A Voice from the Past - John Owen

Sin does not only still abide in us, but is still acting, still laboring to bring forth the deeds of the flesh. When sin lets us alone we may let sin alone; but as sin is never less quiet than when it seems to be most quiet, and its waters are for the most part deep when they are still, so ought our contrivances against it to be vigorous at all times and in all conditions, even where there is least suspicion.

John Owen, 1616-1683, Of the Mortification of Sin in Believers, Chapter 2 (Overcoming Sin and Temptation, Edited by Kelly M. Kapic and Justin Taylor, 2006, Crossway Books, p. 51)

Is this true? How should it affect our lives?

The Presence of Evil

One of the oldest philosophical questions on record is the problem of evil.The reason it persists is it has not just an intellectual but an emotional impact. We experience or observe suffering, and our reaction is, How can a good God allow this? The basic Christian answer to this is that we live in a world in rebellion against God and this results in evil consequences.

Now the Christian position is that we are we are responsible for our actions, though it is difficult to understand how this fits in with God's being in control (Ephesians 1:11; Isaiah 43:13; Romans 8:28). Now trying to avoid this responsibility through psychological determinism leaves us not able to know anything, because whatever we think we know is the result of our conditioning. Also, if we are not responsible to do what is right, how can we condemn God for not doing what is right? And without God, where do we get the moral basis to complain of the evil in the world? We could also claim we are not really bad enough to deserve this suffering. But the Bible's claim is that by God's standard we are indeed that bad (Romans 3:23; Isaiah 64:6; Jeremiah 17:9).

Now the Bible affirms that suffering in this world is not always fair (John 9:1-3; Psalms 73; Job). But there is no such thing as a fair evil, and once evil is let into the world, it will not always affect people fairly. Also, God uses suffering or its absence to work in people's lives to bring them to Himself or to help them grow in Him (James 1:2-4; Romans 2:4; 8:28; John 11:4). Though this ultimately depends on the response of the individuals involved. Now taken by itself, this would lead to an ends-justifies-the-means morality. But given there is evil in the world, it is important to understand that God uses it to accomplish His ends. Also, every viewpoint has to deal somehow with the presence of evil in the world. We can say evil is normal, but then why are we so opposed to it? And if we see evil as normal, we are excluding the one Person in the universe who would be able to eliminate it

There is another fact which helps to put the problem of evil in perspective. It is the Christian contention that God became a Man (John 1:1-18; Philippians 2:5-11; Hebrews 2:9-15) and paid the price for our evil behavior (1 Peter 2:24,25; Romans 8:6-8; Colossians 2:13-15). Further, He has promised to come back again (Titus 2:13; Philippians 3:20,21; 1 John 3:2) and do away with the evil and suffering of this present life (Revelation 21:4; Romans 8:18; 2 Corinthians 4:17,18). We may not be able to fully explain, let alone understand, why God allowed evil in the world. But it makes a huge different whether He is an ivory-tower observer or the Man of Sorrows who identified with our pain and took the worst blow on himself that we might be delivered.     

Has the Old Testament Been Corrupted

It is easier to establish the preservation and historical reliability of the New Testament then the Old. That is because the Old  is set in an earlier period of history. But we do need to evaluate the evidence. Now there is good evidence of preservation from before the time of Christ. There are the Dead Sea Scrolls. Also the Hebrew Old Testament was preserved by the Jews, while the Christians preserved the Greek translation. It is difficult to see how they would have agreed together to alter it. There are also numerous quotes in early Jewish and Christian sources. Now there is the question of the Apocrypha. But the idea that the later Christian church could add to the original Jewish Bible does not accord with Scripture or reason (Romans 3:2). 

If we go back before that, there is more room for doubt, and many have come up with fanciful theories of how the books were composed. (My basic answer to this is, people do not write books that way. It would be one thing if they could produce physical evidence, but there is none. The argument is  based on the plausibility of the theories and they are implausible.) But we are faced with a large amount of archeological evidence confirming the history behind the Old Testament. Now there have been archeologists in recent times who have tried to cast doubt on this, but this has not been based on any new discovery, but is an attempt get around the evidence that is there. There is a considerable amount of evidence for the times of the kings of Israel and Judah. There has been a tendency to minimize or deny the kingdoms of David and Solomon, but there is new evidence to support them as well. Now we do still lack clear-cut evidence for the earliest Old Testament events, the Exodus and the patriarchs; and there is argument on both sides as to whether various pieces of evidence support one view or the other. (This is not surprising, considering the earliness of the events, nor would we expect any Egyptian chronicler writing in the manner of the time to record an event like the Exodus.) But it is amazing how accurate the later parts are if they were written long after the facts. In comparison, while Mycenae and Troy have been shown be real places, there is no record of the details and individuals involved in early Greek history. The early history of Rome is generally considered legendary and lacks detailed proof. The Greek records of Egypt and Mesopotamia are extremely garbled. But the kings of Israel and Judah, along with the other rulers they dealt with, appear repeatedly in inscriptions and records of the period. It is difficult to see how legends created long after the time could have this accuracy. Now this does not prove that the message of the Old Testament is true. But it does mean it needs to be dealt with based on the evidence.      

