A Book Review on “Apologetics to the Glory of God”

Frame, John. Apologetics to the Glory of God. Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R Publishing, 1994: 265 pages.

An Overview of Chapters 1-5

    In Chapter One Frame argues that there is no neutrality in apologetics, i.e. a Christian of necessity must argue from his Christian understanding. This does not mean that there is no common ground between a believer and unbeliever, for all unbelievers have a faded memory of the true God. Furthermore, the success of the Christian apologist is assured because the true God is active in convincing unbelievers. Frame sees the apologist, not as replacing God, but as working with God “practicing a divinely ordained human vocation” (17).

    Frame argues that belief in the sufficiency of Scripture does not diminish the value of natural revelation, which he sees as “the word of God” and “authoritative” (23), as long as extra-biblical data is subordinated to the “corrective” measures of Scripture. He sees verbal revelation as meeting man’s need of a saving promise and as a means “to correct our sinful misinterpretations of natural revelation” (22). This is an important point that Frame makes in viewing natural revelation through the lens of Scripture.

    In Chapter Two Frame sets forth the message of the Christian apologist establishing the philosophical framework from which a believer argues. A Christian does apologetics from a metaphysical belief in the ultimate reality of a personal God who as Creator is distinct from creation, who is sovereign and who exists as a Trinity. This leads the apologist to argue on the basis of a personal rather than an impersonal plan for the world. This also means that though God is immanent in that He is involved in all of creation, He is yet transcendent in His separate-ness from creation. The Christian apologist stands on the ground of God’s sovereignty in that He rules the world and works all things according to His wisdom. The doctrine of the Trinity preserves the personality of God as well as the oneness and diversity of creation.

    A Christian apologist’s epistemology presupposes that God is the origin of truth and the authority for all knowledge. As opposed to human reason, the fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge.

    The message of the Christian apologist is not simply an alternative to conventional wisdom but is good news because it offers the free gift of divine forgiveness.

    Chapters Three through Five discuss methodological issues in apologetics as well as proof for the existence of God and the gospel. Frame interacts with Van Til’s presuppositionalism (transcendentalism) showing both the positive benefits as well as the limits of the transcendental argument. He also shows that the use of traditional arguments are not antithetical to presuppositionalism. Frame, as a presuppositionalist, is more friendly that Van Til to the use of traditional arguments. He does not believe that there is one single argument that can prove the existence of God. Unlike Van Til, Frame believes that positive arguments are useful and can be just as transcendental as negative ones. Frame appeals for a presuppositionalism of the heart that does not simply depend upon argument itself but also “the behavior/language” (87) accompanying the argument. Frame argues that it may not be possible to distinguish presuppositional and traditional apologetics simply on the externals, because they both may employ similar empirical phenomena. The difference lies in the attitude of the heart.

    Frame introduces various arguments for the existence of God. One is an argument on the basis of morals -”Moral values, therefore God” (91). He argues that you moral obligation within relationships and that you can only have an absolute moral obligation with an absolute person. You can only have absolute moral standards if an absolute moral person exists. The God of the Bible best fits the kind of God that absolute morality demands. Another argument is an epistemological one that begins with human rationality and leads to an absolute rational divine personality. He also shows how certain metaphysical arguments (teleological, cosmological, ontological) can be utilized moving from the implications of a reality in the universe to God. Frame appears to have retained a presuppositional apologetic while showing how evidential arguments are useful within the framework of presuppositionalism.

