Dr. Walter Kaiser on Can We Believe in Bible Miracles?

HSOTB Kaiser Bruce Davids Brauch

Without Miracles, Biblical Faith is Meaningless – by Walter C. Kaiser Jr.

In the New Testament we read about numerous miracles. Did these really happen, or are they simply legends or perhaps the way ancient people described what they could not explain?

First we need to look at what is at stake in this question. Both Old Testament and New Testament belief are based on miracles. In the Old Testament the basic event is that of the exodus, including the miracles of the Passover and the parting of the Red Sea. These were miracles of deliverance for Israel and judgment for her enemies. Without them the faith of the Old Testament has little meaning. In the New Testament the resurrection of Jesus is the basic miracle. Every author in the New Testament believed that Jesus of Nazareth had been crucified and on the third day had returned to life. Without this miracle there is no Christian faith; as Paul points out, “If Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins” (1 Cor 15:17). Thus in both Old and New Testaments, without miracles, biblical faith is meaningless.

The fact that miracles are at the root of biblical faith, however, does not mean that they happened. Thus we need to ask if it is possible that they did occur. Some people take a philosophical position that miracles cannot happen in that the “laws of nature” are fixed and that God, if he exists, either cannot or will not “violate” them. While this is an honestly held position, it is also outdated. The idea of firmly fixed “laws of nature” belongs to Newtonian physics, not the world of relativity, which views laws as generalities covering observations to date. The issue for us, then, is whether there is evidence that there is a force (a spiritual force) which creates those irregularities in our observations of events that we term miracles.

The response of the Bible in general and the New Testament in particular is that there is. The basic spiritual force is that of God. He, Scripture asserts, is the only fully adequate explanation for the existence of the world. His personality is the only adequate explanation for the existence of personality in human beings. What is more, because he is personal he has remained engaged with this world. Some of his engagement we see in the regular events of “nature” (Col 1:16–17; Heb 1:3), while at other times he reveals his presence by doing something differently. It is those events that we call miracles.

A miracle has two parts: event and explanation. The event is an unusual occurrence, often one which cannot be explained by the normally occurring forces which we know of. Sometimes the event itself is not unique, but its timing is, as is the case in the Old Testament with the parting of the Jordan River and at least some of the plagues of Egypt. At other times, as in the resurrection of the dead, the event itself is unique.

The explanation part of the miracle points out who stands behind the event and why he did it. If a sick person suddenly recovers, we might say, “Boy, that was odd. I wonder what happened?” Or we might say, “Since I’ve never seen such a thing happen, perhaps he or she was not really sick.” We might even say, “This is witchcraft, the operation of a negative spiritual power.” Yet if the event happens when a person is praying to God the Father in the name of Jesus, the context explains the event. So we correctly say, “God worked a miracle.” Thus in the New Testament we discover that the resurrection of Jesus is explained as an act of God vindicating the claims of Jesus and exalting him to God’s throne.

How do we know that such a miracle happened? It is clear that we cannot ever know for certain. On the one hand, I cannot be totally sure even of what I experience. I could be hallucinating that I am now typing this chapter on this computer keyboard. I certainly have had dreams about doing such things. Yet generally I trust (or have faith in) my senses, even though I cannot be 100 percent sure of their accuracy. On the other hand, we did not directly experience biblical miracles, although it is not unknown for Christians (including us) to have analogous experiences now, including experiences of meeting the resurrected Jesus. Still, none of us were present when the biblical events happened. Therefore we cannot believe on the basis of direct observation; we have to trust credible witnesses.

When it comes to the resurrection, we have more documents from closer to the time of the event than we have for virtually any other ancient event. The witnesses in those New Testament documents subscribe to the highest standards of truthfulness. Furthermore, most of them died on behalf of their witness, hardly the actions of people who were lying. They claim to have had multiple personal experiences that convinced them that Jesus had indeed risen from the dead (see 1 Cor 15:1–11). None of this absolutely proves that this central miracle happened. There could have been some type of a grand illusion. Yet it makes the resurrection believable enough for it to be a credible basis for faith. We see enough evidence for us to commit ourselves to, which is something that we do in everyday life constantly when we commit ourselves to something that someone has told us.

If the central miracle of the New Testament actually happened, then we have much less of a problem with any of the other miracles. Some of those same witnesses are claiming to have observed them, or to have known others who did. After the resurrection of a dead person, a healing or even the calming of a storm appear to be relatively minor. After all, if God is showing himself in one way, it would not be surprising for him to show himself in many other ways.

Miracles in the Bible have several functions. First, they accredit the messengers God sends, whether that person be Moses or a prophet or Jesus or an apostle or an ordinary Christian. Miracles are how God gives evidence that this person who claims to be from him really is from him. He “backs up their act” with his spiritual power.

Second, miracles show the nature of God and his reign. They may work God’s justice, but more often they show his character as full of mercy and forgiveness. Jesus proclaimed that the kingdom of God had come. The people might rightly ask what that rule of God looked like. Jesus worked miracles which showed the nature of that reign. The blind see, the lame walk, the outcasts are brought into community, and the wild forces of nature are tamed. That is what the kingdom of God is like.

Third, miracles actually do the work of the kingdom. When one reads Luke 18, he or she discovers that it is impossible for a rich person to be saved, although with God all things are possible. Then in Luke 19:1–10 Zacchaeus, a rich man, is parted from his wealth and is saved. Clearly a miracle has happened, and the kingdom of God has come even to a rich man. The same is true of the demons being driven out, for each time this happens the borders of Satan’s kingdom are driven back. Similarly, many other miracles also have this function.

So, did miracles really happen? The answer is that, yes, a historical case can be made for their happening. Furthermore, we have seen that it is important to establish that they happened. A miracle is central to Christian belief. And miracles serve important functions in certifying, explaining and doing the work of the kingdom of God.

Miracles are not simply nice stories for Sunday school. They are a demonstration of the character of God, not only in the past but also in the present.

In the New Testament we read about numerous miracles. Did these really happen, or are they simply legends or perhaps the way ancient people described what they could not explain?

First we need to look at what is at stake in this question. Both Old Testament and New Testament belief are based on miracles. In the Old Testament the basic event is that of the exodus, including the miracles of the Passover and the parting of the Red Sea. These were miracles of deliverance for Israel and judgment for her enemies. Without them the faith of the Old Testament has little meaning. In the New Testament the resurrection of Jesus is the basic miracle. Every author in the New Testament believed that Jesus of Nazareth had been crucified and on the third day had returned to life. Without this miracle there is no Christian faith; as Paul points out, “If Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins” (1 Cor 15:17). Thus in both Old and New Testaments, without miracles, biblical faith is meaningless.

The fact that miracles are at the root of biblical faith, however, does not mean that they happened. Thus we need to ask if it is possible that they did occur. Some people take a philosophical position that miracles cannot happen in that the “laws of nature” are fixed and that God, if he exists, either cannot or will not “violate” them. While this is an honestly held position, it is also outdated. The idea of firmly fixed “laws of nature” belongs to Newtonian physics, not the world of relativity, which views laws as generalities covering observations to date. The issue for us, then, is whether there is evidence that there is a force (a spiritual force) which creates those irregularities in our observations of events that we term miracles.

The response of the Bible in general and the New Testament in particular is that there is. The basic spiritual force is that of God. He, Scripture asserts, is the only fully adequate explanation for the existence of the world. His personality is the only adequate explanation for the existence of personality in human beings. What is more, because he is personal he has remained engaged with this world. Some of his engagement we see in the regular events of “nature” (Col 1:16–17; Heb 1:3), while at other times he reveals his presence by doing something differently. It is those events that we call miracles.

A miracle has two parts: event and explanation. The event is an unusual occurrence, often one which cannot be explained by the normally occurring forces which we know of. Sometimes the event itself is not unique, but its timing is, as is the case in the Old Testament with the parting of the Jordan River and at least some of the plagues of Egypt. At other times, as in the resurrection of the dead, the event itself is unique.

The explanation part of the miracle points out who stands behind the event and why he did it. If a sick person suddenly recovers, we might say, “Boy, that was odd. I wonder what happened?” Or we might say, “Since I’ve never seen such a thing happen, perhaps he or she was not really sick.” We might even say, “This is witchcraft, the operation of a negative spiritual power.” Yet if the event happens when a person is praying to God the Father in the name of Jesus, the context explains the event. So we correctly say, “God worked a miracle.” Thus in the New Testament we discover that the resurrection of Jesus is explained as an act of God vindicating the claims of Jesus and exalting him to God’s throne.

How do we know that such a miracle happened? It is clear that we cannot ever know for certain. On the one hand, I cannot be totally sure even of what I experience. I could be hallucinating that I am now typing this chapter on this computer keyboard. I certainly have had dreams about doing such things. Yet generally I trust (or have faith in) my senses, even though I cannot be 100 percent sure of their accuracy. On the other hand, we did not directly experience biblical miracles, although it is not unknown for Christians (including us) to have analogous experiences now, including experiences of meeting the resurrected Jesus. Still, none of us were present when the biblical events happened. Therefore we cannot believe on the basis of direct observation; we have to trust credible witnesses.

When it comes to the resurrection, we have more documents from closer to the time of the event than we have for virtually any other ancient event. The witnesses in those New Testament documents subscribe to the highest standards of truthfulness. Furthermore, most of them died on behalf of their witness, hardly the actions of people who were lying. They claim to have had multiple personal experiences that convinced them that Jesus had indeed risen from the dead (see 1 Cor 15:1–11). None of this absolutely proves that this central miracle happened. There could have been some type of a grand illusion. Yet it makes the resurrection believable enough for it to be a credible basis for faith. We see enough evidence for us to commit ourselves to, which is something that we do in everyday life constantly when we commit ourselves to something that someone has told us.

