Things God Cannot Do

The Bible teaches that there are things God cannot do. Why not? It is certainly not because he lacks the power or knowledge, but it's a matter of who he is, his character. We can understand that. There are things you and I could do, but our character would never allow it. I thought it would be good to use an online Bible concordance for the New King James Version and type in the word "cannot" and see what came up. I was interested only in those things God cannot do. Here is the list I compiled.

(1) God says in Isa. 1:13, "I cannot endure iniquity and the sacred meeting." (NKJV) Prior to this verse God speaking through Isaiah says of his people that they "have rebelled against me." (Isa. 1:2 NKJV) A couple of verses later they are referred to as a "sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, a brood of evildoers, children who are corrupters!" (Isa 1:4 NKJV) They were up to their necks in sin of all kinds and yet were still offering sacrifices to God (V. 11) and observing the assemblies (v. 13). They were a people full of hypocrisy.

God cannot endure worship directed to him when those offering it are full of sin that they are unrepentant of. Living a life of sinful indulgence and disregard for God's word did not please God then, nor will it now, no matter how much playing church we do. Acceptable worship to God must be from a life of faithful living in spirit and truth.

We see what God cannot endure nearly everywhere we look if we have eyes to see. As an example, it is common to see congregations in which there are unscripturally divorced and remarried couples, couples living in adultery by the Bible definition, that are members in good standing. I personally knew of a man who left his wife of, I am told, 37 years, for another woman, married this woman, and now attends another congregation which seemed to accept him and her with open arms, unrepentant. It is also common to hear on the news of churches welcoming homosexual pastors or priests, as they call them. If you know anything about the Bible, you know God condemns homosexuality (1 Cor. 6:9-10). These are just a couple of examples, but God is still saying, "I cannot endure iniquity and the sacred meeting." (Isa. 1:13 NKJV)

(2) Habakkuk says of God in Hab. 1:13, "You are of purer eyes than to behold evil, and cannot look on wickedness." Obviously, God sees or knows the wickedness of man; otherwise, how could he judge man? "There is no creature hidden from his sight, but all things are naked and open to the eyes of him to whom we must give account." (Heb. 4:13 NKJV) The Psalmist tells us in speaking of God that "he knows the secrets of the heart." (Psalms 44:21 NKJV) So, there is no hiding wickedness from God, even wickedness in the heart. Habakkuk is saying in this passage that God cannot tolerate or endure wickedness or sin.

What is the message for today? "Whatever a man sows, that he will also reap. For he who sows to his flesh will of the flesh reap corruption, but he who sows to the Spirit will of the Spirit reap everlasting life." (Gal. 6:7-8 NKJV) "For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad." (2 Cor. 5:10 NKJV) "Tribulation and anguish, on every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek." (Rom. 2:9 NKJV)

The fact that God does not punish men on the spot and immediately for their sin does not mean he has not seen it or has overlooked it. If it seems we have gotten by with it, it is only because God is "longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance." (2 Peter 3:9 NKJV) There will be a day of accounting. God "cannot look on wickedness." It is impossible for him to accept it.

(3) "God cannot be tempted by evil." (James 1:13 NKJV) This is just a straightforward statement of fact. The lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life tempt men, not God. God is spirit. The same passage tells us that God tempts no one.

What does this mean that God cannot be tempted by evil? It means God will not lie to me, he will not cheat me, he will do me no wrong at all, for that would be evil, the thing God cannot be tempted to do. It means God cannot be bribed or bought off, for that would be evil. Evil, by its nature, is absent from God. It means, as we are told in many places in scripture, that God is good.

Yes, there will be problems that enter my life, but they will be for my growth and improvement. "Brethren, count it all joy when you fall into various trials, knowing that the testing of your faith produces patience. But let patience have its perfect work, that you may be perfect and complete lacking nothing." (James 1:2-4 NKJV) "He himself has said, 'I will never leave you nor forsake you.'" (Heb. 13:5 NKJV)

(4) God "cannot lie." (Titus 1:2 NKJV) Titus tells us this in connection with a promise God has made to his people--the promise of eternal life. This is a great comfort and hope as time goes by in our lives and we see ourselves growing older. We know some day we must leave this world for the great unknown, but God has given a promise, and he cannot lie; there is such a thing as eternal life. What a joyous thought and hope.

But we must also remember that when we are told that God cannot lie, it pertains to everything God has said. We cannot choose what parts of the Bible we want to believe and obey. God cannot lie about anything he has said. If he has given a commandment you or I do not like, we must remember God was not lying when he gave us the commandment. He meant for it to be kept and obeyed. Next time you read a commandment that is hard to accept, ask yourself this question: Is God lying about this? Does he mean it?

