59 Confirmed or Historically Probable Facts in the Gospel of John

Craig Blomberg's The Historical Reliability of John's Gospel examines John's Gospel verse by verse and identifies an abundance of historical details and facts.

The facts and details are as follows:

1. Archaeology confirms the use of stone water jars in New Testament times [John 2:6].

2. Given the early Christian tendency towards asceticism, the wine miracle is an unlikely invention [2:8].

3. Archaeology confirms the proper place of Jacob's Well [4:6].

4. Josephus [Wars of the Jews 2.232] confirms there was significant hostility between Jews and Samaritans during Jesus' time [4:9].

5. "Come down" accurately describes the topography of western Galilee. [There's a significant elevation drop from Cana to Capernaum.] [4:46, 49, 51].

6. "Went up" accurately describes the ascent to Jerusalem [5:1].

7. Archaeology confirms the proper location of Bethesda [5:2]. [Excavations between 1914 and 1938 uncovered that pool and found it to be just as John described it. Since that structure did not exist after the Romans destroyed the city in A.D. 70, it's unlikely any later non-eyewitness could have described it in such vivid detail. Moreover, John says that this structure "is in Jerusalem," implying that he's writing before 70].

8. Jesus' own testimony being invalid without the Father is an unlikely Christian invention [5:31]; a later redactor would be eager to highlight Jesus' divinity and would probably make his witness self-authenticating.

9. The crowds wanting to make Jesus king reflects the well-known nationalist fervor of early first-century Israel [6:15].

10. Sudden and severe squalls are common on the Sea of Galilee [6:18].

11. Christ's command to eat his flesh and drink his blood would not be made up [6:53].

12. The rejection of Jesus by many of his disciples is also an unlikely invention [6:66].

13. The two predominant opinions of Jesus, one that Jesus was a "good man" and the other that he "deceives people," would not be the two choices John would have made up [7:12]; a later Christian writer would have probably inserted the opinion that Jesus was God.

14. The charge of Jesus being demon-possessed is an unlikely invention [7:20].

15. The use of "Samaritan" to slander Jesus befits the hostility between Jews and Samaritans [8:48].

16. Jewish believers wanting to stone Jesus is an unlikely invention [8:31, 59].

17. Archaeology confirms the existence and location of the Pool of Siloam [9:7].

18. Expulsion from the synagogue by the Pharisees was a legitimate fear of the Jews; notice that the healed man professes his faith in Jesus only after he is expelled from the synagogue by the Pharisees [9:13-39], at which point he has nothing to lose. This rings of authenticity.

19. The healed man calling Jesus a "prophet" rather than anything more lofty suggests the incident is unembellished history [9:17].

20. During a winter feast, Jesus walked in Solomon's Colonnade, which was the only side of the temple area shielded from the cold winter east wind [10:22-23]; this area is mentioned several times by Josephus.

21. Fifteen stadia [less than two miles] is precisely the distance from Bethany to Jerusalem [11:18].

22. Given the later animosity between Christians and Jews, the positive depiction of Jews comforting Martha and Mary is an unlikely invention [11:19].

23. The burial wrappings of Lazarus were common for first-century Jewish burials [11:44]; it is unlikely that a fiction writer would have included this theologically irrelevant detail.

24. The precise description of the composition of the Sanhedrin [11:47]: it was composed primarily of chief priests [largely Sadducees] and Pharisees during Jesus' ministry.

25. Caiaphas was indeed the high priest that year [11:49]; we learn from Josephus that Caiaphas held the office from A.D. 18-37.

26. The obscure and tiny village of Ephraim [11:54] near Jerusalem is mentioned by Josephus.

27. Ceremonial cleansing was common in preparation for the Passover [11:55].

28. Anointing of a guest's feet with perfume or oil was sometimes performed fro special guests in the Jewish culture (12:3); Mary's wiping of Jesus' feet with her hair is an unlikely invention [in easily could have been perceived as a sexual advance].

29. Waving of palm branches was a common Jewish practice for celebrating military victories and welcoming national rulers [12:13].

30. Foot washing is first-century Palestine was necessary because of dust and open footwear; Jesus performing this menial task is an unlikely invention [it was a task not even Jewish slaves were required to do] [13:4]; Peter's insistence that he get a complete bath also fits with his impulsive personality [there's certainly no purpose for inventing this request].

31. Peter asks John to ask Jesus a question [13:24]; there's no reason to insert this detail if this is fiction; Peter could have asked Jesus himself.

32. "The Father is greater than I" is an unlikely invention [14:28], especially if John wanted to make up the deity of Christ [as the critics claim he did].

33. Use of the vine as a metaphor makes good sense in Jerusalem [15:1]; vineyards were in the vicinity of the temple, and, according to Josephus, the temple gates had a golden vine carved on them.

34. Use of the childbirth metaphor [16:21] is thoroughly Jewish; is has been found in the Dead Sea Scrolls [1QH 11:9-10].

35. The standard Jewish posture for prayers was looking "toward heaven" [17:1].

36. Jesus' admission that he has gotten his words from the Father [17:7-8] would not be included if John were inventing the idea that Christ was God.

37. No specific reference to fulfilled Scripture is given regarding the predicted betrayal by Judas; a fiction writer or later Christian redactor probably would have identified the Old Testament Scripture to which Jesus was referring [17:12].

38. The name of the high priest's servant [Malachus], who had his ear cut off, is an unlikely invention [18:10].

39. Proper identification of Caiaphas's father-in-law, Annas, who was the high priest from A.D. 6-15 [18:13]-the appearance before Annas is believable because of the family connection and the fact the former high priests maintained great influence.

40. John's claim that the high priest knew him [18:15] seems historical; invention of this claim serves no purpose and would expose John to being discredited by the Jewish authorities.

41. Anna's questions regarding Jesus' teachings and disciples make good historical sense; Annas would be concerned about potential civil unrest and the undermining of Jewish religious authority [18:19].

42. Identification of a relative of Malchus [the high priest's servant who had his ear cut off] is a detail that John would not have made up [18:26]; it has no theological significance and could only hurt John's credibility if he were trying to pass off fiction as the truth.

43. There are good historical reasons to believe Pilate's reluctance to deal with Jesus [18:28ff.]: Pilate had to walk a fine line between keeping the Jews happy and keeping Rome happy; any civil unrest could mean his job [the Jews knew of his competing concerns when they taunted him, "If you let this man go, you are no friend of Caesar. Anyone who claims to be a king opposes Caesar," 19:12]; the Jewish philosopher Philo records the Jews successfully pressuring Pilate in a similar way to get their demands met [To Gaius 38.301-302].

44. A surface similar to the Stone Pavement has been identified near the Antonia Fortress [19:13] with markings that may indicate soldiers played games there [as in the gambling for his clothes in 19:24].

