Posts Tagged ‘Alliance for Biblical Integrity’

ABI Quick Survey: What is your opinion of the July 15 CT article by Mark Galli?

A couple of days ago, I published a blog (copied below) concerning an article written by Mark Galli for Christianity Today.

If you have read the comments following the article on the CT website, you have seen mixed responses from the readers. The majority have been negative, but some have expressed their support, suggesting that his perspective was appropriate and helpful.

I hope you will take a moment to participate in our brief survey to express your views (which we will publish in about a week).

Click here to take the survey

Click here to read the Mark Galli article

_______________________________________

Christianity Today Senior Managing Editor Mark Galli’s recent article sparks controversy.

Christianity Today’s identification as “A Magazine of Evangelical Conviction” will almost certainly be called into question once again by many readers because of a July 15 article by Mark Galli in which he calls God “such a drama queen.”

He reduces God to being little more than a totally-out-of-control diva:

“So  what we have, for better or worse, is a melodramatic God. He yells and  throws dishes, and walks off in a huff, slamming the door behind him—and  then he turns around and gives his life for us.”

The article requires no comment other than to ask, “What next?”

Click here to read the article

As the ministry of The Alliance for Biblical Integrity continues to develop in the United States, we are also receiving an increasing number of invitations to teach internationally. These represent tremendous opportunities to provide solid biblical instruction to the next generation of leaders as they are trained by other ministries around the world.

Unlike those in the U.S., overseas ministries need for guest teachers to come as fully-supported short-term missionaries. Therefore, we are seeking additional strategic partners to join our support team specifically for the international ministries of the ABI.

I encourage you to look over the international ministry opportunities listed below and prayerfully consider being involved with a specific ministry trip or even supporting the ministry of ABI on a monthly basis. Most of the noted ministry opportunities are already scheduled for sometime in the next 10 months, some are tentatively scheduled for every year and for some we are just waiting for the time when we have the funds to confirm them.

With over over 1000 personal Facebook friends, over 670 ABI Facebook group members, over 470 ABI Update subscribers and over 100 ABI blog subscribers (some are in all four groups), we hope to be able to easily cover the needed support for the international ministry opportunities each year. No gift is too small.

Our goal is to make sure all support is applied according to each supporter’s wishes. In the event that funds given for a specific trip exceed those needed, we will apply them to a similar trip or direct them to the ABI general operating fund.

___________________

WOL Korea New BI

S. Korea / Philippines:  October 25 – November 12, 2010

I will be teaching for two weeks at the new WOL Bible Institute in South Korea, followed by a week of teaching at the WOL Philippines Bible Institute. In addition to teaching with Word of Life in the Philippines, ABI cofounder Paul Barreca and I will be ministering together in a 2-day pastors conference on the topic of “Biblical Hermeneutics,” which will also be hosted by Word of Life.

Length of trip: 3+ weeks
Total support needed: $3000
Support given or pledged (as of June 21, 2010): $1800 has been pledged for airfare by our sending church

___________________

Canada:  November 22 – December 3, 2010

I will be returning to the Word of Life Bible Institute at Owen Sound, Ontario to teach the Pastoral Epistles for two weeks, for the second year in a row. This BI is an extension of the WOL BI in Schroon Lake, NY.

Length of trip: 2 weeks
Total support needed: None – WOL Canada pays an honorarium and travel expenses

___________________

Manila, Philippines

Philippines: January, 2011

I will be returning to the Philippines again in January, 2011. I have been invited by Dr. Wayne Vanderwier, Founder and Executive Director of Overseas Instruction in Counseling (OIC) to teach Biblical Hermeneutics in the inaugural module of classes in the first graduate-level degree program in biblical counseling to exist in the Philippines – a program established by Dr. Vanderwier.

Length of trip: 2 weeks
Total support needed: $2400
Support given or pledged (as of June 21, 2010):  0

___________________

WOL Hungary BI Opening '09

Hungary / Ukraine / Romania: May, 2011

This past May, I was in Europe for 3 weeks of teaching at the Word ofLife Bible Institutes in Ukraine and Hungary. I have been invited to return to both schools again next spring. I have also been asked to consider teaching at the Word of Life Discipleship TrainingCenter in Romania, if possible. (This is scheduled to be an annual trip.)

Length of trip: 3 or 4 weeks (to be determined)
Total support needed: $2500 – $3200
Support given or pledged (as of June 21, 2010):  0

___________________

Dubai, United Arab Emirates

United Arab Emirates: 2011?

A couple of months ago, I received an email from one of the students I taught at the Asian Christian Academy seminary outside Bangalore, India in 2002.He is now a missionary in United Arab Emirates and has invited me to conduct a series of seminars in an area of apologetics. A specific date for this ministry has not yet been set.

Length of trip: 1-2 weeks (to be determined)
Total support needed: $1800 – $2200
Support given or pledged (as of June 21, 2010):  0

___________________

Buddhist Procession, Myanmar

Myanmar (former Burma): 2011-2012?

Another Asian Christian Academy (India) seminary graduate, whom I also taught, has continued to stay in touch with me after returning to his home country of Myanmar. He has invited me to teach in his country, as the Lord allows in my schedule and provides the finances. Myanmar is a limited access country, with the ministry by foreigners limited to urban areas.

Length of trip: 1-2 weeks (to be determined)
Total support needed: $2600 – $3200
Support given or pledged (as of June 21, 2010):  0

___________________

Nepali Children

Nepal:  2011-2012?

Another Asian Christian Academy (India) seminary graduate, whom I also taught, has continued to stay in touch with me after returning to his home country of Nepal. He has invited me to teach in his country, as the Lord allows in my schedule and provides the finances.

Length of trip: 1-2 weeks (to be determined)
Total support needed: $2000 – $2400
Support given or pledged (as of June 21, 2010):  0

___________________

Asian Christian Academy

India: 2011-2012?

I have taught twice at the seminary which is part of the Asian Christian Academy ministry outside of Bangalore, India. I have a standing invitation to teach there as the Lord allows in my schedule and provides the finances.

Length of trip: 2 weeks
Total support needed: $2000 – $2400
Support given or pledged (as of June 21, 2010):  0

___________________

Again, if you are interested in becoming a strategic partner with ABI in its international ministry in any way, please send me an email at djames@biblicalintegrity.org or visit the support section of our website.

In His Care,

(This article is available in downloadable and printable PDF, 2 column article format: Click here to download)

According to an April, 2009 article on MSNBC, a Washington Post/ABC poll released that month became the first to indicate that the number of Americans supporting same-sex marriages (49%) is now greater than those who oppose it (46%). Although the two numbers are within the typical poll margin-of-error of each other (±3%), there does seem to have been a significant shift in attitudes over the preceding 5-year period, when a Post/ABC poll put the percentage in-favor at just 32% in 2004.

Between 1982 and 2007, Gallup reported a significant shift in attitudes toward the acceptability of homosexuality as an alternative lifestyle. In 1982, only 34% indicated that homosexuality “is an acceptable alternative lifestyle” with 51% indicating that it is not. However, in 2007 the numbers had more than reversed with 57% of Americans stating it is acceptable and only 40% indicating their belief that it is not.

On the other hand, one encouraging statistic is that over 80% of evangelicals still oppose gay marriage, with a statistically negligible shift since 2004 (according to a 2008 Pew Research Center poll). However, the pressure is on evangelicals because in the mainline churches only 40% oppose same-sex marriage – essentially the same as the Post/ABC poll results for the general population.

The “Homosexuality-Neutral” View of Scripture

Coinciding with the increasing social pressure to accept the homosexual lifestyle, is additional pressure by those who take this a step further by seeking to defend their views on biblical grounds. In most cases, the passages which have been historically understood to condemn homosexual behavior are interpreted as being at most “homosexuality-neutral” (my term). In other words, it is argued that these passages were not intended to address the issue of loving homosexual relationships, but rather inappropriate sexual behavior in general, that in some cases simply happened to involve homosexual acts.

