Should Christians Legislate Morality?
Christians Should Not Enforce “Vertical” Morality
In our modern, pluralistic, and heavily secularized society, John Warwick Montgomery points out that Christians should be particularly cautious not to jeopardize the spread of the gospel by insensitively imposing Christian morality on unbelievers. We must avoid any recurrence of the Puritan Commonwealth, where people are compelled to act externally as Christians regardless of their true faith. Unfortunately, these efforts often lead to the institutionalization of hypocrisy and a decline in respect for genuine Christian values.[1] It can also lead people to a false assurance of a right relationship with God.
Instead, Montgomery says Christians should recognize that Scripture presents two distinct types of moral commands. We see this in the first and second parts of the Ten Commandments.[2] In the first part, we see duties related to God. These commands cover the relationship between individuals and God (“vertical” morality). In the second part, we see duties related to neighbors. These commands cover the relationship between individuals and other people (“horizontal” morality).
Montgomery believes it is crucial not to impose the first part of the Ten Commandments on unbelievers. These commands are:
- “You must not have any other god but Me.”
- “You must not make for yourself an idol.”
- “You must not misuse the name of the Lord your God.”
- “Remember to observe the Sabbath day by keeping it holy.”
Even if Christians are in the majority in a country, they should not impose laws related to the above four commandments. “This is because the proper relationship with God can only be established through voluntary, personal decision and commitment.”[3]
1 Corinthians 5:10 is an important verse for us to consider on this subject as well. Paul argues that avoiding all sinful individuals in the world would mean that Christians would need to “leave the world” entirely, which is an impractical and unrealistic standard. Instead, the church’s primary responsibility is not to judge those outside the faith; it is their duty to judge those who claim to be believers but live in sin within the church.
The Quran says there is no compulsion in religion. Jesus demonstrated that principle. He never forced anyone to follow Him. That’s what we see throughout the New Testament. Christians are to be evangelistic and strive to compel people to see the goodness and glory of Jesus. Still, they are never commanded to command people to bow to Jesus.
Christians Should Work Towards A General “Horizontal” Morality
Christians should, however, encourage people towards general “horizontal” morality. Even while the focus in the New Testament is on the morality of Jesus’ followers, we do see warrant for the promotion of social order and general morality. I think of John the Baptizer and the Apostle Paul, for example (Mark 6:14-20; Matt. 14:1-12; Acts 16:35-39; 24:25; 1 Tim. 2:1-4 also see Rom. 13 and 1 Peter 2). But the letters of the New Testament were written to Christians, telling Christians how to live.
Here’s the second part of the Ten Commandments, which are good for every society to lovingly and practically apply.
- “Honor your father and your mother”
- “You shall not murder”
- “You shall not commit adultery”
- “You shall not steal”
- “You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor”
- “You shall not covet”
These commands are applied in various ways throughout the Bible. For example, the Bible talks about the importance of railings on the top of buildings to protect people from falling off and getting hurt or killed.
But even here, we don’t want to put our hope or emphasis on “horizontal” morality. Part of the point of the law is to point us to our need for Jesus. It is not an end in itself. So, we must remember that mere morality is not the solution.
The Problem of Secularism and Morality
Britannica says secularism is “a worldview or political principle that separates religion from other realms of human existence, often putting greater emphasis on nonreligious aspects of human life or, more specifically, separating religion from the political realm.”
One of the problems with secularism, though, is that it is not set up very well to give us a societal analysis. How is secularism going to provide us with:
- The Ideal of what’s healthy
- Observation of symptoms
- Diagnosis or analysis of the disease/disorder
- Prognosis or prediction of cure/remedy
- Prescription or instruction for treatment/action for a cure
Secularists believe Christians should not legislate morality. They say that religion has no place in government. Christian beliefs are not allowed, but their core beliefs are allowed. But, as Britannica aludes to, secularism is really an ultimate commitment—a whole world-and-life-view.
Even atheism has the markings of a religion. Atheists have a creed. Theirs is just that there is no god. Atheism addresses the ultimate concerns of life and existence and answers the questions of who people are and what they should value. A committed atheist is even unlikely to marry someone outside of their beliefs. Many atheists even belong to a group and may even attend occasional meetings (see e.g., atheists.org) and have their own literature they read that supports their beliefs.
A merely secular society cannot give a moral framework that transcends individual belief systems. We are left with a “might makes right morality.” It seems to me that secularism leaves us with the column on the left, whereas Christianity gives us the column on the right.
I believe we need and should want Christianity to help our nation work towards a general “horizontal” morality. Our Founding Fathers (along with Alexis de Tocqueville), many of whom were deists and not Christians, agree. Yet, Christians should realize that legislating morality is not the answer.
Legislating Morality is Not the Ultimate Solution
Christians both understand that sinners will sin and that morality is good for the nation. Righteousness exalts the land, as Proverbs says (Prov. 14:34). Yet, Christians are compassionate and humble. We realize that we all stumble in many ways, as the letter of James says, but if we can help people from stumbling, that’s good. But Christians don’t confuse the kingdom of man with the Kingdom of God. Christians know that here we have no lasting city, but we seek the City that is to come (Heb. 13:14).
Legislating morality is not the solution; Jesus is. As C.H. Spurgeon said, “Nothing but the Gospel can sweep away social evil… The Gospel is the great broom with which to cleanse the filthiness of the city; nothing else will avail.”
Paul David Tripp has wisely said that “We should be thankful for the wisdom of God’s law, but we should also be careful not to ask it to do what only grace can accomplish.” It is the Spirit of God that transforms, although it is true that He often works through law. We need our rocky hearts to become flesh through the work of the Spirit.
Conclusion
The question of whether Christians should legislate morality reveals the complexities of faith in a diverse and secular society. While Christians are called to embody and promote a morality rooted in their faith, imposing a “vertical” morality can hinder the spread of the gospel, foster hypocrisy, and promote a misunderstanding of genuine faith. Instead, the focus should be on humbly and lovingly encouraging “horizontal” morality—principles that promote societal well-being and can be embraced by individuals regardless of their faith.
As apprentices of Jesus, Christians are primarily called to lead by example and encourage ethical behavior rooted in love and respect for one another. The emphasis should be on exemplifying Jesus’ teachings and fostering relationships that draw others to the faith, rather than seeking to enforce morality. That’s what Jesus Himself did.
