Gregory Koukl's Blog, page 42

We���ll Send You the Weekly Blog Highlights

We���ve received some requests from people wanting to subscribe to the blog via email, so we���ve added that feature to our website.

If you go to our home page and enter your email address into the box labeled ���Receive Weekly Blog Highlights��� underneath the banner, we���ll send an email out to you once a week with links to some of that week���s posts.

Our first email should go out on Friday. Enjoy!

Links Mentioned on the 8/19/15 Show

The following is a rundown of today's podcast, annotated with links that were either mentioned on the show or inspired by it:

Guest: Craig Blomberg ��� Can We Trust the Bible? (0:00)

Faith and Reason by Ron Nash
Craig Blomberg
Can We Still Believe the Bible?: An Evangelical Engagement with Contemporary Questions by Craig Blomberg
Denver Seminary
The Ehrman Project ��� A Website responding to Bart Ehrman
The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration by Bruce Metzger and Bart Ehrman
The Basics of New Testament Textual Criticism ��� Free iTunes U course by Dan Wallace
The Canon Debate by Lee McDonald and James Sanders
A Short Argument for the Early Dating of the Gospels by Greg Koukl
Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith by Douglas Groothuis
The Gnostic Gospels: Are They Authentic? by Douglas Groothuis
Ten Basic Facts about the NT Canon That Every Christian Should Memorize #8: "The NT Canon Was Not Decided at Nicea���Nor Any Other Church Council" by Michael Kruger
Ten Basic Facts #6: "At the End of the Second Century, the Muratorian Fragment Lists 22 of our 27 NT Books" by Michael Kruger
The Complete Series: Ten Basic Facts about the NT Canon That Every Christian Should Memorize by Michael Kruger
Why the "Lost Gospels" Lost Out by Ben Witherington III
Miracles: The Credibility of the New Testament Accounts by Craig Keener

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

To take part in the Twitter conversation during the live show (Tuesdays 4:00���6:00 p.m. PT), follow @STRtweets and use the hashtag #STRtalk.

Hard Case of Abortion in Egypt

Egyptian Christians are typically pro-life. Many, however, struggle with being consistent, especially in the case of rape. This is a vexing problem in any part of the world, but it becomes more complex in Egypt. Part of the problem is the unique circumstances created by Islam, particularly in some rural areas of Upper Egypt (far south of Cairo).

For example, if a woman is raped and becomes pregnant, she is faced with a dilemma. Adoption is not allowed in Islam, so she can���t carry the child to term and then ask a loving couple to raise her son or daughter. Orphanages exist in Egypt, but my contacts there tell me the conditions are horrendous. The other option ��� to parent the child ��� is also problematic because both a raped woman and her child are treated like trash. Many times people try to kill her if she doesn���t have an abortion. If they succeed, both mother and child lose their life.

It���s this situation that troubles many pro-life, Arab Christians. Shouldn���t a pregnant woman have an abortion when her life and the life of her unborn child is in jeopardy? If she doesn���t have an abortion, both she and her child die. If she has an abortion, then only the child loses his life. It���s a greater good that one lives than two die.

In the past (although I can���t find the specific post), I think I conceded that abortion could be allowed in such a scenario. I mistakenly compared this situation to an ectopic pregnancy. In this life-threatening condition, the child is growing in a location (e.g. fallopian tube) not suitable to gestate a child. If the pregnancy is not stopped, the growing child will rupture the fallopian tube, cause bleeding, infection, and the death of the mother. Both mother and child lose their life. The alternative is to terminate the pregnancy (resulting in the death of the child) to save the life of the mother.

Typically, pro-lifers agree that medical action is morally appropriate in an ectopic pregnancy. The reasoning is based on the greater good. It���s better that one person should live (the mother) than two persons should die (both mother and child). The child is going to die no matter what course of action is taken (indeed, the child often dies even before medical action is taken because its life can't be sustained without implanting in the endometrial lining). There���s currently no medical procedure where we can transplant a child from the fallopian tube to the uterus. Therefore, it���s a greater good to preserve one life when it���s impossible to preserve two.

