Where Does Evil Get Its Power to Do Evil Things?

The Bible says that all power is given by God. How can we explain then the power that Satan and men such as Hitler have had in the past?

God is saying not only that he is omnipotent, all-powerful in and of himself but also that he is the fountainhead of all power and all authority in this world. And so the devil himself is subordinate and dependent upon God for any power or authority that he exercises in this world.

The question you're raising is not unlike the question the prophet Habakkuk asked when he stood in his watchtower and complained against God because he was watching a foreign nation, known for its unspeakable wickedness, attacking and slaughtering the Jewish people—God's own people. Habakkuk reminded God that God was too pure to even behold iniquity. How could God allow this alien power, this wicked power, to be used in such a fashion? God basically said, "Wait a minute, I have not used this enemy nation as an instrument to punish Israel because Israel is more wicked than this other nation. I'm just making use of this nation to chastise my own people who so richly deserve it. But this other nation will get theirs." That's why we have to be very careful about saying that God is always on our side. He may raise up China to punish the United States as an instrument of judgment against us—because all power is in his hands.

When I was studying in Europe back in the sixties, even though it was twenty years after the end of World War II, the bookstores in Amsterdam were filled with literature about the Second World War. The memories were still very vivid and keen to these people, who suffered so much more than we in this country suffered at that time. I remember reading a book that was a result of the release of earlier classified documents from the archives that was titled Hitler, the Scourge of Europe, in which private documents of Hitler's were photocopied and printed. One was an early entry from his diary, in which was scribbled in Hitler's own writing: "This evening I have made a covenant with Satan." He wasn't just kidding. There was a serious effort by Adolf Hitler to engage the assistance of the prince of darkness in the programs he set forth. Obviously that was all happening under the sovereignty of God. God has his reasons for allowing that to happen for a season, but obviously he reserves that moment when his powerful judgment falls on Satan and on people like Hitler, and God's righteous power is ultimately vindicated.

~ from:
Now - That's a Good Question!
by R.C. Sproul

God Forgives Us, But How Do We Forgive Ourselves?

Frequently in his epistles, the apostle Paul goes to great lengths to describe what we call Christian liberty. In these matters God allows us freedom; he doesn't set down laws prohibiting something or commanding something. The apostle warns us against being judgmental toward our brothers, giving as an example in the Corinthian community the question about eating meat offered to idols. Paul says this has nothing to do with the kingdom of God. He says, "Those of you who have scruples about it, don't judge those who don't" and vice versa. This is a case in which we just have to respect one another.

In those admonitions, Paul uses as his basis this statement: "We are not to be judging people for whom Christ died." He reminds us that "your brother or your sister belongs to Christ. God has forgiven them. Who are you to withhold forgiveness from someone whom God has forgiven?"

Let's look at it this way. If somebody sins against me and that person repents, God forgives them. If I refuse to forgive them, can you think how ghastly that is in the sight of God? God is not obligated to forgive that person. That person has sinned against God, and God has never sinned against anybody. Here I am—a person who is a sinner refusing to forgive other sinners while God, who is sinless, is willing to forgive. Have you ever stopped to think about the arrogance that's in me when I refuse to forgive somebody that God has forgiven?

Now, how could you forgive yourself after God has forgiven you? I've had people come to me and say, "R.C., I committed such and such a sin, and I asked God to forgive me. I've gone to him ten times and asked him to forgive me, but I still don't feel forgiven. What am I going to do?" I don't have any brilliant theological answer to that. I can only tell them to ask God to forgive them one more time. When they say they've done it, I tell them this time I want them to ask God to forgive them for their arrogance. "Arrogance!?" they say. "What do you mean arrogance? I'm the most humble man in America. I've confessed this sin ten times." Doesn't God say that if you confess a sin one time, he'll forgive you? Who are you to refuse the forgiveness of God, and who are you to condemn one whom God has forgiven? That's arrogance. You may not feel arrogant, you may not mean to be arrogant, you may be rolling in humility with all of your confession. But I am telling you that if God has forgiven you, it is your duty to forgive yourself. It's not an option. You must forgive those whom God forgives, including yourself.

~ Excerpted from Now - That's a Good Question! by R.C. Sproul

Does grace give us a free ride to salvation?

We can look at the concept "free ride" in many ways. Grace by definition is something that is free in the sense that we can't earn it, we can't buy it, we can't deserve it, and there's no merit in us by which God bestows his mercy upon us. Anytime God dispenses mercy or unmerited favor, which is how we define grace, he's doing something that he has no obligation to do. I'm convinced that when we receive the grace of salvation, our eternal destiny is secure. I'm convinced that once we are clothed with the righteousness of Christ and have his merit imputed to our account by God (which is an act of God's grace) and we are redeemed, then I believe we are virtually guaranteed eternal life. In other words, I don't think that a Christian can lose his salvation. I say this because I'm persuaded that God has promised he will keep us to the end. If it were up to us to persevere, to hang on, and to be faithful and obedient to the end in order to be saved, I don't think any one of us would persevere enough to merit salvation. But God promises to finish what he has begun.

