March 1998
DO YOU LIVE IN CONTRADICTION?
A question of vital consistency!
Every way of a man is right in his own eyes: but the Lord judges the hearts. Proverbs 21:2
We live at an hour of such immense confusion that perhaps the greatest word to describe our generation is contradiction. Indeed, this is to such an extent that more and more people are concluding that this is what life is all about. From the deliberate attempt to manipulate and confuse reality in the media, t.v., and arts, to the exaltation of the paradoxical and irrationally emotional in religion, more and more philosophies of the absurd and the irrational are being entertained in all areas of life and thought. We all witness day after day the exposure of contradiction in those around us; and because this is so with many in the most important positions of society—from the greatest Presidents to the most influential Religious leaders and speakers—most people have developed a type of cynical and defeatist attitude that brushes off every new hypocrisy as almost trivial and expected. Yesterday's high hopes for an ideal human centered society based on man's innate goodness have succumbed to this universal tragedy of monotonous moral inconsistency. Thus, we hear the frequent expression: "I'm sick and tired of..." Our world is so devoid of meaning, sanctity, trust, and hope that the prevailing spirit of the age is expressed in the common reply given to issues of the most importance: "So what!" or, "I don't care!" We have become so abused and devalued by broken promises that precious nothing gains our interest anymore. As a result we fantasize after the abnormal, the unreal, and the perverse to find relief—behold our new religion.
"So what's so novel about this uaper?" you might be asking. A full solution to all contradiction shall be my aim.
Lonely Desperation Intensifies with Experience
For many years of my life I also expressed the above defeatist, and almost nihilistic loss of interest in reality. How desperately I struggled to find gratification for that certain unknown craving deep down in my being. The 'tossing and turning' of life intensified as the abundant pursuits all around me claimed to be the answer, but never delivered the promise. Unconsciously I kept saying, "This will give me the ultimate satisfaction, I know it! "—only to be disappointed again and again. Yet I would place my hope in my imagination and continue to persuade myself that some new untried adventure or attainment (in pleasure, crime, high religious endeavour, etc.) would deliver that so desperate need. But a vast and most unrestrained experience so solemnly proved what Ravi Zacharias declared: "The loneliest moment in life, is when you have just experienced what you thought would deliver the ultimate and it has let you down." How lonely then was I along with everyone else in our busy world!
It is that innate assurance that something will deliver the ultimate, that drives this world to seek ever-changing gratifications. The pursuits of power, money, fame, pleasure, knowledge, ease, romantic love, and the host of other finite quests of man are nothing new in the circles of history. They only vary in time, and with the changing relations of culture and technology. "There is nothing new under the Sun," says the ancient King who had the greatest opportunity to see if any of these would really deliver. His exhaustive search and subsequent disappointment understandably left him as the most barren and hopeless individual so desperately crying:
"meaningless! meaningless! everything is meaningless!"
But we are all prone to ignore history's lessons and so inevitably prove it's old follies in ourselves. Not surprisingly, the more experienced we are, the more delusioned we feel. Thus, we witness one of the most accomplished skeptics of our century Bertrand Russell, together with Albert Einstein write two days before the latter's death, that those who know the most are the most gloomiest. What once gave excitement, promise, and hope was found at it's peak or in the end to be empty and unfulfilling. Yet is only this undeniable hope that something will meet this profound existential need that keeps us from taking our lives. Alas! see how many have deliberately ended this mocking desperation! Others say that no objective truth exists which can so deliver the sought relief. Yet they nevertheless contradict this by their day to thy life testimony in continually seeking for it in various things.
Since you know of this deep craving, and how it affects all of your pursuits, then you cannot deny that the answer is of the utmost importance. You may outwardly or pridefully shrug off such subjects, when they come as only in theory from light-hearted people and casual suggestions, but deep down, behind the masks of society and the betrayed appearances, you cry for the answers.1 I will attempt to prove and point that Way in a condensed form. My address is to every person that is still hungering for life's deepest meaning, whether you are the hardest skeptic or a 'modem' Christian. "The LORD is very close to all who call upon Him, to all that call upon Him in truth. He will fulfill the desire of them that fear Him, He will also hear their cry, and will save them." Psalms 145
1 Even atheists like Nietzsche and Freud admitted a longing for a God.
Anti-exclusive People Not Excluded
According to 'politically correct' dogma, I have just violated the most sacred value: the legitimacy of all personal beliefs. I not only made the claim that there is only one ultimate answer (all else being fundamentally wrong), but that I have found it. This, along with the quotations of the Bible, perhaps has raised some blood pressure. But before you dismiss this as archaic and bigoted, realize what I am really saying, and what you are really subscribing to.2
2 Why is it that so many who claim to be open and tolerant of all religions, who get upset at anyone who says that they have the only right religion and all others are false, feel no shame, and see no contradiction in using the name of Jesus Christ as a curse word? Why is it that His name is used when they feel He was a great moral person? and not use other famous leaders names, whose character is questioned? Indeed, there does seem to be something unique in this person of Jesus. Also, why do these same people attach to the word "holy" the most perverse words? I believe we shall see why as we progress. How mysterious this was when I was writing these very words and someone demonstrated this in my presence!
Notice I said all other ways were fundamentally wrong. I did not say that anyone was 100% wrong in everything. If this were so then we could not even communicate with each-other. Everyone believes and practices many things that are true. The concern here is with the most important questions in life: origin, meaning, morality, and destiny—and if we are consistent with them. The human race can be illustrated by the following illustration similar to Norman Geisler's:
[MANY ILLUSTRATIONS MISSING DUE TO BEING ONLINE]
The two circles represent people's world views or the way one thinks about reality. The big 'T' represents truth in the above categories of life, while the big 'E' means the person is in error about them. Notice both have little t's and e's. These are truth and error in nonessential matters of life. Thus, the one who is fundamentally right is not without much ignorance in many things; while all others may have a great amount of truth in secondary matters (which are unrelated to our deepest quest). Let me also say that just because one might have the basic answer to life, does not mean that they know it exhaustively in degree. They know that way to be undeniably true, while only sufficiently or to the degree that they are capable. We shall see later, that we need not only the proper view of reality in these subjects, but also the proper conformity to it.
This claim of having the exclusive truth is really the way everyone practically lives; and is the view all communicate to each-other no mater how loudly they may deny it in theory. To prove this, all you have to do is deny it. When you deny that there is such a thing as only one true or ultimate way, you claim that you have the ability to know this, and that you are right. In essence, you are affirming the very thing you are trying to deny. It is the same thing as being absolutely sure there is no absolutes. The problem is you just affirmed it to disprove it. It is one thing to not know something (and be agnostic = Latin: ignoramus), and quite another to dogmatically affirm that you know that you cannot know. The Eastern religious Gurus saw this problem and decided to not say anything and yet try to prove this absurdity. The problem is that one does not have to say something verbally to see it's falseness.
The Exclusive Law of Non-Contradiction is Undeniable
The drive of much philosophy and ethics today is to try and demonstrate this very absurdity. The only problem is that order to disprove it, they have to sneak in what they are really denying through the back door in. It is like saying, "I cannot write a word of English." Well I just did. Behold all the folly of those who write volumes to prove we cannot know anything! We may play around with words and ideas and fool ourselves into confusion and licence, but the fact remains: our ideas and actions are relative to concrete truth. To see it differently, the law of non-contradiction cannot be denied without affirming and believing it. This law says two opposite things cannot both be true at the same time in the same sense. For example, you either exist at the moment you read this, or you do not. Both cannot be true at the same time. And the moment you try and deny it, is the moment you really affirm it, and at the same time deny your own absurdity. For you must exist in order to say you do not. In fact the more you deny this most fundamental law, the more you really prove it—it is undeniable.
This truth is even really believed in India, where this law is the most verbally denied. When one crosses the street, it is either the bus or the pedestrian—not both! As I said before, it matters not what people verbally say they believe—for they are often inconsistent— but only what they practically believe; which is demonstrated in how they act and in what they expect from others. 'Your actions speak louder than words,' no matter how loud, sophisticated, or enthusiastic you may proftss things. Who really cares about whimsical absurdities that fly around in the head but touch not the life?
When the Mouth Admits the Heart: A Willful Denial
Yet in another way it is very serious, for such theories leave their believers confused and deceived in areas of knowledge and morals. The denial of exclusive truth or ultimate meaning gives licence to do whatever one wants. Of course, this is why many say they deny it (even though they affirm it when someone wrongs them). The famous Secular Humanist Aldous Huxley admitted this to be very convenient:
For myself, as, no doubt, for most of my contemporaries, the philosophy of meaninglessness was essentially an instrument of liberation. The liberation we desired was simultaneously liberation from a certain political and economic system and liberation from a certain system of morality. We objected to the morality because it interfered with our sexual freedom; we objected to the political and economic system because it was unjust. The supporters of these systems claimed that in some way they embodied the meaning (a Christian meaning, they insisted) of the world. There was one admirably simple method of confronting these people and at the same time justifying ourselves in our political and erotic revolt: We could deny that the world had any meaning whatsoever.
This unblushing absurdity is most shameful; yet it is no different from what many secretly do. But notice the contradiction, he says he "objected to the political and economic system because it was unjust." How can you mean something is wrong when you deny any such things exist? It is clear that these people know the truth but rather blind themselves by letting their lusts lead them. How terrible when people force this on society. This land of pleasureful fantasy may bring temporary exhilaration, but it will not escape the consequences. He says earlier:
I had motives for not wanting the world to have a meaning; consequently I assumed that it had none, and was able without any difficulty to find satisfying reasons for this assumption. Most ignorance is vincible ignorance. We don't know because we don't want to know. It is our will that decides how and upon what subjects we shall use our intelligence. Those who detect no meaning in the world generally do so because, for one reason or another, it suits their books that the world should be meaningless. 3
3 (emphasis mine) Aldous Huxley, Ends and Means (London: Chatto & Windus, 1946), 273, 270.
Here we have the honest (yet terrible) testimony of a hostile witness, which, as the rules of evidence show, is to be trusted. Every true Christian testifies that prior to their conversion they likewise rejected known truth because of selfishly committed wills. Yet more and more skeptics are admitting the same while failing to live up to responsibility. What then shall we think of their arguments and judgements?
Faithful Rules Of Investigation
If you are willing to be deceived then do not bother reading any further, for it will only harden you more. But for those who seek truth and "the life worth living," I will do my best to give my feeble answers. But we must agree to some rules or we can go nowhere. We have just proven the law of non-contradiction. Therefore it must apply to everything we investigate. If something is shown to be true, then the opposite is false. If there is a God then Atheism is false; if Jesus Christ really rose from the dead by His own Divine power, then doubters are wrong; if He proves to be the only way, then all others are wrong.
As we also have seen, intent is prior to content. It does not matter how much truth and evidence you see if you will not let your will be moved by all truth. For then you will never really be convinced of it, or find satisfaction and rest in it. I will go so far as to say that if you let any known truth remain uncommitted to in your life, then you will be ultimately deceived.4 Let not the ancient Greek error be to your destruction: "To know the good is to do the good." You will not truly find (experience) the ultimate answer if you only want to know it and not commit fully to it. It is only intellectual gluttony and covetousness to reach for more truth when you refuse to be faithful to, and thankful for what you have already.
4 This is even the case with the majority of professing Christians. They are intellectually or emotionally convinced of Christianity, but their whole being—lead by their wills—is not fully won over in love to Christ Himself.
The object of truth is to be lived. If you fail to live up to it you have missed the key ingredient to life. Therefore you must give this matter your full attention, and not skim over it lightly as many do with the other precious things in life. You will not appreciate truth, and be really blessed by it, if you choose to not give undivided and thorough attention to it. You ought to study these things in such a way that every consideration will be seen to affect the well-being of not just you, but of this whole world.
Related to this is the quest for unreasonable expectations. You must not expect to be infallible before you are to believe. You believe many things of importance because they are beyond reasonable doubt and without absolute certainty. You must put away all pride and come to grips with you finitude or limitations. You know many things are true without knowing why and how (as with electricity). If you expect to have everything on the same level as first truths of reason (like mathematics) then you will come to doubt all things. I might add that it is here that the rationalistic skeptics have stumbled in their search. They refused to be consistent and apply the same rules of evidence, that they normally operate by, to these morally related subjects. Again we may deny this in theory, but when someone violates this against us then we know how true it is. It is all so very personally innocent until a Hitler comes along.
We must also be able ourselves to answer the objections we throw at others. For example, to say the existence of evil proves there is no God, may sound convincing; until we turn the question around and ask how evil, as we know it to be morally wrong, can exist in a world without God? In fact evil really destroys that position because it shows how we all know there is a right and wrong transcending (outside or beyond) us. And if there is such a law, then there is a law giver who we rightly call God (see below).
To summarize, we must be honest, consistent, and responsibly committing in all our search; while doing unto opponents as we would have them do to us (or as we do to our own views). There is no room for light-heartedness or hypocrisy here.
Parameters and expectations: A Full Explanation
Without taking too much more space in preparing to look into this exclusive claim, I will set forth what we are to look for and may expect to find. As human beings are so very intricate with many different capacities and cravings, so our Ultimate answer must encompass their full explanation. Not only must our answer be consistent with our whole being, but it must meet society's needs. Indeed, we cannot be satisfied until subjectivity (personal reality) and objectivity (outward reality), past, present, and future are given a united answer. This was the quest of the 'University'—which means: to find unity in diversity—from it's beginnings in fourth century Greece, till perhaps the mid-twentieth century. All struggle with these conflicts, and are never satisfied when we see things out of place and without an answer.
[Every American Coin has "E. PLURIUS UNUM" which means "out of the many, one."]
Again, the human race craves universal unity, so it must not be limited to only a few classes of people, nor to the more advanced in knowledge, or to a specific culture. We are looking for that which transcends (goes beyond) all personal differences and boundaries. And if a personal loving God exists, we may expect Him to reveal the answer to us in some reasonable and sufficient way. It is only right then that the true way is the one that binds all things together (coherence) in a way that is not only not contradictory, but is also remedial of our great problems. This really is the desperate (although covered up) deep-down cry of all people; which partially surfaces when facing emergencies or tragedies. Let us then begin our search with the tools of our mind, experiences, and the every-day expectations of others in relation to God—and lets us keep a sharp eye on preventing the committing of our wills unfairly.
Arguments for the Existence and Nature of God
Before we begin to see if God exists and has revealed Himself in any knowable way, you must answer some questions: How do you know that the author of this book ever existed? Or, how would you know if someone who has provided for your needs through some acquaintances on the other side of the world exists? when you never have seen them before. We must not take for granted how we come to these simple conclusions and then refuse to apply the same procedures to a Being that has also communicated and blessed us. Let us then gather the facts of our existence and see if we cannot find gifts and letters from an unseen Friend.
In the same category of the mind that the law of noncontradiction is found, we also find a number of other undeniable laws and truths that we never practically doubt. Again, it does not matter what sage questioned them in theory, for all sane people livingly assume the basic first truths of reason (time and space exist, the freedom of the will, etc.). It is the actual loss of these truths that makes one eligible for the insane asylum.
From effects to Cause (God)
One of these first truths is the law of cause and effect. We all know that effects must have causes. Voltaire said that "what we call chance can only be the unknown cause of a known effect."5 And even though the post hock fallacy confuses an effect with a wrong cause by mistaking their closeness, we still know that if something happened, then there was a reason why. We assume this in conversation, and in every action of ourselves and of others. It is what gives practical sense to concepts such as: purpose, contract, responsibility, commitment, language etc. What are the nominative case, the verb, and the objective case in every sentence, but the cause and effect. Those who would doubt it, use it contradictingly to voice their opposition to it (now either they do not know what they are saying or they say nothing at all).
