Skip to content

Author: LC

Published on

Today's post was written by Ron Edmondson. Some of the points he makes are reasons why I started this blog. You can read more from Ron here: RonEdmondson.com
---------
7 Ways to Make Bible Reading Fun

A young college-aged girl told me recently that she didn’t enjoy reading her Bible and asked if there was an alternative book. Well…no! This is THE BOOK! There is no substitute. There are plenty of great Christian books, but none compare to this one.

I’ve heard similar concerns many times. The Bible intimidates many people; even those who are avid readers of other books.

I told this girl she could listen to the Bible on a CD or mp3, but I don’t think that’s the complete solution. I think we need to figure out how to enjoy reading God’s Word. Part of maturing as a Believer is to fall in love with the Bible.

Here are 7 suggestions which may help:

Pray – The Bible is not like any other book. You need God’s Spirit to help you. You should always pray before and as you read it. Ask God to help you understand what you’re reading. Good news here! This appears, in my experience, to be one of God’s favorite prayers to answer.

Version – Pick a version easiest for you to understand. I would suggest you read a more literal translation primarily, but the paraphrase versions are good for casual reading. I suggest NIV or NLT for a literal but readable version, ESV or NKJV if you want a most literal translation, or for a paraphrase version, that’s extremely readable, try The Message Version. I read some of each of these for my studies and fun reading.

Sharing – It brings Scripture to life when we can share it with others. Sharing your reading with your small group, a group of guys or girls at a coffee shop or a couple of people from work helps energize you for the passage. The key here is that when you talk about what you’re reading, it helps you value it more. (Read Philemon 1:6 for an example of this.)

Journaling – Writing about your time in God’s Word will help you process your thoughts and keep a record of them. It’s exciting to go back over time and remember what you read before. It fuels your enthusiasm for more.

Taking your time – I love the idea of reading the Bible through in a year. I’ve done this many times. I think it’s more important, however, that you benefit from what you’re reading. I sometimes meditate on a few verses or a story for a day. I also recommend people start with an easier book to understand and move to more difficult passages from there. The books of Matthew, Mark, Luke or John are good places to start, because they are filled with great stories of Jesus.

Clarify – It’a best to have a study Bible for this part, but there are plenty of free online tools also. Look up words you don’t understand. Learn to use Bible dictionaries and commentaries. Look up passages, which aren’t clear, cross-referencing verses with other similar verses using footnotes. For some people, having a Bible study to work through along with reading the Bible is helpful.

Relationship - The best way to fall in love with God’s Word is to get to better know it’s author. It’s cliche now, but read it as a love letter written to you. If someone writes you a love letter, you’ll read it continually until you figure out what it means, and maybe even memorize parts of it along the way. If you can’t figure out something, you’ll consult the author. Fall more in love with God and you’ll find reading the Bible much easier. You may even someday say it’s “fun”!

Published on

How do you feel about practical jokes? I don’t like them. I’ve heard of people putting Nair in their boyfriend’s shampoo bottle, or putting glue on their baseball caps, things that can cause real harm and certainly real embarrassment. If each person insists on getting the better of the other, the jokes only escalate. Where do they end? Perhaps only when someone gets severely hurt.

A similar thing can happen with our words. People seem to think that it’s okay to insult, lie to or make fun of each other, as long as afterward they say that they were only kidding. This is such a common practice that in social media circles, all that is needed is "jk". Sometimes the one doing the joking makes the other feel like they are in the wrong, that they are boring and have no sense of humour. Proverbs 26:18-19 says that someone who deceives another, and then says that they are just kidding is like a madman who shoots flaming or deadly arrows. A madman shooting deadly arrows. That’s a pretty serious analogy. So much for just kidding.

Matthew Henry has said, “By lying and slandering in jest men learn themselves, and teach others, to lie and slander in earnest; and a false report, raised in mirth, may be spread in malice; besides, if a man may tell a lie to make himself merry, why not to make himself rich, and so truth quite perishes, and men teach their tongues to tell lies, Jeremiah 9:5. If men would consider that a lie comes from the devil, and brings to hell-fire, surely that would spoil the sport of it; it is casting arrows and death to themselves.” [Emphasis his.]

