Paul’s Prayer in Colossians 1:9-11

LIBERTY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF DIVINITY
Exegesis of Colossians 1:9—14: Paul’s Prayer in 1:9-11
Submitted to Dr. Walter Davis
In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the completion of
RTCH 500-B4
Summer 2017
Research, Writing, and Ministry Preparation
by
Robert Beanblossom
27 June 2017
ii
Contents
Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………….…..….1
Context ……………………………………………………………………………………………2
General Considerations ……………………………………………………………………3
Authorship …………………………………………………………………………3
Date and Place of Writing …………………………………………………………4
Destination ……………………………………………………………………..…5
Occasion …………………………………………………………………………..6
Purpose ……………………………………………………………………………7
Geo-Historical Context: The Lycus Valley ca. AD 40-70 ………………………………..8
The Text in Context: Paul’s Epistle to the Christians at Colosse ………………………..10
Paul’s Prayer: Colossians 1:9-14 ………………………………………………………….10
Meaning …………………………………………………………………………………………11
Be Filled …………………………………………………………………………………12
Walk Worthy and Pleasing ………………………… …………………………..………15
Be Strengthened …………………………………………………………………………17
Significance: Colossians for Today’s Christian ………………………….………………..…20
Salvation: The Beginning ……………………………………………………………….20
Growth: Be Equipped ……………………………………………………………………20
Relationship: Walk Worthy ……………………………………………………………..21
Conclusion ..…………………………………………………………….………………….……22
Bibliography ………………………………………………………….…………………….……23
Appendix ………………………………………………………………………………..………25
1
Introduction
Paul wrote a letter in behalf of “God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ” (Col 1:2)1 to the Christians at Colosse to encourage them and to give them doctrinal and practical tools to combat false teaching known today as the Colossian Heresy.2 Paul had never been to Colosse, but had started the church vicariously through Epaphras (Col 1:7; 4:12-13), possibly a convert from his Ephesian ministry. Rather than attack the false teachers or their doctrine, Paul extoled the “Person of Christ as the one absolute mediator between God and man, the true and only reconciler of heaven and earth,”3 or, as Ironside described, “Christ as the Head of the body,” the head of His church.4 The Apostle not only represented God, but interceded with Him on their behalf, “praying always” for them (Col 1:3) that they would be filled with the knowledge of His will, walk worthy of the Lord, and be strengthened according to His power (Col 1:9-11). This recurrent Pauline theme (cf. Eph 4:1; 1 Thess 2:12), suggests authenticity.
The following study reveals that a relationship with God is more than the one-time event of salvation: it is a developing relationship based upon increasing knowledge about God and walking worthy in Him and through Him as we mature in spiritual strength and understanding; both demanded and enabled by God. The prayer is in two parts, first for what they need (1:9-11), and second for what they have received (1:12-14). We will consider the Apostle’s intended message in the first part and its application for Christians today.
____________________
1 All Scripture is from the King James Version of the Bible unless otherwise noted.
2 J. B. Lightfoot, Saint Paul’s Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon; A Revised Text, (1892; rpr., Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1959), 73
3 Ibid., 114.
4 H. A. Ironside, An Ironside Expository Commentary: Philippians and Colossians, (1920; rpr., Grand Rapids: Kregel Academic and Professional, 2007), 108.
2
We will utilize Greek-English resources to provide knowledge and authority that we lack in that area, including Strong’s Concordance5 and Marshall’s Interlinear KJV-NIV Parallel New Testament in Greek and English6 to develop a working understanding of the literal Greek of the Received Text. The overall method will be based upon an abbreviated form of the conservative Syntactical-Theological method described by William Kaiser, Jr., and Moises Silva in their Introduction to Biblical Hermeneutics7 that recognizes the preeminence of the Word. The authority of the text results from the Holy Spirit directing the inspired writer: our job is to “grasp the truth the author intended to convey.”8 First, the geo-historical context of Colosse in ca. 60 AD will be reviewed, then the entire letter will be used to establish the context; and finally, the prayer itself will be explored, seeking Paul’s message for those Christians. The prayer as understood from the research will be used to develop an application for Christians toady.
Context
The Epistle to the Colossians is one of four letters written by Paul as a Roman prisoner, either from house arrest in Ephesus, from which he was later released, or from Rome, that ended with his execution. As in his letter to the Philippians (Phil 1:1), Paul associated the letter with his young protégé Timothy (Col 1:1). “It is noticeable how, in many of his letters, the apostle links
____________________
5 James Strong, The New Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1996).
6 Alfred Marshall, ed., The Interlinear KJV-NIV Parallel New Testament in Greek and English (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1975).
7 Kaiser, Walter C., and Moises Silva, An Introduction to Biblical Hermeneutics; the Search for Meaning (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1994), 35-46.
8 Ibid., 45.
3
up younger and less experienced fellow laborers with himself, as here, in his salutations. . . . In his care for the development of the younger brethren, Paul becomes a model for older teachers, and evangelists to the end of the dispensation.”9 This is not incidental to Paul’s purpose but part of his growth plan for young Christians, an example for us founded upon Jesus’ walk with His disciples.
General Considerations
Authorship
The epistle states explicitly that it is from “Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and Timotheus our brother” (1:1), and concludes with a “salutation by the hand of me Paul” (4:18a). Some scholarly discussion exists today that questions the Pauline authorship. The position is without consensus or a reasonable substitute.10 Carson, et al., summarize an evangelical position that holds that the “the actual authorship of the letter does not matter.”11 Ironside unequivocally presupposes divinely inspired Pauline authorship.12 Of these representative positions, only Ironside upholds the Scripture-based conservative Christian position of the inerrancy and divine inspiration of Scripture (1 Tim 3:16). If Paul is not the author as the epistle claims, the inspiration of this letter, therefore the Canon as a whole, is open to question. Therefore, Pauline authorship as claimed in 1:1, is accepted.
____________________
9 Ironside, Expository, 19.
10 D. A. Carson, Douglas Moo, and Leon Morris, An Introduction to the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992), 331-332.
11 Ibid., 338.
12 Ironside, Expository, 107.
4
Paul states that Tychicus (4:7-9) and Onesimus (4:9), known to be his companions (cf. Eph 6, Phil 1), took the Colossian and Philemon letters to their destinations. Conjuncture abounds, but some suggest that Paul’s “thorn in the flesh” (2 Cor 12:7), was a problem with his vision that affected his ability to write (cf. Gal 4:15). Under this theory, his solution was to use trusted scribes, or amanuenses, to record his dictation as he did here (4:18). This suggests that his common closing, in which he noted that his signature was quite distinctive (cf. Gal 6:11), was also his means of authentication. The actual nature of his “thorn” is but speculation derived from scripture. The scope of this paper prevents further commentary. Pauline authorship is accepted.
Date and Place of Writing
Accepting Paul as the author, two limited periods between AD 51 and Paul’s death in 67 are suggested for the date of this letter and Philemon, considered to be two of four prison epistles that also include Ephesians and Philippians. Paul mentions his bonds but does not discuss his specific location. “When he wrote the letter, Paul was in prison (Col 4:3, 10, 18).13 Opinions differ on which prison period this was. For Carson, et al., “It is probable that Ephesians, Colossians, and Philemon were written from the same place. The personal links with Philemon
. . . are clear evidence that Colossians and Philemon were written at much the same time, while the case for Ephesians rests on the general similarities to Colossians,” but concede that a lack of personal links may indicate that it was written from a different place.14 The early date would be during the reign of Claudius (51-54). Since he did not mention governmental persecution, this is possible. The late date would be during the reign of Nero (54-68), who initiated extensive
____________________
13 Carson, Introduction, 334.
14 Ibid.
5
persecution of Christians, blaming them for the fire that razed Rome in 64. If during Nero’s reign, no noted persecution suggests a window of 54 to 63. Thomas Constable suggests that “Paul probably wrote this epistle from Rome, toward the middle or end of his first house arrest there, between 60 and 62 . . . . This view of the letter’s origin generally fits the facts better than the Caesarean and Ephesian theories of origin.”15 “Objections to . . . (other) centers leave us with Rome . . . . “We cannot say that any center is strongly favored by the evidence, but perhaps a little more can be said for Rome than for anywhere else.”16 We agree.
Destination
The primary destination was clearly the “saints and faithful brethren in Christ which are at Colosse” (1:2a). He included instructions to “cause it to be read also in the church of the Laodiceans” with the further note to share other epistles that were circulating, at least in the Lycus Valley (4:16). This argues against a view that isolates the inspired writers from communication with each other and with other Christians. “We are not surprised therefore to find them so closely connected in the earliest stages of Christianity.18 J.B. Lightfoot said that it was to this “least important church” that Paul addressed his epistle.19 This might add weight to the Roman theory: perhaps Paul, seeing his execution coming, developed a sense of urgency regarding several issues that he felt needed addressing, including concern over false teachings that were distracting and misleading a small band of Christians he had never met and never
____________________
15 Thomas L. Constable, “Notes on Colossians, 2017 Edition,” accessed 30 May 2017, Published by Sonic Light: http://www.soniclight.com/http://www.soniclight.com/constable/notes/pdf/colossians.pdf., 3.
16 Carson, Introduction, 335.
17 Lightfoot, Epistles, 23-30.
18 Ibid., 2.
19 Ibid., 16.
6
would, and the very personal letter of Philemon. This is but a thought; there is no documentation to substantiate it.
Occasion
Paul was neither the founder of the Colossian church (2:1), nor did he ever visit it. Epaphras, “our dear fellowservant, who is for you (the Colossians) a faithful minister of Christ,” was the founder and pastor of this church (1:7), and possibly for each of the tri-city churches (4:13).20 Some suggest that he had been recently converted under Paul, possibly at Ephesus, although this is conjecture. He had come to Paul to support him in prison (1:7), to bring him good news of the spiritual condition of the church (1:7-9), and to secure Paul’s advice concerning false teachers who were plaguing the church: the enduring portion of that advise is this epistle. “The two main problems were the misunderstood doctrine of Christ, and the misunderstanding of how this doctrine affects Christian living.”21 Carson, et al., observes that the precise nature of the false teachings, described today as the Colossian Heresy, is unknown.22 Lightfoot infers the “presence of two disturbing elements which threatened the purity of Christian faith and practice in this community.”23 He finds both the presence of Judaic legalism and elements of theosophic speculation, both “alien to the spirit of Judaism proper.”24 After further investigation and evaluation, he concludes that the “epistle itself contains no hint that the Apostle has more than
____________________
20 Renchi Arce, “Exegetical Study of Collossians [sic.] 1:9-11.” 2001. Accessed 15 May 2017. https://www.academia.edu/200183/Exegetical_Study_of_Colossians_1_9-11. Academemia.edu., 3.
21 Constable, “Notes,” 3.
22 Carson, Introduction, 335.
23 Lightfoot, Epistles, 73.
24 Ibid.
7
one set of antagonists in view . . . . Nor indeed does the hypothesis of a single complex heresy present any real difficulty . . . (since) some special tendencies among the Jews themselves . . . prepared the way for such a combination in a Christian community like the church at Colosse.”25
Lightfoot argues that, “the Apostle’s language hardly leaves the question open. The two elements are so closely interwoven in his refutation, that it is impossible to separate them. He passes backwards and forwards from one to the other in such a way as to show that they are only parts of one complex whole.”26 While his opinion may not be universal, even among evangelical theologians, it is consistent with Scripture and adequate for our purposes. We will accept this premise since our focus is Paul’s response rather than the specific heresy.
Purpose
Paul’s epistle to the Christians at Colosse had a three-fold purpose: (1) to communicate his love and concern for vibrant young Christians whom he would never meet; (2) to counteract the work of false teachers who had insinuated themselves into the congregation; and (3) to extol emphatically the supremacy of Jesus Christ, their eternal Savior and Sustainer:
Paul wanted to express his personal interest in this church, which he had evidently not visited. He wrote to warn the Colossians, first, of the danger of returning to their former beliefs and practices. Secondly, he also refuted the false teaching that was threatening this congregation. The outstanding Christian doctrine that this letter deals with is Christology. Thirdly, Paul’s great purpose was to set forth the absolute supremacy and sole sufficiency of Jesus Christ.27
Possibly anticipating the end of his earthly walk, Paul was intentional in exalting Christ above all
____________________
25 Lightfoot, Epistles, 75.
26 Ibid., 75.
27 Constable, “Notes,” 4.
8
else, the sole answer to sin, Satan, and subversive teachings of all sorts. He built upon the success and love of the Colossian Christians, encouraged their growth, and provided a universal solution for the false teachings that they and those who follow them face:
Its great purpose is to close the door of the Colossian church against the peculiar heretical teaching that had recently begun to knock for entrance. No entrance had as yet been effected, but there was danger that it might be gained. The burden of the letter thus consists of warning.28
