The Christian Bible IS IT CREDIBLE?

In his posthumously published work, Letters From the Earth, Mark Twain expressed disdain for the Bible by observing that it is nothing more than a spectacular collection of liars, cheats, crooks and adulterers, all of whom have one very disturbing thing in common – God likes them.

In that same volume, Mark Twain admits that the Bible has some noble poetry and good morals, however it has a wealth of obscenity and upwards of a thousand lies. I wished Twain was alone in his conclusions. Unfortunately, a number of similarly uninformed persons share those acidic views. Bible critics leave us with a number of questions, like, is the Bible an historically reliable document?

It might be appropriate at this time to define what I mean by Bible. I am referring to a document that was written over a period of some 1,600 years. It was written by at least forty authors from various walks of life including kings, fishermen, statesmen and scholars. As literature, the Bible is unique in that it incorporates moral exposition, history and various literary genres.

Like no other religious book, the historical thread of the Bible is unique in religious philosophy and constitutes one of its most genuine marks with reality. For this reason, many scholarly fields can research, to determine the veracity of the text. From these scholarly analyses, one can conclude that no other literary work from the ancient world has as much reliable support as being genuine, as the Bible has.  

The Bible is much more than a catalog of religious philosophical ideas. It identifies names of actual people, places and periods in history. The Bible provides historical dates and events of neighboring countries, thus allowing the contents of the book to be aligned with the findings of non-religious historians, studying other cultures.  

Because of its historical reliability, some scholars mistakenly believe that it is similarly inspired like the writings of Shakespeare or Ernest Hemingway. Here I would differ with literary scholars in that no other book has ever so completely changed the course of human destiny as the Bible. There is something about what the Bible says that distinguishes it from any other literary work in history. The truth is, “it borrows from none and gives to all.” 

Academically, the credibility of the Bible has clearly been established. Available manuscripts and more recently numerous artifacts continue to validate its contents. Despite the evidence, scholars will con-tinue to do what scholars do best. I believe the late Bernard Ramm (Protestant Christian Evidences) was correct when he said, “No other piece of literature has been so chopped, knifed, sifted, scrutinized and vilified as the Bible has, and remains the most read book in the world of literature.”   

One of the phenomenal things about the Bible is its magnetism to profoundly grip the human soul. Is this because of the literary skills of the writers? Most unlikely - the writers were not among the scholars of ancient times. Some were even referred to as “Galileans”, a derogatory term used to describe unlearned people. How then do we account for the phenomenal impact the Bible has had on the world for centuries?

The writer of the New Testament book of Hebrews explains it this way: “For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart” (Hebrews 4:12).

The writer’s choice of words is instructive – “the word of God…” In numerous passages, the Bible speaks unequivocally of the voice of God. Even the most cursory reading of the prophets reveals the constant recurrence of such expressions as “the word of the Lord came,” or, “the Lord said to me.” Such expressions appear more that 2,000 times in the Bible. In essence, the writers were alleging that the information they were providing came from a divine source. 

Is this what Peter may have had in mind when he wrote: “… no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit” (2 Peter 1:20-21)?

Could this be the reason why no other book in human history could compare with the Bible? Study the circulation of Bibles, the translation, its survival through persecution, its influence on literature, law, politics, ethics, philosophy and religion – there might just be enough reason to agree with the writer of the book of Hebrews – that we have in our possession “the word of God.”

WE URGENTLY NEED A Voice on Vice

A new word has been coined to describe a growing elephant in the room of vices – sexting. Sexting is sending sexually explicit messages via cell phone or instant messenger. With advances in technology to record and send photos and video, the practice of sending suggestive and explicit pictures has increased.

Last year at least two congressmen tarnished their political careers because of sexting. A joint study by the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy and CosmoGirl

suggests that 20% of teens (13-19) and 33% of young adults (20-26), have shared nude or semi-nude pictures of themselves either via text or by posting online. The study disclosed that girls are slightly more likely to do this than boys. Furthermore, 11% of the young teen girls (ages 13-16) admitted to sending suggestive photos of themselves.

It is believed that some 51% of teen girls cite pressure from boys as a reason to send explicit messages, while only 18% of teenage boys say they were pressured by girls. A Pew Research Center poll found that 6% of Americans over 18 years of age reported having sent a nude or near-nude image of themselves to someone else. However, some 15% of adults have received sext messages.

Sexting is currently illegal under federal law. It falls under the creation, distribution and possession of child porn and is a felony offense. At the moment law enforcement officers are arresting both those producing and possessing sext messages. Based on a 1973 definition of obscenity by the Supreme Court, sexting is a crime. Sexting depicts or describes sexual conduct. Because it is not intended to reflect something artistic or scientific, it should be adjudged as obscene, and cannot be defended as a First Amendment Right.