If the central miracle of the New Testament actually happened, then we have much less of a problem with any of the other miracles. Some of those same witnesses are claiming to have observed them, or to have known others who did. After the resurrection of a dead person, a healing or even the calming of a storm appear to be relatively minor. After all, if God is showing himself in one way, it would not be surprising for him to show himself in many other ways.

Miracles in the Bible have several functions. First, they accredit the messengers God sends, whether that person be Moses or a prophet or Jesus or an apostle or an ordinary Christian. Miracles are how God gives evidence that this person who claims to be from him really is from him. He “backs up their act” with his spiritual power.

Second, miracles show the nature of God and his reign. They may work God’s justice, but more often they show his character as full of mercy and forgiveness. Jesus proclaimed that the kingdom of God had come. The people might rightly ask what that rule of God looked like. Jesus worked miracles which showed the nature of that reign. The blind see, the lame walk, the outcasts are brought into community, and the wild forces of nature are tamed. That is what the kingdom of God is like.

Third, miracles actually do the work of the kingdom. When one reads Luke 18, he or she discovers that it is impossible for a rich person to be saved, although with God all things are possible. Then in Luke 19:1–10 Zacchaeus, a rich man, is parted from his wealth and is saved. Clearly a miracle has happened, and the kingdom of God has come even to a rich man. The same is true of the demons being driven out, for each time this happens the borders of Satan’s kingdom are driven back. Similarly, many other miracles also have this function.

So, did miracles really happen? The answer is that, yes, a historical case can be made for their happening. Furthermore, we have seen that it is important to establish that they happened. A miracle is central to Christian belief. And miracles serve important functions in certifying, explaining and doing the work of the kingdom of God.

Miracles are not simply nice stories for Sunday school. They are a demonstration of the character of God, not only in the past but also in the present.

About The Author:

Kaiser W image w books in background

Walter C. Kaiser Jr. (PhD, Brandeis University) is the distinguished professor emeritus of Old Testament and president emeritus of Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary in South Hamilton, Massachusetts. Dr. Kaiser has written over 40 books, including Toward an Exegetical TheologyBiblical Exegesis for Preaching and TeachingA History of IsraelThe Messiah in the Old TestamentRecovering the Unity of the BibleThe Promise-Plan of GodPreaching and Teaching The Last Things; and coauthored (with Moises Silva) An Introduction to Biblical Hermeneutics. Dr. Kaiser and his wife, Marge, currently reside at Kerith Farm in Cedar Grove, Wisconsin. Dr. Kaiser’s website is www.walterckaiserjr.com. The article above was adapted from the book The Hard Sayings of the Bible – Chapter 2.

James M. Boice on When is Jesus Coming Back?

What The Bible Has To Say About The Future: Part 4 in a Series of 9  – “The Days of Noah”

Last and Future World Boice image

If the Lord Jesus is coming back to this earth as He promised and as the prophets foretold, the most natural next question is: When is Jesus coming? This is not just a question for time-conscious, twenty-first century man, as though he more than others has a special concern for the timing or for the end of human history. It flows naturally from belief in Christ’s second coming itself and is, therefore, a question which has been asked by Christians ever since Christ first spoke of His return, elaborating on the Old Testament prophecies.

The question was in the minds of Christ’s disciples. Toward the end of Jesus’ three-year ministry, shortly before His crucifixion, the disciples asked Him, “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?” (Matthew 24:3). Part of Christ’s answer was that no one, not even Christ Himself, could know the precise moment at which the prophesied events would unfold. He said, “But concerning that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only” (Matthew 24:36). Later, after His resurrection, He gave a similar answer to an almost identical question. The disciples had asked, “Lord, will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?” Jesus said to them, “It is not for you to know times or seasons that the Father has fixed by his own authority” (Acts 1:6,7).

The disciples could not know. We cannot know. Still, this is not the whole story. For we can hardly fail to notice that when Jesus told the disciples that they could not know the time of His return, He nevertheless went on at some length to describe the conditions that would prevail in the world before He came again. These signs occupy at least two of the twenty-eight chapters of Matthew (24-25), one of the sixteen chapters of Mark (13), and one chapter of Luke (21). Moreover, in the last of these chapters a listing of some of the signs is followed by the challenge: “Now when these things begin to take place, straighten up and raise your heads, because your redemption is drawing near” (Luke 21:28).

Perhaps I can illustrate what Christ was saying by this illustration, borrowed from one of the unpublished writings of Dr. Donald Grey Barnhouse. Suppose a Shakespearean scholar enters a theater one evening not knowing what masterpiece of Shakespeare is to be presented. Before the curtain goes up, he is taken behind the scenes. On stage is a castle with ramparts looking out over a wooded countryside. At once he knows that he will not see Othello, which is set in Venice, not Julius Caesar, which begins with a street scene in Rome. He knows that he not see Macbeth; for although there is a castle scene in Macbeth, the play opens not with the castle but with the witches gathered around their caldron. Finally, our drama critic notices two soldiers with shields bearing the arms of the king of Denmark. He sees two other actors dressed up as a king and queen. There is an actor who is supposed to be a ghost. Now no one has to tell the critic what he will see, for he knows it will be Hamlet.

In the same way today, you and I who are Christians sit in the theater of world events awaiting the opening of God’s apocalyptic drama. We don not know when the play is to start, but, like the drama critic, we know more about it than many. Many stare at the future as at a curtain. For them the future is veiled because they do not have the knowledge of the plan of God. Nor can they go behind curtain where the scene is being set. The Christian is not left in such ignorance. We see behind the scenes. Thus, while it is true that we do not know the precise moment at which the play will begin, we do know the play itself and can begin to sense it beginning as we see the actors starting to take their proper places on the great world stage.

We will understand Christ’s remarks in this light when we realize that they were intended to be indefinite enough to keep anyone from self-satisfaction or complacency but precise enough to encourage Christians to examine history, asking whether the conditions of the Lord’s return may not be entering into their final stages through the developments of their lifetime.

The Days of Noah

But how are we to do this? Where should we begin? One answer to these questions is in Matthew 24, in the verses immediately following Jesus’s statement that no one knows the precise day or hour of His return. These verses contain a reference to the days of Noah, and the point is that the terrible moral conditions that prevailed on the earth just before the flood in Noah’s day will be repeated prior to Christ’s return and the ensuing judgment upon men and nations.

[Note: It might be argued that the emphasis of Matthew 24 is on the sudden and unexpected nature of Christ’s return rather than on the conditions that will prevail at that time. This is partly correct. Certainly Jesus did stress the suddenness of His return: “For as the lightning comes from the east and shines as far as the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man” (v.27); “Therefore, stay awake, for you do not know on what day your Lord is coming” (v. 42). But that is not the sole message of these verses. And it does not negate the position taken here. Another prominent theme in this chapter is unbelief both in Noah’s day and in the day of Christ’s second coming, and unbelief in itself would lead to the conditions recorded. It may also be noted that the view that conditions of Noah’s day will be repeated before Christ’s return is reinforced by other New Testament passages which speak in similar terms of those days (e.g., 1 Tim. 4:1-4; 2 Tim. 3:1-7; 2 Pet. 2:4-9). Jesus stated elsewhere that conditions before His return would be similar to “the days of Lot” in Sodom, which was noted for its sexual perversions and excesses (Luke 17:28-30).

“For as were the days of Noah, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the ark, and they were unaware until the flood came and swept them all away, so will be the coming of the Son of Man” (Matthew 24:37-39).

(1) Since the days of Noah are described in Genesis 6, we may turn to that chapter and see precisely what Jesus was referring to. One characteristic of the days of Noah was a rapid increase in population: “And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth…” (v. 1). Naturally, an increase in population is in itself without moral overtones. It is neither good nor bad. And yet, men being what they are, it is also natural that an increase in population was then and may again be accompanied by moral decadence.

There is a parallel here with developments of our own age. The world’s population is now approximately three billion people [in 1972 – Now in 2013 it’s more in the ballpark of 6-7 billion!]. That figure is double what it was in 1900m and it is expected to double again by the year 2000 or earlier [It has doubled again since 1972]. With the rapid increase in the world’s population there has been an accompanying increase in suffering, particularly in the area of hunger and malnutrition and related diseases. Some experts predict worldwide famine by the year 1985 [there have been and continue to be famines around the globe – malnutrition and starvation is the number one cause of death in the world today]. Another indication of this same general trend is that the movements of world history today seem to be less under the control of individual political leaders than of the mass movements of nationalism, ethnic consciousness, labor, and consumer activity.

We do not want to make the mistake of imagining that, because we have had a sharp increase in the world’s population in recent years, this is proof in itself that the Lord’s return is imminent. We are to look for trends in the history of our times that may be leading up to His return not for events that foretell it precisely. This is only one trend. Nevertheless, we can hardly overlook the fact that the rapid increase of the world’s population in our day has assumed a scale never before duplicated in known history and has caused even secular observers of the world scene to speak in apocalyptic terms when describing it.

(2) The days of Noah were also characterized by an unprecedented accumulation of knowledge. Genesis 4 speaks of the construction of cities, of developments in metallurgy, the arts, and other sciences. If we are to judge by the size of the ark itself — about 450 feet long with a beam of 75 feet, the size of many modern ocean liners — there was also considerable engineering knowledge and skill coupled with an ability to construct the objects designed. This knowledge contributed to a great indulgence in luxury, as it has for many in our day. It was not to the moral advantage of the age.

