The Cosmo-Quattro Argument

Rather than writing on something currently on my mind, I just wanted to upload a response I gave a couple years ago on a Facebook group to someone who posted a meme about theism. The post revolved around how theists cannot provide adequate answers to support their belief in God. I don’t remember which group on Facebook it was, but I think off the top of my head it was either “Atheist Beings,” “Atheism Uncensored,” or “Atheism United.” Either way, because I’m notorious for posting extremely long comments when in a dialogue online, I have had to write my comments on Google Docs before copying and pasting them into discussions.

I wrote this particular response on Google Docs as well and have just kept it over the years in my Google Drive. Also, I name all of my own arguments and this one I called the Cosmo-Quattro Argument because it sounded really cool at the time. So with minor adjustments for clarity and conciseness, here is my response:

“Okay I’m back. Sorry for the delay, I had a long day at work and then after work I was busy for quite some time. Finally have a little time to sit down and write back to you all. In a previous comment, I said that I would lay out the Change Argument and William Lane Craig’s Kalam-Cosmological Argument for those who are following this particular thread. First let me start with Dr. Craig’s argument and then proceed with the Change Argument:

The Kalam-Cosmological Argument (Source: On Guard by William Lane Craig)

1) Whatever begins to exist has a cause.

2) The universe began to exist.

3) Therefore, the universe has a cause.

Now this argument is airtight in its premises. The logic likewise flows as follows and is simple in its presentation. The conclusion is that this universe has a cause. Simple enough. Now let’s take this one step further with the Change Argument:

The Change Argument (Source: www.peterkreeft.com)

1) The material world we know is a world of change.

2) When something comes to be in a certain state, such as mature size, that state cannot bring itself into being.

3) Other things must be involved.

4) Nothing can give itself what it does not have, and the changing thing cannot have now, already, what it will come to have then.

5) Nothing changes itself.

6) No matter how many things there are in the series, each one needs something outside itself to actualize its potentiality for change.

7) The universe is the sum total of all these moving things, however many there are.

8) The whole universe is in the process of change.

9) But change in any being requires an outside force to actualize it.

10) Therefore, there is some force outside (in addition to) the universe, some real being transcendent to the universe. This is one of the things meant by “God.”

11) Briefly, if there is nothing outside the material universe, then there is nothing that can cause the universe to change.

12) But it does change.

13) Therefore there must be something in addition to the material universe.

14) But the universe is the sum total of all matter, space and time. These three things depend on each other.

15) Therefore this being outside the universe is outside matter, space and time. It is not a changing thing; it is the unchanging Source of change.

With Craig’s argument and Plantinga’s argument in mind, we can conclude a series of things:

  1. The universe has a cause.
  2. This cause logically must be immaterial, spaceless, and timeless.
  3. It cannot change because it is the unchanging source of change.
  4. Therefore, the cause of the universe is changeless, immaterial, space-less, and timeless.

Adding these figures together we move onto the next argument that reasonably follows: The Teleological Argument. It is the argument that the late and great Christopher Hitchens considered the greatest argument for the existence of God. Even today, many atheists consider it to be the most formidable argument. The argument goes as follows:

The Teleological Argument (Source: On Guard by William Lane Craig)

1) The fine-tuning of the universe is due to either physical necessity, chance, or design.

2) It is not due to physical necessity or chance.

3) Therefore, it is due to design.

Gathering our conclusions together, let’s now attribute factors to this mysterious first-cause. In order for something to be the first-cause it must fit this specific criteria that we have just observed together:

  1. The universe cannot cause itself into existence nor be the first cause (See: The Kalam-Cosmological Argument).
  2. The first-cause of the universe must be immaterial, space-less, and timeless (See: The Change Argument).
  3. The first-cause of the universe must be changeless (See: The Change Argument).
  4. The first-cause of the universe must be the designer of the universe (See: The Teleological Argument).
  5. Thus, the most reasonable and logical explanation based off of the evidence is that this first-cause must be and is God.

Lastly, in the Greater Than Argument I argue that God must be multi-personal due to Him being beyond our limits as the first-cause of the universe. My argument goes like this:

The Greater Than Argument

1) Every human is a single person.

2) God is greater than a human.

3) Since God is greater than a human, He therefore must be multi-personal.

4) The Christian Trinity is the best explanation of His multi-personal nature.

5) Therefore, God is a tri-unity of persons, yet remains one nature.

From this lengthy and exhaustive breakdown, we can also conclude that this first-cause (i.e. God) is indeed personal and is a transcendent creative mind. Just as a painter paints a painting with a specific purpose in mind, God must have personally caused and created the universe with a specific purpose in His mind. What purpose did God have in making the universe?

In the Judeo-Christian worldview, God caused and created the universe for His own glory. In other words, everything was caused and created for the glory of God. In Revelation 4:11, it says “Worthy are You, our Lord and our God, to receive glory and honor and power; for you created all things, and by your will they existed and were created.”

Branching off of this, why should we glorify God? Well succinctly put, He made us and that should be enough reason to glorify Him. We are in eternal gratitude that God would want and will for us to exist because He desired for us to glorify Him by tending to the Earth in response to His love towards us (1). It’s a relationship that God desires from us because it’s in that relationship that those who choose to love Him back are glorifying Him to the fullest extent. “We love because He first loved us” (2). and that’s why in the Judeo-Christian worldview, we desire to love everyone equally because Christ loved us first.

But before this can take place, everyone must first repent of their sin. The very thing that separated this relationship God and mankind once had together is blemished by our own sin. Yet, God (the Father) so loved the world (humanity) that He gave His only begotten Son (the Christ) that whosoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.

To conclude, you must repent and believe in God, so that you can now determine to glorify God in all that you do. The ultimate aim in Judeo-Christianity is to know God, to be known by God, and to make God known. With that, Godspeed and Jesus bless.”

Footnotes

  1. Genesis 1:26-31
  2. 1 John 4:19
  3. Disclaimer
Advertisements

The Book That Made Your World: Review and Summary Part 2

Photo Cred: (1)

*Note: this is the final installment of a 2-part series on The Book That Made Your World by Vishal Mangalwadi. If you have not read Part 1, go here.*

books-reading-series-narnia-159778

Chapters 10 – 11: Language & Literature | Photo Cred: (2)

The Bible also changed the way the West developed both our language and our literature as time went on. For instance, due to the efforts of several key missionaries like William Carey, Joshua Marshman, and William Ward, India finally had a national language, instead of hundreds of languages and their nuances that were dependent on their geographical or demographic state.

When it came to literature, the Bible has influenced countless writers varying from William Shakespeare to even the immigrants on the Mayflower that sailed to find home in the New World. This is largely due to it having a ring of truth that other famous works of literature simply lacked. Compared to the Iliad or the many poems of Rabindranath Tagore in his work Gitanjali, the Bible resonates because it stands the test of time as true. The Book of books forever changed the way we communicate through whatever medium we choose to do so. It defined how we tell stories because it is the collection of stories that together tell one, ultimate story. The story of God and His plan to save us from ourselves.

pexels-photo-256262

Chapters 12 – 13: Education & Science | Photo Cred: (3)

In light of this, there was also the profound effect that the Bible had on both the development of the university system and on the scientific method as a whole. As history shows, a good portion of cathedrals and monasteries became universities as Christians at the time believed that we ought to relearn our knowledge of nature. A knowledge that supposedly Adam and Eve had before the Fall as they daily walked with God. Even modern day universities were founded by Christians like Cambridge, Harvard, Oxford, Princeton, and even Yale.

In regards to science, a firm belief in the Bible and God was the very cornerstone of the study in general.  John Lennox, professor of mathematics at Oxford University, once said concerning the debate over science and religion that “far from belief in god hindering science, it was the motor that drove it.” At first, science was referred to as natural philosophy and natural history as it branched out from theology. This is because “the scientific perspective flowered in Europe as an outworking of medieval biblical theology nurtured by the Church. Theologians pursued science for biblical reasons” (P. 223).

Francis Oakley has taken the time to observe and validate this claim between the laws of nature (science) and its origin in a Bible-believing culture in his essay entitled Christian Theology and Newtonian Science: The Rise of the Concept of the Laws of Nature (The American Society of Church History, 1961). Later Mangalwadi asserts that “science was born in the university-an institution invented by the church” (P. 229). Some notable founders of science who were also Christians include Isaac Newton, Galileo Galilei, Nicolaus Copernicus, Robert Boyle, Albertus Magnus, Francis Bacon, and many more as pointed out by Elaine Howard Ecklund in her book Science vs Religion: What Scientists Really Think (2010).

