Sermon: Encouragement 1 Thes 5:11

Below is an outline of my first sermon on the topic of Encouragement 1 Thes 5:11, and its role within the Church Family. Dated 3-7-2010.

Encouragement 1 Thes 5.11

On Christian Love, Order, Law, and Government: Loving Your Enemy and Everyone Else

NOTE: A PDF version written in outline form can be found here: On Christian Love, Order, Law, and Government.

This response mainly targets this comment, which was tweeted by a friend of mine. “Christians once used Scripture to support slavery. We now shake our heads in bewildered disgust. Someday so it will be with military service.” I tried to respond directly to the tweet but my points were deleted/censored. For this reason, and in response to some questions on the subject by my good friend Michael Z., I’ve provided this analysis.

In addition, it responds to several wrongly made assumptions and arguments found within the article that accompanied the tweet. It is not a total response to the listed article, but mainly addresses the insensitivity and inconsistency of the above quoted status, and an analysis of the following subjects.

It focuses mostly on the topic of Government, War, Order, and the Christian Virtue of Love. What does Scripture have to say on society using force, and a Christian’s role within this society? How does the primal motive of love relate to law and order? What does scripture provide on the subject?

1. I. Intro
   1. a. Purpose of the Church
   2. b. Where we can Agree
   3. c. Introducing the Terms
2. II. Body
   1. a. Biblical Principles
      1. i. Christian Love
         1. Romans 12:18-19, 14:19, Heb 12:14, Isa 2:4, Mat 5:9, 38-48, 26:52
         2. ii. Government
            1. Rom 13:1-7
            2. Mat 22:21
         3. iii. Self Defense
            1. Luk 22:36, 38
         4. iv. Restraint
            1. Heb 12:14
         5. v. Discipline
            1. Pro 12:1
            2. Psa 94:12, Prov 1:7, 6:23, 12:1, 13:1, 15:5, 29:15, Isa 38:16, Heb 12:9, 12:11.
         6. vi. Christian Responsibility
            1. Hating Evil: Prov 8;13, Amos 5:15
            2. Salt and Light of the World: Matt 5:13-16
   2. b. Responses to Objections
      1. i.     Individual versus Governmental
      2. ii.     Case of the Amish
   3. c. Objections
      1. i.     (1) Micro-Level
      2. ii.     (2) Macro-Level
3. III. Summary
   1. How This approach makes best an explanation of (1) the Golden Rule and (2) The problems of Evil, Social Disorder, Government, War, Force and Christian responsibility.

Introduction

One thing must first be established. The Church has the following purpose: (1) To Love God, (2), To Love our Neighbors, (3) To share the Gospel with the world, (Mark 12:28-34, 16:15). We can surely agree that these are principles that root our total understanding of the Christian Walk.

We will not discuss the third, as we can agree with it and the scenario of military unarmed chaplains. For background, my friend argued a Chaplain speaking in chapel was akin to telling Christians to go to war. After talking with others who listened to the message, this was an absolute lie. It is a great advantage that we have to minister to troops and the lost in this degree. The individual manipulated an event to wrongly support his presuppositions.

Now to the meat of the response. I believe we both must take the same starting point, and can have agreement here. This starting point is love. Our love must be the base of our response, not only for one another, but also mainly for God. Our love of God and His love of us make loving others possible. “So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God.” (1 Cor 10:31). How then, can love be seen to coincide with something as dreadful and ugly as war? Without a doubt war is the most magnified expression of sinful humanity I can imagine. It contains unspeakable horror. How can such a dreadful thing contain anything like Christian virtue?

Christ and Prophecy

I have always been interested in finding ‘proofs’ for Christianity, if such a thing could even be done. It has led me to study apologetics, philosophy, ethics, world religions, etc. As I was reading through my Holman CSB, I found an interesting article regarding a list of related Messianic prophecy. It is from my own experience that many non-believers wrongly assume a bunch of men got together and wrote the Bible. As far fetched as this assumption is (it totally goes against an understanding of history and scholarship), it is rather widespread amongst the populace. ‘It’s just another book written by men’ they say. But is it?