(3) In addition to the increases in population, knowledge, and luxury, there was also a rapid acceleration of vice and lawlessness. The account of Genesis says “The LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually…Now the earth was corrupt in God’s sight, and the earth was filled with violence. And God saw the earth, and behold, it was corrupt, for all flesh had corrupted their way on the earth” (Genesis 6:5, 11-12). Such wickedness was the cause of the great judgment that befell the earth in Noah’s time and was a primary basis for Christ’s warning that the conditions of Noah’s day would be repeated.

One picture that emerges from this description of wickedness in the early chapters of Genesis is of a world characterized by crime. We too are experiencing this. During the 1960’s, crime in the United States rose 148 percent, while arrests of persons under eighteen nearly doubled. In 1969, the number of reported crimes was 4,989,700, which made the crime rate 2,471 per 100,000 persons’ this compares to 2,234 one year earlier . An average of 9 major crimes per minute were committed during the same period [I shudder to think what the statistics are now in 2013!].

In New York City in 1971, the FBI reported an increase in crime of 11 percent, while homicides in the city increased 30 percent. In 1971 New York City, with a population of only 8 million persons, recorded more crimes than England, Scotland, Wales, Ireland, Switzerland, Spain, Sweden, the Netherlands, Norway, and Denmark combined. In that city there are over 300,000 alcoholics, affecting the lives of 1,500,000 people and costing more than 1 billion dollars annually. The loss approaches 2 billion dollars for the upward of 100,000 hard-core heroin addicts, who must continually steal to support their habit.

In Los Angeles crime has increased 60 percent in 6 years, or 7 times faster than the population of the city.

More alarming even than these figures are the growing permissiveness and disrespect for law that have characterized the last decade. These trends have affected even the police, as various “crime probes” have indicated. Courts are affected. Among the forerunners in open defiance of laws that they consider unjust have been clergymen; there is no lack of others to follow or excel their example.

Another example of vice and lawlessness given in the opening chapters of Genesis is an increase in sexual perversions and crimes. This too is reflected in our society. In one recent year, for instance, forcible rape rose 17 percent. Divorce and remarriage are rampant. Many, including clergymen, speak in favor of “term” rather than lifetime marriages. Venereal disease is reaching epidemic proportions. In an ultimate gesture of moral degeneracy and defiance of all former norms, homosexuality and lesbianism have burst from the darkness of the back alleys onto the front pages of newspapers and to televised talk shows. Recently, a new religious order  was founded by members of a so-called homosexual church named the “Church of the Beloved Disciple.” The order is called the Oblate Companions of St. John, who in turn is honored as “the disciple whom Jesus loved (John 21:20), thus implying a homosexual relationship between John and the Lord. Similar churches now exist in more than a dozen U.S. cities. Recently, national papers and magazines carried stories of the decision of delegates from nineteen United Churches of Christ in the San Francisco area to ordain a confessed homosexual to the gospel ministry [The increase of the homosexual population and influence in culture, politics, and the church is absolutely staggering from the time of Boice’s writing this in 1972].

Again, we dare not make the error of arguing that because these crimes and perversions are appearing to such alarming degrees in our age and society, therefore, the coming of Jesus Christ must occur immediately. We have no warrant for that. Nevertheless, we must ask: Are the alarming moral and economic conditions of our age not more than adequate fulfillment of the conditions that Jesus taught must prevail before His return? Are not our days equal in their vice to the days of Noah? Are they not equally lawless? If they are, then we dare not imagine that Christ cannot or will not appear. Nor dare we neglect His warning: “Therefore, stay awake, for you do not know on what day your Lord is coming” (Matthew 24:42).

Demonism

(4) There is one more characteristic of the times that is especially significant. That is the phenomenon of demonism. Genesis 6 relates that there was a time on earth when some of the angels who had fallen in Satan’s rebellion cohabited with the daughters of men, thereby producing a race of extraordinary beings, half demon and half human. This characteristic of the days of Noah is disclosed in the opening verses of the chapter:

“When men began to multiply on the face of the land and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of man were attractive. And they took as their wives any they chose…The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown” (Genesis 6:1-2, 4).

Many who have studied this passage interpret it to mean that the godly descendants of Seth, called “sons of God,” married unbelievers [Note: That is the interpretation given to Genesis 6 by most of the older Protestant commentators–Calvin, Lange, Keil and Delitzch, Scofield and others. More recent interpreters–Simpson, Skinner, Von Rad, Pember, E.W. Bullinger, A.C. Gaebalein, DeHaan–favor the view that the marriages were between human women and demonic beings. Naturally there have been commentators on both sides f the issue at most periods of history]. That would explain the unusual corruption and decadence that existed in the world in Noah’s time and would make good sense of the passage. Nevertheless, there are several reasons why I feel this an inadequate interpretation of these verses.

First, the contrast in the verses is not between the descendants of Seth (both men and women) and the ungodly descendants of Cain. The contrast is between the daughters of men, meaning daughters of the whole human race, and the sons of God, whoever they may be.

Second, in the Old Testament, the phrase “sons of God” is never used of believers. The fact that believers become sons of God or children of God by faith in Jesus Christ is entirely a New Testament concept.

Third, the phrase “sons of God,” when it does occur in the Old Testament, seems to refer not to human beings who believe in God but to angels, that is, to beings not born of others like men but created directly by God. That would be the case with all angels, whether fallen or not. And it would explain the use of the phrase in a new way in New Testament times to refer to those who have experienced a new, direct birth by God through faith in Jesus Christ (Note: The one apparent exception to this usage, an application of the term to Adam in Luke 3:38, actually proves the point being made. For Adam alone, of all the Old Testament characters, was the result of the direct creative activity of God. It should be noted, however, that in the Greek text only phrase “of God” occurs).

The phrase “sons of God” occurs four times in the other parts of the Old Testament — three times in the Book of Job and once in Daniel. In Daniel the phrase was used by King Nebuchadnezzar after he looked into the burning furnace into which he had thrown the Hebrew captives, Shadrach, Meschach, and Abednego. He said, “But I see four men unbound, walking in the midst of the fire, and they are not hurt; and the appearance of the fourth is like a son of the gods” (Daniel 3:25). Nebuchadnezzar clearly meant that the fourth figure looked like an angel. In Job the phrase “the sons of God” occurs in two contexts. In chapter 38 God asked Job where he was at the beginning of creation “when the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy” (Job 38:7). This is apparently a reference to the angels who witnessed the creation of the earth. In the first two chapters of Job we are twice told of a day when “the sons of God” appeared with Satan to present themselves before the Lord (Job 1:6; 2:1). It is in this sense that we must interpret the reference to “the sons of God” in Genesis.

The conclusive argument to this interpretation of Genesis 6 is that, historically, this was also the view held by the Jews before the time of Christ and expressed in various Jewish documents and apocalyptic literature. One outstanding example is in the book of Enoch, a pseudepigraphical work compiled during the time of the Maccabees or earlier.

And it came to pass when the children of men had multiplied that in those days were born unto them beautiful and comely daughters. And the angels, the children of heaven, saw and lusted after them, and said to one another: “Come let is choose us wives from among the children of men and beget us children” (1 Enoch 6:1,2).

After a description of how this happened and of the wickedness that resulted, the book then gives an account of the objection by the righteous angels.

They have gone to the daughters of men upon the earth, and have slept with the women, and have defiled them  -selves, and revealed to them all kinds of sins. And the women have born giants, and the whole earth has thereby been filled with blood and unrighteousness. And now, behold, the souls of those who have died are crying and make their suit to the gates of heaven, and their lamentations have ascended; and cannot cease because of the lawless deeds which are wrought on the earth (1 Enoch 9:8-10).

An account of the punishment of the fallen angels and a brief reference to the flood follows.

This interpretation of Genesis 6 is also found in the writings of Josephus and Philo, in The Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs, and in the Septuagint, which renders the phrase “sons of God” as “angels of God.”

Moreover, the New Testament seems to support the view also in those few passages which link God’s punishment of certain fallen angels to the time of the flood. Thus Peter writes, “For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to chains of gloomy darkness to be kept until the judgment; if he did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, a herald of righteousness, with seven others, when he brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly; then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trials, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment until the day of judgment” (2 Peter 2:4-5, 9 cf. Jude 6).

What shall we say about the duplication or the possibility of the duplication of such things in our day? At the very least, we see an extraordinary revival of spiritism, witchcraft, magic, and Satanism in this country and around the world. Many cities possess hundreds, if not thousands, of spiritualists and mediums. Stories of news interest, particularly gruesome stories, frequently make the front page of the newspapers. Some years ago Swiss papers carried accounts of the murder of a young girl by a group of older people who beat her to death while attempting to exorcise a demon. In America papers carried exhaustive accounts of the Sharon Tate murders by a self-styled devil named Charles Manson and members of his so-called family. Some of the accounts of these murders, such as that which appeared in Esquire magazine (November, 1971), detailed the most horrible practices, including murder, animal and human sacrifice, ritual sex, and sexual perversions.

These practices often involve young people. In 1971, a twenty-year-old was drowned at his request by two friends (aged seventeen and nineteen) because, as he believed, a worshiper of Satan who dies violently is assured command of forty legions of demons in the life to come. He was part of a Satan cult that reportedly involved as many as seventy high school students in his area. Recently another young person who was apparently associated with this group committed suicide.

