Tis the Night Before Christmas...

Perhaps it is the caffeine from the Mt. Dew I drank for dinner, since I haven't had one in several weeks, that has me awake at 4:15AM on this Christmas Eve!?! Then again, maybe it is the words of the Lord that I read prior to falling asleep that has stirred my thoughts and emotions...

Several months have passed since I began the "To Live As Christ" bible study written by Beth Moore. The study, which looks at the life of the apostle Paul, has been extremely eye-opening for me in several ways. Last night as I was rereading a portion of the bible study, the RED words in Acts 9:15-16 caught my attention:

"But the Lord said to Ananias, "Go! This man is my chosen instrument to carry my name before the Gentiles and their kings and before the people of Israel. I will show him how much he must suffer for my name."

Something really strikes me about this passage.

To understand this, a little context is in order. As my recent posts have alluded to, I am trying to better understand the roots of my beliefs. Not that I question them or am searching for answers - I am quite confident in that respect. However, I have not really been able to defend my faith when questioned by skeptics. Modern culture and skeptics echo the sentiment that Christianity is a crutch or a convenient social construct to standardize morals. Numerous movements seek to undermine the credability of the Bible or to prove that Jesus wasn't the risen savior. Neither of which have gained any significant ground in over 2,000 years worth of efforts...

With that said, the thing that strikes me about the Acts passage is the statement "I will show him how much he must suffer..." Whether this SHOWING refers to the few days that he was blind and praying, or over the course of his ministry, or both I don't really know. But the greater question is the thought of what man says "yippee" I get to be stoned, shipwrecked, imprisoned, mocked, ridiculed, etc., etc., etc. - and willingly do it for some social crutch or common moral construct? Especially since the 10 commandments had long since been in place if we were just looking for moral law!

I believe the only reason a man of Paul's stature (a Pharisee) would do such a u-turn is to have had a real encouter with the Lord Jesus. One that he could hear the words of the Lord echo day after day in his mind - one the continued to reassure him of the calling and purpose for which he was called. Something I'm sure he would have to have been reassured of frequently throughout his missionary journeys and the numerous trials.

Twas the night before Christmas and all through the house, I'm going back to bed so I don't wake the mouse... :)

Merry Christmas and God bless!

The Hero Pattern

During a recent church service, the youth pastor at my church referenced the lack of uniqueness surrounding the birth of Christ. The point he was trying to make was that their has to be something more to our faith than a story - it has to be a relationship. Having never heard such a statement, about the birth of Jesus not being unique, I was dumbfounded. While my faith is not established on this point, It aroused an interest to understand the scope of what he was referring to.

Oddly enough, I ran across the The Blasphemy Challenge website that is encouraging folks to commit the unforgivable sin, video tape it, post it on youtube, and receive a free DVD. The DVD is titled The God Who Wasn't There. Out of curiosity I watched the provided trailer and the argument of Christ's birth lacking uniqueness, referred to as The Hero Pattern in the video, was used as "proof" that Christianity is a hoax. A quick google led me to the following site: http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa4.htm.

I'm curious what other people's perspective is on this topic?

On an aside, I think the basis for the Blasphemy Challenge is fundamentally flawed in their interpretation of what Christ was truly saying. The following page helped clarify the true meaning for me: Unpardonable Sin

Gasp! Politically Incorrect?

Can he say that? Won't that offend potential voters? Its refreshing to see that Huckabee is being true to his convictions in spite of his quest for the oval office...

"The Case For Christ" As An Objective Apologetic?

In my previous post - The Basis for an Objective Apologetic - I outlined my desire to find an objective set of criteria to evaluate the authenticity of the story of Jesus Christ.

Perhaps the methodology employed by author Lee Strobel in the book “The Case for Christ” seems reasonable. Essentially Strobel, a former journalist for the Chicago Tribune and a once self-proclaimed atheist, uses the typical logic that an attorney would employ in any standard legal case.

The book documents a two-year period of Strobel’s life where he researched the historical, scientific, and religious aspects associated with Jesus Christ. All-in-all I think the book is very well written, and, for the most part, I agree with the conclusions he and many of those he interviewed, have arrived at. Specifics to follow in future posts...

The basis for an objective apologetic

Why do I believe what I believe? This question has repeatedly surfaced in my mind over the past few months. These questions, combined with the world’s ever increasing effort to undermine the validity of Christianity, has created a deep desire within me to analyze why and how I have confidence in the authenticity of Jesus and the Bible.

Having no formal theological training, unless you want to count the few bible classes I took in college -- knowledge from which I’ve all but forgotten -- I’m looking to create an objective set of criteria by which I can read various religious, historic, and scientific sources to be able to firmly explain why I believe certain things.

Historically, man has used written apologetics to outline their specific beliefs and then to defend those beliefs against critics.

Ask.com defines it this way “The term apologetics comes from the Greek apologia, which means "defense" or "answer." Apologetics is the task of defending a particular idea or belief system and answering its critics. The origin of the concept of apologetics lies in the beginnings of Christianity. Between the second and fourth century, a number of Christian teachers wrote defenses of Christianity against pagan critics.

Usually, apologetics occurs in a religious context, and involves giving reasons for adopting a particular religion as opposed to some other religion or no religion at all. Apologetic defenses are done of doctrines so fundamental to a faith that it is assumed that no members would disagree with them - thus, the defenses are created with external critics in mind.

Most apologists one encounters tend to be Christian apologists, because a great many Christians believe that it is an important part of their faith that they go out and convert others.”

That pretty much sums up where I’m at - desiring to define my beliefs (It helps to know why you believe something when defending it and sharing it) -- and wanting to understand why others are critical of the beliefs I hold.

Stay tuned for more from the prodigal pig.