By fostering relationships and demonstrating the transformative love of Jesus, Christians can influence the moral fabric of society without simply relying on legislation. True change comes through the work of the Holy Spirit rather than external mandates. In this way, the Christian community can contribute to a more just and moral society while remaining faithful to the fundamental teachings of their faith.
Notes
[1] John Warwick Montgomery,Theology: Good, Bad, and Mysterious, 122.
[2] Often referred to as the First and Second Tables of the Decalogue. The “First Table” consists of commands 1-4 and has to do with people’s relationship with God (vertical relationship). The “Second Table” consists of commands 5-10 and has to do with people’s relationship with other humans (horizontal relationships). The First Table can be summed up by “love God,” and the Second Table can be summed up by “love others.”
[3] Montgomery, Theology: Good, Bad, and Mysterious, 123.
Revelation Is Not Mainly About When the World Will End
Eschatology is not mainly about predicting the end, but about living rightly in light of the end. Revelation does not reveal when exactly the world will end, but it does reveal what the end will entail and whose side we want to be on. As many commentators note, the visions in Revelation primarily confront us with God’s demands and promises, they are not meant to satisfy our curiosity about minute end-time details.[1] Vern Poythress says it this way: “Revelation renews us, not so much from particular instructions about particular future events, but from showing us God, who will bring to pass all events in his own time and his own way.”[2]
Interestingly, “one in four Americans believe that the world will end within his or her lifetime.”[3] But America should never be the interpretive lens by which we interpret and think about eschatology. As Craig S. Keener has said,
If today’s newspapers are a necessary key to interpreting the book, then no generation until our own could have understood and obeyed the book… They could not have read the book as Scripture profitable for teaching and correction—an approach that does not fit a high view of biblical authority (cf. 2 Tim. 3:16-17).[4]
There have been many specific failed predictions. Actually, “The failure rate for apocalyptic predictions sits right at 100 percent.”[5] Sadly, sometimes what we think is in the Bible “is actually an indicator of our own biases and pre-conceptions.”[6] Hal Lindsey predicted the end in 2000. Many believe Y2K would be the end. Harold Camping said the rapture would happen on September 6th, 1994. His radio “station raised millions to get word of the end on billboards, pamphlets, and the radio.”[7] One newspaper “estimated that worldwide more than $100 million was spent by Family Radio on promotion of the date.”[8] For some who had “pinned their beliefs to this date, the failure of Camping’s apocalypse left them lost, with little trust in God.” They were “disappointed and adrift” and for some “there was financial ruin.”[9] That’s sad and unnecessary.
As we study eschatology, we should do so with the world and the scope of history in mind. Remembering intense tribulation has
been present at various times, with great severity and over large areas. We think especially of the Mohammedan invasion in the seventh and eighth centuries which swept across all of the Near East, up into Europe as far as Italy and Austria, across all of North Africa, across Spain and into France. The Black Plague ravaged Asia and Europe in the fourteenth century. The Thirty Years War devastated much of central Europe in the seventeenth century. There have been two so-called World Wars in our twentieth century. For a time each of those seemed to qualify as great tribulation.[10]
Also, “As for the Antichrist, various ones have been temporarily cast in that role: Attila the Hun in the fifth century; the pope at the time of the Protestant Reformation; Napoleon in the nineteenth century; Mussolini, Hitler and Stalin in the twentieth century.”[11]
As faithful Christians, we should do our best to present ourselves to God as approved, workers who have no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth” (2 Tim. 2:15). We should know the “signs of the times”[12] and we must be faithful and ready for the return of Jesus. But, “because the exact time when Christ will return is not known, the church must live with a sense of urgency, realizing that the end of history may be very near. At the same time, however, the church must continue to plan and work for a future on this present earth which may still last a long time.”[13]
Notes
[1] Craig S. Keener, The NIV Application Commentary: Revelation, 32. Since Revelation is both apocalyptic and prophecy we must understand that its primary purpose is to provide words of comfort and challenge to God’s people then and now, rather than precisly predicting the future, especially in great detail. Visions of the future are not an end in themselves but rather a means by which people are to be warned and to comforted (Michael J. Gorman, Reading Revelation Responsibly: Uncivil Worship and Witness: Followingthe Lamb into the New Creation, 41).
[2] Vern Poythress, The Returning King: A Guide to the Book of Revelation.
[3] Jessica Tinklenberg Devega, Guesses, Goofs, and Prophetic Failures, 10.
[4] Keener, The NIV Application Commentary: Revelation, 30.
[5] Devega, Guesses, Goofs, and Prophetic Failures, 193.
[6] Ibid., 7.
[7] Ibid., 157.
[8] Ibid., 159.
[9] Ibid., 161.
[10] Loraine Boettner, “A Postmillennial Response” in The Meaning of the Millennium, 204-05.
[11] Boettner, “A Postmillennial Response,” 205.
[12] Wars, famines, earthquakes, tribulation, apostasy, antichrist(s), the proclamation of the gospel to the nations, and the salvation of the fullness of Israel.
[13] Anthony A. Hoekema, “Amillennialism” in The Meaning of the Millennium, 178-79.
Free e-Book
In preparation for Easter, I put together a devotional book. If you don’t have something to go through, I encourage you to check it out.
Here’s the link to the free e-book, I hope you find it helpful: Psalms of Our Suffering Savior
Equality: What it is & where it comes from
In the United States equality is at least expressed to be important. Its importance is seen in people’s views and policies on political participation, education access, views on employment and pay, and disability rights. The Civil Rights Movement has shown that equality is valued by many but not all.
What does equality mean and where did the concept of equality come from? It means the state or quality of being equal. Are there good reasons for believing in equality?
The Assumption of Equality is An Assumption
Naturalism, the belief that no God exists, gives no explanation or reason for equality. People who don’t believe in God or the relevance of God might believe in equality but the belief for them is not based on any foundation. The idea of equality is accepted as true without proof or a solid reason to believe it.
