Institute of Biblical Defense

The Main Themes of Jesus’ Teachings:

The Kingdom of God

Most New Testament scholars, liberal and conservative alike, believe the main theme of Jesus’ teachings is the Kingdom of God (also called the Kingdom of Heaven). Both John the Baptist and Jesus proclaimed, “The Kingdom of God is at hand” (Matthew 3:2; 4:17). But, what exactly is the Kingdom of God? First, a kingdom is the domain (or sphere of rule) of a king. Second, since God is the King of His Kingdom, then the Kingdom of God is wherever God rules.

To be more specific, we need to look at what Jesus said about God’s Kingdom. Jesus often taught in parables. Parables are true to life stories that teach spiritual truth. In Matthew, chapter thirteen, Jesus taught the people parables about the Kingdom of God, telling them what the Kingdom would be like. In the parable of the sower, Jesus said that people could accept or reject the word of the Kingdom. Those who accept the word of the Kingdom would bear much fruit (Matthew 13:18-23). In the parables of the mustard seed and the leaven, Jesus explained that the Kingdom of God would start out small but would grow to the point of filling the earth (Matthew 13:31-33). In the parables of the tares and the net of fish, Jesus preached that, in God’s Kingdom, the unsaved would mingle with the saved until the harvest on the last day when the Son of Man would send God’s angels to separate them, sending the unsaved into a “furnace of fire” (Matthew 13:36-43; 47-50). In the parables of the pearl of great price and the hidden treasure, Jesus proclaimed that the Kingdom of God was worth more than everything a person owned (Matthew 13:44-46).

These parables teach us that the Kingdom of God has two distinct phases or stages. First, the Kingdom of God apparently has a present stage in which God’s Kingdom (the church) is growing throughout the world. During this stage, God’s Kingdom grows until it fills the earth. Still, nonbelievers live side by side with believers during this stage. Second, the Kingdom of God has a future stage in which the Son of Man will come and send His angels to separate the unsaved from the saved, sending the unsaved into eternal torment.

The Apostle Paul spoke of the present stage of God’s Kingdom when he wrote, “For the Kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit” (Romans 14:17). Hence, the present stage of God’s Kingdom is a spiritual stage—God ruling in the hearts of believers.

The future stage of God’s Kingdom is spoken of in the following manner: “And the seventh angel sounded [his trumpet]; and there arose loud voices in heaven, saying, ‘The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ; and He will reign forever and ever’” (Revelation 11:15). Revelation, chapters nineteen and twenty, tell us that Jesus will bring God’s kingdom to earth by reigning on the earth and shepherding the nations with an iron rod for one-thousand years (Revelation 19:11-20:15). Hence, the future stage of God’s Kingdom is when God’s Kingdom physically comes to earth when Jesus returns to rule on earth (Matthew 24:29-31; 25:31-32). Jesus taught the apostles that they would sit on twleve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel in the coming Kingdom (Matthew 19:28), and that many Jews would not make it into God’s Kingdom, whereas some Gentiles would sit and feast with the Jewish patriarch Abraham (Matthew 8:10-12). Jesus told Nicodemus that “unless one is born again, he cannot see the Kingdom of God” (John 3:3). To be born again, a person has to believe in Jesus for salvation (John 3:16-18).

From these passages we can gain insight into God’s Kingdom. In its present stage, God rules in the hearts of believers—those who trust in Jesus alone for salvation. But, in the future, Jesus will return and bring God’s Kingdom to earth, and He will reign on the earth for one-thousand years. The Kingdom of God coming in all its fullness was prophesied in the Old Testament and will be fulfilled by Jesus at His return when He conquers the enemies of Israel and establishes God’s Kingdom on earth (Zechariah 14:1-5, 9-21; Isaiah 2:1-4; 9:6-7; 11:4-9; Zechariah 9:9-10). Jesus instructed believers to pray for God’s Kingdom to come to earth (Matthew 6:10).

by IBD conributor Kyle Larson

After his arrest in Gethsemane, the guards dragged Jesus before the Jewish nation’s supreme court: the Sanhedrin. The high priest, Caiaphas, had arranged for an impromptu trial of the controversial rabbi. Being held at night an in secret, the legality of the trial was already in doubt. As a line of false accusers came forward, each contradicting the last, all hope of a fair trial faded away; Jesus’ was guilty no matter how long it took to prove it.

Eventually, Jesus admitted his unique status as the son of God. Caiaphas, unable to make his sham trial effective, jumped at the opportunity to condemn Jesus as a blasphemer. The sentence was death!

Unfortunately for Caiaphas, the Jewish nation was living under Roman occupation and no man could be executed without the permission of Rome. So the Jewish leaders waited until early Friday morning to bring Jesus before the Roman Governor of Judea, Pontius Pilate. After a short interview, Pilate could not find any real basis for a charge against Jesus, so he sent him to Herod.

Herod could find nothing in Jesus’ worthy of death either, so Pilate, never a fan of the Sanhedrin or or the Jews, decided to release Jesus. Not because he cared for Jesus or because he was particularly worried about justice, but because the Sanhedrin was jealous of Jesus. Releasing Jesus would make them angry … and in some place in Pilate’s heart that thought pleased him.

However, after several attempts to release Jesus, Pilate found himself faced with a riot. What on earth had this man done to so enrage the Jewish leaders? After his wife came to him, begging him to have nothing to do with Jesus, Pilate washed his hands of the matter. He finally gave in to the will of the people and sent Jesus to the cross.

