Category Archives: Current events

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Why isn’t Islam in Bible prophecy?

24 Friday Oct 2014

Posted by in Bible prophecy, Current events

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

,

I grew up in a strong Bible-teaching church that emphasized Bible prophecy, and I have been a student of Bible prophecy all of my life. Given the amount of time that I have spent studying biblical prophecy, I find it curious that I cannot find a reference to the Islamic religion anywhere in the Bible. Currently, and for some time in the recent past, Islam has been a focal point of the world’s attention, due to the rise of militant Islamists who are responsible for a disproportionate number of terrorist attacks, civil strife, and wars in the world. Muslims also currently dominate the Middle East, and the Middle East is the focal point of biblical prophecy. But the Bible presents Israel as living in complete physical peace with its neighbors around the time of the antichrist’s rise to power (Ezek 38:11-12)—something which is not possible so long as radical Islam is present in the region.

So what will happen to Islam? In the absence of any clear biblical statement, it is hard to say with certainty. Maybe all the radical Muslims will become moderates. But it seems to me that Islam is in the process of collapsing, or of self-destroying. Recent events have shown that committed Muslims have a tendency to radicalize, which means waging jihad (war) against the infidels. (Christians are engaged in a spiritual battle, not in a battle against “flesh and blood” [Eph 6:12]; but many Muslims see their religion as indeed a “flesh and blood” struggle for survival and expansion.) The “infidels” include not only people from other religions, but also those from rival sects of Islam. In fact, the radicals tend to fracture into different groups which declare all others to be infidels, including other radical Islamists. More Muslims (and new converts to Islam) continue to radicalize, since the radicals have been able to argue convincingly that the Islamic religion does in fact teach the philosophy they espouse.

Western leaders portray the radicals as not representative of “true Islam.” They essentially want Muslims to hold values that are very close to those held by the Western secular majority, and to make Islam little more than a cultural identity with some belief in a higher power. However, their efforts to promote so-called “moderate Islam” are failing, since the claims about Islam made by Western leaders merely represent what they want Islam to be for political reasons. Claims about “true Islam” can really only be made by presenting a detailed analysis of the theological underpinnings of the Islamic religion, and Western leaders have failed to present such theological argumentation. Modern Muslims who want to become more religious tend to radicalize, and to turn violently against the West.

I believe there is a massive collapse coming in Islam, due largely to disillusionment when the goals and aims of the Islamists are totally frustrated. If the Islamist forces are crushed on the battlefield all over the world, and if Israel wins some sort of total victory, this would create a crisis of belief in the Islamic world. The Islamists themselves are creating disillusionment among many Muslims who are repulsed by what they are doing. Perhaps the West (and China) will even launch a concerted campaign to stamp out Islam someday, possibly as part of a broader campaign against conservative monotheistic religions.

What religious system will replace Islam in the Muslim countries of the world? I pray that the church will make a great effort to reach Muslims with the gospel as they are driven to search for truth and answers.

Enjoy this content? Buy me a coffee.

A biblical perspective on Ebola

19 Sunday Oct 2014

Posted by in Current events

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

,

Most of us have a tendency to become very concerned when we have a serious illness or health problem. Sometimes we even worry over minor health problems, or just the possibility that we may have a health problem. Concern is a natural human reaction that prompts us to take good care of our bodies, though the overreaction of worry is sinful and unhelpful.

Over the past several months, the world has become increasingly concerned (or worried) about Ebola—especially after the disease spread beyond the borders of a few small countries in West Africa and has begun to impact countries in Western Europe and North America. Ebola is now a major crisis in the minds of most people in the West, and enormous resources are, quite sensibly, being poured into the fight to stop it.

What does the Bible have to say about Ebola? Nothing directly, of course, but Mark 2:1-12 describes a somewhat parallel situation involving a man who had a major health problem, which he and his friends viewed as a significant crisis. This man had some sort of paralysis, and had to be carried around by four friends on a stretcher. They heard that Jesus, the great Healer, was in town; however, the house where He was teaching was so packed with people that they could not carry their friend through the crowd to Jesus. The paralytic’s friends devised an ingenious solution to the problem. They carried their friend up the stairs on the outside of the house to its flat roof. Then they opened up a hole in the roof, and used ropes to lower the man on the stretcher directly to Jesus. Jesus recognized this as an act of great faith—the paralytic had no doubts about Jesus’ ability to heal him through the power of God. On this basis, Jesus immediately pronounced the man’s sins forgiven, without healing his paralysis. It was only after Jesus’ pronouncement generated a negative reaction among some people in the crowd that Jesus healed the man of his physical disability, for the purpose of demonstrating that He has the power to forgive sins.

