Category Archives: Current events

JETS: An evangelical Christian seminary in the Arab world

03 Thursday Sep 2015

Posted by in Current events

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

I have spent the past two weeks in Amman, Jordan as a visiting professor at Jordan Evangelical Theological Seminary (JETS). This was the third time I have traveled to Jordan to teach an intensive summer Bible course, and I plan to return. While the Arab world is generally portrayed in Western media as the domain of Islamic extremists, there is a Christian minority in most Arab countries. Within this Christian minority is an increasing number of evangelical Arab Christians. Arab evangelical Christians are some of the most gracious and hospitable people you will ever meet—a far cry from the radical Islamists who dominate news coverage of the Middle East.

Religious freedom for Arab Christians varies greatly from country to country; Jordan is one of the countries that grants greater freedom to Christians, and it contains a significant evangelical Christian minority. Jordan is also the most politically stable of the Arab countries with significant evangelical populations, which makes it an ideal location for a seminary to serve evangelical churches throughout the Arab world. While Christianity is legal in Jordan, evangelical Christians still face discrimination and harassment from individuals who are hostile to evangelical Christianity. Jordanian churches and Christian schools need prayer as they operate within a culture in which many are adverse to their presence.

Jordan Evangelical Theological Seminary was founded in 1991, and was officially registered by the Jordanian government in 1995. Its mission is to train evangelical Arab Christians for church ministry in the Arab world. The school includes students from many different Arab countries. After many years of planning and a frustrating series of roadblocks, JETS finally moved its operations from rented space to its own new campus in 2013. Although prayer is the seminary’s greatest need, the school also has financial needs and relies on donors from the United States to fund its operations. One pressing financial need is for the completion of the new campus, which will reduce the seminary’s expenses by eliminating the need to purchase off-campus housing for the students and will also contain facilities to generate revenue for the school. The new campus is on a beautiful piece of property (see pictures below), and the architecture of the campus is outstanding; however, it is only partially finished. When fully constructed, the campus will include Christian television studios, a Christian conference center, a gym, an outdoor amphitheater, and student and faculty housing. Essentially, the JETS campus is intended as a central gathering point for all the evangelical churches of Jordan. The entire campus could be completed for less than the cost of a single large building on an American college campus. Donations are tax deductible in the United States (see http://www.jets.edu or http://www.jetseminary.net).

Other ways to support the ministry of JETS include adopting a student’s financial needs or supporting Western faculty. Please share this information with anyone who may be looking for a way to support evangelical Christians in the Middle East during a period when the Arab church is under unusual pressure due to wars and political tensions in the region.

Prayer tower at JETS

Prayer tower at JETS

Class photo

Class photo

Unfinished building on JETS campus

Unfinished building on JETS campus

Finished building on JETS campus

Finished building on JETS campus

JETS logo

JETS logo

Enjoy this content? Buy me a coffee, or support this blog via a PayPal donation.

The decline of Christianity in the United States: Whose fault is it?

13 Wednesday May 2015

Posted by in Current events

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

,

A recent study by the Pew Research Center found that the percentage of Americans who identify their religion as “Christianity” dropped by eight percent from 2007 to 2014. This finding comes as no surprise to anyone living in the United States. Among Christian groups, the number of mainline Protestants and Roman Catholics dropped sharply, while the number of evangelical Protestants rose slightly. Most of the people who stopped identifying themselves as “Christian” now identify themselves as irreligious (or “unaffiliated”).

Various “experts” have given their opinion about the reason for the decline in Christianity in the United States. Political commentators tend to paint the decline as a political phenomenon, usually by claiming that conservative Republican Christians have turned people off to their religion by mixing religion with politics. One problem with this theory is that most of the decline has been among politically liberal Christian denominations, not among politically conservative Christian denominations. And politically liberal denominations are often as political as conservative denominations, if not more so. While it is a common fallacy for people to have a higher commitment to political principles than to biblical principles, it is also true that political activism can energize Christians who are genuinely defending their faith in public forums. Political commentators who blame the decline in the population of American Christians on political activism among conservative evangelical Christians are apparently only expressing their own distaste for the application of biblical principles in the sphere of public life.

An “expert” from the Christian Reformed Church who was interviewed on a local television station attributed the decline partly to the church’s failure to listen to what millennials want the church to be, and partly to the church’s failure to give sufficient attention to social issues. The problem is, mainstream churches have been trying for decades to reshape themselves in accordance with the culture, and the more they do this the more they lose numbers. In fact, while the ultra-contemporary church that does not even want to use traditional terms like “church” and “pastor” has had an appeal to a generation of people who grew up in traditional churches and did not like them, some surveys indicate that Christian millennials actually would prefer a traditional-style church. If a contemporary church looks just like a coffee shop or a bar, millennials don’t feel any sense of sacredness about it. As for the claim that a lack of focus on social issues is driving people away from the church, it is in fact the churches that focus the most on social issues who are losing the most members. This is because the gospel which Jesus and the apostles preached was not a social gospel, but was rather a gospel of repentance for the forgiveness of sins—a spiritual gospel. Churches which ignore or disparage soulwinning are inauthentic and are bound to die out sooner or later.

A columnist for the New York Times points to “low levels of Christian affiliation among the young, well educated and affluent,” and cites “economic development” as one of the causes for the decline in American Christianity. Here we may be on to something. Jesus spoke of the great difficulty of a rich person being saved (Matt 19:23-26), since the ultimate loyalty of the rich is usually to their money. In general, people who feel that they are able to meet their own physical needs, or to have these needs met by the government, tend to think that they do not need God. Education is certainly also part of the reason for the decline in American Christianity. The problem is not education in and of itself, but the atheistic, anti-biblical philosophies which are being force-fed to students at all levels of the American educational system. The more educated a person is in modern America, the less chance there is that he will still believe the Bible or attend a church.

