Ten Questions for Atheists

Here’s my thought: You remove God from the equation and the questions that are otherwise answered according to a biblically based dynamic are now responded to with horrendous probability values, concepts that bend the laws of Nature rather than explain them, and philosophical arguments that do not match what we know about the human experience.

In short, you’ve got to do a lot of intellectual scrambling to make up for the lack of substance that characterizes an atheist’s perspective on life. Take a look at the following questions and you tell me…

1) Where did you get your gravity from?

The origin of the cosmos, from the standpoint of the atheist, comes about as a result of a lucky collision of random elements. Then, thanks to the properties of gravity, physics, chemistry and so on, the elegant intricacies of life begin to surface. But where did you get your gravity from? Everything about your explanation is predicated on the preexistence of ordered systems within which your raw materials can combine and form into more complicated life forms. But you never attempt to explain who or what put the science in place that produces your end result.

2) How does a vacuum cleaner become a drummer?

If the starting point for life was something basic that then evolved into a thinking organism with a unique personality and capable of artistic expression, then at some point your “matter” is no longer a mere collection of molecules. It has somehow become both material and non-material and you’ve redefined the essential composition of what matter is. “Panpsychism” is not a new theory, but it borders on the absurd given the lack of evidence there is to support it.

3) Where is your fossil record?

When Darwin first published his theory of evolution, he admitted that the fossil record that was needed in order to substantiate his theory was sorely lacking. Chapter Nine of his book “Origin of Species” is dedicated to what constitutes the most glaring discrepancy of his theory. He says “Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely-graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against the theory.”1 He goes on to explain that it’s not his theory that is flawed, rather it’s the geological record.

“Origin of Species” was published in 1859. The fossil record is no more conclusive now as it was 150 years ago. “Java Man,” the iconic image of man’s supposed distant ancestor, is a creative extrapolation based on three teeth, a skull cap and a femur.2 It is not even remotely close to a complete skeleton, nor are the other hypothetical half man / half ape intermediaries that fill the textbooks of biology classes throughout the nation. The archaeopteryx (ar-key-OPT-er-icks), the fossil remains of a bizarre looking bird discovered in 1861, is unreservedly embraced by many proponents of Darwin’s theories as a conclusive example of a transitional life form, bridging the gap between reptiles and birds. The problem, however, is that birds are very different from reptiles in terms of their breeding system, their bone structure, their lungs and their distribution of weight and muscles. The fact that you have a reptilian look bird doesn’t qualify it as a reptile when it is fundamentally a bird.3

Michael Denton, in his book, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis, sums it up by saying:

…[T]he universal experience of paleontology…[is that] while the rocks have continually yielded new and exciting and even bizarre life forms of life…what they have never yielded is any of Darwin’s myriads of transitional forms. Despite the tremendous increase in geological activity in every corner of the globe and despite the discovery of many strange and hitherto unknown forms, the infinitude of connecting links has still not been discovered and the fossil record is about as discontinuous as it was when Darwin was writing the Origin. The intermediaries have remained as elusive as ever and their absence remains, a century later, one of the most striking characteristics of the fossil record.4

4) What’s the point of your existence?

That may sound kind of abrupt, but think about it: If the fact that you have a pulse is due to nothing more than a fortuitous and altogether random pileup of chemical materials, then you have no real role to play. Your presence in the cosmos is entirely inconsequential – you don’t matter to the storyline because there is no storyline and you’re just an insignificant bump in the road.

You might respond with a noble sentiment that says you’re here to do as much “good” as you can do, or you might feel liberated to be as self serving as you can possibly be. But, again, if there’s nothing intentional behind the structure of the universe, then even the very definition of what’s “good” becomes subjective. In the absence of a definitive standard, what resonates as a positive to one person is perceived as a problem to another.

In short, it’s all pointless. There’s nothing truly worthwhile that endures and you are nothing more than dust on a windy street.

5) How would you defend Darwin’s regard for Africans?

This is a little awkward:

At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.5

Darwin saw Africans as being inferior to Caucasians. In his mind, from a scientific standpoint, Negroes were similar to gorillas in that they were an evolutionary precursor to Europeans. Given Darwin’s prestige as the iconic champion of Evolutionary Theory, no doubt this is something you agree with.

6) What makes your definition of “moral behavior” superior to mine?

While Hitler’s approach to the Jewish people today is regarded as unconscionable, in the late 1930’s and early 1940’s many perceived it as scientifically sound. Germany’s “Society for Racial Hygiene” was Darwinian as far as its philosophical foundation and the ruthless acts committed in the context of the Holocaust were endorsed by some of the greatest German minds of that time as being a reasonable compliment to the forces of Natural Selection.6

Hitler’s approach worked for him and those who were like minded because they weren’t Jewish. But what if Adolf Hitler had been born a Jew? Would he have been as passionate in his belief that his race was inferior to those with blond hair and blue eyes? Probably not. But how would he have pleaded his case? If he was on the short end of Darwin’s evolutionary stick, how would he have convinced Germany’s scientific think tank that his brand of “moral behavior” was superior to their clinical justification for murder?

In the absence of an Absolute moral standard, the basis for one’s behavior is now more about what’s preferred as opposed to what’s right, and the code of ethics that is established for the community is established by those who are more persuasive rather than those who are more wise.

7) At what point do you admit that your theories are based on impossible scenarios?

Scientists have concluded that the chances of a single protein molecule coming together by chance is 1 in 10450 power. These are the sort of probability values upon which you build your entire approach to life, morality and all the intangibles that constitute the human experience. Is that your idea of a credible philosophical foundation?7

8) What makes your explanation of the origin of the cosmos any less “faith based” than mine?

You believe that something can come from nothing, that order can proceed from chaos and, given enough time, a plant can develop a personality. In other words, you subscribe to a doctrine that transcends the natural world as we know it, which is the essence of the term “supernatural.”