45. The Jews exclaiming, "We have no king but Caesar!" [19:15] would not be invented given the Jewish hatred for the Romans, especially if John had been written after A.D. 70. [This would be like New Yorkers today proclaiming "We have not king but Osama Bin Laden!"]

46. The crucifixion of Jesus [19:17-30] is attested to by non-Christian sources such as Josephus, Tacitus, Lucian, and the Jewish Talmud.

47. Crucifixion victims normally carried their own crossbeams [19:17].

48. Josephus confirms that crucifixion was an execution technique employed by the Romans [Wars of the Jews 1.97; 2.305; 7.203]; moreover, a nail-spiked anklebone of a crucified man was found in Jerusalem in 1968.

49. The execution site was likely outside ancient Jerusalem, as John says [19:17]; this would ensure that the sacred Jewish city would not be profaned by the presence of a dead body [Deut. 21:23].

50. After the spear was thrust into Jesus' side, out came what appeared to be blood and water [19:34]. Today we know that a crucified person might have a watery fluid father in the sac around the heart called the pericardium. John would not have known of this medical condition, and could not have recorded this phenomenon unless he was an eyewitness or had access to eyewitness testimony.

51. Joseph of Arimathea [19:38], a member of the Sanhedrin who buries Jesus, is an unlikely invention.

52. Josephus [Antiquities 17.199] confirms that spices [19:39] were used for royal burials; this detail shows that Nicodemus was not expecting Jesus to rise from the dead, and it also demonstrates that John was not inserting later Christian faith into the text.

53. Mary Magdalene [20:1], a formerly demon-possessed woman [Luke 8:2], would not be invented as the empty tomb's first witness; in fact, women in general would not be presented as witnesses in a made-up story.

54. Mary mistaking Jesus for the gardener [20:15] is not a detail that a later writer would have made up [especially a writer seeking to exalt Jesus].

55. "Rabboni" [20:16], the Aramaic for "teacher," seems an authentic detail because it's another unlikely invention for a writer trying to exalt the risen Jesus.

56. Jesus stating that he is returning to "my God and your God" [20:17] does not fit with a later writer bent on creating the idea that Jesus was God.

57. One hundred fifty-three fish [21:11] is a theologically irrelevant detail, but perfectly consistent with the tendency of fisherman to want to record and then brag about large catches.

58. The fear of the disciples to ask Jesus who he was [21:12] is an unlikely concoction; it demonstrates natural human amazement at the risen Jesus and perhaps the fact that there was something different about the resurrection body.

59. The cryptic statement from Jesus about the fate of Peter is not clear enough to draw certain theological conclusions [21:18]; so why would John make it up? It's another unlikely invention. [1]

When one considers these above historically confirmed or historically probable fact and details, how reasonable is it to doubt that the author of John's Gospel [who I believe was John] was an eyewitness or at least had access to eyewitness testimony?

For more from Dr. Blomberg on the reliability of the Gospel of John, see here.

Our thanks to InterVarsity Press for providing us with a copy of Blomberg's important book.

Courage and Godspeed,

Chad

Resource:

1. As recorded by Turek and Geisler, I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist, p. 263-268.

Free E-Book: The End of Infidelity by Jason Engwer and Steve Hays

Jason Engwer and Steve Hays over at Triablogue have written a response to John Loftus' and colleagues latest book The End of Christianity.

You can find the free e-book here.

We have also added it to our Free Online E-book Library.

Courage and Godspeed,

Chad

Why I'm Not Worried about Richard Dawkins "Destroying Christianity"

Richard Dawkins has stated that it is his goal to "win" and to "destroy Christianity." However, I'm quite confident that Dawkins will not achieve his lofty goal when one considers that he has so far offered 11 excuses as to why he will not debate Christianity's top defender, Dr William Lane Craig.

Does anyone else miss Christophter Hitchens?

Courage and Godspeed,

Chad

Theoretical Physicist John Polkinghorne on the Human Paradox

"The human paradox is that we perceive so many signs of value and significance conveyed to us in our encounter with reality, yet all meaning is threatened by the apparent finality of death. If the universe is truly a cosmos, if the world is really intelligible through and through, then this life by itself cannot be the whole story."

- Belief in God in an Age of Science, p. 23.

Are You in the Third Column?

Greg Koukl explains in Stand to Reason’s first Solid Ground of 2012 that in the years following the 1925 Scopes trial “Christianity lost its claim as a player in the marketplace of ideas.” Then a first column in the fight to defend the Gospel formed. It was made up of men like Norm Geisler, John Warwick Montgomery, Francis Schaeffer, Josh McDowell, and Walter Martin. These men paved the way in bringing Christianity back into the “marketplace of ideas.”

The second column, much bigger than the first, then formed. This column is made up of people like Craig Hazen, Frank Beckwith, William Lane Craig, J.P. Moreland, and Stephen Meyer. This column was influenced either directly or indirectly by the first and is currently equipping Christians to defend classical Christianity and its values. This column has shown that Christianity is still worth thinking about.

The third column has started to form, and it is massive. It is made up of “sharp, committed ambassadors for Christ who are students of those in the first two columns and are grouping up with others of kindred spirit in their local communities. Their names will probably never grace the cover of a book or be in lights on an apologetics conference marquee. Instead, they are foot soldiers with boots on the ground, individually being faithful to defend the Gospel in smaller arenas their Commander in Chief has entrusted to them.”

For those of us in this third column, if you are looking for some encouragement, check out the latest edition of Solid Ground.

Stand firm in Christ,

Chase

84 Confirmed Facts in the Last 16 Chapters of the Book of Acts

Scholar and historian Colin Hemer has identified 84 facts in the last 16 chapters of the Book of Acts that have been confirmed by historical and/or archaeological research.