With this in mind, it is amazing how ripe with prophecy the Word of God is. There are actually over 2000 prophecies, with most of them already fulfilled. For this reason, I have decided to borrow James’ Kennedy’s collection, and provide them below. As you read this, especially if you are a non-believer, ask yourself this question: Who am I reading about?

• “Those who hate me without cause are more numerous than the hairs on my head,” (Ps 69:4)
• “The kings of the earth take their stand and the rulers conspire together against the LORD and His Anointed One” (Ps 2:2)
• “Even my friend in whom I trusted, one who ate my bread, has lifted up his heel against me” (Ps 41:9)
• “Strike the shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered” (Zch 13:7)
• “Then I said to them, ‘If it seems right to you, give me my wages; but if not, keep them.’ So they weighed my wages, 30 pieces of silver. ‘Throw it to the potter,’ The LORD said to me–this magnificent price I was valued by them. So I took the 30 pieces of silver and threw it into the house of the LORD, to the potter” (Zch 11:12-13)
• “They are striking the judge of Israel on the cheek with a rod” (Mc 5:1)
• “I gave My back to those who beat me, and My cheeks to those who tore out my beard. I did not hide My face from scorn and spitting” (Is 50:6)
• “They pierced my hands and my feet” (Ps 22:16)
• “My God, my God, why have You forsaken me?” (Ps 22:1)
• “Everyone who sees me mocks me; they sneer and shake their heads: ‘He relies on the LORD; let Him rescue him; let the LORD deliver him, since He takes pleasure in him” (Ps 22:7-8)
• “They gave me gall for my food, and for my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink” (Ps 69:21)
• “I am poured out like water, and all my bones are disjointed; my heart is like wax, melting within me” (Ps 22:14)
• “Yet He Himself bore our sickness, and He carried our pains; but we in turn regarded Him stricken, struck down by God, and afflicted” (Is 53:4)
• “He was oppressed and afflicted, yet He did not open His mouth. Like a lamb led to the slaughter and like a sheep silent before her shearers, He did not open His mouth” (Is 53:7)
• “They divided my garments among themselves, and they cast lots for my clothing” (Ps 22:18)
• “He submitted Himself to death” (Is 53:12)
• “He bore the sin of many and interceded for the rebels” (Is 53:12)
• “You may not break any of its bones” (Ex 12:46)
• “He protects all his bones; not one of them is broken” (Ps 34:20)
• “They will look at Me whom they pierced” (Zch 12:10)
• “They made His grave with the wicked, and with a rich man at His death, although He had done no violence and had not spoken deceitfully” (Is 53:9)
• “For You will not abandon me to Sheol; You will not allow Your Faithful One to see the Pit” (Ps 16:10)
• “You ascended to the heights, taking away captives; You received gifts from people, even from the rebellious, so that the LORD God might live there” (Ps 66:18)
• “The LORD declared to my Lord: ‘Sit at My right hand until I make Your enemies Your footstool’” (Ps 110:1)

To this list I would add:

• “Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.” (Isa 7:14)
• “But you, O Bethlehem Ephrathah, who are too little to be among the clans of Judah, from you shall come forth for me one who is to be ruler in Israel, whose coming.” (Mic 5:2)
• “For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.” (Isa 9:6)
• “he says: “It is too light a thing that you should be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob and to bring back the preserved of Israel; I will make you as a light for the nations, that my salvation may reach to the end of the earth.” (Isa 49:6)
• “Thus says the LORD, the Redeemer of Israel and his Holy One, to one deeply despised, abhorred by the nation, the servant of rulers: “Kings shall see and arise; princes, and they shall prostrate themselves; because of the LORD, who is faithful, the Holy One of Israel, who has chosen you.” (Isa 49:7)
• “Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and you perish in the way, for his wrath is quickly kindled. Blessed are all who take refuge in him.” (Psa 2:12)
• “For he grew up before him like a young plant, and like a root out of dry ground; he had no form or majesty that we should look at him, and no beauty that we should desire him.” (Isa 53:2)
• “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.” (Isa 53:3)
• “Surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted.” (Isa 53:4)
• “But he was wounded for our transgressions; he was crushed for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace, and with his stripes we are healed.” (Isa 53:5)
• “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.” (Isa 53:6)
• “He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth; like a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and like a sheep that before its shearers is silent, so he opened not his mouth.” (Isa 53:7)
• “By oppression and judgment he was taken away; and as for his generation, who considered that he was cut off out of the land of the living, stricken for the transgression of my people?” (Isa 53:8)
• “And they made his grave with the wicked and with a rich man in his death, although he had done no violence, and there was no deceit in his mouth.” (Isa 53:9)
• “Yet it was the will of the LORD to crush him; he has put him to grief; when his soul makes an offering for guilt, he shall see his offspring; he shall prolong his days; the will of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.” (Isa 53:10)
• “Out of the anguish of his soul he shall see and be satisfied; by his knowledge shall the righteous one, my servant, make many to be accounted righteous, and he shall bear their iniquities.” (Isa 53:11)
• “Therefore I will divide him a portion with the many, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong, because he poured out his soul to death and was numbered with the transgressors; yet he bore the sin of many, and makes intercession for the transgressors.” (Isa 53:12)

