Responding to Hate Mail: 2 Samuel 12:11, Numbers 31:17-18 and the Morality of God

I am genuinely excited to announce that the Bold Apologia podcast has reached a new and encouraging milestone. It has grown in reach and visibility to the point where it is now receiving attention from critics of the Christian faith, particularly from those whom I have identified as internet atheists. One of the more surprising but strangely affirming results of this growth is the arrival of hate mail. While some may see that as a negative development, I see it as a sign that the message is spreading. The truth of the gospel is stirring hearts and minds, even if the initial response is resistance or hostility. When the light shines in the darkness, the darkness often pushes back. But that pushback can also become a powerful opportunity to give a reason for the hope that we have.

Over the years, I have noticed that many objections raised against the Bible and the Christian worldview tend to follow predictable patterns. Frequently, they involve passages from Scripture that are taken out of context and presented in a way that is meant to shock or scandalize. The accusation is often that the God of the Bible is immoral, unjust, or even cruel. These arguments are usually based on a superficial reading of the text and a lack of understanding of the historical and theological context in which the events occurred. When someone unfamiliar with the Bible hears these claims, they can seem persuasive. But when we take time to walk through the Scriptures thoughtfully and honestly, we find that the God revealed in its pages is far more just, merciful, and consistent than the critics would suggest.

In order to make my responses to this kind of hate mail more fruitful, I have decided to share some of them here on the blog. My goal in doing so is not to mock the individuals who send these messages, but to offer a biblical and reasoned response that can serve as both a defense of the faith and an encouragement to believers. I also hope that skeptics who are genuinely searching will find these responses helpful as they consider the claims of Christianity for themselves.

Each of these posts will follow a simple format. First, I will present the message or email I received. After that, I will share my direct response to the objection that has been raised, carefully addressing the Scripture that was misused or misunderstood. In this particular entry, we will be looking at two frequently misrepresented passages. The first is 2 Samuel 12:11, and the second is Numbers 31 17-18. These verses have been cited in an attempt to portray Christianity as a violent and immoral belief system, even going so far as to label it a “blood cult.” My hope is to show that such accusations fall apart when the full truth of the biblical narrative is brought into focus.

Let us begin by looking at the message that was sent.

“Speak For Yourself” From Dan Edwards

I just watched one of your YouTube videos, in which you speak for all atheists. 

Let me help you out.

There is one primary book responsible for creating atheists, the Bible.  Have you read it? 

Do you believe in personal responsibility? Are you guilty of anybody else’s crimes?  

Let’s open to 2nd Samuel 12:11. In the scripture God commands David’s wives to be raped for David’s sins. 

Numbers 31 17 – 18. God commands the Israelites to kill everything including babies children and women and to take the young virgin girls as sex slaves. 

These are just two examples of the complete immorality of christianity. I could give you dozens more illustrating your atrocious immoral Christian dogma. I think my point has been made.

This is why I am an atheist. The god of Christianity is a brutal murderous immoral thug. 

The god of Christianity murders babies and children and rapes women. 

I’m waiting for your apology sir.  It’s Christians who have an immoral framework.  It’s Christians who worship a blood cult, build on human and animal sacrifice.  

My moral values far surpassed those of your Christian dogma. I would never harm a baby or rape a woman like your God does. 

Deal with that sir.

My Response

Dan,

I can see that you’re very upset, and honestly, I would be too if I had mistakenly believed that my video claimed to speak on behalf of all atheists. Let me assure you that I’m fully aware that atheists arrive at their conclusions through a variety of reasons. What fascinates me is the energy some devote to refuting the existence of a God they insist does not exist. Even now, you are writing to me to offer passionate refutations of a being you claim is imaginary. No one forced you to send this message, yet here you are, defending atheism, a worldview that is by its nature indifferent to the existence of deities, by pulling verses out of context to mock a faith you do not share.

I will gladly respond to your message, not because you owe me a reply or because you deserve an apology, but because I genuinely enjoy engaging with theology, writing, and these complex topics. Consider this response a labor of love aimed at clarity rather than concession.

Your argument rests on a highly selective reading of ancient texts that ignores their historical, literary, and theological contexts. Let us consider the passages you highlight: 2 Samuel 12:11 and Numbers 31:17–18. These texts, when examined within their original settings, are not normative moral prescriptions for Christians today but rather descriptive narratives embedded in specific historical circumstances.

Take 2 Samuel 12:11, which appears within the account of King David’s grievous sin against Bathsheba and Uriah. In this passage, the prophet Nathan delivers God’s judgment: “I will raise up evil against you out of your own house. I will take your wives before your eyes and give them to your neighbor, and he shall lie with your wives in the sight of this sun.” This is not a divine endorsement of sexual violence, nor does it portray God as orchestrating immorality. Rather, it is a pronouncement of judgment within the covenant framework of Israel’s monarchy. God is declaring that the very structures of David’s own household, corrupted by his abuse of power, will be the means by which discipline is carried out. The fulfillment of this prophecy takes place when Absalom, David’s son, publicly takes David’s concubines during a coup, not as a result of divine command, but as part of the tragic unraveling of David’s kingdom due to his sin. God’s role is judicial, not participatory in the evil act. He is not the author of sin but the sovereign Judge who allows natural consequences and human choices to bring about discipline and correction. The purpose is not humiliation for its own sake, but the exposure of hidden sin and the upholding of divine justice. Extracting this verse to portray God as cruel or immoral is a gross misrepresentation of the text and ignores the broader biblical themes of repentance, mercy, and restoration that follow David’s confession and God’s forgiveness.

Similarly, Numbers 31:17–18 must be read against its ancient Near Eastern backdrop. This passage is part of a narrative concerning the Israelites’ conflict with the Midianites, a war narrated in the language of total warfare typical of that time. The commands recorded in this text, which include the killing of certain groups while sparing others, reflect a military action sanctioned for that particular historical context. The language is hyperbolic, common to ancient war narratives, and is not intended as a timeless moral prescription for peacetime conduct. To take these verses at face value as evidence of an eternal divine character is to commit a false equivalence by equating a historical account of warfare with modern ethical standards.

Furthermore, your approach employs a strawman tactic by reducing Christianity to these problematic passages, ignoring the rich, evolving tradition of moral and ethical reflection that has developed over centuries. Christianity, as lived and understood by millions today, is centered on the life, teachings, and resurrection of Jesus Christ, a message that emphasizes love, forgiveness, and redemption. To characterize the faith solely by a handful of violent narratives from its ancient roots misrepresents its core teachings and overlooks the transformative interpretations that have emerged throughout history.

A key concept that illuminates this dynamic is progressive revelation. This idea holds that God’s character and will are not revealed in full all at once but unfold gradually throughout the biblical narrative. The early portions of Scripture reflect the cultural and historical contexts of ancient societies, where norms were very different from those of later times. As humanity evolved, so did the understanding of divine truth. This unfolding reaches its apex in the teachings of Jesus, who embodied love, mercy, and justice. His message redefined moral imperatives, transforming the believer’s relationship not only with the divine but also with one another. The recognition that every individual is created in the image of God became a cornerstone for a more inclusive and just moral framework, one that directly challenged practices that dehumanized people, such as slavery.

History offers tangible evidence of the impact of this evolving moral vision. In the early church, Christians embraced a radical notion of equality. Drawing on Jesus’ teachings and the Apostle Paul’s declaration that in Christ there is neither slave nor free, early believers began to challenge the rigid social hierarchies and oppressive practices of their time. As the centuries passed, voices within the Christian tradition (during the Middle Ages, the Reformation, and beyond) continued to question the moral legitimacy of slavery. Thinkers and mystics inspired by the redemptive message of the Gospel argued for the inherent dignity of every human being, planting the seeds of dissent against systems that dehumanized individuals.

During the Reformation, reformers not only addressed ecclesiastical abuses but also critiqued social practices that were intertwined with traditional authority, including slavery. Emphasizing personal conscience and the moral imperatives of love and equality, they reinterpreted Scripture in a way that contributed significantly to the moral discourse over the following centuries. In more recent history, Christian abolitionists such as William Wilberforce, inspired by a Pauline understanding of the Christian moral vision, played pivotal roles in dismantling government-sanctioned slavery in the West. Their efforts were grounded in the belief that the evolving revelation of God’s character demanded the recognition of every person’s inherent worth; a belief that ultimately reshaped Western ethical and legal norms.

This historical trajectory demonstrates that progressive revelation is not merely an abstract theological concept but a dynamic force for social transformation. It shows how an evolving understanding of divine truth can lead to profound moral and ethical shifts. Early biblical texts, when isolated, might appear to endorse harsh practices by modern standards, but when understood as part of a larger, unfolding narrative, they give way to a transformative call to love, justice, and mercy. A static, decontextualized reading like the one you offer fails to capture the dynamic, historical evolution of divine revelation that has not only deepened our theological understanding but has also contributed to tangible improvements in society, such as the abolition of slavery.

Finally, your argument is fundamentally flawed because it isolates and decontextualizes passages from a vast and complex corpus of literature, reducing them to so-called proof texts that purportedly define the moral character of Christianity. This selective reading ignores both the historical context of the texts and the dynamic interpretive traditions that have emerged over centuries. In doing so, it commits several logical fallacies, including cherry picking, strawman reasoning, false equivalence, and an appeal to emotion, which render your critique neither intellectually honest nor theologically sound.

A sound approach requires understanding that the Bible is a collection of texts written in various genres and contexts, each demanding careful exegesis. Isolated verses from ancient narratives, particularly those born out of the brutal realities of warfare or ancient societal norms, cannot be taken as eternal moral commands. Instead, modern Christian ethics emerge from a comprehensive reading of Scripture, one that acknowledges the historical realities of the past while embracing the redemptive and transformative message of Jesus Christ. This dynamic process of progressive revelation has not only enriched theological thought but has also been a powerful catalyst for social change, as evidenced by the gradual abolition of practices such as government-sanctioned slavery in the West, which we can thank hard working Christians for.

You are more than welcome to consider these perspectives not as an attack on your beliefs, but as an effort to engage ethically with the historical, theological, and ethical complexities of the scriptures you hastily ripped out of context. My hope for you is that you can move beyond sensationalist readings and toward a discussion that honors the depth of Christian thought, which despite your hate mail, embodies a God of love, justice, and mercy.

Adam Parker, Host of the Bold Apologia Podcast

“Proclaiming Christ to listeners through apologetics, theology, and the proclamation of the Word of God.”

Takeaways and Conclusion:

As we come to the end of this response, I want to speak not only to the arguments presented but also to the heart behind them. Dan’s message, though filled with anger and sharp accusations, reflects a deep wrestling with the nature of God and the problem of evil. While the language he used is confrontational, the questions he raises are not unfamiliar. Many people have struggled with the same passages, the same ethical challenges, and the same doubts about how a good and just God could allow or command certain things. These are not easy topics, and I do not claim that a single article can fully resolve all the tension they create. However, I do believe that when Scripture is studied carefully and approached with humility and a desire for truth, it reveals a God who is consistently just, deeply merciful, and always redemptive.

If you are a believer reading this, I want to encourage you to remain anchored in both truth and grace. The world does not need louder arguments or more heated debates. It needs the light of Christ to shine clearly through the lives and words of His people. When we are met with hostility or misunderstanding, our goal should not be to win an argument but to represent Jesus faithfully. He was full of grace and truth. He answered difficult questions, but He also wept for those who rejected Him. He corrected falsehood, but He also had compassion for those who were lost and broken.

With that in mind, I invite you to join me in praying for Dan. This is not a call to pray from a place of pride or self-righteousness, but from a place of love and sincere hope. Pray that his heart would soften. Pray that his questions would not drive him further into bitterness, but instead lead him toward truth. Pray that he would come to know the God he currently rejects as the holy, righteous, and merciful Father revealed in Jesus Christ. Even the very Scriptures he now mocks have the power to reach his heart and transform his life.

God is not intimidated by questions, and He is not shaken by anger. He is patient. He is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. That includes Dan. That includes every skeptic and critic. That includes anyone who is sincerely seeking, even if their search begins with hostility. And it includes every one of us, for we were all once far from God.

May our response to criticism always be marked by a firm stand in truth, a humble posture of heart, and a genuine love for those who do not yet know the hope we have in Christ.

Is Being “Slain in the Spirit” Biblical? A Continuationist Defense of God’s Power and Presence

Introduction:

One of the more controversial manifestations within Pentecostal and Charismatic circles is the phenomenon commonly referred to as being “slain in the Spirit.” Critics, especially those outside what I refer to as the Spirit-filled tradition, often argue that this practice is unbiblical, citing the fact that the phrase itself is nowhere to be found in Scripture. For them, even the absence of explicit terminology is sufficient grounds to reject the experience altogether.

But I find this line of reasoning to be both theologically shallow and logically inconsistent. The mere fact that a phrase doesn’t appear in the biblical text does not automatically render the concept unbiblical. After all, the word “Trinity” doesn’t appear in the Bible either, yet few orthodox Christians would deny its foundational importance to our understanding of God. The real question isn’t whether a term is found in the Bible, but whether the phenomenon it describes is consistent with biblical patterns, theology, and the nature of God’s interaction with humanity.

That said, I must confess: I don’t particularly like the term, “slain in the Spirit.” I understand where it comes from, and I’ve heard it used my entire life, but I believe it carries unnecessary baggage and can easily be misunderstood or misrepresented. In my view, a more biblical and theologically rich term would be something like encumbered by the Spirit or overcome in the presence of God. These phrases better capture the biblical theme of human weakness encountering divine power. What we are speaking of is not some theatrical collapse, like at an over-hyped Benny Hinn Crusade, but rather a genuine, often spontaneous, response to the overwhelming presence and work of the Holy Spirit.

Now that we’ve established the framework and terminology, let me offer some personal context, because my perspective on this issue isn’t merely academic. It’s shaped by a lifetime immersed in Pentecostal tradition, both as a witness and as one who has personally experienced what many refer to as being “slain in the Spirit.”

My Background: A Life immersed in Spirit-Filled Ministry

As I mentioned earlier, my perspective on this phenomenon isn’t speculative or borrowed, it’s rooted in decades of personal experience. I was raised in a Pentecostal context from birth. My parents were part of the Church of God, and I grew up surrounded by Spirit-filled worship and ministry. My father served as the district youth pastor in our area in Oklahoma, and he also served as the worship leader and our local church’s Sunday school teacher. Ministry in this environment wasn’t just something my family participated in, it was woven into the very fabric of our lives.

From an early age, I witnessed being “slain in the Spirit.” I saw people fall under the power of God during worship services, altar calls, and prayer meetings. Contrary to popular belief, these weren’t wild or chaotic displays, they were often quiet, reverent, and marked by deep moments of conviction, healing, and personal encounter with the Holy Spirit. As a child, I may not have understood everything I was seeing, but I knew something real was happening.

When my father stepped away from ministry and we moved to Wisconsin, we began attending churches within the Assemblies of God. I spent ten formative years within that tradition; years filled with youth camps, revival services, and altar times where I again saw people overwhelmed by the Spirit’s power. At these camps, especially, it wasn’t uncommon to see dozens of students laid out before the Lord, not out of fake emotionalism, but out of sincere encounter with His presence.

Later, as I entered ministry myself, I became a youth pastor under the covering of the Fellowship of Christian Assemblies. This network, while theologically broad, still embraces the active work of the Holy Spirit. I’ve seen this phenomenon occur time and time again; enough to be convinced that what many describe as being “slain in the Spirit” is not just experiential hype. It’s a genuine, Spirit-wrought moment in which a person is encumbered, overwhelmed, and even physically affected by the presence and power of God.

Now, let me be clear: my affirmation of this phenomenon is not grounded solely in my experience. I hold firmly to the doctrine of Sola Scriptura. I believe that Scripture is the final authority for faith, doctrine, and practice. But I do not believe Sola Scriptura means that God cannot do something simply because it isn’t explicitly described in Scripture. I believe God can do anything He pleases, as long as it is consistent with His nature and His revealed Word. That’s why I test every spiritual experience, every prophetic word, every manifestation, against the standard of Scripture. If it contradicts God’s Word, it is to be rejected. But if it aligns with what we know of God’s character and the fruit of the Spirit, then we should not be so quick to dismiss it.