They are as follows:

1. the natural crossing between correctly named ports [Acts 13:4-5]
2. the proper port [Perga] along the direct destination of a ship crossing from Cyprus [13:13]
3. the proper location of Lycaonia [14:6]

4. the unusual but correct declension of the name Lystra [14:6]

5. the correct language spoken in Lystra-Lycaonian [14:11]

6. two gods known to be so associated-Zeus and Hermes [14:12]

7. the proper port, Attalia, which returning travelers would use [14:25]

8. the correct order of approach to Derbe and then Lystra from the Cilician Gates [16:1; cf. 15:41]

9. the proper form of the name Troas [16:8]

10. the place of a conspicuous sailors' landmark, Samothrace [12:14]

11. the proper description of Philippi as a Roman colony [16:12]

12. the right location fro the river [Gangites] near Philippi [12:13]

13. the proper association of Thyatira as a center of dyeing [16:14]

14. correct designations for the magistrates of the colony [16:22]

15. the proper locations [Amphipolis and Apollonia] where travelers would spend successive nights on this journey [17:1]

16. the presence of a synagogue in Thessalonica [17:1]

17. the proper term ["politarchs"] used of the magistrates there [17:6]

18. the correct implication that sea travel is the most convenient way of reaching Athens, with the favoring east winds of summer sailing [17:14-15]

19. the abundant presence of images in Athens [17:16]

20. the reference to a synagogue in Athens [17:17]

21. the depiction of the Athenian life of philosophical debate in the Agora [17:17]

22. the use of the correct Athenian slang word for Paul [spermologos, 17:18] as well as for the court [Areios pagos, 17:19]

23. the proper characterization of the Athenian character [17:21]

24. an alter to an "unknown god" [17:23]

25. the proper reaction of Greek philosophers, who denied the bodily resurrection [17:32]

26. Areopagites as the correct title for a member of the court [17:34]

27. A Corinthian synagogue [18:4]

28. the correct designation of Gallio as proconsul, resident in Corinth [18:12]

29. the bema [judgement seat], which overlooks Corinth's forum [18:16ff.]

30. the name Tyrannus as attested from Ephesus in first-century inscriptions [19:9]

31. well-known shrines and images of Artemis [19:24]

32. the well attested "great goddess Artemis" [19:27]

33. that the Ephesian theater was the meeting place of the city [19:29]

34. the correct title grammateus for the chief executive magistrate in Ephesus [19:35]

35. the proper title of honor neokoros, authorized by the Romans [19:35]

36. the correct name to designate the goddess [19:37]

37. the proper term for those holding court [19:38]

38. use of plural anthupatori, perhaps a remarkable reference to the fact that two men were conjointly exercising the functions of proconsul at this time [19:38]

39. the "regular" assembly, as the precise phrase is attested elsewhere [19:39]

40. use of precise ethnic designation, beroiaios [20:4]

41. employment of the ethnic term Asianos [20:4]

42. the implied recognition of the strategic importance assigned to this city of Troas [20:7ff.]

43. the danger of the coastal trip in this location [20:13]

44. the correct sequence of places [20:14-15]

45. the correct name of the city as a neuter plural [Patara] [21:1]

46. the appropriate route passing across the open sea south of Cyprus favored by persistent northwest winds [21:3]

47. the suitable distance between these cities [21:8]

48. a characteristically Jewish act of piety [21:24]

49. the Jewish law regarding Gentile use of the temple area [21:28] [Archaeological discoveries and quotations from Josephus confirm that Gentiles could be executed for entering the temple area. One inscription reads: "Let no Gentile enter within the balustrade and enclosure surrounding the sanctuary. Whoever is caught will be personally responsible for his consequent death."]

50. the permanent stationing of a Roman cohort [chiliarch]at Antonia to suppress any disturbance at festival times [21:31]

51. the flight of steps used by the guards [21:31, 35]

52. the common way to obtain Roman citizenship at this time [22:28]

53. the tribune being impressed with Roman rather than Tarsian citizenship [22:29]

54. Ananias being high priest at this time [23:2]

55. Felix being governor at this time [23:34]

56. the natural shopping point on the way to Caesarea [23:31]

57. whose jurisdiction Cilicia was in at the time [23:34]

58. the provincial penal procedure of the time [24:1-9]

59. the name Porcius Festus, which agrees precisely with that given by Josephus [24:27]

60. the right of appeal for Roman citizens [25:11]

61. the correct legal formula [25:18]

62. the characteristic form of reference to the emperor at the time [25:26]

63. the best shipping lanes at the time [27:5]

64. the common bonding of Cilicia and Pamphylia [27:4]

65. the principal port to find a ship sailing to Italy [27:5-6]

66. the slow passage to Cnidus, in the fact of the typical northwest wind [27:7]

67. the right route to sail, in view of the winds [27:7]

68. the locations of Fair Havens and the neighboring site of Lasea [27:8]

69. Fair Havens as a poorly sheltered roadstead [27:7]

70. a noted tendency of a south wind in these climes to back suddenly to a violent northeaster, the well-known gregale [27:13]

71. the nature of a square-rigged ancient ship, having no option but to be driven before a gale [27:15]

72. the precise place and name of this island [27:16]

73. the appropriate maneuvers for the safety of the ship in its particular plight [27:16]

74. the fourteenth night-a remarkable calculation, based inevitably on a compounding of estimates and probabilities, confirmed in the judgement of experienced Mediterranean navigators [27:27]

75. the proper term of the time for the Adriatic [27:27]

76. the precise term [Bolisantes] for taking soundings, and the correct depth of the water near Malta [27:28]

77. a position that suits the probable line of approach of a ship released to run before an easterly wind [27:39]

78. the severe liability on guards who permitted a prisoner to escape [27:42]

79. the local people and superstitions of the day [28:4-6]

80. the proper title protos tes nesou [28:7]

81. Regium as a refuge to await a southerly wind to carry them through the strait [28:13]

82. Appii Forum and Tres Tabernae as correctly placed stopping places on the Appian Way [28:15]

83. appropriate means of custody with Roman soliders [28:16]

84. the conditions of imprisonment, living "at his own expense" [28:30-31] [1]

With these facts in mind, it seems reasonable to conclude that the author of Acts [who I believe was Luke] was an eyewitness of the events recorded or at the very least had access to reliable eyewitnesses.

It is also of interest that in the Book of Acts, the author records 35 miracles.

Courage and Godspeed,

Chad

1. The facts are as listed by Norman L. Geisler and Frank Turek in I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist, p. 256-259.

Are the New Testament Gospels Reliable? by Mark D. Roberts

A few years ago Apologetics315 featured an outstanding 30 part series by pastor and author Mark D. Roberts entitled Are the New Testament Gospels Reliable? Roberts later turned this series into his book Can We Trust the Gospels.

This outstanding series deals with important issues such as:

• Can we know what the original Gospel manuscripts said?
• Are there contradictions in the Gospels?
• Did the Gospels writers know Jesus personally?
• Do the Gospels reflect the political agenda of the Church?
• and more!

To checkout this great series, please see here.

Also, readers may want to checkout our Old and New Testament Research Materials found here.

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Common Objection #17- "Christianity Demeans Women!"

It is common for skeptics and critics of Christianity to claim that "Christianity demeans women" or "Christianity seeks to suppress women," but when the facts are considered this is simply not true.

In their book Cracking Da Vinci's Code, scholars James L. Garlow and Peter Jones challenge these oft-repeated notions.

Many are under the false impression that pagan nations of the ancient world affirmed women, while Christianity sought to repress them; however, as Garlow and Jones point out, history tells us another story:

"In Greece, India, and China, women had no rights and were considered the property of their husbands. The Greek philosophers of the day had no higher view of women than did other non-Christians. Aristotle taught that a woman ranked somewhere between a man and a slave. Plato taught that if a man lived a cowardly life, he would be reincarnated as a woman.

