More for Less

In today’s society, everyone wants more for less; we want more house for less money, more car for less buck, free healthcare, and free education.  This is not a new concept, nor is it isolated to our own modern society.  If you follow the current political debates, you’ll notice that some platforms include “free” products and services, and they are gaining a lot of ground from the younger generations who too often lack a valuable work ethic.

It is no surprise, then, that this attitude/perspective bleeds over into religion.  The predominant “religious” view is that IF God exists, then He will not or does not require us to “work” for our salvation.  If He required us to “work” for our salvation, then that somehow means that we have “earned” our salvation, and since we cannot “earn” our salvation, then God must not require us to “work”.  It is, as you can plainly see, a very self-serving argument; through such arguments, we can have our salvation and yet be free of any action contrary to what we want to do.

Are these arguments new? Are we the first generation to come up with such? Can God ever get salvation correct? Will we ever be satisfied with God’s plan?

History distinguishes clearly between those who truly loved God (those who obeyed) and those who were selfish and thought only of themselves (those who disobeyed).  The Israelites, from the time that they departed from Egypt, wanted God to work on their own terms and constantly complained against both God and His servants.  Consider it this way for a moment: God frequently provided for the Israelites and required very little effort on their part.  For instance, only two months out of Egypt, the Israelites began to complain against God and said, “Oh, that we had died by the hand of the Lord in the land of Egypt, when we sat by the pots of meat and when we ate bread to the full! For you have brought us out into this wilderness to kill this whole assembly with hunger” (Exodus 16:3).  It is clear that this generation of Israelites had very poor short-term memories; they were enslaved in Egypt and Pharaoh had increased their workload to unbearable levels to keep them docile (Exodus 5).  How much easier did the Israelites want their lives to be? God had promised them great things, including a glorious land that they would simply walk into and take over by the hand of God.  After their complaint in Exodus 16, God provided “bread from heaven” (16:4) for them and required very little from them in return. 

What did God require of the Israelites? Did God require too much of them? The account in Exodus informs us that the Israelites were to gather a certain quota every day for five days, then an extra quota on the sixth day, gather nothing on the seventh day (Sabbath Day), and, except for the night of the sixth day, they were to leave none of the bread overnight (Exodus 16:15-31).  However, the Israelites violated these very simple commands; they left Manna over until the morning (16:19-20) and some attempted to gather on the Sabbath Day (16:27-30).  Couldn’t God get it right? Perhaps, if God truly existed, He should have made the bread appear inside their tents for their convenience? How could God be so inconsiderate as to implement rules governing the Israelites concerning the bread for which they did not have to cultivate soil, plant, water, weed, harvest, process, and bake? And yet, what attitude did the Israelites have? One of disobedience, selfishness, and ungratefulness, for they said “our soul loathes this worthless bread” (Numbers 21:5). 

When we complain about what God requires us to do today or claim that there are no stipulations placed upon salvation, we are telling God that “our soul loathes this worthless bread”.  Why are we so arrogant and self-righteous as to insist that the almighty God bend to our wishes? Why do we pretend that God ought to be grateful of us for whatever service we decide to “bless” Him with?

In our society, entertainment reigns supreme, which naturally leads to the attitude mentioned earlier that many people want more for less (or for nothing, in most cases).  Our society desires freebies; we want to have fun all the time and not be bothered with work.  This concept is clearly defined for us in 2 Thessalonians 3:6-15; Paul’s command for those who were refusing to work and were busybodies was that they should not eat.  However, we want to take that a step further; while it is clear that Paul’s immediate context concerned physical needs, is there a spiritual application we can make? If we refuse to do the commands of God (work), should we be able to have salvation (eat)?

Salvation does not come on our own terms.  Our fulfilling the commands of God does not negate the grace of God, although some attempt to make these concepts mutually exclusive.  Did the Israelites somehow “earn” their Manna (miraculously given) because they picked it up off of the ground? Could they have had their Manna if they had not picked it up off of the ground? In reality, it is a ridiculous argument to claim that we earn salvation because we adhere to the commands of God; both parts of the equation are necessary or salvation will not be obtained (reference also 2 Kings 5).  As Jesus stated in John 14:15, “If you love Me, keep My commandments.” 