5 Chance is either nothing, or something. Thus, the argument against God creating 'out of nothing,' defeats itself.
Since we know that from nothing comes nothing, we must ask ourselves where did all these events and effects come from? Something that always was there had to have caused everything, because it is logically possible that nothing could have existed. So why is there something rather than nothing at all?
We see the events of history and images of peoples, and we can ascertain their individual causes. We may even construct many theories about the history of the universe and how the great chain of lead us to this moment. The question is, what started it all? Marx said there was only two possibilities: either mind created matter matter created mind. As we look at our chain of causes and effects we soon learn that no matter how long the series is, it still can be put in brackets (effect, e, e, e, etc....) and be called an effect. Everything that depends upon another and is changing and limited needs to be caused by another. And since these kinds of relations cannot be infinitely so—because a series always implies a first—some Infinite Cause must self-exist (who always did) to get it all going. The second Law of Thermodynamics, or the Law of Entropy says that the amount of usable energy in the universe is running out (like heat from your house). But if the universe is "running down" then it must have had a beginning. If it is growing old, it must have been young; if it is wearing out, it must have been new; if it is running down, it must originally have been 'wound up.' (Henry Morris). In Professor Jastrow's words: "Now we see how the astronomical evidence tends to a biblical view of the origin of the world. The details differ, but the essential elements of Genesis are the same: the chain of events leading to man commenced suddenly and sharply at a definite moment in time in a flash of light and energy."6 Causes are greater than their effects, therefore an effect, such as the Universe and all it contains, can be no greater than its Cause. We know then it's Cause cannot be nothing, but something greater than itself. (William Lane Craig: 1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause. 2. The Universe began to exist. 3. Therefore the Universe has a Cause.). Thus we see the first Cause must be uncaused, independent, and self-existent.
6 Jastrow,God and the z4stronomers;Teny Meithe,W7iy Believe? God Exists!
From design to Design
In fact, as we look at the grand Universe without, we see it's marvelous detail and organization; and become overwhelmed the more we see how complex it is. The greatest skeptical philosopher, Immanuel Kant, quoted the ancient Psalmist in the wonder of it all:
"The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament shows His handiwork." In fact, we invent new technologies and program new computers on the basis and in imitation of these great laws and wonders of the earth and universe. Yet we cannot even compare with the efficiency, complexity, and intricate detail of our 'programed' DNA7 or our own brains.
71t has been shown how DNA has the same characteristics as any language and thus must have come from an intelligent source.
In Solitude and Struggle for Survival Reality is Revealed
Now imagine if you were stranded on a remote and deserted
island, and while walking along the beach you found a cross that had been carved out of wood. You would immediately get hope that someone might still be there to rescue you. This would not be questioned, because you know and assume it was made for a purpose.Yes, there is the evidence and grounds for the search for a cause. Now your eyes are scrutinizing every detail of the island for its source, till eventually you see an old book. Rushing towards it, you hope it might have some answers for you to escape your lonely exile. Perhaps it will have a map or give you some instructions on how you may survive on that island. However, as you look through it you find that it is only Paley's book dealing with the Watch-maker, it is no use to you. For what good can it be for you to read about proofs for the existence of God from design when you need your daily bread, and someone else beyond you to rescue you?
But as you skim the pages to see if there might be some other indications of your real (present) needs, you notice an illustration of a modified cave among some rocks by a shore. This picture reminds you of the rocks you had passed by decided not to climb because they seemed to be of no use to you, and possibly dangerous. So you decide to see if there might be some sign of life there. After a
strenuous climb over the rocks, to your amazement you find a similar ~ cave. And after wondering if there was any intelligent connection, you enter in and find an abundant supply of dry clothes, preserved food, and everything else suited to your needs. In the course of indulging yourself you become convinced of the goodness of the person who left them so benevolently. And because of many more details it soon becomes evident that the book and everything in the cave were united in the same person.
Now having finished reclothing and eating, and having nothing left to do, you decide to read some more of the book. Who knows? maybe there might be a clue for help off the lonely island. And in the course of skimming through the pages again, you start reading it. After a while you start to see how your own situation parallels the arguments. You remember how you discovered the cross and the book, and how you assumed there was a person behind the obvious design. Then the realization comes upon you how kind that person was to have gone to all the trouble to leave such things for someone so in need. At the same time you think of the book and see how God is behind so much more. You then decide to give thanks. So you knell down and offer some deep felt gratitude for all those needed and designed provitions. Then you decide that perhaps He might hear and help you further still. So you offer up a desperate request for a way home. And upon rising to your feet you see a tiny sparkle of the sun in the lower corner. Ah ha! here is but further evidence of preservation and benevolence in a two-way radio. Your help will soon be coming.
You might be saying "this might all sound nice, but it is not real life." Realizing that it is quite loaded and simplistic, it is all that is needed with such little space. Yet I believe it serves it's purpose well. As the cross, book, and sheltered provisions proved someone was obviously behind it, so our daily needs, abundant faculties, and many deliverances reveal a Personal loving hand. This is very similar to my experience. Finding myself continually deserted by life's empty allurements, alienated from personal love, and chastened to an island of struggle for existence—when all distractions and excuses were removed, when the eyes began to open and search, then I received answers, one step at a time. When I was forced to make my theories based on reality and not on gain, then life began to make sense— hope no longer mocked me. I shall come back to this later. Lets see Paley's argument in logical form:
1. A watch shows that it was put together for an intelligent purpose (to keep time).
a) It has a spring togive it motion;
b) It has a series of wheels to transmit this motion;
c) The wheels are made of brass so that they do not rust;
d) The front cover is of glass so that one can see through it.
2. The world shows an even greater evidence of design.
a) It is a greater work of art;
b) has more subtle and complex design;
c) and has an endless variety of means adapted to ends.
3. Therefore, if the existence of a watch implies a watchmaker, then t e existence of the world implies an even greater intelligent Designer God.8
8 From N. Geisler, Philosophy of Religion, p. 95
As the latest sophisticated computers come from highly trained intelligence, so the far more complex code of DNA testifies of a greater Intelligence. As the intricate watch assumes a skillful intelligent designer, so the human brain—billions of times more complex—speaks as loud as heaven of a far more brilliant Creator.9
9 I might add that all biological systems are degenerating. No mutations are producing more intelligence and complexity.
Again, nothing more comes out than what goes in.
As we infer the existence of man from the phenomena which he exhibits to our senses, so we infer the existence of God by His footprints of purpose all around us. We may know our Creator has all our capabilities (intelligence, communication, happiness, love, etc.) by the fact that causes have what their effects have. And yet how much more must the Divine Being have, being infinite in all respects.
To Give in to the Truth
Perhaps you noted in the island story that one event so easily lead to the other and thus seemed unrealistic. But I really do think this is so in real life. If we really go looking in expectation, it is my experience and claim, that we will not be disappointed; but will receive more than we first sought. I do not mean that we should assume that which we have, good reason to question, and over-look the obvious by being naive. What I am talking about is being faithful with the light you already have and taking it to its honest conclusions.
If we take the time to honestly and reverently seek the truth (without getting impatient and prejudiced) we will find it. The problem is that we will never properly see it if we seek it solely for ourselves. This is the great mystery. This is why the truth is so obscure and foreign to so many, especially amongst the learned. They have failed to see that fundamental truth comes only with a benevolent (loving) heart. They think it comes from the most developed reason and facts. They sought it and never found it, because they stumbled over the stumbling stone of sin, and did not understand: "It is better to give than to receive."
Moral Argument: Alive when in Defense
Perhaps the greatest contradiction today comes in the meanings surrounding the word sin. It baffles me how it is one of the most abundantly proven concepts and yet denied by so many. Even more staggering is that so many of those who admit it in word, really deny it's great evil by their lives (while demonstrating it's reality). At least they do not practically think it is personally blame-worthy or vitally dangerous. Let's start with those who deny it.
Those who deny all meaning, or an objective moral law in life, will object to such concepts. Even though they might live offensively lawless lives; they nevertheless hold defensively to a universally binding moral law when they are wronged. It is all fine and convenient when you want your own way, or when you are debating with words and flared emotions. But let these get out into the real world, and get bumped around by their philosophy, and we will all watch their contradictions; and will gain conclusive evidence. It is said that the soldiers became believers when they were in the deep trenches. There, they could see and feel the horrors of depraved hearts. Let us go to Hitler's sign at Auschwitz to see the logical result of such lawless ideas:
"I freed Germany trom tile stupid anddegrading fallacies of conscience and morality....We will train young people before whom the world will tremble. I want young people capable of violence—imperious, relentless and cruel."
We all know the horrible trifling of life that resulted from that belief I could tell of many gruesome details and merciless acts (such as eliminating over 300,000 mentally retarded people), that would enrage all. But before you release your emotions towards such people, make sure your life (not just theory) does not testify against the moral law of God and so give logical influence to such wickedness. It is no small mistake to imbibe a lawless philosophy. Those who claim one, and say such men were wrong, are contradictory and have no grounds for disagreement. When you say he was wrong, you appeal to a moral law that transcends all. And for those who dare to say there is no such thing as wrongness, even in this case—your theories would not survive in his death camps. The fact is, we all affirm morality in the many times that people wrong us. We always think and feel and affirm how that person should not have done so—that they know better, that they could have done the opposite, etc. There is an instinctive knowledge of a higher law within us. It is a point of reference in which we all judge everyone's actions no matter how little we may want to reflect about it.
When the skeptic questions the existence of God because of all the evil in the world, he becomes inconsistent and really says nothing. For what he is really saying is, "I deny the existence of right and wrong because of all the wrong I see." But if you use something to disprove it then in effect you have said nothing. He likes to throw the emotionally charged question at others while he fails to see how the very question reveals complete self-destruction of his whole system. For he really believes there is evil and he wants to know why it is. His question is emotional not logical. Thus, even the skeptic believes there is ultimate meaning and morality; for his arguments against them prove them—and he is betrayed by his life.
1. I am conscious of feeling moral obligation to do right and avoid wrong. 2. I am conscious of mental states for which I feel praise or blame-worthy (having moral character), 3. Moral character implies a moral nature; 4. also, a law or rule of moral action apprehended by the mind. 5. This law within implies a law with-out. 6. A moral constitution and moral law imply a Creator cause, law-giver, and judge who is God. 7. Or, a law has no meaning unless it comes from a mind; Disloyalty makes no sense unless it is to a person; Truth is meaningless unless it is a meeting of mind with mind; Hence, duty to and discovery of moral law makes sense only if there is a mind or person behind that law. 8. Also, I cannot doubt that others are accountable for their conduct to the same moral law. Thus I award them praise and blame, and practically assume that we are part of an universal government. Of course government implies a Governor; who is God.10
10 Also, let it be remembered that people are always less credulous to things that impose moral obligation on them. So the fact that the sinful human race has always almost universally believed in a God who poses moral obligation on them is evidence from as many hostile witnesses as is possible.
As the first Cause and great Designer is no less then us, it follows that morality must also come from the same Source. It is to this One alone that we look to as a reference point. Without such a Archetype all forms of authority are meaningless and tyrannies. It is only fitting that this same One be Moral Governor of all moral subjects—being infinite in all things. And since we know and experience much good (despite all the publicity to the contrary) we know that it must have come from above; and that therefore God is infinitely good or holy. For Infinite evil would allow for no good.
Moral Law: Arbitrary or Grounded in Good Reason?
But how is God infinitely good? This is perhaps the most important question of all; and yet it's truth cannot be doubted. Perhaps most forms of skepticism has been born out of the wrong answer to this question. Many have been repulsed at the idea that God created a moral law consulting nothing but arbitrary Will. If this were so we would naturally want to run away from an infinite Tyrant who decided what was right and wrong for no good reason. This is where people get the idea that things are right and wrong, in, and of themselves. If this were so, then God would be above morality and would not be a moral Being. For then He could make evil, good and good, evil.11 We could not have any appreciation for the Divine Governor's conduct that was not virtuous, but random, aimless, or selfish. Perhaps no greater incentive to rebellion, and no greater feeling of alienation has resulted than from thinking that God is like an absolute tyrant controlling and legislating people for personal pleasure and gain (there are some very popular religions that amount to just this). In the same way that we know that there is such a moral law, we also know that this cannot be. We are rightly repulsed at it. It is perhaps loose thinking or overly-fearful reverence that such views are entertained. While the creating of such ideas is no doubt creating God in our selfish likeness.
11 Just as society is doing today. See how even words like wicked are reversed.
The Pursuit of God: The Most Valuable
It is in the Divine intelligence that all ground for morality originates. In this way we see why making God's will law was partly right, if correctly understood. If it meant that His will was in conformity to all His reason in all wisdom, and choosing the valuable, then they would be right. But this is a far cry from mere aimless will. God must choose the greatest happiness or well-being (as this is the most valuable) of all. He ought to make things as best they can be for the whole. We cannot conceive of anything less from God, for we rightly expect this from all men. Thus, it is the worth of all beings individually12 that imposes obligation on us. God, being infinitely valuable, should be honored above all; and we, being much less (relatively) valuable, ought to be only honored as much as we are worth. In other words, because God is so important—capable of, and able to promote infinite happiness—we should seek His happiness above all things. And because we are so much less important (personally and collectively), and everyone's happiness comes from His, our happiness should not be sought in any way that takes away from fulfilling His (for then we would never find it).
12Md not like the pretended communist ideal that really was a tyranny.
Prioritising Intrinsic Interests
Yet our happiness is important and needs to be legitimately sought. Everyone knows this very well by the way they feel when someone violates it. Therefore, if we invert this negative, we can see how important other people's happiness is. The problem with the human race is that we have all understood our own value and have promoted it's happiness, but we have deliberately closed our eyes to the fact that there is other beings whose value equals ours;13 and whose collective interests are almost six billion times more important (not to mention future generations). The great evil of this can be seen in placing our individual happiness above and against all this greater interest! Thus, selfishness in relation to the human race is most abominable. Yet this does not even compare to setting our tiny interests above God's.14
13 1n no other way can we solve racism.
14 Humanism is the placing of man's collective interests above God's; and this relation is seen as most abominable.
We must bear in mind that honoring God and our neighbour does not disagree (and even proper self-love). God is honored and blessed when we seek each-other's happiness (with no secret selfishness back of the choice). This comes from His creating us in the first place. If it brought Him no happiness in creating us to love each-other then He would not have created us to do so.
When our inner Revelation consists with Written Revelation that points to a latter proven Living Revelation, then we can know how to Live
Even though we have not proven that Jesus Christ and His word, is God's word, yet I will say that all this is consistent with it. Only in it we find that when you do not love your neighbour then you cannot possibly love God (1 John 4). In fact, in many places the Bible says love is the sum of all commandments. Of course love is devoid of almost all meaning today, and so must be illustrated. it was most wonderfully illustrated in the God-man (Christ-Jesus) willingly suffering a tortuous death in exchange for our forgiveness (but more on this later). Jesus gave many illustrations of what true love was—showing it to be absolutely unselfish. He said on a number of occasions that we were to love God supremely and our neighbour as ourselves—just as we concluded. He condemned those who hypocritically taught that things were right and wrong in themselves, apart from valuable beings and their relative interests (as above). Naturally then, He taught that the greatest is one who serves others. Thus, many of the greatest skeptics have affirmed that Jesus taught (and lived) the greatest morality ever. Perhaps, we can now have more understanding of why it is better to give than to receive.
