reason.cck.org.uk

In recent weeks we have seen the utter devastation that has come about in Haiti with nearly 230,000 people having been estimated to have died as a result of an earthquake. When you consider the million people who have been left homeless and destitute as well, it causes deep emotion and a very real sense of concern to rise up in us. We are left asking again why such a terrible disaster could happen, and perhaps why God could allow such a disaster to happen? Many have been quick to speak up and give their opinion. The ‘New Atheists’ such as Richard Dawkins have seen this as further evidence that God does not exist, that it is just ‘the blind happenings of nature’. However, as we saw in the first article there are major problems with this perspective.  Just because you can give a geological explanation for an event does not mean that there is no law giver behind these events. This is a basic philosophical category mistake.

On the other hand, others such as Pat Robertson have been quick to suggest that it is God’s specific judgement on Haiti for their involvement with voodoo and the occult. However, respected theologian Dr. Albert Mohler rightly questions this premise:

“Why did no earthquake shake Nazi Germany? Why did no tsunami swallow up the killing fields of Cambodia? Why did Hurricane Katrina destroy far more evangelical churches than casinos? Why do so many murderous dictators live to old age while many missionaries die young?”

It is far too simplistic to claim that God has specifically judged one nation for wrong doing, but not others. It is true that God will judge everyone in the future (Rev 20:11-15), but for now we are wise not to speculate about God’s specific judgement on nations. In the Bible, we do see occasions of God judging nations and people for their sin, but God gives a messenger to explain these events before they even happen (Genesis 19:12-13).

Why do natural disasters happen?

The reason that we see such disasters take place is first and foremost because we live in a world which is spoiled by sin.  As I stated in my previous article, the world was in a state of perfection until Adam and Eve chose to sin against God (Gen 3:6-7), and there were consequences to this rebellion (Gen 3:17-18). Ever since the ground was cursed in response to the sin of Adam and Eve, these same natural disasters have been present. In Romans 8:18-22, Paul explains that this will remain the case until God redeems everything.

Those who agree that the world is billions of years old may find the chronology of this inconsistent with what scientific records seem to suggest. Surely there was pain, struggle and suffering in the natural order before Adam and Eve the first man and woman?

Intelligent Design scientist William Dembski agrees and has responded to this question by saying that he believes it is entirely possible that when the ‘curse’ took place in Genesis 3, it affected the world retroactively. His reasoning fits with the way that the cross of Jesus affected human history.

God’s acts transcend time in their impact

Jesus gave his life up and brought about salvation for the men and women of faith that lived in the Old Testament age. We find this clearly taught in Romans 4, when Paul is talking about how Abraham was justified by faith (Romans 4:1-3) and not by works. Similarly, despite the fact that the Israelites sacrificed animals on the day of atonement it was not the acts themselves which brought about salvation, but the sacrifice of Jesus Christ (Hebrews 10:3-5).  The salvation which God gave through Jesus Christ was transhistorical; it saved those who had faith in God’s salvation plan before the birth of Christ, as well as those who lived at the time and in the future.

Dembski argues that if you use this same logic it is possible for another act of God, [the cursing of the earth], to affect the created order in a transhistorical way too. In other words, if the salvation offered through Jesus can go backwards and forwards in history to save those living in 2010 and those living in 2010 BC, it is entirely possible for this to be true of the ‘the fall’ as well. Consequently, any pain, suffering and death which may have taken place prior to Adam and Eve could have still resulted from their sin, and God’s resultant cursing of the earth. I would want to state that this is one theory though, and would be wary of drawing too many conclusions from this.

God’s providence

In the previous article I made the point that our moral behaviour as people would be even worse if it were not for God’s common grace. This is true in a similar way for the earth that we live in. Romans 6:23 tells us that the wages of sin are death, so we could easily have expected that God would have destroyed the earth in response to our rebellion against him, but he hasn’t because of his sheer grace and mercy. Luke 8:22-25 sees Jesus commanding the wind and sea, demonstrating God’s control over the forces of nature and whilst we see many natural disasters happening around us, God’s grace will have undoubtedly stopped many others from occurring.

Conclusion

In the final article of this series we will look at how God uses suffering and difficulty in the here and now for good. For now, we can say that we see the world in the mess that it is because of sin. God was completely justified in cursing the earth in response to human sinfulness.

