Showing posts with label Romans. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Romans. Show all posts

Monday, July 13, 2026

Can God forgive really really really really really really bad people?

To the cat, “cat and mouse” is just a game. Cats will stalk mice, catch them, torture them, release them, catch them again, torture them more, and eventually kill them. You know it's a game to them because even after the rodent dies, the cats don't necessarily eat them immediately. Often they'll walk around with the carcasses in their mouths like it's some kind of toy. Still other times they will leave it as a “gift” for their owners. Many cat owners abhor this behavior. Sometimes, they leave their cats' bowls full of food thinking cats won't hunt if they're not hungry. I've heard though that well-fed cats only prolong the torture because, again, it's a game to the cats.

Are cats evil when they do this? I ask because I'm still a little fuzzy about how atheists define right and wrong.

Critics often criticize Christianity by attacking the justice/mercy of God. I came across an article online, written by The Friendly Atheist, where he made this very argument. Consider this quote from the article:

To the Almighty, nothing is unforgivable. Let that sink in. Nothing. You can be a genocidal maniac who eats crushed-up infants on toast during snack time… and still go to heaven if you eventually repent. [italics and ellipsis in original]

To drive this point home, the author relates the horrific career of Liberian-born Joshua Milton Blahyi. Blahyi's vile history supposedly began at age 11.  You can read the gruesome acts attributed to Blahyi in the article where One source cited describes Blahyi as, “the most evil man in the world.” Blahyi later claimed to be a born-again Christian, forgiven of his many sins, and bound for an eternity in glory with the Father.

Critics often point to the forgiving nature of God and question its “fairness.” Could even people like Hitler, Stalin, or Pol Pot, after their lifetimes of sin, have been forgiven by God if they had just confessed and accepted Jesus on their deathbeds? Even many Christians struggle with this concept and will hem and haw when asked to defend it. Indeed, that is why skeptics like the Friendly Atheist continue repeating the criticism. I see many flaws with this argument.

The first problem with this criticism is that, at its core, it commits the fallacy of an argument from incredulity. This is where a speaker essentially claims something seems too outrageous to be true. It's hardly a rebuttal when you think about it. Even if it seems unfair of God to forgive really bad sinners, it doesn't make it untrue. Romans 10:13 says, For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. There's no qualifier in that verse limiting salvation to “only those who haven't been that bad.”  It says, whoever.

Next, atheists have a problem claiming any moral high ground because, ultimately, they have no objective standard of morality. If they are correct and the universe is all there is, then everything that happens is nothing more than matter acting on matter. One person murdering another is no different than a cat torturing a mouse or an apple falling from a tree. It's just the way things are and the universe doesn't care. Actually, if one particular cat were able to torture thousands of mice, it would probably be considered a superior cat from an evolutionary perspective. Likewise, one human who is able to personally murder thousands of others could arguably be described as the “more fit” human if the goal is the survival of the fittest.

Think carefully about atheism. If there is no ultimate Lawgiver, then “morality” is merely the product of whatever people think is preferable. You may think Blahyi’s acts were horrible but he didn't think so at the time. Without appealing to anything beyond human opinion, what makes your view right and Blahyi's wrong? By that same token, critics try to say that God's standard of justice is perverse. On what grounds can they say their opinion is correct and God's wrong? Evil can only exist if God exists. Their argument, then, really has no teeth. They rely solely on the fact that it sounds awful that God could forgive someone like Hitler.

I understand that we struggle sometimes to understand God. It's a symptom of our sin nature. God is infinite and perfect; we are finite and corrupt. His ways are not our ways so we should never presume to judge God according to how we think it ought to be done. It's laughable, really, that the clay should think it can instruct the potter. To understand God, we need to look into His word.

In Matthew 20:1-16, Jesus tells the parable of the workers in the vineyard. I always encourage people to read the Bible themselves but, for the sake of brevity, I'll give you a thumbnail: A land owner goes into the marketplace early in the morning and hires people to work in his vineyard. He agrees to pay them a penny (the standard wage for a day's work). Throughout the day, he returns to the market and hires more workers. He even hires some 1 hour before quitting time. At the end of the day, as the workers are leaving, the land owner gives all of them a penny. Those who were hired first felt slighted that the people who worked only 1 hour got the same pay as they, who had worked all day.

