When I was in my senior year of high school, I struggled to decide which college course to take. I prayed earnestly for wisdom and direction, desperate to know God’s will for that season of my life.

In late 2019, I again found myself seeking God’s direction—this time about whether to accept an invitation to serve at CBCP or remain in my home church. I was discerning God’s will for both my career and ministry. It was a significant decision, and I didn’t want to take it lightly.

These and many other moments have led me to ask: Is it really possible to know God’s will for our lives? Maybe you’ve asked the same question. Maybe, like me, you’re worried, What if I get it wrong? These are valid and important questions—ones that deserve our thoughtful attention.

In Mark 4:1–33, Jesus teaches the crowds through a series of parables. He begins with a call to listen carefully, signaling that what He’s about to say requires special attention. After the first two parables, He repeats the phrase, “He who has ears to hear, let him hear.” Clearly, Jesus doesn’t want His listeners to miss what He’s teaching.

Mark then tells us that Jesus explains the first parable to the Twelve and a few others who stayed behind to ask about it. Perhaps the parable stirred something in them—curiosity, hunger, or even confusion—that made them want to know more. Unlike the rest of the crowd, who simply heard and went home, these few listened deeply and acted on what they heard by drawing near to Jesus for further understanding.

Then Jesus makes a striking statement: “To you has been given the secret of the kingdom of God, but for those outside, everything is in parables…” He’s referring to those who didn’t stay to seek more from Him. For them, everything remains veiled and mysterious. In other words, if you remain at a distance, Jesus remains unclear. You can’t truly know His heart or His purposes.

Jesus taught in parables not to confuse, but to invite. His parables were designed to lead people to Himself—to provoke questions, stir hearts, and draw people into deeper relationships. One Bible commentator puts it this way:

“God’s self-revelation is veiled in order that people may have the space to make a personal decision. A true turning to God, or repentance, is made possible by the inward enabling of the Holy Spirit—but would be made impossible by the external compulsion of a direct and overwhelming manifestation of God’s majesty. The revelation is veiled for the sake of man’s freedom to believe.”

So how does this relate to discovering God’s will?

It begins with coming to Jesus and hearing more from Him. Just as with the parables, discerning God’s will starts with knowing Jesus. The better question isn’t “What if I get it wrong?” but “Do I truly know Jesus?” When we understand more of His character and purposes, we are better equipped to respond in faith and obedience.

Our search for God’s will is not meant to lead us into fear or paralysis, but to draw us closer to Jesus—to seek His voice, wrestle with His Word, and be changed by His presence. As we keep coming to Him, we will gain greater clarity about His will for our lives. Our capacity to discern and receive will grow as we pay closer attention to Him.

But if we do not listen—if we remain passive or distracted—Jesus warns that even what little we have may be lost. The call, then, is to lean in. To seek. To listen. And to keep coming to the One who still speaks.

The post The Struggle to Find God’s Will appeared first on Christian Bible Church of the Philippines.

Two patients with stage-four cancer received two different types of miracles from God. The first patient was cured of the horrible disease. His family rejoiced and thanked God for this miracle. But the man went back to his old ways of debauchery, drunkenness, and moral decadence. He spent the remaining years of his life in misery, hated by many. 

The second patient received no cure from cancer. But something beautiful happened in his character. As he battled with this excruciating disease, the once egotistical, abusive, and angry person became humble, kind, generous, and compassionate. The impossible happened. His friends had a difficult time recognizing this brand-new person. His family rejoiced and thanked God for this miracle. The cancer stayed, but he lived his final weeks with gratefulness, loved by many.

Miracles and Spiritual Lenses

Both miracles are the powerful work of God to bring about what is humanly impossible. However, it is interesting to note that even if the second miracle seems more profound, it is the first miracle that is more sought-after. Sometimes, the miracles of God are hidden in plain sight. It just depends on the spiritual lens we use in order to see how God is working powerfully in our midst.

A miracle is generally defined as an extraordinary and often inexplicable event that is considered to be caused by a divine power or supernatural force. It typically refers to occurrences that defy natural laws, seemingly beyond human understanding or scientific explanation.

It is sad but true that society is plagued with deceptive forces that produce counterfeit miracles disguised as divine. However, these demonic activities do not invalidate the truth that God is still doing miracles in our world today. Moreover, while it is also true that the spiritually astute believer may see the unnoticeable mundane tasks of daily life existence as miraculous in themselves (e.g. the birth of a child, the kiss of a lover, the beauty of a sunset, the poetry of peach blossoms, the aroma of good coffee, etc.), we recognize that there still exists today spectacular powerful events that are beyond-the-natural, which defy rational explanations even in our postmodern world.

As Christians, it is our spiritual lens that serves as a map by which we steer through life. This helps us see things that others do not see, and stirs in us a desire to understand how God works.  More than knowing the truth, there is also an aspect of faith that brings illumination — realizations, insights, and awakenings that lead us to see Christ’s miracles in our lives and in our world.

Miracles of The Inner Life

In the Gospel of Mark, we see a plethora of miracles that Jesus Christ displayed: (1) physiological miracles such as healing people with evil spirits or mental illness (Mark 1:21–28; 5:1–20; 7:24–30; and 9:14–29) and people with physical illness — skin disease (Mark 1:40–45); paralysis (Mark 2:1–12); hemorrhagic sickness (Mark 5:25–34); deaf mute (Mark 7:31–37); blind (Mark 8:22–25); etc.; (2) geophysical miracles such as calming the storm (Mark 4:35–41) and walking on water (Mark 6:45–52); and (3) inner-life miracles — people who had moral turning points, such as from greed to generosity (Mark 2:13-17), hopelessness to gratefulness (Mark 14:3-9), confusion to confidence (Mark 8:29), doubt to faith (Mark 15:39); etc.

A case can be made that humanity’s greatest need today in the twenty-first century is what we call “inner-life miracles”. Seeing the miraculous Christ powerfully at work in our egotistic attitudes, our troubled marriages, our embittered unforgiving hearts, our sexual addictions, our psycho-emotional wounds, our manic depression, our relational brokenness, etc., these types of miracles are like signposts that point people to the God who heals relational wounds and who breaks emotional bondages.

Miracles and Relational Discipleship

All the miracles of Jesus are powerful works of God. Their overall impact was intended for people to recognize His divine authority as Messiah and His kingdom’s supremacy over the empires of this world. Ultimately, the greatest miracle of Christ is His resurrection from the dead. This truth shapes our belief — that in the resurrected Christ, our forgiveness is settled, our faith is sure, and our future is secure. 

The miracles of Christ in the Gospel of Mark also shape our own discipleship — i.e., what it means to be a follower of Jesus Christ. They become enriching conversations on how we do relational discipleship. 

First, the miracles of Christ occurred in RESPONSE to human need. A woman is sick, she is healed. A child is demonized; she is delivered. The disciples fear that they will drown, and the storm is stilled. The crowd is hungry, the thousands are fed. 

Second, the miracles of Christ occurred to REVEAL the inclusive nature of the kingdom Jesus preached. Outsiders to Israel, such as a leper, a hemorrhaging woman, or gentiles (non-Jews), are included. 

Third, the miracles of Christ occurred to REVERSE what makes people unclean. Unlike the strict Jewish purity regulations during His time, Jesus does not get contaminated by the impurity He touches. Instead, His own holiness is contagious. Lepers are cleansed. Evil spirits are overcome. 

Yes. The eyes of our faith allow us to see the miracles of Christ still happening today in our generation.  We can see that the kingdom Jesus teaches is an inclusive, all-embracing, restorative, compassionate, and victorious kingdom.

As followers of Jesus, He calls us to do a quality of discipleship that relates to where people are and that brings them closer to God. Christ invites us to become His hands and feet as He continues to do powerful miracles in our world today. When we live as the body of Christ, we have the privilege to work together with God to bring about the miracles that broken, wounded, rejected, empty, and lonely people need.

The post What Do Miracles Look Like Today? appeared first on Christian Bible Church of the Philippines.

For centuries, Christian believers have disagreed on many issues. They include debates on trivial matters such as eating meat, drinking wine, worship style, mode of baptism; theological matters such as women in leadership, views on eschatology, predestination, human freewill; socio-ethical matters such as homosexuality, divorce, war, poverty, engagement in politics; and so on. But one of the most intense conversations that have sparked heated arguments among followers of Jesus is the debate on the Genesis account of how divine creation happened.

While all Christians agree that it was God who created the world and that human beings are created in the image of God, it seems that there are different perspectives on whether the earth is less than 20,000 years old or more than 4 billion years old. Then of course, there is also the dispute on whether God included evolution in the process of creation.

Some Christians believe in the “Young Earth Creationism” view — God actually created the world within six days (consecutive 24-hour periods). Others embrace the “Old Earth Creationism” view (a.k.a. Progressive Creationism) — God actually created the world within long periods of time (billions of years). There are also fellow believers who agree with the “Evolutionary Creationism” view (a.k.a. Theistic Evolution) — God actually created the world and used the process of evolution in His work.

In 1999, the book entitled Three Views on Creation and Evolution was published. Various Christian thinkers representing different views wrote arguments and proposals to questions such as: Can a “young earth” be reconciled with a universe that appears to be billions of years old? Does scientific evidence point to a God who designed the universe and life in all its complexity? Can the process of evolution be harmonized with the biblical story of creation?

This was followed by more books seeking to deepen this fiery conversation such as The Origins Debate: Evangelical Perspectives on Creation, Evolution, and Intelligent Design (2012) and Four Views on Creation, Evolution, and Intelligent Design (2017). That is why today we have good Christians throughout various opposing camps such as Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis who defends Young Earth Creationism, Hugh Ross of Reasons to Believe who argues for Old Earth Creationism, Deborah Haarsma of BioLogos who supports Evolutionary Creationism, and Stephen Meyer of The Discovery Institute who contends for Intelligent Design. 

This goes to show that the creation-evolution debate within the Christian family is a significant topic that deserves exploration. We need to stop demeaning or demonizing fellow Christians who may not agree with our perspectives. The challenge to the global body of Christ is to discern and listen to various Christian voices within the Church, and to humbly and wisely integrate biblical studies with aspects of geology, paleontology, biology, and other relevant domains of scientific inquiry about how our world began.

Healthy Disagreements Among Fellow Believers 

Christians can disagree on significant issues without condemning each other as non-believers or heretics. Certain matters of disputes among fellow believers (Romans 14:1-15:7; 1 Corinthians 10:23-33) are non-essential topics of debate that allow for freedom of conscience and healthy disagreements among believers. The creation-evolution debate is one of such topics.

When Christians disagree, it is helpful that we distinguish between matters that are ‘worth debating on’ and matters that are ‘worth dividing for’.

Topics that are ‘worth debating on’ are matters of disagreements based on different persuasions or interpretations, but they are not worth dividing for. They may be important truths, but they are not essential to Christian salvation. A believer can have full persuasion about a certain belief or value without judging others. Here, Christians can maintain unity on the essentials and allow freedom of interpretation on the non-essentials.

Issues that are ‘worth dividing for’ are matters of disagreements that separate orthodoxy from heresy because they include truths essential to a correct theology of salvation (distinct from heretical teachings). These disputes may require public confrontation and the breaking of fellowship over the purity of the Gospel.

Disagreements about the creation-evolution debate may fall under matters that are ‘worth debating on’ but definitely not on matters that are ‘worth dividing for’. This should not cause division among believers. We can love one another in Christ, and practice unity even when we disagree on our understanding of the Genesis creation story.

We must promote the maxim by Rupertus Meldenius: “In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity.”

Finite Beings Trying to Understand the Infinite God

You may be wondering why there are many competing theological perspectives within the Christian family. This is because God is huge and we are small. Our human explanations, reasonings, and attempts to totally comprehend God are fallen, limited, and prone to be mistaken.

