Biblical Support for Christ’s Deity

In his excellent book, Without a Doubt, Ken Samples provides a brief list of Scripture texts which attest to the deity of Jesus Christ.  This list, as Ken notes, is incomplete, but it is a good start.  Here are some texts you may want to study for the next time you encounter a proponent of one of the modern-day cults (i.e. Jehovah’s Witness, Mormon, etc.) or a theological liberal (i.e. someone who denies the deity of Christ).

Divine titles proclaimed by or attributed to Jesus Christ:  1) God (John 1:1, 18; Rom. 9:5; Titus 2:13; Heb. 1:8), 2) Lord (Mark 12:35-37; John 20:28; Rom. 10:9-13; 1 Cor. 8:5-6), 3) Messiah (Matt. 16:16; Mark 14:61; John 20:31), 4) Son of God (Matt. 11:27; Mark 15:39; John 1:18; Rom 1:4; Gal 4:4), 5) Son of Man (Matt. 16:28; Mark 8:38; 14:62-64; Acts 7:56).

Prerogatives or actions of God in the Old Testament proclaimed by or attributed to Jesus Christ: 1) Worship of God (Is. 45:23/Phil. 2:10-11), 2) Salvation of God (Joel 2:32/Rom. 10:13), 3) Judgment of God (Is. 6:10/John 12:41), 4) Nature of God (Ex. 3:14/John 8:58), 5) Triumph of God (Ps. 68:18/Eph. 4:8).

Divine names, actions, or roles proclaimed by or attributed to Jesus Christ: 1) Creator (John 1:3; Col. 1:16; Heb. 1:2, 10-12), 2) Sustainer (1 Cor. 8:6; Col 1:17; Heb. 1:3), 3) Universal Ruler (Matt. 28:18; Rom 14:9; Rev. 1:5), 4) Forgiver of sins (Mark 2:5-7; Luke 24:47; Acts 5:31; Col. 3:13), 5) Raiser of the dead (Luke 7:11-17; John 5:23; 6:40), 6) Object of prayer (John 14:14; Acts 1:24; 7:59-60; 1 Cor. 1:2), 7) Object of worship (Matt. 28:16-17; John 5:23; 20:28; Phil. 2:10-11; Heb. 1:6), 8) Object of saving faith (John 14:1; Acts 10:43; 16:31; Rom. 10:8-13), 9) Image and representation of God (Col. 1:15; Heb. 1:3).

Divine attributes or qualities proclaimed by or attributed to Jesus Christ: 1) Eternal existence (John 1:1; 8:58; 1 Cor. 10:4; Col. 1:17; Heb. 13:8), 2) Self-existence (John 1:3; 5:26; Col. 1:16; Heb. 1:2), 3) Immutability (Heb. 1:10-12; 13:8); 4) Omnipresence (Matt. 18:20; 28:20; Eph. 1:23; 4:10), 5) Omniscience (Mark 2:8; Luke 9:47; John 2:25; Col. 2:3), 6) Omnipotence (John 1:3; 2:19; Col 1:16-17; Heb. 1:2), 7) Sovereignty (Phil. 2:9-11; 1 Pet. 3:22; Rev. 19:16), 8) Authority (Matt. 28:18; Eph. 1:22), 9) Life in himself (John 1:4; 5:26; Acts 3:15).

Again, this list is incomplete (and, for the sake of space, I left out a few citations that Samples gave), but it is a good start.  Indeed, Jesus of Nazareth, the Messiah, is the eternal Son of God who is one with the Father and the Holy Spirit.

The above list in its entirety can be found on pages 125-6 of Ken Samples, Beyond a Doubt.

rev. shane lems

All Religions Don’t Lead to God

I don’t know how many times I’ve heard people say things like this: “All roads lead to God,” or, “People of all faiths pray to the same God,” or, “We’re all praying to the same God.”  These statements sound nice, tolerant, and politically correct.  However, they are both illogical and unbiblical.  Kenneth Samples, in Without a Doubt, gives a helpful explanation of these phrases.  He wisely notes, “The acceptance of social pluralism (tolerance of diverse religious expression) does not logically imply the truth of metaphysical pluralism (that all religious truth-claims are equally valid and simultaneously true).

Here are three reasons why it is illogical and unbiblical to say or think that all roads/religions lead to God.

“1) The world’s religions are fundamentally different.  While many religions share some common beliefs and especially moral values, fundamental and irreconcilable differences clearly divide them on many core issues.  These distinctives include the nature of God, the source and focus of revelation, the human predicament, the nature of salvation, and the destination of mankind.”  Some religions are polytheistic, some are monotheistic, and at least one religion is atheistic.  “Careful examination of the basic tenents of the various religious traditions demonstrates that, far from teaching the same thing, the major religions have radically different perspectives on the religious ultimate.”

