Home » Posts tagged 'resurrection'

Tag Archives: resurrection

The Relationship of the 2024 Total Eclipse to the End Times

Eclipse and Path of Totality

My wife and I live in the path of totality.  Yes, that’s right.  We live in the path where for three or four minutes we will see a total eclipse.  For that reason, this rural area with a relatively small population will grow in population over the next few days with people who want to be here too.  For those coming into our parking lot, our church will offer eclipse glasses through which to look at the eclipse when it shows itself in the most significant fashion.

Many people think the eclipse is an eschatological sign.  Even unbelievers around this area speak in a wary way about what’s happening in the sky and what it means for their future.  I’m happy that it has them thinking about their lives.

Signs of the Times Are Everywhere?

I grew up in a small Baptist church in rural Indiana, and I’m not endorsing the song, but I have the words in my mind of one we sang then:

Signs of the times are everywhere,

There’s a brand new feeling in the air,

Keep your eyes upon the eastern sky,

Lift up your eyes, redemption draweth nigh.

For many, that sounds about right.  Signs of the times are everywhere.  Except they’re not.  Signs won’t appear until after the Antichrist reveals himself (2 Thessalonians 2:3-10).  On April 8, if you keep your eyes upon the eastern sky, you better at least be wearing your eclipse glasses.

I know people are writing and producing youtube presentations about the eclipse as a sign of the end times.  I have not read any of these works but just have heard people asking and talking about it as such.  So here goes.  The total eclipse on April 8 is not a sign of the end times.  It isn’t.

Seeking After Signs

What gets people’s attention, I believe, is the weird or earie astronomical nature of the eclipse.  It’s obvious and odd.  Jesus’ own birth provided a star, a sign in the sky for that event.  People who followed Him around also wanted astronomical signs from Him, but He said He wouldn’t give them.  He said in Matthew 16:4:

A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas.

The sign of the prophet Jonas was Jesus’ resurrection from the dead.  So He says, besides that, He would give no more signs to that generation.  The message of Jesus was that scripture was sufficient.  “But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it” (Luke 11:28).  Blessing came to those who believe the word of God without having or seeing signs.  Signs are not for them who believe, but believe not.  Believers don’t need signs.  They believe, and faith comes by hearing the Word of God (Romans 10:17), not from signs.

Era of Astronomical Signs

Jesus in Luke 21:25 says that during the Tribulation period on earth, Revelation chapters six through sixteen, God will give astronomical signs:

And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring.

Peter references these occurrences in Acts 2:20 on the Day of Pentecost:

The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and notable day of the Lord come:

This references Joel 2:31, which also also says this is when “the great and terrible day of the LORD come(s).”  These signs mark the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ when He opens the seals of His judgment.  People on earth will know they have little time for salvation at that point.

None of us need signs, because nothing needs to occur for the rapture of the saints (1 Thessalonians 4:13-18).  Neither do unbelievers need signs for sufficiently knowing they’ll be left behind for God’s judgment.  Not just that, but it is already appointed unto man once to die (Hebrews 9:27), and no man knows when that will occur (Proverbs 27:1, James 4:14).  In the next second, eclipse or no eclipse coming, the Lord could descend through the clouds to meet true believers in the air.

Signifying Nothing

This total eclipse signifies nothing.  Eclipses happen.  The fact that we could predict this one indicates that God created astronomical bodies with mathematical precision.  Ships navigate by the movements of celestial bodies.  This testifies already to the glory of God, eclipse or no eclipse.

Eclipses testify to man’s helplessness and the immensity of God’s creation.  The sun is just one star of many, not even the largest.  It is a fiery, hot mass that God created just the right distance away for enough heat without burning up men.  It’s not always going to be this way though.  Everything in the future will burn with a fervent heat (2 Peter 3:10), annihilating everything, and God will create a new heaven and a new earth.  Only those who believe in Jesus Christ will make it to the other side and a whole new and eternal and blessed era.

Reminder of Opportunities

Man does not have interminable opportunities for salvation.  If the eclipse helps him remember this, the eclipse offers a great blessing to him.  No doubt an eclipse gets people’s attention and makes them think.  If men continue in their sin, never listening to God’s Word, then the eclipse serves very little purpose for them.  Perhaps it just makes men more proud, because they saw it with their special glasses.  Now they can say they’ve done another thing that makes them more special.

The total eclipse does provide an opportunity.  It parallels with future astronomical events that will be signs.  They provoke men to think about the last times.  On April 8, 2024 and even before and after that day, let everyone consider what Jesus warned in Matthew 24:44:

Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh.

