News

The most important thing Christian parents need to focus on with their children

2 Comments

I know what you’re thinking – I’m going to say apologetics. But I was actually having a talk with a young women who found the arguments for God convincing, but wasn’t sure whether she was ready for a personal relationship with the God of the Bible. It got me thinking about my past and what it was about the God of the Bible that caused me to make a commitment.

If I had to say what it is that cause me to take Christianity seriously, including accepting Jesus as my Leader (more than just as my Savior), it would be the conviction that God was lining things up in my life to show himself to me. This was particularly welcome because I could see that I had not been blessed with the best situation in life to start out with.

Sean McDowell has a recent post about it, and since he is an expert in apologetics, I’m inclined to agree with him.

He writes:

In his book The Four Loves, C.S. Lewis makes a distinction between “Gift-love” and “Need-love.” As for Gift-love, he gives the example of a father who works and plans for the future well being of his family, even though he will die without seeing them benefit. As for Need-love, Lewis gives the example of a lonely and frightened child who comes to its mother’s arms for comfort and protection. Such love is neither selfish nor improper, because children are intended to have nurturing mothers, and mothers are intended to care for their kids.

According to Lewis, God’s love for mankind is entirely Gift-love: “The Father gives all He is and has to the Son. The Son gives Himself back to the Father, and gives Himself to the world, and for the world to the Father, and thus gives the world (in Himself) back to the Father too.” God does not need our love or worship. Rather, He freely loves us as an extension of His grace.

But our love for God is different. While we may be able to offer God Gift-love, our love is primarily need based. Lewis explains: “But man’s love for God, from the very nature of the case, must always be very largely, and must often be entirely, a Need-love.” We desperately need God in both this world and the next.

And then Lewis makes an additional (and helpful) distinction—while our objective need for God will never change, our awareness of that need can. And if our awareness of the need for God fades, then so may our faith. Thus, Lewis says:

There seems no reason for describing as hypocritical the short-lived piety of those whose religion fades away once they have emerged from “danger, necessity or tribulation.” Why should they not have been sincere? They were desperate and howled for help. Who wouldn’t?

In other words, if someone believes in God because of an immediate need for safety or comfort, then as soon as the danger or pain ends, so may the faith. How does this relate to students? Think about it. If a young person believes in God for social or relational needs in the family, church, or school, then when those needs fade, so will his or her faith. If belief in God fulfills some external need, then as soon as that need fades, or another venue provides satisfaction of that need, the student will likely abandon his or her faith (or minimally, have a marginalized faith).

The whole post is worth reading, because no less than Sean McDowell himself had a moment like this where he realized his own sinfulness and had to rely on Jesus for his forgiveness.

Judging from his tweets, I know that Sean is obsessed with super-heroes like Spider-Man, and so he would not be comparing himself to his peers in terms of righteousness. That sort of distance between you and Spider-Man can be really grating for boys. Inside, we feel like we are meant to be super-heroes. Many young men go into apologetics because they see it as a super-power. The problem of not measuring up is very strong for us, because we see the demands of Christianity as much greater than mere church attendance. I imagine that as Sean engaged with people using his apologetics super-power, he probably realized how difficult it was to know everything and give an answer to everyone. That’s above and beyond the standard shortcomings or pride, anger, hatred, and so on that are inside of every person.

We are not super-heroes but we need to have super-human righteousness (that is, perfect righteousness) in order to stand before our Creator and Designer. The only solution is to rely on the imputed righteousness of Jesus for our super-hero status. It is a good and healthy thing to take on Jesus as King, and to imitate him. But when we fail, we must also rely on him as Savior. And thank God the Father for that provision of salvation. And indeed, I myself think of Jesus as Savior in the moments where I am conscious of my own sin. But I need to think about him more than that, and I’ll explain how next.

In my case, I wanted to be a super hero growing up, but I knew I wasn’t coming from a family or a background that made super-heroes. I was saved in a non-Christian home where, thanks to my hands-off “parents”, I was on a very dark path to failure. In fact, I can see where I would have ended up by just looking at where my older brother is now. That disaster is what my parents, my schools, my culture, etc. produced in him, and it would have been me except for God stepping in to make himself known. I get excited about God as initiator and architect of salvation (not without my free will to trust). When God architects a divine appointment for me to use my prepared abilities in his defense or in mentoring little ones, I praise God as author of salvation. But I forget that Christ is the one who allows me to be clean enough to participate in this plan.

