Gospel Outreach Conversations

When you see a physically handicapped person using a crutch, a wheelchair, or a walking stick, do you think anything less of them as a human being? Of course not! If anything we know they have learned to accept their physical shortcomings and make the most of what abilities they do have. Spiritually speaking, we also have “shortcomings’, not the least of which is the fact that as sinners we need Jesus in order to be in a right relationship with God. This means, then, that Jesus is a sort of “crutch” for us and the only way we can benefit from the help he offers is to swallow our pride, admit our shortcomings, and receive the help He provides. I bring this up because during a conversation with a religious sceptic named Kevin, he explained his view that religion simply provides the comfort some people need to deal with the loss of loved ones and the certainty of their own death one day. Like most such sceptics I talk to, the implication is that, unlike the masses of religious people out there, he has no need for such a “crutch”; that he just uses his own logic and common sense to see beyond the superficiality of religion. But what kind of logic would lead one to believe they can solve the difficult questions of life, to explain where we have come from, why we are here, and where we are going? What common sense tells us we can control our own destiny and don’t need help from anyone, that to admit weakness in this area is somehow demeaning? The Apostle Paul, who had every reason to boast, learned the power of humbly admitting ones weaknesses, writing “But (the Lord) said to me, ‘My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.’ Therefore I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ’s power may rest on me.” Instead of boasting about his own power and abilities, Paul had the wisdom to boast about God’s power and to find his strength in Him. May we have the sense to accept all our shortcomings – physical and spiritual – and make the most of the help the Lord provides for us.

Are you “agnostic” when it comes to religion? What does that even mean? As a Christian, I often tell people in my gospel outreach conversations that if I had not had the kind of personal encounters and experiences with God in living out my Christian faith that I’ve had, the wisest position I could take would be to call myself “agnostic”. I’ve told them that the ability to admit one’s ignorance on a subject – which is what the term “agnostic” means – is the most honest and open-minded position one can take. I need to be more careful, though, when I say this because I’m realizing “agnostic” means different things to different people. For me, when I think of being agnostic I tend to automatically assume that one is actively pursuing spiritual interest, but is honest enough to admit they have not yet found convincing truths. They are uncommitted but interested and open to new ideas and possibilities. An atheist, on the other hand, would be close-minded in that they have already reached a conclusion that God does not exist, as if they have looked under every rock in the universe. But not all who say they are agnostic are actively doing something to alleviate the ignorance they claim to have. Many, such as a young man named Jack whom I spoke with recently, view being agnostic as more of an easy label to use to just explain that they really don’t care to know, that they take no interest in spiritual things. Maybe a better descriptive label might be “indifferent”. I find it hard to believe that others really don’t care about who we are, where we’ve come from, where we are going, and what our purpose is here in this life. I remember a time when I feigned indifference to spiritual things, because that was the safe way to avoid getting involved, to face up to my shortcomings and sins, and to avoid committing myself to something greater than myself. I wouldn’t have been able to articulate this at the time, but I think that was what was going on. Jesus said that when the gospel seed is planted, it will be received by many different types of “soil” and in 3 of the 4 that he mentioned it will not grow to maturity. He said that some seed fell among thorn bushes which grew up and choked the plants. He later explained that this meant that the thorn bushes choke the message of God. It is heard, but people’s concern for riches and their worries about life cause the plants to die. Is that the case with many people I meet who, like Jack, I would describe as “indifferent” toward the things of God? Maybe a better way to describe them would be “distracted”. If so, than maybe my conversations with Jack and others are exactly what is called for: to break into their regular routines and comfort zones that can be so distracting from spiritual things, and to ask some uncomfortable and thought-provoking questions that might lead to more thought in that direction. John the Baptist had the same sort of role, as one who was “a voice crying out in the wilderness”. We live in a wilderness of competing ideas and distractions that lead many to an indifferent and distracted sort of agnosticism. I pray that many believers will step out of our comfortable Christianity and be that voice crying out in the wilderness.

“I create my own answer, whatever works best for me. And that’s the best way to experience religion” This statement summarized what I was hearing during a coffeeshop conversation with Riley, a college student who believes some sort of creator god exists but doesn’t believe one can, or should, understand or relate to it. Yet at the same time, without reference to the standards such a higher power might set, Riley was confident of his own goodness and that he would surely deserve rewards in eternity. This self-righteous belief seems to be common the further we get from God’s holy standard and are left with a standard of our own. The self-righteousness of the Pharisees, the religious teachers of Jesus’ time, seems to have resulted from the fact that there had been no new prophetic voices in Israel for some 400 years, ever since Malachi wrote the last book of the Old Testament. In its absence they had turned to the teaching of man rather than the words of God. In the same way, I believe the self-righteousness of the “woke” movement today is largely due to an increasingly secular society that has rejected the teachings of God in favor of the teaching of man. It tends to come up with its own rules and punishment for what it perceives as right and wrong, often contrary to time-honored Biblical principles. Riley, for his part, hasn’t read the Bible much for himself and prefers to rely on his own sense of logic and his moral compass. When these fail, he said he is comfortable with the mystery of not knowing. Riley, who identifies as gay, pointed to the hypocrisy of church members who condemn homosexuality but ignore other sins such as divorce or adultery. He makes a good point, but maybe needs to see the fingers pointing back at himself when he points out the sins of others. Maybe I do too, so, like John the Baptist who ended the long silence of the intertestamental period that resulted in the self-righteousness of the Pharisees, I’d rather point people back to the word of God and our need for repentance. We need to get back to the word of God rather than the teachings of man.