A Touch of Humor - The Rules

What rules should there be for worship? Do they at some point become silly?

A Voice from the Past - Chesterton

But what we suffer from to-day is humility in the wrong place. Modesty has moved from the organ of ambition. Modesty has settled upon the organ of conviction; where it was never meant to be. A man was meant to be doubtful about himself, but undoubting about truth; this has been exactly reversed. Nowadays the part of a man that a man does assert is exactly the part he ought not to assert - himself. The part he doubts is exactly the part he ought not to doubt - the Divine Reason.

G. K. Chesterton, 1874-1936, Orthodoxy,  III. The Suicide of Thought (Dover Publications, 2004, p. 23)

Is this helpful in explaining our world today? How should we respond to it?

In Search of Revival

Evangelical Christians have long prayed and worked for revival, but while there have been some claims of likely prospects, it has not come. Why? I do not believe it is because we have not prayed (James 4:2). I am under the impression many of us have prayed. Could it be we have prayed (at least in many cases) with the wrong motives (James 4:3)?

Why do we want revival? Is it possible one motive for wanting it so that we can be comfortable in the world? We have been through a shift as a nation where Christianity as gone from being respected and nominally adhered to, to being looked down upon and rejected. This is true not only of Christian beliefs but also of Christian moral principles. This, not surprisingly, can make Christians very uncomfortable. Could it be one of our chief reasons for praying for revival is so we can go back to being comfortable? Now it is really not surprising if the world is hostile to us; in fact Jesus promised it would be (John 15:18-21; 16:1-4; Matthew 10:16-25). Also, when the world is fully on our side there is a question of whether this means we have become conformed to it (Romans 12:1,2; 1 John 2:15-17; James 4:4). It might even be suggested that our comfortableness in the world contributed to the world slowly turning away from us.

Now do not get me wrong; I am not suggesting we should all become hermits and hide ourselves out in a cave somewhere or even hem ourselves in with multitudes of legalistic rules to avoid any contact with the world. Being in the world but not of the world is a difficult balance (John 17:14-19). And we are to reach out to those who need a Savior (Matthew 9:10-13; 1 Corinthians 9:19-22; Colossians 4:5,6). But we must expect opposition from the world if we are serving God. Does that mean we should not pray or work for revival? No, we should pray and work that souls will be saved. We should pray and work for better laws to be passed in our nation. But we must do so with the knowledge that we live in a fallen world and we cannot expect it to be totally on our side (and should be suspicious of it when it seems to be). And we should want it for the glory of God and the salvation of others, not so that we can be comfortable. And most of all, whatever happens we must trust in God and His power to bring us through (Proverbs 3:5,6; Romans 8:28; Matthew 16:18).     

Why Can't We Get It Right?

If the Bible is the inerrant Word of God, why are we not able to agree on what it has to say? This has been used to try to prove the Bible is not really authoritative and we need something else to interpret it. How should we look at this problem?

If we have trouble interpreting the Bible, is the problem with the Bible or with us? We are sinners (Romans 3:23; Isaiah 64:6; Jeremiah 17:9), and being sinners, our understanding of truth is imperfect (1 Corinthians 3:18; 8:1-3; 2:14). We allow our traditions and preconceived notions to determine our interpretation (Matthew 15:7-9, 12:1-14, Romans 12:2). I know from personal experience how hard it is to get past what I have been taught and to see what the Scripture really says. We can also be influenced by our culture and what it sees as acceptable (1 John 2:15-17; Colossians 2:8; James 4:4). Along with this, we must consider how far it is legitimate to interpret Scripture to fit in with the current scientific or philosophical opinions and how reliable those opinions really are.

There is also the desire to be different. The desire to see in Scripture some mysterious truth that no one else sees. The root of this is, of course, personal pride (Proverb 16:18; Romans 12:16; 1 Corinthians 13:4). This is why it is important to consult great Christian teachers of the past. It is not that they are more authoritative then Scripture, but that they put our own teachings in perspective. To keep from going off on a tangent, we should check our ideas against respected Christian teachers. To avoid being merely conformed to our own time, we need to consider the teachers of past ages.

Also, there is a danger of trying to make the Bible speak on subjects the Bible never claimed to speak on. The Bible is the authority for faith and practice to prepare us for every good work (2 Timothy 3:16,17). But it is not intended to give us answers to all our questions on other subjects. Even on faith and practice it tells us what God wants us to know, not what we want to think is important. I am convinced that the emphasis, as well as the words of Scripture, is inspired and that what God does not command, He leaves free (Deuteronomy 4:2). Therefore, when the Bible does not teach something clearly, we should not be dogmatic on it.

It is not surprising that in certain incidental matters there should be questions of cultural context, linguistics, or textual criticism. This is a result of being in a fallen world. But that does not mean the basic message does not come through. Nor is it surprising that in explaining the things of God, there would be things hard for us to understand. We need to avoid changing them into something that makes more sense to us. But even if there are difficulties, we should not throw out the standard and replace it with something else.