My ambition from small was to be a super-hero, and this later turned into great respect for people in the military, especially those who are awarded the Medal of Honor, like Michael Murphy. I want God to give me the Medal of Honor, too. But sin ruins my ambition every day. When I am called out to serve and am found faithful and competent, I need to remember that what makes me fit for service is Christ’s sacrifice on the cross. His shed blood is the cape that I put on when it is my turn to come off the bench and be who I was designed to be. It is very important to me that the God I serve is the kind of God who won’t turn away from me when I fall short.

News

Does archaeological evidence confirm names, dates and places in the Bible?

5 Comments

I spotted this post on Be Thinking by UK apologist Peter S. Williams. (H/T Eric Chabot at Think Apologetics)

So let me pick the ones I liked most for this post.

Here’s a good one:

Jerusalem and The Pool of Bethesda

John 5:1-15 describes a pool in Jerusalem, near the Sheep Gate, called Bethesda, surrounded by five covered colonnades. Until the 19th century, there was no evidence outside of John for the existence of this pool and John’s unusual description “caused bible scholars to doubt the reliability of John’s account, but the pool was duly uncovered in the 1930s – with four colonnades around its edges and one across its middle.”[38] Ian Wilson reports: “Exhaustive excavations by Israeli archaeologist Professor Joachim Jeremias have brought to light precisely such a building, still including two huge, deep-cut cisterns, in the environs of Jerusalem’s Crusader Church of St Anne.”[39]

And this one:

Jerusalem and The Pool of Siloam

In the 400s AD, a church was built above a pool attached to Hezekiah’s water tunnel to commemorate the healing of a blind man reported in John 9:1-7. Until recently, this was considered to be the Pool of Siloam from the time of Christ. However, during sewerage works in June 2004 engineers stumbled upon a 1stcentury ritual pool when they uncovered some ancient steps during pipe maintenance near the mouth of Hezekiah’s tunnel. By the summer of 2005, archaeologists had revealed what was “without doubt the missing pool of Siloam.”[40] Mark D. Roberts reports that: “In the plaster of this pool were found coins that establish the date of the pool to the years before and after Jesus. There is little question that this is in fact the pool of Siloam, to which Jesus sent the blind man in John 9.”[41]

I just read this one because I am working my way through John. In case you haven’t read John, you really should it’s my favorite gospel.

Here’s another one:

Herod the Great

We have a bronze coin minted by Herod the Great. On the obverse side (i.e. the bottom) is a tripod and ceremonial bowl with the inscription ‘Herod king’ and the year the coin was struck, ‘year 3’ (of Herod’s reign), or 37 BC.

In 1996 Israeli Professor of Archaeology Ehud Netzer discovered in Masada a piece of broken pottery with an inscription, called an ostracon. This piece had Herod’s name on it and was part of an amphora used for transportation (probably wine), dated to c. 19 BC. The inscription is in Latin and reads, “Herod the Great King of the Jews (or Judea)”, the first such that mentions the full title of King Herod.

Herodium is a man-made mountain in the Judean wilderness rising over 2,475 feet above sea level. In 23 BC Herod the Great built a palace fortress here on top of a natural hill. Seven stories of living rooms, storage areas, cisterns, a bathhouse, and a courtyard filled with bushes and flowering plants were constructed. The whole complex was surrounded and partly buried by a sloping fill of earth and gravel. Herod’s tomb and sarcophagus were discovered at the base of Herodium by archaeologist Ehud Netzer in 2007.

And one more:

The ‘James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus’ Ossuary

James, the brother of Jesus, was martyred in AD 62. A mid-1st century AD chalk ossuary discovered in 2002 bears the inscription “James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus” ( ‘Ya’akov bar Yosef akhui di Yeshua’). Historian Paul L. Maier states that“there is strong (though not absolutely conclusive) evidence that, yes, the ossuary and its inscription are not only authentic, but that the inscribed names are the New Testament personalities.“[68] New Testament scholar Ben Witherington states that:“If, as seems probable, the ossuary found in the vicinity of Jerusalem and dated to about AD 63 is indeed the burial box of James, the brother of Jesus, this inscription is the most important extra-biblical evidence of its kind.”[69] According to Hershel Shanks, editor in chief of the Biblical Archaeological Review: “this box is [more] likely the ossuary of James, the brother of Jesus of Nazareth, than not. In my opinion … it is likely that this inscription does mention the James and Joseph and Jesus of the New Testament.”