The particular purpose for Colossians was to equip the congregation to overcome the assault on the young converts by false teachers: the Colossian Heresy. We will consider the letter in a geo-political sense, in the context of Paul’s message, and in the context of his prayer for those Christians in 1:9-11. It is assumed in this paper that Scripture is the inspired, inerrant, and complete Word of God through His select inspired authors.
The Geo-Historical Context: The Lycus Valley ca. AD 40-70
The text of Scripture is the primary authority that must be considered in any interpretation. However, all human communication since man was created exists in space and time: a historical context. After a lengthy discussion concerning attacks on historicity and objective reality in some modern scholarship, Walter C. Kaiser, et al., state that, “If meaning is to be held accountable to the criteria of truthfulness and veracity, it will need to set that text in the primary world of realities in which it purports to have happened.”29 We, therefore, will briefly
____________________
28 Richard C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of St. Paul’s Epistles to the Colossians, to the Thessalonians, to Timothy, to Titus and to Philemon (n.d.; rpr., Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1964), 17.
29 Kaiser, Hermeneutics, 137.
9
review some geographic and historical factors that impacted Paul and the Colossians at the time the letter was written.
“Lying in, or overhanging, the valley of the Lycus tributary of the Maeander (River) were three neighboring towns: Laodicea, Hierapolis and Colosse.”30 The cities of Laodicea and Hierapolis stood within six miles of each other on opposite shores of the river that ran through Colosse, upstream by ten or twelve miles.31 The cities were part of the Roman colonial system. Located on crossroads of important trade routes, the area was a producer in its own right, known for a particular black dyed wool.32 The area was known for its beauty: geologic activity gave it a surreal appearance as a peculiar calcareous coating reflected brightly in the sun.33 Earthquakes destroyed the tri-cities more than once. Adjustments to trade routes due to altered geography possibly caused a population shift that allowed the neighboring cities to rebuild and grow at the expense of Colosse.34 Strabo (64 BC-AD 24) wrote, somewhat earlier, that Colosse had been reduced to a small, but cosmopolitan, town.35 The population was primarily Greek colonists and native Phrygians, but included many Jews from the Diaspora.36 Religion reflected Greek and Roman influence as well as that of resident foreign traders and former Syrian rule.37
____________________
30 Lightfoot, Epistles, 1.
31 Ibid., 2.
32 Ibid., 22.
33 Ibid., 8.
34 Ibid., 22.
35 William Hendriksen, New Testament Commentary: Exposition of Philippians and Exposition of Colossians and Philemon, (n.d., rpr., Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1979), 13.
36 Constable, “Notes,” 1.
37 Lightfoot, Epistles, 10-13.
10
The Text in Context: Paul’s Epistle to the Christians in Colosse
Paul’s opening remarks to the Colossian Christians include his typical salutation identifying himself and his current helper, Timotheus, a blessing and general prayer, and encouraging words, reminding them that they, as others of his flock, are constantly in his prayers (1:1-8). Next is a specific prayer for the Colossians (1:9-14). We will consider the first part in this paper (1:9-11). Following, and overlapping his prayer, is a discussion of the preeminence of Christ (1:13-23): in creation (1:13-20); in redemption (1:21-23); and in His church (1: 24-2:3).
Paul’s Prayer: Colossians 1:9-14
Paul’s prayer distinguishes between asking God for those things they need to grow, and praising Him for what they received at their salvation. The message is not new, but reminds these “saints” of what they have “heard before . . . the truth of the gospel; which is come unto you” (1:5b-6a). Overall, it presents Jesus Christ in God as the foundation of their salvation and the power to overcome all attacks on their faith and obstacles to the experience of their fulness in Him.
The Apostle again expresses his love and concern for the Colossian Christians by asserting that he “does not cease to pray” for them (1:9) as he told them in his introduction (1:3). Lucius R. Paige related this unceasing prayer to habitual prayer: Paul brought this church before God on a regular basis.10 In vs. 9-11 he seeks those specific blessings needed to further ground them in their faith and enable a maturing Christian walk. The remainder melds his discussion of the preeminence of Christ, with “thanks unto the Father” (1:12) for the foundational gifts they
____________________
38 Lucius R. Paige, A Commentary on the New Testament: From the Epistle to the Galatians to the Epistle of Jude (Boston: Universalist Publishing House, 1869), 6:78-79.
11
had already received as believers.
Meaning
“For this cause we also, since the day we heard it, do not to cease to pray for you . . .” (1:9a)
Writing with Apostolic authority and fatherly concern, Paul prays “for this cause” (1:9), where dia toutou39 “signifies a principle cause,” according to W. E. Vine, et al.40 That principle cause was a reminder of the bedrock of their faith. Marvin Vincent differentiates between Paul’s prayer and his desire, concluding that prayer is a general request, and desire is a special, or specific, request.41 His desire was that the Colossian Christians might be “filled” (1:9), that they might “walk” (1:10), and that they might be “strengthened” (1:11), all to establish them in the gospel of the all-sufficient Jesus Christ, to strengthen them against false teachings, and perhaps of persecution to come. Paul prayed for foundational growth, for a basic “faith in Christ Jesus, and of the love which ye have to all the saints, for the hope which is laid up for you in heaven” (1:3-5a). Ironside summarized Paul’s prayer: “He hath made us meet for the inheritance of the saints in light; He hath delivered us from the authority of darkness; He hath translated us into the kingdom of His love; and we have redemption through His blood.”42 The work of the Spirit in the church founded by Epaphras had produced faith, love, and hope, all in the right areas. Through their attention to and power of the Gospel, they had “brought forth fruit . . . since the day ye
____________________
39 Strong, Exhaustive, G1223.
40 W. E. Vine, Merrill F. Unger and William White, Jr., Vines Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words with Topical Index, (Abingdon Press, 1890; rpr., Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1970), NT 99.
41 Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament: The Epistles of Paul (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishing, 2009), 3:465.
42 Ironside, Expository, 127.
12
heard it, and knew the grace of God in truth” (1:6b). This was a joy to the Apostle and a testimony to the efficacy of the Holy Spirit in changing lives. Their testimony had reached him through his “fellow prisoner” and co-worker Epaphras, who was apparently evangelist and minister to the Lycus Valley Christians. Paul would later address his concern for their continued faithfulness “lest any man should beguile you with enticing words” (2:4). This first part of his prayer (1:9-11) was, then, for the spiritual tools to continue their walk steadfastly and victoriously in the light of the Gospel in the face of false teachers or coming persecution.
Be Filled
and to desire that ye might be filled with the knowledge of His will in all wisdom and spiritual understanding . . . (1:9b)
Paul petitions God on behalf of the Colossians that they might be “filled with the knowledge of his will in all wisdom and spiritual understanding” (Col 1:9). The filling [pleroo] Paul prayed for was exuberant, overflowing, complete and topped off.43 It was not static: overflowing requires movement as the contents spill over and flow outward, submerging all in its path, as the Gospel was doing through Christians such as these. This word was translated later in the epistle as complete: once assuring them that they “are complete [pleroo] in Him, which is the head of all principality and power” (2:10, emphasis author’s). Here we see shades of his earlier prison epistle to the Ephesians (cf. Eph 1:15-20), where he spoke of Jesus’ resurrection, as God “set Him at His own right hand in the heavenly places, far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion . . .” (Eph 1:20-21). Using what Kaiser calls the analogy of scripture, where earlier Scripture supports later,44 and given the mandate to actively share the Colossian epistle
____________________
43 Strong, Exhaustive, G4137.
44 Kaiser, Hermeneutics, 240.
13
with the others in the Lycus valley (4:16), it is easy to believe that the Ephesian and Colossian epistles were also shared, giving additional context to Colossians. Since Paul’s missionary journeys ranged from about 1,500 miles to over 3,000 miles, the 120 miles separating Ephesus and the Lycus Valley churches were not prohibitive to interaction via the Roman roads. Neither time, distance, nor false teachers have been successful in limiting God or the development of His church.
In closing the epistle, he reminds the Colossians that Epaphras is “always laboring fervently for you in prayers, that ye may stand perfect and complete [pleroo] in all the will of God” (4:12, emphasis author’s). Paul’s prayer opens with the petition and assurance that what he seeks for them God will provide in sufficient measure to meet all of their needs, unchecked and unhindered by any other force. Vincent links the power of Paul’s prayer with Mark’s statement: “What things soever ye desire, when ye pray, believe that ye receive them, and ye shall have them” (Mk 11:24).45 He prays, not for an initial filling, for he says, “As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in Him: rooted and built up in Him, and stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught” (2:6-7). Paul was evermore the Apostle of Action, putting his, and encouraging others to put their faith into Spirit-fueled action.
His God is neither in hiding, nor secretive. He seeks boldly to join the creature with his Creator in a working relationship, seeking and living in His will. Paul has already reminded them that this God is not a local deity, but the God whose gospel “is come into you, as it is in all the world” (1:6). This knowledge is both “full knowledge,” and a “perfection of knowledge of God in Christ.” Salvation through the gift of God annuls the effects of the law
____________________
45 Vincent, Studies, 465.
14
while failure to accept the gift of God’s grace retains the curse of the law: “Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in His sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin” (Rom 3:20).46
According to Paul, the God who is Spirit, can be known “with the knowledge of His will in all wisdom and spiritual understanding” (1:9b). This knowledge carries more than just a bit of data received and stored: Strong says that epignosis is, by implication, “full discernment.”47 This is an active knowledge, information that is accessible and able to be used, more than rote feedback, it is the foundation for “all wisdom and spiritual understanding” (1:9b). It is knowledge synthesized by faith into godly wisdom. It is wisdom that is spiritual understanding, where “understanding is the central apprehension of particulars growing out of wisdom” that is practically applied.48 Here we find that spiritual [pneumatikos]49 is emphatic in the Greek.50 Vine says that pneumatikos “always connotes the idea of invisibility and of power. It does not occur in the Septuagint nor in the gospels; it is in act an after-Pentecost word.”50 In this verse, he continues, it is “wisdom in, and understanding of . . . (of) which the burden is the things revealed by the Spirit.”51 This whole is synthesized as an imparted regenerate religious wisdom with the intellectual component driving a practical response, a synthesis of “Seek ye first (Matt 6:33a),” with “Go ye into all the world (Mark 15:15a)” through the “power of the Holy Ghost” (Rom 15:13c).
____________________
46 Vincent, Studies, 466.
47 Strong, Exhaustive, G1922.
48 Vincent, Studies, 467.
49 Strong, Exhaustive, 4152.
50 Vine, Dictionary, 594.
51 Ibid.
15
Walk Worthy and Pleasing
that ye might walk worthy of the Lord unto all pleasing, being fruitful in every good work, and increasing in the knowledge of God . . . (1:10)
Paul prays that they “might walk worthy of the Lord” (1:9a). Paige says that this walk includes “cherishing His Spirit” to the extent that one “obeys His precepts.”52 Vincent say that Paul’s desire anticipates that the Colossians would “please God in all ways.”53 Ironside relates this walk to three worthies: (1) “I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech ye that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called” (Eph 4:1); (2) “Only let your conversation be as it becometh the gospel of Christ” (Phil 1:27a); and (3) “that ye would walk worthy of God” (1 Thess 2:12),54 where worthy (including Col 1:9) and becometh are all the Greek axios which Strong’s amplifies: “as becometh after a godly sort.”55 The writer of Acts added, “that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for His name (Acts 5:41). Lightfoot suggests that the worthy walk produces the following attributes rather than being the product of those activities.56
The Greek areskeia, translated here as pleasing,57 is the only usage in the NT.58 Vine gives it the connotation of “a giving pleasure” whose purpose is a “Godward . . . walk worthy of the Lord.”59 Ironside, citing Griffith Thomas, notes that it is used elsewhere in Greek literature as
____________________
52 Paige, Commentary, 789.
53 Vincent, Studies, 465.
54 Ironside, Expository, 123.
55 Strong, Exhaustive, G516.
56 Lightfoot, Epistles, 139.
57 Strong, Exhaustive, G699.
58 Ironside, Expository, 123.
59 Vine, Dictionary, 474.
16
“a preference of the will of theirs before our own,”60 as Paul admonishes the Colossians to please God by adopting His will at the expense of their own.