The sin should have led to death for all of us, but God has shown mercy and grace to us by restraining the physical destruction which happens. God can still use these very tragic events for good as we will see in our final article in this series, but we can have hope for the future, when God will complete his redemption. God is making all things new (Rev 21:5), and those who place their trust in Christ will not be experiencing pain and misery forever. There will be a day when Christ comes again, and every tear will be dried (Rev 7:17).

In the meantime Christians are called to show compassion to people who have experienced loss, to reach out with the love of Christ, both my providing for people practically (James 1:27) as well as introducing people to the one who will heal their pain ultimately.

Tweet This

Mulled cider & Love actually

In the last few weeks I have (like everyone else) been preparing for Christmas, and been doing my best to avoid going into Brighton. I have been enjoying that wonderful phenomenon known as online shopping, or more specifically Amazon.com. My wife Jac has also started to fill our home with those classic Christmas tunes again, Band Aid, Mariah Carey and others.

Christmas is a time of year that is associated with many different things for different people. It is often thought of as time to spend with our families and close loves ones. Many others will also crack out ‘Love actually’ on DVD yet again, have a few glasses of mulled wine (or cider ideally), and of course buy one another presents, some of which will no doubt be subtly making there way onto ebay in early January. If any of my family are reading, don’t worry I wouldn’t dream of it!

For others, Christmas may be a time that some will dread for a number of reasons. The struggle to fund sufficient presents, awkward conversations within a fractured family, keeping up appearances for a few days with distant relatives and for some, acute loneliness. Is this as good as we can hope for?

Where does Jesus fit in?

In recent years it may seem surprising that in what is often considered a more secular culture, there have been a number of songs recorded about Jesus by artists such as U2, The Killers, Green Day, Kanye West, REM and even Marilyn Manson. Whatever you think of him, Jesus still occupies a central part of our culture.

Jesus was a remarkable man, and according to a recent survey taken in June 2009 (published in The Daily Telegraph) around 33% of the UK population, say he is the dead person that they would most want to meet, ahead of figures such as Princess Diana, Marilyn Monroe, Shakespeare and Einstein. However, he is more than just a famous dead man. Jesus made some startling claims while he was on earth, he claimed to be God and not just to be a good human moral teacher. As the author CS Lewis writes, ‘he didn’t leave that option open to us, he didn’t intend to.’

Christmas celebrates the time when God put his plan of redemption for the world into action. Jesus voluntarily left behind the glory of heaven, to become a servant for humankind, a sacrifice and a substitute for the wrong we’ve done. As humans we’ve been made as relational people, to experience the joy of love. This love is wonderfully experienced in our personal relationships with one another, but there is an ultimate one that we have been made for, with our creator.

The key doesn’t fit the lock

As people we often talk of a sense of emptiness that there is in our lives, in our quest for meaning and purpose. We try many different things for satisfaction, even good things and try to squeeze them into ultimate things. The key does not fit the lock though. Consider the way that we try to define ourselves and find security and our identity in relationships, friendships, money, musicianship, a sportsman, a lover. None of these things are bad in and of themselves, but they were not designed to be the supreme definition of our lives. How could they? All of these things will come and go, they fade over time. There is only one thing that is truly unfading and will satisfy us completely, found in Jesus Christ.

We are out of sync with God, because we have all gone against him in our lives. We have elected ourselves as the decision maker, the purpose creator and the rock upon which all other things must be built around. This is what the bible calls sin, falling short of his perfect standard, in word, thought and action. The consequence is that we are separated from our perfect holy creator, and because God is just, he can’t just overlook our errors like some modern parents do with a spoilt child. Action needed to be taken.

Descending: God comes to us

Christmas celebrates God coming among us, in the first stage of his mission which would be completed at Easter with Christ’s death and glorious resurrection. He took upon himself the sin of the world, because we can’t earn our way to God. We couldn’t do enough good works and karma to achieve the necessary 100% perfect standard. Religion teaches us to try and ascend to God, Christianity teaches that God descended to us. This is crucial.

Jesus came to earth so that we could experience reconciliation. Jesus is in the business of mending relationships, firstly our relationship with God, but also our relationships with others.

We live in a world full of broken and wounded people who need to experience reconciliation with family members, neighbours and former friends. This is possible only when we see that through Christ justice was accomplished on the cross, sin was paid for, grudges can be dropped, forgiveness can be extended.

Conclusion

More than 2000 years ago, the God-man Jesus Christ came and dirtied himself by getting involved in human culture. He showed that he is not a distant God who created the universe and left it to chance. The incarnation of Christ is the central point of human history. We date our history around him, and history has never been the same since.

