Gregory Koukl's Blog, page 143

Why Isn't Sincerity Enough? (Video)

Why isn't sincerity enough?

Why Isn't Sincerity Enough?

Why Isn't Sincerity Enough?

Links Mentioned on the 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:

Beyond Death: Exploring the Evidence for Immortality by Gary Habermas


Near-Death Experiences: Evidence for an Afterlife? (Video) by Gary Habermas


Gary Habermas's website


Newsweek: Heaven Is Real by Melinda Penner

Listen to today's show or download any  show for free.

Investigating Bart Ehrman’s Top Ten Troublesome Bible Verses

On the final page of the paperback edition of Misquoting Jesus, Bart Ehrman famously listed the “Top Ten Verses That Were Not Originally in the New Testament.” In an effort to discredit the reliability of the New Testament text, Ehrman offered this list to demonstrate the existence of many late insertions in the text. He found this reality troubling as a young man, and eventually walked away from his Christian faith as a result:

“The Bible began to appear to me as a very human book. Just as human scribes had copied, and changed, the texts of scripture, so too had human authors originally written the texts of scripture. This was a human book from beginning to end.” (from Misquoting Jesus)

Let’s take a look at Ehrman’s list of troublesome verses and examine how they impact the reliability of the New Testament text:

1 John 5:7
There are three that bear witness in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one.

John 8:7
Let the one who is without sin among you be the first to cast a stone at her.

John 8:11
Neither do I condemn you. Go and sin no more.

Luke 22:44
In his anguish Jesus began to pray more earnestly, and his sweat became like great drops of blood falling to the ground.

Luke 22:20
And in the same way after supper Jesus took the cup and said, "This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.“

Mark 16:17
These signs will accompany those who believe: in my name they will cast out demons and they will speak with new tongues.

Mark 16:18
And they will take up snakes in their hands, and if they drink poison it will not harm them, and they will lay their hands on the sick and they will become well.

John 5:4
For an angel of the Lord went down at certain times into the pool and disturbed the waters; and whoever was the first to step in when the water was disturbed was healed of whatever disease he had.

Luke 24:12
But Peter rose up and ran to the tomb, and stooping down to look in, he saw the linen clothes by themselves. And he went away to his own home, marveling at what had happened.

Luke 24:51
And when Jesus blessed them he departed from them and he was taken up into heaven

While this list may seem large (and even surprising for those of us who haven’t examined the presence of textual variants in the New Testament), I think this list does little to impact the reliability of the text. In fact, I think Ehrman is profiting from the unfamiliarity that most Christians have with the presence of textual variants. The list does seem shocking and daunting if you’ve never taken the time to examine matters such as these. But if you stop and think about it and examine each verse listed here, the impact is actually very minimal. I recognize four truths about these verses:

The Verses are Designated Earlier
Seven of these passages (John 8:7, John 8:11, Luke 22:44, Luke 22:20, Mark 16:17, Mark 16:18 and John 5:4) are already clearly designated in my Bible (I’m using the ESV for this blog post). It’s not as though these specious verses are hidden; most modern translations do an excellent job of including everything, then identifying those verses that are variants. Check it out for yourself. You’ll see that these verses, like many others in the text, have been clearly marked.

The Verses are Described Elsewhere
Three of these passages (Luke 22:20, Luke 24:12 and Luke 24:51) are simply reiterations of information that is given to us in other gospels. So, although these verses could be removed from Luke, their claims are found elsewhere in passages that are uncontested (see Matthew 26:28, Mark 14:24, John 20:3-7, Acts 1:9-11).

The Verses are Decidedly Extraneous
That leaves only one verse on Ehrman’s list (1 John 5:7) that begs for explanation. But even if this verse can’t be reconciled, it’s clearly extraneous. The doctrine of the Trinity it addresses is found elsewhere in the scripture. Like other scribal variants, it may have been included by a scribe to make the doctrine clearer, but with all the other Biblical evidence for the triune nature of God, this verse has no impact on our understanding of the Trinity. The superfluous nature of this verse is similar to the vast majority of all Biblical textual variants; they have no impact on the theological or historical claims of the text.

The Verses are Detected Easily
Perhaps most importantly, these late entries were easy to detect, given the large number of ancient Biblical manuscripts we possess. By comparing these texts, we are able to determine which verses should not be in our Bible today, and the same discipline that allows us to determine what is specious, allows us to determine what is special. The skill set that allows us to identify what doesn’t belong is the very same skill set that allows us to identify what does belong.

I’ve written a lot more about this issue in a chapter in my book entitled, “Separating Artifacts from Evidence.” It turns out that Ehrman has the ability to complain about the existence of these passages only because we happen to possess the accurate methodology to remove them from consideration in the first place. As a result, we ought to have even more confidence that we possess documents today that are a reliable reflection of what was originally written thousands of years ago.

