Did Paul Write About Jesus as a Historical Person? by Kyle Butt, M.Div.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=10&article=2836

Did Paul Write About Jesus as a Historical Person?

by	Kyle Butt, M.Div.

In his book, The Pagan Christ, Tom Harpur claims that the story of Jesus was mythical. To bolster his assertion that there never was a real human named Jesus as depicted in the gospel accounts, Harpur alleges that the apostle Paul, whose writings were penned before the gospel accounts, never mentioned Jesus as a historical figure. Harpur wrote: “The earliest writings in the New Testament, which make up more than one-quarter of its total content, are the letters of the Apostle Paul. What is absolutely striking about them is their virtual silence on the whole subject of a historical Jesus of Nazareth” (2004, p. 166). Harpur believes this claim to be of such force that “[t]here is no question that this is the datum that ultimately stares down the proponents of historicity.... Paul never once mentions the man Jesus, in the full historical sense” (pp. 166-167).

Harpur, anticipating the fact that many who read Paul’s writings see that the apostle mentioned Jesus, wrote:

Of course, a critic will argue that Paul does occasionally speak of Jesus by name. This is quite true. But today, most Bible theologians agree that even when he does so, he is not talking about a man of flesh and blood, a historical person, any more than the Egyptians were when they spoke of Iusa millennia earlier.... Yes, Paul does talk about “this Jesus whom we have seen,” and at times he gives the impression he has an interest in an actual person, but closer examination shows that he really is speaking always of mystical visions of an exalted, spiritual being whom he calls Christ (pp. 167-168).

Is it true that Paul only mentioned Jesus “occasionally” and never referred to Him as a flesh and blood human being? Certainly not. In fact, it is amazing that Harpur could make such an outlandish, unscriptural claim and still have his book published by anyone familiar in the least with Paul’s writings.

The fact of the matter is Paul often spoke of Jesus in terms that cannot be understood correctly in any way other than as a historical, flesh-and-blood human being. Paul used the name “Jesus” 218 times in his writings (Strong, 2001, p. 453), not counting other names for Jesus like Christ or Lord. For Harpur to say Paul “occasionally” mentioned Jesus is outright dishonesty. Paul used the name Jesus five times in the first eight verses of Romans, seven times in the single-chapter book of Philemon, and 22 times in the brief, four-chapter book of Philippians. An honest account of Paul’s writings shows that they are replete with Jesus’ name, containing it an average of two and a half times per chapter.

Not only did Paul repeatedly mention Jesus, but he specifically stressed that Jesus had come in the flesh as a real human being. For instance, in 1 Timothy 2:5, Paul wrote: “For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus.” To elucidate what he meant by the word “man,” Paul wrote in Philippians 2:5:

Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a servant, and coming in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross (emp. added).

Any attempt to turn Paul’s phrase “in the likeness of men” into some sort of spiritual, mystical appearance is doomed to failure. Furthermore, Paul more specifically mentioned that “the likeness of men” that he discussed in Philippians meant human flesh. Paul wrote to the Romans about “Jesus Christ our Lord, who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh” (Romans 1:3, emp. added). The apostle further mentioned in 1 Timothy 6:13 that Jesus “witnessed the good confession before Pontius Pilate” (emp. added).

Harpur’s major contention is that Paul did not mention details about Jesus’ life such as His birthplace in Bethlehem, His mother’s name, or His specific miracles. Yet, if the guiding hand of God produced the New Testament documents, it makes perfect sense that such information would not be repeated in Paul’s writings, since it was so thoroughly documented in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. In truth, the fact that Paul repeatedly alludes to Jesus in the flesh, but does not reiterate the various details of the gospel accounts, shows that Paul coincides with the Gospel writers, but was independent of them as well. Why would God need to record for the fifth time the various miracles and facts about Jesus’ life in the writings of Paul? Paul consistently dealt with many of the events in Jesus’ life such as His death, burial, resurrection, trial before Pilate, birth according to the seed of David, and the overarching fact that He took on the form of a human. Harpur’s complaint that Paul did not mention enough of the details that are recorded in the gospel accounts is a criterion that he and his fellow skeptics have arbitrarily chosen and that proves nothing.

Harpur’s false assertion that “Paul was a mystic, and he knew only the mystical Christos, Christ not ‘after the flesh’ but after the spirit” (p. 172) lacks scholarly integrity and biblical foundation. The obvious truth is that Paul saturated his writings with the name of Jesus and repeatedly stressed that Jesus had come in the flesh as a historical human being. The details he left out of his writings accord perfectly with what one would expect from divine inspiration, and show that, while he acknowledged the historical Jesus, his writings serve as testimony independent of the gospel accounts.

REFERENCES

Harpur, Tom (2004), The Pagan Christ (New York: Walker).

Strong, James (2001 reprint), The New Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible (Nashville, TN: Nelson).

Why Christianity? Why the Bible? by Kippy Myers, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=1362

Why Christianity? Why the Bible?

by	Kippy Myers, Ph.D.

Are religions of the world simply different expressions of the same thing? Is Christianity the counterpart to Hinduism, Islam, or Buddhism, and do these religions merely “complement” one another? Is Allah the same deity as Jehovah, and is Jehovah the same as the Hindu god, Brahman? There are some who think that we are all trying to get to the same place, and simply call God by different names or approach Him in different ways. Thus, in the final analysis, the different approaches are coequal, and therefore equally acceptable to God.

The brief answer to these questions is a simple “no.” These religions are not the same truth in different wrappings. We can discern why by noting some of the radical distinctions at the very heart of these religions that show how completely distinct and unrelated they are. Of course, they have things in common (they are religions, they have deities, they have holy books, etc.), but this does not mean that they are equally efficacious, any more than a book with blank pages is equal to a book filled with good information.