In the absence of the concrete evidence required to substantiate your theories, like Darwin, you have “faith” that science will one day vindicate your convictions.

Regardless of how you attempt to veil your paradigm in academic sounding verbiage, your arguments are ultimately founded on a metaphysical platform and not an empirical one. When it comes to the origin of the cosmos, you believe in processes and forces that don’t exist. If your aversion to including a Judeo-Christian perspective in the conversation pertaining to the creation of the universe is due to the fact that one must have “faith” in order to subscribe to such a thing, then what prevents you from disqualifying yourself given the fact that your approach is no less subjective?

9) Why does the tone of the conversation change anytime the name “Jesus Christ” is mentioned?

You can talk about any religious figure that has ever graced the world stage and the tone of the conversation remains comfortably academic. But mention the name Jesus Christ and something changes. People start getting a little uncomfortable.

Why?

If Christ is nothing more than either a ridiculous fairy tale or a self-serving promotion designed to advance the fortunes of charlatans posing as pastors, then why does the very mention of Jesus’ Name reverberate in a manner that makes people look down and take a sudden in interest in their shoes?

10) If the Bible is nothing more than a massive PR campaign, then why make Peter a coward, Moses a murderer and Jacob a liar?

Why include all of the flaws and shortcomings belonging to the principal characters of Scripture? If Christianity is nothing more than a massive PR campaign, then how do you explain what is obviously a nonsensical decision as far as discrediting the heroes of the Bible by detailing their weaknesses and bad decisions?

Peter denied that He even knew Christ while talking to a servant girl. He wasn’t even conversing with someone of stature. He caved in the face of talking with a girl that was probably young enough to be his daughter (Matt 26:69-70). Moses was guilty of murder (Ex 2:11-12) and Jacob was a liar (Gen 27:19). Compare that to the way even Muhammad’s fingernail clippings and hairs were fought over by his followers.8

Scripture presents human beings as they are and not the way in which an intentionally misleading commercial would attempt to play down the undesirable characteristics of its main characters. Furthermore, the Bible invites questions and acknowledges its absurdity should its central theme prove false (Is 1:18, 1 Cor 15:192 Pet 1:16). In short, this is hardly the verbiage of a text attempting to mislead its reader.

Conclusion

No doubt, there will always be those that simply refuse to believe. At the end of the day, it’s a spiritual dynamic that’s being engaged, which doesn’t always fit neatly within the confines of a box defined by purely empirical parameters.

But…

The existence of God can be recognized (Rom 1:20), the Reality of Christ can be observed (Acts 26:25-27) and His Gospel can be understood (Jn 6:65; 1 Cor 2:12; Jas 1:5). The only thing that’s illogical about the Bible is why God would go to the lengths that He does for the sake of humanity. To dismiss the Bible and Christianity in general based on the notion that it has no basis in fact is not an assessment founded on evidence, rather it’s a choice inspired by preferences.

What is it that possesses a human being to look at the stars – to consider the elegant intricacies of the created order – and respond with an explanation that contemptuously dismisses God and replaces Him with horrendous probability values, questionable time frames and theoretical processes that mock the boundaries of legitimate science?

Moreover, what drives an individual to spit upon the notion of a sinless Savior who lays aside His right to condemn and sacrifices Himself in order to redeem?

Typically, atheists proudly promote themselves as enlightened thinkers that tolerate followers of Christ as fools that refuse to accept the obvious and instead cling to antiquated myths that are ultimately revealed as limiting and intolerant.

Here’s my thought:

I see you at the foot of the cross either sneering at your God as He dies for you or dismissing it as a pointless fiction.

I hear you dismiss the depths of the ocean, the expanse of space and the exquisite complexity of our planet as crossword puzzles that can be solved, it’s just a matter of time.

And finally, I watch you passionately cling to a terminal existence where significance and happiness are built upon a foundation comprised entirely of things that are destined to die, quit or change at any given moment.

Christ brings a lot to the table – more than what you might’ve been lead to conclude based on whatever bad experiences you’ve had with “religion” in the past. Don’t evaluate a system according to the way that it’s abused and don’t dismiss your King according to the way He’s been distorted.

I’ve got no further questions…

1. “Origin of Species”, Charles Darwin, Penguin Classics, New York, NY, 2006, p250
2. “The Case for a Creator”, Lee Strobel, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, MI, 2004, p61
3. Ibid, p57
4. Ibid p56
5. “On the Origin of Species – Sixth Edition”, Charles Darwin, https://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/jksadegh/A%20Good%20Atheist%20Secularist%20Skeptical%20Book%20Collection/Charles%20Darwin%20-%20The%20Origin%20of%20Species%20-%206th%20Edition.pdf, accessed March 4, 2015
6. “Darwinism and the Nazi Race Holocaust”, Jerry Bergman, http://creation.com/darwinism-and-the-nazi-race-holocaust, accessed August 28, 2015
7.”Probability and Order Versus Evolution”, Henry Morris, PhD., Institute for Creation Research, http://www.icr.org/article/probability-order-versus-evolution/, accessed May 11, 2015 (see also http://www.icr.org/article/mathematical-impossibility-evolution/)
8. “Muhammad: A Very Short Introduction”, Jonathan A.C. Brown, Oxford University Press, New York, NY, 2011, https://books.google.com/books?id=9JafXLrLiwYC&pg=PT48&lpg=PT48&dq=Muhammads+fingernail+clippings+&source=bl&ots=9yZoCsiR2G&sig=SGuWORW8dxaD9P_gOeAc9MqB3U0&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCIQ6AEwAGoVChMIvNesz_DVxwIVCjI-Ch0HRg3t#v=onepage&q=Muhammads%20fingernail%20clippings&f=false, accessed September 1, 2015

When Politicians Become Theologians

When politicians begin to position themselves as society’s theologians, at that point politics is no longer a spiritually neutral arena and the question isn’t whether or not the church is becoming too political. Rather, it’s to what extent is the government attempting to replace the Bible. 