Are these merely tragic eccentricities? Or are they evidence of a widespread outbreak of genuine Satan worship and demonism in our time? Unfortunately, the extent of Satan worship suggests the latter. And, if the idea precedes the act and theme of the popular book and movie Rosemary’s Baby, which told the conception of a child by a demon father and a human mother, is any indication, the worst may be yet to come.

On the basis of all such evidence, David H.C. Read, minister of the Madison Avenue Presbyterian Church in New York City, recently wrote:

This kind of experience is spreading rapidly and has to be taken much more seriously than we have in the past. The time for ignoring it or laughing it off is over. For too long we have lived with a comfortable, rationalized religion, leaving the mystic, the emotional, and what we call the “spooky” to the ecclesiastical underworld or psychiatrists. In the main-line churches there has been little room for the supernatural of any hue, divine or demonic. Both angels and devils have evaporated from our consciousness. They have disappeared into a little box labeled “primitive superstitions.” Now the lid is off, and it is obvious that the sedate, sensible, secularized religion of the recent past is unable to cope with the storm that is bursting upon us.

According to the Bible, all these things — a rapid increase in the world’s population, an unprecedented accumulation of knowledge, the acceleration of vice and lawlessness, and demonism — will exist side by side with a worldwide proclamation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ before His return. Jesus said, “And this gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world as a testimony to tall the nations, and then the end will come” (Matthew 24:14).

Therefore Stand

One more point is in order here. Many are inclined to take lightly te so-called “spiritualist” phenomena — rappings, Ouija boards, witchcraft, seances, and even demonism — particularly as such things are portrayed in popular writings or on television. But the Christian should not do this, nor should he participate in seances or any other form of attempted communication with the spirit world. We have our knowledge of the life to come through Scripture. God has told us many things in the Bible, certainly everything we need to know. To indulge in spiritualist phenomena is really to dishonor and disobey God.

We must remember at this point that God ordered the people of Israel to avoid the various forms of devil worship practiced by the nations around them:

“There shall not be found among you anyone who burns his son or his daughter as an offering, anyone who practices divination or tells fortunes or interprets omens, or a sorcerer or a charmer or a medium or a necromancer or one who inquirers of the dead, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the LORD. And because of these abominations the LORD your God is driving them out before you”  (Deuteronomy 18:10–12).

At the same time, we need to be careful not to take the various evidences of demonism too seriously, in the sense that we might be tempted to fear these things and forget the power of our God. It is the demons, not Christians, who should fear.

It is significant that the demonic activity recorded in the Bible is not scattered throughout the years of biblical history but rather is concentrated at the four focal points of history at which God has been or will be particularly active.

(1) We find demonism at the creation of the world and in the generations immediately following creation. The days of Noah belong to this period.

(2) Again we find demonism at the time of the Exodus of the Israelites from Egypt. Ancient Egyptian worship was demon worship; the plagues at the time of the Exodus were directed  against the supposed power of these “gods.”

(3) Third, there was a remarkable outcropping of demonic activity during the lifetime of Jesus Christ. Many writers have expressed the idea that in this period particularly the demonic powers gathered themselves together in a major effort to prevent the destruction of their kingdom.

(4) The fourth period is one in which the Lord Jesus Christ will return.

“Is it possible that rising evidence of demonism in various forms has an eschatological import?” wrote Russell T. Hitt in a recent booklet. “Is it because the Second Coming of Christ is near, that we are witnessing stepped-up Satanic activity? Perhaps we have a clue here to present worldwide unrest in every area of life.  (Russell T. Hitt, “Demons Today” [Philadelphia: The Evangelical Foundation, 1969, p. 12).

If that is true — and the other periods of unusual demonic activity would suggest that it is — then the phenomena we are witnessing today are much more an evidence of fear and frenzy on the part of Satan and his followers than they are of confidence by Satan in the outcome. Those who are followers of Jesus Christ and know their Bible are not ignorant of Satan and his devices. In fact, armed with such knowledge and with the Word of the living God, we can stand against him: “Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the schemes of the devil” (Ephesians 6:11). We cannot do this in our own strength, of course, but we can in the power of the Lord Jesus Christ, who “disarmed the principalities and powers and made a public example of them, triumphing over them” (Colossians 2:15).

The Return of Jesus Christ

Well, then, is the Lord coming soon? That is the question with which we began, and again we must repeat our first answer. We do not know. Certainly it could be at any moment. It could be delayed.

We should not close this particular article without mentioning a final condition which must precede the return of Jesus. This condition has nothing to do with the days of Noah, yet it is mentioned several times in the Bible as being of great significance. It is the return of the Jews to their homeland, which began to take place in 1948, and especially the repossession of the old city of Jerusalem, which took place as a result of the Six Day War in 1967.

There are statements in the Bible by Jesus Christ that seem to date the second coming within a generation of these events. Two of the most significant statements are in Luke’s version of the Olivet discourse. After an opening section of the discourse listing events that will take place but which are not signs of His immediate return, Jesus refers to the repossession of Jerusalem by the Jews after a long period of Gentile domination. “Jerusalem will be trampled underfoot by the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled” (Luke 21:24). The implication is that His return will take place shortly after this time of Gentile domination. Several verses later He adds, “So also, when you see these things taking place, you know that the kingdom of God is near. Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all has taken place” (Luke 21:31-32). These verses seem to indicate that the Lord Jesus Christ will return within one generation of the repossession of Palestine and the reconquest of Jerusalem by the Jews. If that is so, the biblical length of a generation being about forty years of 1948 (the year of the reestablishment of the state of Israel) or of 1967 (the year in which the old city of Jerusalem once again came into Jewish hands).

All this makes the necessity of belief in the Lord Jesus Christ more urgent. People have always said, “Well, if things get bad enough, I’ll believe in Christ then.” They say that in our time.

It does not work that way. When conditions in the world become more and more like those prophesied for the end times, it is easier to postpone belief rather than harder. It is easy to do what you please when there is no longer a respect for law or popular opinion to restrain you or any regard for sound preaching. Do not think that if these things are true, you will find it easy to arrange a last-minute repentance. The Bible says, “In favorable time I listened to you, and in a day of salvation I have helped you. Behold, now is the favorable time; behold, now is the day of salvation” (2 Corinthians 6:2).

About the Author

Boice JM in pulpit

James Montgomery Boice, Th.D., (July 7, 1938 – June 15, 2000) was a Reformed theologian, Bible teacher, and pastor of Tenth Presbyterian Church in Philadelphia from 1968 until his death. He is heard on The Bible Study Hour radio broadcast and was a well-known author and speaker in evangelical and Reformed circles. He also served as Chairman of the International Council on Biblical Inerrancy for over ten years and was a founding member of the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals.James Boice was one of my favorite Bible teachers. Thankfully – many of his books and expositions of Scripture are still in print and more are becoming available. He was one of only a handful of reformed theologians that was premillennial in his eschatology (Steven J. Lawson, John MacArthur, Erwin W. Lutzer, S. Lewis Johnson, Rodney Stordtz, John Hannah and John Piper also come to mind). However, what makes him really unique as a Reformed Theologian is that he was not Historic Premillennial – but leaned Dispensational (Held to a pre-tribulation rapture) as well. This article was adapted from Chapter Three in one of the first of James Boice’s plethora of books, and is entitled: The Last and Future World, Grand Rapids, MI.: Zondervan, 1974 (currently out of print). This book is based on 9 sermons that Dr. Boice preached at Tenth Presbyterian Church in Philadelphia in 1972. Though this book was written almost 40 years ago – it is just as relevant as when it was first written since many of the prophecies taught in the Scriptures and addressed by Dr. Boice in this book have yet to be fulfilled. Scripture verses are quoted from the more modern English Standard Version – DPC.

10 Ways The “Man of Steel” Points Us To Jesus

How The Man of Steel Helps Us to Behold Jesus – The Real Superman by David P. Craig

Man of Steel

On the road to Emmaus after Jesus rose from the dead He appears to His disciples and speaks of how all the Scriptures pointed to Himself: “And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself” (Luke 24:27). Last night I went to see the movie “Man of Steel” about Superman with my wife and one of my daughters. We enjoyed the movie and afterward discussed some of the parallels between Superman and Jesus. The movie doesn’t purport to be a theologically accurate portrait of Jesus, but nevertheless it is rare occasion when you leave a movie thinking and talking about Jesus – and for that very reason alone this movie is very significant and worth seeing. This movie has been doing very well around the world – I think it’s because all of humanity longs for what Superman points us to – the real Superman – The Lord Jesus Christ. There’s probably more parallels than the ones we discussed, but here’s what we came up with:

(1) The first pointer is an ironic one. Jesus was born of a virgin (Isaiah 7:14 cf. with Matthew 1:20). In the movie everyone on Krypton is conceived through a sterile process that does not involve sexual reproduction. Kal-El (Superman) is the first child born in many centuries of a natural birth. This is the opposite of the way it is between all humans and Christ – nevertheless Superman’s birth like Jesus’ is totally unique among his people.

(2) Superman like Jesus has a “Heavenly” Father and an adopted earthly father and mother. Jesus had always been with His Heavenly Father and then came to earth and was raised by his earthly father and mother – Joseph and Mary. Superman had a Father on Krypton – Jor-El  (played by Russell Crowe)  and came to earth and was raised by his adopted dad, Jonathan Kent (played by Kevin Costner).