Like pornography, sexting thrives because of prurient or lustful minds. The practice is destructive both to the individual and to the society to which he or she belongs. Lustful practices escalate and often demand more challenging and stimulating opportunities. As these debased practices become more bizarre, they resort to more sullied methods to satisfy their cravings.

Social scientists confirm that many adult rapists, child molesters and serial killers began their raunchy behaviors with pornography. What began as private fun resulted in disaster in the community. Family counselors would also confirm that persons who embrace pornography with the aim of finding sexual fulfillment in marriage, witness destruction rather than fulfillment in their marriages.  

More persons need to expose and seek to curb these destructive behaviors. It is bad enough if the practices were evident only outside the church. However, I have every reason to believe that deviant sexual behavior is also practiced in the church.

Late last year my wife and I were invited to provide leadership to a new ministry designed to address issues of value and virtue among today’s youth. As we attempted to identify some of the more specific areas of need, we felt we needed to begin among young people in our churches.

This new ministry, Love Protects, exists to expose deception and lies, to confront assumptions with logical truth-claims and to defend a biblical worldview with “grace and truth”. We intend using social media, lectures, debates, seminars, rallies, mentorship programs and training conferences to disseminate our message.

Honestly, you would be shocked to hear the stories from some of our churched young people. Many have no concept of biblical sexuality. When confronted about their behavior, many consider our approach to be out of date. Cases of abortion are as prevalent as among un-churched young people.

I must encourage you to visit our website – www.loveprotects.com. Although still under construction, you will be able to get a sense of why we do what we do. Young adults form the base of our Board of Directors. They love the Lord, understand the youth culture and are committed to change. Prior to conversion, some Board Members were victims of the culture. Now, they are determined to use every professional tool available to make a difference.

With the passing of Chuck Colson, the need for others to engage the culture is critical. We need people to pray for us - this is a battle against forces of evil. This mission requires more than analytical skills for victory.

We need financial support. With one full-time staff member providing executive leadership in a few weeks, we know there are fiscal challenges ahead. Please check our website and see how you can assist to provide a voice on vice.

By the way, if you know of anyone in need of professional help with deviant sexual behavior, please encourage them to contact Pure Life Ministries today.

To Be Born Again CAN DAMAGE YOUR BRAIN?

A study, recently published by Duke University suggests that religious factors like being born again can cause shrinking of the brain. The Abstract of the study states, “The findings of this study indicate that hippocampal atrophy in late life may be uniquely influenced by certain types of religious factors.”

Hippocampal atrophy is the wasting away or decreasing of the part of the brain that is responsible for emotions and senses like fear, anger and pleasure. As people age, the brain deteriorates giving rise to clinical outcomes such as depression, dementia and even Alzheimer’s disease. The Duke study contends damage is also done to older persons who have had “life-changing religious experiences.” The Protestant understanding of being born again was specifically singled out as a contributor to this impediment.

 
The inter-disciplinary study is a welcome addition to a number of studies showing the effects of religion on the brain. As a matter of fact, the study is among the first to examine religious and spiritual correlates with brain atrophy. Although thorough, I have some concerns about the methods used, which would ultimately affect the outcome.
 
I believe the sample size of the study was too small. The study evaluated 268 men and women between the ages of 58 and 84 over the course of two to eight years. The sample was also too narrow in that it examined mainly Southeastern Protestant Christians. In addition, the study could not clearly determine if the outcomes were related to religious experiences or to the stresses that normally accompany persons in the specific age group.
 
I would agree that some religious experiences do bring on stress. However, these experiences are more as a result of cultural and psychological expectations, as opposed to healthy biblical responses to the Scriptures.
 

For example, when Jesus challenged Nicodemus to be born again (John 3:1-21), He was not suggesting that Nicodemus should attempt to relive some childhood experience as a perception of reality. In other words, Jesus was not saying Nicodemus should recover his innocence.

The context is very clear – Jesus was not referring to natural birth. Like some of today’s psychoanalysts, Nicodemus thought Jesus was inviting him to relive infancy when he asked: “How can a man be born when he is old? Surely he cannot enter a second time into his mother’s womb to be born?”    

In His lengthy reply, Jesus contended, “flesh gives birth to flesh; the Spirit gives birth to spirit.” In other words, the born again experience to which Jesus referred was not a human phenomenon. Jesus was talking about a new life – a new life in which God imparts spiritual life to a person.

