Sometimes as you are reading a passage in scripture it seems perplexing. Got Questions? Ask the Pastor. Pastor Larry enjoys answering BIBLE questions.
BIBLE QUESTIONS?
If you would like to blog your question, just use the Reply section below.
28 thoughts on “Ask the Pastor”
Leave a Reply
Conscience
The belief that our conscience is the Holy Spirit and therefore everyone has the Holy Spirit is a mistake first believed by Quakers. They talked about a light within them that everyone had if they would only listen to it. Early Quakers like William Penn actually denied the doctrine of the Trinity by following this light, which reveals it is not the Holy Spirit. Quakers elevated the experience of the Holy Spirit and the supposed new revelation of the Spirit above the Scriptures. Putting a subjective experience above the objective Word of God is very dangerous. The conscience is simply a part of who we are. God made us with a knowledge of right and wrong, an aspect of our humanity. Unfortunately the conscience is not full proof because we can sear it (1 Timothy 4:2), and due to our sinful nature it can be weak or defiled (1 Corinthians 8:7; Titus 1:15). The Holy Spirit can bring our conscience alongside God’s truth, but our conscience is not the Holy Spirit. Jeremiah 12:2 spoke of the wicked people who have God ever on their lips but far from their conscience. If the Holy Spirit was their conscience this would read that God was near their lips but far from himself. In Romans 9:1 Paul declares the Holy Spirit and his conscience both testify concerning his care for the Jews; if they were one and the same this sentence would be nonsensical. Our conscience is imperfect and therefore not the Holy Spirit, but it can become good (1 Timothy 1:19), clear (1 Timothy 3:9) and cleansed (Hebrews 9:14). The best advice I would give to your friend is to abandon the cultish teachings that exalt humans and embrace the teaching of God’s Word. God’s Word humbles us as it reveals our depravity and helplessness, but it lifts us up with the cure for our selfish and sinful nature. When we repent of our sins and place our faith in Christ, declaring our surrender in baptism we receive forgiveness and the gift of the Holy Spirit. The real Holy Spirit does cleanse our consciences and gives us wisdom, comfort and strength to live this life God has called us to in conjunction with the Scriptures – because He wrote the Scriptures (2 Peter 1:20-21).
Recently, I got into a discussion with someone about the Holy Spirit and they expressed that they believe that the Holy Spirit is the same as our conscience. In essence, they were saying that every person on earth has the Holy Spirit/conscience in them, whether they follow Christ, another god, or no god at all. I’ve always grown up learning that the Holy Spirit enters someone at the time of belief/baptism/salvation. Can you provide some insight and/or scripture on this topic? Thank you!
Hello Phillip,
The simple answer to your question is, “no.” Proverbs 18:22 is a principle that states that the person who gets married finds a blessing from the Lord. God loves marriages. Satan hates marriages, so he will try to stop them or hurt them. The American single population has surpassed the married population primarily because Satan has convinced people marriage isn’t a blessing. There is no unpardonable sin that would stop you from getting married. We do live in a messed up world, where at times people are not able to find a spouse through no fault of their own, but this doesn’t mean they are cursed. 1 Corinthians 7:28 is for you: “If you do get married, you have not sinned, and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned.” God’s grace and mercy is new every morning (Lamentations 3:22-23). I hope this helps.
Sr. Pastor Larry Siekawitch, PH.D.
Is it possible to have a scenario where a believer steps out
of the will of God and as a consequence is chastened by the
Lord and the believer forfeits the blessing of God by having
the door closed on any future marriage? In this scenario,
the particular believer (myself) has never married and so
there is no issue of divorce and remarriage. Perhaps another
way of asking this question is framed around Proverbs 18:22.
Could that believer have lost the favor of God in relation to
marriage and thus the door closed on that option?
I would appreciate your pointing out what Scripture has
to say regarding this question.