Chapter Six: “Apologetics as Defense, the Problem of Evil, 1- Questions, General Principles, and Blind Alleys”

    Frame discusses the issue of resolving the problem of why evil exists in a world where God is supposedly good and powerful. His approach is to examine the teaching of Scripture. At the outset he confesses the inability to find complete answers though we can find answers that bring encouragement (152). In this chapter he first disposes of solutions that contradict the Bible. Describing evil as an un-reality or an illusion contradicts what the Bible teaches about God’s sovereignty over all events, good and evil (156). Suggesting that God is incapable of overcoming evil undermines the biblical teaching of God’s omnipotence and sovereignty (157). Saying that a world with evil is the best possible world and one which is logically necessary to achieve certain ends is a plausible explanation, yet it assumes that God is not free to make things that are imperfect (158-9). The defense that asserts that evil exists because of the free choice of rational creatures allows for a freedom that goes beyond the Bible. Men are free to carry out only what God has foreordained (161). The explanation that views evil as a character building device assumes that the character which God desires can not be developed in any other way (163-4). The argument that a stable environment is necessary for human life and therefore creates the possibility of evil mistakenly blames creation rather than the evil of human hearts (164-5). The assertion that God is the indirect, not direct, cause of evil does not logically, though true, relieve him of responsibility for evil (165). The solution that God is outside of law and therefore free to do things which we perceive as wrong fails to recognize that, though we are forbidden to criticize God, he yet conforms to the law which he has given to us (166-8). Frame, lastly argues against the explanation for evil that simply attacks the unbeliever who offers the question rather than answering the question (168-170).

Chapter Seven: “Apologetics as Defense, the Problem of Evil, 2 – A Biblical Response”

    In this chapter, Frame begins arguing that the absence of a clear answer to the problem of evil is God’s prerogative, soliciting trust from us. In the absence of cogent explanations, we are to simply accept and obey what the Bible clearly reveals and to trust Him for the doubts and suspicions we may have (171-178). He proceeds to explain that believers have a “new historical perspective.” This perspective includes a look at the past where God people waited and suffered until the justice and mercy of God were vindicated at the cross. This perspective also includes an outlook on the present that utilizes a refinement of the greater-good defense. Since God’s ultimate purpose is to glorify himself and our chief end to glorify him and enjoy him then the Scripture teach certain ways that God uses evil to bring about greater good (184-7). Also, this new perspective offers encouragement to trust and obey while we wait for that day when there will not be a problem with evil (187-9). Finally, Frame concludes: “Believers, even with their new hearts, do continue to ask about the problem of evil. But there are so many reasons for giving thanks that we can never look at evil with the same passion as the unbeliever” (190).

Evaluation of Chapters Six and Seven

For the most part, Frame briefly, yet adequately refutes the inadequate answers to the problem of evil. The one place where his refutation is lacking is in his discussion of the “Free-Will Defense.” On page 161 he offers scriptural proof that God determines free choices, both good and evil. The problem is that none of the verses cited by Frame offer the same degree of certitude regarding God’s determination of free choices. What can be deduced from those verses is that man’s free choices fulfill God’s plan, correlate with God’s plan; are overruled to accomplish God’s plan, etc. In the purest sense of the word “free”, no one is free. Our freedom is not exercised in a vacuum but in a world where God is sovereign and powerful. Nevertheless our freedom is actual and is in some ways an explanation for the evil that exists. However, our freedom is never a threat to God’s sovereignty and power; our freedom will never thwart his ultimate plan for the universe; and the evil that our freedom creates will never be so great as to be beyond God’s justice and mercy. All of this is not so far from Frames earlier statement in chapter one that “… God’s sovereignty does not exclude, but engages, human responsibility. Indeed, it is God’s sovereignty that grants human responsibility, that gives freedom and significance to human choices and actions, that ordains an important human role within God’s plan for history” (15).

    The greater-good argument correlates with the free-will argument as an expression of God’s power and wisdom over the evil that free-will creates. God allows evil and employs evil to accomplish greater glory for Himself. We do not have all the answers as to why God foreordains an evil event, but knowing that he does encourages us to trust him in the midst of evil (187). Because believers have a new heart, they “can never look at evil with the same passion as an unbeliever” (190).

