Ludicrous Logic

I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with senses, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use.
-Galileo Galilei

These words were uttered by a Godly scientist who was ahead of his time. God Himself is a God of order and reason. He created things in a logical order. Creation itself was an organized process. Heaven is organized, as are the Laws of God. If we are to follow God, we must do it according to the understanding He gives us both in His Word and our reason (as far as it is in accord with His). Christianity is not a religion that is for those who want to stop reasoning. In fact, God is the author of reason. He created it. We cannot make choices without reason. In fact, that is what separates us from animals. It is our ability to reason. This is an important part of being made in the image of God.

Using reasoning properly is where we seem to fail. We no longer teach reason in most schools. We teach memorization. We memorize multiplication, division, rules, and quotes. We are not taught to think logically anymore. Therefore we fall for many logical errors. Examine these examples.

All living humans need air.

I am alive.

Therefore, I need air.

All cows eat grass.
My dog eats grass.
Therefore, my dog is a cow.

These are examples of deductive/inductive reasoning. Deductive reasoning can only be used if at least one point is absolutely true. The first example shown is always true of living people. The second example shows that even though all cows eat grass, not all things that eat grass are cows. Instead we could/should have said.

All cows eat grass.
Betsy is a cow.
Therefore, Betsy eats grass.

We can only apply this form of reasoning when proving the absolute (the all). In other words, we must have an absolute that applies, then work from there. This form of reason is called deductive reasoning. It is the most accepted form of reason. All though things can go both ways at times, (e.g. All cows eat grass. Betsy eats grass. Therefore Betsy is a cow) they cannot go the other way at all times. That is called inductive reasoning, and it is much more complex to prove. Even though Betsy ate grass, that fact does not prove her to be a cow. Too often, we see these types of reasonings used in Theology as well. Here is a prime example.

All Reformed Doctrine uses the word elect.
Paul used the word elect.
Therefore, Paul is a Reformed Theologian.

See the flaw? Although all Reformers use the word elect, not all who use the word elect are Reformed Theologians. The point of reasoning is not always reversible. (in fact it is often not.) We cannot use a single point that has variable values to prove a constant for an entire group. It cannot work. Here's a more whimsical example.

All Amish grow beards.
Mr. T has a beard.
Therefore, Mr. T is Amish.

Makes sense right?

Here is another example of interesting logic.

Now we know that we should always check to make sure our reasoning is accurate. We always check multiplication with addition. So here is how to check the problem.

Tada! The checking gave us the same answer as the multiplication. So its the correct answer, right?

Not even close. The flaw in the first problem is not in any one step but in the entire method. The checking is also complete hogwash, but it comes out to the same number. What's the point? Never check your own solution with your own idea. If you were wrong the first time, likely you will be wrong when you check it as well.

Now, with math its easy to check this out. We whip out a calculator (if you don't trust your mental math) and punch the buttons. Whoops! Turns out 14x5=70. Who knew? Math has absolute correct answers that cannot be argued with or changed. Many of our moral and Theological problems are also the same thing. They do have absolute right answers. Just like 14x5 doesn't ever really equal 25, stealing is never really justified either. Just because I can do it on paper and "check" it to be correct does not make it so.

In the end, this type of 'math' only works on those who don't practice Math in daily use. If they did, they would see the error instantly. In the same way, heresy can be found out by checking the Bible, not the heresy. Often the heretic can "check his work" as well as I can check the answer of 14x5=25. Trust the Bible, not the problem.

Conclusion

How do we check our Theology? We whip out our Bible. Does Jesus say anything about it? Do we have exact commands? Does the Bible mean what it says? Was there an underlying point to this? Are we obeying it? Are we taking things and twisting them to make them 'make sense' (dogs and cows)?
Let us make sure we are follow the commands of God, not the doctrines of man.

Debating Doctrine

One of the things that I have heard more than once is this, "If you just stopped debating these things, we would have less conflict in the Brotherhood." Indeed, some things we should not debate. However, we need to also realize that there are also things we need to know and stand firm upon. There are those things that we cannot debate without destroying Christianity, but there are those points that we as Christians can disagree upon without changing our core belief systems.

So where do we draw the line? Well, part of that is answered with where we stand in our fellowship with God and the local Church. Those who are in authority in the Church will indeed have to take a more firm stand on some doctrines than the lay members. I know great Christians that never have even heard of Soteriology or Eschatology, yet are warriors for God. There are those who do not know of John Edwards, TULIP, Martin Luther, Jan Hus, or the Moravian Church are often the strongest Christians one will meet. Do we all need to have this knowledge? No. (see this post for more details on this subject) So who does? Those who are leaders do indeed need to have a knowledgable understanding of Theology in order to lead.

