What Happened to John 5:4?

-------

Why do some translations of the Bible include John 5:4, and some do not? Bill Mounce explains why, and gives a brief lesson in textual criticism along the way.

HT: Challies

-------

Was Adam a Real, Historical Person?

-------

Tremper Longman III, a respected Old Testament scholar, sheepishly answers:

James Anderson responds HERE with "twelve prima facie reasons why an evangelical view of the Bible commits one to the existence of Adam as a real historical individual."

HT: JT

-------

Under the Sun

Eccl. 4:1-3:

Then I looked again at all the acts of oppression which were being done under the sun and behold I saw the tears of the oppressed and that they had no one to comfort them; and on the side of their oppressors was power, but they had no one to comfort them. So I congratulated the dead who are already dead more than the living who are still living. But better off than both of them is the one who has never existed, who has never seen the evil activity that is done under the sun.

Is the world a good place? Not from the above point of view. Have you ever heard unbelievers complain about all the suffering in the world? They're right. If the only thing you can see is what is "under the sun" this world is a damnable place. The problem is that they stop short. Scripture acknowledges how bad and fallen this world is, but it goes farther. There is a God who is good that man has kicked against in rebellion (Eccl. 7:29). The world is fallen and broken because of our sin (Rom. 5:12).

If there were no God and no salvation to be found, indeed it would be better to have never been born than to come into this hellish world. But those that adopt this despair show that they haven't found Christ yet. There is a spiritual realm not mentioned in these verses that changes everything. One wonders how much of it Solomon saw. Did he really get it? Do you get it? Or are you just drifting through life as a comfortable American, trying hard to be prosperous and afluent when the world around you is sinking in sea of tears and sin and misery. Don't live off in some "la-la land" playing with your toys and trying to drown out the fact that men superficially say "Peace, peace" when there is no peace. Your world, and your life is fallen.

If you see that and admit that you may have a better chance of finding what life is really about: redemption and reconciliation to God through his Son.

Who Moved the Stone?

Ok, now nobody throw a stone at me for using evidentialist apologetics. I admit they aren't ultimately weighty. Ok? But I still think the following are a good thoughts.

--- --- ---

In a section of his book "Who Moved the Stone?", Frank Morison comments on the resurrection of Christ as a historical fact and begins by talking about it as attested to by the book of Acts, but then he says:

There is a far earlier and more authoritative testimony in the letters of Paul, of Peter, and of James the Just, and in the admittedly historic network of Christian churches stretching from Jerusalem through Asia Minor to the catacombs at Rome. Only from an intensely heated center of burning zeal could this vast field of lava have been thrown out from a tiny country like Palestine to the limits of the Roman world. We cannot insist on the strict reign of causality in the physical world and deny it in the psychological. The phenomenon that here confronts us is one of the biggest dislodgments of events in the world's history, and it can be accounted for only by an initial impact of colossal drive and power.

In other words, we know that physically Christianity spread very far and very fast, therefore we ought to ponder what psychological force could drive it? He continues...

Yet the original material from which we have to derive this dynamic force consists of a habitual doubter like Thomas, a rather weak fisherman like Peter, a gentle dreamer like John, a practical tax gatherer like Matthew, a few seafaring men like Andrew and Nathanael, the inevitable women, and at most two or three others.

I do not want to minimize the character of the historic nucleus from which Christianity spread, but, seriously, does this rather heterogeneous body of simple folk, reeling under the shock of the Crucifixion, the utter degradation and death of their Leader, look like the driving force we require? Frankly it does not, and the more we think of it disintegrating under the crisis, the less can we imagine it rewelding into that molten focus that achieved those results. Yet the clear evidence of history is that it did. Something came into the lives of these very simple and ordinary people that transformed them out of all similitude to the broken and shattered party of Jesus that we have recently been studying.

I feel upon examination these are two noteworthy points.

First, how could it spread so fast? I mean, we aren't talking about the decades and centuries required for 'myth' to form about some legendary resurrection (he makes this point later in his book). That the church grew and spread rapidly in the first few years is a historical fact.