Today, men and women are living in disobedience to plain commandments of God because in their minds, he will not care, he did not mean it for us today, he knows times have changed. In other words, God did not mean what he said and will not count our disobedience against us as sin. We need to remember the words of Jesus, "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God." (Matt. 4:4 NKJV) We ought to emphasize from that passage the phrase "every word." God "cannot lie."

(5) God "cannot deny himself." (2 Tim. 2:13 NKJV) Taken in the context in which this passage is found, the entire verse reads as follows: "If we are faithless, he remains faithful; he cannot deny himself." This is very similar to the previous passage from Titus telling us God cannot lie. To be faithful means we keep our word. For God not to do this would make him unfaithful, and he would be denying himself, denying what he had previously told us.

This really means that you and I can take God's word to the bank, as the old saying goes. It is good as gold, better than gold. There is no possibility of a failure or fault to be found with it. We need to have confidence in the word of God, for without it, when doubts start entering in, sin and falling away are not far behind. Jesus says, "The scripture cannot be broken." (John 10:35 NKJV) God cannot deny himself.

It is wonderful to know the things God can do, but it is also wonderful to learn there are things God cannot, will not, do.

[To download this article or print it out click here.]

Praying to God to Bless the Bread

“God is Spirit, and those who worship him must worship him in spirit and truth.” (John 4:24 NKJV) 

Whose job is it to bless the bread and bless the fruit of the vine when the Lord’s Supper is being observed in the communion service? One hears prayers or petitions to God continually to “bless the bread” and to “bless the fruit of the vine” leading up to their serving at the observance of the Lord's Supper. Why? I have no idea other than it has been done so long that it has become a habit. It is not scriptural.

A little thinking on the subject ought to convince most. How do you bless an inanimate (non-living) object? Rain after a long drought is certainly a blessing, but it is not the rain God blessed in sending it to man, but the man who received the rain. God blessed man, not the rain, unless you want to say the rain was blessed in the sense that God made more of it.

It is true in Deut. 7:13 you will find inanimate objects being blessed, but if you turn there and take a look at the passage you will see that those objects (fruit of the land, corn, wine, oil) are being increased by God’s blessing, being made abundant for the sake of his people. Do we want God to “bless the bread” and “bless the fruit of the vine” at the communion table this way–by making more bread and more fruit of the vine? I think not.

When we ask God to bless the bread and/or the fruit of the vine at the communion table, those who ask do not know or understand what it is they are asking for or what they are expecting from God. We want God to bless it, but we do not have the slightest idea of what we expect as a result of his doing so. What is supposed to happen when he does bless the bread (assuming he is doing it, which I deny)?

Sometimes the one who leads the prayer will qualify his request for a blessing on the bread and/or fruit of the vine by adding a qualifier saying “bless it to its intended use.” How does that help? What is the intended use of the bread and fruit of the vine–is it spiritual or physical? All agree the intended use lies in the spiritual realm but that means for the bread and the fruit of the vine to be of benefit to me personally it is not what God does to the emblems (as they are frequently called by man–the bread and the fruit of the vine) but my attitude, my spiritual state of mind, my approach to the supper that makes the difference as to whether or not it proves a blessing to me. It is not what God does that makes it a blessing.

The Lord’s Supper is meant to be a blessing to us, but it is already that without further action on God’s part. God long ago did all that was needed to make the Lord’s Supper a blessing to man.

It is what man does, not what God does, that counts now as to whether or not the Lord’s Supper will be a blessing to man or not. Paul teaches that the Lord’s Supper, instead of being a blessing, can become a condemnation, not because of God but because of our reckless partaking of it if we play the fool while partaking. “Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.” (1 Cor. 11:27 KJV) “For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.” (1 Cor. 11:29 KJV) I have, over the course of a few decades, seen once in a great while someone talking or visiting while the Lord’s Supper was being observed. Do they understand what they are doing? I think not. Partaking of the Lord’s Supper is serious business. It needs to be done showing all respect, reverence, honor, and thanksgiving.

I do not believe there is the least bit of evidence in scripture for the idea that Jesus ever blessed the bread or the fruit of the vine in instituting the Lord’s Supper, based on what is recorded in the word. If he did, where is it found? Furthermore, where is the example of any man in New Testament times asking God to bless the bread and/or the fruit of the vine?

What does the word “bless” mean as it relates to prayer? There is one passage that is so clear on the matter as to settle the issue. That passage is 1 Cor. 14:16-17:

“Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest? For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.” (1 Cor. 14:16-17 KJV)

This is so simple as to be nearly impossible to misunderstand. To bless in prayer means to give thanks.