Seeking truth is similar to the story of the blind men and the elephant, who each described, out of their own disability, what the whole elephant is like. Each was right in his perception of the part he detected. But everyone was wrong in assuming that the part they discovered was all there was to the elephant. 

In doing theology, we may be looking at the same thing and yet see it in many different ways. What we see depends largely on what we are disposed to see; and what is seen is but a corner of the reality that is there.

As finite, fallen, and fallible beings trying hard to grasp a huge universe created by an Infinite Being, we are prone to come up with blurry glimpses of reality. That is why even among fellow Christians, we seem to have incomplete, conflicting perspectives or interpretations on many significant issues. One such debate among believers is about the account of human origins found in the book of Genesis.

This ought to humble us and realize that we are limited beings and that we do not always get it right.  Even the Apostle Paul speaks about the limits of human knowing. He described that the human attempt to understand reality is partial, vague, and imperfect, like we are “seeing through a dim glass” (1 Corinthians 13:12).

We grow in knowledge by learning together from our mistakes, our sharing of insights, exchange of ideas, conscientious reflection, dialogue, debate, and deliberation.  Hence, because of our limitations and imperfections, we need each other in a cooperative endeavor to figure out the world and to search for truth.

We can partly understand who God is. But certain things about Him remain a “mystery.” Some things are simply beyond our capacity as humans to fully grasp.

Three Christian Views on Creation and Evolution

God has two books — the ‘book of God’s Word’ (Scripture) and the ‘book of God’s World’ (Nature). Both of these books contain truths that can lead human beings to knowledge of God. This implies that all ‘revealed truths’ 𑁋 about our world, about our humanity, and about our Maker 𑁋 they all belong to God. In other words, “all truth is God’s truth” whether these truths were discovered by astronomers, physicists, biologists, philosophers, psychologists, sociologists, or theologians. Both believers and non-believers uncover God’s truth revealed through nature as they study our planet (e.g., law of gravity, atoms, heliocentric universe, round earth, human genome, etc.). We can see this principle in Romans 1:18-21 and Psalms 19:1-6.

Although Christians today have intense debates about the complicated love-hate relationship between creation and evolution, there are several important truths that all Christians agree on regardless of their views. With regard to the ‘creation-evolution debate’, these are basic non-negotiable beliefs that are common to all believers:

• God created and sustains everything. Creation itself provides unmistakable evidence of God’s handiwork.
• Human beings are created in the image of God and are thus unique among God’s creatures.
• Christians should approach the claims of science with both interest and discernment, confident that all truth is God’s truth.
• Everything in creation finds its source, goal, and meaning in Jesus Christ, in whom the whole of creation will one day achieve redemption and renewal. All things will be united in Him, things in heaven and things on earth.

While these convictions unite all Christians, there are still many issues about the theory of evolution, the story of creation, and the age of the earth that divides us today. But as time goes by, and as technology and knowledge increase, our understanding of how the world works also becomes more clarified. For the meantime, while we wait for more evidence, let the discussions and debate about these matters continue within the Christian family. 

The following article is partly adapted from Jeffrey Koperski, “Creationism” in Science, Religion, and Society: History, Culture, and Controversy, Gary Laderman and Arri Eisen, eds. (Armonk, NY: Sharpe Reference, 2006).

1. YOUNG EARTH CREATIONISM (YEC)¹

God actually created the world within six days (consecutive 24-hour periods). The Genesis story is a literal and historical description of how divine creation happened.

The core teaching of Young Earth Creationism (YEC) is that the book of Genesis should be taken as a literal account of the prehistory and early history of the earth. The creation week is taken at face value: consecutive 24-hour periods adding up to six calendar days. Allowing for gaps in Old Testament genealogies, this means that the universe was created between 10,000 and 20,000 years ago. YECs also hold that geological data, including the fossil record, should be understood in light of the worldwide flood depicted in the account of Noah and the ark.

YEC was the majority view among Jews, Christians, and Muslims from ancient times until the nineteenth century. With little scientific evidence to contradict a young earth view, Scripture and tradition were the only sources available on the origin question. A dramatic change began around 1800. As geology matured into a distinct science, unexpected data began to emerge, including extinct volcanoes in central France and a consistent order among fossils in the geological strata. Scientists began to argue that geological explanations should appeal only to observed processes which they hypothesized to have been at work at the same rate and strength for millions of years

By the middle of the century, an old-earth view had taken hold. In 1852 it is estimated that one-half of all the Christians had come to believe that Genesis did not need to be interpreted in a young-earth creation view.

By the early twentieth century YEC had fallen into a minority position having few visible supporters among Christian leaders. The young earth view was adopted by some fundamentalist groups by World War II, but it was catapulted into the broader Christian community by seminary professor John Whitcomb Jr. and professor of civil engineering Henry Morris through the publication of The Genesis Flood (1961). YEC has since become a popular view among evangelical Christians and has been incorporated into the doctrinal statements of a number of churches, seminaries, and independent ministries.

The YEC interpretation is straightforward: Genesis should be taken as a simple, historical record without metaphor or symbolism. The length of each day (yom) is the same as the length of any other day found elsewhere in the Bible. YECs believe the flood in the account of Noah (Genesis 6-9) was a worldwide event. Allowing for a reinterpretation of Genesis with an old earth undermines the biblical framework. A less-than-literal interpretation of Genesis is thus taken to be a slippery slope toward a loss of biblical authority and a retreat to a naturalistic worldview.

Flood Geology

Modern YEC is not merely a set of religious doctrines about the Old Testament. Most creationists believe that their views will be vindicated by science, or at least would be if science could be freed from its philosophical commitment to naturalism. In order to counter scientific claims that the earth is over 4 billion years old, most YECs advocate a biblical flood geology. Instead of the millions of years required to create fossil fuels such as coal, flood geologists claim that they were formed within a year under the tremendous pressure of the floodwaters during Noah’s time. As for the consistency of fossils found at certain layers of the strata (rather than a given kind of fossil being found at all levels), flood geologists have three main answers: (1) if a creature lived on the ocean floor, it tended to be covered first, (2) denser creatures tended to sink and be buried faster than lighter creatures, and (3) larger, mobile creatures could escape the rising flood waters and were buried last.

Today many YECs see the debate as a strict dilemma: either one is a Christian upholding the truth of the Scriptures or one has fallen under the sway of atheistic naturalism. They believe that, since the Bible are without error and teach that the earth is less than 20,000 years old, any evidence that science might present to the contrary must be wrong.

The Appearance of Age

As we have seen, YECs argue that many scientific explanations requiring extreme age can be accounted for in terms of a recent creation. But what about, say, the starlight from distant galaxies? Such light would have taken millions of years to reach Earth, yet early civilizations saw the same constellations as we do. How could distant stars be seen if the universe is less than 20,000 years old? To answer this objection and a number of others like it, all YECs to some degree or other employ the notion that a recent creation must have the “appearance of age”. For example, Adam and Eve were created as fully grown adults. And since they needed food, many plants were likewise created whole. Thus, a recent creation requires that some things appear to have age at the instant they were brought into being. This provides a way to explain starlight: both the stars and the light en route from those stars were part of the initial creation. Scientists wrongly infer that the light has been traveling for millions of years since, again, they begin from naturalistic presuppositions rather than the truth of revelation.

Appealing to the appearance of age becomes the final line of defense against any seemingly incontrovertible evidence for an old earth. If such data cannot be accounted for in terms of flood geology, changes in the laws of nature, etc., YEC creationists then claim that things merely look extremely old from a naturalistic point of view. Stars, radioactive isotopes, continental plates, coral reefs, and the like merely have the appearance of age when in fact they were initially created much the way they are.

Critics object that this makes God into a deceiver: He has created a universe that falsely implies an ancient origin. YECs reply that there can be no deception if God explicitly tells us that the earth is young, which He has done in Genesis. The most familiar form of YEC is known as “creation science” or “scientific creationism.”

2. OLD EARTH CREATIONISM / PROGRESSIVE CREATIONISM (PC)²

God actually created the world within long periods of time. The Genesis story is a symbolic, metaphorical, or poetic description on how divine creation happened.

Although today the word “creationism” connotes a literal reading of Genesis, this was not always the case. Progressive Creationism (PC) or “old earth” creationism holds that while God made the universe and continues to act within it, the days of Genesis 1 are not literal, consecutive 24-hour periods. The six days of creation instead are thought to refer to an unspecified length of time. Most PCs believe that God directly created life as well as human beings. But since no age of the universe can be inferred from the text, they accept the findings of modern cosmology and geology. Most hold that Noah’s flood was a local phenomenon, and not a global event.

PC affirms that God created the universe, the earth, and all life on earth but it denies the teaching of evolution. In this way PC is similar to YEC. However, its most significant difference is that PCs believe God created the universe over billions of years rather than in six 24-hour periods.

Unlike the YECs, PCs do not contest the enormous body of evidence showing that the earth and the universe are billions of years old, and that complex, macroscopic life forms have been on this planet for hundreds of millions of years. PCs read Genesis in light of that evidence, accepting that mainstream scientific conclusions are indeed very well founded and do not contradict the Bible.

Although the term “progressive creation” was popularized in 1954 by philosopher/theologian Bernard Ramm, a nonliteral view of early Genesis can be found in ancient sources. Among these are Jewish philosopher Philo of Alexandria (c. 20 BC-c.50) and historian Flavius Josephus (37-c.95), as well as Christian theologians Origen (c. 185-254) and Augustine of Hippo (354-430). By the early twentieth century, virtually all well-known Christian leaders believed in an old earth: leaders of the Fundamentals movement such as D.L. Moody, conservative theologians Charles Hodge and B.B. Warfield, as well as William Jennings Bryan. Although PC remains strong among theologically conservative scientists and intellectuals, it has declined somewhat in the broader Protestant culture in the wake of YEC’s reemergence in the 1960s. PCs and YECs continue to oppose strict Darwinian evolution, especially in the case of humans.

More Christians have affirmed that a planet which is billions of years old poses no threat to Christian orthodoxy, but rather may be considered plausible and valid interpretations of the biblical text. Some of the famous believers who agree with this include the following: John Ankerberg, Gleason Archer, James Montgomery Boice, Chuck Colson, Paul Copan, William Lane Craig, Norman Geisler, Hank Hannegraff, Jack Hayford, Walter Kaiser, Greg Koukl, C. S. Lewis, Paul Little, J. P. Moreland, Robert Newman, Mark Noll, Francis Schaeffer, Chuck Smith Jr., Lee Strobel, Wayne Grudem, among many others.

PCs believe that the creation account is one of many passages in the Bible that should be taken figuratively. Angels are said to stand at the four corners of the earth (Revelation 7:1), but no one today thinks the earth is flat or square. There are also references to the sun rising (Judges 9:33; Matthew 5:45) and standing still (Joshua 10:13). Taken literally, the sun is pictured as the body in motion within a geocentric universe. For centuries, the Bible was understood to teach that the earth was the center of the universe. Once the Copernican Revolution took hold, exegetes began to question whether the naive interpretation of these texts was required or had simply been assumed all along. Rather than being a capitulation to science, theologians recognized these as new interpretive questions that no one had previously thought to ask.

PCs take a similar approach today when it comes to the creation account and geology. They argue that the traditional interpretation was dominant for so long only because there had been little reason to question the simple reading of Genesis 1. Now there are such reasons, and again sound exegesis shows that the simple interpretation is not the only permissible interpretation.

The Gap Theories

How then should the creation passages be interpreted? There are several approaches. The first are so-called “gap theories.” One of the most popular views at the turn of the nineteenth century held that there is an unspecified gap of time between Gen 1:1 and Gen 1:2. In Gen 1:1, God is said to have “created the heavens and the earth.” One English translation of Gen 1:2 reads “it became without form and void,” implying some sort of catastrophe or possibly divine judgment associated with the fall of Satan. On this “ruin-and-reconstruction” view, Gen 1:3-2:3 is actually a second creation. A more popular gap theory takes the days of creation as actual 24-hour periods separated by an unspecified length of time. On this “intermittent day” approach, God’s intervention on specific days in the course of cosmic history is summarized in Genesis.

