A Brick in the Valley

I’ll buy you a piece of pie and a cup of coffee at the Royal Blue in Stillman Valley if you can find someone who gets offended if you call them a purple zebra.

Try it.  Go to the mall.  Or, your local coffee shop and look at someone, and tell her that she’s a purple zebra.  See if they get mad.

Of course, no one in their right mind will get upset about being called a purple zebra.  Everyone knows the label doesn’t fit.

On the other hand, if you tell someone that he’s a rebellious sinner, things get more interesting.  Because, all people, even unbelievers, know deep down in their heart of hearts that they are accountable to a righteous God.  The defensiveness of people – - (Romans 2:14 ff) shows that they have a standard of righteousness written on their hearts.

And, for those, who will be broken about their sin, we have good news . . .

Tiger Woods today issued an unqualified apology for his infidelity.  I appreciate the way Tiger took ownership and pray he will hear the invitation of the Gospel.

At the same time, Tiger’s statement raises questions about his professed Buddhism. Tiger said:

Part of following this path for me is Buddhism, which my mother taught me at a young age. People probably don’t realize it, but I was raised a Buddhist, and I actively practiced my faith from childhood until I drifted away from it in recent years. Buddhism teaches that a craving for things outside ourselves causes an unhappy and pointless search for security. It teaches me to stop following every impulse and to learn restraint. Obviously I lost track of what I was taught.

Besides saying that immorality is wrong, how will Buddhism help?

Buddhism with its belief that god is an abstract void or undifferentiated essence leaves those who seek change to find the resources within themselves.  Does Tiger really think he has the resources within himself to change?

Said a different way, Tiger has just had a cruel encounter with the Law and the Law won. Tiger is faced squarely with the requirements of morality, but he is trying to do it on his own. Yet, if he would turn to Christ, he would find the truth of this simple rhyme:

Run [Tiger] run, the law commands,

But gives us neither feet or hands,

But, better news the Gospel brings,

It bids us fly and gives us wings.

Can a Buddhist be forgiven?

Buddhism offers no forgiveness. In reference to Buddhism, Dean Halverson points out:

Because the law of karma is an impersonal principle similar to a law of nature, the consequences of our moral actions are inevitable. Sin, in other words, cannot be forgiven because there is no forgiver. Just as you don’t ask forgiveness from the law of gravity – a natural law – neither is it possible for the law of karma to forgive. Compact Guide To World Religions, The , page 66.

This may explain why Tiger did not use the word “forgive” or “forgiveness.” Tiger apologized to different groups, but he did not ask for forgiveness which fits with Buddhist beliefs. Yet, didn’t it come through that Tiger knows he needs forgiveness?

Oh to point Tiger and others carrying such heavy burdens to the invitation of Jesus Christ, “Come to me all you who are heavy laden and I will given you rest (Matt 11:28-30).

Does Tiger really think he can atone for what he has done?

Tiger said,

I have a lot to atone for . . . It’s now up to me to make amends, and that starts by never repeating the mistakes I’ve made. It’s up to me to start living a life of integrity.

Of course, Tiger can never atone for what he has done.  He needs grace.

Giving him the benefit of the doubt, Tiger probably realizes that he can never atone. Yet, he also sees the need. So, he is caught. Again, we would proclaim Gospel of the Triune God and his demonstration of love: “Not that we love God, but that he loved us and sent his son as an atoning sacrifice for our sin (1 John 4:10).”

Or, we might point Tiger to Toplady’s words in Rock of Ages:

Not the labor of my hands
Can fulfill Thy law’s demands;
Could my zeal no respite know,
Could my tears forever flow,
All for sin could not atone;
Thou must save, and Thou alone.

Is it okay for a repentant Buddhist to be angry on behalf of his wife?

Tiger said:

It angers me that people would fabricate a story like that. Elin never hit me that night or any other night. There has never been an episode of domestic violence in our marriage, ever. Elin has shown enormous grace and poise throughout this ordeal. Elin deserves praise, not blame.

Later in the interview, Tiger expressed indignation over his children being followed.