Ironside reads the phrase translated in KJV as “being fruitful in every good work,” as better rendered, “bearing fruit in every good work.61 He includes the connotation that the duty for Christian service is not “simply preaching the gospel, teaching the Holy Scriptures, or engaging in what is sometimes called Christian activity or church work. We are very prone to do this and to distinguish between secular employment and sacred.”62 The Greek karpophoreo, fruitful,63 and ergon, work,64 are good, literal translations in the KJV according to Vine, holding their intended sense today.65 Joseph Thayer suggests that karpophoreo includes the nuance “to bear fruit of one’s self,”66 while ergon suggests “every good work springing from piety.”67 We might conclude, by integrating the complementary thoughts of Vine ad Thayer, that Paul’s message encompasses a desire for the Colossian Christians to understand that their fruit is the result of a walk that is submissive and obedient to the Holy Spirit, “Being filled with the fruits of righteousness, which are by Jesus Christ, unto the glory and praise of God (Phil 1:11).
Vincent suggests that the KJV translation of epignosis, “with the knowledge,”68 might
____________________
60 Ironside, Expository, 123.
61 Ironside, Expository, 123.
62 Ibid.
63 Strong, Exhaustive, G2592.
64 Ibid., G2041.
65 Vine, Dictionary, 257, 684.
66 Joseph H. Thayer, Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament; Coded with Strong’s Concordance Numbers, (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1896), 326.
67 Ibid., 248.
68 Strong, Exhaustive, G1922.
17
better be rendered as “by the knowledge,”69 suggesting that the increase in the “worthy walk” is the result of God’s grace, not the result of our efforts (cf. Acts 20:32). Vine expands this to describe “’an exact or full knowledge, discernment, recognition’. . . expressing a full ‘knowledge’ (that is) a greater participation by the ‘knower’ in the object ‘known,’ thus more powerfully influencing him.”70 Lightfoot wrote, “The simple instrumental dative represents the knowledge of God as the dew or the rain which nurtures the growth of the plant; not only showing the fruits of your faith before men (Matt 7:16), but yourselves growing meanwhile in moral stature (Eph 4:13).”71 The walk [peripateo] that Paul demands is a walk that additionally yields proof of ability, following as a companion, as involved in an occupation, according to Strong.72 This walk is a trek filled with grand sights, hardships, victories, and joy rather than a superficial trip to the mailbox to see what God has in store for the moment. It is submersion in God’s will and supporting grace. The language is powerful and motivating, intended to rally these Christians around the risen Savior who is both the object of their loyalty and service, and the ultimate source of their strength: joy now and to come.
Be Strengthened
strengthened with all might, according to His glorious power, unto all patience and longsuffering with joyfulness (1:11)
Paul concludes his list of requests for Christian growth, asking that the Colossians be
____________________
69 Vincent, Studies, 465.
70 Vine, Dictionary, 348.
71 Lightfoot, Epistles, 139.
72 Strong, Exhaustive, G4043.
18
“strengthened [dunamoo]73 with all might [dunamis].”74 This is the only NT use of dunamoo, to enable, although it is used in the Septuagint.75 The combination of dunamoo with dunamis (a miraculous power) emphasizes source of that power that follows, “His glorious power.” Lightfoot points out that kratos,76 the word Paul selected for power, in the “NT is applied solely to God.”77 “God’s revelation of Himself to us,” he continues, “however this revelation may be made, is the one source of all our highest strength.”78 Paul learned to not rely on his own strength. His conversion humbled him before his God, leaving this militant Pharisee, who robustly persecuted the Christians, helpless and in the care of the very Christians he sought to destroy (Acts 9:3-9). Paul struggled with an unspecified infirmity, praying twice to have this impediment removed, believing that his Apostolic performance would be enhanced. God again brought him to his knees, teaching that man’s strength is in submission to God (2 Cor 12:7-10). In submission, he went on to serve in spite of being “thrice beaten with rods, once I was stoned, thrice I suffered shipwreck, a night and a day I have been in the deep,” and much more, all without murmur (2 Cor 11:24-26). Paige observes that Paul had learned to “rely on a higher strength than his own . . . (and) prayed for the Colossians to have that same strength.”79
Ironside suggests that we might suppose that “all this manifestation of divine energy would result in producing some great outward display that would astonish and amaze an
____________________
73 Ibid., G1412.
74 Ibid., G1411.
75 Vincent, Studies, 466.
76 Strong, Exhaustive, G2904.
77 Lightfoot, Epistles, 140.
78 Ibid.
79 Paige, Commentary, 79.
19
unbelieving world.”80 But that was neither God’s intent or Paul’s prayer. Instead, he prayed that they would receive “strength unto all patience and longsuffering with joyfulness” (1:11). Jamieson, et al. brings patience into context: “so as to attain . . . (to patience) in the faith, in spite of trials of persecutors and seductions of false teachers.”81 The call is to be witnesses to His Gospel, not to reform the world. The Apostle was not satisfied with a mundane life of marginal effectiveness and self-satisfaction, either for himself or for his converts. He told the Galatians that “the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance . . . If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.” (excerpted Gal 5:22-25). He told the Ephesians that their walk must be “with all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering . . .” (Eph 4:2a), calling for them to “walk worthy in their vocation” (Eph 4:1b) with hardships endured in “longsuffering with joyfulness” (1:11). He followed the lead of Moses, who told the Israelites that, “The LORD is longsuffering, and of great mercy, forgiving iniquity and transgression . . .” (Num 14:18).
Vincent declared that Paul’s joyfulness included the construction, “in every good work being fruitful: with all power strengthened: with every joy giving thanks . . .(since) joyful suffering expresses itself in thanksgiving.”82 Ironside notes that joy in tribulation is “something that the natural man knows nothing of—joy in the time of trial; gladness in the time of hardship; songs in the night, though the darkness be overwhelming; praises to God of my salvation when nature shrinks and trembles.”83
____________________
80 Ironside, Expository, 125.
81 Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset, and David Brown, A Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2008), 3:440.
82 Vincent, Studies, 466.
83 Ironside, Expository, 125.
20
God’s power for the Christian is in patience that encompasses and develops endurance and constancy while waiting, with longsuffering, or fortitude and patience, with joyfulness, to the point of exceeding joyfulness. It is the power of the army of God, trained, equipped, and following divine orders as it moves in en-masse through battle to victory.
Significance: Colossians for Today’s Christian
Salvation: The Beginning
Paul’s wrote his epistle to the Christians at Colosse who were faithfully serving their Lord, secure in the knowledge of their salvation: “To the saints and faithful brethren in Christ which are at Colosse . . .”(1:2). Without this experience, this beginning, the journey toward Christian maturity is impossible. Drawing from Isaiah (Is 29:14), Matthew wrote, “You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving” (Matt 13:14).
Growth: Be Equipped
Paul could well have brought this prayer before the Lord today on behalf of the Gentile church in the United States, in Tennessee, in my own town. Christianity faces increasing hostility from non-Christians in America as 240 years of Judeo-Christian values are being replaced by relativistic assumptions as their usefulness and authority are discarded as outdated and irrelevant. The autonomy of the church is under attack. Constitutional protection is being reinterpreted in a reversal of the intention of the founding fathers and historical application.
The Christian today needs a revitalized and reinforced toolbox of foundational values and empowerment to move forward in God’s personal call for worship and witnessing and the corporate mandate for the church. Christianity, as in the first century, is again requiring an intentional declaration with consequences as passivity and spectatorship loose their social appeal.
21
Paul’s prayer in Colossians 1:9-11 includes those tools that will assure that the will of God prevails through each Christian in contemporary society in the face of world-wide persecution as it approaches the Christian in America. He prays for a back-to-basics approach for the Christian-on-the-street, not the leadership alone, but for every Christian in every walk of life. Prayer, and the power requested for submissive Christians, is as effective today as it was for the Colossians in the first century.
Relationship: Walk Worthy
For Paul, the basic equipment for the Christian (be filled, walk worthy and pleasing, be strengthened), is not for a defensive stand, but to mount the offense that began in the First Century (Matt 28:19) and continues today. He sees these as a cycle of growth that is pleasing to God. This is not done on our own strength, but through the dunamoo of the power of God, resulting in patience and longsuffering, both with joy. This is achieved, not only by observing the words of Paul, but the methods of Paul: he prayed and he witnessed, both constantly. Emulating Paul by “praying always, we tap into the kratos of the Creator of the universe: “Prayer is the divine telephone of communication. It lines us up to Christ, and helps us to be sensitive to His Spirit and the needs of others. God gives us a complete understanding, in His own time, what he wants us to do with our lives.”84
____________________
72 Richard Krejcir, 2008. “Into Thy Word: Colossians 1:9-14.” Accessed 15 May 2017, npn., http://www.intothyword.org/apps/articles/default.asp?articleid=50857& columnid=3803. Into Thy Word Ministries.
22
Conclusion
Paul was converted from the physically militant zealous Pharisee who sought out and executed Christians, to a Christian militant, with a significant difference: his allegiance and zeal were transferred from his perception of the law of Moses to the person of the Lord Jesus Christ, his Savior; his methodology and teachings emulated his Master. His physical and political arsenals were replaced with the far more powerful and effective Word of God. The Christian life is not static, not fixed at salvation: Paul joins Luke: I want you first and foremost, to emulate Jesus; to increase in “wisdom, and stature, and in favor with God and man” (Luke 2:52). Christ, Paul concludes, is supreme, complete, and sufficient in every way (2 Cor 12:9). Paul called for a developing relationship with the Lord of Lords: He who “strengthened with all might [dunamoo en pas dunamis]”, bringing Paul forth as new creature in Him, and every Christian since (2 Cor 5:17), pleasing in worship and powerful in service. The power of Acts 2 may be manifested somewhat differently today, but the Source of that power is no less than it was on the day of creation, with Moses and the children as they faced the might of Egypt, with Joshua and the children as they surrounded Jericho, or on the day that He saved my soul from eternal damnation (Heb 13:8). The command has never changed from Adam to this moment: follow me, obey me, have fellowship with me (John 14:6): walk worthy of Me (1:10). The result will never change: obedience leads to an eternity with Him; “my way,” any way but His way, leads to eternal damnation (Rom 6:23).
23
Bibliography
Arce, Renchi. “Exegetical Study of Collossians [sic.] 1:9-11.” (2001). Accessed 15 May 2017. https://www.academia.edu/200183/Exegetical_Study_of_Colossians_1_9-11. Academemia.edu.
Carson, D. A., Douglas J. Moo, and Leon Morris. An Introduction to the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992.
Constable, Thomas L. “Notes on Colossians, 2017 Edition.” Accessed 30 May 2017. Published by Sonic Light: http://www.soniclight.com/http://www.soniclight.com/constable/
notes/pdf/colossians.pdf.
Hendriksen, William. New Testament Commentary: Exposition of Philippians and Exposition of Colossians and Philemon. n.d. Reprint, Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1979.
Ironside, H. A. An Ironside Expository Commentary: Philippians and Colossians. 1920. Reprint, Grand Rapids: Kregel Academic and Professional, 2007.
Jamieson, Robert, A. R. Fausset, and David Brown. A Commentary on the Old and New Testaments. Vol. 3. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2008.
Kaiser, Walter C., and Moises Silva. An Introduction to Biblical Hermeneutics; the Search for Meaning. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1994.
________. “Hermeneutics and the Theological Task.” Trinity Journal 12.1 (Spring 1991): 3-14. Accessed 17 May 2017. http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/.
Krejcir, Richard. 2008. “Into Thy Word: Colossians 1:9-14.” Accessed 15 May 2017. http://www.intothyword.org/
apps/articles/default.asp?articleid=50857&columnid=3803. Into Thy Word Ministries.
Lenski, Richard C. H. The Interpretation of St. Paul’s Epistles to the Colossians, to the Thessalonians, to Timothy, to Titus and to Philemon. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1964.
Lightfoot, J. B. Saint Paul’s Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon. 1892. Reprint, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1959.
Marshall, Alfred, ed. The Interlinear KJV-NIV Parallel New Testament in Greek and English. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1975.
Paige, Lucius R. A Commentary on the New Testament: From the Epistle to the Galatians to the Epistle of Jude. Vol. 6. Boston: Universalist Publishing House, 1869.
Strong, James. The New Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1996.
Thayer, Joseph H. Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament; Coded with Strong’s Concordance Numbers. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1896.
24
Vincent, Marvin R. Word Studies in the New Testament: The Epistles of Paul. Vol. 3. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishing, 2009.
Vine, W. E., Merrill F. Unger and William White, Jr. Vines Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words with Topical Index. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1970.
25
APPENDIX
OUTLINE
I. Context
A. General Considerations
1. Authorship
2. Date and Place of Writing
3. Destination
4. Occasion
5. Purpose
B. The Geo-Historical Context: The Lycus Valley ca. AD 40-70
C. The Text in Context: Paul’s Epistle to the Christians at Colosse
D. Paul’s Prayer in 1:9-14
II. Meaning
A. Be Filled (1:9)
B. Walk Worthy and Pleasing (1:10)
C. Be Strengthened (1:11)
III. Significance: Colossians for Today’s Christian
A. Salvation: The Beginning
B. Growth: Be Equipped
C. Relationship: Walk Worthy
IV. Conclusion