So where does that leave us with debate? Is it ever right? I do believe so, under the correct circumstances, with the correct people, and doctrines that can be used to build up the Church. So what are the parameters for debate? Lets start with those whom it is not advisable to debate with or in front of.

I. The Non-Christian We should not debate complex doctrine in front of a non-Christian. To do so shows division in Christ's body. We need to be unified in our ministry to the world. This does not mean we cannot reason with a non-Christian. Even God reasons with us as people (Is. 1:18)

II. The Carnal Christian We should not debate doctrine with a carnal brother. To do so is usually just a way to justify whatever state they are currently living in. They do not want to understand God better; they want to live in wanton sin. We need to be firm on the concept of being sanctified with such a person and not debate other topics with them.

III. The New Converts If a person is new to the Christian faith we do not need to burden them with Theology that will trouble or confuse them. We need to let them grow into it first. Let them start on milk. But no one should stay at the milk stage, either. They need to grow.

IV. The Weak Christian There are those in the faith who are not as strong as others, sometimes through no fault of their own. They are troubled by every new thought and theory and struggle with every new idea. Such a person should not be troubled with debate. Jesus himself says that to those who are given more, more will be required. If a person is given less, than we are commanded not to trouble them. (I Cor. 8:11)

So, debate is limited to mature Christians that are not new converts. They need to be strong in their faith as well. These things are important if we are to be leaders and not just factioning, bickering, backbiters.

So when is it right -indeed, sometimes necessary- to debate doctrine? And what doctrines are up for debate?

There are some things that are not up for discussion. Man's need for salvation, our lack of goodness without God, our desire to serve ourselves instead of God, God's Holiness, Jesus as God's Son and our Saviour, God's lack of sin, man's complete inability to save himself, and the requirement of God's grace that alone can save us are all non debatable parts of the Gospel. But some more complex doctrines, than do not always have a defining point in Salvation itself do bear studying and debating. What is the difference between the teaching of Joel Osteen and John Bunyan? Aren't they both Christians? Do we need to argue between the two? Do we not agree with both because they are both in the Religion section of the local book store?

Some say no, live and let live. Others say yes, this is a defining point of Christianity. Indeed, I too would say we do need to know where we stand with these doctrines. If we do not understand who Christ is and what He has done for us, we cannot understand the differences between these different teachings. We are commanded to test the spirits. (I John 4:1) We are to be wise as serpents and harmless as doves. (Matthew 10:16)We are not to be tossed by every wave of doctrine. (Eph. 4:14)

So in order to do these things we must indeed debate some issues. Taking a stance is important in many of these places. However, we must balance out this with the other side of the metaphorical coin. We are not to teach these doctrines as the commands of God. (Matt. 15:19) We are also to avoid foolish rambling as well. (II Tim. 2:14-17) In the same breath, we are also told to accurately handle the word of truth. So to do so we need to know what that is. Some doctrines that we may hold are not essential to our Theology, others are. We need to know which are truly nonnegotiable and which are based in human reason. This is yet another reason that we are not to debate with immature or weak Christians, seeing as some of our Theology is indeed core- yet other portions are not.

Conclusion

In the end, yes, debate is important for mature Christians. But there are many limitations and guidelines to follow. I don't have them all; indeed, I don't know them all. But these are some of them.

Don't debate without prayer. Don't leave the Author out of the Book discussion.

Somber Soteriology

Imagine an elderly man. He sits alone in his hut, thinking and praying. He has heard that the soldiers are coming, ready to kill all those who resist them and their religion. They have pillaged and murdered for months, growing ever closer, ever nearer to this village. The young men are dead, having defended their families and wives with their last breath. All that remains for him is waiting for death to come at the end of a soldier’s blade.

The man did not fear death. He had made peace with the fact years ago. He had suffered much in his childhood, growing up in a disease-ridden desert area. Many of his siblings had died before they reached adulthood. He had been lucky to make it to the age of manhood. He had however; and as soon as he reached that ripe age of 13, he was quickly wed. His darling wife had also passed, but not before giving him two sons. He loved his sons, who had loved their father as fiercely as he them. But the boys were both gone now, having died in the first wave of attacking soldiers. The boys had given their lives defending the weak and allowing many of the others to survive until now.

A horn sounded outside. The lookout, a boy of eight summers- not quite a man- had been posted on a hill in the direction of the onslaught.

The man bowed his old wrinkled head one final time. 

