Dedicated to the devotional, exegetical and philosophical study of theological paradox in Conservative, Thoroughly Biblical, Historically Orthodox, Essentially Reformed theology . . . to the glory of God alone!
Showing posts with label Doubt. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Doubt. Show all posts

Friday, November 05, 2010

Isaiah 53:3 - The Discounted Savior


Editor's Note: For awhile now, I've been far too busy arguing (here and on other blogs) for inerrancy, six day creation, divine sovereignty, complementarian gender roles, and other Biblical doctrines that I consider basic and obvious. Meanwhile, the series on Isaiah 53 has been idle for too long. Where does the time go? I have learned at least three things through all of the debating and discussing. First, the deception and theological confusion in mainstream American Evangelical Christianity is so widespread that unbelief has become an accepted, unrestrained epidemic. It is the norm. Bible believers are pejoratively labeled "fundamentalists" and systematically marginalized in some circles. Second, it is God alone who can change the mind and heart of a person bent on disbelieving Scripture (myself included). Third, the Word of God itself holds the greatest potential to benefit sinners (myself included), in whatever state of belief or unbelief they find themselves. With that, I repentantly and deliberately move away from debating with other Christians, and take up the plain study of God's Word once again. I stand by my convictions as articulated, and I won't hesitate to proclaim the truth (and I may continue to selectively engage in some doctrinal discussions), but it's time for a change of focus. I pray that you, dear reader, will be blessed and encouraged by what is written here, and not turned aside to the quagmire of religious controversy that is perpetually fueled by doubt.


He was despised and forsaken of men,

A man of sorrows and acquainted with grief; 
And like one from whom men hide their face
He was despised,
And we did not esteem Him.
.
Humanity's rejection of Christ is on full display here. The Jewish leaders in Jesus' day did not accept Him. The Roman authorities passed a death sentence against Him. The people did not rise up to defend Him, but instead shouted, "Crucify!" Even the more stalwart disciples ran away and hid themselves. A tiny group of women, a condemned criminal and a surprised centurion were His sole supporters during His suffering on the cross (perhaps even they hid their faces in horror at the sight of His torment). He died alone, and He entered the grave without any companions.
.
Isaiah's words also remind us of His rejection in our day, by unbelievers and by professed believers who are not really believers. By brazen hypocrites who use Christian religion as a means of personal gain. And by sincere and growing Christians who fail to honor Him in many ways as we battle with idols of the heart, pride, selfishness and misdirected worship. We, too, are rejectors of Christ in some measure, and we need the continuous cleansing of the Gospel.
.
In these words His humanity is emphasized. He is distinctively a man of sorrows. In the incarnation, God presented Himself not as infinite God, but as finite man. His true deity was hidden behind, under, and within His real humanity. In Christ's ministry we see a compassionate gentleness that didn't blast sinful humanity with a divine "shock and awe," and presented truth with the padding of parables. The raw power of His Deity was presented selectively and with great purpose, and primarily to those who believed. Revelation dropped as gentle rain upon the weary, and only rarely did it thunder down over the heads of the stubborn. Jesus had not come to deal out wrath, but to absorb it.
.
.
.
His humility is presented. He is a man of SORROWS, SICKNESS, SADNESS, SOLITUDE, and SCORN.
He was despised, and counted as worthless. It is stated twice in this one verse. Perhaps it is repeated so we can first see the whole world's rejection of Him, and not fail to recognize our own personal rejection of Him as well. The subject of the verse moves from "men" in general to "we" in particular.
He was diseased. He Carried our spiritual sickness in His own body. He felt the weakness of our humanity.
He was depressed. The sad realities of our sin affected Him deeply and personally. Though He had joy in the Father's continuous embrace, He simultaneously apprehended the severity of the Father's displeasure against the sin He would bear in our behalf. The eternal embrace would be temporarily broken at the cross, where fierce wrath fell over Him. Not only men, but God also hid His face.
He was deserted. He was alone in His redeeming work. The Only Man, the One Mediator, the Sole Savior, our Great High Priest who went by Himself into the Tabernacle to make atonement for our sins.
He was disposable. He was considered by most to be little more than an interesting public figure, one of many who would come and go. Like all other men, He would die.
Think of the accusations made against Him by the religious elite, the spiritual leaders and the respected intellectuals of the day. They said He was demon possessed, insane, an alcoholic, not a true Jew, a law-breaker, a troublemaker, and a liar. He was despised.
.
He felt the pain of the sick, the disenfranchisement of the marginalized, the uncertainty of the poor, and the shame of the outcasts. He grieved over the dullness and doubting of the disciples. He agonized over the world's unbelief. He was crushed by the destructiveness of human sin. He was shattered by the Father's condemnation. Devastated by divine decree, and hated by humanity.
.
We are among the condemners. We have stood in the crowd shouting "Crucify!" We have not esteemed Him. We have worshiped Him falsely. All of our remaining sin is a result of not sufficiently valuing Him. All of our hypocrisy is a result of rejecting Him in some compartment of our lives. All of our sanctification struggles boil down to a view of Christ that is too low. We simply don't trust Him enough, don't love Him enough, and don't think highly enough of Him. He, for His part, still calls out, "Father, forgive them." He always makes intercession. He invites us to swim out to Him, through the sea of our failures, beyond the foaming waves of doubt, and draws us with the undertow of grace. Our hearts can be purified and are being purified.
.
We must renew our affection for Christ, revive our trust in Him, repent and return to our First Love. The remedy is to change our values so that nothing is above Him and He is valued above everything else. We must expand the practical boundaries of His Lordship and exaltation. All of life is worship, and the need of every fallen creature is to be restored to the true worship.
.
When we enter our heavenly rest, our present faith and struggle will culminate in an exclusive, uncompromising and eternal devotion to Him - never contradicted by disobedience, idolatry, or doubt - as we shout "Soli Deo Gloria" forever without ceasing.
.
In the meantime, we practice.

