In the Beginning Was the Word

What is the longest word in the English language? It is not antidisestablishmentarianism! It is, as the Oxford mathematician John C. Lennox likes to say, the 3.5 billion-lettered word in DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) in every human cell! A word in the human cell? Scientists are wrestling with the idea “that information and intelligence are fundamental to the existence of the universe and life.…”[1] But from where has this information come? How did words get inscribed in DNA? Philosopher of science Stephen Myer calls it the “DNA enigma.”[2] Where did the four-character digital code stored in DNA come from?

And you may be wondering: What does this have to do with Advent? Think of the intriguing connection with the Christmas text of John 1: 1, 3: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God… All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.” Consider this in tandem with the text of Hebrews 11:3, “The world was created by the word of God.”

The discovery of information in the cell in our lifetime is fascinating. In 1953, Crick and Watson demonstrated the structure of DNA. DNA consists of parallel strings, a double helix. These parallel strings are connected like a twisting ladder with rungs that are chemical words. These chemical words function like digital characters in a computer software section. Bill Gates says, “DNA is like a computer program.” These chemical words are arranged to convey particular information. I can arrange letters: tttooooeernb; or I can rearrange them: “To be or not to be.” So, depending on how they are arranged, these DNA strings give instructions for making the parts to build tiny machines in each cell.

Within the cell, extremely sophisticated exchanges of information occur. DNA strings instruct these cell machines to haul cargo; turn on and off cellular switches, and wait for another machine to arrive. At the end of the day, the arrangement of the chemical words of the DNA strands and their instructions contribute to the difference between Samson, Henry VIII, and Marilyn Monroe, The “DNA enigma”! From where do the different words, the genetic instructions, come?

Is it chance? Science journalist Clifford Longley writes that saying it’s random chance is like thinking Shakespeare’s works could be written by a billion monkeys sitting at a billion keyboards typing for a billion years. The monkey argument was put to the test in 2003 in Plymouth, England. Some museum curators put typewriters in the cage of some macaque monkeys. The best they could get out of them, before they “did their business” on the typewriters, was to repeat the ‘S’ key. There simply is not enough time in the history of the cosmos for chance to formulate complex cellular messages.

How about random mutation and “natural selection”? There is not enough time in the history of the universe for random mutation and natural selection to locate extremely rare genetic sequences of chemical words capable of building cellular machines. Stephen Meyer compares it to a bike thief trying to pick a bike lock with 10 dials. The thief would have to search through 10 billion possible combinations to unlock it. Devoting a lifetime to unlocking the bike lock would prove fruitless. There has not been enough time since the origin of the universe for random mutation and natural selection to construct even a single gene.

From where do genetic instructions come? Was it quantum tunneling? Can the possible existence of an infinite number of universes explain it? No matter which of materialism’s and naturalism’s arguments, they come up short for the same reason. They cannot adequately explain how new genetic, biological information necessary to produce new biological life-forms arose from nothing.

There is a better argument. This argument assumes letters arranged in intelligent sequences of meaning imply a sentient mind. Ink and paper do not produce the Oxford English Dictionary. Egyptian hieroglyphics, Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet, or Microsoft Office; they come from conscious, mental activity. In our human experience, information is always a product of an intelligent mind. Moreover, not only does mind produce the information, but it also guides and orders information’s selection to an ultimate, purposeful, and moral end. How is this achieved? Where is the power to accomplish such an end?

Might the scientific discoveries of cellular words lead us back to Genesis and John? God in his creative act speaks his word issuing information. “Then God said, ‘Let there be light’.” When Francis Collins stood next to the President and announced the decoding of the human genome, he said, “This is the language of God.” The Word who speaks has informed each living cell. Furthermore, he has the power to direct the information to a purposeful and moral end: “And there was light.” As Hebrews 11:3 says, “The world was created by the word of God.” Before mass-energy was, “in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God … all things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being” (John 1:14).

This is absolutely stunning! We celebrate this Advent the Word which not only dwells in the constitution of every human cell, but who himself became “flesh” and seeks to dwell in every human heart!

[1] John C. Lennox, God’s Undertaker: Has Science Buried God? (Oxford: Lion Hudson, plc, 2007), 167.

[2] Stephen C. Meyer’s recent book is the major resource for this article; see Stephen Meyer, The Return of the God Hypothesis: Three Scientific Discoveries that Reveal the Mind Behind the Universe (Harper One).

He Appeared to Me

Who saw what? How did the sight change their lives? On the third day after His burial in a garden tomb in Jerusalem, Jesus began appearing to numerous people. Consider His appearances to just three persons: the betraying disciple Peter, the skeptic James, and the unbelieving rabbi Saul. How were each of these lives radically altered?

Around 30 A.D., Jesus Christ died in Jerusalem and three days after His burial people report seeing Him alive! The first century historian Josephus says, “He appeared to them alive again the third day.” The apostle Paul collects these appearances and reports them in his 1 Corinthians letter. Paul concludes Jesus “was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures.…” The apostle lists some of those who saw Him. Let me note just three of them.

The apostle Paul says Jesus “appeared to Cephas” (Peter). The actual word “appeared” means “catch sight of” and “see with one’s eyes.” The text makes clear Peter saw Jesus with his own two eyes. This makes Peter an eyewitness. Eyewitnesses give direct, first-hand evidence. First-hand evidence demonstrates a fact by being involved personally in the event. Eyewitnesses witness what happens as it happens. Attorneys attest that a credible eyewitness testimony often wins the jury. Clint Eastwood’s film, The Gauntlet, dramatizes the magnitude of an eyewitness. The alcoholic police officer Ben Shockley, played by Clint Eastwood, goes through a death-defying maelstrom to deliver a material witness, Gus Mally (Sandra Locke), to the Phoenix courthouse alive. The report of Jesus’ resurrection is eyewitness testimony.

Eyewitness Peter is a “what-you-see-is-what-you-get” kind of person. Not subtle, but direct, transparent, open, and frank. Early on, he tells Jesus he’s not the kind of guy Jesus wants to hang with. “Leave me, Lord, for I am a sinful man!” says Peter. When Jesus is questioned by Caiaphas, Peter sits by the fire in earshot of the proceedings. Several servant-girls say to Peter, “You also were with Jesus the Galilean.” Peter curses and three times says, “I do not know the man!” Peter is afraid. If he acknowledges Jesus, the high priest will be after him. So, he denies the Messiah he once confessed. Then the rooster crows.

Sometime later, something happened to Peter. This once guilt-ridden Peter afraid to associate himself publicly with Jesus stands up at the festival of Pentecost before thousands of Jews and says, “Jesus of Nazareth ... you crucified and killed … but God raised him up…” (Acts 2:22-24). Luke and Paul solve the riddle: the living Jesus appeared to Peter. The early church father Clement knew Peter personally. Clement says after Jesus appeared to Peter, Peter’s confliction was gone. With the Holy Spirit’s empowerment, no longer was Peter the coward, but Peter the courageous! Our risen Lord appeared to Peter!

There is another eyewitness. In 2002 archaeologists discovered a first century ossuary box, a box containing a dead person’s bones. This first century limestone, bone box has an Aramaic inscription on it, “James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus.” Scholars debate its authenticity. No matter, Jesus of Nazareth had four brothers, one of whom was James. Early in His ministry, Jesus travels with his mother Mary and his brothers, including James. But Jesus does not win James over. Differences arise between Jesus and James. Anybody can get away with claiming to be a Messiah in rural Nazareth. “If you do mighty works, show yourself to the world,” they say mockingly to Jesus. Prove yourself in D.C., not Tight Squeeze, Virginia! His family seems almost embarrassed by Jesus as the word around Nazareth is that Jesus is unhinged, “gone out of his mind.” John’s Gospel comments, “Not even his brothers believed in him” (John 7: 6). Jesus goes to his grave with his hostile brother James a skeptic.

But something happens to brother James. The next thing we hear James is on his knees praying. Ancient testimony says James is so frequently found in the temple on his knees begging forgiveness for people that his knees are as hard as a camel’s. James’s new name is “James the Just,” the recognized head of the Jerusalem church. Even Paul reports to him. How does skeptical brother James become a believer? The apostle Paul clues us in: Christ “was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures … and then he … appeared to James…” (1 Corinthians 15: 7). Our risen Lord appears to His own brother!

