What Jesus Felt...

Bodily Health & Spiritual Health

Reading this morning in the 2nd letter to the Corinthians I was inspired by what the apostle Paul wrote. Could this simple command I just read really be a key to unlocking the best health for your spirit and body?

Lets first examine the verse in question:

"Since we have these promises (2 Cor. 6:18), dear friends, let us purify ourselves from everything that contaminates body and spirit, perfecting holiness out of reverence to God.

-2 Corinthians 7:1 emphasis mine-

A surface reading of this seems to imply health and wellness by a process of removing those things which contaminate us. You may be thinking, "I have already done this, and I am still miserable." Let me encourage you to delve deeper.

What sorts of things contaminate the body?

Seems like a simple question to answer. You may be thinking that excess smog, eating too much sugar, consuming drugs and alcohol may warrant the tag of bad for your bodily health. While this is certainly true, are their other things that constitute a pollutant for the body?

I want to suggest there certainly are but only when we consider these in light of the second part of Paul's command, the spirit.

In the relationship between the mind and the body we can observe some simple things. When we take a medication for back pain we are also alerted to the potential side effects of the drug. Among these are a list of physical symptoms such as dry mouth, itchy throat, or perhaps stomach discomfort. Yet there are another category of symptoms quite their own. You may feel confused, have hallucinations or acquire a general feeling of malaise. Some of the symptoms of medication are so extreme as to cause suicidal ideology and actions. Though these symptoms can be brought about by a physical substance, namely a medication, the results can cause symptoms of the mind to occur altering the mind state. Notice I did not infer some brain-chemical change, however this may be involved. Rather I am referring to what happens to a person's inner man, his spirit, when he ingests something not prescribed for his consumption.

This last sentence was not intended to make you think any longer about ingesting medication as it was more aimed at your willful imbibing of physical stimuli. When we listen to music some are said to experience any range of emotions from euphoria, passionate frenzy, a sense of tranquility, anger, skepticism towards life and violent brooding. How can a physical stimuli like sound waves produce a mind state that causes these range of emotions?

It seems Paul was on to something more than just sour milk and a lack of exercise. Paul was referring to the unique relationship between mind (spirit) and body. No doubt we have all watched a movie and then become inspired by the tale heroism and self-sacrificial service that it motivated us to do something for someone else. But what caused this physical reaction? The very delicate relationship between mind and body can be the explanation. 

What can we do about it?

If what we ingest, either physically, visually or audibly causes a change in our mood, should we not be more aware of what kinds of things we are subjecting to our consumption? I say we should be.

I have recently been removing any television programming that contains messages that cause me to speak abruptly to my wife, treat women as objects of lust and show gratuitous sexual situations. Though this is only one part the result of this action will reverberate into the other areas of my life. By removing these sense stimuli my spirit is refreshed, uplifted and encouraged to carry on the fight against the tendency to relent to temptations of all sorts. 

This sort of effect can be the same for you. If you are down, listen to uplifting music or watch a funny movie, if you need encouragement open up your Scripture and read or talk with a good friend who will pray with you. Also remember that bodily exercise can help the spirit by increasing the flow of endorphins in your body which will uplift your mood. 

Lastly, choosing the right foods also can have a positive effect on your spirit. First it will allow your body to properly process the energy and remove the wastes. Have you ever felt anxious after you ate a big meal or how about the way you feel mentally when you have food poisoning? The opposite is also true, intake the right fuel and your mind will thank you. Second, your brain will be stimulated with the right fuel to ensure your stress levels stay low and your joy is more complete. Lastly, by exercising more frequently you can enchance your self esteem by viewing your body in a more positive light. Many of us have desired to feel better about our bodies and some have a low sense of bodily image. With proper nutrition and exercise you will feel better overall about who you are.

With this new sense of mind and body health you can more completely serve the kingdom of God. This perfecting of holiness then can be seen as a worshipful act towards our heavenly creator who has created our bodies to function at their best. Yes we will still suffer setbacks, emotional and physical trials but by watching our intake of all sorts of stimuli that has a negative impact on us we will be more equiped to handle the trials when they come.