An Evaluation of Origins of Morality in Secular Humanism

LIBERTY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF DIVINITY
An Evaluation of Origins and Morality in Secular Humanism Relative to the Christian Worldview
Submitted to C. Fred Smith
In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the completion of
APOL 500
Apologetics
By
Robert Beanblossom
17 October 2017
ii
Contents
Introduction..…………………….…………………..………..……………….…………….…..1
Summary of Secular Humanism……………………….………………….…………….….…1
Evaluation of Secular Humanism …….………………………………….……….………..….3
Origins—Evolution ……………………………………………………….…………………….4
The Source of Morality ………………………..………………………….…………………….5
Defense of Christianity ………………………………………….……….…………………….8
Origins—Creation …………………………………………………..……….…………………..8
The Source of Morality ………………………………………………………………………….9
My Plan to Share and Defend the Christian Worldview ………..….………………………11
Bibliography …..………………………………………………………………………..………15
1
Introduction
This paper will examine secular humanism as a worldview and evaluate it relative to the Christian worldview. Secular humanism holds that within an ever-evolving universe man is currently the most advanced lifeform that has evolved, but is limited existentially in a world without deity to birth, life, and death; who will one day create utopia. The Christian worldview holds that the infinite personal triune God of creation is apparent in His works, and in His relationship with man, who is created in His own image. Although fallen by original sin, and living in a world cursed because of that sin, this God has provided for the redemption of man through the sacrifice and resurrection of His Son Jesus Christ, the Second Person of the Godhead, providing two alternatives: eternity with Him through accepting that redemption, or eternity without Him for failing to accept His Son.
Each worldview will be evaluated under three essential categories of a viable worldview as proposed by Douglas Groothius. These include coherence, factual adequacy, and radical ad hoc readjustment as applied to the questions of origins and morality. This paper will show that secular humanism fails when evaluated by objective criteria, and that Christianity alone provides an adequate belief system. We will then develop an apologetic suitable for adherents to Secular Humanism.
Summary of Secular Humanism
Secular humanism proclaims the radical freedom of man and the complete rejection of the miraculous and divine while evolution is a given. This paper will consider a representative form of secular humanism defined and re-defined frequently by the series of documents known as Humanist Manifestos. It is “opposed to all varieties of belief that seek supernatural sanction
2
for their values or espouse rule by dictatorship,” while it is “explicitly committed to democracy.”1 It builds upon faith in
atheism . . . and agnosticism or skepticism. . . . Because no transcendent power will save us. . . humans must take responsibility for themselves. . . . (and) encourage wherever possible the growth of moral awareness and the capacity for free choice and an understanding of the consequences thereof.”2
“Secular humanism is a balanced and fulfilling life stance. It is more than ‘unhyphenated humanism;’ it offers its own significant emergent qualities.”3 Rational methods of inquiry, logic, and evidence are essential in developing knowledge and testing claims to truth, but recognizing that humans are prone to err, knowledge including principles including those governing inquiry are subject to constant correction.4 Free inquiry is the “first principle” of secular humanism. This is in militant opposition to “any tyranny over the mind of man” that includes organizational standards or precepts from religious, political, ideological, or social institutions. In the quest for truth, the “process is as important as the result.”5 The scientific method is the “most reliable way of understanding the world.” Evolution is absolutely proven by science, “(a)lthough there are some differences among scientists concerning the mechanics of evolution.” Creationism can not be considered or examined as science, even as a possibility: religion is the anathema of
____________________
1 “A Secular Humanist Declaration,” Council for Secular Humanism. Originally published in 1980 by the Council for Democratic and Secular Humanism (now the Council for Secular Humanism): npn., accessed 3 October 2017, https://secularhumanism.org/index.php/11.
2 Ibid., npn.
3 Tom Flinn, “Secular Humanism Defined: Secular Humanism’s Unique Selling Proposition, Undated, Council for Secular Humanism: npn., accessed 9 October 2017. https://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php/13)
4 “Declaration,” npn.
5 “Declaration,” npn.
3
rationalism and the oppressor of the people. Arthur Schopenhauer observed, just before the rise of Darwin, that “in the nineteenth century we see Christianity significantly weakened, almost wholly deserted by serious faith,” as the energy of the Enlightenment made mockery of God.6
Replacing religion, reason and science are the major contributors to benefit humankind, with “no better substitute for the cultivation of human intelligence” to develop and exhibit ideal morality. Education is the vehicle to develop intelligence in the individual and the community.”7
Man is an evolutionary product of nature. Life originated by chance from pre-existing inorganic chemicals that combined to form viable organic lifeforms. As a product of evolution the mind is indivisibly conjoined with the functioning of the brain in which the body, mind, and personality can have no consciousness after death.8 Human ethics are based upon Critical Intelligence in which individuals develop autonomous choices that benefit humanity as a whole over self-interest. All human values grounded in experience and relationships. Reason and the scientific method must be implemented socially in all areas of economic, political, and cultural life with full freedom of expression, parliamentary government, and civil liberties. Anti-social, that is, immoral behavior, can be corrected by education.9
Evaluation of Secular Humanism
The ongoing succession Humanist Manifestos are self-contradictory, and fail the tests of
coherence and factual adequacy as proposed as standard criteria of worldview evaluation
____________________
6 Arthur Schopenhauer, “Uber Religion,” Sammtliche Werke, ed. Julius Frauenstadt, New Ed., 6 Vol. (Leipzig: Brockhaus, 1922): 6:6. Post-publication English translation by Theodore Ziolkowski.
7 “Declaration,” npn.
8 “Declaration,” npn.
9 “Declaration,” npn.
4
by Douglas Groothius.10 Secular humanism holds high ideals for personal achievement through science and reason in a moral environment which brings civilization to a utopian level, all by the force of personal will and self-actualization. It postulates democratic organizations where the will of the individual is willingly subordinated to the good of the group. All of this is made possible by evolution.
Origins–Evolution
Evolution is a mindless natural process, by definition, in which lifeless and amoral protons, neutrons and electrons have combined accidentally to form viable life, consciousness, intelligence, and morality. It is a continuing process in which man is an expendable organism.11 William A. Dembski says that the evolutionary community has re-defined science to include philosophical ideas that are outside the limits of the traditional method, but “evolution addresses a “scientific” question whereas intelligent design addresses a religious question.”12 He notes properly, that both are beyond the scope of the scientific method that requires observation, formulation and testing of a hypothesis, revision until tests conform to observation, and the opportunity for falsification. Evolution as a species-to-species change has never been proven, nor has any historical record been discovered to confirm it. Evolution fails as a matter of factual adequacy. Secular Humanism holds that man has intelligence, the ability to reason, and develop and live by moral values as a result of chance as described in the discussion on evolution.
____________________
10 Douglas Groothius, Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Truth (Downer’s Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2011), 52-60.
11 George Gaylord Simpson, The Meaning of Evolution, rev. ed. (New Haven, CN: Yale University Press, 1967), 345.
12 William A. Dembski, Intelligent Design: The Bridge Between Science and Theology (Downer’s Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 1999), 117.
5
The Source of Morality
Secular humanism declares that moral values emanate exclusively from human experience; that “Ethics is autonomous and situational needing no theological or ideological sanction;”13 and that “Critical Intelligence is the best method that humanity has for resolving problems,” since reason is balanced with “compassion and empathy.”14 The tension between individual and corporate morality is balanced by the individual goodness of man who innately possesses “individual freedom of choice. . . (that) should be increased.”15 “For the first time in history we possess the means provided by science and technology to ameliorate the human condition, advance happiness and freedom, and enhance human life for all people on the planet,” proclaims the Humanist Manifesto 2000.16 The “we” who moderates the Critical Intelligence to achieve societal good is never specified. The Christian worldview does not deny that non-Christians do not possess some measure of moral value since under that worldview, the unbeliever is the person that each Christian was prior to redemption.17 All humans are part of the Adamic race to whom God gives some indication of Himself (John 1:9). Philosopher Michael Ruse says of the modern evolutionary position, “humans have an awareness of morality. . . because such an awareness is of biological worth. Morality is a biological adaptation no less
____________________
13 Paul Kurtz and Edwin H. Wilson, “Humanist Manifesto II, Point 3,” American Humanist Association (1973): npn., accessed 9 October 2017, https://americanhumanist.org/what-is-humanism/manifesto2/.
14 “Manifesto II,” Point 4.
15 “Manifesto II,” Point 6
16 Paul Kurtz, 2000, “Humanist Manifesto 2000: A Call for a New Planetary Humanism,” International Academy of Humanism, USA, Prospects for a Better Future: npn., accessed 9 October 2017, https://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php/1169.
17 Groothius, 331.
6
than are hands and feet. . . . Considered as a rationally justifiable set of claims about an objective something, ethics is illusory. . . . Morality is just an aid to survival and reproduction.”18 This “biological factor” is what William Lane Craig calls “herd mentality.”19 He refutes the proposition of Critical Intelligence by showing the inconsistency of the evolutionary argument that, while holding humans as simply another animal, claims this unique moral objectivity which other species lack. Craig calls this logical inconsistency “an unbiased bias toward one’s own species.”20
Objectivity is relative to humanists such as Kurtz: “There are objective standards that we can use. But these standards are, of course relative to interests and needs, and they change over time.”21 With no objective basis for moral accountability to make moral choices significant, those choices are trivialized, making no contributions to society.22 John Hare states that, in Kantian terms, “moral goodness without belief in God is rationally unstable.”23 The humanist attempt to restore human worth resulted in the destruction of the “self-determining, personal agent who was to have dominion over his environment rather than being determined by it,” according to Gordon R. Lewis and Bruce A Demarest.”24 E. J. Carnell, as understood by Brian
____________________
18 Michael Ruse, “Evolutionary Theory and Christian Ethics,” The Darwinian Paradigm (London: Routledge, 1989), 262, 268-69.
19 Robert K. Garcia, and Nathan L. King, ed., Is Goodness without God Good Enough: A Debate on Faith, Secularism, and Ethics (NY: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2009), 32.
20 Ibid.
21 Ibid., 35.
22 Ibid., 38.
23 Ibid., 85. “Unstable” is from N. T. Volckman’s notes to Kant’s Natural Theology, 28:1151 in the Berlin Academy Edition).
24 Gordon R. Lewis and Bruce A. Demarest, Integrative Theology, 3 Vol. (Nashville: Zondervan, 2014), 1:41.
7
K. Morley, believes that as moral beings we must be aware that we “are not the authors of our own existence, (but) that we are bound by moral duties and that violations of duty are culpable before and administrator of justice who transcends humanity;” the absence of a transcendent administrator makes all moral judgements meaningless.26 We see that the evolution as the foundation and the claim for a godless source of morality fails the test of factual adequacy. William Lane Craig muses, “if theism is false, it’s very hard to understand what basis remains for objective moral duties. . . . if theism is false, what is the basis of moral accountability?”27 Even Paul Kurtz, author or co-author of the Manifestos acknowledges that the expectations of a dawning utopia in “far too optimistic” in view of ongoing world conditions.28 The secular humanist position on morality fails coherently and, as adapted and modified in the evolving Manifestos, fails in terms of current and expected radical ad hoc readjustment.
Critical Intelligence suggests that some undefined extra-human group intelligence exists that governs human moral behavior. This position fails on three counts: (1) no proof for Critical Intelligence has been proposed; (2) human behavior does not demonstrate a universal goodness in man; and, (3) the secular humanist emphasis on the autonomy of the individual is at odds with an undefined “we” that is the group ethic. R. Z. Friedman concludes that, “Without religion the coherence of an ethic of compassion cannot be established. The principle of respect for persons and the principle of the survival of the fittest are mutually exclusive.”28 Critical Intelligence as ____________________
25 Brian K. Morley, Mapping Apologetics: Comparing Contemporary Approaches. (Downer’s Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2015), 167.
26 Groothius, 33.
27 “Manifesto II,” Preface.
28 R. Z. Friedman, “Does the Death of God Really Matter?” International Philosophical Quarterly 23 (1983): 322.
8
a source of societal morality is contrary to the historical behavior of man: it is without proof, not supported by the random agglomeration of inert chemicals, thus failing the test of actual adequacy; in addition, experience does not support a universal goodness of man.