It is no secret that the moral values in American culture are moving farther and farther away from the Bible. There is virulent cultural opposition to such biblical principles as the sanctity of life, sexual morality, modesty, male leadership, eternal punishment for the unsaved, and the exclusivity of salvation in Jesus Christ. There is a major push from the media, the government, and the educational system to make Christianity a religion that people just believe and practice in private, while acting and talking like everyone else in public. While every individual unbeliever is responsible for his own unbelief, the leading anti-Christian voices in America bear the greatest responsibility for pushing people away from the offer of salvation in Jesus Christ. No man bears greater blame for the decline in American Christianity from 2007 to 2014 than the President of the United States, who has adamantly opposed biblical principles on such issues as abortion, homosexuality, the right of the Jewish people to control the land of Israel, the true nature of Islam as a violent and false religion, and many others. Mr. Obama identifies himself as a Christian, but seems only to criticize Christianity in public, while defending Islam and atheism. The Supreme Court justices and other judges appointed by Mr. Obama are also causing considerable trouble for American Christians. While the President has the lion’s share of influence in the country, there are many other leaders who may be blamed, such as the leaders of the nation’s major media outlets, who helped President Obama win two elections and continue to support his anti-Christian outlook. In addition, the Pew study documented the first-ever major decline in American Catholics, and surely some of the blame for this lies with Pope Francis, who seems to be transforming the Roman Catholic Church into a socio-political organization with little or no theological or biblical foundation. The mainline Protestant denominations are also becoming or have become socio-political organizations whose Christian religious aspect no longer seems necessary, and might even be counterproductive to their mission.

So who is to blame for the decline in American Christianity? Certainly not God, who has spared no cost to save the human race, and has offered salvation as a free gift. The American church has many problems, and so do American Christians. But churches and Christians have always had many problems. Ultimately the blame falls squarely on the individuals who reject God’s way of salvation, whether they profess to be Christians or not. Unbelievers are responsible for their own rejection of the Christian gospel. Romans 14:12 says, “Each one of us will give an account of himself to God.” The truth is, there have always been anti-Christian voices in American culture; the reason why they are now ascendant is that the majority of people in the United States are attracted to this message and approve of this message. If millennials and other Americans are leaving the church, it is not, ultimately, due to the failures of the church or of Christians; it is the unbelievers themselves who are responsible for their own deliberate actions.

Postscript: Society’s ongoing rebellion against Christ and His church is a great tragedy, but it is also a sign of hope, for the Bible predicts a great worldwide rebellion against God at the end of history, culminating in the rise of the antichrist (2 Thess 2:1-12, etc.). The antichrist leads man’s rebellion against God to its ultimate expression, after which Jesus will return to earth to judge the nations of the world and seize political power over the world. Christians ought to be encouraged by the fulfillment of biblical prophecy, knowing that the Christ’s return is drawing closer every day, and that God is still directing events in the world in accordance with His plan.

Enjoy this content? Buy me a coffee, or support this blog via a PayPal donation.

America’s sacred animal

01 Friday May 2015

Posted by in Current events, Theology

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

,

It is well known that cattle are sacred to the Hindus of India. Recently there have been news stories about a law passed in the west Indian state of Maharashtra which prohibits the killing of cattle and the sale, possession, or consumption of beef. Even tigers and other carnivores at the Mumbai zoo are being made to eat white meat instead of red meat.

While the sacredness of cattle to the Hindus seems ridiculous to many people, and rightly so, I would like to suggest that the United States is in the process of making dogs (and their biggest wild relative, the wolf) a sacred animal. It seems that at least once a week I see a story on the local news in which someone is being prosecuted for killing a dog or for failing to properly care for a dog. Recently an overwhelming majority of voters in Michigan voted against allowing wolf hunting, even though biologists say that the wolf population is as high as or higher than it should be. Most people in Michigan and other states view the shooting of a wolf as something qualitatively different than the shooting of a deer, even though deer are docile animals and wolves are predators. (The wolves are eating so many deer that the DNR may cancel this year’s deer hunt in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula for the first time ever.) This is not just an American phenomenon, either—recently a group of Chinese animal rights activists laid down on the road in front of a truck that was carrying Tibetan mastiffs to a slaughterhouse, and proceeded to provide medical care for the dogs after “rescuing” them. (The popularity of Tibetan mastiffs in China declined sharply after numerous instances where they attacked and killed people.) Animal rights groups also objected several years ago when Baghdad police began to shoot some of the 1.25 million stray dogs in the city after they had developed a taste for human flesh and had begun attacking humans.

In the United States, it is illegal to sell dog or cat meat. In some states, it is illegal to eat dog meat for any reason. This is not too much different than laws in India which prohibit the butchering of cattle. Although I have never personally tasted dog meat, some of my Korean friends say that it is their favorite kind of meat, that it tastes like beef but is more tender. They can’t understand why it is illegal to sell and eat dog meat in the United States.

Since I don’t have pets, I am not exactly sure what the law requires of dog owners. But I wonder if someone could go to jail for not paying for surgery and chemotherapy if his dog has cancer. It seems that dog hospitals and clinics with 24-hour emergency rooms and advanced medical equipment keep proliferating, and health insurance for dogs is becoming commonplace. I would not be surprised to see the next version of Obamacare make health insurance for dogs mandatory. Nor would I be surprised to see hate speech laws expanded to criminalize derogatory remarks about dogs. Already in Michigan there are frequent rallies in defense of the pit bull, which is the most dangerous of all dog breeds.

I do not advocate unnecessary cruelty to animals, but at the same time it should be recognized that there is considerable confusion today about the difference between man and animals, due largely to the teaching of Darwinian evolution. I do not understand why people think that stray dogs and cats should be captured, then neutered and spayed or put in cages in the Humane Society, rather than shot and buried. I do not understand why a man who accidentally leaves a dog in a hot car, resulting in its death, should go to jail. That is an unfortunate accident, but from a biblical point of view killing a dog is not morally different than killing a rat.

