The Reasonable, Evidential Nature of Christian Faith

By J. Warner Wallace 2/23/2018

     Skeptics sometimes portray Christians as both “unreasonable” and “unreasoning”. The Christian culture only exacerbates the problem when it advocates for a definition of “faith” removed from evidence. Is true faith blind? How are true believers to respond to doubt? What is the relationship between faith and reason? Richard Dawkins once said:

     “Many of us saw religion as harmless nonsense. Beliefs might lack all supporting evidence but, we thought, if people needed a crutch for consolation, where’s the harm? September 11th changed all that.”

     This view of Christian belief is common among skeptics and believers alike. Critics think Christians accept truth claims without any evidential support and many Christians embrace the claims of Christianity unaware of the strong evidence supporting our worldview. Dawkins is correct when he argues against forming beliefs without evidence. People who accept truth claims without any examination or need for evidence are prone to believing myths and making bad decisions.

     Christians Are Called to A Reasonable Faith | Christians, however, are not called to make decisions without good evidence. The God of the Bible does not call his children to obey blindly. The Gospels are themselves an important form of direct evidence; the testimony of eyewitnesses who observed the life, ministry, death and resurrection of Jesus. That’s why the scriptures repeatedly call us to have a reasoned belief in Christ, and not to resort to the behavior of unreasoning animals:

     Jude 4, 10 | For certain persons have crept in unnoticed, those who were long beforehand marked out for this condemnation, ungodly persons who turn the grace of our God into licentiousness and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ…But these men revile the things which they do not understand; and the things which they know by instinct, like unreasoning animals, by these things they are destroyed.

Click here to go to source

James "Jim" Warner Wallace (born June 16, 1961) is an American homicide detective and Christian apologist. Wallace is a Senior Fellow at the Colson Center for Christian Worldview and an Adjunct Professor of Apologetics at Biola University in La Mirada, California. He has authored several books, including Cold-Case Christianity, God’s Crime Scene, and Forensic Faith, in which he applies principles of cold case homicide investigation to apologetic concerns such as the existence of God and the reliability of the Gospels.

• Cold-Case Christianity: A Homicide Detective Investigates the Claims of the Gospels

• God's Crime Scene: A Cold-Case Detective Examines the Evidence for a Divinely Created Universe

• Alive: A Cold-Case Approach to the Resurrection

• Cold-Case Christianity for Kids: Investigate Jesus with a Real Detective

• Keeping Your Kids on God's Side: 40 Conversations to Help Them Build a Lasting Faith

• Forensic Faith: A Homicide Detective Makes the Case for a More Reasonable, Evidential Christian Faith

The Institutes of the Christian Religion

Translated by Henry Beveridge

     11. I am aware it seems unaccountable to some how faith is attributed to the reprobate, seeing that it is declared by Paul to be one of the fruits of election; [284] and yet the difficulty is easily solved: for though none are enlightened into faith, and truly feel the efficacy of the Gospel, with the exception of those who are fore-ordained to salvation, yet experience shows that the reprobate are sometimes affected in a way so similar to the elect, that even in their own judgment there is no difference between them. Hence it is not strange, that by the Apostle a taste of heavenly gifts, and by Christ himself a temporary faith, is ascribed to them. Not that they truly perceive the power of spiritual grace and the sure light of faith; but the Lord, the better to convict them, and leave them without excuse, instills into their minds such a sense of his goodness as can be felt without the Spirit of adoption. Should it be objected, that believers have no stronger testimony to assure them of their adoption, I answer, that though there is a great resemblance and affinity between the elect of God and those who are impressed for a time with a fading faith, yet the elect alone have that full assurance which is extolled by Paul, and by which they are enabled to cry, Abba, Father. Therefore, as God regenerates the elect only for ever by incorruptible seed, as the seed of life once sown in their hearts never perishes, so he effectually seals in them the grace of his adoption, that it may be sure and steadfast. But in this there is nothing to prevent an inferior operation of the Spirit from taking its course in the reprobate. Meanwhile, believers are taught to examine themselves carefully and humbly, lest carnal security creep in and take the place of assurance of faith. We may add, that the reprobate never have any other than a confused sense of grace, laying hold of the shadow rather than the substance, because the Spirit properly seals the forgiveness of sins in the elect only, applying it by special faith to their use. Still it is correctly said, that the reprobate believe God to be propitious to them, inasmuch as they accept the gift of reconciliation, though confusedly and without due discernment; not that they are partakers of the same faith or regeneration with the children of God; but because, under a covering of hypocrisy, they seem to have a principle of faith in common with them. Nor do I even deny that God illumines their minds to this extent, that they recognize his grace; but that conviction he distinguishes from the peculiar testimony which he gives to his elect in this respect, that the reprobate never attain to the full result or to fruition. When he shows himself propitious to them, it is not as if he had truly rescued them from death, and taken them under his protection. He only gives them a manifestation of his present mercy. [285] In the elect alone he implants the living root of faith, so that they persevere even to the end. Thus we dispose of the objection, that if God truly displays his grace, it must endure for ever. There is nothing inconsistent in this with the fact of his enlightening some with a present sense of grace, which afterwards proves evanescent.