The Seed

In Mark 4, Jesus presented His audience with the parable of the sower.  Often, when Christians discuss the sower and spreading the Gospel, they talk about how to alter the methods of the sower so that the soil will accept the seed.  Too often, this translates into altering the message with the hope that the soil will receive what humans and society perceives as a kinder, gentler message.  Is there a “one size fits all” method of preaching the Gospel? Examples provided for our learning within the Scriptures indicate that the method of teaching depends upon the circumstances in which the Gospel is being taught, but the message is never to be changed; note that in the parable of the sower, the message (the seed) is exactly the same for all different kinds of soil and, in this case, the sower even sows the seed in exactly the same manner. 

Many Christians and evangelists today advocate the preaching of a “kinder, gentler” Gospel and purport that if the soil rejects the seed then the message was not presented in a kind or gentle enough manner.  What did the sower do wrong? Was his tone or words too harsh? Did he talk too much about the cost of discipleship and not enough about the benefits? Many people assert that because Jesus had compassion and taught in a gentle manner in some instances that this is the only method of teaching; further, they too often condemn other Christians who do not adhere to this conclusion. 

Consider the example of the following teacher: like most evangelists, this man received mixed reactions to his teachings.  Some people welcomed both the man and the message, while others rejected both.  Still others would initially welcome both the man and the message, only to reject both later.  To this point, he clearly fits what Jesus taught via the parable of the sower in Mark 4.  In one particular instance, this man had a prospective convert “on the line,” but thwarted the opportunity by telling his student what the gospel would mean specifically to him.  What did this sower do wrong? How could he be so harsh? Did he lack compassion? In yet another instance, this same teacher used physical force to establish his point.  Another time, this teacher used derogatory terms to describe an entire group of people to whom he was lecturing.  By this point, it ought to be clear who this teacher was: Jesus the Christ. 

What would happen today if a Christian had enough zeal to drive out the unrighteous? Would we claim that they are too harsh? Would we claim that they would drive individuals from God rather than to Him? Would we claim that they have an anger problem? In John 2:13-22, Jesus physically drove the money changers and merchants from the Temple using a whip.  Was it anger that caused Him to do this? John 2:17 states that it was zeal that caused Jesus to do this.  Was this a rash decision on the part of Jesus? John 2:14-15 tells us that Jesus saw the merchants and money changers in the Temple, He then went and made a whip of cords, and then went to the Temple to drive them out.  It appears that if Jesus had initially been acting out of rashness or anger, He would have calmed down while He created the whip.  Likewise, what would happen if a Christian used derogatory terms to describe an entire group of people that they are addressing? In Matthew 23, Jesus calls His audience hypocrites, blind guides, fools, whitewashed tombs, and murderers.  Would we dare use such harsh terms in our own politically correct society?

Many Christians today are worried that prospective converts will be driven away if we do not present the message in a kind or gentle enough manner.  Too many evangelists assert that Christians are only to teach the good things contained in the Bible, such as salvation, the resurrection, and eternal life.  If a Christian implies that there is a cost to discipleship and that an individual must alter their lifestyle, they are deemed even by fellow Christians to be “un-Christ-like” and “un-Christian-like.” 

While the parable of the sower established for us that the message is to always be the same, are we granted a certain amount of leeway in how that message is presented? The Scriptures through multiple examples indicate that this leeway is granted.  It is clear that there is not a single, one size fits all method for teaching lost souls the Gospel.  Did Jesus always use derogatory terms towards His audience as He did in Matthew 23? Absolutely not! Did He always use physical force to establish His point? Absolutely not! Jesus had both compassion and great zeal when it came to completing the tasks that God the Father had set before Him (John 2:17).  In Matthew 9:35-38, we see the compassion of Jesus in two different ways; first, Jesus was aiding the people by “healing every sickness and every disease” that was among them (9:35) and second, “He was moved with compassion for them, because they were weary and scattered, like sheep having no shepherd” (9:36).  The compassion of Jesus truly showed through when He observed the spiritual destitution of the multitudes; Jesus said to His disciples that the “harvest truly is plentiful, but the laborers are few.  Therefore pray the Lord of the harvest to send out laborers into His harvest” (9:37-38).  Were these laborers intended to care for the physical needs of the harvest or the spiritual needs? Matthew states that Jesus was moved by compassion because the multitudes “were weary and scattered, like sheep having no shepherd” (9:36).  Is the job of the shepherd to make the sheep feel safe even when there is a wolf amongst them, or is the shepherd’s job to warn the sheep of impending doom?

