People feel guilty when they do certain things; others feel that way when they consider their past. Some feel perpetually guilty.
But on a whole we all feel guilty. Guilt is a feeling that abides in abundance.
Psychologists have struggled with the problem of guilt.
Some have suggested people feel guilty because of repressed sexual desires.
Others say guilt results from fear of separation from one’s mother. Still others say guilt is simply a social convention necessary to the preservation of an orderly society. Continue reading “The Problem Of Guilt”
I don’t think most atheists have an intellectual problem with the existence of God but rather an issue with sin that biases them against the existence of God. The Bible asserts the cause of atheism is not the lack of evidence for God but the suppression of it. When I’m speeding it’s more convenient to believe the state patrol is not out.
But for those atheists who do have genuine questions, I think it important Christians have answers.
One question I’ve heard from skeptics is, “If God exists why doesn’t he just appear to the human race and eliminate any doubt?” The answer may be that, in our fallen corrupt state, He can’t. Continue reading “Why We Can’t See God”
The other day I was thinking about that episode where George Costanza,while working late one night, has sex in his office with the cleaning lady. I know, I know, this is not the stuff of Sunday School lessons, but I’m assuming my audience is mature, and I am headed somewhere with this.
It’s what everybody thinks until they read the Bible: “If I’m good enough the Lord will let me into heaven.”
It’s what I thought before I became a Christian, and it is the default philosophy for just about everyone who thinks they are a Christian but have never read what the Bible says about the subject. On the scale of accurateness though this philosophy is right there with the flat earth society.
There are some good reasons the Lord didn’t set up a goodness standard as the test for eternal life.
First, how would anyone this side of heaven ever know how good was good enough? One could never know whether one had done enough good to have their ticket punched.
Second, it would make us the means to our own salvation. We would, in effect, become our own saviors. While that might seem attractive at first blush, it would actually foster pride, which makes us more self-centered and less good. The means to our salvation would become the means to our own destruction. Our quest for salvation would ensure its failure.
Third, it would create an uneven playing field because people who come from broken homes, are victims of physical or sexual abuse or other dysfunctional conduct, would always start off at a severe disadvantage as a result of something over which they had no control. That would hardly be fair.
It makes sense then that the Bible says to the Christian, “…by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, that no one should boast.” (Eph. 2:8-9).
Salvation occurs by believing on Jesus who paid the price for our sin. It is Jesus who saves, not us. And it happens by grace, i.e., as a gift that is offered to us by God. If it was a result of our good works, we would be able to brag and be full of pride. And, salvation happens on the even playing field of the heart, about as fair a playing field as you can find in a fallen world.
When I’m litigating a case, I try to find out early in the case the other side’s best argument. I may not know all the evidence they will present at trial, but I do know they know, and therefore the argument they lead with is the one they usually think gives them the best chance of winning.
In Jerusalem at the time of Jesus’ crucifixion, the “other side,” the opponents of Christianity, were the Jews. They had a vested interest in their religion. This was particularly true of the religious leaders who made their living by their religion. The Jewish leaders’ opposition to Christianity is best shown in that they were the ones who were responsible for turning Jesus over to the Romans for crucifixion.
After Jesus’ resurrection, the argument the Jews decided upon to disprove the resurrection was that Jesus’ disciples had stolen the body. Given what the Jews had to lose, we must conclude this was the best argument they had. There is something else we can know: It must have been undisputed the tomb was empty.
The easiest way to disprove Jesus’ resurrection would have been to march to the tomb and produce the body. That they didn’t means the tomb was definitely empty. Second, it must also mean there was no dispute about where Jesus had been buried.
So, the Jews said Jesus had not been resurrected from the dead but that the disciples had stolen His body from the tomb.
There’s one problem with this argument. Actually, there are a number of problems with this argument but one very, very big one.
The disciples, the same disciples the Jews said stole Jesus’ body from the tomb, ended up giving their lives in martyrdom based on the truth of the resurrection. All they had to do to avoid martyrdom was to deny the resurrection, to deny Jesus was who He said He was.
Some might argue that people throughout history have given their lives based on mistaken ideas about God. I agree.
The difference here is that if the disciples stole the body of Jesus, that means they gave their lives for something they knew was a lie. That is, of course, absurd.
The better explanation, and the one that is consistent with the disciples’ transformation from despair and timidness to joy and boldness is the historical fact of the resurrection. GS