I think our society has come to the place where we don’t understand the value of truth or the power of our words. According to Proverbs 18:21, death and life are in the power of the tongue, and those who love its use will eat its fruit. James tells us that our tongue will determine our direction just as a rudder steers a ship (James 3:4-5) and that what comes out of our mouths represents who we really are. (James 3:8-11)

Who are you really? Who do you want to be? Make sure that your tongue is leading you in the right direction.

Published on

I’ve been going to church since before I was born, so I’ve grown up hearing certain words used in particular contexts. These words are often referred to as Christianese—words that aren’t really used by people who don’t hang out at church. If that includes you, please don’t feel left out; sometimes they aren’t really understood by the people who do hang out at church either. One of those words is “worship”. The word worship is sometimes used to refer to an entire Sunday morning service, but is most often used to refer to the part of the church service in which hymns and spiritual songs are sung. This understanding limits the scope of what worship really is.

In an interview recently with John Piper, Louie Giglio said,

We wanted to make sure we could message for the world: worship is not singing songs. Worship is acts of justice. That’s every bit of scripture breathing that out, and the heart of it for me is Hebrews 13:15-16. Through Jesus then, let us continually offer a sacrifice of praise to God, which is—so here’s the definition—the fruit of lips that give thanks to His name—so bring a song—but then he says, and don’t neglect doing good and sharing with others for with these sacrifices God is pleased. And so if our purpose in worship is to feel good, we’re just going to keep singing songs, but if our purpose in worship is for God to be pleased, then we’re going to figure out what pleases God, and what pleases God is when the last and least of these are touched.

Worship then is using our voices, whether in song or not, to acknowledge God’s name—to give Him praise—remembering that the only reason we can come before God at all is because we have gained access to Him through Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross. (John 14:6) But worship is also doing what pleases God—doing good and sharing with others. Jesus says that there are really only two commandments, to love God and to love others. (Matthew 22:37-40) He also says that what you do for others, you do for Him. (Matthew 25:40) James says that good deeds are an extension of our faith. (James 1:27, James 2:8, James 2:14-22) The next time you are singing songs in church, I hope that you will be truly worshipping God, but realize that true worship goes far beyond those few moments.

Published on

We have just celebrated the birthdays of two great countries that share a border and consider themselves to be not only neighbours, but friends. Canada Day (July 1) and the Fourth of July (America’s Independence Day) often elicit thoughts of freedom and gratitude for the country that we live in. Both countries have paid a high price for their freedom, and are still paying for it with the lives of their young men and women.

What does it really mean to be free? From John 8:31-32 come the words that the truth will set you free. These days there are many differing opinions about what truth is, including that each person has their own truth; what’s true for me might not be true for you, and your truth might not be my truth. Therefore one has to wonder what truth will set us free? This saying has been repeated so often it has become a cliché, but if we look at the whole context for it, we will gain the insight we need to find freedom.

Jesus had just been speaking to the people at the temple. He had been telling them that He was the light of the world, (John 8:12) and that if they knew Him they would also know His Father. The Pharisees questioned Him and argued with Him. Many of the Jews at that time depended on religious rituals and ceremonies for their hope of salvation, and they did not understand what Jesus was saying, but many of them professed to believe in Him.

Jesus knew that for some that profession was superficial, and He responded to them with these words, “If you continue to follow my teaching, you are really my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” What then must we do? We must spend time studying the word of God, and spend time in prayer asking the Lord for understanding. Jesus said, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.” (John 14:6) The more we get to know Jesus, the more we will know the truth, and the truth will set us free.

Published on

Today's post was written by David Plaunt.
---------

One Monday afternoon I called up my wife and said to her, "We are leaving for a vacation in France on Wednesday." What I did that afternoon to my wife makes me think of God telling Abraham to pack up and head out (Genesis 12:1-2) and what Abraham had to say to Sarah. "Honey we need to move; I think we are going to head east." Off they went, family in tow, on an adventure of faith.