In ancient Greece, women-especially wives-were regarded as lowly. A wife was not allowed to leave her house unescorted. She was not allowed to eat or interact with guests in the home, but was consigned to her quarters (gynaeceum). In contrast, a hetaera (mistress) was allowed to accompany a married man in public.

The average Athenian woman had the social status of a slave. Women were not educated, nor were they allowed to speak in public. Silence was considered the great grace of a woman, even at home. Not only were women considered inferior, they were also thought to be the source of evil and were thus not to be trusted." [1]

The authors continue by contending that it was the advent of Christianity that "radically transformed the fate of women."

"Wherever Christianity has been introduced, it has lifted up women, not just in antiquity but even in modern times. Sex-selection infanticide was common in 1880 in pagan China before the influence of Christian missionaries. Girl babies were disposed of as a liability. In the last two centuries, because of Christian influences, the treatment of women worldwide has improved immensely. It was the influence of Christians that helped to abolish China's practice of binding women's feet in order to create the diminutive effect that men found attractive. This dangerous practice had led to gangrene infection, needless amputation, and sometimes even death.

In India, the practice of suttee was ended by the influence of Christianity. A good Hindu wife was expected to follow her husband in death on the funeral pyre, even if she was young with her whole life ahead of her. "Child widows" were also part of the pagan goddess-worshiping Hindu culture. There girls were raised to be temple prostitutes. Amy Carmichael, a Christian, fought to put an end to this practice by rescuing girls from it." [2]

Further, as female apologist Sharon James argues:

"...historically, wherever Christianity has spread, the status of women has improved. Those countries where women are most exploited today are those with the least exposure to the gospel. The Bible teaches that men and women were made equally in God's image [Gn. 1:27-28]

and that all human life is sacred. Christians have been among the first to provide education and other rights for women." [3]

Is seems clear from the above that Christianity has historically affirmed the worth of females.

How are Women Portrayed in the Old Testament?

As Garlow and Jones continue, they point out the numerous places in the Old Testament that women are celebrated and affirmed:

"Esther was courageous to the point of defying the king himself, an action that usually resulted in death. The outcome of her courage was the salvation of an entire race of people [Esther 1-10].

Ruth was loyal, astute, and shrewd. She stayed with her impoverished mother-in-law after the death of Ruth's husband. She humbled herself in order to secure food for herself and her mother-in-law. And she was obedient, marrying a stranger who ended up loving and caring for Ruth and her family [Ruth 1-4].

Deborah was a wife, mother, and judge in Israel [Judges 4].

Proverbs 31 affirms the greatness of women, demonstrating their ability to juggle the amazing pressures as community leaders, businesswomen, wives, and mothers. The chapter exalts the qualities of one whom the Bible portrays as a model woman:

• She is skilled with her hands [vv. 13, 19] and her mind [vv. 13-31].
• She understands manufacturing [vv. 13, 24]; importing [v. 14]; time management [v. 15]; real estate investing [v. 16]; agribusiness [v.16]; physical workouts [v. 17]; business profit [vv. 16, 18, 24]; a work ethic [vv. 15, 18]; "hands on" labor [v. 19]; welfare and compassion [v. 20]; planning, administration, and organization [v. 21]; and fashion [vv. 21-22].
• When she speaks, she is articulate and her speech is content-rich [v. 26].
• She is an instructor, a teacher [v. 26].
• She is an unashamed homemaker-and a good one [v. 27].
• Not surprisingly, she is busy-very busy [v. 27].
• She enjoys being a mother and is quite successful in child rearing [v. 28].

Does this sound like a repressed women?" [4] I think not!

How are Women Portrayed in the New Testament?

It can be demonstrated as well that women were held in high esteem by the New Testament authors. Consider the following:

• Women were included in the genealogy of Jesus [Matthew 1:1:16]. Unusual, when one understands that a typical lineage at that time would have included only males.
• Jesus' very first announcement that He was the Messiah was shared with a woman [Jn. 4:17-26].
• When Mary [the sister of Martha and Lazarus] listened to Jesus' teachings [at a time an activity reserved for males] and Martha scurried about fulfilling the "female" role, Jesus affirmed Mary and challenged Maratha [Luke 10:41-42].
• In contrast to the custom of the time, a group of women were part of the entourage that traveled with Jesus and other men. These women even supported His ministry financially [Luke 8:1-3].
• In the book of Acts, Peter cites an Old Testament scripture saying that both "your sons and daughters will prophesy" [Joel 2:28].
• Paul is clear that both male and female have equal standing with Christ. [Galatians 3:28]
• Following the often discussed directive "wives, submit to your husbands" [Ephesians 5:22], Paul, only 3 verses later, gives the most difficult assignment any male have ever received: "Husbands love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her" [Ep. 5:25]. As husbands, we are called to give up our lives for our wives.
• Women were the first to proclaim the resurrection of Jesus. This is especially significant when one considers that, according to the customs of that time, women would not have been allowed to testify in court. All of Christianity hinges on this one event, and a woman was chosen for this highest honor. [5]

The Bible also commends specific women for their godly actions and contributions.

• Anna [Luke 2:36-38]
• Phoebe [Rm. 16:1]
• Tabitha or Dorcas [Acts 9:36-41]
• Lydia [Acts 16:13-15]
• Joanna [Luke 8:3]
• Susanna [Luke 8:3]
• Mary Magdalene [John 20:11-18]
• Lois and Eunice, Timothy's grandmother and mother [2 Timothy 1:5] [6]

Is seems clear that the authors of the New Testament indeed had a very high view of women.

What Contributions have Women made in Church History?

The critics who claim that Christianity demeans women also seem to completely overlook the numerous women who have made significant contributions in Church history. Garlow and Jones report:

• Perpetua: This twenty-six-year-old mother of a newborn, along with her servant girl Felicitas, demonstrated unequaled courage as they were martyred for their faith in March 205.
• Monica [331-387]: She was the most significant influencer-as mother-on Augustine, one of the most influential persons of Christianity.
• Clare: Turning away from wealth to follow Christ, she established in 1212 the "Poor Clares," now located in seventy-six countries.
• Catherine of Sienna: Born in 1347, she was an activist, prayer leader, humanitarian, and adviser and counselor to the most powerful political and ecclesiastical leaders.
• Katherina von Bora: Without her, Martin Luther could never have become the leader of the Protestant Reformation in the 1500s.
• Susanna Wesley: The twenty-fifth child in her family, she gave birth to nineteen children, was a brilliant thinker, and theologian, and was the counselor, confidante, and theological mentor of son John Wesley, leader of the massive Evangelical Awakening in the 1700s.
• Catherine Booth: A stronger preacher than her husband William, she co-founded with him the Salvation Army in the late 1800s in England.

