General

Our worldview has a great impact on our expectations and actions.  Consider the early church.  As we read through the book of Acts we see the Apostles performing signs and wonders in the name of Christ.  For example, Acts 5:12 tells us the apostles “performed many signs and wonders among the people.” People were so impressed that they “brought the sick into the streets and laid them on beds and mats so that at least Peter’s shadow might fall on some of them as he passed by.”  Talk about a recipe for revival.

In Acts chapter 9, Peter, through the power of the Holy Spirit, raised Tabitha from the dead in a place named Joppa.  When this became known all over Joppa, the Bible tells us that many people believed in the Lord.

These incidents, along with many others, did indeed bring about what we today would refer to as a great revival.  As the scripture tells us, many people believed in the Lord, and God added daily to their number.  But did things continue along the path that we today, would expect?  In our worldview, would we anticipate what happened later?

What would we expect after such signs and wonders and the ensuing response? Would we start our plans for a bigger building or campus, possibly a TV program?  How about a crusade schedule or a series of “God Can” conferences?  Would we expect this ‘movement’ to simply keep on growing?

Would we be anticipate what actually happened? Lets take a look at just what did happen.  Shortly after the mention of the apostles performing many signs and wonders in Acts 5:12, we see Stephen martyred and then Acts 8 tells us a great persecution broke out against the church in Jerusalem – in the midst of their good works and signs and wonders.  The persecution was so great the people had to flee and the church was scattered.  Now, I realize this worked to fulfill the spread of the Gospel beyond Jerusalem, but would this have been in our “5 year plan?”

Consider the course of Peter’s life. This same Peter who raises Tabitha from the dead, whose shadow people had tried to place their loved ones in to receive healing, ended his life as a martyr for Christ. He was persecuted and ultimately killed for his teaching and good deeds in Christ.  Is this the end we would anticipate for a great preacher today?

The worldview of the church in the west no longer includes persecution for the Gospel.  We want the church to be popular and well-liked in our culture.  But Jesus said that the world would hate us just like they hated Him.

Does this really make a difference? Is there a problem with wanting to be well thought of and respected as a church and Christians?  At what cost are we willing to be well thought of and respected?  Does our desire for such cause us to compromise the very Gospel that brings us salvation? If that be the case then it most certainly makes a difference and there is a problem.

“Unforgiveness is like acid; it destroys the vessel in which it is stored.” Author unknown

“For if you forgive men when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive men their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins” (Matt. 6:14-15).

Man sitting at a dinner table with a group of people: “God does not exist.”

Christian in the group: “Really, why do you say that?”

Man: “Because of all the bad, evil things that happen to people.”

Christian: “Do you give your children everything they want and always do things the way they want you to?”

Man: “Of course not!”

Christian: “Do your children always do what you want them to do?”

Man: “Absolutely not!”

Christian: “Well, then I guess you don’t exist.”

There is a mythical ‘gospel’ that exists in our world.  It is not written down, at least not in a single writing from a single source.  Instead, it exists in the mindset of many Christians.  It

The gospel of trying harder reveals itself in the lives of Christians who are desperately trying to be good for God.  In some ways they sound a lot like Paul in Romans 7 verses 15 to 20

I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. ^16 And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. ^17 As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. ^18 For I know that good itself does not dwell in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. ^19 For I do not do the good I want to do, but the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing. ^20 Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.

If read by itself these verses are some of the most confusing words in the Bible.  This confusion looks a lot like the way many Christians who adhere to the gospel of trying harder live their lives.  They try to be good (oftentimes referring to it as holy or holiness) and then when they fail the answer is to try again and try harder.  Afterall, disciple is the root word of discipline, right?

But the point of Romans 7 is that we have been released from the Law and bound to Christ.  Any goodness is found only in Christ.  Pleasing God, very important to those who practice the gospel of trying harder, is actually found in surrender, not performance.  It is in the recognition of our weakness and the surrender to Him that His strenght is made perfect in us.  Our discipline is to be a disciplined surrender rather than a discipline of performance.  Our abstinence is to be an abstinence of self, including self-reliance. Walk by the Spirit and you will not gratify the lust of the flesh.

The gospel of trying harder is not a gospel (good news) at all.  Instead it is a deception that produces bondage.  It is a reliance on self rather than a surrender and reliance on God.  It is sin.  To His people God calls, repent therefore and be set free.

“A man can no more diminish God’s glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word ‘darkness’ on the walls of his cell.” C.S. Lewis, The Problem of Pain

There is no problem that impinges more directly on the question of the existence of God.  If there is a God, and He is good and wise, why does he allow such suffering?  This is the question we have been dealing with the last couple of weeks.

Most people, unconsciously or otherwise, resist the idea that God is evil and desires to make life miserable for us. It is easier to reject the idea of God altogether.  The Bible declares that God is, that He is good and that He is wise.   It states consistently that he is a personal, intelligent God who created this universe and that he is just, loving and compassionate. So why is there suffering?

To be continued…

Why would anyone ever get upset about someone telling other people they were servants of God who were telling people the way to be saved? Sounds like a compliment to me. But that is exactly what happened with Paul the apostle in Macedonia. A slave girl who had a spirit of divination followed them around saying ”These men are servants of the Most high God who are telling you the way to be saved.” Paul put up with it for a few days but finally turned to the girl and commanded the demon come out of her. At once the demon left her and she no longer could practice the evil craft that brought her masters much money.

Why did Paul respond this way? What she was saying was  true. After all isn’t any witness a good witness? No. While what she was saying may have been true Paul would not want the message of the Gospel associated with an evil spirit. Dong so legitimizes the demonic spirit in the eyes of those who witness the event and clouds the very clear line between the true power of God and the counterfeit power of Satan. Even though what she was saying was true it came from a false witness. Beware the false witnesses, wolves in sheep clothing, even when a part of what they say may be true.

A popular argument from the cynic unbeliever often revolves around the supposed historical inaccuracy of the Bible.  But is this a fair argument, or even one with any basis of fact?

Over the years many have taken to challenging the Bible and its historical inaccuracy.  One such individual was 19th century scholar, Sir william Ramsay.  After physically exploring the actual Bible lands with a Bible in hand this is what he had to say.  “The more I have studied the narrative of the Act, and the more I have learned year after year about Graeco-Roman society and thoughts and fashions, and organization in those provinces, the more I admire and the better I understand.I set out to look for truth on the borderland where Greece and Asia meet, and found it here (referring to the Book of Acts; Revraney). You may press the words of Luke in a degree beyond any other historian’s, and they stand the keenest scrutinity and the hardest treatment, provided always that the critic knows the subject and does not go beyond the limits of science and of justice.” Ramsay, William (1915), The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1975 reprint).

Twentieth Century archaeologist Nelson Glueck says the following, “It may be stated categorically that no archaeological discovery has ever controverted a Biblical reference.  Socres of archaeological findings have been made which conform in clear outline or exact detail historical statements in the Bible.”   Glueck, Nelson (1959), Rivers in the Desert: A History of the Negev ;New York: Farrar, Strauss, and Cudahy.

For the discerning mind and soul doubting the Bible simply because it seems unbelievable or even worse becasue it is an inconvenient truth is not an acceptable approach.