“Confidence versus Curiosity”

Is there a difference between convictions and preferences; beliefs and opinions; doctrine and speculation?  Obviously there should be.  A better question might be this: can we tell the difference?  How do we wisely differentiate and discern the distinctions in the sometimes murky world of religion, (where traditions and cultural norms are often naturally blended with genuine biblical worship and thereby bring deceiving biases in our thinking)?

As I mentioned last week, I’ve been thinking a bit lately about the various levels of certainty which we Christians have on our various doctrines, principles and convictions.  A doctrine is basically a teaching.  My principles are my ethics; morals; values; philosophies.  My convictions are, very simply, the beliefs about which I’ve been thoroughly convinced.  I’m persuaded.  I’m sure. 

Some have defined convictions as “things we would die for.”  I deeply dislike such a definition.  I understand the point.  The desire to discriminate in that way is evidently designed to draw a line between things that may be highly important and other things that are absolutely imperative.  That is the same as my desire; I just don’t perceive that such a definition lends itself to precision. 

Here is an absurd example to make my point.  I’m absolutely convinced that Jesus had a beard, yet I wouldn’t die to defend my postulation.  In this case, it is a lack of the crucial centrality of the issue that makes me willing to behave with deference toward someone who may disagree with me on such a matter.  In other words, a person’s willingness “to die for something” speaks more about the priority of the issue than about the level of persuasion which the holder possesses concerning it (even though certainty could logically be a major factor in any such cases of martyrdom).

Today, the word “believe” implies 51% conviction.  We say, “I believe Grandma will be coming for dinner.”  “I believe the economy is headed toward disaster.”  “I believe I’ll stop by Wendy’s for lunch.”  We mean, “I think; I suppose; probably; this may happen; I perceive that it will; the odds are favorable in this direction, etc…”  While there were certainly believers in the Bible who suffered from less than 100% levels of confidence (Example:  Mark 9:24 “The father of the child cried out, and said with tears, ‘Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbelief’”), I’m under a deep impression that the word “belief” as used in the Scripture carried with it the idea of “a willingness to invest” in the object of faith, more than some feeling of assurance.  In other words, assurance can be somewhat lacking even while simultaneously genuine faith is exercised. 

Maybe I’m venturing needlessly into semantics – I surely hope not.  Second Timothy 2:14 says “…strive not about words to no profit…”  Please forgive and rebuke me if you are convinced that I’m chasing rabbits and ignoring the game we are to be after.  Hmm…

For sake of clarity, I would like to compare my beliefs in the spiritual realm to a silly gambling scenario.  I’m not a betting man, but if I were, I would definitely want to place my wagers on the surest possibilities, probabilities, potentials, etc.  Actually, I would want facts.  I would want my gambles to seem like no gamble at all (because of the high likelihood of success).  Of course, there can be a difference between the actual surety of an “investment” and the feeling which one has about that venture and its outcome.  A lunatic may feel 100% certain that he can fly, but that “belief” brings him no nearer to soaring like an eagle as he jumps off a cliff than a sane man who is pushed off the same cliff, being fully aware of the inevitability of the impending descent and demise.

A good gambler (I suppose) would be a person whose sense about the results of his or her gamble is in agreement with (and also a product of) the hard cold mathematical facts of the game.  A blackjack card counter (according to my understanding, though having never played), bases his bets on a superior understanding of probabilities at given points in the game. 

Now, truth is, the kind of “gambling” which I’m referring to today reminds me more of Blaise Pascal’s wager, as postulated in Pensées.  According to the convenient web source, Wikipedia, Pascal’s philosophy is explained as follows:  “Even though the existence of God cannot be determined through reason, a person should ‘wager’ as though God exists, because so living has potentially everything to gain, and certainly nothing to lose” (www.wikipedia.com).  While I hardly see this intellectual perspective as a useful tool in evangelism, I do find it efficacious in evaluating other matters of faith.

So, here is the theoretical scenario:  Suppose I have a billion dollars.  Suppose also that I have an opportunity to wager it (or not) on certain specific theological questions (having an absolute certainty that the true answer to each question will be certified by my hypothetical, infallible inquisitor and correct answers rewarded).  It is my supposition that there are certain doctrines that I would “lay it all down on” without hesitation… fully expecting to receive my investment back along with the benefits of a winning jackpot. 