Before a condemned man was taken to the cross, it was a preliminary procedure to have that man scourged. The type of whip used by the Romans was totally different than the kind used during the days of slavery in the Southern United States. The Romans used a kind of whip that had long leather strips. At the end of each of these leather strips were pieces of sheep bone and other VERY sharp objects. Thus, when this whip came down upon upon a man’s back, it also wrapped around the chest of the bent over man. This whip ripped through skin, muscles and nerves. This caused intense pain. As the whip came down on the man’s back and wrapped around his chest. severe bruising on the rib cage and the lungs would occur. Thus, when a man took a breath, it was extremely painful. Thus, during and after this brutal scourging, Jesus had to be careful to take shallow short breaths because if he attempted a normal deep breath, he would be in extreme agony.

If we had been there to view the scourging of Jesus, we would see his entire back broken open. Not only would the top layer of skin be totally ripped open, but also deeper layers of the back that would have ripped apart muscles and nerves. Large pieces of flesh came flying off of Jesus back, chest and legs.

The pain must have been agonizing not only on the back but also on the chest. Jesus would continuously slump down on the ground, only to be jerked back up again so that the scourging could continue. Many people died at the whipping post. Many people called the scourging at the post “the half death” because most victims, including Jesus, already half dead before even being nailed to the Cross.

As the scourging continued, the man would experience nausea and vomiting as well as severe dizzy and fainting spells. Yet the Roman soldiers showed no mercy as the scourging continued. When the scourging of Jesus was finished, he had huge black, blue and purple bruises all over the front and back of his body. He could hardly stand up.

The Crown of Thorns

In the case of Jesus, he claimed to be a King. Thus, the Roman soldiers chose to mock the Kingship of Jesus. In order to do this, the soldiers took part of a thorn bush and formed a “cap” that covered his entire head. These thorns probably came from the “Syrian Christ thorn” plant. These thorns were as hard as nails. When the Roman soldiers rammed down the crown of thorns on the head of Jesus, the thorns went the two major nerves that covered the entire head. When the crown of thorns came down upon Jesus, he experienced “trigeminal neuralgia” There would be agonizing pain all over the front and sides of his face. There would also be agonizing pain on the insides of his ears. It would have been the equivalent of having someone come up with a knife and stabbing a person all over the face.

I have a friend who has experienced trigeminal neuralgia. She writes:

“There are different levels pertaining to the pain of trigeminal neuralgia. I personally experience most of the time the pain on both sides of my face called bilateral pain. Besides feeling like a toothache I experience a severe amount of pressure around my whole lower jaw. It feels as though someone is squeezing your cheeks and jaws together with a piercing pain going on at the same time. Also, every so often I experience sharp, electric shocks to the side of the face like someone stabbed me with a sharp needle or knife. The pain can extend up the side of the face where your temples are and keeps going around to the top of my eyes and forehead like an excruciating, unbearable migraine in your entire face.There are times when the pain can get so severe that you feel like your face is on fire and there is nothing you can do about it; where you cannot get any relief”

Most movies on Jesus do not emphasize the severity of the scourging and the crown of thorns. Remember these things as you meditate on the passion of our Lord Jesus Christ.

On September 11^th, 2001, Islamic extremists hijacked American commercial airplanes and flew them into the twin towers and the Pentagon. Another hijacked plane crashed in a field in Pennsylvania. Many commentators claimed that these terrorists had “hijacked” the Islamic faith. In reality, these Muslim terrorists seemed to take the violent commands of the Koran very seriously. They had not hijacked the Islamic faith; instead, they passionately obeyed the unethical commands uttered by Muhammad in the Koran.

However, the past few generations have witnessed a real hijacking: the hijacking of the historical Jesus. The historically reliable New Testament portrait of Jesus has been replaced with varieties of a politically-correct Jesus, New Age Christs, and other false Christs. In most cases, these false Christs were created in the image of the people who promote them.

Was Jesus married to Mary Magdalene and did He appoint her to lead His church? Or, was Jesus merely a man who never claimed to be God? Maybe Jesus was merely a legend or myth—He never really existed? In short, is traditional, biblical Christianity a perversion of first century Christianity? Today the traditional view of Jesus has been replaced by a myriad of false conceptions of Christ that look nothing like the true Jesus of the Bible. The traditional view of Jesus has been hijacked, and the Christian church needs to respond. We need to defend the true Jesus of history—the true Jesus of the Bible.

Today, two of the leading false pictures of Jesus in the Western world are being proclaimed by Dan Brown, author of the best-selling novel The DaVinci Code, and by the radical left-wing scholars who comprise the Jesus Seminar—a think tank dedicated to presenting an alternative, politically correct Jesus to the world. The next two chapters will examine their work and refute the false Jesuses they promote. Other false portraits of Jesus will be refuted as well.

In this chapter, we will examine ancient Christological heresies (i.e., ancient false views of Jesus), the liberal “Christian” view of Jesus, the cultic views of Jesus, and the mistaken views of Jesus found in the world religions as well as in postmodern circles. We will then briefly discuss the true biblical view of Jesus. In later chapters, after refuting the work of the DaVinci Code, the Jesus Seminar, and other recent attacks on the historical Jesus, we will build a strong case that the true Jesus of the Bible is identical with the real Jesus of history.