The eclipse is not a sign, but Jesus said always to be ready.  Be ready for His return.  Paul says that it will occur in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye (1 Corinthians 15:52-54).  Behold now is the accepted time, behold now is the day of salvation (2 Corinthians 6:2).

Historic Doubts Relative to Napoleon Buonaparte by Richard Whately & Skepticism

Have you ever read Historic Doubts Relative to Napoleon Buonaparte by Richard Whately? (view the book online for free here or here; a version you can cut and paste into a document so you can listen to it  is here), or get a physical copy:

 

David Hume, the famous skeptic, employed a variety of skeptical arguments against the Bible, the Lord Jesus Christ, and against the possibility of miracles and the rationality of believing in them in Section 10, “Of Miracles,” of Hume’s Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. Whately, an Anglican who believed in the Bible, in miracles, and in Christ and His resurrection, turned Hume’s skeptical arguments against themselves. Whately’s “satiric Historic Doubts Relative to Napoleon Bonaparte (1819), … show[ed] that the same methods used to cast doubt on [Biblical] miracles would also leave the existence of Napoleon open to question.” Whately’s book is a short and humerous demonstration that Hume’s hyper-skepticism would not only “prove” that Christ did not do any miracles or rise from the dead, but that Napoleon, who was still alive at the time, did not exist or engage in the Napoleonic wars.  Hume’s argument against miracles is still extremely influential–indeed, as the teaching sessions mentioned in my last Friday’s post indicated, the main argument today against the resurrection of Christ is not a specific alternative theory such as the stolen-body, hallucination, or swoon theory, but the argument that miracles are impossible, so, therefore, Christ did not rise–Hume’s argument lives on, although it does not deserve to do so, as the critiques of Hume’s argument on my website demonstrate. For these reasons, the quick and fun read Historic Doubts Relative to Napoleon Buonaparte is well worth a read. (As a side note, the spelling “Buonaparte” by the author, instead of Bonaparte, is deliberate–the British “used the foreign sounding ‘Buonaparte’ to undermine his legitimacy as a French ruler. … On St Helena, when the British refused to acknowledge the defeated Emperor’s imperial rights, they insisted everyone call him ‘General Buonaparte.'”

 

Contemporary Significance

Part of the contemporary significance of Richard Whately’s Historic Doubts Relative to Napoleon Buonaparte relates to how we evaluate historical data. We should avoid both the undue skepticism of David Hume and also undue credulity.  Whatever God revealed in His Word can, and must, be accepted without question.  But outside of Scripture, when evaluating historical arguments, we should employ Biblical principles such as the following:

 

Have the best arguments both for and against the matter in question been carefully examined?

Is the argument logical?

Are there conflicts of interest in those promoting the argument?

Does the argument produce extraordinary evidence for its extraordinary claims?

Does the argument require me to think more highly of myself than I ought to think?

Is looking into the argument redeeming the time?

Are Biblical patterns of authority followed by those spreading the argument?

 

(principles are reproduced from my website here, and are also discussed here.)

 

A failure to properly employ consistent criteria to the evaluation of evidence undermines the case for Scripture.  For example, Assyrian records provide as strong a confirmation as one could expect for Hezekiah’s miraculous deliverance from the hand of Assyria by Jehovah’s slaying 185,000 Assyrian soldiers (2 Kings 19). However, Assyrian annals are extremely biased ancient propaganda.  Those today who claim that any source showing bias (say, against former President Trump, or against conservative Republicans–of which there are many) should be automatically rejected out of hand would have to deny, if they were consistent, that Assyrian records provide a glorious confirmation of the Biblical miracle.  Likewise, Matthew records that the guards at Christ’s tomb claimed that the Lord’s body was stolen as they slept (Matthew 28).  Matthew, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, intends the reader to be able to see through this biased and false argument to recognize the fact that non-Christians were making it actually provides confirmation for the resurrection of Christ. (If you do not see how it confirms the resurrection, think about it for a while.)

 

Many claims made today, whether that the population of the USA would catastrophically decline as tens of millions would die from the COVID vaccine, that Democratic gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams had her election win in Georgia stolen by Republicans, that Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump had his 2020 election win in Georgia stolen by Democrats, that 9/11 was perpetrated by US intelligence agencies, that Trump colluded with Russia to win the 2016 presidential election, that the miracle cure for cancer has been discovered but is being suppressed by Big Pharma, and many other such claims are rarely advanced by those who follow the Biblical principles listed above for evaluating information. Furthermore, the (dubious) method of argumentation for such claims, if applied to the very strong archaeological evidence for the Bible, would very frequently undermine it, or, indeed, frequently undermine the possibility of any historical investigation at all and destroy the field of historical research.