The Bible teaches that man is qualitatively different than a dog or any other animal, because man alone was created in the image of God (Gen 1:26-27; 9:5-6). People who talk about their pet dogs as their “children,” as many now do, are seriously mistaken. The word “murder” is used less and less today where it should be. Where news headlines used to read “Police investigating murder” they now read, e.g., “Police investigating shooting death” or “Police investigate fatal stabbing.” A murderer is now called a “homicide suspect” or a “man convicted of killing.” Perhaps this is because the word “murder” implies moral guilt, whereas problems today are said to be the result of environmental or psychological factors and not willful sin. But where I do hear the word “murder” used with greater frequency is with respect to people killing dogs. From a biblical point of view, animals can be killed, but they can never be murdered. Only man can be murdered, since only man is created in the image of God.

In the Bible, dogs are portrayed as among the basest of all animals (cf. 1 Sam 17:43; 24:14; 2 Sam 3:8; 9:8; 16:9; 2 Kgs 8:13; Job 30:1; Ps 22:16; Isa 66:3). Male prostitutes are called “dogs” in Deuteronomy 23:18. Paul calls false teachers “dogs” in Philippians 3:2. Jesus warned more than once against giving good things to “dogs” (Matt 7:6; 15:26; Mark 7:27). The book of Revelation uses the term “dogs” to represent people who are loathsome and unclean (Rev 22:15).

While as an unclean animal dogs could not be eaten under the Mosaic Law, the New Testament affirms that all types of animal meat—including dogs—are now permissible to eat, since the Law was fulfilled in Jesus Christ (Mark 7:19; Acts 10:9-16). Before the Mosaic Law, as well, it was perfectly permissible to eat dog meat (Gen 9:2-4). Dogs can make fun pets and can be useful for such tasks as protection and hunting, but they are animals—they are not human. Even in comparison to other animals, dogs do not have superior status; they are, in fact, singled out in the Bible as among the most despicable of all animals. The veneration of dogs in the United States would seem, then, to be a mark of a society that has departed from God and from a biblical way of thinking.

Enjoy this content? Buy me a coffee, or support this blog via a PayPal donation.

Will Iran destroy Israel? Will Israel destroy Iran?

06 Friday Mar 2015

Posted by in Bible prophecy, Current events

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , ,

Iran’s nuclear program has been in the news for a long time, most recently because of Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech before Congress. It is an open secret that Iran has been trying to develop nuclear weapons for more than a decade, with some help from North Korea and Russia. Negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program have continued almost for the entire Obama presidency. At first, the goal of the negotiations was to end Iran’s nuclear program. However, Iran seems unwilling to end their nuclear program, since the Islamic rulers of Iran need nuclear weapons to realize their political ambitions of conquest. If Iran’s nuclear program was solely for generating electricity, the Iranians would have ended it many years ago or agreed to allow inspections in accordance with international law, since economic sanctions have done great damage to the Iranian economy. By the same token, it has become evident that President Obama will not even consider destroying Iran’s nuclear program with a crippling airstrike. Mr. Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry have therefore been trying to get the Iranians to agree to something that will limit Iran’s nuclear program in some way.

The rulers of Iran, who are not Arabs, belong to a sect of Islam that is considered a heterodox fringe or cult by the majority Sunni sect of Islam, although probably the worst Islamist groups today are actually composed of radical Sunnis (ISIS, al-Qaida, and affiliated groups). The Iranian form of Islam has a strange apocalyptic eschatology revolving around the supposed coming of the “twelfth imam” and some sort of world conquest or world war. Some people think that Iran’s religious rulers might use nuclear weapons in order to bring about the events that they believe will be associated with the coming of the twelfth imam.

The Iranian regime hates the state of Israel, and has said again and again that they are committed to destroying Israel. Iran is an active supporter of the anti-Israel terrorist group Hezbollah, and in the past Iran has been a strong supporter of Hamas. It comes as no surprise, then, that Israel is working hard to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. But I personally doubt that Israel would be the first target of a nuclear Iran. Iran knows that Israel has a powerful military and nuclear missiles, and Iran knows that Israel would use its nuclear weapons against Iran if necessary. Iran’s archrival in the Middle East is Saudi Arabia, and neither the Saudis nor their Gulf allies have nuclear weapons. The Saudis and their allies are therefore very concerned about a nuclear Iran.

There is a lot of uncertainty about the Iranian nuclear issue. For one thing, no one outside of Iran knows for sure exactly how developed Iran’s nuclear program is, and it is possible that Iran already has a nuclear bomb. The Iranians have a history of hiding as much of their activity as possible, and they would not be the first country to have developed nuclear weapons well before Western intelligence agencies discovered them. The increasingly polarized rivalry between Vladimir Putin and the West could also result in Russia taking a much larger role in supporting Iran and its Shiite allies (primarily Bashar Assad and Hezbollah). Perhaps Mr. Putin will provide more direct support to Iran’s nuclear program in order to gain a powerful ally against the United States and Europe.

But while we can speculate about what may or may not happen vis-à-vis Iran’s nuclear program, there is no need for Bible-believing Christians to be in suspense regarding the outcome of events in the Middle East. Ezekiel 38–39 describes prophetically a great invasion of the Middle East by Russia and its allies at the end of the present age (3½ years before the return of Jesus Christ to the earth). Curiously, it describes Israel as “the land that is restored from the sword, whose inhabitants were gathered out of many peoples to the mountains of Israel” (Ezek 38:8). It further calls Israel “the land of unwalled villages . . . those who are at rest, who dwell securely, all of them dwelling without walls, and having neither bars nor gates” (Ezek 38:11). In other words, Ezekiel 38 portrays Israel as so completely and totally at peace with its neighbors that it has actually disarmed and torn down all of its security walls and fences. Ezekiel 38:13 also seems to portray Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states as unarmed. (Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq are not mentioned, while Jordan is said in Daniel 11:41 to successfully resist end-time invasions.) Incredible as it may seem, the Bible portrays the peoples of the Middle East as living in complete peace and harmony, without violence, in a future day! That is not to say that the violence that now exists in the Middle East will not continue or worsen for a while, but it will not last. Further, Israel will not be destroyed by Iran (nor will, it appears the Gulf states); the nation of Israel will remain in its land and prosper until the final few years of world history, when the antichrist will invade the Middle East and will launch a fierce pogrom to attempt to exterminate the Jewish people.