And finally one short one:

Tiberius Caesar

The Denarius coin, 14-37 AD, is commonly referred to as the ‘Tribute Penny’ from the Bible. The coin shows a portrait of Tiberius Caesar. Craig L. Blomberg comments: “Jesus’ famous saying about giving to Caesar what was his and to God what his (Mark 12:17 and parallels) makes even more sense when one discovers that most of the Roman coins in use at the time had images of Caesar on them.”[48]

This is a good article to bookmark in case you are ever looking for a quick, searchable reference on archaeology and the Bible. There are many more examples in that post.

Now some people might be wondering why archaeology doesn’t confirm every detail in the New Testament. And here’s what J. Warner Wallace has to say about that:

But what are we to say to those who argue the Biblical archeological record is incomplete? The answer is best delivered by another expert witness in the field, Dr. Edwin Yamauchi, historian and Professor Emeritus at Miami University. Yamauchi wrote a book entitled, The Stones and the Scripture, where he rightly noted that archaeological evidence is a matter of “fractions”:

Only a fraction of the world’s archaeological evidence still survives in the ground.

Only a fraction of the possible archaeological sites have been discovered.

Only a fraction have been excavated, and those only partially.

Only a fraction of those partial excavations have been thoroughly examined and published.

Only a fraction of what has been examined and published has anything to do with the claims of the Bible!

See the problem? In spite of these limits, we still have a robust collection of archaeological evidences confirming the narratives of the New Testament (both in the gospel accounts and in the Book of Acts). We shouldn’t hesitate to use what we do know archaeologically in combination with other lines of evidence. Archaeology may not be able to tell us everything, but it can help us fill in the circumstantial case as we corroborate the gospel record.

I think you can form an opinion about the whole New Testament based on the record of confirmations. The verdict is in: the New Testament should be presumed trustworthy.

News

What are the consequences of voting for “compassion” and “non-judgment”?

3 Comments

Many people who vote for big-government Democrat policies do so because they feel that not judging others is a worth goal. Although the practice of not making moral judgements (“tolerance”) has become “morally good” in our culture, it does cause trouble for some people. In this case, the people who vote against moral standards (“judging”) actually do more harm than good.

So, one group that votes for the Democrat party because of “tolerance” and “compassion” is young, unmarried women. In my experience, most young, unmarried women form their beliefs by adapting to the people around them. They enter a social situation, they find out what the “smart” people believe, then they believe that too. They aren’t trying to bound their beliefs by truth. They feel that the social environment determines “truth”. If you’ve ever known a perfect Christian girl who prayed, sang and read her Bible at home, but then turned into a secular left radical in college, you’ll know what I am talking about.

Transgenderism opponent Abigail Shrier writes:

Today, before any of us decides what it is we want, we open our phones and participate in our own manipulation at the hands of those who actively want us to think, and see, and vote differently than our own wills would have us do.

[…]Spotify presses us to like the same music; Amazon pushes us to purchase specific books and away from others. If you’re under the impression that the books Amazon recommends to you are based solely on a content-neutral algorithm, I can disabuse you of that fiction right now. I once asked one of my sources at Amazon, who was concerned about the ways the search results were being manipulated, whether he’d ever seen a book deliberately boosted. Yes, he said. Becoming by Michelle Obama. When that book came out – he told me – virtually every search you did led to the recommendation to buy the former First Lady’s book. And the opposite is also true. There are books that are never recommended by the Amazon algorithm, irrespective of how well they’ve sold or how likely a specific shopper is to buy them.

[…]None of you will be shocked to hear that Google promotes certain search results in order to lead us to a certain perspective. But did you know that, for contested entries, Wikipedia assigns editors, some of whom are ideologically committed activists, many of whom have very particular views they want you to walk away with.