 

In conclusion, I would encourage you to read Historic Doubts Relative to Napoleon Buonaparte, and, as you read it, think about what Scripture teaches about how one evaluates historical information.

 

TDR

 

-The Amazon link above is an affiliate link. Please visit here to learn about how one can donate to charity at no additional cost when purchasing products at Amazon and here to learn how to save on Internet purchases in general.

Objections to the Resurrection of Jesus Christ: Are there answers?

The bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ is at the core of the Christian faith. Without the resurrection, the gospel is not “good news,” but absurd deceit. As 1 Corinthians 15 explains:

 

1 Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; 2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. 3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: 5 And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: 6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. 7 After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles. 8 And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time. … 12 Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen: 14 And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.15 Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not. 16 For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised: 17 And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. 18 Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished. 19 If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable. 20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.

 

What are the Major Objections to Christ’s Resurrection?

 

How would you respond to someone who denies the resurrection of Christ, making one or more of the following arguments:

1.) “The disciples stole Christ’s body.”

2.) “Christ did not die, but only swooned/passed out on the cross and appeared to be dead. Then He came out of the grave after the cool tomb revived Him, and so appeared to have risen from the dead, when in fact He never died.”

3.) “The post-resurrection appearances of Christ were just hallucinations or visions.”

4.) “Christ did not rise from the dead because it is a miracle. ANY explanation is more likely than a miracle, because David Hume has proven miracles are impossible when he wrote:

 

A miracle is a violation of the laws of nature; and as a firm and unalterable experience has established these laws, the proof against a miracle, from the very nature of the fact, is as entire as any argument from experience can possibly be imagined.… Nothing is esteemed a miracle, if it ever happen in the common course of nature.… [I]t is a miracle, that a dead man should come to life; because that has never been observed, in any age or country. There must, therefore, be a uniform experience against every miraculous event, otherwise the event would not merit that appellation. And as a uniform experience amounts to a proof, there is here a direct and full proof, from the nature of the fact, against the existence of any miracle; nor can such a proof be destroyed, or the miracle rendered credible, but by an opposite proof, which is superior. (David Hume, Of Miracles)

 

A version of argument number four came up in my PATAS debate with the president of the Philippines ATheist/Agnosticism, and Secularism organization in the Philippines (also on Rumble here).


The atheist argued that aliens stole the body of Christ and made it look like Christ really rose from the dead. His point was that anything is more likely than a miracle–making David Hume’s argument above, albeit in a less sophisticated and even more problematic way than Hume made it. (We posted about the PATAS debate on the blog here, while Shabir Ally also attacked the gospel accounts as discussed here.)

 

How would you answer these objections?

 

In my series on how to teach an evangelistic Bible study, we discuss these objections in the class sessions starting with 4.8, the eighth study on how to teach Bible study #4, on the gospel–the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. So if you would like answers, please click here to check out the teaching sessions starting with section 4.8.  Written material dealing with the resurrection can also be found here.

 

-TDR

Evangelistic / Apologetic Pamphlet for Buddhists on Buddhism

Since there are many Buddhists in the San Francisco Bay Area, and not a great deal of literature available to reach them with the gospel of Jesus Christ, I have written an evangelistic pamphlet for Buddhists. You can view it at the link below:

 

The Buddha and the Christ:

Their Teachings Compared

 

Because Buddhism does not consider the sovereign, Almighty God important for its religious system, the presentation of the gospel is designed to be especially God-centered, explaining the work of the Trinity to reconcile sinners.  It also seeks to assume that someone has no preexisting knowledge of the BIble or of Christianity, as is the case with great numbers of Buddhists.

 

Both the persons of Buddha and of the Lord Jesus Christ and their respective teachings are compared.  The evidence overwhelmingly favors Christ, to the detriment of Buddhism.

 

If your church does not already have something to evangelize Buddhists, let me encourage you to add it to the resources available on your tract or pamphlet rack.  An easy link to keep in mind with many different resources for the various world religions and groups in Christianity is also available here.

 

Learn when Buddha lived; how much we know about what he did and taught; the evidence, or lack thereof, for the truth of Buddhist Scriptures; the preservation, or lack thereof, of Buddhist Scriptures; the evidence, or lack thereof, for the many teachings of Buddhism; and how these compare to the evidence for the Bible and for the Lord Jesus Christ as the crucified and risen Lord.

 

TDR

Reality and Truth: Celebrity Conservatives Versus True Bible Believers

Perhaps you, like me, as a Christian, pay attention to certain celebrity conservatives, who take many of the same or similar viewpoints as you.  You know there are differences.  Where is the overlap?