Why is James called upon by the scribes and priests? The priests ask him to persuade the Jewish people not to follow to Jesus. Tradition is that James stands at the top of the temple, and proclaims instead, “Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, the Savior.” Rushing upon him the priests push him off the temple tower. The fall does not kill him. So, they finish him off by stoning him to death. Eyewitness appearances of our risen Lord Jesus are the game changers! James the skeptic becomes James the Just.

Paul mentions one last appearance of the risen Jesus. A Jerusalem rabbi, Saul, leads the charge to bring upstart Jews enamored with Jesus back into the fold. Saul is a single-minded, driven, high achiever. A contemporary of Jesus’ apostles, at an early age he is steeped in Old Testament law. By age thirteen, the Jewish scholar Gamaliel tutors Saul. Gamaliel is the Alan Dershowitz, Harvard law professor of the day. Saul’s zeal surpasses his peers. He kills for the Law.

Taking a leading role in bullying the church, Saul goes to Christian homes and hauls disciples – even women – to prison. Saul admits, “I was violently persecuting the church of God.” I “was trying to destroy it” (Galatians 1: 13). He takes satisfaction in preacher Stephen’s stoning, holding others’ coats, so they could throw stones (Acts 8:1).

Suddenly, something happens to Saul. People say, “He who formerly was persecuting us is now proclaiming the faith he once tried to destroy” (Galatians 1:23). “Is not this the man who made havoc in Jerusalem…?” (Act 9:21). Now called “Paul,” he argues that Jesus “is the Savior, the Son of God,” the crucified Messiah who was raised on the third day (Acts 9:22). Though beaten with rods, stoned, shipwrecked, in dangers from rivers, robbers, rioting mobs, Roman governors, tribunals, and even Caesar himself, he continues to testify Jesus “appeared to me.”

What happened to Paul? Paul answers in his testimony. At midday as he travels to Damascus, a brilliant light, brighter than the sun, surrounds him. A Voice speaks to him, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?” (Acts 26: 14). Paul asks, “Who are you, Lord?” “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting” (Acts 9: 5). Seeing and hearing the resurrected Lord Jesus Christ, Saul becomes Paul.

After his burial, the risen Jesus appeared to … Peter … James … Saul and hundreds more. This first-hand, eyewitness evidence is conclusive. Fiction did not transform Peter; legend did not change James; and myth could not convince Saul; only, “he appeared to me.”

***************************

The Beauty of Creation

The other day on Facebook I saw a meme featuring an expositor preacher, on Mother’s Day, ignoring that it was Mother’s Day and proceeding to the next biblical passage on the docket. It was interesting because this past Sunday, by coincidence, I was asked to speak on a passage from Genesis at a church here in Houston, and it was Mother’s Day.

I started by mentioning Mother’s Day, told some stories about my own mother, pointed out that there are some passages, especially in Isaiah, that offer images of God as a mother and not just a father, and, after discussing the Genesis excerpt, ended by reading Billy Collins’ poem “The Lanyard.” It was easy to carve out a few minutes to honor mothers.

Anyway, the passage from Genesis was from chapter 2, verses 8-17. It begins with God planting a garden in Eden, where he put Adam. God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground, trees pleasing to the eye and good for food. And in the middle of the garden were the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Near the end of the passage we’re told that God charged Adam to work the garden and take care of it, and then told Adam that he was free to eat from any tree in the garden save for the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

I spoke about three things: (1) the garden, (2) the work of tending the garden, and then (3) this tree of the knowledge of good and evil. In this post I’m going to talk about the garden, and in the next two posts I’ll talk about tending the garden and the tree of knowledge of good and evil, respectively. I do this without taking any position on the literalness of these chapters. Such questions are notoriously vexed when it comes to the early chapters of Genesis, but I take it that, however literally or figuratively we are to take some of these matters, the passages are rife with substantive theological insight.

The garden of Eden represents the world prior to the fall. It’s unspoiled, creation as it was intended to be. And we all know that Adam and Eve will soon disobey God, and the horrible fall will ensue. But sometimes Christians get accused, and properly so, of starting with the fall and paying short shrift to the preceding creation narrative. The flow of salvation history in the Bible goes like this: Creation, Fall, Redemption, Consummation (or Restoration). Whereas Adam is responsible for our expulsion from the Garden, Jesus makes possible life once more at it was intended be.

We shouldn’t start with the fall. We should start with the creation narrative. God created this world, and he made us, and in fact made us in his image and after his likeness. That’s an even more central aspect of who we are than our fallenness. Our fallenness is a contingent feature that we have—like where we live. It can change; likewise, our sin problem can be fixed, and for those who follow Christ it has been fixed and it will be fixed. But our having been made in God’s image is an essential feature of ours—a feature that, if we were to lose it, would prevent us from being us. It’s not an accidental feature, but a necessary feature. It’s central to our identity. This is one among other aspects of this all-important creation narrative that predated the fall.

The creation narrative also reminds us that there really is a way the world ought to be, and the world as it currently is isn’t it. We as Christians have an account for why this world falls short of what it should be. When it comes to something like the problem of evil, therefore, its whole force comes from the sense that the world is somehow broken, not what it ought to be. And that’s true, and something that Christianity itself acknowledges and explains. In contrast, a wholly secular or naturalistic understanding of the world doesn’t leave much if any room for the world not matching up to a higher ideal. It is what it is; why expect anything different? It’s all an inevitable byproduct of the laws at work in the world and atoms in motion. Christians in strong contrast have a principled and grounded hope for the world’s redemption, the closing of the awful gap between is and ought. This is part of the good news of the gospel.

Another reminder the creation story offers us is the goodness with which God imbued the world. Think about the garden, filled with delightful fruit and stunning beauty. God wants us to enjoy life and the goodness of the world he created. He imposes some limits on our behavior, it’s true, but the freedoms far exceed the limitations. And what limitations he imposes are for our own good. He wants us to taste and see his goodness in a plethora or resplendent ways. There are so many wonderful things this world contains—meaningful work, rich friendships, faithful marriages, rearing children, beautiful art, transformative conversations, music and literature, food and sport, worship and love The world contains great goodness, enough to break our hearts with joy.

Yet still it isn’t what it was originally intended, and for some their lives are filled with sadness and pain. In fact, the world wasn’t perfect even in Eden, was it? Temptation comes to Adam and Eve—in the form of the serpent. If the world were perfect, that wouldn’t be the case. Plausibly this points to something like a fall before the fall. Tradition has it that Satan was an angel who fell. So the world, even in Adam’s time, was already in need of fixing, even prior to the fall.

There are thus at least two ways that the ultimate redemption of the world will make for a world even better than Eden: (1) Satan will eventually be utterly defeated and silenced. And (2) we won’t be vulnerable and susceptible to sin in our glorified state.

The latter point raise in the minds of some the issue of freedom. If we can’t fall in our beatified state, does that mean we lose our free will in heaven? I don’t think so. I think we’ll lose a vulnerability to sin that they had (and we still retain for now). In that sense our glorified state isn’t simply a return to Eden. It’s better. The picture is one of complete victory over sin—not just forgiveness for our sins, but the defeat of sin itself—understood in a broader way than just individual sins. Whatever is wrong with the world—and clearly the world isn’t the way it ought to be—will be wholly fixed.

Biblically speaking, the deepest sense of freedom is freedom from sin. Sin binds us, holds us in bondage. This is why those who think they’ve broken free from God’s constraints are often those most held in the grip of sin.

One more thing about the creation narrative for now—notice that the creation is described as good—and the notion there is interchangeable with the notion of beautiful. Christianity has always taught there’s a close connection between the good and the beautiful, so that makes sense. Kant thought of the beautiful as a symbol of morality, and of course the history of philosophy is replete with those who have thought of the transcendentals of the beautiful and goodness as flip sides of the same proverbial coin, in some ultimate sense ontologically inseparable, even if they remain conceptually distinct.

Hans Urs von Balthasar famously argued that Kant’s arrival at beauty only in his 3rd Critique (after truth in the 1st and goodness in the 2nd) represents the way philosophers tend to privilege truth and goodness over beauty. Balthasar actually argued that this is a mistake. He thought that beauty paves the way to thinking of goodness and finally of truth in the right sort of way, making beauty the appropriate place to begin. It can offer an enrapturing vision of how the world ought to be, something that includes our will within God’s animating providence. This is one reason among others why, though I’ve devoted most of my professional energies to work on the moral argument(s), I have a growing desire to extend my work to an aesthetic argument for God’s existence. If goodness and beauty are in fact inseparable, perhaps I’ve been doing so all along.