In answer to the question, it would be my understanding that, the Buddhist answer to the question of whether or not it is ever okay to be angry is “no.” Indeed, the Buddhist goal of enlightenment would be to extinguish all passions. Again, quoting from Compact Guide To World Religions, The :

Christians, for example, speak of a God who has emotions such as anger and love, but Buddhists see such emotions as a negative rather than something to be proud of. Such emotions indicate that such a person is still stuck in his or her attachment to the ego.

The Christian response to the question of whether or not Tiger could be justly angry on Elin’s behalf is clearly, “yes.” There is such a thing as righteous anger.

Why would our culture say Tiger was wrong?

Tiger accepted that he was wrong.  But, we ought to ask our pornography saturated, infidelity celebrating culture why we are so indignant.  Tiger pointed to cultural standards and the expectations for married couples.  He also mentioned his Buddhist faith, which would condemn his behavior.  But, what standards do these establish if one does not believe in a personal, holy God?

So, our culture, even as it tries to suppress the truth, testifies against itself (Romans 2:14-15).

In his recent talk on C.S. Lewis, John Piper shared that both Tolkien and Lewis believed that the chord stories strike with the depths of our being is evidence that there is a true story.

Notice especially the bold.

One decisive influence was J. R. R. Tolkein, author of The Lord of the Rings. He argued like this, as Lewis did for the rest of his life: When this Joy—this stab of inconsolable longing—is awakened by certain powerful “myths” or “stories,” it is evidence that behind these myths there is a true Myth, a true Story that really exists, and that the reason the Joy is desirable and inconsolable is that it’s not the real thing. The True Myth, the Real Joy is the original shout, so to speak, and the stories and myths of human making are only echoes.

Tolkein pressed the analogous truth for Christianity. And Lewis did the same years later: “A man’s physical hunger does not prove that that man will get any bread: he may die of starvation on a raft in the Atlantic. But surely a man’s hunger does prove that he comes of a race which repairs its body by eating, and inhabits a world where eatable substances exist.” In other words, “If I find in myself a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probably explanation is that I was made for another world.”

Read the rest of Piper’s talk here.

See also, Without A Dark Introduction, There Are No Fairy Tales, C.S. Lewis posts

I thought Joni Mitchell’s folk song, “Clouds,”was the most powerful part of the Olympics opening.  Surely such music reminds us again that people know in the depths of their being that there is something more in life.

Could people sing like this if we’re just a collection of cells, if we are only biological accidents?

It’s the sensucht thing.

“The experience is one of intense longing. It is distinguished from other longings by two things. In the first place, though the sense of want is acute and even painful, yet the mere wanting is felt to be somehow a delight.” See Pilgrim’s Regress, page 7.

Sunday (D.V.) I will remind our people that time in Romans should motivate us to be missional: to always be living to further the cause of Christ.  We are all about spreading the Gospel for God’s glory and our joy.

Missions was a major part of why Paul wrote Romans .  He wanted to establish a base in Rome, so that he could eventually make his way to Spain.  Once he reached Spain, Paul would have planted churches like a belt across the breadth of the Roman Empire.  With this accomplished, the Gospel would spread like a fire north into Europe and south to North Africa.  Whether or not Paul made it to Spain, we know this is what happened.

Here, John MacArthur illustrates how pastors and theologians should remember the mission.  MacArthur is best known as a preacher and student of the Bible, but this is an amazing account of how he shared his faith over a 50 year time period.

HT: Unashamed Workman

David L. Turner:

In evangelism and apologetics the Christian should not attempt to prove the existence of God to the unbeliever.  The unbeliever, if he is honest with himself, knows this already.  The Christian should proclaim the gospel, God’s appointed dynamic for turning the lost to himself.

In an article, “Cornelius Van Till and Romans 1:18-21: A Study in Presuppositional Apologetics,” GTJ 2:1 (Spr 81).

If nothing else, read the last paragraph.

Doug Moo (NIV Application Commentary on Romans, 82-83):

We do not think these verses give any grounds for thinking that salvation can be gained apart from the gospel.  Paul’s argument in 1:18-3:20 is intended to establish the reason why God has unleashed his saving power in the gospel.  Human beings are locked in sin and need to be rescued.  For Paul to introduce at this point the possibility of salvation apart from the gospel would undercut his own argument.