Chapter Eight – “Apologetics as Offense: Critique of Unbelief”

    In this chapter Frame reviews the fundamental distinction between the “absolute personality of Christianity and the ultimate impersonalism of every other system…” (191). He shows that the unbeliever in his suppression of the knowledge of God and of truth enters two ways of thinking: atheism and idolatry. Atheism and idolatry may be held in isolation from each other or they may be mixed together. Frame sees atheism and idolatry as the only alternatives to Christianity, either the unbeliever denies all gods or gives his allegiance to a false god. He offers arguments against what he calls atheistic relativism, idolatrous rationalism, and atheistic idolatry (201-2).

    His last chapter is an example of how to talk to a stranger about the gospel. The book closes with an evaluation of the Ligonier apologetic as opposed to presuppositionalism. Frame adequately shows that an evidential apologetic that “starts with the self’ is a rationalistic apologetic that denies the biblical assertions upon which Van Til’s apologetics were based: “(1) that human beings are obligated to presuppose God in all their thinking, and (2) that unbelievers resist this obligation in every aspect of thought and life” (223). Frame shows how presuppositionalism utilizes rational arguments and how evidentialism is often presuppositional. The main point of difference is how evidentialists and presuppositionalists understand autonomy. Evidentialists hold that before one can presuppose God he must first think about Him, i.e. “we can not make God our supreme standard unless we know that he exists” (228). On the other hand, presuppositionalists, going back to Van Til’s two main assertions, hold that autonomous reasoning is not possible, because all reasoning is inherently religious, either acknowledging the truth about God or suppressing it in atheism or idolatry.

                                                                                                    Mark 9:1-13

Asking the Right Questions about the End of the World

The previous passage contrasted the honor one might obtain in human society by concealing one’s allegiance to Jesus and his teaching with the shame or repudiation seen in the light of our participation of God’s eternal kingdom. Jesus spoke about dying for the gospel, a real possibility for first-century Christians and for Christians in many parts of the world today. Although I have never faced imprisonment or threats of death for my faith in Christ I have had the opportunity to meet those who have. There can be no dying for the gospel if not living for and in the gospel.

Shame now, sacrifice now, losing your life for Christ’s sake and for the gospel, is a small price to pay for future honor and acknowledgment. You progressively and purposefully grow in what it means to lose your life (translated “soul” in Matt. & Luke, “life” in Mark) for Christ’s sake and for the “gospel” (only Mark). This involves the literal loss of earthly life which we are called to accept as a potential result of following Jesus. We can extend this to the loss of privilege, reputation, advantages, comfort and so forth yet we must not set aside the radical and primary focus of the text. Let us be clear – to cling to life according to that which humanity values most is the way to forfeit true life. The acceptance of the possibility of death, for the right reasons, is the way to real life. Jesus himself in his death and resurrection will be the supreme example of this new perspective, one which we must adopt but cannot without a new and deeper understanding of who Jesus is along with a fresh and ongoing experience of his grace.

The specific mention of the “gospel” in Mark is related to an active role in mission where Christians more often encounter persecution and death. And we will have to ask ourselves – “Living in a time and place where persecution and martyrdom are unlikely how should be lose our lives for Christ’s sake and the gospel?” You may never suffer real persecution or martyrdom for the gospel but if you adopt the attitude of sacrifice and the investment of your life for the gospel you will be prepared to live for Christ or to die for him. The gospel does not call us to ease, to the advancement of our purposes, and to the attaining of our comfort and material acquisitions. That is not the message we find in the Bible. It is not the message the message you will find in this church. It may be too radical for many but by God’s grace we will not lower the bar. We are not about buildings, about programs, about entertainment, about Christian consumerism or health and wealth prosperity, about meeting all our felt needs. We are about the gospel, about worship, about mission, about the glory of God.