(3) Throughout his life Superman is mocked, taunted, and even beaten by others and refuses to retaliate in words or actions. This reminds us of Jesus: “He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth; like a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and like sheep that before its shearers is silent, so he oppened not his mouth” (Isaiah 53:7).

(4) Superman has tremendous powers as a child and refrains from using them accept to save others. Jesus came in total humility and lived in his human nature and refrained from using His omnipotent powers which reminds us of Philippians 2:3-5, “Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves. Let each of us look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others. have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus.”

(5) Superman like Jesus has a “Heavenly” name (Kal-El) and a name given to him by his earthly parents (Clark). Jesus is called Immanuel “God with us” in Isaiah, and then Joseph and Mary are told to call Him Jesus “for He will save his people from their sins” (Matthew 1:21).

(6) Kal-El has to battle the vicious archenemy of humanity and the Kryptonites throughout the movie and ends up victorious just as Jesus was constantly attacked by Satan and was victorious. This reminds us of John 10:10, “The thief [Satan] comes only to steal and kill and destroy. I [Jesus] came that they may have life and have it abundantly.”

(7) Superman keeps his identity hidden until it is time to fulfill his mission. Jesus also waited to accomplish His mission in the fullness of time: “But when the fulness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born or woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons” (Galatians 4:4-5).

(8) Kal-El (Superman) was sent to earth by his Father to save the world. Jesus was sent by His Heavenly Father to save the world – “For the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve and give His life as a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45).

(9) Clark Kent gives himself up in a crucifix pose at the age of 33 and fulfills his mission for which he came to earth – the same age Jesus was when He was crucified on the cross.

(10)  Superman was “cut-off” from his Father for the good of humanity. Just as Jesus was “forsaken” by His Heavenly Father for the salvation of humanity: “He was despised and rejected by men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief; and as one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not. Surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions; he was crushed for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace, and with his wounds we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned–every one–to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all” (Isaiah 53:3-6).

Why is God So Narrow-Minded About Salvation? By Dr. R.C. Sproul

Answer to Objection #2 To Christianity: “All Religions Are Good. It Doesn’t Matter What You Believe.”

RTB sproul image

America is a melting pot. People from every conceivable ethnic and religious background come together to form one nation–e pluribus unum, from the many, one. At the heart of our national sense of unity stands the crucial principle of religious toleration. Under the principle of religious toleration, all religious systems are guaranteed freedom of expression and equal treatment under the law. No one religion has exclusive claim to legal rights and government establishment. The government of the United States of America expresses the will of the founding fathers that there will be no “established national religion.: Thus, we have no state church that enjoys exclusive privilege under the law.

With the principle of equal toleration has come the idea that no religion has exclusive claims to truth. Though the concept of legal religious toleration says nothing at all about the validity of truth claims, many have drawn the implication that equal toleration means equal validity. Thus, when Christians or advocates of any religion make claims of exclusivity, their claims are often met with shock or anger at such a narrow-minded posture. To make exclusive religious claims is to fly in the face of national sentiment. It is like attacking baseball, hot dogs, motherhood, and apple pie (not to mention Chevrolet).

In the sixties the uplifted index finger became a symbol not only of a number one ranking for a football team, but also a popular sign of the members of the “Jesus movement” that there is but “one way” to God, the way of Christ. The zeal of the Jesus People met great resistance and hostility at this point.

One of the most embarrassing moments I ever experienced came in a freshman class in college. it was a time of painful public humiliation. The professor was a former war correspondent who was outwardly hostile to Christianity. In the middle of a class she looked at me and said, “Mr. Sproul, do you believe that Jesus is the only way to God?” I gasped as I felt the weight of he question and knew that every eye in the room was on me. My mind raced for a way to escape my dilemma. I knew that if I said yes people would be angry. At the same time, I knew that if I said no I would be betraying Christ. Finally, I mumbled almost inaudibly, “Yes, I do.” The teacher responded with unmitigated fury. She said in front of the whole class, “That’s the most narrow-minded, bigoted, and arrogant statement I have ever heard. You must be a supreme egotist to believe your way of religion is the only way.” I made no reply but slouched rather meekly in my chair.

After the class was dismissed, I went to speak with my teacher privately. In the conversation I tried to explain to her why I believed that Christ was the only way. I asked her if she thought it was at least theoretically  possible that Christ be one way to God. She allowed the possibility. I asked if she thought it were possible that without being narrow-minded or bigoted a person could come to the belief that Jesus was God. Though she did not believe in the deity of Christ, she recognized that people could, in fact, believe that without being bigoted. Then I explained to her that the reason I believed that Christ was the only way because Jesus Himself taught that.

I reminded her that Jesus said, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me” (John 14:6). I also pointed out that the New Testament refers to Christ as the “only-begotten” of the Father, and that “there is no other name under heaven by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12). I said to her, “Can you see that I am torn between my loyalty to Christ and the modern spirit of pluralism?” I said, “Do you see that it is possible for me to believe in the uniqueness of Christ because He taught it? If I believed Christ was the only way because I believe that my way must be the only way because it is my way, that would be an act of arrogance and egotism.” She finally acknowledged that it was possible for someone to believe in the uniqueness of Christ without being arrogant and apologized sincerely to me. However, she went on to raise a more serious question than the question of my arrogance. She said, “How can you believe in a God who only allows one way to Himself?” Isn’t it narrow-minded of God to restrict redemption to one Savior and one faith?”

Aren’t All Religions Basically the Same?

In the final analysis this is the issue that must be faced: Is God so narrow-minded that He provides only one way of redemption?

Part of the reason we struggle so deeply with a question like this is due to the impact of the results of the nineteenth century approach to the study of comparative religion. In the nineteenth century there was a concerted effort by scholars to examine closely the distinctive characteristics of the major religions of the world. The “buzz word” of the day was “essence.” Many serious studies of religion were published which contained titles like The Essence of Religion or The Essence of Christianity. These books reflected an attempt to get at the basic core of religious truth that was found in all religion.

Religion was often reduced to its lowest common denominator. Frequently the distilled essence of religion was pinpointed by the phrase “the universal fatherhood of God and universal brotherhood of man.” Thus it was seen that at the heart, all religions were working for the same thing. The outward trappings of religious belief and practice differed from culture to culture but at the root their goals were the same. Thus, if all religions were essentially the same then no one of them could ever make exclusive claims to validity.

Out of this quest for the essence of religion came the now famous and popular “mountain analogy.” The mountain analogy pictures God at the peak of the mountain with man down at the base. The story of religion is the account of man’s effort to move from the base of the mountain to the peak of fellowship and communion with God. The mountain has many roads. Some of the roads go up the mountain by a very direct route. Other roads go up the mountain in a circuitous fashion, but eventually reach the top. Thus, according to the proponents of this analogy, all religious roads, though they differ in route, ultimately arrive at the same place.

Out of this conviction that all roads lead to God has come a considerable number of ecumenical movements, pan-religious endeavors, and even new religions such as Bahai which seek a total synthesis and amalgamation of all the world religions into one new unified religion.

I once had a conversation with a Bahai priest. He told me that all religions were equally valid. I began to interrogate him concerning the points of conflict that exist between islam and Buddhism, between Confucianism and Judaism, and between Christianity and Taoism. The man responded by saying that he didn’t know anything about Islam, Judaism, or the rest but that he did know they were all the same. I wondered aloud how anyone could assert that all religions were the same when he had no knowledge of what those religions professed or denied/ How can Buddhism be true when it denies the existence of a personal God and at the same time Christianity be true when it affirms the existence of a personal God? Can there be a personal God and not be a personal God at the same time and in the same relationship? Can Orthodox Judaism be right when it denies life after death and Christianity be equally right when it affirms life after death? Can classical Islam have a valid ethic that endorses the killing of infidels while at the same time the Christian ethic of loving your enemies be equally valid?

There are only two possible ways to maintain the equal validity of all religions. One is by ignoring the clear contradictions between them by a flight into irrationality; the other is by assigning these contradictions to the level of insignificant nonessentials. The latter approach involves us in a systematic process of reductionism. Reductionism strips each religion of elements considered vital by the adherents of the religion themselves and reduces the religion to its lowest common denominator. The distinctives of each  religion are obscured and watered down to accommodate religious peace.

Why does this kind of reductionism take place? Perhaps there are many motivating factors for it. Certainly one of the most powerful factors is the desire to end religious controversies and the upheaval they bring. Differences in religious conviction have led again and again to passionate disputes between people, family alienation, violent forms of religious persecution, and in many cases even war. Thus if we were able to achieve a universal religious essence perhaps we can end these very costly disputes. The goal is peace. The price is truth.

if religion deals with matters of ultimate concern, there is little wonder that religious debates produce so much passion. But if we are interested in truth we can never discover it by denying real differences of truth claims. The peace that is produced by reductionism is a false and carnal peace. We recall the false prophets of Israel who, in their desperate attempts to avoid conflict, cried, “Peace, peace,” when there was no peace. Jeremiah’s lament remains relevant, “These men heal the wounds of the daughters of Zion, slightly” (see Jeremiah 11).

It is one thing to seek an atmosphere of religious debate that is characterized by charity. It is quite another thing to say the matters under debate are not important. It is one thing to protect the right of every religious person to follow the dictates of his conscience without fear of persecution; it is another to say that opposing convictions are both true. We must note the difference between equal toleration under the law and equal validity according to truth.

Why is God So Narrow-MInded?