One Day is Billions of Years

The most widely held PC interpretation appears to be the “day-age” theory. On this view, each “day” in Genesis 1 refers to an indistinct period of time, in some cases billions of years. In support of this interpretation, PCs point to instances in Scripture where the Hebrew word yom refers to periods (seasons of time) other than 24-hours, e.g., “on that day the Lord will extend his hand . . .” (Isaiah 11:11) and “in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens . . .” (Gen 2:4). Defining the “days” as “long ages” resolves some of the tensions with modern science, but not all. In particular, the days in the Genesis account are out of sequence from a scientific point of view. Plants and trees appear on day three; the sun and moon were created on day four.

Genesis is Not a Science Book

A more recent approach is known as the “literary framework” view, which emphasizes that Genesis 1 is not a scientific or historical description of the timing and mechanisms of creation. The point of the text is that Yahweh, the God of the Israelites, is the Creator of heaven and earth, rather than the Canaanite god Baal. The sun, moon, land, and seas were brought into being by Yahweh. He, not they, should be worshiped. To make this point, the author arranged the six days topically, not chronologically. Events are grouped in two triads of days. The realms of creation are separated in days 1-3. The rulers over those respective realms are created in days 4-6.

Critics complain that the parallel is not as neat as it might appear. For example, fish inhabit the seas (day 3), not merely the waters (day 2). Advocates of this view contend that even if this parallelism fails, the point remains that the purpose of early Genesis is not about strict history or science, but rather to prove Yahweh’s sovereign creation and reign.

Another view that should be mentioned is “Intelligent Design Theory”, which cuts across the YEC/PC distinction. Design theorists believe that traces of purpose and intelligence have been discovered in nature, but they are officially neutral with respect to the old earth/young earth controversy. In fact, they are officially neutral with respect to the identity of the creator. Some design theorists are not even theists.

3. EVOLUTIONARY CREATIONISM / THEISTIC EVOLUTION (TE)³

God actually created the world and used the process of evolution in His work. The scientific theory of evolution is compatible with biblical creation.

Theistic Evolutionists (TE) believe that the age of the universe debate has been dominated by a false dilemma: either supernatural interventions were needed to create the earth and its creatures on one hand, or purposeless, cosmic evolution produced everything purely by chance on the other hand. When faced with this choice, conservative Christians naturally see one side as orthodox and the alternative as atheistic. TEs believe there is a middle ground and that their religious views are fully compatible with modern cosmology, geology, and biological evolution.

For Christian believers who belong to the TE camp, Evolutionary Creationism is a position that takes the Bible seriously, upholding God as the creator of all things, and also takes science seriously, understanding that evolution is the best scientific explanation for the diversity of life on earth today.

Some of the famous Christians who seem supportive or open to Evolutionary Creationism are Karl Barth, Billy Graham, C.S. Lewis, John Stott, Francis Collins, Tim Keller, John Walton, Philip Yancey, Scott McKnight, Alister McGrath, Richard Mouw, John Ortberg, and N.T. Wright, among many others.

God Used Evolution to Start Everything

Christians who embrace this view argue that the scientific theory of evolution is compatible with biblical creation. They make a clear distinction between Darwinist evolutionism — which uses evolution to disprove God — and the scientific theory of evolution, which does not necessarily have theological implications. 

The universe has evolved, according to TE, just as science has taught us. The Big Bang, gradual formation of stars and planets, down through the self-organization of complex life and natural selection were God’s chosen means for bringing about the present universe. It’s not as though God were caught off guard; he foresaw the outcome and set the initial conditions in place that were required for this world.

Ancient Writers with Ancient Perspectives

Thus, evolution is not a worldview in opposition to God but a natural mechanism by which God providentially achieves his purposes. God spoke in Scripture in a way that the Jews and Christians would understand at the time, with the available limited scientific explanations of the ancient world.

The books of the Bible were written by many human authors under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, across a span of more than a thousand years, to tell the big, true story of God’s work in the world and with his people. Those authors came from many cultures, wrote in multiple languages, and used several literary genres. In fact, Holy Scripture features an ancient perspective of the structure, operation, and origin of the universe and life (e.g., the earth is flat and immovable, covered with a solid domed structure with the sun moving across the sky).

In other words, the Holy Spirit came down to the level of the ancient biblical writers and employed their understanding of the physical world in order to communicate as effectively as possible life-changing spiritual truths. By using an ancient science in the Bible, God revealed the inerrant message of faith that He created the world, not how He created it.

Differences among TEs tend to hinge on the nature of God’s ongoing guidance of the universe. Most hold some form of non-interventionism, the view that God’s main (and perhaps only) action after the initial creation is a continuous sustaining of the physical universe, rather than episodic interruptions. In other words, God upholds the natural order and the lawlike regularities studied by science, but does not violate the laws of nature. Since God was able to foresee the outcome, there was never a need for direct intervention or special creation within the natural order. Everything required for the present cosmos to evolve with all of its complexity was frontloaded at the initial creation. 

Other TEs believe that God continues to directly act within nature, but only in ways that do not violate the laws of physics. For example, quantum mechanics seems to indicate that nature is fundamentally probabilistic rather than deterministic. That means that some events at the subatomic level are purely matters of chance; the laws of physics do not determine their outcome. If so, then different outcomes are physically possible. Such causal gaps allow God to influence the behavior of the material world without violating its laws. Some TEs believe that God influences the behavior of natural systems via such means — a view which comes very close to PC. The difference has to do with our ability to detect such action. PCs believe that, at least in principle, the acts of God are empirically detectable by finding traces of design, purpose, intelligence. TEs generally reject this: specific acts of God within the causal gaps of nature cannot be detected.

Concluding Thoughts for Reflection

For centuries, one of the most intense conversations that have sparked heated arguments among followers of Jesus is the debate on the Genesis account of how divine creation happened. While all believers are united in the belief that God started the universe through a divine act of creation, there are at least three different Christian views which attempt to wrestle with this topic of creation and evolution.

• Young Earth Creationism believes that God actually created the world within six days (consecutive 24-hour periods). For them, the Genesis story is a literal and historical description of how divine creation happened.
• Old Earth Creationism / Progressive Creationism argue that God actually created the world within long periods of time. For them, the Genesis story is symbolical, metaphorical, or poetic description on how divine creation happened.
• Evolutionary Creationism / Theistic Evolution contends that God actually created the world and used the process of evolution in His work. For them, the scientific theory of evolution is compatible with biblical creation.

It seems that YEC is still the majority view among most conservative Christians, while PC and TE remains a minority view especially for Christians who are more open to reconciling biblical faith with science.

YECs believe they will eventually be vindicated by science. PCs respect YECs for their faithful devotion to Scripture, but they disagree about the interpretive rules one should bring to the creation texts. TEs agree with PCs on this, but then go on to reject divine intervention in nature after the Big Bang. YEC continues to be popular among conservative Christians, but has made little or no headway in the broader culture. PC, at least in the form of intelligent design theory, has a shaky footing in academia, but has yet to produce the scientific results needed to keep it there. TE has the most respect among intellectuals, but has the weakest theological content of the three.

In light of the on-going conversations within the Christian family regarding the creation-evolution debate, it seems appropriate and God-honoring to propose the following recommendations:

• Harmony. We need to stop shaming or demonizing fellow believers who do not agree with our perspectives or opinions on the creation-evolution debate. We must allow space for Christians to hold a range of views, advocate for those views and still feel loved in Christ.
• Humility. None of us have totally figured it out, especially when it comes to the creation-evolution debate. As finite beings we are prone to come up with blurry glimpses of reality. This ought to humble us and realize that we do not always get it right.  We need each other in a cooperative endeavor to figure out the world and to search for truth.
• Honesty. Keep asking the right questions in order to find the right answers, no matter how difficult the conversations become. Honestly examine why you believe what you believe and do not be afraid to engage with rational arguments, critical thinking, and scientific evidence. A faith that went through fire and survived is better than a hand-me-down type of faith that lacks intellectual foundations.
• Holiness. No matter how much we disagree as believers, remember that we must honor Christ with our lives through word and deed. More than clever arguments, it matters how our conversations and debates reflect Christlikeness.

The creation-evolution debate within the Christian family is a significant topic that deserves exploration. The challenge to the global body of Christ is to discern and listen to various Christian voices within the Church, and to humbly and wisely integrate biblical studies with aspects of geology, paleontology, biology, and other relevant domains of scientific inquiry about how our world began.

Serving Christ with you,

The CBCP Pastoral Team

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Sources / Recommended Readings:

• Three Views on Creation and Evolution | John Mark Reynolds, Howard J. Van Till, Paul Nelson, Robert C. Newman, James Porter Moreland
• The Origins Debate: Evangelical Perspectives on Creation, Evolution, and Intelligent Design | Alister McGrath, John Wilson, Richard N. Ostling, Tim Stafford, Nancy Pearcey, Charles Edward White, Howard J. Van Till, Stan Guthrie, Dinesh D’Souza
• Four Views on Creation, Evolution, and Intelligent Design | J.B. Stump, Ken Ham, Hugh Ross, Deborah Haarsma, Stephen C. Meyer
• The Lost World of Genesis One: Ancient Cosmology and the Origins Debate | John H. Walton
• God and Evolution | Jay W. Richards
• Science and Faith: Friends or Foes? | John Collins
• The Battle of Beginnings: Why Neither Side is Winning the Creation-Evolution Debate | Del Ratzsch
• The Fourth Day: What the Bible and the Heavens are Telling Us about the Creation | Howard Van Till
• I Love Jesus & I Accept Evolution | Denis O. Lamoureux
• How I Changed My Mind About Evolution: Evangelicals Reflect on Faith and Science | Kathryn Applegate, J.B. Stump
• Evolution and Belief: Confessions of a Religious Paleontologist | Robert J. Asher

[1] Jeffrey Koperski, “Creationism” in Science, Religion, and Society: History, Culture, and Controversy, Gary Laderman and Arri Eisen, eds. (Armonk, NY: Sharpe Reference, 2006).

[2] Koperski, “Creationism” in Science, Religion, and Society: History, Culture, and Controversy.

[3] Koperski, “Creationism” in Science, Religion, and Society: History, Culture, and Controversy.

The post How to Navigate Through the Creation-Evolution Debates Within the Christian Family? appeared first on Christian Bible Church of the Philippines.

Politics tends to polarize our society in general, and the body of Christ in particular. Political divisions are evident on social media, where discussions by all sides are usually angry, hurtful and personal. As a result, it becomes difficult, if not impossible, to carry out a reasoned exchange of divergent views even among Christians.[2]

Sadly, this hateful and harmful kind of political polarization is getting worse. Some experts call it the rise of “political sectarianism”. It is the “growing tendency of one political group to view its opponents as morally repugnant. This level of political divisiveness on both sides creates a feedback loop of hatred… a highly moralized political identity that views the other side as contemptible.”[3] This ‘taliban-like-cancel-culture’ brand of political sectarianism has three key components: the first one is what we call “othering”—labeling people with opposing opinions as so different from us that they’re almost incomprehensible. The second part we call “aversion”—this idea that they are not just different, but they’re dislikable. The third part is this “moralization”, where they are written off as morally bankrupt.[4] Those who do not agree with the group’s political convictions are banished as idiots, evil, or heretics.

As Christians we need to bring back human dignity in our political conversations, and reverse this ugly trend of dehumanizing and “othering” one another. But given the wide range of perspectives within the Christian family and the complex and divisive nature of politics, it should not surprise us that Christians also disagree about how to approach politics.

So, how should Christians engage in political debates over divisive issues in politics?