Now Jesus will give us a glimpse through the eyes of three disciples – not only of what will be when he comes in glory – but what and who he is now. Talking about “losing your life” for the gospel sounds pessimistic. They needed to see something that would in time enable them to face death not as an enemy to avoid but as following in the steps of Jesus. We will see that Jesus is more than he appears to be (and the same can be said of his kingdom. The veiling of Jesus did not alter the reality of his glorious person. Neither does the veiling of the God’s present reign alter the reality of its present outworking.

In asking questions about the end of the world as did the disciples there are some truths that need to be established. Jesus will give fuller teaching on the end of the world in chapter 13. For now, let’s see that the right questions are not about how and when the world will end but how will we live in a world that does not recognize Jesus as king. In other words, how do we as Christians live in a world hostile to the cross? It is easy to allow the modern era and world events determine our questions.

1. The Bible is not preoccupied with many of our questions
How a Christian should live and die was of far more the concern to the community to which Mark wrote this gospel than the fruitless speculations of our days. How do they live as a persecuted minority which has adopted a new way of seeing and new way living, a way that will lead for many to martyrdom? When seen in that context the questions which are often asked and the answers given are far removed from biblical concerns. How often have we heard people announce the end of the world (Camping), to see in present day events some supposed fulfillment of biblical prophecy? Obviously we should study what the Bible says about future things – we call that eschatology – but we should not be fixated on figuring everything out, we should avoid fanciful interpretations, and we should shun sensationalism which creates either unrealistic expectations or unnecessary fear.

The passage before us demonstrates the difficulty of interpretation. To what was Jesus referring in 9:1? What is clear is that Jesus gave a select group of disciples a promise that they would not die before they saw the kingdom of God after it had come in power. There is disagreement on what event 9:1 refers to – cross, resurrection, ascension or even the destruction of Jerusalem. However, it seems best to understand that in the immediate following event, in his transfiguration, Jesus provides a preview of the future glory of the kingdom of God, a kingdom which Mark had already described as “near” (1:15), a kingdom which Jesus inaugurated as evidenced by his authority over, demons, disease, and death, yet a kingdom that cannot be immediately perceived by the senses but must be experienced in submission to the king.

The disciples have a heavenly preview although future events like those mentioned would make this clearer. They needed reassurance after the projection for their likely destiny – “to taste death” – perhaps not only to die but to die violently. This event enabled them to see God’s sovereignty affirmed and his purposes worked out in the coming of the Messiah. There was a visible alteration of Jesus (word for metamorphosis). Matthew alone reports that Jesus’ face shone like the sun. Luke 9:32 tells us “they saw his glory.” However that they did not perceive the significance can be seen later in James and John’s request that they be seated in place of honor in the kingdom (10:35-37) and the disciples arguing about who would be the greatest (8:33-34). All this leaves the disciples bewildered. You have to love these guys. They are so much like us! And Peter didn’t know what to say so he said something – build three tents so this experience can continue.But compare 2 Peter 2:16-18 which Peter wrote having grasped what it was all about:
16 For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. 17 For when he received honor and glory from God the Father, and the voice was borne to him by the Majestic Glory, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased,” 18 we ourselves heard this very voice borne from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain.

Why Elijah and Moses? Promise of Elijah’s return (Mal. 4:4-6). 5 “Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the great and awesome day of the Lord comes. 6 And he will turn the hearts of fathers to their children and the hearts of children to their fathers, lest I come and strike the land with a decree of utter destruction.”

“A prophet like Moses” (Deut. 18:15-19). Both symbolized the coming of the long-expected Messianic Age. Both considered “deathless” – Elijah taken to heaven and Moses’ grave never found. Both met with God at Mt. Sinai and heard his voice (echoes of Ex. 24 where Moses takes three with him, then the cloud covers the mount for six days). Now on another unidentified mountain (not important which mountain since the kingdom does not have territorial limitations or distinctions). How much of this the disciples grasped we don’t know but their presence evoked a sense of the climatic place and ongoing purpose of God in the presence of Christ.