Far from suppressing or demeaning these women, it seems Christianity empowered them to achieve much that many of us can be thankful for!

How Did Jesus View Women?

We must judge Christianity by it's Christ. It is Him we follow and live for. So, did Jesus hold women in high esteem? As I have demonstrated above [see How are Women Portrayed in the New Testament?] and Marla Alupoaicci contends, He did indeed:

"As God incarnate, He did not demean women. Rather, He powerfully affirmed their worth. He demonstrated love and compassion to women and engaged them in discussions about relationships and other significant issues [Mt. 9:22; Jn. 4:7-29]. In fact, the level of interaction He had with women shocked His disciples and the religious leaders of His day. Jesus Christ valued and affirmed women, and He is our ultimate example." [7]

When one demeans women and attempts to use his Christian beliefs to justify his actions, he is acting in contradiction with the very One he claims to represent.

Conclusion

1. History demonstrates that wherever Christianity has spread, women have been lifted-up and affirmed.

2. Women are celebrated and affirmed in the Old and New Testaments.

3. Women have made significant contributions in Church history.

4. Jesus valued and affirmed women and He is our ultimate example.

5. Whether in history or in modern times, if a person or group has used Christianity justify their demeaning of women, they acted in contradiction with what Christianity teaches. I believe even the atheist would agree that we should not judge a philosophy or worldview by those who abuse it.

To see our answers to other common objections, see here.

Courage and Godspeed,

Chad

For further research, check out the following:

1. A Complementarian Response to Feminist Theology by Candace Jackson of apologetics.com

2. The Biblical View of Women by Kyle Butt

3. Sexism in the Bible: Is the Bible Sexist? by Richard Deem

4. Audio- Isn't the Bible Sexist and Out of Date? by Amy Orr-Ewing

Resources:

1. James L. Garlow and Peter Jones, Cracking Da Vinci's Code, p. 62-63.

2. Ibid., 63.

3. Sharon James, Does the Bible Demean Women?, The Apologetics Study Bible, p. 730.

4. Garlow and Jones, p. 68-69.

5. Ibid., p. 70-72.

6. Marla Ahupoaicci, Does the Bible Demean Women?, The Apologetics Study Bible for Students, p. 507.

7. Ibid.

Book Review: God Behaving Badly: Is the God of the Old Testament Angry, Sexist and Racist? by David T. Lamb

Chapter One: A Bad Reputation

David Lamb has observed that God has a bad reputation in today’s culture. He is often seen as one who gets angry, smiting people for no apparent reason; a cosmic kill joy imposing bountiful amounts of laws upon us, and one who favors one race (the Jews) over all others.

his book, The God Delusion, Richard Dawkins describes the God of the Old Testament in this manner:

“...jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully” (p. 13).

Lamb states that such a vicious evaluation of God demands a response. He states that the Church has not studied and taught portions of the Old Testament that challenge the way we view God, but have merely swept them under the rug and left claims similar to those of Dawkins unanswered. This book is a response to those claims.

Lamb writes:

“I will emphasize aspects of God’s character because the Old Testament repeatedly describes God in this manner. But if I am to be faithful to the whole Old Testament, I will also need to examine other texts, even ones that appear to undermine my arguments…To avoid misrepresenting the Bible, we need to look at many texts, to study passages on both sides of an issue and to read texts within their context. This type of reading will involve work, but the result will be well worth the effort as our understanding of God is profoundly deepened” (p. 17).

Lamb concludes this chapter by making a few points.

1. God is primarily called Yahweh in the Old Testament and Jesus in the New Testament and throughout the book he refers to either one or the other depending on which portion of Scripture he is examining. He absolutely believes in the Triune God and is purely “following the conventions for divine names established in the two testaments” (p. 19). The same will be done in this review.

2. “People who overdichotomize the two testaments seem to forget one important fact: the Bible of Jesus was the Old Testament” and “Jesus used the Old Testament to describe God” (p. 20).

3. The image of God an individual holds affects their relationship with Him, their desire to read Scripture, and what attributes that person thinks His followers should manifest.

Chapter Two: Angry or Loving?

In this chapter, Lamb examines a portion of Scripture that is often used to support the idea of Yahweh being a God of anger (2 Samuel 6:1-8). Here we find that the Israelites have recovered the Ark of the Covenant from the Philistines after losing it in battle. The Ark was being transported back to Jerusalem and a great celebration was taking place. The oxen pulling the cart which held the Ark stumbled and Uzzah took hold of the Ark to steady it. Yahweh struck him dead for doing so and the party ends. Why did Yahweh do this? Was not Uzzah just being helpful? Lamb effectively explains that Yahweh was angry here for three main reasons:

1. The Israelites were not carrying the Ark correctly. Yahweh had made it abundantly clear throughout the law that the Ark was to be carried by the priests on poles through rings on the side of the Ark. Here they are carrying it on a cart despite having done it correctly every time before this incident. Lamb uses a clever analogy to demonstrate that Yahweh is not just being overly particular about transporting the Ark- Just as the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission put protocols in place for transporting plutonium, so also, Yahweh put protocols in place for transporting the Ark. The Ark was the symbolic presence of Yahweh among the Israelites. Lamb writes:

“Handling the ark was inherently dangerous, like handling radioactive materials. If people do not use proper precaution when transporting plutonium, people die…God is more powerful than plutonium” (p. 28-29).

2. The decision by the Israelites to transport the Ark on a cart was not only disobedient, it was insulting. As mentioned above, the form of transportation for the Ark that the law prescribed was essentially a litter. This form of transportation was common for royalty in ancient times. “It was important for Yahweh’s symbolic presence to be treated in a royal fashion because he was their God and King” (p. 30).

3. The lack of respect the Israelites were showing towards the Ark was a symptom of their lack of concern for their relationship with Yahweh. Lamb compares the Ark to a wedding ring. The Ark was the symbol of the relationship between Yahweh and His people. He would not tolerate any disrespect towards that symbol.

Lamb concludes from this event “that Yahweh gets mad to protect his law, his honor and his relationship with his people” (p. 33). This reader finds all of these valid reasons for the God of the Old Testament to get angry. Lamb also discusses how Yahweh is slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love not only towards the Israelites, but also other nations. Also, he briefly discusses two incidents where Jesus became angry (the “cleansing of the Temple” and when Jesus heals the man with the withered hand on the Sabbath). To top it off, he provides some helpful advice on page 42 when coming upon a difficult passage in the Old Testament:

1. Ask why Yahweh got angry.

2. Read the whole context

3. Have reasonable expectations.

Lamb finishes off the chapter by bringing all of this down to a personal level with the following:

“Is the God of the Old Testament angry? Yes. Is the God of the Old Testament loving? Yes. Is the God of the New Testament angry? Yes. Is the God of the New Testament loving? Yes. Anger and love are not mutually exclusive. Love for people can lead to anger over a broken relationship. Love for people can also lead to anger about injustice. The God of the Old Testament and New Testament is both quick to love and slow to anger (Jas 1:19). And we should be too” (p. 46).