Abraham is referred to throughout the Bible, including at least 74 times in the New Testament. It seems to me there is one point that is hammered home whenever Abraham is mentioned, and that is faith.

It was through this faith that Abraham was justified, (Genesis 15:6) and through the same faith that we, both brothers and sisters, are all called sons of Abraham. (Galatians 3:6-9) Being called a son of Abraham is not the same as being Jewish; rather it is having faith that makes us a son of Abraham. (Galatians 3:8, Genesis 12:3, Genesis 18:18) Why would we want to be called sons of Abraham? As sons of Abraham, those who trust in the promises of God just as Abraham did, we inherit the blessings promised to Abraham. (Galatians 3:9) The inheritance our faith brings us is justification. That is the acquittal of our sins so that we need not fear meeting a righteous God. This is the basis of any other blessing we may receive. It is only through this justification that we can receive the promise of the Spirit (Galatians 3:14) that leads to eternal life.

Of all the references to Abraham in the New Testament there is only
one thing we are instructed to do as Abraham did, and that is to have
faith. Because we share this same faith with Abraham we receive
the blessings he received as well.

Published on

It saddens me to see how little some people care about others. They are intent on getting the best for themselves even if it means manipulating others, stealing from them or lying to ruin their reputations. Why do these people think that their desires are more important than anyone else’s? Why are they willing to hurt others to reach their own goals? Is getting what they want really worth that? If we were truly worthy of the best, we shouldn’t have to resort to these tactics to get it, and if we are not worthy of the best, sooner or later, someone is going to put us in our place.

Jesus was obviously upset by similar self-serving behaviour. In Luke 14:7-11, He tells a parable in response to those who wanted to elevate their status by pushing and shoving their way to the best seats at a Sabbath meal. It would be as if they were invited to a wedding reception, but decided to take their seats at the head table which was reserved for members of the wedding party. How many times do you suppose that someone could do that without being told that they would have to move? On the other hand if the guests had chosen to sit at the equivalent of the kid’s table, surely someone would ask them to move to a place of higher honour. Jesus was warning them against the dangers of pride, something that Solomon had taught long before. (Proverbs 16:18)

This parable can apply to other situations besides seating plans. How often are you willing to do the things that don’t get recognition or appreciation but still need to be done? How often do you help someone else with difficult or unpleasant tasks? Are you willing to help even when it’s inconvenient for you? D.L. Moody once said that, “There are many of us that are willing to do great things for the Lord; but few of us are willing to do little things.” Jesus said that whatever you do for the least fortunate you do for Him. (Matthew 25:40) If we love our neighbour as ourselves, (Matthew 22:37-39) we won’t try to get ahead at their expense.

Published on

The purpose of this blog is to look closely at individual Bible verses or short passages of scripture, but those verses should never be considered outside of the message of the entire Bible nor outside of their immediate context. One verse that is frequently taken out of context is Matthew 18:19. Many people believe that if two or more are together in the same room praying for the same thing, that they will get the answer they desire. This verse, however, is sandwiched between instruction on how to restore a relationship with a fellow believer (Matthew 18:15-18) and how often we should forgive. (Matthew 18:21-22) The agreement referred to in Matthew 18:19-20 is in the context of church discipline.

If two on earth agree about what measures are necessary in the way of church discipline, it is likely because they have both already sought God’s guidance in the matter. Because they are praying for God’s will, and because they agree, God is there with them. Therefore, whatever they decide to do, shall be done. This presumes that they have already been following God’s steps for reconciliation: private confrontation, the testimony of two or three witnesses, the decision of the church. It is only as a last resort that anyone should be asked to leave the congregation. (Matthew 18:15-18)

That is not to say that agreement in prayer is not a good principle. By praying together, we can encourage each other and hold each other accountable to praying according to the will of God. Hebrews 10:24-25 urges us to spur one another on, and to not abandon meeting together, because--we learn from Proverbs 27:17--as iron sharpens iron, one friend sharpens another. We help each other, and we are kept from feeling like we are facing the trials of life alone when we meet together to pray.