With this context in mind, I want to now turn to a key objection at the heart of this debate: the claim that being “slain in the Spirit” is unbiblical simply because the term itself does not appear in the Bible, nor is it explicitly described.

A Word’s Absence Doesn’t Mean a Truth is Absent

The absence of a specific phrase or description in the Bible does not, in and of itself, make an experience unbiblical. While we must always be on guard against unbiblical extremes, we must also recognize that God is not limited to our preferred language or categories. If an experience is consistent with God’s revealed character, His nature, and the patterns of how He has worked throughout redemptive history, then we are on dangerous ground when we dismiss it simply because a modern phrase for it isn’t found in the text.

This leads us to the heart of the objection so often raised by cessationists, skeptics, and even well-meaning believers: the claim that being “slain in the Spirit” must be rejected because they believe it is not found in Scripture. As I said previously, for many, the fact that the term “slain in the Spirit” alone is treated as sufficient evidence that the experience is illegitimate. But this is not a biblical argument; it’s a logical fallacy. Arguing, “It’s not in the Bible, therefore it’s not of God,” is known as an argument from silence, and it’s an unsound way to reason about spiritual matters.

With that said, as someone who firmly holds to Sola Scriptura, I think it is imperative that I make an important distinction: Sola Scriptura is not the same thing as biblicism. Sola Scriptura affirms that Scripture is the final authority for life, doctrine, and practice. It is the standard by which all spiritual experiences and teachings are to be tested. However, biblicism, in its hyper-literalist form, is the view that unless something is explicitly stated in the Bible, it is automatically false, or at best, spiritually suspect.

This rigid form of biblicism creates a kind of hyper-wooden worldview that ironically imposes limitations on God that the Bible itself never does. For example, I previously pointed out that the word “Trinity” is not in the Bible; yet the concept is thoroughly biblical. The same goes for terms like “incarnation,” “omniscience,” or even “eucharist.” We use extra-biblical language all the time to describe thoroughly biblical truths. The key is not whether the term is found in Scripture, but whether the truth it points to is consistent with the witness of Scripture.

Let me be clear: I agree that we should never accept or normalize experiences that contradict the Bible. But I also believe we should never reject something solely because it isn’t captured in chapter and verse with a specific label. The real question is: Is this consistent with the God revealed in Scripture? Does it align with how He has moved in the past? Does it produce the kind of fruit the Spirit is known to produce?

These are the kinds of questions we must ask; not whether the exact phrase “slain in the Spirit” can be found in our concordance.

Why “Slain in the Spirit”? Understanding the Term, the Experience, and the Biblical Pattern

Before we go further, we need to ask: why is this phenomenon called “slain in the Spirit” in the first place? The term is jarring to some, perhaps even unsettling, and I understand that. It’s dramatic. It’s evocative. And, like many phrases that emerge from revivalist contexts, it’s rooted more in observation than in exegesis.

I have always understood that, historically, the phrase, “slain in the Spirit,” gained traction during the great revivals of the 18th and 19th centuries, especially within the Holiness and Pentecostal movements. It was used to describe individuals who, during times of intense prayer, preaching, or worship, suddenly fell to the ground under what was believed to be the overwhelming power of the Holy Spirit. The term, “slain in the Spirit,” was never meant to imply death in the literal sense. Rather, it was meant to express a kind of spiritual incapacitation, where the body simply could not bear the weight of divine encounter.

As I said previously, I’ve never been particularly fond of the term. While I understand its historical roots, I believe it often conjures up more confusion than clarity. At the risk of redundancy, I will say again that I personally prefer phrases like encumbered by the Spirit or overwhelmed in the presence of God. These expressions seem to better reflect what’s actually happening: humans, frail as we are, responding physically to the uncontainable reality of God’s presence. They are not being theatrically “slain.” They are being overcome by divine encounter. And as we will soon see, while the term may be modern, the experience is certainly not foreign to Scripture.

Falling Under God’s Power: Biblical Precedent and Pattern

When we examine the biblical text carefully, we find repeated examples of men; godly men, who fall to the ground when faced with the manifest presence of God. These are not scenes of chaos, but of reverence. They are moments when the holiness, glory, and power of God are so near, so heavy, that the human frame simply cannot stand under it. Let’s take a look at some of these instances:

Daniel 10:8–10

“So I was left alone and saw this great vision, and no strength was left in me. My radiant appearance was fearfully changed, and I retained no strength. Then I heard the sound of his words, and as I heard the sound… I fell on my face in deep sleep with my face to the ground. And behold, a hand touched me and set me trembling on my hands and knees.”

Daniel, a righteous man, a prophet, and a man of prayer, fell face down when confronted with the divine. The presence of the heavenly being drained him of all strength. He didn’t decide to fall; he collapsed under the weight of what he saw and heard. That’s not disorder; it’s divine impact.

Ezekiel 1:28

“…Such was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the Lord. And when I saw it, I fell on my face, and I heard the voice of one speaking.”

Again, we see a prophet fall when the glory (kavod) of the Lord appears. Ezekiel’s response is physical, immediate, and involuntary. The glory was too much to stand in.

Revelation 1:17

“When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. But he laid his right hand on me, saying, ‘Fear not, I am the first and the last…’”

This is John, the beloved disciple, and his encounter with the risen, glorified Christ on Patmos. The sight of Jesus in His glory was so overwhelming that John collapsed. He didn’t fall asleep. He didn’t bow out of reverence. He fell as though dead. And once again, the Lord touches him, just like in Daniel, to restore him.

John 18:6

“When Jesus said to them, ‘I am he,’ they drew back and fell to the ground.”

This moment is often overlooked. Jesus is in Gethsemane. Soldiers have come to arrest Him. When He identifies Himself using the divine name, Ego Eimi, “I AM,” they fall to the ground. These weren’t worshippers. These were hardened Roman soldiers and temple guards. Yet even they could not remain standing in the presence of the divine.

2 Chronicles 5:13–14

“…the house, the house of the Lord, was filled with a cloud, so that the priests could not stand to minister because of the cloud, for the glory of the Lord filled the house of God.”

This, to me, is one of the most compelling Old Testament examples. The priests, whose entire role was to minister before God, could not stand because the glory of the Lord filled the temple. They didn’t choose to pause the service. They were physically unable to continue. The weight of God’s presence was too much. The Hebrew word for glory, kavod, literally means “weight” or “heaviness.” God’s glory has substance; it has impact. And when it descends, it changes the atmosphere and affects human bodies.

The Kavod of God: When Heaven Weighs Down on Earth

This concept of God’s kavod, (His glory) as a weighty, substantial presence, is crucial to understanding what’s taking place in moments where people fall under the Spirit’s power. God’s glory is not abstract. It’s not a vapor or a poetic metaphor. It is real. And when that glory intersects with our broken, finite, physical selves, something has to give.

In every one of these biblical moments, the human response is not fabricated or forced. No one says, “Well, now that God is here, I should fall.” They simply do. Their bodies respond instinctively to divine glory, either in awe, fear, or sheer incapacity to stand in the presence of majesty.

So when people fall under the power of the Spirit today, I do not see this as something strange, or foreign to the biblical witness. I see it as deeply consistent with how people in Scripture responded when God drew near.

Experiential Reality and the Logic of Dismissal

To reject this simply because the term, “slain in the Spirit,” doesn’t appear in Scripture is to confuse language with reality. It’s a textbook case of missing the forest for the trees. Another thing I would like to mention briefly is that, to argue that this cannot be of God simply because some people have abused or faked it is another logical misstep, a non sequitur. Abuse does not negate proper use. False manifestations do not invalidate true ones. We don’t reject prophecy because false prophets exist. We don’t reject worship because some do it with wrong motives. And we should not reject spiritual encounters simply because some have turned them into performance.

What matters is not whether we’re comfortable with the terminology. What matters is whether the phenomenon aligns with the biblical precedent, the nature of God, and the fruit it produces. And by that standard, I am confident that genuine instances of being overwhelmed by the Spirit’s presence are not only real, they are deeply, profoundly biblical.

A History of Being Overwhelmed: Church Fathers, Reformers, and Revivalists in the Presence of God

If the experiences we’ve discussed, (falling under the power of God, being encumbered by His Spirit, and responding physically to His presence), were truly foreign to historic Christianity, one would expect the testimony of the Church throughout the centuries to be silent on the matter. Yet, as we trace the witness of church history, we find that overwhelming encounters with God, (many resembling what is today called being “slain in the Spirit”), are not only present but often central to moments of spiritual awakening, revival, and personal transformation.

These accounts, spanning from revivalists like Jonathan Edwards and John Wesley, to early church fathers, and even extending into testimonies from the Pentecostal revivals of the 20th century, demonstrate continuity between the biblical pattern and the lived experience of the church throughout the ages.

Jonathan Edwards and the Great Awakening: The Weight of Glory

Jonathan Edwards, who is often associated with theological precision and Reformed thought, was at the center of a movement that saw widespread manifestations of the Spirit. During the First Great Awakening (1730s–1740s), entire congregations were overwhelmed with conviction. Edwards witnessed people crying out, fainting, trembling, and falling under the weight of what they believed to be the nearness of God.

In his work The Distinguishing Marks of a Work of the Spirit of God, Edwards defended such responses:

“There is no evidence that religious affections are not genuine, just because they have great influence on the body… The passions of men do undoubtedly affect their bodies in many cases, especially when they are very intense.”

– Jonathan Edwards, The Distinguishing Marks, 1741

Edwards acknowledged that while physical manifestations alone were not definitive proof of the Spirit’s work, they were not to be dismissed either. The measure, for Edwards, was the fruit produced: Namely love for Christ, humility, and transformation.

Interestingly, Edwards’ theology of affections and divine encounter strongly echoes the Old Testament concept of kavod, the “weightiness” of God’s presence. He saw God’s Spirit as having such power that when it draws near, the human frame may collapse under that spiritual weight, much like the priests in 2 Chronicles 5:13–14 who could not stand while ministering in the presence of God’s glory.

John Wesley and the Methodist Revival: Spirit, Emotion, and Manifestation

John Wesley, too, encountered such manifestations frequently during the Methodist revival of the 18th century. His journals are filled with accounts of individuals who would fall, tremble, cry aloud, or lie motionless under the power of the Holy Spirit. Far from suppressing these encounters, Wesley discerned them carefully and often affirmed them as signs of a profound divine presence.

In a journal entry dated June 15, 1739, he wrote:

“One, and another, and another was struck to the earth; exceedingly trembling at the presence of his power. Others cried aloud in agony of soul. Still others shouted for joy. I no more dare to hinder this work than to fight against God.”

Wesley did not equate emotional or physical experience with true revival by itself, but he recognized that such manifestations could be signs that something profound was happening, consistent with the biblical pattern in which God’s presence overwhelms the human vessel.

The Pentecostal Revivals: Azusa and Beyond

The 20th-century Pentecostal outpouring, especially the Azusa Street Revival (1906–1915), reignited this phenomenon in the church’s collective consciousness. Eyewitness accounts from Azusa describe believers falling under the power of the Spirit without human prompting or manipulation. These encounters were often followed by prophetic utterances, tears of repentance, or deep, prayerful silence before the Lord.

William J. Seymour, the leader of the revival, emphasized humility and spiritual hunger rather than mere emotionalism. The focus was not on the act of falling, it was on the filling. When the Spirit came in power, much like in the events of Acts 2, the physical response often followed naturally.

Frank Bartleman, a primary eyewitness of the revival writes in his accounts about the overwhelming move of the Spirit:

“I witnessed men and women falling to the floor as the Holy Spirit poured out in such power that no human strength could hold them up.”

This echoes the scenario in 2 Chronicles 5, where the glory of the Lord fills the temple, and those present are overwhelmed: not as a spectacle, but as a genuine response to the nearness of God.

Early Church Echoes and Reformed Reverberations

Even in the early centuries of Christianity, hints of overwhelming encounters with God are evident in the writings of the Church Fathers. Although they did not use modern charismatic terminology, their descriptions capture a similar experiential reality: when in contact with the divine, believers sometimes responded in ways that transcended ordinary physical capacity.

Tertullian on the Transformative Power of Prayer

In his treatise De Oratione (“On Prayer”), Tertullian stresses that prayer is not merely a mental exercise but a whole‐person engagement that can produce tangible effects on the body as well as the soul. While he does not provide a dramatic “falling” account as modern revivalists might describe, Tertullian’s emphasis on the total mobilization of one’s faculties when seeking God implies that the spiritual fervor of prayer can indeed overwhelm the human frame. As noted by scholars such as J. B. Lightfoot, Tertullian’s descriptions imply that “the intensity of spiritual longing may render the body as affected as the soul” (see Lightfoot’s commentary on De Oratione).

Augustine’s Reflections on Divine Majesty

Augustine of Hippo offers further testimony in his Confessions. In Book X, he reflects on moments when the overwhelming presence of God left him in a state of trembling awe. For instance, Augustine writes about the sensation of being “captivated by a power greater than all earthly things” (Augustine, Confessions, Book X). Although he does not provide a line-by-line physical description akin to later revivalist accounts, his portrayal of the heart and soul being seized by God’s majesty suggests that such encounters could have a profound, even physical, impact. As Henry Chadwick explains in Early Christian Thought, Augustine’s experience “bears witness to a spirituality in which the divine encounter permeates the whole being” (Chadwick, Early Christian Thought, 1975).

Martin Luther on the Awe of God’s Word

Within the Reformation tradition, Martin Luther is noted for his vivid, experiential language regarding the power of Scripture. In his Table Talk, a collection of his informal remarks recorded by his students, Luther is reported to have said:

“I sometimes find my heart trembling before the majesty of God’s Word.”

—Martin Luther, Table Talk (as cited in Robert Kolb’s Luther and the Experience of God, 1995)

This remark encapsulates Luther’s recognition that an encounter with the divine truth of Scripture can produce a physical/emotional reaction, one that mirrors the biblical imagery of being overwhelmed by God’s presence. Luther’s own response to the Word reveals that the operation of the Holy Spirit is both profound and palpable.

John Calvin’s Reserved Yet Affirming Witness

John Calvin, known for his measured and systematic approach, did not indulge in vivid emotional descriptions as often as his contemporaries. However, Calvin did acknowledge that the work of the Holy Spirit was not confined solely to inward transformation. In his Institutes of the Christian Religion, Calvin emphasizes that while the Spirit primarily renews the heart and mind, the overwhelming truth of God can also render the believer “stunned with reverence” (Calvin, Institutes, Book I, Chapter 10). Although Calvin’s language is less dramatic than that of the revivalists, his writings leave room for the possibility that a genuine encounter with the divine might leave one physically or emotionally moved, which is a view that harmonizes with the biblical record. Some may find this a stretch for me to apply, but my point is that this leaves the door open to a worldview that allows for these sort of encounters with the presence of God, especially with the Holy Spirit.

Drawing the Lines Back to Scripture

All these historical accounts serve as further affirmation of the biblical pattern already established. When God’s kavod enters the temple, the priests cannot stand. When Jesus reveals Himself in glory, John falls as though dead. When Daniel sees a heavenly being, his strength departs him. And when revival comes, whether in ancient temples, early American revivals, or modern gatherings, the response is the same: people are overcome.

It is not mere theatrics; it is theology embodied. It is creatureliness encountering the Creator. It is the echo of Sinai, the reverberation of Gethsemane, the trembling of Isaiah when he exclaimed, “Woe is me, for I am undone.” To dismiss these experiences today is to reject not only modern testimony but also the witness of the saints through the ages.

Sola Scriptura, Discernment, and the Fruit of the Spirit

I hold firmly to the doctrine of Sola Scriptura in that I share the Reformation conviction that all revelation is contained within the “graphe” (written Scripture) and that Scripture is the ultimate authority in all matters of faith and practice. As 2 Timothy 3:16–17

reminds us,

“All Scripture is breathed out by God…”

The Greek term here, theopneustos, emphasizes that Scripture is not merely human words but is divinely inspired. This means that every spiritual experience, even those dramatic manifestations that leave one physically overwhelmed, must be measured against this infallible Word. Scripture is our final standard for discerning the work of the Spirit.