“2) Attempts to reduce all religions to a common meaning are futile.  The religions of the world are so diverse in belief and in worldview orientation that they defy attempts to reduce them to a single common theme or essence.  Indeed, in light of this vast and complex array of religious perspectives, religious reductionism would appear to be a dubious, if not altogether impossible, venture. …Attempts to reduce all religions to their lowest common denominator usually succeed only in distorting them.  …Religion cannot be reduced simply to ethics, for they are rooted in claims about the ultimate nature of reality (metaphysics) to which ethical systems appeal for justification.””

“Similar ethical values shared by religions such as Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, and Confuscianism cannot be separated from the distinct doctrines that define these particular religions.  This distinctiveness is especially true for historic Christianity, which is not primarily a system of ethics.  Christian ethics flow from a redemptive relationship with God through the person of Jesus Christ.  Therefore the ethical teachings of Jesus in the New Testament cannot be separated from the unique Christian doctrines that emerge directly from the great redemptive events of Jesus’ life (incarnation, atonement, and resurrection).  In other words, the truth of Christian ethics is inextricably tied to the truth of Christian theology.”

“3) Different religious beliefs remain logically irreconcilable.  The formal laws of logic demonstrate the impossibility of all religious truth-claims’ being true at the same time and in the same way.  For example, Jesus Christ cannot be God incarnate (Christianity) and not God incarnate (Judaism, Islam) at the same tame and in the same respect (the law of noncontradiction: A cannot equal A and non-A).  Contradictory religious claims have opposite truth value, meaning that they negate or deny each other.  Therefore exactly one is true and the other false.  And, accordingly, Jesus Christ must either be God incarnate or not be God incarnate; there is no middle position possible (the law of excluded middle: either A or non-A).  Since Jews, Christians, and Muslims all conceive the identity of Jesus of Nazareth differently…logically speaking, their conceptions cannot all be true.”

This is an abbreviated quote of a longer and helpful argument by Samples found in chapter 12 of Without a Doubt: Answering the 20 Toughest Faith Questions.  In summary, Samples says, “according to the laws of logic and the historical realities of Scripture, religious pluralism (no matter how popular and appealing) cannot be true.”

shane lems

sunnyside wa

The Christian Faith and Scientific Inquiry

Douglas Groothuis, in his excellent book Christian Apologetics, spends quite a bit of time discussing Christianity and science.  I found many of his discussions helpful and refreshing.  Here’s one section where Groothuis gives ten ways “in which Christian belief creates a hospitable environment for scientific inquiry.”  These ten ways, Groothuis noted, are found in more detail in Ken Samples book, Without a Doubt (another book Andrew and I highly recommend).

1) The physical universe is an objective reality, which is ontologically distinct from the Creator (Gen. 1:1, John 1:1).

2) The laws of nature exhibit order, patter and regularity, since they are established by an orderly God (Ps. 19:1-4).

3) The laws of nature are uniform throughout the physical universe, since God created and providentially sustains them.

4) The physical universe is intelligible because God created us to know himself, ourselves, and the rest of creation (Gen. 1-2, Prov. 8).

5) The world is good, valuable, and worthy of careful study because it was created for a purpose by a perfectly good God (Gen. 1).  Humans…were created to discern, discover, and develop the goodness of creation….

6) Because the world is not divine and therefore not a proper object of worship, it can be an object of rational study and empirical observation.

7) Human beings possess the ability to discover the universe’s intelligibility, since we are made in God’s image and have been placed on earth to develop its intrinsic possibilities.

8) Because God did not reveal everything about nature, empirical investigation is necessary to discern the patterns God laid down in creation.

9) God encourages, even propels, science through his imperative to humans to take dominion over nature (Gen. 1:28).

10) The intellectual virtues essential to carrying out the scientific enterprise (studiousness, honesty, integrity, humility, and courage) are part of God’s moral law (Ex. 20:1-17).

“While Christianity and science have had their scuffles, there is nothing inherent in the Christian worldview that is inimical to science rightly understood.”

Douglas Groothuis, Christian Apologetics (Downer’s Grove, IVP, 2011), 102-3.

shane lems

Seven Obstacles of Spiritual Maturity

 I’ve been making my way through this outstanding book: Love God with All Your Mind by J. P. Moreland (Colorado Springs, NavPress, 1997).  Among other things, I appreciated Moreland’s discussion of the “seven traits of the empty self” that are so prevalent in many Westerners today.  And these seven traits, Moreland argues, undermine and stand in the way of spiritual growth and maturity.  In other words, if we as Christians want to grow in Christian maturity, we’ll have to fight obstacles like these.  This post is a bit longer than usual, but I  urge you to take a moment to read these seven – they are very astute observations.