Yuval Noah Harari is a historian, philosopher, and author who received a PhD from the University of Oxford and is a lecturer at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. I appreciate his candor in this quote from his book Sapiens:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. According to the science of biology, people were not ‘created’. They have evolved. And they certainly did not evolve to be ‘equal’. The idea of equality is inextricably intertwined with the idea of creation. The Americans got the idea of equality from Christianity, which argues that every person has a divinely created soul, and that all souls are equal before God. However, if we do not believe in the Christian myths about God, creation and souls, what does it mean that all people are ‘equal’? Evolution is based on difference, not on equality. Every person carries a somewhat different genetic code, and is exposed from birth to different environmental influences. This leads to the development of different qualities that carry with them different chances of survival. ‘Created equal’ should therefore be translated into ‘evolved differently.’[1]
So, Harari rewrites the famous line from the Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truth to be self-evident, that all men evolved differently, that they are born with certain mutable characteristics, and that among these are life and the pursuit of pleasure.”[2]
For the naturalist, equality isn’t really a thing. It is a dream wish. Perhaps maybe pleasant make-believe.
Christians have a Foundation for Equality
The Bible teaches the equality of all humans by saying all humans are made in the image of God (Gen. 1:26-27). It also explains that we are all equally fallen. That is, we all sin and do wrong things. Lastly, it says that salvation is freely offered to all through Jesus.[3]
In Dominion: How the Christian Revolution Remade the World, Tom Holland argues that Christianity has profoundly shaped Western civilization, influencing core values like human rights and equality. It may not be consciously recognized but many Christian beliefs our embedded in society. As Harari has said, we “got the idea of equality from Christianity.”
The belief in human equality and rights, equality of men and women, love for foreigners, and care for the poor, weak, and marginalized are specifically Christian beliefs. History shows us that it was only as Christianity spread that these believes became generally accepted. The ancient Greeks and Romans would have laughed at them.[4]
Christian Equality has a lot of Explanatory Power
“We’ve all got both light and dark inside us. What matters is the part we choose to act on. That’s who we really are.” Sirius Black said this to Harry Potter in one of their last meanings. Humans have complexity as J.K. Rowling is so adept at showing. The Bible agrees. We are complex beings. We are all equally made in the image of God, fallen, and redeemable.
The Bible says we all stumble in many ways (James 3:2). We are all broken. Christians are no less complex. Christians are simultaneously sufferers, strivers, sinners, and saints. So, “The line between good and evil is never simply between ‘us’ and ‘them.’ The line between good and evil runs through each one of us.”[5] Or as Dietrich Bonhoeffer said in prison in Nazi Germany, “Nothing that we despise in the other man is entirely absent from ourselves.”[6]
Therefore, in one sense, Christians should be “culturally wary because they know that evil is real, that everyone is a sinner, that no one is beyond a stumble or a scandal, and that human beings are capable of some devious deceptions and horrific thoughts, words, and acts.”[7] Yet, in another sense, Christians should also be cultural optimists “because they know that no matter how grim and hopeless sin makes the world or how wretched sin makes an individual or a group, it does not define us at our deepest level, and it is an imposter that has no ultimate claim on anyone, whoever they may be and whatever they may have done.”[8]
Christianity gives a realistic and complex picture that explains the paradoxical nature of people.
If we lose Jesus, we lose our bases for Equality
I appreciate how Rebecca McLaughlin says it:
Even if historians agree that our moral building blocks came to us from Christianity it’s tempting to think we can keep the values we cherish while gently removing the claims about Jesus Himself. Like easing out a bottom layer Jenga block, perhaps we can build our moral tower higher without belief in God at all. But extracting Jesus from our moral structure isn’t like gently sliding out a Jenga block. It’s like pulling the pin on a grenade. In the resulting explosion we don’t just lose morality, are sense of meaning blows up too.”[9]
This is the case because if Jesus is not real and right, the next most plausible explanation is that of Harari or Nietzsche.
Conclusion
Secular culture assumes equality but gives no basis for it. Christianity, and specifically Jesus, gives a solid footing for equality. Without Jesus equality is on a shoddy structure and is destined to fall. In other words, if Jesus is make-believe so is equality. On the other hand, if Jesus and His ethic are real, we can’t mix and match to our liking. He is either a liar, lunatic, legend, or the Lord. But if He is anything other than the Lord, His emphasis on equality evaporates with Him.
Notes
[1] Yuval Noah Harari, Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind, 109.
[2] Harari, Sapiens, 110.
[3] See Christopher Watkin, Biblical Critical Theory: How the Bible’s Unfolding Story Makes Sense of Modern Life and Culture, 116.
[4] Rebecca McLaughlin, Is Christmas Unbelievable?
[5] N. T. Wright, Evil and the Justice of God, 38.
[6] Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Letters and Papers from Prison, 10 as quoted in Biblical Critical Theory, 128.
[7] Watkin, Biblical Critical Theory, 168
[8] Ibid.
[9] McLaughlin, Is Christmas Unbelievable?
Photo by Jacek Dylag
What is Christmas about?
Christmas is about the coming of the Christ. But, what does “Christ” mean? And why does it matter?
The word Christ comes from New Testament Greek. The Greek word is Christos (Χριστός), and it translates the Hebrew word Messiah (מָשִׁיחַ). Great. But what does Christ/Messiah mean? The simple answer is that Messiah means “anointed one.” But there is much more behind the meaning of the word Messiah than just “anointed one.” The Old Testament in various ways and in numerous writings promises that one would come and fulfill various promises. So, the expectation for the Messiah cannot be captured if we think it just means “anointed one.” It does mean that, but that is not all it means.
Do you know what a “honey-do-list” is? Have you ever seen one? I currently have a few things on the list: fix the leaky faucet, refinish the chair, and paint my son’s bedroom. A “honey-do-list” is a checklist of expectations. My wife, Leah, gave me a list and expects me to get everything done on the list. I am glad my wife is understanding and gracious, so the list isn’t very long.
As we think about the Jewish expectations for the Promised One, we are looking at a “honey-do-list” of sorts. We see from Scripture and history the “honey-do list” was not as small and understanding as my wife’s. The Jewish people had a huge list. And different people had different lists, but any list would be difficult to check off.
