Return from the (near) dead…

Back!

WordPress was blocked where I was living, and I’m afraid I’ve been unable to access my blog for ages now. We now find ourselves back in the strange and diverse land known as ‘Canada’!

WordPress works here.

Praise God!

Time Out

I haven’t been able to log into wordpress for the last several weeks. I currently live in a country which periodically blocks access to various websites, usually for reasons connected to political or social order.

 As a Canadian, my own culture would condemn this, yet I often wonder whether we have gone too far in our focus on individualism.

Certainly the Bible does not espouse this radical individualism. As followers of Jesus Christ, we affirm that he is our Lord and Saviour. That word ‘Lord’ is pretty important. It means I willingly submit myself to His viewpoint and thoughts, not because God is a tyrant, but because I recognize and accept that He is good. God is the only one who truly deserves my praise and worship.

The word often translated ‘servant’ in the New Testament reflects this. The Greek word is ‘doulos’, which in a Hebrew context had the sense of a person who willingly gives themselves over into slavery.

I am not my own. I have given myself over willingly to a good and just Master. I have been bought at a price… the blood of Jesus Christ.

Christ, Baha-u’llah and the Baha’is

My thoughts on “How Baha’is view Christ” ( www.bahai.us/print/node/169 ).

I think it’s great that Baha-u’llah speaks well of Christ. Who is the Christ that he praises though? Is this ‘Christ’ the same as that which is laid forth in the scriptures given to us? Is the Christ that Baha-u’llah praises the same as that which followers of the Word of Truth in the Bible follow?

We are told that “many will come in my (Christ’s) name, claiming, ‘I am the Christ,’ and will deceive many.” (Matthew 24:5), and again that “false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect” (Matthew 24:24).

Baha-u’llah praises Christ, yet also claims that he too is a manifestation of God, who like Christ is a ‘perfect mirror’ for the Spirit of God.

Is Baha-u’llah then truly the ‘return’ of Christ, or is he one of those who will come and deceive?

The essence of the question is, what is ‘Truth’, and how do we know it?

Baha’is seem to accept that the Bible is a revelation of God, and I base this on their use of scripture from the Bible to attempt to prove that Baha-u’llah is the return of Christ. I would like therefore to speak of what I know, and which Bahai accept as well, as a basis for understanding and exploration of truth.

The goal should never be our own desire or thoughts though, but rather an honest listening to the word of God. Let God be true, and every man a liar (Romans 3:4). To this end, I will endeavor to speak simply what God has revealed to men through the Bible, which the Jews accept as the Law and the Prophets, and which Muslims too accept as the Taurat, Zabour and Injil.

May the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart be pleasing in your sight, O LORD, my Rock and my Redeemer.

Please understand though that my views may challenge yours though, and as you have asked me to focus on truth, so I ask you the same. I do not write with any intent to cause you harm nor hurt, but rather that we may both draw nearer to that which is true. The truth often is not what our hearts desire to hear though, and we should remember that “the heart is deceitful above all things” (Jeremiah 17:9).

One might say that the revelation of the Bible is for its time though, and that the successive revelations of Muhammad (pbuh) and the Baha-u’llah thus supersede the teachings there.

This is the first thing I’d like to look at, because it goes to who God is, and the nature of God’s truth.

As we look at truth, it is important that in doing so, we are looking for God. It is written that God “does not change like shifting shadows” (James 1:17), and again that “I the LORD do not change” (Malachi 3:6), and yet again that “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever” (Hebrews 13:8).

While God sent prophets and messengers to speak to men in the past, these all spoke of the same unchanging God, who does not change like shifting shadows. One of the marks of a message from God is that it will agree with what God has previously said, because “God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man, that he should change his mind” (Numbers 23:19).

In fact, we are told that lies are the preserve of the devil, and that “there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies” (John 8:44). In other words, the nature of God is to be unchanging and true, while it is the nature of Satan to lie.