Does that mean it's a free ride? So often the concept of free ride means that since God has given me grace and since God has started this work and he promises to finish it, there's nothing left for me to do. I can do whatever I want. I'm saved and I don't have to worry about a thing. It's free from here on in, I'm on a roller coaster without any brakes, and I can do whatever I want. I can sin as I please and enjoy it the rest of my life. It's a license to sin.

However, the apostle Paul points out that where sin abounds, grace abounds much more. That is to say, the more I sin the more I see the grace of God because more grace is necessary for me to get into heaven.

Some people say that if the more you sin the more grace you get, the best thing to do is to keep sinning and that way you'll get more grace. Paul asks the question "Should we continue in sin that grace may abound?" How does he answer it? He says, "God forbid." Sinning all the more is a totally opposite response to one that is pleasing to God. As a matter of fact, the more grace we receive, the more we are to be moved toward a sense of gratitude; the more gratitude we experience, the more we should be moved to the pursuit of righteousness through obedience to the law of God. As Paul says elsewhere, "We're to work out our salvation with fear and trembling" because God promises to work within us to will and to do what is right. But along with God's grace comes the challenge for us to fight with all of our might to resist the temptations of sin and to pursue a life of righteousness and obedience. My salvation doesn't depend on my obedience, but my obedience is to be a response to that grace of God.

from:
Now - That's a Good Question!
by R.C. Sproul

I'm Asked This One a Lot

How does the Old Testament apply to Christians today?

One of the great weaknesses of today's church is a tendency to denigrate and neglect the Old Testament. It's a much more sizable piece of literature than the New Testament, and it covers an enormous period of history, the history of redemption from the creation of the world until the appearance of the Messiah. All of that is a revelation of God's activity on this planet, and I believe it was inspired by the Holy Spirit and given to the church for the church's instruction and for the church's edification.

I also think that one of the great problems in today's church is an abysmal ignorance of God the Father. We relate to Jesus. He's our Redeemer. He's God in the flesh, so we have a way in which we can understand Jesus. It is more difficult when we look at God the Father and also the Holy Spirit.

The history of the Old Testament certainly calls forth something of the Messiah who is to come, but it is constantly revealing the character of God the Father, the one who sends Jesus into this world, the one whom Jesus calls Father, the one from whom Jesus says he has been sent, that person to whom we are being reconciled and redeemed. So how can we possibly justify neglecting such an enormous body of literature that communicates to us the character, nature, and will of our Creator and the one who has sent our Redeemer to this planet?

Saint Augustine is the one who said that the New Testament is concealed in the Old Testament and the Old Testament is revealed by the New Testament. In fact, about three-fourths of the material of the New Testament is either a quotation from or allusion to what went before it. I don't think we can really understand the New Testament until we have made a very serious study of the Old Testament.

Obviously there are things in the Old Testament that do not apply to the Christian in our day. For example, we are not to continue the ceremonies that were required of the Jewish people; those ceremonies were "types" that anticipated the once-for-all fulfillment of them in the work of Christ. So for us to offer animals as sacrifices would be an insult to the completion of Jesus' work on the cross.

That doesn't mean that since that part of the Old Testament is fulfilled we are to neglect it altogether. The Old Testament is a treasure-house of knowledge for the Christian who will seek to investigate it.

~ Now - That's a Good Question!
by R.C. Sproul

How Do We Know the Bible is True?

How do you know the Bible is true?

That's an excellent question because so much is at stake in the Christian faith in terms of the truthfulness of Scripture. The Bible is our primary source of information about Jesus and about all of those things we embrace as elements of our faith. Of course, if the Bible isn't true, then professing Christians are in serious trouble. I believe the Bible is true. I believe it is the Word of God. As Jesus himself declared of the Scripture, "Your word is truth." But why am I persuaded that the Bible is the truth?

We need to ask a broader question first. How do we know that anything is true? We're asking a technical question in epistemology. How do we test claims of truth? There is a certain kind of truth that we test through observation, experimentation, eyewitness, examination, and scientific evidence. As far as the history of Jesus is concerned, as far as we know any history, we want to check the stories of Scripture using those means by which historical evidence can be tested—through archaeology, for example. There are certain elements of the Scripture, such as historical claims, that are to be measured by the common standards of historiography. I invite people to do that—to check it out.

Second, we want to test the claims of truth through the test of rationality. Is it logically consistent, or does it speak with a "forked tongue"? We examine the content of Scripture to see if it is coherent. That's another test of truth. One of the most astonishing things, of course, is that the Bible has literally thousands of testable historical prophecies, cases in which events were clearly foretold, and both the foretelling and the fulfillment are a matter of historical record. The very dimension of the sheer fulfillment of prophecy of the Old Testament Scriptures should be enough to convince anyone that we are dealing with a supernatural piece of literature.