I bring written revelation into the argument because I wanted to show that it was consistent with reality, and because without it we cannot really know how God wants us promote His interests (nor how we can really best promote the greatest happiness on earth). I will add here that though we are responsible only for what we know, and ought to live up to thorough unselfishness,15 we cannot do this on our own, apart from acknowledging God's offices or relations to us.
15 I use a negative because true love or benevolence is so uncommon while selfishness is so familiar to all.
The great problem with the human race is they think that they can be unselfish and truly love without God! But this is serving God on your own terms and is detestable when He has something much better. It would be like going out blindfolded to combat, as opposed to seeing, and knowing all the enemies plans. As we shall see, God wants a relationship with us that He can promote the greatest good to all (ourselves, humanity, and Himself). Again, evil or sin is the willful choice of lesser good for personal gratification or desire, even if it is humanistic.
We become Sinners when we become Active Moral Agents
I will say a word hear about a very popular error that stumbles many; indeed, it stumbled me for years. Many claim that the Bible teaches that we were born sinners even from conception. This is very absurd and cannot be proven from the Bible—which always equates sin with a rational subject who had the idea of obligation developed enough to understand the good and refuse it.16 One can hardly do wrong when one has no concepts of right or wrong categories. The Bible says "sin is lawlessness" which is refusing to be lead by the law of love. But what infant or severely mentally challenged person ever was able to do (or even know) such? In fact Jesus rebuked such Platonic teaching when he was asked who sinned that a certain man was born blind—the man or his parents? He said neither, but he was born that way that God might be glorified in healing him.
16 See John 9:41; 15:22, 24; Romans 1:19-29; 3:20; 4:15; 7:8-9; James 5:17; etc.
Do not judge a system by those who profess to be latter followers of it. Look at the foundation honestly with the mental faculties you were given, and see if it is consistent with reality (and I do not mean manipulated reality). The Bible says that God has revealed Himself in nature and in ourselves; we can then compare the Bible and see if it corresponds. It is in fact this very truth that is so dear and harmonious to every believer. It is because we have this mutual correspondence, coupled with personal moral conformity that we only can have peace. The Eastern Mystic seeks to be one with an impersonal Ultimate and nature, while abandoning reason and values, and forgetting about others; the Bible teaches dependence on the personal Ultimate, in conformity to reason, upholding all values, and laying down our lives for mankind's greatest good.
Practical Lawlessness or Convenient Obedience
There are many people who say they believe in a moral law and yet live as if there is not. With them it is at best, only occasionally considered; and is usually then only in regard to public sentiment or personal prejudice. In this sense the life testifies both for and against the moral law of God. As has been shown above, every time they are crossed, or when ever extreme evil manifests, they appeal to it as a binding rule of action that all ought to obey. This all seems so noble and righteous, and many satisfy themselves that they are in the path of the righteous, the just, or the good. Their delusion is unnoticed by the fact that they do not really consider the reasons for their actions. If they would examine themselves, they would observe that their stand for truth and justice is only selective and has little to do with rebuking all disobedience categorically. They make the common fallacy of confusing degree with kind—by thinking extreme (degree) vice is inexcusable and deserves punishment, while their vice (same category) is not. You see, it all can consist with a selfish heart. A selfish heart is given to his own interests as supreme)17 Anyone may decry many vices without crossing their own at all. We all know from experience how we have observed ourselves and others do this very thing.
17 But the specific manifestations vary with the circumstances, preferences, and opportunities. Thus, it often changes from one form to another.
Yet Jesus said to first take out the log in your own eye and then you will see clearly to remove other's (Matthew 7:1-5). All their selective morality is, is deceived hypocrisy that has taken its eyes off the reference Point while using the moral law as an arbitrary tool against personal dislikes or hinderances to their selfishness. The Apostle Paul showed how those who believed that the immoral deserved the judgement of God, and yet committed their own sin, would be judged along with them: "Do you think this, 0 man, that judges them which do such things, and does the same, that you shall escape the judgment of God?.. for as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law... for the wages of sin is death" (Romans).
When 'Good Works' are only Good to Self
In the same way, people think their 'good works' will balance out their bad works. What they fail to see is that outward actions alone can neither please God nor take away the fact that they have disobeyed His law. You cannot bargain with God and bribe Him as you can selfish men. Do you think He would be fooled by you sacrificing to gain His favour while you are not completely won over to His rule in everything? and while you still remain selfish? You see, one can even be very 'dedicated' in 'good works,' all the while wanting to get something out of it. Multitudes of religious people are motivated to do extraordinary things purely by the desire that they may be saved from a Hell (fear) or a hope for heaven; or from a host of other possible legal and selfish considerations.18
18 Let me say here that no passive desires (or feelings) of the mind or the body are in themselves evil or good. The evil comes in obeying them for their own sake and not acting in accordance with Reason in love, which leads us to choose the highest interests of God and His kingdom. All desires are blind, therefore we should never be lead by them.
Good Works Need Definition.
The question is 'how do we define good works?' Is it merely outward actions that do not hinder or help others in this world? In that case, a man who is on his way to rob a bank and who obeys the traffic rules, opens the door for the old lady, says good morning to those who so greet him, and waits patiently in line for his turn, must be considered good too. But we all see how his polite, consistent good actions were all part of his goal—to get the money for some selfish gratification. And after all the witnesses have been examined, you might see that he behaved no differently on his way there than others; yet all world agree that his end or intention nullified all 'good works' done while on the way. You see, those good works did not conflict with his selfish end, and no man would recognize him as really good while he did any of them. We must not fool ourselves in thinking that certain degrees and types of selfishness are wrong while others are acceptable, normal, or even praiseworthy. From the Judge to the illiterate street kid, we all judge people by their motives.19 But what is a right motive? It can only be that which all people should will. It can only be choosing what. is best for all for its own sake, as described before. It is a completely impartial ultimate aim that prefers and chooses the greatest good to all valuable beings in accordance with their essential worth.
19 It is interesting to note that we do not do so to animals unless we are so overcome in selfishness and thus acting very unreasonable.
Perhaps you are beginning to see that there is no neutral ground. If I had the time I could describe scores of examples of the great evil of selfishness: Is there anything praise-worthy in striving for a job, experience, or security, that one might feel comfortable or gratified? Can any secondary work or pursuit be justified while this ultimate goal or end is motivating all the rest? How about going to church to get business or social gratification? or being 'religious' (going through the motions) for aesthetic enjoyment, ease of conscience, or for fear of man? Can the outward life be right throughout the week (and in acts of devotion) when the heart is rank with such poison?
And if you still do not see the evil of selfishness, what about the humanist who wanted to forward human progress at the expense of the individual, and without reference to God. He influenced a nation with his good works (marketing of VW., constructing superb roadways, etc.) and yet committed his planed genocide! Was his earlier actions justified by their usefulness to society? Did not his later works void everything earlier, because they were part of the plan?— the gratification of a man's selfish ambition!
Do we only condemn selfish ambition when it has opportunity to be so unrestrained? or is the very attitude itself worthy of indignation? Because we are so caught up in the moment, we overlook the tremendous evil one moment of selfishness can bring in the long run. And because one from is no more justifiable then the next, any example might influence another to become selfish—the chain reaction and amount of evil as a result is potentially endless (naturally the penalty should be accordingly).
The common attitude that says, "I am only responsible for myself and can be selfish if I don't harm anyone else," is contradictory and deplorable. For that very attitude breeds a powerful influence on all who witness it; and it becomes a precedented incentive for all to do what they want—there is no way to posit limits on selfish licence. To say that harm to others is the acceptable limit is hypocritical, for the influence of self-justifying selfishness is the greatest harm you can do to anyone. To be an instrument in enslaving someone in this most dangerous and degrading bondage is no small evil.
Selfishness Influences the Greatest Evils
This was illustrated at the moment I was writing this.2° After reading a powerful sermon called 'Sinner's Doom,' I was reminded of the first time I read it. After just finishing the part about how God often rebukes selfish people by bringing their friends of vice to their graves prematurely, I was interrupted by my mother who informed me of the sudden death of Princess Diana. Words could not describe the fear and sorrow that came upon me. Much could be said of the tragedy of that whole monarchy in the last number of decades; how it has become a modern soap opera of scandals and gossip. Surely Diana was victimized by the great mess of it all; and her death seems to shout a clear rebuke in two distinct ways: First, we ought to see the great madness and wickedness of the gossip thirsty media—her blood is on their hands. For if they had not invaded her privacy so disrespectfully and so often, then all such accidents and torment would be avoided. It is not just the media of that day that is responsible, neither is it only the media in general, but it is everyone who supports these kinds of blood-thirsty gossips. Every indulger ought to see the stains of blood on their hands for the relishing of such perverted and destructive news. The second rebuke ought to be felt against the idolatry towards the ungodly and famous. See the extent of such influences! The mod-ern Westerner envies such lifestyles of fashion, fame, and fortune. But God shows us how vain it all is—in a moment it is all gone.
20 We shall see later that when Christ becomes our Teacher and Wisdom then He gives us illustrations in a most confirming and personal way. "Wisdom cries in the streets."
So here I was remembering all this, when the second illustration came into my office; a man of no care for any truth or morality. He was only interested in money, and it did not matter what immoralities he made possible by getting it. I could not get through to him at all. The will had long fastened upon self-indulgence and would not be challenged. After questioning him about responsibility he said, "I can't influence anyone for good, I'm not a bad person, I haven't been in trouble with the law, and haven't murdered anyone." I pressed him on the fact that he had no regard to God's law and thus was in trouble with an infinitely more serious law. But he made no answer.2' He said he could not influence anyone. Yet does not his selfishness hourly preach a licence for selfishness—does it not infect all who see and feel its loss—with justification to do what they want? And as for his never killing anyone, is influencing people towards eternal destruction any less serious than physically eliminating only one part of them?22 In the latter, as monstrous as it is—only one is destroyed; yet in the former, the infectious disease can easily spread to bring down whole nations and worlds. Alas! what a shallow careless morality of the vilest contradiction.
21 It then dawned on me that this was precisely an identical encounter to the one described in the sermon.
22 No doubt murder can and usually does both. But my point is that the loss of a whole person for eternity is far worse than merely destroying a body.
Life Demonstrates Authenticity or Hypocrisy
Before we get to the more major proofs for Jesus Christ being the Answer to our struggles and existence, I want to deal with two of the greatest obstacles in the way of truly trusting Jesus Christ in the way He demands. The two are very much related. We have learned that example speaks louder than words, and is so very powerful. And as so many profess to be followers of Christ and contradict Him by their lives, it is no wonder why so few even consider what He really said. In fact, much of the mass of professing Christians are in a much more hypocritical and dangerous position than unbelievers. Many of them think they will be saved, from the judgement to come because they do not do some of the more extreme sins and/or because they have some kind of mystical ticket to heaven which they supposedly received in one emotional moment of confessing their desperate moral state. The majority do not even know what it means to be saved and are guilty (on a ongoing basis) of thinking that God will not judge lesser sins that are only really socially acceptable selfishness. Their hierarchy of sins fails to see that "With God their is no partiality." Their contradiction comes not only with their own Bible, but also with themselves when they answer the skeptics that point to the vices of the crusaders and the like. They answer that they were not real Christians for Christ taught the opposite. But Jesus also said, "If your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast it away from you; for it is better for you that one of you members should perish, than that your whole body should be thrown into hell.. . Not everyone that says to me 'Lord, Lord,' shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; hut he that does the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, "Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in your name? and in your name have cast out demons? and in your name done many wonderful works?" And then will I say to them, I never knew you; depart from me, you that work sin." (Matthew 5,7)
He understood how sinners would take advantage of all the social, personal, and political benefits His framework would offer.23
23 An important point could be made about how so many opponents to Christ nevertheless operate using His framework, or appreciate the logical results of the improvements caused by His influence.
In fact, He prophesied that "many false prophets shall rise, and deceive many. And Because of the increase of lawlessness, the love of many will grow cold." This presupposes a great falling away, as has arrived in this last century in the entire Western world. The rest of the world is deceived in supposing that the West is Christian when it is really either out-right atheistic, or practically so. We might not live in a day when there are many real Christians to observe, but we sure enjoy the many benefits the scores of consistent Christians of long ago have given us. Again, it is not fair to judge someone by those who are inconsistent with him. Certainly we would not want someone to do this to us. Nor would we judge a man if someone stole his clothes and robed a bank. He might resemble the man outwardly, by his pretending to be someone he was not; but the poor man was innocent, no matter how much the similarity.
Consensus Gentium: The Comfort of Popularity
Underlying this common objection is the fallacy that has most weight with us. When we gather up the majority vote to decide what is right, we commit the fallacy called 'Consensus Gentium.' It does not matter how many people have stolen Christ's robe in deception, we are in error when we say that their majority defines real Christianity. In fact the early church was the opposite. More than seventy years after the resurrection of Jesus an important leader named Ignatius said, "To the Trailians: Let none of you hold a grudge against his neighbour. Do not give any opportunity to the pagans, lest the godly majority be blasphemed on account of a few foolish people. For "Woe to him through whose folly My name is blasphemed among any." (8:2) This is a contradiction to the skeptics claim as well as the modern lawless professors. But instead of seeing all this false Christianity as proof against Christ we should say the reverse is true as a fulfilment of prophecy.24
24 If you claim the name of Christ, make sure you know and really live consistently with His teaching and Person. Realize that you do the greatest damage possible to this world and God by being a hypocrite.
We must give up the majority vote for truth and become Galileos who do no not recant. But accepting the average or common opinions is very comfortable and does not cost very much. It makes selfish ambition easier to practice. For the more you are in agreement with people the greater the bonds increase and the less likely they are to challenge the differences and negatives. On the other hand, if you radically disagree in some area, you can be sure your sins will find you out. A little study of history combined with some reflection of eternity ought to keep us clear from this fallacy. Now let us leave behind the consensus of unjustified opinion and compile solid evidence from credible witnesses.
UNITY THE ANSWER TO CONTRADICTION
As you may have gathered, my objective is to expose, refute, and solve all forms of vital contradictions that so trouble us. Of course, we should never simply try an prove a negative to prove our point, but should offer positive evidence. Thus, my goal is to show that everything in existence is united in one way or another. This really is the search of all people. We are all looking for something that will bring the most correspondence to our experiences—that will answer, satisfy, fulfill, put together—something that will unite. All these words, and so many more, imply the same thing: that we assume a unity is out there. No person can consistently live out the belief that real needs cannot be fulfilled. "It is in opposition to a person's very fiber as a human to ask him to believe that there is thirst and no water, that there are males but no females, that there are sucklings and no mothers' breasts, that there is a need to be loved and no love anywhere to fulfill that need.. . Not only does the need for God show that there is a God somewhere to satisfy that need, but the fulfilment of the need for God in some people indicates that an experience with this God is actually
achieved."25
25 Norman Geisler, Philosophy of Religion. (Baker, 1988) p. 75.
Relationships and Beauty: When Deceptive Passions Blind
As already mentioned, we look here and there and only get more and more disappointed as we fail in our search. One of the most gripping needs in our lives is to have a loving relationship. This can be seen in all the focus on finding that perfect partner to love us. The hunger is so strong that many have given in to perversion or premature commitment. Oh how sad it is to see all the devastated lives of those let down by cheep thrills and broken commitments! It all starts when the longing is unrestrained and is gratified by the beholding of beauty or attractive personality, and while the imagination is allowed to take over. Soon the emotions toward another are given top priority and everything else becomes blurry. The deep longing for an ultimately ideal relationship is then excited and you experience hope for this in this other person. And if the feeling is mutual the hope is proportionately strengthened. The expectancy that you will experience the ultimate is intensified as the hope increases and the bond secured. There is a bliss in this expectancy and agreementfor a while. You can become caught up in the beauty of the moment with deep gushings of emotion, and convince yourself that you have found what you are really looking for. You have set your heart on this person—they are the answer to your deepest longings.