Second, how could this pathetically small and weak group of individuals account for such vast effects and rapid spread of Christianity? And especially how is this so in light of the fact that they were shaken up and devastated by the death of Christ, seemingly unprepared for it - the men fled, Peter denied the Lord, and only John and the women were there at the cross. This the gospels openly admit. They don't hide the warts, and they don't have to because they can be totally honest. So how does this work?

Answer - Christ rose from the dead, appeared to his disciples, ascended into heaven, and sent the Spirit of God in power, starting at Pentecost in Jerusalem.

The "Problem of Evil"

-------

One of the best and most helpful things I have ever read on the so-called "problem of evil" has now been made available online, so I would encourage you to take the time to read "The Problem of Evil" by W.R. Downing. It is full of Scripture and does a good job of defending what I believe to be the Biblical position on the issue.

While it may seem overly philosophical, this is actually an extremely practical issue. When talking to self-professed atheists about the gospel, they will almost always raise the existence of so much evil in the world as a reason why they don't believe in God. It behooves us as followers of the Lord to have a Biblical response, and I think this article will go a long way in providing one.

-------

Jesus Idealized by Cult Followers

I talked to a girl on campus yesterday. She was very closed off to submitting to God, especially the Christian God, but was quite open to talking about how closed off she was. I tried to plead and reason with her in every way that I thought could be helpful. I told her about her sin of not loving God and centering her universe around herself. I tried to expose the fallacy of her claiming that there were no absolute standards of right and wrong (by appealing to the Holocaust, which actually seemed to strike a chord with her). I tried to show her that she wasn't living up to her own standard of right and wrong even by her own definition. She wouldn't budge. I told her she had no idea the kind of danger she was in and I told her that I hoped at some point soon she would realize her great need for God and seek the Lord in the person of Jesus Christ.

Out of all her objections, one stuck out to me (and is the purpose of this post). She said, after having grown up in church, the Christian message was totally lacking for her. The best she could figure as to the origin of the gospels was that Jesus probably said and taught a lot of good things, but like so many “cult-followings” (and she actually apologized for associating Jesus with being a cult leader) Jesus was probably just idealized to the extreme by his disciples, even to the place where they were willing to die for him. After all, many cult-followers will go through terrible things to follow their leaders.

- - -

This proposal as to the origin of Christianity a very common one. “Jesus was a good teacher and nice guy but his disciples blew him out of proportion after his death because they were so obsessed with him.”

Here is the problem. Jesus is too great. Read about his life, the things he said and taught, the things he claimed for himself, the fulfillment of prophecies, the unparalleled morality he laid down, his sinlessness and compassion for the outcasts. It's all too much. As Phillip Schaff (and Charles Leiter) have pointed out, it would take someone as great as Jesus to invent Jesus. See the problem here? Not even the greatest religious gurus could have invented him, and the disciples weren't even close to being gurus. They were fishermen!

And then the whole question of motivation should be considered. If their motivation was to make money or gain power, perhaps it could be true that a religious genius could have conceived of Jesus. But the “inventors” of Jesus knew going into it that they were going to die for their faith. The only way that a person can idealize and inflate a normal person so much that they are willing to follow them to their death is if they are out of their mind. But if they are out of their mind followers, they would not be sane or genius enough to invent Jesus now would they?

So by examining the impossibility of coming up with the greatness of his person, and by examining the issue of motivation, her proposal is totally unreasonable. What is very straightforward and reasonable however is that Jesus himself really was as great as he is claimed to be because he was indeed the Son of God and that's why his fishermen disciples had the motivation to follow him to death. Who was leaping into the dark here, her or I?

- - -

Now, did I tell her this? No. She didn't need to hear more arguments. Again, she definitely had a heart issue, and that's what I tried to press home. I'm learning not to wrangle with people in this manner when witnessing. When you are dealing with a person bound up in lies and self-deceit a lot of times what they need is the truth in raw form, straight from the word of God. Don't try to massage it too much.

Nevertheless, these things can be good for Christians to think about. Hopefully it encourages you all to think about the great Lord that we follow. He's beyond creation.

More about Christ, Less about You

During Saturday bible study last weekend a brother shared something about being a witness to the truth that I thought was very helpful, straightforward, and profound.

Suppose someone asks you "Why do you believe what you believe?" What would your answer be?