We are still left with a problem, however, of a narrow-minded God who provides only one way of redemption. Does this not mean that people who live in a culture where that one religion is proclaimed have a decisive advantage over people living in other cultures? Let’s examine the deeper question of the narrow-mindedness of God who provides only one way of redemption.

We remember the words of Jesus when he said, “Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few( Matthew 7:13-14).”

What kind of a God would have such a narrow gate? The question implies a serious accusation; that God has not done enough to provide redemption for mankind. Let us examine the accusation from a hypothetical perspective. Let us suppose that there is a God who is altogether holy and righteous. Suppose that God freely creates mankind and gives to mankind the gift of life.

Suppose He sets His creatures in an ideal setting and gives them the freedom to participate in all of the glories of the created order with freedom. Suppose, however, that God imposes one small restriction upon them, warning them that if they violate that restriction, they will die. Would such a God have the right to impose such a restriction with the penalty of forfeiture of the gift of life if His authority is violated?

Suppose that for no just cause the ungrateful creatures disobeyed the restriction the moment God’s back was turned. Suppose when He discovered their violation instead of killing them, He redeemed them. Suppose the descendents of the first transgressors broadly and widely increased their disobedience and hostility toward their creator to the point that the whole world became rebellious to God, and each person in it, “did what was right in his own eyes” (Judg. 21:25).

Suppose God still determined to redeem these people and freely gave special gifts to one nation of people in order that, through them, the whole world would be blessed. Suppose God delivered this people from poverty and enslavement to a ruthless Egyptian Pharoah. Suppose this privileged nation, as soon as it was liberated, rose up in further rebellion against their God and their liberator. Suppose they took His law and violated it consistently.

Suppose that God, still intent upon redemption, sent specially endowed messengers or prophets to plead with His people to return to Him. Suppose the people killed the divine messengers and mocked their message. Suppose the people then began to worship idols of stone and things fashioned by their own hands. Suppose these people invented religions that were contrary to the real God and worshiped creatures rather than the Creator.

Suppose in an ultimate act of redemption God Himself became incarnate in the person of His Son. Suppose this Son came into the world not to condemn the world, but to redeem the world. But suppose this Son of God were rejected, slandered, mocked, tortured, and murdered. Yet, suppose that God accepted the murder of His own Son as punishment for the sins of the very persons who murdered Him.

Suppose this God offered to His Son’s murderers total amnesty, complete forgiveness, transcendent peace that comes with the cleansing of all guilt, victory over death and an eternal life of complete felicity.

Suppose God gave these people as a free gift the promise of a future life that would be without pain, without sickness, without death, and without tears. Suppose that God said to these people, “There is one thing that I demand. I demand that you honor my only-begotten Son and that you worship and serve Him alone.” Suppose God did all of that, would you be willing to say to Him, “God, that’s not fair, you haven’t done enough”?

If man has in fact committed cosmic treason against God, what reason could we possibly have that God should provide any way of redemption? In light of the universal rebellion against God, the issue is not why is there only one way, but why is there any way at all? I know of no way of answering that question.

Why Do Christians Say that Christ is God Incarnate?

At the heart of Christianity stands the person and work of Jesus Christ. His person and work are part of the essence of Christianity. It is in who He is and what He has done that the essence of Christianity can be discovered. Both in His person and work we find elements of utter uniqueness. The Christian claim is that in the person of Jesus of Nazareth we meet God incarnate. Buddha never claimed to be anything more than a man. Mohammed never claimed to be anything more than a prophet. Moses and Confucius were mortals. If Christ was in fact God incarnate, then it is a travesty of justice to ascribe equal honor to Him and to the others. To do so would necessitate either falsely attributing to mortal man the attributes of deity or stripping Christ of His divine nature.

In the truth claims of Christianity we find the notion of the sinlessness of Christ. If Jesus was in fact without sin, this would put Him in a class by Himself. If He had no other uniqueness, this one factor would set Him apart from every religious leader the world has ever known. Though claiming something does not make it true, nevertheless the fact that Jesus claimed to be sinless is significant. By that claim the religious stakes are established. If the claim is true, then Jesus’ uniqueness is assured. If the claim is not true then Jesus fails to qualify as even one of many great religious teachers. He would only qualify as a hypocrite and a charlatan.

The claim of resurrection is vital to Christianity. If Christ has been raised from the dead by God, then He has the credentials and certification that no other religious leader possesses. Buddha is dead. Mohammed is dead. Moses is dead. Confucius is dead. But, according to the truth claim of Christianity, Christ is alive. If Christ has been vindicated by resurrection, His uniqueness as an object of religious devotion is established.

Another dimension of the uniqueness of Christ that is vital to Christianity is His work of atonement. Moses could mediate on the law; Mohammed could brandish a sword; Buddha could give personal counsel; Confucius could offer wise sayings; but none of these men was qualified to offer an atonement for the sins of the world.

It is not only the resurrection of Christ that makes Him unique but it is His death that puts Him in a class by Himself. His death was made as a payment for the sins of mankind. His sacrifice was perfect. Here we see the direct correlation between the uniqueness of His person, of His sinlessness, of His atoning death, and of His resurrection. Together these factors describe the only-begotten of the Father.

It is a mistake, indeed a fatal mistake, to assume that God is pleased by “religion.” The cliche that “it doesn’t matter what you believe as long as you are sincere” involves a devastating error. We can be sincerely wrong and miss the way of redemption offered by God. What we believe in makes an ultimate difference to our destiny. “Religion” can be a substitute for truth; a man-made system of distorting the revelation of God.

Christ alone is worthy of unlimited devotion and service. His total value sets Him apart from all pretenders to the throne. He alone is able to redeem. He alone is worthy of worship.

The exclusiveness of the Christian truth-claim must always rest on the uniqueness of Christ. Christians are not immune from arrogance and bigotry. Yet arrogance and bigotry have no ally in Christ. Christ’s critique of these evil practices is more severe than any critic of Christianity can muster. At the same time this one who is so critical of arrogance and bigotry calls us to a single-minded devotion to truth. He claims to be that truth.

Key Points To Remember:

Are all religions good? Does it matter what you believe?

(1) Religious toleration does not mean equal validity of truth. The problem of exclusive claims to truth are deeply rooted in our culture. We must keep in mind the difference between religious toleration as a matter of legal rights and the concept of equal validity of truth.

(2) Objective evidence, not arrogance, must be the basis for Christian truth- claims. Christians must guard against communicating a sense of arrogance about their convictions. The uniqueness of Christ must be established on the basis of objective evidence rather than by personal preference.

(3) All religions do not teach the same thing but differ at key points. Attempts to make all religions “basically the same” involves the serious problem of reductionism–reducing everything to a broad common denominator. Analogies such as the “mountain analogy” obscure the real and crucial differences between world religions.

(4) The uniqueness of Christ and His own exclusive claims are the heart of the issue. To understand that uniqueness we must understand the whole pattern of biblical history. If the biblical history is true, then we can never suppose that God “has not done enough” to provide for our redemption.

(5) In light of biblical history it is easy to see why there is only “one way.”

(6) In spite of the fact that the world has been in constant rebellion to Him, God has provided a way of redemption. The ultimate question of redemption is the question why God would bother to provide any way of redemption for us. The wonderful truth is that even though we don’t deserve it, in Christ “we have redemption through his blood…the forgiveness of sins…according to the riches of his grace” (Eph. 1:7).

About the Author:

Sproul RC laughing over podium image

Dr. R.C. Sproul (Founder of Ligonier Ministries; Bible College and Seminary President and Professor; and Senior Minister at Saint Andrews in Sanford, Florida) is an amazingly gifted communicator. Whether he is teaching, preaching, or writing – he has the ability to make the complex easy to understand and apply. He has been used more than any other person in my life to deepen my walk with Christ and help me to be more God-centered than man-centered. His book the Holiness of God has been the most influential book in my life – outside of the Bible. The article above is adapted from Chapter Two in another one of his excellent books: Reason to Believe. Grand Rapids, Zondervan, 1982 (It was originally entitled: Objections Answered, 1978).

The Goodness of God and the Reality of Evil by Dr. Albert Mohler

lightning striking 7 times

Every thoughtful person must deal with the problem of evil. Evil acts and tragic events come to us all in this vale of tears known as human life. The problem of evil and suffering is undoubtedly the greatest theological challenge we face.

Most persons face this issue only in a time of crisis. A senseless accident, a wasting disease, or an awful crime demands some explanation. Yesterday, evil showed its face again as a giant tornado brought death and destruction to Moore, Oklahoma.

For the atheist, this is no great problem. Life is a cosmic accident, morality is an arbitrary game by which we order our lives, and meaning is non-existent. As Oxford University’s Professor Richard Dawkins explains, human life is nothing more than a way for selfish genes to multiply and reproduce. There is no meaning or dignity to humanity.

For the Christian Scientist, the material world and the experience of suffering and death are illusory. In other religions suffering is part of a great circle of life or recurring incarnations of spirit.

Some Christians simply explain suffering as the consequence of sins, known or unknown. Some suffering can be directly traced to sin. What we sow, so shall we reap, and multiple millions of persons can testify to this reality. Some persons suffer innocently by the sinful acts of others.

But Jesus rejected this as a blanket explanation for suffering, instructing His disciples in John 9 and Luke 13 that they could not always trace suffering back to sin. We should note that the problem of evil and suffering, the theological issue of theodicy, is customarily divided into evil of two kinds, moral and natural. Both are included in these passages. In Luke 13, the murder of the Galileans is clearly moral evil, a premeditated crime–just like the terrorist acts in New York and Washington. In John 9, a man is blind from birth, and Jesus tells the Twelve that this blindness cannot be traced back to this man’s sin, or that of his parents.