The Bible clearly teaches that Jesus is fully God and fully man. He always existed as God the second Person of the Trinity, but at a point in time He added a human nature. Throughout the history of the church there have been those who have rejected this biblical view of Jesus and have instead promoted false Christs who cannot save.

An excerpt from “The True Jesus of the Bible”, chapter one in the Institute’s latest book: Hijacking the Historical Jesus.

As you can probably guess, this Institute receives a number of Theological questions. Recently, I ran across the following question and  decided it merited a public response.

“I was recently asked about the the Isaiah verse that Matthew quotes. I’m being told it was a mistranslation. I tried to tell the person that he needed to read it all in context. He said I can’t call for context amongst all the books then ignore the context in which the book of Isaiah was written.”

Interesting discussion. The quote in question is from Matthew 1:22 & 23:

“So the Lord’s promise came true, just as the prophet had said, ‘A virgin will have a baby boy, and he will be called Immanuel,’ which means ‘God is with us.’”

Matthew here is quoting from Isaiah chapter 7.

“Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. He shall eat curds and honey when he knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good.  For before the boy knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good, the land whose two kings you dread will be deserted.”

The Lord is giving the people of Israel a “sign” as a pledge that He will deliver them; In the time it takes a young women to conceive and her child to grow to the age of accountability, Israel shall be delivered from her enemies. That is the straight forward meaning.

We can read the fulfillment in Isaiah, chapter 8, verses 3 and 4.

“And I went to the prophetess, and she conceived and bore a son. Then the LORD said to me, “Call his name Maher-shalal-hashbaz; for before the boy knows how to cry ‘My father’ or ‘My mother,’ the wealth of Damascus and the spoil of Samaria will be carried away before the king of Assyria.””

So why did Matthew apply this fulfilled prophecy to Jesus? Did he hear about Jesus’ virgin birth and go searching for a some verse justify it? Does the verse in Isaiah actually refer to a “virgin” or just a young woman? Can we justify both the near fulfillment and Matthew’s application of this verse to Jesus? The only way to solve this is to look at the text itself.

In context, the word used by Isaiah (almah) merely means “young maiden of marrying age”. The word “betulah” means “virgin”. Of course, it was expected that a young maiden be a virgin before marriage … but that is only implied.  So, “almah”, in context, could either mean young maiden or virgin (or both). Since we know the context and have Isaiah’s writings, we could make a determination ourselves. However, I think consulting pre-Christian, Jewish interpretations would appear less biased on our part.

Long before Christ’s time here on earth, the Greeks decided it was in their best interest to understand those rebellious Jews. Perhaps if they understood why they rebelled, they’d be able to better rule them. So, the rulers asked that a Greek translation of the Jewish holy book, the Old Testament, be made. It was called the LXX (the 70), as legend says that 70 elders were involved in the translation process.

Now we have an unbiased translation into a more literal language. Looking at the verses in question, we turn to Isaiah and find that the phrase (ha’almah) was translated into Greek as “the virgin”. This means that decades before Christ was born, Jewish scholars decided that “virgin” was correct in context. It wasn’t until after Christ’s time that some Jews sought to change the meaning to “young woman” (not necessarily a virgin). Before and during Christ’s time, there is strong evidence to believe that few Jewish scholars doubted the translation in the LXX.

So why did the Jewish scholars translate the phrase “ha’almah” as “the virgin”? The word “almah” is only used 10 times in the entire Old Testament; That isn’t a large number of times. In 6 of the 10 cases, the LXX translators chose the Greek word for “virgin”: Genesis 24:43, Exodus 2:8, Psalm 68:25, Song of Solomon 1:3, 6:8 and Proverbs 30:19. In no case is the word ever translated as “young woman” or anything other than an unmarried maiden of marrying age (which implies virginity). So to an ancient Jew, the idea that this could not mean a virgin young maiden was out of the question.

That said, I believe something clever is going on here; I believe that God’s choice of the word “almah” was not an accident. In the near fulfillment, Isaiah married a “young maiden” and a child was born. However, since young Jewish maidens were expected to be virgins until marriage, the word can also be properly translated “virgin”.  So God used the word “almah” knowing that the dual meaning of the verse could be applied to both prophecies.

But wait! How did I come up with this concept of a “dual” fulfillment or a “dual” meaning? Looking at Isaiah 14, we see God humiliating Babylon and its arrogance. But then, starting in verse 12, we see this:

“How you are fallen from heaven, O Day Star, son of Dawn!
How you are cut down to the ground, you who laid the nations low!
You said in your heart, ‘I will ascend to heaven; above the stars of God I will set my throne on high;
I will sit on the mount of assembly in the far reaches of the north;
I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High.’“

Either the king of Babylon made some wild, inhuman claims of becoming God, or this section is referring someone else. Even in Jesus’ day, Jewish scholars agreed that this passage was about Satan, the spiritual power behind Babylon. So this section refers both to the king of Babylon and to Satan at the same time. Wow! God is clever.

So, in Isaiah we see God predicting a natural birth (as a sign), at the same time, predicting the birth of Jesus the Messiah.

Taken from Matthew chapter 13, Dr Fernandes speaks on sharing the Salvation of Jesus with non believers, how different people react and what can happen in the hearts of those who hear the message.

