2 Cents

2013 was a year spent entrenched in the book of Revelation for me.  I spent the first 7 months studying it hard verse-by-verse just because I felt like I didn't really understand it very well at all.  The last 15 or so weeks I've spent teaching the book to a group of adults at our church, which as you can imagine has produced even more study and meditating on the book.

Here I would just like to give you a quick look at the resources that have helped me most and give a short explanation of each one.

The Book of Revelation - G.K. Beale

This is undoubtedly the top commentary on Revelation and has the best and most information in it.  However it's also part of the New International Greek Testament Commentary series, which means it's very scholarly and deals a lot with the original language translation issues from the Greek text of the book of Revelation.  If you're serious about studying Revelation, this is the first place to go.  Even if you don't know Greek this will still help you out a lot.  But if you really don't like reading scholarly type books, this might not be for you.

The Book of Revelation - Robert Mounce

This is another top commentary on Revelation, but is more accessible to the every-day reader than Beale's.  There's a lot of good information in this one to help you understand the hard parts in Revelation.  However Mounce is a premillennialist - a view I think is unbiblical - so know that going in.

Revelation - Christopher Davis

This one is from the College Press NIV series, which has authors from the Christian Church/Churches of Christ contributing (that's my "denomination").  This one is not near as helpful as the two commentaries above, however there are some very good sections on the significance and symbols of numbers in Revelation, as well as the sections the book should be divided into, which greatly affects the way you interpret the book.

40 Questions About The End Times - Ekhard Schnabel

This is a great book with all sorts of information divided up into 40 chapters on 40 questions.  Most of them have a great deal to do with what's in Revelation.  You will find some great answers in this book to many of the tough questions about the symbols in Revelation.  Schnabel is also a premillennialist, so know that going in, but he's very biblical on just ab
out everything else in the book.  This one is well worth the $!

The Bible and the Future - Anthony Hoekema

This is probably the best book to read for everything End-Times related.  Hoekema is extremely knowledgable about the Bible and all of his points are supported with numerous pieces of evidence straight from the Bible.  I loved this book and agree with 99.5% of what is in it!

A Case for Amillennialism - Kim Riddlebarger 

This book deals exclusively with the debate over the thousand year period talked about in Rev. 20:1-6.  There has been much controversy over this small portion of Scripture and Riddlebarger does an excellent job presenting what I believe to be the correct and biblical position.

Bible Prophecy and End Times (12 Sermons) - Jack Cottrell

These are twelve sermons given by my favorite seminary professor and the teacher/author who has most influenced me in theology.  I trust just about everything this man says or writes and you can too.  The audio is not great on these sermons as they're pretty old, but the information is well worth the price and the time it takes to listen to them.  These talks are also just very interesting!

The Faith Once for All - Jack Cottrell

This is Dr. Cottrell's systematic theology, which is like a reference book that presents what the Bible says on numerous topics.  Some of the topics Dr. Cottrell examines and dedicates chapters to include The Millennium, The Final Judgment, The Intermediate State, Interpreting Biblical Prophecy, Heaven, Hell, and The Second Coming of Jesus.  Not only does it contain great information in helping us to understand Revelation, but this is one book I would recommend every single Christian owning for reference to a myriad of important Bible doctrines.

In Part 1 of these posts on the book of Job we looked at how Job seems to have suffered for either for no reason at all, or because he was an upright and godly man.  Either answer leaves us very confused.

But there's another reason the book of Job is so tricky: You don't know who to listen to.

For chapter after chapter we read the dialogue between Job and his three friends and they debate back and forth the reasons for Job's suffering.

But oddly enough God rebukes both Job (chs. 38-41) and all three of his friends (Job 42:7) at the end of the book when he begins to speak.

From chapters 3 to 31 we're constantly confused.  Who do I listen to?  Is anyone speaking things that are correct about the Lord?  What am I supposed to agree with and what am I supposed to reject?  How do I know?

Well the first thing to know is that there are times where all four men speak things that are correct about God.  But there are also times where all four men are in the wrong.

So as you're reading the book of Job, don't just automatically take everything you read as something you're supposed to believe is true.

Often when we read the Bible we think that anytime we see a statement about God it's automatically true.  But we have to understand the context.  For instance, who's saying it?

Not only that, but we also have to compare what we read to the rest of the Bible.  Does this statement contradict some other part of Scripture?  Is it contrary to another clear biblical teaching on God's character?

Also we must remember that Job's friends are miserable comforters.  Initially they sit with Job in silence for a whole week (Job 2:13) - something that can be very helpful to those going through immense trials.

But after a while they can't hold back and they try to start rationalizing - which is rarely helpful.

Even when they say things that are true on the surface, it's just the wrong time.  As Christians we're not only called to speak the truth, but to speak it in a timely fashion (Prov. 15:23), and in love (Eph. 4:15).

Sometimes spouting off accurate theology only exasperates someone who's suffering.

Finally, it's also helpful to know that a fifth man, Elihu, begins to speak in chapter 32 and goes on until chapter 37.  And this man is perhaps the only one of whom we can say everything he speaks is accurate and God-glorifying.

So as you're reading chs. 32-37 you can relax a little and be less critical.

I hope these two posts help you to better understand the book of Job the next time you read it, and to connect more effectively with God's message to us through this amazing book.

The book of Job can be a great encouragement to those experiencing suffering.

Most people say no.

I say yes.

There are two reasons why.

First is his teaching in Matthew chapter 19.

I have heard some New Testament scholars convincingly argue that Jesus' use of porneia in Matt. 19:9 includes homosexuality because it is a catch-all term for any sexual sin.  The best Greek lexicons seem to support this definition.

Since Lev. 18:22 and Lev. 20:13 are OT texts that clearly name it as a sin, homosexuality would be included in Jesus' statement along with such things as adultery, fornication, multiple partners, incest, etc.  A strong example of this argument can be found HERE.