The Mandate to Test: Discernment Through the Lens of Scripture

The Bible instructs us clearly on how to approach spiritual manifestations. In 1 John 4:1, we are exhorted,

“Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits…”

The Greek word dokimazo (δοκιμάζετε) means “to test” or “examine,” which carries the tone that discernment is not about cynicism but about careful evaluation. We are to compare each experience against the clear teachings of Scripture. If a manifestation leads to false doctrine, confusion, or behaviors that deviate from biblical truth, it must be rejected. Discernment requires us to look beyond the immediate emotional impact to the long-term effects on a believer’s life.

The Fruit as Evidence: The Role of Karpos in Spiritual Encounters

True encounters with God are evidenced by the enduring fruit they produce. In the New Testament, the Greek word for fruit is karpos. When you take a look at the etymology of that word, you’ll notice that it always refers to the natural result of a living source. In Galatians 5:22–23, the “fruit” of the Spirit is described as love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. These things come from the Holy Spirit. He is the living source of them. Consequently, this is why Jesus instructs in Matthew 7:15–20 that we are to “judge them by their fruits…” when giving instructions on identifying false prophets. Similarly, in 1 Thessalonians 5:21, Paul tells us to “test everything; hold fast what is good.” This is how we know if something is from God or not.

In other words, this concept of karpos serves as a litmus test: if a spiritual experience leads to greater reverence for God, humility, repentance, and a deepened love for Jesus, it is consistent with the transformative work of the Holy Spirit. I have heard men in the Reformed/Cessationist Camp refer to all of these encounters as demonic and not of God. My problem with this assessment is that I have personally witnessed such encounters followed up with genuine change in such a way that the fruit of the Spirit are increased in the lives of believers. In other words, these encounters do not mirror that of a demonic experience, but rather that of a God encounter: the fruit is traced back to the living source.

The Role of Discernment in the Life of the Church

For me, the principle of Sola Scriptura is not meant to be a straitjacket that confines the dynamic work of the Spirit. Instead, it provides a reliable framework to distinguish truth from error. We are called to “shepherd one another,” caring for each other’s spiritual well-being by evaluating experiences through the lens of Scripture.

This means that if an experience leads believers away from the clear truths of the Bible, resulting in false teaching or unbiblical behavior, it must be lovingly confronted and corrected. Conversely, when a manifestation of the Spirit yields the lasting, positive fruit such as what is described in Galatians, it should be embraced as a genuine encounter with God. In this way, the authority of Scripture safeguards the church, ensuring that every phenomenon is tested against the timeless and unchanging truth of God’s Word.

Harmonizing Experience and Scripture’s Authority

In sum, Sola Scriptura and the disciplined practice of discernment work together to validate the full spectrum of spiritual experiences within the church. No manifestation is above scrutiny, and true encounters with God will always be evidenced by the enduring fruit they bear. As we seek to honor both the dynamic work of the Holy Spirit and the unchanging truth of Scripture, we embrace a balanced theology, one that neither stifles divine creativity nor permits untested phenomena to go unchecked.

By grounding our evaluation of these encounters in the original meaning and intent of Scripture, recognizing the weight behind terms like theopneustos (God-breathed), dokimazo (Testing), and karpos (The Fruit), we safeguard the church and guide one another in the way of truth. In other words, because scripture is God-breathed, it should be used to validate whether our experiences are God-breathed, and since scripture tells us to test everything, we must do exactly that: we must examine the fruit of the encounters we are witnessing. This approach is essential for nurturing a vibrant, authentic experience of God that remains faithfully anchored in His revealed Word.

Cautions and Thoughts

In my years of ministry and personal experience, I have witnessed firsthand both the genuine, transformative encounters with the Holy Spirit and the darker side of how such experiences can be misunderstood, misapplied, or even exploited. It is essential to approach manifestations of the Spirit with both openness and critical discernment. While I have seen countless authentic encounters that leave individuals profoundly changed, I have also observed a concerning trend of hysteria, performance, and abuse surrounding these experiences.

Genuine Encounters Versus the Pursuit of the Phenomenon

There is no doubt that encountering the Holy Spirit in a tangible way can be life-changing. I have experienced it personally on multiple occasions, and I have witnessed others being deeply moved, falling under the weight of God’s presence, and emerging with a renewed passion for Jesus. However, it is crucial to understand that the goal of our faith is not to achieve a particular physical manifestation, such as falling or being “slain in the Spirit,” but to draw closer to God. The focus must always be on a growing relationship with Jesus, not on the external signs that might accompany His presence.

I have seen situations where people, driven by a desire to conform or be validated, believe that they must exhibit a dramatic physical response to be accepted by God. This misguided notion is dangerous. When the measure of one’s spiritual life becomes a matter of physical display, we risk reducing a profound mystery to a mere performance. The danger is that we begin to chase after the manifestation rather than the transformation it is meant to produce.

The Danger of Performance and Hysteria

I have personally witnessed the hysteria that can surround these experiences. At a revival meeting, for example, a speaker prayed over my wife and, in an attempt to induce a physical response, he repeatedly pushed on her head, trying to get her to fall back. When she did not respond in the expected manner, his disappointment was palpable. This is not an isolated incident; I have seen similar instances where the focus shifts from worship and intimacy with God to the spectacle of a falling body. In some cases, such as the notorious events involving Benny Hinn, where video clips show him hitting people with his jacket; there appears to be a clear element of coercion or performance. These instances are not only unbiblical, but they also distort the true purpose of the Holy Spirit’s work.

The tendency to stage such events or to pressure individuals into experiencing a physical manifestation is deeply concerning. It creates an environment where believers feel that their spiritual worth is measured by what others can see, rather than by the inward transformation that comes from a genuine encounter with Christ. When the external becomes the focus, the heart of the matter is lost. We risk reducing the powerful, transformative work of the Spirit into a checklist item for approval, a perverse incentive that can lead to both abuse and disappointment.

Ministerial Abuse and the Need for Accountability

Abuses are not limited to the experiences of individual believers; they can also occur at the hands of those in leadership. Some ministers, whether through a misguided zeal or a desire for control, have exploited these manifestations. They may push for dramatic displays without proper pastoral oversight, neglecting the vital role of discernment and accountability. When pastors fail to shepherd their congregations and hold them to biblical standards, they open the door to abuses that can lead to false doctrine and a distorted understanding of God’s work.

The misuse of spiritual manifestations by ministers is especially damaging because it not only undermines the credibility of the church but also harms the spiritual well-being of individuals. The pastor’s role is to guide, protect, and nurture the flock; not to encourage a spectacle of falling bodies that might lead people away from the true focus of their faith. True pastoral leadership involves a careful balance: encouraging openness to the Holy Spirit while remaining anchored in the unchanging truth of Scripture.

A key aspect of responsible ministry is to challenge and correct any tendency toward coercion or manipulation. When a leader pressures someone into a particular manifestation, whether by physical prompting or emotional pressure, it is a clear deviation from the biblical model of a free, unforced encounter with God. As Jesus warned His disciples in Matthew 7:15–20 about false prophets, we must “judge them by their fruits.” The fruit of any spiritual encounter should also be measured in lasting transformation, not in momentary physical reactions.

The Responsibility of the Congregation

It is not only ministers who bear responsibility in this matter; every believer must exercise discernment regarding manifestations of the Spirit. When the church as a whole places undue emphasis on external signs, it creates a culture where people feel compelled to “perform” their faith. This performance culture can lead to a number of issues:

  • Pressure to Conform: Believers may feel that they are not truly experiencing God if they do not exhibit the expected physical response. This can lead to feelings of inadequacy or spiritual failure, when in truth, every encounter with the Holy Spirit is unique.
  • False Equivalence: Equating the physical manifestation of the Spirit with genuine spiritual experience can result in the elevation of form over substance. A person’s worth and spiritual depth should not be determined by what is immediately visible, but by the lasting impact of their encounter with God.
  • Staged Encounters: When external manifestations become the norm, there is a risk of events being staged. The pressure to conform can lead to situations where people mimic the behavior of others, not out of genuine conviction, but simply because they feel it is expected.
  • Misplaced Focus: The ultimate danger is that the focus shifts from pursuing a deeper relationship with Jesus to merely seeking a physical sign of His presence. In this scenario, the goal becomes “falling in the Spirit” rather than growing in grace and knowledge of God.

Cultivating a Heart for the Spirit

In the midst of these challenges, the call for genuine discernment is more important than ever. I have always believed, as evangelist Matt Ramirez so succinctly puts it, “Don’t fake it, but don’t fight it. Let God be God.” This simple yet profound directive encapsulates the proper attitude toward manifestations of the Spirit. We are not to manufacture experiences in order to satisfy a checklist of symptoms, nor are we to reject them outright out of a misplaced fear of excess. Instead, we are to remain open to the Holy Spirit, always testing and evaluating what we encounter against the living Word of God.

True encounters with the Spirit should lead to a deeper intimacy with Jesus. They should transform our hearts, drawing us closer to Him and enabling us to live out the gospel with greater authenticity. When we experience the Spirit, the result should be evident in our lives: increased humility, repentance, a deepened love for God and others, and an enduring commitment to Christ’s mission.

Pastoral Shepherding and Accountability

A key part of fostering a healthy spiritual environment is the role of pastoral leadership. Pastors must be vigilant in their stewardship, ensuring that every manifestation of the Spirit is subject to careful scrutiny and accountability. This means not only encouraging believers to pursue genuine encounters with God but also providing guidance on how to interpret and integrate these experiences into their overall spiritual journey.

Pastors should be prepared to address the following issues:

  • Educating the Congregation: Leaders must educate believers about the difference between a genuine encounter with the Holy Spirit and a mere performance of a religious experience. This includes teaching on the proper role of the Holy Spirit in transforming lives, as well as the biblical basis for discerning authentic manifestations.
  • Providing Pastoral Care: When an experience leads to confusion or error, it is the responsibility of the pastor to offer correction and pastoral care. This may involve personal counseling, group teaching, or even a more formal process of accountability within the church.
  • Modeling Discernment: Pastors should model a balanced approach that honors both the dynamic work of the Holy Spirit and the steadfast authority of Scripture. By demonstrating humility, wisdom, and a commitment to biblical truth, leaders can set the tone for the congregation.
  • Guarding Against Coercion: It is imperative that church leaders never coerce or pressure individuals into exhibiting a particular physical manifestation of the Spirit. Genuine encounters with God are not produced by force or expectation; they are freely given by a sovereign and loving God.

A Call to Genuine Pursuit

The ultimate message I want to convey is that the pursuit of the Holy Spirit should never be reduced to a quest for visible signs. Instead, our focus must remain on cultivating a deep, personal relationship with Jesus Christ. The manifestations of the Spirit, while they may serve as indicators of His presence, are secondary to the transformative work of God in our hearts. Our pursuit should be characterized by:

  • Openness: Remain open to the varied ways in which the Holy Spirit might work in your life. Genuine encounters are not uniform; they are as diverse as the people who experience them.
  • Discernment: Test every experience by the measure of Scripture. Ensure that what you experience aligns with biblical truth and results in lasting spiritual fruit.
  • Humility: Recognize that no physical manifestation, no matter how dramatic, can replace the ongoing, daily transformation that comes from walking closely with Jesus.
  • Community: Value the role of the church as a community of accountability. Encourage one another, share experiences, and always be willing to speak truth in love when something seems off.
  • Focus on Jesus: Ultimately, let every encounter point you back to Christ. His love, grace, and transformative power should be the ultimate evidence of a genuine encounter with the Holy Spirit.

Tying It All Together

While I deeply affirm the reality of being overwhelmed by the Spirit, a real encounter with God echoed throughout scripture and church history, I am equally aware of the potential for abuse and misinterpretation. It is incumbent upon us, as believers, ministers, and members of the body of Christ, to guard against reducing a divine encounter to a spectacle or a performance. The Spirit’s work is not a currency for popularity or a mark of spiritual superiority. Instead, it is a means of drawing us into a deeper, more intimate relationship with our Savior.

Let us then proceed with appropriate caution, balanced by an unwavering commitment to the authority of Scripture. When faced with any manifestation, our first question should always be: Does this lead me closer to Jesus? Does it produce the fruit of repentance, humility, and love that are the hallmarks of true transformation? If the answer is yes, then we are likely witnessing a genuine move of the Holy Spirit. If not, we must have the courage to say, “This is not from God,” and seek correction and accountability.

I urge all ministers and believers alike to remember that the goal is never to be “slain in the Spirit” for its own sake, but to be drawn into the heart of God. Let us not be so caught up in the external that we miss the profound truth of His love and grace. As I have often heard from evangelist Matt Ramirez, “Don’t fake it, but don’t fight it. Let God be God.” Embrace the mystery of the Spirit, but always let the measure of authenticity be the fruit that endures; a life transformed, a heart renewed, and a soul drawn ever closer to Jesus.

In this way, I pray that you will remain open to the genuine work of the Holy Spirit, discerning each encounter with wisdom and care. I pray that your pursuit of God be characterized not by a checklist of signs, but by a deep and abiding relationship with the One who is the source of all life, love, and transformation. And, As we all journey in this pursuit, let us be ever vigilant against the abuses that can arise when the focus shifts from Christ to spectacle, always remembering that Jesus is the ultimate focus and the only one who can truly change our lives.

Conclusion

Throughout this article I have sought to clarify and defend the reality of being overwhelmed by the Spirit in a way that is both faithful to Scripture and consistent with the historical witness of the church. I began by addressing the objection that because the term “slain in the Spirit” does not appear verbatim in the Bible, the experience itself must be unbiblical. I argued that the absence of a modern label does not negate the authenticity of an encounter that aligns with the biblical narrative. Scripture contains numerous accounts of individuals being physically affected by the presence of God. The examples of Daniel, who lost his strength in the presence of a heavenly being, the response of John when confronted by the risen Christ, and the temple scene in Chronicles all serve as a biblical foundation for understanding that a tangible response to divine glory is a recurring motif in God’s interactions with His people.

I have drawn from my own experience growing up in a Pentecostal environment and ministering within settings that celebrate the dynamic work of the Holy Spirit. In my early years in the Church of God and later within the Assemblies of God and in my current ministry time with the Fellowship of Christian Assemblies, I have witnessed firsthand the power of God that sometimes left believers physically moved. I have experienced such moments personally and have seen many others fall under the weight of God’s presence. These experiences are not meant to be mere theatrical displays. They serve as genuine encounters that point toward a deeper reality, one that goes beyond an emotional high and touches the core of our being.

The historical record further reinforces the legitimacy of these experiences. In the accounts of Jonathan Edwards during the Great Awakening, we see that intense spiritual encounters were not only common but also transformative. Edwards documented the signs of genuine spiritual awakening by noting that people cried out, trembled, and sometimes fell as a response to the overwhelming majesty of God. Similarly, John Wesley during the Methodist revival observed that his congregants would sometimes fall, tremble, or be visibly moved by the power of the Holy Spirit. Their testimonies, along with accounts from the Azusa Street Revival in the early twentieth century, provide a strong historical continuum that demonstrates that encounters with the Spirit, which may involve a physical manifestation, are not new or isolated events but are deeply rooted in the tradition of the church.

I have also shown that early church fathers such as Tertullian and Augustine recorded instances where believers responded in awe and sometimes in a physical manner during prayer and worship. Although they used language that differs from contemporary descriptions, their accounts reveal a similar reality: when a person encounters the divine, the impact is profound and often transcends ordinary human capacity. The writings of Tertullian and Augustine remind us that the transformative power of a divine encounter was recognized even in the early centuries of Christianity. Furthermore, within the Reformed tradition figures such as Martin Luther and John Calvin, although they expressed themselves with a different style, acknowledged that a genuine encounter with the Holy Spirit could leave the believer trembling with awe. Luther famously remarked on his heart trembling before the majesty of God’s Word, while Calvin, despite his more reserved tone, affirmed that the work of the Holy Spirit could have tangible effects on both soul and body.

Central to this discussion is the principle of Sola Scriptura. I have maintained that Scripture is our final authority and that every spiritual experience must be tested against the inspired Word of God. The original Greek terms such as theopneustos, dokimazo, and karpos provide us with a deeper understanding of how the New Testament views divine revelation and discernment. When we consider that all Scripture is described as “breathed out by God” and that we are instructed to test every spirit, it becomes clear that no experience, no matter how dramatic, is above scrutiny. Genuine encounters are validated by the lasting fruit they produce. The fruit of the Spirit as described in Galatians is evidence that the encounter has led to transformation in the believer’s life. Love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control are the enduring markers of an encounter that aligns with the truth of the gospel.