Since the word “bless” is only used 10 times in a total of 9 verses in the King James Version of the New Testament it will not take long to run through those listings, check them out, and see what we can find, namely, see if we ought to continue this practice of asking God to bless the emblems at the Lord’s table. Since we have already looked at 1 Cor. 14:16-17, we only have 8 other verses to look at. Those verses are: Matt. 5:44, Luke 6:28, Rom. 12:14, 1 Cor. 4:12, Acts 3:26, 1 Cor. 10:16, Heb. 6:14, and James 3:9.

Four of these eight verses teach the same message, so we can deal with them as a group. I will use the passage of Luke 6:28 for this purpose, which reads as follows:

“Bless them that curse you, and pray for them which despitefully use you.” (KJV)

If the reader will check out Matt. 5:44, Rom. 12:14, and 1 Cor. 4:12 he will find the same doctrine being taught. I did not start with Matt. 5:44 for the reason that most modern versions do not have the word bless in them at that verse in view of the fact that there is a textual variant there.

Anyone can see from a quick reading that man, not God, is to do the blessing in all four of these passages. It is also obvious that one man can only bless another in one of two ways, either by word or by deed. Most commentators agree with Barnes’ remarks who says, “The word ‘bless’ here means to ‘speak well of’ or ‘speak well to.’” I am not sure I would want to limit it to that alone, but I am just passing on this famous commentator’s remarks. (Barnes’ comments are on the parallel passage–Matt. 5:44.)

This only leaves four other times the King James New Testament uses our word “bless,” and the reader will realize that so far we have not found an instance where the word bless is used as man commonly uses the term today.

The next verse is Acts 3:26:

“Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.” (KJV)

In this passage, the meaning of the word bless is self-explanatory as it is plainly stated. Jesus does bless us by “turning away every one of you from his iniquities.” The ESV is even plainer for it reads, “God, having raised up his servant, sent him to you first, to bless you by turning every one of you from your wickedness.” This blessing came to man by means of the cross and the gospel which, if believed and obeyed, results in the greatest blessing possible that could be bestowed upon a man—eternal life.

We next come to the word “bless” as found in 1 Cor. 10:16, which deals with the Lord’s Supper. It reads:

“The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?” (KJV)

All agree that Paul is talking about the communion service. The “cup of blessing which we bless” (please notice we do this, not God) is the fruit of the vine used in that service. Paul says he was told by the Lord what was to be done at the Lord’s Supper, “For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, ‘Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.’ After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, ‘This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.’” (1 Cor. 11:23-25 KJV) Please note this 1 Cor. 11 passage comes in the very next chapter after 1 Cor. 10:16, the verse just quoted in the prior paragraph. 

Paul says that Jesus gave thanks for the bread and then says of the fruit of the vine Jesus did the same (gave thanks), for he says “after the same manner,” that is, he followed the same procedure for the fruit of the vine as he had done for the bread. Bless thus means to give thanks in prayer to God or else Paul in 1 Cor. 10:16 is asking us to do something different from what he said Jesus did in 1 Cor. 11:23-25. I also remind the reader again of 1 Cor. 14:16-17 which defines the word “bless” when used in prayer to mean give thanks. 

In the last half of chapter 11 of First Corinthians, Paul deals with the subject of the Lord’s Supper so that the Corinthians (and all later generations) might observe it properly. He begins with the words (verse 23), “For I have received of the Lord.” (KJV) If you want to do what Jesus did and follow his example, do as Jesus did. It is safe; it is what ought to be done.

Here is the summary of the points that need to be learned from these Corinthian passages. (1) We are indeed to bless, give thanks, while at the Lord’s table, but that means we do it, not ask God to do something mysterious to the emblems, nor ask him to give thanks himself. (2) Jesus’ example shows that he did not bestow a blessing (as modern-day man perceives of the thing) on the bread and/or fruit of the vine in instituting the Lord’s Supper, but merely gave thanks for the emblems. (3) Jesus did not ask God to bless the bread and/or the fruit of the vine. 

I think it is very possible that modern-day error on this subject has come from a bad rendering in the King James Bible of Matt. 26:26-27 where a word was added to the text by the translators but generally read by readers as though it was a part of the original Greek manuscripts. The text there reads as follows:

"And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it." (Matt. 26:26-27 KJV)

In the original Greek, there is only one “it” in this entire passage, and that is the very last one. The reader is likely aware that in the King James Bible the italicized words were not in the original text but were added by the translators for clarification. All the other "it" words in this passage were added by the translators.

Thus, the King James Version makes the text sound as though Jesus blessed the bread, and people have been led astray by that little word added by the translators.