Let me introduce an important term—“ontology.” Ontology refers to something’s being, essence, or nature. It has to do with what makes it what it is even after being stripped of all its unnecessary elements. Hinduism, Islam, and Christianity are different ontologically. When you strip them of their coincidental characteristics and focus on what makes them distinct as religions, they are radically divergent. They are different by their very nature, even in their most basic elements. Their books, their concepts of salvation, and even their deities are wildly different from one another. Let us make a simple beginning by noting a few of their essential differences.

THE BOOKS OF WORLD RELIGIONS
DISASSOCIATE THEMSELVES FROM ONE ANOTHER

Individuals who claim to be members in good standing of one religion (whether Christian, Moslem, or Hindu) sometimes extend the hand of fellowship to those in other religions. That is, some express a willingness to accept people who remain in other religions as if they have their deity’s blessing. But for the most part, these open-armed well-wishers are viewed as heretics by the faithful followers because the holy books themselves, which form the very center of the religions, are not so accepting of one another. Can the follower be better than the “inspired” book from which he gains faith?

The Bible—For example, the New Testament clearly claims to be the only way by which a person can come to God (specifically, one must come through Jesus—John 14:6; 2 John 9; et al.). This establishes solid barriers against all who disagree with the person of Jesus depicted in the gospel accounts. Prior to New Testament times, Judaism carried the same policy. In the Old Testament, God always spoke against pagan religions and their followers. The religions of Egypt, Babylon, Assyria, Canaan, Greece, and others are roundly attacked, condemned, and described in great detail as false and devilish.

Obviously, simply calling something “god” and worshipping it does not mean that it is acceptable to the God of the Bible. Jesus said that they who worship God must do so in spirit and in truth (John 4:24). Amazing as it may seem to those who think that the God of the Bible approves of other religions, the apostles of Christ even condemned those in the Christian age who were going backward, trying to be saved by the Mosaic law, a religion that unquestionably centered on the same God as Christianity (Galatians 5:4). In addition, they even condemned their own Christian brethren if they were living wrongly (Acts 8:18-23; Galatians 2:11).

Thus, even if the different religions did comprehend the same God, worshipping the same God does not legitimize one’s religion or religious practices according to the Bible since the one true God must be worshipped properly, that is, as the Bible prescribes (Colossians 3:17). The Bible claims to be the uniquely acceptable religion before God, and specifically condemns any other as illegitimate. Whatever we say about Islam and Hinduism’s relationship to Christianity, we cannot say justifiably that biblical Christianity has any affiliation with them. Any superimposition of fellowship between them would be forced and unnatural.

The Koran—The Islamic holy book, the Koran (or Qur’an), claims to be the final word from God. It claims that the Bible was just a step in its direction, so the Koran is further and final revelation (Sura 4:161). Whereas the Bible says that the apostles would be led into all Truth, and although it condemns additional and different alleged revelations as false (e.g., John 16:13; Galatians 1:6-9), the Koran teaches that if a person has only the Bible, it is not enough because then he rejects the greatest prophet of all, Mohammed. Since the Islamic holy book condemns unbelievers, it condemns those who accept only the Bible.

Whereas the Bible says that Jesus was and is God, and is the only way to heaven (Philippians 2:5-11; Hebrews 5:9), the Koran exalts Mohammed above Jesus. Mohammed explicitly says several times that Jesus was not God, but a prophet and apostle (Sura 5:79; 4:169, et al.). The apostle John, however, calls the teacher of this doctrine “the antichrist” and has a lot to say about his spiritual condition (1 John; 2 John; 3 John).

Speaking of misbelievers (which would most definitely include Hindus) who turn others from the path of God, the Koran says in Sura 13:34, “For them is torment in this world’s life; but surely the torment of the next is more wretched still—nor have they against God a keeper” and “the recompense of misbelievers is the Fire!” (13:35). Also, “Whosoever craves other than Islam for a religion, it shall surely not be accepted from him, and he shall, in the next world, be of those who lose” (Sura 3:79).

Mohammed claimed that his revelations came from God via a Heavenly Book from which all Zoroastrian, Jewish, and Christian revelations came. The Bible, however, teaches that God is not a God of confusion (1 Corinthians 14:33), which would be contradicted if all of these conflicting religions came from the same source. The Koran says that Moslems believe what was revealed to Jesus and the prophets, but this is incredible in light of the aforementioned facts in addition to hundreds of others left unmentioned here (Sura 3:78-79). Amazingly, Richardson says in his introduction to the Koran, “the Qur’an often contradicts itself as well as other scriptures. Allah, then, changes his mind and alters the text of the Heavenly Book accordingly (Surah 13:39).” Compare this with Jesus’ statements, “Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my word will not pass away” (Matthew 24:35), and “The Scripture cannot be broken” (John 10:35).

Hindu Writings—Contradictions between the most basic doctrines of the Bible and the Koran could be multiplied, and the Hindu Vedic literature is widely divergent from these two. As different as they are, the Bible and the Koran have more in common than either has in common with Hindu writings. Vedic materials are something altogether different. The point here is that if the major religious books condemn and contradict one another on such fundamental issues, where does anyone get the idea that they belong together? If we believe any one of them, we must disbelieve the others. They cannot be related unless severely mutilated. They clearly are mutually exclusive. Since they so clearly do not affiliate, which, if any, is the right one?

HISTORICAL EVENTS AND INDIVIDUAL EXPERIENCES

The Koran—Islam is based entirely upon the secret, private experiences of one man. Mohammed regularly went alone to a cave and said that a Revealer delivered visions to him there. He later identified this person as the angel Gabriel. Only one person allegedly saw the angel. Only one person allegedly heard a voice. Only one person allegedly saw the visions. The only way to become a Moslem, then, is to take this one man’s word for it. We must believe a man who was kicked out of his home town, became a robber baron, led a pack of thieves in attacks on caravans, and then later returned to the city and took it by force. Compare the lifestyle and character of this man with that of Jesus Whom he claims to supersede, and see who is more worthy of belief.