That’s why it’s not only appropriate, but it’s absolute necessary for believers to step up and voice their support for those candidates that champion a platform that’s in line with Scripture. Otherwise, you’re leaving the door of the fence open and all kinds of pain, hurt and corruption make their way on to the property and the only ones that are happy about it are those that walk up to God every morning as He’s sitting on His Throne and tell Him to get out of their chair. 

Regulating the outward expression of one’s faith to taking care of widows and orphans is to qualify God’s command to influence our world according to singular gestures as opposed to a comprehensive ministry. The fact is, we’re supposed to help all those who are in need. But you fail those same people by obligating them to contend with a sinister society as opposed to a godly one by remaining silent when it comes to the way they’re governed (1 Chron 12:32; 1 Tim 2:2), educated (Dt 6:5-9; 2 Tim 2:15) and informed (1 Thess 5:21). In short, looking after the downtrodden includes the improvement of the world they’re living in and not just the house they’re sleeping in. 

The ideal that is America is worth protecting and promoting. It’s unique among all other nations in that our approach to government is based on Divine Absolutes. It’s that premise that attracts people from all over the globe to our shores whether they’re able to articulate that reality or not. Dismissing any kind of passion or resolve when it comes to the maintenance of who and what we are as far as the motto on our coinage as “white nationalism” is irresponsible, ignorant and downright wicked. 

When you place the Liberty Bell alongside the Iwo Jima Memorial, the graves at Gettysburg, and the Vietnam Wall, you’re not looking at a paradigm that was created to promote a specific race. You’re looking at a biblically based ideal that was designed to promote all races because of the way all races are created equal under God. The personalities that have used an American flag to facilitate an evil agenda are not representative of what we are as a country. The baggage and sin they bring to the table is theirs alone and not a systemic anomaly let alone a national transgression. To believe otherwise is to embrace a campaign that seeks to portray America according to the faults of some of the fools we have within our ranks in order to usher in a godless philosophy that is as toxic as it is treacherous. 

Moreover, the term “white nationalism” reduces the substance of what generations of statesmen and soldiers have sacrificed their lives for to something self serving and vulgar. Not only is it outrageously disrespectful, it ignores the obvious manner in which our Constitution facilitates the rights that are ours according to Scripture. Where there is room for improvement, that space is built into its design. You don’t evaluate it according to the character flaws of those that wrote it as much as you evaluate it according to its substance and those who are critical of if forget that their criticism is allowed because of the rights guaranteed by the very document they supposedly despise. 

Bottom line: Believers are the keepers of the philosophical and spiritual foundation upon which our nation is built. To say that God doesn’t particularly care about politics or that Christ followers are allowing themselves to be distracted when investing any time and energy into governmental affairs forget the way in which God works through rulers and elected officials to either prosper a nation or run it into the ground. Our obedience makes a difference. To withdraw from the conversation – to be ignorant or apathetic – is to be disobedient and it’s not enough to merely informed, you have to be wise.

You Have to Talk to Thomas

Fact from Fiction

Apart from first hand knowledge, everything we know about the world is based on what we’ve been told.

Provided your resources are credible, you’re on solid ground in the way you formulate your convictions.

But when there’s more than one perspective being circulated and it all seems to be based on something authoritative, what might otherwise be a consensus is now a disparate group of passionate voices all convinced that they’re right and everyone else is just trying to catch up.

In such a situation, it’s difficult to separate fact from fiction and what’s true becomes defined more by one’s philosophical preferences than actual events and whole conversations.

In the end, the truth is going to be defined by evaluating all the facts. That, as opposed to scenarios where the commentator is manipulating just some of the facts.

Take, for example, the Resurrection of Christ.

Personality vs Platform

You could talk to Pilate and get one perspective. You could talk with John and get something entirely different. If those two individuals are your only sources of information, in the absence of something undeniable, you will be drawn to the personality championing the platform more so than the platform itself.

But at some point, you have to talk to Thomas.

Pilate sentenced Jesus to death, John saw Him die but it was Thomas who refused to believe anything as nonsensical as Jesus having come back to life unless…

…unless he was able to physically touch where the spikes had gone through His wrists and put his hand into the wound created by the spear that had punctured His side.

The NIV Text Note for this particular verses says, “Hardheaded skepticism can scarcely go further than this.”1

Unless you talk to Thomas, or at least objectively consider his experience, your take on Jesus having conquered death is going to be based more on what you want to believe than what’s actually the case.

You have to talk to Thomas.

Whether it’s COVID-19 or Donald Trump

And the same thing applies to similar situations where you have a variety of viewpoints. Whether it’s COVID-19 or Donald Trump, you have to consider all of the players involved and give extra consideration to the one that represents, not just an eyewitness, but someone whose testimony makes no sense apart from it being absolutely true.

And when you encounter a differing viewpoint who would accuse you of being biased in an effort to make their perspective appear more credible, figure out who the “Thomas” is, make sure you’re familiar with what “Thomas” said, and then say to your opponent…

You have to talk to Thomas.

1. NIV Study Bible, Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, MI, 1985, p1637

There is no Referee

download

The Liberal disposition towards God is similar to a football player who’s on the field, playing the game, but doesn’t believe in a Referee.

There are no penalties, only plays. The idea is to move the ball down the field and enjoy the fulfillment that comes from putting points on the board. That is not only his goal, it is his right and with that sense of entitlement comes the authority to define the standard by which his conduct on the field is measured.

Should someone challenge his approach, because he’s unwilling to acknowledge the Reality of a “higher authority,” he sees it as a situation where he’s being compelled to adjust his perspective according to only the traditions and preferences of those on the other team and he will look at them and demand to know why he has to play by their rules and refer to them as judgmental and fascists.

There is no Referee.