Here is the way the two verses read when words added by the translators that are not in the original are omitted (as they should have been):

“And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and brake, and gave to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave to them, saying, Drink ye all of it.” (Matt. 26:26-27, KJV, without the words added by the translators)

Jesus thus just blessed, which means, as we have already shown, that he gave thanks for the bread. In fact, one ought to be able to see this easily enough, for with regard to the cup, the text clearly says Jesus gave thanks. Did he do one thing for the fruit of the vine while doing something entirely different for the bread? Did he give a supernatural blessing to the bread while not doing so for the fruit of the vine? We know better. 

Let the reader beware, the King James Version is not the only translation that has done this sort of thing with this verse, namely, added words not in the original Greek text. I am not going to go through all the various versions, but I can tell you the English Standard Version (ESV) is guilty of the same thing, and the problem with the ESV is that it does not italicize words added by the translators that are not in the original Greek. Overall, the ESV is an excellent translation, but I hate this failure to italicize added words.

Before leaving Matt. 26:26-27 here are some comments from Barnes’ commentary on the passage. He says, and I quote, “or ‘gave thanks’ to God for it. The word rendered ‘blessed’ not unfrequently means ‘to give thanks.’”

The word bless is used in the sense of giving thanks in prayer in all passages relating to the Lord’s Supper. One can find the record of the Lord’s instituting the Lord’s Supper in Matt. 26:26-27, Mark 14:22-23 (again, the word it was added by the translators), and Luke 22:19-20. Matthew and Mark say Jesus “blessed” with regard to the bread, while Luke says he “gave thanks,” as does Paul in 1 Cor. 11:23-24. (As already stated, blessed means to give thanks when we are talking about prayer.) Matthew and Mark are not contradicting Luke and Paul. In every instance, as it related to the fruit of the vine in these passages, it was not blessed but “gave thanks” as far as what terms were used in describing what was done. Luke says “likewise,” but says about the bread that Jesus gave thanks, thus “likewise” means Jesus gave thanks.

The New International Version never uses the word bless in any of the passages related to the Lord's Supper.  It is always gave thanks.

If the reader will just remember 1 Cor. 14:16-17, he/she will never be confused again with regard to this subject. Many years ago, when I was growing up in the 1950's and 1960's, it was common when people were gathered together for a meal to hear the one in charge ask another “to give the blessing.” People back in those days knew what the blessing was. As times have changed, so has the vocabulary people use. However, to bless or give the blessing is to have a prayer of thanksgiving to God. This is not to say that this is what the word bless means in every instance in the Bible, but it is to say that it is what it means in reference to the Lord’s Supper and in prayers surrounding that observance. 

That pretty much covers the discussion, which is the subject of this paper, for the last two verses where the word “bless” is used in the New Testament do not relate to the Lord’s Supper. The first passage is Heb. 6:13-14, “For when God made promise to Abraham, because he could swear by no greater, he sware by himself, saying, surely blessing I will bless thee, and multiplying I will multiply thee.” (KJV) The reader will readily see we are not dealing with the subject of prayer here. The words blessing and bless here refer to what we commonly think of when we hear the phrase “blessings from God.” 

The last time the word “bless” is used in the King James New Testament is in James 3:8-9. “But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison. Therewith bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God.” Here again is another passage showing that bless in prayer means to give thanks. The TEV, or as it is sometimes called “The Good News Bible,” translates these two verses as follows:

“But no one has ever been able to tame the tongue. It is evil and uncontrollable, full of deadly poison. We use it to give thanks to our Lord and Father and also to curse other people, who are created in the likeness of God.” (James 3:8-9 TEV) To bless is to give thanks, as is easily seen by comparing the King James translation with that of the TEV.

We should follow the example Jesus gave in giving thanks to God the Father for the bread and the fruit of the vine when instituting the Lord’s Supper, and should stop this business of asking God to bless the bread and fruit of the vine. What do we expect him to do after all?

Many who give thanks at every meal and would not think of doing otherwise observe the Lord’s Supper regularly, where thanksgiving is never or rarely given, and that at the most important meal a person will ever take part in–the Lord’s Supper. Jesus gave thanks but we often don’t. We need to be educated on the subject. Jesus gave his life for us, and yet in observing that event, we do not give thanks. Friends, if you are a Christian, you ought to think long and hard about that.

Instead of doing what we ought to do, we do that which was unheard of in scripture, and that which no one can explain about what it is they want God to do. We say we want him to bless the bread, to bless the fruit of the vine, but when asked to explain who can? What is he supposed to do in blessing it? The reality is, he gave us the Lord’s Supper as a blessing. It is up to us now, not him, to make it what he intended it to be for us.