Christians who have trouble understanding how God can mercy on especially evil people are, in fact, demonstrating the same attitudes as the workers hired early. They are, in a sense, saying, “God, I've worked much harder at being good than that person. How can you give him the same reward as me?”

The owner of the vineyard gave an interesting reply to the complainers. He said, Friend, I am doing you no wrong; did you not agree with me for a denarius? Take what is yours and go, but I wish to give to this last man the same as to you. Is it not lawful for me to do what I wish with what is my own? Or is your eye envious because I am generous?” The Bible says that God will have mercy on whoever He chooses to have mercy (Romans 9:15). If God has made salvation available to anyone on the condition that the person believes in His Son, then who are we to attach strings? Should we say, “God, I know that person accepted Christ but let me tell you how bad he's been....”? If so, we are placing our sense of justice above God's. If you really think some people can be forgiven but not others, then you are endorsing a type of salvation by works. You're essentially saying, “This person has been good enough to deserve Christ's forgiveness but this other person hasn't.”

At the bottom line, no one deserves God's mercy. Indeed, if it is deserved, then it's not “mercy,” is it? We all have broken God's commandments and we all are deserving of hell. The Father has made salvation available through the Son. Jesus is the Lamb of God, the one who takes away the sin of the world. Please do not mock God by saying some sin is more than His blood can cover!

God forgives sins. It doesn't matter if you don't think He should; it doesn't matter if you don't understand why. He still does. People should rejoice when they read articles like those written by the Friendly Atheist. It shows that even your sins can be forgiven. No matter how great. No matter how many. Accept Jesus now and though your sins be like scarlet, they'll be made whiter than snow. Now that's good news! Praise God!!


Saturday, April 4, 2026

The Passion Week: Saturday, the Sabbath

 This Easter season, I’ve made a series of posts addressing skeptics’ criticism surrounding the Resurrection.  As we close in on Easter, I want to do a day-by-day detail discussing the events happening during the Passion Week. 

Please keep checking back!



Saturday


Being the Jewish Sabbath, not much would have been done on this day.  The disciples, shocked and demoralized, were probably hiding for fear that they too would find themselves facing religious and political persecution.  The only record in the gospels of what happened on this day is found in Matthew 27:


Matthew 27:62-66, Now the next day, that followed the day of the preparation, the chief priests and Pharisees came together unto Pilate, [s]aying, Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, while he was yet alive, After three days I will rise again. Command therefore that the sepulchre be made sure until the third day, lest his disciples come by night, and steal him away, and say unto the people, He is risen from the dead: so the last error shall be worse than the first. Pilate said unto them, Ye have a watch: go your way, make it as sure as ye can. So they went, and made the sepulchre sure, sealing the stone, and setting a watch.


For His entire public ministry, Jesus found Himself at odds with religious leaders.  His sincere and correct way of teaching the Law upset the hyper-literal and fruitless interpretation taught by the Pharisees.  Because He spoke as someone with authority, they wanted to see a sign from God, a miracle, to prove He had the authority to speak for God.  Jesus promised them one:


Matthew 12:38-40, Then certain of the scribes and of the Pharisees answered, saying, Master, we would see a sign from thee. But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas: For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.


The Pharisees seemed to understand His words because, in their conversation with Pilate, they said, “[W]e remember that that deceiver said, while he was yet alive, After three days I will rise again.”  I think it’s interesting that they understood His words even better than the disciples did!  


Anyway, even when Jesus hung on the cross, they mocked Him, saying, “He saved others; himself he cannot save. If he be the King of Israel, let him now come down from the cross, and we will believe him” (Matthew 27:42).  That’s curious.  Still today, I have heard unbelievers say that if God came down and appeared to them, then they would believe.  I know comments like this are never sincere but I’m not sure of the point of them.  Do people say things like this in order to be condescending?  Or are they trying to convince other people that they are being open minded, saying they would believe if they had enough evidence?  I don’t know.


What they said to Pilate next strikes at the heart of the issue: “Command therefore that the sepulchre be made sure until the third day, lest his disciples come by night, and steal him away, and say unto the people, He is risen from the dead: so the last error shall be worse than the first.


The Pharisees understood the power of the Resurrection.  They remembered that Jesus had promised the sign of Jonah to prove His authority.  If Jesus rose from the dead, then everything He said, did, and taught would be validated!  The Pharisees didn’t want that.  If Jesus remained dead in the tomb, then all of His promises would be there too, dead with Him.


