Modern Science knows Jesus conclusively; they just don't know Him.

THREE HISTORICAL FACTS CONCERNING JESUS OF NAZARETH

1. His empty tomb

2. His post-mortem appearances

3. The origin of the disciples belief in His resurrection

Historians have reached something of a consensus that Jesus of Nazareth came on the scene with an unprecedented sense of divine authority. The authority to stand and speak in Gods place. He claimed that in himself the kingdom of God had come and as visible demonstrations of this fact, He carried on a ministry of miracle working and exorcisms. But the supreme confirmation of His claim was His resurrection from the dead. If Jesus really did rise from the dead then it would seem that we have a divine miracle on our hands and thus evidence for the existence of God.

Most people would probably think that the resurrection of Jesus is something that you just believe in by faith or not.

There are actually 3 facts represented by the majority of historians today which are best explained by the resurrection of Jesus.

Fact #1 - On the Sunday after His crucifixion Jesus' tomb was found empty by a group of His women followers. Jacob Kramer, an Austrian Specialist, states that “By far most scholars hold firmly to the reliability of the biblical statements concerning the empty tomb.” 1

Fact #2 - On multiple occasions and under various circumstances, different individuals and groups of people saw appearances of Jesus alive after His death. According to the prominent new testament critic Gerd Lüdemann “It may be taken as historically certain that Peter and the disciples had experiences after Jesus’ death in which Jesus appeared to them as the risen Christ.” 2

Fact #3 - The original disciples suddenly came to believe in the resurrection of Jesus despite having every predisposition to the contrary. Jews had no belief in a dying and executed Messiah and Jewish beliefs about the afterlife precluded anyone's rising from the dead to glory and immortality before the end of the world. Nevertheless, the original disciples came to believe so strongly that God had raised Jesus from the dead that they ultimately went to their deaths for the truth of that belief. Luke Johnson, a New Testament scholar from Emory University, states that “some sort of powerful, transformative experience is required to generate the sort of movement earliest Christianity was . . . .”3 N. T. Wright, an eminent British scholar, concludes, “that is why, as a historian, I cannot explain the rise of early Christianity unless Jesus rose again, leaving an empty tomb behind him.”4

The three most popular explanations that Critics, both past and present, use to explain away the resurrection are as follows:

1. The disciples stole the body.

2. Jesus wasn't really dead after the crucifixion.

3. Everyone who claimed to see Jesus alive after His death was experiencing a corporate mass hallucination.

These attempts to undermine the historicity of Jesus' resurrection have been overwhelmingly and universally rejected by contemporary scholarship. The fact is, there is absolutely no plausible naturalistic explanation of these facts. The Christian is amply justified in believing that Jesus rose from the dead and therefore was who He claimed to be.

1. Jacob Kremer, Die Osterevangelien—Geschichten um Geschichte (Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1977), pp. 49-50.

2. Gerd Lüdemann, What Really Happened to Jesus?, trans. John Bowden (Louisville, Kent.: Westminster John Knox Press, 1995), p. 80.

3. Luke Timothy Johnson, The Real Jesus (San Francisco: Harper San Francisco, 1996), p. 136.

4. N. T. Wright, “The New Unimproved Jesus,” Christianity Today (September 13, 1993), p. 26.

Debating Intelligent Design

My very good friend Jae Lewis posted on his Facebook wall this evening about the overwhelmingly improbable spontaneous existence of a life supporting universe.  A very interesting dialogue followed that I thought was worth sharing.  Feel free to join the discussion on Facebook or here on our blog.

Jae Lewis

Science now knows that life prohibiting universes are vastly more probable than a life permitting universe.

Our existence has defied the odds so authoritatively that "random chance" is now a very ignorant answer. The only two remaining educated answers are Design or Multiple Universes. Guess which one has ZERO empirical evidence? That's right, the Multi-Verse Theory = a wild guess.

