He Offered, but They were Not Willing

Heaven had so much to offer the Jewish nation. The prophets of God were in its midst and delivered the precious words of the Bible to them (Rom. 3:1) for a thousand years. Even more than this was the fact that God longed to dwell among them, but they rejected Him in His holy temple. Finally, Jesus came and vividly illustrated all that God still had to offer them. “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem . . . How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing” (Matt. 23:37)! The picture of distressed chicks finding shelter and warmth under the hen’s wings is what God wanted so often, but the Jews “were not willing!” If Israel had listened to the Scriptures they would have known what was found under His wings.

There is loving kindness found under His wings. David said, “How precious is Your loving kindness, O God! Therefore the children of men put their trust under the shadow of Your wings” (Psalm 36:7). There is no doubt about the fact that His loving kindness is infinite. There is no doubt where it is found—under His wings. The tragedy is that though He longed to give it, they “were not willing!”                 There is a place of refuge under His wings. The heading of Psalm 57 shows that it was written when David was hiding in a cave in order to escape from the armies of angry King Saul. His prayer begins, “Be merciful to me, O God, be merciful to me! For my soul trusts in You; And in the shadow of Your wings I will make my refuge, Until these calamities have passed by” (Psalm 57:1). Put yourself in David’s place and sense his dire circumstances. Instead of being distressed, he saw His only hope was to hide himself under the wings of God and find refuge “until these calamites have passed by.” This same place of refuge was so often available for Israel but they “were not willing!”

There is joy found under His wing. “Because You have been my help, Therefore in the shadow of Your wings I will rejoice” (Psalm 63:7). It makes no difference what happens outside His wings, those there can rejoice because of the help found there. The joy was available for Israel, but they “were not willing!”

There is a place for YOU under His wings. God’s nature has not changed. What He offered Israel He offers to you—and even more! He so often offers the shelter under His wings.  Hear His invitation and find His loving kindness, His refuge and His joy. Make sure YOU are willing!

Posted in Dan Jenkins | Tagged , , | Comments Off on He Offered, but They were Not Willing

Fellowship with God (Part one)

I love being a Christian.  There is no greater privilege, no greater honor, no greater joy, than to be a child of God through Christ Jesus our Lord.  I didn’t always comprehend this joy I speak of.  As a young boy in Bible classes I believed there was a God; I joined my friends in singing songs to the praise of the Son of God (etc.), but I didn’t quite grasp the concept of a “relationship” with God.  I could see, touch, hear, laugh with, and cry with my mother, father, siblings, and friends, but I could not experience those same things with God (for He is not a physical being; He is spirit, Jn. 4:23-24).  It wasn’t until I was a little older that I began to comprehend what it meant to “walk by faith, and not by sight” (2 Cor. 5:7).  This is critical if we are to understand the true nature of the Christian’s relationship with the Lord.  Truly, there are many people, even among adults, who do not grasp what it means to have fellowship with God.

So how does one have a relationship with the unseen God?  Well, the answer to that question will take us beyond this short article, but truly it begins with a consideration of what God actually desires.  God Himself seeks to have a relationship with us.  He is not content with just being some supernatural power who oversees human existence from the backdrop of the created universe.  Listen to Him.  “…As God has said: ‘I will dwell in them and walk among them.  I will be their God, and they shall be My people.’  Therefore ‘Come out from among them and be separate, says the Lord.  Do not touch what is unclean, and I will receive you.’  ‘I will be a Father to you, and you shall be My sons and daughters, says the Lord Almighty.’” Did you hear that?  God wants to be a Father to us, and He wants us to be His children.  He wants us to be a family.  These are intimate terms.

Friends, if you have not thought about a relationship with God in these terms, then this series of articles is truly for you.  So I encourage you to look for my future articles titled, “Fellowship With GOD,” as we continue to discuss how to develop a close, meaningful relationship with our Creator.

Posted in Aaron Veyon | Tagged , | Comments Off on Fellowship with God (Part one)

Hitler Was a Christian – Huh?

It is often alleged by skeptics and atheists that Hitler was a Christian.  In fact, in my debate with Dan Barker in 2009, this allegation was brought forth.  Of course, it takes more than an allegation to prove something.  This was one of the central themes of this debate.  What does it take for someone to be a Christian?  Atheists want to stake Christianity simply upon those who would verbally claim to be a Christian.  The Bible teaches that such a claim is simply not sufficient.  Jesus said, “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven” (Matthew 7:21).  One must actually do the will of Jesus’ Father to be known of Him.

The claim that Hitler was a Christian, however, may be challenged on historical grounds.  In 2010 I took a graduate level class on the Second World War.  During the course of this class I was exposed to some period materials by war correspondents.  I came across a very interesting article written by Sigrid Schultz who worked for the Chicago Tribune.  Reporting from within Nazi Germany, she wrote under the pen name of John Dickson in order to protect her identity.  Still, this was not enough.  The German authorities eventually traced her articles back to her, and deported her from the country.  Nevertheless, among the articles that were published in the Chicago Tribune was one titled: “Nazis Push War on Christianity Among Children: Hitler Youth Leaders Bare Secret Orders.”

