Prove It

For several years I had a coworker that repeatedly asked me to "Prove it." Prove Christianity is true was his daily chant. In response, I would ask him as to what standard I had to meet in order to "prove it"? To which he responded with nothing. The floating standards or impossible standards of unbelievers is a difficult challenge.

Recently, Christian apologist, James White, debated atheist, Dan Barker, over whether or not the Triune God Lives. At one point in the debate Barker raised the typical argument that if God wants us to believe in Him, why doesn't He just reveal Himself in a way that science can verify His existence. In fact, he claims to have greater wisdom than the God of Christianity in that he would have done things better. You can get the debate here. (You may also get Doug Wilson's debate with Dan over the same topic for free here.)

Over the next couple of posts I'd like to attempt to answer that question from a different perspective than in ways I have answered it in times past.

Race Card Once Again

I am certain by now everybody has heard former President Carter's statement about racism. Here is his quote:

"I think an overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward President Barack Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man, that he's African American. I live in the South, and I've seen the South come a long way and I've seen the rest of the country that shared the South's attitude toward minority groups at that time ... and I think it's bubbled up to the surface, because of a belief among many white people, not just in the South but around the country, that African-Americans are not qualified to lead this great country."

Two things need to be said about this ridiculous blabbering. First, polls show that most Americans like Barak Obama personally. They may not like his policies, but they like him. So with what evidence does Carter make this claim?

Carter sees animosity must be on a fundamental level racism. There is nothing in a Liberal's mind that allows him to see another explanation. The fact that millions of people are telling us exactly why they oppose President Obama , and the fact that those reasons are political and Constitutional, does not seem to ever cross his mind.

If you remember my own experience on this Blog with one commenter about homosexuality. The fact that I disagreed, no matter what my reasons were, makes me a homophobe. Why is that? Because the Political Left believes we must reason and think with their worldview and presuppositions. They get to define and frame the debate because they say so.

So here we have millions of Americans explaining in great detail about why President Obama's policies are unconstitutional. Just doing so in the mind of the Left is racism. Never mind that many Americans opposed George Bush with far more extreme hatred.

Perhaps some humor would be better.

Time To Repeal 17th Amendment?

A Pastor friend of mine pointed me to this CNN interview with Al, a teabagger.



At about 2:20 into the interview, Al makes a statement that I think is easily overlooked. He mentions that Senators no longer represent their respective States but instead serve special interests.

For all of the hot air John McCain makes about the corruption of congress by special interest groups, I would like to see how he would object to Al's arguments. Perhaps we need a public debate once again on this issue.

Only One?

I didn't watch the President's speech last night. I am just not interested in watching a man speak to a joint session of congress in order to pass a bill. The whole thing is completely arrogant. YahooNews stated,

"The speech galvanized support along the Democratic caucus across the political spectrum, from the progressive caucus to the Blue Dogs, and everybody left determined to get something done this year..."

Here is one problem with this whole thing. The Republicans had no ability to stop this thing. The Democrats continually keep blaming the Republicans when they were in the super majority (until Teddy's death).

So my opinion is that if this is sooooo necessary, just pass it without Republican support. The truth is, if this passes, Democrats will need major cover because as the President admitted in an answer to a skull full of mush,

What happened is that back in the 1940s and fifties, a lot of -- most of the wealthy countries around the world decided to set up health care systems that covered everybody. The United States, for a number of different reasons, organized their health care around employer-based health insurance. What happened was is that the majority of Americans still have health insurance through their job and it's, you know, most of them are happy with it, but a lot of people fall through the cracks.

Yuppers. We are happy with what we have. The President is lying when he says I will get to keep my health insurance. We have him on video lying about this whole thing.

Since it is unnecessary to do any of this, since there are better ways of reforming the problems in our system, since the President's own stimulus would pay for citizens that are not covered, we know there is no reason to overthrow our current system. So why do it? If you have read the Constitution and know why it was written, you know what the answer is.

The night's defining moment — which Democrats hope to transform into a turning point – came when Rep. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.) shouted "You lie!" as Obama claimed his plan wouldn't offer free care to illegal immigrants.

So what if one Republican is painted as being an idiot for saying something. The fact that all of the other Republicans said nothing and seem completely unaware of the fact that we are in the midst of a civil war over whether or not the Constitution will be the law of the land is not being missed by their constituents.

Believe me when I say that if there were another party that held to the Constitution as being the law of the land, conservatives would abandon the Republican party today. If more Republicans don't speak up and call the President what he is, then to quote George Lucas back to himself, "Liberty dies with thunderous applause."

So in conclusion, the "night's defining moment" should have been that a hundred Republicans chanted, "You lie!" It is a shame there was only one.