Respectfully,
Phillip
Hello Carolyn,
I am not familiar with the Waldorf method of teaching, but head, heart and hand teaching is very important here at Harvest. The Biblical worldview practiced by the Jews at the time of Jesus and advocated by the disciples of Christ emphasized a holistic approach to learning; this is very foreign to most people today. The Enlightenment brought about a divorce between mind and heart and we are the inheritors of that worldview, which exalts the mind above the heart and usually doesn’t do anything about it once the supposed truth is discovered. We want our hearts enflamed with love for God, our minds filled with His truth, all the while serving Him with all of the energy He provides to make a Kingdom difference in this world.
God bless,
Sr. Pastor Larry Siekawitch, PH.D.
I have recently heard of your fellowship and found this on the home page:
“If we are all head or all heart or all hands and feet we are monsters, not disciples. At Harvest we seek balance. By balance we don’t mean a little mind, heart and actions; we challenge each believer to experience the fullness of God’s truth, love and plan for his or her life. We want a heart for God, a mind for truth, and hands and feet serving the world!”
As an educator and one inspired by the Waldorf method I’m wondering if there is a connection to Waldorf, or appreciation as well by the writer of your home page, and or possibly some fellowship members, or if it is just a coincidence. If it is just a coincidence I appreciate the recognition of the head, hands, and heart triad on your home page! If intentional I am very excited to have heard of you!! I haven’t found a fellowship that so clearly recognizes, and heeds the relationship.
Have a great day!,
Carolyn
Below are some Waldorf tidbits:
Developed by Rudolf Steiner in 1919, Waldorf Education is based on a profound understanding of human development that addresses the needs of the growing child. Waldorf teachers strive to transform education into an art that educates the whole child—the heart and the hands, as well as the head.
From my head to my feet,
I’m the image of God
From my heart to my hands,
His own breath do I feel.
When I speak with my mouth
I shall follow God’s will
When I see and know God
In Father and Mother
In all loving people, in beats and flower,
in trees, plants, and stones,
Then no fear shall I feel,
only love then fills me
for all that is around me.
Hello Todd,
Your son’s question is a good question, but probably for a scientist. From what I understand of star formation, the star coalesces and then the planets are formed after the star is stable. It is amazing though that we actually need all the stars in the universe in order for life to be possible. The amount of mass in the universe made it possible for star formation and heavier elements to be possible, which is necessary for planet formation and life. I am not a scientist, but I do marvel at the incredible creation of God. The paper on Mormonism is on our website under Resources.
God bless,
Sr. Pastor Larry Siekawitch, PH.D.
Larry,
My son Matthew wants to know………………
if the sun is 25 cosmic years(2,000,000 earth years)how come it took so long to make the earth? Matthew Nelson
I could use a copy of your letter to the Mormons. Thanks, Todd
Hello Jason,
This is a difficult passage, one of the most questioned passages in the Bible. You are on the right track. It describes an unpardonable sin and Matthew 12 says the blasphemy of the Spirit is the only sin that cannot be forgiven so logic says the passage in Hebrews must be talking about what Matthew 12 is talking about. The parallel passage to Matthew in Mark 3:20-30 specifically says the scribes who opposed Jesus and claimed his miracles were done in the power of Beelzebul were the ones who committed this sin. What this tells us is that highly religious people, close to the truth but not alive in the truth, were the ones who committed this sin. Hebrews 6 says “those who were once enlightened, who tasted the heavenly gift, became companions with the Holy Spirit, tasted God’s good word and the powers of the coming age” are the ones in danger of committing this sin. Either Hebrews is talking about those who seemed to be Christians but in fact were not and were similar to the scribes spoken of in Mark 3, or they are Christians and are simply being warned that if they totally walk away from God after knowing Him they could not be forgiven. For those who believe it is impossible for a true believer to lose his or her salvation, this passage is a warning that is actually effectual – no true believer actually commits this sin as Hebrews 6:9 indicates when it says better things accompany salvation. It seems to me that it is talking about religious unbelievers who willfully reject the true relationship with God and go so far as calling it a work of Satan. I always tell people who are worried if they have committed this sin to not worry about it because if they had committed it they wouldn’t be worried about it because there would be no conviction of the Spirit.