Finally, there is the matter of conscience involved in this. If one believes as I do that we are to give God thanks for the bread and the fruit of the vine at the Lord’s table how are we to worship in good conscience if the one leading prayer does not give thanks but wants to go ahead and ask God to bless? What are we to do? We know we are to thank God, but the one in charge wants God to bless the bread, an inanimate object, and does not thank God. If we are to worship God “in spirit and in truth,” are we doing so when we do not give thanks? Where is the truth part if we do not give thanks? I do not have any answers since I am like all others in that I am subject to whatever the speaker says; he is in charge, not me. I do all I can and offer a silent prayer of my own, but this is certainly not the preferred route to take, but what are you going to do?

[To download this article or print it out click here.]

Why Men Do Not Believe

Paul, in writing to the Thessalonians, asked the brethren to "pray for us that the word of the Lord may spread rapidly and be glorified, just as it did also with you; and that we may be delivered from perverse and evil men; for not all have faith." (2 Thess. 3:2 NAS) The question I want to deal with in this article is why men do not believe. This is a question that has bothered me over the years, for it seems only natural to believe. Yet, I cannot deny what is obvious to all, just as Paul said, "not all have faith." What does the Bible have to say about the reasons for unbelief?

Paul said of himself, in talking about his past, how he was a persecutor of Christians, and then says, "I was shown mercy, because I acted ignorantly in unbelief." (1 Tim. 1:13 NAS) Thus, there was a time in Paul's life when he was an unbeliever. Yet, Paul, then known as Saul, was an honest man, for he says elsewhere in Acts 23:1 while standing before the Council or Sanhedrin that "I have lived my life with a perfectly good conscience before God up to this day" (NAS) or, as the NKJV puts it, "in all good conscience."

It would be easy to say unbelievers are all dishonest, but that will not work. Paul's case proves just the opposite. Paul, or Saul, was present from the very beginning of the Christian religion. In Acts 7, we are told that those who stoned Stephen "laid aside their robes at the feet of a young man named Saul." (Acts 7:58 NAS) And then we read in chapter 8, the first verse, that "Saul was in hearty agreement with putting him to death." (NAS) This was in the earliest days of Christianity.

One wonders why Saul was blinded to the miracles that were occurring in Jerusalem. Working back from Acts chapter 7, back from the time of Stephen's stoning, we find in Acts 6:8, "Stephen, full of grace and power, was performing great wonders and signs among the people." (NAS) The footnote to verse 8 in the NAS says "attesting miracles." Even earlier in Acts 5:12, we are told, "By the hands of the apostles many signs and wonders were done among the people." (NKJV) Is it likely that Saul was totally ignorant of these events, of what had been going on? Read also Acts 5:15-16. Was he unaware of how Ananias and Sapphira had been miraculously struck down? Was he unaware of Peter healing the lame man at the temple gate in Acts 3? Was he unaware of the veil of the temple being rent on the day of Christ's crucifixion? Were the priests denying that? More questions could be asked.

It is highly unlikely that Saul was totally unaware of everything that had been transpiring. He says in Acts 22:3 that he was raised in Jerusalem. That does not necessarily imply he was an eyewitness to everything that went on there, but one is reminded of what Cleopas said to Jesus, unknowingly, on the road to Emmaus, "Are You the only one visiting Jerusalem and unaware of the things which have happened here in these days?" (Luke 24:18 NAS) That was said before the disciples generally knew that Jesus had risen from the dead, but one wonders if much the same could not be said of Saul in the days of which we speak. Are you the only one who does not know of the miraculous events occurring here in the name of Jesus Christ?

Yet, Saul was an honest unbeliever. My point is this: here we have a man with a world of evidence before him, but he is not willing to accept it. Why not? How do we explain it? I cannot except for one statement that Paul made later.

I refer to Gal. 1:13-14, "For you have heard of my former manner of life in Judaism, how I used to persecute the church of God beyond measure, and tried to destroy it; and I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my contemporaries among my countrymen, being more extremely zealous for my ancestral traditions." (NAS) Vine says the Greek word here for zealous means "an uncompromising partisan." Thayer says "one burning with zeal." Not just zealous but burning with zeal.

With unbelievers who are extremely zealous, even in their error, their misguided zeal blinds the mind and heart to the extent that even miracles have no effect upon them. Paul, evidently, fit into that category for a time. No doubt, this is one reason it is so hard to convert one who holds false doctrine zealously.

Paul says in Rom. 10:2 of his fellow countrymen, "I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not in accordance with knowledge." (NAS) They were where he once was--religious but unbelievers—zealots. The Bible teaches that zeal itself is not a bad thing (Gal. 4:18), is good, but it must be based on knowledge.

Looking back over all of this, the one lesson that ought to be burned into our minds is that zeal does not make right. Zeal proves nothing about truth or error. The Catholics were zealous centuries ago, while burning men and women at the stake, just as Saul was in agreeing that Stephen ought to be put to death. Zeal is no measure of truth.