Of course, some theologians have said that with all of the evidence there is that Scripture is true, we can truly embrace it only with the Holy Spirit working in us to overcome our biases and prejudices against Scripture, against God. In theology, this is called the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit. I want to stress at this point that when the Holy Spirit helps me to see the truth of Scripture and to embrace the truth of Scripture, it's not because the Holy Spirit is giving me some special insight that he doesn't give to somebody else or is giving me special information that nobody else can have. All the Holy Spirit does is change my heart, change my disposition toward the evidence that is already there. I think that God himself has planted within the Scriptures an internal consistency that bears witness that this is his Word.

~ Now - That's a Good Question!
by R.C. Sproul

One important point mentioned in the second paragraph (above) is that, of all the so-called "holy" books accompanying various religions, the Bible is the only one containing prophecies. Of those prophecies, approximately 2500 appear in the pages of the Bible, some 2000 of which already have been fulfilled to the letter—no errors. The remaining 500 or so reach into the future and may be seen unfolding as days go by.

May God bless you for reading this, and may He reveal the truth of His Word to each of you.

Paul

Does The Holy Spirit

ever lead in a way that's contrary to biblically revealed ethics?

No, of course not. The Holy Spirit couldn't possibly lead somebody to disobey the Holy Spirit's teaching. That would be God acting against himself. I would think it would be elementary and manifestly obvious to every Christian that God the Holy Spirit will not give you as an individual a leading to act in defiance of the written Word of God.

I speak so strongly about this precisely because I run into people all the time who tell me that God has given them an inclination or a private leading that excuses them from the moral obligations God has set forth. I've had people tell me that they prayed about committing adultery and that God the Holy Spirit gave them peace about it. How much lower can you go? That's not blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, but that certainly grieves the Holy Spirit. It also comes perilously close to blasphemy against the Holy Spirit to not only refuse to repent of sin but to attribute the motivation and the license for it to God himself. This is the propensity we have, to call good evil and evil good.

I've seen otherwise devout and earnest Christians talk in this manner. I've had biblical scholars look me straight in the eye and tell me that the Holy Spirit gave them permission to do something that God clearly prohibits in his Word. This is one of the reasons the Scriptures tell us to test the spirits to see if they are from God. How do we test a spirit? How do I know if I have the leading of the Holy Spirit? That can be a very whimsical and subjective type of thing. I do believe that God the Spirit inclines our hearts in certain directions and will help to lead us in the living of this life, but we have to be very careful lest we confuse the leading of the Spirit with indigestion or, what's worse, the leading of the anti-Spirit, the leading of the enemy himself, who would seek to lead us astray. Remember that Satan disguises himself as an angel of light.

If you believe that the Scriptures come through the inspiration of God the Holy Spirit and that he is the Spirit of truth and it is that truth that is embodied in the sacred Scripture, then the easiest way to test any private inclination or group leaning that you get from other people is with the written Word of God. I'm confident that there we have the leading of the Spirit. There the Spirit is inspired. The Spirit of truth has set forth for us in the propositions of Scripture what is pleasing to God and in keeping with his perfect will. I can't conceive of God the Spirit telling me to disobey what God has spoken.

~ Now - That's a Good Question! by R.C. Sproul

"The Father Is Greater Than I"

In the Gospel of John, Jesus says, "The Father is greater than I." What does he mean by that?

Sometimes when Jesus makes straightforward statements that appear to mean one thing on the surface, they require that we go a bit beneath the surface to resolve the apparent difficulty. In this case, that kind of extra labor is not required. Jesus meant exactly what he said: "The Father is greater than I." That's somewhat distressing for Christians because we have this sacred doctrine of the Trinity that describes the unity of the three persons of the Trinity—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Here the Son of God is saying that the Father is greater than he is. This is one of the reasons the church has always confessed a doctrine called the subordination of Christ. Notice that it's not called the inferiority of Christ. I stress that because in our culture some people conclude that subordination necessarily implies inferiority.

The reason Christian theology contains a doctrine about the subordination of Christ is that even though the second person of the Trinity is coessential with the Father (he's of the same essence, "very God of very God," eternal in his being) there is a distinction among the persons of the Godhead. In the economy of redemption and even of creation, we see certain works attributed to the Father, others to the Son, and others to the Holy Spirit.

The traditional view is that the Son is begotten of the Father—not created, but eternally begotten. The Father is not begotten of the Son. The Son is sent into the world by the Father; the Son does not send the Father. Jesus said, "I do nothing on My own authority, only that which the Father tells me to do." His meat and his drink were to do the will of the Father. He was commissioned by the Father to come into the world for the work of redemption. In that plan of redemption in the Godhead itself, one sends the other, and the one who sends is said to be greater than the one who is sent in terms of the economic distinctions and the structure by which the Godhead works.

By the same token, the church historically, except for the filioque dissenters, has stated that, as the Father sends the Son, so the Holy Spirit is sent by both the Father and the Son. As the Son is subordinate to the Father in the work of redemption, so the Spirit is subordinate to both the Father and the Son. But again, that does not mean an inequality of being or dignity or divine attributes. The second person of the Trinity is fully God; the third person of the Trinity is fully God. In that work of redemption we see the expression of superordination and subordination.