Most educated answer today = Design = only Minds Design (numbers are not causal) = only a Person has a Mind = a Person with a Mind who chose to Design humans must value humans = Jesus Christ

Jaret Burkett 

Technically, we only know of one universe. However, the odds of life sprouting in any given galaxy is small. Lets say 1,000,000 to 1. However, any data on the subject is just guessing and is based on carbon based life like we have here when life could be based on any particular atom theoretically. There is also an assumption that a planet would have to be in the Goldilock zone to support life. An assumption that we have found to be false even on our own planet with life existing in some of the most hostile environments. Now, with the infinite size of space, we can run a simple mathematical equation. If it is 1,000,000 to one odds, which it is probably better odds for non carbon based lifeforms, the math is: ∞/1,000,000=∞. So technically life sprouting in the universe randomly has an infinite chance to happen and infinite number of times. Now the odds of us happening to be one of these species that evolved to our state is very very rare. But here we are. Someone who has a very rare disease had very little odds of having the disease. But being that person with it, you still have it despite the odds. Now, I am not ruling out the possibility of creationism, and that is because it is possible. But evolution outside of creationism is also possible so it should not be ruled out either. And I hate to quote South Park, but I will. When they were learning about evolution and they told the kids that because of it there is no God, Stan chimed in with. "There could still be a God. Couldn't evolution be the answer to how not the answer to why?"

Tim Edwards 

Your being a little short sighted with your odds. Space has a populated size, and the odds of life being on this planet are more like a billion trillion. Most staticians/astronomers/biologists would agree that it is it is (if you don't want to use the word miraculous) amazing that there is life. In fact even when you account for the vast number of galaxies we can see now, statistically there is still quite a low chance of there being life on other planets.

Jaret Burkett 

Well it is also arguable the God just popping into existence being as complex as he is and and powerful as he is is more highly unlikely. If it is unlikely for human beings, a simple creature in comparison to God, to just pop into existence. Then it is far more unlikely for God to happen to pop into existence. All i am saying is even the most die hard atheist still leave room for the possibility that creationism could be true. Richard Dawkins admits this in the God delusion. It is simply because we will never have enough evidence to conclude 100% one way or the other. All i am saying is that creationist should use the same measure that it is possible for it to have happend without God, however unlikely it may seem. Either way the searching of the universe and the exploration of the past and the creatures who have evolved on this planet since millions of years ago will only get us closer to the truth. Weather it be creationism or big bang, or aliens, we must search the evidence and find the truth if it ever comes to be. Jesus as an example showed that sometimes you have to go against the grain of common religious beliefs to more accurately approach the truth. He showed that the ideals of the old testament and strict laws once worked, but were inapplicable in his time. Perhaps today in this age of knowledge we are in, it is time to accept that old stories about how the earth was created in the mind of prehistoric men, is not applicable with our current understanding. We must adapt our thinking.

Tim Edwards 

Also, I might add that Jae's stance was not against evolution. I think a minority of Christians oppose evolution. Jae was arguing for a designed and created universe. One that so uniquely supports life that many opponents of creationism fall back to having no more than faith in thearies such as infinite universes. (typing on a computer > ipad)

The astronomer Hugh Ross was drawn to Christianity in early in his life because he found a remarkable accuracy in the book of Genesis to what he observed in science. He has written a few books outlining in great detail how the bible is actually amazingly accurate when compared to what we now know about how a universe and planets form. I think it would at the very least be a fascinating read. The trick is, there is no 100% proof one way or the other. You can't current prove, empirically, the existence of God, or vice-versa. The debate does however tip heavily towards the existence of God. There are many pillars of rational thought that Christianity has to stand on and is backed up with philosophy, science, and history (and don't forget experiential evidence). Would you rather stand back from religion merely because you can't get to 100% even when the scale leans in its favor? The bible doesn't guarantee doubt-proof evidence, but it also doesn't make allowances for rejecting it for a "lack of evidence".

Phillip Knight 

Jaret, I take issue with a few of the points you made in your posts and would like to address them. I do however appreciate your openness on the subject. Anyone who espouses the idea that God CERTAINLY does NOT exist can hardly be taken seriously for the reasons you have pointed out.

First, I think the statistics you use in your example of “life in any given galaxy” are exceptionally inaccurate. If we consider the list of required constants and ratios (strong nuclear force, weak nuclear force, gravitation constant, electromagnetic force, expansion rate, mass density etc..) and ask the question “what are the odds of a universe that permits life”, we find that it is 1 chance in ten to the power of 229 (see research of Physisist Lee Smolin). That’s 1 with 229 zeros after it, not 1 in a million. Said another way, the odds of a life permitting universe are unfathomably small. At this degree the word “impossible” comes to mind. Also, we are talking about the entire universe, not just a galaxy.