2. To follow Jesus now in his suffering is to share in his ultimate triumph and glory
Mark 8:31 and 9:12 are like parentheses – “the Son of Man must suffer many things” and is part of the key to unlock the meaning of this passage. We understand the presence of God’s kingdom in the world today means that God reigns in and over us, not that we reign. Losing our lives for Christ’s sake and the gospel are possible only when we adopt the truth of God reigning in us rather than us reigning in the world. At times in history churches have sought to exercise secular authority over populations. It has always resulted in disaster. In our times it is tempting to impose our way of life on people, forgetting that our way of life is impossible apart from God’s work of regeneration = giving us a new heart, new eyes, and new life.

Luke tells us that Moses and Elijah spoke about his “departure.” Christ’s rejection and death will lead to vindication and his followers must be prepared for similar experiences. How ironic it is today that many Christians have visions of reigning now and imposing their values on others by law rather than by radical devotion to Christ. Recently a mass rally was held in Washington D.C. with tens of thousands, mostly Republicans, mostly middle-class and white, and with many evangelical Christians in attendance. Among the organizers and speakers were radio personalities and political aspirants. What was most interesting to me was a claim that “America today begins to turn back to God.” Certainly there are elements of political conservatism which resonate with conservative Christians. This makes for good drama and good business. However, 1) the God who was invoked by the speaker in question God is not the God of the Bible, 2) America can’t turn back to some mythical past, and 3) God’s political agenda is the kingdom of Christ, presently inaugurated awaiting eschatological consummation. We as the church of Jesus Christ, the people of God, must not pander to a political party – whether right or left, red or blue – or follow any call to action or demand for allegiance which contradicts Scripture and/or contravenes our calling as disciples of Christ. We may be lonely at times and fewer in number than if we were to follow a populist agenda and jumped on the right bandwagons. I am not suggesting that Christians abandon the political process and abdicate their responsibility as citizens in a modern democracy. I am saying that we must never equate the kingdom of God with any human political agenda.

I Pt. 2:9 – “You are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation (ethnos), a people for his own possession.” There you have it – nationally, religiously, ethnically, and politically! In Christ our lives are given eternal significance as we are caught in God’s story, as we journey in his history.

There are many voices clamoring for attention today. The Father had already spoken in 1:11 “You are my beloved son; with you I am well pleased.” Now the Father says, “This is my beloved Son; listen to him.” You don’t get to live life your way any longer. You are a subject of Christ’s kingdom, part of Christ’s church which does not receive her charter or her orders from the State, and as such liable to rejection because you confess Christ as Lord. As such, there is no political, national, or ethnic allegiance which trumps our allegiance to Christ. Someone has said: “The political left is not noticeably more interesting than the political right; both sides tend toward solutions that act as if the world has not ended and begun in Jesus” (Resident Aliens, 28). When we witness our world as it is we are reminded that something is wrong and that Someone has come to set things right.

3. The world as we know it will end but there is more – a new heaven and earth with a king
This scene transports us into the future, a glimpse of the reality of knowing and being known. Moses and Elijah were there as themselves. We may not know exactly how they looked or what form they took since at the resurrection they along with us will receive glorified bodies like Jesus’ resurrection body. Elijah and Moses were in what we call the intermediate state. It is the time between our death and the resurrection of the body. We know little about the nature of our existence at that time except that we will be “with the Lord.” But we will be with him in a disembodied state, that is, without the body which we receive at the resurrection. Going to heaven then is not the ultimate destiny of believers. As one writer (N. T. Wright) puts it, there is life after life after death. There is life after death but there is also life after that intermediate period between death and resurrection.

The prophecy concerning Elijah’s return has been fulfilled in John the Baptist (explicit in Matthew 17) in his rejection and death. This is the pattern which will be fulfilled in Jesus. Rejection and death (compare Elijah and Moses – rejection although their death was unusual). Some understand that there will be a double fulfillment and that Elijah will appear again. That may be. Yet we see that the Malachi fulfillment as taught correctly by the scribes was fulfilled in a way that was not fully anticipated. I fully expect that we will all receive some correction of our understanding of future events.