12. Although faith is a knowledge of the divine favor towards us, and a full persuasion of its truth, it is not strange that the sense of the divine love, which though akin to faith differs much from it, vanishes in those who are temporarily impressed. The will of God is, I confess, immutable, and his truth is always consistent with itself; but I deny that the reprobate ever advance so far as to penetrate to that secret revelation which Scripture reserves for the elect only. I therefore deny that they either understand his will considered as immutable, or steadily embrace his truth, inasmuch as they rest satisfied with an evanescent impression; just as a tree not planted deep enough may take root, but will in process of time wither away, though it may for several years not only put forth leaves and flowers, but produce fruit. In short, as by the revolt of the first man, the image of God could be effaced from his mind and soul, so there is nothing strange in His shedding some rays of grace on the reprobate, and afterwards allowing these to be extinguished. There is nothing to prevent His giving some a slight knowledge of his Gospel, and imbuing others thoroughly. Meanwhile, we must remember that however feeble and slender the faith of the elect may be, yet as the Spirit of God is to them a sure earnest and seal of their adoption, the impression once engraven can never be effaced from their hearts, whereas the light which glimmers in the reprobate is afterwards quenched. [286] Nor can it be said that the Spirit therefore deceives, because he does not quicken the seed which lies in their hearts so as to make it ever remain incorruptible as in the elect. I go farther: seeing it is evident, from the doctrine of Scripture and from daily experience, that the reprobate are occasionally impressed with a sense of divine grace, some desire of mutual love must necessarily be excited in their hearts. Thus for a time a pious affection prevailed in Saul, disposing him to love God. Knowing that he was treated with paternal kindness, he was in some degree attracted by it. But as the reprobate have no rooted conviction of the paternal love of God, so they do not in return yield the love of sons, but are led by a kind of mercenary affection. The Spirit of love was given to Christ alone, for the express purpose of conferring this Spirit upon his members; and there can be no doubt that the following words of Paul apply to the elect only: "The love of God is shed abroad in our hearts, by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us," (Rom. 5:5); namely, the love which begets that confidence in prayer to which I have above adverted. On the other hand, we see that God is mysteriously offended with his children, though he ceases not to love them. He certainly hates them not, but he alarms them with a sense of his anger, that he may humble the pride of the flesh, arouse them from lethargy, and urge them to repentance. Hence they, at the same instant, feel that he is angry with them or their sins, and also propitious to their persons. It is not from fictitious dread that they deprecate his anger, and yet they retake themselves to him with tranquil confidence. It hence appears that the faith of some, though not true faith, is not mere pretence. They are borne along by some sudden impulse of zeal, and erroneously impose upon themselves, sloth undoubtedly preventing them from examining their hearts with due care. Such probably was the case of those whom John describes as believing on Christ; but of whom he says, "Jesus did not commit himself unto them, because he knew all men, and needed not that any should testify of man: for he knew what was in man," (John 2:24, 25). Were it not true that many fall away from the common faith (I call it common, because there is a great resemblance between temporary and living, everduring faith), Christ would not have said to his disciples, "If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; and ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free," (John 8:31, 32). He is addressing those who had embraced his doctrine, and urging them to progress in the faith, lest by their sluggishness they extinguish the light which they have received. Accordingly, Paul claims faith as the peculiar privilege of the elect, intimating that many, from not being properly rooted, fall away (Tit. 1:1). In the same way, in Matthew, our Savior says, "Every plant which my heavenly Father has not planted shall be rooted up," (Mt. 16:13). Some who are not ashamed to insult God and man are more grossly false. Against this class of men, who profane the faith by impious and lying pretence, James inveighs (James 2:14). Nor would Paul require the faith of believers to be unfeigned (1 Tim. 1:5), were there not many who presumptuously arrogate to themselves what they have not, deceiving others, and sometimes even themselves, with empty show. Hence he compares a good conscience to the ark in which faith is preserved, because many, by falling away, have in regard to it made shipwreck.

13. It is necessary to attend to the ambiguous meaning of the term: for faith is often equivalent in meaning to sound doctrine, as in the passage which we lately quoted, and in the same epistle where Paul enjoins the deacons to hold "the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience;" in like manner, when he denounces the defection of certain from the faith. The meaning again is the same, when he says that Timothy had been brought up in the faith; and in like manner, when he says that profane babblings and oppositions of science, falsely so called, lead many away from the faith. Such persons he elsewhere calls reprobate as to the faith. On the other hand, when he enjoins Titus, "Rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith;" [287] by soundness he means purity of doctrine, which is easily corrupted, and degenerates through the fickleness of men. And indeed, since in Christ, as possessed by faith, are "hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge," (Col. 1:2, 3), the term faith is justly extended to the whole sum of heavenly doctrine, from which it cannot be separated. On the other hand, it is sometimes confined to a particular object, as when Matthew says of those who let down the paralytic through the roof, that Jesus saw their faith (Mt. 9:2); and Jesus himself exclaims in regard to the centurion, "I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel," (Mt. 8:10). Now, it is probable that the centurion was thinking only of the cure of his son, by whom his whole soul was engrossed; [288] but because he is satisfied with the simple answer and assurance of Christ, and does not request his bodily presence, this circumstance calls forth the eulogium on his faith. And we have lately shown how Paul uses the term faith for the gift of miracles--a gift possessed by persons who were neither regenerated by the Spirit of God, nor sincerely reverenced him. In another passage, he uses faith for the doctrine by which we are instructed in the faith. For when he says, that "that which is in part shall be done away," (1 Cor. 13:10), there can be no doubt that reference is made to the ministry of the Church, which is necessary in our present imperfect state; in these forms of expression the analogy is obvious. But when the name of faith is improperly transferred to a false profession or lying assumption, the catachresis ought not to seem harsher than when the fear of God is used for vicious and perverse worship; as when it is repeatedly said in sacred history, that the foreign nations which had been transported to Samaria and the neighbouring districts, feared false gods and the God of Israel: in other words, confounded heaven with earth. But we have now been inquiring what the faith is, which distinguishes the children of God from unbelievers, the faith by which we invoke God the Father, by which we pass from death unto life, and by which Christ our eternal salvation and life dwells in us. Its power and nature have, I trust, been briefly and clearly explained.