The Bible—In vivid contrast to this approach of having to take one man’s word for an entire religion and basing one’s eternal destiny on one person’s private visions, the Bible is rooted and grounded in objective historical events—things many thousands of people beheld. Its specific times, places, people, and events can be located in history. Archaeology, ancient history, geography, literature, etc., corroborate its details. These give the Bible the ring of authenticity, and tie it to reality outside the mind of any single person or any group of people.

Because of this, the Bible has a beginning, middle, and end. It has a flow, a progression, a unity. It is very orderly and systematic. The Koran, however, is a very disjointed collection of many small apothegms called Suras. This is because Mohammed could not write and did not intend for his revelations to be compiled into a book. Richardson’s introduction to the Koran says, “It was addressed to the ear, not to the critical eye....” However, after Mohammed died and many began to question the legitimacy of his visions, believers gathered together the leaves, potsherds, etc., on which his sayings allegedly had been copied by some of his hearers. Someone later edited them and put them in a book format. Richardson says, “Apart from its preposterous arrangement, the Qur’an is not so much a book as a collection of manifestoes, diatribes, harangues, edicts, discourses, sermons, and such-like occasional pieces. No subject is treated systematically....” It certainly does not appear to be related to an alleged Mother Book from which the Old and New Testaments also were derived. The Koran’s sum and substance is very different from Scripture as Christians know it.

Hindu Writings—The holy literature of Hinduism encompasses many volumes, and is referred to as the Vedic literature. The most widely known is the Bhagavad-Gita, a small section of the much larger section, the Mahabharata—a huge work that has influenced Hinduism profoundly. It allegedly was composed over a period of eight hundred years (400 B.C. to A.D. 400), and supposedly tells the Sanskrit history of the ancient world. But as A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada says in his translation, the Gita is “the essence of Vedic knowledge.”

The high god in Hinduism is Brahman. In a sense, Brahman is the All, the infinitely embracing Everything—ultimate reality. In another sense, Brahman is a god composed of Brahma, Shiva (the one often pictured with four arms), and Vishnu. Each of these three has a basic personality and work. Brahma creates, Shiva destroys, and Vishnu preserves. Each has wives, sons (one of Shiva’s sons is the elephant-headed Ganesha), daughters, and a series of folklore-type adventures. Their consorts also are worshipped, so there is actually an indefinite number of gods. A Hindu expert will tell you that they often use the number 330,000,000 as a convenient way of describing how many are worshipped. The boundaries and eccentricities of Hinduism, therefore, are very loose, and there are many types and sects of Hindus. What ties them together seems to be their belief in Brahman and the pantheon of gods, reincarnation (the idea that after you die you are reborn into another life on Earth), karma (the law which says that if you were bad in this life you will have a difficult life in the next), and the Vedic teachings.

One of Vishnu’s avatars (incarnations) was named Krishna. He has been described as “an impetuous, violent, and erotic figure.” Krishna is the speaker and the hero of the Bhagavad-Gita, in which he is prince of a great dynasty. The Gita’s setting is a battle in which he is involved with relatives who are enemies of his kingdom. There is no way of checking whether these events actually occurred or if this is pure legend, since we have no record of the events outside the Gita itself.

Someone might respond, “But why is it better to be historical and checkable (like the Bible) than to be non-historical (like the Koran or Vedic writings)?” The real issue, of course, is that we believe we must be rational in regard to religion. Does anyone seriously suggest that we beirrational about it? If we are to be irrational, then what is the use of arguing rationally that we must be irrational? Why worry about persuading people that the major religions are all the same if it does not really matter? Actually, all of the world religions attempt to use reason and (with the possible exception of Buddhism) teach their adherents to use their minds in religion. Even though Buddhism tries to get its adherents to a point in meditation where they lose thought and feeling, it uses reason to teach them, to explain itself, and to get them to that point. The point is, should reason and proof be the “engine that pulls our train of life” or not? Should we not require proof for what we believe? If not, that would put us in the position of accepting every person who claimed a divine vision. The Bible both demands proof and provides it (Deuteronomy 18:20; Isaiah 41:21-24; 1 Thessalonians 5:21, et al.).

UNIQUENESS OF INCARNATION

The Bible—The Christian system centers on the fact that God has come to Earth in a physical body and made a one-time sacrifice for sin (John 1:1-14; Philippians 2:5-9). The Bible says that the salvation of mankind was accomplished only through this act and that apart from it, man would be hopelessly lost in sin (John 3:16; Ephesians 1:7, et al.). The incarnation of the Word, along with His death and resurrection, combine to form the fundamental essential truth that defines Christianity (1 Corinthians 15:1-4). Without it, Christianity would not exist.

Hindu Writings—In Hinduism, there is no requirement to escape from sin before judgment comes (Hebrews 9:27) because for the Hindu, there is no final judgment day. Rather, the Universe is eternal; we live here forever in different personalities, one lifetime after another. The goal is to gain release from being reincarnated. The incarnation and sacrifice of someone in Jerusalem plays no role at all in Hinduism. Hindus gain release from this cycle through individual observance of ritual, right thinking, and right acting. Everything we get in this life is what we deserve because of the way we lived in past lives (even though we cannot remember our past lives so as to learn to do better in the next one, we still suffer for them). If we are better in each successive life, we will climb the ladder of goodness until we finally achieve release and oneness with divinity and the Universe.