Here are some helpful guidelines:

1. We are spiritually united in Christ. But our political views as believers are diverse.

Christian disagreements about politics are often disputes on matters of mere opinion. That is why political debates should not cause division among believers. We can love one another in Christ, even when we do not agree in politics. Hence, Christians need to practice unity even when we disagree: “In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity” (Rupertus Meldenius). We must seek to generate more light than heat.

“Welcome with open arms fellow believers who don’t see things the way you do. And don’t jump all over them every time they do or say something you don’t agree with—even when it seems that they are strong on opinions but weak in the faith department. Remember, they have their own history to deal with. Treat them gently.” (Romans 14:1, MSG)

Instead of calling all followers of Christ to speak with one political voice and claiming to resolve political debates definitively, we must recognize there are different Christian views when it comes to politics. We must accept that, “far from conformity and unanimity, finding a common ground in politics is about providing room for divergent viewpoints and disagreeing opinions. It is our capacity to disagree agreeably that is the true hallmark of a mature democratic society. The truth is that democracy is not served by asking everyone to think in the same manner, or for that matter—to vote for the same candidates.”[5]

Hence, a healthy church would allow space for members to hold a range of political views, advocate for those views, and still feel loved in Christ.[6] We need to stop shaming, belittling, demeaning, dismissing, or demonizing fellow believers who do not agree with our opinions in politics.

We Christians must learn how to do political dialogue and have honest conversations without people getting angry. We do not have to agree on all matters of politics, but we need to stay one in Christ.[7]

“Always be humble and gentle. Be patient with each other, making allowance for each other’s faults because of your love. Make every effort to keep yourselves united in the Spirit, binding yourselves together with peace.” (Ephesians 4:2-3, NLT)

It is crucial that the Church be understood as a diverse family of believers (with different political views) that finds its commonness in Christ. The nature of how we engage politically and how we disagree with each other is an aspect of our discipleship. By working together across boundaries of political opinions, we can seek unity in Christ as we share the Gospel message with a broken world.[8]

Hence, it becomes problematic when a certain group baptizes their political view as the only correct Christian view. When we dismiss nuances and diversity in democratic discourse and dialogue, and claim that we have absolute monopoly of the right view, we end up with nothing but outrage devoid of intellectual humility and integrity.

When we dehumanize others, it can lead people to the justification of words and actions that degrade other people. This stands in deep contrast to the theology of the Imago Dei (the Image of God). As Christians, we believe that every single human being bears the image of God. We believe that every human being is fearfully and wonderfully made. When you find yourself disagreeing with someone’s politics, what is your usual response? Does it align with kingdom values?[9]

As Christians, we need to agree that the most significant aspect of our relationship is not our political views, but that we are connected together as brothers and sisters in Christ. [10]

So, when it comes to politics, all Christians disagree. The question is, does it matter “how we disagree”?

2. We belong to a higher kingdom. God’s rule is above and beyond any political government.

In the Gospels, religious leaders tried to drag Jesus into political controversies of his day.

Knowing that either answer would very likely cause Him trouble, they hoped to trick Jesus into making a dangerous statement, asking, “Tell us, then, what is your opinion? Is it right to pay the imperial tax to Caesar or not?” (Matthew 22:17). Unwilling to take their bait, Jesus responded with a command and a question.

First, He told them to show Him the coin used to pay the tax, and then He asked them whose image it bore. When they answered that the coin bore the image and inscription of Caesar, He offered this enigmatic response: “So give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and give back to God what is God’s” (Matthew 22:21). With this reply, Jesus refused to take a side in the fierce political debate of His day over the poll tax and “implied that loyalty to a pagan government was not incompatible with loyalty to God.”[11]

It is also interesting to know that among Jesus’ twelve disciples, He included a government official who is loyal to the Roman government (Matthew the tax collector), and a revolutionary activist who wants to fight the Roman government (Simon the Zealot). While Jesus did not condemn Matthew’s apparent submission and service to the political leaders of their time, He neither condemned Simon’s anti-government political convictions.[12]

Jesus seems to be showing us that the values, principles, and purposes of His Kingdom are beyond and above the political kingdoms of this world.  Matthew and Simon may have different political preferences, but at the end of the day they are both followers of Jesus. We may disagree with other believers about their opinion about the government, yet we all belong to Christ’s family.[13]

The truth about governments, empires, and rulers is that they all come and go, they all rise and fall. Yet God remains to be the sovereign authority over our nation, and over our world. God is in charge.[14]

This means that our highest loyalty and allegiance are to God, not to political entities or governing authorities. God is the true King over all other kings.

We are citizens of a higher kingdom. That is why no matter who rules our world — tyrants, corrupt leaders, or empires — as God’s people we can have confidence and hope (instead of panic, fear, anger, or despair) that God’s rulership is above and beyond all governments and political leaders of this world.

As Christians, we can find comfort and peace knowing that whoever ends up in power is in that position because God has allowed that to happen. So, whether you like or disapprove of whoever is in authority, the Almighty God is still on His throne and has a plan and purpose that our finite minds cannot comprehend.[15]

“Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.” (Romans 13:1, NIV)

3. We are the light of the world. Our thoughts, speech, & actions must reflect who Christ is.

The New Testament speaks exhaustively about how we believers are to conduct ourselves in all spheres of life, including in politics. And this much is certain, our citizenship in the kingdom of God is meant to inform or guide the way that we exercise our citizenship in our own nation. That means being more engaged in the political process. It means cultivating a willingness to bear our political and civic responsibilities no matter the cost.[16] Christ instructs us: “you are the light of the world… let your light shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven.” (Matthew 5:16, NIV)

If political engagement is chiefly an act of neighbor love, and if love, as defined by the apostle Paul in Scripture, is to be kind, among other things, then there is really no excuse for us to take up our political responsibilities without the kindness that Scripture requires (1 Corinthians 13:4). And, lest we misunderstand, kindness is not being spineless or weak. On the contrary, a Spirit-driven commitment to convictional kindness in the face of slander and misrepresentation takes courage and resolve. And it might be just the thing to turn the tide of politics as we know it.[17]

When entering a political conversation, Christians should be more focused on loving their neighbor and honoring the dignity of that person than on proving a point or winning an argument. Perhaps how we engage—the tone and approach—are just as important as what argument we can bring to the conversation.[18]

How we speak and engage in politics should be glorifying to God. We should be “quick to listen, slow to speak, and slow to anger” (James 1:19). Jesus cared for others, and we should care for others too as we seek to walk as Christ walked (1 John 2:6). When others know that we care for them, they will be more likely to hear us out. Even the person we adamantly disagree with is made in the image of God, and we ought to honor them as such (Genesis 1:27).[19]

Every person has value and worth, and our conversations with them should reflect that.[20]  In a world where opinions seem to be dividing us more and more, let us remember our humanity. Let us treat others the same way we want to be treated. We don’t have to always agree. But we should always be kind.

Thus, we need to focus on finding common ground with others. Meeting on common, non-threatening ground can soften one’s heart, open the door for future conversations, and deepen relationships.[21] 

“When I am with those who are weak, I share their weakness, for I want to bring the weak to Christ. Yes, I try to find common ground with everyone, doing everything I can to save some.” (1 Corinthians 9:22, NLT)

We must also remember that there’s so much more to people than their political affiliations. If we put people in a box based on their political party or who they vote for, we are missing an opportunity to recognize and appreciate their other unique traits and interests. Where we align politically is not our identity. We are first and foremost daughters and sons of the King, who are created in His image and called to “declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light” (1 Peter 2:9). [22]

Think before you post on social media. Check your heart for the motive behind your post.

Are you trying to change people’s minds? Do you want others to think of you in a certain kind of way? Are you trying to belittle or discredit people who don’t believe what you do? Or do you enjoy inciting arguments to make people get engaged in a verbal war of comments?

“Be wise in the way you act toward outsiders; make the most of every opportunity. Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.” (Colossians 4:5-6, NIV)

As Christians we must use social media as a tool to build others up instead of contributing to the negativity. Our behavior on social media is part of our witness as Christians.

4. We trust that God is in charge of history. Pray with discernment and vote with wisdom.

Ultimately, God is the Sovereign King who rules our planet. No political candidate will ever hold a government position apart from God’s plan and God’s will.

Daniel who served under a ruthless political leader said: “Praise be to the name of God for ever and ever; wisdom and power are his. He changes times and seasons; He deposes kings and raises up others. He gives wisdom to the wise and knowledge to the discerning. He reveals deep and hidden things; He knows what lies in darkness, and light dwells with him.” (Daniel 2:20-22)

While it is true that God is in charge of our universe, God still invites His people to participate and collaborate with Him in the accomplishment of His plans, the advancement of His kingdom, and the redemption of nations. God in His wisdom, allows us human beings to make choices as to which form of government would work best for our society and which type of leaders would be most able to lead us well.

●  We must pray for our nation and our political leaders.

“I urge, then, first of all, that petitions, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for all people— for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness. This is good, and pleases God our Savior, who wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all people. This has now been witnessed to at the proper time.” (1 Timothy 2:1-6, NIV)

This encouragement by the apostle Paul of praying for those in authority can definitely be easier said than done especially when we do not like our political leaders. However, think about how many times Jesus called His followers to embrace counterculture ideas. He challenged them to love their enemies, pray for those who persecuted them, turn the other cheek, and more. Surely, He wouldn’t call us to do these things if we weren’t capable of doing them. As Christians, we have the Holy Spirit, our Helper, to empower us to achieve the seemingly impossible and not give into the desires of our flesh.

Ask the Holy Spirit to help you to remember to pray for those in positions of leadership.

●  We must vote prayerfully, responsibly, and wisely.

When you vote, know your reason why you choose the specific candidate. Your reason should not just be for any personal gain, but for the good of many. God calls us to love Him and love others. Choosing the best candidate is one way of showing love to others. Do your best to choose wisely and educate others, then vote (this is our responsibility). If others are already closed minded, don’t be angry. You did your part in reasoning with them. Leave the results to God.

“And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but must be kind to everyone, able to teach, not resentful. Opponents must be gently instructed, in the hope that God will grant them repentance leading them to a knowledge of the truth…” (2 Timothy 2:24-25)

Pray that God would guide the Filipino people to choose which leaders are the best ones to govern our country. Remember that whoever wins the elections, it is God who is ultimately in charge of our political leaders and the affairs of our nation.

“The king’s heart is in the hand of the LORD; he directs it like a watercourse wherever he pleases.” (Proverbs 21:1)

For more helpful Christian guidelines on how to choose political candidates, please read the segment below entitled: “PCEC Guidelines in Choosing Candidates”.

Concluding Thoughts for Reflection

In light of these not-so-easy discussions in politics, we must still acknowledge that Christ is Lord even in the political areas of our society. As Christians we strive to honor God as we engage people in difficult conversations.

• The Bible teaches us that everyone is a sinner and human wisdom is imperfect. Ask yourself: Do I see the moral flaws and mistakes of my chosen candidate? If none, is it because I am unaware or unwilling to see it?

• The Bible teaches us to ‘speak the truth in love.’ Ask yourself: Am I willing to speak the truth and hold my chosen candidate accountable? Am I speaking in love to the other candidates and their ‘camps’?

• The Bible teaches us all persons have dignity. Ask yourself: Am I treating the other candidates and those who plan to vote for them with the same dignity as my political ‘camp’? If no, then what sinful attitude or wrong thinking do I need to repent from?

• The Bible teaches us to ‘love our enemies’ and ‘overcome evil with good’. Ask yourself: Do I choose to retaliate with insults to those who malign me? Am I burning bridges or creating walls instead of becoming a peacemaker? Do I choose to be kind and respectful even when I disagree with others?