Natural evil comes without a moral agent. A tower falls, an earthquake shakes, a tornado destroys, a hurricane ravages, a spider bites, a disease debilitates and kills. The world is filled with wonders mixed with dangers. Gravity can save you or gravity can kill you. When a tower falls, it kills.

People all over the world are demanding an answer to the question of evil. It comes only to those who claim that God is mighty and that God is good. How could a good God allow these things to happen? How can a God of love allow killers to kill, terrorists to terrorize, and the wicked to escape without a trace?

No superficial answer will do. Our quandary is well known, and the atheists think they have our number. As a character in Archibald MacLeish’s play, J.B. asserts, “If God is God He is not good, if God is good He is not God; take the even, take the odd . . . .” As he sees it, God can be good, or He can be powerful, but He cannot be both.

We will either take our stand with God’s self-revelation in the Bible, or we are left to invent a deity of our own imagination. The Bible quickly excludes two false understandings.

First, the Bible reveals that God is omnipotent and omniscient. These are unconditional and categorical attributes. The sovereignty of God is the bedrock affirmation of biblical theism. The Creator rules over all creation. Not even a sparrow falls without His knowledge. He knows the number of hairs upon our heads. God rules and reigns over all nations and principalities. Not one atom or molecule of the universe is outside His active rule.

The sovereignty of God was affirmed by King Nebuchadnezzar, who confessed that God “does according to His will in the host of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth; and no one can ward off His hand or say to Him, ‘What have You done?’” [Daniel 4:36]. Process theologians have attempted to cut God’s power down to size, rendering the Creator as one power among others. The evangelical revisionists pushing open theism have attempted to cut God’s omniscience down to size, rendering Him as one mind among others.

Rabbi Harold Kushner argues that God is doing the best He can under the circumstances, but He lacks the power to either kill or cure. The openness theists argue that God is always ready with Plan B when Plan A fails. He is infinitely resourceful, they stress, just not really sovereign.

These are roads we dare not take, for the God of the Bible causes the rising and falling of nations and empires, and His rule is active and universal. Limited sovereignty is no sovereignty at all.

The second great error is to ascribe evil to God. But the Bible does not allow this argument. God is absolute righteousness, love, goodness, and justice. Most errors related to this issue occur because of our human tendency to impose an external standard–a human construction of goodness–upon God. But good does not so much define God as God defines good.

How then do we speak of God’s rule and reconcile this with the reality of evil? Between these two errors the Bible points us to the radical affirmation of God’s sovereignty as the ground of our salvation and the assurance of our own good. We cannot explain why God has allowed sin, but we understand that God’s glory is more perfectly demonstrated through the victory of Christ over sin. We cannot understand why God would allow sickness and suffering, but we must affirm that even these realities are rooted in sin and its cosmic effects.

How does God exercise His rule? Does He order all events by decree, or does He allow some evil acts by His mere permission? This much we know–we cannot speak of God’s decree in a way that would imply Him to be the author of evil, and we cannot fall back to speak of His mere permission, as if this allows a denial of His sovereignty and active will.

A venerable confession of faith states it rightly: “God from eternity, decrees or permits all things that come to pass, and perpetually upholds, directs, and governs all creatures and all events; yet so as not in any way to be the author or approver of sin nor to destroy the free will and responsibility of intelligent creatures.”

God is God, and God is good. As Paul affirms for the church, God’s sovereignty is the ground of our hope, the assurance of God’s justice as the last word, and God’s loving rule in the very events of our lives: “And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, who are the called according to His purpose.” [Romans 8:28]

We dare not speak on God’s behalf to explain why He allowed these particular acts of evil to happen at this time to these persons and in this manner. Yet, at the same time, we dare not be silent when we should testify to the God of righteousness and love and justice who rules over all in omnipotence. Humility requires that we affirm all that the Bible teaches, and go no further. There is much we do not understand. As Charles Spurgeon explained, when we cannot trace God’s hand, we must simply trust His heart.

And so, we weep with those who weep, and we reach out with acts of care and compassion. We pray for those who are grieving and have experienced such loss. We cry for the children lost in this storm, even as we are so thankful for brave people who did their best to save lives as the winds raged. And, we pray: Even so, Lord come quickly.

Article originally appeared on August 20, 2005 and reposted again @ http://www.albertmohler.com/2013/05/21/the-goodness-of-god-and-the-reality-of-evil-4/

About Dr. Albert Mohler:

R Albert Mohler

Dr. R. Albert Mohler Jr. serves as president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary – the flagship school of the Southern Baptist Convention and one of the largest seminaries in the world.

Dr. Mohler has been recognized by such influential publications as Time and Christianity Today as a leader among American evangelicals. In fact, Time.com called him the “reigning intellectual of the evangelical movement in the U.S.”

In addition to his presidential duties, Dr. Mohler hosts two programs: “The Briefing,” a daily analysis of news and events from a Christian worldview; and “Thinking in Public,” a series of conversations with the day’s leading thinkers. He also writes a popular blog and a regular commentary on moral, cultural and theological issues. All of these can be accessed through Dr. Mohler’s website, http://www.AlbertMohler.com. Called “an articulate voice for conservative Christianity at large” by The Chicago Tribune, Dr. Mohler’s mission is to address contemporary issues from a consistent and explicit Christian worldview.

Widely sought as a columnist and commentator, Dr. Mohler has been quoted in the nation’s leading newspapers, including The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, USA Today, The Washington Post, The Atlanta Journal/Constitution and The Dallas Morning News. He has also appeared on such national news programs as CNN’s “Larry King Live,” NBC’s “Today Show” and “Dateline NBC,” ABC’s “Good Morning America,” “The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer” on PBS, MSNBC’s “Scarborough Country” and Fox’s “The O’Reilly Factor.”

Dr. Mohler is a theologian and an ordained minister, having served as pastor and staff minister of several Southern Baptist churches. He came to the presidency of Southern Seminary from service as editor of The Christian Index, the oldest of the state papers serving the Southern Baptist Convention.

A native of Lakeland, Fla., Dr. Mohler was a Faculty Scholar at Florida Atlantic University before receiving his Bachelor of Arts degree from Samford University in Birmingham, Ala. He holds a master of divinity degree and the doctor of philosophy (in systematic and historical theology) from Southern Seminary. He has pursued additional study at the St. Meinrad School of Theology and has done research at University of Oxford (England).

Dr. Mohler also serves as the Joseph Emerson Brown Professor of Christian Theology at Southern Seminary. His writings have been published throughout the United States and Europe. In addition to contributing to a number of collected volumes, he is the author of several books, including Culture Shift: Engaging Current Issues with Timeless Truth (Multnomah); Desire & Deceit: The Real Cost of the New Sexual Tolerance (Multnomah); Atheism Remix: A Christian Confronts the New Atheists (Crossway); He Is Not Silent: Preaching in a Postmodern World (Moody); The Disappearance of God: Dangerous Beliefs in the New Spiritual Openness (Multnomah); and Words From the Fire: Hearing the Voice of God in the Ten Commandments (Moody). From 1985 to 1993, he served as associate editor of Preaching, a journal for evangelical preachers, and is currently editor-in-chief of The Southern Baptist Journal of Theology.

A leader within the Southern Baptist Convention, Dr. Mohler has served in several offices including a term as Chairman of the SBC Committee on Resolutions, which is responsible for the denomination’s official statements on moral and doctrinal issues. He also served on the seven-person Program and Structure Study Committee, which recommended the 1995 restructuring of the nation’s largest Protestant denomination. In 2000, Dr. Mohler served on a blue-ribbon panel that made recommendations to the Southern Baptist Convention for revisions to the Baptist Faith and Message, the statement of faith most widely held among Southern Baptists. Most recently, he served on the Great Commission Task Force, a denominational committee that studied the effectiveness of SBC efforts to fulfill the Great Commission. He currently serves as chairman of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Council of Seminary Presidents.

Dr. Mohler has presented lectures or addresses at institutions including Columbia University, the University of Virginia, Wheaton College, Samford University, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, the University of Richmond, Mercer University, Cedarville University, Beeson Divinity School, Reformed Theological Seminary, The Master’s Seminary, Geneva College, Biola University, Covenant Theological Seminary, The Cumberland School of Law, The Regent University School of Law, Grove City College, Vanderbilt University and the historic Chautauqua Institution, among many others.

Dr. Mohler is listed in Who’s Who in America and other biographical reference works and serves on the boards of several organizations including Focus on the Family. He is a member of the Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood and serves as a council member for The Gospel Coalition.

He is married to Mary, and they have two children, Katie and Christopher.

How Long Would it Take to Reach The World for Christ?

C&C David Watson

If you were an outstanding gifted evangelist with an international reputation, and if, under God, you could win 1,000 persons for Christ every night of every year, how long would it take you to win the whole world for Christ?

Answer: Ignoring the population explosion over 10,000 years.

But if you are a true disciple of Christ, and if you are able under God to win just one person to Christ each year; and if you could then train that person to win one other person to Christ; and if you could then train that person to win one other person for Christ each year, how long would it take to win the world for Christ?

 Answer: just 32 years!

– David Watson, speaking of James Kennedy’s illustration

 

Robertson McQuilkin on the question: Why Does God Let Us Get Old?

