Gregory Koukl's Blog, page 115

Links Mentioned on the 11/12/13 Show

The following are links that were either mentioned on this week's show or inspired by it, as posted live on the @STRtweets Twitter feed:

Why Would God Punish Finite, Temporal Crimes in an Eternal Hell by J. Warner Wallace


Politics According to the Bible: A Comprehensive Resource for Understanding Modern Political Issues in Light of Scripture by Wayne Grudem


Fathers Don't Mother by Amy Hall


The Puritan Consensus (on the age of the earth) by Ian Clary


The Reformed Consensus by Ian Clary


Does It Matter if We Evolved? – Video by Greg Koukl

Listen to today's show or download any archived show for free. (Find links from past shows here.)

To follow the Twitter conversation during the live show (Tuesdays 4:00–7:00 p.m. PT), use the hashtag #STRtalk.

Webcast Tuesday

Greg is live online today 4-7 p.m. PT. Give him a call with your question or comment at (855) 243-9975, outside the U.S. (562) 424-8229. 

Listen live online. Join us on Twitter during the program @STRtweets #STRtalk.

Challenge: Pro-Choicers, Not Pro-Lifers, Decrease Abortion

The challenge this week comes from an article titled "How I Lost Faith in the Pro-Life Movement":

Why did I stop identifying as pro-life? Quite simply, I learned that increasing contraceptive use, not banning abortion, was the key to decreasing the number of abortions. Given that the pro-life movement focuses on banning abortion and is generally opposed [to] advocating greater contraceptive use, I knew that I no longer fit. I also knew that my biggest allies in decreasing the number of abortions were those who supported increased birth control use – in other words, pro-choice progressives. And so I stopped calling myself pro-life.

Are you making a mistake by taking the pro-life position? Would you actually be more pro-life if you were pro-choice? How would you respond to this challenge? Make your case in the comments below, and then on Thursday, Alan will post his response.

[Explore past challenges here and here.]

How To Deal with Christians Who Are in Favor of Abortion or Same-sex Marriage? (Video)

How do you deal with fellow Christians who are supportive of abortion or same-sex marriage?

A Plan to Begin a Year of Learning

A man who will be mentoring a college-aged student in Theology,
Bible, and Apologetics for a year asked me for some recommendations on
materials he could use. I wanted to post my recommendations here, as well,
because many of you may be looking for some sort of program you can go through
on your own in order to develop a better foundation for your life as a
Christian. And many others of you might like to use the knowledge God has
gifted you with by starting a class or book club to build up the body of Christ
around you.

Everything on this list is written at a level that a
layperson can understand—there's nothing too technical or overly academic. It
will give you a good foundation in the Bible (which is most important), cover a
few topics in apologetics that are big right now, and give you tools on how to
think and have productive conversations.

The total number of pages in the books (not counting Bible
pages) comes out to only 2489. That means if you go through this over a year’s
time, there are roughly 50 pages of reading a week, or only 7 pages a day. Anyone
can do this. And if you fall behind, just extend the time a little longer in
order to finish.

Find a friend who can join with you to discuss these ideas and
keep you on track, and then start reading! I recommend reading them in this
order:

From
Creation to the Cross (and the associated “Suggested Scripture
Readings” in each chapter) – Book: Understanding
the big picture of the Bible and how the Old Testament fits together with the
New is valuable both for theology and for apologetics. Nothing is more
important than getting a good grasp of the Bible (400 pages).

Never
Read a Bible Verse – Article:
An intro to hermeneutics.

How to Read
the Bible for All Its Worth – Book:
The study of hermeneutics is crucial. This book has the basics you need to know
(288 pages).

You
Want to Be a Good Apologist? – Post:
The best advice I ever received.

James
Gray on Mastering the Bible – Article:
This article has been life-changing for me. If you follow its advice, you’ll
begin to know the Bible in a much deeper way.

The
Basics of New Testament Textual Criticism – Video: A series of free videos on how textual criticism works,
helping you understand and answer objections about the reliability of the
Bible.

