Chapter 13
HIS EVIDENCE FOR YOUR FAITH
The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands.
PSALM 19:1 NIV
120 What Is Faith?
To have faith in something means you believe in and trust it. Faith is only as good as the trustworthiness of its object.
If you trust friends to repay a small loan but they don’t, their failure won’t ruin you. On the other hand, if you trust a wooden barrel to protect you during a plunge over Niagara Falls, you’ll be disappointed to death. The barrel isn’t worthy of your trust.
The same is true if you trust in the untrustworthy object of your virtuous deeds to make yourself right with God. Biblical faith is not about its quantity, but its resting place—in God who is trustworthy.
Actions demonstrate biblical faith. Robert Chesebrough believed in the Vaseline he invented.
He injured himself repeatedly and applied it to demonstrate its healing properties. People could see his healed wounds and realize Vaseline’s value and how much he trusted it.
Those with faith in God demonstrate it by how they live. Most people (and all demons!) believe God exists (James 2:19). Like demons, few possess a “faith” that affects how they live. That’s not biblical faith.
Faith is more than agreeing that the Bible is true, Jesus is God’s Son, and He died on the cross for the sins of the world. True believers prove they love God by trusting His character and promises and doing what He says.
Meanwhile, God transforms their “ugly duckling” characters into increasingly beautiful “swans.” Only obedient faith pleases God (Hebrews 11:6).
Biblical faith includes trusting your eternal destiny to Jesus alone and His finished work on the cross. You depend upon His resources to meet everyday problems.
He’s the same yesterday, today, and forever (Hebrews 13:8). Circumstances change. He doesn’t. Faith trusts in and acts on God’s character and promises as a way of life.
When you squeeze the tube of faith, what comes out? (See Galatians 5:6). How will you know your faith is growing? Read Romans 3.
121 Why I Believe in the Resurrection
Without Jesus’ resurrection, Christianity would collapse. The church’s existence makes no sense. It began only after His resurrection.
Beginning a religion based on a resurrected George Washington would be foolish. It is easily disprovable. Jesus’ tomb was empty. No one could find His dead body.
Jesus’ resurrection is why Sunday is the Christian day of worship. The first Christians were all Jews. For them, Saturday, not Sunday, was special. His resurrection triggered the shift.
The New Testament contains six independent testimonies of the resurrection. Three are by eyewitnesses (Matthew, John, and Peter).
The Apostle Paul’s references to it suggest it was an accepted fact in the 50s and 60s A.D. No evidence suggests these six writers made it all up.
The earliest explanation of the resurrection was that Jesus’ disciples stole the body. They would have gained absolutely nothing by making up a resurrection story.
They lost their lives by sticking with it. People don’t die for telling a lie they know is a lie.
The disciples utterly believed in the resurrection. It transformed them from cowardly hiders into bold preachers.
Jewish or Roman authorities didn’t move Jesus’ body. They would’ve produced it to squash the preaching that Jesus had risen. They didn’t because they couldn’t.
The women who first saw the empty tomb didn’t go to the wrong tomb. Joseph of Arimathea knew the right tomb (his). He would’ve corrected any such mistake.
Jesus didn’t somehow recover from His wounds in the tomb. If He had, He’d have been a world-class liar. He encouraged His followers to believe in and preach His resurrection.
Jesus’ followers claimed to see Him alive from the dead. They didn’t hallucinate. None of them expected Him to resurrect. Jesus had to convince them He had risen from the dead.
Jesus is alive to change your life today. He has changed mine! He can do the same for you!
How does the evidence for the resurrection strengthen your faith?
Read Romans 4.
122 Is the Resurrection Real?
“You’ve been duped,” a critic commented on my blog, “Why I Believe in the Resurrection.” His second comment was more caustic: “It certainly is not because you witnessed Jesus stepping out of the tomb or because you know what you’re even talking about.” Is the resurrection real?
“Why I Believe in the Resurrection” highlighted only the beginning of the evidence for Jesus’ resurrection from the dead. My response back to the critic follows:
“[My belief in the resurrection] is based on the testimony of dependable witnesses, the same as evidence is examined in our law courts today. See Evidence That Demands a Verdict by Josh McDowell and Sean McDowell.
John Singleton Copley, one of the greatest legal minds in British history said, ‘I know pretty well what evidence is, and I tell you, such evidence as that for the resurrection has never broken down yet.’ I don’t have to see John Wilkes Booth shoot Abraham Lincoln to know it happened.”