I have emphasized that discernment is essential in navigating the diverse manifestations of the Spirit. The Bible instructs us to test every experience and to hold fast to what is good. This call to discernment means that if a manifestation leads to false doctrine, confusion, or behavior that strays from biblical truth, it must be rejected. Conversely, if it results in a deeper reverence for God, increased humility, genuine repentance, and a stronger love for Jesus, then it is to be embraced as a sign of the Spirit’s work. This balanced approach ensures that we are neither uncritical in our acceptance of every emotional or physical display nor overly rigid to the point of dismissing genuine encounters. The guiding principle is that every experience must point back to a closer relationship with Jesus and to the transformative power of His Word.

I have also taken a moment to address the potential dangers and abuses associated with these manifestations. I am fully aware that practices such as being overwhelmed by the Spirit can be misused. I have seen how hysteria can develop around these experiences and how individuals may come to believe that they must be physically overwhelmed in order to be accepted by God or to prove the genuineness of their faith. I recall an incident from a revival meeting where a speaker, in an attempt to induce a physical manifestation, repeatedly prayed over my wife and applied pressure to her head in an effort to make her fall. When she did not respond in the expected manner, the speaker’s disappointment was evident. I have witnessed video recordings of events where individuals were pressured into a particular physical response, sometimes even staged, just to conform to a perceived norm. These instances are deeply troubling because they reduce a profound encounter with the Holy Spirit to a performance or a measure of worth. Such abuses not only undermine the integrity of the experience but also lead believers away from the true objective of a deep, personal relationship with Jesus.

It is important for both ministers and congregations to be aware of the dangers of misuse. Ministers must exercise wisdom and accountability in guiding their flocks. They are called to educate believers about the proper understanding of spiritual manifestations and to provide a safe environment where the work of the Holy Spirit can be experienced authentically. When leaders fail to offer proper guidance or when they encourage a spectacle rather than a genuine encounter, they compromise the mission of the church. The responsibility falls on every member of the community to remain vigilant, to test every experience against the Word of God, and to support one another in pursuing a sincere, transformative relationship with Christ.

In reflecting on all that has been discussed, I invite you to embrace a posture of openness and discernment. Do not be tempted to measure your spiritual worth by outward signs or to feel pressured into a particular physical manifestation. True encounters with the Holy Spirit are characterized by the inward transformation they produce in our hearts and lives. The pursuit of the Spirit should be a pursuit of genuine intimacy with Jesus, not a race to achieve dramatic displays of emotion or physical collapse. As evangelist Matt Ramirez wisely advises, do not fake it but do not fight it. Allow the Holy Spirit to move as He will while you remain anchored in the truth of Scripture.

I encourage you to seek all that God has for you with a heart that is open yet discerning. Let your journey be defined not by the transient signs of the Spirit but by the lasting fruit that comes from a true encounter with Christ. Let your pursuit be guided by the Word of God, knowing that it is the ultimate authority and the sure foundation on which every spiritual experience must be evaluated. May you be filled with a deep reverence for the transformative power of the Holy Spirit, and may that reverence lead you to live a life marked by love, humility, and a passion for the gospel.

In closing, I urge you to remember that the ultimate goal of every spiritual encounter is not the spectacle itself but the drawing near to Jesus. Let every manifestation be a means of deepening your relationship with Him and of experiencing the abundant life that He offers. Remain open to the diverse ways in which the Holy Spirit may work in your life, yet always measure those experiences against the unwavering truth of God’s Word. May your walk with the Lord be characterized by both a vibrant openness to His dynamic work and a steadfast commitment to the scriptural truth that anchors us in all circumstances.

May you be encouraged to pursue a balanced, authentic faith where every experience of the Holy Spirit leads you closer to the heart of God. In your quest for a deeper encounter with the Lord, may you find that His presence transforms your life in profound and lasting ways. Let your life be a testament to the reality of His love and power, and may you continually seek to know Him more fully. Embrace the mystery of the Spirit with a discerning spirit, always allowing His truth to guide your steps and shape your character. May you be filled, guided, and transformed by the Holy Spirit as you grow ever closer to Jesus, the source of all life, love, and redemption.

Reflecting on the Recent Discussion on Apologetics Live with Dan Kreft

As part of last night’s discussion on the cumulative case argument for apologetics, we examined whether Acts, as a descriptive text, should be used prescriptively in evangelism. I want to first express my gratitude to Dan Kraft for engaging with me on the topic. His thoughtful approach is genuinely appreciated, and his commitment to a godly dialogue was evident. If I misunderstand any of his perspectives here, I invite him to correct me, as my intent is to represent his views as accurately as possible.

During our discussion, we discussed whether Acts offers a prescriptive model for evangelism, Romans 1’s relevance in conversations about God’s existence, and the role of 1 Peter 3:15 in apologetic contexts. My goal here is to delve more deeply into these passages, grounded in sound exegesis and a spirit of humility, both to clarify my own position and to encourage further reflection.

Acts as Descriptive or Prescriptive?

  • Dan’s Position (as I understand it): Dan holds that Paul’s evangelistic approach in Acts should be viewed as a prescriptive model for how Christians today should share the gospel. He argues that Paul’s consistent approach throughout Acts—including his direct proclamation of the gospel rather than arguing for God’s existence—demonstrates a “biblical” method of evangelism, rooted in the conviction from Romans 1 that God’s existence is evident to all. By this logic, Paul’s lack of engagement in philosophical arguments for God’s existence serves as an implicit directive for believers to similarly affirm, rather than argue for, God’s reality when witnessing.
  • My Position: I see Acts primarily as a descriptive narrative, chronicling the specific contexts and methods the apostles, including Paul, used to spread the gospel, rather than a prescriptive manual for all believers. In my view, the accounts in Acts serve to illustrate the early church’s growth, its challenges, and the flexibility of the apostles’ methods based on their audiences, without necessarily mandating that we imitate each aspect of their approach in every setting. To consider Acts as prescriptive in this way could inadvertently limit the scope of effective evangelism and ignore Paul’s own adaptability.

Exegetical Analysis:

Acts, written by Luke, presents a historical account of the early church’s growth and includes a variety of evangelistic methods adapted to diverse contexts. For instance, Paul’s approach to Jewish audiences differs from his engagement with Greek philosophers in Athens (Acts 17). The fact that Paul changes his method based on the audience suggests flexibility rather than rigidity. If we understand Acts as prescriptive, we might risk limiting the range of methods allowed in evangelism, contradicting the nuanced, contextual approach that Paul himself models.

If Dan believes all Christians must follow Paul’s methods exactly as described in Acts, I respect his consistency in seeking a biblical foundation. However, I see Acts as primarily historical, intending to inform and inspire rather than dictate a single method. If I’m wrong on this point, I encourage Dan to offer further clarification. Consequently, I think Dan is committing a hermeneutical error.

Romans 15:4 and 1 Corinthians 10:11

One moment in the discussion where I admittedly was taken by surprise was Dan’s use of Romans 15:4 and 1 Corinthians 10:11 as the “biblical answer” to why there are “historical books” included in the Old Testament, linking them to the way the book of Acts is seen in the New Testament. I wasn’t prepared for this, and since have noticed a missed opportunity I had at this point in the discussion. Here are the perspectives and breakdowns:

  • Dan’s Perspective: Dan referenced these verses to argue that all Scripture, including Acts, was written for our instruction, thus supporting a prescriptive reading of Paul’s approach.
  • My Perspective: I believe these verses speak more to moral and spiritual instruction rather than prescribing an evangelistic or apologetic methodology.

A deeper Analysis of these verses:

Romans 15:4

  • Context and Purpose: Romans 15:4 states, “For whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction, that through endurance and the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope.” In the broader context of Romans 15, Paul addresses the unity of believers, urging the “strong” and “weak” to bear with each other, follow Christ’s example, and live in harmony. Paul’s appeal to the Scriptures here supports his encouragement for mutual endurance and the communal hope shared by believers.
  • Focus on Endurance and Hope: Paul’s phrasing suggests that the purpose of the Old Testament writings is to instill perseverance and encourage believers in times of difficulty. The “endurance” Paul mentions is tied to a capacity for resilience, often in the face of persecution, hardship, or challenges within the Christian community. This is not a directive for evangelistic or apologetic method but rather an affirmation of Scripture as a source of strength and resolve.
  • Scripture as a Guide for Personal and Communal Growth: Paul’s reference here highlights the Old Testament’s value for guiding moral and spiritual formation within the church. By seeing how God sustained His people, believers are encouraged to hold fast to faith. The instruction of “whatever was written” points to a broad applicability, suggesting that all Old Testament Scripture contributes to the believer’s spiritual foundation, developing character and hope through examples of faithfulness.

1 Corinthians 10:11

  • Context and Purpose: In 1 Corinthians 10:11, Paul writes, “Now these things happened to them as an example, but they were written down for our instruction, on whom the end of the ages has come.” Leading up to this verse, Paul recounts the moral failures of the Israelites in the wilderness—idolatry, immorality, testing God, and grumbling. Paul’s aim is to caution the Corinthian believers against repeating these mistakes, stressing that their lives as New Covenant believers require vigilance and integrity.
  • A “Warning” for Godly Living: The term “example” (Greek: typos) implies a pattern or model meant to teach a lesson. Here, the emphasis is on learning from Israel’s errors to avoid similar pitfalls. The phrase “for our instruction” conveys a moral and ethical intent, underscoring the importance of holy living and cautioning against complacency. Paul uses Israel’s story as a solemn reminder, not as a model for how to conduct apologetics or evangelism, but as a call for self-examination and personal sanctification.
  • Relevance to New Testament Believers: Paul’s use of “on whom the end of the ages has come” signals an eschatological urgency. Believers, standing in the fulfillment of God’s redemptive plan, are urged to live with heightened awareness and commitment. This passage serves as a moral and spiritual instruction for Christian conduct, aimed at fostering maturity and discernment within the church body, rather than offering a formula for external evangelistic methods.

The Formative Role of Scripture in Christian Life

  • Spiritual and Ethical Formation:

Both Romans 15:4 and 1 Corinthians 10:11 point to Scripture’s role in shaping the inner life of the believer. These verses underscore that Scripture acts as a tutor, leading believers to develop virtues like patience, faithfulness, and resilience. By looking at Israel’s history and the fulfillment of promises, Christians are equipped to build lives marked by integrity and perseverance.

  • Scripture as Instruction for Growth, Not Methodology:

The emphasis in both verses is on personal and communal transformation rather than prescriptive methods for evangelism or apologetics. They highlight the Old Testament’s instructive power, providing believers with examples to emulate or avoid, reinforcing the view that these passages serve as guides for character formation. If these verses were intended as directives for methodology, we might expect clearer connections to specific evangelistic or apologetic practices.

If Dan sees these passages as supporting a particular apologetic approach, I can understand his reasoning in linking them to the narrative examples in Acts. However, I interpret these verses as broadly encouraging Christian living, focusing on the ethical and spiritual formation that equips believers for faithful witness. In this sense, they function as a foundation for enduring faith rather than prescribing specific methods for engaging others. Therefore, I would, in retrospect, kindly point out that Dan is misapplying these texts.

Romans 1: Does It Preclude Arguing for God’s Existence?

• Dan’s Perspective (as I understand it): Dan suggests that Romans 1 renders arguments for God’s existence unnecessary. He interprets this passage to mean that because God’s existence is evident in creation, there is no need to argue for it, particularly in evangelism. According to this view, Romans 1 provides a sufficient basis for presupposing God’s existence without engaging in additional philosophical or evidential arguments.

• My Perspective: I interpret Romans 1 as affirming the principle of general revelation—that God has made His existence known to all through creation. However, I believe that this does not exclude the use of reasoned arguments for God’s existence, especially when addressing those unfamiliar with or skeptical of Christian teachings. I see value in engaging people intellectually to help bridge gaps in understanding, as Paul demonstrates in his discourse with the Athenians in Acts 17.

Exegetical Analysis of Romans 1

Romans 1:20 reads, “For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.” The Greek phrase aorata (“invisible qualities”) and dynamis (“power”) affirm that creation provides clear evidence of God’s existence and attributes. Paul’s wording—phanera (“clearly seen”)—implies that God’s qualities are perceptible and understood universally, which aligns with the concept of general revelation.

However, Paul’s intention here seems more focused on establishing humanity’s accountability than eliminating the need for discourse on God’s existence. He emphasizes that people are “without excuse” because creation itself attests to God’s reality. While this natural knowledge of God provides an inherent awareness, it doesn’t necessarily eliminate the usefulness of engaging people through argument, particularly when addressing different intellectual or cultural contexts.

Classical and Evidential Apologetics’ Use of Romans 1

Evidentialists and classical apologists often appeal to Romans 1 to support the value of general revelation in apologetics. They argue that this passage affirms the natural world as a foundation for demonstrating God’s existence, which allows for reasoned discourse and evidence-based arguments. For evidentialists, Romans 1 validates using creation as a “first step” to present the case for God’s existence, allowing observations from science, history, and nature to reinforce faith.

  • Classical Apologetics and Romans 1: Classical apologists, who often utilize a two-step approach (first arguing for theism, then for Christian claims), see Romans 1 as a biblical basis for general revelation. They argue that while creation reveals God’s reality, reasoned discourse helps articulate and clarify this revelation. For example, Thomas Aquinas viewed natural theology—arguments based on observation of the natural world—as a means to lead people toward an understanding of God. Classical apologists believe Romans 1 supports the use of cosmological and teleological arguments, which point to God’s existence as a rational conclusion drawn from the natural order.
  • Evidential Apologetics and Romans 1: Evidentialists also turn to Romans 1 as a foundation for presenting evidence that supports theism. They argue that if God’s attributes are “clearly seen” in creation, then scientific, historical, and philosophical evidence can serve as a legitimate basis for helping others recognize God’s existence. Evidentialists often use the passage to show that arguments based on observable phenomena—like the complexity of the universe or the fine-tuning argument—can bring people closer to belief. In this sense, they see Romans 1 as an invitation to use creation as an apologetic tool, grounding their approach in the natural revelation that Paul describes.

Acts 17 as a Model of Engaging Through Reasoned Discourse

Paul’s encounter in Athens (Acts 17:16-34) serves as a compelling example of his willingness to engage in discussions about God’s nature with people unfamiliar with the Jewish faith. In Acts 17:22-23, Paul opens his address by acknowledging the Athenians’ religiosity and referring to their altar “To an Unknown God.” This beginning is a contextual, respectful acknowledgment of their worldview, designed to open the door for dialogue. Paul then moves into a theistic argument, proclaiming God as the “Lord of heaven and earth” who does not live in temples built by hands (Acts 17:24).

This approach aligns with Paul’s assertion in Romans 1 that God is evident through creation, yet it shows his willingness to expound on this truth in ways that resonate with the cultural and intellectual background of his listeners. By quoting Greek poets (Acts 17:28), Paul leverages general revelation to build a bridge to his audience, showing that reasoned discourse can serve as a valuable means of helping others understand God’s nature. The Greek word used in Romans 1:20, kathoratai (translated as “clearly seen”), emphasizes that God’s qualities are observable and accessible, yet it does not imply that additional reasoning or evidence is redundant.

General Revelation and Reasoned Apologetics

While Romans 1 presents God’s existence as evident in nature, this revelation is non-specific and may leave certain individuals seeking a fuller understanding. Classical and evidential apologists argue that reasoned discussions help clarify and expand upon this general revelation, making it more intelligible to those from secular or skeptical backgrounds. For them, Romans 1 supports the approach of starting with common ground—such as the natural world—and moving toward a fuller understanding of God, especially when addressing modern audiences who may lack a foundational belief in God.

In this view, reasoned apologetics complements Romans 1 rather than detracts from it. While creation reveals God’s attributes, dialogue helps address specific doubts and intellectual barriers, allowing individuals to engage deeply with these truths. If Dan sees this reasoning as detracting from the sufficiency of Romans 1, I respect his view; however, I believe that Paul’s use of reason in Acts 17 exemplifies the validity of engaging audiences intellectually. This approach can offer clarity for those genuinely seeking to understand, without negating the foundational truth that God has made Himself known through His creation.