Today, consider the impact that the birth of Christ could have on your life. Whatever your situation this year, there is one who knows your every need, who restores relationships, and gives you a complete and unshakeable identity because of his love and compassion for you. He has made himself accessible, will you respond?

If you want to know more, why not come to our Christmas service.

Tweet This

Introduction

Christians believe that Jesus is the Son of God, and not merely a human teacher. This central idea has long been challenged by opponents of Christianity, and opposition has again, in recent years, come to prominence with the appearance of books such as The Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown.

Jesus was a man

Of course, at the very outset of this discussion, it is worth remembering that Christians also believe that Jesus was a real flesh-and-blood man. There were some early teachers (such as the “Docetists” and “Gnostics”) who denied this, arguing instead that Jesus merely appeared to be human (see, for example, section 93 of the Acts of John). It is curious to see such documents being referred to as evidence of early Christian belief in a merely human Jesus (see, for example, pages 231 and 234 of The Da Vinci Code), when this is something that their authors denied.

The Council of Nicaea of 325 A.D.

At the core of the dispute, however, is the idea that the Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D. voted to make Jesus divine, when, previously, Christians had accepted him as a human teacher. This interpretation of history is largely supported by the Jehovah’s Witnesses and is a key aspect of the storyline of The Da Vinci Code.

The Council of Nicaea consisted of about three hundred bishops (tradition places the number at 318), and was convened by the emperor Constantine the Great in order to end the divisive disputes in the church, which arose from the teaching of Arius. It is interesting to note that only twelve years earlier, the Edict of Milan, issued by Constantine the Great and his eastern counterpart Licinius Augustus, had granted toleration to Christians after centuries of persecution. Many of those who attended the Council of Nicaea had experienced persecution directly during the reigns of the emperors Diocletian and Maximian, and it seems unlikely, having withstood such opposition in the past, that these church leaders would have been easily persuaded to abandon their belief for reasons of political expediency.

The teachings of Arius and the decision of the Council

Before looking at the decision of the Council, it is worth noting that Arius did not actually deny that Christ was, in some sense, divine. It was the nature of his divinity that was in dispute at Nicaea. Is Jesus eternally divine, or is he a lesser, created divinity? All of which is very far from the idea that a human teacher called Jesus was made God by a vote.

The debate centred on whether Christ was of the “same essence” (Greek: homoousious) as the Father, or whether Christ was merely of a “similar essence” (Greek: homoiousios) to the Father, as argued by the Arians. The majority of members of the council were not prepared to compromise on their beliefs, even by a single letter, and overwhelmingly accepted the final text of the Creed of Nicaea (not to be confused with the later Nicene Creed).  Although the character Leigh Teabing in The Da Vinci Code speaks of “a relatively close vote” (page 233ff), there were only two bishops, Thomas of Marmarica, and Secundus of Ptolemais, who refused to accept the creed.

Earlier testimony to the divinity of Christ

In addition to the Creed of Nicaea, there is earlier testimony to the idea that Jesus was considered divine from among second century Christian writers. These include, among others, Irenaeus of Lyon (born early second century A.D.) who, commenting on John 1:1-2, noted that, “That, which is begotten of God, is God” (Adversus Haereses, I.8.5) and Justin Martyr (born circa 100 A.D.), who argued that, “The Father of the universe has a son; who also, being the first-begotten Word of God, is even God.” (First Apology, chapter 63).

There are also hostile witnesses, including the second century pagan author, Lucian of Samosata (born circa 120 A.D.) who wrote about a cynic philosopher (and temporary Christian convert) called Peregrinus, “It was then that he learned the wondrous lore of the Christians, by associating with their priests and scribes in Palestine … next after that other, to be sure, whom they still worship, the man who was crucified in Palestine because he introduced this new cult into the world.” (The Passing of Peregrinus, section 11). Other pagan authors, such as Hiercoles and Celsus, also mocked the idea of Jesus being worshipped, and it is hard to understand why they would have done so if he had only been made divine by a vote in the 4th century.

Furthermore, while there is not space in this article to consider this point in any detail, the considerable testimony of the New Testament itself to the divinity of Christ should also be borne in mind (see, for example, John 1:1, John 5:18, John 20:28, Romans 9:5, I Corinthians 8:6, Colossians 2:9, Titus 2:13 etc.). In this context, it is worth remembering that there are many early manuscript copies of the New Testament, or portions of it, including manuscripts which pre-date the Council of Nicaea.