But aside from Jesus' use of the word porneia, we have his statements in verse 4-6:

Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, "Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hod fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh"?  So they are no longer two but one flesh.  What therefore God has joined together, let man not separate.

It's very clear that Jesus is teaching on marriage and to him, marriage is between one man and one woman.  So while he does not speak of homosexuality here directly, he does indirectly state that a relationship between two men or two woman does not constitute as marriage.  God is the one who created marriage and he did so when he created the first two human beings - one man and one woman.

However there is a second reason why I believe it is clear that Jesus taught on homosexuality and this one is almost universally overlooked, even among Christians.

The argument is this: If Jesus is God, and everything in the Bible is God's word, then Jesus teaches on homosexuality numerous times throughout the Bible.

First we have to note that Jesus claimed to be God numerous times (John 10:30; John 8:58; John 14:10-11; John 5:18).

Also there is a vast collection of statements outside of the four gospels that ascribe deity to Jesus (Col. 2:9; Phil. 2:6; Gal. 1:1; Rom. 9:5; John 1:1; John 20:28; 1 John 5:20; Heb. 1:3; 2 Peter 1:1, etc). 

So it is very clear the Bible presents Jesus as God.  As Christians we do not worship multiple gods, but one God in three persons - Father, Son, and Holy Spirit - the Trinity.

It is also clear that the Bible presents God as the one who inspired every word of Scripture.  They are the words of God.  (See 2 Tim. 3:16; 2 Peter 1:20-21; 1 Thess. 2:13)

So if all the words in the Bible are God's words, and if Jesus is God, then Jesus did in fact teach on homosexuality in Lev. 18:22, Lev. 20:13, Rom. 1:26-27, 1 Cor. 6:9-11, and 1 Tim. 1:8-11.

So when someone tells me that Jesus did not teach on homosexuality, not only do I see it as an excuse to disregard the rest of the Bible's teaching on the subject, but also a claim that isn't actually true.

A few weeks ago a very controversial conference happened in the Christian world.  In Sun Valley, California, renowned Bible teacher, author, and pastor John MacArthur led a conference entitled Strange Fire.  

Before Jesus was crucified he was brought to trial.  But trial for what?  Did he even do anything wrong?  Could anyone bring a charge against him?

There were many false witnesses claiming he did things he never did (Matt. 26:60).

The false witnesses also couldn't get their stories straight and contradicted one another (Mark 14:56).

Pilate didn't find him guilty of anything worthy of death (Luke 23:4, Luke 23:13-14).

But they did bring a charge against him.  The one thing that eventually led the Pharisees and the chief priests to sentence Jesus to be crucified was that Jesus claimed to be divine; he claimed to be God!  And in the eyes of the Jews, this was blasphemy worthy of death.

Jesus claimed that he and God the Father were one (John 10:30).

Jesus also claimed that he was eternally pre-existent with God (John 8:57-58).

He also claimed the authority to forgive sins, of which only God has.

And when Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, "Son, your sins are forgiven."  Now some of the scribes were sitting there, questioning in their hearts, "Why does this man speak like that? He is blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?"  And immediately Jesus, perceiving in his spirit that they thus questioned within themselves, said to them, "Why do you question these things in your hearts? Which is easier, to say to the paralytic, 'Your sins are forgiven,' or to say, 'Rise, take up your bed and walk.'? But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins" - he said to the paralytic - "I say to you, rise, pick up your bed and go home."  (Mark 2:5-11)

Now it's not hard to see why this infuriated the Jews.  The Old Testament is clear.  There is only one God (Deut. 6:4) and blaspheming his name is punishable by death (Lev. 24:16).

You could make a case that in Jesus' day, anyone making the claims that Jesus was making actually should have been put to death.

And they tried many times.

After his claim that he and the Father were one.  (John 10:31-33)

After his claim that he was eternally pre-existent with God.  (John 8:59)

John 5:18 also shows they were seeking other opportunities as well because of Jesus' claim to be God.

And finally, they could take it no more.  They conspired with Judas to arrest Jesus in the middle of the night, and at his impromptu trial they charged him...

Again the high priest asked him, "Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?"  And Jesus said, "I am, and you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven."  And the high priest tore his garments and said, "What further witnesses do we need?  You have heard his blasphemy.  What is your decision?"  And they all condemned him as deserving death.  (Mark 14:61-64)

So did Jesus commit a crime?

Well in the eyes of the Jews, yes, he was blaspheming the name of God, claiming to be God himself, an action God said in the OT was punishable by death.

But it's not a crime if Jesus really is God.  And that's the key.  Jesus was simply telling the truth.  But it was a very hard truth for many people to swallow.

But oddly enough, that was God's plan.  We needed Jesus to be delivered up to the Roman guards and killed because without that we would have no hope, no forgiveness, no chance to be reconciled to God.

If you're a reader of Christian books and you want to read today's popular authors you're going to run into many Calvinists - those who hold to the teaching of John Calvin, most notably the TULIP doctrines as well as a belief in determinism, which is a way of saying that every single thing that happens was decreed by God to happen before he even created anything.

If you want to listen to popular podcasts of sermons from excellent preachers, many you will find will also hold to this doctrinal system.

Personally I believe these doctrines to be unbiblical and out of touch with reality as we experience it.  God's word never explicitly argues for free will, it simply assumes it, and there are many places we could go in Scripture to see that God has given his creatures freedom to choose what they will do and believe - the most important of which is our ability to either choose Jesus or reject him.  (See Matt. 23:37; Deut. 30:19; etc.)

Now before I go further I need to say I spend a lot of time reading the works of Calvinist authors and listening to them preach and I've benefitted greatly from them.  Many of them are very skilled at what they do and 95% of the time they're preaching and teaching on things I can heartily agree with.  I'm very thankful for their work and consider it a privilege to serve alongside them as brothers in Christ seeking to reach the world with the gospel.

But, having said that, one prevailing theme that occurs time and time again in Calvinist writings, whether explicitly or implicitly, is this: the doctrine of Grace is inherently Calvinistic and opposed to free will or Arminian theology.

