Coming Back

Not really sure when but we are looking at hosting another event where we will answer difficult questions to theological issues. I'm going to start collecting questions now for the event so our panel (not yet determined) can start gathering their thoughts on each topic. If you wish you submit a questions you can do so by commenting on this post or you can e-mail me Ryan@opfirst.org. I'll post the info on the event once I have more specifics. Until then start submitting your questions.

The Generation of Mark 13:30

At the beginning of Mark chapter thirteen Jesus i sleaving the temple area and one of his disciples points out the grandure of the temple buildings. Jesus' remark to that disciple concerns the fact that these buildings will one day be torn down. The disciples question Him further as to the times of these events, and so begins an extended teaching from Jesus on the end times.

As Jesus' remarks are drawing to a close, He makes this comment in Mark 13:30:

"Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place." (NASB)

So the reader is left to wonder the meaning of this statement. Either our understanding of generation is wrong, or we are understanding what Jesus meant by "these things" wrong. I think there are at least two solutions.

1. The word for generation (genea: Greek) could mean, as some side column reference Bibles note, "the human race". This is possible, since the events have not all happened and the human race is still on earth. But this is not the most natural reading of the word generation. Typically, you would think of a generation as a time span of less than 100 years, or the maximum typical life span.
2. Another option, and the one I lean more in favor of is another understanding of the phrase "take place". In the Greek New Testament it is one word (genitai: a 2 Aorist Middle Subjunctive Verb, 3rd Person Singular). David Allen Black, in his book It's Still Greek To Me, lists a sense of the aorist verb as Ingressive Aorist. That is, it stresses the beginning of an action.

So if I am labelling this verb right, and I hope I am, then we could translate the verse, "Truly I say to you, that this generation will not pass away until these things begin to take place." This would mean that the events of the end time began with the persecution of the church and the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. If this is right, then Jesus' generation did most certainly live to see these things take place.

Our Goal

When we first talked talking about this question and answer concept something that kep coming up was that we didn't want to be the period at the end of the sentence. Meaning we didn't want people to walk away from the answer night or leave this website and just accept the answer as being complete. Most of these questions require in depth research and would take much more than one night and a simple blog to answer. They require individuals willing to dig deeper in their personal study time. Concepts like predestination vs free will are issues that people have been debating over for years and years. I believe that God is not impressed or well pleased with christians bickering and debating over small details of the debate. I do however believe that God loves when the issues leads His children to wrestle with His Word. We must remember that God is much bigger than us and our finite brains, just because something seems wierd or different from how we always thought it was doesn't not mean it isn't true.

Is there such a thing as an unforgiveable sin?

Many believers have often questioned the meaning behind what is referenced in parallel in Mark 3:29, Luke 12:10, and Matthew 12:32 which state that someone can commit an unforgivable sin by blaspheming the Holy Spirit. There is a popular movement amongst an atheist group called the Rational Response Squad who have issued the “blasphemy challenge” to encourage people to publicly state that they deny the Holy Spirit. They encourage this because they think that this means that a person can never be forgiven by Christ and thus not saved. In my opinion, it seems like they are expending a lot of energy speaking against someone who they believe does not exist! Anyway, upon a careful examination of this text we find the real meaning behind what Jesus was saying. At this particular moment, Jesus is talking to a group of men called Pharisees. They were one of the strictest sects of Judaism. He had been showing them who he was through miracles, wise teaching, and fulfillment of prophecy for a good amount of time and yet they still did not believe. In verse 32 of Matthew 12, Jesus lays it out for them in a very simple way. The Holy Spirit had clearly been active in Jesus’ ministry and the Pharisees were claiming that Jesus did this through the power of Satan. So even though the truth of Jesus’ claim to be the Messiah was revealed to them, they still would not believe. So they denied Jesus as their Lord and Savior and thus this is an unforgivable sin because in their unbelief they would spend eternity in Hell. The Bible Knowledge Commentary points out that while many of these particular Pharisees would never become believers, Jesus’ brothers initially rejected Jesus as Messiah (John 7:5), but would later come to faith (Acts 1:14).[1] So while at some point in our lives, in our ignorance of God we may speak against Jesus, we may still be moved to believe by the Holy Spirit, but if the truth is revealed to us and we do not respond to the call to believe by the Holy Spirit then when we die we will not have a chance to respond to the invitation to follow Christ. (See Hebrews 10:26-27). This is the unforgivable sin...An unrepentant heart which knows not Jesus Christ as it's Lord and Savior.

1 John F. Walvoord, Roy B. Zuck and Dallas Theological Seminary, The Bible Knowledge Commentary : An Exposition of the Scriptures (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1983-c1985), 2:237.

How can a person who has never been exposed to the gospel (through no fault of his own) be expected to come to a saving knowledge of Christ?