In the first article of this review, I touched upon the nature of God and His attributes. Rob Bell’s vision of God’s attributes, as described in his controversial new book Love Wins, was compared and contrasted with the scriptures. In his writing, Bell seems very comfortable with the Love of God, but shows little interest in interacting with attributes of God he is not personally comfortable with.

The Bible teaches that God manifests all of his attributes all the time. They exist in perfect harmony with one another. There are no contradictions within the nature of God (e.g. love vs justice). As I wrote in the previous article, on this issue Rob Bell does not rightly divide the Word of truth.

Error usually enters a church or denomination when the whole counsel of God is not seriously considered. Often, blinded by pet doctrines or new theological fads, the leadership will pick and choose from the scriptures to feed certain doctrines while ignoring those scriptures which refute or qualify them. In effect, they create a god in their own image; One they can be personally comfortable with.  Before long,  this new theology becomes church doctrine. I believe that this is the case with Rob Bell. It seems as if Bell wants to scold the God of the universe for manifesting any attributes not conforming with his personal theology.

In this article, the second in the series, the version of salvation presented in Love Wins will be contrasted with Biblical salvation. My contention is that if a person attempts to come to God on their own terms, that person will end up eternally separated from God; God has the right to set down the terms for a person’s salvation. He has done so clearly in His word.

Let’s start by looking at specific statements from Rob Bell’s book concerning how a person is saved.

“If the message of Jesus is that God is offering the free gift of eternal life through him – a gift that we cannot earn by our own efforts, works or good deeds – and all we have to do is accept and confess and believe, aren’t those verbs? And aren’t verbs actions? Accepting, confessing, believing — those are things we do. Does that mean then, that going to heaven is dependent on something I do? How is any of that Grace? How is that a gift? How is that Good News? Isn’t what Christians have always claimed set their religion apart – that it wasn’t in the end a religion at all – that you don’t have to do anything because God has already done it through Jesus.” (Love Wins – 11)

It is here that we encounter one of the most serious errors in Rob Bell’s book: a radically distorted understanding of the Gospel. For Bell, as stated in this passage and in many other passages throughout his book, salvation is a universal fact. When Jesus died on the Cross, salvation wasn’t just available to everyone who believes, but everyone, regardless of whether they actually believe the Gospel or not, is saved. According to Bell, the “Good News” really isn’t “good” if one has to place their faith in Jesus to be saved. Bell believes that the mainstream view of salvation is just plain wrong; It is anything but Good News. As far as he’s concerned, Jesus died and as a result, everyone is saved . Personal Trust in Jesus is not required.

However, according to the Bible, neither Jesus nor his Apostles taught anything like Bell’s universal salvation. It must be remembered that Jesus of Nazareth presented clear and undeniable credentials to show that he had authority to speak for God the Father on earth. Moreover, he claimed to be God. He backed up this claim by fulfilling Old Testament prophesy, performing miracles and then rising from the dead.

So then, if we claim to believe the Bible, we must also believe that Jesus has the right and the authority to spell out the terms of salvation. The fact that Jesus rose from the dead alone validates everything he taught during his 3 ½ year ministry. I would hope and pray that Rob Bell would not disagree with this as being the foundation for why we as Christians accept the authority of Jesus.

What this all boils down to is this question: “What is the Message of the Gospel?” Rob Bell asks this same question in many different ways throughout the first chapter of his book. The content of the Gospel involves the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus. Consider the following passages:

“Thus it is written, that the Christ would suffer and rise again from the dead the third day, and that repentance for forgiveness of sins would be proclaimed in His name to all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem. – Luke 24:44-48

“Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain. ³For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve – 1 Corinthians 15:1-8

Thus, the Gospel involves what Jesus did for us, on our behalf. We could not save ourselves. We did nothing to earn God’s sending of his Son. Yet, contrary to many statements that Rob Bell makes throughout the book, Jesus’ death and Resurrection for our salvation does not mean that everyone in the world is automatically saved. A person needs to believe that what Jesus did, He did for him or her individually. Consider the words of Jesus:

^“As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lift0ed up; ¹⁵so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life. “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. “For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. “He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.” – John 3:14-18

I would suppose that Bell could easily go along with John 3:16,17, because Jesus talks about how God sent him into the world to redeem it and not to judge it. But I wonder what Bell would say concerning verse 18. Would Bell tell Jesus that he was not presenting Nicodemus with Good News because those who do not believe in Him already stand condemned for not believing in Him? Would Bell find fault with Jesus for spelling out the consequences of rejecting his specific gift of salvation? Is Jesus, in verse 18, being too narrow minded and unloving for Rob Bell? Is Rob Bell more loving than the Son of God himself?

“What shall we do, so that we may work the works of God?” Jesus answered and said to them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.” – John 6:27-29

“For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.” – John 6:40

Based on these passages ALONE, we can get a very clear understanding of what Jesus deemed to be necessary for salvation. Jesus said that personal trust and belief in Him was absolutely necessary for a person to be saved.

Bell would say that there is nothing gracious in God instructing people to believe in Jesus for salvation. Bell would say this is too narrow. For Bell., God would have been much more loving if, at the moment that Jesus died , He had automatically forgiven everyone and not put a burden on people by declaring, through the preaching of the Apostles, that one must individually believe on the Lord Jesus Christ for salvation. That sounds narrow and not grace filled for Rob Bell.

The Apostles also stated that personal trust in Jesus and what did is necessary for salvation. Peter stated twice that personal trust in Jesus and the turning away from sin are necessary for salvation.