Conclusion

I would argue therefore, that there is clear historical evidence to show that belief in Jesus as both fully human and fully divine is very far from being a 4th century invention, decided by the vote of a council. Rather, the followers of Jesus, from the very beginning, have acknowledged him to be, what he claimed to be, the eternal Word of God come in the flesh.

Suggested further reading:

J. Ed. Komoszewski et al., “Re-inventing Jesus”, especially chapters 14 – 15.

Carl E. Olson et al., “The Da Vinci Hoax”, especially chapter 4.

Tweet This

If you consider yourself a sceptic about Christianity or a Christian who is looking for honest answers to some of the toughest questions, then this book was quite simply written for you. Tim Keller is a pastor in New York, who has put into writing the kinds of questions that he is asked on a regular basis about Christianity such as ‘ How can a good God allow suffering?’, ‘Hasn’t science disproved Christianity?’ and ‘How can a loving God send people to hell?’

In this book, Keller takes an unusual approach to defending Christianity, in that he essentially divides the book into two. The first half is dedicated to answering objections that are often raised against Christianity, but in the second half of the book he somewhat changes his approach. Many people often believe that the burden of proof is on Christians to show why they believe in ideas that go beyond mere naturalistic thinking. However, Keller shows very clearly through philosophy, literature and reasoning that there are in fact many assumptions made in atheistic and agnostic worldviews in practice; such as when we consider the origins of moral values, and indeed meaning in life, amongst other things that are a significant problem.

Tim Keller manages to come across as thoughtful and persuasive while maintaining an intellectually credible yet accessible work.  Overall, I would suggest that this book is a must-read for anyone, whether you consider yourself a person of faith or not. This will challenge many of your pre-suppositions to the core.

Tweet This

One of the key things to note about the era of 1st century Palestine, is that it was primarily an oral culture. This means that information was rarely written down about  things that we might today consider to be highly significant ( let alone every single minor event; a stark contrast to 21st century western society). The main way that information was passed on was through verbal communication. However, we do still have a good number of documents which help to verify information about Jesus and the origins of the early church.

The primary sources for Jesus’ life are the Gospels in the Bible.  The main two sources are Tacitus and Josephus. These two records are very important because they verify the death of Jesus at the hand of Pontius Pilate, which collaborates the Gospel records (Mark 15:1-15, Matthew 27, Luke 23, John 18:28-40).

Cornelius Tacitus (born A.D. 52-54)

A Non-Christian Roman historian, in A.D. 112, Governor of Asia, son-in-law of Julius Agricola who was Governor of Britain A.D. 80-84. He wrote in the reign of Nero, making reference to Christians in Rome, and to Jesus’ death:

‘But not all the relief that could come from man, not all the bounties that the prince could bestow, nor all the atonements which could be presented to the gods, availed to relieve Nero from the infamy of being believed to have ordered the conflagration, the fire of Rome. Hence to suppress the rumour, he falsely charged with the guilt, and punished with the most exquisite tortures, the persons commonly called Christians, who were hated for their enormities. Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius: but the pernicious superstition, repressed for a time broke out again, not only through Judea, where the mischief originated, but through the city of Rome also.’ (Translated quote found in: McDowell, Josh., Evidence That Demands a Verdict, 1990, Scripture Press, p.82)

Flavius Josephus (born A.D. 37)

A Jewish Historian, in A.D. 66 he was the commander of the Jewish forces in Galilee. The following quote has been debated as to its entire validity. Certain sections of the text have been judged, by some, as unlikely to have been written by a Jewish scholar. For a preliminary overview of this see: Strobel, Lee The Case or Christ, Zondervan, 1998, pp.78-80. However, the important sections attesting to the life and death of Jesus are reliable. Josephus’ writings were translated into the Arabic, which does not contain those sections of the text that have been judged suspicious. The following is a quote from the Arabic translation:

‘At this time there was a wise man who was called Jesus. And his conduct was good, and (he) was known to be virtuous. And many people from among the Jews and the other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned Him to be crucified and to die. And those who had become him disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that He had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion and that He was alive; accordingly, He was perhaps the Messiah concerning who the prophets have recounted wonders.’ (Translated quote found in: McDowell, Josh., Evidence That Demands a Verdict, 1990, Scripture Press, p.82)

Thallus (a Samaritan-Born historian)

He wrote in A.D. 52, which is one of the earliest writers concerning the life and death of Jesus. Unfortunately we no longer have the originals of his work, but a man called Julius Africanus, who was a Christian writer of about A.D.  221, discusses his work. He cites a section of Thallus that confirms that there was a darkness that covered the land after Jesus died, which is also recorded in Luke 23:44 and Mark 15:33. He writes:

“ ‘Thallus, in the third book of his histories, explains away this darkness as an eclipse of the sun – unreasonably, as it seems to me’ (unreasonably, of course, because a solar eclipse could not take place at the time of the full moon, and it was as the season of the Paschal full moon that Christ died)’ (Translated quote found in: McDowell, Josh., Evidence That Demands a Verdict, 1990, Scripture Press, p.84)

Phlegon

A first century historian, like Thallus, his work is now lost. However Julius Africanus (above) in A.D. 221 again quotes a section of his work:

“ ‘During the time of Tiberius Caesar an eclipse of the sun occurred during the full moon’ ” (Translated quote found in: McDowell, Josh., Evidence That Demands a Verdict, 1990, Scripture Press, p.84)

Lucian of Samosata

Roman of the Second century: he wrote in The Passing Peregrinus:

‘ . . . the man who was crucified in Palestine because he introduced this new cult into the world . . . Furthermore, their first lawgiver persuaded them that they were all brothers one of another after they have transgressed once for all by denying the Greek gods and by worshipping that crucified sophist himself and living under his laws.’ (Translated quote found in: McDowell, Josh., Evidence That Demands a Verdict, 1990, Scripture Press, p.82)

Suetonius (A.D. 120)

Another Non-Christian Roman historian writes in Life of Claudius:

‘As the Jews were making constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus (another spelling of Christus), he expelled them from Rome’ (Translated quote found in: McDowell, Josh., Evidence That Demands a Verdict, 1990, Scripture Press, p.83)

Plinius Secundus, Pliny the younger

Governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor (A.D. 112). The following quote comes from a letter that he wrote to Emperor Trajan. The main concern of his letter is how to treat the Christians. In the second century, during the reign of the Caesars, the populace was expected to worship Caesar as a god. This the Christians did not do. Pliny had been putting to death those Christians who would not bow down to a statue of Trajan. In the letter he writes the following:

‘They affirmed, however, that the whole of their guilt, or their error, was, that they were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verse a hymn to Christ as to a god, and bound themselves to a solemn oath, not to do any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft, adultery, never to falsify their word, not to deny trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up’ (Translated quote found in: McDowell, Josh., Evidence That Demands a Verdict, 1990, Scripture Press, p.83)

Further reading

There are many more sources that attest to the origins of the early church, and many instances where books are quoted, which no longer exist, but would have been accessible in the day in which they were quoted. For further research, I have suggested some books below:

• McDowell, Josh., Evidence That Demands a Verdict, 1990, Scripture Press, Chapter 5.

• Strobel, Lee The Case or Christ, Zondervan, 1998, Chapter 4

• Bruce, F. F., Jesus and Christian Origins outside the New Testament, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974.

• Habermans, Gary., The Historical Jesus, Joplin, Mo.: College Press, 1996

To view Ruth’s recent testimony about how she became a christian, click here

Tweet This

There has been a lot of speculation (and prediction in some cases) about the exact day when Jesus would come back to the world. For instance, Nostradamus predicted that “from the sky will come a great King of Terror” in 1999. This was interpreted by some as a prophecy about the second coming of Jesus. When this did not occur, some of his followers claimed that Jesus was conceived in 1998, born in 1999, and is currently living on Earth as a reincarnated person.

How do we know Jesus will return?

In all 4 of the Gospels (the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) in the Bible, Jesus says that he will come again and bring in His Kingdom.

The apostle Paul, in his letter to the church in Thessalonica, Greece, writes,

For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever. (1 Thess 4:16-17)

When will he return?

Interesting, Paul then adds:

Now, brothers, about times and dates we do not need to write to you, for you know very well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night. While people are saying, “Peace and safety,” destruction will come on them suddenly, as labour pains on a pregnant woman, and they will not escape. (1 Thess 5:1-3)

Evidently, the question of Jesus’ return plagued people nearly 2 millennia ago!

Paul’s response is in tune with what Jesus had said a few decades earlier before He returned to His Father.

“No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.”

“Therefore keep watch, because you do not know on what day your Lord will come. But understand this: If the owner of the house had known at what time of night the thief was coming, he would have kept watch and would not have let his house be broken into. So you also must be ready, because the Son of Man will come at an hour when you do not expect him.” (Matt 24;36, 42-44)

Put simply, Jesus could return today! Are you ready for His return? Have you put your faith and trust in him?