Knowing
God – Book: Learn the basics
of theology (286 pages—you can get a study
guide for this one, as well).

The
Holiness of God – Book: Understanding
God's holiness is the key to answering many current apologetics questions. This
is the biggest blind spot in our culture, so this one is a must-read (240
pages).

Tactics:
A Game Plan for Discussing Your Christian Convictions – Book: I think this is the most valuable apologetics
resource out there, because it teaches you how to skillfully use any knowledge you have in conversation
(208 pages).

The
Unaborted Socrates – Book:
This book is excellent both at demonstrating good tactics and teaching pro-life
apologetics (155 pages).

The
Case for the Resurrection of Jesus – Book: The resurrection is central to Christianity, and Gary
Habermas is the expert on this subject (384 pages).

If
God Is Good: Faith in the Midst of Suffering and Evil – Book: Evil is another hot topic in
apologetics right now. Don’t let the length of this book scare you; the
chapters are short, readable, and compelling (528 pages).

If you start planning for this now, you could easily begin on January 1.

Why Must the Cause of the Universe Be Personal?

William Lane Craig explains why the timeless cause of the
universe must be personal, not impersonal…in less than three minutes. Here’s
the bottom line:

The only way to explain how we can
have a temporal effect, with a beginning, arise from an eternal cause is if
that cause is a personal agent endowed with freedom of the will, and therefore able
spontaneously to create a new effect in time.

 

(HT: @LeeStrobel)

Why Shouldn’t We Trust the Non-Canonical Gospels Attributed to Peter?

When I first started investigating the reliability of the New Testament Gospels, I was fascinated by the ancient non-canonical stories and legends related to Jesus. While they were written too late to be legitimate eyewitness accounts, they were built on the core truths of the Gospels (albeit altered and embellished by authors with specific motivations). There are good reasons to reject these texts, but there is much we can learn about Jesus as well. I’ll be examining a number of non-canonical documents over the next several weeks in an effort to discover how they differ from the reliable accounts, why they were rejected by the Church, and what we can learn about Jesus, in spite of their unreliability. We’ll begin with the work of ancient authors who attempted to legitimize their stories by attributing them to Apostle Peter:

The Preaching of Peter (100-150 AD)
The original manuscript of the Preaching of Peter is now lost to us. We do, however, have a few fragments and evidence from letters written by Clement of Alexandria (150-215 AD) and Origen (185-254 AD) that quote the Preaching of Peter in several places. In addition, Origen wrote that early church leaders like Heracleon used the text alongside the canonical Gospels.

Why Isn't It Considered Reliable?
The text does not appear in early lists of canonical documents and may not have been considered worthy of addition based on the fact it appeared in history well after the life of Peter (too late in history to have been written by him), and did not add significant, new (or even contradictory) material to the eyewitness account of Jesus.

How Does It Corroborate the Life of Jesus?
The few quotations available to us corroborate several elements of the historical account of Jesus. The Preaching of Peter describes Jesus as the real, historical "Son of God" through whom God created the universe and everything in it. The text also affirms that Jesus had many disciples, and from these disciples twelve were specifically chosen and commissioned to preach the Gospel. The Preaching of Peter corroborates Jesus' persecution at the hands of the Jews, His crucifixion, resurrection and ascension. The text also affirms the Old Testament prophetic predictions related to Jesus and the Biblical notion that only those who hear and believe are saved.

Where (and Why) Does It Differ from the Reliable Accounts?
In the few passages that are available to us from the letter of Clement, nothing from the Preaching of Peter appears to contradict or distort the orthodox teaching related to Jesus.