When you read through this list, ask yourself: Who is being spoken about? Clearly the answer is Jesus Christ. A non-believer, if reading these passages, may even assume that they come directly from the New Testament. However these verses were written hundreds and hundreds of years before the coming of Christ. Truly remarkable!

We would then need to ask ourselves for a proper explanation. Clearly the naturalist response is not satisfying. These verses describe in remarkable detail the life, ministry, and death of Jesus of Nazareth. There is no better explanation, given the historicity of scripture, than Divine Revelation.

You do not find such prophecy and accuracy in the writings of any of the ancient religions (work of Buddha, Mohammad, Lao-Tzu, Confucius, etc). Nor do you find an appropriate response explaining these prophetic verses from opponents of Christianity.

It truly points to the reality of the nature of Scripture: only a Figure with universal perspective and ultimate knowledge could know such detail, and we find the Word of this Figure, God, contained within the Holy Bible. What a wonderful collection it is, and what sobering conclusions this produces!

I am VERY excited about this: Glo Bible

Marriage and How it Works

It is where two sinners come together and must learn how to deal with their sinfulness. Ultimately, they must arrive to two conclusions:

1. They will never be perfect for one another, and humans are in a constant state of flux and change. Their ugliness will be known to one another. They must settle for conflict and friction as they struggle to either give or receive as much pleasure as possible.

or…

2. They understand they can never be perfect for one another, nor were they intended to. A marriage is not reliant on how much pleasure or happiness it produces. Rather, it is relies on the promise of fidelity, life-long partnership, exclusivity, and selflessness. How beautiful and freeing this security!

How then, can we even approach such a thing, seeing we are changing, ugly, sinful creatures? Because we do not produce the model for marriage, but God has. Ultimately then, marriage is not merely about man and woman, but about God.

Greater yet, God not only defines marriage, but tells us how it works (understandably, given he created it). He would know what makes it work, and namely this is Him! Marriage, by its exclusive nature, necessitates selflessness, forgiveness, patience, kindness, compassion, etc. However these are things that don’t naturally occur in humans! If they did, we wouldn’t have things like divorce! Rather, with God in a marriage, we always have a perfect model for what marriage looks like!

God has every right to divorce mankind. We have broken the first commandment by placing ourselves as gods in our lives. We pursue pleasure for pleasures sake, because it makes us feel good. We are the lords of our lives, and we bring this into a marriage. However, God does not divorce humanity! Rather, he humiliates himself on the cross to show us the grandness and perfection of His love. He shows us how we are to be selfless and forgiving. Radically perfect love.

Because He showed this to us, namely in the form of the Cross, we can do this in a marriage (with His help). When God is part of a marriage, as it’s intended to be, partners can practice the selfless and forgiveness that they have witnessed AND experienced from the Almighty God! This is how God intended marriage, and how needed He is to make it work.

• “As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you. Abide in my love.” (John 15:9)
• “You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.” (Matt 5:48)
• “Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant” (1 Cor 13:4)
• Parable of the Unforgiving Servant, Matt 6:12

Perfection, Rationalism, and God

Perfect:

1. We can conceive of something as not being perfect, therefore perfect must exist.
2. God is the concept of He who is absolutely perfect. Who or what can be more perfect than God? Our ability to simply perceive of perfection, given its nonexistence in the universe, implies something outside of our material universe that is fully perfect.
3. How can we have an understanding of perfect if we cannot find and observe perfect in the material universe? (i.e. we can perceive of a perfect square, but nowhere in the material universe can we find this perfect square. i.e. we can perceive of the perfect concept of 0, but nowhere can we find nothingness. Even thinking of nothing involves something, namely thought or an idea).