Part of my concern about Baha-u’llah is that he claims to be ‘one of a series of Manifestations of God that includes Moses, the Buddha, Muhammad – and, today, the Baha’u’llah” (How Bah’is view Christ).

This cannot be. The teachings of these men all differ on key points, and God does not change nor does He lie. Even to say that he offers teachings that are progressive is not possible, since even if the teachings progress, they would still speak of the same core truths. We are not talking here of minor issues that require spiritual discernment, but rather of core, fundamental statements of who God is and who Jesus Christ is.

An example of this is in the statement of Baha-u’llah quoted above. In the word of God given to us in the Bible, God tells us that in “the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe.” (Hebrews 1:1-2). In fact, Jesus himself says, “before Abraham was born, I am!” (John 8:58), which echoes the fact that Jesus is more than a prophet.

Each of the prophets was only a man, and “no one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven–the Son of Man” (John 3:13). The one who comes from above is above all; the one who is from the earth belongs to the earth, and speaks as one from the earth. The one who comes from heaven is above all. He testifies to what he has seen and heard, but no one accepts his testimony. The man who has accepted it has certified that God is truthful. For the one whom God has sent speaks the words of God, for God gives the Spirit without limit. (John 3:31-34)

In other words, Jesus of Nazareth is not one of the prophets who have come before, like Moses or Abraham. Rather he is unique. “For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus” (1 Timothy 2:5). Baha-u’llah has written about how some of the books of the Bible point to him, but Jesus the Christ says that “these are the Scriptures that testify about me” (John 5:39). In other words, it is not merely a few passages that speak of God’s Holy One, but rather all of scripture. For this reason, Christ is repeatedly called the ‘one and only’.

This parable that Jesus told may help clarify;

There was a landowner who planted a vineyard. He put a wall around it, dug a winepress in it and built a watchtower. Then he rented the vineyard to some farmers and went away on a journey. When the harvest time approached, he sent his servants to the tenants to collect his fruit.

“The tenants seized his servants; they beat one, killed another, and stoned a third. Then he sent other servants to them, more than the first time, and the tenants treated them the same way.

Last of all, he sent his son to them. ‘They will respect my son,’ he said. “But when the tenants saw the son, they said to each other, ‘This is the heir. Come, let’s kill him and take his inheritance.’ So they took him and threw him out of the vineyard and killed him. (Matthew 21:33-39)

Does this mean that all of what Baha-u’llah teaches is false? Certainly not. But as a starting point, it raises the problem that there are contradictions between the truth that Baha-u’llah presents, and the truth that the God of Abraham and Isaac has revealed. These two truths are contradictory. God may have sent many messengers, but the claim of Christ is not to be a man with a message from God, but rather that God has come down and taken earthly form in a man.

None of the prophets of the Bible, nor Muhammad, nor Buddha make this claim.

Only Yeshua ha’ Maschiach makes this claim.

“Religious Tolerance”

Religious tolerance can be a confusing term. What people mean by it can run the spectrum from tolerance for their own beliefs, to an affirmation that all beliefs must be somehow equal and synonymous… and all points in between, in the vacinity, or in that relativist universe.

There’s an internet site that purports to promote ‘religious tolerance’ and generally provide factual information about beliefs. They claim to ‘not advocate any one religion’, and to thus be above bias in that way.

Promotion of religious belief: Unlike almost all other religious WWW sites, we do not advocate any one religion. We are a group whose members follow five different theological beliefs (Agnosticism, Atheism, Christianity, Wicca, and Zen Buddhism). It would be difficult for us to promote any one belief system, even if we wanted to. (http://www.religioustolerance.org/purpose.htm)

I find this statement interesting, as in reading a few of their articles over the years, I’ve found the exact opposite and wondered why. If their articles are reflective of this broad based belief spectrum, why in actuality do their articles take a strongly ‘liberal’ post-modernist perspective?