The answer to those four questions define one’s spiritual creed. Whether you answer those questions according to the Christian faith or a humanistic worldview, both are “religious” viewpoints.

This is why any conversation pertaining to morality or politics or the cultural in general is destined to fall short of anything influential because until he’s willing to acknowledge the Reality of God, he is his own bottom line. And his philosophical apparatus will interpret anything that comes across as critical of his behavior as not only a negative appraisal of his performance, but an attack on his dominion over all that constitutes the difference between right and wrong.

There is no Referee.

Oftentimes the debate that happens between Democrats and Republicans ceases to be about policy as much as it becomes an argument about morality. The moment it becomes a moral issue, it is therefore a spiritual topic in light of what God specifies in Scripture. But if there is no Referee, than the only Standard by which moral conduct is defined and measured is whatever best promotes the humanistic agenda lurking behind the behavior being discussed. And what applies to one team may or may not apply to the other and what may be an infraction today may not even resonate as a headline tomorrow.

On the surface, the argument that defends the idea that there is no Referee can sound compelling in the way it suggests that to assert a Biblical position is to violate the separation of church and state and force a person to adopt a particular religious disposition that may or may not coincide with their personal convictions. But the idea that there is no Referee is a religious disposition in that it establishes man as his own deity. It’s not just a question of what the Liberal doesn’t believe about God as much as it’s what they assert as an acceptable replacement for the Role that God plays in, not only determining the difference between right and wrong, but the origin of the universe, the question of life after death as well as the purpose for one’s existence.

The answer to those four questions define one’s spiritual creed. Whether you answer those questions according to the Christian faith or a humanistic worldview, both are “religious” viewpoints. And to strip our nation of it’s Christian foundation by insisting that any reference to a religious framework is to violate the separation of church and state is revealed as a sinister absurdity once it becomes apparent that the atheist’s perspective on the human experience is just as much of a “religion” as much as Christianity and in that regard they are the very thing they claim to despise.

Yet, hypocrisy is only recognized as such when there’s a concrete Truth in place to flag when a person is being hypocritical.

But that’s not something that concerns a Liberal because…

…there is no Referee.

God Cares About Politics

To say that God isn’t interested in politics represents a twisted interpretation of Scripture.

God works through human institutions and authorities to accomplish His Purposes. You see that in the way He hardened Pharaoh’s heart to facilitate the Exodus (Ex 4:21). He used King Cyrus to give the Israelites the legislative green light they needed in order to begin rebuilding Jerusalem (Ez 1:2-4) . He used Quirinius to institute a census that would bring Mary and Joseph to Bethlehem (Lk 2:1-3), He used taxes to illustrate how we are to allocate our sense of duty and responsibility (Matt 22:21).

The Old Testament devotes four books to chronicle the actions of all the kings of Israel, we’re commanded to pray for kings and those in positions of authority that we might live peaceful and godly lives (1 Tim 2:1-3) , He stresses the importance of godly leadership by highlighting how citizens beneath the tyrannical boot of a wicked ruler are miserable (Prov 29:2). He commends godly leadership , He despises evil rulers (1 Sam 15:11), He hates dishonest scales (Prov 11:1) and He encourages political involvement (Ex 3:10-12; 2 Chron 7:14; Neh 2:4-6; Acts 23:11). Furthermore, “…there are 642 verses that refer to law, laws and lawlessness. There are 211 verses that refer to judgment, judges, and judging, and 561 verses that speak about justice. There are 195 verses that talk about courts, 301 verses that talk about ruling and rulers, and 100 verses that speak of governing and government.1

Just prior to the Battle of Jericho, Joshua comes upon an imposing individual standing in front of him with his sword drawn. Joshua asks, “Are you for us or for our enemies?” The man replied, “Neither,” and went on to say that he was the commander of the Lord’s armies.

Some use this passage to suggest that God is indifferent to Politics – that the discussions, divisions and elections that dominate the headlines irrelevant when compared to more lofty, theological concerns. But that’s not the case. The angel was not relaying Divine indifference to the upcoming battle, he was reminding Joshua that this was God’s campaign and as such they could be confident of a victory. But because it was God’s battle, they couldn’t look upon it as a mere military action and their heart and their minds had to be focused on Him.

God cares about Politics.

Warnings and Rewards

Dishonest scales” are referenced in Proverbs 11:1. That’s referring to cheaters and liars. He hates them.

He hates them.

He also says this the monarchs reigning in Judah:

“Moreover, say to the royal house of Judah, ‘Hear the word of the Lord. This is what the Lord says to you, house of David: “‘Administer justice every morning; rescue from the hand of the oppressor the one who has been robbed, or my wrath will break out and burn like fire because of the evil you have done—burn with no one to quench it. (Jer 21:11-12)

To whom much is given, much will be required (Matt 20:25-28; Lk 12:48; 1 Pet 5:1-3). If God places you in a position of authority, you are accountable to God for the way you lead. Your honesty (Prov 12:22), humility (Jn 19:11) and compassion (Is 1:17, 23) are crucial to the way you administer the affairs of those in your charge.

God cares about Politics.

I Will Bless Those Who Bless You

And here’s something else to bear in mind while we’re talking about it:

The nation is like a mighty lion; When it is sleeping, no one dares wake it. Whoever blesses Israel will be blessed, And whoever curses Israel will be cursed.” (Num24:9 [see also Gen 12:3])

Just prior to the Battle of Jericho, Joshua comes upon an imposing individual standing in front of him with his sword drawn. Joshua asks, “Are you for us or for our enemies?” The man replied, “Neither,” and went on to say that he was the commander of the Lord’s armies.

Some use this passage to suggest that God is indifferent to Politics – that the discussions, divisions and elections that dominate the headlines irrelevant when compared to more lofty, theological concerns. But that’s not the case. The angel was not relaying Divine indifference to the upcoming battle, he was reminding Joshua that this was God’s campaign and as such they could be confident of a victory. But because it was God’s battle, they couldn’t look upon it as a mere military action and their heart and their minds had to be focused on Him.