Moreover, as Christians living in a democratic society, we need to understand that our political system can be messy.  Democracy is meant to be messy. Necessarily, to be a democracy, people must be free to exercise their beliefs, to speak, and to organize. This is because a democracy involves everyone who wants to participate. As wide and rich is the diversity in our backgrounds, opinions, ideologies, and persuasions, thus there is no doubt democracy can be messy. Strong differing opinions, the freedom to speak one’s mind, and the right to participate in governance are all part of the “messiness” of democracy.[23]

While democracy can be a messy thing, and despite all its many faults and misgivings, a democratic system gives us hope because in the end, these mistakes can be corrected through wider political participation. We can always work to make it better through our choices. For example, voting during elections.[24]

We know that we are having political maturity in a democracy like ours when we recognize that “we need to engage with others who may think, live or believe differently from us—to listen when we don’t like what they have to say, to respect what they have in mind without attempting to change them, and to remain open minded enough to the possibility of changing our own views, if need be in the end.”[25]

Hence, a democratic society matures when people are able to hold on to their beliefs, have clarity about their principles and the confidence to think and speak freely—whether or not they are in agreement with the rest.[26]

Therefore, as followers of Christ living in a democracy, we need to remember that: (1) we are spiritually united in Christ, but our political views as believers are diverse; (2) we belong to a higher kingdom. God’s rule is above and beyond any political government; (3) we are the light of the world. Our thoughts, speech, & actions must reflect who Christ is; and (4) we must pray for our nation and our political leaders. Pray with discernment and vote with wisdom, and trust that God is in charge of history.

Serving Christ with you,

The Christian Bible Church Pastoral Team

PCEC Guidelines in Choosing Candidates

The Philippine Council of Evangelical Churches (PCEC), the largest network of Evangelical Christians in the country, believes that a mature electorate produces good governance. Instead of campaigning and endorsing candidates they have focused on voter education so the people can be discerning in choosing the candidates that they should vote for.

They have also mobilized their member churches to watch and pray for HOPE (Honest, Orderly, Peaceful Elections). PCEC recognizes the sacredness and the significance of even one vote, and call on everyone to have the mindset that even one vote can help change the nation if we vote responsibly. If 67 million Filipino voters stand up for their sacred vote, it would be enough to change our nation. Enlightened and empowered voters are God’s instruments for choosing leaders that will bring Good Governance.

It is important that we ensure the eligibility of the candidates we vote for, to avoid national consequences. PCEC urges the people to use the “5 K” criteria in choosing a right leader:

1. Kakayahan (Ability to Govern) – They must have the ability to lead. They should be open to changes, and push for them when necessary. (Exodus 18:21 – “Moreover, look for able men from all the people, men who fear God, who are trustworthy and hate a bribe, and place such men over the people as chiefs of thousands, of hundreds, of fifties, and of tens”).

2. Karanasan (Experience in Governance) – They should have a good track record in leadership and governance (Proverbs 12:24 – “The hand of the diligent will rule, while the slothful will be put to forced labor”).

3. Kongkretong Plataporma (Platform of Governance Programs) – They should be clear with their platforms and have a solid stand on issues concerning their area of jurisdiction (Proverbs 29:18 – Where there is no prophetic vision the people cast off restraint, but blessed is he who keeps the law.). 

4. Karakter (Character as a Leader) – They should have humility and integrity, prioritizing the welfare of the people (Matt. 7:16-18 – “You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17 So, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit. 18 A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit”). 

5. Koneksyon – They should have trustworthy connections. Do they have the right people they connect with? (1 Cor. 15:33 – “Do not be deceived: Bad company ruins good morals”).

Sources / Recommended Readings:

• Five Views on the Church and Politics | Amy E. Black and Stanley N. Gundry
• Christians and Politics: Uneasy Partners | Philip Yancey
• When Christians Disagree in Politics | Michael Cariño
• Thou Shalt Not Be a Jerk: A Christian’s Guide to Engaging Politics | Eugene Cho
• 4 Rules for The Way Christians Engage in Politics | Jordan Wootten,
• How Should Christian Communicators Engage with Politics | Joshua Martin
• 6 Ways Believers Can Respectfully Engage in Politics |Alyssa Mendez and Richard Blatz
• Why Hatred and ‘Othering’ of Political Foes Has Spiked to Extreme Levels | Christie Aschwanden
• The Politics of Common Ground | Jude Acidre
• The Messiness of Democracy | Jude Acidre

[1] Amy E. Black and Stanley N. Gundry, eds. Five Views on the Church and Politics. (Counterpoints: Bible and Theology, Zondervan Academic. Kindle Edition).

[2] Jude Acidre, “The Politics of Common Ground” in the The Fifth Gospel published by the Manila Standard on June 22, 2020.

[3] Christie Aschwanden, “Why Hatred and ‘Othering’ of Political Foes Has Spiked to Extreme Levels”, article online: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-hatred-and-othering-of-political-foes-has-spiked-to-extreme-levels/

[4] Aschwanden, “Why Hatred and ‘Othering’ of Political Foes Has Spiked to Extreme Levels”.

[5] Acidre, “The Politics of Common Ground”.

[6] Amy E. Black, “Politics and the Church” in Outreach Magazine, article on-line: https://outreachmagazine.com/ interviews/ 42891-amy-e-black-politics-and-the-church-part-2.html

[7] Black, “Politics and the Church”.

[8] Black, “Politics and the Church”.

[9] Eugene Cho, Thou Shalt Not Be a Jerk: A Christian’s Guide to Engaging Politics (David C Cook. Kindle Edition).

[10] Cho, Thou Shalt Not Be a Jerk: A Christian’s Guide to Engaging Politics.

[11] Michael Cariño, “When Christians Disagree in Politics” article on-line: https://michaelcarino.com/when-christians-disagree-in-politics/

[12] Cariño, “When Christians Disagree in Politics”.

[13] Cariño, “When Christians Disagree in Politics”.

[14] Cariño, “When Christians Disagree in Politics”.

[15] Cariño, “When Christians Disagree in Politics”.

[16] Jordan Wootten, “4 Rules for The Way Christians Engage in Politics”, article on-line: https://erlc.com/resource-library/articles/4-rules-for-the-way-christians-engage-in-politics/

[17] Wootten, “4 Rules for The Way Christians Engage in Politics”.

[18] Joshua Martin, “How Should Christian Communicators Engage with Politics?”, article on-line: https://nrb.org/articles/how-should-christian-communicators-engage-with-politics/

[19] Martin, “How Should Christian Communicators Engage with Politics?”.

[20] Martin, “How Should Christian Communicators Engage with Politics?”.

[21] Alyssa Mendez and Richard Blatz, “6 Ways Believers Can Respectfully Engage in Politics”, article on-line: https://www.ccaeagles.org/news-detail-02?pk=1236993

[22] Mendez and Blatz, “6 Ways Believers Can Respectfully Engage in Politics”.

[23] Jude Acidre, “The Messiness of Democracy”, in The Fifth Gospel published by the Manila Standard on November 15, 2021.

[24] Acidre, “The Messiness of Democracy”.

[25] Acidre, “The Politics of Common Ground”.

[26] Acidre, “The Politics of Common Ground”.

The post The Christian and Politics appeared first on Christian Bible Church of the Philippines.

As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to surge around the world, the deadly virus which started in 2020 keeps infecting and killing millions of people. When the COVID-19 vaccines came out in 2021, Christian responses were diverse. Some are against the vaccines, others favor the vaccines, and there are those who are somewhere in between. The various justifications for these views range from ethical, medical, political, to theological reasons.

On one side of the debate are pro-COVID vaccine Christians. Many believers see the COVID-19 vaccines as a blessing from God amidst this global pandemic crisis. Because science is a God-given enterprise that seeks to understand the order and complexity of God’s creation, Christians can rejoice in the fact that a solution to a widespread disease was investigated by scientists.

For these believers, to get vaccinated is to live in Christ-like servanthood to our communities. Loving our neighbors involves seeking their good. Pro-COVID vaccine Christians understand that no vaccine is 100% safe. However, if getting vaccinated means we can protect others from illness, then we have an obligation, given our Lord’s command to love our neighbors, to be vaccinated. Vaccinations not only protect you but also protect other vulnerable members of society.

On the other side of the debate are the anti-COVID vaccine Christians. These believers have apprehensions over the formulation, safety, and side effects of vaccines. They see good stewardship of the body God has given them to include being careful of what they inject into their bodies. They would rather wait until vaccines are 100% effective or when there’s more information about the possible side effects and complications. They are persuaded that the risks of taking the vaccine outweigh the benefits. For these believers, loving their families and those in their areas of influence means taking the potential health risks of the vaccine seriously. For them, there are many other ways to show love to our neighbors other than getting the vaccine, e.g., by strictly following safety protocols, by helping those who get the virus, etc.

A sub-group among the anti-COVID vaccine Christians are even convinced that the COVID-19 vaccines are satanic or are part of government plot in a complex scheme that will lead to worldwide control by the antichrist.

Sadly, both sides tend to espouse anger, hate, enmity, and antagonism toward those who disagree with their group’s beliefs and convictions. What must Christians do? How should Christians respond to this divisive issue?

We Need Conversations that Generate More Light Than Heat

In light of these two polarizing views within the Christian family, questions abound and continue to spark disagreements among followers of Christ.

Should Christians be opposed to vaccination? Do we have a Christian obligation to get a COVID-19 vaccine? How should followers of Jesus think about the COVID-19 vaccine?

These questions deserve conversations and dialogue that hopefully generate more light than heat, and lead to more clarity than confusion. While we may have a right to our own opinions, we do not have a right to our own facts.

Here are some guidelines that can help us navigate through the ongoing debates between anti-vaccine Christians and pro-vaccine Christians.

1) Sustain Unity in Diversity

Since the beginning of Christianity, believers have disagreed on many issues. They include questions about eating meat, drinking wine, worship style, fashion preference, secular music, women in leadership, bible translations, views on eschatology, mode of baptism, and so on. Some Christians refer to these matters as “conscience disputes” (Romans 14:1-15:7; 1 Corinthians 10:23-33) because these are non-essential topics of debate that allow for freedom of conscience and healthy disagreements among believers.

Today, we can include the debate about COVID-19 vaccines in this list of conscience disputes.

“Welcome with open arms fellow believers who don’t see things the way you do. And don’t jump all over them every time they do or say something you don’t agree with—even when it seems that they are strong on opinions but weak in the faith department. Remember, they have their own history to deal with. Treat them gently.” (Romans 14:1, The Message)

When Christians disagree, it is also helpful that we distinguish between opinion, persuasion, and conviction.

Opinion includes matters ‘worth discussing about’ but are not worth dividing for. These are the personal desires or preferences of the individual. We must recognize that these opinions are not true for everyone. Christians need to accept the differences and not impose one’s opinions or preferences over others.

Persuasion is about topics ‘worth debating on’ but are not worth dividing for. They may be important truths but they are not essential to Christian salvation. A believer can have full persuasion about a certain belief or value without judging others. Here, we can maintain unity on the essentials and allow freedom of conscience on the non-essentials.

Conviction consists of issues that are ‘worth dividing for’ because they include truths essential to a correct theology of salvation (distinct from heretical teachings). These disputes may require public confrontation and the breaking of fellowship over the purity of the Gospel.

Disagreements about COVID-19 vaccines fall under opinion and persuasion, but definitely not under conviction. This should not cause division among believers. We can love one another in Christ, and practice unity even when we disagree.

“In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity.” (Rupertus Meldenius)

While we have our differences and diversity of beliefs ethically, culturally, theologically, politically, medically, etc. we must still follow the way of Christ. As His followers, we are called to unity—not uniformity. Yet there is always a call for all Christians to maintain spiritual unity.

2) Speak with Love and Wisdom

A healthy church would allow space for members to hold a range of views, advocate for those views, and still feel loved in Christ. It would be great if many of our churches display this kind of intellectual humility and integrity. We need to stop shaming or demonizing fellow believers who do not agree with our opinions ––whether it is in politics, theology, health (e.g., Ivermectin), or vaccination.