Calvinists often characterize believers in free will as anti-grace, saying that they teach salvation by works.  They argue that God chose, in eternity past, who would be saved and who would go to hell, and therefore we do not ultimately decide to believe in Christ or reject him, we just do what God determined long ago that we should do.  To them, this is grace, the fact that those who are saved are chosen arbitrarily.

However in the free will perspective salvation still only comes to human beings through the grace of God - they are not opposed to one another.

Arminians (those believing in free will) still believe that there would be no salvation if God had not graciously punished his Son Jesus for our sins.  That was an act of grace.  We did nothing to deserve it.

Arminians also believe that there is nothing we can do to save ourselves.  God is the one who saves us. We are simply asked by God to respond to the free gift he has already made available by choosing to put our faith in Christ, repent of our sins, claim his as our Lord, and be baptized.

Are those all things we do?  Of course they are.  But does that mean we worked our way to salvation?  Of course not!  We simply met God's conditions for receiving his grace!

It's like if I gave you two free tickets to a UK Basketball game (lucky you!).  But just because I gave you the tickets doesn't mean you automatically get to enjoy the game.  You still have to be in Lexington and go to the arena at the right time on the right day.  You also have to present those tickets to the ushers as you enter.  Otherwise you won't get to experience the gift I offered.

Such is what I believe to be the biblical teaching of salvation.

Another jab Calvinists often take at Arminians is that their view of God diminishes his glory and authority.  They are placing limits on God's sovereignty.

In response we must say, yes, according to free will theology God is limited in that he cannot force someone to choose Christ or reject him.  But this does not diminish God's glory because God himself is the one who put these limits in place!

God, in creating creatures with free will, by his own sovereign and free choice, limited himself by refusing to invade our freedom.  Not that man's freedom to choose is seen as more important than God's sovereignty, but that God himself desires that our love for him and for Jesus be genuine and not forced.  Indeed this is the only way I see that we can biblically rationalize the existence of hell and eternal punishment.  In this way God is still supremely glorious because it all results from his own wisdom and free choice.

No matter what our theological camp, we must all admit that there are things God cannot do.  He cannot sin or be tempted (James 1:13).  He cannot lie (Heb. 6:18).  He cannot deny himself (2 Tim. 2:13).  But the fact that these limits are in place does not make God less glorious.

So it's not fair to characterize those who believe in free will as diminishing the glory of God's grace with their theology.

But let's end by seeing what we have in common.  Both Calvinist and Arminian brothers and sisters in Christ believe everything rests on God's freedom to choose to create whatever kind of world he desires.  Both have an extremely high view of God's glory and his right to create and rule his world in the way he sees fit.  And both see the work of sharing the gospel so that God can save sinners as extraordinarily important.

I almost hesitate to write articles like this because, before we're Calvinists or Arminianists, we're Christians.  We're Protestants... we're Evangelicals... and we should work together.

In that light I'd also like to say I'm excited and blessed to be attending the Together for the Gospel conference next April, of which all 8 plenary speakers are very strong Calvinists, because the conference is all about working together for the gospel.

In America's continued debate on so called "same sex marriage" and whether or not the church should label homosexual practice as a sin, evangelicals have failed to clearly articulate certain biblical teachings.

One of those biblical teachings has to do with the effects of the fall in Genesis chapter 3 and the entrance of sin into the world.

A common argument brought against those arguing for a biblical view of homosexuality and marriage is that some people are born with same-sex attraction.  They weren't made that way by some outside force or something they did, they were simply "born this way" as Lady Gaga might say.

Proponents of so called "same sex marriage" and homosexuality will then argue something to this effect: If God made them that way, how can it be called a sin?

And this is where our failure to articulate the Bible's teaching comes in - when the jump is made from "they were born that way" to "God made them that way."

Is that true?  Did God really make them that way?  What does the Bible have to say about it?

In Genesis ch. 3 we read about the first human sin.  Adam and Eve listened to the lies of Satan and broke the one commandment God had given them.  That's when sin entered into the world.

And when sin entered the world, the Bible says it affected everything.

Pain in childbirth and marital difficulties come from the entrance of sin. (Gen. 3:16)

Weeds, thorns, and even frustration at work come from the entrance of sin. (Gen. 3:17-19)

And these were just the tip of the iceberg.

All of creation exhibits the negative effects of sin's entrance into the world (See Rom. 8:20-22).  From colds to mosquito bites to natural disasters, it's all the result of sin's entrance into the world.

And not only that, but every human being was affected too.  Now we all have to deal with what the Bible calls "the flesh." (See Rom. 7:18; Rom. 8:13; Gal. 5:17)

And that means we all have a proclivity toward sin that we are "born with."  We didn't choose it.  We didn't make ourselves this way.  And yet we still have to say 'NO' to these desires.

For instance, while I was not born with a proclivity toward same-sex attraction, it is very plain to me that I was born with a proclivity toward selfishness - to seek out my own good before and above the good of others.

I think anyone who claims to believe in the Bible would agree that selfishness is a sin.  And yet, I was "born this way."

The point is this: just because we have a "natural" or innate desire to do something does not automatically make it morally right.

In fact, one of the marks of becoming a mature adult is learning to say 'NO' to many of our natural desires, like selfishness.  I think even proponents of so called "same sex marriage" would agree with that.

If evangelicals want to win people to their way of thinking, the ability to articulate this biblical doctrine of the effects of sin's entrance into the world is crucial.

The argument "God made them that way so it can't be a sin," has no biblical evidence and should not be accepted by anyone who reads their Bible and believes what it says is true.

Recently I just finished memorizing the book of Philippians.

That may sound crazy to you, or at least extraordinarily difficult, but it's really not that hard.

Here's how I did it.

First, I bought a pocket-sized Moleskine journal - HERE.

Then I printed out this PDF and cut out each square and pasted them on alternate pages - leaving a page to the side for reflection.  Below is a picture of one of the pages.