Here are a few examples:

·         Does God exist?  I would say, “Yes!”  100% sure that my wager is no real “gamble” at all.  I’m totally persuaded!

·         Are there any living Gods other than Jehovah?  Again, with certainty… No!

·         Was Jesus the Son of God?  Yes!

·         Am I a sinner?  Yes!

·         Did Jesus die for me?  Yes!

·         Does the Holy Ghost live in me?  Yes!

·         Will I go to heaven when my life on earth here is over?  Yes!

·         Are heaven and hell real?  Yes!

·         Was Jesus born of a virgin?  Yes!

·         Can prayer affect outcomes?  Yes!

·         Is abortion (murder of an unborn human baby) sin?  Yes!

·         Is homosexuality wrong?  Yes!

…the list could go on. 

No doubts in there!  I’m absolutely, positively sure about those things.

Now, there are other doctrines about which I have enough confidence to live by them, yet if the hypothetical wager is not compulsory, well then honestly, I think I’ll just keep my money – thank you.  Do you follow me?  There is a difference in the level of conviction here.  If the wager was like Pascal’s, if the wager had to be made, then, though I would not actually struggle with how to answer, yet I would indeed prefer not to play the game in these situations.  This hesitation indicates that I have some reservation, some questions on these issues… though I claim to be convinced!

Here, I’d like to give a few examples again… though in such cases I fear honesty.  There are a multitude of practices, patterns, standards and positions about which I have enough conviction that I would greatly tremble at any vacillation concerning them, yet I see that I’m not as sure as in the first cases… because (as I’ve said) I would just keep my imaginary billion if asked these questions (if the wager is not required), lest I should lose it (however slight I might perceive that possibility to be).  In such a case as these, any temptation to risk my purse would not be based upon my sincere confidence, but upon my desire to respect orthodoxy, or on my esteem for current sensibilities or my fear of being seen as a doubter.  In pitiful protection of my own self-confidence, I’d like to skip the most important topics and use more mundane (and hopefully less controversial) examples.  But, fools rush in where angels fear to tread – so here goes a few (some significant, other frivolous to keep some levity in a heavy discussion).

·         Is remarriage absolutely prohibited under any circumstance as long as a person has another living spouse?  I would say, “Yes.”  But, still… I prefer not to wager here.

·         Will anyone ever see the Father or the Holy Ghost?  No.

·         Did Adam have a belly button?  Yes (just trying to lighten things up here remember)  J

·         Is immersion the only mode of baptism which God honors?  No, though it is clearly the mode used… but still… I would prefer not to bet on this question.

·         Could Lucifer have chosen to humbly remain in his rightful place under God’s authority?  Yes.

·         Is the Authorized Version totally accurate? Yes.

·         Can a genuine child of God commit murder or suicide?  Yes.

·         Does God approve of women who serve as pastors or deacons?  No.

·         Will the Apostle Paul’s name be written on one of the foundations of heaven?  Yes.

·         Can any musical instrument be used for God’s glory?  Yes.

·         Do all babies go to heaven when they die?  Yes.

·         Is interracial marriage ok?  Yes.

·         Historically, have the Baptists gotten closer to New Testament Christianity than any other denominational group?  Yes.

·         Do people still get visions and revelations from God?  No.

·         Have I made somebody furiously mad today?  Yes.

It’s not that these answers are pure conjecture.  In fact, I’m positive enough about my answers that I can say that I anticipate that I will die without adjusting my position on such issues (but, not die for them - LOL).  It’s just that I can see room for other possibilities of interpretation and application – even though I’m not personally impressed or significantly affected by those divergent views.  I.e., I can see how other people could have other views that are defensible logically and scripturally… not that I actually give those possibilities great consideration of plausibility myself.  I guess I just happen to recognize my own fallibility in judgment as well as the practical likelihood of not being right about everything all the time.  Additionally, I gladly admit God’s position alone as sovereign judge… along with seeing my own lowly position as a… nobody.

So, there are things I would bet on even if I didn’t have to.  Why?  Because I’m SO incredibly sure about them.  There are other things that I would not bet on unless I had to, even though I feel sure about my positions and would not dillydally around about how to bet - if betting on them were actually compulsory.  Then there are positions that I have which I would need to seriously reevaluate (if a wager was required) due to the fact that while I hold a position, I can’t say that my mind is settled in a concrete manner.