His point was that while it's not wrong to appeal to supernatural experiences you may have had at your conversion, it is usually more appropriate to appeal to the glory of God that is continually day by day before your eyes, as revealed by God himself. The difference is that one approach means allowing supernatural experiences to teach you what is and isn’t true, whereas the other means accepting the totally self-evident and self-attesting truth that you now see after God opened your eyes.

The problem with the first approach is that it could be understood to mean that unless or until a person has a grand experience, there is really no legitimate reason for them to believe the bible. And suppose some Mormon claims to have a much grander experience than your own. What then?

The second approach however is based on having your eyes open to see what is true, and right in front of you. You know something is glorious because it shines. So then what would be helpful for the other person to hear is all of the glorious things about Christ that you have been learning, and all of the powerful truth of the gospel and the kingdom of God that has gripped you since the day of your conversion and continues to grip you to this day. So what's probably more important is your ongoing testimony and belief in God, and not so much initial experiences.

After all, let's face it; not everyone has the same experiences at conversion. And if it's the experience that matters most, then only people rivaling the apostle Paul with his Damascus Road experience would really be worth listening to. But we know that’s not right, because the message itself has weight and glory. After all, did not Jesus say, “Blessed are they who did not see, and yet believed.” We can share the truth no matter how inconsequential our experiences may seem.

(Not to mention there is a real danger of casting pearls before swine in this kind of situation.)

Suffice it to say that people usually need to hear more about the glory of God in the face of Christ, and not as much about your own experiences. . . . more about Christ, less about you . . .

How To Lose A Bet: Pascal's Wager

I commend those who are on the front lines of evangelism, especially those who labor on college campuses. Anyone who spends time in this arena knows the atmosphere is that of suffocating unbelief. The temptation is to relieve the tension with methods which take the blade out of our presentation of the Gospel. We, however, must let the Bible dictate both our message and our method. We are seeing a resurgence of the former. We have yet to see a resurgence in the latter.

A case-in-point of unbiblical methodology is Pascal's Wager. You can find the argument in Pensees. Click here for a synopsis.

The Argument
Premise 1 - If you believe in God, and find out your were wrong, you lose nothing.
Premise 2 - If you do not believe in God, and find out you were wrong, you lose everything.
Conclusion - You should believe in God.

The following will show this method to be unbiblical.

1 - Pascal assumes God is incomprehensible and therefore "we are then incapable of knowing either what He is or if He is." This premise is based on philosophy instead of the Bible. Romans 1:18-32 states that all men know God exist. They simply "suppress the truth in unrighteousness." Pascal's Wager allows man to remain unchallenged in his autonomy. Notice throughout the other points the wide-spread effects of this one belief.

2 - Pascal's wager gives up the certainty of God's existence in order to prove it. This method is condemned by Scripture. "Do not answer a fool according to his folly, or you will also be like him" (Proverbs 26:4). In other words, we are not to give up God in order to prove Him. We do answer the fool - we won't let him be wise in his own eyes. The answer, however, will be from the standpoint of certainty.

3 - Pascal's Wager destroys the meaning of faith. Since, in his view, "reason can decide nothing" he asks, "What will you wager?" In this system, faith is a leap in the dark. In other words, faith is believing something which could be true, but also could be utter foolishness. This is not the biblical definition of faith. "Faith is the assurance of things hoped for" (emphasis mine). Faith, in order to be biblical faith, must be based on the revelation of God. Once again, notice the devastating effects of not affirming the truth of Romans 1:19-32. All men know God exists - and they hate it.

4 - The premise flat-out contradicts the Bible. Pascal says, "If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing." Wrong. Read the context of 1 Corinthians 15:13-19. If I am wrong, I lose everything. Or, as Paul said, "If we have hoped in Christ in this life only, we are of all men most to be pitied."

Good men have used this method. And there may be some who have come to faith after hearing this presented. Nevertheless, we must not ask if the method works, we must ask if the method honors God. This is utterly crucial for a generation of Christians for which the end justifies the means. We are to love Him with all of our heart then love our neighbor. To seek to love the latter first is essentially to hate both.

Crackers in the Pantry

I found this resource on the DG site, "Why We Believe the Bible - Appendix Five: Thoughts on How to Know If a Writing Is From God." I thought it was really good as I have been trying to study inerrancy and the related issues lately.

