The downbound train ...

Before getting into the meat of this post, check out this video. Okay, maybe this is just an excuse to post one of my favourite Chuck Berry tunes, but it does relate to my topic today, honest :)

Since I was drawing a blank about what to blog about, I had asked over at our Facebook page for suggestions. One idea that came up, in part due to the brewing controversy surrounding Rob Bell's new book Love Wins, was to write about hell.

Hell isn't one of those topics people really enjoy studying or spending their time thinking about. RC Sproul wrote: "There is no biblical concept more grim or terror-invoking than the idea of hell. It is so unpopular with us that few would give credence to it at all except that it comes from the teaching of Christ himself."

But that last sentence is the key to why we feel this doctrine must not only be understood, but defended. Most of the teaching we have about hell came directly from Jesus during his earthly ministry; as Mark Driscoll points out: "13 percent of his sayings are about hell and judgment; more than half of his parables relate to the eternal judgment of sinners."

Yet, even though this is something Jesus himself stressed, it is something many of us either shy away from, ignore or outright deny. Again, Sproul says: "It is this doctrine, perhaps more than any other, that strains even the Christian's loyalty to the teaching of Christ. Modern Christians have pushed the limits of minimizing hell in an effort to sidestep or soften Jesus' own teaching."

But those who outright object to hell and promote unbiblical alternatives don't have a corner on the market of bad teaching either. In fact, most of us have likely been influenced more by misconceptions in popular culture than by those teaching outright errors in the non-secular realm.

This brings us back to the Chuck Berry song above (I really did have a point in including it!). In the song, the idea of hell is treated as real, but a very common misconception is displayed.

As the train barrels on to its final destination, the man hears the devil say: "Ha ha ... we are nearing home." This illustrates a common misunderstanding about the nature of hell and Satan's role - that he is the guy in charge.

Unfortunately, in the vacuum of real teaching on this subject, many have adopted this understanding. In reality, Satan's "home" is not hell. Hell is not a kingdom he does or will one day reign over. Hell is as much a place of judgement and punishment for Satan and his demons as it is for fallen man; they will be fellow prisoners and God will rule over hell, not the devil (Matt 25:41, Rev 20:10).

So what is hell exactly? Wayne Grudem summarizes it simply this way: "Hell is a place of eternal conscious punishment for the wicked." It is a suffering under God's wrath that will last forever and there will be no reprieve for those who end up there.

What will it be like? Well, many pictures are used to describe hell including fire, darkness, restlessness and the weeping & gnashing of teeth. While these are all symbols, no solace can be found in this fact. Symbols are used to point to something larger than themselves, something bigger which cannot be explained without the aid of such metaphoric language. As Sproul points out: "It is probable that a sinner in hell would prefer a literal lake of fire as his eternal abode to the reality of hell represented in the lake of fire images."

I feel like I've barely scratched the surface but the short of it is hell is real. People you and I know will go there. It will be worse than anything you can imagine and it will last forever. This should break your heart; it should be your motivation.

Ultimately this is why we do what we do.

The importance of truth

Unlike Adam Savage's quotable saying, we can't simply reject reality and substitute our own. Truth is what is real regardless of whether we like it, agree with it, or even understand it; it simply is.

If I don't believe gravity is true and I jump out of an airplane at a height of 4,000 metres without a parachute I will quickly find out my belief is irrelevant.

Truth is important; understanding what is true guides our actions because to do otherwise would be asking for trouble. Like the parachute situation, knowing the truth helps us determine appropriate actions.

Now, most people don't have any problem with the idea that truth is important with regards to physical and material things. It's when we transition to the spiritual or immaterial things that people have a sudden change of heart. For many a mental-shift occurs and truth is no longer something which is important and, if it exists, it has no bearing on the decisions one must make in life.

If they are walking on a railroad track and they are warned that a train is barrelling down on their position, they will take that warning to heart and move to safety. But if they are told that a man who claimed to be God (and backed up his words) said most of us are on a path leading to destruction (Mat 7:13), the same person will often ignore or laugh off such a warning.

But is it this a correct way of thinking? We'd argue it's not; truth exists whether we are talking about the material or immaterial and in both cases it has a very real bearing on the way we live.

Do you want to explore the nature and implications of truth?