There are, however, other passages in the Bible where we are instructed, or shown the example, to pray alone. Just before Jesus gave the disciples a model for praying that we now know as the Lord’s prayer, (Matthew 6:9-13) He told them that they should pray alone and in secret to avoid being like the hypocrites who prayed publicly so that they would look pious. (Matthew 6:5-8) In the Garden of Gethsemane, Jesus left His disciples Peter, James and John and went off by Himself to pray. His most important instruction to them was not about how to pray, but to in fact keep praying and not fall asleep. (Mark 14:32-42) He wanted them to focus on communicating with God rather than giving in to their own physical desires. If our heart is focused on prayer, then we will pray without ceasing, (I Thessalonians 5:17) whether we are alone or with others.

Whatever we pray needs to be in keeping with all scripture that teaches us about prayer. (Matthew 6:9-13, I John 5:14-15, James 1:6-8, Hebrews 10:22) God is not obligated to give us whatever we want just because we get someone else to agree with us, but He does listen to and answer the prayers of His people whether they pray in groups or alone. We are encouraged to take all of our cares to Him. (Philippians 4:6)

Published on

Today's post is written by Rusty Wright and Linda Raney Wright. It is a little different from my regular posts in that it doesn't look at one specific passage, but it is an excellent look at the documented evidence of the authenticity of the New Testament.
---------
The New Testament: Can I Trust It?

"How can any well-educated person believe the New Testament? It was written so long after the events it records that we can't possibly trust it as historically reliable." This is a common question on the university campus and deserves an honest answer.

How does one determine the authenticity of an ancient book? C. Sanders, a military historian, outlines three basic tests used by historians and literary critics.{1} These are the internal, external and bibliographic tests. Let's consider briefly how the New Testament stands up to each one.

1. The Internal Test

Here our question concerns the trustworthiness of the writers as revealed by the text itself. One of the chief issues is whether or not we have eyewitness testimony. The New Testament accounts of the life of Christ were written by eyewitnesses or by people relating the accounts of the eyewitnesses of the actual events. John wrote, "what we have seen and heard [concerning Christ], we proclaim to you also."{2} Peter stated that he and his associates were "eyewitnesses of His majesty."{3} Luke claimed that his gospel was based on accounts compiled from eyewitnesses.{4} In a court of law, eyewitness testimony is the most reliable kind.

Another issue in the internal test is the consistency of the reports. If two writers present testimony that is contradictory, doubt is cast on the integrity of one or both records.

Many have charged that the New Testament contains contradictions. To deal with such charges, it is important to understand that "contrary" is defined by Webster as "a proposition so related to another that, though both may be false, they cannot both be true." Thus, the statement, "Joe and Bill are in this room" contradicts the statement, "Only Joe is in this room." It does not, however, contradict the statement, "Joe is in this room." Omission does not necessarily constitute contradiction.

With this in mind, consider several alleged New Testament contradictions. Some observe that Luke writes of two angels at the tomb of Jesus after the resurrection{5} while Matthew mentions "an angel."{6} The observation of the statements is accurate, but the interpretation of them as contraries is not. If Matthew explicitly stated that only one angel was present at that time, the two accounts would be dissonant. As it is, they are harmonious.

Others note an apparent discrepancy in the accounts of the birth of Jesus. Hans Conzelmann, a German theologian, writing of Matthew's and Luke's accounts of the nativity, states that "in every detail they disagree."{7} He focuses on apparent geographical inconsistencies.

Simple observation shows that the two accounts do differ. Luke tells of Joseph and Mary starting in Nazareth and traveling to Bethlehem (for the census and the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem). He then records the family's return to Nazareth.{8} Matthew's account begins with the couple in Bethlehem (and Jesus' birth there) and records their flight into Egypt to escape King Herod's wrath, and relates their travel to Nazareth after Herod's death.{9}

Conzelmann regards these details as contradictory, but are they? The Gospels never claim to be exhaustive records of the life of Christ. Any biographer must of necessity be selective. Could not Matthew have chosen to omit the census journey from Nazareth to Bethlehem and Luke the flight into Egypt? As such, the accounts are complementary, rather than contradictory.{10}