JW_engraving_600

Chapter 14: Morality | Photo Cred: (4)

Morality is another way in which the Bible sculpted the Western way of living, in that there was a return to a more civilized society every time a movement was led by the Holy Spirit and not by the hearsay of men. One notable time that Mangalwadi points out is John Wesley and his impact on England and the surrounding area as a preacher and social activist. Reminding people that there is a moral law written on the tablet of our hearts. This effect can also be seen when comparing Holland and India in the way the Bible’s influence, or the lack thereof, helped shape these two very different countries.

family-outdoor-happy-happiness-160994

Chapter 15: Family | Photo Cred: (5)

In this day and age, the idea of family is under serious investigation and scrutiny in the West. This is due to the rise in awareness of the LGBT+ movement that preaches that all sexual expressions of love are love. That no matter the combination of sexual partners, it still counts as equal to the original idea of what a family looks like.

In the Christian worldview, the monogamous family structure is central to what is directly taught in Scripture. Because of this model of the ideal family structure of one man and one woman in a mutually consensual relationship raising the next generation, the West thrived. As the culture carried on this idea generation by generation, they could rightly live in light of the original intent of God’s grand design. The Bible gave Western society a firm foundation to build a better world and that foundation was a proper understanding of the most functional family structure: the monogamous family.

clasped-hands-comfort-hands-people-45842

Chapter 16: Compassion | Photo Cred: (6)

Shifting his focus, Mangalwadi then pinpoints another key in the difference between those places that are influenced by the Bible and those that are not with the fact that compassion is an essential outpouring of Christian living. Unlike America for example, India has the karmic belief that the needy do not need to be helped because they have received what they sowed. Justice has had its way and the best thing is to let the needy sort out their karmic threads on their own without the aid of the more fortunate.

Yet Christ taught numerously that we ought to love our neighbor as ourselves, to help the poor, to serve the downtrodden, and to not neglect the needs of the weakest links in our own societies. Compassion is a key outpouring of God’s Word penetrating the hearts of humans as they live out what Christ taught. It is for this reason that Christians have made the most homeless shelters, hospitals, and orphanages than any other religious system in history by a long shot.

cyrus-mccormick-1

Chapter 17: Wealth | Photo Cred: (7)

Concerning wealth, Mangalwadi argues that capitalism is a direct result of the Bible’s influence on the West in the economic sense. He believes that because of this influence, it created brilliant inventors like Cyrus McCormick who would go one to revolutionize the way farmers tended to their crops with the invention of horse-driven reapers . Mangalwadi argues that his influences of both growing up in a home that had strong Protestant influences such as John Calvin and his Puritan upbringing made McCormick the man that history knows him as now. Later on in his life, McCormick continued to influence the world by promoting the Bible in the local newspapers and when he changed the name of the Presbyterian Theological Seminary in Chicago to the now McCormick Seminary. True wealth stems from true wisdom and true wisdom is rooted in true worship unto the triune God.

Later on in the chapter, Mangalwadi makes the statement that “ambition is good, but it becomes greed when separated from moral absolutes (P. 321).” The idea of a free market economy and saving wealth for later, instead of either hiding it or throwing it away on quick pleasures was unheard of in these older days. Greed was far more commonplace as the rich would hide their wealth, instead of redistributing it back into the free market. As Ayn Rand would say and Mangalwadi would agree, “happiness is that state of consciousness which proceeds from the achievement of one’s values.” This specific chapter covers a lot of other ground too like foreign markets and the history of capitalism in the West, but you will have to read the book yourself to find Mangalwadi’s argument on the relation between the Bible and its influence in those areas as well.

Huguenot_Monument

Chapters 18 – 20: Liberty, Missions, & the Future | Photo Cred: (8)

Jumping off of the free market section of the book, Mangalwadi ends by highlighting a few other key places that the Bible has influenced: the idea of liberty, Christian missions, and what lies ahead in the future. On the biblical idea of liberty, Mangalwadi makes the case that only the Bible could drive people like the Huguenots (French Calvinists) to construct the Huguenot monument in South Africa to commemorate their newfound freedom from the Wars of Religion where the strong, woman holds firmly a Bible in her left hand. There is a reason Plato’s Republic and Aristotle’s Politics didn’t stir the hearts of the downtrodden to keep fighting for freedom. Only the Bible could invoke this sense of longing to be free like Adam and Eve once were in the garden of Eden.

On the subject of missions, Mangalwadi tells the story of how the introduction of the Gospel of John revolutionized an extremely remote tribe called the Hmars who lived in the dense forests that rest on the border between Myanmar (Burma) and India. The effect of missions work such as that done for the Hmars tribe is evidence of the effect that the Gospel can radically change even the most primal tribes of people and turn them into much more civilized people with the tools necessary to keep up with an ever changing world.  

Finally, the book ends with where the West is going now that these biblical principles are being abandoned in favor of other, more tolerant, worldviews. A direction that, if continued, could lead to a social and spiritual decay that we cannot recover from. Mangalwadi ends with an urgency to remind people of how the West was built in the first place. On the very spine of the Christian Scriptures leading and guiding us from darkness and into the light.

In summary, the Bible is the most influential book of all time and Mangalwadi does a pretty good job of showcasing that in this book. There is a lot of good information in this book and it’s worth the read for any who are curious on the Bible’s impact on history. Suffice to say, the Bible is the book that made your world. With that, Godspeed and Jesus bless!

Footnotes

  1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vishal_Mangalwadi
  2. www.pexels.com
  3. www.pexels.com
  4. https://sites.smu.edu/cdm/bridwell/jwl/
  5. www.pexels.com
  6. www.pexels.com
  7. https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/cyrus-mccormick-6675.php
  8. https://en.wikipedia.org
  9. Disclaimer

 

The Greater Than Argument

A while back I wrote an argument for the doctrine of the Trinity called The Lovely Trinity Argument (1) and it was okay in retrospect. After further study and improvement in philosophical argumentation, I have a second argument for the doctrine of the Trinity. This new argument is called The Greater Than Argument. The argument goes as follows:

The Greater Than Argument

By Christopher Cribari

  1. Every human is a single person.
  2. God is greater than a human.
  3. Since God is greater than a human, He therefore must be multi-personal.
  4. The Christian Trinity is the best explanation of God’s multi-personal nature.
  5. Therefore, God is a tri-unity of persons, yet remains one nature.

Now this argument is meant to be presented after belief in God is philosophically proven. This can be done by showing the person that you are talking to any number of arguments for the existence of God. In the spirit of my argument, I think the Kalam-Cosmological Argument (2) makes the most sense as a foundation to then build off of and further understand who God logically must be if they exist. Although, one could just as easily use Norris Clarke’s World as an Interacting Whole Argument (3) or Peter Kreeft’s version of The Change Argument (4) first proposed by Thomas Aquinas in his famous Five Ways collection of philosophical arguments.

On the flip side, I also have in addition to the original Greater Than Argument, made an alternative version that is simply called The Alternate Greater Than Argument. This alternate version is more so meant to be used in broader contexts, but still requires a logical building block to be placed upon in order to work correctly in dialogue. The Alternate Greater Than Argument goes as follows:

The Alternate Greater Than Argument

By Christopher Cribari

  1. Every human is a single person.
  2. If God exists, then they would have to be greater than a human.
  3. If real, God would be multi-personal.
  4. The Christian Trinity is the best explanation of both God’s existence and His  multi-personal nature.
  5. Therefore, God is a tri-unity of persons, yet remains one nature.

The basic concept for my Greater Than Argument was inspired by many things, but mostly Alvin Plantinga’s philosophical work in general and a YouTube video from InspiringPhilosophy called “The Trinity Explained” (5). I’d highly recommend those resources, along with James White’s book, The Forgotten Trinity, that you can buy anywhere books are sold (6). Both arguments have the exact same conclusion and start with the same first premise. Where they differ is in their next three premises, in order to get to the same conclusion.

It’s probably not going to become the most groundbreaking development in defense of the doctrine of the Trinity, but I would say it is a vast improvement over my first argument. Not only in its more focused nature, but also for the fact that it is a third of the length of that first argument (i. e. A 15 point argument vs. a 5 point argument). So the use of The Greater Than Argument and/or The Alternate Greater Than Argument in discussion will be far easier to defend in a dialogue, rather than The Lovely Trinity Argument because of those two primary reasons mentioned above. Because the argument is shorter and more to the point, the defending apologist has more time to support their view by focusing on a combination of logic, Scripture, and everything of that sort.

Maybe you may find it useful to use or might figure out a better way of defending the doctrine of the Trinity. Regardless, I hope it helps you out in some way. With that, Godspeed and Jesus bless!