It's Piper's thoughts on how to know if God wrote the bible. His point here is that being convinced that God wrote the bible is not going to come about like conviction of most other things. Bahnsen referred to this in his famous debate with Stein, calling it the "crackers in the pantry" fallacy. If you wanted to look in the pantry to see if the crackers were really there, you would just open up the door and look. This is not so with God and his word. As finite, created, and sinful beings we cannot take God in hand and examine Him at will, rather God must reveal himself to us. There are a lot of other good statements in here about the inward witness of the Holy Spirit; and Piper even cites 2 Corinthians 4:-6 which are perfect verses for all this. The gist of those verses being that men do not need to pursue verifying the gospel presentation so as to find God, so much as have their eyes opened to what's right in front of them. God must shine into their heart. This is an inward work that must be done, and always happens through the Holy Spirit.

What I always think is helpful when talking to believers about this is to turn things personal and inward. Do you know God? How did you become convinced of his reality and the veracity of the gospel message? Was it by thoroughly researching all the historical issues? Or was it by considering all the philosophical ideologies and systems of thought? No. If you're a Christian, whatever your exposure to extra-biblical evidences may have been, you believe God to be who he is because of two things. One, you have heard the gospel in some form or fashion. And two, God has shone in your heart and revealed himself to you, convincing you of it's truth and glory.

. . .

Actually, the whole set of notes and all of the appendices are really good. So scroll to the top and check them out if you have time. If nothing else, at least read the above mentioned appendix as it's very good and very short.

Omniscience Justifies Knowledge

How many times have you thought you were right and turned out to be wrong? Have you ever come to wrong conclusions because you didn't have all the facts, or because you were operating under faulty assumptions? ... ... ... This deserves our attention. How can one be certain of anything unless they know everything there is to know? Is it possible that tomorrow through some turn of events you could find out that everything you have believed up to this point has been wrong?

For the Christian, the answer must be "No." Christians don't just "hope" or wish that what they believe is true, they are convinced that it is true (faith is the assurance of things hoped for and the conviction of things not seen). And they are indeed justified in there convictions because Omniscience backs them up. Who's omniscience? God's.

God, and God alone, knows everything. That would mean that only he can know and be certain of anything, however, something else true. He has revealed truth to believers in Christ and in the Scriptures. God, the only one justified in his knowledge, imparts pieces of knowledge to us. Therefore, we can be certain of what he has imparted to us. This means that we have as a foundation for our convictions then, not our own intelligence or our own thoroughness in our investigations, but God himself. God's omniscient knowledge revealed to man is the only way to be certain of anything. We cannot survive on our own. Our finitude will fail us in the end.

Essentially, what I'm saying is that if you want to be sure about something, you need an omniscient stamp of approval.

***

Now, one may be convinced of the soundness of the above principle (that only omniscience justifies knowledge) and yet still hold a bit of reservation. A good follow-up question is, "Does the bible teach such a principle?" I was encouraged recently to find these things in the Scriptures (thanks to a helpful pointer from R. Reymond).

This is the clearest Scripture passage that I now know of on this issue.


Job 28

1"Surely there is a mine for silver
And a place where they refine gold.
2"Iron is taken from the dust,
And copper is smelted from rock.
3"Man puts an end to darkness,
And to the farthest limit he searches out
The rock in gloom and deep shadow.
4"He sinks a shaft far from habitation,
Forgotten by the foot;
They hang and swing to and fro far from men.
5"The earth, from it comes food,
And underneath it is turned up as fire.
6"Its rocks are the source of sapphires,
And its dust contains gold.
7"The path no bird of prey knows,
Nor has the falcon's eye caught sight of it.
8"The proud beasts have not trodden it,
Nor has the fierce lion passed over it.
9"He puts his hand on the flint;
He overturns the mountains at the base.
10"He hews out channels through the rocks,
And his eye sees anything precious.
11"He dams up the streams from flowing,
And what is hidden he brings out to the light.
12"But where can wisdom be found?
And where is the place of understanding?
13"Man does not know its value,
Nor is it found in the land of the living.
14"The deep says, 'It is not in me';
And the sea says, 'It is not with me.'
15"Pure gold cannot be given in exchange for it,
Nor can silver be weighed as its price.
16"It cannot be valued in the gold of Ophir,
In precious onyx, or sapphire.
17"Gold or glass cannot equal it,
Nor can it be exchanged for articles of fine gold.
18"Coral and crystal are not to be mentioned;
And the acquisition of wisdom is above that of pearls.
19"The topaz of Ethiopia cannot equal it,
Nor can it be valued in pure gold.
20"Where then does wisdom come from?
And where is the place of understanding?
21"Thus it is hidden from the eyes of all living
And concealed from the birds of the sky.
22"Abaddon and Death say,
'With our ears we have heard a report of it.'