14. Let us now again go over the parts of the definition separately: I should think that, after a careful examination of them, no doubt will remain. By knowledge we do not mean comprehension, such as that which we have of things falling under human sense. For that knowledge is so much superior, that the human mind must far surpass and go beyond itself in order to reach it. Nor even when it has reached it does it comprehend what it feels, but persuaded of what it comprehends not, it understands more from mere certainty of persuasion than it could discern of any human matter by its own capacity. Hence it is elegantly described by Paul as ability "to comprehend with all saints what is the breadth, and length, and depth, and height; and to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge," (Eph. 3:18, 19). His object was to intimate, that what our mind embraces by faith is every way infinite, that this kind of knowledge far surpasses all understanding. But because the "mystery which has been hid from ages and from generations" is now "made manifest to the saints," (Col. 1:26), faith is, for good reason, occasionally termed in Scripture understanding (Col. 2:2); and knowledge, as by John (1 John 3:2), when he declares that believers know themselves to be the sons of God. And certainly they do know, but rather as confirmed by a belief of the divine veracity than taught by any demonstration of reason. This is also indicated by Paul when he says, that "whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord: (For we walk by faith, not by sight)," (2 Cor. 5:6, 7) thus showing, that what we understand by faith is yet distant from us and escapes our view. Hence we conclude that the knowledge of faith consists more of certainty than discernment.

15. We add, that it is sure and firm, the better to express strength and constancy of persuasion. For as faith is not contented with a dubious and fickle opinion, so neither is it contented with an obscure and ill-defined conception. The certainty which it requires must be full and decisive, as is usual in regard to matters ascertained and proved. So deeply rooted in our hearts is unbelief, so prone are we to it, that while all confess with the lips that God is faithful, no man ever believes it without an arduous struggle. Especially when brought to the test, [289] we by our wavering betray the vice which lurked within. Nor is it without cause that the Holy Spirit bears such distinguished testimony to the authority of God, in order that it may cure the disease of which I have spoken, and induce us to give full credit to the divine promises: "The words of the Lord" (says David, Ps. 12:6) "are pure words, as silver tried in a furnace of earth purified seven times:" "The word of the Lord is tried: he is a buckler to all those that trust in him," (Ps. 18:30). And Solomon declares the same thing almost in the same words, "Every word of God is pure," (Prov. 30:5). But further quotation is superfluous, as the 119th Psalm is almost wholly occupied with this subject. Certainly, whenever God thus recommends his word, he indirectly rebukes our unbelief, the purport of all that is said being to eradicate perverse doubt from our hearts. There are very many also who form such an idea of the divine mercy as yields them very little comfort. For they are harassed by miserable anxiety while they doubt whether God will be merciful to them. They think, indeed, that they are most fully persuaded of the divine mercy, but they confine it within too narrow limits. The idea they entertain is, that this mercy is great and abundant, is shed upon many, is offered and ready to be bestowed upon all; but that it is uncertain whether it will reach to them individually, or rather whether they can reach to it. Thus their knowledge stopping short leaves them only mid-way; not so much confirming and tranquilizing the mind as harassing it with doubt and disquietude. Very different is that feeling of full assurance (plerophori'a) which the Scriptures uniformly attribute to faith--an assurance which leaves no doubt that the goodness of God is clearly offered to us. This assurance we cannot have without truly perceiving its sweetness, and experiencing it in ourselves. Hence from faith the Apostle deduces confidence, and from confidence boldness. His words are, "In whom (Christ) we have boldness and access with confidence by the faith of him," (Eph. 3:12) thus undoubtedly showing that our faith is not true unless it enables us to appear calmly in the presence of God. Such boldness springs only from confidence in the divine favor and salvation. So true is this, that the term faith is often used as equivalent to confidence.

16. The principal hinge on which faith turns is this: We must not suppose that any promises of mercy which the Lord offers are only true out of us, and not at all in us: we should rather make them ours by inwardly embracing them. In this way only is engendered that confidence which he elsewhere terms peace (Rom. 5:1); though perhaps he rather means to make peace follow from it. This is the security which quiets and calms the conscience in the view of the judgment of God, and without which it is necessarily vexed and almost torn with tumultuous dread, unless when it happens to slumber for a moment, forgetful both of God and of itself. And verily it is but for a moment. It never long enjoys that miserable obliviousness, for the memory of the divine judgment, ever and anon recurring, stings it to the quick. In one word, he only is a true believer who, firmly persuaded that God is reconciled, and is a kind Father to him, hopes everything from his kindness, who, trusting to the promises of the divine favor, with undoubting confidence anticipates salvation; as the Apostle shows in these words, "We are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence steadfast unto the end," (Heb. 3:14). He thus holds, that none hope well in the Lord save those who confidently glory in being the heirs of the heavenly kingdom. No man, I say, is a believer but he who, trusting to the security of his salvation, confidently triumphs over the devil and death, as we are taught by the noble exclamation of Paul, "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," (Rom. 8:38). In like manner, the same Apostle does not consider that the eyes of our understanding are enlightened unless we know what is the hope of the eternal inheritance to which we are called (Eph. 1:18). Thus he uniformly intimates throughout his writings, that the goodness of God is not properly comprehended when security does not follow as its fruit.