Footnotes

  1. https://chriscribariblog.com/2016/01/
  2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CulBuMCLg0
  3. http://www.peterkreeft.com/topics-more/20_arguments-gods-existence.htm#8
  4. http://www.peterkreeft.com/topics-more/20_arguments-gods-existence.htm#1
  5. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0G2S5ziDcO0
  6. https://www.amazon.com/Forgotten-Trinity-James-R-White/dp/1556617259

Christian Reconstructionism: Not So Right

Photo Cred: Austin Cline (1) | Updated: 4/3/2018

As of late, I have noticed a strange phenomenon growing in the political climate and it is one that concerns me because of its implications on American society and Christianity as a whole. That phenomenon is the Christian Right and its underlying belief by some within the movement in an ideology called Christian Reconstructionism. Before addressing the problem, let me properly define it and then get into why Christian Reconstructionism is a dangerous ideology that should not be upheld by Christians or those on any political platform.

6157kb7Jk-L._UX250_
R. J. Rushdoony | Theologian Source: http://www.amazon.com

Christian Reconstructionism is a theonomic movement that really began in the early twentieth century by a man named R. J. Rushdoony and flourished during the 1980s in American politics as it seeped into the Republican Party as a major driving force (2). They are similar to a political action committee (i.e. PAC or Super PAC), but instead of using primarily money to influence the political process they twist Scripture to push their ideology. Rushdoony’s philosophy of Christian Reconstructionism was largely influenced by the fact that his family were victims in the Armenian Genocide of 1915 and his strong resistance to the New Deal proposed by Franklin D. Roosevelt in the 1930’s, which led him to creating this new form of Christian political involvement.

The basic philosophy of Christian Reconstructionism is the idea that any given nation must be run as a theocracy by Christians, for Christians. Just to be clear, let me define a few terms before moving forward. A theocracy is a form of government where a nation is ruled by the divine order of some type of deity. A theonomy is how a theocracy is run by any given governing institution in power. The difference between the two terms would be “what it is” versus “how it is” from what I could gather online. A couple examples of theocratic government include, the Catholic Church in the Middle Ages and Islam in the Middle East. So, why is this scary? Why is this such a problem that people still have this mentality, albeit only a small minority? Well, let’s quickly look at those two examples for a refresher on the negative side effects to a theocratic government.

Church
Source: https://strangenotions.com/is-the-catholic-church-a-force-for-good/

When it came to the Catholic Church, they essentially ruled Europe during the Medieval Ages and had complete control up until both the Reformation and later the Enlightenment that flipped the world upside down. As PBS put it, “the church reinforced the political authority of the states, and the states reinforced the authority of the church (3).” What this meant was that they worked together to enforce law. The government enforced the law of the land, while the Catholic Church enforced the law of the LORD. If one broke either law, then they broke both forms of law and thus would not only receive punishment in this life, but also in the life to come afterwards.

Because of this political snare, the common people were apart of the faith in fear of the tyranny that loomed above them. If they did not believe in the Catholic faith, then they were subjected to torture or even death like those that were implemented during the Spanish Inquisition. This fear drove the commoner to live in utter submission to whatever the government said. Likewise, the government lived in utter submission to whatever the Catholic Church said because in those days, spiritual concerns superseded material matters.

Regarding Islam in the Middle East, it is much more extreme when compared to the Catholic Church not only by the length of time, but also by the amount of death and torture inflicted onto non-believers throughout history. These modern methods include, but are not limited to forcing homosexuals to jump off of buildings to their death, genital mutilation of women, stoning, and so on. Nevertheless the same goal for both forms of these theocratic governments was to sustain control over the region and in these two cases, through whatever means necessary. For the purposes of this blog-post, I’ll leave further research into both of these abuses of theocratic forms of government to you to look into on your own.

Going back to where we started, this is what a theocratic government would look like if the Christian Reconstructionist had their way and that is why it is a danger to the American way of life. Under theocratic rule, every American would have to be Christian or suffer the severe consequences for believing otherwise. Not only that, but a very specific type of Christian that upholds certain beliefs like rejecting antinomianism (opposite of legalism), upholding presuppositionalism (opposite of evidentialism), and affirming postmillennialism to name a few.

progressive-revelation
Source: https://www.gotquestions.org/progressive-revelation.html

The Torah, the first 5 books of the Bible, would become the new rule of law and it would be barbaric to say the least in its application to 21st century civilization. Things such as interracial marriage, individual autonomy, and even modern women’s rights would be abolished. In other words, the philosophy of Christian Reconstructionism reapplying the Old Testament Law as the new law in American society is the equivalent of reapplying the use of horses instead of modern-day tractors for farming. They had their use and importance in history, but their need in today’s society is no longer applicable as the world has advanced beyond that phase of human civilization (4). 

At the time, the Old Testament Law was amazing when compared to the horrific cultures that surrounded the region. Other nearby nations like the Hittites and the Canaanites were utterly wicked in the sight of the LORD, so God commanded the Israelites to live differently in almost every way than these other cultures lived. This is why the Old Testament Law existed in the first place: to fulfill the Hebrew’s part of the Old Covenant. If the Israelites obeyed God, then they would be blessed beyond belief under this covenant. If they didn’t keep the covenant, then they would receive the repercussions of their actions in full (5).

Fast-forward to the times of Christ when the Old Covenant is turned obsolete as Jesus introduces the New Covenant not just with the Hebrews, but with all of mankind (6). Hence, the Christian Reconstructionist’s major selling points on their particular philosophy are in direct conflict with crucial biblical truths in Scripture. The Old Covenant is no longer necessary and yet the Christian Reconstructionist advocates the reintroduction of the old way of relating to God.

As history can attest, when the political and the spiritual are unnaturally bent into a particular agenda we all lose. When it comes to Christian Reconstructionism, this just happens to be one of many attempts to do just that. Forcing someone to live a certain way in spite of their convictions in order to show them what you believe is a better way is not loving, but tyranny. In the name of freedom, there must be flexibility. In the specific case of Americans, what could be better than each and every one of us freely doing as we will to do, without infringing on the dignity inate in others. Sharing ideas rather than controlling them to fit within certain boundaries that favor one sect, while simultaneously oppressing another.

So what is the solution to a theonomous culture? Well, there are only two other options: a heteronomous culture (totalitarianism) and an autonomous culture (libertarianism). For the sake of brevity, America began as a theonomous culture with the mutual belief in the natural law of God giving us unalienable human rights, but has overtime become an autonomous culture where the rights of the individual matter more than the rights of the collective group. Act, believe, and think how you want, but without stepping on the toes of another person’s freedom to do the same.

As I clearly noted earlier, American politics and Christian Reconstructionism are simply not compatible. The movement would only cause more harm than help in the grand scheme of things. When choosing between compromise and extremism in the game of politics, compromise is always the better way out. Compromise is the reason that we as Americans can proudly say that we freely pursue life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. With that, Godspeed and Jesus bless!

Footnotes

  1. http://fax.libs.uga.edu/wwpost/
  2. http://www.religioustolerance.org/reconstr3.htm
  3. http://www.pbs.org/godinamerica/people/catholic-church.html
  4. The idea that I am referring to in this section of my blog-post is called progressive revelation. It is a common concept in both Christianity and Islam. Read more about it here.
  5. Deuteronomy 30:15-20
  6. Luke 22:20

Who Is Chris Cribari?

Updated: 10/12/2018 | Photo Cred: Daniel Walton

For those of you that are new to this blog and since I’m closing in on 50 blog-posts pretty soon as of this blog-post, I figured it might be time to reintroduce myself to new visitors to this site. Who am I exactly? Well, here is a little about myself and what makes me who I am today.

I grew up Southern California for the first ten years of my life and then my family moved to Colorado in July of 2007 for my Dad’s job where I have lived ever since. I was raised by my parents in the Calvary Chapel Movement, along with my four siblings. My four siblings are Rachel, John, Corban, and Nathan. My parents grew up in very broken homes, which directly influenced their strong emphasis on a family established on Christ first and foremost.

I came to faith in Christ when I was 9 in the summer of 2006 and have been a Christian ever since. My parents strong belief in Christianity had a great impact on my path towards the Christian faith, but the decision was all my own. I privately accepted Christ walking home from my friend David’s house where we were watching Playboy DVD’s after school. I publicly came to Christ at Calvary Chapel Oxnard’s Summer VBS a few weeks later when my VBS group leader explained the Gospel to me after I questioned him as to whether or not it was true.

