Questions "Part IV"

 

The next question down the Atheist list will again be superficial. The question itself has no real meaning, but because he asked it, we will attempt to address it. He asked, "When is the Bible being literal?" He is implying by his question no one cannot discern between literal and symbolic language when reading the Biblical text.

I can remember reading through the entire Bible when I was 13 years old, when I finished, nor at anytime during the process did I ever stop and have to wonder was that literal or symbolic language.  I had no more difficulty discerning the intent of the sentence structure than I had when reading any other book or paper. The Bible is not written in some obscure syntax where you cannot apply normal grammatical tools and techniques to determine the meaning of the text at hand. 

Modern translations render the reading more readily comfortable to the modern eye, but it is so easy to read that even as a 13-year-old boy I had no difficulty even with the old English version. It is true after 53 years I understand the Biblical text in greater depth than I did in the beginning, and I expect to continue to grow in that understanding as I progress in my study. Though my understanding is in greater depth, it is not a different understanding than I obtained as a 13-year-old. As a young boy completing the reading of the Bible for the first time, I readily understood the message and concept of what it was about. Now after 53 years I simply understand that message and concept in greater dept.

He (the atheist) points to a number of examples to support his thesis, one being the account of Jonah being swallowed by a whale. In his commentary, he points out that some Christians take it symbolically and others literally. Thus, he rests his point and demands to know, which is it? Who can know?

But this has nothing to do with the clarity of syntax, the obvious reading of the text reveals it was intended to be taken literally. That is the way I read it as a young boy, and it is the way I read it now. The text requires a literal reading, the reason some such as Bill O'Reilly and others determine to take it symbolically is because of the miraculous content, not because it cannot be determined by the text. There is symbolic language in the Bible, but when it is used it is easy to determine from the language itself, or many times the text itself identifies the symbolism.

The next question he brings to our attention addresses a valid issue, but he miss-applies the application. He asks, "Why do God's morals keep changing?" His argument is related to the fact as secular society and cultural changes occur, the Christian moral value eventually changes with it. 

Unfortunately, he is correct in his observation, however, he miss-applies it suggesting God's standards change. The Biblical standard of Christian morality has not changed, the fact Christians no longer want to walk in them is not something new to our era. The Church throughout history has been politicized and corrupted in various degrees because men are sinful and do not love God's law. The visible church has gone through various levels of correction and corruption throughout history, but the Biblical standard never changed. 

This is the 3rd posts addressing a number of questions the atheist brings to our attention. They have all either been mis-applied or asked from a misunderstanding of Christian doctrine. There is no real substance to these or the remaining one's he brings to the table. I feel this is a sufficient response for the time, and we will move on to hopeful something of more substance value in the next post.

God bless,

David 

Questions "Part III"

Continuing our discussion concerning questions that are often posted by Atheist is one that actually deserves addressing. The atheist ask, "Why are God's miracles untestable?" Unfortunately, the question is either purposely misguided or he is ignorant of Christian doctrine.  This particular atheist promotes himself as once being a Christian minister, if that were true, he would know most Protestant denominations do not hold doctrinally to current day miracles. The Roman Catholic Church and the Pentecostal Charismatic churches are mostly responsible for this error. The idea of modern day miracles in most cases is a misunderstanding of what constitutes a miracle.

It will be helpful to consider some definitions so we understand what is being referred to. The modern Merriam-Webster dictionary defines "Miracle" mir·​a·​cle ˈmir-i-kəl
1
: an extraordinary event manifesting divine intervention in human affairs
the healing miracles described in the Gospels
2
: an extremely outstanding or unusual event, thing, or accomplishment
The bridge is a miracle of engineering.
3
Christian Science : a divinely natural phenomenon experienced humanly as the fulfillment of spiritual law

However, this does not quite grasp the Biblical definition. The 1823 Webster dictionary comes closer. 

MIR'ACLE, n. [L. miraculum, from miror, to wonder.]
1. Literally, a wonder or wonderful thing; but appropriately,

2. In theology, an event or effect contrary to the established constitution and course of things, or a deviation from the known laws of nature; a supernatural event. Miracles can be wrought only by Almighty power, as when Christ healed lepers, saying, ""I will, be thou clean,"" or calmed the tempest, ""Peace, be still."