Palestine is giddy that Biden has won. And before you begin to think that the PLO represents an honorable cause, understand that in the aftermath of WWII, the UN set up a territory that was supposed to be two separate nations: An independent Arab state and an independent Israeli state. Six days after this arrangement was made, war broke out which was initiated by the Arab world and the hostilities have endured since.

Hamas is a terrorist organization that doesn’t respect Israel’s right to exist. And while the majority of their efforts are directed towards Israel, they are part of a network that is undeniably opposed to any supporter of Israel, including the US. Click here to learn more.

The US, under Trump, has been supportive of Israel. Biden and his like minded compatriots are not. In fact, Obama sent 221 billion dollars to the PLO during his last hours as President.

Now, however you want to process all this is up to you. But don’t think for a minute that God is somehow detached from politics and encourages neutrality. It’s not so much what side God is on, it’s whether or not the nation in question is on God’s side. It’s that nation that thrives and regardless of how stately or crass the leadership may appear on the surface, it’s their actions that reveal, not only their personal disposition, but the collective perspective of the country that voted them into office.

Conclusion

The thing is, God does care about Politics because it’s not just “politics.” It’s either His Purposes or man’s rebellion being played out in the context of legislation and foreign policy.

God cares about politics.

1. “First Person: Does God Care About Politics”, David Shelley, August 30, 2010, https://www.baptistpress.com/resource-library/news/first-person-does-god-care-about-politics/, accessed March 30, 2021

Pharisees Doubt the Resurrection of Christ – an Example of Fake News

Arguing with a liberal is difficult for several reasons, but among them is the fact that they’re determined to believe the kind of journalism that you would expect from a Pharisee reporting on the death and resurrection of Christ.

You can be ethical without being completely honest and you can be honest without telling the whole truth. Add to that the way in which you can imply a lack of credibility by using select words to describe a particular “eyewitness,” and you can shape public opinion without ever having to overtly lie or being accused of failing to cover “both sides” of the issue.

As an example, consider, “Pharisees Doubt the Resurrection of Christ…”


All of Israel is caught up in the rumors pertaining to the supposed resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth, a religious and political criminal that was recently put to death. While some are insistent that he is, in fact, alive, there are many others who dismiss it as yet another attempt being made on the part of his followers to validate his claims that he was anything more than a charismatic anomaly. We sat down with several high ranking officials, both from the Jewish and the Roman institutions that championed what was a very difficult, yet just, decision to get their thoughts.

pharisee

From the very beginning, the Nazarene who referred to himself as the Son of God, was a problem in the way he incited many Jews to question the Law and their own heritage. His exploits weren’t curious as much as they were damaging, though many of those who heard him speak were unaware of just how toxic his perspective was. Thankfully there were steady and committed hands ready to prevent his corrosive effect from spreading by publicly questioning him and revealing his true colors.

“We challenged him,” said Simon, one of our more prominent Pharisees. “We demanded that he validate his testimony concerning himself and he wasn’t able to do it. (John 6)”

“His illegitimacy is no secret,” says Reuben, an associate of Simon and with him while they were questioning Jesus. “His mother was a disgrace and to see him now trying to assert himself as being equal to Jehovah is not only ludicrous, it’s almost sad to see someone so desperate to cover up the scandalous and unlawful aspects of his birth. (Mk 6:3)”

Clavius, a familiar tribune who serves Rome and has been an advocate for our Jewish traditions on many occasions, has no trouble being critical of Jesus.

“I remember a servant who lived in the household of one of my centurions who was deathly ill,” said Clavius. “He asked the Christ to come and heal his servant and this Jesus, who is supposedly compassionate, never even came to his home. I remember hearing that and from that moment forward, I was convinced that he was a problem and a fraud. (Matt 8:5-13)”

Atticus is yet another distinguished Roman, having served in the Roman army for two decades and a veteran of many conflicts. He was one of the guards who were stationed at the site of the Christ’s tomb (Matt 27:62-65).

“It’s insane!” he said. “I’ve been around death more than once.  Jesus died. He’s dead. It might make you sad, but that doesn’t change the fact He’s gone. And I know what it is to grieve, but to see this rabble refuse to accept the death of their cause and their champion by inventing this ridiculous story that he ‘rose from the grave’ is nothing more than a crazy effort to not accept the fact that your Christ is no more and you need to move on.”

When asked about the way in which the Pharisees were accusing the disciples of having stolen Christ’s body in order to give the appearance of Jesus having risen, Atticus said, “Your readers need to know that the disciples are lying! There is no resurrection. They broke the seal, they violated the sovereignty of Rome, they’re a stench among their own people…they’re insane! (Matt 28:11-15)”

Among those who insist that he rose is a former small business owner named Peter. As a fisherman, your fortunes are limited by default. Perhaps that’s why the prospect of becoming one of the Christ’s followers appealed to him to the point where he abandoned his craft and his family (Matt 8:14-18; 1 Cor 9:5). Maybe in the context of aligning yourself with someone who challenges the governing authorities could lead to a more prominent and financially sound position. Whatever his motivation was, his resolve to promote the fantasy of a risen “Messiah” is still very much intact.

“I’ve seen him!” said Peter. “I’m ashamed to admit that during his arraignment and trial, I denied even knowing him – I was that determined to put as much distance between myself and my former teacher as possible (Matt 26:73-75).”

“But that all changed when I saw him,” Peter said. “He’s alive and I’ll stake my life on it (Acts 4:18-19).”

Peter’s passion is admirable, but does that passion negate the testimony of hundreds of eye witnesses let alone the sworn statements coming from established and reputable Roman officials and Jewish authorities?