What is interesting about the story in Mark 2:1-12 is that when Jesus was presented with a man who had a severe physical disability, He saw the man’s real and most urgent need as spiritual, and it was the man’s spiritual need that He immediately met. Didn’t Jesus care about this man? Of course He did, which is why He pronounced his sins forgiven. The healing of the man’s physical disability seems almost like an afterthought in the story; or, at least, a matter of secondary concern. This is exactly the opposite of the way in which we naturally think, since we have a tendency to focus on the visible and tangible. The lesson for us is that man’s most basic need is spiritual, not physical. Compared to eternity in a world of glory, all the sufferings of this life are light and temporary, and really are of little consequence (2 Cor 4:17-18); conversely, feeling healthy and comfortable in this life will do nothing to ease the pain of eternal torment in hell if a person does not repent and believe the gospel (Luke 13:3-5; 16:19-31).

Why is it that great multitudes thronged Jesus to receive physical healing, but only a few came to Jesus to ask Him to forgive their sins (Luke 7:36-50)? Why is it that so many people in America today are obsessed with the health crisis caused by Ebola, but so few are concerned about the spiritual crisis in America that is causing people to live in darkness and die without Christ? Why aren’t internet billionaires pouring millions of dollars into the fight to save souls? Why isn’t the media running stories about the grave dangers of America’s departure from a historically Christian culture? Why do people go to the hospital when they are physically ill, but most do not go to church or read the Bible to seek healing for the sickness of their souls? Clearly the world’s perspective is badly skewed; most people are completely blind to their real need, which is spiritual.

Ebola is indeed a serious problem that deserves a strong response, and the deaths of thousands of people is a great tragedy. But the greater tragedy is that the world continues to be focused almost exclusively on physical issues such as health and wealth, while ignoring their infinitely more serious spiritual problem of sin and separation from God.

Enjoy this content? Buy me a coffee.

A Christian perspective on the Hong Kong protest movement

14 Tuesday Oct 2014

Posted by in Current events

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

The Hong Kong pro-democracy protests that have been in the news since September 26 seem to be losing steam. They do not have the widespread support that they had initially, and most of the protestors’ barricades have been torn down. It is possible that there could be some sort of violent confrontation with the police in the coming days, with many arrests. These “occupy” protests are illegal, but the protesters say they had exhausted all other avenues for change, and so were forced to resort to civil disobedience.

As someone who has been to Hong Kong and who has a family member living in Hong Kong, I have a special interest in these protests. Coverage of the protests in the West has generally been supportive of the protesters, who want unfettered democracy in Hong Kong, while coverage of the protests by official media outlets in China has either been nonexistent or strongly opposed. But since all of these news sources are secular, none of them evaluates the protests by the Bible.

The New Testament shows a striking disinterest in political issues. It teaches that Christians have a responsibility to submit to and obey their government and the laws of their land (Rom 13:6-7). A Christian who opposes government opposes God, and will pay for it (Rom 13:1-2). Whether government officials are good or bad, they need our prayers to help them do their jobs (1 Tim 2:2). Christians are commanded to honor the governing authorities (1 Pet 2:13-17)—including, in the context of 1 Peter 2:17, Emperor Nero. The apostles were neither political agitators, nor social reformers; they were heralds of the gospel of salvation, and their mission was to save individual souls, not the government or society. While the New Testament does not prohibit Christians from being involved in government or politics, Romans 13:1, Titus 3:1, and 1 Peter 2:13 clearly imply that political activism must be done in accordance with the laws of one’s country; civil disobedience is sinful as a form of political activism.