Today, we have the full revelation of Scripture.  We have the written testimony of people who were eyewitnesses to His preaching, His miracles, and His Resurrection.  They are people who saw Him alive, saw Him die, and saw Him alive again!  If you believe in your heart He rose from the dead and accept Him as your Lord, you will be saved (Romans 10:9-10)!


But if people do not believe the Bible, if they do not believe the words written by the prophets and apostles as they were moved by the Holy Spirit, then no amount of “evidence” will convince them.  I’m reminded of the Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus.  In the parable, Jesus tells us of a conversation between Abraham and the rich man.  From Hell, the rich man pleaded with Abraham:


Luke 16:27-31, Then [the rich man] said, I pray thee therefore, father [Abraham], that thou wouldest send [Lazarus] to my father's house: For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment. Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent. And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.


The Pharisees claimed to believe in Moses but they didn’t.  They claimed to be the sons of Abraham but they weren’t.  Had they believed in Moses and Abraham, then they would have believed in Jesus, but they didn’t - even though He rose from the dead!!

Friday, April 3, 2026

The Passion Week: Good Friday

This Easter season, I’ve made a series of posts addressing skeptics’ criticism surrounding the Resurrection.  As we close in on Easter, I want to do a day-by-day detail discussing the events happening during the Passion Week. 

Please keep checking back!



Good Friday


So many things happen on this day that it’s impossible to fit a thorough discussion of them into a single post.  The most important event - by far, of course - is the Crucifixion.  Yet, what do I do about the other events?  Though they may be overshadowed by the Cross, should I omit them when there is still so much to learn from them?  Of all the days of the Passion Week I’ve covered before now, I knew this day would be the most difficult to address adequately.  I just pray in advance that God will guide my thoughts and forgive my clumsy words.


Let me start by saying there is some debate on what day of the week Jesus was crucified.  Much of the disagreement centers on Matthew 12:40 where Jesus said, For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.  There are those people who insist this means Jesus must have been in the tomb for 72 hours - 3 literal days.  In order to fit 3 nights between the Crucifixion and the Resurrection, they claim Jesus died on Thursday.  Others go even further, saying He died on Wednesday, just before sundown and the Passover (the ‘high day’ discussed in John 19:31) was Thursday.  


My problem with a Wednesday or Thursday crucifixion is that Paul attests that Jesus “rose again the third day according to the scriptures” (1 Corinthians 15:14).  If Jesus were in the tomb for the entirety of 3 days, then He would have risen on the fourth day!  I believe the “days and nights” Jesus spoke of in Matthew, is just a colloquial way of saying “day” and includes any part of the day.  Thus, part of Friday, all day Saturday, and raising on Sunday fits with both passages of Scripture.  


This is my personal belief but I do not begrudge others who may hold a different opinion.  In our western way of thinking, it’s hard to draw a defining line between the events of Thursday and the events on Friday.  The Jewish day begins at sundown, while in the west, the next day starts at midnight.  So in this case, Friday technically began on what some (including me) would call Thursday.  Since I ended my last post with the arrest of Jesus, I will consider the events that followed His arrest to be happening on Friday.  I know it’s complicated, but realize that the events are historical regardless of the day to which we assign them.


The flight of the disciples and Peter’s denial


Jesus had warned His disciples earlier that they would soon fall away, citing Zechariah 13:7.  I will remind you of that conversation:


Matthew 26:31-33, Then saith Jesus unto them, All ye shall be offended because of me this night: for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock shall be scattered abroad. But after I am risen again, I will go before you into Galilee. Peter answered and said unto him, Though all men shall be offended because of thee, yet will I never be offended.


I’m amused at the pride of Peter who seemed more upset that his loyalty would be questioned rather than amazed at Jesus saying He would rise again!  It’s as though Peter was so offended, that he completely missed the remark.  Of course, Jesus was correct and, just as He had also prophesied, Peter would later deny even knowing Him.


I think we sometimes judge people of the Bible too harshly.  We have the entire revelation of Scripture so, in a sense, we know more than they.  They were living in the times the Bible was being written and probably struggled to understand what was happening.


In my life of comfort, it’s easy for me to look down on Peter and boast that I would have never denied knowing Him.  I like to think that I would stand fast if I had to face real threats of harm on account of my faith.  But I know that I’ll probably never be in that situation.  In the meanwhile, I know there are some Christians who wouldn’t take their Bibles to work because they’re afraid of what their coworkers might say.  Knowing what I know now, if I were to ever deny knowing Jesus, that would make me 100 times more a coward than Peter!


