Representin' the Text...

Jesus discussed creation in Genesis. Mark 10

Jesus compared his journey to Jonah's. Matthew 12

He also spoke about Sodom. Matthew 11

He referenced the Prophet Daniel. Matthew 24

Noah's Ark is discussed. Matthew 24

Jesus quotes Isaiah (several times). Matthew 24

He notes hells reality. Mark 10

He acknowledges the reality of Moses and gives him credit for the Torah. Mark 12

Though I realize this is an oversimplified deduction...is it possible to acknowledge that Jesus is who He claimed to be, 'the way, truth and life' and not believe in the creation story? or Noah and the flood? or the reality of Hell? or Jonah and the whale?

Did Jesus lie and simply 'play along' with the ancient tales in order to connect with His audience? In His human nature did He truly believe in these fictitious stories? Did He truly fulfill hundreds of prophecies, live a miraculous-sinless life, raise from the dead and yet misrepresent the OT? If so, then do these theories alter His righteous character?

Do you doubt the trustworthiness of the OT and yet follow Christ? Then ask yourself - 'What insight do I have, above and beyond the Christ, the Scriptures, the Spirit, that allows me a more 'trustworthy' vantage point than that of the Creator?'

Now if Jesus is the Messiah.
And He assumed the reality of even the wildest OT stories.
And you believe in Jesus.
Then it stands to reason that you can trust the entirety of the Scriptures.

'I praise You, Father...that You have hidden these things from the wise and intelligent and have revealed them to infants' (Matthew 11:25) - the wisdom of this world doesn't compare to the open heart and mind of the faithful.

God-Man-Morality

'I am the Lord your God; consecrate yourselves and be holy, because I am holy.' (Leviticus 11:44)

The breath of God in His creation of man imparted the Holiness of God into His new creation. Paul confirms that the moral law of God truly is written on our hearts. This is wild! Knowledge and experience of holiness is within each of us and has been all along.

All of nature speaks of Gods revelation of Himself, His will, His kingdom and His holiness...everyone is left without an excuse. Regardless of culture, time period, race, gender...there are clearly acts that are good and those that aren't, period. On that note Peter, the trustworthy and imperfect disciple of Christ, speaks to the church:

'As obedient children, do not conform to the evil desires you had when you lived in ignorance. But just as he who called you is holy, so be holy in all you do...' (1 Peter 1:14-15)

And so that no one can brag saying they've become holy due to their own efforts, we know that, 'we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all' (Hebrews 10:10).

God is the standard that never changes. This isn't legalism, you and I are welcome to do as we please, we're free to conform to the worlds standard. However, what pleases us doesn't become the standard. God is holy and holiness doesn't change. Our standards are to be transformed into His.

The Truth of the moral freedom within each of us didn't develop through time via monkey-men, although it's reality has been slowly revealed by the Spirit and set in Scripture. It was instilled in us from the beginning of time, before time began. It was revealed to man as man moved about.

In Christ truth was codified eternally through his sacrifice on our behalf and our breathing in and out of this reality awakens our hearts, souls and minds to Truth as it was, is and will be.

Half-Monkey-Man-Morality

I overheard a discussion in the philosophy section of a bookstore the other day regarding the trustworthiness of the moral standard coming from the Bible. That a 3,500 yr. old book couldn't possibly speak into the lives of modern men and women.

They went on to describe the development of morality as it appeared in nature. Evolving along with the monkey-men hundreds of thousands of years ago. Half-man/half-monkey and various combinations therein slowly discovered right and wrong. What was acceptable and what was intolerable. Basic good and evil.

I find it interesting that these individuals find the moral aptitude of half-monkey-men living hundreds of centuries ago more acceptable than a coherent system of moral law recorded only 3,500 yrs. ago, without the help of the half-breed.

Hm. Interesting as well that half-monkey-men could figure out the basic tenets of good and evil and yet many of us, a much more evolved and advanced version of these creatures have come to the conclusion that there is no standard of right and wrong. That each person may define it for oneself.

Thanks monkey-man and your evolutionary counterpart...but I'll stick with the reality of the divine moral code written on our hearts, experienced in the world, recorded in Scripture and modeled in the Trinity.

Healthy Skepticism...

...sounds like an oxymoron right? To be a true Skeptic one must believe that truth us unattainable or even nonexistent. Ultimately it's a lifestyle of doubt. An attitude of disbelief...is that really healthy?

Think practically - a true skeptic could never believe that their wife truly loved them. They would have to ask these questions regularly: What if she's lying? Did she really promise to stay by my side? Does love even exist? Are these fears justified? Does fear exist? and so on and so on...if there is no attainable truth, then a true skeptic can find no end to these questions. Is that a healthy marriage?

A lifestyle of Doubt can't lead to a fulfilled life can it? Think about all the times Paul tells the Philippians to 'Rejoice!' If truth is nonexistent then what do we have to rejoice in?

But if Truth does exist and has made itself attainable, understandable and experiential - then Paul is dead-right when he tells the Philippians that God, who started a work in their community, will truly carry it out until He is finished - and that bit of knowledge is worthy of our trust.

Seek answers. Ask questions...even the most difficult ones. Study. Research. Pray. Discuss. Debate.

But should you find yourself living a lifestyle of doubt maybe you should spend some time doubting that lifestyle.