     Christian Classics Ethereal Library / Public Domain

     Institutes of the Christian Religion

The Stone and the Snake

By John Piper 2/25/2017

My Father bade me come, and said,
“Ask me for what you need. And spread
Before me all your heart. Seek me
For ev’ry true desire, and see
If I will ever fail to love
You perfectly with treasures of
My boundless store, my heart. And keep
On knocking. Though I do not sleep,
I have my reasons for delay,
And I delight to hear you pray.
If you should need an anchor for your boat,
But, lured by hunger, ask for bread,
I’ll mark your need, and lest you seaward float,
Give you a heavy stone instead.
Or if you need to drain a viper’s fang,
A healing antidote to make,
But ask for useless fish to ease the pang,
I will discern, and give the snake.
O precious child, think not, because
I meet your needs with love by laws
Beyond your grasp: It is in vain
For you to pray, as if the gain
Of snake and stone were no reply
To your desire. Dear Child, your cry
Does open treasuries, and shake
The heavens. I bid you come and take
These keys, and all my store unlock,
My heart. To ask, and seek, and knock.”

12 | Wellhausen’s Reconstruction of Hebrew History in the Priestly Period
Introduction: Wellhausen’s Reconstruction (Priestly Period) (cont)

By Gleason Archer Jr.

      8. Elements in the Jewish ritual and temple service which figured very prominently in the post-exilic period receive no mention whatsoever in this allegedly priest-inspired document, P. Thus, we find no reference whatsoever to (1) the Levitical guild of temple singers; (2) the scribes, of which Ezra himself was the acknowledged leader; (3) the temple servants known as the Nethinim; (4) the employment of musical instruments. It is impossible to explain how a professional priestly group, manufacturing a spurious law of Moses for the purpose of justifying and enforcing their claims to special authority, could have failed to include Mosaic sanctions for any of these items. Nor, for that matter, is it explicable how J and E and D could have failed to mention items (1), (3), and (4), if they were in fact composed later than the reign of Solomon (970–931 B.C.), under whom the temple singers, Nethinim, and musical instruments were intimately involved in the temple cultus. It is therefore difficult to account for this astonishing silence about matters of peculiarly priestly interest, except upon the basis that P was in fact composed before Solomon’s time.

      9. In this connection it ought to be pointed out that the holy city of Jerusalem is never mentioned in the Mosaic legislation. There is a reference to Melchizedek, king of Salem, in  Gen. 14; Mount Moriah is named as the scene of Isaac’s near-sacrifice; and “the mountain of thine inheritance” is a phrase appearing in  Ex. 15:17. But never once is Jerusalem referred to as such in the Torah. How is it possible that after five hundred years of existence as the religious and political capital of the Jewish commonwealth, the assorted contributors to document P neglected to include any slightest sanction for the holy city? Not even by later interpolations (such as apparently crept into the Samaritan text of the Torah to establish the sanctity of their holy Mount Gerizim) were Zion and Jerusalem certified as the uniquely acceptable place in which to offer sacrifice according to either P or J or E. Even  Deuteronomy leaves the “place Jehovah shall choose” ( 12:5, 14; 16:16 ) altogether anonymous, though it would have been very easy for a seventh-century author to insert at least the name of Jerusalem, even if he hesitated to disturb the illusion of Mosaic origin by specifying its future importance. A large number of other Palestinian cities are referred to by name in document D, but never Jerusalem.

      10. Lastly it should be pointed out that one of the most frequent and characteristic titles of God employed by the post-exilic prophets and authors is never once found in the entire Pentateuch. This title is Jehovah of Hosts (Yahweh Ṣebāʾôt), which occurs sixty-seven times in  Isaiah (in sixty-six chapters), eighty-three times in  Jeremiah (in fifty-two chapters), thirteen times in  Haggai (in two chapters), fifty-one times in  Zechariah (fourteen chapters), and twenty-five times in  Malachi (three or four chapters). This indicates a mounting frequency or popularity for this title culminating in the three post-exilic prophets:  Haggai (6.5 times per chapter),  Zechariah (3.5 times per chapter), and  Malachi (6 to 8 times per chapter). It is well-nigh impossible to explain how Yahweh Ṣebāʾôt could fail to appear in document P, if in fact it was composed after the exile. (While it is true that  Ezekiel does not use this title either, the Documentary Theory attributes strong  Ezekiel influence only to H, i.e.,  Lev. 17–26, and dates the rest of P as arising between 550 and 450 B.C.) No other title for God approaches the frequency with which this one was used by the very prophets in whose generation this Priestly Code was supposedly being composed. (At the same time it should be recognized that the narrative authors,  Ezra and  Nehemiah, do not employ this expression except in  Chronicles. For some reason it was not much used by the Jews dwelling in Babylonia.) It occurred eleven times in  1 and  2 Samuel, six times in  Kings, but not once in the entire Pentateuch. The most natural inference to draw from these data is that Yahweh Ṣebāʾôt did not come into vogue as a title for God until after the period of the  Judges, and that P, along with J, E, and D, was composed before the age of the  Judges began.

A Survey of Old Testament Introduction

Read The Psalms In "1" Year

Psalm 25

11 For your name’s sake, O LORD,
pardon my guilt, for it is great.
12 Who is the man who fears the LORD?
Him will he instruct in the way that he should choose.
13 His soul shall abide in well-being,
and his offspring shall inherit the land.
14 The friendship of the LORD is for those who fear him,
and he makes known to them his covenant.
15 My eyes are ever toward the LORD,
for he will pluck my feet out of the net.
16 Turn to me and be gracious to me,
for I am lonely and afflicted.
17 The troubles of my heart are enlarged;
bring me out of my distresses.
18 Consider my affliction and my trouble,
and forgive all my sins.