Have you committed a “cardinal sin” lately? Cardinal sins, also known as the “seven deadly sins” or “capital sins”, may not be exactly what you think they are. They are often brought up in my outreach conversations with Catholics, such as a man named Bruce whom I talked with recently out on the sidewalk. I often hear something like “Well I’m not perfect, but at least I haven’t committed any Cardinal sins like other people.” Bruce told me he has rejected his Catholic faith in favor of a belief in reincarnation, but, from what he told me, I could see that the influence of his Catholic upbringing still affects his view of how he would stand before God on the day of judgment with heaven and hell at stake. Bruce was quick to proclaim his own goodness in comparison to others who have committed much more serious sins such as murder, rape, or child molestation. These people, he said, would deserve the ultimate punishment, perhaps the death penalty, in this life or the punishment of hell or at least purgatory in the next. But, in Catholic teaching, the “Cardinal Sins” are not actually such obvious sins like murder or rape. These would actually just be the symptoms of the sin that runs much deeper. Cardinal sins are actually more like attitudes or habits, and a standard list includes pride, greed, wrath, envy, lust, gluttony and sloth (laziness). These vices are not actually listed so neatly in any particular Bible passage, but as a non-Catholic Christian I recognize them as biblical. And I also recognize them in myself from time to time. Any of us willing to take an honest self-assessment will know that, yes, we have committed a “Cardinal sin” lately. Jesus encourages us as his followers to self-assess, such as in Mark 7:21-23 – “For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness. All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person.” Paul, likewise, lists both our sinful thoughts and the results of our corrupt thinking in Galatians 5:19-21: “Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, envy, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these.” Paul goes on to tell us the consequences of our sin: “ I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.” If we are honest with ourselves, we will see ourselves at least somewhere, if not everywhere, in these lists, and that we are not deserving of forgiveness or inclusion in the kingdom of God. What to do? Toward the end of our conversation I tried to tell Bruce of the forgiveness and the salvation we can find only in Jesus, but as I reviewed the recording of our conversation I realize we were just “talking past” one another. I had failed to convince Bruce of his sinfulness and need of the savior, and he was too focused on his own goodness to hear me. We all commit sin, cardinal or otherwise, on a regular basis, and we all need the Savior because we can’t save ourselves.

When it comes to understanding God, shouldn’t we just shrug our shoulders and say “Well, God works in mysterious ways” and just leave it at that? After all, isn’t it rather arrogant or presumptuous of us to think that we’ve got God all figured out? One of the first things a young man named Serge told me in answer to my question about what happens after we die was that he really didn’t know, that he really couldn’t be sure. Now, I could understand the first part about not knowing, but what about the second – that he really can’t be sure. Not trying to be snarky here but – are you really sure about that? As I try to initiate Gospel conversations with various people at various levels, I often get accused of arrogance in presuming to know something about God and eternity. My answer is that I really don’t know anything by my own ability, but I can be fairly certain about what the Bible says about these different topics. Granted, the Bible itself can be mysterious and confusing at times, and there are passages within it that tell us that God’s thoughts and wisdom and ways are much higher and more complicated than our own, such as this from Isaiah 55: “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.” There are several similar passages in the Old Testament like this, and the confusion seems to continue into the New Testament where even the apostle Paul seems overwhelmed: “O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!” But this passage in Romans 11 comes near the end of a long treatise in which Paul spends the entire first half of Romans explaining the things of God to all who will take the time to read it – not for the purpose of muddying the waters but in order to make crystal clear who God is and what His purposes are in human history. In fact - and this is the point I want to make – the entire Bible is given to us for the expressed purpose of God’s revelation – revealing Himself – to man in a way we can understand. Yes, God’s character and thoughts and ways are impossible for us to understand on our own, and for that reason we have many warnings in Scripture that it is foolish for us to try to do so. But we are not on our own. We have the Bible, which was written by men who “spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.” (2 Peter 1:21) And this same Holy Spirit who inspired the writing of the Bible is there to help us understand it: “But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come.” (John 16:13) So again I ask – How sure are you that God’s ways are too mysterious to understand? Is it really humility that leads you to give up trying, or is it the pride of certainty that the effort would be futile, the pride of a laziness that says you have more important things to do, or just simply the pride of being content to live life your own way without God’s interference? Yes, God does often work in mysterious ways. But that is precisely the reason he gives us the Bible, the Holy Spirit, and godly teachers both past and present to help guide us through it.

“I wanna go on camera and say ‘I appreciate God!’” a young man named Dre said at the 8:20 mark in my recorded conversation with him. He had been talking about the fact that he believes in God and prays every day, not just when he needs something, but all the time. This told me that Dre didn’t just view God like a genie in a bottle, to be taken out when he needs something, but as more like Jesus portrayed – as our heavenly Father with whom we can have a relationship and who cares for us as a good father cares for his children. In fact, when Jesus gave us his “Lord’s prayer” as our model, we are instructed to not only ask “Our Father in Heaven” for our daily bread but for important relational things like forgiveness and the ability to forgive; for a right relationship to God as our Lord and most high King, yes; but also for His protection from temptation and evil. I think Dre learned to relate to God in this way from his church involvement growing up, but he really hasn’t taken ownership of his part in that relationship now that he is an adult. He has stopped going to church, he’s lost perspective on the sins for which he has been forgiven, and he’s forgotten what it means to respect God in repentance. As a result though he knows it is important to have gratitude and appreciation, he’s forgotten why we should have that attitude in the first place. So why should we appreciate God? What is the ultimate source of having an attitude of gratitude? Does it come from looking around the world and seeing people suffering and in great need of basic necessities, and just being grateful that we are not in their situation? I don’t think so, because I’ve met many people who see the pain and suffering in our world and, instead of gratitude, respond with bitterness toward God or the idea of a god who has the ability to instantly relieve all that suffering but chooses not to. Since God made us, they reason, shouldn’t He be obligated to take care of us? No, our gratitude needs to be built on a much deeper foundation than that. It needs to be built on the very foundational principle of the Bible itself – that rather than the innocent children and victims we might see ourselves as, we are in fact rebels against God who choose to go our own way. We are sinners not just be nature but by our actual actions, and we don’t deserve God’s loving care and mercy. Because God is perfect in His goodness which means He is also perfect in His justice, we need to be redeemed from the consequences of our sin and the only adequate payment for our redemption was the sacrifice of God’s perfect Son Jesus on our behalf. As he has drifted from his church upbringing, I think Dre has also drifted from this biblical understanding of Jesus and the cross as the basis for our gratitude, and toward the cheap substitute of simply being glad that we don’t have a worse situation than the next guy. Toward the end of our conversation, I told Dre of the constant sense of wonder and amazement and gratitude I feel as a Christian, that comes not as a result of temporary blessings, but because, as Jesus said, “rather, rejoice that your names are written in heaven” (Luke 10:20)