I think of the messianic expectations like water and oil. You don’t expect them to go together. How can the promised one be a king (2 Sam. 7:12-13; 1 Chron. 17:11-14) and a servant (Is. 52:13-53:12)? “One like the son of man” (Dan. 7:13) and also “Everlasting Father” (Is. 9:6)? How could the promised one suffer and die for His people and yet bring an eternal righteous reign? You don’t think of those things as going together. But sometimes things that you wouldn’t think go together, work quite nicely.
You wouldn’t think oil and vinegar make sense together. And you probably wouldn’t initially think it would make sense to have bacon with anything! It’s good enough on its own, right? But if you add spinach, candied pecans, cheese, oil, and vinegar (transformed into salad dressing), the bacon is elevated, and maybe even a little healthier.
If unexpected combinations result in delicious food, how great would the impact be on a spiritual level? A king who is also a servant?! Someone who has all power but is also all good? We don’t often think of these combinations, but if they could happen, it would be amazing.
The expectation presented in the Old Testament for the Promised One seems almost impossibly diverse. How could any one person fulfill the many expectations? How could it make sense for the “Ancient of Days” (Dan. 7:9, 13, 22) to be a descendant of king David (2 Sam. 7:12-16; Is. 11:1; Jer. 23:5-6)?
The New Testament authors, over and over, argue that Jesus is the Promised One, the long-awaited Messiah, who fulfills the prophecies, patterns, pointers, and promises of the Old Testament (2 Cor. 1:20). He will crush the serpent of old (Gen. 3:15) and lead the way back into Eden, He will bless all the nations of the earth, and He will set up His righteous and eternal Kingdom.
The messianic expectations appeared to be nothing more than unrelated and random shards of glass. But the New Testament helps us see they all work together to form an astounding, almost unbelievable, stained-glass picture of Jesus, the long-awaited, promised Messiah. That’s why understanding what Christ means matters. Without understanding the expectations for the Messiah, we’re left with broken glass, rather than a breath-taking mosaic.
Regarding prophecy, there are several Old Testament passages we could consider. I’ll give the Old Testament reference and then the New Testament reference.
- His appearance will be disfigured (see Isaiah 52:14 and Matthew 26:67).
- He will be despised and rejected (see Isaiah 53:3 and John 11:47-50).
- He will take sin upon Himself (see Isaiah 53:4-6, 8 and 1 Corinthians 15:3).
- He will be silent before His oppressors (see Isaiah 53:7 and Matthew14:60-61).
- He will be assigned a grave with the wicked and the rich in His death (Isaiah 53:9 and Mark 15:27-28, 43-46).
- He will be a descendant of king David (see 1 Chronicles 17:11-14 and Luke 3:23, 31).
- He will be born in Bethlehem (see Micah 5:2 and Matthew 2:1).
- He will be preceded by a messenger (see Isaiah 40:3-5 and Matthew 3:1-2).
- He will have a ministry of miracles (see Isaiah 35:5-6 and Matthew 9:35; 11:4-5).
- He will enter Jerusalem on a Donkey (see Zechariah 9:9 and Matthew 21:7-9).
- His hands and feet will be pierced (see Psalm 22:16 and Luke 23:33).
- He will be hated without reason (see Psalm 69:4 and John 15:25).
- His garments will be divided and lots will be cast for them (see Psalm 22:18; John 19:23-24).
- His bones will not be broken (see Psalm 34:20 and John 19: 33).
- His side will be pieced (see Zechariah 12:10 and Jn. 19:34).
- He, the Mighty God, will be born (see Isaiah 9:2-7 and Matthew 1:23; John 1:1-3, 14).
Christmas—the real meaning of the season—is about Christ, the fulfillment of God’s promises, and all the many things that means.
Photo by Jakob Owens
Is Christmas True?
Is Christmas true? Or should we assume Christmas is just a fairytale like Santa Claus?
Our starting places or assumptions have a big impact on the way we weigh evidence. For instance, in Harper Lee’s book, To Kill a Mockingbird the correct verdict could not have been given in that context (i.e., Maycomb’s racist white community) because people excluded the possibility that anyone other than the black man, Tom Robinson, was guilty. Despite the strong evidence that Atticus Finch put forward, Tom was still convicted. Why? Because people were prejudiced against the truth. The people’s a priori assumption, that Tom was guilty because he’s black, led them to not honestly look at the evidence and pronounce the correct verdict.
This sadly still happens. It happens in the court of law and it can happen when people consider evidence about Jesus too. But, if God exists and wants to be born as a baby, as Christmas says, then certainly God can do that.
The Bible says Christmas is true. It even says the “star” guiding the Wisemen is true. Are there actual reasons for believing in the historical accuracy of Christmas? I believe so. But will people openly weigh the evidence?
Honestly, there’s a lot to look at. Here I’ll just share two pieces to consider.
Jesus’ Biographies
Although the Gospel accounts in the Bible may not be exactly like our biographies today, they really are biographies. Or they certainly claim to be. They purport to give actual history about Jesus of Nazareth. The Bible has four historical biographies about Jesus, often referred to as the Gospels.[1] Two of them explicitly claim to tell us what Jesus actually did and said, and they claim to be based on eyewitness testimony (Luke 1:1-4; John 21:20-24). And so, Justin Martyr, a second-century Christian writer and philosopher, referred to the Gospels as “the memoirs of His apostles.”
This is what Luke says:
Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us, it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught (Lk. 1:1-4).
Luke is basically making the claim to be a journalist or historian.
The Gospels place themselves in a historical context. They don’t start with imaginary elements. There is no “once upon a time.” Instead, they give us identifiable time stamps. They say things like: “Augustus was emperor of Rome,” “Quirinius was governor of Syria,” “Pilate was governor of Palestine,” “Herod was king of the Jews,” and “Joseph of Arimathea was a member of the Sanhedrin” (e.g., Matt. 2:1; 27:2; Mk. 15:1, 43; Lk. 2:1-2; Jn. 19:38). These were not made-up people or made-up positions. They repeat historical realities because the Gospels claim to be historical documents.
Many of the events that the New Testament writers wrote about were well-known. The Apostle Paul could tell king Agrippa: I am persuaded that none of these things has escaped your notice, since these things have not been done in a corner(Acts 26:26). The early Jesus followers did not follow cleverly devised myths about the Lord Jesus Christ but claimed to be eyewitnesses (2 Pet. 1:16).