Thursday, August 05, 2010

Don't Be Duped By Evolutionists, or "The Slippery Slide Into Devolving Theological Liberalism"

For atheists and agnostics, evolution is a no brainer. They don't have the Book - the authoritative self-revelation of the Creator - to guide their thinking. The only viable choice for God-rejectors is to look backward and guess what might have happened in the prehistoric past. Dig up some rocks and try to piece it all together with limited intellect and and a tiny little slice of empirical evidence. Their driving positive presupposition is that they can figure it out, and their driving negative presupposition is that the Biblical account can't possibly be true and isn't even worth considering. They write it off as mere superstition.

It is odd to see Christians follow in lock step with the results of such godless thinking. It's shocking, in fact, to consider how many well-meaning believers are now accepting evolution as an unquestionable fact. We have the official story on cosmic and human origins. We have the Creator's Own Word on the matter. He includes specific details of His own actions in the God-breathed account of Genesis. There is no good reason to doubt His account, from a scientific standpoint or a Biblical one.

The Inerrant Bible: An Alternative to Evolutionary Assumptions

Every day for the past week, I have attended 2-3 hours of scholarly lectures given by Dr. Joel D. Klenk, a scientist from the Paleontological Research Corporation. Klenck, who holds an earned Ph.D from Harvard, teaches extensively on the scientific study of Biblical creation. His material is as deep in the study of Hebrew language and Biblical texts as it is in the study of rock layers, fossils and archeological evidence. He demonstrates how and why the Biblical texts, taken as actual fact, do not conflict with ANY scientific evidence. With insights derived from a career in the field and extensive firsthand study, he exposes multiple and specific instances in which contradictory evidence has been ignored by his evolutionary-minded colleagues. But Klenck is not just another player on the creationist bandwagon. He fearlessly takes fellow creationists to task when any aspect of their approach is either unbiblical or unscientific.