Often such critics seem unable to carefully discern the content of biblical texts because of their own negative presuppositions and lofty speculations. One is inclined to agree with C. S. Lewis' criticism of these skeptics when he writes, "These men ask me to believe they can read between the lines of the old texts; the evidence (that they cannot) is their obvious inability to read (in any sense worth discussing) the lines themselves."{11} Consider a final (and more difficult) example of alleged inconsistency. Many have noted a difference between the synoptic accounts (those in Matthew, Mark and Luke) and John's account of the dating of the death of Jesus. Specifically, the issue concerns the chronological relationship of the crucifixion to the celebration of the Passover meal by the Jews. Mark refers to some Jews observing the Passover the evening before the crucifixion.{12} John seems to indicate a Passover celebration after the crucifixion.{13} In a recent definitive article, Dr. Harold Hoehner of Dallas Theological Seminary solves the puzzle.{14} Citing evidence from the Mishnah and the scholars Strock-Billerbock, Hoehner shows that the Pharisees and Sadducees (two contemporary religious parties) disagreed about the day of the week on which the Passover should fall. The result was that the Pharisees celebrated the Passover one day before the Sadducees did. This makes it entirely plausible that the synoptics use the reckoning of the Pharisees, while John presents that of the Sadducees, thus accounting for the difference.

2. External Test

This test asks whether other historical and archaeological materials confirm or deny the internal testimony provided by the documents themselves. Several authors of antiquity wrote of Jesus as a person of history. Among them were Tacitus, Josephus, Seutonius, and Pliny the Younger.{15} Sir William Ramsey, an eminent archaeologist, once held that Luke's writings were not historically sound. His own subsequent investigation of near-eastern archaeology forced him to reverse his position and conclude that "Luke is a historian of the first rank."{16}

Nelson Glueck, former president of Jewish Theological Seminary in Cincinnati, one of the greatest archaeologists, and a Jew, wrote: "It may be stated categorically that no archaeological discovery has ever controverted a biblical reference."{17}

Consider a few examples of archaeological confirmation of the New Testament. In I Corinthians, Paul refers to the meat market in Corinth.{18} An inscription from ancient Corinth has been discovered which refers to the "meat market."{19} Luke refers to the temple of Artemis in Ephesus and speaks of a riot that occurred in a theater in the same city.{20} The temple was excavated in 1803 and measured 100 by 340 feet.{21} Twentieth-century Austrian archaeologists unearthed the theater and found it could hold nearly 25,000 people.{22}

Mark writes of Jesus healing a blind man as He left Jericho.{23} Luke, apparently writing of the same event, says it happened while Jesus was approaching Jericho.{24}

Excavations in 1907-09 by Ernest Sellin, of the German Oriental Society, showed that there were "twin cities" of Jericho in Jesus' time--an old Jewish city and a Roman city separated by about a mile.{25} Apparently Mark referred to one and Luke referred to the other, and the incident occurred as Jesus traveled between the two.

William F. Albright, one of the world's leading biblical archaeologists, adds a helpful comment: "We can already say emphatically that there is no longer any solid basis for dating any book of the New Testament after about A.D. 80, two full generations before the date of between A.D. 130 and 150 given by the more radical New Testament critics of today."{26} This statement is crucial because it means that some of Christ's opponents, who were living when He was on earth, were undoubtedly still around when the New Testament books were penned. Their presence would have prompted the New Testament writers to give careful attention to the veracity of the statements. And we can be certain that if any errors were made in their accounts the opponents of Christ (of which there were many) would have been quick to expose them.

3. Bibliographic Test

This final test is necessary because we do not possess the original manuscripts of most ancient documents. The question that must be asked, then, is: "How many early copies do we have and how close in time are they to the original?" A. T. Robertson, author of one of the most comprehensive grammars of New Testament Greek, wrote, "...we have 13,000 manuscript copies of portions of the New Testament."{27} Many of these copies are dated only a short time (80-400 years) after the original.