“God,” he prays. “I am not worthy of your mercy. I am an evil man, no better than the soldiers who are coming towards our village. I too, have fought and killed those who do not believe as I do. I pray that though I am not worthy, you may receive my soul with mercy. I pray that you would show these men that killing others does not make us right, it only makes us guilty. I pray that you may have mercy on their souls as well.”

Opening his eyes, he reaches for his cane. Slowly rising to his feet, he feels a peace well up inside his soul. He walks slowly outside to meet his fate. He would stand as his brave boys had. There was no fear in the old man’s eyes, only pity for these lost, misguided souls who were butchering an entire people with fanatic religious fervor.

As one of the young soldiers enters the town, he sees this old man standing there, resting heavily on his cane. The soldier hesitates, why kill an old helpless man? he asks himself. As he stalls, he recalls the voice of the captain, as he lead them off to this crusade, all those months ago. “Kill them all! God will know His own.” With that thought in mind, the young man takes his sword from its sheath. The old man looks at him with soft, patient eyes. No hate, no anger, just pity looks back at him. The man’s gray beard is already moist with tears that must have preceded this moment. But now, those eyes were dry, resolute, awaiting what he knew was coming. The boy waits, he sees no evil in this man. Putting his sword back in its sheath, he moves instead to help the weak man stand.

As the soldier moves toward him, the old man sees an archer come over the hill. As if in slow motion, he watches the bowman pull an arrow from his stained quiver and fit it to his bow. The pull was smooth and true; a well seasoned pull of a man who had seen many battles. Without even a twitch of hesitation, the archer lets his arrow loose.

It flies true and hits the elderly man in the chest. He falls down, as a warm feeling spreads through his body. He closes his eyes and sees no more.

Questions to Ponder: 

What is calling on the name of the Lord?

JOHN 14:6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”

ACTS 4:12 And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”

ROMANS 10:13 For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

What saves us?   God’s Name or His Grace?

The story written above is an example of something that could very well have happened. It is set in the Middle East during the Holy Crusades (1095-1272 AD) when the Church killed many Middle Eastern people who were ‘defiling’ the Holy Land. The Crusade soldiers had the Name of God on their side. These were wars blessed by the Church. The man in our story would have despised the name of Jesus, not for the name’s sake, but because those who carried it were thieves and butchers of men. If the man did indeed come before God, broken and humbled, knowing that he was not good enough to obtain grace, but begged for mercy anyway. What difference is there from what we as Christians teach? Do we not teach that a man or woman must come to God realizing they are not good enough for God? Do we not rely on God’s mercy? Are we the only just ones because we know a ‘secret password’ - the name of Jesus? If all that separates us is this, than how was Melchizedek saved, or Job, or Moses, or Noah? They relied on God’s mercy, not knowing the name of Jesus. If the only thing that makes a difference there is that Jesus hadn’t come; then why would He come? If people could be saved by grace without Jesus name before He came why not after? Is this not what “by Grace alone” means? If this man is condemned only because he did not speak the name we know, then Moses, Abraham, and David are also condemned. If they are not, then this man should not be either. The only other explanation is that God has changed the requirements of Salvation. If Moses could rely on God’s grace without knowing his Saviour’s earthly name, then why could this man not do so as well?

Right Reasoning

I recently heard a prominent Theologian make a very interesting claim. He said we cannot trust human reasoning in Theology. The statement was interesting, because it depends on it being untrue to be true. Let me explain. In order to assume something as truth, we must reason and think it through in order to accept it. If we assume that we cannot reason, then we cannot accept any statements, Theological or otherwise. This is not just a paradox, it is an oxymoron. It's impossible to think that we cannot think. We reason about everything, and to say that our reasoning is completely untrustworthy is saying that no matter what we think, it is wrong.

Before I say too much, let me give the context of what the man was saying. He was discussing complex doctrines of Theology. Now, I do heartily agree that we cannot completely reason our way into knowing every thought, intention, or concept of God. However, we should apply this to doctrine correctly. We cannot lay out doctrines and expect people to listen to them because they aren't "smart enough" to understand them. We should not use that form of psychological bullying anywhere, especially amongst Christians. Instead, we should humbly admit that there are aspects of God that no one understands, therefore, we should not assume either party absolutely correct on some complex doctrines.

Now, that does not apply to some core Christian beliefs. Some items are laid out so clearly in the Bible there is no way to ignore them without changing Christianity. However, some items can be understood differently, (and even incorrectly) and still both parties can be sincere Christians. A.W. Towser once commented that he could forgive almost any error as long as it was in sincere love for God.