Many different things can now happen, but often this expectancy in the other becomes so strong that you could care less if nothing else existed, and you will do anything to keep it. Thus, anything that hinders it is suppressed, and even eliminated according to the degree of expectation and opportunity. The blinding drive might lead you to do anything to gratify it.
This morning (March 31, 98) the Toronto Star illustrated the deception of seeking aestheticism (love of all kinds of beauty) primarily: "By Roberta Avery Allaston—Local residents are in shock following the suicide of a man who tried to kill a woman described as the 'love of his life,' and her two children... a neighbour and close friend of the family was stunned when he found out what happened. 'I can't understand it; its unbelievable'... He described [him] as a quiet mild-mannered man and an apparent caring family man... 'They were excited about the [newl business. I can't understand how this happened.'.. [There were] no record of any domestic disputes... [Another friend said they] 'seemed very much in love... [and] would often walk down the street hand in hand and were talking about marriage, They were happy as hell... This just didn't seem possible, [He] was so mild-mannered.'" It does not matter how wellmannered or happy you may appear, if you make anything but God 'the love of your life,' you will eventually find yourself extremely let down, and a wretch capable of anything!
The devastation comes when you realize that you cannot keep what you had thought you had; and can never get what you are looking for, no matter how ideal things seem. The stunning effect wares off as reality sets in. And it is often expressed in anger at the very ideal that you thought would deliver. Perhaps then you go to another and try again. Then to another, and another. Each time expecting to find it. And with each disappointment there is also a broken commitment, and a broken heart, and an emptying of spirit. There is a temporary counterfeit soothing of emotions, but like sugared junk food, the momentary wonder that keeps you coming back for more, only ends up making you dependent on it while dulling your capacity for feeling in that area. Indeed, all abuses callous our being progressively. And as this is only one area of ultimate expectancy, you might try some other pursuit such as the following: knowledge, based on hunger for truth; power, based on desire for control; religion, based on need for security; or music based on passion for harmony and beauty.
All of these desires and so many more are engaged in by the world as the answer to the God-shaped vacuum in our souls. And the quest goes around in a circular fashion, on and on, emptying you of hope with every hopeful indulgence. We must learn from those who have exhausted these counterfeits; from men like Jack Higgins, who said at the high point in his career that he wished someone had told him as a small boy: "When you get to the top, there's nothing there."
It is not seen how secondary pursuits can never fulfill the primary need. If you were to do the same towards God as you did towards yourself, in seeking all these creations, you would really find what you are looking for. And all the secondary things, legitimately sought or experienced would no longer so devastate you because you were drinking at the Fountain of Life. We must see that satisfying one part of our being will not make up for all the other parts. We can never fulfill them all at once, until we come to the only One who can.
I tried so desperately to do this in so many ways. One way was in savoring music (and latter even in Christian music). When all betrayed me, there I went to find the answer. It was soothing and exhilarating, yet it always left me wanting something more.
I use to crave music that fostered my depression and rebellion. But if it were only words I would not have been so interested. It was the beauty and the attractive pulsation or enthrallment of the rhythm and voice that deceived me into personally swallowing its message. Thus, Fletcher says, "Give me the makings of the songs of a nation, and I don't care who writes its laws." The and soothing nature of beauty in any form is more powerful and influential than we realise.
But as many do, I also deceived my heart in later mistaking the exhilarating experience of good music—which is entirely passive— for true love and obedience to God. It is most fatal to think that feeling necessarily demonstrates true religion. I thought that my excitement and emotion was the greatest confirmation, until I began to see that the feeling was my focus and drive, and that I was only happy while it was being stirred. Wretched man that I was! Thus, even though feelings of delight are passive and can be good, to seek them for their own sake is nothing but the greatest deception of cultured selfishness. Do not fool yourself.
If I only knew that the answer is in seeking for everyone what I was seeking for myself. Then I would have saved myself and all those I neglected to love, the waste and devastation. But instead, God had to let me almost exhaust these pursuits and find out the hard way—by experience.
The Contradiction of Selfishness
The reason we do not find ultimate contentment is because we are impulsive, shallow, partial and selfish in our pursuit. If we would consider a moment, we might see the contradiction: we are searching for unity in an ununified way. We assume our search and questions are meaningful while we attack or doubt meaning itself. We look for answers in the Universities (the uniting of diversity) which no longer believe in unity, and come out devastated or confused. For the University, which is properly now a Pluralversity, is unified in its dogmatic disbelief of unity; and while it unifies in its belief that there is no unity in diversity (absolute relativism)! it still manages to sneak united theories of evolution, skepticism, individualism, etc. in the back door. Departments of learning no longer compliment each-other and unite in the study of God (Theology, which was called the Queen of sciences for that reason); and yet they still seek a unity in their individual fields. They get so caught up in the present and narrow pursuit of lesser unities that they fail to see other unities all around them, which can all be united.
Lack of Complete Unity in Other Religions
This is the same with the pantheistic26 quests. They take one department of reality and seek to be unified in it alone. They wish to be united to a mystical (non-personal) force as drops of water unite with an ocean. But they fail to see other diversities such as personality, morality, reason, and the physical world, that also need and have unity. The problem with all non and false-Christian systems or religions is that they focus on one or a few areas, and claim to have found unity (the answers), while they neglect the other evidence which is disunified with their contentions, and which would create contradictions in reality.
26Who say God is everything; which is really just spiritual atheism.
Judaism fails to unify the Kingship and suffering Servant roles of their longed for Messiah;27 and they overlook His Divine nature,28 death, and resurrection. It is because they did not know how to reconcile the oneness of God with the Messiah being His only Son.
27 Their desperate hopes for a prideful and warlike political figure would have been stumbled by the fulfilment of Christ in this prophesy: "Rejoice greatly, 0 daughter of Zion; shout, 0 daughter of Jerusalem; behold your King comes to you: He is just, and having salvation; humble, and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey." (Zechariah 9:9)
28 "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: the government shall be upon his shoulder: and His name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The Father of eternity, The Prince of Peace. Isaiah 9:6
The same is true of Islam. They uphold one part of the unity of God, history, revelation, and Jesus,29 and while overemphasizing parts of these categories, they become like a contentious man who is oblivious to all other evidence, realities, and categories. They arbitrarily pick which facts will consist with their truth, while they ignore evidence that comes from the very same context and which would contradict their beliefs. For instance, they often quote anti-supernaturalistic (against miracles) skeptics to disprove the Bible. While they do not see that these skeptics also destroy the Qur'an—because of their starting point—no God exists. They also quote the Bible to prove the Qur'an to then prove that the Bible was corrupted (which then would consistently destroy proof for the Qur'an). You cannot build anything from a foundation you are destroying. They also fail to account for the diversity of culture, language (saying God can only rally be understood in Qur'anic Arabic), and salvation of all races. They neglect to show the unity of Islam with Christianity, when they claim to succeed this once true revelation of God.3° As Christians so not say Judaism was wrong, but that Christ was the fulfilment, so Islam must be able to show itself a fulfillment when Christ claimed to be the Ultimate fulfillment of revelation, morality, history, truth, and everything. You cannot be consistent to say you agree with Christ as from God (as most people do), who said He was the God-man who fulfills all needs and all is united in Him, and then add something to Him.
29 The Qur'an even goes so far as to call Him "Messiah, the Word of God, the Spirit of God (4:169-71), the Speech of Truth (19:34-35), a Sign unto men, and Mercy from (God)" (19:2 1).
30 "Let the people of the Gospel judge by what Allah hath revealed therein...To thee We sent the Scripture in truth, confirming the scripture that came before it. (the Torah and Gospel).." 5:46-48
This is exactly what Islam, Roman Catholicism, most of Protestantism, and all the various cults do when they add and succeed Christ in His office. While upholding the true unity in some limited extent they have overlooked the True unity of Christ by contradicting His claims of being the Ultimate Unity. "For it pleased the Father that in Him should all fulness dwell; And, having made peace through the blood of His cross, by Him to reconcile all things unto Himself; by Him, I say, whether they be things on earth, or things in heaven. And you, that were once alienated and enemies in your mind by evil deeds, He has now reconciled in the body of His flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveahie in His sight: If you continue in the faith grounded and settled, and not moved away from the hope of the gospel." (Colossians 1)31 Whether it is another prophet, tradition, or a theology that excuses lesser sins, all these say He was not really as He is. You see, they really only use Him to prove what He rejected, in the same way as people use logic to disprove logic.
31 He is all we need to make us holy if we continue holding onto Him.
United with the Ultimate Unity
To Promote this Unity Universally
Not only do all of these groups contradict themselves in misquoting Christ, but all who have failed to find that ultimate unification of all things are united in at least one thing. They all 'miss the mark' of total unity because they seek it in a fragmented part, or limitation. And the main way they do this is by seeking the unity for diverse reasons, and not united reasons. You cannot find the unity when your only settling for diversity or partiality. Let me explain this most important thing. The great problem with man—indeed, the fundamental reason why people are lost, is because they seek unity for themselves primarily. The do not really seek the unity for the sake of all—that all might come to and be in harmony with ultimate unity. They crave the fulfillment but they cannot be filled until they unite with the Ultimate unity, on His uniting conditions of choosing this unity for all the diversity of humanity (which equally craves unity). This again, is selfishness, which fails to see that the answer to all unified cravings is the submitting our individuality to, and for the benefit of all universal
being. "It is better to give than to receive."
No matter where I looked, or how hard I tried, I could never find peace. It did not come until I did the last thing that came to mind—the thing that sin will not agree with—to lay down my particular needs and interests for the sake of everyone else. This is where fulfillment is found: when we become consistent with our real position in this universe, in our relationship with God through Christ,32 and man. That is why you will never be satisfied in any pursuit (even in seeking heaven or to please God), if you seek it for yourself. It amazes me how I hear so much conversation about seeking life's answers selfishly, while wondering why there is no complete satisfaction. Do you see it yet? If you seek satisfaction, you will not find it. But if you seek to promote universal satisfaction or happiness—to your surprise, you will find yourself fulfilled or truly happy. They key is in the surprise, for many seek universal happiness in order to really get fulfilled. But they only fool themselves and others (temporarily) for God and reality cannot be fooled.
32 As ones who have sinned against Him and His subjects.
The Nature of the Conditions of Happiness
For those who think this can be done in a sort of general way, which leaves Christ really out of the picture, you will find yourself disappointed. For He is the One who brings it all together. And as we will see, you cannot really promote universal happiness until you first see that you have not ever truly done so, and that you deserve the most dreadful consequences as a result. Until you can forget about your happiness and future, and come to the point where you will promote universal happiness (for everyone impartially) with your whole person at all times (as you did for yourself), and be willing if it were God's will, to be thrown in an eternal Hell (receiving complete retribution) until you can submit to what is due to you and universal being—then you can never find happiness or be saved!33
33 This applies to not just one moment but for the rest of eternity.
This is the problem with 'modern' Christianity,34 it has turned the 'good news' into really good selfish news for the sinner:
promising the best of both worlds. It deceives the masses because it has the forms of truth and believes most of the right things. But it fails to deal with the real autonomy, a sinful heart. They practically say that you can be forgiven of sin without being saved from it! Can you imagine a parent or government doing any such ridiculous things? It is no wonder people are so confused and repulsed at it, when it lacks the essential power and the most fundamental fulfillment.
34 Yet God still has His thousands all over the earth.
.Jesus Christ is the Only Consistent Answer
Only one religious leader ever made the claim that He was in Himself the answer to life's ultimate quests and problems. You find all the major systems and leaders pointing a way out by explanation, but only Jesus Christ so boldly claimed to be the explanation. He said to doubting Thomas, "I am the Way the Truth, and the Life, no one comes to the Father but by Me." This is no little claim. If He was wrong in this, He was the most blasphemous and deceived person ever. He also said He was the Light that lightens every man; the King of Kings; the Good Shepherd; the Almighty; our Friend; our Savior; our God; our Peace; and The Utmb of God (along with many more essential titles). Now either He was all these things or He was not. If He was not, we have the greatest deception of history; not to mention the greatest wonder of history. For as we have seen, and as any will see if they care to read: He taught the purest morality, transcended the cultural prejudices, sought no personal gain or glory, helped all He encountered, tolerated no hypocrisy, could not be charged with sin, confounded the skeptics and yet was unlearned, taught that His death would be for life of the world, and willingly submitted Himself to the most humiliating and painful death! This is the most remarkable thing imaginable! It is too wonderful for many to believe. It is so wonderful because He claimed to be all we need and long for. He said He was more than an example, but that He would feed our hearts and souls as He fed their bodies. That He would give us Living water that we would never thirst for satisfaction again—only in Him. He said He would fulfill the search we all have for an ultimate personal relationship by uniting Himself to us within us—forever. He said, "Without me you can do nothing." Is He right?
Christ is called the 'Stone of Stumbling" and the "Rock of offence" (by His formerly greatest enemy) because He got to the heart of the issue; which crossed man's selfishness and all ideas that resulted from it. It is no wonder that the most fundamental doctrine of Christianity is so often misunderstood and rejected. Yes, the answer to all search for unity among all the diversity, just like the solution to morality, is found in the Nature and Person of Jesus the Christ. The fact that He allowed all religious focus to revolve around, or towards Himself—which was confirmed by His complete command over creation and performing that which was beyond or forbidden to man—was enough to show He was not merely human, but something more. Yet He not only "made Himself equal with God" by this, but He talked about Himself in ways that was only right for God to do. Again, if He was mistaken He was the greatest fool ever.
The Union of the Finite and Infinite
It is easy to go back and see the big picture when history has transpired and the outcome is known, but while the ancient Jews heard Christ say "before Abraham was, I AM," they must have been very shocked. For not only was this Jesus claiming to exist fifteen hundred years earlier, but He was claiming to be the "I AM" who was the God that delivered their forefathers from the bondage in Egypt. The comprehension of a man being God was, and is, a difficult concept to swallow. But this is what He claimed He was. Obviously in one sense this would be a blatant contradiction. Indeed, to say that a finite being is also infinite is absurd. But remember that a contradiction only means two opposites cannot both be true at the same time in the same sense in the same thing. Few if any really claimed that Jesus Christ was such a contradiction. What He claimed to be was an infinite Being (Son of God) that was united with a finite nature (son of man; in the same sense we are) that He created. The two natures did not mix to form an impossible in-between-one, but coexist together in a way we do not know how or need to know. There is no more contradiction in this then there is in the fact that He could creating anything finite in the first place.
Believe this Testimony after He is Proven to be from God
Of course this is a matter of special (Bible) revelation and is not something to be learned from the mere observance of natural revelation. We need not understand the 'how,' only the 'what' (which comes after we believe His testimony about Himself—see below). Once it is proven that He was from God, then we can believe what He said about all things. The scriptures say, "For unto us a child is born, unto us a Son is given...and His name shall be called.. .The Mighty God, The Everlasting Father..." (Isaiah 9:6 of the Jewish Old Testament). The finite and physical nature was created and born, the Infinite Son was given.. .to "make His soul an offering for sin." (Isaiah 53) The two were united but not confused. The Infinite never ceased to be (nor could He) even when He died (for He said to the thief on the cross "today you shall be with me in paradise," (even though He was dead for three days). Only the physical part died (and rose as we shall see later).