“Peter said to them, “Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit” – Acts 2:38

“And He ordered us to preach to the people, and solemnly to testify that this is the One who has been appointed by God as Judge of the living and the dead. “Of Him all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins.” – ACTS 10:42-43

The Apostle Paul, the Apostle of Grace, also stated many times that while there was nothing that we could have done to motivate God in the sending of his Son for our salvation, there is something that we need to do to receive that salvation personally. That one thing is believing on the Lord Jesus Christ and in what He did in his death and resurrection for our salvation. Consider the following four passages below from God’s Word.

”……suddenly there came a great earthquake, so that the foundations of the prison house were shaken; and immediately all the doors were opened and everyone’s chains were unfastened. When the jailer awoke and saw the prison doors opened, he drew his sword and was about to kill himself, supposing that the prisoners had escaped. But Paul cried out with a loud voice, saying, “Do not harm yourself, for we are all here!” And he called for lights and rushed in, and trembling with fear he fell down before Paul and Silas, and after he brought them out, he said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” They said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.” – Acts 16:26-31

^“But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe; for there is no distinction; for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus; ²⁵whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed; for the demonstration, I say, of His righteousness at the present time, so that He would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. Where then is boasting? It is excluded By what kind of law? Of works? No, but by a law of faith. For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law.” – Romans 3:21-24

^“Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom also we have obtained our introduction by faith into this grace in which we stand; and we exult in hope of the glory of God.” – Romans 5:1-2

^“For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.” -Ephesians 2:8

Now if Peter, Paul and the rest of the Apostles stated that one needs to put his or her personal trust in Jesus for salvation, how can Rob Bell come along and state that the Apostles were not really full of grace, did not understand that salvation is a gift and did not have a correct understanding of what the Good News is? Peter traveled with Jesus during his 3 ½ year ministry. Peter saw Jesus’ mighty miracles and heard his powerful sermons? Peter was an eyewitness of the Resurrected Jesus. Jesus vested Peter with Apostolic authority and power to proclaim the Gospel.

Does Rob Bell know something more than what Peter experienced? Has Rob Bell seen the physically resurrected Jesus like Peter and Paul did, which officially made them Apostles? Does Bell know more about the Grace of God than Peter, Paul and the rest of the Apostles? People’s souls are at stake when they read Rob Bell’s book “Love Wins” and come away with a false sense of security thinking it’s okay if they reject what Jesus did for them on the cross,……because they are already automatically saved by the cross anyway regardless of what they do with The cross. False security is the worse kind of security!

Guest Post by IBD contributor Kyle Larson

Let’s face it, controversy sells. In today’s media-driven, instant-access society, we are prone to skip the facts and report the controversy. The endgame being, of course, to sell more books, gain more viewers or entice readers to frequent your awesome blog. When we hear about Rob Bell’s latest book and the very controversial nature of its content, one wonders if this is what he had in mind. Rather than a treatise on the nature of salvation, one wonders if this a response to the shrinking bottom line. This would explain why someone so well respected as Rob Bell would create a book like Love Wins.

In this book, Rob Bell lays out his philosophy concerning both the nature of God and the extent of His salvation. When reading it, the first thing that came to mind, at least for me, were the controversies that plagued the early church regarding the nature of Christ. From the beginning of Christianity, the apostles taught that Jesus was both God and Man at the same time. For this reason, their writings in the New Testament speak about both the deity and humanity of Jesus. In the early church, neither aspect of Christ’s nature was overemphasized or under emphasized at the expense of the other. Yet during the first three centuries, each new heresy regarding the nature of Christ either overemphasized his deity at the expense of his humanity or overemphasized his humanity at the expense of his deity; Both extremes are simply different forms of the same heresy which denies that Jesus is fully God and fully man.

When reading Rob Bell’s book, Love Wins, one sees the overemphasis of one of God’s attributes at the expense of others. Bell is absolutely correct in emphasizing that God is Love. From Genesis to Revelation, the Bible describes the Christian God as a God of Love. There are many passages in the New Testament that state that God sent his Son into the world out of pure and perfect love for humanity.

When we look at the book of Psalms in the Old Testament for example, we see a great emphasis on the love of God. It’s hard to miss. Yet, the book of Psalms clearly speaks of other attributes of God. The book of Psalms, as well as the rest of Scripture, maintains an emphasis on God as a being with many attributes, each an equal part of the whole. If one overemphasizes God’s holiness at the expense of his love or goodness, we come up with an inaccurate picture of who God is. This is true regardless of what attribute of God is being overemphasized. If one attends a church where the wrath of God is always preached on and the love of God is hardly mentioned, that church has lost balance. In the same way, if God’s love is overemphasized at the expense of his holiness or wrath, then that church too is off balanced.

This off balanced understanding of God’s attributes begins in chapter 1 of Love Wins, which is entitled “What About The Flat Tire?” In it, Bell asks a series of questions regarding the nature of God when it comes to the eternal punishment of the unsaved. Bell asks if God can still be loving if He allows people to be lost in Hell.

“Does God punish people for thousands of years with infinite eternal torment for things they did in their few finite years of life?”

“What kind of faith is that? Or more important, What kind of God is that?”

The ONLY way that we can discover what God is like is by reading what He has revealed about himself in his Word, the Bible. We don’t have to guess what God is like; He has told us. While there are some specific attributes of God that will be explored in this article, there are some very fundamental basics concerning the attributes of God that need to be made clear at the very beginning.