In diagnosing a worldview, there are various components to understanding it, as some people have or might put it, to see the map of the world.  Some of them are knowledge, ethics, purpose, and epistemology, but among the others, I want to explore two of them, reality and truth, as they relate to celebrity conservatives versus true Bible believers.  In general, very often true Bible believers are interested in the celebrity conservatives without their being interested in them.  Part of their “fan base” are Christians, who listen to their podcasts and watch their shows.
One of the celebrity conservatives, Jordan Peterson, the famous PhD professor, author, and public intellectual and speaker from Canada, doesn’t even call himself a conservative.  Celebrity conservatives today might call themselves classic liberals (you can look up classical liberalism).  Maybe he really isn’t conservative, but you also shrink your audience if you call yourself one.  As well, “liberal” might mean you keep your job and other opportunities.  Peterson does resonate with true Bible believers and they listen to, watch, and read him.
When I write, celebrity conservatives, I’m especially saying, Peterson, Ben Shapiro, Charlie Kirk, Tucker Carlson, Laura Ingraham, Sean Hannity, the late Rush Limbaugh, Dennis Prager, and Candace Owens.  There are many others.  There is overlap between their worldviews and the worldview of a true Bible believer.
Before Covid hit and also before he had major health issues, my wife and I and another couple got tickets to hear Jordan Peterson in person in San Francisco, sponsored by the Independent Institute.  As I was listening to him, I enjoyed many things he was saying.  However, I knew he and I did not have the same worldview.  I was glad he could say what he did in public, but it wasn’t nearly enough for me either.  The celebrity conservatives like him are disappointing.
In the last week, I was thinking about the difference between the worldviews of celebrity conservatives and true Bible believers.  Even as I write this, I think about how a true Bible believer could even be a celebrity in our world.  I don’t think it’s possible.  The greater the celebrity status, the more you must be doing something wrong, and that includes evangelical leaders who have their own celebrity. They in part got there through capitulation and compromise.  Their greater celebrity doesn’t speak well.
The common ground in worldview, I believe, is that there is more proximity between celebrity conservatives and true Bible believers in their view of reality.  I would say that they both attempt to function according to reality, even if it means abandoning the truth.  The truth and reality do go together.  They overlap completely for a true Bible believer, but they don’t for celebrity conservatives.  Even actual reality and the reality of celebrity of conservatives don’t overlap identically.  To stay a celebrity, like everyone else who isn’t a true Bible believer, celebrity conservatives forsake actual reality and even more so, the truth.  Let me explain.
I want to use Jordan Peterson as an example.  Jesus either rose from the dead or He didn’t.  Jesus can’t be the greatest figure who ever lived if He wasn’t truth and He lied about the resurrection.  Peterson says that he’s not sure if he believes Christianity, but he tries to live like one.  He’s also saying, he’s not committing to the truth of the resurrection of Jesus Christ, while living like Jesus did resurrect from the dead.  He borrows a reality based upon the truth without actually believing the truth.  Other conservatives do that, and it’s easy to see.
The world we live in is the real world.  Celebrity conservatives more than the mainstream culture try to explain positions according to reality, even if they deny much of the truth or many truths, depending how you want to put that.  You may live a reality of Jesus and defend a life that fits His existence and deny the pivotal truth of His resurrection.  Peterson does that.
Complementarianism is the truth and celebrity conservatives borrow from a complementarian reality without the truth of complementarianism.  Gender fluidity proceeds from egalitarianism.  God designed men and women differently.  That’s the truth.  Celebrity conservatives deny complementarian truth while defending a complementarian reality.
Let me get more simple.  Whether you think he’s a conservative or not, let’s consider President Donald J. Trump as if he were a conservative.  Trump operates according to a certain Christian reality that results in Christian support, including from true Bible believers.  Trump thinks that one thing is better than another.  Certain behavior is wrong.  He believes that America as a standard of living better than other countries, which can be and should be protected at the border.  This is one of the most fundamental conservative beliefs and it is a reality that borrows from the truth.
Former President Trump doesn’t believe the truth, but he functions as though there is truth. He is a realist in that we must have standards.  Things won’t be better when we can’t discern the differences of one thing from another.  This is a reality according to a Christian worldview.  The truth is more important.  However, people who eject from reality are much further away from the truth. These either practical or positional nihilists must be rejected for something short of the truth, if that’s the choice.  The path to the truth won’t come through their relativism.  It can come through someone who at least embraces reality, even if it doesn’t mirror actual reality.
The answer for humanity is still the truth.  It isn’t the reality of celebrity conservatives.

AUTHORS OF THE BLOG

  • Kent Brandenburg
  • Thomas Ross

Archives