Thus, there is also no unique one-time incarnation of God because the Hindu god, Vishnu, has come in the flesh many times in a number of guises. Vishnu has visited Earth ten times as a deliverer (as Rama, Krishna, et al.). For example, the one to whom the Gita is directed is a warrior named Arjuna. One day Krishna is driving his chariot, and Arjuna says to him, “You are the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the ultimate abode, the purest, the Absolute Truth. You are the eternal, transcendental, original person, the unborn, the greatest” (10:12-14). In the section “Knowledge of the Absolute” Krishna says, “as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, I know everything that has happened in the past, all that is happening in the present, and all things that are yet to come” (10:26). He elsewhere comments, “This material nature is working under My direction.” Hence, he was allegedly deity in the flesh several times.

The Koran—Islam teaches that Jesus Christ was not deity, but rather one of the great prophets (see previous quotes). His death is not necessitated for redemption, and if He died on the cross at all, its purpose was definitely not to wash away our sins. Moslems believe that salvation is obtained through observance of the “five pillars” of Islam: recite the creed (which is basically, “There is no God but Allah, and Mohammed is his prophet”); pray five times daily while facing the holy city of Mecca; give alms to the poor; fast for an extended period each year; and once in your life make a pilgrimage to Mecca.

RADICALLY DIVERGENT DIVINITY

Hindus do not believe the Universe was created by God out of nothing. It is simply an eternal emanation from Brahman. It is illusory and must be escaped so that we may gain what is real, viz., oneness with the Universe and oneness with Brahman. Islam and Christianity think of this as blasphemy, for Jehovah is perfect in every way, and infinite in every attribute. A created being never could attain such a degree of being and certainly never could become God.

Hindu gods in their many thousands of representations are commonly worshipped by means of figurines and “idols” that are condemned by both Old and New Testaments (e.g., the first two of the ten commandments—Exodus 2:3-4). One of Mohammed’s primary goals was to condemn and destroy this practice.

Islam also says there is only one member of the godhead, Allah. Christianity preaches a trinity: God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:18). Obviously, Christianity and Islam are as opposed to Hinduism on this matter as it is to them.

DECIDING WHICH IS RIGHT

From this brief introductory study it can be seen that these three religions and their books cannot be equated. But the question remains, which one should we accept? I maintain that we should accept the Bible over other religious books because no book can amass the evidence for supernatural origin that the Bible can. No other book exhibits such profound evidence for inspiration. We should accept the Bible because:

1. It claims to be from God. That in itself does not prove its claim, but the claim is something we should look for. Would God send His revelation anonymously?
2. It is based in history, not in the subjective experience of one individual. That opens it to being tested. It can be proven or disproven.
3. It contains the highest and purest moral teachings. They remain unsurpassed for their simplicity, applicability, and profundity.
4. It contains prophecies that are made and fulfilled. They surpass the possibility of human or natural powers to foresee or bring about.
5. It has a sublime unity about it in every way—doctrine, progression of thought, story line, theme, details, structure, etc.
6. It is accurate in every way—historically, geographically, scientifically, etc. As diligently as skeptics have tried for centuries, there never has been one flaw or contradiction proven to be in the Bible that would establish that it is not what it claims to be. Yet, “to err is human.”
7. It contains medical and scientific knowledge ahead of its time. The Bible did not partake of its contemporary medical and scientific ignorance.
8. It has had an immeasurably profound impact on the world and always in a positive way whenever faithfully practiced.
9. It has the best textual sources of any ancient book. That is, we can trace its history back to its beginnings more accurately, and with greater corroboration, than any major writing of the ancient world.
10. It contains a reasonable view of God, man, and truth.
11. It is indestructible. Its most powerful, rabid, and scholarly opponents have failed to do away with it.
12. It always is current. Last year the Book of the Month Club asked 2,000 of its readers what book most influenced their lives. The Bible was number one.
13. It addresses our fundamental questions about why we are the way we are, why suffering exists, where we came from, what our destiny will be, how the Universe began and how it will end, etc.
14. It fulfills our spiritual, social, psychological, and emotional needs.
15. It is incredibly brief, although it is set forth as a seminal book from the Creator. Men are notorious for their verbosity in such matters.
16. It is based on the testimony of thousands of witnesses throughout its history.
17. It portrays its heroes, flaws and all. It is unbiased in its treatment of history, unlike works of men praising their heroes.

On the other hand, the evidence for the inspiration of the Koran is based solely upon the testimony of one man, Mohammed. The same kind of “evidence” would make you a Hindu. Why accept Mohammed’s testimony and reject the Hindu testimony? Or, why accept the Hindu writings and reject the Koran? Both have essentially the same evidence in their favor. One cannot be proven to be any more legitimate than the other.

However, the preceding list includes just a few of the many very significant avenues that should be considered if a person is truly seeking to be open-minded about searching for truth among the world’s alleged books from God.

All religions are not the same. Their most basic doctrines readily contradict the others. However, there is one religion that is based upon a book that provides good reasons to be believed—unity and consistency of thought, high standards of thought and conduct, etc. Which should we believe?

[EDITOR'S NOTE: Kippy Myers holds an M.A. in philosophy and Christian apologetics from Harding Graduate School, an M.A. in philosophy from the University of Dallas, and a Ph.D. in philosophy from the University of Tennessee at Knoxville. He is an assistant professor of Bible at Freed-Hardeman University in Henderson, Tennessee.]

Higgs Boson—The "God Particle"? by Jeff Miller, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=3870

Higgs Boson—The "God Particle"?

by	Jeff Miller, Ph.D.