1 Peter 3:15 and Its Role in Apologetics

  • Dan’s Perspective (as I understand it): Dan maintains that 1 Peter 3:15 should not be exclusively viewed as an apologetic text, given its broader context focused on godly conduct and endurance in the face of suffering. He emphasizes that Peter’s primary concern lies in how believers respond to opposition, not necessarily in prescribing formal apologetic methodology.
  • My Perspective: While I agree with Dan that 1 Peter 3:15 is set within a broader context of encouraging steadfastness and integrity during persecution, I see this verse as underscoring the need for believers to be prepared to articulate their faith. This readiness extends beyond hostile situations to encompass daily interactions where questions about faith may arise.

Exegetical Analysis of 1 Peter 3:15

Contextual Background of 1 Peter 3:15

  • The broader section (1 Peter 3:13-17) addresses believers enduring hardship and persecution. Peter encourages them not to fear intimidation but to conduct themselves with honor and gentleness. His aim is to strengthen their witness, advising them to sanctify Christ as Lord and remain ready to answer anyone who asks about their hope.
  • Peter’s immediate context is one of suffering, but his instruction in verse 15 goes beyond simply enduring hardship. He emphasizes a proactive stance: believers are to sanctify Christ in their hearts and be prepared to give a reasoned explanation for their faith, implying a responsibility to both steadfastness and clarity in testimony.

Detailed Exegesis of Key Phrases in 1 Peter 3:15

1. “Sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts” (Greek: kyrion de ton Christon hagiasate en tais kardiais humon):

  • The verb hagiasate (translated as “sanctify”) means to “set apart” or “consecrate.” This command is in the aorist imperative, signaling an urgent, decisive action to honor Christ above all in the believer’s heart.
  • En tais kardiais humon (“in your hearts”) suggests an internal commitment. Peter links the act of sanctifying Christ as Lord directly with the believer’s core being—the “heart” (kardia), which in Greek thought often represented the seat of emotion, intellect, and will. By anchoring this in the heart, Peter establishes that a believer’s outward testimony flows from a deep-seated devotion.
  • This phrase, then, underscores that apologetics is not merely intellectual but deeply rooted in one’s commitment to Christ. The heart-orientation toward Christ as Lord provides the foundation for a life that is visibly set apart, attracting questions from others.

2. “Always be prepared to make a defense” (Greek: hetoimoi aei pros apologian):

  • Hetoimoi (“prepared” or “ready”) suggests a continual, vigilant readiness. The adverb aei (“always”) reinforces that this preparedness is not situational but rather a permanent state of readiness, whether in persecution or in everyday interactions.
  • The term apologia (translated as “defense”) means “reasoned response” or “explanation.” In classical Greek, apologia was often used in a legal context to denote a formal defense, yet Peter’s usage here suggests something broader: the ability to articulate one’s beliefs clearly and thoughtfully.
  • The phrase pros apologian can be rendered as “toward a defense,” indicating an orientation or intention toward explanation rather than simply passive endurance. Peter thus calls believers not merely to withstand questioning but to actively engage in thoughtful, reasoned responses about their faith.

3. “Always be prepared to make a defense” (Greek: hetoimoi aei pros apologian):

  • The phrase panti to aitounti (“to everyone who asks”) implies that this readiness to respond is not limited to hostile interrogators but to anyone who inquires, including those genuinely curious or seeking understanding.
  • Logon peri tes en hymin elpidos can be translated as “a reason concerning the hope that is in you.” Logon (from logos) means “reason,” “word,” or “explanation,” suggesting a clear, logical articulation of one’s beliefs. The word elpidos (“hope”) speaks to the future-oriented confidence Christians have, grounded in the resurrection and promises of Christ.
  • Importantly, peri tes en hymin elpidos (literally “concerning the hope in you”) highlights that the hope is internalized—it is something believers personally hold, experience, and can testify to. This hope isn’t an abstract concept but a living reality that should naturally provoke questions, especially when expressed with peace and steadfastness in challenging circumstances.

4. “With gentleness and respect” (Greek: meta prautetos kai phobou):

  • Prautetos (gentleness or meekness) and phobou (respect or reverence) together characterize the demeanor believers should embody when giving their defense. Prautetos denotes a humble, patient attitude, while phobou conveys a reverent, respectful approach, possibly toward both God and one’s audience.
  • This phrase indicates that the manner of apologetics is as important as the content. A defense given with gentleness and respect avoids arrogance or aggression, aiming instead to invite understanding and reflect Christlike humility.

Broader Implications of 1 Peter 3:15 for Apologetics

  • While 1 Peter 3:15 is situated within a context of persecution, the call to be “always prepared” (hetoimoi aei) suggests an all-encompassing readiness applicable to daily life. The open-ended phrasing “to everyone who asks” (panti to aitounti) implies that this preparedness is not exclusive to hostile situations but includes any opportunity where questions may arise.
  • Furthermore, the internal aspect of “sanctifying Christ as Lord” grounds the apologetic response in personal devotion, making it relevant beyond specific moments of persecution. Believers are encouraged to give a reason for their hope with humility and clarity, not as a defense mechanism but as an invitation for others to understand the faith that sustains them.

If Dan views the apologetic application of 1 Peter 3:15 as overly narrow, I understand his caution, especially given the verse’s primary setting in the context of suffering. However, I interpret the verse as urging both preparedness in trials and in general interactions. This readiness to give a reasoned account is essential for engaging a world that often asks questions about faith in a variety of contexts. By emphasizing gentleness and respect, Peter sets a tone that is universally applicable, ensuring that the believer’s response is not only reasoned but also Christlike.

Final Reflections:

Reflecting on this dialogue, I am sincerely grateful to Dan for his thoughtful engagement and the chance to refine my perspective. His commitment to the authority and clarity of Scripture is inspiring, and his points have challenged me to revisit each passage with a deeper sense of responsibility to accurately represent God’s Word. If I have misunderstood or misrepresented any aspect of his views, I welcome his correction, as my goal is to engage with both accuracy and humility. These conversations offer invaluable opportunities not only to sharpen our own theological understanding but also to build unity in our shared pursuit of truth.

In considering these passages together—Acts, Romans 1, Romans 15:4, 1 Corinthians 10:11, and 1 Peter 3:15—I find that each, while distinct in purpose and context, collectively upholds a principle of flexibility and wisdom in evangelism and apologetics, without diminishing the importance and supremacy of scripture in evangelism. Acts illustrates the adaptability of the apostles’ methods, revealing how they responded to diverse audiences with contextually relevant approaches. Rather than prescribing a single evangelistic method, Acts demonstrates the apostles’ responsiveness to the Holy Spirit and to the unique backgrounds of their listeners, which I see as an encouragement to similarly engage others thoughtfully.

Romans 1 affirms the truth of general revelation, that God’s existence and attributes are evident in creation. However, rather than precluding further dialogue, this passage establishes a foundation for engaging those who may need a bridge from their natural awareness of God to a fuller understanding of the gospel. Classical and evidential apologists have long understood Romans 1 as validating reasoned discourse and the use of evidence, reflecting Paul’s own practice of engaging others thoughtfully, as he did in Athens.

Romans 15:4 and 1 Corinthians 10:11, while not focused on methodology, reinforce the formative role of Scripture in shaping believers’ lives and character. These passages remind us that the Old Testament writings are for our instruction, teaching us perseverance and humility. This personal formation naturally informs our witness, equipping us to respond to others from a place of integrity and maturity rather than rigid adherence to a single model.

Finally, 1 Peter 3:15, set within the context of enduring hardship with faithfulness, emphasizes the importance of readiness to give an answer for the hope within us. While it encourages steadfastness under persecution, its message extends beyond this to a general call for preparedness in all encounters. Peter’s focus on gentleness and respect highlights the spirit in which our witness should be given, making this verse foundational for an apologetic approach that is both reasoned and compassionate.

In sum, these passages collectively encourage a witness that is thoughtful, adaptable, and grounded in Scripture. Rather than binding us to one prescriptive method, they emphasize the importance of context, character, and readiness. While Dan’s perspective offers valuable reminders of the foundational truths we share, I hold that these texts invite us to approach apologetics and evangelism with flexibility and attentiveness to the needs of those we encounter. Thank you again to Dan for his insights and his godly approach to this discussion; his perspectives have both challenged and encouraged me in my commitment to faithful witness.

Commentary on Jonah Chapter 1:1-6

Jonah Flees God’s Presence

John Bevere is famous for always saying God is a gentleman and would never force you to do anything. I wonder what Jonah, in Jonah chapter 1, would think of that!

Jonah Flees God’s Presence

            “Now the word of the Lord came to Jonah the son of Amittai, saying, “Arise, go to Nineveh, that great city, and call out against it, for their evil has come up before me.” But Jonah rose to flee to Tarshish from the presence of the Lord. He went down to Joppa and found a ship going to Tarshish. So he paid the fare and went down into it, to go with them to Tarshish, away from the presence of the Lord.

 But the Lord hurled a great wind upon the sea, and there was a mighty tempest on the sea, so that the ship threatened to break up. Then the mariners were afraid, and each cried out to his god. And they hurled the cargo that was in the ship into the sea to lighten it for them. But Jonah had gone down into the inner part of the ship and had lain down and was fast asleep. So the captain came and said to him, “What do you mean, you sleeper? Arise, call out to your god! Perhaps the god will give a thought to us, that we may not perish” (Jonah 1:1-6).

            This text starts off in a peculiar manner, almost as if it is a continuation of a larger story. But isn’t that what every book contained in the canon of scripture is? The Bible is comprised of 66 books, from around 40 different authors, over the course of thousands of years. It is God’s story to humanity about Himself and the work of Christ on the Cross for the redemption of us, His covenant people set aside for Himself in an age of mass rebellion. Yet, in the midst of all that, it is also a story that often reminds us of the rebellion that is frequently inside our own ranks as God’s covenant people. I think this is one of the themes of this Book of Jonah. I think the Holy Spirit caused the writer to start this work with the word “now” to make it clear that this story is a continuation of major themes found in the books of scripture before it. Throughout them, God wrestles with a rebellious people! In this case, one of these rebellious people would be our dear friend, the prophet Jonah. We see in the text that the “word of the Lord came to Jonah the son of Amittai.” This is no small thing. When “the word of the Lord” comes to a prophet, it’s because God has something He wants to say! He tells his oracle, Jonah, “Arise, go to Nineveh, the great city, and call out against it, for their evil has come up before me.” God is essentially telling Jonah to call Nineveh to repentance! Calling out against Nineveh’s great sins. But what does Jonah do? He flees from the presence of God in rebellion against Him.

            This is such a serious moment. Jonah does several things that are unbecoming of a prophet of God. A prophet is one who should make his home in the presence of God. Here, Jonah exiles himself from God’s presence. In fact, He leaves Israel, the covenant promised land of God to live in utter disobedience. Why would a prophet of God willfully leave the presence of God and all the good things that come from it? Well, the simple answer would be because Jonah had a rebellious attitude. Warren Weirsbe points out, “Jonah’s wrong attitude toward God’s will stemmed from a feeling that the Lord was asking him to do an impossible thing” (Weirsbe, Be Amazed, pg. 92). How often do we, in our Christian walks, see that God has called us to do something seemingly impossible, and we turn from Him in disobedience? I’m not talking about supernatural things. I’m talking about things that, to us, seem like an outrageous request. This was the case for Jonah, whom Timothy Keller refers to as the “prodigal prophet.” But what exactly is the problem here? Well, as St. Jerome points out, “The prophet knows, the Holy Spirit teaching him, that the repentance of the Gentiles is the ruin of the Jews. A lover, then, of his country, he does not so much envy the deliverance of Nineveh as will that his own country should not perish” (Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, XIV, pg. 130). What is our forefather saying about Jonah? That he is politically motivated! Jonah has heard all of the prophecies about the doom and exile coming to Israel. He is also the prophet who prophesied the restoration of the boundaries of the Northern Kingdom (2 Kings 14:25). When this happened, it cemented his name in scripture forever and likely the hearts of the Israelite people.  

            Imagine what thoughts may have entered into his heart as he mulled this over. Think about his hatred for the Assyrians, who were violent, evil people. Think about his patriotism and desire to see Israel continue in her time of prosperity in light of the Assyrians, who had committed great atrocities against Israel. Think of the envious thoughts he may have had toward other prophets. Our father in the faith, St. Jerome, puts it this way, “Seeing that his fellow prophets are sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel to excite the people to repentance, and that Balaam the soothsayer too prophesied the salvation of Israel, he grieves that he is chosen to be sent to Assyria, the enemies of Israel, and that the greatest city of the enemies where there was idolatry and ignorance of God” (Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, XIV, pg. 130). Think about it. All the other prophets before him get to preach repentance to Israel, the apple of God’s eye. He has to preach to the wicked Ninevites. Even Balaam the wicked false prophet was used to preach salvation to Israel; but Jonah? Jonah was stuck with the Ninevites. Oh the things that can muddy up the hearts of God’s people, causing their actions to be impure!

And what did Jonah do? He fled from the presence of God. He fled so intentionally that he “went down to Joppa and found a ship going to Tarshish. So he paid the fare and went down into it, to go with them to Tarshish, away from the presence of the Lord” (Jonah 1:3, ESV) Jonah has committed a serious, willful sin here. Not only did he disobey God, but he did it deliberately. He packed up his bags intentionally, and intentionally followed the map to get down to Joppa to arrive at the port. That was very intentional! But what’s worse? While he was in Joppa he could have repented. He could have repented and turned 550 miles northeast to Nineveh, but instead he paid what was likely a large sum of money to sail 2,500 miles toward Tarshish. The writer of the Book of Jonah adds something very interesting to the end of this verse. He adds at the end, “…away from the presence of the Lord.” Not only was Jonah intent on being disobedient, but he was willing to leave God’s presence to get away. One may be asking, what is s important about Tarshish? Why would he flee towards there? Tarshish, which is part of modern Spain, was the very edge of the known world that Jonah lived in. For all intents and purposes, it was as far from Nineveh as possible. In other words, Jonah was willing to go to the end of the world to get away from his calling.

One thing that we will see as we go through this book is the type and shadow that Jonah really is. One of the types he resembles is God’s intention for humanity. A way to look at it, which we will visit in a later chapter as well, is found in the gospels of Matthew and Mark. In them, Jesus tells the combatant pharisees that they will not receive a sign except the sign of Jonah: “For just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth” (Matthew 12:40). Jonah was a foreshadowing type of Jesus and His resurrection. Now, you may be wondering why I am bringing the resurrection up in light of Tarshish. Allow me to bring you to Paul’s epistle to the Romans where he says to the saints in Rome, “I hope to see you in passing as I go to Spain, and to be helped on my journey there by you, once I have enjoyed your company for a while” (Romans 15:23, ESV). Remember when I said that Tarshish is modern Spain? The borders of Spain have not changed much since then. Paul’s mission was to go to Tarshish!

Again, I know I need to bring this home for you to really know where I am going with it. Paul was headed to Spain to preach the message of the risen savior to the gentiles there. In fact, Paul is intending to fulfill the prophecy given by Isaiah, which says, “…I will set a sign among them, I will send survivors to the nations, to Tarshish, Pul, Lud, who draw the bow, to Tubal and Javan, to the coastlands far away, that have not heard my fame or seen my glory. And they shall declare my glory among the nations” (Isaiah 66:19, ESV). Paul sees himself as a survivor sent to the nations, to proclaim the gospel to the gentiles so that God’s glory will be declared to all the nations. Now, these are not modern nations. These are the nations listed in Genesis 10, called the “table of nations.” Paul is trying to make it to all nations, and Tarshish is the last stop. Now, the type and shadow comes here: Just as Jonah was the rebellious prophet to the gentiles, Paul, filled with the Spirit of Christ, is the obedient apostle to the gentiles. Just as Jonah was rebellious and fled, Paul was obedient and was sent. Just as Jonah fled to Tarshish so the gentiles would not be saved, Paul advances obediently to Tarshish so that all that gentiles may be saved. Just as Jonah only preached to one gentile city, calling it to repent, Paul preached to many gentile cities and called them to repentance. Paul’s actions are a reversal of Jonah’s actions. Why? So that the one who is greater than Jonah, (Jesus), could redeem the lost that lived there. This is why I bring up Jesus’ words so soon. The salvation to be brought through Him is the completion of Jonah’s time in salvation history.