Rationalism:

1. “If irrationalism is true, then there is such a thing as truth, which means that irrationalism is false.” (J. Frame).
2. If rationalism is true, then there must be something that is perfectly rational that we can judge all other things as either rational or irrational (an absence of rationalism).
3. Any variation from this perfect rationalism is not existent in and of itself (such as irrationalism), but is a illusion or manipulation of rationalism (i.e. cold and darkness do not exist in and of themselves, but are absences of heat and light). Something is irrational because it does not adhere to the standard of perfect rationalism, not because it adheres to a standard of irrational.
4. Irrational is parracidic on Rational, as cold is parracidic [dependent] on heat. Heat can exist without cold (perfect heat), however cold cannot exist without heat (as an absence of heat is nothingness, and nothingness cannot exists by its very nature). But again, how is it we can even ponder there existing perfect heat, or perfect rationalism?

Will

1. God is perfect and rational (by how we define God). What then separates God from merely the perfect concept of heat, or any other perfect ideas [i.e., what makes him the source of perfect ideas, and not simply another perfect idea]? God has perfect Will.
2. God then is perfect, rational, and contains absolute will.

If we can rationally conceive of perfect without having observed perfection in the natural universe, and if we cannot say irrationalism is true as to do so would be to state an irrational truth, then rationalism must exist in a perfect form. However, rational absolutes do not exist in and of themselves because they would have no source for creation/being. Where would they come from?

Therefore, there must exist a Perfect Rational Being, whose outside of time and its laws, and whose perfect Will is perfectly satisfactory for Willing itself. An all-rational all-powerful perfect being is fully satisfactory as its own source for being. How?

Nothing greater than perfection and rationalism can exist, so it makes perfect sense that it would be the necessity for itself. To argue something greater than reason or perfection exists is to create something outside of perfection which is irrational. We can ask where perfect rational concepts come from (such as heat), as it does not contain within itself a reason for its existence, however we cannot ask where did God come from, because to do so is to ask for something greater than an All-Perfect All-Reasonable Willful being.

This all argues towards exclusivity in the understanding of an all-powerful perfect Creator, in whose perfect Will and Reason we find the existence for rationalism and conceptions of perfect, in addition to all that is necessary to understand his existence (nothing of greater will and perfection can exist outside of an already perfect God, so God satisfies His reason for existing via a perfect Will). Add to this a personality, and a desire to be imminent in our world, and we begin to understand why this fits the figure of the Christian God.

When we speak of Revelation, or the Word of God, we are discussing His perfect Reason and Will made evident within written works that man can approach. When we stress then authority of Scripture, we are stressing the revelation of a Perfect Will and Reason in which we may judge all things. It provides/reveals to us perfection and reason, thus making their treatments possible. To conceive of perfection and rationalism as being revealed from an outside All-Powerful All-Rational All-Willful source makes sense in our understanding of where they come from. Better yet, they may be used as the ruler/standard to weigh what is true and rational.

Bahnsen and Stein Debate. Christianity vs. Atheism.

The Great Debate. Bahnsen and Presuppositional Apologetics.

http://www.sbbic.org/Greg-Bahnsen-vs-Gordon-Stein-The-famous-debate-that-people-still-talk-about.mp3

Response Bablonian Exile/Post Exilic Dating for the Hebrew Bible

“and learned that this was written in the period of the Babylonian exile.”

I could firmly disagree with that. You could assume that it came together in it’s canonical form then, but not the above quotation.To argue that the idea of the Creation narrative was written after (or during) the Babylonian exile should be dismissed. Why? First, it would sound as if an assumption is made that 1. Revelation does not exist (God would reveal to Moses the stages of Creation, 2. An oral tradition of the event does not exist. The assumption would mean that Moses didn’t write the Torah, and instead it was redacted (or edited) out of the blue after the exile (for whatever political reasons liberal scholars which to propose).