[NOTE—For updates to this article, see Higgs Boson—The "God Particle"? (Update) and Higgs Boson—The "God Particle"? (2nd Update)]

The Higgs Boson particle, presumptuously called the “God Particle” by some physicists, is a theoretical elementary particle that is predicted by the Standard Model of particle physics, but which has yet to be observed by physicists through experimentation. It is “thought to be the fundamental unit of matter” (“Has Quest for the Elusive…?” 2011). In theory, the particle could explain how other elementary particles have mass. But why do some call it the “God Particle”? To Big Bang-believers, the Higgs Boson is “a theoretical energy particle which many scientists believe helped give mass to the disparate matter spawned by the Big Bang” (“Scientists Close in…,” 2010). Big Bang theorists consider its existence “crucial to forming the cosmos after the Big Bang” (“Scientists…,” emp. added). Therefore, the particle is god-like to such sadly deluded individuals.

Recently, in an article titled, “Has Quest for the Elusive ‘God Particle’ Succeeded?,” Fox News reported on a “controversial rumor…based on a leaked internal note from physicists at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC)” that began circulating in the public eye (“Has Quest...”). The rumor suggests that the LHC, a particle accelerator located in Switzerland, may have run across proof of the Higgs’ existence. The leaked note “details an unexpected ‘bump’ in emissions that may be proof of the long-sought particle” (“Has Quest...”). Wait a minute. A “bump” could be proof of the Higgs Boson? Surely such an occurrence, which could be the result of any number of possibilities, would not constitute valid proof of anything to scientists. Although many scientists these days would consider such a vague incident enough proof to satisfy their longings, James Gillies, a spokesman for the European Organization for Nuclear Research responsible for building the LHC, admitted that “the leaked note faces several layers of scrutiny before it could be submitted for publication [in a scholarly scientific publication—JM].” He explains: “Things such as this show up quite frequently in the course of analysis…. It’s way too soon to get excited, I’m afraid. It’s not the physics find of the millennium, unfortunately” (“Has Quest...,” emp. added). So, atheistic evolution still stands as scientifically impossible.

As stated above, evolutionists consider the existence of the Higgs Boson “crucial to forming the cosmos after the Big Bang” (“Scientists…,” emp. added). Notice that without the existence of this theoretical particle, Big Bang theorists recognize that the Universe could not even form after the Big Bang theoretically occurred. Its existence would not prove that the Universe didform in the manner suggested by Big Bang Theory. Its existence would not even prove that the Universe could form after a hypothesized Big Bang occurred. Further, its existence would not prove that the Big Bang itself could occur at all. Its existence would not prove that matter could exist forever or pop into existence out of nothing, one of which must be true in order for the Big Bang to even get started. And its existence would certainly not prove that the scientific laws governing the Universe could write themselves into existence. However, without the existence of the particle, theorists know the Big Bang could not happen. Thus, discovery of its existence would not prove anything in the end, but only allow evolutionists to cross one of the many chasms that stand in the way of their theory even being considered a remote possibility. In other words, the Big Bang has not even reached square one in the realm of proof. It still lies firmly in the realm of impossibility. Bottom line: the Creation model still stands as the most logical explanation for the origin of the Universe—the model that matches the scientific evidence.

REFERENCES

“Has Quest for the Elusive ‘God Particle’ Succeeded?” (2011), Fox News, April 25, http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/04/25/quest-elusive-god-particle-succeeded/?test=faces.

“Scientists Close in on God Particle” (2010), Fox News, July 27, http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/07/27/scientists-closing-god-particle/.

God Cannot be Tempted...But Jesus Was? by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=13&article=3580

God Cannot be Tempted...But Jesus Was?

by	Eric Lyons, M.Min.

According to Scripture, Jesus was Deity in the flesh (John 1:1-5,14; 20:28). He was not sired by man; He was not conceived naturally by woman (Isaiah 7:14; Matthew 1:23). Rather, Jesus came from heaven (John 3:13; 6:38), proved His “mighty God” Messiahship (Isaiah 9:6) through a variety of verified miracles (John 20:30-31; cf. Lyons and Butt, 2006), accepted worship (Matthew 14:33; John 9:38), and claimed a unity with God the Father that even His enemies understood was a profession of Deity (John 10:30,33). Some, however, question the Bible’s consistency of Jesus being God. The argument goes something like this (cf. Wells, 2010): The Bible declares that Satan tempted Jesus (Matthew 4:1), and that Jesus was “in all points tempted as we are” (Hebrews 4:15). Yet, the Bible also declares that “God cannot be tempted by evil” (James 1:13). Therefore, the Bible (allegedly) contradicts itself regarding the nature of Jesus. How could He be God, if God cannot be tempted?

First, Christians freely admit that contemplation of the nature of God is by no means a simple mental exercise. We were created; He has always been (Psalm 90:2). We have flesh and bones; God is Spirit (John 4:24). We are limited in power; He is omnipotent (Genesis 17:1). We can become knowledgeable about some things; God’s knowledge has always been infinite—“too wonderful for me; it is high, I cannot attain it” (Psalm 139:6). The apostle Paul expressed his amazement of God to the Christians in Rome, saying, “Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and His ways past finding out!” (11:33). It is always a humbling mental struggle for mere man to contemplate the wondrous attributes of God.

Still, however, the legitimate question remains: How could Jesus be God, if He was tempted while on Earth? The answer to this question is basically the same for a variety of questions that one may ask about the nature of Jesus. How could Jesus not know something if He was God (e.g., the time of His Second Coming; Mark 13:32)? How could God the Father be greater than Jesus if Jesus was “equal with God” (John 14:28; John 5:18; Philippians 2:6)? The answer to these and similar questions must be understood in light of what the apostle Paul wrote to the church at Philippi concerning Jesus’ self-limitation during His time on Earth. According to Paul, Christ

being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but made Himself of no reputation [He “emptied Himself”—NASB], taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross (Philippians 2:6-8, emp. added).