The following quote, from the ReligiousTolerance.org website, seems to capture this view of homosexuality in the Bible as commonly held by the average liberal / progressive Christian. (reference)

To many — not all — liberal/progressive believers, the Bible is silent on loving, consensual same-sex sexual behavior. God accepts persons of all sexual orientations and approves of sex that is consensual, non-manipulative, safe and within a loving, committed relationship. Liberals and progressive have a range of beliefs concerning save, consensual, and casual sex by heterosexuals, bisexuals or homosexuals.

However the Bible condemns:
• Male rape of other men.
• One of two behaviors:
–- Either men engaging in ritual sex in Pagan temples, or
–- Men having sex in a woman’s bed.
• People having sex that violates their sexual orientation. For example:
–- Heterosexuals having sex with a member of the same sex.
–- Homosexuals having sex with a member of the opposite sex.
• Men sexually abusing children. The passage also condemns young victims of sexual molestation.
• People engaging in bestiality: having sex with non-humans.

Some gay Christians would contend that the Bible condemns only promiscuous homosexual behavior (not homosexuality in general), just as it condemns heterosexual promiscuity.

Passages Cited as Affirming Same-sex Relationships

Beyond arguing against traditional interpretations of certain passages, some Christian gay groups also cite other passages which they claim affirm same-sex relationships. One such group is Gay Christianity 101, which contends that the relationship between David and Jonathan was explicitly homosexual (reference):

Did God bless David and Jonathan, a same sex couple in romantic, committed, sexual partnership? The Bible devotes more chapters to their love story than any other human love story in the Bible. What does God intend us to learn from that dramatic emphasis?

Many gays believe that Jonathan and David were same sex lovers, based on the way God presents their story in scripture and based on the Hebrew words used to describe their relationship.

Although Gay Christianity 101 acknowledges that this is not the view of even most gay Christians, it is the one, as a gay-friendly ministry, they hold and promote. After presenting six other possible interpretations, it is concluded that a seventh one best fits the text. (reference)

David loved Jonathan. In reminiscing about Jonathan, David describes Jonathan’s love to him as “wonderful, passing the love of women-wives.”

To make David’s statement refer to platonic friendship, ‘I was closer to Jonathan than to any of my close female friends’ is a woefully inadequate understanding of the text.

Because Jewish men in David’s time did not have close, platonic friendships with females to whom they were not related by blood or marriage, it better fits the text to accept David’s statement at face value.

The romantic, emotional, sexual love between Jonathan and David was more wonderful than the romantic, emotional, sexual love between David and his wives.

It is also suggested by some that Ruth and Naomi had a sexual relationship as did Daniel and Ashpenaz (both in a brochure on the state of Connecticut’s website, Homosexuality and the Bible, p. 13). Other passages which are said to involve homosexuals who are not condemned (and therefore at least implicitly affirm them), include Matthew 8 and Luke 7 concerning the Roman centurion, and Acts 8 concerning the Ethiopian eunuch.

_________________

In the remainder of this article (and at least one subsequent article), it will be demonstrated that the attempts to find homosexuality-compatible interpretations fail to adequately handle the relevant passages, while the historical condemnation of homosexuality has solid biblical support.

Arguments for the Neutrality of Scripture Regarding Homosexuality

GENESIS 19 AND THE CITY OF SODOM

In dealing with the exegesis of 19:5, the author of an article titled “Bible Abuse Directed at Homosexuals” makes the following argument:

The key verb here, transliterated ya,da (or yadha’ ) , is usually translated as “know.” This verb appears 943 times elsewhere in the Hebrew Scriptures, where it generally means “to know a fact” or “to know a person well.” It has an obvious sexual connotation in only ten of these cases, all of which involve heterosexual relationships.

The translation, then, could have the following meanings:

* Gang rape the angels (a common way to humiliate men – especially enemies – at the time);
* Engage in consensual homosexual sex with them (possibly what the NIV translators intended with “have sex with them”);
* Interrogate them. (The city had in the recent past been sacked, and the strangers might have been spies sent to check out the fortifications which provided some protection for the trade routes that passed the city.)

In choosing the proper meaning, consider this. In Biblical times, travel was slow and dangerous, and safe places to rest were few. Travelers could only pray for the hospitality of strangers – an important theme in the Bible. And Jews, having been ill-treated travelers in Egypt, had particular reason to be hospitable, and emphasis on it permeates Jewish law. For many reasons, hospitality, once offered, could not be breached.

Gay Christianity 101 also endorses the inhospitality view (reference):

For almost 1800 years after the events in Sodom, Jewish prophets in the Bible and Jewish authors outside the Bible, understood this story to be about inhospitality, not homosexuality. Sodom is mentioned 48 times in the Bible and never in those 48 passages is homosexuality given as the cause of God’s judgment. Isn’t that interesting? Have you given that astounding fact the weight it deserves in your thinking about this true story?

Some contend that rather than the sin of the Sodomites being homosexuality in general,  it was that they intended to homosexually rape the angels (who appeared as men) as a means of humiliating them as their enemies. (reference)

Most feel that Genesis 19 is totally unrelated to consensual same-sex behavior.

It is obvious that Lot wanted to protect the angels from the city mob. The people of Sodom, having recently been under attack by foreigners, might have been worried that the angels were really military spies. Alternately, the mob might have wanted to humiliate the strangers with homosexual rape which is as abhorrent as heterosexual rape.

Furthermore, concerning Sodom, Gay Christian 101 states what it calls “six surprising facts” (reference):

1. Genesis 19 never mentions homosexuals in Sodom.

2. Genesis 19 never mentions a homosexual act being committed in Sodom.

3. Scripture never mentions a same sex relationship in Sodom.

4. Scripture never tells us that the inhabitants of Sodom were homosexuals.

5. Scripture never tells us that God destroyed Sodom because of homosexuality.

6. Sodomite, in scripture, never refers to homosexuals. Every time sodomite is used in scripture, it refers to cult, shrine, temple prostitutes who worshiped the Canaanite fertility goddess.

A BIBLICAL RESPONSE

Genesis 19

Sodom and Gomorrah are first mentioned in Genesis 10:13, with the second reference in chapter 13:10-13, where the men of these cities are characterized as being “exceedingly wicked and sinful against the Lord.” In other passages in Genesis (7:19; 15:1; 16:10; 17:2, among others) where the Hebrew is translated “exceedingly” by the NKJV the context indicates that the word carries the force of “beyond measure.” That the lack of hospitality, even to the point of actual ill-treatment, would be described as “wickedness beyond measure” seems very unlikely.

And while it is true that the author of Hebrews writes, “Do not forget to entertain strangers, for by so doing some have unwittingly entertained angels” (Hebrews 13:2), it seems immediately apparent that the problem in Sodom was not simply that of not being hospitable. Even if their treatment of strangers went so far as to warrant a rebuke in that Near-Eastern culture, the suggestion that God would have utterly destroyed these cities for this reason just does not seem to merit serious consideration.

The suggestion that the passage could possibly refer to the men of Sodom simply wanting to interrogate the angels just doesn’t seem plausible as a cause for inviting God’s judgment. For a country on a war-footing, having genuine concerns about the motives of foreigners who just showed up could hardly have been considered outrageously wicked behavior. Also, there is nothing in the text that indicates there was concern that these foreigners might be spies in the first place. And of course they had made no initial attempts to hide as they planned to spend the night in the town square (19:2).

Furthermore, the men of the city threatened to treat Lot worse than they intended to treat these strangers, which is clearly a threat of violence (19:9). But even if the treatment that the strangers would receive as captives under interrogation would have been sufficient to warrant judgment by God, this is ultimately a moot point. God had already determined to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah prior to the angels entering the city.

The passage certainly rules out the possibility that the men of Sodom were hoping for a consensual same-sex encounter with the angels (who were obviously thought to be men). But even though gang-rape is fairly clearly in view, neither was this intended detestable act the reason for their coming destruction. Again, God’s stated intent, prior to their arrival, was to wipe out the entire society – because of a lifestyle so wicked and so prevalent that fewer than even ten decent people could be found.