The Gospel of Peter (150-200 AD)
The Gospel of Peter was first discovered by the French archaeologist, Urbain Bouriant in 1886. He recovered the 8-9th century manuscript from a monk’s grave in Akhmim Egypt, approximately six miles from the Gnostic Nag Hammadi Library discovery. The text available to us is only a fragment, and it represents a narrative description of the Passion of Jesus (His crucifixion and resurrection). It is unknown if the original Gospel of Peter was a complete narrative about the life of Jesus or if the text was always limited to the Passion. The Gospel of Peter may have been very popular among early Christians and was certainly known to the early Church Fathers.

Why Isn't It Considered Reliable?
Eusebius mentions the Gospel of Peter and cites a letter written by Serapion, the Bishop of Antioch between 190 and 203 AD. Serapion describes the Gospel of Peter as mostly trustworthy, declaring that “most of it belonged to the right teaching of the Saviour.” But Serapion also condemned the text and warned that some parts incorrectly described Jesus in a Gnostic or "Docetic" manner, as a spirit whose body was only an illusion. Much later in history, Church leaders continued to condemn the work as heretical; both Jerome and Pope Gelasius I classified the text in this manner. In any case, scholars date the Gospel of Peter to the late 2nd century and consider any internal claims related to Peter’s authorship to be inauthentic. The Gospel of Peter appears in history far too late to have been written by Peter.

How Does It Corroborate the Life of Jesus?
Interestingly, the Gospel of Peter confirms and acknowledges much of the Passion narrative without actually utilizing material from Luke or Matthew. This has caused many scholars to wonder if the Gospel represents yet another independent eyewitness account or is referencing source material that was also referenced by the other Gospel writers (the latter opinion being that of more ‘liberal’ theologians and literary critics). The Gospel of Peter agrees remarkably with much of the Passion narrative, identifying Pilate and Herod by name, and identifying Joseph (presumably of Arimathea) as the “friend of Pilate” who asked for Jesus’ body. The details of the Passion are then described in a manner similar to the canonical Gospels. Jesus is taunted and subjected to the crown of thorns and the purple robe. His opponents beat Him and slapped Him and ultimately crucified him between two thieves, placing a sign on His cross that read, “THIS IS THE KING OF ISRAEL.” His garments were divided, and the executioners gambled for them. They gave Jesus gall and vinegar to drink. At the death of Jesus, the veil of the Temple was torn in two, and the sky became dark. Jesus was later removed from the cross and taken to Joseph’s tomb. Pilate assigned guards to Jesus’ tomb (the lead guard was named “Petronius”) but on the night before Resurrection Sunday, the tomb was visited by angels and Jesus was resurrected from the grave. The guards saw the stone being rolled from the grave, but the silence of the guards was purchased, and like the canonical Gospels, Mary and her “women friends” are the first to visit the tomb and speak to the angel. Three disciples of Jesus are mentioned specifically (Peter, Andrew and Matthew).

Where (and Why) Does It Differ from the Reliable Accounts?
Serapion’s concerns related to the Gospel of Peter seem to be well deserved. The Gospel demonstrates a Docetic view of Jesus that is consistent with the Gnostic view of matter shared in the community located just six miles from the monk’s grave where the Gospel was first discovered. The text encourages an immaterial view of Jesus. For example, when Jesus died on the cross, the Gospel of Peter claims He “remained silent, as though he felt no pain,” and at the point of Jesus’ death, He is described as ascending immediately to heaven (“…he was taken up”). The narrative does, however, claim the “body” of Jesus is ultimately placed in the tomb. The surviving Gospel fragment is missing its closing chapter(s), but it does not seem to contain any accounts of the bodily resurrection of Jesus. The Gospel of Peter seems to describe Jesus as resurrecting and ascending on the very same day (although it is unknown if the missing chapters would include the reappearance of Jesus among the disciples). A Docetic view of Jesus would naturally exclude such accounts of a resurrected Jesus with a material body. Some scholars have also observed what appears to be an anti-Jewish inclination within the Gospel of Peter. The Gospel omits all references to fulfilled prophecy from the Old Testament and exonerates Pilate from any responsibility in crucifying Jesus (laying the blame on Herod and the Jews who, unlike Pilate, fail to “wash their hands”).

