I was watching the History Channel try to explain away the miracle of Christ's coming to Earth. They were trying to say that what we hold to as true from the Bible is not true at all. For instance, they claim that Mary was a politically-savvy young woman who knew that the Jewish resistance to Roman rule needed a boost. So, as she is pregnant, she decides to make sure her son would be thought of as a descendant of David and that is why they went to Bethlehem. The whole story of the census is false.
To undermine the virgin Birth (or ANY portion of the Biblical account of the Incarnation of Christ) is to make sure that Jesus is not who He claimed to be. If He wasn't conceived in a miraculous way, then He was just a man. And, as just a man, He was at best the starter of a new religion, but definitely not a Savior and not worthy of praise. You see, if He really is just a man then He is not "Immanuel", God with us (see Matthew 1:23), He is lessened. And if He is just a man, the cross becomes less than the full atonement for our sins, because God didn't hang there, a man did. And if "just a man" hung on that cross, He could not have been doing it for anyone else. He may have been innocently convicted, but He certainly was not dying to pay the sin-debt of all mankind "once for all" (see Romans 6:10). So, while there are those who want to downplay the significance of Jesus' birth, we, as people of faith, need to speak out. They are not just attacking portions of the Bible, they are attacking the whole Bible. If one part is false, then all has been called into question.
Which brings me to another thought about these "historians" and the way they are doing their "science". Throughout the centuries, there has been effort after effort to undermine the Holy Scripture. In the church that calls Jesus Lord, these have all been labeled with one word: heresy. Heresy simply means "false truth". It is putting forth an unproven theory as truth. This theory may (or may not) make sense in our limited understanding, but it is placed in the public forum as absolute fact. The validity of the Bible is a perfect example. Every time the Bible has come under attack as being false, there has been found evidence to the truth of God's word. Yet, when some unbelieving archaeologist finds one piece of papyri or one engraved stone that somehow refutes the Bible, then the papyri or the stone is assumed to be true and the Bible false. Can I ask a simple question? If the Bible has proven to be true every time it has come under attack, then should we not assume that the Bible is the one that is true and the papyri or the stone are the ones that are wrong?
It comes down to something called a world-view. If your world-view allows for the Bible to be false, then you are comfortable saying that the "new" evidence is correct and the Bible is proved false. But if your world-view holds to the inerrant, infallible Word of God, then the "new" evidence is the one that is suspect. And, Christian, we have been allowing the secular world-view to color our view of Scripture for far too long. Let's have a truly Biblical world-view. The Bible says that God's words will not pass away (Matthew 24:25). We need to stop allowing these unbelieving people undermine our faith in almighty God. He either is who He says He is, or we are to be pitied (1 Corinthians 15:12-23). But there is no middle ground here. You either believe it, or you don't.
Let's keep the truth of Christmas (Immanuel) in the foreground. Let's remember that Immanuel not only came to earth in a miraculous way, but that He also died for our sins and on the third day He rose from the dead. It is the basic message of the Gospel. It must either be believed or rejected. Do you believe?
No comments:
Post a Comment