Gospel Is Not My Testimony

On my drive back from my dental appointment in Garden City, I turned on radio and managed to pick a Christian radio station playing a sermon. During this sermon the preacher said something that totally confuses the law/Gospel categories. He basically stated that Christians need to live righteous lives because we may be the only Gospel our unbelieving neighbors ever see.

I am not certain how Christian leaders come to confuse their terminology or theology so easily. My life is not the Gospel in way, shape, matter or form. Now I realize that Christian ministers want their people to live godly for obvious reasons. Yet confusing the Gospel with my personal testimony is to confuse my life with Christ's. Apparently, others have noticed as well.

Read here an editorial at WorldMag.com from Mickey Mclean as he interacts with the White Horse Inn program.

Motorcycling In Western Kansas

Steven takes a break from riding.


Rachel's pictures were out of focus except for the KDX. I wonder if Kawasaki would like this for advertising.


Steven took some fun pics. They look much cooler than the reality they depict.


If you notice, there is plenty of 2-cycle smoke coming out the exhaust. I just love burning oil. Hopefully it won't become illegal anytime soon. Until then, I'll just keep driving the Leftys crazy.

Waldron's Any Momentness vs Immanence

One other aspect to Jesus' Second Coming that I'd like to address is the timing. Jesus said in Matthew 24,

⁴²"Therefore keep watch, because you do not know on what day your Lord will come. ⁴³But understand this: If the owner of the house had known at what time of night the thief was coming, he would have kept watch and would not have let his house be broken into. ⁴⁴So you also must be ready, because the Son of Man will come at an hour when you do not expect him.

The Christian life is often full of tensions. The Christian must grow in maturity in handling the different teachings of the Scriptures. The Second Coming and its timing is no exception.

The Christian believes in what has been called the immanence of Christ's return. All Christians agree that Christ will come at a time that is unexpected, and therefore, we are to be vigilant and to keep watch. However, for many Dispensationalists, the term immanence has been confused with what Sam Waldron calls, "at any momentness".

In one of Waldron's many internet lectures on the subject, he illustrates the meaning of the example from Matthew's Gospel in a personal anecdote. Going from my short term memory, Waldron explained how he had a friend stuck in an airport due to the fact that a part on the engine broke. Since repairs were needed to be made and the part was being fetched from quite a distance away, it was told to the people waiting to board the plane that there would be a delay in the schedule of their flight. Therefore boarding would be delayed.

It was guessed that the retrieval of the part would probably be a few hours plus the time to fix the part. So no one really knew how long the delay would be. However, the delay was going late into the night. So Waldron's friend felt he had to stay awake, not because the plane could be fixed at any moment, but because he did not want to be asleep when the delay ended and the plane was ready to be boarded. In other words, the friend needed to stay awake as to not miss the flight. This was not because the flight was going to leave at any moment, but because he needed to be alert when the delay came to an end.

Jesus tells us that there will be a delay in His coming again, and He tells us a few reasons why. First, we read in Matthew 24 text that the Gospel must go into all the nations and people groups.

This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all the nations, and then the end will come.

Another reason may be found in Jesus' parable of the wheat and tares.

"The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a man who sowed good seed in his field. But while his men were sleeping, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went away. But when the wheat sprouted and bore grain, then the tares became evident also. The slaves of the landowner came and said to him, 'Sir, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then does it have tares?' And he said to them, 'An enemy has done this!' The slaves *said to him, 'Do you want us, then, to go and gather them up?' But he *said, 'No; for while you are gathering up the tares, you may uproot the wheat with them. Allow both to grow together until the harvest; and in the time of the harvest I will say to the reapers, "First gather up the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them up; but gather the wheat into my barn.'"

God has His purposes in allowing both the righteous and the unrighteous to grow up together until the end of the age. We see this culminating between the Man of Lawlessness of 2 Thessalonians and Christ's appearance also at the end of the age.

Now we request you, brethren, with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, that you not be quickly shaken from your composure or be disturbed either by a spirit or a message or a letter as if from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, who opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God. Do you not remember that while I was still with you, I was telling you these things? And you know what restrains him now, so that in his time he will be revealed. For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only he who now restrains will do so until he is taken out of the way. Then that lawless one will be revealed whom the Lord will slay with the breath of His mouth and bring to an end by the appearance of His coming;

The Shepherd has chosen to use means to find His sheep and is not wanting any of them to perish. According to the Apostle Peter, God is not wanting any of us to perish. So He is patient with us. Aren't we glad He is.

In conclusion, I believe Waldron is right. There is a delay in Christ's coming. There is much work to be done. There are far too many family groups that have never heard the Gospel. Yet we must remain alert for this Blessed Hope. Paul tells us in 1 Thessalonians 5,

But you, brethren, are not in darkness, that the day would overtake you like a thief; for you are all sons of light and sons of day. We are not of night nor of darkness; so then let us not sleep as others do, but let us be alert and sober. For those who sleep do their sleeping at night, and those who get drunk get drunk at night. But since we are of the day, let us be sober, having put on the breastplate of faith and love, and as a helmet, the hope of salvation. For God has not destined us for wrath, but for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ, who died for us, so that whether we are awake or asleep, we will live together with Him. Therefore encourage one another and build up one another, just as you also are doing.