Sodom and Gomorrah were apparently Canaanite – a culture known to be one of the most morally reprehensible in history. The Canaanite fertility cult involved both heterosexual and homosexual encounters with male and female shrine prostitutes. With this in mind, consider this question: Is it reasonable to think that the “beyond-measure” wickedness of these cities could have somehow excluded sexual debauchery as at least a significant part of the basis for their annihilation?

Additionally, the overall flow of the narrative seems to suggest a direct connection between the incident with the angels and Sodom’s societal wickedness. What they were demanding was not something new to them. And certainly it must be asked if such an utterly wicked warfare tactic like gang-rape could even be considered if sexual debauchery were not already characteristic of the entire culture. And, as we know, all the men of the city came out and surrounded Lot’s house.

At this point, it could be argued that we’re still not talking about loving, monogamous same-sex relationships – but about a culture that was characterized by adulterous relationships, both hetero- and homosexual. However, I think there is one more element of the story that specifically pinpoints homosexual behavior itself as the ultimate trigger for the execution of God’s wrath (independent of whether or not it was occurring in a “loving, monogamous” relationship).

The inescapable problem with the homosexuality-neutral view of Genesis 19 involves Lot’s daughters. No one on either side of the debate would defend rape of any kind as morally acceptable. So, whether the rape would be against Lot’s daughters or against the angels (again, who were thought to be men) is another moot point in and of itself.

This means that there had to be some incredibly significant reason why Lot would be willing to allow even his own daughters to be brutally raped by an out-of-control mob rather than turn over the two angels to them. (And nothing indicates that Lot had any reason to think his guests were not men.)

So, what was this additional factor that struck terror in Lot’s heart as he contemplated this no-win situation? Could it be that Lot so clearly understood that homosexuality is such a detestable abomination in the Lord’s sight that he was unwilling to allow the sin of a homosexual encounter to be added to the sin of rape?

Earlier it was noted that not even ten righteous people were to be found in Sodom. But the obvious implication is that there was not a single person in Sodom who was not guilty of whatever specific sin (or category of sin) was in view. Given the overall wickedness of the Canaanite culture – which even included child sacrifice – what could have been the unique sin of Sodom and Gomorrah among all of the Canaanite cities?

And there is yet another factor that hasn’t been noted concerning Genesis 13:13:

But the men of Sodom were exceedingly wicked and sinful against the Lord.

The word translated “men” does not simply mean “people” in the generic sense – it literally means “men,” i.e., “the males of Sodom.”

So, it appears that the “exceedingly” wicked sin of Sodom and Gomorrah was uniquely committed by the men of those cities – and it involved all of the men. As bad as it would have been for the men to gang-rape their enemies, or worship their gods through encounters with male shrine prostitutes – the overall situation was worse than that. The society was dominated by male homosexuality. And the seriousness of this situation brought the complete destruction and utter desolation of those cities as God hurled fire and brimstone – annihilating every man, woman and child – and everything that had life. Only the judgment of the Flood exceeded the judgment that God brought upon Sodom and Gomorrah on that day.

In the next article in this series, we will examine other passages to see if the biblical record as a whole supports the view that homosexual behavior, independent of the context in which it occurs, is the sin that incurred God’s wrath in Genesis 19.

(This article is available in downloadable and printable PDF, 2 column article format: Click here to download)

Bruce Waltke is one of the most well-known Old Testament scholars in the Reformed tradition of this generation. Known by many as a conservative, his comments made in a recently-released 2009 interview may have created one of the most significant theological firestorms to sweep through the evangelical community in recent memory.

(This issue has generated a tremendous number of articles, blogs and comments and because of the sheer volume it has become very difficult to trace everything back to the primary sources for the information I have reported below. However, I do believe that the picture I have presented is accurate.)

________________

“Bruce Waltke: Why Must the Church Accept Evolution?”

On March 24, the Science and Sacred blog of the Biologos Forum posted a 2009 interview in which Dr. Waltke made definitive statements defending theistic evolution, while simultaneously marginalizing and potentially alienating all who still hold to a literal six-day-creation view of Genesis. In the video titled Bruce Waltke: Why Must the Church Accept Evolution? Dr. Waltke makes the following statement*:

…if the data is overwhelmingly in favor of evolution, to deny that reality will make us a cult…some odd group that is not really interacting with the world. And rightly so, because we are not using our gifts and trusting God’s Providence that brought us to this point of our awareness.

(Quoted in an April 9, 2010 article on the Christianity Today website and on many other sites)

* I have not been able to locate the video anywhere on the internet as it has apparently been taken down everywhere. However, that this is an accurate quote is corroborated by many websites.

At the time the video debuted, Dr. Waltke had been a professor of Old Testament at Reformed Theological Seminary (RTS) for more than 20 years, but his resignation from the seminary was reported on April 6. Biologos reports that on March 29 he was asked by the seminary to request that the video be taken down. Miscellanies: a Christ-centered blog reported a clarification by Dr. Waltke on March 31 in which he continues to affirm that Adam and Eve are historical figures from whom all humans descended.*

*Although I have not yet found the original, that this is accurate is also corroborated by other websites carrying the same statement.

Although some early reports indicated that RTS had essentially forced his resignation, Dr. Waltke and seminary Chancellor and CEO Robert (Ric) Cannada have subsequently issued a joint statement that this is not true. Dr. Waltke tendered his resignation because of the harm the video was causing RTS and his resignation was accepted as being in the best interests of RTS. (for a post of Bruce Waltke’s statement, click here; for Ric Cannada’s statement, click here).

On April 30, the board of Knox Theological Seminary approved the appointment of Dr. Bruce Waltke as Distinguished Professor of Old Testament. (the KTS statement) (Knox Theological Seminary is a ministry of Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church, a member of the PCA.)

This “Will Make Us A Cult”

The Alliance for Biblical Integrity holds to Young-Earth Creationism (YEC) and I will deal with some of the specific scientific and exegetical issues in the evolution / creation debate at some point in the future. However, in this article, I am limiting my comments to the general theological and philosophical problems of evolution, including those associated with marginalizing Young-Earth Creationists by suggesting we may eventually be viewed as a cult.

To be fair, Dr. Waltke has stated that he would have given the video a different title and that the interview was edited in such a way to make him appear to be making stronger statements than he intended against those who don’t agree with his views on theistic evolution. The following has been posted on a third-party blog as being copied from a statement on his Facebook site:

I am not a scientist, but I have familiarized myself with attempts to harmonize Genesis 1-3 with science, and I believe that creation by the process of evolution is a tenable Biblical position. I apologize for giving the impression that others who seek to harmonize the two differently are not credible. I honor all who contend for the Christian faith.

However, the statement concerning the problem of being labeled a cult does not seem to simply be an off-the-cuff remark in an unguarded moment. And even if he might state it differently in retrospect or if this was not his intention, his comments do reflect a widely-held view that YEC is only held by those on the anti-intellectual fringe of conservative evangelicalism. Of course, this has been the consensus of the scientific establishment for as long as anyone can remember. But Dr. Waltke’s words seem to imply that we legitimately run the risk of this becoming the common consensus—which would necessarily include that of the evangelical community in general.

It seems surprising that Dr. Waltke would use the word “cult” so loosely and imprecisely. “Cult” is almost exclusively reserved for groups that deny the deity of Christ, yet it seems unlikely that he is suggesting that rejecting theistic evolution is somehow even close to being equivalent to such heresy. So why even use this term—even if to stress his concern that those who continue to hold this position run the risk of losing credibility? At the very least, the term is unnecessarily inflammatory.

The reasoning behind Dr. Waltke’s statement is also puzzling. Ultimately, a primary reason for us to be concerned about being labeled a cult for any reason must be that the gospel message we proclaim will be rejected as a result. But who would reject our gospel over the question of beginnings if not those who already reject it on other grounds—including many in the scientific community?

Will Theistic Evolution Really Help The Cause Of The Gospel?