The core of this article points out that Hitler Youth were being taught by the Nazi party to reject Christianity because it lacks strength.  Schultz reports: “throughout the whole country there is discernible a systematic drive against the Christian religion.”  The Hitler Youth were told to avoid wedding ceremonies in churches, to not have their children baptized, and that “Christianity undermines true heroic values.”  The article reports Nazi leaders to have said, “If in a quiet way one can help the children realize there is no real strength in Christianity it will be useful.”  It was thought that Christianity’s promotion of meekness was not compatible with the Nazi’s conception of strength. [1]

In the 1930s Germany was home to millions of Roman Catholics.  In fact, they comprised the bulk of Germany’s religious populous.  It would have been political suicide for Hitler and the Nazi party to not publicly placate this demographic group.  The fact that they did, simply proves that Hitler and the Nazis were master politicians, not that they were Christians.  This article from the Chicago Tribune proves that to be the case.  The Nazis were only interested in Christianity as much as it garnered them political power.  They had no real interest in pursuing the teachings of Jesus Christ any more than Joseph Stalin was interested in pursuing free-enterprise.

After the Second World War ended, those prosecuting the surviving Nazis for war crimes drew up a document that detailed what the Nazi master plan had been against Christianity.  This document also points out that part of their plan had been to persecute and eventually eliminate Christian churches.  The Nazis had, in fact, already dispossessed the German Evangelical Church and the Norwegian National Church of their properties.  They also desired to legally abolish all central institutions of church government.  In a section titled, “The Basic National Socialist Attitude Toward Christian Churches,” the document said, “National Socialism by its very nature was hostile to Christianity and the Christian churches.  The purpose of the National Socialist movement was to convert the German people into a homogenous racial group united in all its energies for prosecution of aggressive warfare.”  It went on to say, “Important leaders of the National Socialist party would have liked to meet this situation by a complete extirpation of Christianity and the substitution of a completely racial religion tailored to fit the needs of National Socialist policy.”  The report then says, “Considerations of expediency made it impossible, however, for the National Socialist government to adopt this radical anti-Christian policy officially.” [2] Those “considerations of expediency” was the fact of the German populace’s large Roman Catholic demographic.

While it is true that Adolph Hitler publicly professed himself to be a Roman Catholic, it should be apparent that his true documented intentions, and the intentions of the Nazi party, were to eliminate Christianity altogether, a goal that those who profess atheism fondly desire.  Hitler’s religious façade may give atheists and skeptics a veneer upon which to lob grenades at Christianity, but the truth is that Hitler’s and the Nazi Party’s objectives regarding religion are identical to the objectives of atheists and others who desire freedom from religion today.

[1] Dickson, John. “Nazis Push War On Christianity Among Children.” Chicago Daily Tribune. 18 May 1937. 11. In ProQuest Historical Newspapers Chicago Tribune. Print.

[2] Schorake, Carl E. Lt., USWR. “R & A No. 3114.4., The Persecution of the Christian Churches.” Memo to Major William Coogan. Office of Strategic Services: Research and Analysis Branch. 10 July 1945. 4-7.

Posted in Kevin Cauley | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Hitler Was a Christian – Huh?

Faithfulness

One of the attributes of God is faithfulness.  “God is faithful” is a thought explicitly found in Deuteronomy 7:9, 1 Corinthians 1:9, and 1 Corinthians 10:13.  It is, however, a thought that runs implicitly on every page of the Bible as God unfolds his plan for man’s salvation.  The faithfulness of God is more than His immutability (Malachi 3:6), though it is based upon it.  Something may be immutable, yet not be faithful.  Faithfulness implies a trust, which implies a personality, and a personal relationship with someone.  Faithfulness is a quality of personhood, and infinitely so in the person of God.

As an imitator of God (Ephesians 5:1), the Christian should strive to be faithful.  Faithfulness implies unwavering dedication irrespective the trials that may come our way.  Faithfulness entails a level of commitment that stays true to the course notwithstanding the obstacles in one’s path.  Faithfulness means that one consistently practices that which he knows to be true.  The Christians at Ephesus, in the face of coming persecution, were urged, “Be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee the crown of life” (Revelation 2:10).

The apostle Paul wrote, “Moreover it is required in stewards, that a man be found faithful” (1 Corinthians 4:2).  The Greek word for steward here is OIKONOMOS, a house ruler.  Such stewards in Paul’s time were often slaves.  One could not rise to such a position of prominence in the home of one’s master through fickleness and irresponsibility.  Faithfulness was required!  So also “in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth” (1 Timothy 3:15) – faithfulness is required!

The Psalmist wrote, “LORD, who shall abide in thy tabernacle? who shall dwell in thy holy hill?” (Psalm 15:1).  Among the various characteristics of such a one a statement found in verse 4, “He that sweareth to his own hurt, and changeth not.”  This is faithfulness.  It is emulating the very character of God Himself, who also keeps His promises regardless the amount of suffering that He, as God, must endure.  Of course, the ultimate manifestation of God’s suffering is presented to us in the person of Jesus who was faithful unto the death of the cross (Philippians 2:8).