Let us live as children of the day, who are sober and vigilant so that the great day will not overtake us by surprise.

Stars Falling In Your Backyard

Jesus said in Matthew 24:29,

Immediately after the distress of those days
'the sun will be darkened,
and the moon will not give its light;
the stars will fall from the sky,
and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.

The interpretations of Jesus teaching from the Olivet Discourse vary because of the different approaches to Scripture. The Dispensationalist tends to interpret the Bible literally. This is a good thing. As an Amillenialist, I agree we must allow the grammatical, historical approach to be a guide in our interpretations. However, when it comes to prophecy, we quickly see the radical departure of the two positions.

For the Dispensationalist, the method tends to be to interpret prophecy literally when possible and to treat prophecy as if it is a historical narrative. There is also the approach that has been discussed in other places of interpreting prophecy from one of two perspectives. Do we start with the Old Testament to interpret the New, or do we allow the Apostles to interpret the Old in light of Christ and His work?

As for the above prophecy, the Amillenialist recognizes that prophecy often contains elements within the same verses of dual events being recorded together. In other words, prophecy is not a literal historical narrative, but often contains multiple events written together.

What makes recognizing this interpretive method important is the fact that Jesus predicts events to His Apostles that were to occur in their lifetime as well as at the end of the age. This has caused many headaches for us westerners. How many movies have you watched where a skeptic hears about a prediction that he believes will not happen because in his mind it is just not possible? And then it happens!

The Dispensationalist sees the destruction of Jerusalem being tied to the above cited verse. Since the above cited verse happens at the Second Coming of Christ, the destruction of Jerusalem must also happen right before Christ's coming.

The Amillenialist recognizes that Jesus does predict the destruction of Jerusalem in the generation of the Apostles. History tells us that Jerusalem was destroyed in AD 70. From here we see that there may be a dual fulfillment. That at the end of the age, there may be another greater fulfillment of this teaching. With this framework, the Amillenialist sees that Old Testament types and shadows of an earthly city points to an even greater fulfillment in the church and her enemy, Babylon the Great Harlot.

The Amillenialist does not need to read newspapers to see if the end is about to happen. Verses are often wrenched out of their context to be applied to our modern newspapers. The Bible is not a newspaper.

Every generation must be watchful. For antichrists come in every generation. Even in recent history, Germany's Hitler fulfilled in some respects the Man of Sin. He claimed for himself the role of deity. Christmas carols were sung to him by Germany's children. Prior to Hitler there were many others. Even some of the Protestant Confessions claimed the Pope as the Man of Sin. Yet the end is still to come.

Not only is prophecy not a historical narrative, it also uses symbolic language to describe the future. The literalist may say that God could darken the sun, but are we really going to say "stars" or other suns are going to fall out of the sky on to the earth? Of course not.

Jesus is quoting an Old Testament passage that was used to describe a major catastrophic event in the life of Israel. In the same way, at the Second Coming, the events of history are being described as catastrophic. What makes the Second Coming different from other events is that it will be worldwide in its scope. So although every generation has its own watch for local antichrists, at the end of the age there will be a worldwide man of lawlessness whom Christ destroys by His Coming.

In conclusion, we all must be watchful. The Christian's hope is not in this age, but in Christ. Christ has left us in this age to contend and struggle with the evil of this age. He has left us here to go and make disciples. We do so knowing knowing full well that Jesus sits at the right hand of God, ruling and reigning from David's throne. Knowing that Christ has all authority in heaven and earth, let us be faithful in going about the work He has called us to do.

What's the Point?

The short answer to the title question is, “No. 2012 will not bring the end of the world.”

What's the point? Well, if he doesn't believe that these events do bring the end of the world, then why write this paragraph?

So what will the 2012 disasters accomplish? I believe that God will use these and other End Times judgments to begin putting the Earth back into the condition it was when He gave it to Adam. Remember, Jesus called the Millennium the time of restoration of all things (Matt. 19:28) and Paul said the whole creation has been groaning in anticipation of being liberated from the bondage it was subjected to. (Romans 8:20-21). And at the beginning of the Millennium God will proclaim, “I am making everything new.” (Rev. 21:5)

Here Kelley admits that he believes these events will accomplish putting the Earth back to its original condition. He even calls these events "End Times judgments". He also writes this paragraph following a prophecy from Isaiah 13. So Kelley has switched from a skeptic just looking at dubious pagan myths to one who believes that God is using these so-called scientific events.