Robertson McQuilkin

Robertson McQuilkin, former esteemed president of Columbia International University in Columbia, South Carolina, once drove an elderly friend on an errand. She moved slowly and painfully, being crippled with arthritis.

“Robertson,” she asked as they drove along, “why does God let us get old and weak? Why must I hurt so?”

“I’m not sure,” McQuilkin replied, “but I have a theory.”

“What is it?”

He hesitated to share it, but she insisted. This is what he said: “I think God has planned the strength and beauty of youth to be physical. But the strength and beauty of age is spiritual. We gradually lose the strength and beauty that is temporary, so we’ll be sure to concentrate on the strength and beauty which is forever.”

John C. Maxwell on “Listening to the Voices of Vision”

THE VOICES OF VISION

T21IQOAL Maxwell

Where does vision come from? To find the vision that is indispensable to leadership, you have to become a good listener. You must listen to several voices.

The Inner Voice: Vision starts within. Do you know your life’s mission? What stirs your heart? What do you dream about? If what you’re pursuing in life doesn’t come from a desire within—from the very depths of who you are and what you believe—you will not be able to accomplish it.

The Unhappy Voice: Where does inspiration for great ideas come from? From noticing what doesn’t work. Discontent with the status quo is a great catalyst for vision. Are you on complacent cruise control? Or do you find yourself itching to change your world? No great leader in history has fought to prevent change.

The Successful Voice: Nobody can accomplish great things alone. To fulfill a big vision, you need a good team. But you also need good advice from someone who is ahead of you in the leadership journey. If you want to lead others to greatness, find a mentor. Do you have an adviser who can help you sharpen your vision?

The Higher Voice: Although it’s true that your vision must come from within, you shouldn’t let it be confined by your limited capabilities. A truly valuable vision must have God in it. Only He knows your full capabilities. Have you looked beyond yourself, even beyond your own lifetime, as you’ve sought your vision? If not, you may be missing your true potential and life’s best for you.   —The 21 Indispensable Qualities of a Leader  

MAKE SURE YOUR VISION CONTAINS ALL THAT IT MUST FOR YOU TO REACH YOUR POTENTIAL.

Source: Maxwell, John C. (2008-10-28). The Maxwell Daily Reader: 365 Days of Insight to Develop the Leader Within You and Influence Those Around You (Kindle Locations 5088-5102). Thomas Nelson – A. Kindle Edition.

R.C. Sproul on the Question: “Does Prayer Change God’s Mind?”

We’ve been taught that prayer changes things. In view of God’s sovereignty, what is the role of prayer in a Christian’s life?

 

First of all, we need to establish that it is the sovereign God who not only invites us but commands us to pray. Prayer is a duty, and as we perform that duty, one thing for sure is going to be changed, and that is us. To live a life of prayer is to live a life of obedience to God.

Also, we must understand that there is more to prayer than intercession and supplication. When the disciples said to Jesus, “Lord, teach us to pray,” they saw a connection between the power of Jesus and the impact of his ministry and the time he spent in prayer. Obviously, the Son of God felt that prayer was a very valuable enterprise because he gave himself to it so deeply and passionately. But I was surprised that he answered the question by saying, “Here’s how you ought to pray,” and gave them the Lord’s Prayer. I would have expected Jesus to answer that question a different way: “You want to know how to pray? Read the Psalms,” because there you see inspired prayer.

The Spirit himself, who helps us to pray, inspired the prayers that are recorded in the Psalms. When I read the Psalms, I read intercession and I read supplication, but overwhelmingly what I read is a preoccupation with adoration, with thanksgiving, and with confession.

Take those elements of prayer, and what happens to a person who learns how to adore God? That person is changed. What happens to a person who learns how to express his gratitude to God? That person will now become more and more aware of the hand of Providence in his life and will grow in his sense of gratitude toward God. What happens to the person who spends time confessing his sins? He keeps in front of his mind the holiness of God and the necessity of keeping short accounts with God.

But can our requests change God’s sovereign plan? Of course not. When God sovereignly declares that he is going to do something, all of the prayers in the world aren’t going to change God’s mind. But God not only ordains ends, he also ordains means to those ends, and part of the process he uses to bring his sovereign will to pass are the prayers of his people. And so we are to pray.

Question adapted from the section on Prayer by R.C. Sproul. Now, That’s a Good Question! Wheaton: Tyndale House Publishers, 2001.

About Dr. R.C. Sproul

R.C. Sproul has taught theology to hundreds of thousands of people through books, radio, audiotapes, videotapes, seminars, sermons, seminary classes and other forums.

Sproul has written approximately sixty books (and counting). In addition to many volumes designed to teach theology, apologetics, and ethics to laymen through expository prose, he has written a novel, a biography, and several childrens books. He has also edited several volumes, including a festschrift for John H. Gerstner, a seminary textbook, and the New Geneva Study Bible. He has written one of the top classics of the 20th century – The Holiness of God; and perhaps the best book to explain God’s sovereignty in our salvation for laymen entitled Chosen by God.

Sproul founded Ligonier Ministries in 1971, a teaching ministry to assist the church in nurturing believers and equipping them for the ministries to which God has called them. Ligonier sponsors a radio program, “Renewing Your Mind,” which features Sproul and is broadcast nationally, five days a week.

Ligonier Ministries sponsors several seminars each year, the largest one in Orlando every winter. Ligonier publishes a monthly periodical, Tabletalk, and has its own web site (http://www.gospelcom.net).

Sproul has taught theology and apologetics at several seminaries. He earned a B.A. degree from Westminster College, a B.D. from Pittsburgh Theological Seminary, and a Drs. from the Free University of Amsterdam. He is ordained in the Presbyterian Church in America.

In 1994 Christianity Today asked a select list of “critics,” “What theologian or biblical scholar has most shaped your Christian life?” Third on the list (and the only American in the top four) was R.C. Sproul.

God Has Always Been and Ever Will Be by J.I. Packer

“Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever you had formed the earth and the world, from everlasting to everlasting you are God.” – Psalm 90:2

The Self-Existence of God: His Aseity 

Children sometimes ask, “Who made God?” The clearest answer is that God never needed to be made, because he was always there. He exists in a different way from us: we, his creatures, exist in a dependent, derived, finite, fragile way, but our Maker exists in an eternal, self-sustaining, necessary way—necessary, that is, in the sense that God does not have it in him to go out of existence, just as we do not have it in us to live forever. We necessarily age and die, because it is our present nature to do that; God necessarily continues forever unchanged, because it is his eternal nature to do that. This is one of many contrasts between creature and Creator.

God’s self-existence is a basic truth. At the outset of his presentation of the unknown God to the Athenian idolaters, Paul explained that this God, the world’s Creator, “is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else” (Acts 17:23-25). Sacrifices offered to idols, in today’s tribal religions as in ancient Athens, are thought of as somehow keeping the god going, but the Creator needs no such support system. The word aseity, meaning that he has life in himself and draws his unending energy from himself (a se in Latin means “from himself”), was coined by theologians to express this truth, which the Bible makes clear:

Psalm 90:1-4, “Lord, you have been our dwelling place in all generations. Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever you had formed the earth and the world, from everlasting to everlasting you are God. You return man to dust and say, “Return, O children of man!” For a thousand years in your sight are but as yesterday when it is past, or as a watch in the night.”

Psalm 102:25-27, “Of old you laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands. They will perish, but you will remain; they will all wear out like a garment. You will change them like a robe, and they will pass away, but you are the same, and your years have no end.”

Isaiah 40:28-31, “Have you not known? Have you not heard? The Lord is the everlasting God, the Creator of the ends of the earth. He does not faint or grow weary; his understanding is unsearchable. He gives power to the faint, and to him who has no might he increases strength. Even youths shall faint and be weary, and young men shall fall exhausted; but they who wait for the Lord shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings like eagles; they shall run and not be weary; they shall walk and not faint.”

John 5:26, “For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself.”

Revelation 4:10-11, “the twenty-four elders fall down before him who is seated on the throne and worship him who lives forever and ever. They cast their crowns before the throne, saying, “Worthy are you, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honor and power, for you created all things, and by your will they existed and were created.”

In theology, endless mistakes result from supposing that the conditions, bounds, and limits of our own finite existence apply to God. The doctrine of his aseity stands as a bulwark against such mistakes. In our life of faith, we easily impoverish ourselves by embracing an idea of God that is too limited and small, and again the doctrine of God’s aseity stands as a bulwark to stop this happening. It is vital for spiritual health to believe that God is great (cf. Ps. 95:1-7 below), and grasping the truth of his aseity is the first step on the road to doing this.

Psalm 95:1-7, “Oh come, let us sing to the Lord; let us make a joyful noise to the rock of our salvation! Let us come into his presence with thanksgiving; let us make a joyful noise to him with songs of praise! For the Lord is a great God, and a great King above all gods. In his hand are the depths of the earth; the heights of the mountains are his also. The sea is his, for he made it, and his hands formed the dry land. Oh come, let us worship and bow down; let us kneel before the Lord, our Maker! For he is our God, and we are the people of his pasture, and the sheep of his hand. Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts.”

Article above adapted from J.I. Packer. Concise Theology: A Guide to Historic Christian Beliefs. Wheaton: Tyndale House Publishers, 2001, p. 26.

About J.I. Packer:

Dr. J.I. Packer is a British Theologian and has written over 50 books and numerous contributions to theological journals, reference works, and compilations. He is a a brilliant humble scholar who is best known for his works on Theology Proper – The Study of God. His classic work on the attributes and character of God – Knowing God is “must reading” for the Christian.