I hope this was encouraging to you. May you find God's best health for you this day!

Wisdom on a Wednesday

This morning as I sat down to read from my devotional I was struck by the last sentence in it. I am currently reading through Oswald Chambers classic, My Utmost for His Highest, and his final comment of the day encouraged me to write.

“God never gives us discernment so that we may criticize, but that we may intercede.”[1]

            Too many times in my life have I sought God’s direction so that I might be able to vindicate my position on something. The results have been mixed at best but I usually end up reflecting on how I could have handled my response to revelation differently.

            To truly take this mornings reading seriously, I have to reevaluate the reasons I seek discernment from above. If I am seeking it to exact my own revenge or to affirm my position in an argument then I should sincerely seek some real godly counsel because my intentions need an adjustment. However, if I am seeking His counsel for the sole reason to intercede on behalf of the other party then my will should line up precisely with His will. Then I will have the clear insight and vision to proceed along the path of reconciling the situation in whatever form that might take.

            “Father…not my will, but yours be done.” (Lk. 22:42)

---

[1]        Oswald Chambers, My Utmost for His Highest (Grand Rapids: Discovery House Publishers, 1992), November 23.

Inspiration and Inerrancy...A short essay

When one truly examines the foundations of Christianity it becomes inescapably clear that the question of both Inerrancy and Inspiration of the Scriptures are paramount to one’s theology. Reflecting on the above the issue of authority is raised. The Lord Himself taught with great authority (Matt. 7:29) and furthermore He utilized great power and authority in healing the sick (Mk. 8:22-25). This type of authority is ontological authority[i] and was the basis for Christ’s self-contained authority. Christ has been given the divine title of the logos, “Word” (Jn. 1:1) and if by ontological epistemology Christ can claim his authority then by the same the logos of God is authoritative, being in its very nature “God breathed” (2 Tim. 3:16). Naturally you would expect such an authority to be both faithful and true (Ps. 119:89) and the Word attests to itself this absolute faithfulness and truth.[ii]

            The Inspiration of Scripture is hard to deny and as one looks deeply into the text you discover countless examples of men speaking from God and being prompted and moved by the Holy Spirit (2 Pet. 1:21). This inspiration also gains its very creditability in the fulfilled prophecies of the Old Testament in the lives of historical figures such as Cyrus (Is. 45:1). This fits nicely with the theme of truth and faithfulness discussed in the previous paragraph. Yet those critical of such a view of inspiration lean on another idea, a conceptual form of inspiration where God inspired the ideas of Scripture while neglecting to inform the readers which parts were inspired[iii]. These critics also appeal to manuscripts that have no actual evidence of existence[iv] from which to draw the texts we have today. It would appear safer to assume the historical, traditional understanding of inspiration, which is the Bible as a whole is the written word of God.[v]            

            As the debate continues the topic of Inerrancy arises. When Paul claimed he sailed to Troas (Acts 16:8) it should be understood by the reader to be fact. Likewise when Christ proclaimed Himself as the way, truth and the life (Jn. 14:6) it should be properly understood that Christ claimed these things. Yet what we cannot say of Scripture is that it is completely without error because we lack the original manuscripts to empirically verify that no errors, including grammatical, were made in transmission. However, on my view of Inerrancy, from the grounds of God’s Middle Knowledge, the doctrine of Inerrancy need not be the reason one forfeits his faith ala Bart Ehrman. If God does in fact posses counterfactual knowledge, knowledge of what one would freely do in any given situation, inerrancy does not need to be such a hotly contested doctrine. Certainly some of the salutations Paul wrote (Eph. 6:21, 2 Tim. 4:19-21) could have been indifference to God, yet we can affirm on Middle Knowledge, that the Bible says precisely what God wanted to say and it conveys his message of salvation to mankind.[vi]

