Where does Jesus get His Authority? Where do His Followers get Theirs? Part 2

What about Jesus?  
2. Will God reach out to everyone? (Possibly disturbing)

One conjecture holds that if God really is all-powerful and all-loving, He would create "undeniable evidence... that would convince agnostics, atheists, and members of competing religions." Excusing this lack of such a loud universal proclamation makes belief "extremely tricky." (10)

Now I definitely am not as well-read in this subject as any lay person who specifically studied for a response, but still can give an invigorating answer.

Prominent British atheist A. J. Ayer once had a shocking near-death experience(11). He found himself before a light which he could identify as the source that governed the universe! As you would expect, it was very uncomfortable for him. 

Afterward, he said that this could be "rather strong evidence that death does not put an end to consciousness," although he doubted that conclusion...and confirmed he was an atheist still. 

(It struck me as sort-of funny when Antony Flew, another former famous British atheist, thought his experience could be explained by Ayer having gone crazy[12]. Flew would go on to believe in a god.  People accused him by saying this was because of old age, but he pointed out that he still denied an afterlife[13]. Flew believed in a deistic god because of "a pilgrimage of reason," not religious experience[14]. Anyway, the cause of his near-death experience doesn't matter.)

Then, Michael Goulder, in his comments on a debate where he tried to explain away Jesus's resurrection as hallucinations, brought up Susan Atkins(15). She had become imprisoned after following a murderous group led by someone named Charles Manson. But one day in her prison cell, while she was considering nothing but terrible options, she thought of Jesus. And then she heard Jesus say, "You have to decide. Behold, I stand at the door and knock." A door appeared before her, in her mind, and she took the handle and pulled it open! The most pure, most amazing light flooded over her, but she could still make out some image of a Man. When it was over, she was the happiest she had ever been in 26 years, because God had forgiven her of all her sins.

Now I must tell you that skeptical verification of my examples end here. That's not because I don't trust my sources. On the contrary, I don't have any reason to think these people would be lying. They definitely are in the position to know, and we follow the same God. But you might not feel convinced to believe anything right away, so just please be open to the possibility that a theistic world is true and maybe this is really happening. Thus, other reasons might convict your mind of the point I'm getting to, and that they wouldn't make this up. 

Ravi Zacharias, who perished just this year, was a world's leading Christian apologist. Growing up in New Delhi, India, he was well-versed in Eastern religion and thought, especially Hinduism. In The Case for Faith: A Journalist Investigates the Toughest Objections to Christianity, Lee Strobel sought his answers for the big question "What about those who haven't heard?" (16)

Zacharias has, as one might expect, shared Christ in many Islamic countries. He told Strobel about one women who worked for a prominent business, but one day walked out the doors feeling empty inside. Suddenly she blurted, "Jesus, can you help me?" Naturally, being a Muslim who does not understand Jesus to be the go to person at all, she was surprised. This started her journey to coming to Christ.

Zacharias also said that there are by far two most common ways for Muslims to become a Christian in their homeland across the seas: someone who follows Jesus shares His love with them, or "a vision, a dream, or some other supernatural intervention. Now, no religion has a more intricate doctrine of angels and visions than Islam, and I think it's extraordinary that God uses that sensitivity to the supernatural world in which he speaks in visions and dreams and reveals himself." 

Elsewhere in the 2018 Case for Miracles, a man named Tom Doyle expanded on these striking events. Described by a Christian friend as someone with "the credibility of a man who has the smell of the front lines of the battlefield on his clothes because he was there yesterday and will be back tomorrow," (17) he served as an avid missionary in the East and works as the founding president of UnCharted. The organization seeks to challenge Christians to join God's good work in ministering to Jews and Muslims, and also protecting the persecuted church. 

What he described I remember reading about before then. I don't know if I thought of the name myself, but I came to know it as "the great Muslim revival." "Iran, Syria, all over" Muslims were having dreams of Jesus in a white robe telling them the Gospel(18). Christian ministries realized what their God was doing, and so even went so far as to place ads in Egyptian newspapers saying, "Have you seen the man in a white robe in your dreams? He has a message for you. Call this number." 