Good God, Moral Choice, and the Presence of Evil - Panel Discussion

From the Lanier Theological Library:

A conversation about evil must begin with discussion of what is good and ultimately who is good. As Christians, this starts with identifying the character and person of God as the source and measure of goodness. If humanity is created in God’s image as his representatives in the physical world, it should follow that we are made “for good works” (Ephesians 2:10). Does this undermine the belief by some that God causally determines all human thoughts, actions, events, and therefore evil?

Panel members:

David Baggett (Professor of Philosophy, Director, Center for Moral Apologetics, Houston Christian University)

Ingrid Faro (Coordinator of MA in Old Testament–Jerusalem University College Program, Northern Seminary, Lisle, IL)

Catherine L. McDowell (Associate Professor of Old Testament, Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, Charlotte, NC)

John H. Walton (Professor of Old Testament, Wheaton College, Wheaton, IL)

Jonathan Walton (PhD Candidate, University of St. Andrews, Scotland)

Mark Lanier (Moderator - J.D. Trial Attorney, Bible Teacher, Author, and Founder of Lanier Law Firm & Lanier Theological Library, Houston, TX)

Full of Grace and Truth

A lie is the truth! So seems postmodernist verbal sleight-of-hand. Postmodernism can be tied to a number of intellectual trends, from a denial of any normative overarching metanarrative to the relativity of truth, but most postmodernists assume with ancient Greek philosopher Protagoras that “Man is the measure of all things” and that we humans are the sole source of meaning, morality, and “truth.”[1] Postmodern philosophy constructs “truth” unconnected to any referent in objective reality “out there.” As the godfather of postmodernism, Friedrich Nietzsche, said, we create truth from out of the perspective of our perceived need, in our contemporary world, out of marginalization, powerlessness, racial, gender, or sexual oppression.[2]

The unfitness and insufficiency of the postmodern rhetoric to account satisfactorily and do justice to the way things are was vividly lit up for me in the Johnny Depp v. Amber Heard defamation trial last spring 2022. The celebrity trial fascinated millions of people worldwide. Depp contended that Heard damaged his reputation by declaring through various public media sources that he had committed domestic violence against her and physically and sexually abused her. Amber’s statements under oath highlight for me the postmodern proclivity to use objectively false “true-for-me” statements as authentic, legitimate, moral speech protesting exploitation and abuse of an oppressed class—in this case, a woman Amber Heard.

Ms. Heard spoke as a vulnerable woman oppressed by a rich, violent man. In the Virginia court of law, she accused Johnny Depp of beating her up and breaking her nose. Photos of her face the next night after a gala showed no signs of being beaten—no marring, no swelling or bruising, and no crooked nose. There were no doctor visits. When confronted with her speech and the lack of correspondence to actual outside reality, she defended her speech saying it certainly “felt broken”!

To Amber, “felt broken” is the same as being broken. No, they are not the same. Neither does “felt broken” describe the fact he had not struck her at all! A claim must correlate with the facts it describes. Rather than creating a harmony of justice in which right is restored and the injured party and the malefactor get what each deserves, Amber Heard’s speech created injustice she sought to right. Amber Heard was not the injured party. Heard’s claim, “I spoke up against sexual violence,” justified as authentic testimony of an oppressed woman, carries significance only if it is connected with actual oppression. If she was not an offended party against whom sexual violence had been committed, words to that effect are simply untrue.

In fact, Johnny Depp proved to be the injured party because the public prior to the trial considered Amber Heard’s words to be connected to actual reality and acted accordingly. Movie studios did not renew Depp’s contracts for leading roles such as iconic pirate “Jack Sparrow” in Pirates of the Caribbean and villain “Gellert Grindelwald” in Fantastic Beasts. Depp was deemed an abuser of women. His reputation suffered and he lost employment.[3] Of course, in recent days our society has done at least a marginally better job taking the claims of real victims seriously, but if claims of abuse are demonstrably manufactured, investing them with authority will not advance the cause of justice, but subvert it.

With postmodernism denying truth as objective and considering only personal perspective authentic, the Depp/Heard trial claims drew me this Advent season to juxtapose it with the Word become flesh “full of grace and truth.” The Incarnate Word’s claims of deity were and have been received or rejected since based on whether they correspond to objective, existent reality. In Acts 2:17 and following, Jesus’ disciple Peter told the Jewish crowd on Pentecost that the Lord’s display of deity by acts of power and might was visible to them as eyewitnesses. Though defying human explanation, His words and wondrous acts connected with this real, corporeal world.

The truth embodied in Jesus is not rhetoric originating from Jesus’ particular perspective as a minority Jew subjugated by an imperial Roman power. It was and remains words and acts corresponding with reality they describe and to which they were directed. The Word become flesh has abided with this vulnerability for millennia. Christian teaching has from the very first century rejected Gnostic tendencies to separate the Word from His incarnation in this sensual, material world. The Word become flesh full “of truth” in correspondence to this world is a fascinating contrast to postmodernism’s refusal to be evaluated by the truth and falsity of the existent, objective world. The Word become flesh “full of grace and truth” connected to this objective world beckons all to view Him in accordance with it.

In postscript, the Word become flesh is judged against the objective world, but the objective world is also judged against Him. He the Truth came “to testify to the truth” that the way things are inhere in Him. His Advent promises “the glories of his righteousness.” He reveals Himself the universal scale by which all things are weighed, including oppressor, and oppressed; and all, both oppressor and oppressed, are found wanting; neither is the way they’re supposed to be.

Certainly, though Johnny Depp had not physically or sexually abused Amber Heard, the trial testimony disclosed that before God there was sin and offense enough on both sides. The Word become flesh full of truth reveals that “all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God”; yet the Advent season points to the Word become flesh who is not only full of truth but also full of grace. The Gospel John says, “The Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.” Indeed, His truth promises the oppressed and the oppressor justice! But better yet, His grace promises each undeserved grace more than either deserves, more than either you or I deserve. Truly good tidings of great joy and good news indeed. Merry Christmas!

---

[1] I have referred to Douglas Groothuis’s book in writing this piece.  See, Douglas Groothuis, Truth Decay: Defending Christianity Against the Challenges of Postmodernism  (Downers Grove: Intervarsity Press, 2000).

[2] This has resulted in a transition from what Charles Taylor calls a “mimetic view,” according to which the world has objective order and meaning, to a “poietic” view that sees the world as so much raw material out of which meaning and purpose can be cranked by the individual. 

[3] Abby Gorzlancyk, “The Defamed Explained: Depp v. Heard,” Syracuse Law Review, Syracuse University/College of Law, June 9, 2022.

John Oswalt - The Centrality of Holiness

From the Henry Center:

In many views of salvation, especially Protestant ones, holiness is often marginalized. It is seen as a desideratum, but only as a somewhat incidental state procured by the Cross, to be realized as a reality at death. This view is the result of an inadequate understanding of the relation of the Testaments to each other. It is clear in the Old Testament that the achievement of holiness as a replication of the character of Yahweh in this life is the fundamental issue. The writers of the New Testament assume that this is still the issue, so do not restate it. Rather, they move on to consider the ways in which the Incarnation and the Atonement of Christ address it. This is especially clear in the Gospels and the Epistles. The failure to recognize these truths is one reason for the observed lack of distinctly Christian character in our contemporary society.

Interview with David Horner: "Apologetics and the task of Evangelization"

Caius Obeada hosted an interview with David Horner earlier this year. Dr. Horner is a terrific moral philosopher and, in this interview, he discusses apologetics and the role in evangelism. This is a topic Horner also explores in this essay: Too Good Not to be True: A Call to Moral Apologetics as a Mode of Civil Discourse.

From Caius Obeada:

“This is an interview with Dr. David Horner, professor of Theology and Philosophy at Biola University in California. We discussed apologetics and the task of evangelization, the role that they play, the tools, and the relation with the body of Christ. Dr. Caius Obeada, director of Reasonable Faith Romanian Chapter and Founder of Vox Dei Institute of Apologetics, discussed many aspects of apologetics in defending the Christian Faith.”

Moral Faith and Huntington's Disease: An Interview with Dr. Elton Higgs and Dr. Laquita Higgs

In this interview, Caregiver Chronicles interviews doctors and authors Elton and Laquita Higgs, who raised two adoptive daughters with Huntington's Disease. They speak about how their caregiver journey and how their faith has guided them as parents.

Dr. Higgs is a longtime contributor to MoralApologetics.com and a good friend and mentor of Dr. David Baggett. This interview highlights the role that moral faith can have in dealing with suffering.