An example of this is their chosen definition of ‘Christian’; “We define “Christian” as including any individual or group who devoutly, thoughtfully, seriously, and prayerfully regards themselves to be Christian” (http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_defn3.htm). The definition leaves out any consideration of the historical or biblical considerations involved, and rests it simply upon the individual use of the term. In essence, anyone choosing to call themselves ‘Christian’ according to this definition IS a Christian, even if their beliefs, actions and god are entirely contrary to historical and biblical teachings.

I am not questioning an individual’s right to hold any spiritual position. I am merely asserting that if a person calls themselves a Marxist, I would expect them to follow the teachings and writings of Karl Marx. If a person referred to themselves as a Vegetarian, I would expect them to avoid meat to some degree.

To say that a person’s personal definition lies above these historical usages of these terms, would be tantamount to saying that a person is a Vegetarian if they call themselves one… even if they eat meat in every red blooded form. This form of Vegetarianism would certainly appeal to many people who desire the health and ethical overtones of Vegetarianism, but do still desire meat. Yet it would also be a lie.

Returning to the point though, how does a “group whose members follow five different theological beliefs” end up with articles that all seem to reflect the same bias?

The answer in the end was frightfully simple.

“Almost all of the over 4,475 essays and menus on this web site (as of 2008-NOV) were written by our main author, and coordinator Bruce A. Robinson.” (http://www.religioustolerance.org/credentials.htm)

In other words, while the site claims non-partisanship through the holding out of it’s five members, in actuality the site overwhelmingly reflects the views of one man. For a site whose premise is to promote truth as a vehicle for ‘religious tolerance’, I find this troubling. For reference, the author in question, Bruce A. Robinson, is an Agnostic (inactive) member of the Unitarian Universalist  Church with a Bsc in Engineering Physics.

It also puts into strong question the site’s assertion that ‘theological credentials’ “would be counter-productive in our work” (ibid). They, or rather he, states that any theological training would bias the authors’ understanding, yet isn’t that understanding already highly biased by his own beliefs and the fact that the other four ‘writers’ on the site are virtually non-existent? 

Religious tolerance is a wonderful idea. We should all understand and value the right of each person to hold views, especially when those views differ from ours. I thoroughly enjoy talking to people who are devout in their beliefs, regardless of whether those beliefs conform to my own. Through understanding of each others beliefs, we can see the commonalities, but also the differences, and though we may not agree on theology, we build a deeper love and understanding for the person and their heart-felt desire to know their Creator.

This understanding needs to be based on fact and truth though.

A God of Contradictions

The Bible is full of contradictions.

• God alone is good, yet there is evil in the world.
• God is love, and perfect love casts out fear, yet the beginning of wisdom is fear of God
• Christians are to be involved and love the people of the world, yet are to be set apart from the world
• God hates homosexuality, yet Christians are supposed to love all people
• God is love, yet those that do not follow Him are doomed to hell
• God is all powerful, yet there is a Satan
• …feel free to post me your own personal contradictions!

Most people stop here and say that therefore the Bible and Christianity must be wrong then. In essense, we’re saying that our wisdom and knowledge demonstrate that the God of the Bible must be false because he doesn’t match up with our logic.

But what if these contradictions are not evidence of Christianity’s falsehood, but rather are windows to seeing a God who does not mirror ourselves and our preconceptions? A ‘god’ who fits easily and automatically into how man understands things, would logically be merely… a man. If God is greater than man, then perhaps his wisdom and viewpoints will strike us as different and strange as well?

It was in struggling over one of these contradictions that God revealed himself to me, and through that won me over to serving him with all my heart, all my soul and all my mind . But that’s another story…

Family and Sundar Singh

My wife’s family is one of those joyous anomalies. I’m not aware of any person within her extended family who is not a dedicated follower of Jesus Christ. They are far from perfect, and how they see their relationship and service to Christ may differ, but each in their life seeks to serve the Lord. I cannot see their hearts, but I can see the overflow of their hearts, and it gives me both strength and encouragement  in my walk with Christ, as I hope what Christ has done in my life strengthens and encourages them.