We need to realize that we are not to be puffed up with knowledge. It doesn't even matter whether it is correct knowledge or not. What matters is that we come before God humbly and realize that He has indeed revealed some of Himself to us. We need to be careful though, when we extrapoliate things that are not directly said. We also need to realize that if we cannot support our Theology from other Biblical sources, then we should be very careful in how firmly we believe it ourselves, but also in how much we require others to believe it as well.

Conclusion

On the subject of human reason, God does indeed use reason. He is the God of reasoning.Therefore, we should be careful how we word the fact that we cannot reason as far as He does. We need to humbly admit that what He has given us is incomplete, not for His lack, but ours. Therefore, we should not assume our Doctrine to be correct because so many Theologians agree that they believe it is true. God does not submit to any Theologian or Doctrine; He is the origin of such things. Let us use caution when we speak of things we do not truly understand. Remember what God to Job when he assumed too much.

 1 Then the Lord answered Job out of the whirlwind and said:

² “Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge?
³ Dress for action like a man;
    I will question you, and you make it known to me.

Erasing Errors

I was talking to a good friend of mine just recently, and he showed me how he'd whited out some parts of the New Testament. I thought this was a quite interesting concept. Before you get too worried, let me explain. What he had done was white out all the headings of the passages in the New Testament. His reason for it was that he wanted to understand the text with an unbiased point of view.

Although I will probably not follow in his footsteps, it does raise an interesting point. When do we follow other peoples assumptions about Scripture and force the Holy Word to match what they say, instead of taking what Scripture says and applying it as it is? Often times we will actually see something that we had not seen beforehand without realizing it.

Often times in our lives we just assume that the Bible says something and even base our teaching or preaching of off what we think it says. For years I actually thought that the list of seven deadly sins was written in the Bible somewhere. Although that list is not inaccurate, it is not Scripture, therefore it carries less weight.

How many things in your life are like that? Things we believe, defend, and debate about, that we are completely convinced are in the Bible, or at the very least, are completely Biblical. I heartily agree with my friend that we do indeed take too much of our Theology from other people and do not check the Scriptures for their truth.

Conclusion

In the end, let us make sure that what we believe has a Scriptural backing. If we do not, we are just teaching doctrines from the commands of men. And that, my friend, is damning.

Pre-Emptive Perdition

As Christians, we believe in the Sovereignty and Omniscience of Christ. That means we believe God is indeed all-powerful and all-knowing. We also believe that He is Just. Some people run into a unique question then. If God already knows what we are going to do in the future, and He is all powerful, does that mean that He judges people before they sin? Can He punish people ahead of time?

Well, what is our view of God? Could He do that? Would He still be a Just God if He did? Does it even matter? What would change if He did? Well, the Pharisees asked Jesus a question similar to this. In John 9 the Pharisees assume that the man born blind must have been punished for his future sins or the sins of his parents. Jesus says both of these are not the case. So what can we extrapolate from this? Can we say that it is never the case then? Actually, Jesus does not say that this is never the case, but we cannot say that the opposite is true without reason either.

Lets look at this another way. It is completely true that God is not bound or bothered by time. He exists in a place outside of time entirely. So would it matter to Him if we were punished for things before we did them? Possibly not. But the real question we should consider is this, "If we were punished for sins before they happened, would we still do them?" If not, was the punishment even just, because then we would not have done anything to be punished. If we did still do it, was the punishment of any use, for we did not learn a lesson.

In the end, it may not matter to God, but it would to us. God takes great pains to show us His Glory in ways we can understand and make sense to our feeble human minds. Not only that, but if God did punish us ahead of sins' occurrence on our plane of existence, then God would in effect destroy the concept of faith and loyalty. God would reward the faithful before they were faithful and punish the bad before they were bad. That directly contradicts what God says in Matthew 5:45. He sends rain on the evil and the just. Another thing we can look at is the examples we have in the Bible itself. Adam and Eve were not punished before they sinned. Nor do we find record of any other punishment that precedes action. Therefore, with such a large amount of information available to us and not one bit of actual evidence to support that theory, we must conclude that we cannot support it. To support a theory without evidence because there is no evidence the the contrary would be like saying that my great-great-grandson will be an astronaut. Just because something  cannot be proven untrue does not make it true by default.

Conclusion

In the end, Paul tells us not to argue about vain and useless things that cannot be proven. He also tells us to stay way from endless debate and quarrel. Things of this nature that cannot be proven and do not alter our Salvation or the requirement of our faithfulness and obedience should not get too much attention. We need to focus on what is truly important. We need to glorify God in all that we do. What is required of us is simple. We are to be faithful.