~ From Now - That's a Good Question! by R.C. Sproul

Does God Still Bring Judgment Against Nations?

In the Old Testament, God brought judgment against Israel and other nations through catastrophic events. Does this still happen?

Is God still God? Is God still the Lord of history? The difference is this: When God used a catastrophe as an arm of judgment in the Old Testament, we know that his judgment was behind the catastrophic event because we have the benefit of the written revelation telling us that this was God's hand in history. As we live out our lives and see nations suffer catastrophes and calamity strike people, we don't know exactly what the relationship is between those catastrophes and the judgment of God.

Let me construct a biblical parallel here. In the ninth chapter of John's Gospel, the Pharisees raised this question about a man born blind: Was this man born blind because he was a sinner or because his parents were sinners? Jesus' answer: It was neither one of them. He was born blind for another reason altogether. It wasn't done as a matter of course, as an expression of divine judgment. That text and the whole book of Job should restrain us in the case of individuals from ever assuming that a person's tragedy or catastrophe or calamity is a direct act of divine judgment. Now, it may be. We see countless cases in Holy Scripture where God does, in fact, bring calamity upon the house of a person who has been flagrant in disobedience toward God. The Bible is saying that if we are guilty, God may withhold judgment until later, or we may receive temporal judgment in this world right now at his hands. We never know for sure whether the calamity we experience as individuals is a direct act of judgment or not. What is true of individuals is also true of nations.

I remember hearing Billy Graham say in a sermon a few years ago, "If God does not bring judgment upon the United States of America, he's going to have to apologize to Sodom and Gomorrah." Remember, Jesus warned the cities that heard his message, Chorazin and Bethsaida, that the Day of Judgment would be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah than it would be for them. While we no longer have prophetic interpretation of God's reasoning for bringing judgment, we do know that no nation is ever exempt from the judgment of God.

~from:
Now - That's a Good Question!
by R.C. Sproul

Why Does God Let Bad Things Happen?

Since we believe that God is the author of this planet and is sovereign over it, it's inevitable that we ask where he is when these terrible things take place.

I think the Bible answers that over and over again from different angles and in different ways. We find our first answer, of course, in the book of Genesis, in which we're told of the fall of humanity. God's immediate response to the transgression of the human race against his rule and authority was to curse the earth and human life. Death and suffering entered the world as a direct result of sin. We see the concrete manifestation of this in the realm of nature, where thorns become part of the garden and human life is now characterized by the sweat of the brow and the pain that attends even the birth of a baby. This illustrates the fact that the world in which we live is a place that is full of sorrows and tragedy.

But we must never conclude that there's a one-to-one correlation in this life between suffering and the guilt of the people on whom tragedies fall. If there were no sin in the world, there would be no suffering. There would be no fatal accidents, no random shootings. Because sin is present in the world, suffering is present in the world, but it doesn't always work out that if you have five pounds of guilt, you're going to get five pounds of suffering. That's the perception that the book of Job labors to dispel, as does Jesus' answer to the question about the man born blind (John 9:1-11).

On the other hand, the Bible makes it clear that God lets these things happen and in a certain sense ordains that they come to pass as part of the present situation that is under judgment. He has not removed death from this world. Whether it's what we would consider an untimely death or a violent death, death is part of the nature of things. The only promise is that there will come a day when suffering will cease altogether.

The disciples asked Jesus about similar instances—for example, the Galileans' blood that was mingled with the sacrifices by Pilate or the eighteen people who were killed when a temple collapsed. The disciples asked how this could be. Jesus' response was almost severe. He said, "Unless you repent, you will all likewise perish," again bringing the question back to the fact that moral wickedness makes it feasible for God to allow these kinds of dreadful things to take place in a fallen world.

~ RC Sproul, Now - That's a Good Question!

What Does It Mean to "Fear God"?

Throughout the Bible we are told to fear God. What does that mean? Can you give an example?

We need to make some important distinctions about the biblical meaning of "fearing" God. These distinctions can be helpful, but they can also be a little dangerous.

When Luther struggled with that, he made this distinction, which has since become somewhat famous: He distinguished between what he called a servile fear and a filial fear. The servile fear is a kind of fear that a prisoner in a torture chamber has for his tormentor, the jailer, or the executioner.

It's that kind of dreadful anxiety in which someone is frightened by the clear and present danger that is represented by another person. Or it's the kind of fear that a slave would have at the hands of a malicious master who would come with the whip and torment the slave. Servile refers to a posture of servitude toward a malevolent owner.

Luther distinguished between that and what he called filial fear, drawing from the Latin concept from which we get the idea of family. It refers to the fear that a child has for his father. In this regard, Luther is thinking of a child who has tremendous respect and love for his father or mother and who dearly wants to please them. He has a fear or an anxiety of offending the one he loves, not because he's afraid of torture or even of punishment, but rather because he's afraid of displeasing the one who is, in that child's world, the source of security and love.