Notice the double use of “it is written.” These things are necessary as part of Old Testament patterns and prophecies. There will be rejection and death. And yet the tone is not gloomy or fatalistic. The death of Christ is not meaningless or a tragic fate but freely accepted and filled with purpose.

The death of Jesus was not the triumph of Christ’s enemies but the fulfillment of the Father’s eternal purposes. The disciples needed to see not only Jesus’ destiny but their own. They were slow to learn but they came to understand that in light of who Jesus was that discipleship could never be the same and neither would they. You either live in society which has been called a “vast supermarket of desire” where you are encouraged to stand alone, take what the world owes you, and create your own reality. Or you will be part of that band of Jesus followers, perhaps insignificant in number – certainly when compared to events which draw huge crowds in our day mostly for entertainment – refusing to exercise power and influence by coercion, and yet like the disciples, having had a glimpse, faint as it may be, of the glory, majesty, and splendor of King Jesus, who reigns, and before whom one day every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus is Lord. As for me, I bow today. I confess today and invite you to join with me and others in confessing that Jesus Christ is Lord.

Mark 5:21-42 Faith in the God-Sent King

Mark 5:21-42

Faith in the God-Sent King

Introduction:

In this text we have two severe crises and one great need in the midst of these crises.

The great need is to have faith that Jesus Christ is the God-sent King whose Kingdom triumphs over all kingdoms.

On the surface it may seem that the great need is to be delivered from a crisis, and in both of these instances the external crisis was resolved. But the deeper crisis in the lives of these two people and the disciples is the crisis of faith.

Do we believe that the kingdom of Jesus triumphs over the kingdom of Satan? Even though that kingdom is not here in its fullness, is the kingdom present and growing?

Both of the miracles that take place are signs and promises of the kingdom of Jesus Christ. They are not ends in and of themselves nor are they ultimate final deliverances. Eventually both people that are delivered will die. The ultimate deliverance is that from unbelief to faith. Read more »

Does Jesus Call Me Brother?

Mark 3:31-35
Our study of the book of Mark has endeavored to look at the words and actions of Christ and those with whom he interacts. Besides the voice of Christ, we have heard from John the Baptist, God the Father, The Disciples, The Outcasts of society, The Religious Leaders of Israel, and even Demons. Today we are going to take a look at the next group, one that was partially introduced to us by Pastor John last week – The Biological Family of Jesus Christ. Just as the Gospel has invaded other resistant realms and created conflict with the status quo, so too this last group in this series of detractors resists the invasion of the Kingdom. Let’s review the text together. Read more »

Mark 3:22-30 Prejudice that Blinds to the Power of God!

Mark 3:22-30
Prejudice that Blinds to the Power of God!

The text we will be looking at today is Mark 3:22-30. Between the text of last week and this week’s text are verses 7-19 which introduce what some would call the “later Galilean ministry of Jesus. The earlier ministry was prior to the religious leaders plot to bring about his death. The later Galilean ministry occurs after that plot and continues through 6:6a. Read more »

THE GOSPEL AND PATRIOTISM

The Gospel and Patriotism

Dr. John P. Davis

Note: I am indebted to Steve Wilkins’ article on “Biblical Patriotism” for some of the major points and the basic thrust of this blogpost.