Second, you gave the example of ∞/1,000,000 = ∞. I would caution your use of this example because this mathematical equation only points out the rational impossibility of anything physical existing infinitely (either time or individual object). Your mathematical equation is mathematically impossible. A quick example of why infinity cannot exist physically is this: if planet A orbits the sun twice every 365 days and planet B orbits the sun once every 365 then how many more times has planet A orbited the sun relative to planet B over an infinite span of time? The answer is zero. Both planets would have orbited an infinite number of times. This is logically and mathematically absurd. My point is there cannot exist anything physical that is infinite. You may find a particular article (recently released) by Alexander Vilenkin of Tuft University interesting. The article explains why none of the proposals for an eternal universe are workable: eternal inflation, a cyclic universe, and the "cosmic egg" hypothesis. In each case, the mathematics and the laws of physics can't eliminate the need for a starting point. This forces the community of naturalistic astronomers to face what they have been trying to avoid: a beginning. In response to this article/research Stephen Hawking said "A point of creation would be a place where science broke down. One would have to appeal to religion and the hand of God." The evidence is mounting at a nauseating level that our universe at some point began to exist.

Third, you argue that it is “more unlikely” that God could pop into existence than a universe. I am not sure that you can support that argument in any objective way but I strain to even object to it because it is also fallacious given your misunderstanding of the definition of God. God as defined would not “pop” into existence. He would be eternal, his existence infinite. Therefore your example does not make sense. A universe could pop into existence (being caused by something), God, by definition, could not. So to analyze the relative likelihood of either is illogical. It is important to note here (given my second argument above) that God is not physical and therefore allowed to be infinite. God would be uncreated, having always existed. It seems I can argue much easier than you that an infinite immaterial God exists than you can an infinite universe. In a similar vein I can also point out why your point is mathematically impossible and mine is not.

Also, you say that you “do not have enough evidence to conclude 100% one way or the other”. I find this to be a very interesting argument, as we NEVER have 100% evidence for anything. We act every day of our lives on faith (will my marriage succeed, will I get killed driving to work, does this food contain bacteria that will kill me etc…)

Last, you suggest that “in this age of knowledge” we should “adapt our thinking”. I agree completely but I am not sure you would appreciate the outcome. As our knowledge of physics, cosmology, biology and the like increases we are finding more and more need for a creator. Physics shows us the impossibility of a universe existing without God, cosmology shows us the FINITE existence of the universe and as a result the need for an uncaused cause, and finally biology shows us that at the most basic level life is guided by language (DNA) which we can only relate to an attribute to an intelligent mind.

Middle Knowledge Anyone?

Last year I was invited by a friend to join a group and study Systematic Theology as taught through Wayne Grudem's condensed tome "Bible Doctrine".  Little did I know, I knew little about God.  I can say that this study has been a profoundly positive experience.  We are called in the Gospel of Luke to "love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind".  This study would be an exercise in the latter.  Studying God's word only serves to strengthen our walk, correct our mistakes, and make us fall more in love with our Creator and Father.

This study is not without its trials however and as we found quickly this exercise involves a bit of heavy lifting.  As we approached the topics of God's Sovereignty/Providence and The Doctrine of the Application of Redemption the group had more questions than our book had answers.  The author, espousing a reformed view, introduced to the majority of us to a theology we had never heard before.  For many of us it was troubling, for some interesting, and for others completely outrageous.

Some in the group agreed with the view of the author and some certainly did not.  I found myself in a slightly different situation.  I understood both points of view, found scripture to support both, but knew that both could not be true.  I would like to briefly explain my dilemma and then offer a solution that I feel is reasonable and well supported by scripture and logic alike.  

It seems from my observation that the Christian world is divided primarily into two camps, the Calvinists (reformed theology) and the Arminians.  Both groups are nearly identical in their beliefs but part ways with respect to God's sovereignty over creation, his interaction with creation, and the process through which he redeems sinners.

Calvinism

The Calvinist holds that God is sovereign over all things, ordains all events, and renders all things certains.  God, according to a Calvinist, is even sovereign over the hearts and decisions of Men (although they claim that Man continues to make free decisions, see compatibilism).  God ordains all things (including rape and the holocaust) but is not morally responsible.  The Calvinist defers to the secret will of God and quotes St. Paul when he says "does the potter not have a right over His clay".  Said another way "God is righteous and just and can do what he pleases".  We find scripture that seems to support this view of God's sovereignty over creation:

Ps. 115:3 But our God is in the heavens; He does whatever He pleases.