The Gnostic Apocalypse of Peter (160-210 AD)
This text, like other Gnostic documents from the late 2nd century, was discovered as part of the Nag Hammadi Library in Egypt in 1945. The surviving text is a 4th century manuscript written in the Coptic language (like many other Gnostic documents), so it is sometimes referred to as the “Coptic Apocalypse of Peter.” Like other Gnostic texts from this period, the Gnostic Apocalypse of Peter is presented as a dialogue between Jesus and a key figure from Christian history, in this case, Peter.

Why Isn't It Considered Reliable?
The Gnostic Apocalypse of Peter appears in history too late to actually have been penned by Peter or any other writer who could have had contact with Jesus. The author of the text includes a reference to Hermas and appears to be arguing in opposition to theology that is presented in the “Shepherd of Hermas,” a document that dates to the middle of the 2nd century. In addition to this, the Gnostic Apocalypse of Peter was discovered alongside other Gnostic texts that date to the middle or late 2nd century. These texts were immediately identified by the early Church Fathers as late, heretical Gnostic frauds.

How Does It Corroborate the Life of Jesus?
In spite of these heretical elements, the Gnostic Apocalypse of Peter does affirm many details related to Jesus. He is described as the “Savior” and the “Son of Man,” and Peter is identified as one of His disciples. Jesus is described as a wise spiritual teacher with Divine knowledge. He makes several statements familiar to the canonical Gospels, including: "For people do not gather figs from thorns or from thorn trees, if they are wise, nor grapes from thistles" (Matthew 7:16). Jesus’ death on the cross is also referenced as part of the text, including the fact that he was pierced with nails.

Where (and Why) Does It Differ from the Reliable Accounts?
The Gnostic Apocalypse of Peter contains a number of common Gnostic characteristics, including the value of hidden, esoteric knowledge (in this case revealed exclusively to Peter), and the corrupt nature of the material body. Like other Gnostic texts, this manuscript also seems to demonstrate a “Docetic” view of Jesus: His material body was only an illusion, and He is in truth a purely spiritual being who only appeared to die on the cross.

As with other non-canonical documents we’ll examine over the next weeks, there’s an emerging pattern related to dating and accuracy (this set of ancient documents attributed to Peter is an excellent example). Earlier documents tend to be more orthodox in their presentation of Jesus than later texts. As time progressed, religious sects of one kind or another co-opted the person of Jesus and “reshaped” Him to fit their particular theological perspective. The later the non-canonical text, the more dramatic the “reshaping.” That’s why the first question we must ask any eyewitness is simply, “Were you really there to see what it is you said you saw?” That’s also why we can trust the New Testament Gospels are the only true eyewitness accounts related to the life, ministry, death and resurrection of Jesus.

[Find all of J. Warner Wallace's posts in this series here.]

Free to Say We've Sinned

1 John 1:10 is one of the most freeing verses in the Bible:

If we say that we have not sinned,
we make Him a liar and His word is not in us.

But let me back up a little bit.

This verse comes at the end of a passage that starts off in
a terrifying way:

This is the message we have heard
from Him and announce to you, that God is Light, and in Him there is no
darkness at all. If we say that we have fellowship with Him and yet walk in the
darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth…

There is no darkness in our holy God. At all. And there is
no fellowship between God and sin.

This is as far as atheists see into Christianity—an
unforgiving, impossibly high moral law enforced by a fearful Judge. They accuse
us of “living in fear,” and they want no part of that kind of life. They’re
good people, thank you very much, and they don’t need anyone making them feel
guilty.

But now it’s time to finish that passage:

…but if we walk in the Light as He
Himself is in the Light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of
Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin. If we say that we have no sin, we are
deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, He is
faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all
unrighteousness.

Our ongoing sins are assumed
in this passage, and the solution offered is complete. This is the end of fear and guilt, not the fuel of
it. And that’s where 1 John 1:10 comes in. Do you feel the strength of it now?