While I was preparing this week to be on a panel for the discussion of theological issues I came across a very difficult question that pushed me to spend some time solidifying my own doctrine on a certain issue. The question came from a student in our youth group: "How can a person who has never been exposed to the gospel (through no fault of his own) be expected to come to a saving knowledge of Christ?" This simple question has been discussed for centuries and divided denominations since the first denomination was formed. Dr. Ken Keathley, now a professor at a Southern Baptist seminary wrote an interesting work on this very question. His paper delineates the differences between the three schools of thought on the issue presented. The excerpt presented below is from his paper titled, "None Dare Call it Treason: Is an Inclusivist a Paul Revere or a Benedict Arnold?" appearing in the Journal for Baptist Theology and Ministry, Vol. 1 No. 2."Exclusivism holds that an explicit response of repentance and faith to the preaching of the Gospel is necessary for salvation. Until recently, this has been the dominant position of the church and still is the majority position in conservative evangelical circles. Pluralism looks upon the non-Christian religions as alternative and valid venues for the salvific work of God. Unlike the classic liberal of times past, the pluralist does not see the various religions as expressions of the same religious impulse, but as unique systems in their own right, believing there should be no attempt to reconcile or judge between the competing truth claims. Offered by its proponents as a mediating position, inclusivism posits that even though the work of Christ is the only means of salvation, it does not follow that explicit knowledge of Christ is necessary in order for one to be saved. In contrast to pluralism, inclusivism agrees with exclusivism in affirming the particularity of salvation in Jesus Christ. But unlike exclusivism, inclusivism holds that an implicit faith response to general revelation can be salvific. God expects from man a response proportional to the light given. Saving faith is not characterized so much by its cognitive content as it is by its reverent quality. Perhaps pluralists are the most fond of the threefold taxonomy since the terms cast them in the most positive light. This should not be surprising since the pluralist Alan Race coined the terms."So in light of this article here is my response to the question posed by our student.Paul was very clear that mankind has no excuse for its sinful state. He reminds us that God has revealed Himself to us through natural revelation (Rom. 1:20) and thus we cannot plead ignorance in our sinful state. So knowing this, what happens to those who die never having heard the Gospel? Let’s first examine Christ’s command to all of us as believers. He commands us to go out to preach the Gospel message to all people everywhere (Matt. 28:19-20). Paul then has the same concerns that we do in Rom.10:14-17. How will people believe unless they hear the Gospel message? This should spur all of us on to spread the Gospel wherever we are. As to the fate of that person who lived 1,000 years ago who did not hear the Gospel message. What happens to that person? First we must remember that God works in incredible ways, so we can in no way pass judgment on someone’s salvation. We know not the absolute destination of any one person. What we do know is that salvation is found only in Jesus Christ so consequently if someone doesn’t believe in Him then he or she will not be saved from the wrath of God for his sin and will go to Hell. Many times we get so concerned with that man or woman who lived 1,000 years ago who may or may not have been saved while our friends or neighbors who we see every day most certainly do not have a relationship with Jesus. We all have so much work to do.

Why is God a man, not a woman?

First thing’s first. We must remember that God is so much more then man. In Genesis we learn that man was made in the image of God and that woman was made in the image of man. This helps us understand many of the important dynamics in the marriage relationship but that’s not relevant here. So what makes God a man and not a woman? Well, in the original text we know that the name “God” (Proper Noun or name) was always referred to in the masculine or male tense and the pronoun used in place of “God” is “He”. In the New Testament we read that Jesus always referred to God as the Father or used He in reference to God (John 15:26, 16:25). So on these accounts alone we can be quite sure that God possesses traits that would make him appear to be more masculine then feminine. We must remember, however, that He is much more then we could ever understand Him to be. He is not a simple man. He is God perfect in every way, able to be everywhere at once, knowing all things of past times and in the future. Our mind can never conceive all that our God is we only know what He has chosen to reveal to us.

Why if God destroyed the earth with a flood does He not destroy evil civilizations in the past or even now with another thing?

God did destroy evil civilizations after the flood. God has used a gamut of different tools to destroy those civilizations that were against Him. The flood encounter begins in Genesis 6:13 when God makes a covenant with Noah and promises to destroy the rest of mankind from the earth because of their evil ways. One of the next known mass destructions from God upon a nation of people is found in Gen. 18:20. This is the well known account of Sodom and Gomorrah. “Then the Lord rained on Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the Lord out of heaven, and He overthrew those cities, and all the valley, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and what grew on the ground,” (Gen. 19:24-25). Let’s not forget what our Lord did to the Egyptian people when the king would not release the Israelites from bondage beginning in Exodus 7. God has not always used supernatural events to destroy people groups. All throughout the book of Joshua God uses the Israelite people to destroy people groups as they claimed their promised land (See Joshua 6 on).
So why doesn’t God destroy evil civilizations in our age? That question cannot be answered by anyone because God has not revealed the answer. We do know that we are in the last days before the return of Christ and that we are in a different age then those who lived during the Old Testament times described above. We are living in a new part of God’s plan. While we may desire for God to rain down fire and brimstone on our enemies we must remember that we are also sinners who deserve the same death as our enemies, but God by His mercy has given us the gift of life in Jesus Christ and thus we are saved from the wrath from Him that we deserve.