He'll Do Something He Would Not Have Done

A month after reading this in a post
by Steve Fuller at the Desiring God Blog, I can say that it has tremendously
reinvigorated my prayer life:

One reason we don’t pray is because
we believe Satan’s lie that prayer does nothing. But that’s not what Jesus
taught (Matthew 7:7).

Jesus promises that every time we
pray, God will answer. He will either do exactly what we ask, or something even
better, which he would not have done had we not prayed.

So if I start the day praying about
my heart, marriage, children, work, and ministry, then God will do things in my
heart, marriage, children, work, and ministry that he would not have done had I
not prayed. Trust Jesus’ promise about prayer — and pray.

It was that last paragraph that pierced me, that I continue
to hear in my head every time I sit down to pray, that indeed compels me to sit
down to pray when I’m tempted to skip prayer that day.

When we pray about something, God will do something in that
situation He would not have done if we hadn’t prayed. 

Those are words of great promise, and hope, and
responsibility. I hope they’ll move you to pray like never before.

Not Neutral

The assaults on religion in the public square – from crosses on public land to nativity scenes – are motivated from the premise that atheism is the truly neutral position.  Atheists these days claim that they lack belief, not that they have a positive belief.  Society should be neutral, so our public square should be devoid of religious expressions.

At the same time, atheists are being appointed as chaplains and holding "services."  They're replicating religious life without God.

So if they are taking on religious-type expressions, how can they go on claiming that their view is neutral?

Of course, it isn't.  Atheism is a positive belief about God, just like any form of theism is.  We'd just like the terms of the public debate to be consistent.

Apologetics Aren't Enough to Connect You with a Person

This morning I was thinking about someone who left a comment
on our blog last year.  After immersing
himself in apologetics, “Searching” had found himself struggling with his
faith. Since I first read his comment, I’ve heard virtually the same story at
least twice more, so I suspect that talking about this could be helpful for
some of you—if not to deal with a current situation, then at least to avoid
these difficulties in the future. Below is an abbreviated version of his comment
followed by my (edited) response:

Having been a committed and serving
Christian for nearly 30 years, I have been going through a real crisis of faith
over the past few years. During that time, I have been increasingly engaging in
the debate that has arisen with the New Atheists, and I have come to the
conclusion that the case for God's existence cannot be finally settled one way
or the other. The evidence is inductive, rather than deductive, and cumulative.
It will get you so far and then the move from merely cognitive to relational
and existential takes place, and one places one's trust in God.

But that's where it has broken down
for me. For, at the same time as I was exploring the apologetic arguments, I
suffered from a very severe case of depression (induced, most likely, by an
underactive thyroid). I was overwhelmed by a whole series of completely
non-rational emotions that caused me to doubt almost everything in life,
including my relationships with those closest to me.

I have leveled off emotionally now,
and am much more in control of my feelings. However, the nagging uncertainties
remain; I think I still trust in God relationally, but I am often
assailed by doubts from my analytical side—you’re deluding yourself, you've
been suckered into this, this is purely wish fulfillment. Set against this are
30 years of very real experience of the truth and reality of my relationship
with God.

So which do I believe? How do I
reignite the existential side of my relationship with God without being
bombarded by questions and doubts from parts of my rational thinking? I
desperately want to reclaim my faith, but I fear I am slipping into the
agnostic camp.

When it comes to putting our trust in God, I wouldn’t
describe it as analytic thinking getting you “so far” and then
intuitive/relational thinking “taking over.” I don’t think that’s exactly
what’s going on. I think, rather, that we get information from both of these
types of thinking and they interact with each other. So in your case, when you
lost all accurate input from your relational thinking because of your
depression, you were working on less complete information, and your confidence
failed (just as it did with your other relationships). 

Now think about how spending a large amount of time on
atheist blogs will affect you when you’re in a less-than-optimal emotional state.
Imagine if, while you were feeling severely depressed, you had spent all your
time with someone who was constantly trying to prove to you that your family
and friends didn’t care about you. How would your relationships have come out?
Not so good. So it’s not surprising that you’re feeling this way now about God.

We’re such complicated beings, and our physical bodies
affect so much of how we think and feel. I know from experience what depression
does for a person’s relationship with both God and man, and it’s not pretty. I
don’t blame you at all for feeling disconnected from God and not knowing where
to go from here.

The important thing to remember is that our relationship with
God is a relationship with a person. Sometimes I think we forget this and start
treating Him as if He were a thing that we walk around, look at, and learn
about, rather than a person whom we know and relate to. When you’re asking what
to do about reigniting the existential side of your relationship with God, ask
yourself what you would do about reigniting the existential side of any
relationship after a situation of distrust like this.