Now here is a major difference between Dispensationalists and Amillenarians. Dispensationalism was formed during an era of date setting in the 1800s. Its history is replete with failed end times speculations with the Millerite movement right on down to the present with Hal Lindsy. Now I must say that simply because one is Dispensational does not mean one is a date setter, nor does it mean Amillenarians are immune from date setting. It is just that one need not look very hard to see the link between date setting and Dispensationalism.

For an example of Kelley's hermeneutic he states,

Remember, Jesus called the Millennium the time of restoration of all things (Matt. 19:28)

He has also stated in another place that he believes in the literal, grammatical and historical approach to interpreting the Bible. Yet could anyone please tell me where in the verse cited above that Jesus says anything about the Millenium?

This is simply not the case. In Jesus' eschatology, there are only two ages. The one in which we currently live and the one to come. Jesus never speaks of an intermediate age of a thousand years. Kelley is doing what so many Dispensationalists do. He is assuming an interpretation of Revelation 20 and Daniel 9, and then forcing that assumption back into Jesus' words.

Allow me to offer some examples of Jesus' teaching on the "two-age model".

In Luke 20,

Jesus replied, "The people of this age marry and are given in marriage. But those who are considered worthy of taking part in that age and in the resurrection from the dead will neither marry nor be given in marriage, and they can no longer die; for they are like the angels. They are God's children, since they are children of the resurrection.

There is the age of marriage and the age of the resurrection. Nothing is in between nor is there an overlapping age (unless we look at the now and not yet aspects of the Kingdom).

Jesus explains his parable of the weeds with a two-age model approach.

He answered, "The one who sowed the good seed is the Son of Man. The field is the world, and the good seed stands for the sons of the kingdom. The weeds are the sons of the evil one, and the enemy who sows them is the devil. The harvest is the end of the age, and the harvesters are angels. "As the weeds are pulled up and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of the age.

Notice that during this age, the sower sows seed. It is at the end of this age when the harvest happens and the weeds are permanently pulled out. Nothing in Jesus' words shows any temporary intermediate Millenium.

Because Jesus' teaching on end times is so often misunderstood, many have been looking at Scripture from an improper perspective. In my next post, we will look at Jesus' teaching of the signs of the end of the age from Matthew 24.

Planet X Is Coming?

Some weeks ago a friend of mine began telling me about certain things he had been hearing concerning end times from different teachers. One of the things he mentioned was something about a planet that was going to pass through our solar system, possibly causing many of the prophecies in the book of Revelation to come to pass. This planet was referred to as Planet X.

Now I have been getting an email that is being circulated by a friend which mentions this Planet X and also the Mayan calendar ending in 2012. This certainly cannot be a mere coincidence. Every few years, Christians get worked up about end times due to certain political and/or other cultural factors.

This circulated email is a Blog post written by Jack Kelley (read here) forwarded by John Terry, Director of the Revelation Files. On the RevelationFiles website, the author states one of its purposes,

The events foretold in the Bible are coming to pass before our very eyes, and it is an exciting time to be alive. Reading the newspaper or watching global events on the news time and again reveals another piece of the prophecy "puzzle" being put into place. But so much is happening, how do you keep track of it all?

At The Revelation Files, we gather news from around the globe that seems to be of prophetic significance, as well as articles of interest to those of the Christian faith. We also share teachings and insights from many Bible prophecy teachers and scholars. Most people see prophecy only in the context of predicting the future, but prophecy can also serve to speak as a "thus saith the Lord" to an individual or the Body of Christ. To prophecy literally means "to speak a truth".

Over the next few posts, I would like to interact with my Dispensational friends from an Amillenial perspective. When Christians are able to cite from sources that are questionable at best, and then think that these sources somehow buttress Christ's teaching, I think it is a little time for discernment.

For instance, after spending several paragraphs explaining Planet X and the Mayan Calendar issues, Kelley concludes as to the importance of this information to date setting.

What’s The Point?

The short answer to the title question is, “No. 2012 will not bring the end of the world.” But without attempting to tie these predicted events to specific prophecies, I think it’s interesting to see how similar the Biblical descriptions of end times judgments are to the scientific view of possible coming events.

This is the problem when "we gather news from around the globe that seems to be of prophetic significance". We end up interpreting the Bible through what has been called "newpaper theology".

Although, as a Dispensationalist, Kelley claims to "subscribe to a literal, historical, grammatical interpretation of scripture", there is nothing in his interpretation throughout the Blog post that even follows that methodology at all. And since in the end, Kelley concludes there really is no point in linking these things together, why go to all of the trouble? The truth is, end times speculation always abounds, especially among folks whose eschatology is linked to newspaper theology/eschatology.

So yes, as an Amillenailist I agree with my Dispensational brothers that we must watch and pray for Christ's return. On the other hand, over-emphasizng end times speculations with our newspapers combined with pagan sources of myths will easily cause us to become imbalanced. Remember Y2K anyone?