Extreme zeal blinds. It gives one tunnel vision, all the while destroying one's ability to reason. We see this in radical Islam, but its blinding power is seen in many different places. Many hold to atheism with extreme zeal, along with the theory of evolution, especially in the academic world. The Nazi's of Germany of WW II come to mind as another example. People often have extreme zeal for whatever they believe in, resulting in the truth being hidden from them.

We also learn from Paul's case that truth is not dependent on my feelings about it. I may be totally opposed to the truth in all good conscience, but that will not turn my error into the truth, nor will it transform the truth into error. Jacob believed a lie and was sure Joseph was dead upon seeing the blood-stained robe of many colors (Gen. 37:33). His feelings did not make the error true. Trust your feelings and you risk your eternal life. "He who trusts in his own heart is a fool." (Prov. 28:26 NKJV) We must trust what God's word says and not our feelings about it.

Yet, I think there is little doubt that in religion today, feelings generally prevail over what is plainly recorded in scripture. How I feel about an issue is what matters. It is also what will destroy. It is what God says about an issue that counts, not how I feel about it. Too many of us want to tell God how he ought to view matters, view them the way we want.

Men also fail to believe when their minds will not allow them to think otherworldly. The truth is incomprehensible to them, beyond belief. They can only believe what they see or know with their senses. They live by human instinct. They cannot think beyond the physical flesh and blood realm of existence. Life after death, the resurrection of the dead, God, all these things are beyond comprehension to them. It just cannot be. It is incomprehensible. They see themselves as advanced evolutionary animals, but never consider the first cause or source.

A good Bible example of this was when Jesus went back to his hometown--Nazareth. The Bible reads in Matt. 13:54-58, "And coming to His home town He began teaching them in their synagogue, so that they became astonished, and said, 'Where did this man get this wisdom, and these miraculous powers? Is not this the carpenter's son? Is not His mother called Mary, and His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? And His sisters, are they not all with us? Where then did this man get all these things?' And they took offense at Him. But Jesus said to them, 'A prophet is not without honor except in his home town, and in his own household.' And He did not do many miracles there because of their unbelief." (NAS)

They said of him, "Where did this man get this wisdom, and these miraculous powers?" That should have been easy to answer if you were willing to admit the man did miracles. They admitted he did. However, all human reasoning was against Jesus being associated with deity, for they had known him and his family all their life. It made no sense to them. It just could not be. It was impossible.

Another example was when Jesus was resurrected. You remember when Mary Magdalene saw Jesus after he was resurrected and then went back to the disciples and told them. The Bible says, "They refused to believe it." (Mark 16:11 NAS) Then, when the two who were with Jesus on the road to Emmaus came back and reported the same to the disciples, after Mary had, the Bible says, "They did not believe them either." (Mark 16:13 NAS)

They were like Saul on the road to Damascus; they had to personally experience the miracle to believe. Jesus had to come into their presence, and when he did, he rebuked them for their unbelief (Mark 16:14). Men do not rise from the dead. How is it possible? It was beyond the realm of all human reason and experience, too wild to imagine.

What do we learn from these two examples--Jesus' trip to his hometown and the disciples' refusal to believe the resurrection? We learn that some cannot believe because their mindset is such that if a thing is outside the realm of human experience and personal knowledge, it is unfathomable and cannot be. The mind is closed to such things.

Today, we would say they have a scientific mindset. If a matter is outside the realm of scientific study, unrelated to all known laws of physics and science, then there can be no truth to the thing. Much of the world today does not believe in life after death or a resurrection of the dead. Their mindset will not allow it. Nothing exists that is beyond the realm of human scientific knowledge, as they see it, for that would be impossible, nothing other worldly that is, nothing of another dimension or realm of existence.

They are so stuck in this way of thinking about life that they have come up with what they consider the scientific answer to the earth's creation and life on earth. They will tell you what happened millions and millions of years ago with a straight face and will consider you a fool if you doubt them. They are convinced that men evolved from sea creatures that crawled up on shore millions and millions of years ago and evolved. They do not think that is an incredible thing. They can believe that because they think they can reason that out scientifically. The only foolishness with them is the idea of God.

But what else does the Bible have to say about why men do not believe? Paul says in 2 Cor. 4:3-4, "And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, in whose case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving, that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God." (NAS)

When a person is young and seemingly has what he or she perceives to be 40 or 50 years of productive life left in this world it is easy to get so caught up in education, acquisition, achievement, career building, marriage, and raising a family that there is no time or interest in a spiritual life. This continues once started pretty much on into old age.

These are people who don't believe because they have never given themselves a chance to believe. There is always too much to do, too much going on, to even give thought to God or the gospel.