God bless,
Larry
Larry,
Hebrews is hard. Tonight I was reading 6:4-8 and I I think I’ve got a handle on the bulk of the passage, but there’s one thing that I’m having trouble understanding. The passage starts with “For it is impossible in the case of those” and connects with “fallen away, to restore them again to repentance, since they are crucifying once again the Son of God to their own harm and holding him up to contempt.” The way I read it is seems to indicate clearly that someone in the circumstances of 4-8 can reach a point of “falling away” at which they can no longer be saved. Matthew 12:31-32 indicates that the only unforgivable sin is blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. Are they talking about the same thing?
Thanks!
Jason
Muslims believe in Jesus, but it is not the same Jesus as the Jesus of the Bible. The best response to his suggestion that Jesus is a prophet, a good guy and someone we can emulate our life after is the response of C.S. Lewis.
“I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: “I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept His claim to be God.” That is the one thing we must not say. A man who said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic — on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg — or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.”
Jesus is God, not just a good teacher. Philippians 2:10-11 states that every knee will bow and every tongue confess that Jesus is Lord. Muslims do not believe He is Lord, but someday every one of them will bow down and confess that Jesus is Lord and Mohammad is a false prophet. You asked how you should respond to your friend. Share the quote by C.S. Lewis and then explain that Christianity has believed that Jesus is God from the very beginning of Christianity. We have ancient quotes that date back to within 1-3 years of Jesus’ death that reveal the belief of all Christians was that Jesus was God (i.e. Philippians 2:6-11 which was an ancient baptismal instruction poem). We have the Gospel of John written by one of Jesus’ disciples who travelled with him for three years, which declares Jesus as God (John 1:1; 8:58; 20:28). We have the rest of the New Testament which consistently calls Jesus God and Lord as well as the Son of God. We have the records of the early church fathers who lived in the first through third centuries and all declared Jesus to be God and Lord. The only group that began to deny His deity is the followers of Arius in the fourth century. Mohammad lived in the seventh century and simply misunderstood what early Christianity believed. He made up a religion that does not fit the records of the first century. Jesus’ resurrection backs up His claim to be God.
there is a muslim fellow i talk to when i visit my dad. the gentleman has a tea shop at the mall that i frequent when i am in vero. he had some Christmas decorations up so i asked him if he believed in Jesus. he said “yes, i believe he was a prophet, a good guy and someone we are supposed to emulate for living a good life”
what would be a proper response to my friendly tea seller?
Hello Luke,
Great question. In 1 Peter 3:19 it says Jesus “made a proclamation to the spirits in prison…” The first question is, “Who are these spirits?” They are either fallen angels (see 2 Peter 2:4; Jude 6) or unrepentant sinners that died in the flood (see v.20). Either way, we know that once you die there is no second chances. Jesus taught about the rich man and Lazarus in Luke 16:19-31. In this teaching Jesus refers to the realm of the dead prior to the resurrection of Jesus called Sheol in the Old Testament. Sheol is a generic term referring to the realm of the dead in general where both the wicked (those not in covenant with God) and the righteous (those in covenant with God) go after death. In the teaching in Luke, Jesus refers to a chasm that separates the wicked from the righteous. The righteous were at Abraham’s side, but the wicked were being tortured; this place of torture is referred to in the New Testament as Hades. The clear point Jesus makes is that it is impossible for anyone to cross the chasm. Revelation 20:14 states that after the Great White Throne judgment those in Hades are cast into the lake of fire also referred to as Gehenna. Those in the lake of fire are “tormented day and night forever and ever” (Revelation 20:10; Isaiah 66:24). After the resurrection of Jesus the righteous now go to be with him in heaven and Sheol is only contains the wicked who are tormented and await the final judgment where they are then cast into the lake of fire. Hebrews 9:27 says, “And just as it is appointed for people to die once – and after this, judgment.” Once we die we face the judgment if we are not saved. Because there is no chance of salvation after we die, it would be foolish to preach salvation to those who have already died. The passage in 1 Peter 3:19-20 gives no indication that it is a message of salvation; therefore it was probably a message of judgment. This is not the most pleasant topic, but it very real. Because of these truths we must be very serious about sharing the gospel with as many people as we can.