Iran, for its part, is evidently not going away, either. Iran (Persia) is listed in Ezekiel 38:5 as an ally of Russia when Russia invades the Middle East at the end of history. The Bible does not say whether there will be some sort of previous military conflict between Iran and Israel, but it does indicate that Iran will continue to exist, and also that Iran will be brought firmly within the Russian orbit. (For a more detailed description of Ezekiel’s prophecies, see the analysis of Ezekiel 34–39 in volume 4 of my Interpretive Guide to the Bible.)

I am not saying that Christians, or American politicians, should not be concerned about Iran’s nuclear program, or that Christians should not pray for Israel’s protection. But the Bible gives us assurance that Israel will indeed survive the present conflict, and that peace will come to the Middle East.

Enjoy this content? Buy me a coffee, or support this blog via a PayPal donation.

Is imprisonment as a punishment for a crime biblical?

04 Wednesday Feb 2015

Posted by in Current events

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

The United States is probably the world’s greatest proponent of imprisonment as punishment for crimes. For the recent past, the United States has consistently had the highest incarceration rate of any large country in the world. Most of the rest of the world has followed the United States’ example, and prison is the generally accepted method of punishing crime in the world today. It will be shocking to many Americans and Europeans to hear that the whole idea of a prison system does not have biblical support, and there are good reasons to believe that it is unsound.

The Law of Moses sets out what is, without a doubt, the ideal system of criminal justice. It must be the ideal, since the Law was devised directly and entirely by God Himself, as Israel’s King. It is striking, then, that there is no jail in the Law of Moses. Punishment is by physical and financial damages or death. Outside of the Mosaic code, jail is mentioned occasionally in the Old Testament (Gen 39:19–40:23; Jer 37:11-21), which shows that it existed at the time, though there was no jail in Hammurapi’s ancient law code, either. In Numbers 15:34, a man was held in custody pending a verdict, but it was assumed that the verdict would not be that he should remain in jail. So jail did exist at the time of Moses, but only as a place to temporarily hold the accused pending an investigation and trial. Jail finally became the societal norm by the time of the Greco-Roman world of the New Testament, although the Romans used their jail system in combination with other forms of punishment.

Jail is a terrible place that forces otherwise good men to act as criminals, and subjects them to great abuse from other criminals and from guards. It creates a great financial burden on society to care for the prison population. It creates a great social and financial burden for families who lose members of their family to jail. It condemns the incarcerated to a terrible living death. It is well established that in any country that has a prison system, otherwise good people who enter the prison system for minor offenses will often come out of jail as hardened criminals. Many are forced to join gangs, often along racial lines, as a means of surviving in prison. Many are horribly beaten, abused, and even killed; there were 9,000 reported instances of (homo)sexual assault in U. S. prisons in 2011 alone, and many more that were not reported. In America, about 70 percent of prisoners are rearrested within three years of their release. Society, meanwhile, loses the services of people who otherwise could be doing productive labor, and instead has to pay to take care of them. The idea of jail as punishment for crime ultimately comes from the Greco-Roman classical world—and, more recently, from England—not from the Bible.

(As an application, the Bible never recommends jail as discipline for children. The Bible recommends rebuke and non-injurious corporeal punishment for the discipline of children [cf. Prov 13:24; 19:18; 23:13-14; 29:15, 17]. The idea that it is better for parents to send children to their rooms than it is to spank them does not come from the Bible, although the Bible does not forbid parents from sending children to their rooms. In my own experience, adults who are the best disciplined and best behaved are the ones who were disciplined physically as children, not the ones who were grounded and sent to their rooms.)

One of the fundamental flaws of the jail system (and also of extrabiblical ancient Near Eastern law codes, such as Hammurapi’s) is that it lacks a sense of punishment in proportion to the crime. Under the Mosaic Law, a thief had to make restitution for the thing which he stole, adding 20 percent to its value (Lev 6:4-5). If a man dug a pit and failed to cover it, and another man’s ox fell into the pit and died, the man who dug the pit was given the dead ox, but had to pay the price of the ox to the ox’s owner (Exod 21:33-34). The overall principle of justice in the Mosaic Law was equal recompense: eye for eye, tooth for tooth, life for life (Exod 21:23-25). The punishment was to be exactly equal to the crime committed—no more, and no less. A murderer was to be put to death (Num 35:17). A man who knocked out his neighbor’s tooth was to have his own tooth knocked out (Lev 24:19). A false witness was to be given the sentence that would have been given to the man whom he falsely accused (Deut 19:16-19). In certain cases the judges could prescribe a limited number of lashes as punishment for unspecified crimes (Deut 25:1-3). Various other punishments are prescribed in the Mosaic Law for specific offenses, but always with the aim of equal recompense and preserving the moral fabric of society. This is a great contrast to the modern American legal system, in which often light sentences are given for serious crimes, while some minor offenses result in a long jail sentence and a heavy fine. Little or no concern is given to how the sentence might negatively impact the guilty person, his family, or all of society. The perfectly equal nature of the criminal justice system set out in the biblical Torah led Moses to boast, “What great nation is there, that has statutes and rules so righteous as all this law, which I set before you today?” (Deut 4:8).

There are several other errors in the reasoning behind the prison system. One is the idea that all punishment that causes sensory pain is evil, whereas imprisonment is compassionate because it does not cause sensory pain (the same idea behind the movement to ban the spanking of children). However, I guarantee you that if you asked people who were being sentenced for a crime to choose between twenty years in prison or forty lashes, most of them would choose the forty lashes. They might be sore for a while, but they would still be free and able to work and to be at home with family. This shows that prison is actually a far more terrible punishment than lashes. God Himself often afflicts His people with physical problems in order to teach them lessons, and certainly God is not unjust. Even within the prison system, it is unfortunate that prisoners are punished for misbehavior by being placed in solitary confinement, rather than by being punished physically. Studies have repeatedly shown that solitary confinement creates mental and physical problems that are far more serious than the temporary, superficial injuries caused by appropriately administered physical punishments.