Is it reasonable to expect that Muslim intellectuals will accept the deity of Christ if—or because evangelical Christians accept theistic evolution? Will Hindu biologists accept the concept of the triune personal God of the Bible if—or because evangelical Christians reject Young-earth Creationism? Will liberal Protestants return to the biblical gospel of personal redemption through faith in Jesus Christ alone if—or because evangelical Christians embrace their view of Genesis 1-11 as merely a collection of myths? Will even one materialistic evolutionist recognize that he has been wrong about God’s existence if—or because evangelical Christians recognize that they have been wrong about Darwin’s theory?

The answer to these questions seems intuitively obvious. These groups all rejected the biblical gospel long before the evolution / creation debate became a scientific issue, a social cause, a cultural phenomenon or a political football. And if anything, the deepening rejection of the gospel within academia has tracked right with the movement away from a literal view of creation – and not even pretending to slow down at theistic evolution on its way to atheistic evolution. Despite Dr. Waltke’s long years of ministry and work in the rigorous field of theological academics, his comments seem oddly naive.

From a scientific perspective, don’t the twin issues of the resurrection from the dead and life-after-death pose least as much of an obstacle as evolution? Concerning the case for the resurrection, the only evidence consists of historical records. Concerning the case for life-after-death the only arguments are purely philosophical / theological. There is no empirical evidence that the spiritual realm exists, apart from a few spurious claims to the contrary. Anecdotal reports of common near-death experiences do not constitute scientific proof. But even if such proof did exist, it would not produce a rush by the scientific community or anyone else to trust in Christ for salvation, because lack of evidence is not the real issue.

Another significant issue is that of Adam and Eve. In a post-video follow-up, Waltke states:

1. Adam and Eve are historical figures from whom all humans are descended; they are uniquely created in the image of God and as such are not in continuum with animals.

2. Adam is the federal and historical head of the fallen human race just as Jesus Christ is the federal and historical head of the Church.

I don’t see how Dr. Waltke’s present position will give him much more credibility as long as he continues to maintain that Adam and Eve were historical figures. Sooner or later, he will have no choice but to abandon one view or the other. Apart from the scientific problems, the virtually insurmountable nature of the logical and theological problems can readily be seen by anyone who thinks through the issue. (These will be discussed later.)

Is Theistic Evolution The Only Credible View?

Apparently, Dr. Waltke has not always thought so. In an article on biblical cosmogony in the Jan.-Mar. 1975 edition of Bibliotheca Sacra, Dr. Waltke asked the question:

Why has the new generation turned from the theologian to the scientist for the answer to his nagging question about the origin of the universe? (“The Creation Account in Genesis 1-3″)

In the quote from the video, and in the subsequent clarification, one cannot deduce for sure that Dr. Waltke has completely ruled out the possibility that the Genesis account can be taken literally. However, he does seem to be very close to that position—particularly in light of his resignation from RTS.  This leads us to wonder what has happened over the last 35 years that has caused him to change his views regarding evolution if his high view of Scripture hasn’t changed, as well—something which he also maintains.

Although Dr. Waltke has made it clear that he holds to theistic evolution (as opposed to naturalistic evolution), it is not at all clear that he held to any form of evolution in 1975. In explaining his position in this article, Dr. Waltke refers to a lecture he gave as a guest speaker in a course on genetics at Southern Methodist University, during which he appeared to defend the literal creationist position. His basic thesis was that evolution, like creationism, is a faith position which cannot be scientifically proven.

During the questioning session that followed the lecture, the basic thesis was accepted by both professor and students, but their next question was, “Why should we accept your faith position instead of ours?”

Now the author is not suggesting that by this one experience he has refuted the hypothesis of evolution, but he is maintaining that all answers which attempt to explain the origin of the universe are essentially faith positions. The question that the LORD asked of Job is asked of every man: “Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth?”

The following is an excellent statement that he made in the same article under the section, “The Importance of Cosmogony.” (If Dr. Waltke’s views haven’t fundamentally changed since 1975, it seems odd that after 20 years it would only now be in the best interests of RTS for him to leave the school.)

But it may be asked, “What difference does all this make?” It is important because the question of cosmogony is closely related to one’s entire world view. Someone has said that our world view is like the umpire at a ball game. He seems unimportant and the players are hardly aware of him, but in reality he decides the ball game. So likewise one’s world view lies behind every decision a person makes. It makes a difference whether we come from a mass of matter or from the hand of God. How we think the world started will greatly influence our understanding of our identity, our relationship to others, our values, and our behavior. Because the question of cosmogony is important for understanding some of the basic issues of life, intelligent men throughout recorded history have sought the answer to this question. Just as the knowledge of the future is crucial for making basic choices in life, so also the knowledge of beginnings is decisive in establishing a man’s or a culture’s Weltanschauung (“world view”). No wonder the Bible reveals both.

Because of man’s limitation as a creature, he must receive this knowledge by revelation from the Creator. Moreover, because of the noetic effects of sin, he needs to be reborn before he can comprehend that revelation.

Scientists now regularly state that evolution is no longer a theory, but a proven fact—and it would appear that Dr. Waltke has become persuaded that this is true. However, the problem he cites above has not changed, and in fact, it cannot change. As he notes, “The answer is beyond the range of empirical proof” and this is because it involves events that happened in the past.

For the sake of argument, let’s assume that God has created the universe such that macro-evolution can actually occur without his ongoing intervention. That macro-evolution could happen and that it actually did happen are two entirely separate issues. The only way there can be a necessary relationship between the two is if God does not exist—and that is precisely the starting point for atheistic evolutionists.

But this begs the question for theistic evolutionists, as well. If theistic evolution is true, then either evolution requires God’s intervention or God unnecessarily chose to be involved. However, this presents a conundrum. The evidence and arguments required for theistic evolutionsists to maintain that God is necessary at some point in the process are essentially the same ones used by Young-earth Creationists. So, what is the advantage when trying to persuade anyone either of God’s existence or of the truth of the Gospel? If the arguments are essentially the same, then on what grounds do Young-earth Creationists run the risk of being labeled a cult any more than the theistic evolutionist who also maintains the view that Christ arose from the grave to be alive forevermore—a view that most scientists would claim to be decidedly “unscientific.”

Irreconcilable Practical and Theological Problems

Ultimately, theistic evolution creates far more problems than it solves. This is not simply an issue of whether or not a given passage should be understood figuratively or literally. Below are just a few of the many questions and problems raised by the theory of theistic evolution.

If theistic evolution is true in general…

• Wouldn’t death have been a part of life for the millions of years prior to the fall of Adam and Eve?

• Wouldn’t biological decay have occurred over the eons, as well?

• Wouldn’t have all the forces of nature that we observe today been at work also—i.e., destructive weather and geological phenomena?

• What, exactly, were the effects of the Fall, if death, destruction and decay had been an inherent part of the creation from the beginning?

• How could God pronounce that all he created was “good,” if death, destruction and decay had been an inherent part of the creation from the beginning?

• How could it be determined scientifically which parts of the evolutionary process were immediately and necessarily guided by the hand of God, and which ones could have happened without God’s direct intervention?

• How would the answer to the previous question fundamentally differ from the arguments used by Young-earth Creationists?

If Adam and Eve were created instantaneously millions to billions of years after the initial creation…

• How can it be explained that Adam and Eve were placed in an environment that was already marked by death, destruction and decay?

• Were Adam and Eve created to live forever in such an environment?

• Did God also at that time create the Garden of Eden, the Tree of Life and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil or are these simply metaphorical?

• What, exactly, did Adam and Eve do to bring about their spiritual and physical death, if these things are only metaphorical?

• Why did Moses include the details about cherubim and a flaming sword guarding the entrance to the Garden—and how should we understand this passage, if these things are only metaphorical?

If instead of Adam and Eve being independently created, lower life forms had evolved into hominids over the millennia…

• Would it be proper to say that Adam and Eve were animals prior to God breathing into them the breath of life so that they became “living souls?”

• Would it be reasonable to assume that only two such animals had evolved or that these were the only two among many which became living souls—which would be required for them to be the only progenitors of the human race?

• Wouldn’t it be reasonable to suggest that there were many such hominids at that time, who were biologically identical to humans and looked exactly like humans, but really were not?