I often ask sceptics and atheists “What would it take for you to believe in God? What would your criteria be? Most answer that they would have to experience some sort of personal miracle or revelation from God. A young man named Liam pondered this question and told me that he would need “some sort of undeniable truth” personally revealed to him, and that to be fair all people would need to have the same experience. With almost 8 billion people in the world, not to mention the billions that come before and after us, I wonder how that would look. Could it be “personal” and “fair” at the same time? I also often ask believers in God how they came to faith. Many just take it for granted with a childlike trust and can’t remember a time when they didn’t believe at least in God’s existence. Others can point to a specific experience, but often just a quirky coincidence that others would scoff at, and relatively few point to a earth-shattering miracles like, say, Paul experienced on the road to Damascus. I know in debates with sceptics it often seems to me like they are moving the goalposts. They might say they don’t require much evidence, but when some is provided they always need just a little more. I didn’t want to get into this kind of chess match in a debate with Liam, but basically told him what the Bible says – that though we might get all the evidence we want, we do get all the evidence we need. I think Jesus said as much to the sceptic “Doubting Thomas”, to whom he had appeared personally: “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” Thomas and the rest of the disciples were blessed to personally see Jesus resurrected from the dead, but Jesus knew countless millions would still be blessed with faith based only on their eyewitness testimony. Still countless others are blessed with faith based on the eyewitness testimony of believers who have experienced Jesus actively working in their lives. Who knows? Maybe Liam could be one of them. Our chance encounter there on the sidewalk may just have been that personal, undeniable truth that Liam said he is looking for. It didn’t seem to be while we were talking, but, then again, God isn’t through with any of us yet :)

Can Christians believe in reincarnation? Short answer – absolutely not! I often make a distinction between issues that are essential to the faith and those that are only of secondary importance, and I would have to say that the idea of people “reincarnating” in another life in order to improve or somehow “get it right” before being welcomed into heaven is completely antithetical to the Gospel. I was talking with a man named Adolpho, who told me he believes that people will go to heaven when they die, but that many will experience reincarnation because they need more time to prove themselves worthy. As we talked further it seemed like Adolpho has many solid Christians beliefs, but his early statement of the possibility of reincarnation let me know that deep down he believes that our salvation depends on our being worthy or deserving, rather than the free gift of God that it is to those who trust in Jesus. If anyone needed a chance to come back to earth and live a better life, it was the thief who was crucified next to Jesus. Yet Jesus did not reassure him he would be given a second chance but rather that “Today you will be with me in paradise”. (Luke 23:43) Why no second chance? Because… “it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment”. (Hebrews 9:27) Some might see this as unfair, that some people have simply been dealt a horrible hand in life and need that second chance to make things right, but they miss the point: no matter how many chances we might have to repent and improve ourselves, whether in this life or in another, we are still guilty of the sins we have already done. We don’t simply need improvement – we need mercy and forgiveness. And we can’t earn that forgiveness ourselves, not in one lifetime or a hundred. It is something that only Jesus could do, the perfect Son of God who lived the perfect life, yet died in our place. To believe in reincarnation is ultimately to believe in our own ability to improve and deserve salvation, albeit over the course of several lifetimes. And that is simply not part of the Gospel of Jesus.

Does one have to believe in hell to be a Christian? I know for myself there was a time in my Christian walk when I desperately wanted to believe that hell didn't exist. My faith in Christ left me sure of my own salvation but I was concerned about the fate of others - as well we should be. What concerned me also was that I didn't want to believe in a God who would use the punishment of hell as a reasonable consequence of our sin. That was also one of two main reasons a young man named Lester gave me for rejecting the Christian faith he grew up in. Most people I talk to find it difficult to believe that they might end up in hell. They trivialize their own sin and God’s holiness to the point that they doubt whether they are so bad that they personally would ever deserve such a punishment, though they have no problem believing that others might end up there. Lester, however, takes it a step further and says that no one should be eternally punished for their sins, and that a loving God would not judge and punish sin like that. However, Lester gave a second main reason for his rejection of Christian belief – that a person shouldn’t just be able to “pray a prayer” and be saved automatically. God’s grace can’t be that free. They should have to prove their faith through repentance and good deeds somehow in order to be saved. I find these two reasons for rejecting the faith of his upbringing to be both in conflict and in agreement with one another in different ways. First, they are in conflict because on the one hand is the idea that God is too harsh with the punishment of hell, yet on the other hand God would be too soft by letting guilty people off the hook, only to keep on sinning. The middle approach Lester prefers is to say that God doesn’t punish sin, but that if a person does continue to sin then they would be reincarnated in another life where they would hopefully be more worthy of salvation. Yet the two main problems Lester has with the Christian faith also have something in common. Lester rejects both because to him they seem too extreme. Like the famous “this porridge is to hot” or “this one is too cold, but tis one is just right” dilemma in Goldilocks and the Three Bears, both views assume that Goldilocks is in charge. But who is Lester, and who are we to determine that God’s punishment is too harsh, or that His grace given too freely? Instead of committing the sin of idolatry and creating an image of God that we are more comfortable with, shouldn’t we let God reveal Himself to us through scripture, no matter how extreme it might seem and no matter how uncomfortable it makes us feel? If we are truly open to the truth revealed throughout the Bible and especially through the teaching of Jesus in the Gospels, we will find both extremes – both God’s wrath in the punishment of sin AND God’s grace in the granting of forgiveness through repentance and faith in Jesus. So, do we have to believe in hell to be a Christian? Romans 5:8 tells us that “God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.” The emphasis in scripture is usually on the Savior, not on what we have been saved from, but this particular passage gives us all we really need to know in the very next verse: “Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God’s wrath through him!” In Jesus, we are saved from “God’s wrath”, which we may not understand completely but would all agree it must be avoided at all costs, for elsewhere we read “It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.” (Hebrews 10:31) I’m not so sure we have to agree on the specifics - such as whether it is eternal punishment or eternal destruction – but what I do know is that knowing of the judgment and punishment I deserve as a guilty sinner makes the forgiveness and grace I experience through a faith relationship with Jesus all the more amazing.