Here is some more fodder for you along such a vein:

·         Who wrote Hebrews?  Paul – I think?

·         What should people wear to church assemblies?  Um…

·         When are Old Testament saints going to be resurrected?  ….

·         What will be the Psalmist David’s role in the millennial kingdom?

·         Is it ok to drink coffee?

Sheesh!  Calm down you!  I’m trying to keep things cool and keep your attention at the same time.  The items I’ve listed are not actually my interest right now… it’s the overall question of the nature of convictions and how they control our behavior.  If you have focused only on the individual items in my list, then you have missed the point of my meditation today.

Obviously there is a final category of things that I have no idea about.  I would be totally guessing.  I don’t have a position.  A wager would be a blind roll of the dice.

·         Does outer space have an end?

·         What did God do before he made our universe?

·         How do women think?

·         Will Sarah Palin be our next vice president?

·         What will I eat for supper tomorrow?

·         Should men wear necklaces?

·         Who thinks I’m cool, and who thinks I’m a doofus?

·         Am I cool or am I a doofus?

·         Are tattoos evil?

·         Are bar codes the mark of the beast?

·         How many angels can sit on the head of a pin?

·         If a tree falls in the forest and nobody is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

A little tongue-in-cheek there, these types of questions would require complete speculation on my part.  I have no conviction… I’m not convinced, positive or even inclined in a particular direction.  Some of these things may matter, others clearly do not.  Some of these things I can affect, others I cannot.  Essentially, they are mere curiosities.    

Did you notice that the further I got from absolute guarantees of “God is real, I’m a sinner, abortion is murder, etc.,” the more frivolous my issues became.  The existence of God and the redemption of my soul are among highest on my list of certainties.  There are two reasons for this.  1)  God’s authoritative, infallible written revelations focus on these most significant matters rather than on fringe irrelevancies.  2)  My studies and experiences have been riveted primarily upon these preeminent matters. 

Now, here is the heart of the matter.  What happens when we are more vehement, passionate, vocal, interested, occupied and involved in things of lesser paramountcy than we are in those matters of infinite import?  I submit to you that in both the secular and sacred world today, the rightful prioritization of issues has been turned on its head in favor of a hierarchy more favorable and palatable to our meager fleshly sensibilities.

In the secular world, not only do people not know the answers to the most important questions, they generally don’t care.  Those who do care, unfortunately, have the wrong answers.  Many others deify agnosticism and revere ignorance, pluralism, toleration and relativism as if these positions were superior to actual knowledge that is based upon a sure foundation of reason and revelation.  It seems that the popular convictions that do exist are based upon imagination and rebellion rather than any legitimate evidence.

Being no better than they, in the sacred world, we squabble and crusade about preferences, opinions, favorites and inclinations while avoiding with dereliction the proper emphasis on those things which God has placed at the top of His list.  We expend our energy on religious aesthetics and spiritual facades without due consideration for the relational infrastructure of our walk with Christ.  Money, programs, strategy, buildings, customs, appearance and other like temporal things ought not to occupy so great a fraction of our attention in comparison. 

Can I put it on the bottom shelf?  We get more bent out of shape over the price of gas than we do the eternal destiny of our loved ones.  Something is way out of kilter here.  Christians are more likely to be concerned about the length of the Sunday service than the length of eternity.  We get all excited about the election of politicians and simultaneously disregard the election of the saints.  We know more about the current gossip than we do about the revelation of God’s Word.  Many spend more time worrying than praying.  Is anything wrong with this picture?  I think so…

I know I’ve done a poor job making the distinction here, but please overlook the abstract haphazardness of the distractions and focus upon the real issue at hand. 

1.       What issues are important on the grand and eternal scale of things?

2.       Do you have complete confidence in answering those most crucial questions in life?

3.       Does the load of your lifework effort line up with the relevance and convictions of your ideal biblical belief system? 

Considering question # 3, I know that what I do every day should be based upon those indisputably essential principles of life about which I should be absolutely sure where I stand.  From another angle, my achievements should contribute to whatever the natural and logical outgrowth of my faith is. 