Join us at Faith Beyond Belief for our 2-day seminar Building a Faith Beyond Belief: Does Truth Matter? January 22 and 29 from 10 am to 2 pm.

This seminar will include teaching, role-playing and discussion time. This is a free seminar and it is open to all who want to come; we hope to see you there.

Discussing extraordinary claims

It looks like we will be seeing some new bus ads in the coming year sporting the phrase popularized by Carl Sagan: extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

Overall, I like the direction these new ads are going in. While I think there are some issues with the argument it is presenting, I think it is a much better campaign than the last one¹.

Regarding these proposed ads, I think they will provide us with an excellent opportunity to open up the discussion about the evidence for God and, most importantly, the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus.

From my initial reading, it looks like there are 2 main claims (or at least inferences) that this campaign will make:

1. To support a historical claim which involves the supernatural (like Jesus' resurrection) you require a higher standard of evidence than a "regular" historical event (like the assassination of Julius Caesar).
2. There is as much (or, rather, as little) evidence for the claims of Christianity as there are for Bigfoot.

Based on this, I see good discussions to be had and sound arguments to put forth.

First, we can discuss what evidence would be necessary for someone to accept that the resurrection did occur (and I do favour focusing on the resurrection). This is an important discussion to have because for many it will reveal that no evidence would be sufficient for them to accept this claim. In the end, it can help highlight when the issue really has nothing to do with evidence, but rather it's something either more personal or foundational.

Secondly, it provides us the opportunity to discuss the evidence that does exist; that there is strong and compelling evidence which leads us to believe that the resurrection of Jesus was a real, historic event. We can show people why many intelligent, rational men and women have and do believe this extraordinary claim is true based on the evidence we have and why they make claims like this:

According to the laws of legal evidence used in courts of law, there is more evidence for the historical fact of the resurrection of Jesus Christ than for just about any other event in history. - Simon Greenleaf

I look forward to seeing what happens when this campaign comes to our city.

1. As a side note, I found the slogan There's probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life. was a bit silly since Jesus' message to us was that we need not worry (Mat 6:34) and most of us are living pretty joyful lives (Gal 5:22-23) ... not perfect, or painless (John 16:33), but joyful none the less.

God of second chances?

The phrase "God of second chances" is one that I've been thinking a bit about lately. Is this really an accurate way to describe our God?

After all, accurately explaining God to others is very important. This is our job, bringing the Gospel to others; introducing people to God and what he has done for us. Even if one ultimately rejects God, we've done our job if they have an accurate understanding of God and his works. It's when people reject a misrepresentation or caricature of God that we really fail.

This is what I wonder about with the term God of second chances; can it paint an incorrect picture of God?

A second chance is something you get when you fail at something but are then given the opportunity to succeed by trying again.

But is this really what God gives us?

Are we like the pardoned prisoner given another chance to be a good citizen and follow the laws from here on out?

In one way this is accurate, we are forgiven of all we've done like the pardoned man. But I think this is where the idea of a second chance breaks down.

We aren't simply forgiven of past sins; we are forgiven of all sins past, present and future. Regarding our standing with God, we are supernaturally given the righteousness of Jesus so that when God the Father views us, he sees Jesus' sinless life, not our sin-stained deeds. This is the great exchange that occurred at the cross.

If all God gave us was a second chance, we'd still be in a hopeless state. We'd as certainly fail the second time as the first; none of us can live lives which are completely righteous and honouring to God. We cannot live sinlessly, even if given the chance to start again.

For that, I am glad we don't simply get a second chance; we are given so much more.

This doesn't mean that this phrase is necessarily wrong, but maybe it's one we need to be careful with; ensuring we aren't leaving people with the impression that God is just giving them another shot at earning their way to heaven.

Survey results from Dr. Evans' UofC talk

We've compiled the results of the surveys we handed out at Dr. Evans' talk at the UofC; the topic of this talk was "Is the Bible Reliable History?"

Some highlights include:

• 10.3% of respondents left with an increased confidence that the Bible is reliable history; no one reported a decrease in confidence
• Respondents rated Dr. Evans' speaking ability an average 8.8 out of 10
• 93.1% of respondents said they would recommend this series of talks

These results are based on a total of 58 completed surveys. You can view the full summary of the results in PDF format here.