            The arguments on Inerrancy start with The Biblical Argument. This argument has some strong points yet its downfall comes when it attempts to relate error to authority. When defenders of this position state that if something contains errors it cannot be essentially authoritative[vii] they ultimately take a path to the edge of the cliff. If in the future errors are discovered in scripture then they will jump into disbelief. The second argument, The Historical Argument, appears to be the strongest argument for affirming the inerrancy of scripture. Yet this argument is not without its problems for history shows starting with Benedict de Spinoza and his publication Tractatus Theologicopoliticus in 1670[viii] that theologians believed in alternate views of inspiration thereby raising the question of inerrancy. The third argument, The Epistemological Argument, falls victim to the thought that if there is one error then all scripture is false, overplaying the worry that this calls all of Scripture into question.[ix]  Just as with the Biblical Argument, the bar need not be raised this high. The Slippery Slope argument is the weakest argument presented by Feinberg, and as such has the smallest defense. A great many theologians hold a less rigid view of Inerrancy and are still professing Christians, they have not surrendered the central doctrines of Christianity[x]. There is simply no proof to support the necessity of such a conclusion.

            The relationship between inspiration and inerrancy find their locus in God Himself for it was through the Word that became flesh (Jn. 1:14) that men were revealed salvation, which is the overarching theme of Scripture.[xi]            

            When properly applied to life, the Scriptures come alive by the very inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Just as Peter and the apostles were filled with the Holy Spirit and the Word of God (Acts 2:4) my view on Scripture continues to fuel my passion to pursue the things of God with a focus on spreading His message to the lost.

Bibliography

Craig, William Lane. “‘Men Moved by the Holy Spirit Spoke from God’ (2 Peter 1:21): A Middle Knowledge Perspective on Biblical Inspiration.” Philosophia Christi, NS 1, 1999.

Feinberg, P.D. “Bible, Inerrancy and Infallibility of.” In Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, ed. Walter A. Elwell, 2nd ed., 156-59. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2001.

Henry, C.F.H. “Bible, Inspiration of.” In Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, ed. Walter A. Elwell, 2nd ed., 159-63. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2001.

McDonald, H.D. “Bible, Authority of.” In Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, ed. Walter A. Elwell, 2nd ed., 153-54. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2001.

Towns, Elmer. Theology for Today Mason, OH: Thomson Custom Solutions Center, 2001.

---

[i] H.D. McDonald, “Bible, Authority of.” in Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, ed. Walter A. Elwell, 2^nd Ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2001), 153.

[ii] McDonald, 154.

[iii] Elmer L. Towns, Theology for Today (Mason: Thomson Custom Solutions Center, 2001), 61.

[iv] C.F.H. Henry, “Bible, Inspiration of.” in Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, ed. Walter A. Elwell, 2^nd Ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2001), 162.

[v] Henry, 161.

[vi] William Lane Craig, “‘Men Moved by the Holy Spirit Spoke from God’ (2 Peter 1:21): A Middle Knowledge Perspective on Biblical Inspiration.” Philosophia Christi, NS 1 (1999): 73.

[vii] P.D. Feinberg, “Bible, Inerrancy and Infallibility of.” in Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, ed. Walter A. Elwell, 2^nd Ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2001), 157.

[viii] Craig, 58.

[ix] Feinberg, 158.

[x] Feinberg, 158.

[xi] Towns, 53.

The Bible - Fundamentalist view of Transubstantiation?

I am currently reading Elmer Towns work on Theology, Theology for Today, and as I was reviewing the second part - Bibliology - my brain began to ponder a few things.

Here are my thoughts, your comments and feedback positive or negative are gladly accepted.

When I hear the debate about inspiration I am in agreement with most scholars that the Bible is the inspired word of God. When it comes to inerrancy I am certainly okay with the idea that the Bible is without error yet I am open to other views about this.

Where my thoughts caught me this morning was thinking about some of the statements I read from Towns. Here is the one that got me thinking the most,

"Just as a man can say, 'I am as good as my word,' God can say the same thing, for the Bible is God's Word. When the Bible is raised to this level, it is as perfect as God, and its perfection extends to every word." [1]

On the surface the statement may seem to be harmless but if you dig a little deeper you might see where I came up with my thought.