You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments. (Ex 20:5-6)

It gives me great hope for my children, and one day my grandchildren. I pray often that God would give me the wisdom and love to raise my daughters to love and follow faithfully on His road, and I trust in God’s promise that he shall love us to a thousand generations… just as He has been faithful to my wife’s family. I am so incredibly thankful to God for this grace.

A Christian doctor who examined me once said that given the life I had lived before Christ, he was amazed that I was alive. I thank God for each moment He has given me to be with my wife, my family and to serve him.

My wife’s family is far from a small family either. Family gatherings in the summer regularly reach into the 3 digits. Coming from a small family, and being terrible with names, it is always a humbling time for me as I struggle to remember names and relationships!

There is great strength in the unity, love and belonging of family. Challenges also.

I have had great reason to praise God for the family in Christ that he has given us as well. Though we are far from home and family, Christ has provided so richly in the family that is formed from acceptance of His blood.

“I tell you the truth,” Jesus replied, “no one who has left home or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields for me and the gospel will fail to receive a hundred times as much in this present age (homes, brothers, sisters, mothers, children and fields–and with them, persecutions) and in the age to come, eternal life. (Mark 10:29-30)

One of my in-laws who has walked the walk of faith for many years once mentioned to me that he sees great value in books. Specifically, he mentioned that he always has 3 books on the go. His advice was to always be immersed in the Bible, and a missionary biography. I’ll be honest, the 3rd book genre he recommended has slipped my mind, but I’ve tried my best to follow his first two admonitions, as I too see the value in them.

I tend to keep many more than 2 books in progress, but the Bible and whenever possible a missionary biography have been among them.

In the same sense as our biological families, the lives lived by our brothers and sisters in Christ can strengthen and encourage us in our life in Christ. They are no less our brethren, and in some senses they are more truly our family, because we share in the acceptance and grace of God through His Son.

I read about Sadhu Sundar Singh for the first time recently.

Sadhu is a term for one who has renounced all things to follow their faith, normally used for itinerant Hindu holy men.

Sadhu Sundar Singh came from a devout and wealthy Sikh family, and  after initially hating Christianity, heard Christ’s voice in his life. While he had been well versed in both Hindu and Muslim scriptures, and had sought earnestly to walk the path of his ancestors, true peace continued to elude him.

In the end, he decided upon suicide. In his final hours though, as he struggled and prayed for the true path, Christ came to him in a vision as he lay.

“He was searching for me before I sought Him. Christ whom I had never expected came to me. I was praying, ‘If there be a God, reveal Thyself’…I was praying to Hindu gods and incarnations. But when He came there was no anger in His face, even though I had burnt the Bible three days before. None of you have ever destroyed Scripture like me. He is such a wonderful, loving, living Saviour…”  (Sadhu Sundar Singh)

For God does speak–now one way, now another–though man may not perceive it. In a dream, in a vision of the night, when deep sleep falls on men as they slumber in their beds, he may speak in their ears and terrify them with warnings, to turn man from wrongdoing and keep him from pride, to preserve his soul from the pit, his life from perishing by the sword. (Job 33; 15-18)

This vision was not a random encounter, but the fruition of a long journey to know truth. This vision broke the hardness of his heart, and Sundar Singh accepted the blood and Lordship of Christ to wash his sins away. He knew peace.

He determined to become a Sandhu Christian. Christianity had come to India in a Western cup. Sundar Singh believed that if it came in an Indian bowl, then his people would drink of it. As a Sandhu, he would teach about Christ in a way that his people understood. He put on the yellow robe that marked a Sandu, and walk the roads without possessions, trusting in faith for food to sustain himself.

He was asked, “Do you ever ask for food anywhere?” He said, “Hindu Sadhus do, but I never do so. When my Heavenly Father sees that I need food, He arranges it for me.”