Getting Grace

What does it mean to have God's grace in our lives? How do we get it? Where do we even get this phrase? The first time that we hear the word grace in the Bible is in Genesis. We read that Noah found favor (grace) in God's eyes. So how'd he do it? Well, let us take a look at the verb here. Found is an active verb in the perfect tense. The fact that it is active shows us that he DID something. God could have easily said this in many different ways, but chose to show it in the active tense. Noah found grace. This is like the Shepherd finding the lost sheep. There was action involved. Noah longed to walk with God, he strove for it. And God did indeed walk with Him.

So what was Noah's secret? Did he live in a better world than ours? Maybe a simpler time would make it easier to walk with God? Actually, the whole reason Noah was told to build the ark was the corruption of all the people around him. Their hearts were always bent on evil. Even after years of preaching the only people who listened to this man were his wife, sons, and daughters-in-law. If we had an eighty year ministry that produced results like this, we would shut it down and blame the preacher. But God didn't. Instead, God used this man to repopulate the entire Earth. All of creation was saved by this man's faithfulness. It could not be measured by his success in converting those around him. Instead, God's grace in his life was only evident in obedience and God's judgement upon those around Noah and sparing the family of this righteous man.

So are we saved by action? Not our own. Jesus action in our stead is what saved us, just like Noah's action saved his family. We must walk with God in order to have any real righteousness. There is a form of pseudo-righteousness that looks good for awhile, but in the end, it leads to condemnation. So how do we have real righteousness and not just be self-righteous? (To see where self-righteousness gets you check Matthew 23)

Conclusion

So would we be like Noah? Could we stand for right when the world was that evil? Before we ask ourselves that, check your life now. Are we walking with God? Would we be ashamed or nervous if God did show up? Do you have something that jumps to the top of your mind when you think of God's return?

If something does come to mind, ask yourself. Is it sin? Is there something I am trying to justify before God? We humans so quickly want to explain to God why what He calls wrong isn't really wrong. We know its foolish when we hear it aloud, but we end up doing it all to quickly. Instead, let us call a spade a spade. Indeed, let us call sin, sin. Repent, give it to God, and ask Him to replace that sin with something that glorifies His Name. If we try to remove things from our lives and do not allow God to replace them with something new, we put ourselves in grave danger.

So what is a Christian to do. Read. Read your Bible. Nothing helps us overcome sin like God's word.
D.L. Moody once said. “The Bible will keep you from sin, or sin will keep you from the Bible.” Let us live by that.

Are You Known in Hell?

Some of you who have worked for a family business know that sometimes it doesn't matter how well or poorly you do your work, but what matters is who you know; or rather, who knows you. In our spiritual warfare we have a similar issue. It truly matters whom we are known by.

"What do you mean?" you may be asking. Well let's take a look at a story in the Book of Acts. Acts is a book about the very beginning of the Christian Church, and in it we find much wisdom and instruction. Here we have a story of Paul, one of the great apostles, and how he was affecting those around him. His name was well known in the area, to the extent that some wannabe prophets used his name in their attempted demon extortion.

"In the name of Jesus whom Paul preaches," they quoted. Impressive, huh? They used the very name of God, under the authority of the man they had seen do the same thing and guess what happens. The demons tell the seven guys that they have indeed heard of Paul and know the name of Jesus, but they have no idea who these seven foolish men are. So instead of leaving the posessed like the seven men had planned, the demons decided to chase and torture them.

So, what can we learn from this? Many things, I believe. Today I want to focus one of the things here that I hadn't really noticed before reading out of a new (for me) book titled "Why Revival Tarries" by Leonard Ravenhill. A very good read. Mr. Ravenhill points out that Paul's name was known by these demons. Why? Because Paul was a warrior. Paul was a spiritual combatant. These demons knew Paul's name because they feared him.

Why would demons fear one man but not seven? Did they miss the math lesson where seven is definately bigger than one? Nope, that has nothing to do with it. They feared Paul, not for Paul's sake but for the sake of what Paul did. Paul was not a warrior for himself. Paul was a warrior in Christ. The seven men had no power because they had not done what Paul had. They expected the battle to be won in public. But that is not how it works. That is never how it works.

What does that mean, you may ask. Simply put, it means that we don't do our spirituual battling in front of other people. We do it alone with God. How? In prayer. In communion with God. No Christian will win any battle by standing strong and fighting alone. The only way we can win is by kneeling and admitting that the battle is not ours, but the Lords.

Conclusion

In the end, where does this leave us? It leaves us before the Throne of God. We must first come there as humble, broken, unworthy servants before we can be used for His Will. To do otherwise is only a futile attempt on our part to do God's work. God does not need our inteligence or wisdom, He needs our surrender. Only in surrender to Him can we be useful soldiers on this battlefield.