God has no beginning and end; He is eternal. (Exodus 3:14) No other being can say this. God is the creator who created all other things (Genesis 1:1). God is Omnipotent. This means that God has all power and is unlimited. (Jeremiah 32:17, Jeremiah 43:13, Jeremiah 49:`19) God is also Omniscient; He knows all things. (Job 37:16, Psalms 139:2-4, Matthew 6:8) God is also Omnipresent; He is fully present everywhere at the same time all the time. (I Kings 8:27, Psalms 93:3-5, Psalms 139:7-10)

With these basic attributes of God in place, we can now deal some other specific attributes of God as they relate to Rob Bell’s latest book Love Wins.

GOD IS HOLY

God is holy in that He is separate from all creation. The primary reason for this is that God is not a creature. He has no beginning and no end. All creatures have a beginning at some point in time. Not so with God. Being therefore holy, God cannot stand in the presence of evil or sin

Several passages in the Old Testament speak of the Holiness of God:

“Who is like You among the gods, O LORD? Who is like You, majestic in holiness, Awesome in praises, working wonders?” – Exodus 15:11

“‘For I am the LORD your God Consecrate yourselves therefore, and be holy, for I am holy. And you shall not make yourselves unclean with any of the swarming things that swarm on the earth. For I am the LORD who brought you up from the land of Egypt to be your God; thus you shall be holy, for I am holy.’” – Leviticus 11:44-45

“There is no one holy like the LORD. Indeed, there is no one besides You, Nor is there any rock like our God” – 1 Samuel 2:2

GOD IS RIGHTEOUS AND JUST

The Greek word for “righteous” means “to be just”. God, being the God revealed in scripture, cannot be anything other than totally just and righteous. If we believe the scriptures, and Rob Bell claims this, God will forever be righteous and can do nothing wrong; That would be against His nature.

“The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring forever; The judgments of the LORD are true; they are righteous altogether” – Psalm 19:9

“Righteousness and justice are the foundation of Your throne; Loving kindness and truth go before You.” – Psalm 89:14

In the second passage particularly, we see several attributes of God together, all in perfect harmony with each other.

God is absolutely holy and righteous along with being absolutely and perfectly loving. All of God’s attributes are in perfect harmony with each other because of who God is. For Rob Bell to elevate only one attribute of God, his love, while deemphasizing other attributes of God he may not be comfortable with is not accurately handling the word of truth. Only after balancing all of his attributes, each perfectly working together, are we offered an accurate and complete and accurate picture of who God is.

GOD IS MERCIFUL

The Mercy of God is emphasized throughout the Bible:

“The LORD is slow to anger and abundant in loving kindness, forgiving iniquity and transgression; but He will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generations.’ ¹⁹“Pardon, I pray, the iniquity of this people according to the greatness of Your lovingkindness, just as You also have forgiven this people, from Egypt even until now.” – Numbers 14:18-19

“O give thanks to the LORD, for He is good; For His loving kindness is everlasting.” – Chronicles 16:34

^“The priests stood at their posts, and the Levites also, with the instruments of music to the LORD, which King David had made for giving praise to the LORD–’for His loving kindness is everlasting’” – 2 Chronicles 7:6

Rob Bell does a good job giving many other passages throughout the book that speak of God’s love and mercy. We have no argument with Rob Bell here.

THE WRATH OF GOD

Yet the Bible also solemnly speaks about the Wrath of God. Some of these passages include the following:

”… and My anger will be kindled, and I will kill you with the sword, and your wives shall become widows and your children fatherless.” – Exodus 22:24

“Now then let Me alone, that My anger may burn against them and that I may destroy them; and I will make of you a great nation.” – Exodus 32:10

“When he fills his belly, God will send His fierce anger on him and will rain it on him while he is eating” – Job 20:23

These are just a few of the many passages that speak of the Wrath of God

God’s mercy and God’s wrath are not contradictions , rather, as Dr. Norman Geisler explains in his Systematic Theology series, God’s Wrath acts upon one person and his mercy on another person. It would be contradictory to say a person is both a Christian and a non Christian at the same time and therefore also a contradiction for this person to end up both in Heaven and Hell at the same time. Rob Bell would be correct if he reached this conclusion, but he never follows his own reasoning to this conclusion. In fact, he peppers the book with statements on how terrible God would be if He sent a person to Hell for rejecting Jesus.

In writing about a situation in which a person hears the Gospel, rejects it and later on that same day dies in a car accident, for God to send that person to Hell, Rob Bell writes:

“God would, in essence, become a fundamentally different being to them in that moment of death, a different being to them forever. A loving heavenly Father who will go to extraordinary lengths to have a relationship with them would, in the blink of an eye, become a cruel, mean, vicious tormenter who would ensure that they had escape from an endless future of agony. If there was an earthly Father who was like that, we would call the authorities. If there was an actual human dad who was that volatile, we would contact child protection services immediately. If God can switch gears like that, switch entire modes of being that quickly, that raises a thousand questions about whether a being like this could ever be trusted, let alone be good.” (Love Wins, pg 174)

This statement reveals a serious misunderstanding of the immutability of God. God is unchanging in his nature and in all of his attributes. He retains all of his attributes at all times. He doesn’t discard one attribute in order to display another of his attributes. Again, all of God’s attributes work together in perfect harmony, but they are also eternally constant and unchanging in nature.