I am and always have been an avid storyteller, along with an active listener to people’s stories. I started writing my first stories in either second or third grade and continue to write to this day. At home, I have stacks of partially-written novels, poems, sermon ideas, and short stories either on flash-drives or busting out of years-old binders. Writing allows my soul to speak truthfully, in spite of my high-spectrum autism disorder as diagnosed by Stanford University.

This is also why I love cinema and going to the theater so much. When Blockbuster was still a thing, my siblings and I would watch our VHS movie collection to death as we rewatched our favorites all the time growing up. This collection that we had as kids contained the original Star Wars trilogy (1977-1983), The Lord of the Rings trilogy (2001-2003), the Wallace & Gromit series (1990-1995), a pair of Jurassic Park movies (1993; 2001), a few Val Kilmer movies like The Ghost in the Darkness (1996), The Saint (1997), and The Prince of Egypt (1998), along with a few dozen other films.

When we got a little older, we boys got the privilege of watching my Dad’s infamous movie collection that holds some of the best films I’ve ever seen. This collection consisted of mostly war movies like Braveheart (1995), Gladiator (2000), Saving Private Ryan (1998), The Patriot (2000), and We Were Soldiers (2002). It also had other genre movies like A Beautiful Mind (2001), Bandits (2001), Equilibrium (2002), Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man trilogy (2002-2007), The Matrix (1999), The Passion of the Christ (2004), and the Phantom of the Opera (2004). It might just be a box of DVD’s, but it holds some of my favorite memories as my Dad showed us boys what men he wanted us to be through the medium of film.

When I have time to train, I occasionally compete in Strongman too. I was introduced to the sport by my mentor Andrew Morrison and have loved it ever since. I have competed four times and I am preparing for future competitions as well. Through my time training, I’ve met some of the world’s strongest men like Brian Shaw, Mike Burke, Robert Oberst, and Stan Caradine. My favorite Strongman lifts are Atlas Stones, Deadlift, and Log Press.

My theological stance is Molinist, while my preference on church function leans heavily towards Anabaptist. I favor the elder-run church model versus the Moses model as seen in the Calvary Chapel Movement. As the old saying goes, power corrupts. For me, the more powerful one is the more likely they are to be corrupted. Therefore, more accountability before God and His church is necessary for the Great Commission. I currently attend and serve at church in Colorado called LifeGate Denver as a youth pastor.

My favorite apologists are John Lennox, Ravi Zacharias, and William Lane Craig. Although some honorable influences also include Alvin Plantinga, C.S. Lewis, Hugh Ross, James White, Michael L. Brown, Nabeel Qureshi, Norman Geisler, Peter Kreeft, R. C. Sproul, and Voddie Baucham. My parents taught me the basics of Christianity when I was young and from there I have continued to develop my own systematic theology as I mature in the faith.

If I specialized in a subject within Christian apologetics, then it would either be philosophy or world religions. With that said, I’d like to know more about every subject if I’m perfectly honest. I’m mostly self taught, but I have had mentors in my life that have sharpened my worldview to be more coherent and concrete.

I attended the Colorado Film School for a while and have an education in screenwriting, along with directing for the screen. I continue to use my education in my career as I am currently the Director of Creative Content for AvidMax and produce their video media. I’m in the process of researching for two books that I am writing. The first book is a fictional novel that focuses on a married couple’s grieving a stillborn birth and the problem of suffering. The other book is like Mere Christianity for the modern world.

I started this blog for a few reasons. It gave me the opportunity to speak freely about whatever has been on my mind. People have also asked and encouraged me to write, so that inspired me as well. Most importantly, I believe God put me on this planet to write for Him.

This blog started in June of 2015 and will continue to go on as long as God wills. I’m Chris Cribari and this is just a frame of my life. With that, Godspeed and Jesus bless!

The Book That Made Your World: Review and Summary Part 1

Updated: 9/16/2017 | Photo Cred: (1)

After taking over a month off, I finally have another blog-post finished. Except this one here was commissioned by a friend at my local church, Peace Mennonite Community Church (2), and this friend, Marjorie, asked me to do a book review, along with a short summary of The Book That Made Your World: How the Bible Created the Soul of Western Civilization by Vishal Mangalwadi (3). To be honest, I had never heard of him or his oddly titled book, but I went for it and thoroughly enjoyed it for the most part. There were a few minor issues I had with the book, but they are too minut to mention every single one in detail.

Primarily, my issues with the book were either grammatical spelling errors (i.e. “bcome” vs. “become”) or jumps in logic to unproven conclusions. Yet, those issues were brief and were my only nitpicks with the book itself. There was also the fact that it reads like an encyclopedia of information as it goes from subject to subject like a textbook of sorts. Then again, I guess there was no way around that problem either considering the subject matter in the first place.

Mangalwadi’s The Book That Made Your World is a very informative take on the Bible’s influence in twenty key areas of the human experience. From the origins of science to the concept of compassion and forgiveness in the face of utter barbarism in the early first century. Its aim was to show how the Bible has shaped the West in some of the most profound ways imaginable, even in some ways unexpectedly. In that respect, the book succeeds, but it does tend to lack the artistic appeal of more expressive writers.

Related image

Chapter 1: The West Without Its Soul | Photo Cred: (4)

The book begins with how the Bible was crucial in the conceptual development of the human soul. Comparing both Johann Sebastian Bach and Nirvana’s lead singer, Kurt Cobain, we see a stark contrast in their lives and striking similarities. Bach’s biblical upbringing versus Cobain’s Buddhism, which led to his belief in Nihilism later in life.

For Bach, his worldview produced some of the most celebrated classical music of all time that gave a sense of hope to its audience as they admired the art of his compositions. For Cobain, his worldview led to producing music that bears nothing meaningful or worthwhile in substance. The soul can express itself best through music and music allows us to see into the souls of one another. The Bible shapes our souls into redeemed wretches, while its absence allows our souls to rot in utter decay. On the one hand, everlasting life and on the other hand, a life that left too soon.

Related image

Chapter 2: Service | Photo Cred: (5)

The next chapter focuses on the biblical value of service when compared to other worldviews. Drawing from his own experiences growing up in India, Mangalwadi explains how someone who lives out the statutes of the Bible in a real-world way will see their whole outlook on life change as they do less for themselves and more for others in the name of Christ. While others worry about getting to the other side where the grass is always greener, Christ compels His followers to seek out those whose grass is not so green and to help them flourish as they soak in the love of the Son. The world promotes self-love for our own good, but Christ commands selfless love as we serve others for the greater good.

Image result for journey

Chapters 3 – 4: Quest and Self | Photo Cred: (6)

Mangalwadi continues into more particular ways in which the Bible has influenced and helped make the modern West by going into the quest of life, along with our role in that quest as free creatures. The Bible helped give humans the ultimate quest in life: to be known by God, to know God, and to make God known. In the same respect, it also gives us a true sense of self as we now know that we are neither equal to God nor to a dog, but rather exist in the middle of the spiritual and the natural. We are free creatures that create like our Creator and yet are the cherry on top of Creation itself. He asserts that “I am a creative creature” and a free one at that too as we journey on our unique quests into the unknown reaches of what truly makes us human. As we draw close to God, we at the same token draw close to a proper understanding of ourselves in light of His light: the Word of God.

Image result for george lemaitre

Chapters 5 – 6: Humanity and Rationality | Photo Cred: (7)

From here, Mangalwadi touches on our humanity and rationality as self-conscious beings. When it comes to humanity in particular, the Bible was the very spark that ignited the Renaissance, along with the reintroduced idea of human dignity. Even in the most cruel cases of people living in rejection to God in history, our human dignity cannot be erased from the human consciousness. It remains an ever-present element in our lives as a mark that we were made for more.

For rationality, the greatest movements post-11th Century Europe all involved in some shape or form, a strong emphasis on learning, especially through reading and writing. This can be traced back to Augustine, Boethius, William Tyndale, and other brights that sought to bring the truths of Scripture to the commoners who lived in ignorance. It was men like these who brought about new generations of free thinkers that could now test the claims of the corrupt and powerful.

Image result for lateen sail

Chapters 7: Technology | Photo Cred: (8)

When it came to the advancements of technology throughout the ages, notable scholar Ernst Benz clearly pinpoints the four key ways that a Judeo-Christian worldview helped the development of technology on a worldwide scale. His reasoning is summarized below by Mangalwadi:

“First, the Bible emphasized intelligent craftsmanship in the world’s design. Second, the Bible suggested that human beings participate in divine workmanship by being good artisans themselves. Third, the Bible taught that we follow divine example when we use the physical universe for righteous ends. And fourth, the Bible challenged the West to use time wisely, because each moment is a valuable, one-time opportunity (P. 97).”