“There is something both healthy and beneficial in retreating from emotionally charged declarations and instead cling to the certainty of one’s spiritual heritage,” said Simon. “We obey the political authorities that God has instituted and we revere the Law He gave to Moses. This is my stance and I hope it is one that our people will adopt as well.”

It’s What You Do Believe

When you hear an atheist talk about what they don’t believe, it’s often articulated in a way that sounds as though his perspective is based on an empirical foundation characterized by reason, science and compassion.

  • There’s nothing mystical or “miraculous” about their approach to the human experience.
  • They don’t subscribe to anything other than what can be proven and observed.
  • They don’t believe in Creation, they’re not overly concerned about life after death and they have a real problem with any kind public reference to the Christian faith in that they see it as a violation of the “separation of church and state.”

But, here’s the thing…

It’s not what you don’t believe, as much as it is what you do believe.

When you pop the hood on the philosophical framework subscribed to by the atheist who supposedly refuses to accept anything other than can be scientifically verified, you encounter some scenarios where a fantastic lead of faith is required in order to justify their mindset. In addition, you’ve got an approach to morality and one’s sense of purpose that reeks of personal preferences more than absolute standards which is like a football player insisting he scored a touchdown, not because he moved the ball down the field, but because he moved the goalposts.

As a born again Christian, you see yourself as someone who was on Christ’s screen long before your parents ever met. You were “fearfully and wonderfully made (Ps 139:14)” and equipped with everything you need to make a difference and not just an appearance (2 Pet 1:3). You embrace the moral guidelines coming from God as “tools” and not just “rules” that allow you to, not just succeed and prosper (Josh 1:8; Matt 6:33), but also avoid all of the pain and baggage that goes along with driving on the wrong side of the road (Matt 7:26). And when it’s all said and done, the curtains come up and rather than the show being over, the real performance begins (Rev 21:1-4).

As an atheist…

You’re a lucky accident that ceases to exist when you cease to breathe. You are your own bottom line and the only things that matter are the ones you believe to be important.

Doesn’t sound nearly as sophisticated now, does it?

It’s not what you don’t believe, it’s what you do believe.  And when you look at what an atheist actually believes – what they submit as a substitute for God, as far as explaining the origin of life and a basis for morality and significance – their platform is revealed as the nonsensical attempt to declare themselves as their own deity.

It’s not what you don’t believe, it’s what you do believe.

Bonus: The atheist platform is presented as being a non-spiritual approach to the human experience. But regardless of it’s substance, it is nevertheless a “religious” framework in that it functions in exactly the same way as a faith based paradigm as far as it being a response to those questions pertaining to creation, life after death, moral absolutes and one’s sense of purpose. From that perspective, any complaint coming from the mouth of an atheist about the “separation of church and state” is not so much as a “concern” as much as it’s a campaign to establish their “religion” as the only religious school of thought permitted in public. In that way, they are the very thing they claim to despise.

The Liberal and the First Amendment

There is no Referee

Three Questions (Part III)

Your neighbor’s house is on fire. You’re working alongside several people put out the blaze when all of a sudden you realize that among those you’re working with, there are several whose lifestyles you seriously disagree with. Do you keep working to put out the fire or do you walk away believing that it’s wrong to be a part of any effort involving people who don’t believe as you do?

At one point, the disciples were agitated by the fact that some people were casting out demons in the Name of Christ, yet they weren’t a part of Christ’s inner circle of disciples…

38 “Teacher,” said John, “we saw someone driving out demons in your name and we told him to stop, because he was not one of us.”

39 “Do not stop him,” Jesus said. “For no one who does a miracle in my name can in the next moment say anything bad about me, 40 for whoever is not against us is for us. 41 Truly I tell you, anyone who gives you a cup of water in my name because you belong to the Messiah will certainly not lose their reward. (Mk 9:38-40)

However petty the disciples may have appeared to be –  as far as feeling like they were only ones capable of doing any good, being that they were a part of Christ’s inner circle – it’s not an uncommon complaint.

Appearances can be distracting. A person’s manner, their background – if it doesn’t line up with tradition or convention – it can be mistaken for something sinister.

Fact is, the earth is the Lord’s and everything in it (Ps 24:1). Everything that was created was made by Christ and for Christ (Col :16;Rev 4:11), so however dirty or different the glove may be, it’s the Hand inside the glove that’s doing the work and you don’t want to be so preoccupied with appearances or qualifications that you fail to appreciate how God uses different people to do His bidding.

That doesn’t mean you throw caution to the wind and assume everyone is reading from the same page of music. 1 John 1:4 says to test the spirits, but that’s not always accomplished by focusing exclusively on a person’s checkered past or a vulgar outburst.

King Cyrus is a great example of how God can use someone that doesn’t have a relationship with Christ and may even be a little offensive in their manner to do God’s bidding.

The Jews were in exile and their city was a mess. The Temple was a heap of rubble and the walls were completely torn down (see 2 Chron 36:15-19). God had said that the Jews would be allowed to return, but if you were to look at an aerial photo of Jerusalem, you’d be pretty skeptical – especially given the very unlikely scenario of your enemy permitting the reconstruction of your city let alone financing it.

King Cyrus of Persia would put things in motion by paying for the rebuilding of the Temple and issuing a decree that would allow any willing Hebrew to return to Jerusalem to get it done.

Here’s the thing:

Cyrus is addressed by name in Isaiah 45. God refers to him as someone He has anointed for the sake of his people. He also says of Cyrus:

For the sake of Jacob my servant, of Israel my chosen, I summon you by name and bestow on you a title of honor,  though you do not acknowledge me . I am the Lord, and there is no other; apart from me there is no God. I will strengthen you,  though you have not acknowledged me  so that from the rising of the sun to the place of its setting men may know there is note beside me. I am the Lord, and there is not other. (Is 45:4-5)

Cyrus didn’t believe in God, but that didn’t change the fact that God used him to accomplish the reconstruction of Jerusalem.