It doesn’t make sense to accept only things my eyes have seen. Imagine how the coronavirus would spread if everyone behaved as usual until they met their first victim!
If I only believed what I have witnessed, I wouldn’t accept that George Washington was the first President of the United States or that The Philippine Islands exist. I’ve never seen Washington or the Islands.
Much of what you believe is based on the testimony of dependable witnesses. It’s the same in the Christian faith.
According to tradition, all but one of Jesus’ disciples died because they preached that Jesus had risen from the dead. People don’t die for a lie they know is a lie. By far the best explanation of their martyrs’ deaths is that they saw Jesus risen from the dead and never got over it!
The Apostle Paul writes: “For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools” (Romans 1:21–22 NIV).
Is the fool the one who believes in Jesus’ resurrection or denies it? Why? Read Romans 5.
123 Faith and Scientific Proof
You don’t need to prove God exists and the Christian faith is valid scientifically. The scientific method is the wrong tool. It’s like trying to tighten a screw with a hammer or measure barometric pressure with a thermometer.
The scientific method requires repeatability. Multiple tests must demonstrate that distilled water boils at 100 degrees centigrade at sea level. If someone else does the same tests tomorrow, the results should be the same.
Yet, most human experience isn’t repeatable. Using the scientific method, I can’t prove I ate Cheerios for breakfast forty-five days ago.
I can’t prove where I was born. I can’t prove I’m a fraternal twin and born second.
Accurate historical accounts depend on the testimonies of dependable witnesses, not on the scientific method. Don’t conclude, however, that science and Christianity are bitter rivals.
Evidence for God surrounds us. Wernher von Braun said, “For me, the idea of a creation is not conceivable without invoking the necessity of design. One can’t be exposed to the law and order of the universe without concluding that there must be design and purpose behind it all.”1
He also said, “My experiences with science led me to God. They challenge science to prove the existence of God. But must we really light a candle to see the sun?”2
“The heavens declare the glory of God;
the skies proclaim the work of his hands.
Day after day they pour forth speech;
night after night they reveal knowledge.
They have no speech, they use no words;
no sound is heard from them.
Yet their voice goes out into all the earth,
their words to the ends of the world” (Psalm 119:1–4 NIV).
“The fool [that is, one who is morally deficient] says in his heart, ‘There is no God’” (Psalm 14:1 NIV, my explanation in brackets).
An all-powerful God’s existence is obvious to all who don’t stubbornly refuse to see it.
Do you see evidence of God from the design of the universe? How so?
Read Romans 6.
124 Creation and Evolution (1)
Are creation and evolution mutually exclusive? The short answer is, “Not necessarily,” but unwarranted assumptions often dominate both sides.
Christians shouldn’t assume Genesis explains creation with scientific precision. That wasn’t its purpose.
For example, “kind” in Genesis doesn’t correspond to what scientists define as species. Christians shouldn’t assume God created all species just as they are now.
Genesis groups all plants into just two categories—seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in them (Genesis 1:11). Scientists estimate there are about 400,000 species of flowering plants.1
Scientists know how many things work, but not why they work that way. By contrast, Christians know why God spoke the heavens and the earth into existence (He wanted a relationship with us). But they don’t know the details of how He did it.
As long as Christians receive God’s word as authoritative, even though their understanding of parts of it may vary, they’re on solid ground.
Frequently, scientists come to science with atheistic assumptions. They assume they don’t need God to explain why the universe exists. They reject the possibility of miracles.
They assume the universe is a closed system of cause and effect. Nothing can interfere. These are all unprovable. They are as unprovable as recreating the Mona Lisa using unlimited explosions in a paint factory.
Genesis 1:12 doesn’t explain how the earth produced vegetation or how the animals appeared. A wise, good, and powerful God made the earth for people to enjoy and manage carefully and responsibly.
Scientists should use their God-given intelligence to help people fully enjoy His creation and manage its resources wisely.
Genesis’s description of creation doesn’t require that it took place during six twenty-four-hour days. Christian interpreters have understood these six days in various ways.
As 24-hour periods. As a sequence of geological ages where each day corresponds to a geological age. As workdays for God. As a literary tool representing the week of creation as if it were a six-day period even though it wasn’t.
Each of these can be squared with Exodus 20:11 (NIV), “For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.” Day means what it means to them in Genesis 1.
Was creation in 4004 BC as Archbishop Ussher calculated based on the genealogies in Genesis? Not necessarily.