I ask that you please consider the evidence below, as you will not get it at FIU. I put the time into it with the hopes you could read it in full, and consider it justly. I know it is lengthy, but that is my prayer:

There are two central areas of evidence that can show how invalid a claim that Genesis was written after the Babylonian exile.

1. Inner-Biblical Evidence
   
   1. First and foremost, the Bible is the revelation of God in an inspired Text. Not simply a collection of books written over time or written out of whim (this latter one easily rejected by all serious scholars). Instead, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God [theopneustos, or God-breathed]” (2 Tim 3:16). If you dismiss the supernatural, as liberal scholars do in their approach to scripture, you will have difficulties not only with Creation, but the Bible as a whole. Within itself, it claims to be inspired revelation, and it is no stretch to assume an All-Powerful Creator, who created the very universe, can reveal how Earth was created to Moses. In addition, there is an appropriate warning in scripture to any idea that man simply wrote it at whim; “The prophecy [the Old Testament prophetic Scriptures] came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost,” (2 Peter 1:21).
   2. Second, the Bible all the way through affirms Moses’ authorship, and the literal creation of man and woman.
      
      1. The Torah testifies to Moses as having composed it (Ex. 17:14, 24:4, 7, 34:27, Num 33:1-2, Deut 31:9, 11,
      2. Other Old Testament books reference Moses: Josh 1:8, Josh 8:31, 32, 2 Kings 14:6, etc. The authorship of the Torah is ALWAYS attributed to the personal man of Moses. Ezra 6:18, Neh 13:1, Dan 9:11-13, Mal 4:4
         
   3. Most sobering as well, is that the New Testament affirms Mosaic authorship. If it was simply all fabricated after the Babylonian Exile, our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ would be wrong, and hardly the Perfect Son of God, but a liar. See Matt 19:8, John 5:46-47, John 7:19, Acts 3:22, Romans 10:5, etc. Mark 12:26 states that God uttered to the historical Moses Ex 3:6. Jesus himself said: “Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you doeth the law?” (John 7:19)
      
      • • Also to note: The New Testament affirms the literal historical existence of Adam and Eve, not some myth. The book of Genesis, in it’s Hebrew style, is relating an ACTUAL HISTORICAL, not fabricated, event. The book of Romans states: “By one man sin entered into the world…By one man’s offense death reigned by one…By one man’s disobedience many were made sinners.” Romans 5 continued to relate Adam with Jesus. If Jesus was a historical figure (absolutely no doubt), then such a comparison would logically assume Adam was as well. The apostle Paul, takes Gen 2 and 3 as literal history, NOT allegory.
          
2. Extra-biblical Evidence also affirms the antiquity of the dating and authorship of the Torah (first five books)
   
   1. Archaeology
      
      • In the words of the most prominent biblical archaeologist in the 20th century, W.F. Albright: “Archaeological and inscriptual data have established the historicity of innumerable passages and statements of the Old Testament; the number of such cases is many times greater than those where the reverse has been proved or has been made probably.“
      • I could go ON and ON and ON and ON regarding how the archaeological record, not available to Wellhausen and others (the authors of what you learned in high school), have affirmed the historicity of scriptures narrative. From the city of Ur as literal, to the name of Abram, etc. I’ll provide some of the many that affirm the historicity:
        
        1. Hittite Legal Code (dated 1300 BC). Affirms patriarchal purchase of the cave in Gen 23. Affirms the very procedure they used.
        2. Code of Hammurabi: Affirms many ancient customs written in scripture and not understand to those living in the post-exilic period. From How orchids are to be collected (Lev 19, CoH 60), to various punishments, the legal codes match the historical period.
        3. House of David Inscriptions: Earliest mentioning of David, who liberals assumed to be fictitious.
        4. Ras Shamra Tablets (1400 BC): Affirms the poetry styles and early sacrificial terms. The stuff you studied argued that these complex sacrificial systems were edits made by post-exilic priestly group trying to strengthen the priest system.That’s how they explained these complexities, let low-and-behold, we have matching sacrificial ter,s during the time-frame of conservative dating estimates..
        5. Merneptah Stela (1220 BC): Earliest mentioning of the name “Israel“
           
   2. Biblical Narrative
      
      1. You cannot make sense of the Bible without reading it within its context. Essential to the context is the beginning. The Torah puts the ENTIRE bible in perspective. You will not understand the need of a 2nd Adam (Jesus), if you do not understand the first. You will not understand what is sin, why we’re here, what’s our purpose, and why Jesus came.
      2. In addition, you will miss out on the wonderful cohesiveness of the structure. The post-exilic writings ALL ASSUME THE VALIDITY of the Old Testament works. You cannot make sense to the God of Abraham-Isaac-Jacob without their historical accounts.
         