If I know that God does really exist, then I should be getting to know Him, right?  If I know that there are no other living Gods except Jehovah, then I ought to be warning those who are self-deluded idolaters – never pretending that it’s no big deal.  Since Jesus is the Son of God and Savior of the World, I need to be telling more people about Him.  Since the Holy Ghost lives in me, I do have an infinite resource of wisdom and power so I should act like that reality has dawned on me and controls me.  If I know that I will go to heaven when my life on earth here is over, then for me, my life here becomes an expendable commodity in the service of the King.  Since I don’t wonder if heaven and hell real… I know they are real… then I should be charging the gates of hell in order to rescue perishing men.  If I am a freewill-$1,000,000,000-wager-certain that prayer changes things, then I must become a fervent prayer warrior.

I’m afraid our lives are too frequently governed by our tastes, not by our convictions.  What a shame!  Curiosities may be intriguing, but it will be faith filled convictions that are based upon the firm foundation of revealed truth which will be used by God to glorify His name and bring pleasure to his heart – of this, I am sure.

“Fulfilling Worship”

Blog’s are meant to be personal; almost diary-like in nature.  However, my weekly meditation entries have frequently been little more than sermons in a different format and by a different name.  Today’s is some of the same, but with a little twist.  My purpose today is actually a little odd… I’m trying to get you to buy a particular book. 

I’m currently reading “Jesus among Other Gods (The Absolute Claims of the Christian Message)” by the great Christian apologist, Ravi Zacharias.  His personal testimony (partially included in the book) has a magnetic quality to it.  He was brought to Christ in an unlikely place and in unusual circumstances... but, I’ll leave you to read that for yourself.  Instead of discussing Dr. Zacharias’ story, I want to outline briefly some points he makes in chapter five, “Is God the Source of My Suffering?” 

It is indeed highly ironic that I should come across this particular book and this precise chapter at this time, considering my meager attempt at defending God’s goodness in last week’s entry.

At first, I actually had a different theme in mind for today.  I was interested in evaluating the principles in Christianity about which I am most certain, compared with those that I am somewhat confident concerning and others about which I feel as if I’m really only guessing.  Maybe I can get to that next week.  I got so caught up in Dr. Ravi’s book that I can’t help but wish all of my readers would read it ASAP.

So, here is a little taste from his work.

In comparing (well, CONTRASTING) Christianity with Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism and Naturalism, Dr. Ravi examines how each of those religions address the horrors of the effects of evil.  The vast ineptitude of those antichrist philosophies in satisfying the rational mind (or the breaking heart) is interesting enough, but thankfully the good Dr. focuses more on the view which we revere; the only right perspective – humility before the God of the Bible.

As the Bible states plainly enough, pain and death in this world are a product of the presence of evil in this world.  A simpleton looks at the misery around him and declares that, since God could prevent pain and death (but doesn’t always do so), either He is a sadist or He doesn’t exist at all (Psalm 14:1).  The difficulty with this view is that is presupposes that the purpose of life is goodness and pleasure.  But, is that true?  Consider the following interpretation of his outline:

1.       Our good God, Jehovah, is the designer, originator, source and sustainer of our existence.

2.       Since the infinitely wise Creator is behind our subsistence, there is a plan to this story which we are living out.

3.       The purpose of our life is the willing worship (in a loving relationship) of our Holy Creator.

4.       God gave the quintessential demonstration of the “unjust” suffering dilemma (with which we wrestle) when He gave His perfectly innocent Son to die a horrible and painful death in the place of (and at the hand of) a terribly guilty human race.

5.       My greatest problem with evil is with the evil found internally in me, not the evil found externally in someone else.

6.       The emptiness of meaningless pleasure is a greater mystery than the problem of “senseless” pain.  

Of course, he spent almost 40 pages articulately expounding how thoroughly these thoughts answer our inquiry into why wickedness and pain dominate in a world where the sovereign God of Love has ultimate sway.  I encourage you, well, I beg you to get the book and read it carefully.  I’m convinced you will be encouraged, cheered and strengthened.

If I could venture a generalization of his conclusions, I would personally boil them down to two things:

1.       It would be impossible for an automaton to fulfill the purpose of the human race, hence the imparted ability to exercise prerogative (even at the expense of others' rights).