In short, most of the most important inventions of the last several centuries can be attributed to a Biblical worldview that fueled the passion of many inventors over time. These inventions include the lateen sail, the wheeled plow, the horse as a tool in the workforce, the water mill, the windmill, the crank, the wheelbarrow, the flywheel, the pipe organ, the mechanical clock, eyeglasses, and dozens of other inventions that are the basis of Western technological advancements.

Chapter 8: Heroism | Photo Cred: (9)

The idea of a hero has changed as the culture in Western society has transformed with the passing of time. The classical hero exemplified the traits that would be expected of the Greco-Roman mentality and that meant powerful leverage over others, whether politically, militarily, or any other barbaric means necessary to control those beneath you. The medieval hero was the next idea of heroism and they sought glory, skill, prowess, loyalty, generosity, and courtesy. This eventually led to what is known as religious chivalry and this was basically the equivalent of placing a spiritual mask onto a sinful practice.

That is, fighting for the LORD would guarantee salvation, which was a lie. This idea has evolved into what is known today and what I like to call “good-person salvation.” The idea that because someone “lives a good life” and is a “good person,” that they will inherit eternal life in Heaven. As this idea flourished over the years, it was the Reformers of the 15th and 16th centuries who brought back the idea of true heroism. A heroism based off of Christ himself and His selfless sacrifice for his enemies. This is the backbone behind what most people refer to in Western society as a real hero: someone who is sacrificial, loving, true, and giving to those in need.

Image result for reformation

Chapter 9: Revolution | Photo Cred: (10)

A true revolution is one that either goes back to the way things were or changes the culture into something better. The Protestant Reformation was one of the most influential revolutions because it did both. This revolution was different in a sense from other revolutions because it started from the top and worked its way down. Starting in universities and growing in pubs all across Europe, this revolution stood firmly on God’s Word as its source of reform. The reformers consisted of a team of ragtag “heretics” who just wanted the Word to be the final say in the World, even greater than the Pope. The result of the revolution? Two Bible translations for the commoner, the Geneva and the KJV, along with the most powerful force in any society: an informed public.

Well that’s just half of my review and summary of The Book That Made Your World! Stay tuned for Part 2 and the rest of my thoughts on this book. With that, Godspeed and Jesus bless!

Footnotes

  1. www.revelationmovement.comhttps://www.facebook.com/VishaMangalwadi; https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-HDVxmzfkt5Ws_GfCOC_Gw/featured
  2. http://peace-mennonite.org/
  3. http://amzn.to/2wlAnCZ
  4. http://movies.ndtv.com/photos/forever-27-kurt-cobain-would-have-been-46-yesterday-10981
  5. http://www.nlb.gov.sg/sure/a-good-deed-goes-a-long-way/
  6. https://rgyan.com/blogs/omens-while-starting-for-a-destination/
  7. http://thelibertariancatholic.com/raising-your-child-with-the-bible-you-may-be-raising-an-atheist/
  8. https://hhswhi.wikispaces.com/Lateen+sail
  9. http://halfey.moe/post/the-melancholy-of-one-punch-man-attack-on-one-punch-man
  10.  https://thecompassmagazine.com/adventism/reformation-and-the-remnant-a-review

Deception Part I: After An Innocent Mistake

Guest Writer: Mark Cribari

In this first segment of a three-part series on deception, I would like to focus on where it all began: in the beginning. Since the Bible clearly tells us in multiple places that Satan was the source of the very first lie spoken through an animal in the Garden of Eden, we have our starting point. Then, we will follow the progression of deception from the serpent to separation to “The Secret” in parts II and III.

The Genesis record reveals that every physical thing God made in its original state was declared “good” in the opening two chapters. The only exception to this was loneliness as described in Genesis 2:18, but then again, the LORD wasn’t finished creating at that point. The results from His short surgery (v21‭) included the beauty of ceremony (v22), poetry (v23), unity (v24), and shameless transparency (v25). Even verses 16‭-‬17 imply God’s love by the mere fact that He warned the first man within His first command. Then things took a turn for the worse in chapter 3 when doubt was introduced by that serpent of old (Revelation 20:2).‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬

One of my favorite aspects about the Bible is that God used progressive revelation to continue revealing to us things He wanted us to know. What amazes me is that He was also able to use different types of literary genre to do so like historical narratives, poetry, prophecy, and even letters. A good example of this can be found in John 8:44 where Christ gave us more insight about the devil than Moses did in Genesis 3:1 when Jesus said, “He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it.” Details like this should be helpful as we take a closer look at the subject of deception throughout Scripture.

Since the Gospel according to John and Genesis are both in the genre of historical narratives, it becomes almost seamless to use Scripture to interpret Scripture since that literary style deals primarily with people, places, things and events. It could get interesting when we use other styles to help us understand this historical event and possibly assist in answering some of the questions I have for you as well. Now before I get to these specific questions so you can come to your own conclusions about the first deception and, at the same time, test what I’m saying based on the facts presented (1st Thessalonians 5:21), I’d like to remind you about the difference between explicit and implicit observations.

Explicit facts are those that are usually obvious to most people whereas those that are implicit would be those truths that are implied by the text within its context. I’m clarifying this distinction so that you as the reader know that if the things I share from this point forward are not supported by the text and the context, you’re welcome to throw them out as assumptions. There is a phrase used by many to describe this as “chewing the meat and spitting out the bones.”

Now there are two reasons why I titled this “After An Innocent Mistake.” First of all, this brief conversation with the serpent reflects the purity and innocence Eve had when she made the mistake of trusting that what he said could be the truth, even though this creature was planting doubt in her mind and denying what God said to her husband in chapter 2. Secondly, the terrible consequences of sin took place only after they both broke God’s original command. At this point, I’d like to present you with some inductive questions to consider in regards to when Adam was actually with Eve during this account.

First off, working from the New King James Version of the Holy Bible, why do Genesis 3:1 and Genesis 3:4 record that “the serpent said to the woman” instead of saying to them (i.e. Adam & Eve) if her husband was there when this initial conversation took place? Why do most people assume that “her husband (was) with her” during the serpent’s deception in the verses previous to verse 6 since we don’t know “when” Eve “saw, took, and ate its fruit” in Genesis 3:6?

Why does the wording in Genesis 3:6b, “She also gave to her husband with her, and he ate” appear to be an after thought as if it could be a separate event from her choice? The Holy Spirit confirms a fact about this event in 1st Timothy 2:14 when it is written, “And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.” If Adam was there when the serpent lied to Eve as many people believe, wouldn’t “they” have been deceived instead of the strong clear wording of 1st Timothy 2:14? It’s safely been said that Scripture interprets Scripture, so we can’t ignore this New Testament insight into Old Testament history.

Since all the pronouns turn plural in Genesis 3:7-8 after Adam ate (e.g. them, they, themselves, up to the phrase “Adam and his wife”), why did Adam blame her instead of the serpent? As well as in Genesis 3:12 when addressed by God and she then blames the serpent in the singular when she admits in verse 13, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate” instead of including her husband if he was actually there when she was lied to? When Paul expressed his concern in 2nd Corinthians 11:3, why didn’t he include Adam when he wrote, “as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness” if her husband was actually with her during moment that lie was delivered by the Devil?

Genesis 3:17‭ reads: Then to Adam He said, “Because you have heeded the voice of the serpent…” Oh, wait a minute. He didn’t say that at all! Adam’s curse and consequences were because he listened to his “wife.” Don’t you think this would have been a great opportunity to clear things up for us since “God is not the author of confusion?” (1st Corinthians 14:33a). God says what He means and means what He says. Nowhere in Scripture does He say nor infer that the serpent said to the man or that Adam heard from the serpent.‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬

Finally, when reading through Romans 5:10-21, I find it interesting that the Spirit of God holds Adam solely responsible for disobeying the LORD’s command and bringing sin into the world instead of holding both Adam and Eve liable for it in phrases such as “through one man sin entered the world,” “those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam,” “by the one man’s offense many died,” “through the one who sinned,” “the judgment which came from one offense,” “by the one man’s offense,” “as through one man’s offense,” and lastly “as by one man’s disobedience.” My only question at this juncture is why do some sermons and many pieces of art depict both of them together in the garden with the serpent when the source material, Holy Scripture does not seem to support it? For more on this, see https://answersingenesis.org/bible-characters/adam-and-eve/was-adam-with-eve-when-she-spoke-to-the-serpent/ and this seems to contain a more thorough investigation than https://www.gotquestions.org/amp/Adam-with-Eve.html.