When you review what was said Towns seems to infer that the Scriptures are in fact God if they are as perfect as he is. Earlier he denies this point as something non-inerrantists like to use as a tactic of ridicule.  He states, "They accuse the inerrantist of 'bibliolarty' - worshiping the Bible." [2], yet it appears Towns could be leaning towards this point.

I think Scripture would be best understood like a good biography. If I wrote my biography and someone was to read it they would be able to get a feel for my life, personality, thoughts, beliefs and my very nature (namely that I am human). Yet on the other hand the reader could not carry the book to bed with them and state to their partner that, "Chris is coming to bed with us tonight." That seems most absurd to say something like that and I would suggest that person seek psychological intervention. Yet when we elevate the Holy Scriptures to this status it does leave the window open for someone to make the Bible the 4th person of the divine union of God.

In this way I believe some inerrantists place a burden on the Scriptures such as the Catholic theologians did when they postulated and instituted the doctrine of Transubstantiation on the Eucharist. Every time a Catholic takes communion they are literally eating the flesh and drinking the blood of Christ. This makes the wafer and wine out to be the very God we are said to worship. My God is no cracker or liquid and as we can see from a elementary study of Scripture, God is an immaterial being, "God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship him in spirit and in truth" (Jn. 4:24), how can he be imbued in a wafer?

Well those are my thoughts, we need to be cautious of the weight and burden of inerrancy we put on the Scriptures. Though I am certainly inclined to believe and affirm the Bible as God's perfect word, I am never open to claim God's word as equal to God, this is heresy. Again, though Towns does not affirm this, such a strong stance on inerrancy may lead one down a slippery slope to idolatry. It happens to pastors who are on radio or television, these men are raised to rock star status when they did not nor were they intended to be raised to this status. When this happens it becomes more about their message and transformation than the Heavenly Message Giver and Transformer. I think again, this could happen to some who places such a weight on Scripture, they would worship God's Word and not the God who uttered and inspired those words.


1. Elmer L. Towns, Theology for Today (Mason: Cengage Learning, 2008), 72.
2. Ibid., 65.

Would man really write the Bible if he could?

I will attempt to keep this brief, but this question was brought to me and I was prompted to answer it. When considering Bibliology - the theology of the scriptures - we will draw upon inspiration, inerrancy, origin and the very revelation of the text. When we examine this then we can draw a conclusion as to the nature of the very text and whether or not it was in fact God breathed.

As we do this we come across the point of who Christ claimed to be. As C.S. Lewis put it,

"You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse...Let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to." [1]

So as one justly and diligently reads the Scriptures you cannot deny the fact that Christ claimed to be God. So given that point one must then ask the question posed in the title, Would man really write the Bible if he could?

As Lewis S. Chafer, founder and former president of Dallas Theological Seminary wrote, "It (the Bible) is not such a book as man would write if he could, or could if he would." [2] In other words,

"Man would not write the Bible, for in doing so he has created a message of the perfect Son of God who condemns all men. Since God will judge sin, no rational man would write a book that would be self-condemning." [3]

Furthermore man could not write the Bible if he would because of the simple limitations on human understanding. It would be most impossible for an imperfect creature like man with limited rational capabilities to conceive of an unlimited God who is certainly most-powerful with his accompanying eternal attributes.

So to answer the question, above, I would say no, man would not write the Bible if he could for the reasons above. That point given, then the author of the Scriptures had to be God himself. As Scripture attests, "All scripture is God-breathed..." (2 Tim. 3:16)

1. C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity (New York: MacMillian Company, 1952), 40-41.
2. Lewis Sperry Chafer, Systematic Theology (Dallas: Dallas Seminary Press, 1957), 22.
3. Elmer L. Towns, Theology for Today (Mason: Cengage Learning, 2008), 46.