While I agree with the moral reasoning of taking medical action in an ectopic pregnancy, I think I was wrong to compare it to the situation women face in Egypt when they are raped and become pregnant. Admittedly, there is some similarity. In both cases, having an abortion would result in one person surviving, and doing nothing likely results in two persons dying. That���s where the parallels end, though.

There are some key differences. In the case of an ectopic pregnancy, the child is going to die as a result of a medical problem. His or her death is certain. The child conceived through rape, though, has the possibility of living. Although wicked people might attempt to kill the mother and child, this is not an inevitable outcome. The would-be killers might not find out about the pregnancy, may not care enough to kill, or the mother might run to seek help from people who would care for her and her child.

There���s a second difference. No one is morally culpable when a child dies as a result of an ectopic pregnancy. However, intentionally killing a healthy child (albeit under dire circumstances) is morally problematic.

Consider the following hypothetical situation (this is the ���Trot Out the Toddler��� tactic for those familiar with this approach). A terrorist breaks into your home and demands you murder a two-year-old child sitting on your sofa. If you don���t, he will kill you and the child. Would you do it? Are you justified in murdering an innocent child to save your life? I submit it would be immoral to use a child as a shield to protect yourself.

The woman facing pressure from Muslim culture to abort or be killed faces a similar moral dilemma. I don���t think abortion would be the right thing to do.

I���m not saying I would come down hard on a woman who chose abortion under such a circumstance. I think I would understand if a woman made that choice. But I believe the consistent pro-life view would be to not abort. Perhaps she could flee and seek Christians who would take her in and provide her with shelter. That would give her and the child a chance to live.

Besides, trying to preserve your life at all costs (especially by killing an innocent child) doesn't reflect a Christian worldview. It presumes that this life (this side of the grave) is the only life that matters and that the afterlife is not real. The Christian worldview, though, rejects that notion. Yes, our earthly lives matter, but they are merely a precursor of more significant things to come.

Jesus said, ���Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell��� (Matt. 10:28). After all, Jesus reminds us 10 verses later, ���He who has found his life will lose it, and he who has lost his life for My sake will find it��� (Matt. 10:39). Difficult words, to be sure, but true nonetheless.

Is "Righteous Anger" Biblical?

Jesus got angry without sinning. Is it possible for us to get angry and remain righteous?

Indirect Claims Jesus Is Jehovah

I sometimes get requests from people asking us to create more resources for talking to Jehovah���s Witnesses, but until now, we haven't had anyone on staff who had the experience and knowledge necessary for this. Now that Tim Barnett is on board here at STR, I think we���ll be seeing more on this topic in the future.

Here���s a brief video from Tim on indirect claims Jesus is Jehovah (see the series this came from���Part 1, Part 2):

 

You can see a comparison between the titles given to both Jehovah and Jesus in article form here.

Links Mentioned on the 8/14/15 Show

The following is a rundown of today's podcast, annotated with links that were either mentioned on the show or inspired by it:

Announcements:

Greg speaking at Hawthorne Gospel Church in New Jersey ��� August 16
CrossExamined Instructor Academy
Upcoming events with STR speakers
STR Cruise to Alaska ��� August 6-13, 2016
God's Crime Scene by J. Warner Wallace

Guest: Denny Burk (0:05)

Denny Burk's blog
Boyce College
What Is the Meaning of Sex? by Denny Burk
It's about the Difference between Men and Women by Amy Hall
The Barronelle Stutzman Story by Denny Burk (about the florist in Washington)
Transforming Homosexuality: What the Bible Says about Sexual Orientation and Change by Denny Burk and Heath Lambert
Same-Sex Attraction, Temptation, and Sin (Audio) by Denny Burk and Heath Lambert
What Is Marriage? by Robert George, Sherif Girgis, and Ryan Anderson

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

To take part in the Twitter conversation during the live show (Tuesdays 4:00���6:00 p.m. PT), follow @STRtweets and use the hashtag #STRtalk.