Many people today hold the mistaken notion that the purpose of the criminal justice system is not actually to inflict punishment on criminals, but is rather to isolate dangerous people from the rest of society and to rehabilitate them. The Bible, however, teaches that retribution is the basic purpose of the punishments inflicted by a criminal justice system (Rom 13:4). Another purpose of the criminal justice system is to restrain sin, whether by punishing people who commit crimes, or by others hearing of this punishment and being afraid to commit the same trespass. The ultimate deterrent to crime is capital punishment (cf. Deut 13:5, 11; 17:7, 12-13; 19:19-20; 21:21; 22:21-24; 24:7). Under the Mosaic Law, people who were so thoroughly wicked that they had to be removed from society—such as sorcerers (Exod 22:18), apostates (Deut 13:1-18), and uncontrollable rebellious teenagers (Deut 21:18-21)—were to be executed, rather than locked up in prison.

If people are in jail, they should have to work (or at least be given the opportunity to work), so as to make them productive contributors to society. But the American model is generally for the prisoners to be cared for at the public expense. Prisoners in America are given free meals, free medical, dental, and vision care, free clothes, free housing, 24/7 protection, and so forth—benefits that poor, hardworking people do not receive. Some of the worst criminals receive these benefits for decades, and the financial cost to society is enormous. According to a New York Times study, the city of New York’s annual cost per inmate was $167,731 in 2012. Nationwide, the average annual cost per inmate is a little more than $30,000. The moral cost to the prisoners themselves and to their families is even more devastating. Prison is an unbiblical idea that society truly cannot afford.

Enjoy this content? Buy me a coffee, or support this blog via a PayPal donation.

A troubling erosion of free speech (part two)

28 Wednesday Jan 2015

Posted by in Current events

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

In my previous post, I noted how the liberty to speak freely against the sin of homosexuality is systematically eroding in the United States. But homosexuality is not the only issue for which the ability of Christians to speak their conscience is threatened. Another such issue is feminism. People who make statements supporting a traditional (biblical) view of the role of women as homemakers can expect to be punished for it. In fact, the modern homosexual movement was the natural product of the feminist movement, which has tried to erase distinctions between men and women and to destroy traditional/biblical principles of morality. This is a problem because the New Testament explicitly seeks to define different roles for men and women, both in the church (1 Cor 14:33b-35; 1 Tim 2:8-15) and in the home (Eph 5:22-33). The Old Testament is just as strong, for example giving as the sign of membership in the covenant community a mark that only males could bear (circumcision), only counting males in censuses, and only anointing males as priests and kings. The idea of redefining marriage started with the feminist movement, which sought to liberate women from the constraints of marriage, or at least from the constraints of a traditional marriage. The feminist movement has so much power in the culture that it has even rewritten the English language, banning the use of “man” as a generic reference to “humanity” (in contradiction of Gen 5:2), replacing “men working” signs on the highway with “workers ahead,” and so forth.

It almost goes without saying that the Bible speaks out in the strongest terms against false religions and false teachers. Yet today there is a huge push in the media, the government, and public education to treat all religions equally. Invariably, however, the religions that are highlighted in government educational campaigns are false religions such as Islam and Buddhism, rather than conservative Christianity. Also, while it used to be common for placards and signs with Bible verses on them to be posted in public buildings and public parks, and for Bible stories to be taught in public schools, today these are being removed; the first amendment’s guarantee of religious freedom has been reinterpreted in a way that makes secularism the state religion and actually prevents the free exercise of religion by Christians. In some countries, such as Canada, Christians who make strong statements against Islam or other religions can be punished for hate speech, although I have never heard of people who speak against biblical Christianity being punished in these countries.

Racism is a more complex issue, since the Bible does not condone racism (when properly defined). It is also true that many American Christians of an earlier generation were racially insensitive, or just plain racist. But lobbyists for homosexuality, feminism, and ecumenism have linked themselves with the civil rights agenda. As a result, racial issues are now less about not prejudging or hating individuals on the basis of their skin color than they are about promoting groups that are seen as historically disenfranchised (blacks, women, homosexuals, and non-Christians). The achievements of white male evangelical Christians—arguably the greatest historical positive influence in the United States—are now downplayed, and white men are the least desired group of people for jobs and promotions. Also, it is now possible for any criticism of a black person by a white person, or any arrest of a black person by a white police officer, to be viewed as a racist act, with potentially severe legal repercussions. Conversely, the African American community places a great deal of emphasis on the race issue, which blames other people for their problems, while they seem far less passionate about combating the endemic violence, immorality, drugs, anger, pride, stealing, disrespect, foul language, wicked music, and other sins that are truly wreaking havoc among them. The Bible makes statements about Jews (Acts 7:51-53; 1 Thess 2:14-15), Cretans (Titus 1:12-13), Canaanites (Gen 9:25-27), and women (1 Cor 14:33b-35; 1 Tim 2:11-15) that would be considered “prejudiced” by today’s standards, but that just shows that there is a problem with today’s standards—people do not want to be criticized or to be told that what they are doing is wrong. If someone could go to jail or be fired in America for saying about a modern racial or ethnic group what Paul said about Cretans in Titus 1:12-13, then there is a problem with our way of thinking about racial issues.

What about people who really do make racist statements? Surely it is unchristian, unforgiving, and oversensitive for someone to be ostracized without mercy, even after profuse apologies, simply for having said the “n” word sometime in the past. It is hypocritical for people in government and the media to act like people who have made racist remarks are “contaminated,” and since they themselves are righteous they cannot have anything to do with them anymore. Public figures use the name of God in vain openly every day, and they shamelessly promote and practice all sorts of immorality, yet there is no public outcry against such behavior which is so offensive in the sight of heaven. Racism is wrong, but there are far worse moral problems in America today.