It is to be noted that our attitudes while teaching the Gospel do matter and we can establish this principle by examining the book of Jonah. It is clear that Jonah had a horrible attitude and that God showed His disapproval of Jonah’s attitude by dealing with it.  That being said, modern Christians need to stop seeking to lay the blame for the soil’s rejection of the seed at the feet of the sower.  If the soil is good, it will accept the seed, but if it is bad, then it will reject the seed; this principle is also established in the book of Jonah.  In spite of the fact that Jonah had the worst attitude a teacher could ever have towards his pupils, his pupils accepted the message and responded to it.  Clearly we are not to have the attitude of Jonah, but Jonah’s attitude did not alleviate the responsibility of the Ninevites to respond obediently to the message of God.  In other words, God held the Ninevites accountable to the message even though Jonah did not proclaim it with a nice enough attitude; God also held Jonah accountable for his attitude. 

Compassion and zeal should drive every Christian to teach the entire Gospel to lost souls.  Rather than determining to utilize only a single method of teaching, those same characteristics should dictate to us what method of teaching best suits the circumstances in which we find ourselves.  The message should never be altered, a principle which is also established in Mark 4; same seed, different soils.  Jesus, the Apostles, and the inspired writers of the New Testament used multiple methods of teaching; from kind, gentle, encouraging words (1 Thessalonians 4:1-2; 2 Thessalonians 1:3-5) to harsh rebukes and descriptions of destitute false teachers (Jude; 2 Peter 2).  We even have examples of nearly identical wording producing two entirely different outcomes (Acts 2:1-47; Acts 7:1-60), which indicates that the reaction depends more upon the hearer than the speaker.  Did Stephen have less compassion than Peter, or was his audience composed of the wayside soil (Mark 4:4)?

Whether we like it or not, acceptance or rejection of the Gospel depends upon the individual and what kind of soil they are.  As Christians, our compassion and zeal should drive us to ensure that they have received the entire message of God; this means that we need to show them from Scripture that there is a reward for obedience (James 1:12; 2 Timothy 4:6-8), consequences for disobedience (2 Peter 2:18-22; Matthew 7:22-23), and what the cost of discipleship may be while they linger here on earth (John 15:18-25; Matthew 10:32-39). 

Too often, we accept “it isn’t what you said, but how you said it” as a viable reason why an individual rejects the Gospel and we are successfully distracted from the real problem of sin in the life of that individual and condemn the teacher for their method of teaching.  Again, we must ensure that our attitude in teaching is in adherence with the Scriptures, but the attitude of the teacher is rarely the reason a person accepts or rejects the Gospel.  As Jesus emphasized with the parable of the sower, the message (seed) is the same, but each person (soil) is different.  We cannot control whether an individual will accept or reject the Gospel, but we can control whether or not they have had the chance to hear it in its entirety.  

First-Generation Christians

The terms “second generation” and “third generation” are often used to describe Catholics, Baptists, Mormons, and even some Christians in the religious world today.  More often than not, these terms are intended to be harmless and to simply express that an individual’s parents and grandparents were of the same religion.  Unfortunately, too many of the people who use these terms are a “second” or “third” generation simply because their parents or grandparents were of that religion and not because they have sought out and grounded themselves.  If questioned as to why they are a Christian rather than a Baptist, Mormon, or a Catholic, could they give a definitive answer that is supported Scripturally?

Every parent is to bring up their children “in the training and admonition of the Lord” (Ephesians 6:1-4), but every Christian needs to be a “first generation” Christian in the sense that we have personally evaluated the evidence found in the Bible and developed our own faith.  While Christian parents are to teach their children about God and what to do, we are also to teach why we obey God.  Consider how in 2 Peter 1:16-21 Peter used the fulfillment of prophecy as evidence of faith and the reason righteous men spoke as the oracles of God.  In this manner, Peter showed through evidence why he had faith in Christ and why he was obedient.  Peter, like the rest of the Apostles (except, perhaps, for Judas), had made his faith his own; he had to examine the evidence and to adhere to the gospel of his own volition, not only because someone else in his life had believed. 

In order to develop our own faith, we must be willing to question, and we need to teach our children to question conclusions, demand Scriptural evidence for a conclusion, and to accept conclusions that are founded only in Scripture.  In Acts 17:10-12, there was a group of Jews who were considered “fair-minded” because they questioned the teachings of the Apostle Paul.  While Paul could have been offended by this questioning, he was not; rather, Luke records positive words concerning them.  Like Paul, every modern day evangelist and Bible teachers should welcome those who question their conclusions and test them against the Scriptures to ensure validity.  Parents, likewise, should strive to maintain a true Scriptural grounding and teach their children how to establish authority from the Scriptures as well. 