I think this distinction is helpful because the basic meaning of fearing the Lord that we read about in Deuteronomy is also in the Wisdom Literature, where we're told that "the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom." The focus here is on a sense of awe and respect for the majesty of God. That's often lacking in contemporary evangelical Christianity. We get very flippant and cavalier with God, as if we had a casual relationship with the Father. We are invited to call him Abba, Father, and to have the personal intimacy promised to us, but still we're not to be flippant with God. We're always to maintain a healthy respect and adoration for him.

One last point: If we really have a healthy adoration for God, we still should have an element of the knowledge that God can be frightening. "It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God" (Heb. 10:31). As sinful people, we have every reason to fear God's judgment; it is part of our motivation to be reconciled with God.

~ RC Sproul, Now - That's a Good Question!

Why is The Christian God Different?

Perhaps the most unique characteristic of the Christian God is that He exists. The other ones don't. Of course, that is a matter of profound debate, as we all know.

I would say the chief and most critical differences have to do, ultimately, with the Christian God's character of holiness. You're going to get an argument on this from other people who will say that their gods are holy, too. What is unique about Christianity among all the world religions is its central doctrine of a once-for-all atonement that is offered to people to grant them salvation. Old Testament Judaism had a provision for the atonement of sin, but most religions have no provision for an atonement, basically because they do not consider it to be a prerequisite for redemption.

My question is, Why would a world religion not consider an atonement necessary for redemption unless, in their view, God is less than holy? If God is perfectly just and people are not perfectly just, yet those people are trying to be in a vital relationship with God, you have a basic, overwhelming problem. How would a God who is holy and just accept in his presence unjust creatures? That's what Judaism and Christianity understand as the vital problem. Human beings who are unjust must be justified somehow to enter the presence of a holy God. That's why the whole focus of Judeo-Christianity is at the point of atonement, which brings about reconciliation.

But if you don't believe that God is all that holy, there's no need for any concept of reconciliation. We can live however we want because this kind of god is a cosmic bellhop who will overlook all of our sins and do whatever we want him to do for us. I would say the holiness of God is the vital difference

~ R.C. Sproul, Now - That's a Good Question!

Charles Haddon Spurgeon, a British preacher and evangelist of the 19th century, once said, "Sooner could a fish live in a tree, than a sinner in the presence of a holy God."  Most world religions propose a standard of living - a code of conduct if you will - whereby one can be acceptable to their god.

But your Christian Bible says, "All have sinned, and come short of the glory of God." (Romans 3:23) And Jesus Himself said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." (John 14:6).

So ... the difference? Jesus said that we cannot make ourselves acceptable to God, except by believing in Him - and that He would give us the ability to live a Christian life here on earth and spend eternity with Him and His Father in Heaven.

Do we fail? Certainly, and all the time. But does our God forgive us? If we've accepted Jesus as our savior, then the answer is a resounding, "Yes!" 

Why Do Christians Call God "Our Father"?

What does it mean for us to call God our Father?

One of the most well-known statements of the Christian faith is the Lord's Prayer, which begins with the words "Our Father which art in heaven." This is part of the universal treasury of Christendom. When I hear Christians in a private gathering praying individually, almost every single person begins their prayer by addressing God as Father. There's nothing more common among us than to address God as our Father. So central is this to our Christian experience that in the nineteenth century, there were some who said the basic essence of the whole Christian religion can be reduced to two points: the universal brotherhood of man and the universal fatherhood of God. In that context I am afraid we have missed one of the most radical teachings of Jesus.

A few years ago, a German scholar was doing research in New Testament literature and discovered that in the entire history of Judaism—in all existing books of the Old Testament and all existing books of extrabiblical Jewish writings dating from the beginning of Judaism until the tenth century A.D. in Italy—there is not a single reference of a Jewish person addressing God directly in the first person as Father. There were appropriate forms of address that were used by Jewish people in the Old Testament, and the children were trained to address God in proper phrases of respect. All these titles were memorized, and the term Father was not among them.

The first Jewish rabbi to call God "Father" directly was Jesus of Nazareth. It was a radical departure from tradition, and in fact, in every recorded prayer we have from the lips of Jesus save one, he calls God "Father." It was for that reason that many of Jesus' enemies sought to destroy him; he assumed to have this intimate, personal relationship with the sovereign God of heaven and the creator of all things, and he dared to speak in such intimate terms with God. What's even more radical is that Jesus says to his people, "When you pray, you say, 'Our Father.'" He has given to us the right and privilege to come into the presence of the majesty of God and address him as Father because indeed he is our Father. He has adopted us into his family and made us coheirs with his only begotten Son (Rom. 8:17).

~ RC Sproul, from Now, That's a Good Question!

What is our responsibility toward the poor?

If you do a word study of poor as it appears in Scripture, you will find that four categories emerge.
The first group consists of people who are poor as a direct result of indolence; that is, these people are poor because they are irresponsible. They are lazy. They refuse to work. The response of God to that particular category of the poor is one of somewhat harsh judgment and admonition. "Consider the ant, thou sluggard." Go watch the ant and learn how to live. Paul takes a strong view in the New Testament: "If anyone will not work, neither shall he eat" (2 Thess. 3:10). So the basic posture toward that group of people is one of admonition and a call to repentance.