2.       The story (and it’s Author) must not be judged until its conclusion is reached. 

I’ve long been enamored with the relationship between faith and reason.  If there has ever been a work that has addressed my questions… this is it.  Praise God!  Of course, we must never delude ourselves into thinking that we will find ultimate satisfaction in knowing the answers to life’s difficult “mysteries” (as Dr. Ravi dubbed this issue).  True fulfillment (both real and perceived) is found in loving worship of our Holy Heavenly Father.  Unfortunately, learning to truly worship Him is a different and perhaps more difficult topic for another day.

Check Dr. Zacharias out @ www.rzim.org

…or the book @ “Jesus Among Other Gods”

Musings of a blind man…

 

Well, it has been about seven weeks since I last undertook to write a meditation.  Since the last one I wrote, I have preached a Bible Conference in Alabama, worked through a week of VBS here in Maryland, traveled to Wisconsin and back for a family reunion and spent a week at DBF Teen/Jr. camp in Pennsylvania.  Needless to say I am intensely relieved to be back into a normal routine. 

 

Most especially, all the traveling was a hair tedious for me.  My wife would gladly witness concerning the fact that I do not really prefer traveling.  I would seldom choose it on my own.  I’m reminded of Proverbs 6:10 & 11 that compares the effects of laziness with the effects of traveling… “Yet a little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the hands to sleep: so shall thy poverty come as one that travels…”  I’ve tried to use that passage as Biblical grounds to stay at home forever, but so far my interpretation and application has been unsuccessful (I’m smiling, Honey).   

 

Seriously now, one thing that all four of those weeks had in common was this: each one of these experiences was packed with opportunities to meet a bunch of new people.  When meeting new people, one always encounters fresh and divergent perspectives on life.  Probably the most memorable issue that I encountered in my summer of traversing involved a question about God’s ways…

 

Specifically, I was confronted with a question about the reasoning behind God’s command to some of His Old Testament saints to kill “innocent” children.  It is not in my nature to ignore serious, confrontational, puzzling inquiries (regardless of my own inadequacies in reply).  It is not my purpose to answer such questions to the satisfaction of an unbeliever (no matter how intelligent, ignorant, antagonistic or sincere).  However, I do set out to answer the legitimate inquisition to the satisfaction and peace of my own mind and heart.  I may be doing others a disservice in exploring this matter, but I intend to put my own mind at ease with the revelation of the Scripture, confident faith in God’s nature and the comfort supplied by the Spirit of Christ which dwells within me as His child.  It is not that I doubt God’s goodness, it simply that I have never methodically analyzed this particular part of God’s interaction with humanity.

 

I begin any research into the ways of God by reminding myself of His infinite transcendence.  A cynic will likely label it a copout, but for me the authority of the Bible supersedes any and all logic, passions and unanswered questions. 

·         Isaiah 55:8-9, “‘My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,’ saith the LORD.  ‘For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.’”

·         Roman 11:33, “O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God!  How unsearchable are His judgments, and His ways past finding out!”

It is the very nature of the Christian faith.  We believe things that we cannot see, understand or explain.  We begin with certain presuppositions and assumptions that we can’t necessarily prove (especially to someone who does not share our faith).  In fact, Jehovah God offers to us eternal life based upon this childlike trust.  Adam didn’t take God’s word at face value; He didn’t submit to his Creator in obedience.  Instead he disobediently explored the world of “knowledge” outside of the parameters established by the Almighty.  He allowed curiosity, deception and influence to pressure him into choosing to rebel against God.  Now, in reconciling the fallen human race to Himself, God expects us to return to that place of acceptance that existed before the fall.  We must simply admit that there are things that God knows which we don’t… and we have to be OK with that.  Adam and Eve were not satisfied with that arrangement.  By God’s grace, I am comfortable with God’s infinite transcendence and sovereignty.  It doesn’t mean I’m perfect or that I’m not interested in the ways of my Father.  In fact I’m intensely inquisitive when it come to the why, when, where and how of God’s behavior.  My studies are not, however, purposed to deny, destroy, accuse or dethrone my King.  I’m not involved in an effort to excuse my sin by assassinating the character of my benevolent Savior.  Indeed, my reason for looking into hard questions such as this one (which I’m evaluating now) is in order that:

(1)    I might resist and defeat (with verse and experience) the Devil himself when he comes to me in an attempt to make me doubt.