Why Apologetics Is Personal: Keeping Human Dignity at the Heart of Defending the Gospel

Below is audio and PowerPoint for a presentation TJ Gentry did in April at the National Conference on Christian Apologetics in Charlotte.

PowerPoint

What Happened to James?

James the Just, 16th-century Russian icon.

What happened to our Lord’s brother, James?  James was known for his unbelief.  Then, years later, he is known for being on his knees praying.  Before I get to James, let me ask you these questions:  what happened to the sociopath David Wood?  What happened to Saul, the Pharisee hunter of Christians?  What do these questions have to do with Jesus’ resurrection?

David Wood’s dog is hit by a bus and dies. His mother is terribly upset. David is not. It is just a dog.   A few years later his friend dies.  He feels no sorrow.  He sees how others are feeling and senses maybe he should feel sorrow.  David is separated from his feelings.  He cannot empathize with others.  He is diagnosed a sociopath.  On top of this, David is an atheist.  Right and wrong do not matter to him.  One day David’s life comes into focus.  He brutally attacks his father and beats him with a hammer until he thinks him dead (he wasn’t).  He is imprisoned for ten years.  David is now a missionary, reconciled with his father, and has an earned Ph. D. from Fordham University.  What happened to him?

Before I answer this question and the one about James, consider the question about Saul. What happens to Saul, the Pharisee hunter of Christians?  Saul is a contemporary of Jesus’ apostles.  He is a Jew of the tribe of Benjamin.  From the age five Saul is educated in the Old Testament law.  At age of thirteen, he studies Scripture under the Jewish scholar Gamaliel. Gamaliel is the Alan Dershowitz Harvard law professor of the day.  He prepares Saul to teach the law. Saul becomes so zealous for the law he surpasses his Pharisee peers.  He kills for the Law. 

In fact, Saul takes a leading role in bullying the church.  He goes to Christians’ houses.  He hauls them – even women – to prison.  Saul says, ‘I was violently persecuting the church of God’…I ‘was trying to destroy it’ (Gal 1: 13).  He takes cool satisfaction in the stoning of preacher Stephen.  He holds the coats of others to throw their stones. (Acts 8:1)

Then, something happens suddenly.  People say, “He who formerly was persecuting us is now proclaiming the faith he once tried to destroy?” (Gal 1:23)”Is not this the man who made havoc in Jerusalem…?” believers ask (Act 9:21). He now goes by the name of Paul.  He testifies in the synagogues Jesus “is the Son of God”.  He argues Jesus is the Messiah. (Acts 9:22) What gives?  How could one so passionately against Jesus turn so for him?  This brings me to James.

What happened to James?  In 2002 an archaeological discovery was made.  A first century ossuary box was uncovered.  An ossuary box contains the bones of a deceased person.  This box has this inscription on it, ‘James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus.’  Whether it is authentic is still being studied.  No matter, Jesus of Nazareth had four brothers, one whose name was James.  Not much is known about James. James is the biological son of Joseph and Mary. He, his brothers, and mother Mary travel with Jesus early in Jesus’ ministry.  But Jesus does not win him over.  Conflict arises between Jesus and James and his brothers.  They do not believe him.  They think anybody can claim to be a Messiah and get away with it in the rural countryside.  “If you do Messiah works, show the world”. Prove yourself before the watching world.  Do your miracles in D.C., not in Tight Squeeze!  Do out- in- the-open miracles. Jesus goes to his grave with his brother James a skeptic.

But then what happened to James?  The next thing you hear James is on his knees praying.  Ancient testimony says James is frequently found on his knees begging forgiveness for people; his knees are as hard as a camel’s.  After his brother’s crucifixion, he is with his mother Mary and Jesus’ disciples in the upper room.  James is now called “James the Righteous”, the leader of the Jerusalem church.  Because of this, James is stoned in 62 AD.  What happened to James? Once a skeptic …now a martyr. 

Here’s the answer:  Take Paul first:  Paul sees the bodily risen Jesus Christ.  At midday when traveling to Damascus a light shines on him.  The light is brighter than the sun and encircles him.  He hears the Voice speak to him, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?” (Acts 26: 14) Paul asks, “Who are you Lord?”  “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.” (Acts 9: 5) Paul testifies, Jesus “appeared also to me.”  “Have I not seen Jesus our Lord?” Paul asks (1 Cor 9:1).  Seeing the resurrected Lord Jesus Christ instantaneously turns Saul around.  The resurrected Jesus turns Saul into Paul. 

What happened to David Wood?  In prison he runs into Randy, a Christian. Randy articulates his reasons for believing in Jesus.  It makes David’s unbelief seem silly. David wants to refute Randy’s faith. So, David begins reading the Bible. Jesus’ bodily resurrection bothers him.  Why would the disciples risk death to testify to the resurrection if they didn’t believe it? He also reads in the Bible Jesus says, “I am the resurrection and the life”; the Son of God can set you free.  David knows he has many psychological, spiritual, and moral disorders.  He cannot help himself. Who could? Only Jesus, the One God raised from the dead, can. 

What happened to James, our Lord’s skeptical brother?  The apostle Paul tells us: Christ “was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures…and then he …appeared to James…” (1 Cor 15: 7) Our risen Lord Jesus appears to James!  To his own brother the risen Lord reveals himself!  Jesus Christ shows himself visibly, bodily to James and to Paul; this is the game-changing event that overturns them both. Not hallucinations; delusions; mental dreams; a myth; a lie, a conversion disorder, or any combination thereof.   Jesus appears bodily, visibly!  Our risen Lord turns James the skeptic into James the Just!!  He transforms Saul into Paul.  The meditation on Jesus’ bodily resurrection in concert with the risen Jesus Christ radically changes David Wood the sociopath into David Wood the missionary.  For what else would they have endured and kept true through insults, ridicule, rejection, mockery, beatings, suffering, and martyrdom: Paul beheaded, and James stoned. 

Do you too know the risen Lord Jesus?  He says to you, “Look at me. I stand at the door. I knock. If you hear me call and open the door, I’ll come right in and sit down to supper with you.” * 

*Gary R. Habermas and Michael R. Licona’s book, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus and David Baggett’s Moral Apologetics testimony of David Wood have been instrumental resources for the above.                                     

---

Tom is currently a retired Elder in the Virginia Annual Conference. He has pastored churches in Virginia, California and England. Studying John Wesley’s theology, he received his Ph.D. and M.A. degrees from the University of Bristol, Bristol, England and his Master of Divinity degree from Asbury Theological Seminary. While a student, he and his wife Pam lived in John Wesley’s Chapel “The New Room”, Bristol, England, the first established Methodist preaching house. Tom was a faculty member of Asbury Theological Seminary. He has contributed articles to Methodist History and the Wesleyan Theological Journal. He and his wife have two children, daughter Karissa, who is an attorney in Richmond, Virginia, and, John, who is a recent graduate of Regent University. Being a part of the development of their grandson Beau is a rich reward. Tom enjoys a good book by a crackling fire with an English cup of tea. His life text is, ‘Jesus, confirm my heart’s desire, to work and speak and think for thee’.

Lord’s Supper Meditation – Ambivalence of the Cross as Symbol

A Twilight Musing

Do you wear a cross around your neck or have one on display elsewhere on your person?  If so, is it simple or elaborate, and what is your purpose in wearing it?  How many crosses might you see during the course of a day?  Most churches we pass have a cross somewhere on the building, most likely at the top of a spire, perhaps on the sign out front, and very probably at one or more spots inside the building.  If there are paintings inside, Jesus on the cross will be given prominence as a subject.   The very shape of many older churches is what is called “cruciform.” All this should cause us to ask, “What kind of religious purpose prompts its adherents to give such ubiquitous attention to an instrument of torture and utter humiliation?  Do we realize the strangeness of honoring such an image and wearing it as jewelry and giving it prominence in our art and architecture?

As we participate in the Lord’s Supper, we do well to consider whether we have appropriately assessed the cross of Christ.  Jesus regarded it as something to be taken up and borne, a token of self-denial, not only for Himself but for His disciples (see Matt. 15:24-25).  He set the example of embracing his cross, humbling Himself and “becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross” (Phil 2:8).   It is no light matter to be associated with the cross on which the Son of God died.  Paul considers the cross of Christ to be the instrument by which he “has been crucified . . . to the world” and the world to him.  In other words, the cross represents his sharing in the death of Christ, and thus it is to be to us.  It is a symbol of our willingness to radically forsake the supposed wisdom of the fallen world around us and to identify with “Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles” (I Cor. 1:23).