A maturing and flourishing community of faith that can provide respect for different views would be an incredible witness to the outside world. Christians must learn how to do dialogue and have honest conversations without people getting angry, to ask questions of the other side without becoming defensive. Disagreement tends to devolve into anger and frustration instead of a healthy dispute. These are real problems. We see them on social media, over family dinners, and church group meetings.

“Live wisely among those who are not believers, and make the most of every opportunity. Let your conversation be gracious and attractive so that you will have the right response for everyone.” (Colossians 4:5-6, NLT)

“Dear friends, since God loved us that much, we surely ought to love each other. No one has ever seen God. But if we love each other, God lives in us, and his love is brought to full expression in us.” (1 John 4:11-12, NLT)

Imagine if churches and Christians can love one another well, and the bond we have as brothers and sisters in Christ goes far deeper than any other point of contention, then perhaps we will be able to make genuine space for disagreeing dialogue. We do not have to agree on all issues, but we need to stay one in Christ.

3) Seek Truth while Maintaining Humility

It is very important that amidst the fiery debates about disputed matters such as the COVID-19 vaccination, we must practice due diligence in separating facts from fiction.

We ought to be conscientious as we do our best to acquire truth. This means that we must do our research, learn to be sensitive to evidence, and avoid unreliable sources of belief. In other words, a conscientious believer is a reasonable, reflective, responsible person who carefully ensures that she achieves rational beliefs.

Although we value the search for truth, we must also practice intellectual humility –– to recognize that we may not have the final say in all matters of dispute.

Intellectual humility is simply the recognition that the things you believe in might in fact be wrong, it is being open to learning from the experience of others. Intellectual humility is about being actively curious about your blind spots. It’s essentially asking: What am I missing here?

Intellectually humble persons are more open to hearing opposing views. They more readily seek out information that conflicts with their opinion. They pay more attention to evidence and have a stronger self-awareness when they answer a question incorrectly. Most important of all, the intellectually humble are more likely to admit it when they are wrong. When we admit we’re wrong, we can grow closer to the truth.

This means that we must realize that we are limited beings and that we do not always get it right. Even the Apostle Paul speaks about the limits of human knowledge. He described that the human attempt to grasping reality is partial, vague, and imperfect like we are “seeing through a dim glass” (1 Corinthians 13:12).

The human lenses we use in perceiving the world are dim, blurry, unclear, and fragile. But even if our attempts to know are imperfect, given enough time and experience, our ability to grasp truth as humans will eventually become better. We grow in knowledge by learning together from our mistakes, our sharing of insights, exchange of ideas, conscientious reflection, dialogue, debate, and deliberation.

4) Stay Faithful to Christ yet Be Open for Dialogue

In our world that’s not yet the perfect Kingdom of God, where everything is definitely not yet all made right, where God does not yet rule in that kind of perfection, our main call is to be faithful and live out the great commandments to love God and to love our neighbor.

Like everything in our fallen world, governments, medicine, science, politics, and all efforts to stop the COVID-19 pandemic are broken, imperfect, and incomplete.

Debates will continue to rage, and faithful Christians from all perspectives will get caught in the crossfire. It is crucial that the Church be understood as a diverse family of believers that finds its commonness in Christ. The nature of how we disagree with each other is an aspect of our discipleship. By working together across different opinions, we can seek unity in Christ as we share the gospel message with a broken world.

5) Set our Hope in God and Communicate that Hope to Others

The COVID pandemic has brought a lot of fear, worry, and anxiety to many people. But as the people of God, the Lord calls us to be people of hope and bearers of hope (Romans 15:13). In fact, we are called to always be ready to give an answer to everyone who asks us to give the reason for the hope that we have (1 Peter 3:15 NIV).

As Christians, we should not put our ultimate hope in the vaccines, not in Ivermectin or other meds, not even in our own efforts to avoid getting infected or to build a healthy immune system.

We are to put our hope in God who is the ultimate source of healing & deliverance both for the vaccinated and the unvaccinated. He is our Sovereign Lord who rules and reigns over all. And He will bring into completion His purpose according to His perfect time and ways.

Instead of living in fear, let us walk by faith. Let us also share that hope with others who are trapped in the cycle of worry, fear, and anxiety.

So, as we make our decisions with regards to this matter, let us do so with prayerful discernment, for the good of others, and for the glory of the God we serve.

Serving Christ with you,
The CBCP Pastoral Team

The post How Should Christians Respond to Debates About the COVID-19 Vaccines? appeared first on Christian Bible Church of the Philippines.

From Jonah 4:1-11

^4:1 But to Jonah this seemed very wrong, and he became angry. ^4:2 He prayed to the Lord, “Isn’t this what I said, Lord, when I was still at home? That is what I tried to forestall by fleeing to Tarshish. I knew that you are a gracious and compassionate God, slow to anger and abounding in love, a God who relents from sending calamity. ^4:3 Now, Lord, take away my life, for it is better for me to die than to live.”

^4:4 But the Lord replied, “Is it right for you to be angry?”

^4:5 Jonah had gone out and sat down at a place east of the city. There he made himself a shelter, sat in its shade and waited to see what would happen to the city. ^4:6 Then the Lord God provided a leafy plant and made it grow up over Jonah to give shade for his head to ease his discomfort, and Jonah was very happy about the plant. ^4:7 But at dawn the next day God provided a worm, which chewed the plant so that it withered. ^4:8 When the sun rose, God provided a scorching east wind, and the sun blazed on Jonah’s head so that he grew faint. He wanted to die, and said, “It would be better for me to die than to live.”

^4:9 But God said to Jonah, “Is it right for you to be angry about the plant?”

“It is,” he said. “And I’m so angry I wish I were dead.”

^4:10 But the Lord said, “You have been concerned about this plant, though you did not tend it or make it grow. It sprang up overnight and died overnight. ^4:11 And should I not have concern for the great city of Nineveh, in which there are more than a hundred and twenty thousand people who cannot tell their right hand from their left—and also many animals?”

In Jonah 4:10 and 4:11, the word “concern” appears twice. The Lord said to Jonah, “You have been concerned about this plant, though you did not tend it or make it grow […] should I not have concern for the great city of Nineveh…”

Was Jonah really concerned about the plant? No, he was actually concerned about himself. Of course, the Lord knew this and so He asked Jonah this question to make him reflect. Jonah’s love was superficial; he loved his country, he loved those who feared God and those who were righteous. As for those fearful and cruel Assyrians, he hoped for their immediate destruction. He did not want to go to Nineveh to preach because he was afraid they would repent and that their repentance would cause God to relent and spare them from the disaster that is His judgment. Jonah 4:2 “He prayed to the Lord, ‘Isn’t this what I said, Lord, when I was still at home? That is what I tried to forestall by fleeing to Tarshish. I knew that you are a gracious and compassionate God, slow to anger and abounding in love, a God who relents from sending calamity.’” It seemed Jonah felt he was totally right in saying this. And so the Lord taught this disobedient prophet lessons by sending the storm, the big fish, the plant, a worm, and the hot east wind.

God’s concern was completely different from Jonah’s concern. God is concerned about each person. Everyone is created in the image of God, but because of sin, we have fallen short of God’s glory. Yet the Lord God prefers to see men come to repentance rather than perish. When God looked at the great city of Nineveh, He saw a city whose numbers run over a hundred and twenty thousand. Can God not be concerned about these poor children?

The Book of Jonah concludes with a question. Jonah 4:11 says, “And should I not have concern for the great city of Nineveh, in which there are more than a hundred and twenty thousand people who cannot tell their right hand from their left—and also many animals?” How did Jonah respond? I have reason to believe that Jonah repented because if he hadn’t, the Book of Jonah would not exist. Apart from Jonah, no one else could have known the whole story this clearly.

God not only wanted to save the entire city of Nineveh; more than that, He wanted to save His servant Jonah. Are you Jonah? Are you willing to repent?

Previous Post: The True Meaning of Repentance

你愛惜什麼 | 約拿書 

張國強牧師

約拿書 4:1-11

^4:1 這事約拿大大不悅, 且甚發怒。^4:2 就禱告耶和華說: 耶和華阿, 我在本國的時候, 豈不是這樣說麼? 我知道你是有恩典, 有憐憫的神, 不輕易發怒, 有豐盛的慈愛, 並且後悔不降所說的災, 所以我急速逃往他施去。^4:3 耶和華阿, 現在求你取我的命罷, 因為我死了比活著還好。

^4:4 耶和華說, 你這樣發怒合乎理麼?

^4:5 於是約拿出城, 坐在城的東邊, 在那裡為自己搭了一座棚, 坐在棚的蔭下, 要看看那城究竟如何? ^4:6 耶和華神安排一棵蓖麻, 使其發生高過約拿, 影兒遮蓋他的頭, 救他脫離苦楚, 約拿因這棵蓖麻大大喜樂。^4:7 次日黎明, 神卻安排一條蟲子, 咬這蓖麻, 以致枯槁。^4:8 日頭出來的時候, 神安排炎熱的東風, 日頭曝曬約拿的頭, 使他發昏, 他就為自己求死, 說: 我死了比活著還好。

^4:9 神對約拿說, 你因這棵蓖麻發怒合乎理麼?

他說, 我發怒以至於死, 都合乎理。

^4:10 耶和華說, 這蓖麻不是你栽種的, 也不是你培養的, 一夜發生, 一夜乾死你尚且愛惜, ^4:11 何況這尼尼微大城,其中不能分辨左手右手的有十二萬多人, 並有許多牲畜, 我豈能不愛惜呢?

4:10與4:11二次出現「愛惜」這個字; 耶和華問約拿, 這蓖麻不是你栽種的, 也不是你培養的, 一夜發生, 一夜乾死你尚且愛惜; 然後神說: 何況這尼尼微大城,其中不能分辨左手右手的有十二萬多人, 並有許多牲畜, 我豈能不愛惜呢?

約拿真的愛惜那棵蓖麻樹嗎? 不是的, 他真正愛惜是他自己, 神不是不知, 神發出這個問題, 是要約拿好好反省一下; 約拿的愛是很膚淺的, 他愛他的國家, 他愛那些敬畏神的人, 愛那些公義的人, 但面對亞述那些那怕又殘忍的人, 他巴不得他們馬上滅亡, 他不去尼尼微傳道就是怕他們悔改, 神不降災下來。4:2 就禱告耶和華說: 耶和華阿, 我在本國的時候, 豈不是這樣說麼? 我知道你是有恩典, 有憐憫的神, 不輕易發怒, 有豐盛的慈愛, 並且後悔不降所說的災, 所以我急速逃往他施去。當他說這句話的時候, 他好像一點都沒有錯。神藉著安排大風大浪, 大魚, 蓖麻樹, 一條蟲與炎熱東風來教導這位不順從的先知。

神的愛惜與約拿完全不同, 神愛惜祂所造的人, 他們都是照神的形像被造的, 但因為罪虧欠了神的榮耀, 但神更願意看見人的悔改而不是人的滅亡。當神觀看尼尼微大城的時候, 單單孩童就有 12萬, 神能不愛惜這些可憐的孩子嗎？

約拿書的最後是用一個問題來結束, 4:11 何況這尼尼微大城,其中不能分辨左手右手的有十二萬多人, 並有許多牲畜, 我豈能不愛惜呢? 約拿是怎樣回應的呢? 我個人有理由相信約拿悔改了, 因為如果他悔改, 約拿書根本不會出現, 因為除了約拿以外, 根本沒有第三者那麼的清楚整個故事。我心裡更明白一件事, 神不單要拯救整個尼尼微大城, 神心裡更要拯救的是祂的僕人約拿。你是約拿嗎? 你願意悔改嗎？

The post What Concerns You? | Jonah appeared first on Christian Bible Church of the Philippines.

From Jonah 3:1-10

^3:1 Then the word of the Lord came to Jonah a second time: ² “Go to the great city of Nineveh and proclaim to it the message I give you.”