Although the Bible teaches that all people are born with the same spiritual standing before God, that in the church everyone has the same spiritual privileges in Christ (Rom 10:12; Gal 3:28; Col 3:11), and that there should be no partiality in judgment (Lev 19:15; Deut 1:17), the Bible does not teach that everyone should be treated equally. Different people in this world must be treated differently on the basis of their character, their position, their age, and their gender, among other factors. The Bible teaches that greater honor should be given to authority figures (Rom 13:17; 1 Thess 5:12-13; 1 Tim 6:1; 1 Pet 2:17), Bible teachers (Gal 6:6; Phil 2:29; 1 Tim 5:17), and older people (Lev 19:32; 1 Tim 5:1-2), for example. We should have greater respect for the righteous than for the wicked (cf. 2 Kgs 3:14; Esth 3:2; Heb 11:38). In the Old Testament, God blessed kings who pleased Him with extraordinary wealth, and He did not command those kings to distribute their wealth evenly to everyone in the country in order to keep some people from rising above others. God Himself will judge all men after this life is over, and He will give greater reward to some believers than to others, and greater punishment to some unbelievers than to others. The idea in modern America that a public employee should not treat a Baptist pastor any better than a gangster or a drug addict is not biblical, and it is a recipe for societal disaster (cf. Prov 26:1, 8).

Freedom of speech is a right contained in the United States Constitution, although not in the Bible. The Bible teaches that we must be very careful what we say, because we will be judged by God on the basis of our words (Matt 12:37). The Bible does, however, make statements on issues such as homosexuality, the role of women, and other religions that could easily be considered hate speech under contemporary laws of the United States and other Western countries. A ban on such speech is direct opposition to God, to God’s Word, and to God’s people. As pressure on Christians in the United States increases, it appears that sooner or later Christians will have to move to another country where they may speak their conscience without fearing for their personal safety or suffering official harassment. If so, Christians would be leaving America for the same reason for which the first immigrants originally came to America: to find freedom to worship God according to their conscience.

Enjoy this content? Buy me a coffee, or support this blog via a PayPal donation.

A troubling erosion of free speech (part one)

22 Thursday Jan 2015

Posted by in Current events

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

,

Watching President Obama’s State of the Union address on Tuesday was another reminder of the way in which any criticism of homosexuality or homosexuals has become completely taboo in the United States in recent years. Even voicing opposition to so-called homosexual marriage, which a great number of Americans still oppose (and which Obama himself did not openly support until public opinion allowed his position to “evolve”), can result in the loss of one’s job due to fear of a backlash from the aggressive homosexual lobby. Transgendering, which is the worst form of homosexuality, is now also presented as a civil right that cannot be spoken against—even though the Bible calls people who are merely cross-dressing “an abomination unto Jehovah” (Deut 22:5).

Homosexuals, like most others who are politically liberal, do not believe in freedom of conscience. They want to compel everyone to profess to hold the same basic beliefs that they do, whatever those may be at the moment. It is not enough for homosexuals merely to gain legal tolerance, which they already have. They want to force everyone in the world to approve of homosexuality, or maybe even to become homosexual. They want to jail people who lift up their voices against their perverse acts.

The classification of speech against homosexuals as “hate speech” is a big problem for Christians, because the Bible clearly calls homosexuality a sin. In fact, Romans 1:24-27 teaches that homosexuality is qualitatively different from other sins, because those who commit homosexual acts are actually behaving contrary to human nature, even in its fallen state. Homosexuals are acting contrary to their natural desires. Homosexuality is therefore the mark of those whom God has handed over to their sin for their own degradation. It follows from this that homosexuality always carries a whole set of other sins with it, as described in Romans 1:28-32.

The Old Testament is just as strong in its condemnation of homosexuality, prescribing the death penalty for acts of sodomy in Leviticus 20:13. Of course, this command was given in the context of a legal system for Old Testament Israel which is no longer in force. The New Testament does not prescribe a legal system, and homosexuals who converted to Christianity and repented of their sins were integrated into New Testament churches (1 Cor 6:9-11). Vigilante justice is not to be practiced by Christians (Rom 12:19). But if a modern-day government imposed capital punishment for homosexual acts—as some countries do—this could hardly be considered unjust since it is the same punishment that God called for when He wrote ancient Israel’s legal code. But what would happen to a public figure in America who called for the death penalty for homosexuals?

On the other side of the coin, I believe that the day is coming when homosexuals and other unbelievers will demand the death penalty for non-violent Christians who condemn them (cf. Rev 18:20, 24). Perhaps there will someday be public spectacles similar to those in ancient Rome, in which Christians are publicly murdered in front of a raucous crowd. American sports and entertainment are continually becoming more violent, with an emphasis on reality shows rather than mere acting. It is also possible that Christians will someday be sold as slaves to support a wealthy, privileged class of citizens (cf. Rev 13:16; 18:13).

In theory, pastors and lay Christians in America can still speak out against homosexuality, though in certain cases they could be prosecuted by the Justice Department for a civil rights violation. In practice, those who speak against homosexuality may lose their jobs and careers. This greatly increases pressure on Christians not to speak up, since it is obviously very difficult to survive without a job. In colleges and universities, students who voice opposition to homosexuality can expect to have a very difficult time passing classes and graduating. The popular ebook distributing service Smashwords will not list a book that “advocates hateful, discriminatory or racist views,” though it will publish any kind of pornography that is legal. In the future, it is possible that banks and credit card companies could refuse to do business with opponents of homosexuality, which in today’s society would make it nearly impossible to conduct any financial transactions whatsoever (a precursor, perhaps, to what is described in Revelation 13:17).

But homosexuality is not the only issue for which free speech is threatened. Some other troubling threats to freedom of speech will be described in my next post. A brief note of encouragement, though: God is still sovereign, and He will vindicate His people and prevail over all sin and sinners. The ultimate victory of God over the world is certain to come, and it will come soon.

Enjoy this content? Buy me a coffee, or support this blog via a PayPal donation.

Shattering Babel, and our illusion of security

17 Monday Nov 2014

Posted by in Current events

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

This past March, German chancellor Angela Merkel said after a phone conversation with Vladimir Putin that he was “in a different world” and “not in touch with reality.” More than seven months later, it can rightly be asked whether it was in fact Merkel and the West that were out of touch with reality. Russia continues to take an aggressive military posture in Ukraine, and both Russia and China continue their military buildup, with signs of increasing aggressiveness against the West. Clearly the West has, at a minimum, failed to anticipate Vladimir Putin’s behavior in Ukraine and elsewhere. It seems to me that the West still does not fully appreciate Putin’s nationalistic ambitions and the lengths to which he will go to realize them. But the real problem lies not in a failure to understand Putin, but in the failure of people in the West to see the world through biblical eyes.