But the real kicker is I used the voice memos on my phone.

Each week I would record my own voice reading that week's set of verses on the Voice Memos app on my iPhone.

And then every time I got in the car I would play that week's recording over, and over, and over, and over again.

You'd be quite surprised how quick you can learn a verse doing it this way.  Often I would have two verses memorized just in the span of one 15 minute car ride.

And if you're anything like me, you take plenty of 15 minute car rides every week.

On the latter days of the week (Th, Fr, Sat) I would review previous weeks' verses, again simply playing the audio track on Voice Memos and reciting along with it aloud.

So really it was no extra time out of my day.  The only real sacrifice I had to make was not listening to as much music or podcasts in the car - a small and worthwhile sacrifice for memorizing the words of God.

I also installed a GTA Car Kit in my car because my car is a little older and doesn't have an AUX input built into the stereo.  Installing the kit was a lot of fun and it works great!

I was very surprised how easy it was to memorize an entire book of the Bible this way.  Yes, I will have to review, but the process helped me to know the book of Philippians better than I ever have in my life.  And the benefits of carrying around Scripture in my heart are numerous (See Psalm 119:9; Psalm 119:11; Joshua 1:8).

You can do this too.  You just have to want to.  Seriously, it's easier than you think.

So many people today have an unhealthy fascination with the end of the world.

They try to predict when it will occur.  They are constantly looking at political and military events in the world today as fulfillments of biblical prophecy.  And they are constantly proclaiming that some current public figure is the antichrist - a being who will rise to great power and try to challenge God's authority just before the end of the world.

One of the most common assertions is that the President of the United States (whoever it is at the time) is the Antichrist.  Franklin D. Roosevelt, President from 1933-1945, is noted by many to be the first President publicly labelled as the Antichrist.

According to Joe Carter, from that time "almost every president has landed on the Antichrist suspect list. FDR, JFK, Nixon, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama have all been named by various individuals and organizations." (HT: Gospel Coalition)

Other popular figures accused of being the Antichrist include the Pope, Adolf Hitler, various communist leaders, and virtually any prominent politician that some radical obsessor over the end of the world doesn't agree with.  

The problem with all of this, aside from the unhealthy obsession with anything related to end times, is that the Bible does not speak of the "antichrist" being any one person.

The term "antichrist" is only used four times in the entire Bible, and the Apostle John is the only biblical author to use it.  No one else uses the term at all.  (See 1 John 2:18; 1 John 2:22; 1 John 4:3; 2 John 7)

Each time he uses the term he does so to describe anyone who is opposed to Jesus Christ - hence the term anti-Christ.  John never speaks of a single person coming to power.  Each time he uses the term he does so to warn his readers that there are many people who oppose Jesus Christ - and those were people alive during John's lifetime, the first and second centuries.

There is no biblical warrant for the term "antichrist" to be applied to a current or future person rising to power to challenge the authority of God.  

The "man of lawlessness" in 2 Thess. 2:3-5 is about as close as you come to such a figure, and most commentators argue that this prophecy was fulfilled in the first century close to or during the attack on Jerusalem in 70 A.D. 

It might also surprise you to know that the word "antichrist" never appears in the book of Revelation at all.

So it is inaccurate and unbiblical for anyone to claim that such and such person is "the Antichrist."  

What we should be more concerned about is that an anti-Christ culture and attitude is alive and well today.  

There are many people who relegate Jesus to simply a great teacher and a moral man.  That's antichrist type teaching.  

There are many today who seek to prove that Jesus was only a legend or a myth.  That's antichrist type teaching.  

And there are many who argue that there are other paths to God and Heaven apart from Jesus Christ (See John 14:6; Acts 4:12; 1 John 5:12).  That's antichrist type teaching as well.

I heard a story once of a college professor teaching a "Bible as Literature" course.  If you know anything about these type of courses they're usually taught by atheists who examine the Bible as if it were just another fallible, human-produced piece of literature.

Each semester, knowing there would be Christians in the class, the professor would start out the first class with a broad survey.

"Who in here claims to be a Christian?" And many of the hands would go up.

"Alright, how many of you think that this book contains the words of God?" And all of the hands would remain raised.

"Alright.  Now... how many of you have read every word in this book?" And then almost every hand would go down.

"You see," he would proclaim, "You don't really believe they're the words of God.  Otherwise you'd read and know them!"

And he has a great point.

How many of us who claim to be Christians and claim to believe that the words in the Bible are the very words of the God of the universe haven't even read them all?  How many of us barely pick up our Bibles during the week - except of course to carry them to church?

We might say we believe our Bibles contain the words of God, but if you look at our actions - how much time we spend reading them, memorizing them, getting to know them, studying them - it's clear we really don't comprehend what we're saying.

If the Bible really is the words of the God of the universe, the God who said "Let there be light," and light just came into being out of nothing, the God who was never caused or born or created, the God who knows every atom in the universe in intricate detail and holds them all in place, the God of all power and knowledge and wisdom and authority... we should cherish it more than anything else we have!

Take some time today and just mediate on the astounding fact that the God of the universe has given us a book with his words in it.  How important is the Bible!  How precious is it!  How lucky and blessed are we that we have such easy access to it?

The people in this video below understand.  Watch it... you'll see what I mean.

In Luke 22:2 we read this:

And the chief priests and the scribes were seeking how to put him to death, for they feared the people.

For they feared the people.

It wasn't primarily because he upset the established order of things.  It wasn't because he claimed to be God and the Jews had strict laws about there being only one true God.  It was because they feared the people.

But what does that really mean?

It means PRIDE.  They killed Jesus because they were prideful.

When you break it down pride is basically when we care too much about what other people think about us.  In other words, the fear of man or the fear of other people.

When we pridefully refuse to admit we're wrong it is because we care too much about other people thinking we are right.

When we pridefully show off or boast it is because we care too much about people admiring us.

When we pridefully don't want to confess our sins to someone it is because we care too much about them viewing us as a righteous person.