   3. Hebrew Poetic Style and Writing
      
      1. It has been proved that the poetic style of the Psalms is very very ancient. The earlier mentions of the Ugaritic texts have affirmed 1) Alphabet & Complex Writing systems were well developed, 2) The poetic styles used in the Psalms match the antiquity of the Ugaritics.
      2. Why is this so important? If these ancient writings and styles were written after the Babylonian Exile, for some fabricated reason for political unity through a priestly group, it is illogical to assume they had access to these buried writings. We’re talking about 1000+ years without google! It is inconceivable to think post-exilic writers could have researched and copied the ancient poetic styles (this simply was not done, and an impossibility). They would have instead used their own poetic styles.
      3. The same is similar to the accounts of Abraham and Moses. Only Moses best matches the authorship of the Pentateuch. Besides him being witnessed to in the text, there are a host of internal writing evidences that would make no sense in a Post-exilic environment.
         
         1. The Exodus lists eyewitness details.
         2. Author of Exodus shows a vast acquaintance of Egypt (using Egyptian names, words, and local geographic references that are not used in the later Old Testament).
         3. Shows a consistently foreign or ‘extra-Palestinian perspective, instead of imposing a perspective matching the penmanship of post-exilic writers.
         4. References to Archaic customs in Genesis that are demonstrable for the 2nd millennium BC, but not the first.
            

CONCLUSION: These are only a splash the vast array of evidences. You can draw the various conclusions:

1) If you assume it was all simply fabricated after the Babylonian Exile, you would go against the internal biblical evidences. If Jesus is God, and he is, and He is perfect, why would he get the creation of the world and the authorship of the books wrong? You would make him out to be a liar. In addition, the Torah itself testifies to Mosaic authorship, not that of post-exilic. You cannot separate these first five books either, as they are a single work.

2) The vast array of internal evidences found in narrative, poetic style, archaeology, etc. attest to the antiquity of the Scriptures. You cannot assume post-exilics and others knew the complex ancient poetic styles used within the Psalms. It would simply be a fabricated.

What then is the best explanation? That the texts are inspired, and they are historical accounts. The rest of the scriptures rely on them.The scripture is not just about some ‘higher love’. It is about God, and his plan to bring humanity to him. It is about God, and we can only learn love by learning him.

Why do I make such an effort to share this to you Paul? After all, you’re a stranger. I share this to you because I had to study the secular perspective. I had to endure with such an empty biased secular study of the Bible. How much I missed out!

YOU MUST UNDERSTAND THE LOGICAL CONCLUSIONS OF YOUR ASSUMPTIONS: If you believe it was all fabricated after the exile, you are now the Judge over scripture, and Scripture is not the judge over you (2 Tim 3:16). If you begin to assume that scripture is not historical where it assumes it is, and place yourself as judge over what did and did not happen, where does it stop? Just Adam and Eve? What about the resurrection? Could it not then be brushed aside with a natural explanation?

The moment you cast aside the inerrancy of scripture, and the validity and supernatural nature of it’s revealed accounts, it turns into simply a work of writings. No longer can it stand in judgment of Man, and reveal to him God’s redemptive plan to save humanity through Jesus. It is not just some account where man stands in Lordship.

Oddly enough, this is exactly why Jesus came! So that man would not be his own Lord! That is why we sin! We place ourselves as God’s over our lives. We believe we can say what is ‘good’ and what is ‘bad’. What is ‘love’ and what is ‘hate’. What is ‘true’ and what is ‘false’. Liberal scholars, like the stuff you studied, work in this pattern, on the assumption of man’s goodness, naturalism, Hegelian Darwinist evolutionism, etc.