In making these remarks, I am reminded of a poem by T. S. Eliot, “The Journey of the Magi.”  It depicts the Wise Men making their arduous pilgrimage to see and pay homage to the newborn Messiah.  As they encounter bad weather, disloyal servants, and villages that gouge them with high prices, they wondered if “this was all folly.”  They finally come to the end of their journey and see the Christ child, but that epiphany is tempered by a concomitant vision of “three trees on the low sky” (i.e., the crosses on Calvary), leading the speaker of the poem to wonder,

Were we led all that way for

Birth or Death?  There was a Birth, certainly

We had evidence and no doubt.  I had seen birth and death,

But had thought they were different; this Birth was

Hard and bitter agony for us, like Death, our death.

We returned to our places, these Kingdoms,

But no longer at ease here, in the old dispensation,

With an alien people clutching their gods.

I should be glad of another death.

This is an appropriate presentation, I think, of the ambiguity of the Cross of Christ; it reminds us of the Divine Man whose very birth had death as its purpose, and it ought to remind us that we, like the Magi, can no longer be “at ease here, in the old dispensation.”  Also like them, we “should be glad of another death,” by which we are dead to the world but alive in the Christ who alone brought glory to the cross.      

---

Dr. Elton Higgs was a faculty member in the English department of the University of Michigan-Dearborn from 1965-2001. Having retired from UM-D as Prof. of English in 2001, he now lives with his wife in Jackson, MI. He has published scholarly articles on Chaucer, Langland, the Pearl Poet, Shakespeare, and Milton. Recently, Dr. Higgs has self-published a collection of his poetry called Probing Eyes: Poems of a Lifetime, 1959-2019, as well as a book inspired by The Screwtape Letters, called The Ichabod Letters, available as an e-book from Moral Apologetics. (Ed.: Dr. Higgs was the most important mentor during undergrad for the creator of this website, and his influence was inestimable.

---

Lord’s Supper Meditation – Commonality and Individuality

A Twilight Musing

Paul’s comments on the Lord’s Supper in I Cor. 11:17-34 are meaningfully followed by a chapter on the importance of communal and harmonious life together in the Body of Christ.  The abuses of the Lord’s Supper in chapter 11 are related to the absence of any sense of commonality in the church at Corinth, so that some poor members were being contemptuously ignored by those who were wealthy.  Chapter 12 of I Corinthians emphasizes the need of all members of the Body to appreciate and value each other, obscuring the superficial differences between them and embracing the lowly and the exalted with equal fervor.  Chapter 13 then goes on to assert “a still more excellent way,” the bonding of all members of the Body into a symphony of love.  The appropriate frame of mind in our partaking of the Lord’s Supper is that God cherishes and reaffirms both our individual gifts in the Body and our identity as one organism, with common purpose and mutual affection for one another.

As we commune together, we need to recognize that Jesus died for His Church, but also for each of us who constitute the Church.  “Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it” (I Cor. 12:27).  Our Western culture cries out for individualism of a sort that gives us license to define who we are; but that identification is God’s prerogative.  Saul of Tarsus was seeking to establish his own identity as one who, by persecuting Christians and casting them in prison, would be regarded as “extremely zealous . . . for the traditions of [his] fathers” (Gal. 1:14).  But God stopped him in his tracks and called him to a radically new identity, in which he was to preach to both Jews and Gentiles “the faith he once tried to destroy” (see Gal. 1:13-24).  Consequently, he could say after he had accepted God’s definition for him that he had been “crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me (Gal. 2:20).

How are we to know who we are in the eyes of God?  First of all, we must be still enough to let Him assign us our place: “Humble yourselves, therefore, under the mighty hand of God so that at the proper time he may exalt you” (I Pet. 5:6).  This exaltation includes being called “children of God” (I Jn. 3:1), a privilege that can be attributed only to the undeserved love of God.  However, our individual identities as children of God feed into our relationships with each other in the Body of Christ; as children of God, we are “joint-heirs with Christ” (Rom. 8:16-17).  If we are siblings in the Body of Christ, we find our full identity in serving one another, as Jesus did.  He could have claimed special status as the only “natural” Son of God, but He “did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage; rather, he made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant” (Phil. 2:6-7).  Only as we serve one another do we fulfill our identity in Christ.  The only place for “competition” is in “[outdoing] one another in showing honor” (Rom. 12:10).  But this sort of holy abnegation is leading us to an eternal relationship to God that is the ultimate individualized identity: “To the one who conquers I [Christ] will give some of the hidden manna, and I will give him a white stone, with a new name written on the stone that no one knows except the one who receives it.”  In the heavenly state, we will see God face to face and will rejoice in knowing Him as He knows us (see I Cor. 13:12).

In the meantime, “until He comes” to take us to Himself, we rejoice in being defined by where He has placed us in the Body that He inhabits and directs.  As we commune together in the Lord’s Supper, we affirm the worth that He imparts to us as units of His own Body.

---

---

Dr. Elton Higgs was a faculty member in the English department of the University of Michigan-Dearborn from 1965-2001. Having retired from UM-D as Prof. of English in 2001, he now lives with his wife in Jackson, MI. He has published scholarly articles on Chaucer, Langland, the Pearl Poet, Shakespeare, and Milton. Recently, Dr. Higgs has self-published a collection of his poetry called Probing Eyes: Poems of a Lifetime, 1959-2019, as well as a book inspired by The Screwtape Letters, called The Ichabod Letters, available as an e-book from Moral Apologetics. (Ed.: Dr. Higgs was the most important mentor during undergrad for the creator of this website, and his influence was inestimable.

Lord’s Supper Meditation – Blood of Christ—Blood of Abel

Gustave Doré - Doré's English Bible

A Twilight Musing

The writer of Hebrews observes at one point that, in both contrast and similarity to hearing the terrifying voice of God at Sinai, we who hear the message of God through Christ have come to “Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel” (Heb. 12:23-24, ESV). 

Eugene Peterson’s translation of this passage throws light on this odd comparison: “You've come to Jesus, who presents us with a new covenant, a fresh charter from God. He is the Mediator of this covenant. The murder of Jesus, unlike Abel's—a homicide that cried out for vengeance—became a proclamation of grace” (Heb. 12:23-24, The Message).  This presentation of the blood of Christ as a “proclamation of grace,” in contrast to the blood of Abel, which “cried out for vengeance,” provides a meaningful contrast that is relevant to our observance of the Lord’s Supper.

In the Genesis narrative about Cain and Abel, after Cain had killed his brother, God appears to him and says, “What have you done? The voice of your brother's blood is crying to me from the ground. And now you are cursed from the ground, which has opened its mouth to receive your brother's blood from your hand” (Gen. 4:10-11, ESV).  Abel, said the writer of Hebrews, was “commended by God as righteous” (Heb. 11:4, ESV), so he was an innocent victim; but he was not, like Jesus, absolutely righteous and innocent.  The only response God could make to Abel’s murder was wrath and vengeance toward the murderer; but God could and did use the innocent death of Jesus as an avenue to show grace and forgiveness to all humankind.  Even on the cross Jesus asked His Father not to count His murder against those who carried it out: “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do” (Luke 23:34, ESV).

The wrongful death of Abel and the response of God to it shows us that no normal human in the fallen world, however righteous in his life, could, by his death, provide a remedy for inherited sin.  Justice could be done, at best, only by God’s wrath being visited on the murderer in response to the cry of the blood of the victim.  But the wrongful death of Jesus and the innocent blood He shed had the power to set aside God’s wrath and to deliver not only those who put Jesus to death, but all of humankind from the just consequences of their sins.

So as in the Eucharist we offer up to death our fleshly, sin-stained bodies and are symbolically infused with the New Covenant blood of Christ, we go beyond the innocent blood that can cry out only for God’s vengeance, and we rejoice in the shed blood of the absolutely innocent Lamb of God that cries out for the forgiveness of all sinners.

---

Dr. Elton Higgs was a faculty member in the English department of the University of Michigan-Dearborn from 1965-2001. Having retired from UM-D as Prof. of English in 2001, he now lives with his wife in Jackson, MI. He has published scholarly articles on Chaucer, Langland, the Pearl Poet, Shakespeare, and Milton. Recently, Dr. Higgs has self-published a collection of his poetry called Probing Eyes: Poems of a Lifetime, 1959-2019, as well as a book inspired by The Screwtape Letters, called The Ichabod Letters, available as an e-book from Moral Apologetics. (Ed.: Dr. Higgs was the most important mentor during undergrad for the creator of this website, and his influence was inestimable.