23"God understands its way,
And He knows its place.
24"For He looks to the ends of the earth
And sees everything under the heavens. (That's it!!!)

25"When He imparted weight to the wind
And meted out the waters by measure,
26When He set a limit for the rain
And a course for the thunderbolt,
27Then He saw it and declared it;
He established it and also searched it out.
28"And to man He said, 'Behold, the fear of the Lord, that is wisdom;
And to depart from evil is understanding.'"

The "Problem" of Evil - Part Two

This is part two of a two-part post on the "problem" of evil; part one can be found here. These are some further thoughts I had on this issue that help to supplement what Mack wrote in the email I quoted in part one.


1. Without an absolute standard of "good" there can be no such thing as "evil" in the world. Biblically speaking, something is evil only because it is a contradiction of the absolutely good character of God. For the unbeliever to raise the "problem" of evil, without an absolute standard of good as their reference point, is foolishness. Before the unbeliever can even raise the problem of evil, they must first give an account for how they can account for good and evil at all!

2. God is not a passive bystander who carelessly watches the evil that occurs in this world from a distance. He is not like the selfish king who sits idly by in his castle feasting while the people of his land starve to death, feeling nothing and caring nothing for their plight. Part of the glory of the Biblical perspective of evil is that God himself has come down into this world and experienced the evil of it firsthand in the person of the God-man, the Lord Jesus Christ. For someone to say that "God doesn't know what I've been through" is to deny the reality of the incarnation.

3. There will be a day when every wrong in this world is put right; a day when every evil will be punished to the full extent of justice. There will not be one sin that is left unpunished, not one "little white lie" that is not called to account. (In fact, it seems right Biblically to say that that punishment often times begins even in this life.) The doctrine of hell is the answer to the oft heard inquiry of "Why doesn't God do something about the evil in the world?" In fact, he has done, is doing, and will "do something". The person who brings this particular objection up is often the unbeliever who seeks to ridicule God by implying that He just allows evil to go on in this world without doing anything about it. But what they are really asking for (unwittingly) is the Biblical reality of hell. In addition, this statement from them confirms the existence of "the law written on the heart," and the inherent sense of righteousness and justice that every person, created in the image of God, possesses.

4. When it comes right down to it, the "problem" of evil is something that we all have played a part in. This was well-put by author G.K. Chesterton in reply to an invitation from The Times for several well-known authors to write essays on the topic of "What's Wrong With the World?" Chesterton's reply was brief, but profound:

Dear Sirs,

I am.

Sincerely yours,

G. K. Chesterton

In other words, the world is not the way it is because of a few bad people like Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot and Mao Zedong. The world is the way it is because it is made up of multitudes of people just like us. There is deep-seated evil that resides in the heart of every fallen son of Adam. Sometimes that evil will manifest itself in greater ways in the lives of some people more than others. Nevertheless, at the core of every human being ever born is a corrupt, polluted heart that is capable of unspeakable evil. It's easy for someone to survey the world scene and to piously bemoan all of the evil present in it, while at the same time being utterly blind to the blackness of their own heart. Such people are nothing more than hypocrites who love to cast blame on God, while being blind to the fact that they themselves are part of the problem.

But the glory of the gospel of Jesus Christ is that God is actually able to take out someone's evil, corrupt heart, and give them a new heart; a heart that loves God, righteousness and truth. May the Lord open the eyes of anyone reading these lines who is still hiding behind their filthy rags of self-righteousness, while inside they are full of dead men's bones and all manner of corruption. It's only when we are honest enough to admit that we are part of the problem, that God will begin to work in us in order to make us part of the solution.