Defense of Christianity
The Christian worldview is the biblical worldview. It is decisive, dogmatic, and intolerant of claims contrary to the God revealed in the Bible. Inherent and foundational are the dogmas of Creation ex niliho29 by an all-powerful eternal personal God, and absolute morality anchored in objective truth established firmly by His infinite righteousness.
Origins–Creation
Creation is attested both in the OT, as in Genesis 1:1, and in the NT, as in Revelation 4:11. His righteousness is also given in the OT, as in His relationship with the Hebrews (Deut 4:8), and in the NT as judge of all righteousness in His creation (Rev 19:1-2).
The physical cosmos is empirical evidence: we see, feel, smell, taste, and hear our world. “Human beings can know both the world around them and God Himself because God has built into them the capacity to do so and because He takes an active role in communicating with them,” according to James W. Sire.30 Enan McMullin, a non-Christian cosmologist, said, “if the universe began in time through the act of a Creator, from our vantage point it would look something like the Big Bang.”31 Science, the discipline that observes, formulates, tests, and
___________________
29 Dembski, 91.
30 James W. Sire, Universe Next Door (Downer’s Grove: Il; Inter Varsity Press, 2009), 36.
31 Enan McMullin, “How Should Cosmology Relate to Theology?” The Sciences and Theology in the Twentieth Century, ed. A. R. Peacocke (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1981), 39.
9
adjusts propositions as necessary to achieve coincidence between theory and observation, cannot rationally address creation. It is impossible to observe that which is past, and it cannot test or replicate ex niliho beginnings. No scientific test has proven any aspect of biblical creation wrong.32 Natural laws require a cause for an effect: something does not come from nothing. Rather than trying to address creation from a scientific viewpoint, William Lane Craig brings a teleological argument known as “kalam,” an inference to the best explanation: the most minute details of the cosmos, Earth, atomic and sub-atomic particles, and life itself can only exist in very narrow parameters and still function, thus a designer (God) is required.33 Creation by an all-powerful God is the only rationally acceptable proposition for beginnings.
The Source of Morality
God is Truth, morality is absolute, and derives from Him alone. Truth and morality are inextricably intertwined in the infinitude of God that authorizes His establishment of morality and truth, but A. W. Tozer admits, “You cannot understand what infinite is, but don’t let it bother you—I don’t understand it and I’m trying to explain it.”34 “We are morally responsible before God to believe things that are true and disbelieve things that are false,” according to C. Fred Smith.35 “Christianity claims to be true.”36 The world “can be lived in successfully because truth
_________________
32 Groothius, 299. Groothius disagrees, suggesting that it might hinder the apologetic argument since “science has long addressed issues that cannot be settled in the laboratory.” This writer contends that holding science to the scientific method and philosophy to things philosophical is both honest and valid.
33 Morley, 243-251.
34 A. W. Tozer, The Attributes of God: A Journey into the Father’s Heart (Chicago: Wing Spread Publishers, 2003), 1-4.
35 C. Fred. Smith, Developing a Biblical Worldview: Seeing things God’s Way (Nashville: B and H Academic, 2015), 45.
36 Groothius, 77.
10
functions here.”37 Groothius finds “two core components” to truth: the nature of truth, and truth claims need to be tested in light of contradictory claims.38 Evidentiary truth must be meaningful in that it puts forth an “understandable truth claim.39 Objective truth is absolute and knowable. “The truth of moral and logical principles does not correspond to reality in the same way as do statements about observable empirical facts,” states Groothius: “The law of noncontradiction is true not because it corresponds to any one slice of reality but because it corresponds to all of reality.”40 The epistemological claim that truth and morality are absolute and knowable is logically consistent. Truth, as bound by the laws of logic, is subject to the principle of non-contradiction as codified by Aristotle in Metaphysics.41 C. Fred Smith puts forth veridical goodness within the Christian worldview as the goodness of truth, claiming a rational God who created a world that has both truth and their opposites which are false, suggesting two primary tests of truth: the first is correspondence, that is, it corresponds with reality; the second is coherence, that is, it fits logically with other statements that we believe.”42 Groothius calls correspondence “realism,” since it is “commonsensical and employed by anyone who affirms something about reality.”43 The Christian worldview is grounded in an unchanging God who has given His followers the unchanging Word: He says, “Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day,
____________________
____________________
37 Smith, 43.
38 Groothius, 122.
39 Ibid., 123.
40 Groothius, 125.
41 Groothius, 46-47.
42 Ibid., 42-45.
43 Groothius, 123.
11
and forever (Heb 13:8). This concept is coherent with the rest of the Christian worldview, it is factually demonstrated in the lives of each Christian, and never changes. Christianity provides the only coherent explanation for objective truth and morality.
My Plan to Share and Defend the Christian Worldview
Each Christian is called upon by Jesus to go into our world as witnesses even as He did (John 20:21). As the apostles demonstrated, the path for each of us is different: each had a different target audience, a different approach to their mission, and different apparent results. This is consistent with the Master’s teaching (Rom 3:12-8). The last thing Christ told His followers before His ascension was that this shall be done in the power of the Holy Spirit whom He would send (Acts 1:8).
This writer has passed his threescore and ten year milestone. One of the prime lessons he has learned is that our Lord has used every step of that life to prepare him for the very next one; without exception and without fail. He has been able to minister to the church as a layman, a witness and a teacher, as he has been ministered to by his brothers and sisters in Christ. In recent years, he has, much to his own surprise, taken to the internet, at his own website and on social media, as a platform for witnessing. This is the thrust of his “outside” personal ministry. Of special interest is his participation in groups that draw atheists and confused Christians, generally those individuals who have read far more about Christianity than have actually spent time in the Word.
Secular humanists are often militant in their evangelistic efforts to convert the world to their point of view. The internet is a useful platform to draw these individuals in to discussions that often begin with an attack they made on God or some other aspect of Christianity. The author’s approach is to carefully read the post and attachments. Posts pro-evolution or anti-
12
creation are often selected, as are comments based upon situational ethics or attacking key Christian ethical values. A key fallacy of the post or attachment will be selected for an opening remark. The approach is situational as Groothius recommends. With E. J. Carnell, I believe that there is sufficient common ground between the believer and non-believer to obey Christ’s command to witness.44 With John Frame, I believe that there is sufficient connection between our finite knowledge as His creature and God’s infinite knowledge to bring coherent arguments to the table on His behalf.45 With Richard Swinburne, I believe that logical arguments with mathematical and scientific integrity appeal to some and offer strong starting points for the message of salvation.46 With C. Fred Smith, I move, flexibly, through the four worldview questions adapted from Brian Walsh and Richard Middleton to bring relevance to the discussions.
The author will respond with a question regarding an “apparent” contradiction between the stated view and the attachment or the stated view and inherent contradictions in the secular humanist worldview as discussed above. Belligerent responses are allowed to fade away. Rational responses are followed with appropriate constructions. These early volleys often bring in other respondents. Another approach is to post a succinct lure, often from my website, such as,
It seems to me that the more I consider evolution, the more confused I am. The evolutionist believes that all life, including man, originated from pre-existing inorganic elements. . . that somehow got together and combined to form organic lifeforms that could sustain themselves.47
____________________
44 Morley, 160-161.
45 Morley, 93-94.
46 Morley, 190-194.
47 Bob Beanblossom, “Evolution—Incredible Worldview,” It Seems to Me. 2017: npn., accessed 15 October 2017, http://bobbeanblossom.com/1530-2/.
13
These posts and links often get quite a bit of response. Two recent posts of this sort in a Facebook group “. . . Christian Society,” drew over 100 and 130 responses each, with many from what can only be described as atheists with that John 1:8 spark working in their hearts through the Holy Spirit. These discussions are always conducted respectfully, with offensive responses ignored.
Evolution is the beginning point for a discussion leading to the establishment of an intelligent creator, and to the existence of the infinite, all-powerful personal God who is interested enough in the individual(s) in the discussion to send His own Son to provide for their redemption.
Evolution is also the springboard for discussions of objective truth and morality as the problem of sin is often interjected when the discussion turns to an infinitely holy God. Here the arguments are more structured, being always founded on Scripture. Groothius’ use of Paul’s argument to the Corinthians (1 Cor 15:14-19) is a favored basis upon which to build.48
The author acknowledges ruefully that the secular perception of diverse beliefs within Christianity is both true and difficult to overcome, especially to one who has not (yet?) embraced Scripture as inspired and inerrent.49 Often appeal to the laws of logic as discussed by Groothius are helpful to these respondants.50
Specific arguments for each concept are tailored around my perception of the knowledge and understanding of the individual, with the intent always to bring that person to salvation, not to “win” an argument.
________________________
48 Groothius, 117-118.
49 Ibid., 118-122.
50 Ibid., 46-49.
14
The author continues to teach Christians, attempting to provide depth as the Spirit leads. Many Christians have been subjected to the same outlines with lesson plans varying only slightly from grade school to grave. Depth in understanding for them is a matter of their individual relationship with out Lord and the time they spend in prayer, fasting, and in the Scripture. Questions concerning proof of their stated beliefs often get a “deer in the headlight” response. Again, following Groothius, the construction is incremental, building precept upon precept.
This is my calling, my mission. I am not the solution, but one of a cloud of witnesses (Heb 12:1). My clock is running down. One day, maybe soon, I will get my transfer orders to report to my Commander-in-Chief. In the meantime, as He allows and directs, I will do my best to follow His lead, preparing constantly for what is to follow.
15
Bibliography
“A Secular Humanist Declaration.” Council for Secular Humanism. Originally published in 1980 by the Council for Democratic and Secular Humanism (now the Council for Secular Humanism). Accessed 3 October 2017. https://secularhumanism.org/index.php/11.
Beanblossom, Bob. “Evolution—Incredible Worldview,” It Seems to Me. 27 September 2017. Accessed 15 October 2017. http://www.bobbeanblossom.com/1530.
Dembski, William A. Intelligent Design: The Bridge Between Science and Theology. Downer’s Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 1999.
Flinn, Tom. “Secular Humanism Defined: Secular Humanism’s Unique Selling Proposition. Undated. Council for Secular Humanism. Accessed 9 October 2017. https://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php/13
Friedman, R. Z. “Does the Death of God Really Matter?” International Philosophical Quarterly 23, Issue 3 (September 1983): 321-332. Accessed 10 September 2017. https://www.pdcnet.org/pdc/bvdb.nsf/purchase?openform&fp=ipq&id=ipq_1983_0023_0003_0321_0332.
Garcia, Robert K., and Nathan L. King, ed. Is Goodness without God Good Enough: A Debate on Faith, Secularism, and Ethics. NY: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2009.
Groothius, Douglas. Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Truth. Downer’s Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2011.
Kurtz, Paul, and Edwin H. Wilson. 1973. “Humanist Manifesto II.” American Humanist Association. Accessed 9 October 2017. https://americanhumanist.org/what-is-humanism/manifesto2/.
Kurtz, Paul. “Humanist Manifesto 2000: A Call for a New Planetary Humanism.” 2000. International Academy of Humanism, USA. Accessed 9 October 2017. https://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php/1169.
Lewis, Gordon R., and Bruce A. Demarest. Integrative Theology, 3 Vol. Nashville: Zondervan, 2014.
McMullin, Enan. “How Should Cosmology Relate to Theology?” The Sciences and Theology in the Twentieth Century, A. R. Peacocke, ed. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1981.
Morley, Brian K. Mapping Apologetics: Comparing Contemporary Approaches. Downer’s Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2015.
16
Ruse, Michael. “Evolutionary Theory and Christian Ethics,” The Darwinian Paradigm. London: Routledge, 1989.
Schopenhauer, Arthur. “Uber Religion,” Sammtliche Werke, ed. Julius Frauenstadt, New Ed., 6 Vol. (Leipzig: Brockhaus, 1922, 6. Cited reference translated by Theodore Ziolkowski.
Simpson, George Gaylord. The Meaning of Evolution, rev. ed. (New Haven, CN: Yale University Press, 1967.
Sire, James W. Universe Next Door. Downer’s Grove: Il; Inter Varsity Press, 2009.
Smith, C. Fred. Developing a Biblical Worldview: Seeing things God’s Way. Nashville: B and H Academic, 2015.
Tozer, A. W. The Attributes of God: A Journey into the Father’s Heart, Vol. 1. Chicago: Wing Spread Publishers, 2003.