Sometimes, however, people will oversimplify it and say that the only reason people are poor is because they are lazy. That's just not true. There are a lot of people who are poor for reasons that have nothing to do with being sinful or lazy. So we come to the second group of the poor identified in Scripture, those who are poor as a direct result of calamity, disease, accident, and that sort of thing. Scripture tells us that it is the responsibility of the church and of Christian people to pour out their hearts in compassion and to give assistance to those who are suffering through no fault of their own, as a result of natural calamity.

The third group is comprised of those who are poor as a result of unfair exploitation or tyrannization by the powerful, those who are victims of corrupt governments or are the almost incidental casualties of war. In that situation, you see God thundering from heaven, calling for justice to be given to these people, and God pours out his indignation against those who would sell the poor for a pair of shoes and who would tyrannize them through illegitimate means. In that sense, we should be advocates of the poor and defenders of the poor.

The fourth and final group of the poor that we find in the Bible are those who are poor voluntarily; that is, they are poor for what the Bible calls "righteousness' sake," willingly sacrificing any worldly gain as a personal commitment on their part to devote their time to other matters. Those people are to receive our support and our approval.

~ R.C. Sproul, Now - That's a Good Question!

Is the Christian Faith Really Rational?

By all means! It is intensely rational. Now, I've had the question asked of me, "Is it true that you are a Christian rationalist?" I said, "By no means! That's a contradiction in terms. A rationalist is somebody who embraces a philosophy that sets itself over and against Christianity." And so, while a true Christian is not a rationalist, the Christian faith is certainly rational.

Is Christianity coherent? Is it intelligible? Does it makes sense? Does it fit together in a consistent pattern of truth, or is it the opposite of rational—is it irrational? Does it indulge in superstition and embrace Christians who believe that Christianity is manifestly irrational? I think that's a great tragedy. The God of Christianity addresses people's minds. He speaks to us. We have a Book that is written for our understanding.

When I say that Christianity is rational, I do not mean that the truth of Christianity in all of its majesty can be deduced from a few logical principles by a speculative philosopher. There is much information about the nature of God that we can find only because God himself chooses to reveal it to us. He reveals these things through his prophets, through history, through the Bible, and through his only begotten Son, Jesus.

But what he reveals is intelligible; we can understand it with our intellect. He doesn't ask us to throw away our minds in order to become Christians. There are people who think that to become a Christian, one must leave one's brain somewhere in the parking lot. The only leap that the New Testament calls us to make is not into the darkness but out of the darkness into the light, into that which we can indeed understand. That is not to say that everything the Christian faith speaks of is manifestly clear with respect to rational categories. I can't understand, for example, how a person can have a divine nature and a human nature at the same time, which is what we believe about Jesus. That's a mystery—but mysterious is not the same as irrational.

Mystery doesn't apply only to religion. I don't understand the ultimate force of gravity. These things are mysterious to us, but they're not irrational. It's one thing to say, "I don't understand from my finite mind how these things work out," and it's another thing to say, "They're blatantly contradictory and irrational, but I'm going to believe them anyway." That's not what Christianity does. Christianity says that there are mysteries, but those mysteries cannot be articulated in terms of the irrational; if that were so, then we have moved away from Christian truth.

~ RC Sproul, Now That's a Good Question!

If the Holy Spirit lives in us, why can't we live perfect lives?

Let me suggest to you that we can live perfect lives. Now that may sound like the most outrageous thing you have ever heard, because one of the few things you'll get both Christian and non-Christian to agree on is that nobody is perfect!

What the New Testament teaches, as I understand it, is that once the Holy Spirit comes into my life, once I'm indwelt by the Holy Spirit, I have living within me the power to obey God. The Holy Spirit gives me the power to obey the commandments of God, and the New Testament says there is no temptation that has ever befallen me that isn't common to every person, and with the temptation God always provides a way of escape. I don't think anybody does, in fact, live a perfect life. But I think that God's grace makes perfection a possibility.

I would say that I have opportunities to sin literally thousands of times a day. Every time I'm confronted with an opportunity to sin, there is a battle within my soul. The indwelling Holy Spirit is inclining me toward righteousness and obedience. But remember that the Holy Spirit is living in me, in R. C. Sproul; he's indwelling an imperfect creature, one who has not been totally cleansed of evil inclinations. So given the manifold opportunities to sin that I have and knowing that there's warfare with every one of those opportunities between what the Bible calls my flesh and the Spirit, statistically it's virtually inevitable that I'm going to sin and be far less than perfect. If we look at them one at a time, we realize that in each single circumstance the power has actually been provided by God to resist that temptation. That's why I can never stand before God and say, "God, you will have to excuse me; the devil made me do it" or, "The Holy Spirit was not powerful enough within me to have resisted that sin." So even though I believe that not even the apostle Paul ever achieved perfection in his life, it's not because of any lack of power or ability or inclination of the indwelling Spirit.

~ RC Sproul, Now - That's a Good Question!

Is there a distinction between Christianity and religion?