Chapter Three: Sexist or Affirming?

To address the accusation that Yahweh is sexist, Lamb starts off this chapter by going all the way back to the beginning to discuss the creation of Eve and the Fall. From the text in Genesis 1 and 2 we find that women are made in Yahweh’s image and it could be argued that Eve was an improvement upon Adam. Lamb writes:

“I don’t actually think that we should argue for the superiority of women because they…came second, but I do think that an argument for their inferiority based on Genesis 2 is also invalid” (p. 52).

He also explains that the Hebrew world ezer or “helper” found in Genesis 2:18 does not hold the sexist connotations some think that it does. In the majority of the Old Testament, God is the ezer. Just as Yahweh helps his people, the woman helps the man. So, again we see that women are like Yahweh.

Lamb then focuses on the Fall narrative in Genesis 3 to address the cultural perception that this portion of Scripture makes Eve look bad. When the text is studied, it is clear that Adam was standing right next to Eve when she ate the fruit. Thus both the man and the woman look bad in this passage and it could even be argued that Adam’s sin was worse. Lamb continues on in this chapter of Genesis to examine the accuracy of the claim that the curse placed upon the woman is sexist. He sums it up this way:

“The curse on the woman and the curse on the man were not the same, but that doesn’t mean that God was treating the woman in a sexist manner. Unlike curses on the man and the serpent, the woman’s ‘curse’ never actually mentions a ‘curse.’ Her punishment speaks of submission, not oppression. It was not as severe as the man’s curse. And, most significantly, in the midst of these curses, she alone is blessed with a promise” (p. 58).

The author then makes the important point that the negative consequences of the curses are not to be accepted. Yahweh overcame them through the death and resurrection of Jesus. Amen!

He also looks at the incident in Genesis 19:5-11 with Lot and his daughters and a law in Deuteronomy 22:28-29, that states that after a woman who is not engaged is raped she is to become the wife of her rapist, and brilliantly answers the claims of sexism. Finally, Lamb provides several examples in the Old Testament where women are influential (Judges 4; 1 Samuel 25; 2 Samuel 13; 2 Samuel 20:14-22; Ruth; Esther) and examples in the New Testament in which Jesus interacts with women (John 4; 20:11-18; Mark 5:33-34; 7:26-29), tells stories in which a woman is the hero (Luke 15:8-10; 18:1-8), and affirms women (Luke 10:38-42; Mark 12:43-44; 14:3-9).

Lamb closes the chapter by stating that sexism in society and the Church are factors contributing to the perception that the God of the Old Testament is sexist and by providing three suggestions for men found on page 68:

1. Women are made in the image of Yahweh. Listen to them and learn about Yaweh from them.

2. Follow the example of Yahweh and Jesus by affirming women whenever possible.

3. Talk and write about sexism.

Is Yahweh sexist or affirming? Lamb gives a huge affirmative for affirming. And this reviewer agrees.

Chapter Four: Racist or Hospitable?

Again, Lamb begins this chapter “in the beginning” by looking at Genesis to address the view that Yahweh is racist. He writes:

“God created man and woman in the image of God and then commanded them to multiply and fill the earth (Gen 1:26-28), and over time groups of peoples and nations were eventually created, all of which reflect the divine image” (p. 72)

In the end, all nations are related to each other and this process of populating the earth was established by Yahweh. This reviewer also appreciated this statement Lamb makes regarding genealogies in the Bible:

“Why does the Bible waste so much ‘prime real estate’ on genealogy? Because race is important to God. The main message communicated through these ‘boring lists of names’ is that God is interested in where peoples and nations came from” (p. 73).

Lamb then discusses the curse Noah placed upon Canaan in Genesis 9:18-27. After the flood, Noah plants a vineyard, gets drunk, and then lies down in his tent naked. He is seen in this state by his son Ham who then tells his other brothers, Japheth and Shem, who in turn quickly and subtly cover up their father. When Noah finds out what happened, he gets mad at Ham and curses his son Canaan. This curse was used by some nineteenth-century Christians to justify slavery as Ham’s descendents were generally thought to be Africans. He provides three points in refutation:

1. The unusualness of the story makes it impracticable to postulate any ongoing repercussions outside of one generation of Noah’s sons.

2. The curse was not spoken by Yahweh, but by Noah

3. The curse focused on Canaan, not Ham or all of his sons. Canaan’s descendants were the people the Israelites encountered in the land of Canaan. So this curse is actually a foreshadowing of the conflict between Israel and the Canaanites.

A discussion of the Canaanites genocide is where Lamb then turns. He expounds on it in greater detail in chapter five, however here he writes:

“The major point of similarity between the biblical conquest narratives and those of their neighbors is the hyperbolic language. The hyperbolic nature of the two Joshua texts can be seen when they are examined alongside other texts. While Joshua 10:40 and Joshua 11:12-15 speak of everyone being destroyed, elsewhere in Joshua and Judges a different perspective is given. These other texts repeatedly state that the Israelites did not kill all the Canaanites; they can’t even drive all of them out of the land (Josh 13:1-6; 15:63; 17:12; Judg 1:19-34). The book of Joshua even refers to foreigners not just living among the Israelites but also participating in the covenant renewal ceremony (Josh 8:33, 35). To reconcile these two divergent perspectives on Israel’s conquest, a nonliteral reading of the texts that speak of ‘all’ people being destroyed is required” (p. 77).

Lamb then goes into a wonderful discussion on promise and punishment. The land of Canaan was promised to the Israelites by Yahweh and their acts were not one of conquest, but of regaining what was rightfully theirs. They had lived there before. He also explains that Yahweh punished His people as well as the Canaanites and intended on blessing all nations through Israel. Lamb asks the obvious question: If Yahweh were racist why would these things be so?

He briefly discusses laws concerning sojourners which instructed Israel to treat them equally (Leviticus 24:22; Numbers 9:14; 15:15-16) and to love them (Deuteronomy 10:17-19) and then gives an example of these being demonstrated by a slave girl, Elisha, and Yahweh in the healing of Naaman the Syrian general (2 Kings 5:1-4, 9-15).