Now that this is brought full circle, it’s important to note that Jonah did not have bad theology about God’s heart and intention toward the lost. As Warren Weirsbe aptly put it, “The Assyrians were a cruel people who had often abused Israel, and Jonah’s narrow patriotism took precedence over his theology. Jonah forgot that the will of God is the expression of the love of God (Ps. 33:11) and that God called him to Nineveh because He loved both Jonah and the Ninevites” (Weirsbe, Be Amazed, pg. 92). The problem wasn’t Jonah’s theology, it was his heart. He had an awful attitude towards God for telling him to go to this horrible enemy to preach repentance. Jonah even admits that he knows God loves the Ninevites at the beginning of chapter 4, “O Lord, is not this what I said when I was yet in my country? That is why I made haste to flee to Tarshish; for I knew that you are a gracious God and merciful, slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love, and relenting from disaster” (Jonah 4:2). Jonah hated the Assyrians. In fact, Weirsbe insinuates that there is a special reason for this. Jonah’s home land, Gath-Hepher, was on the border of Zebulun, one of the northernmost tribes; which was extremely vulnerable to invaders like Assyria. Perhaps Jonah had seen some of the evils Assyria was capable of (Weirsbe, Be Amazed, pg. 214). Needless to say, Jonah was not willing to obey God because of his prejudice towards the Assyrians for the evil they resembled. He was so hardened toward the Assyrians that he was unwilling to submit to the heart of God for the gentiles, which we see fulfilled in the culmination of the work of the apostles in the New Testament. But how often do we ignore the call to preach today? Jonah in some sense has justifiable reasons to abstain from preaching repentance to the Assyrians. For most Christians today the problem is merely that we are uncomfortable, and so we ignore the great commission. Lack of comfort won’t excuse us on judgement day, though! Because of the work of Christ through His apostles, there will be no excuse today for disobedience to the call to preach the gospel to the lost. No matter how evil the lost are or how uncomfortable we are!

The Lord God’s response to this is incredible; and it really reveals an important aspect of His nature. Yes, you read that correctly. The text reads, “But the Lord hurled a great wind upon the sea, and there was a mighty tempest on the sea, so that the ship threatened to break up” (Jonah 1:4). At first glance this seems to be the act of an angry God, bent on forcing His way, and in some ways that assessment may prove correct. As we read the book of Jonah, it appears obvious that God does indeed “make” Jonah do His will. But with that said, pay attention to the patience of God. God could have easily decided to destroy Jonah and use somebody else. But God elects to show Jonah the same kind of longsuffering that He is extending toward the Assyrians. This further proves Jonah’s assessment of the love of God, that God is, “steadfast in love, and relenting from disaster.” Jonah is slowly beginning to realize that when the heart of God is set upon you, His steadfast love remains a lighthouse of hope for the soul that is far from Him. Jonah, who left the presence of the Lord, could not escape the love of the Lord. Perhaps this puts into perspective why the apostle Peter exhorts the Church by saying, “The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance” (2 Peter 3:9, ESV). It is because of the love of God that God is patient towards sinners. God speaks this same sentiment to Israel through the mouth of His prophet Ezekiel saying, “Say to them, As I live, declares the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live; turn back, turn back from your evil ways, for why will you die, O house of Israel” Ezekiel 33:11, ESV)?

Jonah, for all intents and purposes is evil for his rebellion against almighty God. Yet God continues to show divine patience, putting up with his obstinate rebellion. Despite God’s patience, however, Jonah is not doing well. He is unable to sin peaceably. St. Jerome said of the subject, “Nothing is secure when God is against us” (Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, XIV, pg. 132). Jonah may have experienced the grace of God, but God was still against him. God gave him the command to go to Nineveh, and instead, Jonah fled. And Jonah would not be allowed to flee so easily! John Chrysostom adds, “Sin is like heavy cargo” (Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, XIV, pg. 132). This is why when we move to the next verse, we see that, “…the mariners were afraid, and each cried out to his god. And they hurled the cargo that was in the ship into the sea to lighten it for them. But Jonah had gone down into the inner part of the ship and had lain down and was fast asleep” (Jonah 1:5, ESV). Jonah’s sin caused a life and death situation to unfold. The mariners were likely headed to Tarshish to sell their cargo. This was how they were going to make their income. Not only this, but as Timothy Keller notes, these mariners were “…experienced sailors who took bad weather in stride, so this must have been a uniquely terrifying tempest” (The Prodigal Prophet, pg. 33). So, these sea hardened sailors were so terrified by the tempest, (which was the result of Jonah’s sinful rebellion), that they threw their only source of income overboard. How heavy is the burden of sin!

Yet in the midst of it all, Jonah was asleep. And how often are we asleep as God is speaking? When our hearts are so hardened to our own sin that we have fallen asleep as God is shouting loudly to us, “Repent! Repent!” Yet Jonah was clueless. He was fast asleep, and therefore unable to recognize the great warning of God. The unsaved pagans on the ship certainly recognized the situation before Jonah. So much so that they prayed to their own gods in hope that they might save them. The pagan mariners were unable to tell that salvation was only through Jonah’s God, yet they still more awake to the truth in areas of life that Jonah was fast asleep in. We see a similar instance of such hardening in the New Testament. Jesus has just arrived home to Nazareth and He reads the Isaiah scroll, saying, “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed,to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor” (Luke 4:18-19 ESV). This would have been no issue for the people had Jesus not uttered the following words after rolling up the scroll and giving it back to the attendant, saying, “Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing” (Luke 4:21, ESV). The people, who were spiritually asleep doubted Jesus, saying, “Is not this Joseph’s son” (Luke 4:22, ESV)? They had either grown up with Jesus or watched as the incarnate Jesus became a grown man. So used to Jesus, they allowed their hearts to be so “used to him” that they became hardened toward Him when He was revealing Himself as their only hope for salvation. At the end of this passage in Luke, it says, “…passing through their midst, he went away” (Luke 4:30, ESV). Because of the hardness of their hearts, the people of Nazareth missed the coming of the Messiah, the proclaimer of their liberty. May we never be hardened so much so that the presence of the Lord goes away!

In so many ways, this is also Jonah. Yes, Jonah is foreshadowing Nazareth. A prophet of God, so acquainted with the presence of God, flees the presence of God; and when the presence of God returns to him in the form of a great tempest, Jonah remains asleep. Hardened toward God! Yet the pagan captain of the ship would have none of it. In the next verse it says, “So the captain came and said to him, “What do you mean, you sleeper? Arise, call out to your god! Perhaps the god will give a thought to us, that we may not perish” (Jonah 1:6, ESV). There have been times where I would read this verse with great conviction because there have been moments in my life where I was as faithless as Jonah. Since being in ministry, I have been inspired by the willingness of lost young teenagers as they come to church, seeking what they do not yet know, primed for an encounter with God. It reminds me to never allow myself to be hardened towards the things of God; because there are lost people who have less than I, spiritually speaking, who are seeking a salvation that only my Jesus can give them, and I must be ready to preach the Gospel to them. Yes, in my ministry, Young people whose supplications are like the statue at the Areopagus in Athens, “to the unknown God” (Acts 17:23, ESV). Let this be a reminder to all of us that we must be like the Apostle Paul, eager to give an answer to the lost people of this world for the hope that is within us, as Peter commends in 1 Peter 3:15. Let us not be like Jonah, who needed to be begged by the pagan mariners to intercede on their behalf. No, let us already be praying for the lost and ready to spread the hope of Jesus to the lost people of this world.

Conclusion:

            If I were to give Jonah any advice, it would be straight from the writer of Hebrews who said, “By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place that he was to receive as an inheritance. And he went out, not knowing where he was going.  By faith he went to live in the land of promise, as in a foreign land, living in tents with Isaac and Jacob, heirs with him of the same promise.  For he was looking forward to the city that has foundations, whose designer and builder is God” (Hebrews 11:8-10, ESV). In a very real way, Jonah was sent to Nineveh to receive the people there as an inheritance. Winning those lost souls to the Lord was a very real victory, one that would add many jewels to his crown in heaven. Unfortunately, at least at this part in the story of Jonah, he has rejected those jewels. If only Jonah were able to read the book of Daniel where it says, “And those who are wise shall shine like the brightness of the sky above; and those who turn many to righteousness, like the stars forever and ever” (Daniel 12:3, ESV). But unfortunately Jonah was not thinking of “forever and ever.” He was thinking of the nation of Israel, of which Assyria was a rival of. This worldly thinking caused Jonah to rebel! Needless to say, Jonah’s excessive love for country proved that he lacked faith in God. Sure, he believed in God and had faith in God in many ways, but he was holding out. For some reason, he didn’t seem to trust that God would uphold His people. Perhaps he knew Israel was in sin and therefore soon to be judged. Either way, Jonah failed to live as his father Abraham did; who was “looking forward to the city that has foundations, whose designer and builder is God.” Instead, he let his love for the city of Jerusalem blind him. He was so blind that he hardened his heart and fled from God’s presence! What a conundrum for a prophet of God to have to answer for! So, if I could, I would have encouraged Jonah to take his eyes off of himself; and off of the cities of this world, and think of the lost who dwell among him, and to place his sole faith in the God who is the architect and builder of the eternal city that will last forever and ever!

Ravi Zacharias sharing the gospel to an audience.

REFLECTIONS ON THE MORAL FAILINGS OF RAVI ZACHARIAS

2/11/2021
Today, people around the world are shaken by the findings of the recent investigation into allegations of sexual misconduct by the recently deceased Founder of RZIM (Ravi Zacharias International Ministries) and Christian Apologist, Ravi Zacharias. If you are reading this, it is likely that you have already heard the devastating news of his secret life during his years as a minister. Please know that before I continue, my intent in writing this article is not to add more fuel to the fire, nor is it to defend or deflect what was clearly proven in the very extensive and compelling Miller & Martin Report. But, in such a time as this, I believe that it is the responsibility of Bible believing Christians to still give an answer for the hope that is within them. Because of that, in this article, my hope is to do that very thing and nothing else.

As a young teenager, I stumbled in my faith, and it was as a teenager that I relied greatly on men like Ravi Zacharias. His messages on YouTube were, in my teen years, a catalyst for my faith. When I was struggling with doubts about the pain I was going through, I looked to Ravi and his sermons to bring clarity to my life circumstances. In these times, Ravi helped me understand what it means to be human, what good and evil is, and why there is suffering in this world. Some things that will be said about Ravi by many people today stem from shock, disappointment, and anger. Some people have brokenly expressed, “I looked up to this man…” Others have referred to Ravi as a hypocrite, or, as one deeply hurt individual stated, “This is so devastating. It’s like he died all over again…” The man we thought was there, really was not, and it is deeply devastating to many. These are people who will no doubt have to process through their own grief and disappointment at the results of the Miller & Martin Report. These feelings of disappointment are not unwarranted, nor are they unreal.

Even more real to this extremely heartbreaking news is the immense pain of the victims from behind the scenes of Ravi’s double-life. Nobody knows all the names or the exact number of victims of Ravi Zacharias’s sexual transgressions, but we do know that one, Lori Anne Thompson, is one of those individuals. She is one of the true heroes to be acknowledged in all of this. In an open statement she shared her story, and however painful it was to hear, it was very powerful; a story which previously had been held back by the non-disclosure agreement she had in place with Zacharias. She said, “I have repeatedly requested to be released from my NDA. To date, no release has come. So be it. My words belong to me, and I take them back today.” This is an incredibly powerful statement. It is so important that we acknowledge that on the other side of our hurt, disappointment, and shame at this terrible situation, there are real people, such as Lori Anne, who have suffered worse at Ravi’s hands.

Where do we go from here?

As I have mentioned, I have looked up to this man; and thousands of others have as well. Ministers, world leaders, and countless other kinds of people from different ethnicities, countries, social classes, and positions in their society have not only viewed this man in high regard, but have been genuinely and deeply impacted by his ministry, by his words, and by his outreach. How do these people respond to this, really? For me, as I write this in tears, I am deeply pained. I think of myself in my teenage years. I was someone who looked up to this man and placed him on an extremely high pedestal. I can honestly say that had this all come to light in those days, I might have completely walked away from the faith altogether. Fortunately, I am finding this out later in life, and my faith is firmly rooted and founded in Jesus Christ and his words. With this said, this is certainly not the case for those who are not firm in the faith, or worse, those who were on the edge of eternity at the ministry of Ravi. By that, I mean those who were so close to responding to the gospel… How many of them are throwing their hands up? How many will never trust a man of God again? This is a truly devastating thing to ponder.

Since the release of the report, many have taken to condemning and denouncing Ravi Zacharias. Others have called for RZIM to disband and disperse. It could be rightly argued that these callouts are fair and warranted. But that will not be the goal of this article. I hope to do something more… This, at its core for some people, is an issue of faith. I think back to my time as a teen. What questions would I have asked had this come out then? I was a deeply troubled and hurting person that relied on Ravi Zacharias and his ministry to just stay afloat. Fresh out of many years of struggling with suicidal inclinations, self-harm, and many other hurts, I had given my life to the Lord fully, and at many times felt alone in my new walk with the Lord. Then, through YouTube, Ravi came into my life. I could relate with him. His powerful testimony of being saved from “a bed of suicide” resonated with me deeply. Nights when I was ready to throw my own hands up, his words entered the room through that computer screen, and I was given the hope that I desperately needed. News of something like this would have completely derailed me. So really, what would have happened with me had this come out sooner?

As I reflect, I recognize that for much of my teen years, my faith was built on a poor foundation. As I have said, I was deeply impacted by Ravi’s ministry. I used his work to hold me over into my adult years where I began to realize that I must be rooted in Christ’s words, not the words of any eloquent speaker. In Matthew’s Gospel we hear from Jesus that, “Everyone… who hears these words of mine and does them will be like a wise man who built his house on a rock.” (Matt. 7:24 ESV) Why would Jesus use this imagery? Why would he compare his words to a rock? Well, simply because when the storms and uncertainties of life come and beat against us, we need a solid foundation to keep us standing firm in those storms. Jesus and his words resemble that solid foundation, or “rock.” As Jesus said, “…the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house, but it did not fall, because it had been founded on the rock.” (Matt. 7:25 ESV) When our faith is built on this rock, nothing shall overcome it. Not even the moral failings of Ravi Zacharias. This is something I did not understand as a youth, new in my faith. My house was not properly built on the rock-solid words of Christ at that time; something I am very thankful to have today.

The truth is, when I was a youth, I was more like a person who built their house on sand. I took Ravi Zacharias, and I placed him on a pedestal that he was never meant to be on. Jesus said, “…everyone who hears these words of mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand.” (Matt. 7:26 ESV) One thing I know I did, was that I idolized Ravi Zacharias. And anyone who has a basic knowledge of scripture knows that idolizing a person is idolatry, and idolatry is sin. To put it concisely, idolatry is disobedience to the commands of Christ. And such disobedience always leads to the natural consequences warned of in scripture… a great fall. How many are in a crisis of faith at the news of Ravi’s moral failure? Such people have a house (life) built on sand. Of such people, Jesus said, “…the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell, and great was the fall of it.” (Matt. 7:27 ESV) It is so important for us to have a proper foundation. Because without it, in times like this, we will find ourselves in crisis that Jesus never intended for us. So where do we go from here? I would say that we ought to take this time to reflect… What are we building our life on? Men who fail, or Jesus who never fails?