• What would have prevented procreation between humans and biologically identical hominids—or is it possible that this actually happened?

• What happened to all of these pre-human animals?
__________________

These are not absurd questions. And because of these and many others that could be posed, it doesn’t seem that theistic evolution could possibly be more acceptable to unbelievers than Young-earth Creationism. When carefully considered, it actually seems that theistic evolution could be viewed by naturalistic evolutionists as even more foolish and logically inconsistent than YEC.

I understand there are some significant difficulties that remain to be addressed by YEC from a scientific perspective. However, theistic evolution introduces at least as many problems because science and biblical theology must still be reconciled—which is obviously not a burden for naturalistic evolutionists.

Unfortunately, I don’t to see how either Dr. Waltke’s position on theistic evolution or his comments are in any way helpful to conservative evangelicals and the cause of Christ.

(This article is available in downloadable and printable PDF, 2 column article format: Click here to download)

Homosexuality and the Believer’s Identity in Christ

But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. (John 1:12–13, NKJV)

There are many things that distinguish Christianity from the religions of the world, not the least of which is the believer’s identity in Christ. In other religions, philosophies and worldviews, one’s identity – how we view and value ourselves, and how we are viewed and valued by others – is inseparably tied to an endless list of things like ethnicity, gender, appearance, physical and mental abilities (or disabilities), skills, talents and anything else that we think helps us to order the world around us. We use these to identify ourselves and others, while also usually comparing ourselves to others.

However, in Christ our unique identity as individuals is properly found only in and through our relationship with Him. For those of us who have trusted in Christ for salvation, we are first and foremost children of God. As such, we are heirs and joint heirs with Jesus Christ.

The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, then heirs—heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him, that we may also be glorified together. (Romans 8:16–17, NKJV)

Through faith in Christ and his finished work on the cross, God mercifully forgives our sin and graciously gives us the free gift of eternal life.

But now having been set free from sin, and having become slaves of God, you have your fruit to holiness, and the end, everlasting life. For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans 6:22–23, NKJV)

Whatever we may have been through our physical birth has been transformed through our spiritual rebirth.

Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new. (2 Corinthians 5:17, NKJV)

Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God. (1 Corinthians 6:9–11, NKJV)

A Manufactured Complexity

Unfortunately, more and more within the church are asking, “What does this have to do with homosexuality?” And unfortunately, more and more are answering, “Very little, if anything.” However, this has not been the historically-accepted view – and with good reason: God has clearly and unambiguously condemned homosexuality in the Scriptures as sinful. And yet, that this is true is being increasingly challenged – even by some who would identify themselves as part of the evangelical community.

These challenges to the historical view seem to fall primarily along two lines of reasoning. The first has to do with the issues of physiology that I mentioned in the first article in this series. This challenge ultimately seeks to discredit the accuracy and authority of the Bible on the basis of ignorance on the part of the biblical writers. And in reality, it is simply part of the tired, yet oft-repeated argument that the Bible was written by people in ancient societies who lacked the cultural sophistication and scientific knowledge that we now possess. Therefore, we have wrongly condemned something that the Bible wrongly condemns.

The second line of reasoning is arguably more insidious because it superficially gives the impression that the inspiration and authority of the Bible is being kept intact. In this case, it is argued that it is not the accuracy of the text that is being challenged, but rather, the historical interpretation of the text. In other words, the contention is that for centuries even scholars have misinterpreted the passages which mention “homosexuality.” It is maintained that the inherent meaning of certain words has been misunderstood or that there has been a failure to understand the cultural context. Therefore, we have wrongly condemned something that the Bible doesn’t really condemn.

However, I believe that both lines of reasoning unnecessarily introduce layers of complexity to an issue which is not nearly as complex in general as it is often made out to be (even though it may be somewhat complex in certain instances). Whether intentional or not, the apparent complexity introduced by both the quest for the “homosexual gene” and for obscured meanings in the biblical text must be ultimately viewed as being driven by the pursuits of those whose hearts are darkened by sin and who seek to suppress the knowledge of the truth.

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. (Romans 1:18–19, NKJV)

Scientific Evidence and the Word of God

Although, I presented some fairly well-documented evidence of the scientific complexity in the first article, my point was to demonstrate that genuine awareness of these issues does not require that we abandon God’s Word in dealing with them. We need to understand that evidential complexity does not necessarily equate to spiritual complexity. While it may be true that humans are psychologically complex, this doesn’t mean that solutions to psychological problems must necessarily be equally complex. Biblical solutions, though often not easy to implement because of our sin nature, don’t involve complicated concepts or convoluted methods.

Yet, when we encounter such complex scientific evidence for the first time, it can be a faith-shaking experience. This can happen, for example, when we start getting into the issue of creation versus evolution. And of course, whole ministries have been established for countering the claims of the scientific establishment that the evidence unequivocally proves evolution to be true.

However – and this is an extremely important point – the issue is not the evidence itself. Everyone has access to the same evidence. It is not as if the evolutionists have access to one set of evidence and creationists have access to different set. The real issue is the interpretation of the evidence. Therefore, the task of those who trust the Bible as God’s inspired, infallible and inerrant Word is to reconcile what may appear to be contradictions between the Scriptures and the evidence.

However, apparent contradictions are not reconciled by simply ignoring the evidence. That is dishonest. But neither are they reconciled by ignoring clear biblical texts nor by irresponsibly re-interpreting those texts. True reconciliation occurs when both the Bible and the evidence are properly interpreted. This is the essence of the task of apologetics. And it is a central part of the ministry of The Alliance for Biblical Integrity as we seek to apply a biblical hermeneutic to the tough issues and difficult questions that threaten to weaken the church in this generation.

Sorting It All Out

In future articles I will address how to apply biblical principles to the physiological issues and potentially-related temptations which I noted in the first article. However, in the next article I will begin to examine the biblical passages that directly address the issue of homosexuality and respond to some of the exegetical challenges that form the basis for the second line of reasoning used by an increasing number of opponents of the historical view.

This is the first in a series of articles on the topic of “Homosexuality and the Bible.” The series will not necessarily be presented in consecutive blogs, however.

Note: Some may find the first section of this article to be controversial, but the purpose is to show that awareness of some of the difficult biological issues that can come into play do not require that one abandon a thoroughly conservative biblical position concerning homosexuality.

A complex issue

While we the believe that the Bible provides the final and authoritative word on all aspects of life, correctly understanding and applying the Bible to this particular issue may be somewhat more complex than often considered by conservative evangelicals.

Perhaps the first complication has to do with actually defining homosexuality itself. Historically, conservatives, whether Christian or not, have tended to define homosexuality primarily in terms of behavior. In other words, a homosexual has generally been viewed as someone who engages in homosexual behavior, with such behavior being considered to be both unnatural and learned.

For Christians, the logic behind this view involves the sense of justice that says God would only condemn and judge evil behavior – things that we choose to do (whether in thought or deed), rather than things over which we have no control – for example, our gender itself. On the other hand, those who experience feelings of same-sex attraction, but choose to not act upon these urges are not generally treated as homosexuals and of course they are not guilty of sin if these do not go beyond the realm of temptation.

In essence, this view presumes that everyone is naturally a heterosexual at birth and that homosexuality is a life-style choice, often thought to stem from homosexual experiences while growing up – either through sexual abuse by older children or adults, or because of curiosity and experimentation.

However, a search of the internet for the phrase, “scientific studies on homosexuality” shows that opinion remains divided on the answer to the question, “Are homosexuals made or are they born?” Some studies seem to indicate that genetics may play a role in sexual orientation and that homosexuality has a biological basis, while other studies suggest it does not or are inconclusive.