C.S. Lewis knew a lot about legends and he didn’t think the Gospels read like legends. In Lewis’ own words: “Now, as a literary historian, I am perfectly convinced that whatever else the Gospels are they are not legends. I have read a great deal of legend and I am quite clear that they are not the same sort of thing.”[2]
The “Star” of Bethlehem
Matthew’s telling of the story of Jesus includes a lot about a “star.” But if you read the account, he says things about the “star” that do not make sense if he is talking about a literal star. The way he describes what the “star”[3] does would not make sense unless he was knowledgeably aware of the peculiar movements it made. The star was “His star” and it “rose,” “appeared,” “went before them,” and rested “over the place where the child was.”
The sign in the heavens convinced the Babylonian magi—the NASA of the day—to pay a visit to Jesus. They were aware of the Jewish promise of a coming King and what was transpiring in the sky made them think something very significant was happening.[4]
What did the Wisemen see? This would be super random to include in a story about Jesus unless the writer knew it to be factual and significant. Otherwise, the writer could have said something simpler: “a bright and mysterious light shown down on the blessed child.” Instead, the author describes the movements of a beautiful comet, something like the Great Comet of 1811. The potential issue with describing something so seemingly outrageous is that it’s visible to a lot of people. Many people could have come forward and said there was never anything in the sky like that. But that didn’t happen. Instead, later on, Origen rightly identifies the “star” as a comet.
Here’s what Origen said (circa 248):
The star that was seen in the east we consider to have been a new star, unlike any of the other well-known planetary bodies. Yet, it had the nature of those celestial bodies that appear at times, such as comets…. It has been observed that, on the occurrence of great events, and of mighty changes in earthly things, such stars are apt to appear, indicating either the removal of dynasties or the breaking out of wars. … There is a prophecy of Balaam recorded by Moses to this effect: ‘There will arise a star out of Jacob, and a man will rise up out of Israel.’
Ignatius said (circa 105), “The light from this star was inexpressible, and its uniqueness struck men with astonishment.”
So, unless this event with the Wisemen and Comet happened, what would one gain by fabricating the story? The Babylonian Wisemen would not be popular with the Jewish people. The Babylonians took Jewish people into exile and were idolaters and the Wisemen were seen as magicians who practiced sorcery against the LORD’s command (Deut. 18:10–12; Mal. 3:5; Gal. 5:19–21). And so, the God/child receiving charity from such people would probably not be seen positively.
If your premise is that the whole story was fabricated and made up to fool people, why would the author have risked claiming such a visible and verifiable phenomenon? On the other hand, if you look at Matthew as a historical work, there’s nothing that should be excluded outright. For one, Matthew certainly gets king Herod’s personality right. The historian Josephus recorded what a gruesome man Herod the Great was. He put his favorite wife to death as well as three of his sons and killed other family members too.
The slaying of the 15 to 35 babies, known as “the Massacre of the Innocents,” referred to in Matthew 2 may not be mentioned in other surviving historical accounts but it is in keeping with what we know of Herod.[5] And again, why mention this historical datum if it wasn’t accurate? Wouldn’t it be possible as the account of Jesus circulated for someone from Bethlehem to hear about the account of the massacre? Wouldn’t the story of Jesus be on unstable footing if just one lie was found out? Why then would the author take such risks?
Imagine I wanted to lie and make you think I’m good at baseball. There are all sorts of ways I could do that. I could say, “I’m really good at baseball.” I could say, “I played college baseball.” But the more specific and fantastic I get about my lie the higher the risk. If I say, “I played baseball for the Yankees” you’re going to have lots of questions and you’re probably going to seek out verification. A nondescript lie is a lot safer and can still accomplish my purpose of making you think I’m good at baseball. The claims about Jesus are not like that. They are distinctive. They—especially in the first century—are falsifiable.
The biographies of Jesus go beyond saying “Jesus was good at baseball,” and even beyond saying “Jesus played shortstop for the Yankees and batted cleanup.” They give loads of information that could have been found to be false but were never proved to be false. Again, why include so much fantastical false information? And remember, the Jesus movement didn’t take decades to form.
Anyhow, I’m trying to stop writing… There are many reasons to believe Christmas is a true story. We’ve very briefly considered two.
Notes
[1] Gospel means “good news.” In Greek, it is euangélion (εὐαγγέλιον) and it is where my daughter, Evangelina, gets her name from.
[2] C.S. Lewis, “What are we to make of Jesus Christ?,” 169 in God in the Dock.
[3] “Star” here is the English translation of the Greek word aster (ἀστήρ), and it’s where we get our English word “asteroid.” Aster can refer to various lights in the sky.
[4] See Colin R. Nicholl, The Great Christ Comet: Revealing the True Star of Bethlehem (Crossway: Wheaton, IL, 2015).
[5] Remember the infant mortality rate would have been high in that day and the massacre was all boys aged two and below so the number would have likely been relatively low for someone like Josephus to report
Does Satan exist? And if so…
Does Satan exist? There is trouble for us if Satan exists and if he does not exist. Let me explain…
𝐈𝐟 𝐒𝐚𝐭𝐚𝐧 𝐝𝐨𝐞𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐞𝐱𝐢𝐬𝐭
If Satan does not exist, how then do we think about the existence of evil? If God is dead, as Nietzsche argued and many have quipped, then so is Satan, and so is our concept of good and evil. Personal likes and dislikes, yes, we still have individual tastes and preferences. Some people like lima beans, some don’t. Some think murder is in good taste, and others don’t. But there is no moral high ground, no actual good and evil.[2]
Andrew Delbanco wrote a book called The Death of Satan. In it, he explains that evil used to “have a face, a name, an explanation.”[1] But now, modern refined humanity doesn’t believe in an evil force at work in the world. Yet, this hasn’t been the case for most of history or even for most people across the globe, even now.
Germany went from being the most sophisticated culture to being a killing culture. They went from a people of art, architecture, and invention to the mass murder of some six million Jews. If evil and Satan don’t exist, then we can’t say the mass murder of millions is evil. We can say we personally don’t like mass murder, but we can’t call it “evil.” That’s problematic.