Ps. 135:6 Whatever the Lord pleases, He does, in heaven and in earth, in seas and in all deeps.

Ps. 103:19 The Lord has established His throne in the heavens; and His sovereignty rules over all.

1 Sam. 2:6-7 The Lord kills and makes alive; He brings down to Sheol and raises up. The Lord makes poor and rich; He brings low, He also exalts.

Heb. 2:8 Thou hast put all things in subjection under His feet. For in subjecting all things to Him, He left nothing that is not subject to Him.

Eph. 4:6 One God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all.

Pr. 16:33 The lot is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from the Lord.

Calvinists also hold that God elects those whom will be saved.  It is not based on foreknowledge but is rather credited to God's secret and sovereign will.  It then follows that Christ did not die for the sins of the world but rather for those whom God elected.  This election is unconditional.  God moves irresistibly in the hearts of sinners to turn them towards himself.  The reprobate (those not chosen by God) cannot chose God.  They will never have a chance to do so and the Calvinist holds that Christ did not die for their sins also.

I can appreciate the Calvinist's humble view of their own salvation.  No man can boast here.  Salvation was truly and 100% a gift.  Man had no part in it, not even a decision.

I do however have an enormous problem with the idea that Christ did not die for all but for the elect.  What if my son Parker is not elect?  Is there anything that I can do?  Also, the Calvinists propose an interaction between God and man that is quite unusual.  Your thoughts and actions are guided according to the will of God.  God, in order to accomplish his purposes guides your heart and thoughts.  

Arminianism

Arminians hold that God, desiring to experience true relationship with His creation, has suspended his sovereignty (or rather is Sovereign over his sovereignty).  Arminians hold that tragedies (like rape or the holocaust) happened against God's will.  God did not will for free agents to do such things but has left said free agents to make free choices.  In other words "God is not in control of what happens on earth, free agents are truly free".  Arminians hold that Christ died for the sins of the world and salvation is available to everyone.  In a similar vein they believe that man can resist God's grace or fall from it.  Eternal security to an Arminian is not certain.  A crisis of faith late in life or at any time for that matter may cause you to fall from grace and lose your salvation.  To make sense of the Doctrine of Election Arminians hold that God elected "Christ" and that anyone who believes in Him is a member of this group.

Scripture seems to suggest (in defiance of the Calvinist view) that man has some responsibility in his salvation.  Christ calls us to "choose this day whom you will serve".  Why would Christ command us to chose if God is sovereign over our choices or if we have no choice at all (i.e the elect)?  Scripture offers the following:

"choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve" (Josh. 24:15)

"Come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest." (Mt. 11:28)

"If anyone wills to do His will, he shall know concerning the doctrine, whether it is from God." (Jn. 7:17)

"If anyone thirsts, let him come to Me and drink." (Jn. 7:37)

"Repent, and let everyone of you be baptized" (Acts 2:38)

"Repent therefore and be converted" (Acts 3:19)

"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved" (Acts 16:31)

"but now commands all men everywhere to repent" (Acts 17:30)

"Whoever wills, let him take the water of life freely." (Rev. 22:17)

My Confusion

These two very well thought out theologies are enormously conflicting.  I understood the Calvinists argument that God is Sovereign.  I have read the various scripture that suggests that God chose us, we did not chose him.  Election seems clear and in disagreement with the Arminians view.  At the same time man is called to "pick up his cross" and "chose this day".  What is the point of our choosing if it is in fact God who choses?  What of the reprobate?

Insert Middle Knowledge

In the 16th Century a Jesuit theologian name Luis de Molina proposed a rather fantastic philosophical idea in an attempt to bridge the gap between mans free will and God's providence.  To do so he inserted the idea of Middle Knowledge.  Middle Knowledge derives its name from a logical ordering of events in creation.

The idea in layman's is this:

Before the creation of the world God in his omnipotence (knowledge of all things indefinitely) understood all necessary truths.  He did not know anything that was untrue.