To understand what is happening with the resurgent nationalism and militarism in Russia and China, it is necessary to go all the way back to the formation of the nations of the world in Genesis 11:1-9. This passage describes how, at an early point in the history of the world after Noah and his family survived the Deluge in a ship, the entire human race came together at a place called Babylon (Babel). Their purpose in coming together was to glorify themselves, rather than their Creator, through a construction project of epic proportions, which would unite the people of the world into a single family instead of dividing them into many distinct nations and scattering them. Their intent was to build the mother city of the new world, from which man would rule himself—no longer recognizing God’s sovereignty—and would build a great civilization. Mankind was on the fast track to the next all-out rebellion against God, just like the situation before the Deluge, and had God simply let man go his own way, He would have been forced to wipe out the human race yet another time in another cataclysmic judgment. Thus, God interrupted man’s activity by mixing up human language (i.e., by making each family group speak a language that was completely unrelated to all the other languages), which destroyed the unity of the human race and prevented man from effectively working together in opposition to the will of God. The history of the world since Babel has been a history of distinct nations which have competed with one another, and thereby have prevented each other from accomplishing separately what all could accomplish together. World unity is a serious problem, for, left to their own devices, the vast majority of men will always give themselves over to their sinful desires, and will seek to give full expression to their wickedness (cf. Gen 6:5; 8:21; Ps 2:1-3).

The world has had as its goal ever since Babel to unite again as one in order to achieve sinful human ambitions and to glorify man. But there have been two great problems in the way of this evil dream. First and foremost is the problem of the lack of a common language and a means of global communication. This problem has been significantly lessened in modern times through a system of global communication and travel, the use of English as a common language, and the development of automated translation software. The second problem in the way of world unity still exists in a more serious way. This problem is the competing ambitions of nations and rulers with a national, rather than a global, identity. The history of the world since Babel has been a history of violent conflict between rival nations. There have been many rulers in the history of the world who have wished to unite the world, but they have always faced stubborn opposition from competing rulers and nations who want world unity to come on different terms.

The West, particularly Western Europe, has been enamored with the dream of creating a utopian world since at least the eighteenth century. While such dreams were temporarily placed on the shelf by two world wars and the Cold War, they quickly reappeared with the collapse of the former Soviet Union in 1991 and the subsequent rapid global adoption of the internet. The late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries have been characterized by utopian visions of a world without borders, in which people would be “global citizens,” would travel freely from country to country without restrictions, and would enjoy the same rights and freedoms everywhere. The internet and other new forms of communication were supposed to be the ultimate instrument which would create world unity. However, this vision is quickly being reshaped due to the resurgence of strong and oppressive central governments in Russia and China, which are opposed to the Western world for the age-old reasons of nationalism and power-hungry rulers. It has been discovered that the internet and cell phones can indeed be controlled through a vigorous program of monitoring, blocking, and coercion of providers. It is currently being discovered that leaders such as Vladimir Putin are willing to use any means necessary, including brutal military force and nuclear brinksmanship, to achieve their objectives. The response of the West has been timid and tepid. The ultimate result will be a return to a world that is badly divided politically, though with strong economic and cultural linkages.

Vladimir Putin is delivering a reality check to a complacent West that has believed its own utopian wish. Too many people in the West had thought that the age of great wars was over, that liberal democratic values were inevitably taking over the world, and that people in developed countries would never have to fear another large-scale military assault. While there might not be a large-scale war between great powers before the end of world history (the seven-year tribulation period), there certainly will be smaller wars and a great military buildup as part of a new and more dangerous Cold War. It is apparent that Vladimir Putin has ambitions to rebuild the Russian Empire, and that he would ultimately like Russia to dominate the entire world. China would like to do the same. Putin has no qualms about the use of military force, and he appears poised to use his military power to gain as much territory as he thinks he is able to get. Since Europe and the United States do not have the stomach to challenge Russia on the battlefield, it appears that Putin and his successors will indeed successfully expand the new Russian Empire to include not just the territory of the former Soviet Union, but also any other lands beyond where he may be able to extend his reach (Iran? Finland? Africa?).

Tomorrow I am traveling to San Diego for the annual meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society. This is the largest gathering of evangelical Bible scholars in the world. I hope to have some insights from the conference to share on my next post.

Enjoy this content? Buy me a coffee, or support this blog via a PayPal donation.

A biblical perspective on Tuesday’s elections

02 Sunday Nov 2014

Posted by in Bible, Current events

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

Government is a necessary, God-ordained institution whose primary purpose is to restrain sin by maintaining law and order in society (see Rom 13:3-4; 1 Pet 2:13-14). Christians who live in a democracy should seek to influence the government by casting their vote—though, admittedly, sometimes we feel that we are voting for the lesser of two evils. Some Christians are even called to a career in government and politics, although this is becomingly increasingly difficult in the American context.

This Tuesday, November 3, is an important “midterm” election for congressional and state officials. How can we put this election in biblical perspective? First of all, we can say that it is a mistake to place your hope for the future on the results of this election. Don’t fool yourself into thinking that if the Republican party can just win control of Congress, followed in two years by the White House, they will fix the spiritual problems in America. While there are some evangelical Christian politicians in the Republican party, most Republicans are essentially secular, and most have a secular agenda. Even if all the Republican politicians were Bible-believing Christians, there still is just not much interest in the Christian gospel in America today. If the Republicans regain control of the Senate, this will, at best, only slow down America’s moral and spiritual decline.