GOD IS UNCHANGING IN HIS NATURE

“Also the Glory of Israel will not lie or change His mind; for He is not a man that He should change His mind.” – 1 Samuel 15:29

“Even they will perish, but You endure; And all of them will wear out like a garment; Like clothing You will change them and they will be changed. But You are the same, And Your years will not come to an end.” – Psalm 102:26-27

“For I, the LORD, do not change; therefore you, O sons of Jacob, are not consumed.” – Malachi 3:6

Bell uses certain words to describe God’s right to exercise his attributes of justice and righteousness. Some of these words include: “vicious”, “cruel” and “relentless”. It’s almost as if Bell is saying to God, “You can display only your attribute of Love. If you manifest any of your other attributes, such as justice, righteousness or Your wrath, then you are cruel and mean and vicious.” But if that were the case, then is Bell appealing to some greater being than the God of the Bible? He must if he is going to use some other standard or a measuring line to judge the God of the Bible. Of course, this simply cannot be the case if Rob Bell truly believes there is only one eternal being, the God of scripture.

In a related extended passage from the Book, Bell writes:

“… if your God is loving one second and cruel the next, if your God will punish people for all eternity for sins committed in a few short years, then no amount of clever marketing, or compelling language or good music or great coffee will be able to disguise that one true, glaring, unacceptable, awful reality.” (Love Wins 175)

Bell also says that this kind of God has something “wrong” with Him. (Love Wins 175)

Again, what is Bell’s standard of measurement? Does he know a God greater than the God of the Bible to whose greater moral standard he can appeal? Bell, who cannot stand a God of judgment, ends up judging God himself. Words such as “cruel”, “mean”, “vicious” and “wrong” are all words that imply a judgment. The two previous extended quotations from Love Wins remind us of the long series of questions that God asked of Job, who was questioning the way that God does things.

“Then the LORD said to Job, ‘Will the faultfinder contend with the Almighty? Let him who reproves God answer it.’ Then Job answered the LORD and said, ^‘Behold, I am insignificant; what can I reply to You? I lay my hand on my mouth. Once I have spoken, and I will not answer; Even twice, and I will add nothing more.’

Then the LORD answered Job out of the storm and said, ^‘Now gird up your loins like a man; I will ask you, and you instruct Me. Will you really annul My judgment? Will you condemn Me that you may be justified? Or do you have an arm like God, And can you thunder with a voice like His?’” – Job 40:1-3,6-9

Is Rob Bell a fault finder of God? Is Rob Bell reproving God for being who is He in his very essence, nature and attributes? Is Rob Bell trying to instruct the eternal God who has all power, knows all things and is everywhere present at the same time? Is Rob Bell trying to annul the righteous judgments of God? Is Rob Bell condemning God so that he can be justified in his understanding of who God is? These are serious questions that Rob Bell needs to answer

GOD IS THE CREATOR

“Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell Me, if you have understanding. Who set its measurements? Since you know. Or who stretched the line on it? On what were its bases sunk or who laid its cornerstone … “ – Job 38:4-6

GOD IS ALL POWERFUL (OMNIPOTENT)

“Have you entered into the springs of the sea Or walked in the recesses of the deep? Have the gates of death been revealed to you, or have you seen the gates of deep darkness? Have you understood the expanse of the earth? Tell Me, if you know all this.

Have you entered the storehouses of the snow or have you seen the storehouses of the hail, can you bind the chains of the Pleiades, or loose the cords of Orion? Can you lead forth a constellation in its season and guide the Bear with her satellites? Do you know the ⁽ordinances of the heavens, Or fix their rule over the earth?” – Job 38:16-18,22

As we conclude this first article, we can only hope that Bell’s response will be the same as that of Job

^“Then Job answered the LORD and said, ^‘I know that You can do all things, And that no purpose of Yours can be thwarted. Who is this that hides counsel without knowledge? Therefore I have declared that which I did not understand, things too wonderful for me, which I did not know. Hear, now, and I will speak; I will ask You, and You instruct me. I have heard of You by the hearing of the ear; But now my eye sees You; Therefore I retract, And I repent in dust and ashes.’” – Job 42:1-6

The Institute regularly received correspondence from laypeople and apologists worldwide. Most of the time, we either answer the query ourselves or defer the person to a ministry that specializes in the field (anthropology, linguistics, ancient cultures, etc). As always, our goal is to best equip the saints to defend the Christian faith.

On one such occasion not too long ago, we received an email from someone seeking an answer to Jewish apologists. Apparently, they were questioning the genealogy of Jesus. Was Jesus really from the right tribe, family and lineage to qualify as the Messiah? The pedigree of Christ was put on the table.

The following arguments were given to the Christian to show that Jesus’ genealogy did not qualify him as the Messiah:

“The Messiah must be from the tribe of Judah (Genesis 49:10). Under Jewish law, tribal affiliation is conferred through the birth father only (Numbers 1:18-44,34:14,Leviticus 24:10) (Criterion for being the Messiah is not met – in Christianity, Jesus has no human father – therefore he had no tribal affiliation. Jesus not being from the tribe of Judah is eliminated from messianic consideration).”