The questions I would ask…

I want to ponder about God for a little bit, and I want to do this in light of my former self. I know that there are people much like I was, and I know that there are answers that are needed. So, I am going to try to think of some questions I might have had about all this, and then give a good shot at answering them. The first question I might have asked is, does all this mean that Ravi Zacharias was wrong about what he said? Ravi argued powerfully for the existence of God and the truth of Christ as the one and only Savior of the world. But does his moral discrepancies disprove his arguments? In his five-minute short response to these recent revelations regarding Ravi, Dr. Michael Licona pointed out, “…Many will be turned off to Christianity as a result. People don’t necessarily have problems with Jesus. They have problems with many of his followers. Even worse, some Christians will begin to doubt whether Christianity is true, because one of it’s most prominent advocates lacked integrity.” Unfortunately, this is too true. This is devastating news and, though it shouldn’t, it will impact people in a very negative way. What do I mean by that? Well, as Dr. Licona rightly expressed, it is not Jesus people have problem with here. It is the lack of integrity that Ravi had. As Licona follows up, “…Christianity is true because of the person of Jesus…” The good character of a Christian does not prove or disprove anything about Jesus. It only provides us the evidence we need to determine if that person is truly following Christ. This is a thinking error that many believers and non-believers alike might be wrestling with. If you are one of these, just know that Ravi is not Jesus. He is merely a man, and his failings do not overshadow the overwhelming success of Christ. In other words, Christianity is true not because of those who adhere to it, but because Jesus is exactly who he claimed to be when he performed signs and wonders, fulfilled with pinpoint accuracy all the prophecies in the Old Testament regarding the Messiah, and rose from the dead.


The next question I may ask is, how could God use a man like this to do good in the world and still be good? This question is really a cry for justice. Ravi Zacharias received honors and accolades as a loved and admired man of God. Yet, behind the scenes he was a predatory violator of the moral law that he so fervently stood in the gap for. As the Miller & Martin Report indicates, Ravi spent a protracted period living in sin. He was not just messing up from time to time. He was living this out as a double life. A lifestyle of duplicity and sexual impropriety. So where is the justice? Why would God show Ravi mercy, knowing that in the end he would be found out as a fraud, causing many to stumble? These are daunting, difficult questions to answer. But there is an answer. Simply put, the answer to this question is found in a mixture of God’s mercy and His sovereignty. Sometimes we don’t really realize what God is doing behind the scenes while we are here on earth sinning and messing up. So, in these next paragraphs, please bear with me. This may take us for a ride, but the answer, however deep and theological, is refreshing indeed!

To start, the Apostle Peter puts this in good perspective: “The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.” (2 Peter 3:9 ESV) This is an extremely hard pill to swallow for some; but to be frank about it, God did not judge Ravi in this life simply because God is merciful. As a youth pastor, I find myself needing to answer questions about injustice and evil. Generation Z hates injustice, and rightly so. And, as a result, I have learned to effectively give the youth of this generation an answer for this. When they ask, why does God allow evil? Why does he allow injustice? I unflinchingly answer: “Well, because if God didn’t allow injustice and evil in the world, none of us would even be here. God would have already judged and punished us all by now.” God’s word is noticeably clear, “…all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” (Romans 3:23 ESV) Part of me wants to be offended that God allowed Ravi to last so long in his position of admiration and influence. But I know this is my flesh speaking. We ought to praise God for His mercy, not grumble about Him giving the same mercy to Ravi that we would want Him to give us. So, simply put, God did not judge Ravi in this life for the same reason he has not judge you or me. Because He is merciful!

But, how does this mercy tie in with God’s sovereignty? Well, mercy is not something that is deserved. And, mercy is only one part of God’s method for dealing with the wickedness of humankind. As it has already been established, all of us have fallen short of God’s glory. We all deserve judgement from God, yet he works with us all to fulfill his good purposes. With this, despite our evil, scripture is quite clear that God uses the evil of mankind for good. Ravi lived a double life, but God still used him to bring needed answers to struggling people. Now, at face value this seems like a very insensitive thing to say. That, Ravi Zacharias, a man who lived wickedly in God’s eyes was still used by God? Of course! In fact, God has made good out of worse in order to carry out his good purposes.

For example consider King Nebuchadnezzar, who destroyed Jerusalem and the temple, and exiled the Israelites in 586 BC. What does God’s word say of him? Through Jeremiah, God says, “Now I have given all these lands into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon, my servant, and I have given him also the beasts of the field to serve him.” (Jeremiah 26:7 ESV) What? His servant? Why would God refer to this evil man as His servant? Simply put, God is revealing to us that even when we commit evil, He is still sovereign. We may try to break His laws and set ourselves up against Him, but God always finds a way to achieve His plan. This is not the only time that God has used wicked men to carry out his purpose. He did the same thing with the wicked King Cyrus of Persia, who like the King of Babylon, He refers to as like a servant, calling Cyrus His “shepherd” who will rebuild Jerusalem and the Temple. (Isaiah 44:28 ESV) Another example more popular to Christians is in Genesis where Joseph confronts his brothers who sold him into slavery saying, “…you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good…” (Gen. 50:20 ESV) This, of course, led to the saving of many people from a horrible famine in that time, particularly the saving of the entire nation of Israel.

Next comes the question, does this mean that God effectually caused the evil of Ravi, who victimized all of those women? Or did He effectually cause Nebuchadnezzar to destroy Israel as judgement? Or did He make Cyrus kill more people to conquer Israel? Or did God make Joseph’s brothers sell him out into slavery? Not necessarily. God is not the author of evil. Some Calvinists try to imply that God does do this, but I am neither a Calvinist, nor do I believe that. I could get further into that topic, but I won’t because it is not the purpose of this article. That said, Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, Joseph’s brothers, and Ravi chose to do these bad things out of their own free choice. But God is sovereign over evil! And as stated before, throughout scripture it is demonstrated that though God does not cause wicked people to do wicked things, He does use wicked people to bring out His purposes for good!

look deeper at the case of Joseph: his brothers planned to sell him into slavery and ruin his life out of jealousy, but God used the circumstances of Joseph to save Israel and many others. We see a similar sentiment of this sort of phenomenon in Paul’s Epistle to the Romans, “…we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose.” (Romans 8:28 ESV) Here, Paul is referring to the evil persecutions committed against Christians. Paul is saying that in the case of those who love the Lord, all things are worked by God for their good. So, if God can work persecution, death, and destruction for good, he can certainly use a duplicitous man like Ravi for good. And he did. As I have said, God used Ravi mightily to give me the answers I desperately needed as a hurting teen. There is no getting around this fact for me. All glory to God! But, he did use Ravi.

Now, how does this make sense? Wouldn’t God then have to make all situations of evil work out for a good outcome for all of us? First, in the grand scheme of things, God does not owe us anything. Often times we associate good with our own perceived well-being. And, though God loves his creation, (us in particular), we are not owed anything from God… Especially if we choose to break His law and stand in arrogance against Him. All of us have fallen short and have sinned, and as result we all deserve to die. It’s as scripture says, “…the wages of sin is death…” (Romans 6:23 ESV)

This is why any redemptive act that God effects in this sinful and fallen world flows from his mercy. Why? Because our sin has deemed all of us worthy of judgement. With that said, if He does judge us it is a good thing because justice is good! Think about it… Even Joseph, the one wronged by his wicked brothers deserved to be judged because he was also a sinner. Yet, God redemptively participated in Joseph’s story to cause good. This doesn’t mean that all evil in this world is turned around for a good outcome for us in this life; it only means that evil can be used by God in his sovereign mercy to effect good in the world. Therefore, when God uses wicked people for good, we are in no place to stand in judgement of him because we are the sinners worthy of death; and it is the same in the case of Ravi. Ultimately, nobody can stand in judgement against God on the basis of His mercy towards evil men, nor on the basis of how God uses evil men for good.

With all of this in mind, one day, when all of what we now see passes away and we all stand in front of God for final judgement, God’s complete justice will be enacted upon the entire world. But right now, He sovereignly shows mercy. Ravi Zacharias has already faced this judgement, and my hope is that he stood before God having repented of his sins. But, in His sovereignty, God used a man who did great evil, for His own good purposes. That means that in my teen years, God used a man who was committing unconscionable deeds to give me answers to some of life’s most challenging questions. God used a sinner to keep me afloat. And God likely did this for many other people who are like me.

This does not put God in a position to be judged by us, and this does not nullify His goodness. It reveals the goodness of God. That God would have mercy upon Ravi Zacharias, and still used him to extend more mercy to sin-sick people, really is a testament of the patience of God, not the wrongness of God. This in no way excuses Ravi Zacharias. However, this does give an adequate answer to a really challenging question… Many are disappointed today, but knowing that God is willing to use sinful people for the good of other sinful people is a beautiful reality that neither takes away from His goodness, nor does it minimize the genuine impact Ravi Zacharias had in my life, nor in the lives of some of those who are reading this.

Now comes another question, what does God think of what Ravi Zacharias did? Simply put, God is as much against Ravi’s sin as He is anyone else’s. In fact, more! There is a higher standard for men who are in leadership. Jesus’ own brother, the Apostle James, warns: “Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness.” (James 3:1 ESV) It is no shock to anyone that what Ravi did was morally unconscionable considering the scriptures. However, Ravi still stood in a position of great influence in the world and in the church. Yet, God still allowed Ravi to have this position. This is deeply frustrating. Not only to the Christians who are now struggling with their faith as a result of Ravi’s failings, but also for unbelieving people who may have been on the verge of repentance.

Why would God continue to allow Ravi to live in sin? Why wasn’t he exposed sooner? And again, I would refer to what I have said about God’s mercy and sovereignty. It could very well be that God knew things that we do not. But one thing I do know is that had this come out sooner, I may not be writing this article. I may have walked away entirely. Another thing to consider is the mercy of God… Christian leaders need God’s mercy just as much as any sinner. What Ravi did is detestable, but there are mysteries to God’s methods that we may never understand. In the end, we must always remember that men break our trust… Not God. Ravi made these decisions out of his own free will and lived a lifestyle contrary to God’s moral law. Despite this, God showed Ravi ample amounts of mercy and unless Ravi repented before or on his death bed, he was judged before God being without any excuses at all. God will always set things right.

Another thing I might ask is, how do I move on from all of this? I believe the answer to this is something I alluded to earlier in this article. We can’t be building our foundation on shifting sand. When I was a youth, I needed answers and Ravi Zacharias gave them to me. This led to an unhealthy idolization of Ravi, who was a mere man. That said, I really should have put Christ first in everything. My faith is to be built on Him. Ravi Zacharias was full of great and wise words. He spoke eloquently, and powerfully impacted the church whilst he was alive. However, the Apostle Paul has a few things to say about eloquence and wisdom… “And I, when I came to you, brothers, I did not come proclaiming to you the testimony of God with lofty speech or wisdom.  For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.  And I was with you in weakness and in fear and much trembling, and my speech and my message were not in plausible words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, so that your faith might not rest in the wisdom of men but in the power of God.” (1 Corinthians 2:1-5 ESV)

The transformative spiritual power of Ravi’s message was never found in his words. Rather, it was found every time he shared the gospel of Jesus Christ. As Paul said in his Epistle to the Romans, “…I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes…” (Romans 1:16 ESV) This is why Paul told the Church in Thessalonica, “…our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction…” (1 Thess. 1:9 ESV) The Gospel is the source of the power in the message of Christ, not any imperfect man. Unfortunately, many people have succumbed to celebrity-ism when it comes to their foundation, basing their faith in God on their admiration of speakers like Ravi Zacharias. If our faith were always founded in Jesus and His gospel, we wouldn’t be so shaken whenever prominent Christian men fail. Therefore, I submit to you that you refocus your faith on Jesus and his words, and as Paul writes, “…Let God be true though everyone were a liar.” (Romans 3:4 ESV)

Refocusing

Now that we have looked at some of the questions that may be floating around about this terrible situation regarding Ravi Zacharias, I think it is important for us to take time to talk about how we got here. I find myself reminded of Paul’s warning to Timothy, “Watch your life and doctrine closely. Persevere in them, because if you do, you will save both yourself and your hearers.” (1 Timothy 4:16 NIV) As Christians, especially leaders, we must be incredibly careful with how we live and with what we teach. We are ambassadors for Christ to this lost world. What ever happened to holiness in the church? What ever happened to standards for pastors and teachers?

I know that from the outside looking in, many of us would have never guessed Ravi was doing these things on the side. In fact, few of us would ever imagine Ravi in the same picture as a Carl Lentz, or a Jerry Falwell Jr… But now, we certainly see such things floating around the internet today. But might I add… With all the brazen and sharp words some men and women have had for Ravi Zacharias, (and rightly so) statistically speaking, 64 percent of those angry Christian men, and 15 percent of those angry Christian women are addicted to pornography. Yes, is what Ravi did much worse? Of course! But I believe that the increase in moral failings by Christian leaders stems from a serious disregard for holiness in the church. And the problem that churchgoers have with pornography is also evident of that.

Where is the conviction of the Holy Spirit? Where is the accountability? The church in America will never see any sort of revival until we start to value holiness again. We have built a church culture that allows for people to sit comfortably in the pews of church buildings without any challenge from the pulpit to pick up their cross and die daily. With all of this in view, so many “Christian” people today are taking this profoundly disappointing situation and using it as an opportunity to signal their virtue. But that’s not what Christianity is about. It’s about signaling God’s virtue.

We signal God’s virtue by sharing the gospel to this lost and dying world, and by living out the Christ-life. We mustn’t allow ourselves to make holiness merely an image to attain publicly, but a daily denial of self out of our love for our God. Finally, Ravi’s exposure has reminded me personally that I am also merely a man, and I must also watch my life and doctrine. I have a beautiful wife who thinks the world of me. I praise God for her. What things can I do daily to attain the discipline needed to never let her down like Ravi did to his wife, Margie? I have a beautiful baby girl who lights up when she sees me. What can I do right now to make sure that when I die, she will never have to suffer the pain Naomi Zacharias is going through at this time? What can I do to ensure that I don’t cause anyone to stumble? Simply put, I must truly value holiness in every aspect of my life. I must be fully set apart for God. Our arguments for God mean only so much. We must live the life we preach.

Conclusively, in this article I have tried to be real with the reader. I must be honest; I am still fighting my own disappointment. It’s hard because for me, it’s as if he passed away all over again. The man I thought was there really wasn’t. Last May, I remember weeping and needing the comfort of my wife because of my grief over Ravi’s passing. There was so much that Ravi had given me, and I hadn’t taken time to consider a world without him. This is really a mistake on my part, and unfortunately, the American church has allowed for this satanic influence of celebrity-ism to infiltrate it.

We must never allow a minister to grow in popularity so much so that they overshadow Jesus, who is the truth behind the gospel message. This is true whether it be the Apostle Paul in his time, or Ravi Zacharias, Carl Lentz, Jerry Fallwell Jr. or whoever else. Why? Because men fail. Our gospel is not founded on mere men, it is founded on the work and power of Christ. Unfortunately, we have let it come to this in the church today. I have let it come to this. And I take responsibility for it. This is why I have taken this attempt to give answers to some hard questions that people may be facing. My hope is that in doing so, I have brought clarity to those who are in serious need of answers. If I have not been clear enough, I encourage the reader to reach out. Comment on this article or email me at adam@boldapologia.com for more dialogue. I hope this has blessed whoever needed it.

In Christ,

Adam Parker

An Unbiblical Doctrine: Annihiliationism

Introduction:

I was recently asked a thought-provoking question about hell: Is it truly eternal? Interestingly, the word ‘eternal’ isn’t directly mentioned in the Bible. My initial response was based on common Jewish beliefs, especially those of the Pharisees, who viewed hell as everlasting. I mentioned that Jesus, in the Gospels, used terms equivalent to ‘everlasting’ or ‘eternal.’ However, the person questioning me wasn’t satisfied. They believed the original biblical languages didn’t support the concept of an eternal hell and suggested I look into a belief called Annihilationism. This idea suggests hell is temporary, ending in either the destruction or purification of sinners.

Eternal in the New Testament:

To understand this better, let’s examine the original Greek words translated as ‘eternal’ in the New Testament:

1. Aidios: The word “everlasting,” signifying something that endures indefinitely, is indeed used in the Bible, specifically in two contexts that emphasize the theme of eternity.

First, it appears in the context of describing God’s power. For instance, in the book of Romans 1:20 (New International Version), it states: “For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.” Here, “eternal power” aligns with the concept of “everlasting,” illustrating that God’s power is without beginning or end, transcending time.

Second, the term is used in Jude 1:6, which says: “And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their proper dwelling—these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day.” This reference to “everlasting chains” signifies a punishment that is perpetual, highlighting the eternal consequences of the actions of these angels.

These instances demonstrate that the Bible indeed encompasses the concept of eternity, not just as a philosophical or abstract idea, but as a concrete attribute of God’s nature and as a real consequence in the spiritual realm. This underscores the biblical worldview that existence and consequences extend beyond the temporal realm, embracing the notion of an unending, eternal reality.