Exodus 11:1 – 12:20; Luke 14; Job 29; 1 Corinthians 15

By Don Carson 2/28/2018

     The Crushing plagues have followed their ordained sequence. Repeatedly, Pharaoh hardened his heart; yet, however culpable this man was, God sovereignly moved behind the scenes, actually warning Pharaoh, implicitly inviting repentance. For instance, through Moses God had already said to Pharaoh, “I have raised you up for this very purpose, that I might show you my power and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth. You still set yourself against my people and will not let them go” (9:16-17). Yet now Pharaoh’s patience entirely collapses. He warns Moses that he is not to appear in the court again: “The day you see my face you will die” (10:28).

     So the stage is set for the last plague, the greatest and worst of all. After the previous nine disasters, one would think that Moses’ description of what would happen (Ex. 11) would prompt Pharaoh to hesitate. But he refuses to listen (11:9); and all this occurs, God says “so that my wonders may be multiplied in Egypt” (11:9).

     In Exodus 11 – 12 there is yet another almost incidental description of God’s sovereign provision. Exodus 11 tells us, almost parenthetically, that “the LORD made the Egyptians favorably disposed toward the people” (11:3). This is followed in Exodus 12 by the description of the Egyptians urging the Israelites to leave the country (12:33). One can understand the rationale: how many more plagues like this last one could they endure? At the same time, the Israelites ask for clothing and silver and gold. “The LORD had made the Egyptians favorably disposed toward the people, and they gave them what they asked for; so they plundered the Egyptians” (12:36).

     Psychologically, it is easy enough, after the event, to explain all this. In addition to the fear the Israelites now incited among the Egyptians, perhaps guilt was also operating: who knows? “We owe them something.” Psychologically, of course, one could have concocted a quite different scenario: in a fit of rage, the Egyptians massacre the people whose leader and whose God have brought such devastating slaughter among them.

     In reality, however, the ultimate reason why things turn out this way is because of the powerful hand of God: the Lord himself made the Egyptians favorably disposed toward the people.

nbsp;    This is the element that is often overlooked by sociologists and others who treat all of culture like a closed system. They forget that God may intervene, and turn the hearts and minds of the people. Massive revival that transforms the value systems of the West is now virtually inconceivable to those enamored with closed systems. But if God graciously intervenes and makes the people “favorably disposed” to the preaching of the Gospel….

Don Carson is research professor of New Testament at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School in Deerfield, Illinois, and co-founder (with Tim Keller) of The Gospel Coalition. He has authored numerous books, and recently edited The Enduring Authority of the Christian Scriptures (Eerdmans, 2016).

When I Glory in My Shame

By Tim Challies 2/25/2017

     There is nothing my dog won’t do for food. There is no command she won’t obey when we are looking, and no rule she won’t break when we are looking away, if only she can get a bit of food in her belly. I guess it is hard to fault her since, as a Lab, every gene in her body drives her to gorge herself. It’s like Paul was writing about her and her breed when he said, ” Their end is destruction, their god is their belly, and they glory in their shame, with minds set on earthly things” (Philippians 3:19). Food is her idol, her god, the thing that will motivate her to do anything or everything.

     The thing that validates me is the thing I worship, the thing that momentarily takes the place of God in my life.

     I am no dog, but I, too, am hard-wired for something—for validation. Just as a dog will lie down or roll over or beg or bark on command to get a sausage—doesn’t she realize how pathetic she looks?—, there is not much I won’t do to receive validation, to have others affirm my self-worth according to my criteria. I want to feel special about myself, I want to feel big and important. And when I look for what makes me feel good about myself, I inevitably find my idols. The thing that validates me is the thing I worship, the thing that momentarily takes the place of God in my life.

Click here for entire article

V. DIFFICULTIES OF THE CRITICAL THEORY OF INSTITUTIONS

By James Orr 1907

An important part of our argument remains, viz., to show the untenableness of the rival critical explanation of those institutions for which a post-exilian date is claimed. The institutions in any case are there in post-exilian times, and have to be explained. If the account which the Old Testament itself gives of them is not the true one, how did they originate? On this constructive side, as palpably as anywhere else, the critical theory breaks down. We begin, as a chief example, with the  Ezekiel theory of the origin of the Levitical order, then shall pass to the consideration of feasts and other institutions.

1. A chief part of the argument on institutions relates to the fundamental question — already so often referred to — of the distinction of priests and Levites. That distinction, in the view of the critics, did not exist when  Deuteronomy was composed in the reign of Josiah: it is a prominent feature in the Priests’ Code. How was the transition effected? The answer given to this — hinted at by Graf, developed by Kuenen and Wellhausen, and now a cardinal article of faith in all sections of the school — is, through the degradation of the idolatrous priests, i.e., the “disestablished priests” of the high places, on the lines sketched by  Ezekiel in chap.  44:4 ff. In Kuenen’s view the man who is not prepared to accept this explanation is only deserving of pity. Wellhausen indicates his estimate of the importance of the contention in the remark: “The position of the Levites is the Achilles heel of the Priestly Code.” We agree, in the sense that it is the most vulnerable part in the new scheme.