 

Agreed, in attempting to explain this new life, many Christians have made burdensome demands of new believers. Such practices have brought on stress, conflict and a variety of mental health issues. We must therefore ask ourselves whether the mental health challenges that new believers face are related to the born again experience or to the burdensome demands that Christian leaders require, in order to validate the born again experience.

 

To be born again implies that one has chosen to abandon a particular way of living. That abandoned way of living is often referred to as a natural, inherited lifestyle. It is a lifestyle that is often in conflict with the born again lifestyle Jesus talked to Nicodemus about. Because of the noticeable differences between the lifestyles, conflict is inevitable.

   

The conflicts can become more intense among older persons because they are having to change ways that have shaped them for most of their lives. It is difficult to predict the emotional impact such changes can have on converts. We must therefore ask, do the benefits of being born again outdo the apparent risks of hippocampal atrophy?

 
The answer would seem obvious – to be born again offers temporal and eternal benefits. Numerous studies confirm the mental health benefits that accrue to persons who accept the new life Jesus offers. The joy of such a lifestyle is not based on what one abandons, but rather on what one embraces.
 

As Paul presented a defense of his faith before Festus in Acts 26, Festus declared, “You are out of your mind…your great learning is driving you insane.” To this Paul replied: “I am not insane…what I am saying is true and reasonable.” The same is true today - to be born again will conflict with existing worldviews. However, such conflicts do not imply insanity. To be born again is true, reasonable and resonates with the virtuous life Jesus offers in John 10:10 (…I have come that you might have life and have it more abundantly).

NO RESURRECTION, No Christianity

 As we discussed the outcome of the Israel “bone box” case, one student asked, “what would happen if a bone box with Jesus’ name is ever found?” Before disclosing my answer, allow me to explain the background and implications of the question.

Following the death of Jesus, His body was placed in a tomb. This practice was very common among families that could afford tombs in the first century. It was also very common for the remains of the dead to be removed from the tomb and placed in a bone box (ossuary) any time after one year from death. The name of the deceased would be engraved on the limestone box and the box would then be stored in a cave with other boxes. Over the years, about 1,000 ossuaries have been found in Israel - many of these with recognizable engravings of names.

It was in this context my student was asking, “What would happen if a bone box with Jesus’ name is ever found?” My answer was very clear –  I would abandon Christianity. The shock was obvious on the faces of these college students. “Does one have to believe the resurrection in order to be a Christian?” Another student chimed in, “…but I know a Christian who does not believe in the resurrection…”

Seriously though, does one need to believe in the physical resurrection of Jesus in order to be a Christian? Paul in Romans 10:9 contends that belief in the resurrection is necessary for one to become a Christian. Paul is not suggesting that one must know of the resurrection in order to become a Christian. Rather, I believe I hear him saying one cannot reject the resurrection of Jesus and at the same time want to become a Christian.

 THE IMPORTANCE OF THE RESURRECTION

The resurrection of Jesus was humanly impossible- decomposition, not resurrection, follows death. Any reversal of this order is beyond the natural. The New Testament maintains that something beyond the natural occurred and Jesus was seen by several persons for more than a month, following His death. Paul, in his letter to the Corinthians argues, if Jesus did not rise from the dead, then our faith is useless (1 Corinthians 15:14). To deny the physical resurrection of Jesus is to deny the supernatural intervention, following the crucifixion.

 

Even a cursory reading of Acts will show that the testimony of those who witnessed the resurrection was critical to the new movement. Secular historians claim that the resurrection is a matter of faith and not history. The fact that the alleged experience is not a natural phenomenon means it cannot be considered to be an historical event.

Logically, that would seem to make sense. However, what does not seem to make sense is to conclude that because something does not fit one’s definition of reality, that something did not take place. Okay, here are a few historical questions for the historian:

 

1) How can we account for the empty tomb, within days of the crucifixion?

2) How can we account for the sudden enthusiasm of discouraged and fearful disciples so soon after the crucifixion of Jesus?

 

3) How can we account for the rapid growth of the church, were it not for the message of the resurrection?

 

4) How can we account for the early church wor-shipping on the first day of the week, were it not for an opportunity to remember the resurrection?

 

5) How do we account for the martyrdom of the disciples, were it not for their convictions about the resurrection?

 

6) How do we account for the remarkable conversion and life of Paul the persecutor, were it not for the resurrection?

 

7) How do we account for the missing corpse or even the ossuary of Jesus, knowing that either item would negate the Christian claim of His resurrection?

Answers to these and other questions do not require a religious worldview – then why can’t they be answered? Frank Morrison, Josh McDowell and Lee Strobel tried to find answers in their quest to prove the resurrection a hoax – the result? Each one followed the evidence and became Christians.