Finally, as if all this were not enough to clear the charge against Yahweh as racist, Lamb presents the genealogy of Jesus in Matthew 1:1-6. He explains that four women are mentioned in this genealogy all of whom are foreigners. Tamar and Rahab were Canaanites, Ruth was a Moabite, and Bathsheba was probably a Hittite. If Yahweh were racist, “he wouldn’t welcome foreign women into his family and then have them listed prominently in his son’s family tree” (p. 87)

To end the chapter, Lamb discusses the Samaritan parable found in Luke 10:29-37 and how the church needs to engage the topic of racism, confront it, and embrace those of different racial and ethnic backgrounds just as Jesus did by telling this parable. If more Christians did this “there would be more Christians” (p. 92).

Is Yahweh racist or hospitable? Lamb excellently demonstrates that He is hospitable and this reader is persuaded.

Chapter Five: Violent or Peaceful?

In this chapter, Lamb deals with bear attacks, Canaanite slaughters, and the death penalty. However, he makes an important point before diving into the discussion. Simply because something is recorded does not mean it is being glorified. He then proceeds to examine 2 Kings 2:23-25.

In this passage of Scripture, Elisha is taunted by a group of boys who in turn curses them in the name of Yahweh. A couple of she-bears appear and maul 42 of the boys. Why were these boys dealt with so harshly for teasing Elisha? Lamb provides three points from a post he sent to an atheist blog that commented on the passage:

1. There are two Hebrew words for boys in the passage: qatan in verse 23 and yeled in verse 24. Both of these words can mean “boy,” “young boy,” or even “adolescent” or “older teenager.” Based on the text, Lamb states it is reasonable to assume that this was a group of teenagers (for a group of younger children this large would unlikely be hanging outside of town without adult supervision) and that Elisha was in danger.

2. “While in our 21^st-century, Western mindset it may seem like Elisha was overreacting, within his cultural context his behavior was justified” (p. 97).

3. Looking at the broader context of 2 Kings it is clear that the ministry of Elisha was one of mercy and peace. Lamb says we should give him “the benefit of the doubt” in light of all of his other deeds (p. 98).

He wraps the discussion of this passage up with more observations that I think further alleviate concerns regarding Elisha’s and Yahweh’s character:

-It is not explicitly stated that the boys are killed.

-Some manuscripts of the Septuagint record that the boys also threw stones at Elisha

-Elisha was acting in self-defense

-Yahweh was sending a message that Elisha would have divine protection. He wanted Elisha’s “ministry of compassion” to continue (p.99).

Lamb continues on by discussing the violence of the Canaanite conquest in more depth than the previous chapter.

Five points arise from this discussion:

1. The Canaanites were being punished for their wicked and violent behavior.

2. Israel was not trying to expand an empire at any cost (as the Canaanites were); they were trying to restore a home in the land of their fathers.

3. Yahweh waited until the entire period of Israel’s bondage in Egypt was finished to punish the Canaanites. This was plenty of time for them to repent.

4. The conquest of the Canaanites was not unusual in the ancient Near East. Conquered nations were typically killed or enslaved.

5. The killing was probably limited and localized. Only a few texts mention widespread destruction while the majority of them mention many Canaanites still in the land.

Lamb then goes on to discuss a divinely initiated slaughter in 2 Kings 19:35, the need for justice to be “simple, swift, and straightforward” in ancient Israel, and 2 Kings 6:14-23, where Yahweh brings peace instead of violence (p. 104). He concludes the chapter by giving examples in the New Testament of how Jesus is the “Prince of Peace” (Isaiah 9:6) and that we are to promote peace as He and Yahweh do.

Is Yahweh violent or peaceful? Lamb effectively demonstrates that Yahweh is both, but violent only when the wicked need to be punished and the weak protected.

Chapter Six: Legalistic or Gracious?

As the author continues, he again turns to Genesis in this chapter to look at the first commands Yahweh gives to Adam and Eve. They are, essentially, have sex and eat! Right off the bat, Lamb displays the goodness and generosity of Yahweh. So how did Yahweh become viewed as a party pooper? The temptation of Satan. Lamb discerns two lessons from the Fall story:

“First, temptation questions the goodness of God’s commands. Second, sin results from perceiving God not as good, generous and gracious, but as mean, stingy and legalistic. A proper understanding of God and his laws is, therefore, vital to resist temptation and avoid sin” (p. 120).

He also comes to a very thoughtful conclusion: “God’s actions define his character, not popular perceptions of his actions” (ibid).

Lamb then examines three “types” of laws found in the Old Testament: many laws, random laws, and harsh laws. To address the concern that there are too many laws, he simply makes a comparison:

“Old Testament law codes are actually concise compared to modern law codes. We’ve all seen images of a lawyer’s office: four walls, each wall lined with ten shelves, each shelf containing a hundred books, each book with thousands of laws, cases and precedents. Yahweh’s laws don’t even fill up one book” (p. 122).

Lamb examines a law found in Deuteronomy 22:9-11 that seems random for it commands that clothing made of wool and linen woven together must not be worn. He states that “these types of laws are culturally specific, addressing particular problems from their context” (p. 124). To give an example of this, he states that advice to men to not buy Sports Illustrated in early February and to avoid the red-light district given in a sermon today would not make sense thousands of years from now.

He then looks at an incident in Numbers 15:32-36 in which a man is stoned to death for gathering sticks on the Sabbath as the law commanded. This seems rather harsh. Lamb writes:

“The supposedly innocent stick gatherer would have known that he was committing a crime with a punishment of death. Everyone else knew what he was doing was wrong. His decision to blatantly disobey the word of Yahweh was an act of distrust and rebellion, and Yahweh decided not to be lenient at this point, lest a precedent be set for disobedience…he clearly wasn’t trusting God to provide for him…considering he had been supernaturally fed with manna every day since they left Egypt” (p. 126).

The author then echoes what he said earlier in the chapter about a proper understanding of God’s laws by briefly discussing Psalm 119 and how the whole psalm is about the crazy love the psalmist has for Yahweh’s laws. The psalmist knew following them would bring him into a deeper relationship with Yahweh.

The chapter begins to close with an examination of Mark 2:23-3:6 in which three actions take place on the Sabbath: Jesus’ disciples pluck grain, Jesus heals a man with a withered hand, and the Pharisees plot to kill Jesus. Lamb writes:

“The sabbath law is meant to guarantee restoration and rest, and Jesus wants to uphold that law for the sake of this man, even though his action will serve as a catalyst for a process that will culminate in his own death. The legalism of the Pharisees lead them to want to deprive the disciples of food, the man of healing and Jesus of life. Jesus is essentially risking his life here to make the point that God’s laws are designed to bless people. Jesus is not a legalist and neither is Yahweh” (p. 131).

The reoccurring question is effectively answered.

Lamb closes the chapter by swiftly tackling the three forms of legalism: 1) God’s laws are a way to earn salvation 2) God’s laws are viewed as a means of repayment to God 3) God’s laws are viewed as simply a duty or obligation.

Chapter Seven: Rigid or Flexible?