³ Jonah obeyed the word of the Lord and went to Nineveh. Now Nineveh was a very large city; it took three days to go through it. ⁴ Jonah began by going a day’s journey into the city, proclaiming, “Forty more days and Nineveh will be overthrown.” ⁵ The Ninevites believed God. A fast was proclaimed, and all of them, from the greatest to the least, put on sackcloth.

⁶ When Jonah’s warning reached the king of Nineveh, he rose from his throne, took off his royal robes, covered himself with sackcloth and sat down in the dust. ⁷ This is the proclamation he issued in Nineveh:

“By the decree of the king and his nobles: Do not let people or animals, herds or flocks, taste anything; do not let them eat or drink. ⁸ But let people and animals be covered with sackcloth. Let everyone call urgently on God. Let them give up their evil ways and their violence. ⁹ Who knows? God may yet relent and with compassion turn from his fierce anger so that we will not perish.”

¹⁰ When God saw what they did and how they turned from their evil ways, he relented and did not bring on them the destruction he had threatened.

What is repentance? The city of Nineveh is the best example of repentance. The Lord forgave them because of their repentance. Their repentance was genuine and acceptable to the Lord. Let us learn the true meaning of repentance from this chapter:

1. Repentance means to turn around. The Lord asked Jonah to go to Nineveh, but instead, he went to Joppa because he wanted to board a ship and flee to Tarshish. Geographically, these two places were in opposite directions; one was located to the northeast while the other was in the west. However, in Chapter 3, Jonah turned back. Isn’t that what repentance is — a changing of direction? Repentance means to make a U-turn.  This is the first meaning of repentance, turning back from our sins and mistakes.  
2. Repentance is stepping down from the throne. When news about the city’s impending destruction reached the king, he got off his throne, took off his garments, put on sackcloth, and sat down in the dust. The king stepped down from the highest position to the lowest position – is this not the best manifestation of humble repentance?
3. Repentance is a change in behavior. The king commanded everyone to turn around and give up their evil ways and their violence and the people of Nineveh obeyed. True repentance takes place not only in the heart but also in one’s actions. Not only does a person give up his sins, but he will seek to obey God’s will — a true indication of repentance.

When these people repented, God relented and did not bring on the destruction He had threatened.  God is not human that He would change His mind, this is what the Bible says; therefore, we cannot liken God changing his mind to humans regretting and changing their minds. We regret mainly because we made mistakes or judged erroneously, but once we realize our error, we regret it or change our minds.   On the contrary, God does not make mistakes. He does not make mistakes in His judgments and plans because He is an all-knowing and almighty God. God relenting or changing His mind is based on God’s faithfulness and God’s justice. The righteous God rewards good and punishes evil. Good must be rewarded and evil must be punished. 

When a person truly repents, the Lord will — based on His faithfulness and justice — relent and withdraw the foretold disaster. Yet in God’s final judgment, evil will meet retribution and good will be rewarded.  Let us not tarry; instead, let us repent quickly.

Previous Post: Prayer Inside the Belly of a Fish

悔改的真義 | 約拿書 

張國強牧師

約拿書 3:1-10

^3:1 耶和華的話, 二次臨到約拿說, ² 你起來, 往尼尼微大城去, 向其中的居民宣告我所吩咐你的話。

³ 約拿便照耶和華的話起來, 往尼尼微去。這尼尼微是極大的城, 有三日的路程。⁴ 約拿進城走了一日, 宣告說: 再等四十日, 尼尼微必傾覆了。⁵ 尼尼微人信服神, 便宣告禁食, 從最大的到至小的都穿麻衣。

⁶ 這信息傳到尼尼微王的耳中, 他就下了寶座, 脫下朝服, 披上麻布, 坐在灰中。⁷ 他又使人遍告尼尼微通城說: 王和大臣有令, 人不可嘗甚麼, 牲畜, 牛羊, 不可喫草,也不可喝水。⁸ 人與牲畜都當披上麻布, 人要切切求告神, 各人回頭離開所行的惡道, 丟棄手中的強暴。⁹ 或者神轉意後悔, 不發烈怒, 使我們不至滅亡, 也未可知。

¹⁰ 於是神察看他們的行為, 見他們離開惡道, 他就後悔, 不把所說的災禍降與他們了。

什麼叫悔改? 尼尼微城大城是最好的例子, 神也因為他們的悔改赦免了他們的罪, 可見他們的悔改是真實的, 是蒙神悅納的, 我們就從這章經文來看悔改真正的意思：

1. 從約拿身上看見悔改是方向的回轉。神要約拿去尼尼微, 但他卻去了約帕, 因為他要坐船往他施去。從地理上來看, 這是兩個完全相反的方向, 一個在東北, 一個在西; 但在第三章約拿轉回來了, 悔改不就是改變方向嗎？悔改的意思就是U-turn. 我們要從錯誤的方向轉回, 這是悔改第一個意思。
2. 從尼尼王身上看見悔改是從寶座下來。當全城四十日後要滅亡的消息傳到王的耳中, 他竟然從寶座上下來, 甚至脫下朝服, 披上麻布, 坐在灰中。從最高的位置降到最低的地位, 這不就是悔改最好的解釋嗎? 這叫謙卑認罪。
3. 從尼尼微百姓身上看見悔改是行為的改變。王下命令說: 各人回頭離開所行的惡道, 丟棄手中的強暴。真正的悔改不單在心裡, 也有行動的表示。不單離罪更要遵行神的旨意, 這才是悔改真正的表現。

當他們悔改後, 神就後悔不降災了。神不是人, 神不會後悔的, 這是聖經的教導; 所以我們不能用人的後悔來解釋神的後悔。人的後悔主要是因為作錯了, 想錯了, 後來知道了, 所以後悔了。但神不是作錯, 不會想錯的, 因為祂是全知全能的神。

神的後悔是基於神的信實, 神的公義。公義的神是賞善罰惡的, 善一定要賞賜, 惡一定要罰。當人真正的悔改, 基於神的信實與公義, 祂會改變他的心意, 將災禍拿下, 但在神最終的審判裡, 惡必定會有報應, 善也一定會有賞賜。我們要快快悔改, 不要遲延。

The post The True Meaning of Repentance | Jonah appeared first on Christian Bible Church of the Philippines.

From Jonah 2:1-10

^2:1 From inside the fish Jonah prayed to the Lord his God. ² He said: 

“In my distress, I called to the Lord, and he answered me. From deep in the realm of the dead I called for help, and you listened to my cry. ³ You hurled me into the depths, into the very heart of the seas, and the currents swirled about me; all your waves and breakers swept over me. ⁴ I said, ‘I have been banished from your sight; yet I will look again toward your holy temple.’ ⁵ The engulfing waters threatened me, the deep surrounded me; seaweed was wrapped around my head. ⁶ To the roots of the mountains I sank down; the earth beneath barred me in forever. But you, Lord my God, brought my life up from the pit. ⁷ “When my life was ebbing away, I remembered you, Lord, and my prayer rose to you, to your holy temple. ⁸ “Those who cling to worthless idols turn away from God’s love for them. ⁹ But I, with shouts of grateful praise, will sacrifice to you. What I have vowed I will make good. I will say, ‘Salvation comes from the Lord.’” 

¹⁰ And the Lord commanded the fish, and it vomited Jonah onto dry land.

The second chapter of Jonah is a prayer. It can be said that this prayer is one of a kind because no one has prayed from the belly of a fish before and, I believe, neither will anyone else pray from the belly of a fish in the future. When Jonah had been thrown overboard into the sea, it was supposed to be the end for him, but the Lord arranged for a big fish to swallow him up. Jonah ended up in the belly of the fish for three days and three nights. This was a miracle and it was also God’s mercy.

We pray to God in different places, but I do not think any of us will have the opportunity to pray from the belly of a fish as Jonah did. Jonah 2:1 “From inside the fish Jonah prayed to the Lord his God.” Praying while in the belly of a fish also means praying in a time of trouble. Jonah also said the same, Jonah 2:2  “In my distress, I called to the Lord, and he answered me. From deep in the realm of the dead I called for help, and you listened to my cry.”  Are we not also in trouble now? The COVID-19 pandemic that we face is a global disaster; are we not in trouble too? Jonah added in 2:7: “When my life was ebbing away, I remembered you, Lord.”  The phrase “When life ebbs away” signifies those times when even thinking is difficult and when all that is ahead looks dreadfully bleak. Are we not all in this exact same situation now? Nonetheless, we thank God because we can pray.

There is a very important principle that we must grasp from this prayer, which Jonah mentioned twice: In Jonah 2:4, we read: “I said, ‘I have been banished from your sight; yet I will look again toward your holy temple.’ In 2:7, we read: “When my life was ebbing away, I remembered you, Lord, and my prayer rose to you, to your holy temple.”  

Both Jonah 2:4 and Jonah 2:7 mention the same thing – prayer rising from the belly of the fish toward the temple of God. What kind of prayer is this? This is the prayer of Solomon when he dedicated the temple to the Lord. Solomon prayed, “When we, your people, sin in the future, when we are taken captive and become scattered in various places, if we turn back to you in repentance, and pray to you, may our prayers reach your temple.”  He prayed that their prayers may reach the Lord. Now Jonah is in the belly of a fish. Why was he in there? It was because he had disobeyed God. But now that he is repenting, he remembered Solomon’s prayer.  He confessed his sins to God from the belly of the fish. He asked God for mercy and the Lord God heard his prayer. Jonah 2:10 says, “And the Lord commanded the fish, and it vomited Jonah onto dry land.”

It is not important where we, the Church, pray but what is most important is our attitude in prayer. Let us come to God in humility and come to Him with a repentant heart!

Previous Post: God’s Provision

魚腹裡的禱告 | 約拿書 

張國強牧師

約拿書 2:1-10

^2:1 約拿在魚腹中禱告耶和華他的神, ² 說, 我遭遇患難求告耶和華,你就應允我, 從陰間的深處呼求, 你就俯聽我的聲音。³ 你將我投下深淵, 就是海的深處, 大水環繞我, 你的波浪洪濤, 都漫過我身。⁴ 我說, 我從你眼前雖被驅逐, 我仍要仰望你的聖殿。⁵ 諸水環繞我,幾乎淹沒我, 深淵圍住我, 海草纏繞我的頭; ⁶ 我下到山根, 地的門將我永遠關住。耶和華我的神阿, 你卻將我的性命從坑中救出來。⁷ 我心在我裡面發昏的時候, 我就想念耶和華。我的禱告進入你的聖殿, 達到你的面前。⁸ 那信奉虛無之神的人, 離棄憐愛他們的主, ⁹ 但我必用感謝的聲音獻祭與你, 我所許的願, 我必償還。救恩出於耶和華。¹⁰ 耶和華吩咐魚, 魚就把約拿吐在旱地上。

約拿書第二章可以說是一個空前絕後的禱告, 因為從來沒有人曾在魚腹裡禱告, 我想將來也不會有人在魚腹裡禱告。約拿被掉在大海裡, 本來就是死路一條, 但神卻安排一條大魚將他吞了, 結果他在魚腹裡三日三夜, 這是一個神蹟, 這也是神的恩典。

我們會在不同的地方禱告神, 但在魚腹裡禱告, 我想我們都沒有這個機會, 但約拿卻有。2:1 約拿在魚腹中禱告耶和華他的神。在魚腹裡禱告也是困難中的禱告, 約拿也是這樣說的, 2:2 說, 我遭遇患難求告耶和華, 你就應允我, 從陰間的深處呼求, 你就俯聽我的聲音。我們現在也不是在困難中嗎? 我們現在面對的COVID-19是全球性的災難, 我們不也是在困難中嗎？約拿又說2:7 我心在我裡面發昏的時候, 我就想念耶和華。發昏的時候就是連思想都困難的時候, 對前途根本也沒有把握的時候, 這也不是我們現在的情況嗎? 但感謝神, 我們仍可以禱告。

在這個禱告裡, 有一個很重要的原則我們要把握, 約拿二次提到一件事: 2:4 我說, 我從你眼前雖被驅逐, 我仍要仰望你的聖殿。2:7 我心在我裡面發昏的時候, 我就想念耶和華。我的禱告進入你的聖殿, 達到你的面前。2:4/2:7 都提到一件事, 禱告從魚腹中達到神的聖殿, 這是什麼的禱告。這是所羅門獻殿的時候的禱告, 所羅門王說, 將來如果我們犯了罪, 我們被分散到各地, 但只要我們認罪悔改, 在各地向你禱告, 願我們的禱告達到你的聖殿, 其實意思是達到神的面前。現在約拿在魚腹中, 為什麼他會在魚腹中? 因為不順服神, 現在他悔改了, 他想到所羅門的禱告, 他在魚腹中向神認罪, 求神憐憫, 神也垂聽了。2:10 耶和華吩咐魚, 魚就把約拿吐在旱地上。 

教會在什麼地方禱告不是最重要, 用什麼的態度來禱告才是最重要的原則, 以謙卑的心來到神面前, 以認罪悔改的心來到祂面前吧!