“We live in the most brutal century in human history.” “The work of the devil is everywhere, but no one knows where to find him.” We have a crisis in our culture. We experience evil, but many don’t believe in actual evil. “We feel something that our culture no longer gives us the vocabulary to express.”[3]
If Satan and evil don’t exist, then it’s bad because there is no real category for “bad.” Then there is no explanation for the things that seem evil; they would then just be, be a regular part of the world. Seemingly evil experiences would just be normal. The way the world is. Also, if evil is not real, it can’t be overcome, defeated, or done away with.
“Don’t be evil” used to be Google’s corporate motto. It’s not now. Did they change their motto because there is no longer a real category of “evil”? If evil is not a real category, people can’t be evil.
𝐈𝐟 𝐒𝐚𝐭𝐚𝐧 𝐝𝐨𝐞𝐬 𝐞𝐱𝐢𝐬𝐭
The truth is, however, it sure seems like evil and Satan exist. I’m reading The Others Within Us: Internal Family Systems, Porous Mind, and Spirit Possession. It’s essentially about what various cultures have to say about spirit possession. The author says spiritual possession is found in every major world religion. One of the researchers cited did a study in 488 societies worldwide and found that it is “probably universal and occurs in all societies.”[4] The book said, “spirit possession often gives the possessed physical abilities that are not explainable.” I have credible friends who have told stories of people who were out of their mind, were not on drugs, yet possessed physical strength not explainable from a merely material perspective. Could what they witnessed be spirit possession?
We are very likely to be outwitted by Satan and his fellow conspirators when we are unaware of their schemes, let alone their existence. As the movie The Usual Suspects says, “The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn’t exist.”
In Harry Potter, “Voldemort, Lucius Malfoy, and their associates are bent on hating and destroying the stability and structures of the wizard world. Dumbledore, Hagrid, Harry, and their friends are committed to saving them.”[5] In the real world, there’s also a battle going on. We’re in trouble if we’re unaware.
The world is at war. There is an enemy always seeking to harm. We are in a world of magic, good and bad. As C.S. Lewis has said, “There is no neutral ground in the universe. Every square inch, every split second is claimed by God, and counterclaimed by Satan.” But the Bible says that the boss of the universe is good. And that’s a good thing. The sinister Satan will finally and decisively be defeated, never to work his woe again. If Satan and evil exist, it’s bad because Satan and evil are bad. It’s bad because there are actors in our world who want to inflict harm and intentionally destroy.
(𝐒𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐨𝐟) 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐁𝐢𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐬𝐚𝐲𝐬 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐒𝐚𝐭𝐚𝐧 & 𝐄𝐯𝐢𝐥
The Bible makes sense of the weird wild world we inhabit. The Bible is a big, amazing story. It surpasses Marvel and the Lord of the Rings. It tells us about God making the universe. It tells us about spiritual beings rebelling against God and starting a cosmic battle.
The Bible says in our world there is not one actor—humanity, but three—God, spiritual beings, and humans. Christians both believe in actual evil and resistance to evil. There’s a danger to not believing in actual evil; if there’s no evil, evil can’t be resisted. If there is no evil, individuals might label this or that thing “bad” or “good” but that’s just opinion.
For Christians, the understanding of evil and Satan is not simplistic. In regards to human beings, there’s not a clear-cut divide between good and evil. I want to do good but often do bad (Rom. 7:15-20). We all stumble in many ways (James 3:2). Yet, there is something beyond human dysfunction. “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places” (Eph. 6:12).
The Bible says we are in a world where sinister evil lurks. But it also tells us about God’s rescue mission in Christ Jesus. Jesus fought the evil enemy, He defeated and cast out the great dragon’s evil henchmen. Jesus casts out demons like light expels darkness. Jesus, in contrast, to other exorcists “is presented as an authority in control of the unclean spirits. He typically rebuked and commanded them. He relied on the spirit of God and did not use charms or talismans or magical papyri, which were common in his day. He sent out his disciples, clearly stating that he gave them the authority and power to control demons.”[6]
There will come a day when every being will bow, and every entity in the entire universe will publicly acknowledge that Jesus is Lord (Phil. 2:10-11). As humans confess with every breath that we need air, it will be abundantly and eternally clear that Jesus is the boss of every creature. We can withstand anything the world throws at us, not in our power, but through the power of Jesus (Rom. 8; Eph. 6:10).
[1] Andrew Delbanco, Death of Satan, 4.
[2] See J. Daniel McDonald, “Natural Selection and an Epistemology of Evil: An Incompatible Pair.”
[3] Andrew Delbanco, The Death of Satan, 9.
[4] Robert Falconer, The Others Within Us: Internal Family Systems, Porous Mind, and Spirit Possession.
[5] John Killinger, God, The Devil, and Harry Potter, 178.
[6] Falconer, The Others Within Us.
The Bible Shows the Worth of Women
The Bible over and over again shows the worth of women. This is in great contrast to the culture of its time. At the time of the writing of the New Testament women did not have equality with men. For example, there was no approved public place for the self-expression of women, and women could be subject to the death penalty if caught in the stands at the Olympics.
Christianity was also different from the surrounding culture in that it demanded holiness and honor not just from the wife but also from the husband, and both partners had sexual rights. This was not the Roman way. Sexual loyalty was required of women but not men, but the Bible counter-culturally taught that both partners were to be exclusively loyal to the marriage partner.
The Bible shows and defends the value of women. It repeatedly defies the expectations of the surrounding society. Christians turned the world upside down in many ways, for one, it showed women have inestimable worth and so their names are written across the word of God.1 There are some 202 women listed in the Bible. This is significant, for example, because the Quran lists just one and the Hindu Bhagavad Gita lists none.
Women have worth not as sexual objects, not as carriers of kids, and not as cooks. Women have worth because God loves them and Jesus died for them. Christianity also teaches that women are not to be mistreated. That, however, was not the expectation in the culture from which Christianity sprang. We see the contrast between Christianity and the culture of the time when we compare the contemporaries Plutarch, the philosopher and historian, and the Apostle Paul.
Plutarch allows husbands to have sexual relations outside of their marriage. It was actually expected that married men would have sexual relations with other women, such as prostitutes, female slaves, or mistresses from lower social classes. Demosthenes even famously said, “Mistresses we keep for our pleasure, concubines for our day-to-day physical well-being, and wives in order to bear us legitimate children and to serve as trustworthy guardians over our households.”