First, you’re going to have to work through your cognitive issues against the
relationship, just as you would with a friend whom you no longer trusted, but
with whom you wanted to try again to develop a friendship. Keep looking for
answers. You’re probably better off reading some good, new apologetics books than
hanging around blogs. It’s just quieter that way. Give yourself a chance to
focus on one question at a time.

But secondly, if you were working to reignite a relationship
with someone, you would also spend time
with that person, right? Again, speaking from my own experience with
depression, if you stop spending time with anyone—God or man—the relationship
will seem shaky, less real, distant. The trouble is that when we’re depressed,
we don’t have the strength to keep going back to a shaky relationship when it’s
not immediately rewarding. So here’s the oh-so-annoying answer: you have to do
it anyway. Even if it’s boring and plagued with doubts.

What I’ve found with prayer is that it’s very difficult to
start up again after being away from it. But don’t stop. Because I’ve also
found there’s a dramatic difference in my life when I pray and when I
don’t pray. The older I’ve gotten, the more God has not allowed me to drift.
I’m forced to depend on Him and stay close because as soon as I stop meeting
with Him, things get very difficult. Not in terms of my belief necessarily, but
my life, and drive, and love for God, and connection to Him.* I’ve learned
firsthand that my soul is real, and it’s a spiritual reality that if I don’t
eat and drink prayer and the Bible, my soul will starve. I wrote about this here: “The
answer to your apathy or despair might be as simple as beginning to eat again.”
You need to place as much urgency on these things as you do on eating physical
food. This makes all the difference for me.

In addition to prayer, I highly recommend you try something
like this.
Pick one of the shorter books in the New Testament (Ephesians, Galatians, etc.)
and read it twice or more a day for a month, then move on to the next one.
Memorizing whole chapters can also help you to meditate on them. See what
happens.

I also recommend you get out of apologetics a little and
start listening to people who plumb the depths of God. Apologetics aren't
always focused on the person of God, so you're not getting the full picture if
that's where you're spending all your time. Read some books that are hundreds
of years old (I love this
autobiography and this
book). Listen to these.
God is bigger than the discussion that's happening right now, and maybe it
would help to see that.

I’m not saying spending time with God will make up for
intellectual doubts, but neither would I say that answering intellectual doubts
will make up for a lack of time with God—don’t go after one at the expense of
the other. Remember that God is a real person, not just an argument. If you’re
not interacting with Him as a person—even if only weakly—you can’t expect to
strengthen your relationship just by thinking about arguments about Him. You
wouldn’t approach a relationship with any other person that way, right?

And just as it would be the case with a person other than
God, it means something that you have a past relationship with Him that you
remember and cherish. Don't forget that—it’s something for your analytic side
to keep in mind. Knowledge of that past relationship makes it worth doubting
your doubts about the current relationship and trying again.

___________________

*Of course, I’m speaking of my subjective sense of connection here. My actual connection with God is objective
and unshakable because it depends on Christ’s work on the cross, not on my
feelings. Think of the difference this way: I am securely my earthly father’s
daughter no matter how well I know him, and yet there are real relational
benefits from closely and consistently interacting with him and knowing him
more deeply. In the same way, my standing before God depends only on my union
with Christ, and yet the relationship can be experienced more deeply by me, and
I will be more affected by it, as I spend time with Him.

What Does It Mean to Have Been Created In the “Image of God”?

My dog, Bailey, is the best pet I have ever had the privilege to live with. We’ve had a number of dogs, cats, birds, hamsters, lizards and guinea pigs over the years, but in my mind, Bailey sits at the top of the list. As I enjoy her company (now that I’m working at home more than ever before), I can understand why so many of us hope that our pets will be part of our eternal life with God. I’m convinced from scripture that animals have souls, but I still have my reservations about whether or not the souls of animals are eternal. I’m not sure that the Bible is emphatically clear on that issue. One thing is certain, however: we humans are different. According to Genesis 1, we have been created in the “image of God”; we are His last creation, placed carefully in our world after God prepared our environment and filled it with other creatures. Much can be said about what distinguishes us from the other creations of God, but three characteristics of humans seem to stand out as the key to understanding what it means to bear the image of God:

Moral Awareness
Humans seem to be uniquely capable of measuring difficult and weighty moral issues. We understand the value of sacrifice, even when a noble cause may cost us our lives. As humans, we are able to move beyond survival mechanisms and base desires. We have the capacity to distinguish between what “is” toward what “ought to be”. This ability defines us as humans and it is something that we share with our creator. In fact, this innate understanding of morality comes from the creator (Romans 2:14-15). God’s moral law is not written for animals. We don’t assign or recognize moral culpability on the part of creatures other than humans, and the Old Testament also recognizes this difference between animals and humans (Exodus 21:35-36). Humans are held to a different standard; a standard that is a direct reflection of their ability to comprehend and act on the moral law written in their hearts.