Challenge Response: Jesus��� Baptism Proves He Wasn���t a Sinless Messiah

Here's my response to this week's challenge: 

 

Links Mentioned on the 8/12/15 Show

The following is a rundown of today's podcast, annotated with links that were either mentioned on the show or inspired by it:

Commentary: Have a Discipleship Influence on Others (0:00)

Atlanta Ousts Fire Chief Who Has Antigay Views ��� The New York Times
Inclusive, Safe, and Welcoming to All? (On Brendan Eich) by Amy Hall
The Reformation the Church Doesn't Need, Part 1 by Alan Shlemon and Greg Koukl
The Master Plan of Evangelism by Robert Coleman
Bloom Where You're Planted by Greg Koukl

Questions:

1. How should I deal with a co-worker changing gender? (0:19)

Thinking about Bruce Jenner (Podcast) ��� Greg Koukl
Talking about Bruce Jenner (Video) ��� Greg Koukl
Tim Barnett ��� STR speaker in Canada
Support STR

2. People tell us we've done something morally wrong by adopting an African-American baby because we're white. (0:31)

3. What's the difference between Arminianism and Calvinism? (0:45)

What We Believe about the Five Points of Calvinism by John Piper
Sinners in the Hands of a Good God: Reconciling Divine Judgment and Mercy by David Clotfelter
The Bondage of the Will by Martin Luther
For Calvinism by Michael Horton
Against Calvinism by Roger Olson

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

To take part in the Twitter conversation during the live show (Tuesdays 4:00���6:00 p.m. PT), follow @STRtweets and use the hashtag #STRtalk.

If the Quran Is True, Then It���s False

Conservative estimates put the number of Muslims on Earth at 1.6 billion. That's about one-quarter of the world's total population. By 2030, that number is expected to grow to 2.2 billion. The Muslim mission field is huge. The question Christians need to be asking is, how do we reach them with the gospel?

This task is actually more daunting than it might first appear. Ask anyone who has done extended work evangelizing Muslims, and they will tell you that it can seem next to impossible. This is because they have so much to lose. When a Muslim converts to Christianity, he could be disowned by his family, friends, and community. In addition, from an Islamic perspective he would be committing the unforgivable sin of shirk, which is punishable by death.

If we are to be effective in our approach to witnessing to Muslims we need to be strategic. Approaching them with a Bible verse usually won't cut it. They have already written off the parts of the Bible that conflict with the Quran, citing corruption in the transmission of the New Testament text. We need a better way.

One strategy I have in my mind when I speak to Muslims is try to demonstrate from their own holy book���which they trust as God's infallible and uncorrupted revelation���that they shouldn���t trust their holy book. Allow me to elaborate.

If you open up the Quran to Sura 5 titled ���The Gospel of Jesus: Guidance and Light,��� you will read the following:*

[5:46] And in their footsteps We sent Jesus, the son of Mary, confirming the Law that had come before him: We sent him the Gospel: therein was guidance and light, and conformation of the Law that had come before him: a guidance and an admonition to those who fear Allah. [5:47] Let the People of the Gospel judge by what Allah has revealed therein. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah has revealed, they are (no better than) those who rebel. [Emphasis mine.]

First, take note that the Quran actually says that Allah is responsible for sending Jesus and the ���the Gospel,��� referring to what we call the New Testament. Each was given to confirm ���the Law,��� referring to the Old Testament. In describing ���the Gospel��� we are told that it contains ���guidance and light.��� From just this verse, I think we are meant to conclude that God has multiple revelations and that these revelations can be used to confirm each other. For example, the New Testament confirms the Old Testament. 