---

Lord’s Supper Meditation - The Ever-Renewing Legacy

A Twilight Musing

Recently, our daughter received an unexpected legacy through the will of a deceased friend of the family.  She was of course delighted to receive it and considered herself blessed by God through our friend.  But the pleasure was tempered by the fact that the gift came as a result of our friend’s death.  Her response reminded me of a passage in the book of Hebrews that speaks of Christ’s death activating a kind of will that bequeaths certain benefits to His disciples.

Therefore [Christ] is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant. For where a will is involved, the death of the one who made it must be established. For a will takes effect only at death, since it is not in force as long as the one who made it is alive. (Heb. 9:15-17)

 Accordingly, when we partake of the Lord’s Supper, which commemorates the death of Christ, we also remember that we are receiving the benefits, or the legacy of His death.

The chief and most overarching of these benefits is, as the writer of Hebrews notes, deliverance from our transgressions and the cleansing of our consciences “from dead works to serve the living God” (Heb. 9:14). We are thus enabled to “work heartily, as for the Lord and not for men, knowing that from the Lord [we] will receive the inheritance as [our] reward” (Eph 3:23-24).  The beauty of the bequest spoken of here is that we will inherit, not as bondservants, but as children, having “received the Spirit of adoption as sons [and daughters], by whom we cry, ’Abba! Father!’ The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, then heirs—heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ” (Rom. 8:15-17).

Another bequest coming to us as a result of Jesus’ death and resurrection is the gift of the Holy Spirit.  Jesus said to His disciples, “I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you. But if I go, I will send him to you,” and He “will guide you into all the truth” (John 16:7, 13).  In addition, the Spirit will intercede for us with the Father (Rom. 8:26), and “If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in [us], he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to [our] mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in [us]” (Rom. 8:11).  Moreover, the Spirit seals us for salvation and is “the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it” (Eph. 1:13-14).

Also, as we inherited from the First Adam the penalty of death because of our sin, so through the death of the Second Adam, Jesus Christ, we have received “the free gift of righteousness” and are thereby “reconciled to God” (Rom. 5:17, 10; see whole passage, vv. 8-21).  How glorious that our inheritance through Christ supersedes our inheritance from the fallen Adam!

Finally, our legacy from Christ gives us citizenship in the Kingdom of Heaven, for God has “delivered us from the domain of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of his beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins” (Col. 1:12-14).  Like Abraham, we recognize that we are pilgrims on this earth and long for “a better country, that is, a heavenly one” (Heb. 11:16).  We share with Jesus a kingdom not of this world (see John 18:36), and through Him we have become “a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession” (I Pet. 2:9).

So let us partake of the Lord’s Supper with appropriate understanding of the gifts bequeathed to us by His death.  We are privileged legatees of the Son of God.

---

Dr. Elton Higgs was a faculty member in the English department of the University of Michigan-Dearborn from 1965-2001. Having retired from UM-D as Prof. of English in 2001, he now lives with his wife in Jackson, MI. He has published scholarly articles on Chaucer, Langland, the Pearl Poet, Shakespeare, and Milton. Recently, Dr. Higgs has self-published a collection of his poetry called Probing Eyes: Poems of a Lifetime, 1959-2019, as well as a book inspired by The Screwtape Letters, called The Ichabod Letters, available as an e-book from Moral Apologetics. (Ed.: Dr. Higgs was the most important mentor during undergrad for the creator of this website, and his influence was inestimable.

---

Ethics, Morals, and Good Friday: A Lesson in Loyalty and Disloyalty

Judas Iscariot (right), retiring from the Last Supper, painting by Carl Bloch, late 19th century

What comes to mind when you think of Good Friday? On the cultural side, perhaps a day off from school, one last Lenten fish fry sponsored by the local Knights of Columbus, or making sure someone knows to bring the ham and deviled eggs to dinner on Easter Sunday. On the religious side, talk of Good Friday usually evokes images of a traitor name Judas, Peter’s three denials of his relationship to Jesus, and the bloody and disfigured body of the Lord hanging lifeless on a Roman cross. What about ethics? What about morals? Do these two words come to mind when you think of Good Friday? Maybe. Maybe not. At the heart of Good Friday, we find poignant though beautiful ethical and moral lessons giving voice to divine grace and love as they whisper and even shout the gospel message. Before I discuss one of those lessons, let’s make sure we understand the overlap and distinctions between ethics and morals.

Most will have a general sense of the terms, maybe even thinking they are synonymous. Insofar as they both relate to matters of right and wrong, good and bad, ethics and morals are similar. However, there is an essential distinction between the terms as they are used today. Speaking of ethics tells of the more theoretical aspects of right and wrong, asking questions about the nature of the good life, duty, obligation, or right actions. For example, if I say that murder is wrong, I make an ethical statement. Morals are a bit different, less theoretical, and more practical. When we speak of morality, we address concerns related to behavior, conduct, and rules for a particular person or society. When I say that it is wrong to take the life of an unborn child, I am speaking about morality. Such a statement certainly has an ethical foundation: murder is wrong. However, when I apply that ethical norm to concerns over aborting a defenseless child, I move from the theoretical to the practical, from ethics to morality. Assuming the similarities and distinctions between ethics and morals are somewhat clearer, how do they relate to Good Friday? Consider one way, one lesson about ethics and morals from the narrative, a lesson drawn from the actions of Judas and Peter: I call it a lesson in loyalty and disloyalty.

Before Judas betrayed Jesus with a kiss, he walked with the Lord for three and a half years. He ate with Jesus, witnessed the miracles, sat at his Rabbi’s feet, and listened to the Truth speaking the truth. Judas was entrusted with the money and ministered alongside the other disciples. Yet, in the end, after letting Jesus wash his feet and Satan fill his heart, he betrays the Son of God for thirty silver pieces. Then he hung himself. Peter was the self-appointed spokesman of the Twelve, the first to verbalize that Jesus was the Messiah, the Son of God. Peter was the only one who got out of the boat and attempted to walk on water, and he didn’t hesitate to draw his sword to protect Jesus and cut away Malchus’s ear. Yet, when pressed, his boldness evaporated, and his heart filled with cowardice. Though warned ahead of time by Jesus, he still did it; Peter denied his King not once, not twice, but three times. But he didn’t give up. Did he grieve? Yes. Was he broken? Absolutely. He was also one of the first two disciples at the empty tomb, and he didn’t fear jumping from his fishing boat into the water as he rushed to shore to embrace his risen Savior.

What might we learn from these two men, both loved by Jesus and part of His handpicked group of leaders? What do we learn as we consider that Judas went into the darkness and never returned, while Peter also went into the night but returned to the one who said He was the Light of the World? We learn about ethics and morals, loyalty and disloyalty. As an ethical consideration, loyalty relates to the duty and obligation of support and allegiance. Ethical loyalty is not blind sycophantic devotion divorced from an objective standard of goodness and its corollary oughts. Far from such a perversion of virtue, ethical loyalty centers on supporting and giving allegiance to a principle more than a person, or, in the case of Jesus, to the Person who is the living principle of the good and right. Peter eventually understood this and acted accordingly when Judas did not, bringing us to the morality of loyalty. When we realize that morality is the practical expression of ethical concern, we see just how moral Peter was contrasted to Judas’s tragic immorality. Because Peter committed himself to the ethic of loyalty, he was able to rise after falling, to grieve and repent until he eventually made his way back to Jesus. This is the point of Jesus asking Peter three times if he loved Him that morning on the beach after the resurrection. Each question Jesus asked was salve applied to Peter’s self-inflicted wound of temporary disloyalty. Each time Jesus responded with the commands to Peter to feed and tend the His sheep, Jesus was reminding Peter that He was loyal to him and willing to trust him once more: Jesus and Peter teach us the ethics and morals of loyalty.

Sadly, we learn from Judas the ethics and morals of disloyalty, a lesson in unfaithfulness, a lesson in violating allegiance and duty. Because Judas abandoned his ethical commitment to remain loyal to Jesus (yes, I do believe Judas fell away from something, from Someone he did know and at one time even love, and that Someone never stopped loving Judas), he willingly corrupted his morality and made himself subject to even greater corruption by Satan. Judas chose disloyalty when he could have chosen loyalty. He decided to grieve and die instead of grieve and return to seek the Lord’s mercy and live. There was room for another in Peter’s boat that morning, and Judas could have jumped in the water with Peter had he still been alive. He could have sought mercy from Jesus and even been restored, but he didn’t. It’s not that Judas could not. He would not. His compromise and fall into ethical disloyalty led to moral disloyalty. His fall is a poignant reminder of the ethics and morals of disloyalty.