Paul, by contrast, calls for loving marital commitment for both the husband and the wife. Plutarch does not let wives speak in public, but Paul does. Plutarch says a wife should follow the religion of her husband. Paul says both spouses should love their spouse regardless of their religion. “For Plutarch, it is the husband who takes the initiative in sexual matters. For Paul, both partners have mutual obligation and should act in agreement.”2
Plutarch said husbands should rule their wives “as the soul rules the body.” Whereas Paul says in Ephesians 5 that “husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh.” What Paul and Plutarch say about how husbands are to live with wives is very different. Paul’s instructions to the churches he wrote to were subversive. He showed love and respect for both women and wives and told others to do so.
When we read the New Testament we see “Women were among the early churches’ most active and respected members.”3 The Bible shows women in high roles of leadership, compliments them, greets them, and considers them fellow workers in the gospel. Jesus spoke to and cared for the outcast Samaritan woman at the well. Even Jesus’ disciples were surprised. “They marveled that He was talking to a woman” (John 4:27). Yet He was. Jesus loved and cared for women. Of course, He loved women. He created them. And He created women as part of His good design to image Himself through humanity.
The Bible is emphatic that women have worth. Women are precious and made in the image of God. Women do not have less worth than men. Sadly, this has not always been understood or communicated as it should be. But thankfully Jesus once and for all communicated it on the cross when He bled and died for precious women. He never treated them like meat to fulfill His pleasure but died like meat to provide salvation.
Photo by Joel Muniz
- Romans 16 mentions 29 people and 10 of them are women. Here is the list of the females mentioned: Phoebe (Rom. 16:1-2), Priscilla (Rom. 16:3-5), Mary (Rom. 16:6) Junia (Rom. 16:7), Tryphena, Tryphosa, and Persis (Rom. 16:12), Rufus’ mother (Rom. 16:13), Julia and Nereus’ sister (Rom. 16:15). That may not seem like a lot but it is very significant for the time that over one-third of the people Paul greeted were women. Women were valuable colaborers in the early church. Here are some other women Paul mentions in his letters: Claudia (2 Tim. 4:21), Priscilla (Acts 18:25; 1 Cor. 16:19; 2 Tim. 4:19), Chloe (1 Cor. 1:11), Nympha (Col. 4:15), and Apphia (Philemon 1:2). ↩︎
- Benjamin Marx, “’Wifely Submission’ and ‘Husbandly Authority” in Plutarch’s Moralia and the Corpus Paulinum: A Comparison,” 88 in Journal of Greco-Roman Christianity and Judaism. ↩︎
- Sarah Ruden, Paul Among the People: The Apostle Reinterpreted and Reimagined in His Own Time, 86. ↩︎
If God is love, why does He judge?
If God is love, why does He judge?
The Bible says a lot about love and yet a lot about judgment, why?
In reading about God’s judgment in Joel I was struck by something in Joel 3:10. It says, “Beat your plowshares into swords, and your pruning hooks into spears.” It’s saying take the farming implements that you use during times of peace and plenty and prepare to use them for war. It’s a poetic way of saying things are going to get bad. War is coming. Instead of prosperity there will be pillaging. Instead of wine and feast, war and famine.
Joel 3:10 is interesting because it’s the reverse of two other Old Testament verses. Isaiah 2:4 and Micah 4:3 say, “Beat your swords into plowshares, and your spears into pruning hooks.” Those verses are saying the weapons of warfare are no longer needed because peace is here to stay. So, why the seeming contradiction?
Joel, Micah, and Isaiah are all actually saying the same thing just in different ways. Here’s the pattern:
- Sin & Injustice →
- Judgment & Justice →
- Peace & Prosperity (cf. Is. 1:27-28; 2:4).
Joel 3 says the LORD will bring judgment “because they… have traded a boy for a prostitute and have sold a girl for wine” (v. 2-3). That’s an example of the injustice that was going on. So, the LORD brings justice and judgment “for their evil is great” (v. 13). And it results in peace. That’s what Joel 3:17-27 tells us. Even the desert shall bloom.
Note, therefore, that the LORD doesn’t rashly bring wrath. Sin is a rebellion and a rampage. It destroys and damages. Thus, we should see that it’s a good thing that the LORD takes sin seriously. He does not appease those who perpetrate evil, He will deal with each issue as is warranted and right. Although now He is being patient to give people time to repent (2 Peter 3:9-10).
Amazingly, He also offers to save us from the punishment that we deserve because of our sin. Joel 2:32 reassures us that “everyone who calls on the name of the LORD will be saved.” Judgment will indeed be poured out “but the LORD is a refuge to His people” (Joel 3:16).
So, in Joel we see judgment results from injustice and peace and prosperity will ultimately result from the LORD’s just Judgment. When the LORD carryouts perfect Judgment, perfect and eternal peace will come.
When Eden’s enemies are forever banished, Eden shall eternally bloom. Sin marred God’s good creation but our good Creator will remake the world, and He will make it so it can be marred no longer. God’s just justice to injustice is good and it alone will end injustice and bring perfect peace and prosperity. Until that Day may we call people to call on the LORD (Joel 2:32) through Jesus the Messiah and may we fight for justice and pursue peace.
The final book of the Bible points us to the great Day of Judgment, and it also points us to the great day of peace. The two go together. They follow one upon the other. To have peace is to have an end to opposition. Just as in World War II, D-Day must come before VE Day.
So, if God is love, why does He judge? Because love does not take the destruction of that which it loves lightly. Instead, to love—to love fiercely and deeply—is to protect and provide. The LORD both provides a way for all those who would come, to come; and He fiercely and furiously protects His own who do come.
What is Pentecost?
What is Pentecost? And what’s its significance?
Did you know there’s a day that celebrates Pentecost?
I didn’t know what Pentecost Sunday was for a long time, and I certainly didn’t understand the full significance of it. Yet, Pentecost is full of significance. Pentecost Sunday is a celebration of the coming of the Holy Spirit. It, however, is not widely celebrated, at least, not very much in non-liturgical churches.
I grew up celebrating Christmas and praising God for the incarnation of Jesus. And I’m thankful for that. I grew up rejoicing in the truth of Easter, that Jesus is victorious over sin and death! And I’m thankful for that. But Jesus said something that makes me think we’re missing out on an important celebration.