For example, when asked if homosexuality was rooted solely in biology, gay gene researcher, Dean Hamer, replied, “Absolutely not. From twin studies, we already know that half or more of the variability in sexual orientation is not inherited. Our studies try to pinpoint the genetic factors…not negate the psychosocial factors” (Anastasia, 1995, p. 43). In addition, brain researcher Simon LeVay has acknowledged that multiple factors may contribute to a homosexual orientation (LeVay, 1996). (NART website)

And there are apparently additional issues that I had never even thought about until doing some research for this series. These do concern matters of physiology and biology and are not really open to much dispute. Though rare, some people are actually born with what is termed “ambiguous genitalia” which include characteristics of both male and female sexual organs – or internal sex organs of one sex, with external sex organs of the opposite sex. In this situation, at the chromosomal level most are still either males (XY chromosomes) or female (XX chromosomes), with no particular “sexual identity issues”. But in terms of social interaction and personal relationships, such physiological ambiguity can understandably present some very difficult emotional challenges, let alone spiritual ones.

In some very rare cases there are abnormalities such that there is a male / female mix at the chromosomal level. In less rare cases, the “intersexed” person is either a male or female at the chromosomal level, but primarily have the external genitalia of the opposite sex. In the latter case, even though, again, there may not be a conflict between their chromosomal sexual identity and their psychological sexual identity, there is a conflict between their chromosomal sexual identity and their physical appearance.

These truly physiological factors seem to raise some very important questions:

Biblically, with whom may a person with these congenital defects enter a marriage relationship and engage in sexual relations?

Are such people alone free to choose a partner of either sex?

Or must they marry someone who is of the opposite sex at the chromosomal level, even though they are essentially the same sex at the external physical level?

Or are they required to live a life of celibacy to remain morally pure?

Although most of us will never encounter such a person, some of us will and particularly for those of us in ministry, we must try to find biblical answers and give godly counsel to fellow-believers concerning their life-decisions in this area.

And beyond these cases of physically intersexed individuals, there seem to be other situations that also require biblical wisdom and spiritual maturity to handle appropriately. In my experience, there seem to be “degrees” of masculinity and femininity such that these rather subjective areas are not defined by rigid boundaries marked off by our identity as either a male or female (even assuming no physiological abnormalities). Even when chromosomes are not an issue, hormones and other factors seem to be. Some men seem to have more effeminate characteristics and mannerisms, while some women seem to be “less feminine” in any number of ways. And there seems to be an unbroken continuum between the two, such that these characteristics may be more or less pronounced in any given person apart from any personal intent or desire to appear or act in a way that is gender-ambiguous.

When both biological and environmental factors are taken into consideration, it is not difficult to understand how and why some may experience genuine internal conflict and have to deal with truly unwanted sexual urges and temptations. And this is undoubtedly not limited to the issue of homosexuality, but to sexuality in general.

Furthermore, it seems that all of us have different areas of weakness and tendencies toward particular types of sin and to varying degrees. Some struggle with anger, while others struggle with honesty. Some struggle with worry, while others struggle with fear. Some struggle with laziness, while others struggle with lust.  And while it is not too difficult for us to sympathize with those with whom we share common struggles, it can be difficult for us to understand how others can genuinely struggle with things that are not a particular problem for us. But the fact is that any struggle in any area can lead to moral failure if we fail to withstand the temptations that inevitably come.

Certainly there are those who simply choose to fulfill their sexual desire in sinful ways that are condemned by the Bible. There is a troubling and growing trend within the more conservative evangelical community that has existed for a long time within the broader liberal church – that of changing attitudes toward homosexuality such that this behavior and lifestyle is being accepted on various grounds, including the argument that the Bible does not label as sinful committed same-sex relationships. In the next article in this series I will be looking at the relevant biblical texts to discuss whether or not such a position is biblically defensible.

On the other hand, we in the Body of Christ cannot afford to pretend that difficult genuinely physiological gender-related situations do not exist simply because we find them awkward, distasteful – or even disgusting. Yet, during the past twenty-five years that I have been a believer (over twenty-two of which have been in ministry), I don’t recall some of these particular issues ever being addressed or even mentioned in any sermon, class or private discussion. However, we all have an obligation before the Lord to both respond biblically to clearly sinful behavior, and to provide godly instruction and biblical counsel when believers experience problems that cannot be merely condemned as matters of choice alone.

This video is from a service at MorningStar Ministries (founded by Rick Joyner) in Fort Mill, South Carolina. A Google search on “Holy Ghost Hokey Pokey” quickly shows that although recently posted, it has received a lot of attention across the internet. It marks just one of the latest in a long string of “manifestations of the Holy Spirit”  – which are clearly neither biblical, nor the work of the Holy Spirit, whatever the real explanation.

(Note: I am working on a higher quality video that I hope to post in the near future.)

MorningStar is a fairly well-known Charismatic ministry, particularly known for its emphasis on “miraculous healings.”

From the MorningStar website, in their statement of faith, we find the following concerning the present work of the Holy Spirit through spiritual gifts:

On the Present Ministry of the Holy Spirit
We believe that “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever” (Hebrews 13:8) and that His ministry in and through the church by the Holy Spirit has not changed from the beginning. We accept, acknowledge, encourage and seek all of the biblical gifts and ministries of the Holy Spirit as present and vital for the church to accomplish her full purpose today.

Hebrew 13:8 is commonly cited as a proof-text that the miraculous sign gifts are still in operation today. However, this is both a misunderstanding of the verse and, I would suggest, is a disingenuous use of the verse because all Christians recognize that this can only refer to his unchanging character and not to the ministry of Christ.

Jesus’ character was the same both before and after the incarnation, yet his earthly ministry was completely different than his ministry in the Old Testament before he became a human through the Virgin Birth. His ministry in and through the average believer was significantly different before and after his crucifixion and after the day of Pentecost. His ministry after the day of Pentecost, in the present age, is significantly different than what his ministry will be during the Millennium after his return and when he will be ruling and reigning from the Throne of David in Jerusalem. Therefore, even if God were continuing to give the miraculous sign gifts today, Hebrews 13:8 does nothing to support this view.

This ABI blog is a bit of a departure from most articles – but it does focus on reaching the lost with the gospel in a unique way.

This blog features an email from a dear friend, Linda Summer, who is the Director of the Agape Puppet ministry. Linda and her team are currently in India and reaching thousands of Hindu children with the gospel of Jesus Christ. As always, she is accompanied by Sam Shaw (from Northern Ireland), who is the Associate Director for the ministry and his wife, Silvana, who is from Brazil.

Linda Summer is a truly amazing servant of the Lord. Despite innumerable health problems, she travels tirelessly around the world with an ever-changing team of young people (in their teens and early twenties) to get the gospel into some of the most remote places and unreached children on the planet. Her travels fairly frequently take her into limited-access countries, from which she can’t even directly reveal their presence or location.

As if the Agape Puppets’ direct ministry to children were not enough, Linda and her team always take hundreds of dollars worth of puppets, sound equipment and ministry supplies to each country in order to train and equip a new group of nationals each trip, so that they can continue reaching children with the gospel in this most effective way.

I first met Linda in India in 2004 while teaching at the Asian Christian Academy seminary, about an hour south of Bangalore. I was deeply impressed by her commitment to the Lord, her skills as a communicator to children, and the effectiveness in getting the gospel to so many children who would otherwise never hear the gospel in their entire lives. Within a few years we were able to have her come to Hungary with a team to teach our Bible School students and staff in the art of puppet ministry – and that time marked the beginning of the Word of Life Hungary Children’s Ministry.

My sense is that the Agape Puppet ministry is perhaps one of the very most effective evangelistic ministries to children in the world today – particularly when it comes to reaching the unreached children.

I encourage you to go to the Agape Puppets website:

www.theagapepuppets.org/

You can also write to them to ask to receive Linda’s regular email updates as the Agape Puppets ministry travels around the world:

admin@theagapepuppets.org

Note: As you read, you will find that Linda and the team often mention working in Catholic schools, but this is because that is where the children are. The public school system, particularly in rural areas is very, very poor and so if they are able, Hindu parents send their children to these parochial schools to get a level of education that they could never receive otherwise.

Linda Summer’s February 24 Report from India

NOTE: The following is a report that was written across the last three days. By the time you read this, pray and rejoice, we will be on our way to a new city. Keep praying!