The Great Debate?! Hardly...

By now I'm sure many of you have heard about the recently televised debate concerning the existence of God between Ray Comfort/Kirk Cameron, and two members of the so-called Rational Response Squad. I'll admit up front that I have not seen the entire debate. But I did see about two minutes of it, which was more than enough to make me sick to my stomach, and cause me to realize that Ray and Kirk had gotten in way over their heads when they accepted this challenge. I say this not as someone who thinks he could do a better job himself, but as someone who knows for certain that there are several other Christians around who could.

Anyway, my aim in this post is not to belittle Ray and Kirk (In many ways, I admire their boldness and desire to share the truth), but simply to provide my fellow Christians with some resources that I feel are helpful in providing us with a proper foundation for doing Christian apologetics. First though, I wanted to point you to a couple of other blog posts that were written as a "friendly critique" of Ray and Kirk's performance in the debate. Here is Part One and Part Two. I thought these were especially helpful in pointing out the weaknesses in Ray and Kirk's methodology, but at the same time, doing it in a gracious manner. Even if you don't read any of the other resources that I will link to below, I would still recommend reading through those two posts.

Now, here are some further resources that I would recommend for Christians who are wanting to dig deeper when it comes to apologetics. I don't necessarily endorse everything that is stated in these resources. Nevertheless, I do believe that they will help any Christian to gain a better understanding of how to defend Christianity, and to do it in a way that is Biblical and honoring to the Lord Jesus Christ, "in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge."

ARTICLES

There are many excellent articles dealing with Biblical apologetics at the following sites. The first two sites contain articles that would be especially good for those Christians who are studying these things for the first time.

Grover Gunn

Frontline Ministries

Monergism

John Frame

Greg Bahnsen

Sola Gratia Ministries

SERMONS

And here are some sermons that deal with Biblical apologetics that I would recommend. The first one especially would be very good for the Christian who is new to these things.

Curt Daniel-Defending the Faith

Cornelius Van Til
His message titled "The Wisdom of the World" is especially worth hearing.

BOOKS

The Justification of Knowledge by Robert Reymond
I feel this is the best single book available on Biblical apologetics. It is difficult to find, but can be ordered from here for only $7.50!!!

A New Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith by Robert Reymond
This is an excellent systematic theology that contains much of the material from the previous book. In other words, if you can't get the above book, then get this one.

Apologetics to the Glory of God by John Frame

Every Thought Captive by Richard Pratt
I have not yet read this book myself, but I hear it is excellent. It is especially geared towards those who are new to Biblical apologetics.

Always Ready by Greg Bahnsen
Most of the chapters in this book are available as free articles which can be found here.



I realize that there is a LOT of material here to wade through, so if you are wanting more specific recommendations, feel free to email me and I will do my best to help you. If you are new to all of this, I would be happy to point you to specific articles that I feel would be good for you to start with. Or if you are struggling with a particular apologetic issue, I will try to provide resources for you that deal with that particular issue.

In closing, I hope that these resources help other believers to be "always ready" when it comes to defending the faith, and to do so in a way that gives the most honor and glory to the Lord Jesus Christ. But in all of this, we need to keep in mind that no amount of apologetical knowledge can change the heart of the unbelieving man or woman; only God can do that miracle. The unbeliever's problem is NOT that they are just ignorant. The problem is that they suppress the truth in unrighteousness. So above everything, the Christian needs to be a person who knows the Word, and who dwells in the presence of God through communion and prayer. By all means, use the above resources to grow in your understanding of how to Biblically defend the faith! Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort would have been much more prepared had they availed themselves of such things. Nevertheless, it is ultimately by the knowledge of the Word and communion with God that we are made "wiser than our enemies" and through which we become like Stephen, of whom it was said that his enemies "were unable to cope with the wisdom and the Spirit with which he was speaking."