The trials of Jesus


The Bible tells us that Jesus was taken in front of multiple authorities to face the accusations being made against Him: Annas (John 18:13), Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin (Matthew 26:57-68), Pilate (Luke 23:2-5), and Herod (Luke 23:6-12).  


When Jesus stood before the Jewish authorities, He spoke nothing in His own defense just as was prophesied in Isaiah 53:7, “He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.”

The accusation against Him was made by 2 false witnesses who said He had said He would tear down the Temple and rebuild it in 3 days (Matthew 26:59-61).  Yet even when faced with the lies spoken against Him, Jesus remained silent until the Chief Priest asked, “I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God” (Matthew 26:63).  In response, Jesus made His only confession, (v. 64) “Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.”

I see in this scene a picture of Christ as the Lamb of God.  He was examined by the Jewish priests and shown to be without blemish - worthy of being a sacrifice that would atone for sin.  In this case, it was the sin of the whole world! Praise Him!!


John 19 tells us about Jesus before Pilate.  V. 13 says, “When Pilate therefore heard that saying, he brought Jesus forth, and sat down in the judgment seat in a place that is called the Pavement, but in the Hebrew, Gabbatha.”  The word translated as “judgment seat” here is the Greek word Bema (béma, βῆμα, Strong’s word 968).  It’s the same word used in 2 Corinthians 5:10 where the works of Christians are judged by fire.  


I thought it was interesting that Jesus Himself was once judged before the Bema seat. We know the outcome, of course; He was ultimately sentenced to be crucified. However, note carefully what Pilate said about Him. He said that Jesus was a “just person” who had done no evil. It's significant that Jesus was found to be without guilt. The Bible says the wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23). If Jesus had been guilty of any sin, He would have been deserving of death. If He had been deserving of death, He could not have given His life as the payment for our sins since He would have had to die for His own sins. But He was innocent.  Before we stand before the Judgment Seat, it was necessary for Him to stand before the judgment seat. It is by His obedience that we are made righteous (Romans 5:19).


Jesus or Barabbas?


While Pilate was trying to find a way to release an innocent man without raising the ire of religious leaders, he resorted to the Roman custom of freeing a condemned man on the Passover (John 18:39-40).  He offered the people a choice: Jesus, the King of the Jews or Barabbas (a murderer).  To his surprise, the people chose Barabbas.


There’s something very interesting about the name, “Barabbas.”  Bar (bar, בַּר, Strong’s word 1247) is an Aramaic word that means “son of.”  It’s used in a few other places in the Bible such as Matthew 16:17 where Jesus refers to Simon as “Simon Barjona” (Simon, son of Jonah). Many people already know that abba (ab, אָב, Strong’s word 1) means “father.”  Barabba, then, means “Son of Abba” or “Son of a father.”  


Wow.  I happen to be the son of a father.  When you think about it, everyone is the child of a father, so Barabbas could have been anyone.  That could have been my name written there!  This paints a wonderful picture of the substitutionary death of Jesus. Each one of us is a Barabbas: all guilty of many sins and all sentenced to die. But we don’t have to die. Jesus – the innocent man who knew no sin – has died in our place. He went to the cross and we were set free.


Jesus on the Cross


There is more that could be said about Good Friday: the scourging, the mocking, the purple robe of Herod, the crown of thorns, the road to Golgotha, the two thieves, the accusation posted over His head, His clothes being divided, and so much else.  However, time and space does not allow them all to be examined.  


Concerning Jesus on the cross, let us examine this passage given in John’s gospel:


John 19:30-35, When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost. The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away. Then came the soldiers, and brake the legs of the first, and of the other which was crucified with him. But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they brake not his legs: But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water. And he that saw it bare record, and his record is true: and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe.


The last words of Jesus recorded by John were, “It is finished.”  The ultimate goal of Jesus’ incarnation had been accomplished.  The penalty for sin had been paid.  The wrath of the Father had been satisfied.  Our debt has been settled and there is no more need for a sacrifice.  God and sinners are reconciled.  


John tells us that he saw the event with his own eyes and wrote it down for our benefit.  In his own words,  And he that saw it bare record, and his record is true: and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe.  


Let John’s desire be our desire: that we tell others about Jesus so they, too, might believe!