to survive, working against the dirt, and in the end the dirt will win. We will die and the earth will mock us because it endures and we do not. Natural disasters like floods, earthquakes, tsunamis, fires will kill us and destroy what we have worked so hard to build. Diseases will ravish our bodies and we will be crippled by viruses and bacteria. No one is immune. No amount of knowledge or wisdom can preserve us, or save us. Every person who has ever lived has died and we will too and so will those who come after us (Heb 9.27). And in the mean time, our life will be plagued by struggle and heartache. Horrible things will happen to us; we will be betrayed by those we love and others will seek to harm us and destroy our lives. Drunk drivers will kill our children, perverts will molest our sisters and rape our mothers and we are left asking why? We live in a fallen, crooked and depraved world. It is a world separated from God by sin. And what I mean by sin is not simply moral failures, but rather the condition of humanity and creation that has resulted in the separation between creation (us and our world) and creator (God). Sin has corrupted and frustrated every aspect of our lives and God has laid this curse upon us, not because he is vindictive and hates us, but rather because he loves us. He wants us to look out upon our world and see what our separation from him has done and cry out to him asking for the grace and mercy needed to restore that initial community we shared with him in Eden. And although, that restoration has not come to pass fully, the hope for that day is found in the life, death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. It is a hope that one day, bad things wont happen. We will all be judged according to God’s holiness and he will condemn those who defy them and give grace to those who love him (Tit 3.7). It is then that Jesus will reign over the earth as king and lord. It is then that the concept of “shalom” or peace will be made a reality. A peace that is not simply the absence of conflict, but the presence of unity and love between people, the world we live in, and the God who created it all (Rev 21.3-4).
Also, from a biblical worldview, there is no such thing as a “good person” (Ps 14.1-3, 53.1-3; Eccl 7.20; Rom 3.12). Christian and non-Christian are all equally guilty of sin and all are equally deserving of nothing but wrath and punishment for our crimes (see answer to question 3). That is why Christianity is not a religion based on morality or being a good person. Good people die and wake up in hell. Rather, what Christians aspire for is the grace of God provided through the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross. That is the only atonement for our rebellion and dysfunction as God’s creatures.
Even so, there are happenings in our world that are tragic and they do happen to what we would call innocent people. And the question of why is timeless and fundamental to understanding our condition. When God created the world, he created it to be very good (Gen 1.31). Therein, he gave man and woman dominion over it and there was order and harmony (Gen 1.26, 28; 2.15). However, we became arrogant and proud and sinned. We decided that there was wisdom and life apart from God and what we found was confusion and death. God cursed humanity and declared,
“To Adam he said, ‘Because you listened to your wife and ate from the tree about which I commanded you, ‘You must not eat of it,’ Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat of it all the days of your life. It will produce thorns and thistles for you and you will eat the plants of the field. By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return.” Gen 3.17-19.
What this means is that because of sin, life is a struggle and the world in which we live is working against us. We will fight to survive, working against the dirt, and in the end the dirt will win. We will die and the earth will mock us because it endures and we do not. Natural disasters like floods, earthquakes, tsunamis, fires will kill us and destroy what we have worked so hard to build. Diseases will ravish our bodies and we will be crippled by viruses and bacteria. No one is immune. No amount of knowledge or wisdom can preserve us, or save us. Every person who has ever lived has died and we will too and so will those who come after us (Heb 9.27). And in the mean time, our life will be plagued by struggle and heartache. Horrible things will happen to us; we will be betrayed by those we love and others will seek to harm us and destroy our lives. Drunk drivers will kill our children, perverts will molest our sisters and rape our mothers and we are left asking why? We live in a fallen, crooked and depraved world. It is a world separated from God by sin. And what I mean by sin is not simply moral failures, but rather the condition of humanity and creation that has resulted in the separation between creation (us and our world) and creator (God). Sin has corrupted and frustrated every aspect of our lives and God has laid this curse upon us, not because he is vindictive and hates us, but rather because he loves us. He wants us to look out upon our world and see what our separation from him has done and cry out to him asking for the grace and mercy needed to restore that initial community we shared with him in Eden. And although, that restoration has not come to pass fully, the hope for that day is found in the life, death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. It is a hope that one day, bad things wont happen. We will all be judged according to God’s holiness and he will condemn those who defy them and give grace to those who love him (Tit 3.7). It is then that Jesus will reign over the earth as king and lord. It is then that the concept of “shalom” or peace will be made a reality. A peace that is not simply the absence of conflict, but the presence of unity and love between people, the world we live in, and the God who created it all (Rev 21.3-4).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