His new faith brought him many difficulties, but scripture tells us clearly that everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted (2Ti 3:12). His family cast him out and ostracized him. In a traditional communal society like Northern India, this is perhaps the greatest censure. People he met on the road often disagreed strongly with him, and sometimes beat him for teaching a ‘foreign’ religion.

He trusted in the Lord though, and did not retaliate, but instead loved his enemies and prayed for those that persecuted him. I know how hard it is for me sometimes to even weather verbal assault. Perhaps this is why I have not borne as much fruit as I would like. Sundar Singh’s life story is full of those who heard the gospel and came to faith because he was faithful to God’s word.

What strikes me most about Sadhu Sundar Singh is that he clearly understood the need to bring the gospel to people as one of them. The lie is that Christianity is a foreign religion, but we feed this lie when we teach the gospel wrapped in Western cultural trappings. Sadhu Sundar Singh, though he had faults and failings as we all do, saw clearly that the gospel for Indians should come from ‘incarnational’ living and witness among them.

Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death–even death on a cross! (Philippians 2:5-8)

God has given us a wonderful, rich and diverse family. Their spiritual gifts and lives lived are there to strengthen and encourage us… as we are there to make others strong and to mutually encourage one another. Too often we look only to our immediate family. The family that speaks as we do, dresses as we do, and looks like we do. But God has given us brethren of all nations, and as we look to them as well, we remember that the great good news has been given not only to us but to all people. The challenge for me from my Brother Sundar Singh is to strip away my culture from the gospel, and to present the mystery of the gospel both fearlessly and truthfully, but in a manner and way that do not place my stumbling blocks in front of the hearer.

To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some. I do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings. (1Cor 9:22-23) 

——

“With regard to the doctrine of Karma, it is true that man receives the consequences of his deeds; but the difference between the teaching of Christ and Hindu teaching is this — that a Christian performs deeds because he is saved and a Hindu in order to be saved.”  (Sandu Sundar Singh)

Give me Liberty or give me God

I was reading “Unlikely Disciple: A Sinner’s Semester at America’s Holiest University” by Kevin Roose this summer. An interesting book.

It talks about an aspiring journalist who transfers from Brown to Liberty University, which brands itself as “Building Champions for Christ.”

I’m all for building champions for Christ. I’m all for building well educated Christian servants to enter into the world and live a life that glorifies the living God.

Some things about Liberty trouble me though, or at least the Liberty that was laid out in Roose’s book (I’ve looked up some facts, but if you’ve gone to Liberty perhaps you can correct me in any points I’ve gotten wrong).

Liberty holds itself ‘distinctive’ in characteristics that include:
“An uncompromising doctrinal statement, based upon an inerrant Bible, a Christian worldview beginning with belief in biblical Creationism, an eschatological belief in the pre-millennial, pre-tribulational coming of Christ for all of His Church, dedication to world evangelization, an absolute repudiation of “political correctness,” a strong commitment to political conservatism, total rejection of socialism, and firm support for America’s economic system of free enterprise.” (https://www.liberty.edu/index.cfm?PID=6909)

Where did that come from? How did we move from biblical inerrancy to political and economic positions that are not Biblically based? The potential contradiction between biblical inerrancy and the theological stances is questionable in itself, as it takes away authority from the Bible and pre-ascribes it to positions which may or may not be scripturally correct… but where is the building of maturity in believers so that they may test everything. Hold on to the good. Avoid every kind of evil? (1Th 5:21)

Roose talks about certain profs at Liberty viewing questioning as signs of a hardened heart towards God. I’ve met so many ex-Christians whose faith was built upon rigid teachings that were formed by men (though based on scripture) yet who were never taught to test their teachers’ words against scripture itself. When their faith was tested, when the words of their teachers fell short, instead of turning to God in scripture, they fell from God.

I digress though. Let’s leave that rabbit-trail and head back to politics and economics!