The Hebrew words translated as “father” and “son” don’t have a fixed meaning. They can refer to distant ancestors and descendants, respectively.
That’s why we can’t use the genealogies in Genesis to calculate the passing of time. When we eliminate unwarranted assumptions, there’s far less conflict between Genesis and science than people imagine.
Do you see science as more of a blessing or a threat? Why? Read Romans 7.
125 Creation and Evolution (2)
Can you believe in divine creation, the authority of the Bible, and evolution? Many believers and unbelievers think that’s like mixing oil and water.
Ironically, Christians trust scientific advances for their physical ailments and technological advances to make life easier. But many reject what science says about the beginning of life on earth.
Others, however, have a faith that embraces both science and Christianity. They think God uses evolution as an instrument in the development of life on earth.
Pastor Tim Keller believed that what current science tells us about evolution produces at least three challenges for Bible-believing Christians.1
First, believers who embrace evolution can’t take Genesis 1 literally.
Second, evolutionists such as Richard Dawkins expand the evolutionary biological process into an all-encompassing atheistic worldview. They use it to explain the meaning and purpose of life on earth and why humans behave as they do.
Third, not taking Adam and Eve as historical figures threatens the authority of Romans 5 and 1 Corinthians 15. Both teach that human sinfulness traces back to humanity’s connection with Adam.
Consider the first challenge. Not taking Genesis 1 literally doesn’t mean you can’t take any of the Bible literally. You treat the Bible as authoritative best when you understand the biblical authors as they intended.
For example, you mustn’t take metaphorical language literally. Jesus calls Himself the gate and invites you to enter through Him. He promises you’ll find pasture. Of course, this kind of gate has no hinges, and you won’t eat grass (John 10:9). By contrast, Luke 1 assures you that Luke wants you to take his carefully researched account of events literally.
There’s no consensus among Christians on how the biblical author wanted you to understand Genesis 1. That chapter is neither purely prose nor purely poetry.
It’s a mixture of the two. It repeats various statements, for example, “Let there be” and “It was so.” That’s outside the scope of merely telling you exactly what happened.
You can refer to Keller’s paper for other aspects of Genesis 1 that aren’t typical of prose writing. There’s convincing evidence that the author of Genesis 1 didn’t want you to take him literally. The creative events described there aren’t in logical order. In Genesis 2:5 they are.
Keller concludes Genesis 1 doesn’t teach that creation necessarily happened in six 24-hour days. It doesn’t say God did it through evolution either.
God doesn’t explain how He did it. It raises the possibility that the earth could be old.
Do you believe in a young or old earth? Why? Read Romans 8.
126 Creation and Evolution (3)
Evolution’s process of natural selection doesn’t and can’t explain everything about human nature. One can believe in God’s use of evolution in creation without swallowing the teaching that natural selection eliminates any need for God to explain the world. That directly contradicts biblical faith.
Belief in evolution as a biological process doesn’t exclude belief in a literal Adam and Eve and their historical fall into sin. Paul believes that Adam and Eve were historical figures (Romans 5:12ff).
Those who believe in the authority of the Bible must agree. If Adam is not a literal person, Paul’s teaching makes no sense— “For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive” (1 Corinthians 15:21–22 NIV).
Derek Kidner suggests that in the evolutionary process, at a point in time, God chose one man. He uniquely endowed him with His own image. That elevated him to a higher plane of life. The special creation of Eve followed that event. God placed these two in Eden as representatives of the whole human race.
Others believe that evolution produced Adam and Eve and were also the recipients of God’s image.
Still, others believe that God uses evolution to develop life on earth. But He created Adam and Eve through a special act with no common ancestry with other animals.
Denis Alexander summarizes five ways people understand Genesis 2–3:
-
It could be a parable about the sinfulness of all human beings.
-
It could be a figure of a group of early human beings.
-
It could be that Adam and Eve were historical figures who came about through evolutionary biological processes.
-
It could be old earth creationism.
-
It could also be young earth creationism.1
None of these perfectly explains all the data. We must humbly, tentatively hold our position. We must agree to disagree cordially with those who believe the Scriptures are authoritative but interpret them differently than we do.
“The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may follow all the words of this law” (Deuteronomy 29:29 NIV).
What connection do you see, if any, between the biblical account of creation and the theory of evolution? Read Romans 9.