God bless,
Larry
Hi Larry, this is Luke Christie-Perkins, brother of Toby Christie-Perkins.
I just read your response to Lisa’s question about the Apostle’s Creed.
I agree with pretty much everything, save perhaps one thing. You said that you think what Jesus ‘preached’ top those “in captivity’ was judgment, and not the gospel or a potential chance for repentance (my summary).
I certainly lean towards that, but I’m not entirely sure.
Do you go anywhere else in scripture for support of this? Is it primarily a formulation based on other, perhaps more clear teachings of scripture? I know this is a tricky subject to address in brief form, thanks for doing it well in your post. If you have any further thoughts regarding why you think he preached judgement, I’d appreciate it.
Thanks!
Luke
The Apostles’ Creed
The Apostles’ Creed is a great statement of Christian belief that has been around since the second century. It was not written by the Apostles and therefore not equal to the Bible, but it shows that from the earliest times the church embraced the doctrine of the Trinity. Because it is not equal to Scripture it does have errors and is not a sufficient statement of necessary beliefs, though it is a very good and concise statement of belief. One shortfall is that it doesn’t say anything about how to be saved, how to receive the wonderful gift of eternal life Jesus has procured for us. We receive eternal life by grace alone through faith alone (Ephesians 2:8-9; Romans 4:1-8).
There is one clause in the Apostles’ Creed that has been seriously questioned throughout the centuries, the phrase “He descended into hell.” What does this phrase mean? It is not found in the Bible and so cannot be made an essential belief of the Christian. Some have suggested that Jesus went to hell for the three days he was buried and there suffered the wrath of God; John Calvin among others believed this. Others go further and state that he was harassed by Satan as a part of his punishment. Neither of these ideas can be proven from Scripture, though Acts 2:24 indicates Jesus did suffer pain while in the grave. Let me share my view. I believe Jesus went to the realm of the dead when he died, but that he suffered the wrath of God while on the cross. According to the Scriptures in Matthew 27:46 Jesus cried out, “My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?” This is in agreement with Psalm 22 and Isaiah 53 that states the Messiah will suffer our penalty in our place, experiencing the wrath of God as our substitute. He experienced the eternal wrath of God we deserve for our sins those six hours that Friday. John 19:30 states that just before he died Jesus said, “It is finished.” This statement indicates that his crucifixion accomplished what God intended, to bring about our salvation through his substitutionary death on the cross. If it is finished then he didn’t need to suffer anymore for our sins. Luke 23:46 declares another statement of Jesus on the cross; “Father, into Your hands I entrust My spirit.” Here it seems that the anguish of forsakenness has ended. One might ask, “How could six hours of suffering suffice for the eternity of hell we all deserve?” It is sufficient because of the quality of the person who died in our place. Jesus was perfect and he was both human and divine. His humanity was necessary to be our substitute, and his divinity was necessary for the substitution to be of infinite value. Only God could pay the full penalty and only man should pay – Jesus the God Man did pay our penalty for us.
But what about the two passages used to declare Jesus went to hell? Acts 2:24 simply states that the resurrection of Jesus ended the pain of death. We have been influenced by Greek philosophy when we think a bodiless state is a good thing. According to the Bible we are incomplete without a body. We long for the rapture when we will receive our resurrection bodies. Those who have died yearn for the resurrection body according to 1 Corinthians 15:50-58 and 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18. We are present with the Lord immediately when we die if we are a Christian, but we still long for the resurrection body because it is not good to be bodiless. We are not complete apart from the physical realm; true Christianity is very earthy.