---

---

T. J. is a pastor, author, theologian, and apologist, with graduate degrees in Apologetics, Chaplaincy, Church Ministries, Philosophy, and Theology; and doctoral degrees in Biblical Studies, Leadership, and Pastoral Counseling. He became a Christian in 1978, was called into ministry that same year, and began preaching in 1984. T. J. has served as a youth pastor, evangelist, church planter, Christian school teacher and administrator, Army chaplain, pastoral counselor, and senior pastor. His ongoing writing work includes several published books and articles, and he currently serves as Sr. Minister at First Christian Church and Headmaster at Compass Christian Academy, both in West Frankfort, IL. In addition to his duties as Executive Editor at MoralApologetics.com, T. J. is also Executive Vice-President at BellatorChristi.com and an adjunct professor at Carolina University's Piedmont Divinity School. His areas of specialization include preaching and Bible teaching theory and practice, applied moral apologetics, Thomistic philosophy from an evangelical perspective, religious epistemology focused on passional reason, leadership theory and practice, and pastoral counseling drawn from a solution-focused brief therapy modality. He holds board certification as a chaplain and pastoral counselor and is a member of the Evangelical Theological Society, Evangelical Philosophical Society, Society for Christian Philosophers, Evangelical Homiletics Society, International Society of Christian Apologetics, Association of Certified Christian Chaplains, and the Evangelical Missiological Society. T. J. and his wife, Amy, are blessed with five children.

Lord’s Supper Meditation – Siblings of the High Priest

Melchisedech, Jacques Bergé

A Twilight Musing

The book of Hebrews presents us with a profound treatment of Jesus Christ as our High Priest under the New Covenant, and the truth embodied therein is relevant to our observance of the Lord’s Supper.  Unlike any high priest under the Old Covenant (the Law of Moses), Jesus was appointed High Priest apart from any qualifications of lineage, in the image of the Old Testament character, Melchizedek, priest and king of Salem.  The writer of Hebrews (see especially chapters 5-7) goes to some length to describe and establish the relationship between this mysterious figure and the Messiah. We may see in our observance of the Lord’s Supper a reflection of this unique priesthood of our Lord Jesus, as well as an affirmation that we are privileged to participate in that priesthood.

It seems presumptuous to speak of our participating in the priesthood of Christ, but Jesus paved the way for us to be identified with Him in that way by entering into and participating in the realm of our suffering.  The writer of Hebrews presents it thus:

Therefore he had to be made like his brothers in every respect, so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people. For because he himself has suffered when tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted.  (Heb. 2:17-18)

It was God’s will that the Incarnate Son should be made “perfect through suffering,” so that “he who sanctifies and those who are sanctified [would] all have one source”; and “That is why he is not ashamed to call them brothers” (Heb. 2:10-11).  Therefore, having a high priest who “has been tempted as we are, yet without sin, let us then with confidence draw near to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need” (Heb. 4:15-16).  Yea, even as Jesus the perfect High Priest entered the Holy of Holies “as a forerunner on our behalf” (Heb. 6:20) to offer Himself as the unblemished and eternally sufficient sacrifice, we “have confidence to enter the holy places by the blood of Jesus, by the new and living way that he opened for us through the curtain” (Heb. 10:19-20)

Thus it is that, in the likeness of Melchizedek and our Lord Jesus, we are identified as priests in the Kingdom of God, not by any right of lineage or other qualifications, but entirely by the grace and appointment of God.  Through Jesus, we “like living stones are being built up as a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ” (I Pet 2:5).  As we partake of the elements of bread and wine in the Lord’s Supper, we identify with Jesus being both priest and sacrifice, accepting the admonition of Paul in Rom. 12:1 to present our bodies “as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship.”

---

Dr. Elton Higgs was a faculty member in the English department of the University of Michigan-Dearborn from 1965-2001. Having retired from UM-D as Prof. of English in 2001, he now lives with his wife in Jackson, MI. He has published scholarly articles on Chaucer, Langland, the Pearl Poet, Shakespeare, and Milton. Recently, Dr. Higgs has self-published a collection of his poetry called Probing Eyes: Poems of a Lifetime, 1959-2019, as well as a book inspired by The Screwtape Letters, called The Ichabod Letters, available as an e-book from Moral Apologetics. (Ed.: Dr. Higgs was the most important mentor during undergrad for the creator of this website, and his influence was inestimable.

---

Four Reasons Jesus Died

Editor’s note: This article was originally written for Foundations.

Sometime around 33 A.D., in the springtime, Jesus was crucified on a cross. He endured the most brutal and tortuous form of capital punishment in perhaps all of human history. Today, many people throughout the world recognize the Cross as the symbol of the Christian faith. This is appropriate since the Bible clearly teaches that the death of Jesus is absolutely central to the gospel, the good news which Jesus tasked His followers to believe and proclaim. The Apostle Paul says, “that Christ died for our sins” is of “first importance.” But what is the meaning of the Cross? Why did Jesus have to die?

Christians have reflected on this question for nearly two thousand years. In that time, the church has uncovered several different reasons for the Atonement or death of Christ. These different reasons are ultimately harmonious and complementary; they are like the facets of a diamond. Each facet reveals something important and beautiful about the meaning and purpose of the Cross. 

Facet 1: Jesus’s Death as Ransom 

Key verse: “For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” Mark 10:45 

The Bible tells us that Jesus’s death was a ransom. The Old Testament provides some context for the biblical notion of “ransom.” Perhaps the most vivid example comes in the book of Ruth. In this story, we meet Ruth and her mother-in-law, Naomi. Ruth’s husband had died, as well as her sons, and she was left alone and suffering. Fortunately, the law outlined the role of a “kinsman redeemer,” who would be legally obligated to redeem by ransom a family member who had been sold into slavery (Lev. 25:47-55).  Boaz ransomed or redeemed Ruth, buying back her former husband’s property and marrying Ruth, saving her from a life of poverty and hunger. Throughout the Old Testament, “to ransom” often has the sense of “buying back.” 

In the New Testament, Jesus says that He has come to give his life as “ransom for many.” Paul says that Jesus “gave himself a ransom for all” (1 Tim. 2:5-6). But who did God pay ransom to? Some have suggested that God paid Satan the ransom, but that is not supported by the Bible. Instead, we should think of God as satisfying the demands of His own righteousness in order to be our redeemer; He “bought us back” so that we might be free. 

Facet 2: Jesus’s Death as Victory over Evil

Key verse: “And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross.” (Colossians 2:14). 

The Bible also tells us that by his death, Jesus gained victory over the powers of evil. The very first prophecy in the Bible foreshadows this victory. After God created Adam and Eve, they were tempted by the serpent, who is Satan (cf. Rev. 12:9). Though Adam and Eve sinned, in Genesis 3:15, God said that a descendant of Eve would someday “crush the head” of the serpent. God promised that He would decisively defeat the devil through a human person. Christ, who is both fully God and fully man brought this about. By his death, Jesus freed humanity from the power of Satan. But Christ also demonstrated his power over death itself. Though Christ died on the Cross, the Father raised Him again, proving that death itself is “swallowed up in victory” (1 Cor. 15:54). By the Cross, Christ defeats both sin and death; He crushes the head of the serpent. As the Bible says, “thanks be to God! He gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Cor. 15:57). 

Facet 3: Jesus’s Death as Moral Example 

Key verse: “To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps.” (1 Peter 2:21)

The Cross also shows us what God is like and how we should live. The Bible says that Jesus died for us because He loves us (cf. Rom. 5:8). In the Gospel of Luke, Jesus tells a parable about a shepherd who left his entire flock to seek and save a single lost sheep. The shepherd searches for the missing sheep until he finds it and he “joyfully puts it on his shoulders” (Luke 15:5). Like the shepherd, Jesus says that He has come to “seek and save the lost” (Luke 19:10). The Cross shows us the love of God. 

The Cross also shows us what sort of life we should live. By dying on the Cross, Jesus shows that He is obedient to God’s will. And Jesus shows us how we ought to love others. Love is not merely a feeling and godly love may require personal sacrifice. Like Jesus, we may need to give of ourselves, whether that be our money, time, or even our lives. But, we also know that God sees what we do, that He is a just God, and He will reward us for following his commandments (1 Pt. 1:4).  

