It Really is This Simple

I fear that many Christians make Christianity far more complicated than they need to make it. Christianity is about Jesus of Nazareth, period. Christianity is about who Jesus is, what he claimed, and ultimately, it is about whether or not he rose from the dead.

Let's take the last one first. Did Jesus rise from the dead after having been crucified? If the answer is no, then Christianity is a total waste of time. This is not simply conjecture, it is what the apostle Paul taught. He wrote, "If Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain. We are even found to be misrepresenting God that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise if it is true that the dead are not raised...if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins...if in this life only we have hoped in (the resurrection of) Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied" (1 Corinthians 15:14-19).

It breaks down like this:
1. If Jesus did not rise from the dead, preaching Jesus is worthless.
2. If Jesus did not rise from the dead, your belief in Jesus is worthless.
3. If Jesus did not rise from the dead, you lie about God when you tell people he did.
4. If Jesus did not rise from the dead, Paul is self-admitted liar.
5. If Jesus did not rise from the dead, Christians are pitiful.

It really is that simple. Christian, if Jesus did not rise from the dead, do something else.

However, if Jesus did rise from the dead, then that is spectacular. People don't just get up from the grave after being dead for three days. And, as Paul goes on to write, "In fact, Christ has been raised from the dead" (1 Cor. 15:20). It is in this resurrection from the dead that Jesus' teachings and and "Christ" title are validated. Again, Paul writes that Jesus was "declared to be the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead" (Romans 1:4).

Technically speaking, crucifixion is not that awesome. Lots and lots of people were crucified in the first century. However, rising from the dead is a marvelous feat to say the least. Since Jesus rose from the dead, it means that he merits an audience. We ought to listen to this man and what he taught because he alone has the answer to death. He is only one to defeat it.

So ask yourself, if you are a Christian. Is this what defines you? Is this what your co-worker would say defines you? Do they know that you do what you do because Jesus conquered death? Do they know that you obey Jesus because you believe him to be both Lord of all Creation, Conqueror of Death, and Savior of Mankind, and that you believe this because he rose from the dead?

Or do they think that you are simply a moralist? They probably know about your "do and don't do" list, but do they have any idea how you got that list? Do you implicitly or explicitly impose that list onto others without speaking of the resurrection of the dead?

What I mean by that is this: When someone advocates a cause or behavior that you know is not pleasing to the Lord, is your first impulse to declare yourself against it, or is your first impulse that you need to speak about Christ's resurrection? Because if you say what you are against wihtout giving the foundation for why you are against it, you are going to hang yourself out to dry at best, and at worst you will become a moralist.

So talk more about the resurrection of Jesus and the fact that he has the power to grant eternal life. Then, having talked about that until you are certain that everyone knows you are obsessed with it, you may then proceed to unpack why you are for or against certain behaviors.

Apologetic Frustration

"In order to know truth, you must pray that God will reveal it to you. In order to know truth, you must read God's word. If you do these two things, sincerely, then God will show you that what I am saying is true. Why don't you pray that God will reveal to you that the Book of Mormon is true, he did for me."

Sounds pretty good right up to the last point, doesn't it? I have faithfully kept my appointments with the LDS missionaries each time they come by since I have been here. I'm on the list, and so each new crew comes by for a visit. Tonight's appointment was the most frustrating yet.

The girls were sweet and gracious. They were not argumentative, nor were they easily ruffled. Though they were certainly not Scripturally knowledgeable, they knew their Mormon theology quite well. After a certain number of visits, I know, generally where to steer the conversation, but tonight that didn't help.

Did you know that the authority to baptize was lost from the death of the apostles until the apostles appeared to Joseph Smith? When I argued the point, I was told that this was the fulfillment of the great "falling away" that Paul predicted to Timothy. Amos had foreseen it as well.

So I turned to the essence and being of God Himself. This proved totally fruitless. They simply insisted that we were the same essence as him, that we were eternal like him, that we had chosen to come here from before the foundation of the world so that we might become more like him, and that the Scripture never contradicted this. Nothing I could muster would satisfy.

Besides, they knew that the Book of Mormon was true because God had told them it was true. And that, in the end, is how we know truth. God tells us through our feelings, and when that happens, no amount of persuasion would change our minds.

We touched on the glory of God, I countered with every Scripture I could think of, but each was cleverly warped to fit into their thinking. The fact that I refused to pray about God revealing to me whether or not the Book of Mormon was true was simply evidence of my hard-heart. I said plainly that the Bible was the source of authority and that it contradicted Joseph Smith. That was met with incredulous looks.

I seriously prefer debate with the Jehovah's Witnesses. Seriously.

So where would you go, dear reader, to demonstrate that we are not of the same essence as God? (It's not enough to say, "There's nothing like God!" They simply respond, "Of course there's nothing like God. He's way ahead of us!") And where would you go to prove that the church never ceased to exist outside of Ephesians 3?

Knockdown Argument

The argument over the sinfulness of man continues in the comments over at The Evangelical Outpost. Matthew Goggins is arguing that man isn't totally depraved. Here's his reasoning:

Although I do think your phrase, "the Christian doctrine of human depravity" is a bit overwrought. The traditional orthodox church would have made reference, instead, to a doctrine of "original sin", a phrase which I believe better conveys the nuances of your views.

But what have I myself been saying about this doctrine?

I'm not saying that you can't find it in the Bible. Of course you can.

And I'm not saying it wasn't a doctrinal pillar of the Christian church for many centuries. Of course it was.

And I wasn't even saying that the doctrine says we are 100% evil, as opposed to 51% evil or whatever percentage you are claiming it to be.

All I was saying is that this particular bit of biblical wisdom is just flat out wrong.

Why?

Because it is.

Follow the link from the previous post to read the rest, if you want to. This reasoning reminds me of why my son now believes he can do anything he wants by inserting, "Because I said so" at the end. Of course, he's two, and we're trying to deal with that.

The End of the World and Apologetics

I meant to post something here yesterday about the gospel and evangelism. But I got busy in a little debate with someone over at Joe Carter's Evangelical Outpost. It all started over a "rapture friendly" theological video. You can view the video here and then scroll down to read our exchange. So, what do you think? Is that evangelism? Did I present the gospel? Or is it apologetics? Or some of all. I'd appreciate your input since I'm apparently gone off the deep end.

Update:So, is this a complement?

Brad,

I respect you for sticking up for your beliefs in a polite and thoughtful way. But the divergence between your good character and the horrible things you claim to believe is just made all the more stark to me by your calm, rational delivery.

The horrible things that I am claiming are that men are sinful and deserving of death and hell. Also, I claim that outside of Jesus Christ there is no salvation.