1 Peter 3:19 simply states that Jesus will be preaching to people when he is in the grave. What does this mean? Hades is the Greek translation for the word Sheol in the Hebrew Scriptures. Sheol referred to the realm of the dead, both righteous and unrighteous. Luke 16:19ff speaks of the realm of the dead that consisted of two parts, one for the righteous called Abraham’s bosom and one for the wicked. These two parts of Sheol are separated by a chasm that cannot be crossed. So who did Jesus preach to? Ephesians 4:8-10 indicates that Jesus led the righteous to heaven when he ascended from the grave; this means that all the Old Testament saints in Abraham’s bosom are now in heaven awaiting their resurrection bodies. 1 Peter 3:19 seems to be saying Jesus is preaching to those on the other side of the chasm. This doesn’t mean they have a second chance; we know there is no second chance after death (Hebrews 9:27). Jesus is preaching judgment. One thing we know is that if he is preaching judgment to those condemned in the flood who are in the bad part of sheol, and he is emptying the good part of sheol, bringing them to heaven, he is not suffering the wrath of God at that time.
The statement in the Apostles’ Creed that he descended into hell is misleading at best and contrary to the Bible in my opinion. When we think of hell we think of the place where people go if they do not accept Christ as their savior. It should be reserved for the lake of fire also known as Gehenna. Jesus preached about Gehenna more than anyone else and warned us of this place of eternal punishment. If we reserve the word hell for Gehenna, we should not translate Hades or Sheol as referring to hell. Hades or Sheol simply referred to the realm of the dead, which included a place for the righteous and a place for the wicked. Jesus did not go to hell and neither will we if we repent of our sins and place our faith in Jesus as our Lord and savior.
Hi Larry, Recently a family member and I were discussing the Apostle’s Creed. I believe you talked about this in a sermon recently but could you tell me the history of the Apostle’s Creed and specifically address the part that says…”He descended into hell; The third day he rose again from the dead”. I can’t remember specifically what you said and the verses you used. Thanks!
My favorite commentary is “The Bible Speaks Today” series of the Bible with two volumes called The Message of Genesis 1-11 by David Atkinson and The Message of Genesis 12-50 by Joyce Baldwin. These are very readable commentaries but also great scholarly work undergirds both. The Expository Bible Commentary vol 2 with John Sailhamer will give you good information as well. A very thought-provoking book is Hugh Ross The Genesis Question concerning how science and the Bible fit together. A good book on the question of the age of the universe is the Genesis Debate which gives three perspectives from conservative evangelical scholars. I have a paper that will soon be on the website entitled “Genesis One and the Age of the Universe” that can be helpful as well. Genesis is foundational for understanding the rest of the Bible and therefore a very important book. Happy reading!
What study resources/ commentaries do you recommend for the study of Genesis?
Hello Janet,
Your question is, “How do making right choices benefit the Kingdom of G-d?” This is an excellent question. First I noticed you spelled “God” without the “o.” This is the way Jewish people avoid writing the word “God” out of respect for His name and in order to avoid breaking the third commandment. God actually gave His name “Yahweh” to us in order to use it in a personal relationship with Him. The Jews were wrong in avoiding the use of His name. I could speak more on this, but I want to address your question now. The Kingdom of God is the rule and reign of God in our life. He is King and we are His subjects. At this point in time He rules in our hearts, but He will also set up His kingdom on earth at His return during the millennium. The Kingdom comes when we allow God to be Lord in our life and it will fully come when Christ returns. Therefore following Christ in obeying His commands as well as in obeying His lead as we serve Him, advances the Kingdom of God, both in our lives and in those we serve as they become open to the reality of God’s rule. When we make sinful choices we place ourselves on the throne of our lives, which is destructive to both us and those we influence. Obeying God doesn’t save us, but it does reflect our surrender to Him as Lord, and it does benefit the Kingdom of God. I hope this helps.