Although I’d prefer not to be dogmatic about this, I do believe that it’s important to understand the true circumstances of that first deception to the best of our ability in light of 2nd Corinthians 2:11 which warns us that “lest Satan should take advantage of us; for we are not ignorant of his devices.” That last word has also been translated “schemes” and this brings me to my final thought. Could it be that the progression of the devil’s plan as recorded in Genesis chapter 3 to destroy Adam and Eve by introducing doubt, denial, deception, and disbelief of God’s loving warning in Genesis chapter 2 actually began with the strategy of separation? If the old adage, “there is safety in numbers” proves true, then his scheme worked if Satan intentionally waited for these two to be apart from each other before he approached the weaker vessel (1st Peter 3:7). Stay tuned for part two in this series on deception in the near future.

Photo Credhttp://thebibleforum.net

“Thanks for stopping by and reading the first segment of my Dad’s deception series. With that, Godspeed and Jesus bless! Oh, and Happy Resurrection Weekend! He is risen!” – Chris Cribari

What are the Christian Essentials?

Photo Cred: The Four Posts of Avila, Spain (1566) by Francisco de Arellano

Through the years of Christian development and especially in recent times, there has been a dwindling of understanding concerning what exactly makes someone a follower of Christ. What is a Christian really? What does someone need to believe and do in order to adopt such a distinct worldview like Christianity? What separates a Christian from a Muslim or a Mormon? With all of these questions in mind, let us look at what others have laid out as the absolutely essential tenets of Christianity and see if it is a biblical understanding of what makes someone a Christian and others non-Christian.

Most sources you find will list out 5 to 7 essentials that must be affirmed in order to be a Christian. For instance, gotquestions.org says that there are 7 Essentials (1), yet the Gospel Coalition has up to 20 Essentials (2)! Specifically, 10 Essential beliefs and 10 Essential behaviors as written by Kevin DeYoung, respectfully. But are there truly this many Essentials or are we misunderstanding what an Essential actually is in Judeo-Christianity? I think we should start by identifying what an Essential is before pinpointing how many Essentials there are and what they actually entail.

An Essential is a fundamental core value, whether a deed or doctrine, that if removed from the other fundamental core values of any given belief system, would completely cause that belief system to collapse entirely. Islam, for example, has the 5 Pillars of Islam (3) that indicate the basic tenets of the faith that make someone a Muslim as they are the Islamic Essentials. These 5 Pillars of Islam include the Shahada (Profession of Faith), the Salat (Daily Five Prayers), the Zakat (Giving of Alms), the Saum (Fasting of Ramadan), and the Hajj (Pilgrimage to Mecca). If a Muslim does not affirm the Shahada, the other 4 Pillars are useless. If a Muslim does not affirm all 5 Pillars, then their Islamic belief should be called into question for either heresy or ignorance.

Now can or does Christianity have a small list of criteria that distinguishes Christians from other belief systems? Yes and for Christians there are even less Essentials than Islam. In fact, I would argue that Christianity has only 4 Essentials. Not 5 Essentials, not 7 Essentials, and certainly not 20 Essentials. These 4 Essentials are the Nature of God, the Hypostatic Union of Christ, the Gospel, and the Inspiration of Scripture. Let me explain each one individually in further detail below and show why there are only 4 Essentials at the root of Christianity. I refer to them as the “Four Cornerstones of Christianity,” but we will stick to the Christian Essentials for simplicity sake. First of the Christian Essentials is the nature of God.

1) The Nature of God

The nature of God is comprised of 2 unique doctrines: Monotheism and Trinitarianism. The belief of Monotheism affirms God’s unique oneness and the idea that there is only one God (4), while Trinitarianism affirms God’s tri-unity as three persons, yet one being (5). As Dr. Michael Brown would put it, God is “complex in His unity” (6) and this truth is best known as the doctrine of the Trinity. Now the Christian Essential regarding the nature of God also includes His divine attributes as He is omnibenevolent (all-loving), omnipotent (all-powerful), omnipresent (all-enveloping), and omniscient (all-knowing). To be more precise, God is uncaused, eternal, immaterial, non-contingent, non-physical, and personal. I believe St. Anselm of Canterbury sums up God’s divine essence best when he concludes in his Ontological Argument the following:

“Therefore, if that than which nothing greater can be conceived exists in the understanding alone, the very being than which nothing greater can be conceived is one than which a greater can be conceived. But obviously this is impossible. Hence there is no doubt that there exists a being than which nothing greater can be conceived, and it exists both in the understanding and in reality” (7).

Suffice to say, we Christians believe God to be indescribable in His grand majesty that is beyond human comprehension, yet He is near to all who seek Him with sincere hearts. He is the one, true, triune God and His presence is even still so near to our souls in this life, along with the life to come one day for all who seek His face. But how does God, of such glorious splendor and goodness, interact with His Creation? How could a deity bridge the gap between finite minds and His infinite mind? Well, that leads us to the second Christian Essential: the Hypostatic Union of Christ.

2) The Hypostatic Union of Christ

The hypostatic union of Christ is similarly divided into 2 distinct sub-Essentials: that Jesus is both fully God (8) and fully man (9). Hypostatic originally means “personal,” so the hypostatic union of Christ really means the personal union of Christ. In this case, the personal union of two natures within the person that is Jesus.

At certain points in time (10), Jesus adopted a second nature, a human nature, with the sole purpose of bridging this gap between Creator and Creation. As the ultimate mediator, Jesus inhabits the best of these two natures. He is both the only good God and the only sinless man. He is the mediating messiah who has taken the task of healing the world from the sin in the Garden of Eden and is, at the same time, the ultimate human ambassador for the holy Godhead (11).

If His deity is denied, then you find yourself aligned with cults that deviated from Judeo-Christianity like the Latter Day Saints, Jehovah Witnesses, and large portions of the Church of God Movement. These cults most likely came from early historical heresies like adoptionism, arianism, nestorianism, and the like. If His humanity is denied, then you find yourself conforming to some heretical views such as docetism, apollinarianism, eutychianism, and so forth misunderstandings about the Hypostatic Union (12). Needless to say, Scripture is quite clear that Jesus is both fully God and fully man.

If Jesus was not fully man, then He could not be the unblemished sacrifice that atoned for the sins of the world. If Jesus was not fully God, then He could not be the Messiah that the Old Testament proclaims will enter the world and save it from itself. Jesus fully inhabits both natures and if we do not believe this Essential truth, then Christianity collapses as a worldview. Jesus is one person with two different natures that are in complete harmony. These two natures are not contradictory, but complementary. Understanding the God-man is the second Essential of Christianity and the next Essential is the Gospel.

3) The Gospel

The Gospel is grounded both in the historical reliability of the physical resurrection of Jesus from the dead back to life (13), along with the theological understanding that salvation is by God’s grace, not of works, and because of Christ’s atonement on the Cross (14). We will first observe the biblical and theological side of the Gospel, before going into the historicity of the resurrection of Jesus as it is the definitive Christian foundation of our faith.

Now there are many quick ways to understand the Gospel, so we will observe the two most common explanations that reveal what the Gospel message is and why it is an Essential in Christianity. When it comes to understanding the message of the Gospel, Scripture paints the best picture. The most common Scriptural guide in understanding the Gospel is the infamous “Romans Road.” The “Romans Road” goes as follows:

The Romans Road

  • Romans 3:23 (Everyone has sinned and are fallen)
  • Romans 6:23b (Sin leads to death and therefore everyone who has sinned will die)
  • Romans 5:8 (God gives grace and Jesus pays our sin debt)
  • Romans 10:9 (Salvation to all who confess that Jesus is LORD and believe that God raised Him from the dead)
  • Romans 10:13 (Whoever calls on the LORD will be saved)
  • Romans 5:1 (We are justified by faith and now have peace with God)
  • Romans 8:1 (We are no longer condemned to Hell for our sin)
  • Romans 8:38-39 (Nothing can remove this seal of salvation and our salvation is sealed by the love of God)

Now the “Romans Road” is a great resource to use in evangelistic settings, which many believers do, but not all of us can memorize or remember that many passages of Scripture on the spot. So, how do we Christians explain the Gospel in a shorter and more straightforward way? Well, here is the other way to explain the Gospel that summarizes the truths of Scripture in a briefer way:

The 4-Point Gospel Message

  • Creation: God created everything, including us, and it was good.
  • Condemnation: Adam sinned and we inherit his sin debt now that everything is bad.
  • Propitiation: Jesus atoned and paid our sin debt, making those that repent and believe free from the condemnation.
  • Salvation: We receive new life in Christ and enjoy living for the LORD now until forever.