Pride is fearing people.

And pride is the reason Jesus was murdered.

In John 7:7 we see that the reason the world hated (and still hates) Jesus is because he calls people evil. He makes people face up to their sins.  He calls people out (like the Pharisees) when they're being hypocrites.  He exposes people for who they really are.

And prideful people hate that because they care so much about others seeing them as good, righteous, and correct.

If I'm honest, there are many times where I hate it as well.

We see this in John 5 as well.

In John 5:40 we read that there were Jews who "refused" to come to Jesus for eternal life.

Not that they didn't know they were supposed to, but they refused.  They didn't want to.

Why?  John 5:44 gives us the answer:

How can you believe, when you receive glory from one another and do not seek the glory that comes from the only God?

In other words, the root cause of their unbelief in Jesus was their love of praise and glory from people.  They feared the people.  And it led to the murder of Jesus.

So the question we have to ask ourselves is this: have I dealt with my own pride and fear of people?  Am I working to kill it or am I simply letting it live?  Do I care more about what other people think of me than what God thinks?

Because pride a dangerous, dangerous sin.  So dangerous it led to the murder of Jesus.

But there's hope, if you're a Christian, because God has given you a new heart and Paul says in Gal. 1:10, true servants of Jesus are no longer seeking the approval of people.

If you've spent any significant time going to church services in your life you've certainly seen this before - the man or woman who doesn't sing the worship songs but just stands there and enjoys/endures them.

While I certainly understand this in the case of the non-Christian visiting a church and trying to figure out what it's all about, it really, really, frustrates me to see someone who has been a Christian for many years refusing to use their voice to worship God during the church service.

In the book of Ephesians God gives us the following command:

"... be filled with the Spirit, addressing one another in psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, singing and making melody to the Lord with your heart."  - Eph. 5:18-19

In Colossians we read:

"Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, teaching and admonishing one another in all wisdom, singing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, with thankfulness in your hearts to God."  - Col. 3:16

It is very clear that God commands Christians in his word to sing songs of worship and praise and thankfulness to him.  In other words, for the Christian, not singing when you're physically able to do so is a sin.

Some people refuse to sing because they think they have a poor singing voice.  Truth is, many people do have a very poor singing voice that sounds a lot like those delusional people we laugh at on the first few weeks of American Idol.  However I would contend that those people can glorify God just as much, if not more, than those with beautiful voices.

The person who knows they have a horrible singing voice yet belts out worship songs loudly and without shame glorifies God in showing him and others that they love God with all their heart and will give him their all no matter what those around them may think.

I had a good friend in college that truly had a poor sounding singing voice.  Yet when the time came for worship he was "loud and proud" and it was clear it was his joy to use his voice to praise and worship the God who loved him and saved him.

In the church I serve at currently there is a young woman with Down's Syndrome that I personally believe glorifies God in her singing more than any other member of our congregation - indeed more than any other worshipper I've ever sang with.

This young woman has every reason not to sing.  She has a shaky singing voice and you can hear it.  On top of that she can't read very well so most of the time she has to rely on memory for songs she's heard multiple times, or singing a little behind others for songs she doesn't know.

But if you're sitting anywhere next to her you can hear her loud and clear.  And I think it's one of the most beautiful sounds I've ever heard.

I'm convinced God feels the same way.  Of course I can't know for sure, but I'd be willing to bet God loves hearing that young girl sing much more than thousands of people who have professionally trained voices.

So, yes God does command us to sing praise and worship songs to him.  Indeed it is a sin not to do so when we are able.

But more than that, it should be our joy!

No matter our quality of voice God desires to hear us.  And when we make music with our mouths out of the melody from our hearts (Eph. 5:19) it brings Him joy as well.

One day, as a sophomore in college at the University of Kentucky, I was walking back to the dorms from class with a friend named Brandon.

Brandon knew I was a Christian because he had seen me reading and carrying around my Bible and he said to me...

"You know the modern translations of the Bible are not accurate?"

"What do you mean?" I asked him.

"The Bible is a translation of a translation of a translation of a translation.  It's been corrupted over the years.  It's not anything like the original.  It's like the 'TELEPHONE' game."

You know, that game we all played in school where you line up and each person whispers a sentence in the ear of the person next to them.  You can only say it once and then the listener has to pass on whatever they think they heard.  And on down the line.

It's an object lesson in how messages get corrupted the more people pass them on.  Usually it's used to teach teenagers not to gossip.  But my friend Brandon claimed that was exactly what had happened with our modern translations of the Bible.

Is this true?

Not remotely.

Our modern ESV or NIV Bibles were not translated from other imperfect translations.  It is not as though the Bible were translated from the original Hebrew and Greek into Latin and from that into German and from that into French and from that to English.

The committees of language experts responsible for translations such as the ESV and NIV use manuscripts in the original languages.  They go back to the earliest and most reliable manuscripts to ensure our translations are as accurate as possible.  It is nothing like the telephone game.

But The Originals Don't Exist!

It's important for us to understand that the original documents that Moses or David or Paul or John wrote are no longer in existence.  In fact we don't have one original autograph for any book of the Bible.

That's a problem for those of us claiming our modern translations are accurate to the originals right?

No, not really.

While we have no originals, we have a vast number of copies.

The New Testament alone has over 5,800 copies and fragments currently in existence.  The oldest manuscripts date to the 2nd century, less than 100 years removed from the date of the originals.

Compare that to other documents of ancient history and our confidence in the Bible grows.

For example, Herodotus' history, written in the mid-400's B.C. has only 8 copies in existence, the earliest greater than 1300 years removed from the original.  Homer's Illiad, written around 900 B.C. has an impressive 643 copies in existence, the oldest roughly 500 years removed from the original.

But compare that with the more than 5,800 copies of the NT available today, the oldest not even 100 years removed from the original!  No other ancient document even compares!

But Human Copiers Made Errors!