Doyle gave a variety of stories(19). One was from Omar, who "grew up in a refugee camp as a Palestinian. He hated Israel. He told me his goal in life was to kill as many Jews as he could." (20) It's not surprising that one day he was going to work with the terrorist organization Hamas. But while walking there, in an instant Someone stood in the street in front of him. His garb was a white robe, and He pointed at Omar. "Omar, this is not the life I have planned for you. You turn around. Go home. I have another plan for you." Omar went home, met his new Christian neighbor (not a coincidence), told him the experience, and became an underground church planter after being walked through the Scriptures on Jesus. 

These people feel honored that Jesus would decide to appear to them. They don't feel bad, they feel His love: "grace, safety, protection, affirmation, joy, peace." (21) One woman even felt so much peace that she could only notice Jesus, not a missionary pictured by Him. Of course they are open to seeing what the Bible has to confirm about the message in the vision (I love you, I gave everything for you, I died for you). Doyle has never heard of a conversion in the middle of the night. They usually are directed to someone who knows the Bible, where they find His truth. 

These will be all my examples. Why doesn't God give "undeniable proof" of His existence? Because he refuses to coerce a person to believe by some sort of divine rape. It is not the case that if God were to proclaim the truth, say by writing it in the sky where everyone all over the world can see, they would believe it. Ayer denied not only an afterlife but also God. People could dream up things false explanations, like maybe a conspiracy theory caused by some secret, super powerful science machinery. 

Or, even if they were to believe stuff about God, that doesn't mean they would believe in God. They might believe God exists, but try to ignore His message that they have sinned and need Jesus. Think of when a child hurts his sibling, and his parents tell them to "Apologize!" Not every kid is going to be really sorry, for the sake of the person, just possibly sorry for whatever punishment they got. Both errors would be out of selfishness. 

I believe that God knows everyone, and that includes every human being He can persuade to believe in Jesus. God has a plan, and knows the best time to draw them completely to Himself. Indeed, if someone could prove to Americans that those Jesus visions to such non-Christians were happening, they would have an air-tight case for Him. Doyle did say that it's foolish to be skeptical of their conversions that take place "in the Middle East, where people face persecution [death not always excluded] if they pursue faith." (22)

In the meantime, he's not going to give Christians a weapon to beat skeptics over the head with. (Every Christ-follower still sins and very well might feel tempted to do this!) Oh, how stupid it would look to deny why the cross is plastered over the sun! I have some arguments which I consider to be very powerful (some even deal with just straight-forward logic), but they have to be explained and defended. (They will be cited later, along with some more observances on this issue.)

3. What role does interpretation play? (Not disturbing)

Even after someone has determined, if they could, if the Bible is from God, there is still the matter of interpreting that source. This must also take into account traditional understanding of what the text says. 

I do not agree that determining the truth between the specific demands of scripture and tradition is a "difficulty." (23) But I highly agree that Fundamentals of Ethics is right when it insists that theists must defend a specific interpretation of their holy book. What matters is just that: argumentative strength. Evidence. 

The early church fathers, leaders of Christian churches in the later-half of the first-century and centuries proceeding, definitely didn't agree on everything. However, that doesn't dis tradition. Their information actually can be evidence, for instance being the earliest to receive the New Testament books makes it highly likely that they would know what genre they are. Also, unanimous verdicts throughout the church (the church is really all Christians in the world) are most probably true. 

I definitely have ran into information on how to interpret Bible passages, but also definitely haven't really pursued them because I'm more interested in the main message and how Jesus is proven historically (both explained in some detail later). So I definitely have something to say, although it's not going to be elegant.

Some things in the Bible are not paralleled and so obscure that they can't be interpreted. Some things are blatantly obvious. When both extremes aren't met, context is really what to pay attention to. What was the author specifically thinking about at the time? Sometimes, historical (extra-biblical) context even can be used, like I did with my post on women in Christianity(24). There, two passages were outweighed by other clear passages without any need to conclude a contradiction. 

And of course, studying the original wording, in the language the specific book of the Bible was written in, can be vitally important. Christians and Jehovah's Witnesses both believe the Bible as it has been passed down to us through textual transmission over the centuries is uncorrupted, and claim to have a monopoly on its meaning. I believe that the JW Bible, The New World Translation, is really just a biased copy which can leave out important or add in new parts to fit doctrines. For example, the Son of Man in Daniel 7:13-14, who Jesus claims to be in the NT, is not said to be worshipped. Only God can be worshipped, and Watchtower doctrines demand Jesus is not God. And John 1:1 doesn't say that Jesus "was God," the NWT reads He "was a god." 