IN ADDITION to his knowledge of necessary truths he is also aware of all counterfactuals.  A counterfactual is a statement like this: "if Phillip goes to Subway, he will freely order a 6" Meatball sub".  Even if I never go to Subway God knows what I would freely choose should I goto Subway.

It then follows that God in his omnipotence could create more than one possible world.  The world we exist in today is not the only world God had to chose from.  God could instead (before creation) survey an unlimited number of worlds.  He would know in each of those worlds all counterfactuals truths.  He could have actualized a world in which Hitler freely chose to be a pastor of church and in which the holocaust never took place.  Similarly he could have actualized a world in which I did not freely chose him.  God understood before the actualization of any one world what would happen in all situations in that given world and all others.  In conjunction with this foreknowledge of events and counterfactuals he intertwined his plan of Salvation beginning with Abraham and concluding with Christ and the apostles.   It is important to note that without God's "Middle Knowledge" or awareness of subjunctive conditions God would only have a knowledge of the future but lacking an ability to plan events (say the crucifixion of Christ).  God must understand not only what will happen but what will happen IF...

God chose to actualize one of an unlimited number worlds, we find ourselves in that world today.  By invoking this middle knowledge we are able to reconcile so many of the problems inherent in Arminianism and Calvinist (but mostly in Calvinism).

Is God sovereign over all things (including say the Holocaust)?

Yes, God knew when he actualized this world that it would take place through the free agent Adolf Hitler.  God ordained the Holocaust in the sense that he actualized the world in which Hitler freely chose to carry it out but he is not directly responsible for it, Hitler was given a free will.  God did know that Hitler would freely to chose to commit those atrocious murders.

Does God elect and are we predestined?

God knew before he actualized this world who would freely chose him and who would freely reject him.  In this way God is sovereign over those who receive salvation (by pushing "the button" to actualize this world he sovereignly chose those who would chose him).  He could have chose another world in which an entirely different group of people freely chose him.  While we freely chose, he chose this world according to his will.

The focus of Molinism is on God's knowledge of subjunctive conditionals or counterfactuals. God knew before creation what would happen in any version of creation that he chose.  He is sovereign over all things because he chose in the beginning which version of creation to create.  We are retain our libertarian free will as we live in the world created.

It is important to note that foreknowledge is not synonymous with fatalism.  Because God knows what will happen does not mean that he has rendered it certain.  This is a logical fallacy.  Today I went to Strawberry Fields and picked up lunch for my family.  I ordered my usual border chicken wrap.  That border chicken wrap when made had a definite weight x.xxxxxxxxxx... ounces.  God new before the wrap was made what the ultimate weight would be but it does not follow then that he rendered certain the weight.  The weight was unknown to me, although it could have been known.  God, different from me, knows all things including what the weight of my wrap would be.

In summary I am in disagreement with Calvinists about how God elects and brings sinners to salvation.  At the same time I am in disagreement with Arminians that God is not sovereign over all things.  We must rather understand his sovereignty in a different context, one of Middle Knowledge.  I am a Molinist.  Spread the word...

If I have this baby my life will be ruined

I have become convincingly dependent on God for everything. I say "convincingly" because I have never been so sure in my life that, apart from Christ, I am nothing more than a frail, continually sinful COWARD who can't even muster up one righteous thought. When I step out of the Spirit my life looks like a dog returning to its own vomit. Everything that used to be thrilling in this world is now devoid of any pleasure. It's simply the law of diminishing return. Every day that you wake up in a world where everything revolves around you, where the number one objective is your own happiness including the circumvention of people, places and things that could possibly abate that happiness; it takes a little more of the world everyday to feel as satisfied as you felt yesterday.

Pause and think about that...

Tomorrow you will need more happiness than you did yesterday to be satisfied. A year from now you will need 10 times more just to stave off depression. Its true isn't it? That's why lives that play out like this can get so dark in sin that they are unrecognizable. The definition of pleasure becomes so warped that you can't even distinguish it from atrocity. Think I'm being overly dramatic? How about this: "If I have this baby my life will be ruined." How many times do you think these words have been spewed over the past 30 days around the world? This is warped, especially if you rearrange the words just a hair to say, "If I murder this baby my life will be much more fun." I bet a year before this statement was ever uttered that the requirements for this persons happiness were deceivingly much cheaper (Assuming you view life as valuable). Self-love is a monster that's being sold to us as an answer.