God bless,
Sr. Pastor Larry Siekawitch, PH.D.
Pastor Larry, I would like to know your perspective on the following question…”How do making right choices benefit the Kingdom of G-d?”
These are two great questions. First let’s talk about Yoga. A history of yoga and its actual roots will always be clouded in mystery because the east was never as linear as the west and therefore did not write down chronological history. They believed in cyclical history embracing myth even if it was not necessarily historically true. Facts and history were not as important to them. Did yoga begin as a form of pagan worship or did it begin as a method of exercise and/or martial arts discipline? We really don’t know.
The Bible encourages us to embrace other cultures except for the sinful aspects of those cultures. 1 Corinthians 9:19-22 gives us a great example of proper mission work. Paul said he would become like the people he was trying to reach in order to more effectively reach them. He obviously did not include the sinful practices of those cultures, but he did contextualize his methods and practices in order to reach as many as possible. He concluded, “I have become all things to all people, so that I may by every possible means save some.” In another place he actually quotes pagan poets with approval in order to reach the Athenians (Acts 17:28). In the modern missions movement there was some legitimate complaints when missionaries were trying to Americanize the converts rather than contextualize to their culture. Contextualization can easily become compromise, so we need to be careful about what we are teaching and practicing, but we don’t need to change the non sinful aspects of their culture. The Jesus People Movement is a great example of this. In the 1970’s Christians embrace the culture of the hippies (barefoot, surfer, long hair, etc.) in trying to reach them, without embracing the sinful aspects of the hippy culture (drugs, premarital sex, etc.). This was very successful and was perhaps the spark of the largest revival this country has ever experienced. Many Christians complained, especially concerning the practice of Christian rock. They said rock was inherently sinful because of its origins. Larry Norman put it well when he sang, “Why should the Devil have all the good music?” Christmas is another case in point. Historically it clearly began with pagan roots, worshiping false gods. But we don’t have to act like the Jehovah Witnesses who refuse to celebrate Christmas because of its pagan roots. The sinful aspects of Christmas were transformed into a good holiday. Now that we have added Santa Claus and taken Christ out of Christmas we should probably be concerned, but as Christians we can still practice Christmas in a proper way without fearing any “guilty by association” accusations.
Yoga is practiced by millions of Indians (from India) as a form of worship, which would obviously be sinful for a Christian to participate in if pagan worship is involved. But to adapt the culture without the pagan worship would be perfectly acceptable as noted above. It would also be a great teaching point for engaging in conversation with Hindus.
The second question is related to the first. How are we to understand Paul’s teaching concerning being conscientious toward other weak believers? First we must not make the mistake of thinking that this word of care means we should endorse legalism. Jesus did not care about what the Pharisees believed concerning healing on the Sabbath and trampled on their conscience because of its sinful legalism (see Mark chapter 7, Matthew 23). If a Christian has embraced a belief in legalism, this does not mean we have to avoid those things when around them. Legalism must be exposed along with any other sin (Ephesians 5:11). Another example of this is Paul’s confrontation with Peter (Galatians 2:11-21) who ate with Gentiles but then stopped when he was around the Judaizers because he was afraid that they would be put off by the practice. Peter was wrong because the Judaizers were embracing the sin of legalism and should have been confronted, not respected for their difference of opinion.
Paul’s teaching concerns weak, new believers who might have a conscience about certain things even though those things are acceptable for Christians. The illustration he uses is eating meat offered to idols in 1 Corinthians chapter 8. Notice first of all that the person we are concerned about is the weak, new believer, not solid Christians that should know better (see also Romans 14:1-2). Second notice that the concern is that they might fall into sin. If our actions lead a new believer to sin against his or her conscience, then we should avoid those practices around the new believers until they are properly discipled. In the case of yoga, a new convert from Hinduism might need to be taught the difference about exorcise and worship in yoga, but probably most will realize the difference when the Christian does not have any part in the sinful aspects of yoga. I have not met a Hindu convert so I could not tell what they might be struggling with; a conversation with the convert would be best in determining how to proceed with yoga around them.