There is an abundance of evidence in the Bible that proves its validity; in Romans 15:4, we are informed that the things written in the Old Testament were written for our learning, and that we can gain faith and hope from these writings.  From the Old Testament, we learn of those who had great faith, we learn principles of obedience to God, and we learn about the power of God to bring about His plan(s).  Throughout the Old Testament, we are provided with numerous prophecies; some of these prophecies were fulfilled within the times of the Old Testament and some were fulfilled in the New Testament.  Both stand as evidence of the power and omnipotence of God. 

God’s promise to Abraham that his descendants would be a great nation stands as a wonderful example of a prophecy that was both given and fulfilled in the Old Testament (Genesis 22:15-19; Exodus 1:1-10).  In addition to this example, we have other prophecies which are specific in nature, such as the one concerning King Josiah found in 1 Kings 13:1-5.  The prophecy, given in approximately 930 B.C., provided the name of the king, the king’s tribe, the place where the prophecy would be fulfilled, and particulars about what would happen during the fulfillment.  From an examination of the prophecy and its fulfillment in 2 Chronicles 34:1-5, we see that it was not a generalized prophecy; some purported “psychics” today make generalized prophecies and they make them in bulk in hopes of getting one or two correct.  The prophecy concerning Josiah was specific in nature and the fulfillment came approximately 300 years later in 630 B.C.  How can this not stand as evidence for the validity of the Bible?

In addition to the prophecies like the one mention above, we also have numerous prophecies in the Old Testament that are fulfilled in the New Testament.  Many of them directly relate to the coming of the Christ, life of Christ, or His death and resurrection, and there are too many of them to fully explore here.  We will, however, take a look at one such prophecy.  Few people think about the fact that King David (who lived approximately 1000 years before Christ) was also a prophet, and yet there are multiple prophecies in the book of Psalms pertaining to the Christ.  One such prophecy is located in Psalms 22:16-18 where we read, “For dogs have surrounded Me; the congregation of the wicked has enclosed Me.  They pierced My hands and My feet; I can count all My bones.  They look and stare at Me.  They divide My garments among them, And for My clothing they cast lots.”  The fulfillment of this prophecy is located in Matthew 27:33-36 where Jesus has been nailed to the cross, the guards divided His garments and cast lots, and they stared at Him as He died. The fulfillment of prophecies is powerful evidence that proves the validity of the Bible and our faith in God. 

Belief and faith are absolutely necessary for salvation; Hebrews 11:6-13 states that it is impossible to please God without having faith.  Therefore, we cannot simply go through the motions and hope to be saved.  Likewise, Jesus stated in John 8:24 that we must believe in His deity if we desire salvation; denying His deity will result in our own condemnation.  Faith can be established through a variety of methods; Thomas required physical proof (John 20:24-31), but the Centurion required no such evidences (Matthew 8:5-13).  We fall somewhere in between because we are unable to see the miracles of Christ and the Apostles firsthand, but we have been provided with records of “infallible proofs” (Acts 1:1-3; 1 John 1).  Our faith is to be established by the hearing of the word and these proofs contained therein (Romans 10:14-17).  In addition to the “infallible proofs” referred to by Luke, we have numerous examples of great faith in the Bible that were shared for our learning (Romans 15:4).  The Hebrew writer provided many such examples in Hebrews 11, and both the Old and New Testaments give us examples such as Johnathan and his armor bearer (1 Samuel 14:1, 6-23), Elijah (1 Kings 18:22-39), Stephen (Acts 7:54-60), and so many more. 

In Philippians 2:12-13, Paul encouraged the Philippian brethren to “work out” their “own salvation with fear and trembling”.  Was Paul suggesting that the Philippians could dictate their own methods for salvation? From the context, Paul was actually showing his confidence in the Philippian brethren for their ability to maintain their faith and obedience even without his physical presence.  Paul wrote that they had always obeyed, not only in his presence, but much more in his absence.  In essence, Paul established in this passage the principle we are driving at with this brief article; these Christians had their own faith and were not dependent upon Paul’s physical presence to drive them to obey the commandments of God.  Like them, we need to ensure that our faith is our own and firm up our foundation in the Lord.  Great examples, like those mentioned previously, can aid us in the establishment of our own faith, but that simply makes us first-generation Christians! 