The same thing applies to us be it a politician, a doctor, a contractor or any kind of service provider. No, you don’t applaud their sin but you do support them in whatever role they’re playing in accomplishing God’s Purposes. In other words, you vote for King Cyrus, you make the appointment, you go with the best option and you don’t sneer at the cedar that’s being delivered to your doorstep for the construction of whatever God is building because its being delivered by a bunch of idolaters (see sidebar).

Conclusion

There’s a difference between compromise and wisdom. Basing your convictions on personal preferences seasoned with some carefully selected Scriptures that can be taken out of context and made to sound like a solid biblical reinforcement of your prejudices is not the same thing as basing your outlook on Scripture as a whole and refusing to allow your life’s experiences to replace the Word of God simply because you’re more comfortable with your opinion than you are with the Truth.

Discipleship is not being accurately presented if it’s taught as something that only applies in the context of a crisis. Standing up for what is right is not always accomplished by a mere rebuke. David defeated Goliath with a sanctified response that included both a weapon and a word (1 Sam 17:45-47). And however rough around the edges God’s human instrument may be, Scripture proves over and over again that your focus needs to be on the Plot and not the players in order to determine who you should support and who should resist.

There is, and always has been, an aggressive campaign in place to exchange the Truth for a lie (Jn 8:44; Rom 1:25; 1 Peter 5:8). If the author of that campaign is to be defeated, not only can we not afford to be petty, we don’t have the time to watch our countermeasures fail because they were based more on tradition than they were on the Substance of God’s Word.

And even when your convictions are on point, your delivery has to be just as Inspired if the end result is going to be a legitimate win (Prov 15:23; 25:11; Mk 13:11; Titus 2:7-8).

The bottom line is this: You’re here to make a difference and not just an appearance. Christ is the Filing Cabinet and not just a file folder and to restrict His Instruction and all the advantages that accompany obedience to those times that line up with your traditions is to gut His Word, kill your witness and give the enemy all the more opportunity to do some damage.

On the other hand…

Be the kind of workman referenced in 2 Timothy 2:15 and you’ve got a winning strategy in place that will benefit you and everyone He puts in your path because instead of you working apart from Him, He’s now the One working through you.

Solomon followed the example of his father in that he contracted King Hiram of the Phoenicians for laborers and building materials. David used the cedar logs, stonemasons and carpenters provided by King Hiram to build his palace (2 Sam 5:11). Solomon used the same resource for the cedar needed to build the Temple (2 Chron 2:3).

King Hiram resided in Tyre and ruled over a people who were descendants of Canaan. Canaan’s father was Ham who was the son of Noah that had demonstrated an outrageous disregard for God in the aftermath of the flood. Noah saw the same belligerence in Canaan and rightfully prophesied that his descendants would go on to become perverse idolaters and wind up being the object of God’s Wrath in the context of the Israelites conquest of the Promised Land.

Tyre, however, was a boundary and not a target (Josh 19:29). It’s not that the Phoenicians were a God fearing people (Ezekiel 26:2; Lk 10:13). They were descendants of Canaan, but those that resided in Tyre were able to somehow distinguish themselves in the sight of God as being undeserving of the punishment that was doled out to Sidon and other neighboring Canaanite cities. Perhaps that was one of the contributing factors that allowed for a friendly relationship between Hiram and David and then, later, Solomon.

Their true, spiritual colors would be revealed later when they cheered as Nebuchadnezzar destroyed Israel and for that they themselves would be destroyed, as Ezekiel prophesied in chapter 26.

The point being, however, that God can, and often does, use unconventional means and a variety of spiritual dispositions to do His work. In those moments, you want to support His efforts and not question them any more than you would refuse the cedar coming from Hiram simply because he was a Canaanite. Yes, he was an idolater, but he was used by God to do good nevertheless.


Three Questions (Part II)

This is “Part II” of a three part series that features three questions designed to inspire some thought, as far as the practical application of God’s Word as a whole to some situations that don’t always get a lot of attention.

Here’s Question #2…

You’re the Good Samaritan. But instead of encountering the victim after they’ve been beaten and robbed, you encounter him as he’s being beaten and robbed. What does your ministry look like?

Life isn’t always sectioned off in a way where the resulting shapes are characterized by straight and even lines. In order for the Truth to make an impact, you have to follow Christ’s example and communicate it in a way that addresses, not just the situation in general, but the unique “shape” of the situation to include the personalities that are involved, the topic being addressed and the setting that you’re in (Jn 7:24).

Rarely are you going to be in a spot where only one verse applies. Instead, there will be several verses to consider which is why it’s so important to be taking your cue from God’s Spirit and His Wisdom as opposed to a collection of guidelines and techniques that you manufacture on your own based on a portion of God’s Instructions as opposed to the whole Handbook (2 Tim 3:16-17).

Standing up for what is right is not always done in the absence of a physical / violent altercation. There is an evil out there that doesn’t respond to a gentle rebuke or even a stern warning. And to twist Christ’s admonishment to “turn the other cheek” or God’s command to not take revenge on someone for a wrong they’ve done to you in order to justify not standing up to Goliath or to insist that Jesus was talking about a pocket New Testament when He told the disciples to go purchase a sword, is an irresponsible and inaccurate application of God’s Word.