It's also important to note that the first time a Greek NT was produced by a printing press was the year 1516.  This means for the first 1400 years or so of the NT it had to be copied by hand.  That opened it up to human error.

This surely is very bad news for those claiming the accuracy of modern translations right?

Not really.

The process of textual criticism allows us to figure out where those errors occur, to section off groups of manuscripts containing the same errors, and to compare the 5,800-plus copies with each other producing a text that is 99.5% accurate to the original text.  The only reason we cannot say 100% is because the originals don't exist.

So it's very reasonable for us to be extremely confident that when we go to the bookstore to purchase an ESV or NIV Bible, or some other modern translation, we are getting the words of God as originally written down by the men he inspired to write it.

For a great presentation on this stuff, watch the video from John Piper below.

If you're a Christian, I hope you're trying to form the habit of reading the Bible consistently on your own.  This is perhaps the most important discipline of them all for Christians to incorporate into their lives.

Sometimes when we're reading through books of the Bible by ourselves we come across a passage that we don't understand.

What should we do when this happens?

Well it depends.

Some people do not have access to helpful resources that explain hard-to-understand passages.  Some people just have their Bibles and that is it.

Is that a problem?  Not necessarily.  You can be a perfectly obedient Christian with nothing but a Bible and a heart willing to obey and submit to Jesus as Lord.

If this is the case for you, my advice would be to make a note of the passage and find someone that you can ask later, or go to a library to check out a book that can help you.

There's nothing wrong with doing that and moving right along to the next verse.  Most of what the Bible has to say you will be able to understand just fine.  The most important messages of the Bible should be easy enough for the average person to comprehend without the help of commentaries or other extra-biblical resources.

But don't just accept the fact that you don't understand it and never will.  Commit to finding the answer later.

Your first place to turn should be your minister or pastor at the church you attend.  As a biblical Christian I hope you are involved and immersed in a community of other believers at a particular local church.  E-mail the minister and see what he thinks.

Next you could turn to a trusted commentary.  Your minister can give you a couple good suggestions for commentaries you can trust.  Like any other genre of books there are commentaries you should trust and commentaries you shouldn't.  One website that I use to help me in this area is BestCommentaries.com.

While I would encourage every Christian, especially those not in ministry, to slowly start developing a library of commentaries to help you understand your Bible, you won't always have the money to buy a commentary every time you come across a difficult passage.

So one good solution is to borrow them.

Chances are your minister at church will let you look at one of his - but make sure you bring it back!!!

Also, you can always go to your local library.  "But my public library doesn't have any good commentaries," you might say.  Well our public library in Owensboro is like that.  But you can request they get a commentary sent in from another library through an inter-library loan.  This can usually be done at no cost to you, or at least a minimal fee.

Another good solution is to drive to a seminary or Christian university library, if you have one near you.  In the city of Owensboro, Kentucky Wesleyan College's library has many solid Bible commentaries.

Finally I would suggest you invest in a good study Bible, which has notes along with the Bible text to explain the passages that are harder to understand.  My favorite is the ESV Study Bible, which comes in numerous binding options.  You can also purchase the iPad and iPhone version for just $15, which includes all the study notes of the printed version!

This is a question that haunts some Christians.  If someone thinks they've possibly committed the unforgivable sin they may spend their entire lives doubting their salvation.

First, we need to note that there is an unforgivable sin according to Jesus.  Some claim that no sin is unforgivable and God will forgive us of any sin we could possibly commit.  For the most part this is true, but Jesus seems to speak of one exception.

Let's take a look at the passage from Matthew ch. 12:

²² Then a demon-oppressed man who was blind and mute was brought to him, and he healed him, so that the man spoke and saw. ²³ And all the people were amazed, and said, “Can this be the Son of David?” ²⁴ But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, “It is only by Beelzebul, the prince of demons, that this man casts out demons.” ²⁵ Knowing their thoughts, he said to them, “Every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste, and no city or house divided against itself will stand. ²⁶ And if Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself. How then will his kingdom stand? ²⁷ And if I cast out demons by Beelzebul, by whom do your sons cast them out? Therefore they will be your judges. ²⁸ But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. ²⁹ Or how can someone enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house. ³⁰ Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters. ³¹ Therefore I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven people, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. ³² And whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come. 

 In verse 32 Jesus says this unforgivable sin is speaking against the Holy Spirit.

But what exactly is speaking against the Holy Spirit?

Ephesians 4:30 says we can "grieve" the Holy Spirit.  But that's not what Jesus is talking about here.

In 1 Corinthians 3:16-17 we learn that for those of us who have become Christians our bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit and if we destroy our bodies we will be destroyed by God.  Is that what Jesus is speaking of?  No, I don't think so.

So what is it?

Well, as is often the case, the answer is found within the context of the verse in question.

If we look back at verses 22-24 of Matthew 12 we see that the Pharisees were attributing the work of Jesus to Satan (that's what "Beelzebul" means).  They were saying that Jesus did his work not by the power of the Holy Spirit (as Jesus himself says in v. 28), but by the power of Satan.

That's what it means to speak against the Holy Spirit and that is the unforgivable sin - attributing the work of the Holy Spirit to Satan himself.

We can get so twisted and turned around because of sin in our lives that we end up thinking the works of the Holy Spirit - the works of God - are actually the works of Satan.  That's pretty messed up... but it can happen.

The Pharisees apparently reached that point, and that's scary, because I've done and said some things in my life that made me look a lot like a Pharisee.

But do I worry that I've committed this sin?  No.  I've never gotten to the point where I wanted to say the Holy Spirit was actually Satan.  That's unfathomable to me and if you're a Christian it probably is the same to you.

In the video below, posted to YouTube on Monday, the current Prime Minister of Australia gives us an opportunity to learn a few things about proper and improper techniques in interpreting the Bible.  

For most of my life I thought humility was thinking less of yourself.  In other words it meant focusing my attention on how insignificant and unimportant I was and seeking a lowly posture and attitude.

However the more I read the Bible the more I find that humility is not primarily thinking less of yourself, it's thinking of yourself less.