Because the Gospel in it’s biblical and theological sense is so simple to comprehend, as it should be, we will move onto the historicity of the resurrection since it carries so much weight in the defense of Christian thought. For another Scriptural explanation of the Gospel in the form of a video, I would refer you to David Wood’s great YouTube video on “What is the Gospel?” (15). Bottom line: when it comes to the Gospel, keep it Scriptural and simple. That’s what Jesus did and that’s we, His followers, will continue to do until the end of the age.

As Paul the Apostle once said, if Christ did not rise from the dead, then our faith is in vain (16) and thus if we cannot defend this claim, then our faith is in jeopardy. When it comes to defending the resurrection of Jesus, there are many approaches to take and ways to go about supporting this quintessential truth in Christianity. Some might use extrabiblical sources or manuscript evidence, but I like to keep this just as simple as a Gospel presentation and use basic logic. I have a three point argument called “The Resurrection Argument From Reason” that concludes the resurrection of Jesus to be the most logical explanation of the historical evidence. This argument goes as follows:

The Resurrection Argument From Reason

  • The empty tomb of Jesus is due to either the apparent death theory, the conspiracy theory, the displaced theory, the hallucination theory, or the resurrection theory.
  • Based off of the historical evidence, it is not due to the apparent death theory, the conspiracy theory, the displaced theory, or the hallucination theory.
  • Therefore, it is due to the resurrection theory.

Now this is a very short argument that is inspired by analytic philosopher William Lane Craig and his “A Case for the Historicity of Jesus’ Resurrection” argument, as well as the contributions of New Testament scholar Gary Habermas. For more information regarding the resurrection of Jesus, I would point you to both William Lane Craig’s book, On Guard, where his previously mentioned argument can be found and to the book, Did the Resurrection Really Happen?, which is the written version of the third and final debate between Gary Habermas and former atheist Antony Flew concerning the resurrection. Last of the Essentials is the inspiration of Scripture.

4) The Inspiration of Scripture

The inspiration of Scripture is the final Essential and it is the root belief that guides the belief of the inerrancy of Scripture. At the same time, this final Essential gives us Christians the other 3 Essentials. In order to understand biblical inerrancy, we must properly understand biblical inspiration. If the Bible was not divinely inspired, then why should we believe the Bible to be inerrant as the infallible Word of God?

The idea of inspiration can be traced far back in history to the Israelites and their beloved fondness for the Torah, as it was the very Word of God that inspired Moses to write those first five books of the Bible. It was the Law that the Hebrews lived by and this was the start of the canon of Scripture. Since then, that understanding of the holy canon of Scripture now includes the entirety of the Old and New Testaments. Once belief in the inspiration of Scripture is established, we can then conclude the inerrancy of Scripture.

We believe the Bible to be God’s inerrant Word for a number of reasons. When it comes to presenting said reasons the Bible must be inspired, I have both an argument and an acronym from Charlie Campbell (17) that will aid in remembering key reasons to believe the Bible to be the inspired and the inerrant Word of God. First, we’ll observe my own argument for the inerrancy of Scripture below:

The Inerrancy of Scripture Argument

  • The inerrancy of Scripture is due to either chance, divine inspiration, or human manipulation.
  • It is not due to chance or human manipulation.
  • Therefore, it is due to divine inspiration.

With this in mind, the divine inspiration of the Bible logically infers the inerrancy of God’s Word. If God was behind the scenes guiding the process of developing the canon of Scripture, then why can we not conclude that it is without error? Can we empirically prove that because the Bible is inspired, that it is also inerrant? Using the Charlie Campbell’s M. A. P. S. acronym, we can do just that. The M. A. P. S. acronym goes as follows:

  • M = Manuscript Evidence
  • A = Authors’ Forthrightness About Failures
  • P = Persecution Endured By The Early Christians
  • S = Son of God’s View of Scripture

In short, we Christians believe the Bible to be God’s inspired Word because Jesus believed it was and not the other way around. Because we believe it is inspired by God, we also believe it to be God’s inerrant Word. We support this claim with the M. A. P. S. method of providing evidence. Our understanding of the other 3 Essentials hinges on our understanding of this final Essential.

Like the above picture, the 4 Essentials of Christianity all work together and uphold the very essence of what Christianity is as a whole. Everything is built off of these four key pillars of our faith. If you remove one pillar, the whole worldview collapses.

Therefore, just as a Muslim has the 5 Pillars of Islam, we too have the 4 Pillars of Christianity. When you understand the foundation for Christianity, then you will understand the Christian faith. When you understand why you believe what you believe, then defending what you believe is that much easier. With that, Godspeed and Jesus bless!

Footnotes

  1. https://www.gotquestions.org/essentials-Christian-faith.html
  2. https://blogs.thegospelcoalition.org/kevindeyoung/2013/09/12/what-are-the-essentials-of-the-christian-faith/
  3. https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/world-history/medieval-times/islam-intro/a/the-five-pillars-of-islam
  4. Deuteronomy 6:4, Isaiah 43:10-13, 1 Corinthians 8:4b-6, Galatians 3:20; 1 Timothy 2:5
  5. Genesis 1:26, 3:22-23, 11:7, Isaiah 6:8, Matthew 3:16-17, 28:19-20; 2 Corinthians 13:14
  6. The Real Kosher Jesus (P. 134-135). See also Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus Vol. 2: Theological Objections (P. 3-14) by Michael Brown for a theological understanding of the Christian Trinity in response to Orthodox Judaism, along with The Forgotten Trinity by James White for an exegetical understanding.
  7. https://www.princeton.edu/~grosen/puc/phi203/ontological.html
  8. John 1:1-3, 10:30; 20:28-31
  9. John 1:14, Philippians 2:5-11; Hebrews 2:14-18
  10. Genesis 14:17-20, 16:7-14, 18:1-33, 22:11-18,  32:24-30, Exodus 24:9-11, Joshua 5:13-15, Judges 6:11-25, Daniel 3:23-28; John 1:14-18
  11. In his book Biblical Doctrine: A Systematic Summary of Bible Truth, John MacArthur & co. make the following statement regarding Jesus being an ambassador or messenger of the Godhead: “When the biblical account associates “the angel of the LORD” with a theophany, “messenger” might provide a better translation than “angel,” because this title denotes the function or office of the individual, not his nature. In addition, the Scripture speaks of him [the angel of the LORD] as actually being God. He bears the name “LORD,” he speaks as God, and he displays divine attributes and authority. Most significantly, however, he receives worship (Matt. 2:2, 11, 14:33, 28:9, 17). Given what John 1:18 says about the Son-that “no one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known” -the appearances of God in the Old Testament must have been the Son, not the Father. The phrase “made him known” in Greek (exégeomai) is the word from which we derive the verb exegete and its cognate noun, exegesis. Literally, the Son of God “exegeted” the Father to mankind (P. 241).”
  12. http://coldcasechristianity.com/2014/historic-heresies-related-to-the-nature-of-jesus/
  13. John 2:19-22, 1 Corinthians 15:1-22; Galatians 1:6-9
  14. John 14:6, Acts 4:12; Ephesians 2:8-9
  15. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0maL4cQ8zuU
  16. 1 Corinthians 15:13-14
  17. Scrolls & Stones: Compelling Evidence the Bible Can Be Trusted (P. 93). See also The Canon of Scripture by F. F. Bruce and From God to Us: How We Got Our Bible by Norman Geisler & William E. Nix for more information on biblical inspiration and biblical inerrancy.

Mentors That Made Me A Man: Andrew Morrison

When I first met Andrew Morrison, it was at one of the Calvary Chapel Aurora summer youth group events for the high school ministry and we were playing rugby at Olympic Park. Before that day, I had never heard of rugby. After that day, I realized it was probably the hardest sport I have ever played. Oh, and the guy leading this skull-crushing sport was none other than Andrew himself: the man-child that served at CCA in the high school ministry and who loved to pull pranks on everyone in youth group.

There were a few guys from the youth group like Bailey Monroe and Isaac Hardwick there, so I didn’t feel that alone trying out this new sport. Although, I was intimidated by Andrew and his sheer size compared to me as we were on opposing teams. At the time, he was near 300lbs and I was less than half his weight, so I took quite a beating that day during the game. It went as expected: bloody, dirty, and non-stop adrenaline as we went back and forth playing rugby. Regardless, looking back it was actually a good time. Lots of smack-talk, testosterone, and a whole lot of really painful tackles worthy of an ESPN rewind. So that was the start of a discipleship bond between Andrew and I that is still ongoing to this day.

As I continued to go to the high school youth group at CCA, I figured Andrew would only be interested in hanging out with the athletes that went there. Those athletes were usually Bailey, my older brother John, the Fouse boys, Jeffrey Torres, Lomar Rodriguez, the Obinnah trio, and some other athletes that would occasionally attend here and there. Yet, Andrew took the time to invest in the scrawny, 120lbs guy that spent all his free time playing Pikmin, Mech Assault, and other obscure video games that only mega-nerds would like or even play.