Designed

Recently, my brother Kris made the observation that in wildlife documentaries the narrator will invariably state that an animal is "designed" for their habitat.  This statement generally falls among multiple references to how these animals developed via evolution.  Like with documentaries, non-fiction books on wildlife make the same "observations."  The last few weeks, I've read a couple of books on Bighorn Sheep (Ovis Canadensis) where similar statements were made, and currently I am reading The Wolf: Ghost Hunter by Daniel LeBoeuf.  

In one section, LeBoeuf writes that after "millions of years of evolution and adaptation, wolves have become skilled hunters" (pg. 68), but in another section he writes that a "wolf's legs are strong but slender-boned.  While large cats have thick legs that enable them to make short bursts of speed and to hold and crush prey, wolves' legs were designed for speed and endurance" (pg. 56).  

According to Merriam-Webster Dictionary, design is defined as: "to create, fashion, execute, or construct according to plan", "to conceive and plan out in the mind", "to have as a purpose", "to devise for a specific function or end", "to conceive or execute a plan", and "to draw, lay out, or prepare a design".  In which of these definitions does chaos or happenstance appear? Can evolution "have as a purpose" the design of a wolf's leg? Can evolution "create" anything "according to plan"?

Also according to Merriam-Webster, the applicable definition of evolution is the "historical development of a biological group (as a race or species)", a "theory that the various types of animals and plants have their origin in other preexisting types and that the distinguishable differences are due to modifications in successive generations".

Question: What animal or group of animals decides what needs to be modified? How do they survive long enough to be modified? It literally makes no logical sense, although the predominant number of scientists today will use complex language to muddy the waters; when broken down to the simplest form, does evolution make sense? 

Note also that the number one definition in the Merriam-Webster dictionary for evolution is "one of a set of prescribed movements."  One set of "prescribed" movements? Prescribe means "to lay down as a guide, direction, or rule of action", "to specify with authority", and "to lay down a rule". 

How can evolution, which is treated as the sheer happenstance of circumstances, be guided? Who sets the guide? Another sub-definition of evolution is "a process of continuous change from a lower, simpler, or worse to a higher, more complex, or better state."  This definition was applied indirectly to society, but it is often applied to "scientific" evolution as well (think of terms like "evolved higher beings").  Why do we assume that if evolution is purely by happenstance and that there is no intelligence involved that it would automatically go from simple to more complex, or "worse" to "better"? How often do societies actually do so? 

It seems that even in the evolutionist's overwhelming desire to explain away God, some still logical part of their brain realizes the reality of an intelligent designer and they subconsciously understand that for something like the legs of a wolf to operate correctly a design must have taken place.   

The Bible: God's Inspired Word (First Principle Series #2)

Before we begin this study we should clarify that the intended scope is not a comprehensive study of all available evidences on the topic at hand.  To attempt such in this brief space would obviously be an insurmountable task.  Our goal instead is to provide a few foundational evidences that will aid in the building of faith in God and/or intrigue the reader enough that they to continue their study of the Bible. 

While it is possible to look at the world around us and derive that there must be an intelligent designer, this observation alone cannot reveal the mind of that intelligent designer to us.  No matter how well we may know another person, we cannot truly know what they are thinking unless they tell us.  Many people today will say that if God exists, than He MUST accept certain things based on their own preconceptions rather than looking to the Bible to see what God has revealed His will to be.  In 1 Corinthians 2:11, the Apostle Paul establishes the principle that we cannot know the mind of God unless He reveals it to us, just like we cannot know the mind of another person.

There is a rich history of God speaking at various times to various men and women by various methods.  In Hebrews 1:1-2, we are told that God “at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son…” The idea, as expressed by the writer of Hebrews, is that God has not left us to wonder what He wants of us, but rather has told us.  Consider 2 Timothy 3:16-17 where the Apostle Paul writes that “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.” 

What is inspiration? How has God revealed His will to us? God the Father used the prophets, His own Son, and the Apostles to convey His will.  Consider, for instance, what is said in Deuteronomy 18:18, “I [God is speaking through Moses] will raise up for them a Prophet like you from among their brethren, and will put My words in His mouth, and He shall speak to them all that I command Him.”  The “Prophet” spoken of here is a prophecy not only about the coming of the Christ, but also of how and what Jesus would speak.  In John 12:49-50, Jesus says, “For I have not spoken on My own authority; but the Father who sent Me gave Me a command, what I should say and what I should speak.  And I know that His command is everlasting life.  Therefore, whatever I speak, just as the Father has told Me, so I speak.”  Essentially, we have Jesus confirming that He was the Prophet prophesied about in Deuteronomy 18 and that He spoke only the things given to Him by God the Father to speak.