Thus, the answer to all our needs was met in one Being, who was in one way the same as us, and in another, the unfathomable God. Here the mysteries in philosophy, history, and humanity meet in one Revelation. No longer does God feel so distant, for He took on flesh to sympathize with our weaknesses. "Who, being in the form of God thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon Him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, He humbled Himself, and became obedient to death, even death on a cross" (Philippians 2) Since, therefore, the children share flesh and blood, he himself likewise shared the same things, so that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by the fear of death. For it is clear that he did not come to help angels, hut the descendants of Abraham. Therefore he had to become like his brothers in every respect, so that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make a sacrifice of atonement for the sins of the people. Because he himself was tested by what he suffered, he is able to help those who are being tested. (Hebrews 2. NRSV) It was to demonstrate His unselfish love, that He became a servant unto death: that we might be saved from death.
He beautifly unifies history's problems of authority and pain in His Royal/suffering role. He fulfills humanities need of an intermediate defence or advocate in His physical suffering; satisfying the demands of the law (see below). For if He was not really God and man, then He could not reconcile God and man who are so obviously alienated. If lie was not God then He could not reach God on man's behalf; and if He was not man then He could not identify and help man. But as it is, "There is one mediator between God and man the man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself as a ransom for all." The traditionalist lives for the past, the existentialist lives for the now, and the utopian lives for the future. But Jesus Christ unites all of history with meaning. In one simple example He left us the ordinance of the Lord's supper. Paul says, For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as you eat this bread [present], and drink this cup, you do show the Lord's death [pasti till he comes [future]. (1 Corinthians 11). His resurrection unites the past—in the fallen sinful race that brought on physical evil and death—with the future new creation of all things—while we presently hope for this, and yet can now experience moral, rational, and personal fulfilment.
Trinity: Religion. Philosophy, and Humanity's Answer
This infinite-finite union in Jesus Christ—the hypostatic union—is not the only union in God. I said earlier that Islam and Judaism neglect two other aspects of reality that we seek answers to. Indeed, it is the deepest thing we crave in life—relationships. All of us seek fellowship with others. We enjoy the company of like-minded people. But deep down we crave a perfect relationship where the other party will completely understand our every need; and will never disappoint us or leave us. This is felt every-time someone close to us separates or lets us down. We see different individuals everywhere, but where did this come from? I believe the answer is found in the Trinity. We can communicate or fellowship, and love others because God does. We have society because there is community in God Himself. The Bible says to "baptize in the name (singular) of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." The heavenly beings cried "Holy, Holy, Holy is the LORD of hosts" (Isaiah 6:3 Jewish Old Testament). The Trinity is not three Gods (it is impossible to have three infinities), but one God (monotheism), one nature or essence in three persons; with three different roles.
In no other way could love, diversity, and language be communicated in God before the creation. He would need to create if the Trinity were not so. But instead we see Him sharing what already always existed in His very Being. Love is to someone and does not exist when there is no other personality to value. It is only in the Trinity that we find the origin of love and diversity of personality.
Again, we know that other trinities exist without knowing how they are, or how their differences are united: ~, present, and future are diverse categories united or called time; space, time, and mass-energy make up the unverse; light is known to be in wave, particle, and in tension—it transcends but does not violate normal categories; the will, sensibility, and intellect are three distinct yet inseparable categories that unite in every individual; space infinitely exists in three different directions or dimensions, etc—all are one and three with no contradiction.
One other point that needs to be mentioned is that hierarchy of roles in the Trinity does not mean inequality of being, person, or essence. A king may command or authorize something, a minister may serve in declaring and judging it, and a soldier may enforce it or arrest people breaking it—yet all are equally humans, citizens, and important. This is the same with God: The Father is the King and authority, Christ is the Word, Judge, Servant and Advocate, and the Holy Spirit is the One who empowers, convicts, and inspires (these are not exhausted). In no way do the roles make for inequality, for each role is equally important. So we see that our unfulfillable hunger for unity among all the diversity can only be justified and fed by the first Cause, the One "who was, and is, and is to come. The Lord God Almighty"
A little Empirical Evidence
If time would permit, volumes could be written to show how the person and nature of Christ and the Trinity, demonstrate the fulfilment of unity in life; but I shall keep within the parameters of this book and mention only three more major ones. The philosophical and scientific disciplines have continually gone from one extreme to another, and have rarely found much unity. Without entering into their multitude of diversities, I will only say that the greatest problem is the failure to find that ultimate truth that unifies all known diversity. They either deny ultimate unity or fail to consider all the diversity. For example, the Rationalists only really focus on the 'reason,' while the empiricists and scientists tend towards the senses, and existentialists are consumed with the 'will.' Each make too much of one part of the puzzle. But it is interesting to know that most of the founders of modern science were Christians who looked for their discoveries because they expected to fmd them in a Christian framework.
It is with satisfaction that Christ reveals Himself and appeals to us in every department of our being. This would only be natural, for He created us. Our reason affirms His non-contradictory logic and pure morality. Our wills are won over to His love (as no other system can), and are continually motivated with His abiding Presence while we rest in hope that He will finish what He has started; and our troubled experiences are given significance and explanation as He demonstrated His exclusive claim to be the God-man in fulfilment of past, present, and future prophesy and mercy. There is something for everyone in Christ. You do not need to live in a certain location, attain to advanced intelligence or prominence, or be part of a certain culture—His many and varied appeals are to all: "Ho! every one that is thirsty, come to the waters, and he that has no money; come, buy, and eat; come but wine and milk without money and without price. Why do you spend money for that which is not bread? and labour for that which satisfies not? Listen diligently to me, and eat that which is good, and let your soul delight itself in abundance." (Isaiah 55)
The Deception of Self-righteousness: Unbelief of Power
One of the deepest objections to real Christianity is that people do not think they can do it, or be so devoted. Listen to me! Christ promises to dwell in us by His Holy Spirit and empower us with His great love. And as we trace His steps, we see the most dejected and hardened transformed by His melting love. Indeed, no person ever so reformed mankind as He did. His words were not mere philosophy—they have power to change hearts. When the law and religion could not arrest my deeply enslaved criminal, lustful, and ragging passions and life, His love and indwelling Presence did.35 He broke the Power of my reckless and evil heart—Praise His wonderful name! He claimed to be the answer to selfishness, and many in history have cashed in the promise. It is said that at the turn of the century so many thousands came to experience and know Christ in New York City! The influence was so strong that the police had nothing to do, so they formed musical bands. Many have claimed to teach the truth, whose lives reveal ambition, ignorance, contradiction, and delusion, but Jesus Christ claimed to be The Truth and His life and scars speak louder than their volumes.
35 We do not change ourselves so that we might become Christians; we surrender to Him, asking Him to come into our hearts and make us the person we always deeply knew we should be.
Even Power to Humble the Greatest Skeptics
He did not show signs of delusion, nor did He seek to escape society, or life's trials. He gave us all that we would expect God to give, and more! The more we study Him the greater difficulty we have imagining how He could be deceived, when all these things about Him are so fitting and consistent. Indeed, I have a pile of books on my desk of very learned skeptics who had a passion to silence His voice and prove Him a fraud or mistaken. But as their search went on they discovered they were on the wrong side. Simon Greenleaf (1783-1853), who was instrumental in organizing Harvard's law program and who produced "the greatest single authority on evidence in the entire literature of legal procedure," (The dictionary of American Biography) was challenged by his students to put the Gospels to the rigorous test of his famous volumes. And after taking great pains in bringing them to trial with the same criteria used in courts of law, he became convinced of their integrity and truth. His book, 'The Testimony of the Evangelists was then written; and stands as a valuable compilation of well criticized evidence.
The English journalist Frank Morrison had a similar experience:
I wanted to take this last phase of the life of Jesus, with all its quick and pulsating drama, its sharp, clear-cut hack-ground of antiquity, and its tremendous psychological and human interest—to strip it of its overgrowth of primitive beliefs and dogmatic suppositions, and to see this supremely great Person as He really was. [He] originally set out to write one kind of hook and found himself compelled by the sheer force of circumstances to write another. It is called, Who moved the Stone?
C. S. Lewis, the professor of Medieval and Renaissance Literature at Cambridge, a professed atheist, became a believer because of the utter bankruptcy of the skeptical positions. He said:
"In the Trinity Term of 1929 I gave in, and admitted that God was God. ..perhaps the most dejected and reluctant convert in all England." He wrote numerous books on Christian evidences.
Josh McDowell, while in university, laughed at the resurrection of Christ and decided to try and debunk it; thinking it would be fairly easy. He said: "After more than 700 hours of studying this subject, I have come to the conclusion that the resurrection of Jesus Christ is either one of the most wicked, vicious, heartless hoaxes ever foisted on the minds of human beings—or it is the most remarkable fact of history." He has written many books and spoken to millions around the world proving it.
Many more rational skeptics, who became convinced while trying to disprove Christ's claims and history, could be named but space does not permit. Again, when the opposition grants facts contrary to their case they, become very credible. The opponents will not do so unless they have to; and as we have seen, many confess their unwillingness to. If my little feeble presentation does not convince you, a few books from these men should.
The Miracle of Prophesy: No Second Guessing
Jesus fulfilled so many prophesies that were beyond the possibility of staging. Indeed, His pure and demonstrated morality utterly forbids such a suggestion. From a purely selfish standpoint He gained (voluntarily) nothing but extreme pain, rejection, humiliation, and death—this is not the choice and goal of a charlatan. One might go through some of these things for what they believed to be true, but you will never find one so organized, calm, and loving, die for a lie. Ironically, He did die for a lie—for yours, mine, and humanity's sinful deceptions.
Neither was it possible for Him to be deceived about His claim.36 For it is impossible that so many prophesies could be fulfilled by one deceived individual; especially when He predicted the greatest one of all—His resurrection. Among the many prophesies He fulfilled are: That He would be born of a virgin; some 483 years after 444 B.C.; of the seed of Abraham; of the tribe of Judah; of the House of David; in Bethlehem; would be heralded by a messenger of the Lord (whom the Jews received); (even though) He would be rejected by His people; He would have a ministry of miracles; would cleanse the temple; die a humiliating death; by the rejection of His people; while being silent before His accusers; and being mocked; and His hands and His feet being pierced; and crucified with thieves; while praying for His persecutors; and having His side pierced; and the casting of lots for His garments; and being buried in a rich man's tomb; and of course, rising from the grave, and later ascending into heaven. Space will only allow for a few examples of His fulfillment of Old Testament prophesy.
36There are only three possibilities: either He was a liar, deceived lunatic, or the Lord He claimed to be. It will be clearly be seen that the latter it the only one.
Remarkable Predictions Specifically Fulfilled
The first passage, which includes many prophesies, comes from the book of Isaiah written over seven hundred years before Christ (this passage will also lay the foundation for the section on the Atonement). it is amazing to see how the skeptics are dumbfounded when they are confronted with it. Many attempted to make the long time between the two factors, much shorter by various (long disproven) theories. The most outlandish suggested that this detailed prophesy was written some hundred and fifty years before Christ. But even if this were so, how does one account for their precise fulfilment?
With the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in the late forties, many old criticisms of the Bible lost all foundation. For these scrolls which were dated around 250 B.C, contained much of the Old Testament, and almost all of the Book of Isaiah. This prophesy was also among them. Thus we have positive proof that the prophesy was made at least 300 years before Christ's fulfillment of them. There is much more evidence to support the much earlier Biblical date, but this is beyond need here.37
37 It is interesting to note that the earliest manuscripts we had (of Old Testament) before the discoveiy of the Dead Sea Scrolls, dated from around the tenth century. And the difference in comparing them, after about 1400 years, was very little— mostly spelling mistakes and scribal errors.
The passage is so descriptive of what happened to no other man but Jesus, that someone not familiar with the Bible might suppose it was one of the New Testament gospel accounts. Try to pay attention to not just the prophesies but also the message and its consequences, for I shall refer back to it again.
See, my servant shall prosper; he shall be exalted and lifted up, and shall he very high. Just as there were many who were astonished at him—so marred was his appearance, beyond human semblance, and his form beyond that of mortals—so he shall startle many nations; kings shall shut their mouths because of him; for that which had not been told them they shall see, and that which they had not heard they shall contemplate.
Who has believed what we have heard? And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed? 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, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him. He was despised and rejected by others; a man of suffering and acquainted with infirmity; and as one from whom others hide their faces he was des-pised, and we held him of no account. Surely he has borne our infirmities and carried our diseases; yet we accounted him stricken, struck down by God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions, crushed for our iniquities; upon him was the punishment that made us whole, and by his bruises we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have all turned to our own way, and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all. He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; like a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and like a sheep that before its shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth. By a perversion of just-ice he was taken away. Who could have imagined his future? For he was cut off from the land of the living, stricken for the transgression of my people. They made his grave with the wicked and his tomb with the rich, although he had done no violence, and there was no deceit in his mouth.
Yet it was the will of the LORD to crush him with pain. When you make his life an offering for sin, he shall see his offspring, and shall prolong his days; through him the will of the LORD shall prosper. Out of his anguish he shall see light; he shall find satisfaction through his knowledge. The righteous one, my servant, shall make many righteous, and he shall bear their iniquities. Therefore I will allot him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he poured out himself to death, and was numbered with the transgressors; yet he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors. (Isaiah 52-53 NRSV)
Plaing Humble Honesty and the Removal of all Doubt
There are many things that can be seen here, but I will only mention a few. First, we have the prediction of many things that could not have possibly been staged or accidental, given all the extremely difficult circumstances (for these things did not happen in a vacuum). Take for instance the manner of His death; how He was rejected (even though the people were to expect Him), brought before the Royal court and yet silently submitted to injustice (for our sake). No one would do this if they were not absolutely sure they could bring about a greater good than this extreme devastation to self. Next, see how He was pierced like a lamb to the slaughter. In the book of Psalms chapter 22 we find the parallel prediction listing even more details: "For dogs have surrounded me; a band of evildoers has encompassed me; they pierced my hands and my feet. I can count all my hones. They look, they stare at me; They divide my garments among them, and for my clothing they cast lots." (NASV) Here we have combined testimony of a type of the execution—crucifixion—not even in existence until centuries later.
Context of Love Solidifies Testimony
Secondly, we notice the ultimate demonstration of love that gives it context and promotes the highest honesty and self-sacrifice. It would be one thing to stage a great sign, and to go to great lengths and sacrifice to get something for oneself. But here we have unselfishness through and through. Which only could result in the loss of the sole plotter, and which promoted the deepest selfless love to all who witnessed it. If it had been a fraud or mistake, you would easily be able to find evidence of some other motive. But the cross is an offence to mankind. No one would dare allow themselves to look like a fool to promote their cause,38 unless it was for the humble truth. Such humiliation would naturally produce only mockery and ridicule; unless it was a demonstration of the extent He was willing to go to prove His love and concern for all of our fulfilment. Submission to torture and humiliation, and the loss of reputation and dignity for private interests? No! But here, instead of personal glory, power, pleasure, revenge, or negligence to the lowly and afflicted (as we find in every other religion and movement) we find the ultimate love for His enemies! It was not with money, popularity, eloquence, or the sword that He was to convince people, but with a unheard of love that contradicted all our selfish humanism—behold the power of the cross!