However Scripture has a sobering reminder. Within Gen 1, God mentions ‘good’ in reference to his creation seven times. The first time ‘good’ is used by humans is here, with Eve responding to the serpent: “Then the woman saw that the tree was good for food and delightful to look at,” (Gen 3:6). Genesis opens with God telling us what is good, because as God he would know. However, what happened after Eve placed herself in the position of God to determine what was good? The Fall! Sin! What is this telling us?

We sin when we subjectively assume what is good and what is bad. This is why seeing scripture as inerrant and revelation is so important! With this, God is telling us what is Good and Truth. He would only know because he is perfect, and we can know because he reveals it to us. The other is the subjective assumption by man of what is good and evil. If we impose this upon scripture, meaning if we begin to say what did and didn’t happen, or what does and does it not say, in scripture, we now place ourselves in the very same position of Eve! What then, do you think would be the consequences?

God’s Blessings!

Discussion Regarding the Biblical Perspective of Eating Meat, and Hunting

From the following discussion: http://www.facebook.com/leonardooh?v=feed&story_fbid=224860888955

A biblical perspective (personal exegesis and scriptures from about):

Humans are made in the image of God, animals are not (Gen 1:26). God commands man to rule over the earth, and to rule over the animals (1:28). The Hebrew makes the comment ‘to subdue’, (kabash), or to bring under subjection (which fits the role of responsible hunters. Breath means life. Surely animals are alive, but to be made in the image and likeness of God is vastly different.

“Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness.” (John 3:4). Animals are creatures incapable of making moral decisions. The Law was given to humans. Humans are capable of making moral ethical creative and intellectual decisions. Animals function instinctual.

Jesus came to save the souls of man, not animals.

After the flood, God said the following: “Everything that lives and moves will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything.” (Genesis 9:3). Here is a clear biblical permission from God to eat animals. NOT some fanatical abuse and manipulation of scripture…

Later in Leviticus, God mentions the following regarding animals sacrifices: “Speak to the Israelites and say to them: ‘When any of you brings an offering to the LORD, bring as your offering an animal from either the herd or the flock.’” (Leviticus 1:2, NIV).

While discussing offering, it also states the following: “When anyone presents a grain offering as a gift to the Lord, his gift must consist of fine flour. He is to pour olive oil on it, put frankincense to it, and bring it to Aaron’s sons and priests.” (Lev 2:1-2).

In Exodus 20:13, God places a prohibition on murdering men. He DOES NOT place a prohibition on the killing of animals. Christ died to save humans as well, not animals. If killing animals consisted of some sin, he would not have commanded the israelites to sacrifice them, and he would have revealed it in scripture.

There will be animals in the new earth (Isaiah 65:25, Rev 19:14), but this in no ways suggests or provides evidence that animals have souls and they are eternal. Rather it suggests as God created this earth with creatures, so will he do it in the New Earth.

“Man’s concepts of spiritual values, his recognition of morals and his universal acknowledgment that he is responsible for his own behavior set him far apart from the animal world. That is to say, they have no immortal soul, as the following point documents. The spirit of man returns to God who gave it when one dies (Eccl. 12:7). Such is not said of the animal! Adam is called the son of God in Luke 3:38, obviously by creation. What animal is called the son of God or offspring of God?” (Gary Anderson)

In Acts 10, God tells Peter in a dream on a rooftop “In it were all the four-footed animals and reptiles of the earth, and the birds of the sky. Then a voice said to him, “Get up, Peter; kill and eat!…”What God has made clean, you must not call common.” (Acts 10:12-15).

In addition, Paul provides the following clarification regarding kosher and dietary laws, which provides some clarification. “One person believes he may eat anything, but one who is weak eats only vegetables. One who eats must not look down on one who does not eat…” (Romans 14).

Ecc. 3:19-21 is also not some clear claim disregarding the afterlife, as it would not fit within the themes of the scripture regarding eternal judgment. Not is it some absolute statement about the equality of man. If anything, this reads to be a rejection of materialistic notions of the afterlife as found in neighboring Egyptian paganism (see “Harpers Songs”). “Death has been swallowed up in victory. O Death, where is your victory. O Death, where is your sting.” (1 Cor 15:55). It’s clearn scripture speaks of an afterlife, and Ecc seems more at combating egyptian materialistic afterlife than the spiritual and new earth idea of Christianity.