The apostle Paul’s words in 2 Timothy 2:11-13 ring true here: “Faithful is the saying: For if we died with him, we shall also live with him:  if we endure, we shall also reign with him: if we shall deny him, he also will deny us: if we are faithless, he abideth faithful; for he cannot deny himself.”  Because we are sinful, we can never be wholly faithful to him until the day that we cease from sin.  The possibility of apostasy is always present.  “Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall” (1 Corinthians 10:12).  This statement was not written in vain, under the delusion of “once-saved, always-saved” dogma.  It acknowledges the real opportunity for individual Christians to so sin as to be eternally lost.  How important, then, the doctrine of faithfulness!

In the past year, every other issue of the Christian Worker has focused upon the steps to salvation: hear, believe, repent, confess, and be baptized.  To make the series complete, this issue discusses the final step: living faithfully until death.  The scope of this step is so broad, that one could extend the series indefinitely.  In trying not to do that, this issue seeks to address some of the key areas in which the Christian must live faithfully.  In reading this issue, one ought to keep in focus the need for faithfulness regardless the area of life in which one is presently involved.  Faithfulness transcends each arena of life, providing the foundation for consistent Christian living.  This issue does not touch upon all areas exhaustively, but exhorts the reader to put into practice Colossians 3:17, “And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him.”  Only with such an attitude may the Christian find himself at home with his Lord.

Posted in Kevin Cauley | Tagged , | Comments Off on Faithfulness

Spontaneously Out of Nothing? Seriously?

“For every house is builded by someone; but he that built all things is God” (Hebrews 3:4).

In Stephen Hawking’s most recent book, The Grand Design, he suggests that the Universe was created spontaneously out of nothing.  The reason for this, he says, is that the Universe began before time existed.  Armed with this “insight” he writes: “[The theory] removes the age-old objection to the universe having a beginning, but also means that the beginning of the universe was governed by the laws of science and doesn’t need to be set in motion by some god.”  He then goes on to try to explain what the non-beginning of the Universe was like and how it happened.  The apparent contradictions in Hawking’s work seem obvious.

Hawking ties the dismissal of the Universe’s having a beginning with the notion that God (or a god) is needed to set it in motion.  He then explains how the Universe, nonetheless, still adheres to the notion of cause and effect, suggesting that the laws of science are the adequate cause of the Universe.  One certainly ought not to confuse the notion of having a beginning with having a cause.  To dismiss the idea that the Universe had a beginning, is not to dismiss the idea that the Universe had a cause, and the Universe must still have a sufficient cause.  Hawking has not refuted the Cosmological Argument, because it is still true that for every effect there must be an adequate cause.

Hawking suggests that the sufficient cause for the existence of the Universe is the laws of science.  “Because there is a law like gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing . . . .”  But who or what determines the laws?  That is to say, what is their sufficient cause?  Moreover, how can laws determine anything if nothing else exists?  A law is a wonderful thing to have, if it has something to govern.  However, it is meaningless if nothing exists to which to apply it.  For example, one may have a law that requires automobiles to have windshield wipers; without any automobiles, however, the windshield-wiper law is meaningless.  The laws of science (in and of themselves) cannot cause anything to happen if nothing else exists.  One has to wonder why such laws are even around to begin with?  Nevertheless, Hawking says that these laws are responsible for the creation of the Universe, and “Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist.  It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going.”

The question in the mind of the theist, however, is this: Does the Universe have an adequate cause, and if so, what is it?  This brings the discussion outside of the realm of “beginnings” and “time” altogether and simply focuses upon the notion of cause and effect.  If the Universe cannot explain its own existence, and if laws, in and of themselves, cannot explain the existence of anything, then what is the adequate cause of everything?  The notion that something comes from absolutely nothing is an absurdity.  The notion that the cause of the Universe is something less than the Universe is also absurd because there cannot be more in the effect than there is in the cause; that is equivalent to affirming that something comes from nothing.

So long as science continues to persist in the notion that the Universe had a cause (and Hawking is not denying that), and that such a cause is something less than the Universe itself, then the explanation fails the test of the law of cause and effect.  It does not explain why that for every effect there must not necessarily be an adequate cause, but such is exactly what Hawking must explain!  In fact, if the Universe contains even one effect that does not have an adequate cause, science cannot reliably continue.  How would a scientist ever know that the effects he was studying truly had an adequate cause, and did not just irrationally come about as Hawking suggests the Universe came into existence?

It is still true that God is the only sufficient explanation for everything that exists.  Hawking’s Universe does not have the explanation for itself inside itself, because his explanation is no explanation.  The idea that something can come from nothing is irrational, patently false, obviously absurd, and must be rejected unless one wants to forfeit rationality altogether.  However, if one forfeits rationality, one has no assurances that any explanation (including Hawking’s) has any meaning whatsoever.  A good yell might be just as sufficient.

Posted in Kevin Cauley | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Spontaneously Out of Nothing? Seriously?