(2)    I might know more of my God so that I can fellowship more intimately with Him upon the basis of truth.

(3)    I might be drawn to my face in humility and worship before His awe-inspiring and magnificent power and presence.

Besides, what better and more interesting topic of discussion could one find than the person and nature of the Divine?  It is a subject of eternal and endless possibility and intrigue: one never to be exhausted and concluded.

 

So – I begin to look at the question (of His mysterious handling of children) by recognizing that after I’m through meditating and studying, I’ll still be left with the basic choice of faith or rebellion.  His ways are unfathomable!  No evidence or rationale can (alone) settle the matter.  Also, I can’t settle the mind of anyone… other than my own.  Everyone must make the decision for themselves.  May the God of grace grant you faith to believe…

 

Now, from where did this issue arise?  Perhaps it would be (in part) from the following passage:

·         1 Samuel 15:1, “Samuel also said unto Saul, ‘The LORD sent me to anoint Thee to be king over His people, over Israel: now therefore hearken thou unto the voice of the words of the LORD.’   Thus saith the LORD of hosts, ‘I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt.  Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.’”

In today’s dispensation, we stand amazed and even shocked that the same God who said “suffer the little children to come unto me and forbid them not” would have sent His people to slice the throats of the children of Amalek or of any other nation.  We understand well enough that the Canaanites represented “sin” in the type, shadow and figure of the Old Testament and that we likewise are supposed to unmercifully execute the sin in our own heart and life.  Yet, somehow that doesn’t adequately answer the question for that time.

 

There are several poor ways of handling this issue with a shallow and hasty disregard for the depth of the apparent incongruity. 

(1)    We may dismiss the story by giving it some kind of “fairy tale” status.  In that case we are no more bothered by it than we would be by the “Big Bad Wolf” eating “Little Red Riding Hood’s” helpless grandmother.  The problem with this method is that it undermines the legitimacy of the rest of the Scripture, something that I (for one) am in no way willing to do.  The foundation of the doctrines that I hold dear is the assumption that we are to take the Bible literally.  If you do not believe that basic principle, then I say to you that you and I have not enough in common to carry on a coherent conversation about the nature of God.  We would do well to part ways peaceably…

(2)    We may attempt to differentiate between the God of the Old Testament and the God of the New.  There are two problems with this though.  First, the Bible teaches unquestionably the immutability of God (Malachi 3:6) as well as the absolute singleness of His eternal existence.  There is only ONE God and He doesn’t change.  Secondly, the most destructive and gruesome passages describing God’s wrath and damnation upon humanity are found in the New Testament, not in the Old.  The plagues of the Great Tribulation, the annihilation at Armageddon and the everlasting tortures of souls in the Lake of Fire could hardly contribute to anyone’s fancied image of God being a docile deity of only kindness and tolerance.  No, indeed, God is the Holy and the Just.  He guaranteed death to the human race if the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil was violated.  His warning was hardly a hollow threat!  Without the application of Christ’s blood to the doorposts of the heart of an individual, one lies in total condemnation and will eternally reap the fierce wrath of the Consuming Fire of Deuteronomy 4:24.  Sure, God’s anger was propitiated at Calvary, but if a person has not been to Calvary spiritually, then they remain unprotected by that umbrella of redemption.

(3)    We may pragmatically write off those children as collateral damage.  Yet, they could reasonably have been adopted by the Israelites.  While it was the sins of their parents that brought about their deaths and therefore the parents should bear the heaviest weight of the blame, it’s not like the Jews were dropping atomic bombs on Canaanite cities and were therefore unable to discriminate among who would be killed.  But again, God specifically said to kill them all.  There is no way around it in this way.  No person is truly expendable and dispensable to bring about a greater good for a larger number… not ultimately anyway…  Though, truly there are plenty of examples in Scripture where God allowed a mass of humanity to suffer or die because of something that He was doing in the life of one person or group (for example: Job’s first set of children).  Yet, we must assume that God also had a tailored program that He was working out in the existence of every single individual who’s story is not actually told (other than their demise).    