At first, it didn’t make any sense why he wanted to invest in me and be that mentor in my life. I mean, we had literally nothing in common. Well, we both were known by Christ and for Andrew. that was enough reason to invite me to join his “Leaders In Training” group, also known as “L. I. T.” This group was a disciple program for hand-picked, high schoolers that wanted to grow deeper in their faith in Christ. It was a group that included Adaeze Obinnah, Alyssa Almond, Bailey, Bella Newberry, Bethany Trantham, Charlie Tomaskovic, Daniel Walton, David Dekhtyaryuk, Heather Baca, Kathryn Koff, Khilah Fouse, Lisa Brooks, Lomar, Mariah Santos, Miciah Lewis, Millie Tomaskovic, Ryan Vincent, Sarah McFarland, Taylor Urling, Zach Fouse, and potentially others that I cannot remember off the top of my head.

It was a really challenging group in that we had to do the following every week: serve at church during service, serve at evangelistic outreaches in the Denver area, memorize Scripture weekly, inductively study Scripture weekly, along with a number of other tasks that were required for this program. In retrospect, it was a high point in my spiritual growth as Andrew, with the aid of Joel Wheelersberg, instilled the truths of Judeo-Christianity into us and for some of us, it still remains with us 4 years later.

Later on, Joel went and started a new church plant called “Calvary Reach” in 2015. Around that time, Andrew left CCA to be the youth pastor at Calvary Chapel Westminister up north of where we were at in Aurora, Colorado. Even amidst all of this change, Andrew still kept in touch with all of us students to the best of his ability.

He would nag us on how we should workout with him or how we should visit him at his new church. Either way, he kept checking in on us and he still does to this day. This accountability and responsibility he took on is one of my favorite aspects that he has as both a mentor and a friend of mine. His constant desire to see the spiritually young in the faith mature is what makes him such a great leader for anyone that learns under him.

Andrew firmly believes in the idea of a church on the move. What I mean by that is inviting someone to hang out with you outside church doors throughout the week by sharing your hobby or trade with them. For instance, if you love to skateboard, then you would invite whoever it may be to hit the skate park with you and as you hang out, talk about stuff that really matters like God. It’s been his way to share the Gospel to people that don’t go to church or have been hurt by the hypocritical mentality found in the Western church. Like Jesus would do when He would minister one-on-one with people doing simple, everyday things like drawing water from a well (1) or simply having dinner together (2). It’s when sacred meets secular and it is a refreshingly powerful way of reaching out to a world that needs to see authenticity and consistency from Christians.

One way Andrew meets people where they are at is by inviting them to workout with him and do Strongman during the week. I started doing this sort of weightlifting with him in the Fall of 2014 and have been hooked on Strongman ever since. I remember when I walked into the “Colorado Pro Gym” for the first time and saw Mike Burke, a World’s Strongest Man competitor, training on Log Press as he dwarfed everyone around him. It was a little insane how big this guy was as he stood at 6’ 6” and weighed about 350lbs at that time. It was this encounter with one of the strongest men on the planet that inspired me to try out this sport. It was the fact that Strongman is so challenging, both mentally and physically, that really drew me into this small niche of athletics that I still train for even now.

Since then, I have trained on and off with Andrew and have done three Strongman competitions (i.e. Team Tom – May 2015, Iron Warrior Classic – December 2016, Team Tom – February 2017) in that span of time with my next competition in just a matter of months. What this type of discipleship also taught me was seeing people in their element outside of the social construct of “Sunday-Only Christians.” What it looks like to be a Christian in the world, but not apart of it. Watching as Andrew would stop everything to attend to the needs of his family or in-between sets asking how I’m doing and how he can help for me. Meeting people where they are at versus having people meet you where you’re at.

It’s a mode of discipleship that I’ve started to emulate as I now invite people I know to lift and minister to them all at once. Sometimes, seeing someone live like Christ says a lot more about if Christianity is really true, then a thousand sermons or a tirade of 140 character tweets.

Through the years, Andrew taught me how to simultaneously be sensitive to the Holy Spirit, yet physically strong as I equally impact eternity. Over the years, he has pushed me to think like Christ and to completely transform the way I see or think about my life. In fact, we still hang out, workout together from time-to-time, and even share a vision for a new form of church that we believe is the next move of the Spirit in the West. Thank you Andrew for being a mentor that made me a man. With that, Godspeed and Jesus bless!

Footnotes

  1. John 4:3-30
  2. Mark 2:14-17

Is the Holy Spirit a Girl? | Matriarchal Christianity Examined

Photo Cred: Janet McGrath (1)

 

This question is deeply rooted in a problem that relates to the context of Scripture. By context, I mean to say the historical record, the culture and the time period the text was written in, along with the grammatical prose that reflects the author’s intent. In simpler terms, this question stems from a misunderstanding of the difference between eisegesis and exegesis.

The practice of eisegesis is when one projects their own biases and ideas onto whatever text they are reading or studying. The practice of exegesis is when one finds the original meaning of a text they are reading or studying based on its original context. Eisegesis means “to guide into” the text (subjective interpretation), while exegesis means “to guide out of” the text (objective interpretation). With this in mind, let’s quickly observe what Scripture says concerning the gender or sexuality of God in the Bible and examine the claims of Matriarchal Christianity against God’s Word.

In the Bible, there are certain verses and passages that reveal the nature of God and how He chose to reveal Himself in a tangible way for us humans to comprehend. Now, is God a man? No, God is not a man and neither is He a woman. God is not a physical being, so He does not have the physical characteristics that are typically associated with a man or a woman (i.e. anatomy, chromosomes, cognitive function, DNA, etc). In fact, God is beyond the bounds of His own Creation and is free of those specific characteristics that are distinct to both men and women. God is an uncaused being that is eternal, immaterial, non-contingent, non-physical, and personally caused the universe into existence.

With that said, what we find in Scripture is numerous references to the Holy Spirit in the masculine sense. This can be seen in various places such as Isaiah 64:4, Romans 8:26, and 1 Corinthians 12:11, for instance. Yet, we also find allegory and prose that alludes to God bearing feminine characteristics (2) as well, so how do we reconcile the two differing views of God?

Before answering this, we must deduce some simple truths. First off, is God sovereign over all His Creation? Yes. Okay, did the Holy Spirit inspire the authors of the various books within the Bible to clearly and perfectly relay His message truthfully? Yes. Next, if God is sovereign, if the Holy Spirit is God (3), and He had direct control over the development of the Bible, then why did the Holy Spirit choose to associate masculine terminology to Himself?

Because the masculine sense is God’s preferred gender pronoun and best portrays God’s nature to mere humans like us. Think about it. If God wanted us to attribute the feminine sense to Himself as a tri-unity of persons, then He would have made the distinction clear. But, as Scripture overwhelmingly supports, God has chosen to and prefers to be referred to in the masculine sense. The Trinity consists of the Father, the Son, and the Spirit. It does not consist of the Father, the Son, and the Mother.

So for us in the 21st century to incorrectly associate God in the feminine sense is crass and a gross misrepresentation of who God is within all three of the Abrahamic faiths (Islam, Judaism, & Judeo-Christianity). In order to properly understand the text in the Bible, we should allow context to dictate our conclusions, not our culture. In order to know who God is, we should hear and read what He is referred to in Scripture. Projecting our culture onto another culture’s original understanding of God is foolish to say the least.

As believers in Christ, we should have a proper knowledge of God and understand who He reveals Himself to be and the manner He chooses to do so. On the other hand, non-believers should respectfully understand both the historical record and the cultural atmosphere that encompasses the origins of Judeo-Christianity, in order to properly understand who the Christian God is both then and now in this present age. Cultures and interpretations change, but context, the intent of the ultimate author, and meaning will always remain the same when we understand the text. With that, Godspeed and Jesus bless!

Footnotes

  1. http://jmcgrathart.blogspot.com/2013/03/something-new-for-me-my-first-stab-at.html
  2. Judges 14:6 and other references to the Holy Spirit in the original Hebrew of the book of Judges use the feminine verb for “came upon” as we see it in modern English. Also, Matthew 23:37 is another example where those that support the view of Matriarchal Christianity reference as evidence of this idea. Although, this is simply an analogy of how Christ describes his heart for the Jewish people and how He longs to care for them like a mother hen. For more information on Matriarchal Christianity, you can read more here: http://www.theology.edu/journal/volume3/spirit.htm.
  3. Acts 5:3-4