1) The empty self is inordinately individualistic.  …The empty self-populating American culture is a self-contained individual who defines his or her own life goals, values, and interests as though he or she were a human atom, isolated from others with little need or responsibility to live for the concerns of a broader community.  Self-contained individuals do their own thing and seek to create meaning by looking within their own selves.

2) The empty self is infantile.  It is widely recognized that adolescent personality traits are staying with people longer today than in earlier generations, sometimes manifesting themselves into the early thirties.  Created by a culture filled with pop psychology, schools and media that usurp parental authority, and television ads that seem to treat everyone like a teenager, the infantile part of the empty self needs instant gratification, comfort, and soothing. …Boredom is the greatest evil, amusement the greatest good.

3) The empty self is narcissistic.  Narcissism is an inordinate and exclusive sense of self-infatuation in which the individual is preoccupied with his or her own self-interest and personal fulfillment.  The narcissist evaluates the local church, the right books to read, and the other religious practices worthy of his or her time on the basis of how they will further his or her own agenda.  God becomes another tool in a narcissistic bag of tricks….

4) The empty self is passive.  The couch potato is the role model for the empty self, and without question, modern Americans are becoming increasingly passive in their approach to life.  We let other people do our living and thinking for us.  From watching television to listening to sermons, our primary agenda is to be amused and entertained.  Such an individual increasingly becomes a shriveled self with less and less ability to be proactive and take control of life.

5) The empty self is sensate (preoccupied with sensations).  As Christopher Lasch has observed, ‘Modern life is…thoroughly mediated by electronic images.’  Lasch goes on to point out that today, we make decisions and even judge what is and is not real on the basis of sense images.  If it’s on TV, it’s real.  Advertisements sell us things based on images, not on thoughtful content about a product.  The widespread emergence of the sensate self has caused us to be shallow, small-souled people.

6) The empty self has lost the art of developing an interior life.  …The self used to be defined in terms of internal traits of virtue and morality, and the successful person, the person of honor and reputation, was the person with deep character. [Today], however, the self has come to be defined in terms of external factors – the ability to project a pleasurable, powerful personality and the possession of consumer goods – and the quest for celebrity status, image, pleasure, and power has become the preoccupation of a self so defined.

7) The empty self is hurried and busy.  …The empty self is a hurried, busy self gorged with activities and noise. …A frenzied pace of life emerges to keep the pain and emptiness suppressed.  One must jump from one activity to another and not be exposed to quite for very long or the emptiness will become apparent.  Such a lifestyle creates a deep sense of fatigue in which passivity takes over.

Moreland is exactly right.  These are some brilliant observations about the “empty selves” of our culture.  He wrote these observations 15 years ago – these traits seem to be more pronounced today.  These are indeed the things which stand in the way of growing in Christian maturity – these are the things that stand in the way of the renewing of the mind, the taking up of our cross, denying ourselves, and fighting the good fight of faith on the narrow road to the Celestial city.  Get this book (Love God with All Your Mind), reflect on these seven traits (Moreland says more about them), and fight against them in your own life.

shane lems

sunnyside, wa

Truth, Humility, and Apologetics (Groothuis)

Here’s a great quote from a great book.

“Postmodernists fret mightily about arrogance and dogmatism, but to avoid them they typically rebound into the equal and opposite errors of cheap tolerance and relativism.  However, a belief in the objectivity of truth and its importance for all of life does not entail an arrogant attitude or an unbending, irrational dogmatism.  Despite the strong convictions that drive this book, I want briefly to distinguish two claims, lest I be misunderstood.  It is one thing to claim that objective, absolute and universe truth exists.  It is quite another to claim that one has mastered these objective, absolute and universal truths or that one has nothing more to learn and is in no need of correction.”

“I will argue strenuously for the former claim but (not being omniscient) make no pretense to the latter.  In fact, it is precisely belief in a truth beyond one’s own thoughts and culture that allows one to be rebuffed and reconstructed by reality.  We can, therefore, be realigned by the truth and with the truth.  This nonnegotiable distinction should engender humility, not arrogance; a quest for reasonable certainty through dialogue, not dogmatism through mindless affirmation and denunciation.”

“Richard John Neuhaus’ comments ought to serve as a tonic for the Christian thinker, myself included, who may be tempted by visions of intellectual grandiosity. ‘Few things have contributed so powerfully to the unbelief of the modern and postmodern world as the pretension of Christians to know more than we do…If Christians exhibited more intellectual patience, modesty, curiosity, and sense of adventure, there would be few atheists in the world, both of the rationalist and postmodern varieties.’”

You can find this quote on pages 12-13 of Truth Decay by Douglas Groothuis.  If you want a scholarly, Christian, and informative resource on truth, I highly recommend this book.  Amazon even has some used copies for well under $10.  Also, if you’re interested, I’ve commented on Groothuis’ magnum opus, Christian Apologetics on the blog earlier (HERE and HERE).

shane lems

sunnyside, wa