“The Messiah must be from the House of David (Jeremiah 33:17-20,1 Chronicles 17:11-12). This affiliation is conferred through the father and Matthew 1 and Luke 3 attempt to trace Jesus’ lineage through Joseph back to King David. However, according to the Gospels “the holy spirit” not Joseph was Jesus’ father (Matthew 1:18). Tribal and family affiliations of this type can not be claimed by adoption (Numbers 1:18-44,34:14; Leviticus 24:10) and at any rate there is no indication in the Christian scriptures that Joseph ever adopted Jesus under Jewish law (Criterion not met – Jesus eliminated from messianic consideration).”

“The Messiah must be from the seed of Solomon (2 Samuel 7:12-16,Psalms 89:29-38,1 Chronicles 17:11-14,22:9-10,28:6-7). Matthew indeed claims that Jesus was descended through Solomon. However, Luke claimed that Jesus descended through Nathan, David’s other son (who was not king). This eliminates Jesus’ genealogy through Luke. The problem with the claim that Luke’s genealogy is actually that of Mary is that Mary is not mentioned in Luke’s genealogy. Even if it was the genealogy of Mary this is meaningless as Jewish law only recognizes tribal affiliation through the father (Numbers 1:18).”

Of course, as a traditional Christian, I completely disagree with the Jewish assessment of Jesus’ lineage. Here’s my responding email:

So let me get this straight. The argument goes:

1) In order to fulfill the messianic prophecy of being from the tribe of Judah, Joseph would have to have been Jesus’ natural father since tribal affiliation is passed through the father’s lineage.

2) In order to fulfill the messianic prophecy of being from the “House of David”, Joseph would have to have been Jesus’ natural father since tribal affiliation is passed down from the father and cannot be claimed through adoption.

3)  In order to fulfill the messianic prophecy of being from the “seed of” Solomon, Joseph would have to have been Jesus’ natural father since tribal affiliation is only passed through the father’s lineage.

Does the unspoken assumption here seem unusual? If Jesus is the supernaturally conceived Son of God, rather than the natural son of Joseph, then He isn’t qualified to be the Messiah. Really? So if God Himself comes to earth, He is unqualified to be their savior? I wonder if they realize how nonsensical and illogical that sounds?

Setting that aside, let’s continue with the argument. If Jesus was not Joseph’s natural son, but only the son of Mary, one must wonder: did Jesus have any Jewish affiliation at all? If all affiliation were only passed down from the father’s side then Jesus, technically, wasn’t even a Jew; He had no tribe, no family and no real lineage (remember, we’re setting aside the fact that he’s the son of God). So, being born through Mary into the tribe of Judah from the line of King David is irrelevant; Jesus is a nobody from nowhere.

This kind of reasoning, obviously, fails on two levels:

On the first level, without an early father, Jesus’ lineage would instead have come from his mother, Mary. Would anyone, even in the first century, have been so foolish as to deny that Jesus had a family line? So, using Luke’s genealogy, we can place Jesus both in the tribe of Judah and from the line of David; He was qualified to be the Messiah.

On a second level, how can you argue: If Jesus is truly the son of God, then He can’t be the Messiah? That is pure nonsense. Is God unable to bring about the Messiah, even His own Son, without the aid of a natural man? I guess … if you choose to believe that first century Jewish genealogical traditions trump God’s will.

Of course, this kind of thinking is nothing new. If you remember, in like manner the Jews of Jesus’ day accused Him of being a sinner for healing on the Sabbath. When Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead, they plotted to kill them both. It seems that even in Jesus’ day, people could be blind, ignoring the blatant miracles of God and instead embracing the traditions of men?

Now, for arguments sake, let’s even give them this part of the argument. Let’s suppose that in the first century lineage was only passed through the natural father’s line. Jesus Himself offered a great refutation of this argument :

Courtesy of http://www.bible-history.com

“And say not to yourselves, We have Abraham for our father; because I say to you that God is able from these stones to make children for Abraham.” – Mt 3:9

Yeah … on every level these arguments against Jesus’ qualifications to be the Messiah fail and fail badly. The assumptions behind them fail, the premise fails and the conclusion fails.

The last argument fares no better. Although the scripture mentioned, II Samuel and Psalms do speak of a “son of David” they are referring to Solomon. There are allusions to Jesus, but allusions to future events and people aren’t unheard of in the scripture.  Both Antiochus Epiphanes and the king of Babylon are compared to the Satan / the Antichrist in the form of allusions. Does this mean that Antiochus Epiphanes was the Antichrist? Nope.

The point here is that although the texts of the Psalm and II Samuel can’t all possibly be applied to Solomon (as a son of David) they did in fact allude to another “son of David”: Jesus of Nazareth. The Christ.

So let me summarize:

1) Jesus was from the tribe of Judah through Mary.

2) Jesus was from the tribe of David through Mary.

3) The verses mentioned here are about Solomon. They do allude to the Messiah who was indeed from the line of David as predicted.

That’s right. Back up from the grave in a miraculous resurrection comes the Jesus-was-a-myth argument. It has reemerged from the depths of obscurity to plague the world of both Christians and true biblical researchers alike. Dr. Fernandes looks this issue square in the eye and tackles the people, places and events used in the failed attempts to discredit Jesus.

Dr. Fernandes discusses some of the compelling reasons for believing the Resurrection of Jesus was an actual, historical event. Quoting such Christian researcher Gary Habermas and apologist William Lane Craig, Dr. Fernandes highlights his case using the changed lives of the Apostles and early church leaders.