The "Problem" of Evil-Part One

I received the following email from a dear brother, Mack Tomlinson, a few days ago. I thought it was worth sharing since every Christian, at one time or another, will probably deal with the so-called “problem of evil”. I say “so-called”, not because evil isn’t real, but only because the presence of evil in this world is not a “problem” in the way that most people think it is. I hope these brief thoughts help my fellow brothers and sisters to think biblically about this issue, and I will be posting some further reflections I had in response to this in a few days. But first, here is the initial email:

The Origin and Problem of Evil

I received an email from a solid and faithful Christian this week, with the following question:

"Dear Brother,

I am preparing for an exam which is on Thursday. Among those topics is that of God's relation to evil. I am not satisfied with the results of the "modern" debates that use concepts like "middle knowledge" or other philosophical ideas.

I suppose you have reflected on this issue. Would you give me some of your thoughts on this issue? How do you think the problem of evil may be best dealt with? As my exam is in about 2 days, I would appreciate if you could give me some tips. Thank you."

My response--

My dear brother,

I am afraid I am poor in some of these areas of thought, but here would be my brief summary response:

If one allows that God is not sovereign over evil-- that He had no control in the origin of evil, then they have created more problems that they can deal with-- true problems, the main one being that God therefore is not truly God-- He is not ruling over all things, etc, and He is therefore not sovereign over all things, and therefore, He has ceased to be the God of Gen 1-3. By definition, God must be absolutely in control of all things at all times OR He is not God.

If one denies the sovereign control of God over evil's origin and existence, you have already re-defined who God is, and it is not the God of Genesis 1, but a God of your own imagination.

This becomes quite important in the application of theology, because if He was not sovereign over the ORIGIN & EXISTENCE of evil at the beginning, then it consistently must be true that He has no control over it at ANY level; therefore:

1. Christians could never draw any comfort at all from a Heavenly Father who is not controlling evil, for they would have to face the sad reality that He can do nothing about it; it is outside of His control.

2. Neither can Christians pray to God to work in and through evil situations, since He already had no power in evil coming about; so why pray if He is not truly sovereign and in control? We surely cannot ask Him to cause ALL things to work for the good, IF He is not in control of it all completely. If He is not in charge when evil occurs, He could not be in charge to bring about good as a result of it. Prayer would be a vain action if God is not ruling over all things, including all evil.

Therefore we come to a foundational reality--

The Bible throughout declares and make very plain that God rules over all things completely; (see Job 1-3), plus many of the speeches in Job directly show that; Satan could not even touch Job without God's direct permission AND it was God who initiated all of Job's situation. If one did a simple perusal of all the verses in a concordance that directs shows all that God is sovereign over, that would settle it forever- for those who truly believe in the God of the Bible.

Biblically, if God CREATED all things by Himself, it is theologically and logically certain that He must still GOVERN all things Himself;

Any sane person who believes in God's existence will acknowledge that God ALLOWS suffering; one has to deny Scripture completely to deny that; BUT, if as Scripture says, He works all things after the counsel of his own will, then ALLOWING something is exactly the same as purposing it to exist.

Evil must be defined in terms of God, not man; what God says is evil, man often says is good and what man says is evil, God often says it is good; man re-defines evil according to only how it affects himself or mankind; so what man often says is evil is only evil because it messes up man's desires, plans, wishes, and his selfish life; but that interruption by something "bad" often is, from the divine perspective, the greatest and best thing that could have happened to that person to bring about God's redemptive purposes for him or her.

So Joni Ereckson Tada's broken neck and paralysis now for over 30 years is evil according to man's definition, but how much glory and good has come from it?

And the ultimate example and proof is the cross. How evil and wicked of men to reject, blaspheme, deny, and crucify the Son of God, yet this was the predetermined plan according to the foreknowledge and purpose of God and was the only perfect act of good since creation. The cross- how evil and how perfectly good.

A main theological truth from Scripture is this: God certainly purposes the existence of evil for the primary purpose of displaying and revealing His glory in the universe. There is no other ultimate and satisfactory explanation for the existence of evil other than ALL things exist for the glory of God Himself and the display of His purposes in redemption.

I would also recommend you read both C. Sam Storms and John Piper on the subject; most helpful.

This is a little scattered in thought, but it is the best I can do at the moment. I surely hope it helps;

Hope you pull an A on the exam, but if you take this position and because of it, your professor gives you a worse grade, then rejoice! the Lord is King!

Your brother and friend,

Mack