I do not question the sincerity or good intentions of the Hong Kong protestors. But the only biblical justification for Christians to disobey the law is when the law prohibits something that the Bible commands or commands something that the Bible prohibits. The government of the Roman Empire under Nero was incredibly wicked, openly immoral, cruel, and anti-Christian, yet the apostles never lifted their voice in protest. Instead, they commanded meek submission and honor to the governing authorities.

On the other side of the coin, unrighteous rulers will have to give an account to God for their actions. But it is the exclusive prerogative of God (and, in some cases, of rulers who stand in God’s place) to set up and remove kings (Dan 2:21; 4:17). The frustration of people with their governments is often understandable, but rebellion is not a Christian solution to the problem. It is well known that the Chinese government officially espouses the false religion of Communism, and also that the government has a lengthy track record of persecuting the Christian church. But the Roman government to which the apostles commanded submission possessed similar faults, and one would be hard-pressed to identify any “Christian” government in the world today.

I do, like the Hong Kong protesters, have political views and a desire to make government better. But what happens in the political arena is a secondary issue for the Christian. Our job is to be faithful to God’s instructions for us in the Bible, and these instructions are concerned with spiritual, not political, reform. While many reasons have been put forth to justify civil disobedience in certain contexts, these justifications do not come from the New Testament.

Enjoy this content? Buy me a coffee.

Why do the Saudis view history as a threat to their religion?

12 Sunday Oct 2014

Posted by in Current events

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

One of the things that makes Christianity different from other religions is that it is essentially a religion of history. That is, the core tenets of the Christian faith are not philosophical ideas or theories, but are historical events and historical realities—such as the incarnation of Jesus Christ, His virgin birth, His sinless life, His crucifixion, His resurrection, His ascension, and His future return in glory. Even justification by faith is something that involves an actual change in the justified individual, who receives a new nature through regeneration at the same time as he is made right in his standing before God. Christians have always had a fascination with archeology, because of the way in which archeological discoveries illumine the Bible and corroborate Christian beliefs.

Recently there was an editorial in the New York Times, written by a Muslim, who says that “the rulers of Saudi Arabia and the clerics have a deep hatred of history,” and they have intentionally destroyed nearly every site of historical or archeological significance in Mecca. The structures they have razed in Mecca include ancient mosques, the houses of Muhammad’s wives and companions, and houses from the Ottoman era, among many others. In their place the Saudis have constructed an ultra-modern city of skyscrapers, highways, and luxury shopping malls. Muhammad’s house still stands, but it is off-limits and the Saudi clerics want it destroyed. Even the scenic mountains which once ringed Mecca are gone, having been flattened by Saudi bulldozers and demolition crews. The Sacred Mosque at the center of the hajj (pilgrimage) is now closely hemmed in by skyscrapers, including some of the world’s largest, and plans have already been made to demolish the ancient mosque itself and replace it “with an ultra-modern doughnut-shaped building,” according to the article. Muslims who come to Mecca for the hajj are now assigned to a tour group, which restricts their ability to move about and to interact with people outside of their group. This not only keeps visitors from looking for historical sites in Mecca, it also keeps the Saudi people from hearing alternative interpretations of Islam.

It is clear that the Saudis are trying to erase all traces of the past in Islam’s holiest city. But why? The Islamic religion, especially in its strict form practiced by the Saudis, is a religion of laws and principles, not history. A search for the historical basis for these religious principles would potentially undermine them. Rather than asking and investigating such questions as how the Koran was written and standardized, how Muhammad developed and promulgated his religious convictions, and how Islamic traditions subsequently developed, the Saudis want to focus on the Islamic religion as it is taught and practiced by them today, and they want to prohibit the expression of contrary ideas. The self-proclaimed Islamic State (ISIS/ISIL) has also earned a reputation for hating history, and for destroying ancient mosques, churches, shrines, and archeological sites. Their creed is a philosophical system, not a history. History is a threat to them, since there are many historically dubious claims made in the Koran and other Islamic traditions, and the history of the development of Islam shows that it is a manmade religion. The attempt by the Saudis and other strict Muslims to erase all memory of the past in Islam speaks volumes for the largely unspoken problem of finding an authentic historical basis for the beliefs and practices of the Islamic religion.

Enjoy this content? Buy me a coffee.