Refer back to Hebrews 1:1 where we were told that God spoke through the prophets in time past, then turn to Isaiah 59:21 where God is speaking to Isaiah the prophet: “As for Me,’ says the Lord, ‘this is My covenant with them: My Spirit who is upon you, and My words which I have put in your mouth, shall not depart from your mouth…”  Note the similarities in what is said to the prophet Isaiah here and what the Apostle Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 2.  Like the prophets of the Old Testament, the Apostles were inspired both to speak and to write.  In 1 Corinthians 2:12-13, Paul writes that now “we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God.  These things we also speak, not in words which man’s wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual.”  Paul is informing us that he spoke not of his own volition!  Like Jesus, he spoke only what the Father had given him to speak.  Consider a statement earlier in the same chapter where Paul writes, “And my speech and my preaching were not with persuasive words of human wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, that your faith should not be in the wisdom of men but in the power of God” (1 Corinthians 2:4-5). 

The Bible has been provided for us through the inspiration of the writers of Scripture.  In many instances, these writers were passing on eye witness testimony.  In 1 John 1:1-4, John writes,

“That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, concerning the Word of life – the life was manifested, and we have seen, and bear witness, and declare to you that eternal life which was with the Father and was manifested to us – that which we have seen and heard we declare to you, that you also may have fellowship with us; and truly our fellowship is with the Father and with His Son Jesus Christ.  And these things we write to you that your joy may be full.”

He speaks frequently about how they were bearing witness of the things which they had seen and handled.  Likewise,  in Luke 1:1-4 it is written, “Inasmuch as many have taken in hand to set in order a narrative of those things which have been fulfilled among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered them to us, it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write to you an orderly account, most excellent Theophilus, that you may know the certainty of those things in which you were instructed.”  To clarify, the passages from 1 John and Luke 1 show us that in addition to being inspired by God, these writers were conveying their eye witness testimonies. 

Again, this article is not meant to be a comprehensive study of the inspiration of the Scriptures.  There are many, many secondary texts dedicated to showing how we have compiled the manuscripts now known as the Bible and there is far too much to examine here.  It is fair to ask questions about how we obtained the Bible, how it has been translated, and how it has successfully maintained its validity over the course of thousands of years.  Consider, however, that if God is the intelligent designer of the world, is anything too difficult for Him? Would it be impossible for God to ensure that we have His complete will? How would the rather simple task of translation be too much for Him?

Because God has provided us with His will, we must strive to live within it and to do as He commands us.  In Colossians 3:17 we read, “And whatever you do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through Him.”  The term “in the name of” means, essentially, “by the authority of” the person (in this case, Jesus) named, such as the modern term “open up in the name of the law.”  Like Jesus and the Apostle Paul (and all other inspired prophets and authors), we must speak in accordance with the word of God (1 Peter 4:11, 2 Timothy 2:15).

As Peter has written, “If anyone speaks, let him speak as the oracles of God” (1 Peter 4:11).  

The Altar of Selfishness and Greed

"Manasseh was twelve years old when he became king, and he reigned fifty-five years in Jerusalem.  But he did evil in the sight of the Lord, according to the abominations of the nations whom the Lord had cast out before the children of Israel...Also he caused his sons to pass through the fire in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom..." (see 2 Chronicles 33:1-9 for full passage).  

The phrase "pass through the fire in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom" refers to sacrificing of children to false gods (2 Chronicles 28:1-4, 2 Kings 23:10, Jeremiah 7:31).  Even to most non-Christians today, the thought of sacrificing our children in fire is an abysmal thought.  It turns our stomach and it makes us angry, which is the reaction we should have to such sin (2 Peter 2:18-22).  Who could do something so atrocious? Similarly, modern Americans would associate such sacrifices with the horrible nature of more recent events such as the Holocaust.  With both of these particular instances, we might ask "How could THEY have done such things?" 

How could they have done such things? However, the more pertinent question is: do we do the same things today? Our natural reaction is complete denial because we have not built an altar, slaughtered our child, and burned them as sacrifices to false gods.  Is there a spiritual application to be made? 

There is no denying that America is a very materialistic society; we strive to have the most expensive houses and vehicles, and we strive for popularity. We work ourselves to death not to have enough, but to have excess.  Television, billboard, and radio advertisements promote the idea that if you do not have the "latest and greatest," then somehow you are of lesser value to society than those that do.  Generally speaking, such ads insinuate that if you have this newest TV, tablet, phone, car, or house that you will instantly radiate financial success and become instantly popular.  All of these concepts have their root in selfishness and greed. 