I hope this helps.
God bless,
Pastor Larry
I was in a short discussion tonight that was similar in content to your last answered question. First of all, I would just like to share my disclaimer about this topic by saying that my understanding of yoga is that its purpose was/is designed to be a worship of Hindu gods and goddesses by posing in certain ways. I would be curious to hear the opinions of Hindu “gurus” about what their thoughts are on it. The Bible strictly forbids the worshiping of any gods other than God Himself so my question about this particular topic is can we really change something meant to be used for pagan god worship to be something that’s okay for Christians to do even if it has health benefits? My struggle with this is that it seems that we can take things and try to make them palatable and good in the name of it making us feel good.
My other thought and question is about the whole concept of the eating meat sacrificed to idols and abstaining from it if it causes someone else to stumble. If a new person comes into a church and see’s people worshiping in a different way than they’re used to and feels uncomfortable with it, where is the line drawn between us changing to make them feel comfortable with it and them struggling with it and growing into a greater understanding of what is really happening? I hope you can shed a little light on my confusion about this!
Thanks Larry!
n8
Great question! The exercise benefits of yoga are great; stretching, balance and relaxation are good for us. I believe the exercise part can be separated from the spiritual as seen in Wii Fit. One would want to be very careful about any chanting or New Age practices brought into yoga. This question would probably fit into the same question about eating meat sacrificed to idols found in 1 Corinthians 8. Since yoga is practiced in a variety of ways one should be careful they are not participating in pagan practices, but one does not need to fear a demon is going to sneak in unexpectedly.
Hope this helps,
Sr. Pastor Larry Siekawitch, PH.D.
Hi Larry,
I have had several conversations with Christian friends who practice Yoga.. My friends argue that they can separate the “spiritual” side from the “exercise” benefits. Is this possible? Thanks!
That’s a great question Kristi. It helps to understand first century Judaism. This was a common idiom to emphasize something really strongly. In this instance Jesus is emphasizing the priority of discipleship. He is certainly not advocating the breaking of the fifth commandment. What he meant and what everyone at that time understood him as saying was that the would-be disciple must make sure he or she was willing to forsake all to follow Jesus. Not even one’s family relationships should come before one’s relationship with Jesus as Lord. It was an intentionally shocking way of making the point, but the people of that time would have understood. Another way of putting it is that your love for God should make all other loves pale in significance. In the context v.25 says large crowds were beginning to follow him. Jesus was not interested in gathering large crowds for the sake of getting a large following. He only wanted committed disciples. This is still true today. Unfortunately many churches use techniques to gather large crowds by telling the people what they want to hear rather than telling them what they needed to hear. As a pastor I am reminded that I must follow Jesus’ example. As followers in general we must recognize what we are signing up for – total commitment, whatever, whenever Lord! This passage is also a great example of why we must first discover what the original writer was saying to the original audience before we apply it to our own situation, otherwise we might misapply the passage and make it say something it was never intending to say. We are supposed to love our parents, but nothing comes before our relationship with Jesus.
In Luke 14:25-26, Jesus tells the large crowds that were following him that if one does not “hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters, even his own life – he cannot be a disciple of Jesus.” How can a modern day American Christian be a disciple of Christ if this is the standard? What is the meaning of hate is this instance?