The  Ezekiel theory of the critics is bound up with so many subsidiary hypotheses, and involves so many question - begging assumptions, that it is not easy to disentangle it in its simplicity. Its corner-stone, e.g., is the assumption that the Levites for whom provision is made in  Deut. 18:6, 7 are “the disestablished priests” of the bamoth — an assumption which we regard as baseless. When we turn to  Ezekiel 44:4 ff. itself, what we find is that the prophet denounces the house of Israel for having permitted strangers, uncircumcised in heart and flesh, to perform the subordinate services of the sanctuary (vers.  7, 8 ); that he forbids this to be done in the future (ver.  9 ); that he degrades to the rank of servants in the sanctuary those priests who had turned aside, and had caused the people to turn aside, to idolatry (vers.  10–14 ); and finally, that he confines the priesthood in his new temple to the sons of Zadok, who alone had remained faithful (vers.  15, 16 ). There is certainly in these verses degradation of priests to that lower rank of service which the Priestly Code assigns to the Levites; but this is very far from proving that we have here the origin of the order of the Levites, or from explaining the representation of the Priestly Code, which diverges as widely as it is possible to do from the lines of  Ezekiel’s ordinance. There are admittedly difficulties in the interpretation of  Ezekiel’s vision; but the difficulties in the way of accepting this reading of its meaning are to our mind insurmountable.

(1) That the temple service prior to the exile was in a deplorable condition — that both in and out of the temple the priesthood had largely fallen into abominable idolatries — all indications show. Irregularities abounded, and the prophet is sufficient witness that the place which the law gives to the Levites had been mostly usurped by uncircumcised strangers. But the first point evidently which claims notice here is, that this very ministry of the uncircumcised the prophet denounces as an iniquity, a violation of God’s covenant, and the setting up by the people of keepers of His charge in His sanctuary for themselves (vers.  7, 8 ). This ministry, therefore, was not, in his view, a lawful thing, but a breach of law, an abomination like the idolatry itself. What, then, in the prophet’s mind, was the lawful order? who, prior to the degradation of the idolatrous priests, were the lawful keepers of the charge of the sanctuary? Not the priests themselves, for the services in question were subordinate ministries — the very ministries ascribed elsewhere to the Levites (ver.  11; cf.  Num. 18:3, 4 ). Is not the inference very plain, though the critics generally ignore it, that, in  Ezekiel’s view, there did already exist a law on this subject, which in practice had been wantonly violated? It can hardly be mistaken that the only properly official classes recognised by the prophet in the service of the temple are Levitical, and that these are distinguished into a higher and a lower class — the keepers of the charge of the house (chap.  40:45 ), and the keepers of the charge of the altar (ver.  46 ). The unfaithful priests are punished by being degraded to the lower rank.

(2) The next point to be borne in mind is, that this programme of  Ezekiel was, and remained, a purely ideal one. It was probably never intended to have literal realisation; it was at least never actually put in force at the return, or at any earlier time. The degradation it depicts was never historically carried out; therefore could not affect the state of things subsisting after the exile. Scholars have indeed pleased themselves with pictures of “vehement struggles” (adumbrated in the story of Korah) on the part of  Ezekiel’s degraded priests to regain their lost privileges; but these “struggles” exist nowhere, so far as we know, but in the critics’ own imaginations, for there is no trace in history that any such degradation ever took place. On the other hand, we have seen that the distinction of priests and Levites was already known, and universally recognised, at the time of the return from exile. The Books of  Ezra and  Nehemiah assume it, but in no sense create it. If, therefore, this distinction was not made by  Ezekiel’s law directly, as little can it have been called forth by the Priests’ Code founded on that law, for the Code did not make its appearance till  Ezra’s time, long after. It follows, in agreement with what has been said, that it can only be understood as an inheritance from pre-exilian times.

(3) Still more decisive, perhaps, is the fact that the Code, when it did come, by no means corresponded with  Ezekiel’s picture, on which it is presumed to be based, but in many respects stood in direct contradiction with  Ezekiel. There is, as already said, nothing in the Code to suggest “disestablished priests,” degradation as a punishment, substitution for uncircumcised strangers, or any of the other ideas of  Ezek. 44. On the contrary, the Levites are represented as set apart by Jehovah Himself in the wilderness for His peculiar service, and their position from the first is one of privilege and honour. Again, in the Code, the priests are not “sons of Zadok” only (a vital point in  Ezekiel ), but the “sons of Aaron” generally.  Ezekiel can be conceived of as having modelled his picture on the basis of the Code by limiting the priestly dignity to the Zadokites; the Code can never be explained as a construction from his ideas.

(4) Yet, apparently, this Code, so discrepant with  Ezekiel, harmonised with the people’s own recollections and traditions, since we find that they unhesitatingly received it. This simple fact, that, according to the history, the provisions of the Code were received without questioning by priests, Levites, and people alike, is of itself sufficient to overthrow the theory that the distinction was a new one due to the initiative of  Ezekiel. How possibly could such a thing as the critics suppose ever have happened? Had the Zadokites nothing to say about the loss of the exclusive position given them by  Ezekiel? Were the Levites content that certain families of their number — the non-Zadokite Aaronites — should have the priestly prerogatives which  Ezekiel had denied them, while others had not? If the records do not deceive us, both priests and Levites knew something of their own past. They had many links with that past by genealogies and otherwise. If the Levites or their fathers had been disestablished priests of high places, they must have been perfectly aware of the fact. Yet the Levites assent to have a position given to them which agrees neither with their own recollections, nor with the rights of priesthood alleged to be accorded to them in  Deuteronomy, nor with the degradation theory of  Ezekiel — which is thus condemned on every side as unhistorical. That such a patent make-believe should have succeeded is on the face of it incredible. Even had priests and Levites been willing to acquiesce in the new mock status, the people on whom the fresh and heavy tithe - burdens fell would not have been likely to do so. The longer, in fact, the theory is pondered, the more untenable it must appear.