A sidewalk conversation with Ibrahim, a Muslim from Egypt, quickly led us past our secondary differences such as our different traditions and practices. Instead, we focused on the main source of contention between the two faiths: Jesus’ true nature. Islam views Jesus as one of its great prophets, and may accept Jesus as a son of God in the sense that we are all “sons of God”. But it would reject the notion that God could have a biological son. “But the Bible teaches that Jesus is much more than another being created by God” I explained. “It teaches us that in the beginning, before creation, God had already existed forever. He has no beginning or end, and Jesus has always existed with Him. Jesus exists with God as the Creator, not just a part of the creation.” Ibrahim said that while he respects the teachings of Christianity, he questions how we could believe that God is “One” as Islam emphasizes. “How can you say you believe in God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, yet that you also believe in just one God?” I tried to give him several analogies that might better explain this concept, but also let him know that all analogies have limitations. Each leaf on a three-leaf clover may represent one person of the Trinity, but the limitation is that each leaf is obviously not the whole plant. Water may take thee different forms in solid, liquid, and gas, but only one at a time. People may take on different roles such as husband, son, and parent, but each “role” can’t relate to each other as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit do. Ibrahim then asked a great question, which helped explain the problem – “If you work for a company, and this company has three different bosses, one day they are going to fight each other.” It reminded me of the problem with the Greek pantheon of gods. Zeus, Apollo, Artemis, Dionysus and the rest may have provided great drama for Greek myths and legends, but in the end they were really only man’s very flawed attempt at relating to the divine. The Greek gods couldn’t live together in perfect peace, but what if two or three immortal beings did exist in absolutely perfect agreement, with no hint of a difference of opinion between them, wouldn’t you say they are perfectly united as one being? Aren’t our differences of opinion and of will the things that separate us as independent people? From descriptions of interactions throughout the biblical record, we understand that among the persons of the Trinity there are different roles but only one will. The Father, Son, and Spirit have all acted in perfect harmony with one another – even through the most difficult test of all – Jesus’ crucifixion and resurrection. Ibraham related the criticism that I have heard from many atheists – “What Father would abandon his own son to such horrible suffering and death as Jesus endured on the cross?” They like to watch Christians squirm as we wrestle with the apparent contradiction between biblical values and the Father’s neglect and abandonment of His only Son. But if we have a proper understanding of the Trinity, this apparent contradiction doesn’t have to threaten the foundation of our faith. We need to understand it to be a great paradox – that is, something that may look to our untrained mind like a contraction, but that rather requires a much greater depth of understanding than our minds are capable of. Just because we don’t understand something doesn’t mean it isn’t true. So, because of the perfect unity between them, God the Father could seek the glory of God the Son through His victory over suffering and death, and God the Son could seek the glory of God the Father through his perfect obedience to Him, all brought about through the perfect orchestration of God the Holy Spirit. Really, though, I can’t begin to do justice to the depth of the perfect union of the Trinity, and it is way beyond our tendency toward selfish and broken relationships for us to be able to understand if I could. The Bible teaches us that Father, Son, and Spirit not only exist in perfect harmony, but that they have done so for eternity past. Because of the Trinity, God reconciles fallen man to himself – “to be just AND the one who justifies” as described in Romans 3. For its part, Islam is left with Allah, a god who must exist alone for all eternity, and who must either compromise his love and justice and settle for a very flawed system of justice based on human efforts at reconciliation. It was good for Ibrahim and I to look past the differences between our religious traditions, and I appreciated his open mind and friendliness. But as much as we had in common, our view of Jesus’ identity as one person of the Trinity is one difference that neither of us can afford to overlook.

When and why did God choose those who would be saved? Are some not chosen? In part 18 of our 34-part theology series, we learn about God’s work of election, that is, his decision to choose those people who would be saved before the foundation of the world. This act of election is, not strictly speaking, part of the application of salvation to us, since it came before Christ earned our salvation when he died on the cross. In our series, we treat election at this point because it is chronologically the beginning of God’s dealing with us in a gracious way. Therefore, it is rightly thought of as the first step in the process of God’s bringing salvation to us individually. This Doctrine of Election is the subject of lesson 18 of my 34 lessons in systematic theology. Anyone who reads the Bible on a regular basis has begun to develop a “theology” of who God is and what he has revealed of Himself to man down through history. But is it organized to the point where you can confidently say “this is what the Bible teaches” on a particular topic, or do you just base your beliefs on random verses that could well be misunderstood because they are taken out of context? My confidence in going out to share the Gospel with strangers comes largely from my study of “Systematic Theology”, which I’ll define as learning what the whole Bible teaches us about a given topic. I’m confident that I’m not misrepresenting God as revealed in his Word, and I’m confident when people make unbiblical claims about God that challenge my own beliefs. I’m increasingly amazed by the consistency of the Bible, written by so many human authors but without contradiction, that I can only conclude it was written by divine inspiration. I’ve gained so much personally from my systematic study of theology that I’m teaching a 34-week class on it at church, based on Dr. Wayne Grudem’s books “Systematic Theology” and “Bible Theology”. I’m excited to dig deeper personally as I prepare the outlines and lessons, and I want to take as many people along with me on this journey as possible. So I am recording the class and posting the videos to my YouTube channel, and making downloadable PDF chapter outlines and audio recordings available on a Google Drive folder as well. Care to join me? Links to my YouTube channel and shared resources are as follows: Video: YouTube.com/c/JeffReiman Shared Resources folder: https://tinyurl.com/yxy2kb56 #apologetics #BiblicalTheology #doctrine #systematictheology #Grudem #NewLife #Chicago