Who can satisfy my soul like Jesus? This is actually true. Every other taste has become bland or bitter compared to what I've tasted at my Fathers table. Things that used to melt in my mouth like, success, money, praise, comfort or even something like piety, have all become dirty rags compared to what is in His cup. Christ offers us the law of cumulative return, or in other words the old snowball effect. Every day that you wake up in a world where everything revolves Christ, where the number one objective is the happiness of others including the intentional sharing of the burdens of the lowest in our world; it takes a little less everyday to feel completley satisfied. Paul said that he discovered how to have joy even through SUFFERING. That's what I'm talking about. It can make the greatest mountain of pain suddenly hopeful and the smallest provision seem like your cup is over flowing. Heidi Baker, an astonishing missionary in Africa, said that God gave her a vision that Western Christians where living off the crumbs from the Masters table, missing the feast that was happening right in front of them. How devastating is that to hear?! C'mon! We are eating Ramen off the ground in order to hang onto what?! Our money? Our autonomy? Our finley tuned plans? Our HAPPINESS? These are the things that keep us underneath the table in the sty. Self-love, Self-preservation, Self-reliance = Self-Centeredness.

I pray that we can get off the ground and take our seat back at our Fathers table.

I Love Crowd Funding

I saw this post on The Big Picture and had to share.  As of last week I am personally aware of the real positive effects of Crowd Funding although not this specific group.  Thanks again to everyone who donated to help us bring Emme home.  Here are some interesting stats on this growing trend:

My Wife

My wife is so much better at blogging than I am.  Here is her Christmas Eve post.  I am so blessed to be married to such a wonderful women!  Thank you Lord!

More on Sovereignty

I have decided to post this in response to a comment on Jae's post by GHL.

I agree very much with GHL's conclusion.  Paul was correct when he said that "we know in part" (Cor 13:9).

I will, for the sake of discussion, attempt to construct the debate as I see it but please keep in mind that I have neither a degree in philosophy or theology (both very helpful in this instance).  I am still working through the details.  I dont expect to be finished anytime soon, if ever.

When approaching this topic it is very important to remember that the study of the Doctrine of God's Providence, Election, and Predestination, is a systematic study.  We cannot simply point to one or two verses to make our case (although one or two verses can be very helpful) we must instead look at scripture as a whole.  It seems to me that scholars on both sides (all of which are Men/Women of God and who are in love with Christ) have conducted the same systematic study and yet draw entirely different conclusions.  I sympathize with both parties, they both make a compelling case.  

The following is a summary of the debate (from the perspective of an Arminian) (click image to view larger):

All Encompassing Sovereignty

It is not unthinkable, at least for me, to believe that God sovereignly choose those whom he willed to save.  Jae clearly has a problem with this and I understand why.  Keep in mind that I said it is not "unthinkable", this does not mean that I am content or pleased with this idea.  Something does however resonate when I consider God exercising such sovereignty over creation.  He is in fact God right?  How can the Creator not be sovereign over everything?  This is not an obsession with His sovereignty by the way. Scripture seems to support this level of sovereignty:

• Ps. 115:3 But our God is in the heavens; He does whatever He pleases.

• Ps. 135:6 Whatever the Lord pleases, He does, in heaven and in earth, in seas and in all deeps.

• Ps. 103:19 The Lord has established His throne in the heavens; and His sovereignty rules over all.

• 1 Sam. 2:6-7 The Lord kills and makes alive; He brings down to Sheol and raises up. The Lord makes poor and rich; He brings low, He also exalts.

• Heb. 2:8 Thou hast put all things in subjection under His feet. For in subjecting all things to Him, He left nothing that is not subject to Him.

• Eph. 4:6 One God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all.

• Pr. 16:33 The lot is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from the Lord.

These scriptures seem to clearly suggest that God is sovereign over all things including cast lots (tossed dice).  When the dice are rolled God determines the outcome.  This scripture tells us that even the most random of events are in fact ordained by God.

The problem here is that if God is truly sovereign over ALL things then he must be sovereign over things like rape, murder, the Holocaust, etc...  Is he passively sovereign (in that he doesn't act to prevent them) or actively sovereign in the sense that he intentionally plans and causes them to occur?  I am not willing to make the call here but I understand both views.