Second, in the very next sentence the Quran affirms that ���The People of the Gospel,��� referring specifically to Christians, should ���judge by what Allah has revealed therein.��� That is to say, Christians should judge by what���s in ���the Gospel.��� Here the author, Mohammed, is inviting Christians to judge his words by the New Testament. He believes that ���the Gospel��� and his words, the Quran, are in agreement. This makes perfect sense in light of the verse we just looked at. In essence, Mohammed is saying that just as the Gospel confirms the Law, which came before it, the Gospel will confirm the Quran, which is coming after it.

There is a problem here that Christians and Muslims both recognize: The New Testament conflicts with the Quran on a number of central doctrines. The Christian, who takes Mohammed at his word and judges the Quran by the New Testament, is forced to conclude that Mohammed got it wrong.

What does the Muslim say to this? The Muslim���s answer is quite simple. The Quran is God���s infallible, uncorrupted word; therefore, ���the Gospel��� must have been corrupted. Here���s the unstated presupposition: If the New Testament differs with the Quran, then it���s the New Testament that must have it wrong.

However, when the words of the Quran were being written down, Mohammed was communicating that the New Testament and the Old Testament are reliable. In his words, they are ���sent��� from Allah, they ���confirm��� each other and contain ���guidance and light.��� So up until that time in history, ���the Gospel��� and ���the Law��� that Mohammed was working from were not corrupted. If they were already corrupted, then his words don���t make any sense. He wouldn't ask Christians to judge anything by a corrupted book. This leads us to conclude that the corruption must have taken place after the Quran was written (620���632 AD).

Here���s the problem, and it���s a big one. The manuscript evidence we have gathered from after the Quran was written completely agrees with the manuscript evidence we have from before the Quran was written. That is to say, the New Testament around at the time of Mohammed is identical to the text we have today. It���s the same text. Even Bart Ehrman, who estimates that there are around 400,000 variants of the New Testament text, affirms that we essentially know what the originals contained. Therefore, whatever was true about the New Testament at the time Mohammed wrote the Quran is still true of the New Testament today. 

Therefore, if the Quran is true, then what Mohammed said about the New Testament is also true. Mohammed instructs Christians to judge the Quran by what is in the New Testament. Ironically, if you do this you find that the Quran hopelessly contradicts what ���Allah has revealed��� in the New Testament. For example, the New Testament teaches that Jesus died on a cross for the sins of the world and then rose from the dead three days later. Conversely, the Quran says that Jesus was never even crucified on a cross and, thus, had no need for a resurrection from the dead. The Christian is forced to conclude that the Quran is in error. Therefore, by the Quran���s own standard, if the Quran is true, then the Quran is false.

_______________________

*Taken from Abdullah Yusuf Ali's English translation of the Quran

I owe the formulation of this argument to Dr. James White, director of Alpha and Omega Ministries. You can see Dr. White develop this argument here.

Challenge: Jesus��� Baptism Proves He Wasn���t a Sinless Messiah

Here���s a challenge from an atheist who says Jesus��� baptism has three serious implications for our view of Jesus: 

In the gospel of Matthew (3:11), Jesus presents himself to John the Baptist and is baptized.  This presents several problems for Christianity.  First, baptism is a ritual that claims to remove the stain of original sin, but according to Christian dogma, Jesus was sinless and therefore should not have required this rite.

Second, to present oneself for baptism is a subservient action, implying that the person performing the baptism is of a higher station, though, according to Christian theology, Jesus was certainly superior to John the Baptist. 

Third, the scripture states that John the Baptist recognized Jesus as the promised savior, and yet, inexplicably, he does not become a follower of Jesus, but remains the leader of his own group of followers.

This is an embarrassment to the faith because if this event has any historical validity, it is apparent that Jesus considered himself a sinful mortal man needing baptism and was probably a disciple of John the Baptist. He likely followed him for awhile, and only became an independent religious leader after John���s arrest and execution.

You���ll need some knowledge of the Bible and theology for this one. Tell us how you would answer this challenge in the comments below, and come back here on Thursday to hear Brett give his answer.

[Explore past challenges here and here.]