Tweet This

The Genesis account describes how Adam and Eve disobeyed God at the instigation of a snake. Could this be interpreted to suggest that God had made a mistake in his creation? A mistake that would have devastating implications for humanity. The fact that the snake spoke should be noted, and suggests an alternative understanding of the event. There was nothing created in the seven days or eras apart from humans that could speak. The only beings that could were created before the earth was formed, that is, the angels. In fact, throughout the Bible ‘snake’ has been representative of Satan or the Devil (Rev: 12:9, 20:2). Satan is an angel who envied God’s power, tried to usurp the throne of God, and who was thus thrown out of heaven.

Did God ‘put’ the snake in the Garden of Eden?

The Bible does not explain systematically, like a textbook, the events of the Fall (when Adam and Eve turned against God after the snake tempted them). We have the narrative of the first few chapters of Genesis describing Satan as a ’snake’ who incited Eve to disobey God. It seems to be suggested in the text that the snake was a created creature like any other animal, so in one respect God did ‘put’ the snake in Eden. Yet, no normal, natural snake speaks. This factor combined with other scripture passages using ‘snake’ as refernce for the Devil suggests that the snake was influenced by another supernatural entity.

The omnipotence of God

Did God ‘put’ Satan in the Garden of Eden? I have mentioned above that the Bible does not give exhaustive detail on this point. The other passages, apart from the opening chapters of Genesis, that refer to the fall of Satan are Isaiah 14:4-21, Ezekiel 28:1-17. These two sections of text are poetical and have more than one meaning. As such there are things that we can know about how and why Satan (the snake) was in the Garden of Eden, but there are aspects of the event that we cannot discover from scripture. Yet scripture is clear on this point: God never intiates evil. Instead this has always been a result of the choices made by the created: angels and humans (James 1:13-14). The Bible provides records of God’s actions in history. It is not written as a theology essay, explaining who God is and how he acts in detailed academic exposition. Nevertheless, within the records of the Bible , God’s sovereignty is displayed very clearly, in so-far-as nothing happens that is outside of God’s control. This includes the snake’s presence in the Garden of Eden.

God’s providence

Does the above mean that God is somehow to blame for the Fall of man? Was it God’s mistake? Within a human context, if someone has complete control over another, the one who is subject to the other has no power to initiate free action. Therefore the one who is in control must ultimately take responsibility for any action taken by the one who is subject. The image that comes to mind is a puppeteer in control of the strings. This is not an analogy that can be transfered to the God of the Bible and his relation to humanity. God is beyond us, and therefore his actions cannot be equated to that of a human, and his ultimate control does not negate our free action. God is at the same time distinct from his creation, and working through it. Human action is very real and effective, therefore each human is accountable for what he/she does.

Human free will and God’s providence are not opposed to each other. Many times the Bible represents a scenario where a human freely chooses to act, but the Bible declares that God ultimately governed the outcome of the event (Acts 2:23, 4:27-28, Luke 22:22, Matt 18:7). Therefore there is a paradox which is represented – humans act and choose freely, and are therefore accountable, but God works his purposes in and through the willing free actions of humans. Thus God cannot ever be accused of causing the Fall; humanity chose to reject God, and Satan decided to incite us. We remain accountable.

For a more detailed exposition read: Grudem, Wayne Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine, Chapter 16: God’s Providence.

But did God make the ‘mistake’ of not preventing the Fall?

Firstly, because we are beings that are made in the image of God we have the freedom to choose, as I have outlined above. Therefore when Adam and Eve chose to disobey God they had to take responsibility for it. The highest human virtue is love. Part of the essence of love is choice. We need to be free to choose in order to love; and we need to be free to choose in order to do evil. The Fall was caused by our choice to reject God’s governace over our lives.

Secondly, however, God knew that the snake would incite Eve; could he not have stopped it, as he is all powerful? Simply: yes, but realistically, this is a question that is very difficult to answer because it requires information that humanly we do not possess. Such as, God’s thoughts and eternal intentions. How can God not prevent evil and be not partly to blame? I will let Calvin’s words serve as an answer, because he expresses it so well: ‘Let those for whom this seems harsh consider for a little while how bearable their squeamishness is in refusing a thing attested by clear Scriptual proofs because it exceeds their mental capacity’ (Calvin, John. Institutes). The point is this: If God has all the attributes we expect of him he is far beyond our capacity to intellegibly dissect. Paradoxically, however, at the very moment that humanity betrayed God’s law, which he foreknew, God also knew the extremes to which he would go to save humanity from the results of the Fall. This is the very irony of the question: why did God not prevent this evil for our sakes? A result of evil entering creation was the suffering God knew he would undergo for us. The Bible tells us that it is because of his great love for us.