You can learn more about the Paleontological Research Corporation and Dr. Klenck's work by clicking here. (Incidentally, the video introduction/sales pitch was filmed at my church).

If there were actual conflicts between real science and the creation account, I could understand some Christians being tempted to seek an alternative. If evolution made logical and scientific sense, I could understand. But for any believer to deny a creation account that perfectly accords with all of the scientific evidence, and to replace it with something as rickety as evolution theory, is beyond comprehension. Recently, I made the following remark to a Christian evolutionist: even if I were to reject Biblical creation, I could not put evolution in its place because evolution is not scientifically tenable. It's a dead theory, from start to finish. On the other hand, at least theistic evolutionists can claim God made the impossible happen by miraculously intervening - but then why not just say God miraculously created the world in six days as He claims?

Despite the salient problems with their fairy tale, evolutionists throughout the world continue to prop up their theory and present it as factually true. The sheer force of their insistence should cause all thinking people to suspect something is amiss. The pure stubbornness with which they cling to it ought to give us a clue. They leave the impression that only a backwards, intellectually impaired buffoon would ever question their adorable theory. It's all somewhat reminiscent of a cat, which, when cornered, puffs itself up to look big and scary. All that raised fur, the hiss, and those flashing eyes can get you thinking you're in real danger. But in reality you're only facing a terrified little ball of fur. An evolutionist looking at the evidence is rather like a cat stuck up in a tree. He thinks he has the high, safe position, but in reality he was chased up there. Try to get him down, and you'll feel those claws.


Like cornered cats, atheistic evolutionists are scared to death by the obvious drift of the evidence. They're terrified by what the evidence suggests: that we were created by a morally superior God and are accountable to Him in every way. They quell these fears by getting the rest of us to validate and affirm their view (something the evidence can never do). They are more zealous in evangelizing for their secular cause than most Christians are for the cause of the Gospel. In the end, it's all bald conjecture and a denial of the blindingly clear Truth. Christian, don't be fooled!


For further study, see this excellent article by James Anderson:


Wednesday, September 23, 2009

The Historicity of Adam: Genesis DEconstructed and REconstructed

Perhaps you've caught the recent buzz about Tremper Longman III's remarks casting doubt on the UNDENIABLE BIBLICAL FACT that there was a real person named "Adam" who was the first man created by God, in His Own image, not from evolution but by God's own special act, formed from the dust of the ground on the 6th day. Longman is a super-scholar with a long list of credentials and books to his credit, but then again, so is Bart Ehrman. Ehrman's modus operandi is to heap as much doubt as possible on the Word of God, from the perspective of a former Evangelical. Unfortunately, Longman's remarks offer a subtle but equally potent attack on the inerrancy of Scripture - and this from a supposedly conservative Evangelical perspective. Perhaps he's just "reconstructing" the doctrine of inspiration?

One’s views about the historicity of early Genesis are a reflection of one’s view of Scripture. If one primarily views Scripture as similar to other ancient writings of the time period (Babylonian mythology, etc.), one will tend to view the Biblical writings through that lens and come up with ideas that seem sensible but actually disintegrate the unity of the Bible (and ultimately present the idea that it means something other than what it says). If one primarily views the Bible as God’s Eternal Word of Truth, as inerrant as God Himself is (though arriving by His Providence through the minds and experiences of imperfect and errant people), guarded by the Holy Spirit from any contamination or mistake, entirely pure and wholly true, one will tend to say that Scripture means exactly what it says – and that God was careful and exacting in His revelation.

What I have learned here is that Tremper Longman III, although he is 100 times more scholarly and studied than I am, is not a reliable witness about the unity and integration of Scripture. Let God be true, and EVERY MAN a liar. That includes me and you and Tremper. But this is exactly the point – Scripture calls us to trust it more than we trust our own thoughts.