While on Earth in the flesh, Jesus was voluntarily in a subordinate position to the Father. Christ “emptied Himself” (Philippians 2:7; He “made Himself nothing”—NIV). Unlike Adam and Eve, who made an attempt to seize equality with God (Genesis 3:5), Jesus, the last Adam (1 Corinthians 15:47), humbled Himself, and obediently accepted the role of a servant. But, as Wayne Jackson observed, Jesus’ earthly limitations “were not the consequence of a less-than-God nature; rather, they were the result of a self-imposed submission reflecting the exercise of His sovereign will” (1995, emp. added). In the form of man, Jesus assumed a position of complete subjection to the Father, and exercised His divine attributes only at the Father’s bidding (cf. John 8:26,28-29) [Wycliffe, 1985]. As A.H. Strong similarly commented, Jesus “resigned not the possession, nor yet entirely the use, but rather the independent exercise, of the divine attributes” (1907, p. 703).

Admittedly, as with Deity’s very nature, understanding Jesus as being fully human in addition to His divine nature is not a simple concept to grasp. When Jesus came to Earth, He added humanity to His divinity—He was made “in the likeness of men” (Philippians 2:7). He moved from the spiritual realm to put on flesh (John 1:14) and became subject to such things as hunger, thirst, weariness, and pain. Our holy God chose to come into this world as a helpless babe, Who, for the first time in His eternal existence, “increased in wisdom” as a child (Luke 2:52). In order to become the perfect sacrifice and Great High Priest, Jesus willingly submitted Himself to temptation and death. As the writer of Hebrews noted: “[I]n all things He had to be made like His brethren, that He might be a merciful and faithful High Priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people. For in that He Himself has suffered, being tempted, He is able to aid those who are tempted” (2:17-18).

In short, the Bible’s depiction of Jesus as God incarnated is not contradictory. As the immortal, invisible, pre-incarnate Word (1 Timothy 1:17), He was God (John 1:1). When the Word put on flesh, He was still by nature God (John 10:30,33; 20:28), though He willingly “humbled Himself” and “made Himself of no reputation” (2:6-8) in order to become the tempted, but perfect Man. Indeed, He “who knew no sin” became “sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Corinthians 5:21).

REFERENCES

Jackson, Wayne (1995), “Did Jesus Exist in the Form of God While on Earth?” Reason & Revelation, 15[3]:21-22, March,  http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=10&article=354.

Lyons, Eric and Kyle Butt (2006), “The Very Works that I Do Bear Witness of Me,” Reason & Revelation, 26[3]:17-23, March, http://www.apolo geticspress.org/articles/2857.

Strong, A.H. (1907), Systematic Theology (Old Tappan, NJ: Fleming H. Revell).

Wells, Steve (2010), Skeptic’s Annotated Bible, http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/tempt_god.html.

Wycliffe Bible Commentary (1985), Electronic Database: Biblesoft.

"THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS" Walking In Love, Light, And Wisdom (5:1-21) by Mark Copeland

                     "THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS"

               Walking In Love, Light, And Wisdom (5:1-21)

INTRODUCTION

1. Though we now enter chapter five, we are still noticing how to "walk 
   worthy of the calling with which you were called" - Ep 4:1
   a. We have been "called" to be...
      1) "holy and without blame before Him in love" - Ep 1:4
      2) "sons by Jesus Christ to Himself" - Ep 1:5
      3) "fellow citizens with the saints" - Ep 2:19
      4) "members of the household of God" - Ep 2:19
      5) "a holy temple in the Lord" - Ep 2:21
      6) "fellow heirs, of the same body, and partakers of His promise 
         in Christ" - Ep 3:6
   b. What sort of "walk" is worthy of such a calling?  So far we have 
      seen that it is one in which we are...
      1) "Walking Together In Unity" - Ep 4:1-16
      2) "Walking In Truth And Holiness - Ep 4:17-32

2. As we come into the fifth chapter, we learn that our "walk" (or 
   conduct) which is worthy of our calling is one in which we...
   a. Walk In Love - Ep 5:1-7
   b. Walk As Light - Ep 5:8-14
   c. Walk As Wise - Ep 5:15-21

["Walking In Love, Light, And Wisdom":  why is this so important?  As 
indicated in Ep 5:1, we are to be "followers of God as dear children";
and just as God is "love, light, and wisdom" personified, so we should 
try to imitate our Father!

Therefore, consider how we should...]

I. WALK IN LOVE (1-7)

   A. FOLLOWING CHRIST AS OUR EXAMPLE... (1-2)
      1. Jesus certainly has loved us and given Himself for us
      2. He offered Himself to God as an offering and sacrifice in our 
         behalf
      3. Let His example teach us how to "walk in love" - cf. Jn 13:
         34-35; 1Jn 3:16-17

   B. WITH A LOVE THAT IS PURE... (3-7)
      1. Our love should be free from any hint of immorality or greed 
         - Ep 5:3
      2. Even words or jokes suggestive of immorality or greed are 
         unbecoming those who are "saints" (holy, set apart for God's 
         purpose) - Ep 5:4
      3. This is a serious concern, for immoral or greedy persons have 
         no inheritance in the kingdom of Christ, but instead will 
         experience the full wrath of God! - Ep 5:5-7

["Walk In Love", with a love that is sacrificial and free from any hint
of personal gain (either sexual or monetary)...that is the kind of 
"walk" worthy of our calling as "saints".

Our "walk" also bears the responsibility of being a positive influence 
in the world in which we live, and this Paul discusses as we now 
consider our need to...]