The Gambling Christian

The Gambling Christian

By Bob Beanblossom

5 January 2018

  The title of this article is “The Gambling Christian.” Is that an oxymoron, or is gambling a legitimate Christian activity?  I saw a discussion on Facebook recently that got me thinking about my position in the issue. I thought I would just sit back and watch the comments. But, that’s not my style.

It seems to me that, like all issues of Christian behavior, we need to separate the opinion from the biblical position—if we can find one. The Bible was written thousands of years ago to folks in a far different environment, with lifestyles and living conditions that we have a hard time understanding (if we even take time to think about it). We are charged with using the services of the Holy Spirit and our God-given intelligence, knowledge, and wisdom to discern as closely as possible what the original message said, then to make informed applications for us today. With that said, let’s build a biblical case for or against gambling, as the Word leads. All Scripture is from the King James Version of the Bible.

Casting Lots

Casting lots is not only mentioned in the Bible, but God directs this action, perhaps similar to a throwing of dice, as a method of making decisions. The first directive was in Leviticus 16:8 where Moses, at God’s behest, directed Aaron, his brother and the high priest, to cast lots over two goats to determine which would be the sacrifice and which would be the scapegoat (Leviticus 16:8). Joshua used this method to distribute the Promised Land among the tribes (Joshua 18:6-10). This is not gambling, but a God-sanctioned heads-or-tails approach to decision making hundreds of years before there were coins to toss.

As with all that man touches, the good can be adapted to evil. Casting lots is gambling when it becomes chance instead of choice. Perhaps the most memorable description of casting lots as gambling, though not the only one recorded in Scripture, is the incident of the Roman soldiers who seized Jesus’ garments as He hung on the cross. They cast lots to see who would win what items of clothing. This was so despicable to God that all four Gospels recorded it (Matthew 27:35; Mark 15:24; Luke 23:34; and John 19:24). This leaves little room to support any idea that a game of chance is supported by the Word. But we will keep looking.

Gambling in the Bible

            Words like “gamble,” “wager,” “lottery,” “card(s),” and other modern terms associated with gambling are simply absent from Scripture. Gambling was known and practiced among those whom the Hebrews came into contact with, but was not part of God’s plan for His people. Solomon comes as close to the modern attitude of gaming with his lament in Ecclesiastes 9:11: “I returned, and saw under the sun, that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favor to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth to them all.” Jesus repeats and amplifies this in Matthew 5:44-45, making application for His followers. In our context, the application is not fatalism, the “what will be, will be” attitude, but a responsible lifestyle that recognizes our shortcomings as we address the needs of others. This may be the crux of the matter for the idea of Christian gambling. We will look at this from an inward perspective—what is my responsibility to God as far as my behavior; and from an outward perspective—what is my responsibility to others.

Inward Perspective—My Relationship with Jesus

These issues revolve around our individual concept of who Jesus is, and who we are in relationship to Him. We can only brush the surface here. Jesus is eternally God (John 1:1-2). The purpose of His earthly ministry was to “seek and to save that which was lost (you and I)” (Luke 19:10). He alone is the way to achieve a relationship with our Creator; one that has eternal consequences for each person ever created (John 14:6). We are called to “walk worthy of the vocation” that He has called us into (Ephesians 4:1): our life purpose is to worship and serve Him, on His terms: He is a jealous God (Exodus 20:4-6) who will not tolerate divided loyalties (Matthew 4:10).

Divided loyalties seem to be the Scriptural foundation for this application. The Word warns us against those who “serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good works and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple” (Romans 16:18).  Our application will draw on two aspects of this verse. Serving our “own belly” refers to satisfying our own desires, our own cravings, our own greed. Gambling promises something for nothing. No work. No benefits are produced. It also demands an expenditure of time, energy, and money that draws us away from our relationship with and service to our Savior. The other aspect is one of influence. We will discuss that in the next section.