Our hope as a Christian has to do with the world that is to come—that world where the redeemed are raised from the dead, where there is no pain, no suffering, and no death, and where God Himself is ruling directly and visibly. If you set your hope on anything in this world, you will be sorely disappointed, because this world and everything in it is passing away. Don’t hope for a political party or a politician to solve the world’s problems. Don’t think that government, science, or business will solve the world’s problems. Put your hope in Jesus Christ, who is the only Solution to the world’s problems. Jesus will in fact solve all the problems in the world at His second coming to earth; until then, people everywhere are called to receive Him as their Savior in order to obtain a place in that glorious world to come. It is okay to be involved in politics, but the church needs to stay focused on spiritual causes. If you choose to give money to a political cause, make sure that the bulk of your giving is still going to the church, which is where it will really make a difference.

I know many Christians who are fearful of the political future of America. Is there a big economic collapse coming in America, as the doomsayers perennially forecast? Neither party wants to hurt the economy; the economy will probably grow no matter which party is in power, though in different ways and at different rates. The prospect of religious persecution of evangelical Christians is much more real, though it is still unclear exactly how and when this will unfold. Should the rising tide of anti-Christian sentiment scare us? Not if we see our duty as simply being faithful to God, which is something we can do in tough times as well as in good times. (By the way, most American Christians that I know who are very worried about the direction of their country, and who are praying fervently for political change, seem to feel “locked in” to life in America. But if pressure on Christians in America becomes too great, there is nothing in the Bible that says Christians cannot move to another country for their own safety. It would probably actually be good for the spread of the gospel if more American Christians moved overseas [cf. Acts 8:1-4; 11:19].)

The Bible teaches that God is sovereign over rulers and nations; in fact, this is the theme of the book of Daniel (2:21; 3:29; 4:32; 5:21; 6:26; 7:27). So if people who are opposed to God, and who are opposed to biblical principles, win Tuesday’s elections, does that mean God has lost control? Should it shake your faith? By no means. In fact, God will not impose direct political control over the earth until Jesus Christ returns to set up His kingdom. The Bible reveals that the end of the present age is marked by a great rebellion against God, in which the world will continually grow worse until it finally unites in worship of a man known as the antichrist (cf. 2 Thess 2:1-12). The antichrist will lead the world to the ultimate expression of evil, such that God will finally have to intervene and put an end to the kingdoms of this world. Since this is how the Bible reveals the age will end, it should not surprise us when leaders and cultures in the world grow ever more anti-Christian. When things go from bad to worse to worse yet, it is because God’s sovereign plan is unfolding to bring the powers of this world to an end. Our job is to be separate and faithful. By doing so, we obtain a share in the spoils of victory when Christ returns to conquer the world.

Come, Lord Jesus! (Rev 22:20)

Enjoy this content? Buy me a coffee, or support this blog via a PayPal donation.

A biblical perspective on the World Series

27 Monday Oct 2014

Posted by in Bible, Current events

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

Game 6 of the World Series is tomorrow, and millions of Americans will be watching. Nearly everyone in America (or, at least, nearly every male) spends a significant amount of time watching sports of some kind year-round, whether it is baseball or one of the seemingly endless variety of other athletic competitions that are televised today. But did you know that the early church was opposed to sports? (Read Tertullian’s On the Games/De Spectaculis, for example.) Sports were also rejected by observant Jews before the time of Christ’s first advent, in part because training in sports and participation in the games was one of the major emphases of Antiochus IV’s attempt to Hellenize the Jewish people.

What does the Bible have to say about sports? First, the Bible is clear that God is not impressed by athletic ability, but only by godly character. Psalm 147:10-11 says, He does not delight in the strength of the horse; He takes no pleasure in the legs of a man. The LORD takes pleasure in those who fear Him, in those who hope in His lovingkindness. When the prophet Samuel was initially very impressed by the physical appearance of David’s oldest brother Eliab, and assumed that Eliab should be anointed king on this basis, God told Samuel, Do not look at his appearance, or at the height of his stature, because I have rejected him. For [the LORD sees] not as man sees; for man looks at the outward appearance, but the LORD looks at the heart. (1 Sam 16:7).

I have a very hard time believing that God is impressed by how hard a pitcher can throw a baseball, or by how far a batter can hit it.

The apostle Paul once participated in an athletic competition, though not by choice: he evidently was thrown into a ring with wild beasts at the Ephesus amphitheater and was forced to fight them in a life-or-death match as a public spectacle, as a punishment for preaching the gospel (1 Cor 15:32; cf. 2 Cor 1:8-11). But in describing this event in 1 Cor 15:32, Paul says that if he fought with wild beasts “after the manner of men” it would have been of no profit for him. That is, had Paul fought with the motive of the gladiators—worldly fame and fortune, or a love of sport—it would not have been of ultimate value for him, because the world’s glory is passing away. However, Paul fought with wild beasts with the motive of serving the risen Christ, which has an eternal reward. He was fighting by compulsion, not by choice, and he glorified God by demonstrating that God could deliver a man who was in his fifties and not trained as a gladiator from the mouth of the lion (cf. 2 Tim 4:17). The inspired view of sports which Paul gives in 1 Cor 15:32 is that if sports are played for any of the usual motives for which sports are played—to win fame, glory, money, and so forth—they are unprofitable for the players. They are, in a word, worthless.

Even non-competitive bodily exercise, which clearly has health benefits, is said by Paul to be merely of “a little” profit in comparison to the more important exercise of one’s faith unto godliness, since godliness has value both for the present life and for the life to come in eternity (1 Tim 4:7-8).

In the grand scheme of things, it is stupid to be awed by someone’s ability to whack a golf ball or to toss a basketball. It is stupid for coaches, fans, and players to treat the games they play with great seriousness and passion, as if they are a very significant thing. Sports competitions accomplish nothing of any value, since they are worthless insofar as eternity is concerned, and they cannot even be considered productive work vis-à-vis the present world. (Yes, everyone needs a break from work, but do we “need” professional sports?) In fact, sports glorify man, rather than God, and they set up a conflict between rival players and fans for no good reason. Even from the standpoint of fitness, sports create frequent injuries and long-term wear and tear as players push their bodies to the limit and do things that the body was not designed to do. It is better to follow a simpler exercise regimen, and to do so only to maintain one’s health for service to God.

Whether the subject is sports or something else, the things we really care about should be the things that really matter.

Enjoy this content? Buy me a coffee, or support this blog via a PayPal donation.