This is a much bigger problem for young, unmarried women – especially the ones who do non-STEM degrees in college. When you’re in the computer lab, you’re not being graded on your political views. You learn to write code that compiles and runs and produces value for a customer. But in the English classroom, you are taught “correct beliefs”, like “compassion” and “tolerance”. Women tend to gravitate into non-STEM fields. Men – being more combative – tend to look for ideas that win arguments. In my experience, men are more likely to catch on to ideas from William Lane Craig, Thomas Sowell, Stephen Meyer, etc. Men just don’t care what people think of them. We do our own thing. We form our own views. We make our own plans. We believe what works and what wins. We make sure that our actions are taking us down the path to our goals. We don’t like to read fiction, romance and self-help books. We want to solve problems. We don’t want people to think of us a certain way.

Normally, the votes of these young, unmarried women don’t harm them. But now those votes ARE coming back to haunt them. Their feminist views (“all sex differences are social customs”) have led directly to the explosion of transgenderism. And all the benefits that feminists fought for – athletic scholarships, preferential treatment, affirmative action, lenience in the courts, etc. – are now available to biological men who identify as women.

Here’s a story from the Washington Times:

“Jeopardy!” contestant Amy Schneider was born a man, but she’s being toasted as the highest-earning woman in the show’s history, much to the chagrin of those decrying the accolade as an example of stolen female glory.

The transgender trivia whiz hit $706,800 in total earnings with her Friday win, prompting NBC News and NBC OUT to declare her the show’s “top female earner,” surpassing Larissa Kelly, who won $655,930 during her run in 2008-09.

For all we know, Larissa Kelly is a Democrat voter, and voted for the policies and culture that achieved this result. Her voting was out of line with her goals.

Here’s another story from The Federalist:

President Joe Biden is preparing to give every rapist and molester in federal prison a get-out-of-jail-free card. Specifically, Biden is offering to transfer any and all male criminals to women’s prisons. All the men will have to do is say that they feel like a woman, and the Biden administration will take them at their word.

[…][U]nder this executive order, the federal government will house criminals based on subjective, self-declared “gender identity” rather than biological sex. Male rapists, child molesters, and other sexual criminals will be allowed to live in women’s prisons, and because the transgender ideology embraced by the Biden administration claims gender identity is purely internal, they will be allowed in regardless of whether they still possess fully functional male genitalia.

This move toward co-ed prisons will result in male sexual predators exploiting the system in order to abuse and rape female prisoners. We know this because it has already happened in places these proposals have been enacted.

I can guarantee you that 100% of the women who are now in prison voted for the Democrat party when they still could vote. They voted for policies that went against their long-term goals.

Here’s another recent case, reported by Fox News:

A transgender swimmer’s record-breaking wins at the University of Pennsylvania have renewed concern over the future of women’s sports.

Lia Thomas, a transgender student at the Ivy League university, dominated the 500-yard freestyle preliminaries and finals at the Zippy Invitational at the University of Akron this month. Thomas earned a winning time of 4:34.06 in the finals, breaking the Ivy League record, and set new school records in the 1,650-yard freestyle and 200-yard freestyle competitions.

Thomas previously competed as a man for three years on the school’s men’s team. Thomas’ success on the women’s team has renewed criticism over allowing transgender women to compete against biological females.

Some of Lia’s teammates are very angry about this, because they worked their whole lives to compete in women’s sports, but in all likelihood, they voted to cause the effect that is now happening to them. They attend a prestigious university, they’ve probably absorbed the values of their secular left professors. Most women who go to college do. It’s just easier to adapt and fit in.

One more example – the declining marriage rate.

The Democrat party has enacted higher taxes, more control of taxpayer freedom by secular left elites, no-fault divorce laws, and biased divorce courts that award custody to women, along with alimony and child support. This all causes men to lose the desire and the ability to get married. The marriage rate is in a death spiral, and the only “solutions” proposed by pro-marriage people on the left and the right is to blame and shame men, and favor women even more. But this just means that fewer and fewer women will find husbands.

I would like to see parents and pastors teach women to think carefully about their goals, and vote for policies that help them to achieve those goals. If women insist on adopting an ideology like feminism, then they’ll have to live with the consequences. And there won’t be any husband around to blame for the results they caused.