(4)    We may deny the very existence of God, or we may reluctantly admit His presence and angrily defy His claims of goodness and sovereignty.  But I would submit (to my imagined opponent in this debate) that one’s denial of God’s being no more changes reality than one’s denial of gravity.  I personally see the effects of both and accept these realities at face value, regardless of the aspects that I can’t comprehend.  So too, defiance of God’s claims no more affects the truth than a two year old child’s defiance of his Daddy’s position and kindness changes reality for him.  If the atheist, agnostic or antagonist is correct in his rebellion, well, he is left with a mammoth task of erecting a new foundation for life.  If he is wrong, then he will simply be burned by the very Fire that he (or she) denies of defies.  I have to admit that Pascal’s Wager looks incredibly appealing at this juncture.

 

Perhaps there are many other options of redefinition and doubt that could be discussed, but my finite mind is getting exhausted already.  Let’s move on toward a view that involves both humility and faith.

 

I purpose that every person is a sinner just as every rattlesnake is a poisonous viper.  The timing and degree of the despicable nature of the being may fluctuate greatly, yet the nature is always consistent.  Just as I will willingly and without guilt kill any rattlesnake (egg, baby or adult) that I find, no matter the size or shape, so too, in a more serious, yet parallel manner, God views every sinner as a despicable and worthless creature in our fallen state.  True… love, mercy and grace have interfered wonderfully and delivered many undeserving souls from the damnation promised by our Maker, yet the original curse upon every creature is as fair, just and deserved as a 12 gauge slug in your chest would be if you broke into my house with malicious intent toward my wife or children. 

 

“Oh, how horrid!” (the limp-wrist-panty-waist-sugar-cookie intellectual with the “enlightened” sensibilities of our modern culture replies).  Yet, might I remind you and me that we are not the measure of all things.  God’s generosity has allowed many of us to be reared in a “civilized” society being pampered and protected from reality.  But, you know… I’ve got news for anyone who prefers the surreal utopian view of peace without holiness… this world is jam packed with pain, misery, death, destruction, rottenness, decadence and injustice.  God did not design it to be so.  He made everything good.  He had a perfect plan and we (vicariously in Adam; and literally in practice) discarded it in favor of exercising our own prerogative.  Oh sure, I know that He knew it was coming.  That doesn’t mean it was His fault.  Knowledge does not imply culpability.  And, even if it did – remember Romans 9:20 & 21:

“Nay but, O man, who are you that replies against God?  Shall the thing formed say to Him that formed it, ‘Why hast thou made me thus?’  Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honor, and another unto dishonor?”

We are truly His creation and His possession.  He has every right to do with us whatever He pleases.  Admittedly, it is illogical that He would design us to sin only then to turn angrily upon us for doing what we were programmed to do – hence I reject double predestination.  Yet, the deal was plain enough – eat and die.  We ate; we die.  Is it really significant WHEN we die?  Is there a difference on the cosmic or eternal scale if we die while young and beautiful outwardly or when old and… somewhat… less… aesthetic.  We are sinners by nature.  The world and everything in it is condemned.  David even said we were conceived in sin (Psalm 51:5) and came forth from the womb fibbing (Psalm 58:3). 

 

Above all of this, there is the consideration of what is most significant, our existence here or in the hereafter.  From our perspective, it is a great loss when a young person dies, yet, that doesn’t mean that God views the transition as we do.  Hebrews 11:37 & 38 (along with other passages too) implies directly that death is a blessing and benefit because of the adjustment to that occurrence by the death and resurrection of Christ.  For those protected by His life, passing from this world is the most wonderful thing that could possibly happen to us.  Read…   

·         Hebrews 11:37, “They [faithful saint]… were slain… [because] the world was not worthy [of their presence]…”

·         Psalm 116:15, “Precious in the sight of the LORD is the death of His saints” (including the infant and suckling whom I am convinced enter heaven at the instant of their decease… a different discussion for a different day).

·         Philippians 1:21-23 “To me to live is Christ, and to die is gain.  But if I live in the flesh, this is the fruit of my labor: yet what I shall choose I know not.  For I am in a strait betwixt two, having a desire to depart, and to be with Christ; which is far better…”       

I would submit to you that our continuance or passage from life here is no more comparable to life in eternity than the momentary holding of one’s breath in order to dive for a priceless pearl is comparable to the benefit reaped from the purchasing jeweler.