In the first chapter of Romans, the wrath of God is revealed against distortions of God that culminate in various religious practices called idolatry. God is by no means always pleased with the operations and functions that we call religion. I would say that Christianity first and foremost is not a religion, even though we use that term to describe it from a sociological perspective.

The term religion describes human practices—practices of worship, of cultic involvement, of belief in a god, and of obeying certain rules that come from the god or gods. There are various kinds of religions in this world.

There is a religious aspect to Christianity. We do worship, and we are involved in certain human activities, such as prayer and Bible studies and devotions. Our religious practices are similar to the practices of other religions. But Christianity is much more than a religion; it's life.

The very fact that a person is religious does not necessarily mean that he is pleasing God; the primordial sin of man is idolatry, and idolatry is the worship of something that, in fact, is not God. The worship of idols involves the practice of religion. This is exactly what Romans 1:18-32 is speaking about; God is not pleased by any and all types of religious activity.

Our religious activity may at times be insulting to God. Christianity itself can degenerate into being merely a religion; that is, it can have the external formal activities and sociological practices without the substance that motivates all these things—a profound love and devotion to God himself and a profound trust in Christ's work.

~ RC Sproul, Now That's a Good Question!

I Know God Has Forgiven Me For My Sins, But ...

how can I begin to forgive myself?

Frequently in his epistles, the apostle Paul goes to great lengths to describe what we call Christian liberty. In these matters God allows us freedom; he doesn't set down laws prohibiting something or commanding something. The apostle warns us against being judgmental toward our brothers, giving as an example in the Corinthian community the question about eating meat offered to idols. Paul says this has nothing to do with the kingdom of God. He says, "Those of you who have scruples about it, don't judge those who don't" and vice versa. This is a case in which we just have to respect one another.

In those admonitions, Paul uses as his basis this statement: "We are not to be judging people for whom Christ died." He reminds us that "your brother or your sister belongs to Christ. God has forgiven them. Who are you to withhold forgiveness from someone whom God has forgiven?"
Let's look at it this way. If somebody sins against me and that person repents, God forgives them. If I refuse to forgive them, can you think how ghastly that is in the sight of God? God is not obligated to forgive that person. That person has sinned against God, and God has never sinned against anybody. Here I am—a person who is a sinner refusing to forgive other sinners while God, who is sinless, is willing to forgive. Have you ever stopped to think about the arrogance that's in me when I refuse to forgive somebody that God has forgiven?

Now, how could you forgive yourself after God has forgiven you? I've had people come to me and say, "R.C., I committed such and such a sin, and I asked God to forgive me. I've gone to him ten times and asked him to forgive me, but I still don't feel forgiven. What am I going to do?" I don't have any brilliant theological answer to that. I can only tell them to ask God to forgive them one more time. When they say they've done it, I tell them this time I want them to ask God to forgive them for their arrogance. "Arrogance!?" they say. "What do you mean arrogance? I'm the most humble man in America. I've confessed this sin ten times." Doesn't God say that if you confess a sin one time, he'll forgive you? Who are you to refuse the forgiveness of God, and who are you to condemn one whom God has forgiven? That's arrogance. You may not feel arrogant, you may not mean to be arrogant, you may be rolling in humility with all of your confession. But I am telling you that if God has forgiven you, it is your duty to forgive yourself. It's not an option. You must forgive those whom God forgives, including yourself.

~ R C Sproul, Now That's a Good Question!

Are There Gradations of Sin?

I flinch a little bit when you ask me that question because I have in my memory not so fond recollections of having answered that question in the past when people got very upset with what I said. What mystifies me is that it seems that there are a lot of Christians who hold the position that there are no gradations of sin, that all sin is sin and there's no difference between less serious or more serious sins.

The Roman Catholic Church historically makes a distinction between venial sin and mortal sin, meaning that some sins are more heinous than others. Mortal sin is so called because it's serious enough to destroy the saving grace in the soul. It kills grace, and that's why it's called mortal.

Protestant Reformers in the sixteenth century rejected the concept of the distinction between venial and mortal. Calvin, for example, said that all sin is mortal in the sense that it deserves death, but no sin is mortal, save the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, insofar as it would destroy the salvation that Christ has achieved for us. In the Protestant reaction to the Roman Catholic distinction between venial and mortal sin, the Protestant Reformers did not deny gradations of sin. They still maintained a view of lesser and greater degrees of sin. What I'm saying is that in orthodox Christianity, both Roman Catholic and Protestant denominations have taken the position that there are some sins that are worse than other sins. They make these distinctions because it's so plainly taught in the Scriptures.

If we look at the Old Testament law, we see that certain offenses are to be dealt with in this world through capital punishment and others through corporal punishment. Distinctions are made, for example, between murder with malice aforethought and what we would call involuntary manslaughter. There are at least twenty-five occasions where the New Testament makes a distinction between lesser and greater forms of evil. Jesus says, for example, at his own trial, "Those who have delivered me to you have greater guilt than you have."