38 For being hung on a tree was considered God's curse on that individual.
Scientific and Humble Proof of a Needed Fulfilment
Finally, we will notice that since He was to suffer and die, and yet reign forever as a victorious King, the logical connection is that He was to rise again ("prolong His days...allot Him a portion...He will see it and be satisfied..."). The Jews had so over-emphasised His coming as King and Conqueror (because of their humiliating bondage to the Roman's) that they lost sight of a fundamental role— the substitutionary suffering and death. They could not see how the two were compatible in two appearances, so they neglected one altogether (of course pressure and pride repelled the concept of a suffering servant).
It was against such fallacies that Jesus spent great energies. He knew He had to be risen from the dead that his people might be risen themselves and have life in Him: "Come, let us return to the LORD; for it is he who has torn, and he will heal us; he has struck down, and he will hind us up. After two days he will revive us; on the third day he will raise us up, that we may live before him. Let us know, let us press on to know the LORD; his appearing is as sure as the dawn; he will come to us like the showers, like the spring rains that water the earth." (Hosea 6) Thus He preach His death and resurrection from the beginning:
"Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.. .He spoke of the temple of His body." (John 2). Surely if He wanted to convince the people of His message, would He not have appealed the the consensus gentium of the people? But no, His message contradicted so many of their unquestionable traditions and hopes. How was it then, that this most influential movement of all history came about when the odds and prejudices were beyond hope? He made His appeals to their framework and authority by claiming fulfillment of many passages from the Old Testament. For instance, He said, "An evil and adulterous generation seeks a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but of the prophet Jonah: For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man he three days and three nights in heart of the earth. The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgement with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonah; and, behold, a greater one than Jonah is here." (Matthew 12) Thus, He showed how the finite part of Him would die and rise as the story typified (pointed as a sign). On another occasion He also showed how He was more than a mere prophet like Jonah, but had the Divine nature that was indestructible: "As the Father knows me, even so know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep.. .Therefore does my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it up again. No man takes it from me, hut I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and Ihave power to take it up again." (John 10) In this He showed that He had not only the Power to raise others like Lazarus from the dead, but that He was ruler over life and death, and therefore could not be destroyed.
The prejudices were so strong that even His disciples did not understand that He had to die and rise again until after He rose. We can see the depth of blindness by reading how few understood Him when His words were so plain while. But He did not help this. For when the crowds followed Him in great numbers, and were going to make a King by force, He thinned them out by making the most self-denying conditions for being a true follower. Thus, they left Him alone, and only His few disciples were left.39 And turning to them He asked why they did not leave (as people usually follow the crowds). Peter responded with the cry of modem man: "To whom shall we go?"
39 If the modem professing church would have been there, they too would have realised that they really did not want to follow Him with the absolute selfless conditions.
A Humble God Chooses Homely Preachers
These were unlearned men of ordinary backgrounds (not wealthy, powerful, or sophisticated), who had given up their livelihood to follow this strange man. They had nothing to gain but "the hope of Israel" through hardships. They were not a promising bunch at all (as most of us40). For their prejudices and faults so blinded then that they failed to grasp Christ's teaching even after three years! A very important point should be seen here. Ambition is blinded by pride. If the disciples had some how misrepresented the facts, they surely would not have written so openly and humbly. It would have hardly given credibility to their cause to preserve their sins and foolish thinking. But since these poor souls had voluntarily given up all material pursuits, life long dreams, and reputation with the majority, it is not surprising that they did not seek personal glory by hiding their mistakes and making things look more favorable than they were. It is most convincing because their message was anti-selfish, which exposed all forms—starting with themselves.
40 God has chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty...the base and despised... That no flesh should glory in His presence.. .that we might glory in Him. (1 Corinthians 1:27-3 1)
All false beliefs do the opposite, and hid shortcomings under the greed of pride and ambition.4' Even more striking is the fact that they preached the expectation of complete freedom from sin in this life,42 while they admitted their own (to their shame) when it occurred. This would hardly give credence to their message (if it were not true). Surely they would have made some sort of excuses. On the contrary we find them exposing even their former excuses. In fact a careful study of their message will reveal that many things were so written to be too embarrassing and exposing for the false to include. This makes them the most credible witnesses from our standpoint of later history, because it would have made their testimony the least credible at the time-given all the prejudices. If their message were only 'no hypocrisy, sin, and falsehood,' it would be a strong enough case in their favour. But they went further in not practically tolerating any; even if it was an apostle Paul opposing one of the pillar apostles Peter before all (and recording it for us). It would be one thing to record this for one party to claim superiority over the one at fault, but we find no such hierarchy or ambition in them (as we do with many who claim to succeed them).
41 But it must be remembered that the apostles goal was not to get people into an
institution, culture, or theory, but that all may know the great liberty of knowing
Christ and be set free from sin.
42 "Herein is our love made perfect, that we may have boldness in the day of judgment: because as He is, so are we in this world
A Humble Revelation: What we would not Expect
and yet would Deep Down
We see further illustration of this humble 'as it is' way in the early Christian leaders behind the skeptic's charge of inconsistency in their testimony. A casual reading of the Gospel accounts of Jesus will reveal how the stories have apparent inconsistencies. Many a critic has made much of this. I personally thought I had to be able to fully answer all their objections before I could believe the Bible was true. I spent many hours and satisfied myself in reading the many books that answered them. Yet something did not seem right to me in that approach. I learned latter that one can have positive proof for believing something without being able to answer all objections that were either ambiguous, in prestige jargon, or that were only possibilities and "what ifs." If we could not believe thhigs that were beyond reasonable doubt, and had to answer every objec-tion, then we would doubt everything and die of starvation (this is not what we know is true in life). All that has to be shown is that the writers were credible, honest, and capable witnesses. Once established, as it is, charity should be the rule and they should be given the benefit of the doubt. I can honestly say that I no longer see any problem in the Bible that can not be given a satisfactory explanation. But for those who wish everything to be all roses and more proven than ordinary matters of life, Bishop Wilson once said:
Christianity inscribes on the portal of her dominion 'Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, shall in nowise enter therein.' Christianity does not profess to convince the perverse and headstrong, to bring irresistible evidence to the daring and profane, to vanquish the proud scorner, and afford evidences from which the careless and perverse cannot possibly escape. This might go to destroy man's responsibility. All that Christianity professes, is to propose such evidences as may satisfy the meek, the tractable, the candid, the serious inquirer. (Evidences of christianity, 1.38)
It was a real relief to me when I discovered that I did not have to wait until perverse men were convinced before I could believe in meekness. You too, do not have to wait for others to do your part. One day it finally hit me that I could not really doubt the Bible. But I sure could doubt the caviling of the skeptics. Because moral contradiction breeds delusion God will deliberately with-hold essential light or truth if we refuse to obey the light we have in fairness and meekness. Paul talks about a "deception of unrighteousness for those who perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might he saved. And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might he damned who he-lieved not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness." (2 Thessalonians) Let us remember Huxley's quote that supports this.
My point is, that instead of the witnesses destroying their testimony by the seeming difficulty, their testimony is all the more established. For just as in courts of law, if the testimonies are identical and not from different view points, then it shows an organized agreement on what should be said, which gives great suspicion. Instead, we find them stressing different aspects and perspectives of events for different audiences. Certainly none of them are exhaustive. And who has the right to say that they should have each written the same observations as the others? Thus, their liberty of style and lack of identicalness speaks further of their integrity.
There are many more internal facts that demonstrate the writers of the Bible were humble, honest, and credible; but only two more will be given (see Simon Greenleaf's book). It is well known that women were not considered credible witnesses at that time. And yet we find that they were the first witnesses of the resurrection. It is most certain that if the story was a fraud in some way, this would not have been reported as it was. Thus, because the first evangelists were women! we have further evidence of their integrity.
Secondly, they did not even recognize Him at first, because they were so shocked to find Him risen. This would not have been written if it were pretended. Instead, they would have had said that they had expected Him to rise, and did not waver, while saying someone like Peter was there to actually witness His body rising. But the fact is, that all the disciples were so disillusioned by their collapsing political hopes of the Messiah, that they all forsook Him on the night of His arrest (one of them even betraying Him). Also, you do not hallucinate what you do not expect. If He did not rise, nothing would be able to shake their embarrassment and disappointment. In fact, they would be tossed between the greatest discouragement, and a sense of terrible betrayal—hardly fit to campaign a world-changing movement (centered around a failure) that constantly threatened and finally cost them their lives.
After two millennium of intense scrutinizing of these men and their claim about Jesus Christ—yea, when no other event in history has been so studied by scholars—there exists no evidence to suggest fraud, manipulation, or mistake; but rather that these ruff, unlearned, ordinary men told the facts plainly, honestly, accurately, without contradiction, against life-long hopes, and in the face of persecution and rejection.
A Biased rejection of the Resurrection:
The Myth, Delusion, and Deception of Skepticism Itself
In the nineteenth century many liberal (or antisupernatural) scholars exhausted the inventions of all the contrary possibilities to the physical resurrection of Jesus Christ. They relentlessly tried to find a natural explanation for it; for if miracles cannot happen then they must be able to explain this most objective miracle. And as we have shown, many realized that there was none. Many of their arguments failed to consider that because Jesus prophesied that He would rise, the Jewish authorities ensured that a highly trained Roman guard of soldiers (would be torturously executed if caught sleeping) secured the tomb, placing an approximately one tone stone in front. The Jews and the Romans would have ensured that there was no grounds for a pretended rising, and thus a continuation of that competitive faction.
The question comes down to the title of former skeptic Frank Morison's book: Who Moved the Stone? For behind that is the missing body. If the Jews, Romans or any other enemies of the Christians had it, then they would have shown the world the great lie. If the Christians had it, then they not only performed a greater miracle than the creation of the world itself (this deception has been shown to be impossible), but they would not ever be able to convince enemies like Saul/Paul.43 Also hallucinations do not leave empty tombs which these enemies would have pointed out. The tomb was empty—and no skeptic can explain it!
43 If it were a fabrication why did they not posit a spiritual resurrection as the JW's do? In that way they would not have to worry about a discovered body.
After sifting through all their sophisticated arguments, one will find—indeed, many latter confessed—that they all went into the investigation with the unquestionable assumption that miracles could not happen. Naturally then, if they went in with that bias, then they would obviously come out with the same. Even though this was the case, all their theories ended up in absurdities that lost credibility as more detail was considered and evidence discovered. For archeology was making tremendous advances, forcing the liberals to retreat and abandon theories as it progressed. Thousands of ancient manuscripts were found that confirmed the text of the Bible and answered the former objections, because of the nearness to the time they were written and their incredible accuracy. And as criticisms were answered and new light solved old mysteries, skepticism was revealed in its nakedness—a rejiLsal to believe!44
44 The enemies and various sects kept the word from being corrupted. Also all
but eleven verses of the New Testament can be found in the writings of the early
church Fathers of the first two centuries after Christ.
The Consensus Today Points to a Risen Way
Without trying to commit consensus gentium it is very revealing to note that, despite their many philosophical differences, critical scholars today now accept as true, a few core events concerning the resurrection. Dr. Gary Habermas, in Why Believe? God Exists!45 has gathered together at least 11 of them:
Critical theologians, exegetes, historians, and philosophers who study this subject usually accept this factual basis. Virtually all scholars consider at least eleven events to he knowable history, while perhaps most include a twelfth, as well. (I) Jesus died due to the severity of cru-cifixion and (2) was then huried. (3) His death caused the disciples to lose hope and experience despair. (4) Although not recognized to the same degree as the other findings here, most scholars seem to hold that the tomb in which Jesus was buried was found empty just a few days later.
Critical scholars even acknowledge that (5) the disciples then had real experiences that they helieved were literal appearances of the risen Jesus. (6) These experiences transformed the disciples from apprehensive followers who were afraid to identify with Jesus into bold proclaimers of His death and resurrection, even being willing to die for this helieL (7) This resurrection message was central in early Christian preaching and (8) was especially proclaimed in Jerusalem, where Jesus had died shortly before.
Accordingly, (9) the Christian church was established and grew, (10) featuring Sunday as the primary day of worship. (11) James, the skeptical brother of Jesus, was converted when he believed he also saw the resurrected Jesus. (12) Saul of Tarsus, the famous persecutor of the church, became a Christian a couple of years later after an experience that he, similarly, believed to be an appearance of the risen Jesus.
45 (1993 College Press Pub. Co.) p. 262-3.
This is an unbelievable consensus of more hostile witnesses (It should be borne in mind that they came to this conclusion, not just based on the internal evidence of the Bible but by careful study of non-Christian sources at that time). There is no point in quoting these sources when the facts are admitted by the opponents. Again, if space would permit, each point shown in fullness, and in all this unfavorable context, would establish the resurrection as beyond all doubt. Let us examine some more of them briefly.
The Melting of an irresistible Force Conclusive Proof
It cannot be understated how important the testimony of antagonistic critics is. They will not give in to the slightest support of their opponent, especially if they are committed beyond reason. This was also the case with the great Saul of Tarsus (a highly educated leader of the strictest Jewish sect called Pharisees) who was more zealous in persecuting the Christians than possibly any other. With sincerity he later writes: "Now I would remind you, brothers and sisters, of the good news that I proclaimed to you, which you in turn received, in which also you stand, through which also you are being saved, if you hold firmly to the message that I proclaimed to you--unless you have come to believe in vain. For I handed on to you as of first importance what I in turn had received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers and sisters at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have died. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all, as to one untimely horn, he appeared also to me. For I am the least of the apostles, unfit to he called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God."46 He was very advanced in eradicating the entire existence of Christianity; traveling great distances by the commission of the high priest to hunt down those deceivers, and bring them to prison and execution. Such a powerful force is perhaps the hardest to resist, reason with, or change. Yet his Damascus story of change is so well known, and has influenced so much of history, that it has become proverbial. You must answer how it was that the greatest and most violent opponent of Christ, suddenly completely changed into one of His most self-denying, meek, and tortured defenders! destined to face violent persecution in city after city in proclaiming Christ as risen; testifying how he bore on his body the sufferings of Christ; rejoicing in his imprisonment for Him; and expecting to lay down his life for the One who did so for him. Certainly if it was not supernatural, then this would have been gradual and far less extensive. Here is where we see that it takes more than logical argument to win over one from such hostile roots, it takes a Personal encounter who so loves to the level of Blood.
46 (1 Corinthians 15 NRSV) This mentioning of 500 still alive shows the closeness to the time of the event. In essence, he is saying, "If you want to know for sure that these things are so, you can cross examine all these witnesses. Also, modem scholarship has revealed that at least half of this quota-tion was from an early Christian creed that predates Paul's conversion; revealing that it was believed right from the beginning. The fact that this was never challenged by the Jews and other antagonists speaks very loudly in its favour.
With such demonstrated love it is no wonder that the main focus of the early Christians was the Cross and subsequent resurrection. Both were so central that soon, on the day of the latter, a celebration was weekly held in remembrance of His rising; with the former cherished, on the same day in a solemn ceremony of breaking of bread (symbolizing His body) and drinking of low alcoholic wine (symbolizing His life's blood). It would take much more than a myth to substitute the Jewish day of rest when the pressures would have been so strong to continue with the old. This change of the day of rest stands today as strong proof that something very significant and life changing happened on that ancient day of new dawnings.