A Calvinist would say that while God caused these things he is not morally responsible.  An Arminian might argue that God has suspended his sovereignty and these acts are entirely of man.  Tough call here...  We must either embrace the idea of God causing (although not morally responsible for the evil) or we must admit that somehow God is not in control of the awful things that happen in this world.  Either way we have a dilemma. 

Sovereignty Over Out Hearts/Steps

There has been a bit of debate personally surrounding the sovereignty of God with respect to the human heart or path in life.  I have a hard time imagining God not being sovereign over all things including our hearts.  We imagine that we have a completely free will but I find little support for this in scripture and in fact find the opposite:

• Ps. 16:6 The lines have fallen to me in pleasant places; Indeed, my heritage is beautiful to me

• Ps. 33:14,15 From His dwelling place He looks out on all the inhabitants of the earth, He who fashions the hearts of them all, He who understands all their works.

• Pr. 19:21 Many are the plans in a man's heart, but the counsel of the Lord will be established.

• Pr. 16:9 The mind of man plans his way, but the Lord directs his steps.

• Pr. 20:24 Man's steps are ordained by the Lord; how then can man understand his way?

• Pr. 21:1 The king's heart is like channels of water in the hand of the Lord; He turns it wherever He wishes.

• Deut. 2:30 For the Lord your God hardened his [the king’s] spirit and made his heart obstinate, in order to deliver him into your hand, as he is today.

• Isaiah 10:5-7 Woe to Assyria, the rod of My anger and the staff in whose hands is My indignation. I send it against a godless nation....Yet it does not so intend nor does it plan so in its heart.

• Isaiah 63:17 Why, O Lord, dost Thou cause us to stray from Thy ways, and harden our heart from fearing Thee? Return for the sake of Thy servants, the tribes of Thy heritage.

• Acts 17:26-28 And He made from one, every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed times, and the boundaries of their habitation...for in Him we live and move and are.

• Jer. 10:23 I know, O Lord, that a man's way is not in himself; Nor is it in a man who walks to direct his steps.

Scripture seems to suggest that God guides our hearts and steps and most Christians would not disagree.  Many times I have heard the phrase 'The Lord led me", "God put it on my heart", "God called us to".   In what capacity does God move on our hearts?  Is he sovereign?  Compatible? Cooperative?  I am not certain but I understand the Calvinist position.  Do remember that this question is only concerning salvation itself, not Sanctification.

God's Election/Predestination

Perhaps the most emotional topic of all is that of predestination and election.  Does God elect those whom he will save or offer it to all and give it to those who do not reject it?  Is there evidence in scripture that God choose certain people?  Has God sovereignly chosen before in a manner that man might view as unfair?  Here is a look at scripture concerning this:

• Ex. 33:19 And I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show compassion on whom I will show compassion

• Deut. 7:6 For you are a holy people to the Lord your God; the Lord your God has chosen you to be a people for His own possession out of all the peoples who are on the face of the earth.

• Neh. 9:7 Thou art the Lord God, who chose Abram and brought him out from Ur of the Chaldees, and gave him the name Abraham.

• Ps. 33:12 Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord, the people whom He has chosen for His own inheritance.

• Ps. 75:7 But God is the Judge; He puts down one, and exalts another

• Jer. 1:5 Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I have appointed you a prophet to the nations.

• Jer. 24:7 And I will give them a heart to know Me, for I am the Lord; and they will be My people, and I will be their God, for they will return to Me with their whole heart.

It seems clear that God has sovereignly "chosen" some and not others in his history with mankind.  Given such a history it is not unthinkable that the same process may play out with regard to salvation.  Choosing the nation of Israel, choosing certain men to be prophets etc...  It is hard to argue that God has not sovereignly chosen people before.

So what about salvation through Christ?  What does scripture say about this?  Both Calvinists and Arminians would agree that man is totally depraved, meaning we cannot turn to him in our current state.  We require a mesure of grace from God.  Calvinists define that grace as being distributed according to God's secret will (to the elect) and it is irresistible  (meaning that those who are called will turn their hearts to God). Arminians reject this idea of grace and instead propose Prevenient Grace.  This grace is also a gift from God but is given to everyone.  This grace, like irresistible grace, awakens our spirit and allows us to seek God.  Unlike irresistible grace however prevenient grace may be rejected or ignored.  In experience I can say that God's grace felt irresistible.  I never understood and asked several times, why am I pursuing God?  Why dont others in my life pursue the same way?  What in me causes me to do this?  I felt irresistibly drawn.  I also however know people who seem to have been given every opportunity to turn their hearts and lives Christward but have instead chosen to remain as they are, in sin.