The post Prayer Inside the Belly of a Fish | Jonah appeared first on Christian Bible Church of the Philippines.

From Jonah 1:17

¹⁷ Now the Lord provided a huge fish to swallow Jonah, and Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights.

In the book of Jonah, the word “provided” appears four times. 

• Jonah 1:17 “the Lord provided a huge fish”
• Jonah 4:6 “Then the Lord provided a leafy plant” 
• Jonah 4:7 “But at dawn the next day God provided a worm.” 
• Jonah 4:8 “When the sun rose, God provided a scorching east wind.” 

In the original text, the word “provide” means to appoint or assign, just like leaders do with their subordinates, giving them charge to do something. In addition to these four incidences of God’s provision, there is one more incident (though the Bible does not use the word `provide’) — the emergence of the storm on the sea. Jonah 1:4 “Then the Lord sent a great wind on the sea, and such a violent storm arose that the ship threatened to break up.” The great wind and violent waves on the sea were no coincidences. Why? Because we see in Jonah 1:15: “Then they took Jonah and threw him overboard, and the raging sea grew calm.” 

It’s no coincidence that the storm was calmed for the Lord is indeed the God who made the sea and the dry land! The storm had been appointed by God to teach this disobedient prophet a lesson. Once the prophet was thrown overboard, the storm immediately stopped, because it had completed its mission. The leafy plant was appointed by God to grow up overnight, shielding the prophet from the sun; but then it was eaten up by the worm, because its mission had been accomplished. The worm was appointed by God to eradicate the leafy plant, and the worm did its best to eat and chew. I think it would have been crushed to death too. What is most important is that the worm had also fulfilled its mission. The scorching east wind was appointed by God to shine upon Jonah’s head so that he grew faint. The east wind also fulfilled its mission. 

Each of these elements — the storm, the big fish, the leafy plant, the worm, the east wind — fulfilled the mission assigned by God. Only the prophet appointed by God disobeyed and left without fulfilling his mission. What irony this is for us humans who had been made in the image of God. May the Lord have mercy on us. Let us not consider our own ego more important than the mission assigned by God. May God forgive us for our disobedience!

Previous Post: Fear and Awe

神的安排 | 約拿書 

張國強牧師

約拿書 1:17

¹⁷ 耶和華安排一條大魚吞了約拿, 他在魚腹中三日三夜。

在約拿書中, 「安排」這個字先後出現了四次。

• 1:17安排一條大魚; 
• 4:6 耶和華神安排一棵蓖麻;
• 4:7 次日黎明, 神卻安排一條蟲
• 4:8 日頭出來的時候, 神安排炎熱的東風。

安排這個字原文意思是委派, 委派是上級給下屬的使命。除了這四次的安排, 還有一樣, 雖然聖經沒有用安排這個字, 但照聖經的記載, 這也實在是神的安排, 那就是海中的風浪。1:4 然而耶和華使海中起大風, 海就狂風大作, 甚至船幾乎破壞。這海中所起的大風大浪不是偶然的, 為什麼? 因為當約拿被掉在大海後, 1:15 他們遂將約拿抬起, 拋在海中,海的狂浪就平息了。這絕對不是偶然的, 因為神是創造滄海天地的主啊!

大風被神委派要教訓這位不聽話的先知, 當先知下海後, 大風就停止了, 因為大風的使命完成了。蓖麻被神委派一夜之間長大起來, 可以為先知遮蔽太陽, 但當被蟲咬下就一了, 它的使命也完成了, 可以回去了。蟲被神委派要咬死蓖麻機, 蟲就盡力去吃去咬, 我想牠也要被撐死了, 但最重要是使命完成了。東風被神委派要曬約拿的頭, 約拿頭都發昏了。東風的使命也完成了。

神所委派的, 大風大浪, 大魚, 蓖麻樹, 蟲, 東風, 他們都順服神的委派, 完全神給他們的使命, 只有被神委派的先知不聽話, 使命沒有完成就走了。這對我們這些被稱為照神形像所造的人是何等的諷刺, 求主憐憫我們, 我們的自我比神委派的使命更重要, 求神赦免我們的不順服啊!

The post God’s Provision | Jonah appeared first on Christian Bible Church of the Philippines.

From Jonah 1:4-16

^1:4 Then the Lord sent a great wind on the sea, and such a violent storm arose that the ship threatened to break up. ⁵ All the sailors were afraid and each cried out to his own god. And they threw the cargo into the sea to lighten the ship. 

But Jonah had gone below deck, where he lay down and fell into a deep sleep. ⁶ The captain went to him and said, “How can you sleep? Get up and call on your god! Maybe he will take notice of us so that we will not perish.” 

⁷ Then the sailors said to each other, “Come, let us cast lots to find out who is responsible for this calamity.” They cast lots and the lot fell on Jonah. ⁸ So they asked him, “Tell us, who is responsible for making all this trouble for us? What kind of work do you do? Where do you come from? What is your country? From what people are you?”

⁹ He answered, “I am a Hebrew and I worship the Lord, the God of heaven, who made the sea and the dry land.”

¹⁰ This terrified them and they asked, “What have you done?” (They knew he was running away from the Lord, because he had already told them so.)

¹¹ The sea was getting rougher and rougher. So they asked him, “What should we do to you to make the sea calm down for us?” 

¹² “Pick me up and throw me into the sea,” he replied, “and it will become calm. I know that it is my fault that this great storm has come upon you.” 

¹³ Instead, the men did their best to row back to land. But they could not, for the sea grew even wilder than before. ¹⁴ Then they cried out to the Lord, “Please, Lord, do not let us die for taking this man’s life. Do not hold us accountable for killing an innocent man, for you, Lord, have done as you pleased.” ¹⁵ Then they took Jonah and threw him overboard, and the raging sea grew calm. ¹⁶ At this the men greatly feared the Lord, and they offered a sacrifice to the Lord and made vows to him.

In this passage, we see fear and awe emerge one after the other. Jonah 1:5 “All the sailors were afraid and each cried out to his own god.” The wind and waves raged with such intensity that even sailors who were used to the sea all their lives were terrified. We can just imagine how terrible the wind and the waves must have been. Jonah 1:9 He answered, “I am a Hebrew and I worship the Lord, the God of heaven, who made the sea and the dry land.” This is what Jonah told those who were on the ship. He claimed to be a man who worships the Lord. Jonah 1:10 This terrified them and they asked, “What have you done?” This was the sailors’ response when Jonah told them that the Lord is the God who created the sea and the dry land and therefore, this terrible storm came from His hand. Jonah 1:16 “At this the men greatly feared the Lord, and they offered a sacrifice to the Lord and made vows to him.” And this was the response of the men by the end, their great fear turned to great awe. 

Actually, fear and awe are the same word in the original text, but there are obvious differences in this case. The men began with fear but ended in awe, and in their awe, they responded by making vows and sacrifices to the Lord. The fear of God thrust them towards establishing a relationship with God. However, if it had only been fear, that would simply be like the devil’s belief of God. The apostle James says even the demons believe and shudder. We however believe in awe and reverence.

This passage shows us that there can be two completely different attitudes towards God: one is fear and the other is awe. Fear because He is truly a formidable God, and awe because we now know Him and we have a relationship with Him. What is your heart’s response to the Lord? Is it fear or is it awe? 

Previous Post: Fleeing from the Lord 

 懼怕與敬畏 | 約拿書 

張國強牧師

約拿書 1:4-16

^1:4 然而耶和華使海中起大風, 海就狂風大作, 甚至船幾乎破壞。⁵ 水手便懼怕, 各人哀求自己的神, 他們將船上的貨物拋在海中, 為要使船輕些。約拿已下到底艙, 躺臥沉睡。⁶ 船主到他那裡對他說,你這沉睡的人哪, 為何這樣呢? 起來, 求告你的神, 或者神顧念我們, 使我們不至滅亡。

⁷ 船上的人彼此說: 來罷, 我們掣籤, 看看這災臨到我們是因誰的緣故, 於是他們掣籤, 掣出約拿來。⁸ 眾人對他說: 請你告訴我們, 這災臨到我們是因誰的緣故, 你以何事為業, 你從那裡來, 你是哪一國, 屬那一族的人。

⁹ 他說: 我是希伯來人, 我敬畏耶和華, 那創造滄海旱地之天上的神。

¹⁰ 他們就大大懼怕, 對他說, 你作的是甚麼事呢? 他們已經知道他躲避耶和華, 因為他告訴了他們。

¹¹ 他們問他說, 我們當向你怎樣行, 使海浪平靜呢? 這話是因海浪越發翻騰。

¹² 他對他們說: 你們將我抬起來, 拋在海中, 海就平靜了, 我知道你們遭這大風, 是因我的緣故。

¹³ 然而那些人竭力盪槳,要把船攏岸卻是不能, 因為海浪越發向他們翻騰。¹⁴ 他們便求告耶和華說, 耶和華阿, 我們懇求你, 不要因這人的性命使我們死亡, 不要使流無辜血的罪歸與我們, 因為你耶和華是隨自己的意旨行事。¹⁵ 他們遂將約拿抬起, 拋在海中, 海的狂浪就平息了。¹⁶ 那些人便大大敬畏耶和華, 向耶和華獻祭, 並且許願。 

在這段經文裡, 我們看見懼怕與敬畏交接的出現。1:5 水手便「懼怕」, 各人哀求自己的神。風浪太可了, 連一生與海為伴的水手都害怕了, 可想這場風浪是何等的可怕。1:9 他說: 我是希伯來人, 我「敬畏」耶和華, 那創造滄海旱地之天上的神。這是約拿對眾人說的一句話, 他自稱是敬畏神的人。1:10 他們就大大「懼怕」對他說, 你作的是甚麼事呢? 這是水手們對約拿所說的話的反應, 約拿告訴他們, 耶和華是創造滄海旱地之天上的神。那這場可怕的風浪就是從祂而來的。1:16 那些人便大大「敬畏」耶和華, 向耶和華獻祭, 並且許願。這是船上的人最後的反應, 他們從大大的懼怕變成大大的敬畏。其實懼怕與敬畏原文是同一個字, 但在這裡明顯有不同去地方, 那些人從懼怕開始到敬畏結束, 而且還有敬畏的行動, 他們向耶和華獻祭, 並且許願。敬畏神使他們與神建立了關係, 但如果只是懼怕, 這與魔鬼信神的信心是一樣, 雅各說: 魔鬼也信卻是懼怕。我們信卻是敬畏。

在這裡也讓我們看見有二種對神完全不同的態度, 一是懼怕, 一是敬畏。懼怕因為神真是可畏的, 但敬畏卻因為與神有了認識, 有了關係。請問你對神的存心是「懼怕」或是「敬畏」呢？

The post Fear and Awe | Jonah appeared first on Christian Bible Church of the Philippines.