DEAREST FRIENDS,

These are amazing days that we are experiencing in Tirupattur. I don’t want you to miss a single bit of all the incredible things that God is doing in this place. Your prayers have enabled us to stand in the darkest place. This city and the surrounding country side are full of idols.

Everywhere we go, people stare at us as we are also the only foreigners in a large city. There are over a 100 schools here and a 100 more in the surrounding countryside. We are constantly reminded that our God has placed us here to be a sweet witness for Him. Since we are always watched, we have more opportunities. People are curious.

As I read Psalm 96 tonight, I was especially drawn to verses 4 and 5. “For great is the Lord and greatly to be praised; He is to be feared above all gods. For all gods of the peoples are worthless idols, but the Lord made the heavens.” Truly, we are seeing the false gods of this place shamed by the power of the one true God.

You will absolutely love what you are about to read. Right across 3 days, we shared in 10 schools and 2 villages. Over 9,000 children, teenagers and adults heard how they could put their trust in Jesus in a Hindu stronghold. God blessed your prayers. Through your faithfulness, God opened doors and called children to faith.

570 BOYS

Our adventure began at a Catholic school where we shared with an all-boy audience. They sat spellbound,  listening to every part of the program. I could hear soft whispers as some boys prayed, calling on Jesus. Afterwards, many boys thanked us for coming. Most were from Hindu families.

THREE BELIEVERS

At a village school, three of the staff loved Jesus. The children were very poor and had never seen a puppet or anything we had with us. They were very sweet children. We had to tell them that nothing we had would hurt them because everything and everyone was strange to them. Since this was a Hindu public school, we were not allowed to pray with the children, but we could explain to them how they could ask Jesus to be their Savior. Don’t you love what God does!

SIVASAKTHI, RAJENDREN, PONNARARSAM, AND VENKATESAM

These are the names of some of the 1,200 boys and girls that we shared with in an afternoon show at a Hindu public school. All of the teachers came and listened as well. Again, we could not pray with them, but we could explain the Gospel message completely to the children. So many children crowded around us to get an autograph or just shake our hands, many kept saying “Thank you, thank you!”. I saw in their eyes that they listened with their hearts.

THE VILLAGE

A street show in a village moved all of us to tears. Everyone came. We set up in front of a Hindu temple with a statue of a false god beside us. Isn’t it fantastic that God opened this door!

Though we were clearly in a Hindu village, everyone was hungry to hear about Jesus Christ. When we finished, no-one wanted to leave. For a very long time they remained, asking us to pray for them. People came with all kinds of needs. You see spiritual problems in developing nations that are less talked about in the West. A lady came to me who was demon-possessed and wanted to be delivered. She had a Hindu temple blessing mark on her forehead and I explained to her that God could remove the demons from her. However, I explained if she did not put her trust in Jesus, she had no protection.

These people are very poor. Three families sacrificially pooled their resources to offer us hospitality. They served us some boiled sweet potatoes, cookies, coffee and soft drinks. They did not eat. We sat in the only chairs on a dirt floor. How can you express enough gratitude to such dear people! Please pray for them.

SO MANY CHILDREN

At a Catholic school, I walked to the back of the crowd while Sam was juggling on the stage. There were so many children that he looked like a little speck. When we finished, the nuns were ecstatic. They said that all of us had such joy! We had many conversations with the nuns and teachers after the program, sharing with them how God had changed our hearts through faith in Jesus. Around 2,000 children and teachers listened to the Gospel. The children were mostly from Hindu families and desperately poor.

Everyone was so happy. They invited us to their convent. They treated us to homemade vegetable soup, sandwiches, special Indian sweets, tiny wreath-shaped cookies and fruit. Again, we had many more opportunities to share.

As we were leaving, two nuns called me Mother Linda and asked me to bless them. I explained that I could not bless anyone, but I offered to stop right then and pray for them. Please pray for these ladies and all the children in the school to understand God’s Word and love Jesus Christ deeply. They begged us to come again.

UNDER THE TREES

God gave us a breeze and trees for the children to sit under. Hundreds of boys prayed with enthusiasm. We shared with Hindu and Muslim children. We all feel rich as we hold in our hearts treasures no-one can take from us!

AN EXTRA SCHOOL

A Catholic Priest saw the program at another school and so another door opened. He gave us the joy of telling 900 children and teachers about Jesus Christ. When we finished, it seemed that he also had been blessed by the program. He thanked us “for travelling all over the world telling children the Good News”. Many children prayed with us at this program and our joys knows no bounds.

BOYS HIGH SCHOOL

Each program demands that we lean on Jesus and trust in His grace. However, sometimes, as when we were at this school and so exhausted, we tasted a sweeter grace. I knew that I had no more physical strength and had already made arrangements for Sam to take the village show in the evening. I knew that the Lord really wanted me to tell this last story to the boys and I knew that all my strength would have to come from Him.

The Father blessed us! We heard boys, aged 12 to 17, calling on Jesus with enthusiasm! Praise God! Afterwards, they rushed forward to thank us. We heard so many sweet comments: “Beautiful!”, “I loved the program”, “Great!”, “Beautiful songs!”. One boy said to me, “You are a very interesting character”. I think the team liked this comment best.

WITHOUT ME

Anna, Silvana and Sam are amazing! The extreme heat and unexpected wisdom on my part dictated that I rest and not go to the village. The place they went is a BJP village. This is the radical Hindu party that so strongly opposes Christians. Still, surrounded by a complex of Hindu temples, they set up the stage and shared the Gospel. I know that Sam told a fantastic story! Everyone paid attention. Please pray for God to reveal Himself to them.

NOTE:

Wednesday, we shared at three more schools that finished our time at this place. These are part of the ten schools mentioned earlier. We will send you the report as soon as we can. Keep praying!

In Jesus,

Linda for
Silvana
Sam
Anna
Livingston

———————————————————–

“THE AGAPE PUPPETS”

Michael Summer, Founder – Linda Summer, Director
Sam Shaw, Assistant Director
6550 West Armuchee Road
Summerville, Georgia  30747

Phone:  706-397-2956   FAX:  413-425-5805

Email:  Linda@TheAgapePuppets.org

WEB:  www.TheAgapePuppets.org

As an introduction to the second survey in this series, I presented a hypothetical situation of an Indian village and a young girl named Ayanna. However, this blog is about a present, real-life situation deep in the Amazon jungle.

Yesterday, my dad forwarded an email update from a missionary that very directly touches on the question, “What about those who haven’t heard?” And because of its timeliness and relevance to the issue, I have decided to post it (below) before addressing this question in light of Romans 10 in the next few days.

Michael Guerink , is a missionary in the Amazon river basin with ABWE. He and his family are giving everything to reach “a large concentration of completely uncontacted Indian tribes and others who have been minimally contacted”  in an area that is “entirely off-limits to outsiders.”

The ABI surveys showed that roughly 25% of the respondents were not persuaded that those who haven’t heard the gospel are certainly lost. If they are correct, this means that there is really no need for the Guerinks or any of the other missionaries to be there, except for humanitarian purposes (which is certainly no small thing itself). In fact, if someone can be saved apart from explicitly trusting in Christ, then these missionaries are doing far more harm than good.

Almost everyone sincerely embraces the religious beliefs of their parents – and by far, most people are relatively good when judged by the norms of their society. However, we also know from the Bible and from experience, that a very small percentage of those who do hear the gospel accept it as true – and even fewer actually receive Christ as Savior. The vast majority of those who hear the gospel, reject it – and virtually everyone except the most liberal among us would suggest that someone can consciously reject Christ and still be saved. So, in very practical terms, if the possibility of salvation exists apart from Christ, then given the percentages, it would be far better to make every effort to make sure that these unreached peoples never hear the gospel.

______________
Michael Guerink’s February Email Update

So, yesterday (Sunday) I stumbled about our hosts’ house at oh dark thirty again, thankfully unmolested by water creatures (see funny story at the end), to read in Proverbs 31:

Raise your voice in favor of those who cannot defend themselves;

Be the defender of all the helpless.