If we say that we have not sinned,
we make Him a liar and His word is not in us.

When you hide your sin, pretending to be a perfect
Christian, you’re actually telling the world that God is a liar. Did Jesus, or
did Jesus not, need to suffer and die for your present sins? When you feign
perfection, you’re saying you didn’t need Him to do this for you.

Can you see now how freeing this verse is? You no longer
have to be afraid of people finding out about your sin. You have no need to
hide. In fact, as counter-intuitive as it feels when you’re cowering in the
dark, worrying about embarrassing yourself and Christianity should your sinfulness
become known, it’s only when you're open about your sin that people can see
you’re resting on Christ’s work for
you, not your own perfection. This is
when you glorify Christ the most. Rather than being a source of fear, your
sin reveals that God is a truth-teller, for He said that you are a sinner. He
said that your sin deserves judgment. He said that you need grace. He said that
He’s given it.

Here I give Paul’s warning in Romans 6:1-4:

What shall we say then? Are we to
continue in sin so that grace may increase? May it never be! How shall we who
died to sin still live in it? Or do you not know that all of us who have been
baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death? Therefore we have
been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised
from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness
of life.

We don’t intentionally increase our sin in order to glorify
Christ, we recognize and openly acknowledge the sin we already have because Christ’s grace is glorified through our visible trust in that grace.

This is, after all, why we were created.

[He] seated us in the heavenly
places in Christ Jesus, so that in the ages to come He might show the
surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus (Ephesians
2:6-7).

Pilgrim Governor

William Bradford was the long-serving governor of the Plymouth Colony. He arrived in the new world in 1621. Bradford helped author the Mayflower Compact, which set out the civil laws the settlers agreed to live by. The Compact provided for fair treatment for all with the common good in view. This is the general view of government that the Founding Fathers had in mind as they drew up the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. These ideas were fundamental in the very beginning of our country with the Pilgrims.

Bradford served thirty one-year terms as governor of the fledgling colony between 1622 and 1656. He enjoyed remarkable discretionary powers as chief magistrate, acting as high judge and treasurer as well as presiding over the deliberations of the General Court, the legislature of the community. In 1636 he helped draft the colony's legal code. Under his guidance Plymouth never became a Bible commonwealth like its larger and more influential neighbor, the Massachusetts Bay Colony. Relatively tolerant of dissent, the Plymouth settlers did not restrict the franchise or other civic privileges to church members. The Plymouth churches were overwhelmingly Congregationalist and Separatist in form, but Presbyterians like William Vassal and renegades like Roger Williams resided in the colony without being pressured to conform to the majority's religious convictions.

After a brief experiment with the "common course," a sort of primitive agrarian communism, the colony quickly centered around private subsistence agriculture. This was facilitated by Bradford's decision to distribute land among all the settlers, not just members of the company.

Who Would God Discriminate Against?

This question is asked regarding the Employment Non-Discrimination Act moving through the Senate. It would protect homosexual and transgender Americans from hiring discrimination. A better question might be, Who would God force to violate their consciences that are informed by His Word? But of course, the way you ask the question frames the debate.

While the law exempts religious organizations, it does not protect business owners with religious convictions. While all people should be treated with dignity, it's also important that the religious liberties protected in our Constitution be respected, as well. Violating constitutional rights isn't justified by legislating against discrimination.

Note in the WaPo article linked above that the author writes that the "faith denominations" that support the legislation "run the gamut," and she cites a number of denominations that "run the gamut" from the liberal to the extremely liberal. That's actually not much of a gamut.

Andrew Walker, the Director of Policy Studies with the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, provides a very helpful perspective on this issue and legislation.

I was reading Ephesians 6 this morning and reflected on the first piece of armor we're told to take up to stand firm – it's the belt of truth. We cannot sacrifice the truth of what God has revealed to us, or we lose before we've even begun to stand.

Therefore take up the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand firm. Stand therefore, having fastened on the belt of truth... (Ephesians 6:13-14).