Luke describes these people as those beside the road, "who have heard; then the devil comes and takes away the word from their heart, so that they may not believe and be saved." (Luke 8:12 NAS) The Bible says, "A natural man, does not accept the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised." (1 Cor. 2:14 NAS) The natural man is the man caught up in that which is natural to man--the desire for the life of this world. The things related to God are foolishness to him, the Bible says.

In Matthew's account of the parable of the sower, Jesus says of such a one of whom we are speaking that he did not understand the word and thus "the evil one comes and snatches away what has been sown in his heart." (Matt. 13:19 NAS) He does not say why such a person does not understand, but we know without his saying simply by asking a couple of questions. Did God give us his word in such a way that it could not be understood and thus was to be hidden from man? What was God's intent when he gave us his word?

A man who does not understand God's word is a man who has no desire to give it the time and attention necessary to learn it, for he has other things of more interest on his mind. He is Paul's natural man of 1 Cor. 2.

The natural man here is one whose mind is centered solely on achievement and enjoyment of this world. Jesus said, "How can you believe, when you receive glory from one another, and you do not seek the glory that is from the one and only God?" (John 5:44 NAS) This is the kind of man we are talking about, a man centered on achievement or acquisition in this world.

Then there are men who simply enjoy sin, which the Bible speaks of as the "passing pleasures of sin." (Heb. 11:25 NKJV) Jesus said, John 3:19-20, "And this is the judgment, that the light is come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the light; for their deeds were evil. For everyone who does evil hates the light, and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed." (NAS) "Men loved the darkness" is just another way of saying they loved sin. These are people who do not want to believe, for they love sin (love the darkness) and thus are unwilling to believe.

I have not at all exhausted this study of why men do not believe. I am always searching to understand, but it is time to conclude for now. I conclude with this: belief is a choice. If it were not, how could we be condemned for not believing? "He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned." (Mark16:16 NKJV)

We believe what we want to believe, and we can always find a way to justify our belief. That said, there is always a motive for believing the way we do. This is not to say evidence does not exist for what we may or may not believe but it is to say our heart's desire often leads us to not weigh the evidence that is available fairly and impartially. We become subjective rather than objective in our reasoning process. Truth does exist, but the heart makes it hard to find in the minds of men.

If the God of the Bible does not exist, it frees us up to enjoy what the Bible calls "the passing pleasures of sin" (Heb. 11:25 NAS) without any threat of retribution. We can achieve and receive the adoration and praise of men. It is a lot more convenient if God does not exist, at least in the here and now. We do not want him to exist; we do not want the Bible to be true, if our love is for this life and this world.

Those who do not believe have the same evidence as those who do believe. What makes the difference then? Often it comes down to just this one thing. The believer has a desire for "a better, that is, a heavenly country." (Heb. 11:16 NKJV) The unbeliever is satisfied with this world and does not want another. One wants and desires God, the other does not. The evidence remains the same for both.

If the unbeliever came to belief he would have to change his life. He loves this world. It is soothing to his soul to not give the Bible a thought. We believe what we want. The unbeliever wants to believe it is not so, for he has a great stake in it not being true. He has staked his eternal life on it not being so. The Bible cannot be true for if it is he stands condemned. He has no desire to believe that. We believe what we want to believe. That is why disbelief is a sin. It is a sin because it was and is a choice. Bad choices in life just about always lead to disaster. The Bible being true, surely the choice of disbelief will be no exception.

[To download this article or print it out click here.]

The Chastening of the Lord

People often have a misconception about God. They cannot imagine that God would ever bring upon us trials and tribulations, punish us for our sins, or do anything in this life but bring us good--good as we see it. God is love, God is grace, and the very idea that God would ever send upon us anything but that which is most pleasant is abhorrent to our way of thinking.

There is no doubt that when one looks at the big picture that God only does what is best for us for our eternal welfare. Loving parents are like that with their children. All that they do in regard to their children is for the child’s welfare if they are the kind of parents they ought to be. Does that mean, however, that all they do is pleasant from the child’s point of view?

Are we not God’s children? How is it that we would think that God would not send us some unpleasantness in our lives for our own good to correct us and make for us a pleasant and happy future? Sometimes our fleshly children need to be disciplined so they can learn how to conduct themselves and not become involved in self-destructive behaviors. We all come into this world knowing nothing but that which is instinctual. We all need to learn how to live to succeed and if this is true in the physical material world how much more is it true in the spiritual realm?

Hebrews 12:5-11 can be a bit difficult.  What is the chastening of the Lord? How does God do that? How can I recognize it when it is occurring? Questions naturally come to mind.