It was the first day of a two-month visit to Chicago, from Queretaro, Mexico. They were roller skating joyfully through the park, weaving among the people on the sidewalk and performing grandiose spins, enjoying the sunshine and the cool breeze. I didn’t mean to spoil their fun, but what I asked them literally stopped them in their tracks. Despite their happy-go-lucky mood, Raul and Paula, brother and sister, took my question very seriously, and really appreciated it when I gave them time to really work through their answer. It’s a universal question we all need to consider, whether it’s our first day of a long vacation or we are in the midst of the distractions and busyness of our everyday life. What happens when we die? I’m not trying to be morbid or a Debbie Downer, but it’s a question we will all face one day, because the latest surveys reveal that 10 out of 10 people will, indeed, die. These same surveys indicate this isn’t a racial or culture phenomenon. Neither is it socio-economic or simply an American activity. Raul and Paula affirmed that it also true back where they came from in Mexico. The question of death is universal. And so are the answers. I hear a lot of the same sort of wishful thinking from wherever in the world people come from in an international city like Chicago. Now that Covid travel restrictions are loosening up, I look forward to carrying on some of my “reverse missionary” work as more and more international travelers visit our city. I just hope the latest rise in violence doesn’t keep people away – and of course that the plague of violence in Chicago will diminish along with the plague of Covid. What horrible reminders of the randomness of death, and our need to make peace with God here, now, before its too late. In Ecclesiastes 8:8 we read “No man has authority to restrain the wind with the wind, or authority over the day of death”. That day is inevitable for us all, and every little grey hair is just a friendly reminder that our days are numbered. Raul and Paula don’t have any grey hairs, yet they wisely took my question seriously and gave thoughtful consideration to the Gospel. Please pray for them and their two-month stay here in Chicago, that they will be safe and maybe run into other Christians who can further guide them along toward a right relationship with God through faith in Jesus.

What are the undeserved blessings that God gives to all people, both believers and unbelievers? The Doctrine of Common Grace is the subject of lesson 17 of my 34 lessons in systematic theology. Anyone who reads the Bible on a regular basis has begun to develop a “theology” of who God is and what he has revealed of Himself to man down through history. But is it organized to the point where you can confidently say “this is what the Bible teaches” on a particular topic, or do you just base your beliefs on random verses that could well be misunderstood because they are taken out of context? My confidence in going out to share the Gospel with strangers comes largely from my study of “Systematic Theology”, which I’ll define as learning what the whole Bible teaches us about a given topic. I’m confident that I’m not misrepresenting God as revealed in his Word, and I’m confident when people make unbiblical claims about God that challenge my own beliefs. I’m increasingly amazed by the consistency of the Bible, written by so many human authors but without contradiction, that I can only conclude it was written by divine inspiration. I’ve gained so much personally from my systematic study of theology that I’m teaching a 34-week class on it at church, based on Dr. Wayne Grudem’s books “Systematic Theology” and “Bible Theology”. I’m excited to dig deeper personally as I prepare the outlines and lessons, and I want to take as many people along with me on this journey as possible. So I am recording the class and posting the videos to my YouTube channel, and making downloadable PDF chapter outlines and audio recordings available on a Google Drive folder as well. Care to join me? Links to my YouTube channel and shared resources are as follows: Video: YouTube.com/c/JeffReiman Shared Resources folder: https://tinyurl.com/yxy2kb56 #apologetics #BiblicalTheology #doctrine #systematictheology #Grudem #NewLife #Chicago

So do we have to read the Bible literally in order to believe it literally is the word of God? How does that work? First, let’s consider what we mean when we refer to the Bible. Sure, it’s bound together as one big book, but what we really have between the covers is an entire library of books, written by some 40 different authors from 3 different continents, at least 3 different languages and cultures and over a time span of some 1500 years. Its authors were kings, soldiers, herdsmen, legislators, fishermen, courtiers, priests and prophets, and a Gentile physician. As a result, it was also written in many literary styles or genres, including history, law, religious poetry, lyric poetry, parable and allegory, biography, personal correspondence, and even personal memoirs and diaries. None of us would read books from any of these genres in the same way, and neither should we read all the books of the Bible in the same way. Even within each book, we know we need to adjust our approach. We would interpret Jesus differently when he is using strong hyperbole against the Pharisees, or teaching crowds through parables, or talking privately with his disciples, for example. And we should realize that the Bible wasn’t really written TO us, but that as God’s Word it was definitely written and preserved FOR us. When we read the letters of Paul, for example, we should realize that we are really reading someone else’s mail, carefully preserved and passed down for many generations, including our own, to learn from. Much of the Bible is written in a way that a child could understand, but as Paul wrote “When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me.” The original audience and purpose of this passage was to tell the Corinthians about how to mature in love, but it applies to all aspects of our relationship with God, including how we approach God’s word. For many, like a young man named Stephan whom I spoke with in an outreach conversation, the only thing they know of the Bible is from their memory as a child, and we know that children tend to take things literally, often in a very comical way. I believe we are to move beyond our childish understanding of the Bible, and read it as adults, which includes reading it with a childlike faith in it’s Author. The Bible is God’s primary way of communicating and revealing Himself to the world. It is the most widely distributed work every written, with the number of Bibles sold well into the billions, and now on the internet it has been translated into 799 languages and downloaded over 200 million times to date! It has greatly influenced western civilization, laying the groundwork for democratic forms of government and law, the rational exploration of the natural world, movements in both art and literature, and societal morals and values. Yet, popular as it is, no other written work has been so attacked, scrutinized, and persecuted. It has withstood the test of time even as it has been chopped, knived, sifted, scrutinized, and vilified, yet no other book continues to have the same impact on individuals and on our world. What we have is not simply a distorted version of the original manuscripts as one would expect if it came from a single source like the “telephone game”. And we don’t have a case of circular reasoning for the same reason, as the dozens of books in the Bible from so many sources all combine to affirm the truth of one divine Author who inspired all its human writers. ] We cannot and should not read every part of the Bible literally or we will end up with only a childish understanding, but we can and should read it as literally God’s Word, not to us but for us, and with a child-like faith that allows us to read it as God intends.