When the New Testament documents are compared with other writings of antiquity for the numbers of early copies and the chronological proximity of the copies to the original, the New Testament is far superior. (For instance, we have only 10 good copies of Gallic Wars and they are 1,000 years after the original; seven copies of Plato's Tetrologies, 1,200 years after the original. Similar results hold for the writings of Thucydides, Herodotus and a host of others.){28}

The late Sir Frederic Kenyon, former director and principal librarian of the British Museum, was one of the leading authorities on the reliability of ancient manuscripts. He drew this conclusion:

"The interval then, between the dates of original composition and the earliest extant evidence becomes so small as to be in fact negligible, and the last foundation for any doubt that the Scriptures have come down to us substantially as they were written has now been removed. Both the authenticity and the general integrity of the books of the New Testament may be regarded as finally established."{29}

If one concludes that the New Testament documents are historically reliable, it stands to reason that he should seriously consider the message they present. In the Old Testament and the New, the message of the Bible is the message of Jesus Christ. And He offers an abundant and eternal life to anyone who will consider and respond to His claims: "I am the light of the world; he who follows Me shall not walk in the darkness, but shall have the light of life...and you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free."{30}

Notes

1. Sanders, C. Introduction to Research in English Literary History (New York: MacMillan, 1952), pp. 143ff; quoted in Montgomery, John. "History and Christianity," His Magazine reprint, Chicago, December 1964-March 1965, pp. 6-9.
2. I John 1:3.
3. 11 Peter 1:16.
4. Luke 1:1-3.
5. Luke 24:1-4.
6. Matthew 28:1-8.
7. Conzelmann, Hans. Jesus. The classic article from the RGG expanded and updated (Philadelphia: Fortress Press), pp. 26-27.
8. Luke 1:26, 2:40.
9. Matthew 2:1-23.
10. Cheney, Johnston. The Life of Christ in Stereo. (Portland, OR: Western Seminary Press, 1971), pp. 6-14, 243.
11. Hooper, Walter (ed.). Christian Reflections (William B. Eerdmans) quoted in McDowell, Josh. More Evidence That Demands a Verdict (San Bernardino, CA: Campus Crusade for Christ, Inc., 1975), p. 342.
12. Mark 14:12ff.
13. John 18:28.
14. Hoehner, Harold W. "Chronological Aspects of the Life of Christ, Part IV" Bibliotheca Sacra (Dallas: Dallas Theological Seminary, July, 1974), pp. 241-264.
15. Bruce, F. F. Jesus and Christian Origins Outside the New Testament. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974), pp.19-41.
16. Ramsay, W.M. The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament. (1915), p. 222; quoted in Bruce, F. F. The New Testament Documents - Are They Reliable? (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1968), p. 91.
17. Glueck, Nelson. Rivers in the Desert History of Negev. (Philadelphia: Jewish Publications Society of America, 1969); quoted in McDowell, Josh. Evidence That Demands A Verdict. (San Bernardino, CA: Campus Crusade for Christ, Inc., 1972), p. 68.
18. 1 Corinthians 10:25.
19. Bruce, Christian Origins. p 200.
20. Acts 19:27-29.
21. Free, Joseph P. Archaeology and Bible History. (Wheaton: Scripture Press,1951), p.324.
22. Ibid.
23. Mark 10:46-52.
24. Luke 18:35 43.
25. Free, op cit, p. 295; the old Jewish Jericho may have been a "ghost town" or merely a mound in Jesus' day.
26. Albright, William. Recent Discoveries in Biblical Lands. (New York: Funk and Wagnalls, 1955), p. 136; quoted in McDowell, op. cit., p. 65.
27. Robertson, A T., Introduction to the Textual Criticism of the New Testament. (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1925), p. 70; quoted in Montgomery, op. cit., p. 6.
28. McDowell, op. cit., pp. 46-56: Montgomery, op. cit., p. 6: Bruce, op. cit., pp. 10-20.
29. Kenyon, F. G. The Bible and Archaeology. (New York and London: Harper, 1940), pp. 288, 89; quoted in Montgomery, op. cit., p. 6.
30. John 8:12, 32.

---------

Linda Raney Wright is an award-winning author, writer and speaker. A graduate of the University of California at Berkeley (AB, rhetoric), she has written for major magazines and has appeared on television talk shows as she has lectured in universities and cities around the world.