Spiritual Awareness
For this reason, it really shouldn’t surprise us that we are inherently spiritual. If we possess a conscience that has been given to us by God, it makes sense that we would eventually want to know who gave us this burdensome knowledge of right and wrong, and how we can be forgiven for our mistakes. And even though we live in the same environment as other creatures, we alone seem to find ourselves questioning how an environment as magnificent as this could exist without a creator (Romans 1:19-20). We seem to be uniquely curious about our origin, purpose and meaning, and unlike other animals, we desire a relationship with the creator of the universe. This desire to commune with God is unique to the human species.

Self Awareness
Humans also have a uniquely refined self-awareness (consciousness) that allows us to see our place in the world and understand our identity. We have the ability to understand the natural and spiritual hierarchy, and we recognize our place within it (Job 42:1-6). We also have the ability to act outside of ‘natural’ desire. We can be inspired to make choices that are self-sacrificial, benevolent and moral. While the desire for food, pleasure and sex are still strong forces in our lives, we have the free-will ability to act in contradiction to these desires. This ability to choose is an important aspect of our nature in the image of God, because it is with this ability that we choose to seek, follow and trust God (Joshua 24:15).

Fashioned in the image of God, humans have the ability to consider and make moral decisions that are unique to the animal kingdom. We are also uniquely culpable for those decisions. In my entire career as a detective, I’ve never arrested (nor prosecuted) an animal for causing a death. Humans are held to a higher standard for a reason. So as I think about it, I wonder if the ability to decide to accept God’s offer of forgiveness is essential to the eternal life of souls. If it is, animals that are incapable of making such an important decision may be excluded from the next life. On the other hand, animals do lack the moral culpability that burdens humans; perhaps this lack of moral responsibility makes them perfectly suited for the next life. In any case, I hope that pets are a part of God’s plan for eternity; I can’t imagine sitting at the table without Bailey at my feet.

Why the Trinity Impacts Apologetics

Michael Reeves, author of Delighting in the Trinity, has some insights about why understanding the Trinity is important in witnessing.  It helps show that God is loving, and not a solitary dictator.

This is precisely why the apostle John can write that "God is love" (1 John 4:8, emphasis added), for this God would not be who he is if he did not love. If at any time the Father did not have a Son to whom he gave his life and love, then he simply would not be a Father. To be who he is, then, this God must give out life and love. And so we begin to see why the Trinity is such good news: God is love because God is a Trinity, because for eternity this God has been giving out—positively bursting with—love for his Son....

This is precisely why the apostle John can write that "God is love" (1 John 4:8, emphasis added), for this God would not be who he is if he did not love. If at any time the Father did not have a Son to whom he gave his life and love, then he simply would not be a Father. To be who he is, then, this God must give out life and love. And so we begin to see why the Trinity is such good news: God is love because God is a Trinity, because for eternity this God has been giving out—positively bursting with—love for his Son....

To taste the difference the triune nature of God makes, let's step back for a moment and imagine something. What if God was not Father, Son, and Spirit? What if God was really just a single person? Well then, for eternity before Creation he must have been all by himself: no relationship, and nobody and nothing else for him to love. For eternity. This God simply could not have love at the very core of his identity. So would he be the sort of God inclined to be gracious toward us? Most unlikely. And, not having ever known fellowship himself, would he want to have fellowship with us? Would he even know what fellowship means? By definition, a single-person God is not inherently about love and relationship; its "gospel" must be a very poor thing next to the gospel of the God who is love.

But with the triune God, what good news we have! The eternally beloved Son, the delight and joy of his Father, comes to share with us the same love the Father has always given him. He comes from "the bosom of the Father" (John 1:18, NASB), announcing his desire that believers might be with him there (John 17:24), that we might be brought before the Most High—not just as forgiven sinners, but as dearly beloved children sharing the Son's own "Abba!" cry. Because God is Father, Son, and Spirit—and only because God is Father, Son, and Spirit—we can bask in those gorgeous words of the Son to his Father: "you … have loved them even as you have loved me" (John 17:23). The Father's eternal love for the Son now encompasses us. Thus with this God we have a gospel better even than forgiveness—we can have the security and intimacy of children. Beloved children of the Most High! No other God could bring us so close and have us so loved; no other God could so win our hearts.

Why is the Bible more reliable than the Koran? (Video)

Why is the Bible more reliable than the Koran?