What was Christ’s resurrection body like? What is its significance for us? What happened to Christ when he ascended into heaven? The Doctrine of Jesus' resurrection and ascension is the subject of lesson 16 of my 34 lessons in systematic theology. Anyone who reads the Bible on a regular basis has begun to develop a “theology” of who God is and what he has revealed of Himself to man down through history. But is it organized to the point where you can confidently say “this is what the Bible teaches” on a particular topic, or do you just base your beliefs on random verses that could well be misunderstood because they are taken out of context? My confidence in going out to share the Gospel with strangers comes largely from my study of “Systematic Theology”, which I’ll define as learning what the whole Bible teaches us about a given topic. I’m confident that I’m not misrepresenting God as revealed in his Word, and I’m confident when people make unbiblical claims about God that challenge my own beliefs. I’m increasingly amazed by the consistency of the Bible, written by so many human authors but without contradiction, that I can only conclude it was written by divine inspiration. I’ve gained so much personally from my systematic study of theology that I’m teaching a 34-week class on it at church, based on Dr. Wayne Grudem’s books “Systematic Theology” and “Bible Theology”. I’m excited to dig deeper personally as I prepare the outlines and lessons, and I want to take as many people along with me on this journey as possible. So I am recording the class and posting the videos to my YouTube channel, and making downloadable PDF chapter outlines and audio recordings available on a Google Drive folder as well. Care to join me? Links to my YouTube channel and shared resources are as follows: Video: YouTube.com/c/JeffReiman Shared Resources folder: https://tinyurl.com/yxy2kb56 #apologetics #BiblicalTheology #doctrine #systematictheology #Grudem #NewLife #Chicago

Was it necessary for Jesus to die? What really happened at the cross? Did Christ descend into hell? The Doctrine of the Atonement is the subject of lesson 15 of my 34 lessons in systematic theology. Anyone who reads the Bible on a regular basis has begun to develop a “theology” of who God is and what he has revealed of Himself to man down through history. But is it organized to the point where you can confidently say “this is what the Bible teaches” on a particular topic, or do you just base your beliefs on random verses that could well be misunderstood because they are taken out of context? My confidence in going out to share the Gospel with strangers comes largely from my study of “Systematic Theology”, which I’ll define as learning what the whole Bible teaches us about a given topic. I’m confident that I’m not misrepresenting God as revealed in his Word, and I’m confident when people make unbiblical claims about God that challenge my own beliefs. I’m increasingly amazed by the consistency of the Bible, written by so many human authors but without contradiction, that I can only conclude it was written by divine inspiration. I’ve gained so much personally from my systematic study of theology that I’m teaching a 36-week class on it at church, based on Dr. Wayne Grudem’s books “Systematic Theology” and “Bible Theology”. I’m excited to dig deeper personally as I prepare the outlines and lessons, and I want to take as many people along with me on this journey as possible. So I am recording the class and posting the videos to my YouTube channel, and making downloadable PDF chapter outlines and audio recordings available on a Google Drive folder as well. Care to join me? Links to my YouTube channel and shared resources are as follows: Video: YouTube.com/c/JeffReiman Shared Resources folder: https://tinyurl.com/yxy2kb56 #apologetics #BiblicalTheology #doctrine #systematictheology #Grudem #NewLife #Chicago

I learn new things about other religions from our international students all the time. For example, in a recent conversation at the park, with Pranav, a graduate student from India who grew up Hindu, I found out that many Hindu temples have a bell to ring upon entering that is said to remove all germs from one’s body. Pranav told me he believes it, and that Hinduism has many such beliefs that scientists are discovering to be true. I later googled the subject and, sure enough, in addition to many spiritual reasons given for the practice, there were claims of a scientific basis behind it as well. Here is one of them, which claims the practice leads to the healing of the body: “Here is a scientific reason behind Temple bell presence; Bell is not made up of just your ordinary metal. It is made of various metals including cadmium, lead, copper, zinc, nickel, chromium and manganese. The proportion at which each one of them mixed is real science behind a bell. Each of these bells is made to produce such a distinct sound that it can create unity of your left and right brain. The moment you ring that bell, bell produces sharp but lasting sound which lasts for minimum of seven seconds in echo mode good enough to touch your seven healing centres or chakras in your body.” I’m sure there are sceptics of Hinduism who would mock and ridicule teachings like these, just as there are sceptics of Christianity who make fun of scientific claims within Christianity. They would love nothing more that to disprove religion by using science, but, at least when it comes to Christianity, I’m not so sure this is necessary, except maybe for debunking the claims of false teachers who would try to profit from making them. I think Jesus taught an important principle about the limitations of human government that applies to the limitations of human scientific reasoning as well. In his case, the sceptics were religious people, the Pharisees, who doubted that after God was silent for 400 years, He would have finally sent his Messiah: “Then the Pharisees went out and laid plans to trap him in his words. They sent their disciples to him along with the Herodians. “Teacher,” they said, “we know that you are a man of integrity and that you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. You aren’t swayed by others, because you pay no attention to who they are. Tell us then, what is your opinion? Is it right to pay the imperial tax to Caesar or not?” “But Jesus, knowing their evil intent, said, “You hypocrites, why are you trying to trap me? Show me the coin used for paying the tax.” They brought him a denarius, and he asked them, “Whose image is this? And whose inscription?” “Caesar’s,” they replied. Then he said to them, “So give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.” When they heard this, they were amazed. So they left him and went away.” Jesus taught that there were levels of authority that God has delegated to earthly rulers, and others that He has reserved to Himself. I believe the principle would also apply to science by saying that there are levels of knowledge that God has delegated to scientists and others in various areas of expertise, but that there are many areas of knowledge He has reserved only to Himself and His holy Word. Many Christians don’t understand this, and often make the mistake of trying to fabricate scientific rationales for spiritual teachings. They often end up sounding about as scientific as the above Hindu explanation involving the “seven healing centres or chakras in your body”. God never said man’s knowledge – science – extends to all the teachings of the Bible. We don’t need to try to force science into places it was never meant to go. We need to accept that just as there is no human authority that can go past God’s sovereignty, there is no human knowledge that can go past God’s wisdom.