While American Democracy is one of the best forms of government so far conceived by man, in the end it is of man. The only Godly and perfect government will be that enacted on Christ’s return, when the angels will call out;

“The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and his Christ, and he will reign for ever and ever.” (Rev 11:15b)

He (the Prince of Peace) will reign on David’s throne and over his kingdom, establishing and upholding it with justice and righteousness from that time on and forever. (Is 9:7)

New heavens and a new earth. No more weeping or crying. Gladness and rejoicing. God answering us before we call. The wolf and the lamb lying together. Nation will not take up sword against nation, nor will they train for war anymore.

That’s the day I hope for.

Even Kings chosen by God were not desired by God. When Israel demanded their own kings, God said to Samuel that it is not you (Samuel) they have rejected, but they have rejected me as their king. (1Sa 8:7). If a King selected by God is a rejection of God, then what is a President selected by men?

Regardless of whether they are Republican or Democrat, none are automatically ‘of’ God. Though God establishes all authority (Ro 13:1), this does not mean that the authorities are of God. An example of this lies in the Old Testament, where God repeatedly uses pagan nations to discipline his Israel. Nonetheless we are to obey our leaders and submit to their authority. They keep watch over you as men who must give an account. Obey them so that their work will be a joy, not a burden (He 13:17).

I should note that Liberty does not mention Republicans or Democrats in the passage above, but as far as I understand it, “political conservatism” is inseparable from Republicanism at Liberty. Once again, please correct me if I’m wrong.

In May of this year, Liberty had their first ever College Democrats Club… which the school closed down because the “Democratic Party Platform is contrary to the mission of LU and to Christian doctrine” (from the text of the email sent by Liberty VP Mark Hine, from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/22/AR2009052202189.html ).

As to ‘free enterprise’, what we are talking about here is also known as ‘free market Capitalism’; the idea that supply and demand should govern the economy, and government should leave them to it. Free enterprise does sound better to the ear, but the concept is still counter to scripture.

Defend the cause of the weak and fatherless; maintain the rights of the poor and oppressed. Rescue the weak and needy; deliver them from the hand of the wicked. (Psalm 82:3-4)

He who oppresses the poor shows contempt for their Maker, but whoever is kind to the needy honors God. (Proverbs 14:31)

Woe to those who make unjust laws, to those who issue oppressive decrees, to deprive the poor of their rights and withhold justice from the oppressed of my people, making widows their prey and robbing the fatherless. What will you do on the day of reckoning, when disaster comes from afar? To whom will you run for help? Where will you leave your riches? (Isaiah 10:1-3)

(Wicked men) have grown fat and sleek. Their evil deeds have no limit; they do not plead the case of the fatherless to win it, they do not defend the rights of the poor. (Jeremiah 5:28)

The problem is simply that a system that places material wealth as the highest value does not and cannot be equal to God’s teachings, which places love of God and the natural growth into love of our fellow man as the greatest commandments.

If anything, the argument could be made that socialism is closer to what the early church practiced. Compare this passage from the book of Acts;

All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need. (Acts 2:44-45)

The problem with socialism is not in the equality it reaches for, but in the fact that they usually try to do this without God. Love of man without the love of God to enrich and sustain it ends in emptiness.

The gist of all this though, is that it creates stumbling blocks for people to hear the message of Christ.

The up and coming journalism major Kevin Roose, who wrote the book, made a statement to the effect that he was pretty close to accepting the Christ who was born of a virgin, who lived a sinless life, and who died and rose again on the 3rd day as an atoning sacrifice for the sins of the world… but couldn’t accept the socio-political stances that he would have to agree to. Yet these are not part of the Bible.

I trust the Lord to have a purpose in all things, yet it saddens me when we place stumblling blocks between man and the salvation that God freely offers.

May God be with Kevin Roose and continue the work begun in him at Liberty. Even and perhaps especially through the weakness of man, God’s power can be made complete. May Roose see the perfect message, and not the imperfect messengers.

Consequently, faith comes through hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ. (Romans 10:17)

(I’m afraid I have to go by recollection on Roose’s position, as I’m travelling and the book is not with me.)