How do we cause our own children to "pass through the fire"? In Ecclesiastes 2:1-11, Solomon describes his endeavors; he built great buildings, acquired great wealth, acquired fame, and many additional things that appeal to the modern conceptualization of "success."  All that Solomon discusses in this passage appeals to our sense of materialism, but nothing speaks to our devotion to God or even to family.  In Ecclesiastes 4:4-6, Solomon discusses at least two different men; one who is lazy and envious of the materialistic goods that his neighbor has obtained and the other is a man who strives to obtain such materialistic goods to his own detriment.  Both men are equally guilty of selfishness and greed.  

From Solomon's analysis and conclusion, it seems that we could make a logical comparison between physically sacrificing our children to false gods and sacrificing their souls to materialism.  In Matthew 16:26, Jesus asks "For what profit is it to a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?" What material gain or accomplishment on this earth is worth our souls? What is worth the souls of our children? Many parents ensure that their children make it to school, because education is important.  Parents push athletics because there is a one-in-a-million chance that their child will make the pros.  Parents leave their children in the hands of a stranger for a significant part of their childhood so that they (the parents) can feel "fulfilled" by the world's standards.  Are these things worth it?

Some, like Manasseh, learn better later in life.  In 2 Chronicles 33:10-17, we are told that Manasseh was humbled by God and brought into submission.  Following this, Manasseh sought to destroy the evilness that he had previously done, but it appears to have been too late for some.  We are told that Amon, the son of Manasseh, did “evil in the sight of the Lord, as his father Manasseh had done; for Amon sacrificed to all the carved images which his father Manasseh had made and served them” (2 Chronicles 33:22).  Parents today often come to the same realization later in life and realize that they placed importance on the wrong things with their children; the sad reality is that children in such cases follow the example of Amon.  Occasionally, however, they follow the example of Josiah, Amon’s son.  In spite of Amon’s outright evilness, Josiah has a tender heart and seeks to follow God’s will (2 Chronicles 34-35).  Do we want to take that bet?

In Proverbs 22:6, Solomon writes “Train up a child in the way he should go, And when he is old he will not depart from it.”  Often, Christians spend so much time discussing the exceptions to this Proverb that the fact that it is generally truth gets lost.  Generally speaking, when we teach our kids that something is important to us it will become important to them. 

For Manasseh and Amon, idolatry was their way of life.  If Manasseh was willing to offer his children as burnt sacrifices to false gods, then it is logical to assume that he was fully vested in these pagan religions.  In Deuteronomy 6, a principle is established for the Israelites that God and His will was to be all encompassing for them.  Religion wasn’t just to be a passive activity to be taken up and put down at a whim, but rather it was to be the single most influential factor in their lives.  Consider Deuteronomy 6:4-7.  For the Israelites, their love of God was to be their lifeblood. 

While we should not call all material possessions or personal accomplishments “idolatry,” it can easily be elevated to that status.  Is it sinful to be rich? No, it is not, but it does make it difficult to reach heaven because those riches offer distractions from service to God and make it easier to fall prey to covetousness (Colossians 3:5; Matthew 19:23-24).  Why do we desire to be rich? Why do we teach our children to seek to be rich?

Children are often encouraged to seek their fame and fortune in places such as Hollywood and through careers that too often claim the souls of those who have such aspirations.  What is the record of actors and singers today? Do they show godliness? And yet, many parents claim that their son is such a great actor or that their daughter has such a great voice that such a vocation is their best option.  “For what profit is it to a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?” Are we not causing our children to “pass through the fire” when we encourage them to pursue activities and careers in which there is very small chance for spiritual success?

On the other hand, the Apostle Paul offers a perspective that is more in line with the principle gleaned from Deuteronomy 6.  In Galatians 2:20, Paul writes, “I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me.”  For Paul, service to God was all encompassing, just as it was supposed to be for the Israelites in Deuteronomy 6.  If we take this principle from Galatians and apply it alongside Ephesians 6:1-4, we have children brought up “in the training and admonition of the Lord.”  We have set them up for spiritual success, which is of the greatest importance.