The discussion moves naturally to one of motive. Why would I want to gamble? This requires an honest answer. We hear: “I do it to relax;” “I gamble to have a little fun—I know my limits and stop then I get there.” More honestly, gambling exists solely for the purpose of getting something for nothing. How we fit into that purpose is not relaxation or fun, but we attempt to get something for nothing—against the odds that will be defeated by just one more spin, pull, hand, or whatever. And like we would like our lawmakers to do, we must realize that the “something” always comes from “someone.” Winners can only be made on the backs of losers. Only. Back to motives. Money–representing the power to acquire, influence, and empower—can become addictive as the drive for more overrides the original purposes (see Exodus 20:17; Deuteronomy 5:21). Covetousness is simply wanting what is not ours—that which we have not earned—and is an abhorrence to God (Psalm 10:3). Covetousness is loving something (money, power, winning, stuff) more than Someone (God). It is not part of the Christian worldview established by Jesus Christ. Remember Satan tempting Jesus? He tried (and failed) to find a weak spot in Jesus’ morality and devotion to His Father. We do not have His righteousness or His fortitude: our devotion is fragile and sometimes situational. The results are disastrous for our relationship with Jesus Christ: “the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows” (1 Timothy 6:10). The something-for-nothing attitude is divisive; too often it becomes an addiction: “No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon” (Luke 16:13). An addiction is a master that competes with our relationship with God. Gambling is a need that grows and destroys—it is a need that can never satisfy: “He that loveth silver shall not be satisfied with silver; nor he that loveth abundance with increase: this is also vanity” (Ecclesiastes 5:10). If I keep going back to a particular behavior, it doesn’t matter what I call it, it is an addiction. The application for this section is that gambling is a non-Christian attempt to receive personal increase without personal effort, in direct opposition to His Word: “if any would not work, neither should he eat . . . we command and exhort by our Lord Jesus Christ, that with quietness they work and eat their own bread” (2 Thessalonians 3:10-12 excerpted). We are to work and to consume the fruits of our own labor, not that taken from a “loser.”

Outward Perspective—My Witness to the Saved and the Lost

We won’t spend much time here. This is the familiar argument of avoiding the appearance of evil so that we don’t adversely influence others (1 Thessalonians 5:22). The counter-argument is one of individual Christian freedom: “All things are lawful to me” (1 Corinthians 6:12a). The rest of the verse is important—it can’t be divorced from the opening phrase: “but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any” (1 Corinthians 6:12b). I promised that we would return to Romans 16:18. This verse amplifies the thought in 1 Thessalonians 5:22 in an important way for us: “and by good works and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple” (Romans 16:18b). It strongly suggests that, should we consider behaviors not specifically addressed by Scripture, that we apply this test: will others who are not as mature in their Christian walk (and by application, too, those who do not yet know our Lord as their personal savior) be adversely impacted by our actions. I would add that sometimes the “hearts of the simple” who question a particular activity may actually be wiser than we consider, as we, immersed in our behavior, deceive ourselves as the chief priests and scribes did (Matthew 21:15-17): “why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?” (Matthew 7:3).

Have you noticed the firestorm that arises when Christians discuss gambling in a public forum? Do you understand that non-Christians are watching? No matter how we might hold that we can’t please all the people all the time, the real issue is whether we are maintaining our witness: are we credible witnesses of the life changing power of Jesus Christ? If I look like the world, talk like the world, and act like the world, what need is there for a non-Christian to make any change? What do we have to offer? This, of course, transcends gambling and extends to our entire lives. It is a big deal. It is not something we can fix, but reminds us that we rely solely on the Holy Spirit to lead and direct our lives as we, like Paul, are prisoners of our Lord (Eph 3:1; 4:1).

We should not only consider the bigger “they,” but our own household. We are charged with teaching our own children biblical precepts and practices (Deuteronomy 4:10). Our children are turning away from the church at record numbers. The power of the Holy Spirit has not diminished. The message has not changed. The call has not changed. Perhaps it is the witness of the individual messenger. His message is clear, needing little interpretation: “Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you” ((2 Corinthians 6:17).

Parting Thoughts

The question on the table is about “The Gambling Christian.” We asked in opening if that was an oxymoron, or is gambling a legitimate Christian activity?  I have presented some considerations from a scripture that is silent on the particular activities that we call gambling. I have derived some applications that I hope are legitimate, based upon the original meaning and historical context of the scripture. Now it is your turn. Remember that you have a Guide to direct your path: “Let the Word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord” (Colossiams 3:16).

Everyone Does It

By Bob Beanblossom

28 December 2017

 It seems to me that sometimes we need to fall back and regroup, to put theory and opinion aside temporarily and look at life as it is. This is not to minimize these, but help assure that they actually have strong basis in the “real world.

I’m going to tell you a story. This is not a “Once upon a time” story. It is not suitable for all readers and you might consider your audience before you share it.

This story begins, “Once, a few years ago, in Tipton County, Tennessee . . .” It is real. Tragically real. Before I tell you the story, I want you to know that it has a moral, a purpose in two parts, bound together–each distinct, but inseparable: 1) actions have consequences, and 2) the phrase, “It can’t happen to me” is a bold lie that leads to self-destruction.

The Brief Story of a Man Called Bones

Once, a few years ago, in Tipton County, Tennessee, I was called out to join a small team of investigators from the local sheriff’s office. We were there to recover evidence from what appeared to be a suicide. When I arrived, the team was on hands and knees in and around a dry creek bed searching for evidence and remains. A yellow electrical cord was secured to a tree limb hanging out over the creek bed. At the other end was an empty loop too far above the ground to reach. About all that remained of a young man were scattered bones, separated and returning to the natural elements from which they came. The work of time had been efficient, making the job painstaking—carefully remove anything that didn’t look like a bone and collect it and log the location. Foul play had to be ruled out. It was. His cotton jeans and t-shirt had rotted away as had his skin and organs. At some point his remains slipped from the self-made noose and his body slipped into the creek bed. Small bones such as fingers were difficult to find in the mud and gravel. The bones of his feet were easier—his socks were a synthetic blend that survived, holding them together. When no more could be found, the search stopped and I transported two boxes of bones to the sheriff’s office for preliminary review by the Medical Examiner (ME). At that point it was possible to be detached, almost clinical, in the investigation. Almost.

The ME determined that a large percentage of the bones were there but the skull was missing. It was recovered downstream several days later. As we laid out the bones in the rough shape of a man, the ME made some observations. Bones (a suitable name for our victim) had a broken rib near his heart. It had healed like a blacksmith’s joint where a piece of metal is wrapped around a joint and beaten to tightly hold it together. The joint was large and the rib alignment poor. Doc said this would probably have caused continual pain. His 4th lumbar vertebra had been severely damaged and his body had formed an arthritic bony skirt that extended below the disk and over the top of the 5th lumbar vertebra. Doc said that this would be the cause of even more continuous pain. Other lifestyle clues emerged. Bones was beginning to take on life: he was a young man who lived in constant nagging pain from a damaged and neglected body.

The investigation soon gave Bones a name and filled in details of his all-too-short life. He had early-on engaged in “recreational” drugs because “everyone does it.” He became alienated from his family, his behavior increasingly self-destructive. After a car wreck caused injuries left to heal on their own, his drug use became “medicinal” as he attempted to relieve his constant pain. As his demand for drugs increased, his ability to produce income decreased. He stole from family, friends, and strangers, lost jobs as tools “disappeared” when he was around: he became a petty criminal. He was no longer able to function as a productive citizen or even an intelligent criminal.

At some point the increase in pain and decrease in drug effectiveness intersected and he decided to take his own life, a life that was without value to him. An ironic twist is that the investigative team probably cared more about him throughout the investigation than he did about himself in the final days of his life. He took his extension cord to the woods, near a residential area—near his own home. There he died alone and unloved—at least in his own mind.

I will not debate the pros and cons of drug use and abuse, either prescription meds or illegal/quasi-legal street drugs. This is not about that. I will not debate access, of lack of it, to medical attention. This is not about that. This is about self-destructive behavior that is the result of poor personal choices fueled by an “I am in control of my own destiny” mindset. It is about responsible behavior.

This is an individual case. It is real. You might rationalize that it can’t happen to you or a loved one—even as you may recognize the symptoms of a downward spiral in their behavior—or yours. Once begun it is hard to reverse. It is not just drugs and alcohol. It includes the many addictions that destroy rational thinking and productive behavior. It is about friends rejected and “friends” who would help destroy you even as they destroy themselves. Some helpful programs exist that are caring and designed to encourage and empower, to overcome addiction and all that goes with it. But ultimately the cure rests upon the individual, the individual burdened with chemical, physical, emotional, and relational addictions that the unknowing can barely imagine.

But there is an answer. Don’t leave me now—this is the best part. We can’t help Bones. But there is serious help for you right now. Jesus said, “Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls” (Matthew 11:27-29). Let me break that down:

1) Come unto me—that is you and me. All of us that God created. In another place He said, “For God so loved the world (that’s you and me), that He gave His only begotten Son (that’s Jesus), that whosoever (that’s you and me again) believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life (we are not taken out of our world when we accept Him, but He gives us the strength to overcome the old world when we do)” (John 3:16)

2) all ye that labor and are heavy laden—this is not just jobs and work, but the burdens of our mind, the doubts and fears, the pain and hurt.

3) I will give you rest—this is not a maybe, a sort-of: He does give each of us emotional and mental rest that leads to an inner peace that you often see in some Christians who just seem to stand out, not because of what they say, but of how they live. But—and this is important—this promise comes with requirements.

4) Take my yoke upon you, and learn of Me; for I am meek and lowly in heart. His yoke is simply deciding to accept Him as your personal Savior. Not as a “fox-hole Christian” who is a saint today and a haint tomorrow when the pain is less. Accepting Him is just the beginning. By aligning yourself with a Bible-teaching church, and personal Bible study, we learn of Him. Through prayer we develop a personal relationship with Him, a friendship where He is the leader and we are the follower. He will never leave you. You can ignore Him. Others can discourage you. Life may seem about to overcome you. But He is only a prayer away. Believing in His saving power in your own life and learning about Him is called faith. He says he is meek and lowly. We would say that He picks His battles. The enemy is not our friends and family that love us (even if they have a real problem understanding where we are coming from), but those who try to keep us in the same sewer where they live. You can defeat that enemy by prayer and the friendship and support of Christian friends. One of the benefits of salvation is that Jesus gives us a powerful ally—the Holy Spirit—to actually live within us and give us power to live the life that He wants us to live—for our own good. It’s not boring. It’s not quiet and passive. It is more exciting than any drug-induced trip or any daredevil activity can possibly be. And there are no downers, no hangovers.

5) Now comes the promise: ye SHALL find rest unto your souls. No holding back. No “do this, do that, do the other.” Accept Him as your Savior and being to learn who He is and how He wants you to live, and He WILL give you rest in your heart and mind and soul.

The world doesn’t go away. As we said at the beginning of this story, actions have consequences. What has been done will still have to be dealt with. But through His power and your obedience to Him, life can be taken head-on with a joy that is not a feeling but an understanding deep within that becomes action.

Your life is not about statistics and studies, not about the odds. The odds are certain that each and every one of us will die. All of us. Your life is about how you live, and that is your choice. Make it hard and useless, full of pain and heartbreak, or join with the Creator of the universe and live the life He intends for you.

There Were Shepherds in the Field

By Bob Beanblossom

27 November 2017

It seems to me that we don’t give the shepherds who received the message of Jesus’ birth the attention that they deserve. Not because they were special. Far from it. Because they weren’t—they weren’t politicians, theologians, business executives, but just plain folks. In many ways they were like us, not very special in man’s sight, though we hate to admit it; not among the elite, though we sometimes attach ourselves vicariously to successful teams or brands; not among the who’s who directories in our fields, though we are hard working and provide as best as we can for our families; not even among the most faithful in our churches, as examples to our own families. Just average folk. For some reason, God chose these shepherds from all the people in the world to receive the announcement of the most important event of all time–the birth of the birth of God’s own Son, our Savior, Jesus Christ.