The Power of a Message of Sacrificial Innocent Blood
There is one other testimony so convincing that it has become proverbial. It stands as a powerful twofold proof, convincing the mind and the heart. The demonstration of it, if you will go beneath the surface, reveals the deep mystery of Christianity—The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the Church! It was not merely in the fact that a man had risen from the dead, that they were all changed into fearless and holy people. For they had seen Lazarus come back to life. Something much more was needed to counter and win over all the prejudices, fears, and weaknesses of the disciples; the powerful intellect and authority of a hostile Saul; the bewilderment of the multitudes who were daily converted; and the wonder and doubt of scores of millions up until this day, who would not escape death for His sake. It was the reason behind the death of Christ, that motivated those imitators like Paul to give all—when they saw that "He gave Himself for me!" It was not that He merely died as a martyr for a truth, that inspired us all. This alone proved His sincerity, confirmed His total commitment, and demonstrated His doctrine. But this 'moral example'47 could not, and did not bring about the changing of the world. It was not some man's great personal piety that turned the world upside down; nor was it a mere tragedy of history, in the condemning of an innocent martyr, that won the hearts of so many. It was the Blood of God,48 in exchange for you and me!!!
47 Jesus claimed that He was without sin and His enemies could not find fault with Him. This is not the case with all other religious leaders, such as Mohammed, who was told that he needed forgiveness (40:55; 4 1:19; 48:2)
48 Acts 20:28
It was this Personal, powerful, unselfish benevolence, confirmed in history, that converted every believer from 'doubting Thomas,' to the hopelessly ruined Rick Friedrich. And it was this sacrifice of Personal well-being for the interests of others in the ultimate demonstration and climax of history, that broke the power of all evil hearts, and lead the millions to "follow in His steps."
It is not just the fact that all these eye witnesses would not willingly endure persecution and die for a lie,49 or for what they might have mistaken. But it is the meaning behind His death and all those who did the same. I got a book in the mail yesterday. It is about a man named Richard Wurmbrand who was brutally tortured for fourteen years for his faith in Christ. His ministry deals with the thousands of Christians that are tortured and martyred everyday around the world at this hour! Why is it that these endure such things? Is it merely to stand for personal theories or leaps of faith? or to get to heaven? or to end life's miseries?
49 In the first century alone probably millions were killed for this belief in His resurrection. There is no possible way for such a thing to happen unless He left conclusive proof that He really rose from the dead.
For the Joy that is set before us
Another key answer to the meaning is in the fact that it is the opposite to the last suggestion. One thing you notice about these voluntary suffering souls is that they are filled with joy and deep love for their persecutors (as was their Founder). This is the opposite of the desperate suicidal who has lost all joy and hope.5° But these have purpose in their sufferings, for Christ had purpose in His. Thus, "for the joy that was set before Him, He endured the cross, making little the shame." It is here that the contradictions of pain and evil are answered in the opportunity and need of His Ultimate self-denial which would be the greatest possible demonstration of love throughout all eternity, and promote the highest possible interests, happiness, or well-being. These are some feeble words to describe the real message of Christ51—the great unselfish love that if received by His Person, will resurrect the heart to be and do the same.
50 This was the case with the 80 year old woman in the US. (in March 98) who was legally (!) allowed to destruct herself. She "no longer enjoyed beloved pastimes" and found no purpose to live. Her focus was all on herself, as with all who selfishly push for legislation that promotes the greatest evils. Thus, she mixed the poison with brandy and is now gone forever. She had said, "I'm looking forward to it. I will be relieved of all the stress I have." Poor woman! she could not have imagined how wrong she was!
51I feel as though I am trapped in the limitations of written language. Words seem to barely reflect the depth behind what I am trying to show. Thus it takes many words. The only way to really understand these things is to bow down to Jesus and make Him Teacher.
It was no wonder that Paul said, "If Christ is not raised then your faith is vain," and "we are of all people most to be pitied." But if this is so, then what hope can anyone have? If those who proved themselves most honest by their teaching, example, and gruesome deaths—are liars! then who can we trust? On the contrary, to doubt their testimony after all the available evidence is seen, is evidence of evasion and not a lack of justified proof. In fact, one of the most informed minds on the subject of evidence, that former skeptic Simon Greenleaf, addressed these by saying, "You may choose to say I do not believe it all, but you may not say there is not enough evidence."
The Assurance of a Personal Answer
Who then is making the blind "leap of faith?" The one who is surrounded by a multitude of conclusive and all uniting evidence for Jesus Christ; or the one who is lead by the desires of the mind and of the body—being lead aimlessly as impulses are stimulated! The selfish person says "man is the measure of all things." The question is which one? I will agree to this if only one word is added: One man is the measure of all things. The Apostle "Paul stood in front of the Areopagus and said, "Athenians, I see how extremely religious you are in every way. For as I went through the city and looked carefully at the objects of your worship, I found among them an altar with the inscription, To an unknown god.' What therefore you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to you. The God who made the world and everything in it, he who is Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in shrines made by human hands, nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all mortals life and breath and all things. From one ancestor he made all nations to inhabit the whole earth, and he allotted the times of their existence and the boundaries of the places where they would live, so that they would search for God and perhaps grope for him and find him--though indeed he is not far from each one of us. For 'In him we live and move and have our being'; as even some of your own poets have said, 'For we too are his offspring.' Since we are God's offspring, we ought not to think that the deity is like gold, or silver, or stone, an image formed by the art and imagination of mortals. While God has overlooked the times of human ignorance, now he commands all people everywhere to repent, because he has fixed a day on which he will have the world judged in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed, and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead." (Acts 17) Yes, these are the days that the Jewish scriptures pointed to in Jeremiah 31: "The days are surely coming, says the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. It will not be like the covenant that I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt--a covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, says the LORD. But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the LORD: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. No longer shall they teach one another, or say to each other, "Know the LORD," for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, says the LORD; for I will forgive their iniquity, and remember their sin no more. Yes, this new covenant was not merely a system, but a Person: "I have given you as a covenant to the people, a light to the nations, to open the eyes that are blind, to bring out the prisoners from the dungeon, from the prison those who sit in darkness." (Isaiah 42:6-7)
Conviction of the True nature of Sin:
A Precondition to Understanding the Need of Forgiveness and its Solution: The Atonement
If you do not feel like you are in the prison of moral darkness you will never find deliverance from it. Before we look at the most marvelous and glorious exhibition of love in all eternity, we must diligently understand why it was needed so we can appreciate it. We need conviction of sin. Without it we will never so love this atonement so as to be won over to it's Author through it (and so stop this dreadful plague).
These two subjects shall be the last discussed before I conclude with an important summary. The following discussions are quotations from the greatest American Evangelist Charles G. Finney (1792-1875). He was a very intelligent skeptic until his 29th year (being stumble by seeing so much hypocrisy and hearing so much confused and irrational church teachings). He was a sharp lawyer who, after his conversion, was instrumental in winning hundreds of thousands to Christ (many lawyers and judges too). Those who heard him say he was "logic set on fire." I say all this because his writings do not do justice to his whole presentation, which left the hardest trembling. These quotations are very concise, logical and require deep reflection, so be careful to understand each line. The first is from a sermon called "The Wages of Sin," which briefly demonstrates the nature of sin. And the second is on the Atonement.
"An illustration will give us the best practical view of the nature of sin. You have only to suppose a government established to secure the highest well-being of the governed, and of the ruling authorities also. Suppose the head of this government to embark all his attributes in the enterprise—all his wealth, all his time, all his energies—to compass the high end of the highest general good. For this purpose he enacts the best possible laws—laws which, if obeyed, will secure the highest good of both subject and Prince. He then takes care to affix adequate penalties; else all his care and wisdom must come to naught. He devotes to the interests of his government all he is and all he has, without reserve or abatement.
But some of his subjects refuse to sympathize with this movement. They say, "Charity begins at home," and they are taking care of themselves in the first place; in short, they are thoroughly selfish. The man who does this becomes the common enemy of the government and of all its subjects. This is sin. This illustrates precisely the case of the sinner. Sin is selfishness. It sets up a selfish end; and to gain it, uses selfish means; so that in respect to both its end and its means, it is precisely opposed to God and to all the ends of general happiness which He seeks to secure. It denies God's rights; discards God's interests. Each sinner maintains that his own will shall be law. The interest he sets himself to secure is entirely opposed to that proposed by God in His government.
All law must have sanctions. Without sanctions it would be only advice. It is therefore essential to the distinctive and inherent nature of law that it have sanctions. They promise reward for obedience, and they also threaten penalty for disobedience. They are vindicatory, inasmuch as they vindicate the honor of the violated law.
Natural penalties are those evil consequences which naturally result without any direct interference by the government to punish. There should also be governmental sanctions. Every governor should manifest his displeasure against the violation of his laws. To leave the whole question up to mere natural consequences is obviously unjust to society. Inasmuch as governments are established to sustain law and secure obedience, they are bound to put forth their utmost energies in this work.
Penalties should threaten no more and no less than is just. Penalty should be equal to the obligation violated. Hence the guilt must be in proportion to the magnitude of the obligation violated, and consequently the penalty must be measured by this obligation.
Law is not governmentally just unless its penalty be so graduated as to afford the highest security against sin which the nature of the case admits. Suppose under any government the sanctions of the law are trifling, not at all proportioned to the end to be secured. Such a government is unjust to itself, and to the interests it is committed to maintain. Hence a good government must be governmentally just, affording in the severity of its penalties and the certainty of their just infliction the highest security that its law shall be obeyed.
Again, penal sanctions should be worthy of the end aimed at by the law and by its author. Government is only a means to an end; this proposed end being universal obedience and its consequent happiness. If law is indispensable for obtaining this end, its penalty should be graduated accordingly.
Suppose a human law were to punish murder with only a trifling penalty. Under the pretence of being very tender-hearted, the lawgiver amerces this crime of murder with a fine of fifty cents! Would this show that he greatly loved his subjects and highly valued their life and interests? Far from it. You cannot feel that a legislator has done his duty unless he shows how much he values human life, and unless he attaches a penalty commensurate in some good degree with the end to be secured.
God's moral government embraces the whole intelligent universe, and stretches with its vast results onward through eternity. Hence the sweep and breadth of its interests are absolutely unlimited; and consequently, the penalties of its law, being set to vindicate the authority of this government and to sustain these immeasurable interests, should be beyond measure dreadful. If anything beyond and more dreadful than the threatened penalty could be conceived, all minds would say, "This is not enough." With any just views of the relations and the guilt of sin, they could not be satisfied unless the penalty is the greatest that is conceivable. Sin is so vile, so mischievious, so terribly destructive and so far-sweeping in its ruin, that moral agents could not feel that enough is done so long as more can be.
It is for this reason that the Bible says the wages of sin is eternal death. All objections amount only to this, that it is unjust. It is unjust because life is so short. How strange men talk! Life so short that men have not time to sin enough to deserve eternal death! Do men forget that one sin incurs the penalty due for sinning! How many sins ought it take to make one transgression of the law of God? As if a man must commit a great many murders before he has made up the crime of murder enough to fall under the sentence of the court!
The very reason why we affirm any obligation at all is that the law is good and is the necessary means of the highest good of the universe. Hence, since we affirm any penalty at all, we are compelled to affirm the justice and the necessity of an infinite penalty. If any penalty be just, it is because law secures a certain good. If this good aimed at by the law be unlimited in extent, so must be the penalty. Governmental justice thus requires endless punishment; else it provides no sufficient guaranty for the public good.
Again, the law not only designs but tends to secure infinite good. Its tendencies are to this end. Hence, its penalties should be infinite. The law is not just to the interests it both aims and tends to secure unless it arms itself with infinite sanctions. Nothing less than infinite penalty can be an adequate expression of God's view of the value of the great end on which His heart is set.. .The wages of sin is eternal death.
XII. ON THE ATONEMENT.
"How that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures." -- 1 Cor. xv. 3.
"For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him." -- 2 Cor. v. 21.
"But God commendeth his love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." -- Rom. v. 8.
"The Lord is well pleased for his righteousness' sake: he will magnify the law and make it honorable." -- Isa. xlii. 21.
"Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just and the justifier of him which believeth in JESUS." -- Rom. iii. 25, 26.
IN this last passage, the apostle states, with unusual fullness, the theological, and, I might even say, the philosophical design of Christ's mission to our world -- that is, to set forth before created beings, God's righteousness in forgiving sins. It is here said that Christ is set forth as a propitiation that God may be just in forgiving sin, assuming that God could not have been just to the universe, unless Christ had been first set forth as a sacrifice.
When we seriously consider the irresistible convictions of our own minds in regard to our relations to God and His government, we cannot but see that we are sinners, and are lost beyond hope on the score of law and justice. The fact that we are grievous sinners against God is an ultimate fact of human consciousness, testified to by our irresistible convictions, and no more to be denied than the fact that there is such a thing as wrong.
Now, if God be holy and good, it must be that He disapproves wrong-doing, and will punish it. The penalty of His law is pronounced against it. Under this penalty, we stand condemned, and have no relief save through some adequate atonement, satisfactory to God, because safe to the interests of His kingdom.
Thus far we may advance safely and on solid ground, by the simple light of nature. If there were no Bible, we might know so much with absolute certainty. So far, even infidels are compelled to go.
Here, then, we are, under absolute and most righteous condemnation. Is there any way of escape? If so, it must be revealed to us in the Bible; for from any other source it can not come. The Bible does profess to reveal a method of escape. This is the great burden of its message.
It opens with a very brief allusion to the circumstances under which sin came into the world. Without being very minute as to the manner in which sin entered, it is exceedingly full, clear, and definite in its showing as to the fact of sin in the race. That God regards the race as in sin and rebellion is made as plain as language can make it. It is worthy of notice that this fact and the connected fact of possible pardon, are affirmed on the same authority -- with the same sort of explicitness and clearness. These facts stand or fall together. Manifestly God intended to impress on all minds these two great truths -- first, that man is ruined by his own sin; secondly, that he may be saved through Jesus Christ. To deny the former is to gainsay both our own irresistible convictions and God's most explicit revealed testimony; to deny the latter, is to shut the door, of our own free act and accord, against all hope of our own salvation.
The philosophical explanations of the reasons and governmental bearings of the atonement must not be confounded with the fact of an atonement. Men may be saved by the fact if they simply believe it, while they may know nothing about the philosophical explanation. The apostles did not make much account of the explanation, but they asserted the fact most earnestly, gave miracles as testimony to prove their authority from God, and so besought men to believe the fact and be saved. The fact, then, may be savingly believed, and yet the explanation be unknown. This has been the case, no doubt, with scores of thousands.
Yet it is very useful to understand the reasons and governmental grounds of the atonement. It often serves to remove skepticism. It is very common for lawyers to reject the fact, until they come to see the reasons and governmental bearings of the atonement; this seen, they usually admit the fact. There is a large class of minds who need to see the governmental bearings, or they will reject the fact. The reason why the fact is so often doubted is, that the explanations given have been unsatisfactory. They have misrepresented God. No wonder men should reject them, and with them, the fact of any atonement at all.
The atonement is a governmental expedient to sustain law without the execution of its penalty on the sinner. Of course, it must always be a difficult thing in any government to sustain the authority of law, and the respect due to it, without the execution of penalty. Yet God has accomplished it most perfectly.
A distinction must here be made between public and retributive justice.
The latter visits on the head of the individual sinner a punishment corresponding to the nature of his offence. The former, public justice, looks only toward the general good, and must do that which will secure the authority and influence of law, as well as the infliction of the penalty would do it. It may accept a substitute, provided it be equally effective to the support of law and the ensuring of obedience.