Facet 4: Jesus’s Death as Substitutionary Atonement 

Key verse: “God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood—to be received by faith. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness…” (Romans 3:25a). 

Jesus also died as a substitute for sinners. In the Old Testament, Israel sacrificed animals to cover their sins. Once a year, on the Day of Atonement, the High Priest would slaughter a goat as a sin offering. This was for the “wickedness and rebellion of the Israelites–all their sins” (Lev. 16:21). This did not take away the guilt of sin (cf. Heb. 10:4), but it does show us that the “wages of sin is death” (Rom. 6:23). 

Sin is a great offense to holiness and justice of God (cf. Hab. 1:13). God could not simply forgive sin because He is a God of justice. He would be like a judge who let a convicted murderer go free. A judge that ignores the law would be no judge at all. But because God loves us, He paid the penalty of sin Himself by sending His Son to die in the place of sinners. In this way, God shows Himself to be “just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus” (Rom. 3:26). God is God of holiness and of love; both features of God’s character are seen in the Cross of Jesus Christ. 

Conclusion

Jesus died on the cross for many reasons. Each of these reasons reveals something about who God is and why Jesus had to die. Jesus died to ransom and redeem us from death. He died to demonstrate His power and ultimate victory over sin and death. The Cross shows us that God loves us and wants us to live a life of obedience to God and love for others. Finally, Jesus’s death makes atonement for our sin so that we can be right with God. Without the Cross, we would be doomed to suffering and death. But because of it, we can live forever with God. 

---

The Managing Editor of MoralApologetics.com, Jonathan has been a vital part of the Moral Apologetics team since its inception. Currently, he is the E-Learning Project Manager at ICM. He also serves as adjunct instructor of philosophy for Grand Canyon University and Liberty University. He also is affiliate faculty at Colorado Christian University. Prior to these positions, he was ordained as a minister and served as spiritual life director. He is the author or co-author of several articles on metaethics, theology, and history of philosophy. With a Master’s in Global Apologetics and a graduate of Biola’s Master’s program in philosophy, he recently finished his doctoral dissertation in which he extends a four-fold moral argument from mere theism to a distinctively Christian picture of God. Jonathan, his wife Sara, and their two children presently live in Lynchburg, Virginia. You can find his personal website at JonathanRPruitt.com

---

Lord’s Supper Meditation – Sure-Fire Investment

A Twilight Musing

“Don’t put all your eggs in one basket” is common-sense advice that most financial advisors would give to their clients. “Diversify,” they would say, so that if one kind of investment fails, others could compensate.  That makes sense in the world of finance, but God invites us to do just the opposite in our approach to serving Him.  Just as Jesus sacrificed everything to fulfill God’s purposes, we His followers are invited to invest all that we have in His promise of eternal life.  The Lord’s Supper is an appropriate place to reaffirm that our commitment to God is total, even reckless in human terms, holding nothing back.

Jesus illustrates this principle of being “all in” for the Kingdom of God with two little parables.

 The kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field, which a man found and covered up. Then in his joy he goes and sells all that he has and buys that field.

Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant in search of fine pearls, who, on finding one pearl of great value, went and sold all that he had and bought it. (Matt. 13:44-46)

God’s Kingdom is depicted here as a treasure of such transcendent value as to warrant giving all one has to possess it.  In another place, Jesus seems extreme in His expectations of those who intend to follow Him:

Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me, and whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. And whoever does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. (Matt. 10:37-39)

But Jesus did not shrink from exemplifying what he asked of His disciples.  Paul gives us a beautiful summary of how Jesus,

though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.  (Phil. 2:5-8)

In his turn, Paul describes how he followed the example of his Master.  Though he had a brilliant career ahead of him as a leading Pharisee when he was called by Jesus, he “suffered the loss of all things” and counted them “as rubbish, in order that [he might] gain Christ and . . . know him and the power of His resurrection” (Phil. 3:8-10).  Indeed, his commitment to Christ was so complete that his personality was merged with that of his Savior: “I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me” (Gal. 2:20).

That is the radical challenge we meet in the Lord’s Supper.  Jesus calls us to invest recklessly in giving all that we have and are, to be fellow heirs with Him of the Kingdom of God.  Therein lies the power of symbolically sharing in the body and blood of Christ.

---

Dr. Elton Higgs was a faculty member in the English department of the University of Michigan-Dearborn from 1965-2001. Having retired from UM-D as Prof. of English in 2001, he now lives with his wife in Jackson, MI. He has published scholarly articles on Chaucer, Langland, the Pearl Poet, Shakespeare, and Milton. Recently, Dr. Higgs has self-published a collection of his poetry called Probing Eyes: Poems of a Lifetime, 1959-2019, as well as a book inspired by The Screwtape Letters, called The Ichabod Letters, available as an e-book from Moral Apologetics. (Ed.: Dr. Higgs was the most important mentor during undergrad for the creator of this website, and his influence was inestimable.

---

Lord’s Supper Meditation – The Lamb of God

Agnus Dei c. 1635–1640, by Francisco de Zurbarán, Prado Museum

A Twilight Musing

As a part of John the Baptist’s heralding the ministry of Jesus, he twice refers to Him as “the Lamb of God” (see Jn. 1:29-37).  Although John was the first to use that appellation, it echoes a reference to the Messiah in Isaiah 53:7: “He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth; like a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and like a sheep that before its shearers is silent, so he opened not his mouth.”  The relevance of this passage to the message about Jesus is highlighted by the Apostle Philip’s being called by the Holy Spirit to preach to an Ethiopian court official (Acts 8:26ff).  As the man rode in a chariot in the desert, he was reading from Isaiah 53.  After he hitches a ride with the Ethiopian and discovers what he is reading, we are told that Philip “opened his mouth, and beginning with this scripture he told him the good news about Jesus” (Acts 8:35).  Later on in the New Testament, Paul refers to Christ as “our Passover lamb” (I Cor. 5;7), reminding us that the Lord’s Supper was instituted in the midst of a Passover feast (Lk. 22:14ff), in which a sacrificial lamb is eaten.  So as we partake of the Body of Christ in the Communion, it is appropriate to consider the implications of Jesus being presented as “the Lamb of God.”

The lamb image applied to Jesus necessarily denotes a sacrificial lamb, a substitute for the death of someone.  In the original Passover, the blood of the slain lamb was put on the doorposts as an indication that the angel of death should “pass over” the members of that household (see Ex. 12:1-13).  We appropriate that kind of protecting blood in drinking of the cup of the Communion, “the new covenant in my blood” (Lk. 22:20) as Jesus describes it.  And as the participants in the Passover ate the flesh of the lamb that had been sacrificed, so those who ingest the bread of the Lord’s Supper are receiving Christ’s sacrificed body to their spiritual benefit.

Jesus as the Lamb of God figures prominently in the book of Revelation.  The image occurs first in chapter 5, verse 6, where we see “a Lamb standing, as though it had been slain,” and only He is found worthy to break the seals on the book of God’s judgments on the wicked world.  The living creatures around God’s throne then sing a hymn of praise (v. 9ff):

“Worthy are you to take the scroll and to open its seals, for you were slain, and by your blood you ransomed people for God from every tribe and language and people and nation, and you have made them a kingdom and priests to our God, and they shall reign on the earth.”

Jesus is the ultimate sacrificial Lamb, and His death is efficacious not for just a household or a family, but for “every tribe and language and people.”  Moreover, it is “once for all” (Heb. 7:27), effective for all time as well as for all people.

Finally, we see the Lamb of God taking His place with God the Father as His servants are represented as His bride (Rev. 21:1-4), with whom He and the Father will dwell forever in an existence lighted by the presence of the “the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb” (Rev. 21:22).  So in participating in the Lord’s Supper, we are invited not only to remember that the Lamb of God was slain for our deliverance, but to look ahead to fulfillment of the promise that we will be eternally with the Lamb in His glory.

---

---

Dr. Elton Higgs was a faculty member in the English department of the University of Michigan-Dearborn from 1965-2001. Having retired from UM-D as Prof. of English in 2001, he now lives with his wife in Jackson, MI. He has published scholarly articles on Chaucer, Langland, the Pearl Poet, Shakespeare, and Milton. Recently, Dr. Higgs has self-published a collection of his poetry called Probing Eyes: Poems of a Lifetime, 1959-2019, as well as a book inspired by The Screwtape Letters, called The Ichabod Letters, available as an e-book from Moral Apologetics. (Ed.: Dr. Higgs was the most important mentor during undergrad for the creator of this website, and his influence was inestimable.