To refresh your memory of this passage I quote it here:

“(5) And you have forgotten the exhortation which speaks to you as to sons: ‘My son, do not despise the chastening of the Lord, Nor be discouraged when you are rebuked by Him; (6) For whom the Lord loves He chastens, And scourges every son whom He receives.’(7) If you endure chastening, God deals with you as with sons; for what son is there whom a father does not chasten? (8) But if you are without chastening, of which all have become partakers, then you are illegitimate and not sons. (9) Furthermore, we have had human fathers who corrected us, and we paid them respect. Shall we not much more readily be in subjection to the Father of spirits and live? (10) For they indeed for a few days chastened us as seemed best to them, but He for our profit, that we may be partakers of His holiness. (11) Now no chastening seems to be joyful for the present, but grievous; nevertheless, afterward it yields the peaceable fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it.” (NKJV)

There are some points that are readily apparent when one reads the passage, despite the questions one might have.

(1) Verse 5 makes it clear that this chastening is a rebuking from God, for we are not to be “discouraged when you are rebuked by Him.”

(2) It is something to be endured, “If you endure chastening, God deals with you as with sons.” (verse 7) When one “endures” a thing it generally means the thing being endured is unpleasant.

(3) It is a correction, “we have had human fathers who corrected us, and we paid them respect. Shall we not much more readily be in subjection to the Father of spirits and live?” (verse 9)

(4) It is for our profit, “he for our profit” chastens us. (verse 10)

(5) It is painful, “no chastening seems to be joyful for the present, but painful.” (verse 11)

(6) "It yields the peaceable fruit of righteousness." (verse 11)

The question remains as to how God chastens us and why in a more specific sense. I do not claim to have all the answers, but the book of Amos sheds some light on the subject.

All students of the Old Testament are aware of how time after time God’s people would become unfaithful to him and how he would punish them. However, was it just always a matter of punishment for punishment’s sake? No, not always.

“Hear this word that the Lord has spoken against you, O children of Israel, against the whole family which I brought up from the land of Egypt.” (Amos 3:1 NKJV) God speaking, obviously, but then note what he says in chapter 4:6, "'Also I gave you cleanness of teeth in all your cities, And lack of bread in all your places; Yet you have not returned to Me,' Says the LORD." (Amos 4:6 NKJV)

Take a look at another passage, verses 7-8 (same chapter): "'I also withheld rain from you, When there were still three months to the harvest. … Yet you have not returned to Me,' Says the LORD." (Amos 4:7-8 NKJV)

Or how about verse 9: “'I blasted you with blight and mildew. When your gardens increased, Your vineyards, Your fig trees, And your olive trees, The locust devoured them; Yet you have not returned to Me,’ Says the LORD.” (Amos 4:9 NKJV)

I think the reader will get the idea, but if you wish to read more of the same go ahead and read verses 10 and 11.

It becomes clear that the purpose of these troubles, trials, and tribulations was to get the children of Israel (God’s children) to repent and return to him. Why would we think it strange if God was found to still be working today in the same manner to get people to repent--that is, through trials, tribulations, and troubles?

One could say that was on a national scale in Amos' time and did not involve individual action. There is truth to that, but I doubt the man who lacked bread in his house (verse 6), suffered from drought (verses 7-8), suffered from blight and mildew and locusts (verse 9), was thinking much on a national level. His problems were personal: no food, no water.

And, besides, how does a nation repent unless the people who comprise that nation repent on an individual basis? There can be no national repentance without individuals repenting.

There will be in life trials and troubles. No one can say when such occurs that it is a specific instance of God chastening, but it may be. Hebrews 12 teaches beyond doubt that if you are a child of God you will be chastened. God’s desire is that we are always repenting of sin in our lives and that we are always drawing nearer to him and becoming more and more what he would have us be.

I think Albert Barnes, the commentator, put it best when he made the following comments on the Hebrews 12:6 passage: “And as there is in the life of every child of God something that deserves correction, it happens that it is universally true that ‘whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth.’” Would any of us disagree with that? I think not.

He further says: “It should be a matter of deep concern when we are afflicted in any manner, not to treat the matter lightly, but to derive from our trials all the lessons which they are adapted to produce on the mind.” (comments on Heb. 12:5, Barnes Commentary on Hebrews)

Whether it is illness, financial setback, or whatever negative thing it may be that comes into our life, we ought to be brought closer to God by it, repent if need be of sin, live more spiritually, and live for eternity. It may or may not be God’s chastening, but we need to learn our dependence upon him. We are not going to get out of this life alive. What is left if not God? He knows that. He thus chastens us as needed. Why? The answer is for our good and because he loves us, desiring only the eternal best for us. Let us then, “despise not thou the chastening of the Lord.” (Heb. 12:5 KJV)

[For further study on this topic see the book of Haggai, the TEV version, chapter 1 and 2:17. See also, same version, Amos 4:6-12.]

[To download this article or print it out click here.]