Public justice, then. may be satisfied in one of two ways, to wit -- either by the full execution of the penalty, or by some substitute, which shall answer the ends of government at least equally well. When, therefore, we ask -- What is necessary for the ends of public justice? The answer is,
1. Not the literal execution of the penalty; for if so, it must necessarily fall on the sinner, and on no one else.
Besides, it could be no gain to the universe for Christ to suffer the full and exact penalty due to every lost sinner who should be saved by Him. The amount of suffering being the same in the one case as in the other, where is the gain? And yet, further, if the administration of justice is to be retributive, then it cannot fall on Christ, and must fall on the sinner himself. If not retributive, it certainly may be, as compared with that due the sinner, far different in kind and less in degree.
It has sometimes been said that Christ suffered all in degree and the same in kind as all the saved must else have suffered; but human reason revolts at this assumption, and certainly the Scriptures do not affirm it.
2. Some represent that God needs to be appeased, and to have His feelings conciliated. This is an egregious mistake. It utterly misrepresents God and misconceives the atonement.
3. It is no part of public justice that an innocent being should suffer penalty or punishment, in the proper sense of these terms. Punishment implies crime -- of which Christ had none. Christ, then, was not punished.
Let it be distinctly understood that the divine law originates in God's benevolence, and has no other than benevolent ends in view. It was revealed only and solely to promote the greatest possible good, by means of obedience. Now, such a law can allow of pardon, provided an expression can be given which will equally secure obedience -- making an equal revelation of the law-giver's firmness, integrity, and love. The law being perfect, and being most essential to the good of His creatures, God must not set aside its penalty without some equivalent influence to induce obedience.
The penalty was designed as a testimony to God's regard for the precept of His law, and to His purpose to sustain it. An atonement, therefore, which should answer as a substitute for the infliction of this penalty, must be of such sort as to show God's regard for both the precept and penalty of His law. It must be adapted to enforce obedience. Its moral power must be in this respect equal to that of the infliction of the penalty on the sinner.
Consequently, we find that, in this atonement, God has expressed His high regard for His law and for obedience to it.
The design of executing the penalty of the law was to make a strong impression of the majesty, excellence, and utility of the law. Anything may answer as a substitute, which will as thoroughly demonstrate the mischief and odiousness of sin, God's hatred to it, and His determination to carry out His law in all its demands. Especially may the proposed substitute avail if it shall also make a signal manifestation of God's love to sinners. This, the atonement, by the death of Christ, has most emphatically done.
Every act of rebellion denounces the law. Hence, before God can pardon rebellion, He must make such a demonstration of His attitude toward sin as shall thrill the heart of the created universe, and make every ear tingle. Especially for the ends of the highest obedience, it was needful to make such demonstration as shall effectually secure the confidence and love of subjects toward their Lawgiver -- such as shall show that He is no tyrant, and that He seeks only the highest obedience and consequent happiness of His creatures. This done, God will be satisfied.
Now, what can be done to teach these lessons, and to impress them with great and everlasting emphasis on the universe?
God's testimony must be so given as to be well understood. Obviously, the testimony to be given must come from God, for it is His view of law, penalty, and substitute that needs to be revealed. Every one must see that if He were to execute law on the sinner, this would show at once His view of the value of the law. But, plainly, His view of the same thing must be shown with equal force by any proposed substitute, before He could accept it as such.
Again, in this transaction, the precept of the law must be accepted and honored both by God and by Jesus as Mediator. The latter, as the representative of the race, must honor the law by obeying it, and by publicly endorsing it -- otherwise, the requisite homage can not be shown to the divine law in the proposed atonement. This has been done.
Again, to make adequate provision for the exercise of mercy to the race, it is plainly essential that, in the person of their mediator, both the divine and the human should be united. God and man are both to be represented in the atonement; the divine Word represented the Godhead; the man Jesus represented the race to be redeemed. What the Bible thus asserts, is verified in the history of Jesus, for He said and did things which could not have been said and done unless He had been man, and equally could not have been unless He were also God. On the one hand, too weak to carry His cross, through exhaustion of the human; and on the other, mighty to hush the tempest and to raise the dead, through the plenitude of divine power. Thus God and man are both represented in Jesus Christ.
The thing to be done, then, required that Jesus Christ should honor the law and fully obey it; this He did. Standing for the sinner, he must, in an important sense, bear the curse of the law -- not the literal penalty, but a vast amount of suffering, sufficient, in view of His relations to God and the universe, to make the needed demonstration of God's displeasure against sin, and yet of His love for both the sinner and all His moral subjects. On the one hand, Jesus represented the race; on the other, He represented God. This is a most divine philosophy.
The sacrifice made on Calvary is to be understood as God's offering to public justice -- God Himself giving up His Son to death, and this Son pouring forth His life's blood in expiation for sin -- thus throwing open the folding gates of mercy to a sinning, lost race. This must be regarded as manifesting His love to sinners. This is God's ransom provided for them. Look at the state of the case. The supreme Law-giver, and indeed the government of the universe, had been scouted by rebellion; of course there can be no pardon till this dishonor done to God and His law is thoroughly washed away. This is done by God's free-will offering of His own Son for these great sins.
This being all done for you, sinners, what do you think of it? What do you think of that appeal which Paul writes and God makes through him, "I beseech you, therefore, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your reasonable service." Think of those mercies. Think how Christ poured out His life for you. Suppose He were to appear in the midst of you today, and holding up His hands, dripping with blood, should say, "I beseech you by the mercies shown you by God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God!" Would you not feel the force of His appeal that this is a "reasonable service?" Would not this love of Christ constrain you? What do you think of it? Did He die for all that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto Him that loved them and gave Himself for them? What do you say? just as the uplifted ax would otherwise have fallen on your neck, He caught the blow on His own. You could have had no life if He had not died to save it; then what will you do? Will you have this offered mercy or reject it? Yield to Him the life He has in such mercy spared, or refuse to yield it?
REMARKS.
1. The governmental bearings of this scheme are perfectly apparent. The whole transaction tends powerfully to sustain God's law, and to reveal His love and even mercy to sinners. It shows that He is personally ready to forgive, and needs only to have such an arrangement made that He can do it safely as to His government. What could show His readiness to forgive so strikingly as this? See how carefully He guards against the abuse of pardon! Always ready to pardon, yet ever watchful over the great interests of obedience and happiness, lest they be imperilled by its freeness and fullness!
2. Why should it ever be thought incredible that God should devise such a scheme of atonement? Is there anything in it that is unlike God or inconsistent with His revealed character? I doubt whether any moral agent can understand this system and yet think it incredible. Those who reject it as incredible, must have failed to understand it.
3. The question might be asked -- Why did Christ die at all, if not for us? He had never sinned; did not die on His own account as a sinner; nor did He die as the infants of our race do, with a moral nature yet undeveloped, and who yet belong to a sinning race. The only account to be given of His death is, that He died not for Himself, but for us.
It might also be asked -- Why did He die so? See Him expiring between two thieves, and crushed down beneath a mountain weight of sorrow. Why was this? Other martyrs have died shouting; He died in anguish and grief, cast down and agonized beneath the hidings of His Father's face.
All nature seemed to sympathize with His griefs. Mark -- the sun is clothed in darkness; the rocks are rent; the earth quakes beneath your feet; all nature is convulsed. Even a heathen philosopher exclaimed -- Surely the universe is coming to an end, or the Maker of the universe is dying! Hark, that piercing cry, "My God, my God; why hast Thou forsaken Me?"
On the supposition of His dying as a Saviour for sinners, all is plain. He dies for the government of God, and must needs suffer these things to make a just expression of God's abhorrence of sin. While He stands in the place of guilty sinners, God must frown on Him and hide His face. This reveals both the spirit of God's government and His own infinite wisdom.
4. Some have impeached the atonement as likely to encourage sin. But such persons neglect the very important distinction between the proper use of a thing and its abuse. No doubt the best things in the universe may be abused, and by abuse be perverted to evil, and all the more by how much the better they are in their legitimate use.
Of the natural tendency of the atonement to good, it would seem that no man can rationally doubt. The tendency of manifesting such love, meekness, and self-sacrifice for us, is to make the sinner trust and love, and to make him bow before the cross with a broken and contrite heart. But many do abuse it; and the best things, abused, become the worst. The abuse of the atonement is the very reason why God sends sinners to hell. He says, "He that despised Moses' law, died without mercy under two or three witnesses; of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and counted the blood of the covenant an unholy thing, and hath done despite to the Spirit of grace?"
Hence, if any sinner will abuse atoning blood, and trample down the holy law, and the very idea of returning to God in penitence and love, God will say of him, "Of how much sorer punishment shall he be thought worthy" than he who despised Moses' law and fell beneath its vengeance?
5. It is a matter of fact, that this manifestation of God in Christ does break the heart of sinners. It has subdued many hearts, and will thousands more. If they believe it and hold it as a reality, must it not subdue their heart to love and grief? Do not you think so? Certainly, if you saw it as it is, and felt the force of it in your heart, you would sob out on your very seat, break down and cry out -- Did Jesus love me so? And shall I love sin any more? Ah, your heart would melt as thousands have been broken and melted in every age, when they have seen the love of Jesus as revealed on the cross. That beautiful hymn puts the case truthfully --
"I saw One hanging on a tree,
In agony and blood;
Who fixed His languid eyes on me,
As near the cross I stood."
But it was not the first look that fully broke his heart. It was only when --
"A second look He gave which said,
I freely all forgive;
This blood is for thy ransom paid --
I die that thou mayest live,"
that his whole heart broke, tears fell like rain, and he withheld no power of his being in the full consecration of his soul to this Saviour.
This is the genuine effect of the sinner's understanding the Gospel and giving Jesus Christ credit for His loving-kindness in dying for the lost. Faith thus breaks the stony heart. If this demonstration of God's love in Christ does not break your heart, nothing else will. If this death and love of Christ do not constrain you, nothing else can.
But if you do not look at it, and will not set your mind upon it, it will only work your ruin. To know this Gospel only enough to reject and disown it, can serve no other purpose save to make your guilt the greater, and your doom the more fearful.
6. Jesus was made a sin-offering for us. How beautifully this was illustrated under the Mosaic system! The victim was brought out to be slain; the blood was carried in and sprinkled on the mercy-seat. This mercy-seat was no other than the sacred cover or lid of the ark which contained the tables of the law and other sacred memorials of God's ancient mercies. There they were, in that deep recess -- within which none might enter on pain of death, save the High Priest, and he only once a year, on the great day of atonement. On this eventful day, the sacred rites culminated to their highest solemnity. Two goats were brought forward, upon which the High Priest laid his hands and confessed publicly his own sins and the sins of all the people. Then one was driven far away into the wilderness, to signify how God removes our sins far as the east is from the west; the other was slain, and its blood borne by the High Priest into the most holy place, and sprinkled there upon the mercy-seat beneath the cherubim. Meanwhile, the vast congregation stood without, confessing their sins, and expecting remission only through the shedding of blood. It was as if the whole world had been standing around the base of Calvary, confessing their sins, while Jesus bore His cross to the summit, to hang thereon, and bleed and die for the sins of men. How fitting that, while Christ is dying, we should be confessing!
Some of you may think it a great thing to go on a foreign mission. But Jesus has led the way. He left heaven on a foreign mission; came down to this more than heathen world, and no one ever faced such self-denial. Yet He fearlessly marched up without the least hesitation to meet the consequences. Never did He shrink from disgrace, from humiliation, or torture. And can you shrink from following the footsteps of such a leader? Is anything too much for you to suffer, while you follow in the lead of such a Captain of your salvation?"
A Summary of the Matter:
A Pure Heart Compelled by His Love
We cannot deny God's moral existence; so we are open to the possibility of miracles; and yet expect our needed revelation; and when confronted with the historical facts, we believe their consistency—but are not risen from all our alienation, doubt and moral inconsistency until we invite the One whose name is Love, to put to death these anti-lifes, and win over our supreme focus to His benevolent way—being thus motivated by the same Power and purpose that raised up Jesus Christ from the dead.52 But do you really personally know why Jesus said, "I am the resurrection and the life?"
52 Thus, true contentment is only found in worshiping God in everything we do. Worship is the submissive correspondence of our whole being to God through Jesus Christ. It is the empowering of the authority of conscience in beholding His holiness, the satisfying harmony of mind by the direction of the Truth Himself, the harnessing and effectunlising of the imagination in His love and beauty, and the delighting in nothing other than to feast in the glory of our hearts uniting to Him, and for His purpose and happiness. He brings universal peace when He drives out contradiction and becomes our "Peace." This is true contentment indeed!
Sadly many fall in love with this wonderful idea and never fulfill the conditions of really consisting with it. They love the beauty and harmony of it all, but fail to see that they are slaves to sin and cannot partake of it while they set up their own way to serve God. Before Paul beautifly sums up my book by showing the heart of the matter, he compares the unbeliever—who serves his own desires, delights, or flesh—with the true child of God—who is delivered from the bondage of selfishness that continually breaks His law, to serve God through the dictates of the mind (conscience) by the indwelling influence of a Holy Presence breathing love.53
53 Sin is so wretched because it is choosing to live like mere animals and obey impulses, feelings, and desires, instead of living above these in true dignity—the image of God—and always choosing the most valuable interests. This is not perceive by animals, but we have this wonderful responsibility.
For I delight in the law of God after the inward man: But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. 0 wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but [but if] through the flesh the law of sin.
There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law could not do [law only convicts and cannot win the heart], in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit. For to he fleshly minded [obey the body desires] is death; hut to he spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the minding of the flesh is enmity (hostility) against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can he [if it were then it would be spiritual]. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. But you are not in the flesh, hut in the Spirit, if it so be that the Spirit of God dwells in you. But if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; hut the Spirit is life because of righteousness. But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also give life to your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwells in you. Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh. For if you live after the flesh, you shall die: hut if you through the Spirit put to death the deeds of the body, you shall live [thus we all live for the flesh and must give it up to live]. For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. For you have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but you have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father. It is that very Spirit that bears witness with our spirit [God's revelation within confirms His revelation without], that we are the children of God: And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. For the earnest expectation of the creation waits for the manifestation of the sons of God Ithe world will become perfect again after their resurrectioni. For the creation was made subject to futility, not willingly, hut by reason of him who had subjected the same in hope that the creation itself shall also be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groans and travails in pain together until now. And not only it, hut ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit. Even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, the redemption of our body [Pain, not just evil will be vanquished]. For we are saved by hope: but hope that is seen is not hope: for who awaits for what is seen? But if we hope for that we see not, then we wait for it with patience [because we trust that it is in God's best interests to allow what He has].
54 "Love has been perfected in us in this: that we may have confidence on the day of judgement, because as He is, so are we in this world. There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear; for fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not reach perfection in love." 1 John 4
Likewise the Spirit also helps our weakness: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but that very Spirit intercedes for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. And he that searches the hearts knows what is the mind of the Spirit, because he intercedes for the saints according to the will of God. And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose [can anything be more precious?]. For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might he the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.
What shall we then say to these things [so wonderful and promisingi? If God be for us, who can be against us? He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things? Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifies. Who is he that condemns? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also makes intercession for us. Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? As it is written, For your sake we are killed all day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter. No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us. For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. Romans 7-8
Scripture from NRSV is from the New Revised Standard Version Bible Copywrite 1989, Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America. Scripture from NASV is from New American Standard Bible translation Copy~ite © 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973. 1975, 1977. by The Lockman Foundation
For further information write to:
Rick Friedrich
10 Ladbrooke Road
Toronto Ontario
Canada
M9R 2A8
Or phone (416) 630-1871
Email: rickfriedrich@hotmail.com
rickfriedrich@netscape.net