127 Is the Bible Reliable? (1)
The Bible claims to be God-breathed and useful for learning the truth (2 Timothy 3:16). It’ll last forever (Isaiah 40:8). It’s living, active, penetrating, and it judges (Hebrews 4:12). It gives spiritual life to the spiritually dead (1 Peter 1:23).
Some think the Bible is merely a human book. Anyone could claim to speak for God. How do we know people didn’t just make things up and write them down?
A very severe Old Testament test weeded out impostors. If a “prophet’s” prediction didn’t come true, the Jews killed that prophet (Deuteronomy 18:20).
God worked through human writers to produce the best-selling book ever written. God moved the men who held the pens. He communicated His truth through the unique style and personality of each writer.
Do you think most people prefer to live under the authority of the Bible or decide how to live their lives? Duh!
Do you think that might be why people are so committed to undermining its authority? The Bible describes life as it is. Human pride makes us think we see clearly when we’re spiritually blind.
You are feeling well when you go to the doctor for a check-up. You expect a good report. You don’t get it.
After detecting something suspicious, the doctor does a biopsy and sends it to the lab. He calls seven days later and informs you of a life-threatening melanoma.
You must have it removed soon. Is it wise to put more confidence in feeling well than in the doctor’s diagnosis? God’s word, like a biopsy, reveals the spiritual cancer of the inner person.
We naturally think our inner stuff is “sugar and spice and everything nice.” God’s word describes the core of our being as deceitful above all things and beyond cure (Jeremiah 17:9).
Is it wise to trust feeling okay rather than in the Doctor’s diagnosis? Why? Read Romans 10.
128 Is the Bible Reliable? (2)
God isn’t like a safe, nonjudgmental, all-loving Grandfather. He is kind, but not safe to trifle with.
On one hand, John 3:16 records that God loves people enough to sacrifice His Son’s life to save them. On the other hand, Hebrews 10:31 ( NIV) says, “It’s a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.” This verse describes the fate of those who haven’t accepted God’s offer of forgiveness.
Is it wise to put more confidence in feeling well than in the “Doctor’s” diagnosis? Accurate understandings of God’s nature, promises, and expectations are important.
The Old Testament has thirty-nine books. Moses wrote the first five more than 3,000 years ago. We don’t know all the human authors.
God inspired and protected the writing of these books. He superintended their collection. The human authors wrote them in Hebrew or Aramaic, mostly Hebrew.
Malachi wrote the last one about 430 B.C. The Old Testament, therefore, was written and collected over about 1,000 years.
The New Testament includes twenty-seven books. Apostles or men closely connected with them wrote the original documents in Greek.
The first books written were James and Galatians about A. D. 50. The last was Revelation about A. D. 95. Human authors wrote the New Testament over about 45 years.
They wrote them on perishable materials. Therefore, we have only copies of copies.
Experts date the earliest surviving New Testament fragment about A. D. 130.1 The Bodmer Library in Geneva, Switzerland, has copies from the late 100s and early 200s.2
Over the centuries people copied and recopied the books of the Bible. That doesn’t mean they’re error-laden and undependable.
Two tests measure the reliability of a copy of ancient writing. The shorter the time between the original and the oldest existing copy the less chance for error. The number of copies is also important.
Multiple copies help experts detect and eliminate copying errors. Based on these two tests, the New Testament is far more dependable than any other ancient writing.3
For other ancient works, 900–1400 years separate the originals and the oldest existing manuscripts. Only a few hundred years separate the originals and the oldest copies of the New Testament.
Instead of the usual 10–15 manuscripts of ancient classics, over 5,000 manuscripts contain at least part of the New Testament.4
If you discard the Bible on the trash heap as too error-laden to trust, you must deposit all other ancient literature there as well.
How does the Bible’s passing these two reliability tests with excellence make you feel? Read Romans 11.
129 Is the Bible Reliable? (3)
The Bible is a unified book. It’s unique. Although forty authors wrote it over 1500 years, it’s a single book.
The door between the two testaments is open. Genesis begins with the creation of heaven and earth. Revelation ends with the creation of the new heavens and new earth.
In the New Testament Christ fulfills the Old Testament roles performed by the prophet, priest, and king. His New Testament crucifixion eliminated the necessity of the repeated sacrifices described in the Old Testament.
His giving of the Holy Spirit fulfills the prophet’s prediction. God would write His law on the hearts of His people (Jeremiah 31:31–34).
The Bible foretells the future. Christ fulfilled over 350 Old Testament prophecies (http://www.bibleprobe.com/300great.htm).