The Problem of the Old Testament

‘An Unlikely Ally’: What a Secular Atheist Is Teaching Christian Leaders

By Sarah Eekhoff Zylstra 2/28/2018

     Last month, Jonathan Haidt—professor of social psychology at New York University’s Stern School of Business, ethnically Jewish, politically left-leaning, and religiously atheist—stood on the main stage of the Council for Christian Colleges and Universities (CCCU) conference.

     “I was born to be the sort of person who is opposed to your mission,” he told about 1,200 college leaders.

     “Within two years of my bar mitzvah, I started calling myself an atheist. And not just an atheist, but one of those atheists that sees religion—Christianity especially—as the opponent, as the enemy, because they believe creationism and we scientists believe in evolution.”

     Several things changed his mind, Haidt said. Not to convert to Christianity—he’s still an atheist—but to drop his hostility toward it.

     “I got my first teaching position at the University of Virginia,” he told the CCCU. UVA draws students from all over the country, but especially from the western and southern parts of the state.

     “I had never met evangelical Christians, growing up in New York and going to Ivy League schools,” Haidt said. (He received a BA from Yale University and a PhD from the UVA, then did postdoctoral work at the University of Chicago.) “Of course they were there, but they weren’t as ‘out’ as they were at UVA.”

The Pilgrim's Progress From This World To That Which Is To Come;
Delivered Under The Similitude Of A Dream (Part 2)

By John Bunyan 1678

THE FOURTH STAGE

Now when they had eaten and drank, and had chatted a little longer, their guide said to them, The day wears away; if you think good, let us prepare to be going. So they got up to go, and the little boys went before; But Christiana forgot to take her bottle of spirits with her, so she sent her little boy back to fetch it. Then said Mercy, I think this is a losing place: here Christian lost his roll, and here Christiana left her bottle behind her. Sir, what is the cause of this? So their guide made answer, and said, The cause is sleep, or forgetfulness: some sleep when they should keep awake, and some forget when they should remember; and this is the very cause why often, at the resting-places, some pilgrims in some things come off losers. Pilgrims should watch, and remember what they have already received, under their greatest enjoyments; but for want of doing so, oftentimes their rejoicing ends in tears, and their sunshine in a cloud: witness the story of Christian at this place.

     When they were come to the place where Mistrust and Timorous met Christian, to persuade him to go back for fear of the lions, they perceived as it were a stage, and before it, towards the road, a broad plate with a copy of verses written thereon, and underneath the reason of raising up that stage in that place rendered. The verses were,

“Let him that sees this stage, take heed
Unto his heart and tongue;
Lest, if he do not, here he speed
As some have long agone.”

     The words underneath the verses were, “This stage was built to punish those upon, who, through timorousness or mistrust, shall be afraid to go further on pilgrimage. Also, on this stage both Mistrust and Timorous were burned through the tongue with a hot iron, for endeavoring to hinder Christian on his journey.”

     Then said Mercy, This is much like to the saying of the Beloved: “What shall be given unto thee, or what shall be done unto thee, thou false tongue? Sharp arrows of the mighty, with coals of juniper.

Psalm 120:3-4 What shall be given to you,
and what more shall be done to you,
you deceitful tongue?
4 A warrior’s sharp arrows,
with glowing coals of the broom tree!   ESV

     So they went on till they came within sight of the lions. Now Mr. Great-Heart was a strong man, so he was not afraid of a lion: But yet when they were come up to the place where the lions were, the boys, that went before, were now glad to cringe behind, for they were afraid of the lions; so they stepped back, and went behind. At this their guide smiled, and said, How now, my boys; do you love to go before when no danger doth approach, and love to come behind so soon as the lions appear?

     Now, as they went on, Mr. Great-heart drew his sword, with intent to make a way for the pilgrims in spite of the lions. Then there appeared one that, it seems, had taken upon him to back the lions; and he said to the pilgrims’ guide, What is the cause of your coming hither? Now the name of that man was Grim, or Bloody-man because of his slaying of pilgrims; and he was of the race of the giants.

     GREAT. Then said the pilgrims’ guide, These women and children are going on pilgrimage, and this is the way they must go; and go it they shall, in spite of thee and the lions.

     GRIM. This is not their way, neither shall they go therein. I am come forth to withstand them, and to that end will back the lions.

     Now, to say the truth, by reason of the fierceness of the lions, and of the grim carriage of him that did back them, this way had of late lain much unoccupied, and was almost grown over with grass.

     CHR. Then said Christiana, Though the highways have been unoccupied heretofore, and though the travellers have been made in times past to walk through by-paths, it must not be so now I am risen, now I am risen a mother in Israel.

Judges 5:6-7 “In the days of Shamgar, son of Anath,
in the days of Jael, the highways were abandoned,
and travelers kept to the byways.
7 The villagers ceased in Israel;
they ceased to be until I arose;
I, Deborah, arose as a mother in Israel.   ESV

     GRIM. Then he swore by the lions that it should; and therefore bid them turn aside, for they should not have passage there.

     But Great-Heart their guide made first his approach unto Grim, and laid so heavily on him with his sword that he forced him to retreat.

     GRIM. Then said he that attempted to back the lions, Will you slay me upon mine own ground?

     GREAT. It is the King’s highway that we are in, and in this way it is that thou hast placed the lions; but these women, and these children, though weak, shall hold on their way in spite of thy lions. And with that he gave him again a downright blow, and brought him upon his knees. With this blow also he broke his helmet, and with the next he cut off an arm. Then did the giant roar so hideously that his voice frightened the women, and yet they were glad to see him lie sprawling upon the ground. Now the lions were chained, and so of themselves could do nothing. Wherefore, when old Grim, that intended to back them, was dead, Mr. Great-Heart said to the pilgrims, Come now, and follow me, and no hurt shall happen to you from the lions. They therefore went on, but the women trembled as they passed by them; the boys also looked as if they would die; but they all got by without further hurt.