Is having an education and a job important? Do athletics and other appropriate entertainments have their place? The answer is that yes, they do have their place; however, we must keep them in their place! Should we neglect spiritual teaching so that our children can have more time for athletics? Should worship and Bible study time be cut short, ignored, or skipped so that homework can be completed?  The answer here is that no, these things should not take precedent over the Lord.  When we allow such things to happen, they become our gods, thus making them idolatry. 

Concerning Josiah, it is written that he “did what was right in the sight of the Lord, and walked in the ways of his father David; he did not turn aside to the right hand or to the left” and that he, at age 20, “he began to purge Judah and Jerusalem of the high places, the wooden images, the carved images, and the molded images” (2 Chronicles 34:2-3).  Let us be willing to show the same devotion to God; do not turn to the left or the right, and remove any materialism that is idolatry.   

God the Creator (First Principle Series #1)

Often, in their zeal to express the glory of an obedient life dedicated to the Lord, Christians forget that not every individual has even a base understanding that there is a true God, let alone who He is or of what His will consists.  Given the overwhelming number of conflicting views of both God and human origins in our society today, being confused is entirely understandable.  At one time in our society, the majority of individuals had at least a base understanding about who God is even if they did not agree on what God intends for humans.  The purpose of this article is perform a basic examination of the evidence of an intelligent designer, which is a necessary foundation before advancing on to what God wants of us.

What evidence is there that God exists? It is easy enough for a Christian who already believes in the veracity of the Bible to point to this Scripture or that Scripture to prove God’s existence, but for a person who is still seeking truth this evidence may be too advanced for their current state.  Much of the “scientific” community today would have us believe that the universe and everything contained therein is the product of both chaos and happenstance.  All life, according to these scientists, sprang from non-life, which is goes against every bit of what science can even prove. 

Consider it this way: in our society, there are buildings and machines of the utmost complexity surrounding us.  Would you believe someone who claimed that a tornado tore through their junkyard, and because the elements were just right, constructed a pristine 1965 Ford Mustang from junkyard parts? What would be the probability of such an event happening? What if someone claimed that the same tornado tore through a construction site and constructed a perfect apartment building (complete with proper wiring and plumbing)? Such a claim goes against all logical reasoning, and yet many today are indoctrinated with the theory of evolution that claims something much more fantastical than either of these two claims (a single cell is more complex than either an apartment building or a 1965 Ford Mustang).  Does this seem reasonable to you?

On the other hand, what if a representative from Ford drove up in a new prototype vehicle and told you that the engineers at Ford headquarters had designed and built it? Would you believe such a story? Absolutely we would believe this because we see such evidence constantly around us (simply look at the overwhelming number of vehicles on the road and on the car lots around the United States).   

We should apply the same principles when we look at the earth and everything that grows, lives, and reproduces on it.  Is it logical to believe that chemicals just happened to combine at just the right time and in just the right combination to create everything that is around us, or is it logical to believe in an intelligent designer? If an apartment building and a vehicle require an intelligent designer in order to be constructed, then it logically stands to reason that the universe in all of its complexity required the same. 

The world around us is filled with wonders; intricate organisms working together towards common goals.  Even the tiniest of life forms and organisms exhibit complex behaviors such as multi-generational migrations, cellular respiration, and reproduction.  Each of these examples points not to chaos, but to organization completed by an intelligent entity.  The Apostle Paul establishes a very similar principle in Romans 1:20 where he writes that “since the creation of the world His [God’s] invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead…” 

The Bible, which is God’s inspired word (a concept which will be explored in another article), tells us that God created the universe and everything in it.  As a statement of fact, Genesis 1:1 says, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” (read Genesis 1-2 for the account of creation).  While some may advocate the idea that God “got the ball rolling,” but then had no further input in events (this is a mixture of creation and evolution), Genesis 1-2 makes it clear that God was in complete control.  Again, we must question whether or not it is logical to believe that God started everything, but then allowed evolution to take over without having any more impact.  For instance, some purpose that the days depicted in the first chapter of Genesis were actually eons of time.  Does this make sense? Would any life be able to endure eons of time in either complete sunlight or complete darkness depending on which side of the earth they were on? The obvious answer is that no, they would be unable to do so because they would either cook or freeze.  The logical answer, then, is that the days depicted were normal days (as the text confirms). 

While the complexity of the world around us points to an intelligent design, it does not necessarily teach us what this intelligent designer may or may not require of humans.  The requirements of God for us are extremely important concepts and they impact every facet of our lives, but it is beyond the scope of this particular article.  The purpose of this article is to establish that God does exist and to cause the reader to desire to know more about Him.