Recently in the United States, the last Monday in May was marked by the remembrance of those who have given their lives as members of the Armed Forces of the United States of America. In just one week on July 4 we will celebrate Independence Day. National occasions such as this raise the question of ‘what does it mean for a Christian to be patriotic?’ Were you to draw a continuum of Christian opinions on this subject you would have a myriad of views including pacifists, ‘just war’ proponents, some who will not swear loyalty to any earthly government, others who are actively involved in the political process, etc. Read more »

Mark 3:1-6 Looking at Tradition through the Eyes of Jesus

Mark 3:1-6
¹Again he entered the synagogue, and a man was there with a withered hand. ² And they watched Jesus, to see whether he would heal him on the Sabbath, so that they might accuse him. ³ And he said to the man with the withered hand, “Come here.” ⁴ And he said to them, “Is it lawful on the Sabbath to do good or to do harm, to save life or to kill?” But they were silent. ⁵ And he looked around at them with anger, grieved at their hardness of heart, and said to the man, “Stretch out your hand.” He stretched it out, and his hand was restored. ⁶ The Pharisees went out and immediately held counsel with the Herodians against him, how to destroy him.

Introduction:

What is happening in these early chapters of Mark is what we might call a paradigm shift – A paradigm shift is a change in the way in which you look at and interpret life and the world. Read more »

The Lord of the Sabbath – Sermon Notes on Mark 2:23-28

“The Disciples Plucking Grain on the Sabbath” by Gustave Dore (1832-1883)

Mark 2:23-28 (ESV) One Sabbath he was going through the grainfields, and as they made their way, his disciples began to pluck heads of grain.  24 And the Pharisees were saying to him, “Look, why are they doing what is not lawful on the Sabbath?”  25 And he said to them, “Have you never read what David did, when he was in need and was hungry, he and those who were with him: 26 how he entered the house of God, in the time of Abiathar the high priest, and ate the bread of the Presence, which it is not lawful for any but the priests to eat, and also gave it to those who were with him?” 27 And he said to them, “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. 28 So the Son of Man is lord even of the Sabbath.” Read more »

Sermon notes from Sunday, June 6

Jesus Meets the Greatest Human Need

Mark 2:1-12

Mark 2:1-12 And when he returned to Capernaum after some days, it was reported that he was at home.  ² And many were gathered together, so that there was no more room, not even at the door. And he was preaching the word to them.  ³ And they came, bringing to him a paralytic carried by four men.  ⁴ And when they could not get near him because of the crowd, they removed the roof above him, and when they had made an opening, they let down the bed on which the paralytic lay.  ⁵ And when Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, “Son, your sins are forgiven.”  ⁶ Now some of the scribes were sitting there, questioning in their hearts,  ⁷ “Why does this man speak like that? He is blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?”  ⁸ And immediately Jesus, perceiving in his spirit that they thus questioned within themselves, said to them, “Why do you question these things in your hearts?  ⁹ Which is easier, to say to the paralytic, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Rise, take up your bed and walk’?  ¹⁰ But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins”–he said to the paralytic–  ¹¹ “I say to you, rise, pick up your bed, and go home.”  ¹² And he rose and immediately picked up his bed and went out before them all, so that they were all amazed and glorified God, saying, “We never saw anything like this!”

You may feel at times as we go through Mark that some of what is being said about Jesus is strangely familiar. (Did I take the same content from another encounter and transfer it to this one. Yes and No) We will find a persistent consistency in who Jesus is and what His concerns are. Read more »

A synopsis of Sunday’s Message- Encountering an Outcast – Mark 1:40-45

In this text we will be gleaning from Jesus’ encounter with a societal outcast – someone who has been pushed to the edge of a stable life in the city.

Listen to this unusual story:

Mark 1:40-45
⁴⁰ ¶ And a leper came to him, imploring him, and kneeling said to him, “If you will, you can make me clean.” ⁴¹ Moved with pity, he stretched out his hand and touched him and said to him, “I will; be clean.” ⁴² And immediately the leprosy left him, and he was made clean. ⁴³ And Jesus sternly charged him and sent him away at once, ⁴⁴ and said to him, “See that you say nothing to anyone, but go, show yourself to the priest and offer for your cleansing what Moses commanded, for a proof to them.” ⁴⁵ But he went out and began to talk freely about it, and to spread the news, so that Jesus could no longer openly enter a town, but was out in desolate places, and people were coming to him from every quarter. Read more »