Lift up your voice and judge with justice;

Defend the rights of the poor and the needy.

(my translation from Portuguese)

It just so happened that I was on my way to a meeting to do exactly that. One of the river valleys here in the Amazon is home to a large concentration of completely uncontacted Indian tribes and others who have been minimally contacted, and that river is entirely off limits to outsiders; even anthropologists and researchers have a very hard time getting in there.

The problem is that hundreds of Indians from that river are dying from malaria and hepatitis. Tribes are being absolutely decimated. Five tribes sent representatives out to the border and on Sunday several mission organizations met with them to hear first-hand about the problem (hardly anyone knows about these many deaths – it is kept very quiet). Unfortunately, for whatever reason, (let me word this carefully) government organizations have not succeeded in getting them the health care they need to prevent these deaths.

The tribes know that we mission organizations are ready and willing to go in and help them, and they want to know why we’re not allowed. What was accomplished Sunday was an official invitation from the tribes to us as missionaries and humanitarian aid organizations to enter their territory! This is a huge, very important step!  It does not mean the government will now automatically let us in there, but it’s the first thing that needs to happen towards that goal. This is the best news on that front in a long time.

Raul, the Mayoruna tribe chief who called the meeting, was specifically asking that aviation support be restarted in that area. I told him we’re trying as hard as we can as quickly as funds come in to provide the help needed to keep his people from dying. See his picture attached to this email, and pray for him when you look at it.  He lives 8-9 days away by canoe, a very difficult journey. An airplane would reduce medical emergency evacuation time to a matter of hours.

Raul said in the meeting that he does not know God but he suspects God has forgotten about the Mayoruna and other tribes in that area, and he’s wondering if God thinks enough about them to care for their health in the same way he cares about white people. Wow!!  Doesn’t that just make you want to go in there RIGHT NOW?!  Especially when solutions for water purification to prevent hepatitis are easily obtainable (www.waterfortheworld.com) and lists of doctors are waiting for the chance to be flown in there to help with malaria treatment.  One thing that’s lacking is an airplane and the funds to run it.

As you know we’re ramping up to meet that need and to do it in a much more economical way than is presently available (our current mission airplane costs about US$250 per hour just in fuel, so $1,000 doesn’t even buy us a round trip in to the Mayoruna!). The first step is the ultralight that we just had to send back to the USA ($$$!!) due to customs problems.  It hurt to do it, but I had to tell Raul that it’s realistically still going to be several years before we can get medical flights going in there even if the authorities do give permission soon.

You can help Raul’s Mayoruna tribe, the Matis, Marubo, Korubo and other as yet uncontacted tribes by praying that this crack in the door would widen significantly, that the funding would come in, that bureaucratic red tape and political opposition would be overcome.  This struggle REALLY is not against flesh and blood!  Pray that our adversary would be defeated as we work to defend the rights of the helpless, as we work to meet their physical health needs which as you can see above is a VERY important first step toward being able to enter with spiritual life and health. (emphasis mine)

OK, here’s the funny story I promised – at least it’s funny later: ever get impaled by a fish in your house?

While I’m galavanting with two of the kids in the Upper Amazon teaching seminary to minimally contacted Indian tribe members who aren’t allowed to have the Word of God taught in their villages (the Iron Curtain fell – maybe it’s the Jungle Wall or something like that) and Katrina is covering the home front downriver in Manaus, Ian and Vivi and I are staying at another missionary family’s house literally about a 30yd swim across the creek from Peru.  They have cats.  I know some of you just cringed, but really I don’t usually have a problem with the cats – it’s what they hunt and bring in the house that I have to subsequently dispose of that’s usually the dealbreaker.

The eastern horizon here usually starts to turn from black to gray around 6:15am, so I’ve been stumbling around in the dark substantially before that to be able to get some quality time with the LORD before the rest of life can build too much momentum.

A couple days ago as I was blindly walking my normal track from the bedroom to the coffeepot, a stabbing pain shot into my foot!  I hobbled over to a light switch feeling something dangling and painfully swinging right from the tender, ticklish part. There’s a kind of fish here in the Amazon that has a big spike sticking out either side of its head and another one straight out the top.  And that’s what the cat had dragged in.

As much pain as I was in pulling a fish out of my foot, the fish was still alive, very wriggledy and loudly complaining – yes, some fish here squeal and growl at you.  And all the time the cat was looking on with pride, wondering if I was happy with his special present. So starts another day in the Amazon.

Oh, one more thing – very exciting!  At this meeting with the tribal chiefs from the restricted area I sat next to a very non-Ticuna looking Colombian lady.  It was a huge surprise to hear her ask another lady for water in quite passable Ticuna! I asked in my not-quite-passable Spanish (Portunhol as we call it here) how she learned Ticuna.  Turns out she (Danilba) and her husband Jhon and little 4-year-old Sara-Sofia are Colombian New Tribes missionaries to the Ticuna and are in the middle of language training. I thought we were the only ones! Pray for them!  They don’t have electricity or potable water.  I’d love to get them set up with at least a water purification system run by a solar panel.  That’s about a US$2,000 project.  It would also provide clean water for their entire community (emphasis mine), Guanabara 3, about an hour canoe-ride downriver from where we will be living to learn Ticuna. It will be so nice to have neighbors going through the same things for love of God and the Ticuna!  In about a month we’ll be back in this area; we’ll visit them and let you know how you can help.

Michael

______________

Perhaps some of our readers would be interested in being part of the Guerink’s ministry in meeting the physical and spiritual needs of these unreached people.

And I hope that you will continue to follow this important blog series.

I recently became an adjunct professor for Grace College, teaching part-time in their Associates Degree program in the Wabash Valley Correctional Facility in Carlisle, Indiana. There are currently 17 men studying Old Testament Survey and 22 in Systematic Theology. This is an amazing ministry opportunity for me personally and fits well with the goals of ABI in making the Word of God accessible to this generation of believers and preparing the next for leadership. From time to time I will be blogging about some of my experiences and observations related to my prison ministry.
______________________

Between classes on Monday evening, a young man (Cole), an offender,  came into the room to ask about the possibility of me mentoring him in preparation for the ministry. He said that in 16 years he would like to be doing what I am doing – teaching the Bible at the college level.

I would have guessed him to be in his late twenties and seemed like the nicest guy you would ever meet. He looked sharp (as much as you can in prison garb), was obviously intelligent and could have been a student at any Bible college or seminary. He already has his associates degree through the Grace College program at the prison and is ministering there as much as he can. One of his ministries is teaching Bible Study Methods, using Howard Hendricks’ book in Sunday School.

So, we talked about how it might work out for me to mentor him and in the course of the conversation, he mentioned that he had been in for 14 years – which sort of floored me, given how young he looked. Then I asked him how much longer he has left before he gets out – and then he said that his sentence is for – are you ready for this?  – life + 150 years. I was stunned – and still am.

It hit me hard that given the direction of my life 25 years ago, how easily it would have been for me to have made just a couple of worse choices than I was already making that could have put me in the same situation. I don’t yet know what he did – but I do know that all it takes is being in the wrong place, with the wrong crowd, doing something stupid because you’re drunk – and in a moment you have destroyed your life.

It is only by God’s unfathomable grace that he reached down and caught me before I fell harder and deeper than I had already. There’s no real reason why Cole and I shouldn’t be in a reverse situation.

I don’t know what will happen to Cole, as he did mention “16 years” – so maybe there is still a chance for parole. By then he will probably be 50.

And I don’t know the story of any of the 39 men I have in my two classes. Some of them have already been in so long that they have never seen or heard of some of the technology I’m using in class like the laptop and projector or the PowerPoint and Bible study software. Since this is a both a medium and maximum security facility, it could be that some of them will never leave.

Please pray for Cole, the men in my classes and for me in my ministry to them. Also pray that our ministry in our church and through ABI will make a difference in this generation – to reach people with the gospel and disciple them in the truth of the Word of God – and that somewhere along the way, we will make a difference in a young person’s life to keep them from the kinds of decisions that will ruin their lives.