What, then, do we say about people who have never had a chance to hear the gospel and either accept or reject it?  Are they automatically excluded from salvation because they do not have a chance to hear?  This very question was one of my key objections to the gospel when friends of mine in college first confronted me with the claims of Christ.  The contemporary pluralistic environment has sharpened the question even further.  Influential theologians—some within the evangelical movement—are arguing that people of genuine moral commitment can be saved apart from explicit faith in Christ.  Karl Rahner, an influential Roman Catholic theologian, has coined the term “anonymous Christians” to describe such people.

While attractive for many reasons, this view simply does not square with the claims of Scripture.  Paul’s argument in this part of Romans is straight-forward: All people are under sin’s power and can escape the wrath that sin brings only by responding in faith to the gospel of God’s righteousness in Christ (See Romans 3:9, Romans 3:20, Romans 3:21-22).  To be sure, we cannot always know just how God may reveal his gospel to people.  As Paul’s own example powerfully demonstrates, the preaching of the gospel by missionaries and others is God’s normal means of making his gospel known to people.  But we must allow that God may have other ways of revealing his gospel to people that we do not know or even understand.  So, while insisting that only faith in the gospel can save, we perhaps need to be open to different ways by which people may come to know the gospel.

One final point should be made.   The problem of those have not heard takes on a slightly different complexion depending on whether one is a Calvinist or an Arminian.  The Arminian, in a sense, has the bigger problem here.  For Arminians believe that God’s prevenient grace puts all people in the position of being able to respond to the gospel.  There response is, therefore, the crucial factor.  Calvinists, by contrast, while insisting on the need for response, also claim that the ultimate cause of salvation lies in God’s election, his specific choice of certain persons for salvation.  The Calvinist can therefore argue that God will, in his sovereignty, see that every person he has chosen will also be exposed, in one way or another, to the gospel.  Having determined the end, God will also enact the means.

I must confess that I am little closer to a compelling answer to my question about those who have not heard than I was when I was first converted.  I think Scripture requires that we insist on faith in Christ as the necessary means of salvation.  And I trust utterly in the absolute fairness of the God who has revealed himself to me in Jesus Christ.  I am content to leave my questions in his hands and hope for clearer resolution in heaven.

You can read more about Alvin Plantinga here.  Suffice to say in this post, he is one of the most brilliant philosophers of our time.  These clips are short and if you listen to them, it will be to your benefit.

If your time is limited, I recommend the third and fourth parts first.

Reasons for God from CPX on Vimeo.

Where Richard Dawkins goes wrong from CPX on Vimeo.

Sure Faith without Proof from CPX on Vimeo.

Is God good? from CPX on Vimeo.

HT: JT

Cornelius Van Til:

I take what the Bible says about God and his relation to the universe as unquestionably true on its own authority. The Bible requires men to believe that he exists apart from and above the world and that he by his plan controls whatever takes place in the world. Everything in the created universe therefore displays the fact that it is controlled by God, that it is what it is by virtue of the place that it occupies in the plan of God. The objective evidence for the existence of God and of the comprehensive governance of the world by God is therefore so plain that he who runs may read. Men cannot get away from this evidence. They see it round about them. They see it within them. Their own constitution so clearly evinces the facts of God’s creation of them and control over them that there is no man who can possibly escape observing it. If he is self-conscious at all he is also God-conscious. No matter how men may try they cannot hide from themselves the fact of their own createdness. Whether men engage in inductive study with respect to the facts of nature about them or engage in analysis of their own self-consciousness they are always face to face with God their maker.

Many have watched, “The Known Universe” – - but, have you really listened to it?

According to the Bible, there is no excuse for not listening, at least figuratively.  This video which shows the awesomeness of the universe and illustrates the point of Romans 1:18-20 that God has made himself known such that his power and righteousness are ever on display:

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.(Ro 1:18-20).”

” Praise the Lord! Praise God in his sanctuary; praise him in his mighty heavens! Praise him for his mighty deeds; praise him according to his excellent greatness! Praise him with trumpet sound; praise him with lute and harp! Praise him with tambourine and dance; praise him with strings and pipe! Praise him with sounding cymbals; praise him with loud clashing cymbals! Let everything that has breath praise the Lord! Praise the Lord! (Psalm 150).”