In scripture we find very thought provoking statements:

• Mt. 11:25-27 And no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal Him

• Mt. 13:11 To you it has been granted to know the mysteries of the kingdom of Heaven, but to them it has not been granted.

• Mt. 19:11 Jesus replied, “Not everyone can accept this teaching, but only those to whom it has been given.

• Mt. 20:23 This is not Mine to give, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared by My Father.

• Mt. 22:14 For many are called, but few are chosen.

• Mk. 13:20 But for the sake of the elect whom He chose, He shortened the days.

• Jn. 5:21 The Son also gives life to whom He wills.

• Jn. 6:37 All that the Father gives Me shall come to Me.

• Jn. 6:44 No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him.

• Jn. 6:65 For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father.

• Jn. 13:18 I do not speak of all of you. I know the ones I have chosen.

• You did not choose Me, but I chose you, and appointed you, that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should remain.

• Acts 13:48 And as many as had been appointed [ordained] to eternal life believed.

• Acts 15:7 In the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth [Peter’s] the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe.

• Rom. 8:29 For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren;

• Rom. 8:33 Who will bring a charge against God's elect? God is the one who justifies.

• Rom. 9:16 So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy.

• Rom. 9:18 So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires.

• Rom. 9:23 In order that He might make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory...

• Rom. 11:29 For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.

• Cor. 4:7 For who regards you as superior? And what do you have that you did not receive?

• Cor. 12:11 But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually just as He wills.

• Eph. 1:5-6 He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will, to the praise of the glory of His grace....

• Eph. 1:11 In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will.

• Eph. 2:8-9 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that [faith] not of yourselves, it is a gift of God; not as a result of works, that no one should boast

• 2 Thess. 2:13 God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth.

• Peter 1:1 Peter...to those...who are chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father....

• 1 Peter 2:9 But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God's own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light.

• 1 Peter 3:9 For you were called for the very purpose that you might inherit a blessing

Does God sovereignly choose us for salvation or does he offer it to all?  Some say that a view such as this (that God elects) impunes God's love.  While I do not espouse fully the view that God elects, I must say that I do not believe that it impunes Gods love.  One might argue that the Arminian view impunes Gods love.  In this instance God only loves and saves those who love him in return.  This is the opposite of Christ's message to "love your enemy".  Are we not "enemies of God"(Colossians 1:21).

The scriptures concerning election are overwhelming in number and often in clarity but again we are left with conflict.  As a Calvinist one might worry about the reprobate (the unelect).  What about the poor souls not chosen for salvation?  What chance do they have?  Similarly what chance do they deserve?  In the opposite we are faced with the concern of our unsaved brothers.  If our salvation is completely our decision then how can we pray for others salvation?  Can we rely on the Holy Spirit to move our friends to faith in Christ?  Would that be interference with their free will?  The mind bogles.

Summary

Obviously I have more questions than answers.  I struggle even now writing this post because I haven't said everything I wanted to say.  I haven't (and honestly couldn't) address all of the tangents of this topic.  I realize that my summary is likely incomplete and amateur.  Either way I want to post it to keep the dialogue going.  I have not made up my mind either way but I can say this:

I am confident that when I stand before God, if I am given the opportunity to understand fully, I will say "you are just, you are love, you are perfect".  As a sinful human I cannot possibly understand the ways of God.  In any event, I love him and will never stop pursing him.

We can likely debate and investigate this topic for the balance of our lives, and it is certainly a topic worth discussing, but even more important is our task of spreading the Gospel.  We are called to be the light of the world and to take the Gospel to the ends of the earth.  If you are a Calvinist, you are called to participate in the process of salvation and through the Gospel Call take the message of salvation to the elect (to those who have been given ears to hear).  If you are Arminian then you are compelled by the weight of each individual decision to ensure that as many people as possible hear the gospel and experience the life changing love of Christ.

Either way we have all been shown immeasurable grace through salvation and in light of that and regardless of His methods I can say:

"To God be the Kindgom, the Power, and the Glory forever."  Amen.