Who is Jesus Christ? Who did he claim to be? How is Jesus fully God and fully man, yet one person? A biblical understanding of the Person of Christ is foundational to the Christian faith. It separates Christian belief from other beliefs that also claim to believe in Jesus, such as Islam, Mormonism, and Jehovah's Witnesses. It directly or indirectly affects every other major doctrine of our Christian faith, so we want to be sure to establish a solid foundation in our theology. Anyone who reads the Bible on a regular basis has begun to develop a “theology” of who God is and what he has revealed of Himself to man down through history. But is it organized to the point where you can confidently say “this is what the Bible teaches” on a particular topic, or do you just base your beliefs on random verses that could well be misunderstood because they are taken out of context? My confidence in going out to share the Gospel with strangers comes largely from my study of “Systematic Theology”, which I’ll define as learning what the whole Bible teaches us about a given topic. I’m confident that I’m not misrepresenting God as revealed in his Word, and I’m confident when people make unbiblical claims about God that challenge my own beliefs. I’m increasingly amazed by the consistency of the Bible, written by so many human authors but without contradiction, that I can only conclude it was written by divine inspiration. I’ve gained so much personally from my systematic study of theology that I’m teaching a 36-week class on it at church, based on Dr. Wayne Grudem’s books “Systematic Theology” and “Bible Theology”. I’m excited to dig deeper personally as I prepare the outlines and lessons, and I want to take as many people along with me on this journey as possible. So I am recording the class and posting the videos to my YouTube channel, and making downloadable PDF chapter outlines and audio recordings available on a Google Drive folder as well. Care to join me? Links to my YouTube channel and shared resources are as follows: Video: YouTube.com/c/JeffReiman Shared Resources folder: https://tinyurl.com/yxy2kb56 #apologetics #BiblicalTheology #doctrine #systematictheology #Grudem #NewLife #Chicago

“After we die, well, lights out!” he said with a smile on his face. That was pretty much the extent of his beliefs about eternity, despite his church upbringing. Fernando, a guy I was talking with at the park, seemed comfortable with his belief that this life is all there is, which always leaves me somewhat astounded. I can’t imagine this short life without the hope of life eternal. How do unbelievers face eternity and the prospect of death so casually? For Fernando, I think part of the reason is his view of God as nothing more than a “higher power”. This impersonal view of God leaves nothing to look forward to but an impersonal eternity. It might seem convenient when it comes to not having to take personal accountability for our sins, but when it comes to eternal life, the prospect of “lights out” after this life seems preferable to an impersonal future. But God is very personal. The Bible tells us we are made in God’s image, which means we were created to relate to God in a deeply personal way. But our sin actually estranges us from God, so much so that we were condemned as enemies and unable to be reconciled on our own. And this is where God steps in once again, in a deeply personal way: “God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those under the law, that we might receive adoption to sonship. Because you are his sons, God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, the Spirit who calls out, “Abba, Father.” So you are no longer a slave, but God’s child; and since you are his child, God has made you also an heir. (Gal. 4) There is a huge difference between thinking of God as a “higher power” and being able to refer to God as “Abba, Father.” “Abba” is a term of endearment, similar to a child’s reference to a human father as “Daddy”. We are invited into a personal relationship with our Father God, and to be adopted into His family, a far cry from an impersonal eternity. Maybe Fernando’s hope of “lights out” makes sense with his view of an impersonal “higher power” and an impersonal future. But “Abba, Father” makes all the difference when it comes to how we view eternity.

What is sin? Where did it come from? Do we inherit a sinful nature from Adam? The Doctrine of Sin is the subject of lesson 13 of my 34 lessons in systematic theology. Anyone who reads the Bible on a regular basis has begun to develop a “theology” of who God is and what he has revealed of Himself to man down through history. But is it organized to the point where you can confidently say “this is what the Bible teaches” on a particular topic, or do you just base your beliefs on random verses that could well be misunderstood because they are taken out of context? My confidence in going out to share the Gospel with strangers comes largely from my study of “Systematic Theology”, which I’ll define as learning what the whole Bible teaches us about a given topic. I’m confident that I’m not misrepresenting God as revealed in his Word, and I’m confident when people make unbiblical claims about God that challenge my own beliefs. I’m increasingly amazed by the consistency of the Bible, written by so many human authors but without contradiction, that I can only conclude it was written by divine inspiration. I’ve gained so much personally from my systematic study of theology that I’m teaching a 36-week class on it at church, based on Dr. Wayne Grudem’s books “Systematic Theology” and “Bible Theology”. I’m excited to dig deeper personally as I prepare the outlines and lessons, and I want to take as many people along with me on this journey as possible. So I am recording the class and posting the videos to my YouTube channel, and making downloadable PDF chapter outlines and audio recordings available on a Google Drive folder as well. Care to join me? Links to my YouTube channel and shared resources are as follows: Video: YouTube.com/c/JeffReiman Shared Resources folder: https://tinyurl.com/yxy2kb56 #apologetics #BiblicalTheology #doctrine #systematictheology #Grudem #NewLife #Chicago