Our problem arises when confusing our understanding of miracles with the doctrine of divine providence. Divine providence is the understanding that God governs the world sovereignly through natural every day occurrences. To ensure that His purposes are fulfilled, God governs the affairs of men and works through the natural order of things. The laws of nature are nothing more than God’s work in the universe. The laws of nature have no inherent power; rather, they are the principles that God set in place to govern how things normally work. They are only “laws” because God decreed them. 

In Mathew 6:26 we see an example of this providence.  (26) Look at the birds of the air: they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they? (ESV). 

The birds go out and simply do what birds do, and the natural course of their life is governed by the natural course of things, God providence. We get up and go do what we do each day, one day we decide to go to work using a different route. We later discover that by doing so, we averted being involved in a grave accident. A miracle? I would say simply God's providence using the natural course of our lives. In the scope of things, God's governance of the world through His providence is so much beyond measure, greater than a simple miracle. In my lifetime, I have been amazed and astonished at God's providence in my life, and yet I have never seen one miracle. 

During the Constitutional Convention, Benjamin Franklin spoke of this providence saying, "In this situation of this assembly, groping, as it were, in the dark to find political truth, and scarce able to distinguish it when presented to us, how has it happened, sir, that we have not hitherto once thought of humbly applying to the Father of Lights to illuminate our understandings? 

In the beginning of the contest with Britain when we were sensible of danger, we had daily prayers in this room for the Divine Protection. Our prayers, sir, were heard, and they were graciously answered. All of us who were engaged in the struggle must have observed frequent instances of a superintending Providence in our favor…. And have we now forgotten that powerful Friend? Or do we imagine we no longer need His assistance? 

I have lived, sir, a long time; and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth: that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid? We have been assured, sir, in the Sacred Writings that except the Lord build the House, they labor in vain that build it. I firmly believe this; and I also believe that without His concurring aid, we shall succeed in this political building no better than the builders of Babel…and we ourselves shall become a reproach and a byword down to future ages.I therefore beg leave to move, that henceforth prayers imploring the assistance of Heaven, and its blessings on our deliberations, be held in this assembly every morning before we proceed to business, and that one or more of the clergy of the city be requested to officiate in that service. - Benjamin Franklin on June 28, 1787.

It is true, we do read about miracles in the Bibles, and no doubt there have been accuracies throughout history that would constitute a miracle. However, the Biblical accounts as well as historical accounts are rare. There were only three periods during Biblical times when miracles were recorded in frequency, outside that they were very rare. The Biblical miracles recorded would have been testable and undeniable, and any true miracle today would be also. 

The atheist in his question correctly points out the misconception many people have concerning miracles, which has largely been promoted by Christian TV and is not in line with historical Christian teaching. As a result, everything that appears to be an answer to pray is considered a miracle, anything that works out in our favor is a miracle. This is the results when the true doctrine of providence is not taught or is ignored in Christian churches.

In Matthew 17 there is an interesting account recorded. 

    24, And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Does not your master pay tribute?
    25, He said, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What think you, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers?
    26, Peter said to him, Of strangers. Jesus said to him, Then are the children free.
    27, Notwithstanding, lest we should offend them, go you to the sea, and cast an hook, and take up the fish that first comes up; and when you have opened his mouth, you shall find a piece of money: that take, and give to them for me and you. KJV

A miracle? I wonder how many people have sense caught a fish with something in its mouth? There is no record of God miraculously creating a coin, a fish, or anything. Yet, in the natural course of things someone lost a coin in the water, a fish seeing the shining coin flickering in the water hit it like a lore. The coin being lodged in the fishes mouth and Peter later casting a hook and catching that fish. All of this being orchestrated by God's divine providence using the natural course of events. There is no testable way to verify such an event, it just happened. However, it did not happen outside God's providence, had Jesus not directed our attention to the event prior to the catching of the fish, it would have been no more of an event than what has happened numerous times since. 

For example, you wouldn't, expect to find a century old manuscript inside a cod. Yet that is exactly what happened the summer of 1626 in a local market. I doubt that many other manuscripts have made it to the press after being found in a fish, but the story must have been a tremendous boost to sales, though it did little good for the author, thought to have been John Frith, because he had been locked up in a Tower before being burned as a heretic at Smithfield in 1533. I would imagine there must have been a fierce debate about how three religious tracts ended up inside a fish and how long they had been there, but given that a teenage cod was the case in play, the manuscript couldn't have been there very long. Just one of life’s little conundrums, or God's providence? Story from the Fishing Museum.

God bless,

David