There is abundant evidence in the Scriptures to postulate a view of the gradations of sin. Not only that, but the very simple principles of justice would indicate that. But I think that people stumble on this point for two reasons. One is Saint James's statement "He who sins against one point of the law, sins against the whole law." That sounds as if James is saying that if you tell a little white lie, it's as bad as killing somebody in cold blood. But James is actually saying that all sin is serious insofar as every sin is an offense against the lawgiver, so that in the slightest sin I'm sinning against the law of God. I have violated the whole context of that law in many ways. So all sin is serious, but it doesn't follow logically that all sin is equally serious.

People also refer to Jesus' statement that if you lust after a woman, you've violated the law against adultery. Jesus doesn't say that it is as bad to lust as it is to commit the actual act. He's simply saying that if you merely refrain from the actual act you're not totally clean; there are lesser elements of the law that you have violated.

~ RC Sproul,  Now - That's a Good Question!

What do our good deeds have to do with our salvation?

From one perspective our good deeds have absolutely nothing to do with our salvation; from another perspective they have everything to do with it. This is the core debate that has been raging among Christians ever since the Protestant Reformation.

I am persuaded that our good deeds never merit salvation. To merit salvation would mean to earn it or to deserve it. The deeds would have to be so good, so perfect, with no mixture of sin in them, that it would impose an obligation upon God to grant us salvation. I believe that the New Testament is abundantly clear that none of us lives a life that is good enough to earn salvation. We receive God's salvation while we are sinners (Eph. 2:1-6). That's why we need a Savior, an atonement—and why we need grace.

People often say, "Nobody's perfect." We all agree on that. But not one person in a thousand realizes how significant that statement is. Somehow they think that God is going to grade on a curve and "as long as my life is less sinful than somebody else's, then relatively speaking it's good enough to make it into God's kingdom." We forget that God requires perfect obedience to his law, and if we fail to obey him perfectly, then we're going to have to look elsewhere for a way to get our salvation. That's where Christ comes in. Christ makes his merit available to us. When I trust him by faith, then his righteousness becomes my righteousness in the sight of God. So it's his good work that saves me and that saves you—not our good works.

Nevertheless, in a response of gratitude we are called to obey. Jesus said, "If you love me, keep my commandments." Martin Luther taught that justification is by faith alone. But he expanded the concept by saying that justification is by faith alone, but not by a faith that is alone. A person who is truly trusting Christ and resting on Christ for redemption receives the benefits of Christ's merit by faith. But if that person has true faith, that true faith will manifest itself in a life of obedience. Simply put, I get into heaven by Jesus' righteousness, but my reward in heaven will be distributed according to my obedience or the lack of it.

~ RC Sproul, "Now - That's a Good Question!"

For the record, I think Sproul is absolutely correct on this one. Our salvation is due entirely to Him; our reward is based on how we cooperate with His plan from that point forward.

Does Grace Give Us a Free Ride to Salvation?

We can look at the concept "free ride" in many ways. Grace by definition is something that is free in the sense that we can't earn it, we can't buy it, we can't deserve it, and there's no merit in us by which God bestows his mercy upon us. Anytime God dispenses mercy or unmerited favor, which is how we define grace, he's doing something that he has no obligation to do. I'm convinced that when we receive the grace of salvation, our eternal destiny is secure. I'm convinced that once we are clothed with the righteousness of Christ and have his merit imputed to our account by God (which is an act of God's grace) and we are redeemed, then I believe we are virtually guaranteed eternal life. In other words, I don't think that a Christian can lose his salvation. I say this because I'm persuaded that God has promised he will keep us to the end. If it were up to us to persevere, to hang on, and to be faithful and obedient to the end in order to be saved, I don't think any one of us would persevere enough to merit salvation. But God promises to finish what he has begun.

Does that mean it's a free ride? So often the concept of free ride means that since God has given me grace and since God has started this work and he promises to finish it, there's nothing left for me to do. I can do whatever I want. I'm saved and I don't have to worry about a thing. It's free from here on in, I'm on a roller coaster without any brakes, and I can do whatever I want. I can sin as I please and enjoy it the rest of my life. It's a license to sin.

However, the apostle Paul points out that where sin abounds, grace abounds much more. That is to say, the more I sin the more I see the grace of God because more grace is necessary for me to get into heaven.

Some people say that if the more you sin the more grace you get, the best thing to do is to keep sinning and that way you'll get more grace. Paul asks the question "Should we continue in sin that grace may abound?" How does he answer it? He says, "God forbid." Sinning all the more is a totally opposite response to one that is pleasing to God. As a matter of fact, the more grace we receive, the more we are to be moved toward a sense of gratitude; the more gratitude we experience, the more we should be moved to the pursuit of righteousness through obedience to the law of God. As Paul says elsewhere, "We're to work out our salvation with fear and trembling" because God promises to work within us to will and to do what is right. But along with God's grace comes the challenge for us to fight with all of our might to resist the temptations of sin and to pursue a life of righteousness and obedience. My salvation doesn't depend on my obedience, but my obedience is to be a response to that grace of God.

~ R.C. Sproul, "Now That's a Good Question!"

Discuss.