It is true – people would die for what they believe to be true, but never for what they know to be a lie. Trace the deaths of each of the disciples in Foxe’s Book of Christian Martyrs; excepting John who was banished for the truth, all the other disciples died for what they knew to be true. Even Judas, after betraying Jesus, admitted he betrayed innocent blood. Judas eventually took his own life because he could not live with the memories of his crime.

 

It is impossible to believe the resurrection of Jesus and not be affected by what we believe. The disciples lived and even died for what they believed.

May Easter 2012 challenge us to do something about what we believe.

INJUSTICE!

Rarely do we include the pain of injustice when discussing the crucifixion of Jesus. In his movie, The Passion of the Christ, Mel Gibson did a great job in depicting the physical pain Jesus suffered. However, the pain of the unjust trials of Jesus is often overlooked. Then, as well as now, justice is rooted in concepts of truth and impartiality. To be honest, to be deprived of justice is often worse than the alleged crime for which one is accused.

In reporting the trial of Jesus, the New Testament accounts for four trials – two Hebrew and two Roman. Laws were broken in all four trials, thus making the miscarriage of justice even more barbaric.

Before providing a catalog of unjust practices in the trials, one must never forget the pre-trial pains Jesus encountered. The Gospel writers were convinced that the Jewish authorities were determined to have Jesus killed, by whatever means possible. The Greek translation of Matthew 26:4 is clear, they intended to take Jesus by “treachery” and “cunning”, and kill him. Following the restoration of life to Lazarus, John reports “…from that day on they plotted to take his (Jesus) life” (John 11:53). Interesting, the authorities that wanted to kill Him were hoping to conduct an impartial trial later.

Space would not allow us to expand on the pain of betrayal by one of His disciples (John 13:2) or the additional pain of abandonment “when all the disciples deserted Him and fled” (Matthew 26:56). Or, consider the pain from the denial by Peter, even after being cautioned. It is hard to imagine the loneliness Jesus must have felt before trial.

I just completed reading Attorney Steven Allen’s book, The Illegal Trial of Christ (Legal Awareness Series, Inc., 2005). I’ve had the book for a few years and was determined to include it in this year’s Easter readings. Allen does a terrific job in explaining the rules of procedure in Hebrew Law. Citing earlier publications by Walter Chandler (The Trial of Jesus [New York, 1908]) and Alfred Edersheim (The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah), Allen contends, “Christ’s trial was a mockery of Jewish law” (page 11).

 

Here is a partial listing of laws that were broken by the Sanhedrin – the Jewish organization that was responsible for administering justice:

1. Jesus was questioned at night – proceedings were to be conducted during the day only

 

2. Jesus was taken to the palace of Annas/Caiaphas - proceedings were to be conducted in the Chamber of Hewn Stones (a temple chamber).

3. Jesus was questioned on the day of a Passover Feast and on the eve of a Jewish Sabbath – this was a clear violation of not conducting a trial on the eves of Sabbaths or feast days.

 

4. The accusation was based on the testimony of an accomplice, Judas – in order to convict someone, an accusing witness, together with two eyewitnesses, were required.

 

5. Jesus was taken before a prejudiced judge – prejudiced judges should not participate in trials.

 

6. Jesus was convicted on the basis of His own testimony and not that of any other witness – an accused person was never compelled to testify against himself.

 

7. Jesus asked for an accusing witness, which was His right by law, and was denied – the Sanhedrin never produced one credible witness.

 

8. The merits of the defense of Jesus were not considered – absolutely no defense was offered.

 

9. The judge prejudiced the outcome of the case – Caiaphas the high priest “rent his clothes” during the trial – that was a display of disgust that would negatively influence the opinions of his subordinates.

10. Both Hebrew trials took place within ten hours – the law was clear, if a death sentence were pronounced, a second trial was to be held the following day.

Despite these and many other injustices, Jesus allowed the authorities to crucify Him. He scolded his disciple Peter when he attempted to provide protection - Peter drew a sword and cut off the right ear of the high priest’s servant. To this action Jesus replied, “Do you think I cannot call on my Father, and He will at once put at my disposal more that twelve legions (72,000) of angels?” (Matthew 26:53)

 

If Jesus could have escaped crucifixion and chose not to do so, then why did He allow it to happen? Jesus knew death was inevitable. He was paying a price that the prophets predicted hundreds of years earlier. New Testament writers contended that Christ’s horrific death was necessary because of the horrific nature of sin – for which He was dying. In addition, if there was no death, there could be no resurrection – the subject of our next commentary.