2. Aion: The term “aion” in biblical texts is a multifaceted one, capable of conveying a range of meanings related to time, depending on its contextual use. This Greek term can signify an age, a long period, or eternity, and its interpretation can vary from a finite epoch to an infinite duration.

1. Eternal Implication: When “aion” is used in the context of God’s attributes, it often implies an unending, eternal quality. For instance, in the New Testament, Paul refers to God’s eternal nature in Romans 1:20: “For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.” Here, the term “eternal” (translated from “aionios,” an adjective form of “aion”) underscores the timeless, never-ending aspect of God’s power and divine nature.

2. Finite Time Period: On the other hand, “aion” can also refer to a specific, finite period or age, which has a beginning and an eventual end. A clear example is found in Matthew 24:3, where the disciples ask Jesus, “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?” In this verse, “age” (translated from “aion”) denotes a particular historical era or period that, unlike God’s eternal nature, is temporary and will conclude.

3. Combining Both Meanings: In some instances, “aion” may carry a nuanced meaning that blends the concept of a long duration with an implication of an indefinite, perhaps eternal, quality. For example, in the Letter to the Hebrews 1:8, it is written, “But about the Son he says, ‘Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever (aiona tou aionos),’ a scepter of justice will be the scepter of your kingdom.” Here, the phrase “forever and ever” (aiona tou aionos) might be interpreted as a succession of ages, yet implying an unending reign, suggesting a sense of perpetuity.

In conclusion, the usage of “aion” in the Bible is complex and layered. It demands careful consideration of the context to discern whether it is referring to a finite time frame, an unending duration, or a blend of both. This flexibility in meaning underlines the depth and diversity of biblical language and the importance of nuanced exegesis in understanding scriptural concepts related to time and eternity.

3. Aionios: The adjective “aionios,” derived from “aion,” is used in the New Testament to describe the nature of hell’s fire as eternal, conveying a sense of unending duration. This term is particularly emphasized in Jesus’ teachings regarding judgment and the afterlife.

1. Eternal Fire: In Matthew 25:41, Jesus speaks of the “eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.” The Greek phrase here is “to pur to aionion,” where “aionion” (eternal) qualifies “pur” (fire). This usage suggests a fire that is not just long-lasting but perpetual, without cessation. The context of this passage, dealing with final judgment, underscores the permanence of this state.

2. Eternal Punishment: Similarly, in Matthew 25:46, Jesus contrasts “eternal life” with “eternal punishment” (“kolasin aionion”). Here again, “aionion” is used to describe the unending nature of the punishment that awaits the unrighteous. This juxtaposition of eternal life and eternal punishment in the same verse strongly implies that just as eternal life is unending, so is eternal punishment.

In these contexts, “aionios” is used to convey a sense of endless duration. This interpretation is consistent with the traditional Christian understanding of hell as a state or place of perpetual separation from God, characterized by unceasing punishment. This understanding of “aionios” as “everlasting” or “without end” in the context of hell’s fire and eternal punishment is critical to the theological concepts of judgment and the afterlife as presented in the New Testament.

4. Apoleia:The Greek word “apoleia,” commonly translated as “destruction,” plays a crucial role in the theological debate surrounding Annihilationism, a belief that posits the complete annihilation of the wicked in hell rather than their eternal conscious torment. However, a closer examination of how “apoleia” is used in various contexts within the Bible reveals a more complex understanding, often indicating a state of ruin or loss that carries an enduring, if not eternal, implication.

1. Annihilationist Viewpoint: Annihilationists interpret “apoleia” as indicating total destruction or cessation of existence. This perspective is drawn from passages like Matthew 10:28, where Jesus says, “Rather, fear him who can destroy (apolesai) both soul and body in hell.” Here, the term “destroy” could be construed as implying a complete end to existence.

2. Eternal Ruin Interpretation: However, a broader examination across the New Testament suggests that “apoleia” often conveys a sense of lasting ruin or loss, rather than obliteration. For instance, in 2 Thessalonians 1:9, it is written, “They will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction (olethron aionion), away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might.” The phrase “eternal destruction” implies a state of ruin without suggesting cessation of existence.

3. Use in Other Contexts: In Philippians 3:19, Paul describes certain enemies of the cross of Christ, stating, “Their end is destruction (apoleia).” This reference, while not directly about hell, utilizes “apoleia” in a way that suggests a disastrous end or ruin.

4. Permanence and Severity: The Revelation of John also uses “apoleia” in contexts that emphasize the severity and permanence of the state it describes. Revelation 17:8, for instance, refers to the beast that “was, and is not, and is about to rise from the bottomless pit and go to destruction (apoleian).” This usage suggests a profound and lasting state of ruin.

In summary, while “apoleia” can be understood in the context of annihilation or cessation of existence, a comprehensive review of its biblical usage leans more towards a state of lasting ruin or loss. This interpretation aligns with the traditional Christian view of hell as a place of ongoing, perhaps eternal, punishment and separation from God, rather than a place where the soul is annihilated or ceases to exist.

“Eternal” Is Biblical:

When analyzing the concept of “eternity” in the context of hell as described in the Bible, particularly through the lens of the original Greek terminology, the evidence leans strongly towards an understanding of hell as an eternal state. This interpretation emerges from a detailed examination of key terms and passages, which seem to contradict the Annihilationist perspective that a compassionate God would not permit eternal punishment for sinners.

1. “Aionios” – Eternal: The Greek adjective “aionios,” translated as “eternal” or “everlasting,” is crucial in this discussion. For instance, in Matthew 25:46, Jesus contrasts eternal life with eternal punishment: “And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.” The same Greek word, “aionios,” is used for both “eternal punishment” and “eternal life,” suggesting parity in the duration of both states. If eternal life is without end, so, by parallel, is eternal punishment.

2. “Apoleia” – Destruction: The term “apoleia,” often translated as “destruction,” also factors into this debate. In 2 Thessalonians 1:9, it states, “They will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might.” Here, “eternal destruction” (olethros aionios) implies a state of ruin or loss that is perpetual, not suggesting an end to existence but a continuous state of destruction.

3. Contextual and Theological Consistency: The broader biblical narrative and theological consistency also support the eternal nature of hell. For example, Revelation 14:11 describes the fate of the wicked, saying, “And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever (eis aionas aionon), and they have no rest, day or night…” This depiction of unending torment aligns with the concept of an eternal hell.

4. Challenge to Annihilationism: While Annihilationism arises from a perspective of divine compassion, suggesting that eternal punishment is inconsistent with God’s nature, the scriptural references to “eternal punishment” and “everlasting destruction” challenge this view. The consistent use of “aionios” to describe both the positive state of eternal life and the negative state of eternal punishment suggests that both are unending.

In conclusion, a detailed analysis of the biblical text, especially the original Greek terms, supports the interpretation that hell is depicted as an eternal state in the Bible. This understanding, which sees hell’s punishment as unending, aligns with the traditional Christian doctrine and contrasts with the Annihilationist view, challenging the notion that a compassionate God would not allow for eternal punishment.

Conclusive Thoughts:

In forming a conclusive understanding of the nature of hell as presented in the Bible, several key elements and scriptural passages need to be considered, aligning with the views of influential theologians like John Wesley and Jonathan Edwards.

1. God’s Holiness and Justice: The Bible consistently emphasizes God’s holiness and His uncompromising stance against evil. This divine attribute underlines the necessity for justice in response to sin. Scriptures like Nahum 1:2 declare, “The Lord is a jealous and avenging God; the Lord takes vengeance and is filled with wrath.”

2. Eternal Separation and Ruin: The concept of eternal separation from God for those who reject His ways is a recurring theme. This is not presented as a temporary or purifying punishment but as an enduring consequence of one’s choices. For instance, 2 Thessalonians 1:9 states, “They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord.”

3. Vivid Descriptions in Revelation: The Book of Revelation contains some of the most explicit descriptions of this eternal state. Revelation 14:11, for instance, says, “And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever, and they have no rest, day or night.” This imagery supports the interpretation of hell as a place of unceasing torment.

4. John Wesley’s Perspective: John Wesley, a prominent theologian and the founder of Methodism, also underscored the relentless nature of suffering in hell. He is quoted as saying, “There is no doctrine in the whole word of God which is more solemnly and repeatedly asserted than that of the eternal duration of future punishments.”

5. Jonathan Edwards’ View on Hell: Edwards, especially noted for his sermon “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God,” presented a vivid and stark depiction of hell. He emphasized the justice of God in condemning sinners to hell. Edwards described hell as a place of eternal torment, where God’s wrath is justly poured out on those who have rejected Him. In his own words, “The wicked shall be cast into hell, where they shall endure unspeakable torments, forever and ever.”

6. Theological and Practical Implications: The understanding that hell is eternal is not merely a theological position but also carries practical implications. It underscores the urgency of the Christian mission to guide others towards salvation through Jesus Christ. This perspective aligns with the biblical call for evangelism and compassion, as it is not just a matter of intellectual debate but of eternal significance.

In conclusion, a comprehensive examination of biblical texts, alongside the theological insights of figures like John Wesley, leads to the understanding that hell is depicted as an eternal state of separation and torment. This perspective should serve as a motivation for Christians to earnestly engage in sharing the message of salvation through Jesus Christ, recognizing the profound implications of these beliefs on the eternal destinies of individuals.

Bibliography

1. Bible Translations and Commentaries:

• New International Version (NIV) Bible. Grand Rapids, MI: various editions.

• The Interlinear Bible: Hebrew-Greek-English. Edited by Jay P. Green. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, various editions.

• Carson, D. A. “Exegetical Fallacies.” Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1996.

2. Theological Texts on Hell and Eternity:

• Peterson, Robert A. “Hell on Trial: The Case for Eternal Punishment.” Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 1995.

• Fudge, Edward William. “The Fire That Consumes: A Biblical and Historical Study of the Doctrine of Final Punishment.” Houston, TX: Providential Press, 1982.

• Kreeft, Peter, and Ronald K. Tacelli. “Handbook of Christian Apologetics.” Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1994.

3. Studies on Biblical Language and Terms:

• Mounce, William D. “Basics of Biblical Greek Grammar.” Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2009.

• Harris, R. Laird, Gleason L. Archer Jr., and Bruce K. Waltke, eds. “Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament.” Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1980.

4. Historical and Cultural Perspectives:

• Russell, Jeffrey Burton. “A History of Heaven: The Singing Silence.” Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1997.

• Davidson, Ivor J. “The Birth of the Church: From Jesus to Constantine, AD 30-312.” Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2004.

5. Works of Key Theologians:

• Wesley, John. “The Works of John Wesley.” Edited by Albert C. Outler. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, various editions.

• Edwards, Jonathan. “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God.” Edited by Harry S. Stout. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2003.

6. Contemporary Theological Debates:

• Moreland, J. P., and William Lane Craig. “Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview.” Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2003.

• Walls, Jerry L. “Hell: The Logic of Damnation.” Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1992.

7. Critical Analysis and Interpretative Works:

• Bauckham, Richard. “The Fate of the Dead: Studies on the Jewish and Christian Apocalypses.” Leiden, Netherlands: Brill, 1998.

• Blocher, Henri. “In the Beginning: The Opening Chapters of Genesis.” Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1984.

Does Jesus being “Tempted” Mean That He Is Not Fully God?

Are Skeptics badgering you about the sinlessness of Jesus? Are they making you question his place in the Godhead? If you are, you might come up with this often used claim against the authenticity of Jesus being God made flesh. Skeptics often claim that because Jesus was tempted, he could not be God. The passage that Skeptics use to back up this claim is found in James Chapter 1, verse 13, which says, “Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am being tempted by God”; for God cannot be tempted by evil, and He Himself does not tempt anyone.” -The claim comes up that because God cannot be tempted by evil, Jesus could not be God because according to Hebrews 4:15, Jesus was “tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin.” considering the seemingly clear contradiction here, it does seem as if the skeptic is making a solid claim against the belief that Jesus was God in the flesh. However, with proper study of the scriptures we can see that this is not a contradiction at all.

Test and tempt…

To begin, we need to understand what it means to be tempted. broadly defined, temptation is the enticement to do evil (James 1:14). James 1:13 clearly states that God cannot be tempted (or enticed to do evil) nor does God entice anyone. Throughout scripture it has been clearly shown that Satan is the tempter (Mt. 4:3; 1 Th 3:5). -But there is one more word that is extremely important to the subject at hand. “test” is very important to keep in mind. See, Skeptics often like to use the translations of the Bible that they feel are less of an issue for their proof texts against certain doctrines of the Christian faith. For example, in Hebrews, other translations say “testings (NLT)” or “tested (HCSB)” rather than “tempted” …. This could be a problem for the skeptic’s objections already, because there is a clear difference between tempting and testing.

For example…

As we have already settled, temptation is the enticement to do evil. To entice is to attract by offering pleasure or advantage.. Whereas testing is a procedure intended to establish the quality, performance, or reliability of something, especially before it is taken into widespread use. This is very interesting because we do find that throughout scripture God does test his people in order that he may establish them as his own. For example often times throughout the Old Testament, God tested Israel (Deuteronomy 8:2), also, God tested Job by allowing Satan to afflict him (Book of Job), and God tested Abraham (Gen. 22:1). In all these circumstances, God was not enticing his people to sin, but rather allowed hard circumstances to happen to them so that he could establish them as his people. In these circumstances, Satan often times comes to tempt God’s people. Temptation however, is the work of the devil. Satan hates mankind, and wants us to live in the same evil filth that he is in. This is why he successfully tempted Adam and eve in the Garden of Eden (Genesis 3:4).

James 1:13; Hebrews 4:15 ..

So back to the text, if Jesus is God made flesh, why was he able to be tempted if God cannot be tempted? Well, the simple answer that Jesus was never enticed to do evil, in fact, the Greek word in Hebrews that is in place of tempt is “peirazo” which  has a dual meaning of both “tempt” and “test.” This isn’t necessarily meant to say that Jesus was not tempted, because he was.. However, the difference is that Satan tempted him in a sense that he was “trying” to entice Jesus to sin. Jesus himself however did not give into temptation and was therefore was not tempted himself. This is why the translations often appear to be different. In fact, if we were to say that Jesus in this text was indeed tempted, or in other words, gave into temptation, we can also say that in Psalm 78:41 that God was also tempted! Which says in the NASB “Again and again they tempted God, And pained the Holy One of Israel.” However, just as it is with Hebrews 4:15, This is nothing other than a dual use of the word “tempt” and “test” as other translations such as the NIV, NLT, and ESV show “test” as the word being used in the text.

As if it could be any more injurious…

Now as if it could be any more injurious to the skeptical claim, we also have to apply some logic to the equation here using some other great scripture regarding the perfection of Jesus. Something important to note in James 1 is that the verse after verse 13 it says: “But each person is tempted when he is drawn away and enticed by his own evil desires.” (HCSB). -Now tell me, if scripture says things about Jesus like, “committed no sin, and no deceit was found in his mouth” (1 Peter 2:22),  “In him is no sin” (1 John 3:5),  and “had no sin” (2 Corinthians 5:21), how on earth can we say that this verse applies to Jesus? If Jesus had, as James 1:14 describes, “his own evil desires” How could it be that he was ever without sin? There was no evil in him! So it only logically concludes that Jesus is God made flesh, and that this verse is talking about those who have given into sin and fallen short of the glory of God because of the evil desire of their hearts. None of which is the criteria that Jesus fits. Jesus was the sinless and spotless Lamb of God! (1 Peter 1:19)

Conclusively…

To conclude this article I have established that Jesus was not enticed/tempted as we are, he was actually tested/tempted as we are, and he came out victorious in all circumstances because he knew no sin!  James 1:13 is talking about people who have evil desires and have fallen short of the glory of God, none of which are things that Jesus did. Jesus was tested in every way just as we are, yet he knew no sin! (Hebrews 1:13) -And proper word study and comparisons between translations as well as with the Greek will show that Jesus was tempted/tested by Satan, but could not possibly give into the temptation itself. Now we can rest and be assured that Jesus is God made flesh, and he dwelt among us, knowing no sin whatsoever, and that because of this, his death on the cross for our sins has become the atonement for us once and for all.