 

Perhaps the best place to see and accept God’s right to require the life of a person is with Abraham and Isaac on Mt. Moriah.  Did God have the right to ask Abraham to offer up his teenage son on an altar?  In faith we must answer absolutely affirmatively!  What other option do we have without blaspheming God and turning to unbelief?  Sure, it doesn’t fit with our experience in this dispensation, yet in religious fervor we dogmatically defend His ownership and use of both Isaac and Abraham.  The mental picture of the progenitor of the faithful plunging a knife into the chest of his promised child is obviously incomprehensible to us!  I don’t deny that recognition.  I admit it readily.  I’ll not for one instance defend anyone who kills in the name of righteousness today; in this age of grace.  Christ clearly instituted a new pattern for the children of God; a pattern of merciful proselytizing and loving conversion for this era of the church – Hallelujah for that.  Yet that doesn’t change the past or the future.  He has commanded war against infidels and their offspring in the past and he will do it again in the future (thankfully after He removes His church from this planet). 

 

So, what am I saying (other than, “duh… I dunno!”)? 

(1)    Apart from God’s good mercy and grace EVERY person would die miserably – including EVERY child.  If you believe in a basic innocence and goodness in the human race, logically you would reject my proposition.  But regardless, I’m convinced that the survival of anyone for even one second past conception is a product of God’s patience and generosity.  Sorry!  That’s what I believe.  According to my understanding, it’s the doctrine espoused by the Bible.

(2)    Death is not the same from God’s perspective that it is from ours.  Hence, our connection of maliciousness with death is not necessarily always accurate.  Eternal and temporal things are not justly comparable.  If that baby awakes in heaven, was its execution criminal if demanded by the Creator?

(3)    God is good, loving, compassionate, patient, generous, concerned, interested, careful, consistent and trustworthy – regardless of how the evidence may sometimes indicate otherwise as interpreted by our terribly limited and distorted perspective on things.  Also, those appreciable traits do not compromise the other characteristics of His person… such as His power, holiness or omniscience; rather they complement these qualities.

 

Above all things, I point to the cross and to my personal testimony.  I can’t comprehend labeling God as a bully, as insensitive, as cruel, as hard, as uncompassionate, as aloof or any other unfair negative (for that matter), when I have caught a glimpse of His sacrifice on Golgotha’s hill.  He volunteered!  He came and died for me.  He saw my condemned situation and plight and lovingly was crucified in my place.  For me, that gift is enough to build my complete faith in Him.  There may be things about my Savior that I don’t understand, but if He was willing to love me when I hated Him, die for me while I was the one who was willingly killing Him and promise me an inheritance while I was still in rebellion against Him – well, let’s just say I’m convinced of His goodness… perplexing stories of His handling of others notwithstanding.

 

So, is God a baby killer?  John 3:17 says, “God sent not His Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.”  Get mad a Satan…  Get mad at Adam…  Get mad at yourself…  But, for goodness sake, don’t get mad at God because of the curse of death and the broadness of its application.  When He punishes any of us, it is less than our iniquities deserve (Ezra 9:13).  We are in the sin boat together – man, woman, boy, girl, genius and imbecile.  He views the whole race a polluted and damned.  Any of us who escape the torments of hell do so due to His extension of love and mercy.  If He had saved no one, He would have been justified in not doing so.

 

I close my awfully derisory defense and apology with these personally reassuring verses:

·         Ezekiel 18:32, “‘I have no pleasure in the death of him that dies,’ saith the Lord GOD: ‘wherefore turn yourselves, and live ye.’” 

·         Ezekiel 33:11, “‘As I live,’ saith the Lord GOD, ‘I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die?’”

 

If a man so desires, he can stand around and complain about the sinking of the Titanic under his feet and also use its destruction as an excuse to avoid the life rafts that are available.  Or, he can wisely get in the life boat and leave the evaluation of what went wrong in the hands of someone more capable and informed.

 

My God is no “baby killer” – he said plainly in Matthew 18:10:

·         “Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven.” 

Jesus loves the little children… all of them…

 

If any of you who are readers have anything to add, please feel free.  I’m humbly listening….