God’s plan

From the beginning God had a plan to save people from the Fall, to totally and ultimately defeat evil through the Son of God, Jesus Christ, who willingly went to the cross to suffer in our place because of our rejection of God. At the Fall, when God is cursing the snake he said this: ‘I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring, he shall bruise your head and you shall bruise his heal’ (Genesis 3:15). This is a promise that Satan and evil will be trampled under the feet of one man – Jesus Christ.

For more information on Genesis 3:15 see: http://biblescripture.net/First.html

Further Reading

1. Wright, Christopher J H, The God I Don’t Understand, Zondervan, 2008, Chapter 1, 2, 3.

2. Grudem, Wayne, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine, Inter-Varsity Press, 1994, Chapter 16

Tweet This

Who, When and Why?

In the year AD 525, a Bulgarian monk who lived in Rome as a member of the central governing body of the Roman Catholic Church, Dionysius Exiguus devised the Anno Domini (in the year of our Lord) dating system. The system states a year with regards to the year of the Incarnation (conception) of Jesus Christ. He invented a new system of numbering years to replace the Diocletian years that had been used in an old table because he did not wish to continue the memory of the tyrant, Roman Emperor Diocletian who persecuted Christians.

This system became popular when “The Father of English History”, Saint Bede used Anno Domini dating in his famous work, Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum (The Ecclesiastical History of the English People).

Emperor Charlemagne, who was King of the Franks from 768 to his death and his successors further popularized the use of this system.

Birth of Christ

One problem with this system, is that scholars believe that Jesus was actually born around 4 BC! In the Gospel of Matthew, Matthew writes that Jesus was born during the reign of King Herod (Matt 2:1). Further, King Herod ordered the massacre of all boys in Bethlehem and it’s vicinity, who were two years old and under. (Matt 2:16). Famous Roman-Jewish historian, Josephus, dates the death of King Herod at 4 BC. And hence, the problem arises!

Even though the centrality of Christ in the Christian’s life is of utmost in the Bible, the AD calendar dating system does not find it’s roots in the Bible!

Tweet This

Fact 3: The birth of the Early Church

It can be very easy in our 21st century beliefs to assume that people “ in those days” believed any kind of resurrection rubbish because they believed miracles were possible , but now that we have sophisticated minds which are more critical and scientific we know better.

We are only able to hold onto these kinds of views because we are mostly uninformed about resurrection beliefs in first century Palestine.

If we look at the beliefs of Jews and Greeks in the first century we can see that neither group believed that dead men rise! It was practically unthinkable.

But what about the resurrection in Jewish scripture and greek mythology, surely that is where they got their ideas from?

Greek mythology and resurrection

In short this is not true; there were some very fundamental differences in the concepts of ‘resurrection’ in all both parties. As we have already seen from 1 Cor 15 in the previous article, Paul is preaching a bodily resurrection, not merely a spiritual one. Greek thinking at the time was dominated by Platonic and Homeric thought, and in neither of these types of texts do we find any consideration of a bodily resurrection. Tim Keller writes ‘ In Greco-Roman thinking, the soul or spirit was good and the physical and material world was weak, corrupt, and defiling…therefore salvation was conceived as liberation from the body.’

In other words, in the views of the Greeks’ if you could lose your body then your soul would be free. If this is what you were hoping to achieve, being resurrected in the body was not only implausible to the Greeks, but it was also completely undesirable.

What about the Jews?

It is probable that the Jews were unaware or not impacted by these Greek worldviews, after all they were God’s chosen people in their eyes. They were immensely proud to worship the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and would have been unlikely to look to the Pagans for a change of belief; since they believed they were given the Old Testament scriptures by God, why then look to another culture for a sudden change of view?

So what was the Jewish worldview involving resurrection?

Jewish Resurrection thinking

N.T. Wright points out in his extensive scholarly work, The Resurrection of the Son of God, that the Jewish community did have an expectation for a form of resurrection, but one at the end of the world. This is mostly seen in a few passages in the Old Testament such as Daniel 12:2-3, which alludes to an end-time resurrection for the nation of Israel as a whole. Such sentiments are displayed in Isaiah chapters 24-27 of  which talks of God’s judgement, and the hope for resurrection at the end of the world (Isaiah 26:19). This is also seen in Ezekiel 37, arguably the most famous of all resurrection passages.