Hello Jeff,
These are excellent questions. First let’s deal with the “Sons of God” question and then go on to the more general question concerning angels. Genesis 6:1-4 has perplexed Bible scholars throughout the ages because there is not a lot of detail given. There are three main explanations for the passage: Some suggest the “Sons of God” are demons who impregnate humans, producing unusual children. Others suggest the “Sons of God” are children from Seth’s line who are followers of God and the “daughters of men” are those from Cain’s line who are not following God and therefore are unequally yoked. Others have postulated that the passage describes a case where humans are intermixing with a pre-Adamic species (R.K. Harrison). The last option seems highly unlikely to me so let’s look at the first two. The first position has the best Biblical backing because angels are called sons of God in Job 1:6; 38:7; Psalm 29:1 and 89:7. The demons are fallen angels. Some have rejected this view because the New Testament tells us that angels don’t get married (Matthew 22:30), but the Genesis passage is referring to fallen angels who are going against God’s design, so this argument would not necessarily negate the idea that the sons of God are demons. An intriguing twist on this view is given by Hugh Ross: “A third interpretation of Genesis 6 represents a blending of the prominent opposing views. This approach attempts to solve the sexual issues by hypothesizing a special kind of demon possession. The sons of God in Genesis 6 are presumed to be fallen angels who invade and possess human males in such a powerful way that the genes in the human semen were altered to produce the supernatural Nephilim.” (Hugh Ross, The Genesis Question p.132) The second view that believes the sons of God are godly men has potential, but it doesn’t explain the unusual children from these unions. Because the Bible does not explain this passage it is best to hold to a “I am not sure” position, leaning toward the first option because of its biblical support.
Your second question concerns angels in general. The Bible speaks a lot about Angels and lists two by name, but it does not go into detail, at least as much as we would like. Billy Graham has written a book on angels that might be of help. Basically what we know is that God created an angelic race before he created the universe. Job 38:1-7 tells us that they were around when God created, and they shouted for joy at His handiwork. Genesis 1:1 says the heavens were created before the earth which might indicate the angelic realm was made before the physical realm. We also know that at sometime in the past a third of the angels rebelled with Satan who was probably an angel himself. God did not give these rebels a second chance like He did with humans, perhaps in part because they fell without any strong tempter wooing them away from God like Adam and Eve were tempted. Satan and the other angels didn’t have another tempter tempting them; they just chose to reject God. This rejection indicates that angels were created similarly to humans in that they had a free will. However they are not like humans in other ways. There is no suggestion that they were created in the image of God. As you mentioned, Hebrews 1:14 states that they were created for us; perhaps this was the cause of the original rebellion of the angels. By the way the idea that Satan was God’s original worship leader and his name was Lucifer is not taught in Scripture. If you notice in Revelation God doesn’t need a worship leader in heaven; this idea came from a misinterpretation of Ezekiel 28 and Isaiah 14. If you carefully read Ezekiel 28 you see that the author is referring to the king of Tyre; he specifically mentions him. He uses imagery and poetic language of grandeur which throws some people off, but a proper understanding of genre explains this. Isaiah 14 is clearly referring to the king of Babylon. Angels are fascinating but we should be careful about going beyond the Scriptures. Some people pray to angels or ask God to send His angels and others seek to discover the demonic hierarchy over cities and countries in order to cast out those demons. The Bible is consistent in steering us to pray only to God and let Him decide how to respond. If He wants to send angels He can, but we don’t need to tell Him what to do. Daniel does indicate that there are hierarchies of demons with princes of demons over areas, but it does not tell us to find out who they are and to cast them out. Daniel simply prayed to God and He took care of it. I would say that understanding how Satan works in different areas can be helpful; we don’t have to be unaware of his schemes (2 Corinthians 2:11). But too much of an emphasis on Satan only sidetracks us from our mission. I hope this helps.
God bless,
Pastor Larry
Larry,
According to the ESV study bible, Genesis 6: 1-4 can be interpreted a few different ways. For instance, that the Sons of God are fallen angels who took wives on earth. Can you please help our group to understand this passage? Also I’m wondering about angels. I feel rather ignorant about them. I’ve understood that there are a set number, that many fell, that they,according to Hebrews 1:14, are “sent out to serve for the sake of those who are to inherit salvation.” If you would be willing to shed more light on the subject of angels, or direct me to more passages that discuss them, I would really appreciate it. Thanks!