There are many places in the Bible that illustrate this point, but the main passage is Philippians 2:3-11.

For instance, Phil. 2:3 calls us to count others more significant than ourselves, even though technically we're all equal in God's eyes.

Our model for this is Jesus, who did the same thing in Phil. 2:6, convincing himself that he could not be equal with God, even though technically he was.

Meanwhile, Phil. 2:4, calls us to look outside of ourselves instead of constantly focusing our minds inwards on our own wants and desires as we're so addicted to doing.

This reminds me of how most people have conversations today.  Have you ever noticed in conversations how each person is constantly trying to talk about themselves, instead of focusing on the other person?

Have you ever noticed that when someone is telling a personal story in a group, the group is rarely interested in asking follow-up questions or knowing more about what happened to that person, but rather they're waiting their turn to speak so they can tell their own interesting story, almost one-upping the original story teller, because their main desire is to hold the floor and everyone else's attention themselves?

Brett McKay over at the Art of Manliness website astutely calls this "conversational narcissism," and we've all done it.

We also see in Phil. 2:7 that Jesus emptied himself.  In other words he gave up his glory and his right to be the exalted king of the universe - at least for a time.

For us this means we should give up our perceived rights.  Our right to spending time on our hobbies, or leisure, or naps, or being treated with respect, or only having to do just as much work as everyone else.

Humility means giving up your rights for others... seeing them as more important than you.

Take another cue from Jesus, who, when he had finally found some time for he and his disciples to get away from the crowds and actually eat, found another crowd waiting for him, and instead of sending them away, healed their sick, taught them more about God, and performed a great miracle.  (See Mark 6:30-34; Luke 9:10-11)

And finally we see humility in Phil. 2:8, where Jesus put God's desires for his life over and above his own by obediently dying on the cross.

Do you remember Jesus' prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane (Luke 22:42)?  Jesus didn't want to suffer the wrath of God on the cross.  But he did anyway.  Instead of focusing on his own desires he focused on God's.

So biblical humility is not primarily thinking less of yourself, it's thinking of yourself less.

I'll leave you with this famous quote from C.S. Lewis' Mere Christianity:

Do not imagine that if you meet a really humble person he will be what most people call 'humble' nowadays: he will not be a sort of greasy, smarmy person, who is always telling you that, of course, he is nobody.  Probably all you will think about him is that he seemed a cheerful, intelligent chap who took a real interest in what you said to him.  If you do dislike him it will be because you feel a little envious of anyone who seems to enjoy life so easily.  He will not be thinking about humility; he will not be thinking about himself at all.

In this video, one of the many excellent resources from the folks over at Stand to Reason, Alan Shlemon helps us think through how to respond to the challenge that because the Bible only mentions homosexuality six times it is therefore not an important issue or a serious sin.

The challenge is true in that the Bible indeed only mentions homosexuality six times - Gen. 19:4-6; Lev. 18:22; Lev. 20:13; Rom. 1:26-27; 1 Cor. 6:9; 1 Tim. 1:10.

Alan is particularly adept at understanding how Christians' attempts to communicate on this issue often unintentionally come across in a very condescending way to those in the gay community - something we should constantly be aware of ourselves.

In Part 1 we discussed the importance of our humility before the Word of God on this issue.

In Part 2 we sought to answer the question, Does the Bible permit the use of contraception and/or family planning in general?

For this final post my goal is to examine some of the more popular forms of birth control and to come to a conclusion as to whether or not the Bible permits their use.

The key issue here is abortion.

The Bible is very clear that life begins at conception, not birth, and that God is the one doing the work of forming the child inside the womb.  (See Exodus 21:22-23; Psalm 139:13-14; Luke 1:41)  Therefore all abortions are the murdering of an innocent child and the destruction of the work of God himself.

Producers of birth control methods typically refer to them as "contraceptives," meaning they operate to prevent the conception of a child.  While this is accurate for some forms of birth control, it is somewhat misleading for some, and grossly deceptive for others.

The key to deciding which forms of birth control are acceptable is discovering which forms actually work to prevent conception and which forms work to prevent an already conceived life from continuing to fully develop.  The former, I believe, is fully acceptable for married couples to use according to the principles of the Bible.  The latter are abortive in their function, ending the life of an already conceived child.

To its credit the American Pregnancy Association presents this dilemma on their website here, even though they do not take the Bible into consideration.  Their language, however, is extremely vague.

Barrier Methods

Barrier methods fall under the truly "contraceptive" category, and thus are acceptable forms of birth control according to the principles of the Bible.  These include condoms, diaphragms, cervical caps, and spermicides.

Other Contraceptives

Other forms of contraception would include NFP or "Natural Family Planning," sometimes also referred to as the "Rhythm Method," in which a woman pays close attention to monthly menstruation periods, body temperature, ovulation periods, etc.  Also included here would be withdrawal (or more crassly referred to as the "pull-out method").

The Intrauterine Device (IUD)

There are two types of IUD's - the copper IUD, which is becoming less and less popular, and the hormonal (progesterone) IUD, which most doctors prescribe today.  Both types work to prevent pregnancy in two ways.

First they alter the cervical mucus inside a woman's uterus, which decreases the chance a male sperm will reach a female egg.  This is purely and accurately contraceptive.

However, IUD's also thin the lining of a woman's uterus, preventing the implantation of an already fertilized egg (which is conception).  If we accept that life begins at conception, this is a form of abortion.  Because of this, it is my opinion that IUD's are not an acceptable form of birth control because of the chance of unintended and unnoticed abortions occurring within the woman's body.

American Pregnancy Association - Intrauterine Devices

The Birth Control Pill

The birth control pill, unquestionably the most popular form of birth control used by women in the U.S. today, works in three ways.