     Now, when they were within sight of the Porter’s lodge, they soon came up unto it; but they made the more haste after this to go thither, because it is dangerous traveling there in the night. So when they were come to the gate, the guide knocked, and the Porter cried, Who is there? But as soon as the guide had said, It is I, he knew his voice, and came down, for the guide had oft before that come thither as a conductor of pilgrims. When he was come down, he opened the gate; and seeing the guide standing just before it, (for he saw not the women, for they were behind him,) he said unto him, How now, Mr. Great-Heart, what is your business here so late at night? I have brought, said he, some pilgrims hither, where, by my Lord’s commandment, they must lodge: I had been here some time ago, had I not been opposed by the giant that did use to back the lions. But I, after a long and tedious combat with him, have cut him off, and have brought the pilgrims hither in safety.

     POR. Will you not go in, and stay till morning?

     GREAT. No, I will return to my Lord to-night.

     CHR. O, sir, I know not how to be willing you should leave us in our pilgrimage: you have been so faithful and loving to us, you have fought so stoutly for us, you have been so hearty in counselling of us, that I shall never forget your favor towards us.

     MER. Then said Mercy, O that we might have thy company to our journey’s end! How can such poor women as we hold out in a way so full of troubles as this way is, without a friend and defender?

     JAMES. Then said James, the youngest of the boys, Pray, sir, be persuaded to go with us, and help us, because we are so weak, and the way so dangerous as it is.

     GREAT. I am at my Lord’s commandment; if he shall allot me to be your guide quite through, I will willingly wait upon you. But here you failed at first; for when he bid me come thus far with you, then you should have begged me of him to have gone quite through with you, and he would have granted your request. However, at present I must withdraw; and so, good Christiana, Mercy, and my brave children, adieu.

     Then the Porter, Mr. Watchful, asked Christiana of her country, and of her kindred. And she said, I came from the city of Destruction. I am a widow woman, and my husband is dead, his name was Christian, the pilgrim. How! said the Porter, was he your husband? Yes, said she, and these are his children and this, pointing to Mercy, is one of my town’s-women. Then the Porter rang his bell, as at such times he is wont, and there come to the door one of the damsels, whose name was Humble-Mind; and to her the Porter said, Go tell it within, that Christiana, the wife of Christian, and her children, are come hither on pilgrimage. She went in, therefore, and told it. But oh, what noise for gladness was there within when the damsel did but drop that out of her mouth!

     So they came with haste to the Porter, for Christana stood still at the door. Then some of the most grave said unto her, Come in, Christiana, come in, thou wife of that good man; come in, thou blessed woman, come in, with all that are with thee. So she went in, and they followed her that were her children and companions. Now when they were gone in, they were had into a large room, where they were bidden to sit down: so they sat down, and the chief of the house were called to see and welcome the guests. Then they came in, and understanding who they were, did salute each other with a kiss, and said, Welcome, ye vessels of the grace of God; welcome to us, your friends. Now, because it was somewhat late, and because the pilgrims were weary with their journey, and also made faint with the sight of the fight, and of the terrible lions, they desired, as soon as might be, to prepare to go to rest. Nay, said those of the family, refresh yourselves first with a morsel of meat; for they had prepared for them a lamb, with the accustomed sauce belonging thereto,

Exod. 12:21 Then Moses called all the elders of Israel and said to them, “Go and select lambs for yourselves according to your clans, and kill the Passover lamb.   ESV

John 1:29 The next day he saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, “Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!   ESV

for the Porter had heard before of their coming, and had told it to them within. So when they had supped, and ended their prayer with a psalm, they desired they might go to rest.

     But let us, said Christiana, if we may be so bold as to choose, be in that chamber that was my husband’s when he was here; so they had them up thither, and they all lay in a room. When they were at rest, Christiana and Mercy entered into discourse about things that were convenient.

     CHR. Little did I think once, when my husband went on pilgrimage, that I should ever have followed him.

     MER. And you as little thought of lying in his bed, and in his chamber to rest, as you do now.

     CHR. And much less did I ever think of seeing his face with comfort, and of worshiping the Lord the King with him; and yet now I believe I shall.

     MER. Hark, don’t you hear a noise?

     CHR. Yes, it is, as I believe, a noise of music, for joy that we are here.

     MER. Wonderful! Music in the house, music in the heart, and music also in heaven, for joy that we are here! Thus they talked a while, and then betook themselves to sleep.

     So in the morning when they were awake, Christiana said to Mercy, What was the matter that you did laugh in your sleep to-night? I suppose you were in a dream.

     MER. So I was, and a sweet dream it was; but are you sure I laughed?

     CHR. Yes, you laughed heartily; but prithee, Mercy, tell me thy dream.

     Pilgrim's Progress (Illustrated): Updated, Modern English. More than 100 Illustrations.

The Continual Burnt Offering

By H.A. Ironside - 1941

February 28

2 Samuel 23:4  he dawns on them like the morning light,
like the sun shining forth on a cloudless morning,
like rain that makes grass to sprout from the earth.  ESV

Lamb of God, Thou soon in glory
Wilt to this sad world return,
All Thy foes shall quake before Thee,
All that now despise Thee mourn.
Then shall we at Thine appearing
With Thee in Thy kingdom reign;
Thine the praise and Thine the glory,
Lamb of God for sinners slain.
--- J. G. Deck