In this chapter, Lamb explains that the subject of divine changeability centers on the Hebrew word naham which has three meanings: to relent or change one’s mind, to regret, and to show compassion. And the context usually makes it clear which meaning naham is referencing. He focuses on texts that contain the first meaning as it implies mutability. There is also a sidebar that summarizes all of the naham references.

Lamb then identifies four primary Old Testament texts that speak of the immutability of Yahweh: Number 23:19, 1 Samuel 15:29, Psalm 110:4, and Malachi 3:6. The passage in Malachi does not use naham however. He writes:

“The main point that these texts are making is not simply that God is unchangeable, but that God is unchangeable about his commitment to bless his people” (p. 139).

Yet he also recognizes many texts in which Yahweh relents: Exodus 32:14; Numbers 14:20; 2 Samuel 24:16; 1 Chronicles 21:15; Psalm 106:45; Jeremiah 15:6, 18:10, 26:3, 13, and 19, 42:10; Amos 7:3 and 6; Joel 2:13-14; Jonah 3:10, 4:2. In each of these texts, pending judgment and repentant sinners exist. And from these texts Lamb states that we can see that Yahweh “is predictably flexible, constantly changeable and immutably mutable…in regard to showing mercy toward repentant sinners” (p. 147).

Mark 7:24-30 is also discussed by Lamb in this chapter. In this passage of Scripture a Gentile woman asks Jesus to remove an unclean spirit from her daughter. Jesus responds by telling her it is not right to take the children’s (the Jews’) bread from the table and give it to dogs (the Gentiles). The woman responds by saying that even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from the table. As a result of her statement, Jesus changes his mind and heals her daughter.

Is Yahweh rigid or flexible? According to Lamb he is both. Within the chapter he states that when faced with such a seemingly contradictory statement there are three routes we can take: to ignore one of the characteristics; to rationalize that even though Scripture ascribes both of these attributes to Yahweh he is actually only one of them; or to work to understand how they correlate with each other. The author and this reviewer take the third option, because it is clear, once again, that context is the key to understanding Scripture. He ends by saying that Christians “need to teach not only about divine immutability but also about divine flexibility” (p. 151).

Chapter Eight: Distant or Near?

The first several pages of this chapter discuss the psalms, specifically the lament psalms which account for over 40 percent of them. These are passages in which the psalmist cries out to God asking, “Where are you at?” and “Why is this happening?” Lamb writes:

“God apparently thought it was good for the writers of Scripture to express their honest questions about his apparent absence. God gave laments to his people as a way to pray in the midst of pain. Jesus even modeled appropriate use of a lament (Ps 22) by showing how relevant it was to his own crisis as he was dying on a cross…As we follow the pattern of the lament-from doubts and despair to prayer and petition-we eventually arrive at a place of hope, trust and praise” (p. 157).

Lamb goes on to show how throughout the Old Testament, Yahweh:

-Speaks to His people: “In the English Standard Version of the Old Testament, the phrase ‘The LORD said’ appears more than 250 times. ‘Thus says the LORD’ appears more than 400 times” (p. 166). Yahweh speaks the world into creation and blessing to Adam and Eve (Genesis 1:28). He “spoke directly to the patriarchs and later to his people through Moses, judges, kings and the prophets. He spoke through prophecies, visions, dreams (Gen 28:12; 37:5-10; Joel 2:28) and even a talking donkey (Num 22)” (ibid).

-Walks with His people: Yahweh walked with Adam and Eve (Genesis 2:7, 21-22; 3:8), ate a meal with Abraham and Sarah (Genesis 18:1-15), and even had a wrestling match with Jacob (Genesis 32:24-32).

-Dwells with His people: At Sinai, Yahweh tells the Israelites he will dwell with them (Exodus 29:45). While Solomon was constructing the temple, Yahweh told him He would dwell with them forever (1 Kings 6:13). Yahweh consistently says “I am with you” as Israel is rebuilding the temple (Haggai 1:12-2:5).

Lamb also reminds us in this chapter that one of the names of Jesus is “God is with us” (Immanuel, Matthew 1:23). He goes on to talk about how tax collectors and sinners drew near to Him and ate with Him (Luke 15:1-7) because He was approachable. He concludes the chapter by saying that Christians often do not attract people like Jesus did and that they need to do a better job of reaching out to the marginalized of society.

Is Yahweh distant or near? The author did very well showing that He is near.

Epilogue

Here, Lamb briefly summarizes each chapter and explains that this book is fundamentally about God’s nature. He goes on to say that it is important to think about the nature of God because it affects how we relate to Him. He writes:

“Instead of ignoring passages that seem to portray Yahweh negatively, we need to study them, discuss them and teach them to gain understanding. While all our questions may never fully be answered, we will find that Yahweh and Jesus can be reconciled and that the God of both testaments is loving. He affirms women, is hospitable toward foreigners and brings peace, not a sword. He is not legalistic but gracious, not rigid but flexible, and not distant but near” (p. 178-179).

He ends the book by adding three more attributes of God to the list: fascinating, relational, good.

There are also discussion questions for each chapter after the Epilogue, making this a perfect book for group study.

Conclusion

David Lamb’s examination of difficult passages in the Old Testament is easy to read and full of wit. And yet this reviewer can sense his deep respect and love for the Old Testament. The book alleviated the struggles I had with certain passages in the Old Testament and reiterated for me that only a thorough study of Scripture will bring us into a deeper understanding of God and a deeper relationship with God.

Thanks to Intervarsity Press for the review copy.

Stand firm in Christ,
Chase

Counterpoints: John Loftus and Frank Turek on the Death of Christopher Hitchens

John Loftus: "Many Christians are thinking he’s burning in hell. Some others may even say this. But it is a disgrace to humanity to even think this abhorrent thought about such a brilliantly good man...this statement burns me up to no end. It is more repulsive than any thought I can conceive...may his memory live on. He has changed the world for the better." [1]

Frank Turek: "There is no one with whom I disagreed more who I admired so much. I don’t see how anyone who knew Christopher Hitchens could think that a man with such admirable qualities and talents was nothing more than a collection of chemicals– the product of unexplained random processes. Christopher’s intellect, wit, courage, and passion are evidence to me of a Divine Being– a Divine Being who loves human freedom so much that He would even allow the gifts He bestows to be used against Him." [2]

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

A Note Readers:

Although I disagreed with many of Hitchens' views, I did admire his willingness to take on all comers and his story telling abilities. The goal of this post is simply to contrast the views of a Christian and an atheist on the death of a well-known individual. No disrespect toward Mr. Hitchens or his family is intended.

Resources:

1. http://freethoughtblogs.com/loftus/2011/12/16/christopher-hitchens-is-now-burning-in-hell/
2. http://www.crossexamined.org/blog/?p=258