Perhaps scholars like Longman end up spending so much time looking at the ancient cultures, archeological data, and other human/earthly factors related to Scripture that they lose perspective on the heavenly/inspired character of the Word.

My 5-year-old apparently has more faith in God’s Word than most super-scholars, and I take this as a warning against the subtle unbelief that sometimes accompanies “learning.” Ever learning, but never able to come to a knowledge of the Truth – this is the danger for all of us knowledge-hungry seekers of insight from the Bible. May God help us to believe Him.

Here's the video where Longman expresses his doubts . . .




Editor's Note: Although I'm no fan of yellow shirts, I'm glad the colors in this video fit the color scheme of THEOparadox. That is the ONLY point of agreement I am able to identify between myself and this video.

If "Adam" in Genesis 1-3 is not a specific individual, but "mankind" in general, I suppose we have to rewrite Genesis 2:8-25 . . .

8The LORD God planted a garden toward the east, in Eden; and there He placed the [committee of men] whom He had [caused to evolve].

9Out of the ground the LORD God caused to [evolve] every tree that is pleasing to the sight and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

(I'm skipping verses 10-14 because they're not related to the discussion)

15Then the LORD God took the [committee of men] and put [them] into the garden of Eden to cultivate it and keep it.

16The LORD God commanded the [committee of men], saying, "From any tree of the garden you [guys] may eat freely;

17but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you [guys] shall not eat, for in the day that you [guys] eat from it you [guys] will surely die."

18Then the LORD God said, "It is not good for the [committee of men] to be alone; I will [cause to evolve for them] a [bunch of women] suitable for [them]."

(I'm not sure how evolution works when you only have males, but I'll leave that as a question for Longman to answer)

19Out of the ground the LORD God [caused to evolve] every beast of the field and every bird of the sky, and brought them to the [committee of men] to see what [they] would call them (I guess they voted); and whatever the [committee of men] called a living creature, that was its name.

20The [committee of men] gave names to all the cattle, and to the birds of the sky, and to every beast of the field, but for [the committee of men] there was not found a [bunch of helpers] suitable for [them].

21So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the [committee of men], and [they] slept; then He took one [or some] of [their?] ribs and closed up the flesh at that place (via some evolutionary process, no doubt).

(After all, evolution is the one thing a Bible scholar dare not cast doubt upon)

22The LORD God [caused to evolve] into a [bunch of women] the rib [or ribs] which He had taken from the [committee of men], and brought [them] to the [committee of men].

23The [committee of men] said, (Perhaps they had appointed a spokesman?)
"This is now bone of
[our] bones,
And flesh of
[our] flesh;

[they] shall be called [women],

Because [they were] taken out of [the committee of men]."

(at this point the logic is really breaking down!)

24For this reason (what reason? Tremper has taken all "reason" out of this passage) a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.

25And the [committee of men] and [their wives] were [all]naked and were not ashamed.

Um . . . yeah. No further comment needed.

[WARNING: The next paragraph is entirely tongue-in-cheek]

Perhaps other individuals in Scripture were actually committees, too. Abraham might have been a group of people who "had lots of kids," and Joshua may have been an army that was "saved by YHWH," and Moses could have been 100 people who were "drawn out" by God. This would help us understand how a lowly sheep herder convinced the mighty Pharaoh to let the people go. Perhaps they all rushed at him with their staffs swinging. Ridiculous, you say? If we don't trust Scripture, how can anyone disqualify these theories? Next week I'll present an engraving by ancient Midianites that shows 100 shepherds attacking somebody. You can't argue with rocks, right?

Here's a scholarly (and, unlike the video you just watched, Biblically faithful) post from James Anderson in response . . .

Finally, I'd like to challenge those who support Longman's view to re-write Genesis 2 in a way that actually makes sense. Alternatively, I'd like to suggest you simply take it exactly the way it is revealed by an omniscient God.