It is true also that in non-canonical Judaic writings from 400 BC ( like 2 Maccabees, Ecclesiasticus) up to the times of Jesus that similar themes were established. The main two being the restoration of Israel, and resurrection bodies being given at the end of the world.

Messiah as warrior

However, we will note here that just like the long-awaited Jewish messiah was expected to be a warrior who would overthrow with power those governing over the Israelites (rather than a man who would be crushed and crucified); there was no expectation for the Messiah himself to be resurrected, nor for any other form of resurrection in the Jewish community before the end of the world.

Conclusion

N.T. Wright summarises: ‘The immediate conclusion is clear. Christianity was born into a world where its central claim was known to be false’.

The first two factors of the empty tomb, and the post-death encounters of Jesus alone are extremely persuasive in convincing us of the reality of the resurrection of Jesus Christ, but the birthing of the early church is quite simply the knock out blow. In Acts 2:41, Peter preaches the first sermon about Jesus’ resurrection  and we see 3000 promptly respond to become followers of Christ.

This incredible birthing of the early church took place in Jerusalem, the very area where these resurrection events had taken place a few short weeks earlier. Frankly, you could understand this world religion growing from a myth if this all happened a few thousand miles away, but not in a place where there were eye-witnesses. Surely it would have been quashed immediately?

In the final article of this series I will look at the implication of all these facts combined.

For the other articles looking at the resurrection of Christ please click below.

http://reason.cck.org.uk/tag/resurrection/

Tweet This

As we look at our 3rd article in the series on Jesus’ resurrection, we turn our attention to the first of  three key facts that we will examine.

Fact 1: The Empty Tomb

The first detail that we need to concern ourselves with is the empty tomb. I’m making the very non-controversial assumption, which is agreed among New Testament scholars today, that Jesus of Nazareth did in fact die on that cross at Golgotha.

The Burial

After Jesus had died, he was buried by Joseph of Arimathea, who was a member of the Jewish Sanhedrin (the council of Israel). This is highly probable due to the fact that there would have been very little reason for the early gospel writers to have lied about this. This would have been an embarrassing truth for them; that one of the leaders of the pack who effectively arranged the murder of Jesus, then gave his own tomb for him to be buried in. New Testament scholar Raymond Brown said that it was ‘almost inexplicable’ for the early Christians to have made this up. This is significant in that it would mean that both Jews and the followers of Christ, alike, would have known where this tomb was.

We find multiple attestation of this fact in each of the gospel accounts (Mark 15:42-47, Matt 27:57-61, Luke 23:50-54, John 19:38-42) but we are not reliant on this. Actually, there is an even earlier account in 1 Cor 15:3-5, which attests to the burial, that can be dated to around 36AD (within 6 years of Jesus’ ministry) confirming the burial.

More could be made to support this issue, but I want to look at two further reasons why the empty tomb is so strongly agreed on by New Testament scholars today.

Women giving testimony?

Firstly, the inital observers of the empty tomb that Jesus had been in were women. In our culture we simply don’t understand the significance of this. In First century Jewish culture, women were not seen as equal to men and they were not even allowed to be called as witnesses in court. Even part of the daily prayers that men said were to give thanks that they were not born as a woman. Shocking!

Tim Keller writes: ‘There was no possible advantage to the church to recount that all the first witnesses were women. It could have only undermined their credibility of the testimony.’

In light of these facts, N.T. Wright comments that there must have been enormous pressure on the early Christians to change these facts, but the reality is that they didn’t! They maintained their historical integrity and gave an account of what really happened.

Jewish Belief

Secondly, one of the first things that the Jewish leaders claimed is that the disciples stole the body (Matt 28:12-15), which means that they pre-supposed that the body was missing and the tomb was empty. There was no attempt to say that the wrong tomb was checked, or it had been moved. For the non-believing Jews, there was no issue about the empty tomb. It was obvious that the body was gone, and so a new story had to be created to try and cover it up. They had no desire for the birth of a new religion whatsoever.

Summary

When we add all of these pieces of historical evidence together, it seems to verify the fact that Jesus’ grave was found empty on the Sunday after he had been crucified. This provides us with our first part of the jigsaw in looking at whether the resurrection of Jesus really happened. Join us next week when we look at the next piece of evidence, the post-mortem appearances!

Tweet This