For example, He’d be born in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2 and Matthew 2:1–6). God would raise Him from the grave (Psalm 16:10, Matthew 28:10).
Jesus held a lofty view of the authority of the Old Testament. In Matthew 22:29 (NIV) He said, “You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God.
In John 10:35 (NIV) He said, “… the Scripture cannot be broken….” In Matthew 5:17–18, He said that He didn’t come to abolish the Law or the Prophets [the Old Testament] but to fulfill them. He said that the smallest letter or part of a letter wouldn’t disappear from the Law until everything was fulfilled.
If Jesus is God, as He claimed, His opinions about the Scriptures are important. His identity rests on a historical event. He’s declared to be the Son of God by His resurrection from the dead (Romans 1:4).
Lord Darling, a former Chief Justice of England, brought a legal perspective to the evidence for the resurrection. He concluded, “There exists such overwhelming evidence, positive and negative, factual and circumstantial, that no intelligent jury in the world could fail to bring in a verdict that the resurrection story is true.” 1
Jesus’ followers claimed He talked with them after He’d risen from the dead (Acts 1:3). Were they all liars and fools? Tradition holds that enemies of the faith killed all Jesus’ disciples except John for preaching a resurrected Christ.
Would you die for what you know is a lie? Would they? What, if anything, would Jesus’ disciples gain from inventing and then sticking to a resurrection story?
If Jesus rose from the dead and believed the Old Testament was God’s Word, how does that influence your opinion about the Scriptures?
Read Romans 12.
130 Is the Bible Reliable? (4)
Some portions of the Bible are puzzling. How do you treat them? Bishop H. C. G. Moule said he reverently trusted the Scriptures despite the difficulties because Christ trusted the Bible.1
Time and further study often eventually explain troublesome passages. Treat difficult biblical passages like a fish with bones.
Don’t choke on them! Just pick the meat away from them! Someday the “bones” might be as nourishing as the rest. This principle, that I don’t have to understand now everything the Bible says, helps me deal with difficult passages.
Why can’t former U. S. President Bill Clinton get away with a claim that he had a completely unblemished record? Many living people remember his moral failures.
Matthew, Mark, and Luke wrote their Gospels while people still lived who had witnessed the things Jesus said and did. That included those who were bitter enemies of the faith.
They would have certainly questioned any false or exaggerated statements. What does the absence of any such challenge suggest?
The Bible is an immensely profitable book. It equips believers for every good work. It’s an authority on what to believe and how to live.
It teaches that loving is better than hating. Forgiving is better than retaliating. It emphasizes giving more than receiving. Living in harmony with its teaching produces deep satisfaction and fulfillment.
Former British Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin said, “The Bible is a high explosive. But it works in strange ways and no living man can tell or know how that book, in its journey through the world, has startled the individual soul in ten thousand different places into a new life, a new world, a new belief, a new conception, a new faith.”2
How do you explain the vast life-changing influence of the Bible throughout history? Read Romans 13.
131 Shells of Remembrance
As shells go, they’re nothing special. They’re underwhelmingly ordinary. As motivational reminders, they’re overwhelmingly extraordinary. They rest on my dresser.
They remind me of a day at a South Carolina discipleship conference near the seashore. God showed up there in an unexpected way. He encouraged me with the nuclear fuel of hope.
I won’t detail the events of that day. I’ll only say that they’re the ultimate cause of my present ministry in retirement.
God has sporadically punctuated my life in unexpected ways. I’m guessing you can say the same. Sometimes years pass between His supernatural commas, periods, or exclamation marks.
The children of Israel spent 40 years wandering in the desert. God fed them with manna. He kept their clothes from wearing out and their feet from swelling (Deuteronomy 8:3–4).
These daily desert miracles became ho-hum. God noticed. The Israelites crossed the Jordan River at flood stage on dry ground. God told them to carry twelve stones from the riverbed to make a memorial.
It was to remind them of His supernatural intervention (Joshua 4). He did this “so that all the peoples of the earth might know that the hand of the LORD is powerful and so that you might always fear the LORD your God” (Joshua 4:24 NIV).
You don’t have stones piled up in your living room. I doubt that you have seashells on top of your dresser.
I suggest, however, that you reflect on ways and times God has intervened in your life. Select your own “shells of remembrance” so you don’t forget them.
What “shells of remembrance” can remind you how God has intervened in your life? Read Romans 14.