Again, I don't study interpretation and cannot use the original Hebrew and Greek words. But one of my favorite passages to prove Jesus's identity is John 5:18, which looks the same in the Watchtower bible and my New International Version. Quite explicitly, John said that Jesus was "making Himself equal to God." (25) That's a passage with an obvious meaning.

Now I've already brought up the early Christian church, and Christians not agreeing with Jehovah's Witnesses. That's because if you visit any Christian denomination today, they are just that. Baptist, Methodist, non-denominational (comedian Tim Hawkins identifies that as Baptist with a cool website), all have a core understanding that Jesus is God and salvation is only by faith in Him, no works. Obviously different denominations imply different views somewhere, but a Christian church is not that if it denies any one of those two beliefs.

It is possible to have a right interpretation of the Bible. I'll prove it. How does anyone know how to interpret The Fundamentals of Ethics? Well, by looking at the context (is he saying a theory is true or just talking like it to explain?) and words. Granted, I think this twenty-first century textbook was written to at least virtually always have obvious, literal self-explained meanings, unlike a first century epistle (letter to a church in the NT). But that obviously doesn't necessitate that anything in the Bible is stuck to being a matter of opinion! 

It can very easily be self-defeating to say "That's just your interpretation!" How does someone know what they heard is not truly what the author had in mind unless they know what is right? 

I mean, it was mentioned above that it is possible to not know what something means because it can't be proven. Also, even when someone makes an educated guess, there could be evidence against that alone but not enough to see the right one. This all demonstrates my point. There are strategies to defend interpretations of the Bible.

Finally, the author suggested religious people would possibly not want to correctly interpret scripture if the meaning looked immoral or perhaps untenable. I have long realized this would discredit their own beliefs. Examples of "morally troubling advice" and orders "which seem to be clearly required by God" came from the Old Testament. I am not going to bother to defend it because I know I will never have all the answers to every possible objection, and instead just need to know enough to reach a verdict and have faith in God. I believe morals can objectively come from no source but God, and so something harsh doesn't count as evidence against Him. Well, at least in and of itself, because often the objection is "How could a loving God command this?..." Yes, I have a resource to get answers, but I suggest if someone is really interested they read it: Is God a Moral Monster? Making Sense of the Old Testament God by Paul Copan. 

(You are still welcome to comment if you wish and I'll explain an answer if I can. What I'm saying is if it's really that important to you, you're probably better off getting an entire book of answers yourself.) 

Citations:

10. Shafer-Landau, Ethics, 74.

11. A. J. Ayer, "'What I Saw When I Was Dead': Intimations of Immortality," National Review, October 14, 1988, pp. 38-40. Cited in Gary R. Habermas and Antony Flew, Resurrected? An Atheist and Theist in Dialogue, John F. Ankerberg edition (Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, inc: 2005), 50.

12. Habermas and Flew, Resurrected?, 64.

13. Antony Flew and Roy Abraham Varghese, There is a God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind (Harperone: 2007), 2.

14. Ibid., 93.

15. M. J. Meadow and R. D. Kahoe, Psychology of Religion (New York: Harper & Row, 1984), p. 90. Cited in Paul Copan and Ronald K. Tacelli, Jesus' Resurrection: Fact or Figment? A Debate Between William Lane Craig and Gerd Ludemann (InterVarsity Press: Downers Grove, IL. 2000), 87-88.

16. Lee Strobel, The Case for Faith: A Journalist Investigates the Toughest Objections to Christianity (Zondervan: Grand Rapids, Michigan. 2000), 171-74.

17. Lee Strobel, The Case for Miracles: A Journalist Investigates Evidence for the Supernatural (Zondervan: Grand Rapids, MI. 2018), 144. 

18. Strobel, The Case for Miracles, 146. 

19. Ibid., 145-56.

20. Ibid., 148, emphasis mine.

21. Ibid., 151.

22. Ibid., 154.

23. Shafer-Landau, Ethics, 74.

24. https://onechristianthought.blogspot.com/2020/03/christianity-and-women.html

25. https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/l/r1/lp-e?q=John+5