II. WALK AS LIGHT (8-14)

   A. WE ARE NOW "LIGHT IN THE LORD"... (8-10)
      1. Before coming to Christ, we were once "darkness" 

         (remember Ep 2:1-3); but now we are "light in the Lord" and 

         should walk as"children of light" - Ep 5:8
      2. The "fruit" expected of those "children of light" is "goodness,
         righteousness and truth" - Ep 5:9
      3. By bearing such fruit, we fulfill our role as "light" by 
         "proving" (demonstrating) what is well-pleasing to the Lord - 
          Ep 5:10; cf. Ro 12:1-2

   B. AS "LIGHT" WE MUST NECESSARILY EXPOSE "DARKNESS"... (11-14)
      1. We are not to have fellowship with "unfruitful works of 
         darkness" - Ep 5:11; e.g., fornication, uncleanness, 
         covetousness, Ep 5:3-4
      2. Instead, our task is to "expose" them - Ep 5:11b-13
         a. Things that we must "expose" are often so disgraceful, it is
            shameful to speak of them
         b. But by "walking in the light" ourselves, we can through 
            example and word expose by contrast these "works of 
            darkness"
      3. Thus the need to be "light" ourselves, something that comes 
         only from Christ - Ep 5:14
         a. Christ gives "light" to those who were spiritually asleep 
            and dead - cf. Ep 2:4-6
         b. Some scholars think this verse (14) may have been an early
            "baptismal hymn", sung at a person's baptism

[To "Walk As Light" is an awesome responsibility, and some have allowed
the "darkness" to overshadow the "light", rather than the "light" 
exposing the "darkness".  How can we be sure to carry out our role as 
"the children of light"?

This is were "wisdom" comes in, and therefore Paul exhorts us to...]

III. WALK AS WISE (15-21)

   A. CHARACTERISTICS OF "WALKING AS WISE"... (15-17)
      1. Doing so with great care - Ep 5:15
         a. The word translated "circumspectly" means "exactly, 
            accurately, diligently"
         b. Unlike fools, who care little about where they are going or 
            what is happening
      2. Taking advantage of the time available to one - Ep 5:16
         a. To "redeem the time" is "to make wise and sacred use of 
            every opportunity for doing good, so that zeal and well 
            doing are as it were the purchase money by which we make the
            time our own" (from the "Online Bible")
         b. This is necessary, because the days are "evil" (bringing 
            toils, annoyances, perils; of a time full of peril to 
            Christian faith and steadfastness; causing pain and trouble 
            - Online Bible)
      3. Understanding the will of the Lord - Ep 5:17
         a. Only by understanding the will of the Lord can we be a "wise
            people"
         b. Just as Israel was to demonstrate their wisdom by doing the 
            will of the Lord, so we can "walk as wise" only if we 
            understand His will for us - cf. Deut 4:5-6

   B. TO WALK AS WISE REQUIRES BEING "FILLED WITH THE SPIRIT"... (18-21)
      1. While those who "walk as fools" delight in being filled with 
         wine, those who "walk as wise" will endeavor to be filled with
         the Spirit!
      2. What evidence is there that one is "filled with the Spirit"? 
         Paul describes three indications...
         a. One indication is singing praises - Ep 5:19
         b. Another indication is giving thanks - Ep 5:20
         c. A third indication is submitting to one another in the fear
           of God - Ep 5:21

CONCLUSION

1. Children of God who delight in...
   a. Singing praises and making melody in the heart
   b. Giving thanks always for all things to God
   c. Submitting to one another in the fear of God
   -- demonstrate that they are "filled with the Spirit", and as such, 
      truly are "followers of God as dear children" (Ep 5:1)

2. As children of God, and "filled with the Spirit", they are able to
   walk in a manner worthy of their calling, as they...
   a. "Walk in love"
   b. "Walk as light"
   c. "Walk as wise"

3. Brothers and sisters in Christ, we live in a world...
   a. That has perverted the meaning of "love"
   b. That takes perverse pleasure in works of darkness
   c. That stumbles around aimlessly, like drunken fools
   -- Can we not see the need for the people of God today to live up to
      their "calling", and to "prove what is acceptable in the Lord"?

4. May God fill His children with His Spirit...
   a. So that we can truly "walk in love", "walk as light", and "walk as
      wise"
   b. And thereby show to the world the "fruit of the Spirit" (i.e.,
      goodness, righteousness, and truth)!

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2016

 

Just one thing by Gary Rose

2017 is now but a memory. Good things and bad, successes and failures all are in the past. I was thinking about this today because, well, I saw this picture and it tied in with a get-together I had yesterday with Gary and Van Womack yesterday over pancakes. 

We talked of many things- health, wealth and family. Most of all we talked about the church and especially about Jesus. I was taken aback when I was told that I was often remembered for figure eights. This was a reference to the pattern I used when I was mopping floors at a hospital in Gloversville N.Y. in the 1980's. I was between churches and needed a job, so I took a custodial position at Nathan Littauer hospital. Rather than be bitter about having to do  such a menial job, I determined to do my best at it; literally to make the best figure eights I could.

After thinking about this, I recalled a picture that seemed to apply...

What if this wasn't me asking this question, but Jesus? What would you say?

Today is Sunday, so I am guessing this Bible passage will apply...

Matthew, Chapter 26 (World   English    Bible)

²⁶ And, as they were eating, Jesus, taking a loaf and blessing, brake,—and, giving to his disciples, said—Take, eat! This, is, my body.  ²⁷ And, taking a cup, and giving thanks, he gave unto them, saying—Drink of it, all of you;  ²⁸ For, this, is my blood of the covenant, which, for many, is to be poured out, for remission of sins. 

Jesus is special because only he has made a way to be forgiven. Now, that picture is cute, but part of it really hit home. At the lower right hand corner, the little boy is saying:"God knows our sins cause they're stored in his cloud".

Humm, they may be stored there, but if you are a faithful Christian- THEY ARE FORGIVEN!!! Not just in 2017, but forever!!!

"THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS" Walking In Truth And Holiness (4:17-32) by Mark Copeland

                     "THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS"

                 Walking In Truth And Holiness (4:17-32)

INTRODUCTION

1. In the previous lesson, we saw where Paul began to describe our
   "duty" to "walk worthy of the calling with which you were called"
   - Ep 4:1

2. In doing so, he first called us to "walk together in unity" by 
   admonishing us to...
   a. Display the "attitudes" crucial for maintaining unity - Ep 4:2-3
   b. Understand the "basis" of the unity we have in Christ - Ep 4:4-6
   c. Utilize the "gifts" given by Christ to His church that serves to 
      keep the body of Christ together and growing - Ep 4:7-16

3. In the last half of chapter four (Ep 4:17-32), Paul continues to 
   describe the sort of "walk" that is worthy of our calling, especially
   as "a holy temple in the Lord" (cf. Ep 2:21-22)
   a. Whereas the first half emphasized "Walking Together In Unity"
   b. This section emphasizes "Walking In Truth And Holiness"

[We begin, then, in verse 17 with...]

I. THE ADMONITION (17-24)

   A. NO LONGER WALK LIKE THE REST OF THE GENTILES... (17-19)
      1. They walk "in the futility of their mind" - How so?
         a. It starts with the "hardening of their heart" 
         b. Which leads to "ignorance that is in them"
         c. Because of such ignorance they are "alienated from the life
            of God"
         d. And that results "having their understanding darkened"
         -- Notice where Jesus describes this same process - cf. Mt 13:
            14-15
      2. Their walk is "past feeling" - as indicated by the fact they...
         a. "have given themselves over to licentiousness" (i.e., 
            unbridled lust, excess)
         b. "work all uncleanness with greediness"
         -- Desensitized, they seek after ever-increasing forms moral 
            depravity - cf. Ro 1:18-32
      
   B. INSTEAD, WALK IN RIGHTEOUSNESS AND TRUE HOLINESS... (20-24)
      1. This is how you learned Christ
         a. As you heard Him and were taught by Him (through His 
            apostles, of course - cf. Mt 28:19-20)
         b. In Whom is the truth - cf. Jn 8:31-31; 14:6
      2. For you were taught to "put off" the "old man"
         a. That is, your "former conduct", how you behaved before you 
            were saved - cf. Col 3:5-9
         b. Putting off the old man is needed because it is never 
            content, but "grows corrupt according to the deceitful 
            lusts" (like addictive drugs, you always need more)
      3. And to "be renewed in the spirit of your mind"
         a. Which is the key to true "transformation" - cf. Ro 12:1-2
         b. You "renew" your mind only as you "set your mind on things 
            above" - cf. Col 3:1-2
      4. And to "put on the new man"
         a. A new man "which was created according to God" 

            - cf. Col 3:10
         b. A new man, "in righteousness and true holiness" 

            - cf. Col 3:12-17

[In giving the admonition "No longer walk as the rest of the Gentiles",
Paul has made it clear that it involves both a "putting off" and a 
"putting on".  I.e., our "Walking In Truth And Holiness" is not just a
bunch of "Thou Shalt Not's", there are also some "Thou Shalt's".

To illustrate further the difference between the "old man" (how the rest
of the Gentiles walk) and the "new man" (how Christians are to walk), we
find Paul making...]

II. THE APPLICATION (25-32)

   A. CASE IN POINT:  LYING... (25)
      1. The "old man" thinks nothing of lying
      2. The "new man" puts away lying, and in its place speaks truth 
         with his neighbor (especially to those who members of the same 
         body)

   B. CASE IN POINT:  ANGER... (26-27)
      1. The "old man" gets angry and lets it linger, or get out of 
         control
      2. The "new man" may get angry, but does not...
         a. Let it linger ("do not let the sun go down on your wrath"
         b. Allow it to prompt sinful behavior ("nor give place to the
            devil")

   C. CASE IN POINT:  STEALING... (28)
      1. The "old man" is willing to steal
      2. The "new man" not only stops stealing, but works so he can help
         others in need!

   D. CASE IN POINT:  CORRUPT COMMUNICATION... (29)
      1. The "old man" doesn't worry or care what comes out of his mouth
      2. The "new man" not only avoids "corrupt communication", but
         seeks to speak that which is uplifting to those who hear

   E. SUMMARY... (30-32)
      1. Why be concerned about putting off the "old man" and putting on
         the "new man"?
         a. When Christians act like the "old man", it grieves the Holy 
            Spirit
         b. By the Holy Spirit we were sealed for the day of redemption 
            - cf. Ep 1:13-14
      2. Therefore, we ought to put away those things befitting the "old
         man" (bitterness, wrath, anger, clamor, evil speaking, malice)
      3. And in it's place we need to put on those things befitting the
         "new man" (being kind, tenderhearted, forgiving one another 
         just as God forgives us in Christ)

CONCLUSION

1. What a contrast there would be if all those in the church truly 
   carried out the admonition to "Walk In Truth And Holiness"!
   a. The church would stand out like "a city that is set on a hill"! 
      - cf. Mt 5:14-16
   b. And the world, though it now has "their understanding darkened", 
      might be more likely to come to see the truth that is in Jesus
   c. But what hope is there if the church is more like the world than 
      the "holy temple" it is to be?

2. Brethren, are we "grieving the Holy Spirit of God"?
   a. While the increasing worldliness in our society naturally concerns
      us...
   b. Let's be careful not to react with attitudes that are more in
      keeping with the "old man"
   c. But having been "sealed for the day of redemption", let's be sure
      to react in "righteousness and true holiness"

In our next lesson, we will see that "walking worthy of our calling"
also involves "Walking In Love, Light, And Wisdom"...

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2016