Without second-guessing God, and meaning no disrespect to the shepherds, here is a paraphrase that I hope will cause you to go beyond the language to the hearts of these men who lived to protect and raise their flocks that they might in time be sacrificed to the uses of man. I trust the dialect will set a scene, a mood, rather than detract from the message. If you find it offensive, then please go directly to Scripture and read it again there, because it is the story of God’s love for each of us.

There Were Shepherds in the Field

Luke 2:1-20

Out in the country, there were some shepherds watch’en their flocks all night, jus’ like every other night for the last thousand years and more. They gathered in the open hill country to protect their sheep from wolves and other varmints out looking for a square meal. The night was quiet and peaceful. The shepherds talked quietly as men talk around a campfire. All of a sudden, sumthin’ turned the night sky bright as day; it lit up the whole field and they were really skeered. It was a lone angel. Just one, but more than they had ever seen. What was strange was it didn’t bother the sheep at all. He told us to settle down, he didn’t mean us no harm. In fact, he had some really good news: over yonder in the city, a Baby was just borned; not just a baby, but The Baby, the One who would bring a heap of peace and joy to the whole world, even us. This here Baby is the one that God promised the old folks years ago: His name is Jesus Christ, the King of all kings, the Lord of all lords, greater than Caesar and David and even Solomon. Sounds sorta like something the priests talk about that our great prophet Isaiah said years ago.

That angel told us to go on up to the city and see for yerself. My friends and I will look after your sheep fer awhile. I know it’s crowded over thar with the festival going on and all, but it’ll be worth the walk. He won’t look like much. Just a new baby. He don’t have a great throne and bunches of servants and lots of fine stuff. He don’t even have His own room. There weren’t no rooms left for his folks—jus common workin’ folks–with the festival and all, so they are hanging out in a stable for now. Jus’ then, that angel brought on a whole army of his buddies. Couldn’t even count ’em thar was so many. They sang a song for us, went like, “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.” He told us to git on now—they’ed welcome us. That sounded good, but those city folk didn’t think much of us shepherds. We kinda smelled like our sheep and didn’t really dress up to snuff for them. Then the angel and his friends jus’ up and left.  Did I tell ya that they just kind’a hung out up in the air—they didn’t walk up on us but jus’ floated around. Jus’ appeared and disappeared. And he told us not to be skeered. Yeah, right. A hungry bear skeers me—me and only my long stick and sling ta change his mind. That’s nothin’ like how that angel and his friends made me feel. Skeered—if you only knew!

Anyways, after they left and it was quiet and dark and all again, we kind’a wondered if we had had a weird dream or somethin.’ But we all saw and heered the same thing, so off we go to King David’s city. Warn’t far. We could see it on the hill with the walls and fine buildings and all. Didn’t see the angel around, but he said he’d watch our sheep. We believed him about the baby, so we believed him about the sheep. After all, angels are from God and He don’t lie.

So, we took off, up the road to town. The gate was open, people everywhere. No one seemed to know anything about this new baby, but we found one of the inns that had a young mother and her husband stuck in their stable, just in from Bethlehem, and just in time to have a brand new baby boy. There they was, sharin’ the stable with the animals. Mary—that was her name—told us that her baby was the Child of God Himself, not of Joseph, her husband. He didn’t seem concerned. He tended to Mary and the baby like all was normal. The baby didn’t look like a king, just a little baby. But there was somethin’ special about Him, just like there was somethin’ special about the whole night. We tole them thanks for lettin’ us see Him, and left out. We tole everyone who would listen about what had gone on that night—what we seen and heard. Some believed us, some thought we wus just drunk shepherds come inta’ town for some action when we shoulda’ been out in the fields with our sheep. But we knew better. We got back down to our flocks and all was well. The angel had looked after them just like he said he would. We wus still kinda’ excited: the angel and his buddies; the trek into the city when we should’a been with our flocks; seeing the Baby and talking with His mother; telling folks all about what had happened. We kinda’ carried on a bit.

Gave us lots to think about. Like whar the priests and those other important folks were? Didn’t see no Roman soldiers. Figured they might be upset when they heered about a Jewish king. Why us—a bunch of shepherds that city folks try to avoid? But it was true. We wus thar. We know. We seen the face of God and He looked us right in the eye. Glory to God in the highest. We ain’t never gonna be the same.

From the horse’s mouth

by Bob Beanblossom

7 October 2017

It seems to me that a rule of “followship” is that the work of the original person is often so distorted by his followers that he would have a hard time recognizing it. Here is an example:

“. . . as this process of extermination has acted on an enormous scale, so must the number of intermediate varieties, which have formerly existed on the earth, be truly enormous. Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory.”  Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species.

In other words, Charles Darwin said this:

  1. We have ample fossil records of extinction in marine sediments (such as occurs in a massive flood–Bob)
  2. We have no fossil record of transitional record of species-to-species life forms (what is called today macro-evolution to distinguish it from variations in the flu virus, or the size of horses, where the virus changes, but is always a virus, and the horse shows variations, but remains a horse–Bob)
  3. Darwin recognized the problem with his theory (and modern science claims that there is no problem, although it stands today exactly as it did when Darwin wrote these words–Bob)

The problem is not with science but with philosophers-as-scientists who have abandoned the pursuit of truth for the god of secular philosophy. The scientific method–observe, postulate, test, revise, peer review and falsification–has been discarded for models and simulations that have carefully selected parameters to assure particular results to support the dominant worldview that has replaced God with man.

Evolutionary secularism has given us a world where biblical moral foundations and empirical truth of which God alone is the source, has been replaced with a confused me-ism in which we can’t even find the restroom that corresponds with our birth-plumbing, where self-discipline means getting our own way at any cost, and where we blame inanimate objects for man’s failure as individuals and society.

The answer lies–only–in Jesus, who “is come to seek and to save that which is lost” (Luke 19:10). This from the oldest continually read and revered book in the world. Is it possible that the collective experience of thousands of years of men with their God carries a little more weight than the politician who lies and deceives to get elected to blend with the establishment, or the atheistic scientist who claims that “Evolution is fact–trust me.” Both operate on the same level of smoke and mirror truth.

The question is simple–Do you choose God’s unchanging truth where He gave His Son that each one of us could be saved; or the relativist’s ever-changing, self-serving scramble for personal pleasure and gain at the expense of everyone else?

 

 

 

Evolution–Incredible Worldview

by Bob Beanblossomm
27 September 2017
It seems to me that the more I consider evolution, the more confused I am. The evolutionist believes that all life, including man, originated by chance from pre-existing inorganic elements (primarily Carbon, Hydrogen, and Oxygen, but including many more) that somehow got together and combined to form organic lifeforms that could sustain themselves:
1) that could exist in the climatic conditions that existed,
2) breathing the air that just happened to exist, or being able to extract oxygen from the water that just happened to be there,
3) by locating, identifying, and eating whatever ‘food’ just happened to exist (which themselves, had to evolve before they could be eaten),
4) by being able to extract nutrients and disposing of waste from those food sources,
5) by having another of their species readily available, of the opposite gender, that also evolved accidentally with whom to mate so that the species could reproduce (gender confusion would have been species suicide every time evolution produced a new species and the process started all over),
6) and on, and on, and on. 
 
My imagination just isn’t that good. Is yours? Remember–it all occurs by chance: chemicals getting together to form not just complex organic compounds, but essential specialized self-sustaining reproducible systems and highly specialized non-interchangeable organs, ready and able to replicate themselves on the cellular level and on the being level reproducing each “after his kind.,” yet morphing now and then to produce a complete and new species. Just because, I guess.
 
Sorry, I’ll just have to stick with Genesis 1 and 2, and a lot more between Genesis and Revelation. Not to mention observation–just seeing what I see.
 
And we haven’t even considered where that first pile of chemicals (and the earth they occupy and form) came from

On Their Knees

By Bob Beanblossom

25 September 2017

It seems to me that I’m missing something. Again.

I am not a sports fan. I don’t watch sports on TV or follow any teams or players.

That said, it is hard to miss the current hoo-rah over players who fail to show any national pride by not standing for the National Anthem. These, as I understand it, are those guys making millions of dollars for themselves, their teams, and their leagues while playing in taxpayer-subsidized stadiums.

I got the part that they are protesting. After all, I went through the 60s.

The part I am missing is, as usual, responsible, thorough, factual reporting that presents a balanced picture of events. I know. I’m expecting too much of modern “journalism.”

But, what I’m missing is this–and it may well have been reported. How many fans in the stands did not stand for the Anthem? Is this a protest by the populace, or just the elite who are somehow not getting everything they want when they want it the way they want it. You know, the millionaires who spend themselves into bankruptcy before they even retire.

I understand that these players are a minority. Most of us of any color, religion, age, gender, educational level, or whatever, will never have the opportunity to garner the fame (or notoriety) or income that they have achieved. I do wonder if the ability to beat someone else to a pulp legally is a meaningful criterion for listening to their political and social agendas. Their opinion on shoes, maybe. But their considered opinion of the American system that has just had an eight-year black president, black CEOs and other top execs of major corporations, college presidents and tenured faculty, not to mention all sorts of sports idols–well, it seems to be a bit faulty.

Back to the question: How many regular Joes and Janes in the stands refused to honor our National Anthem and the thousands of men and women over far more than 200 years who were sacrificed so they could freely protest and succeed in their chosen field.

This is not to say, of course, that our nation does not need to take to our knees. We desperately need to get on our knees before God and seek His will and leadership in our individual lives and for our nation. These folks, however, don’t seem to be in quite that mode. That just suggests that we need to learn from them and not follow in their ways, but lead our families, communities, and nation in following our God.

The Center

by Bob Beanblossom

10 August 2017

It seems to me that when we begin to think that we are the center of the universe, that everything revolves around us, and that everything should work for our pleasure, we should remember who is really at the center, the heart of it all:

“Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honor and power: for Thou hast created all things, and for Thy pleasure they are and were created. (Revelation 4:11).

Imagine that. There is somebody bigger than you and me. And, although we are part of His eternal plan, we are only a part of it.

Yet we are such an important part of it that He wants us to be a good part of it forever. To that end He provided a solution to reconcile our sinful ways with His righteousness: read John 3:16-17 again: “For God so loved . . .

Got an Answer?

by Bob Beanblossom

30 August 2017

It seems to me that as we, at least occasionally, reflect on our world and the meaning of life, that we can get bogged down in detail and miss the bigger issues. As Christians, we can accumulate a quiver of Scriptural “proof texts” with no idea of the immediate context, the subject of the book, or even the message of the Book.

The Apostle Peter said that we should be ready to answer every man who questioned the reason for our Christian hope (1 Peter 3:15). If we answer that question in one or two sentences, we might be a little shallow. Here study and reflection must join with prayer and the guidance of the Holy Spirit to be effective. If our message is against other worldviews while not able to support our own, we have a problem.

A big part of our answer is whether our worldview, as expressed by our lifestyle, matches what we say or teach. As John Valk noted in “Christianity through a Worldview Lens, “‘practicing what one preaches” is an enormous challenge for all humans.”

The answer, according to Valk, comes from “critical and thoughtful reflection, comparisons, and even some audacious assertions.” In other words, it comes from the study demanded in 2 Timothy 2:15, and walking the walk as commanded in Ephesians 4:1-3.