First, "the pill" works to prevent ovulation, which is a fully contraceptive action.  Next it alters the cervical mucus inside a woman's uterus - also a contraceptive action.  Finally, the pill works to thin the uterine lining preventing the implantation of a fertilized egg.  As we have seen previously with the IUD, this action is abortive because it prevents the further development of an already fertilized egg ending a pregnancy after conception has already occurred.

These three ways work in tandem so if one fails the other two are still working to ensure pregnancy will not occur or develop further.  The third mechanism, the only one that is abortive in nature, is actually the last line of defense so to speak.  Typically the first two measures will work to ensure prevention of pregnancy.  However, a small percentage of the time the third mechanism will be necessary and will prevent the development of the pregnancy by aborting the fertilized egg.

Randy Alcorn writes,

The pill is used by about fourteen million American women each year and sixty million internationally.  Thus, even an "infinitesimally low" portion (say one one-hundreth of one percent) of the 780 million pill cycles per year globally could represent tens of thousands of unborn children lost to this form of chemical abortion annually.  (taken from The Reproduction Revolution, ed. by John F. Kilner, p. 184)

For these reasons I personally cannot recommend the Birth Control Pill as a biblically acceptable form of birth control.  My wife and I have made a decision not to use it in our marriage for fear of the possibility (although low) of an abortion occurring.  Our reasoning is simple... Even the tiniest percent chance that an abortion could occur is unacceptable to us.  We will not even take a chance at killing an innocent human being.

American Pregnancy Association - Birth Control Pills

The Morning After Pill

The Morning After Pill, also known as "Plan B," also known as RU-486, has recently been made available over the counter without restrictions to girls as young as 15 years of age.  Parents are not even required to be informed at all.  And as we highlighted in Part 1, the minimum age is getting lower and lower.

This pill is much like the Birth control pill in its function - it uses the same three mechanisms.  However the dosage of the hormones in the Morning After Pill is much higher than that of typical birth control pills.

Again, because of the possibility of this form causing abortions I cannot recommend it as a biblically acceptable form of birth control.  Not to mention the fact that this pill encourages pre-marital sex simply because of its name and purpose.

American Pregnancy Association - Morning After Pill


In Conclusion

I hope these posts have been helpful and educational.

I realize that many reading this may be currently using one of the birth control methods I designated as abortive or at least partially abortive in their function.  I would encourage you to pray about this and talk it over with your spouse.

I also realize that there are many times when young women are prescribed the Birth Control Pill by a doctor for reasons other than that they are sexually active.  While I see nothing wrong with this biblically it can be very easy for that same young woman, when she becomes married, to simply continue taking The Pill as a method of birth control, and to never question whether or not it may cause abortions.  This is something to pray and think through as well.

For a fuller treatment on The Birth Control Pill see Randy Alcorn's Does the Birth Control Pill Cause Abortions, which is only $1.99 in the Kindle edition.

In Part 1 of this series I touched on how we need to humble our hearts before the word of God and let it judge us and influence us to change our actions and opinions when we come to an understanding that we're wrong.

I felt like that was so important because this is an issue that can get very emotional because a change of belief on this may cause significant inconveniences in our lives.  But we must always be willing to be inconvenienced for the sake of God's glory and our own holiness.

In this post I'll do my best to answer the question, Does the Bible permit the use of contraception and/or family planning?

Children are a Blessing

One of the most important things to note on how the Bible informs our decisions regarding contraception is to understand that children are a blessing.

The rise in contraception use in the world over the last forty years has much to do with the sexual revolution of the 1960's and 70's.  While God, in his wisdom, made children the natural consequence of sexual activity, our culture has consistently sought to divorce sex from children in all the ways that it can.  The reason is because we've made an idol out of sex.  Our culture wants sex with no strings attached and will literally do anything to get it and keep it - including killing some of the babies that result from sex acts (otherwise known as abortion).

In the Bible, however, God consistently tells us that children are a blessing.  (See Psalm 127:3; Psalm 128:3, Psalm 128:6, etc.)

We also see in the Bible that God's people grieved, not celebrated, when they were unable to have children.  (See Gen. 30:1; Gen. 16:2; 1 Samuel 1:5-6; etc.)

Indeed, as I studied this topic for my seminary thesis I found that while God may call some people to lifelong singleness, foster care, or other lifestyles, his intended norm for most human beings is to be married and have children.

The Purpose of Sex

We also must consider God's purpose for sex as laid out in the Bible, because the main question here is,  is it a sin for a married couple to have sex where they have deliberately blocked the possibility of conceiving a child?

The Bible presents numerous purposes for sex.  The first and most obvious is procreation.  (See Gen. 1:28; Mal. 2:15)

But there are others as well!  The poetic book Song of Solomon shows very clear that one of the God-given purposes for sex is pleasure.  (See Song of Solomon 5:1; also Proverbs 5:19)

Other purposes include marital unity between the husband and wife (Gen. 2:24), comfort in times of heartache (1 Sam. 12:24), and protection from sexual sin (1 Cor. 7:5; 1 Cor. 7:9).

Do all purposes have to be fulfilled each time a married couple has sex?  Of course not.  Rather all are legitimate reasons for a married couple to pursue sexual intercourse.

An Answer to Our Question

So where does that leave us?  Well we know at least three things.

First, children are a blessing and most married couples should pursue the goal of having children over the course of their marriage.

Second, God presents numerous legitimate purposes for sex in the Bible.

Third, there are no texts in the Bible that explicitly prohibit contraception.  (Yes, I am aware of Gen. 38:9-10 and it is poor biblical interpretation to conclude from this text that the Bible prohibits contraception.  Please e-mail me if you would like further explanation on this)

Therefore I take the position that the Bible does permit the use of contraception.

I also believe it also allows for family planning - a husband and a wife deciding when to have children.  Having said that I also believe every couple should spend significant time in prayer from the beginning of their marriage seeking God's specific will for them on this issue.


In Part 3, Lord willing, I will seek to answer the question, Which forms of contraception are acceptable and which are not?  (SPOILER ALERT:  Not all methods of birth control that claim they are "contraceptive" always work by preventing conception)