Rusty Wright is an author and lecturer who has spoken on six continents. He holds Bachelor of Science (psychology) and Master of Theology degrees from Duke and Oxford universities, respectively. www.RustyWright.com

Published on

I was just outside enjoying the first full day of summer. It’s a warm day here in Southern Ontario, Canada, and the sky is blue with a few bright white, billowing clouds lazily drifting by. As I walked across the lush green grass, a robin, who apparently would rather run or hop than fly, skittered away from me. A goldfinch flew from the birdfeeder to the safety of the nearby cedar branches. High above me the breeze rustled the leaves of a large ash tree. The dark pink peonies that were in full bloom yesterday appear a little more beaten down today, a result of last night’s thunderstorm. I’m sure some would have enjoyed the majesty of all that thunder and lightning a little more if they hadn’t been trying to sleep at the time.

How can people witness all of these marvelous facets of creation and still try to convince themselves that there is no God? I believe that they are trying to avoid being held accountable to the One who created them. As I said in my last post, (June 20, 2011), God is holy, and because He is holy, He cannot tolerate sin. The only way that people know how to avoid being accountable to God is to pretend that He doesn’t exist. This reminds me of students who don’t look at a teacher when she is asking a question. They must be thinking, if I don’t look at her, she won’t see me, and won’t ask me to answer. God sees us whether we are willing to acknowledge Him or not, and we are accountable to Him, whether we are willing to admit it or not. Just because you don’t want to believe something, doesn’t mean it isn’t true.

Romans 1:18-20 tells us that God’s wrath is revealed against the unrighteousness of those who suppress the truth, and that what can be known about God can be clearly seen in His creation. We know from Deuteronomy 29:29 that there are some things that are known only to God, but what we can know has been revealed to us so that we will want to honour and obey Him. God has made all of humankind to understand that creation requires a Creator. The intricacies of this life, the human body, plants, animals, the rotation of the planets in the universe, they didn’t just happen. They follow a design that requires a Designer. We can try to convince ourselves that God doesn’t exist, but it won’t work. The evidence is all around us.

Psalm 19:1-2

Published on

In conversations that I’ve had with atheists, they have claimed that there is no God, and then seconds later talked about their perception of God. For example: God does not exist; if He does, why does He allow bad things to happen? People who believe in God believe in fairy tales. Why would He allow us to make our own choices? Romans 1:18-20 addresses both sides of this issue. In this post I will examine God’s wrath, and in the next, the proof of His existence.

Sometimes God shows His judgement in historic events like the flood (Genesis 7) or the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 19:15-26), but sometimes His wrath is shown by letting us face the consequences for our own choices. We have the option of looking to Him for guidance, for asking Him to direct our paths, (Proverbs 3:5-6, Isaiah 26:7, Psalm 37:23) but we often wait until after we are in trouble and then plead for His help.

God is holy, completely unique in His perfection, and because He is holy, He cannot tolerate sin. Therefore He pours out His wrath and judgement against this world’s sinfulness. God’s wrath is not like human anger; He does not have an emotional outburst of fury, but a controlled reaction to that which is against His nature and against His will (ungodliness) and also to offenses against his people (unrighteousness). There are those who think that it is unfair of God to hold us to His standard, rather than lowering His expectations to our level of sinfulness. After all, we are imperfect beings; how can He expect us to be perfect? Yet, if He changed to make Himself more like us, He would not be holy, He would not be worthy of our worship, and He would not be God. If God did not get angry at sin, Jesus would not have needed to go to the cross, and we would not be in need of God’s great love and mercy.

Some people prefer to focus on God’s grace and love rather than on His wrath, and I can’t say that I blame them. He loves us more than we will ever be able to fathom, and because of His love we do not have to face destruction. Lamentations 3:22, in the New International Version says, “Because of the Lord’s great love we are not consumed, for His compassions never fail.” But the wrath of God is real. The gift of salvation that has been made possible by Christ’s sacrifice is what will protect us from God’s wrath. Those who choose not to accept it, will ultimately have to pay the consequences.