RECAP:
1) We’re created in the image and likeness of God, animals are not. This is essential.
2) We have dominion and literal rule over animals (a charge of stewardship).
3) The law pertains to us, and Jesus came to save us, not animals.
4) God provides permission to eat animals. ‘Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything’.
5) The sacrificial system includes grain, oil, and frankincense (by Miguel’s argument, these would also have souls).
6) God places no prohibition on killing animals.
7) In a vision, Peter is told by God to eat of any animal, as none are unclean. Although a charge to bring the Gentiles into the church, the revelation is still prominent.
Jesus never spoke of the killing and consumption of animals as sin, and instead served fish to the people.
9) Paul provides an insight on the topic, and a call not to judge those who consume a diet different than yours.

This is a biblical presentation. Not a manipulation. I did this to show you how shameful it can be to claim someone manipulates scripture, without having or presenting some clarification (biblicaly grounded), on the charge. It is simply rude judgment, which Paul comments against in Romans 14. If anything, you need to only Genesis 9:3 as a response to your concerns

You still need to respond to my two questions mentioned earlier.

PS: Also, you must understand that hunters and fisherman have ethical system (catch and release, etc) that aid, and not harm, ecological systems. They consume the catch. They also ’subdue’ animals in the sense of controlling populations. Otherwise, we would experience animal overpopulation (see the various bunny crises in Europe), disease outbreaks, sickness, and ecological turmoil. Meat is used to feed a family, as well as control populations (which is controlled through tag and hunting/fishing requirements). They play an important role, and provide the primary population control and conservation funds. This is not some justification for poaching, or mass useless killing. That’s simply not what hunters and fisherman do. Join NCangler.com or some other hunting and fishing community, or even go hunting and fishing with some enthusiast, and you will likely find no greater community with genuine concerns and love for nature.

God’s Blessings.

For in depth info regarding the status of the soul and animals, please feel free to refer to http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/448.

Exegesis of Hebrews 2:1 (Holy Tradition and Eternal Security)

NOTE: The following exegesis is in response to an email that proposed the following quoted points regarding Hebrews 2:1.

Verse in Question: “We must pay greater attention to what we have heard, so that we do not drift away from it.” (Hebrews 2:1)

1. “the Word of God” and Holy Tradition? “

“First, note that the verse below seems to be clearly saying that the Word of God was imparted orally (it was heard); this is, I believe, a basic part of what Catholics refer to as holy tradition, i.e., the oral transmission of normative doctrine and practice from the apostles to the Church (very similar to the rabbinic understanding of “oral Torah”).”

1. Eternal Security?

“Second, note that there is an equally clear suggestion that those under the sound of apostolic teaching (doctrinal and otherwise) are exhorted to observe it so as not to become apostate (drift away).”

Point of Hebrews: To express the superiority of Christ to the glory of the old covenant (Heb. 1:1-2, 1:4-6, 3:3, Joshua 4:8, 4:14-5:10, 7:1-28, 8:1-10:18). Christ is shown throughout those verses to be superior to the prophets, the angels, Moses, Joshua, the OT priesthood and high priest, and most importantly the sacrificial system and sanctuary. In Hebrews 10:38, the author seems rather concerned about Christians “shrink[ing] back”. Perhaps this is in response to the magnificence of Herod’s temple (where house churches would pale in comparison). It would provide further understanding to Hebrew’s effort at establishing Jesus’ authority against the above mentioned. The focus on Hebrew’s expressing Christ’s superiority in reference to all these OT covenants hints again at preventing individuals from “drift[ing] away from it.” What then, is this “from it” that Heb 2:1 speaks of? The pretext of Chapter one provides an explanation, as seen below. One must understand that when we speak of ‘tradition’, it is in reference to this long narrative of God’s redemptive plan in humanity. The Holy Tradition then, is the prophetic coming of Jesus in which it finds it’s climax. The tradition is an understanding of the Christ in the Old Testament, and the Jesus in the New Testament. The tradition is then a profession of this coming, the Gospel, the Good News.

The Focus of Hebrews: On Christ’s bringing a New Covenant (of salvation by Christ’s shed blood). It is this covenant that is superior to the previous one (of obedience to the law).