Jesus—God in human form—came to earth and walked and talked and performed miracles. And this GodMan, Jesus, said, “It is better that I go away” (Jn. 16:7). How could that be true? I mean, I know Jesus always speaks the truth, but how could this be true? How could anything be better than Jesus walking and talking on earth with us?
How could something be better than Jesus’ physical presence?!
Jesus has said some pretty shocking things, but this is one of His greatest hits!
Who or what could be better than Jesus’ physical presence?! Thankfully Jesus answers that question for us.
He said, “It is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you. But if I go, I will send Him to you” (Jn. 16:7).
Jesus said it was to our advantage that He go because then He would send the Helper, the Holy Spirit, to us.
We rightly celebrate the coming of Jesus the Messiah at Christmas. Yet, if it is to our advantage that the Messiah goes so we have the Spirit, shouldn’t we celebrate the Spirit too? Of course, one of the reasons the Spirit is not celebrated as Jesus is, is because one of the roles of the Spirit is to help us celebrate Jesus (Jn. 16:14).[1] Nevertheless, we should acknowledge and know and praise God for His helpful presence by the Spirit.
Pentecost Sunday is a day to celebrate the powerful presence of the Spirit.
Pentecost’s Background
Pentecost (pentékosté) comes from a Greek word that means “fifty.” Pentecost takes place fifty days or seven weeks after Passover (Ex. 23:14-16; 34:22-23; Lev. 23:15-16; Num. 28:26; Deut. 16:9).[2] Sometimes people call it the Feast of Weeks. Pentecost is one of the three major Jewish festivals or feasts. It was a day to celebrate, anticipate, and thank God for His provisions, specifically wheat.
For this festival, God’s people would offer the first fruits of their wheat harvest (Ex. 34:22), and their new grain (Lev. 23:15-16) to the LORD (Ex. 34:23). This required a pilgrimage. And it required much planning because no customary work was supposed to be done on this feast day (Num. 28:26). “Though the holiday lasted but one day, it was a national event with elaborate rituals well known throughout the land.”[3]
Pentecost, however, is not just mentioned in the Old Testament; it’s in the New Testament as well (Acts 2:1; 20:16; 1 Cor. 16:8). Passover is the more famous festival, but both Passover and Pentecost are important. “The Festival of Passover… pointed forward to the death and resurrection of Jesus, so the Feast of Pentecost pointed forward to another pivotal event in the history of the church.”[4]
The time of Pentecost was a time of anticipation. God had promised to provide and it was a time to see God’s provision. So, “Pentecost is all about living in anticipation of a harvest that is yet to come.”[5] With God’s provision, there was life, health, and rejoicing. But, if God did not provide there would be devastation.[6]
Pentecost in Acts 2
In Acts 2, we see God provide more than just grain. God provided the gift of His presence as Jesus said He would and as was foretold in Joel 2:28-29. God’s people received power from on high (Lk. 24:49).
In Acts 2, we see that “something tremendous happened in Jerusalem that transformed the Apostles into men of conviction and courage and provided them with a spiritual impetus that enabled the Christian movement to expand rapidly, so that in a few decades vital congregations were in all the major cities of the Roman Empire.”[7]
At Pentecost, there was a divine visitation; the presence of God came upon His people. In the Old Testament, we see God’s appearance was accompanied by wind and fire (1 Kings 18:38; 19:11-13; Ezek. 37:9-14). Yet, we see something new in the New Testament. God’s presence was also accompanied by the gift of tongues. So, we see at Pentecost that God is shifting His redemptive purpose from Israel, His particular people, to all people being welcomed in through Christ the risen King.[8] People were scattered because of sin at Babel but through the much-anticipated gift on Pentecost, we see God gathering and uniting His people in King Jesus.[9]
The Spirit did not come just for us personally. The Spirit is also given for the purpose of mission: that all people might know Jesus as both Savior and King. As Glasser has said, “The spirit was not given just to enable the people of God to pursue personal holiness and joy in corporate worship and fellowship… The spirit was also given to energize corporate waiting on God for missionary outreach.”[10]
Jesus told His disciples to make disciples, but He let them know they wouldn’t have to do it all on their own. He would be with them, even to the end of the age. But how? At Pentecost, we find the answer. Jesus sends the Spirit (Jn. 14:16–17, 26 15:26) and is with us by the Spirit (Scripture even speaks of “the Spirit of Christ,” see Rom. 8:9; Gal. 4:6; 1 Pet. 1:11).
The Spirit given at Pentecost is the “first fruits” of more to come (Rom. 8:23; Eph. 1:13-14). God heaps grace upon grace!
“Our redemption has begun, with the fullness yet to come. As Jesus has risen, so we will too. As we have come to Christ, more will follow. The Holy Spirit who guarantees our final redemption is the first part of her vital new relationship with God, with more to come.”[11]
Jesus, who has redeemed the Church, will recreate the whole earth.
On Pentecost Sunday, we thank God for sending the Helper. We rejoice in His gift of the much-needed and anticipated Helper.
Notes
____
[1] It’s important to realize that Peter’s concern on Pentecost aligns with the Spirit’s concern: focus on Jesus Christ!
[2] Pentecost Sunday happens fifty days after Easter. Of course, Easter or Resurrection Sunday corresponds with Passover.
[3] David Brickner and Rich Robinson, Christ in the Feast of Pentecost, 101.
[4] Brickner and Robinson, Christ in the Feast of Pentecost, 31.
[5] Ibid., 108.
[6] In the Old Testament, we see God’s promise to provide crops is often in connection to His people’s faithfulness to obey Him.
[7] A. F. Glasser, “Pentecost,” 757 in The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia.
[8] Glasser, “Pentecost,” 757. “Pentecost marks the completion of Christ’s redemptive work. Following His resurrection He ascended into heaven and presented Himself as the first fruits of the coming harvest” (Ibid., 758).
[9] “Missionary outreach provides the divine reversal of the scattering and hostility of the nations that fall the judgment at Babel (Gen. 11:1-9)” (Glasser, “Pentecost,” 758).
[10] Glasser, “Pentecost,” 758.
[11] Brickner and Robinson, Christ in the Feast of Pentecost, 140.
in X 