‘Turning the other cheek” is the biblical response to an offense, not an assault…

As in much of Jesus’ teaching, pressing his illustration the wrong way may obscure his point. In fact, this would read Scripture the very way he was warning against: if someone hits us in the nose, or has already struck us on both cheeks, are we finally free to hit back? Jesus gives us a radical example so we will avoid retaliation, not so we will explore the limits of his example (see Tannehill 1975:73). A backhanded blow to the right cheek did not imply shattered teeth (tooth for tooth was a separate statement); it was an insult, the severest public affront to a person’s dignity (Lam 3:30; Jeremias 1963:28 and 1971:239). God’s prophets sometimes suffered such ill-treatment (1 Kings 22:24; Is 50:6). Yet though this was more an affront to honor, a challenge, than a physical injury, ancient societies typically provided legal recourse for this offense within the lex talionis regulations (Pritchard 1955:163, 175; see also Gaius Inst. 3.220). (“Avoid Retribution and Resistance”, IVP Commentary, accessed April, 2 2009)

And to suggest that the New Testament somehow nullifies every Divinely sanctioned use of force in the Old Testament is to suggest that God changes His mind when it comes either swinging your fist or firing a weapon (see Ps 44:3).

He doesn’t change His mind.

Ever (Num 23:19).

Judges 3:1-2 makes it clear that God placed a premium on making sure that the Israelites knew how to fight. It makes sense, given the number of times Israel was called upon to strap on their swords and do battle with the enemies of God.

In the New Testament, while Jesus does make it clear that to be reckless and hasty in resolving to remedy any and all disputes with a weapon is foolish (Those who live by the sword, die by the sword [Matt 26:52]), and He encourages believers to respond to insults and offenses by “turning the other cheek,” the context and verbiage of His admonishing the disciples to arm themselves taken along with God’s obvious endorsement of military force in the Old Testament compellingly demonstrates the Truth and Biblical place of “sanctified violence.”

So, if you were to come on a scene where bandits were beating and robbing someone, you’re doing the right thing by stopping them however you need to in order to stand up for what is right and protect those who may not be able to protect themselves.

For more reading on this subject, see “Sanctified Violence” at muscularchristianityonline.com

Three Questions | Part I

Muscular Christianity Billboard

Hello, Daily Broadsiders! Thanks to my buddy Dave for the opportunity to jump into the “Daily Ball Pit” and interact with some quality human beings!

I wanted to kick things off by posing three questions which we’ll cover in the course of a three part series.

It’s called, “Three Questions.”

I believe the way you answer these three questions do an excellent job of revealing the “practical reality” of your walk with Christ (Col 3:18). By “practical reality,” I mean either those times when “ministry” includes working alongside dynamics that aren’t agreeable or safe, or those instances that go beyond the boundaries typically established by textbook examples.

Take a look…

1) If you had to create a billboard that promoted a relationship with Jesus Christ and you couldn’t mention anything about heaven or hell or how Christ helps you with your problems, what would your billboard say?

2) You’re the Good Samaritan. But instead of encountering the victim after they’ve been beaten and robbed, you encounter him as he’s being beaten and robbed. What does your ministry look like?

3) Your neighbor’s house is on fire. You’re working alongside several people put out the blaze when all of a sudden you realize that among those you’re working with, there are several whose lifestyles you seriously disagree with. Do you keep working to put out the fire or do you walk away believing that it’s wrong to be a part of any effort involving people who don’t believe as you do?

In this installment, we’ll be looking at Questions #1.

You ready?

If you had to create a billboard that promoted a relationship with Jesus Christ and you couldn’t mention anything about heaven or hell or how Christ helps you with your problems, what would your billboard say?

It’s one of those questions that can take you by surprise in that conventional church culture puts a lot of emphasis on who we are apart from Christ. Many of the sermons and a lot of the Praise and Worship we sing focus more on the insufficiency of the believer rather than the all sufficiency of God. As a result, the inclination is to process one’s relationship with Jesus as something that comes to bear primarily in the context of a crisis rather than a Resource that’s poised to positively impact every play you deploy on the field rather than something that only applies when you’re on the sidelines.  

You are more than your wounds and better than your sin. Not because of who you are but because of Who Christ is in you. To restrict Christ’s Influence to crisis situations only is to overlook both the Attitude and the Ability He’s given you to excel and not just endure.

Bear in mind, when God says, “excel,” He’s talking about all things at all times (2 Cor 9:8). That includes your performance at work, the way you love the people you care about, the way you work out, even the way you mow your lawn.

And whatever you do, whether in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him. Col 3:17)

Do you smell that that? That’s the aroma of excellence!

Imagine the kind of woodworking Jesus did as a carpenter. Do you think it looked good? Just imagine what your performance at work would look like if it was unhindered by the influence of sin. Have you ever noticed that the people you tend to enjoy hanging out with the most are those that make you feel good about yourself and the world around you? Typically, they’re happy individuals and they’re genuinely interested in your welfare. Those two characteristics are practical manifestations of 1 Thessalonians 5:16-18 and Philippians 2:3-4.

Do you see where this is going?

We are here to make a difference and not just an appearance. But we’re not “tending to our Father’s business” if we spend more time rehearsing our mistakes than we do reviewing His Perfection.

And it’s that Perfection that drives the way we think, act and feel IF we’re astute enough to allow Him to work in and through us so we’re putting some points on the board rather than just complaining about how intimidating the defense is.

There is a time to heal and apart from Christ we can do nothing. But we are commanded to be excellent and if you want to take Matthew 5:16 literally, we should be lighting up every room we walk into with a demeanor that makes people look forward to our arrival.

  • The Joy of the Lord (Gal 5:22-23)
  • The Power of the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:8; Phil 4:13; Col 1:29)
  • The Mind of Christ (Rom 12:1-2; 1 Cor 2:16; Phil 4:8)

I know, right?

Our relationship with Christ is far more than a Divine Emergency Kit as much as it’s a Divine Tool Kit that we’re given to use in a way where we’re able to reek of excellence in everything we say, think and do so we’re making a difference and not just an appearance (Ps 19:14).

So, how about that Billboard?

Here’s some ideas…

Dream Big, Pray Bigger (Eph 3:20) | Don’t Just Try, Win (Josh 1:8) | Don’t Just Make an Appearance, Make a Difference (Matt 6:19-21; Jn 14:12; 1 Cor 3:12)

Go get ’em!