I’ve met a lot of atheists in my outreach conversations, but Jacob was the first who described himself not simply as an atheist, but as an “anti-theist”. This means that not only does he not believe that God exists, but he believes that the world would be a better place without all the theists who believe that He does. Despite our very different world views, Jacob and I had a friendly and respectful conversation out at a basketball court. Early on, I asked if he had been reading books by some of the well-known atheists, such as Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens and he said that, indeed, he had. This didn’t surprise me, because during the course of our conversation Jacob mentioned most of the same atheist talking points I’ve been hearing for years. I’ve just never heard them all in the same conversation like this. I think they flowed so freely from him because he is not only trying to defend his atheist beliefs, but is on a mission to debunk the beliefs of theists as well. At the risk of overwhelming believers with a firehose of skepticism, I’m going to list all the claims and questions Jacob had for me, because if we are to have a rational faith in this secular, skeptical society, we need to be aware of what questions people are asking. Here they are in the order he brought them up during our conversation: • Hypocrisy of churchgoers; • Believers are just trying to overcome fear of death; • Science is the only basis for truth; • Too much suffering and pain, God either not good or powerful enough to stop evil; • Many gods and religions, which one? • Contradictions between and within religions; • A loving God would not allow people to be misled with false religions; • Genocide of whole tribes of people in the Old Testament; • God should not tolerate any evil in world; • Believers attracted to authoritarianism, desire to be under authority; • Believers fooled into believing by mere coincidences; • Believers selfishly think God and universe is all about them; • God is a dictator, chooses some but not others; • God treats women unfairly; • Unfair to be blamed for Adam’s sin; • God unfair to reveal Himself to some but not others; • Why would God make eternal happiness or torture dependent on whether we have heard about him or not? • Can God have the right to save some but not others? Why is God worth worshipping? • It’s like we are born sick and commanded to be well; • We didn’t make the choice to be born; • We have to beg and plead to be accepted by God and not punished; • Isn’t the essence of Christianity hoping to please God, hoping to make it into heaven, or earn God’s approval? • It’s only human to make mistakes, we don’t deserve to suffer for that; • Why would God set us up for failure? • Why should we have to believe in something with no evidence at all? • God’s attributes can exist without demonstration in an evil world; • Why do we need to experience good by going through bad situations? • Christianity does not hold its weight in logic or evidence; • Not healthy to have to fear God; • Ethics are different in different cultures; • Evolution explains why we are cooperative and moral; • Fear of God can’t exist with love for God. Whew! We fit a lot in a short conversation, and somehow my recording was cut short so there was even more! It’s interesting that some of these claims actually contradict each other, and many betray false beliefs about the very nature of Christianity itself. I think a big reason why so many reject the Gospel is because they have been given false impressions of it and don’t truly understand it in the first place. I thought it might be helpful to share these issues and questions because they are typical of the questions our secular world is asking, and they very much affect our families and churches. They are not just for those of us who wish to share our faith with people on the street, but also as we raise our kids, talk with relatives, encourage others at church, and maybe just to be honest that we have some of these same questions ourselves. I didn’t have much time to speak to each of these in our conversation, because Jacob would just move on to the next one fairly quickly. But there is plenty of evidence and resources available for those who want answers for every one of these issues and are willing to take the time to look into them.

Why did God create two sexes? Can men and women be equal and yet have different roles? The doctrine of Man as Male and Female is the subject of lesson 12 of my 34 lessons in systematic theology. Anyone who reads the Bible on a regular basis has begun to develop a “theology” of who God is and what he has revealed of Himself to man down through history. But is it organized to the point where you can confidently say “this is what the Bible teaches” on a particular topic, or do you just base your beliefs on random verses that could well be misunderstood because they are taken out of context? My confidence in going out to share the Gospel with strangers comes largely from my study of “Systematic Theology”, which I’ll define as learning what the whole Bible teaches us about a given topic. I’m confident that I’m not misrepresenting God as revealed in his Word, and I’m confident when people make unbiblical claims about God that challenge my own beliefs. I’m increasingly amazed by the consistency of the Bible, written by so many human authors but without contradiction, that I can only conclude it was written by divine inspiration. I’ve gained so much personally from my systematic study of theology that I’m teaching a 36-week class on it at church, based on Dr. Wayne Grudem’s books “Systematic Theology” and “Bible Theology”. I’m excited to dig deeper personally as I prepare the outlines and lessons, and I want to take as many people along with me on this journey as possible. So I am recording the class and posting the videos to my YouTube channel, and making downloadable PDF chapter outlines and audio recordings available on a Google Drive folder as well. Care to join me? Links to my YouTube channel and shared resources are as follows: Video: YouTube.com/c/JeffReiman​ Shared Resources folder: https://tinyurl.com/yxy2kb56​ #apologetics​ #BiblicalTheology​ #doctrine​ #systematictheology​ #Grudem​ #NewLife​ #Chicago

What is more plausible – a Creator God who always existed and brought the physical universe into existence by the shear force of his spoken word, or the universe suddenly exploding into existence on its own in one tremendous blast? I think most people who believe they know the answer to this question will say that the answer is obvious. Yet those who believe the answer to be obvious often have opposite opinions on just what that answer would be, as was demonstrated in a conversation I had with a man named Chip while he was out grilling for his family in the alley behind his garage. Chip said he has grown up without much exposure to or much interest in religion. He seemed to have learned enough to fuel his distaste for Christianity, however, and was much more interested in the many alternative ideas floating around cyberspace. To him, it seemed obvious to take scientists at their word when they describe a “Big Bang” that brought everything into existence. To me, it seems obvious that creation must have a Creator. The idea that Something creating everything is more plausible than to believe that nothing creating everything. It also leads to other conclusions, such as the idea that this “Something” created everything for a purpose, and that if rational, thinking creatures like ourselves were created, then that purpose would likely be communicated to us as well. For many reasons I don’t have the space to list, it seems obvious to me that the Bible, with its universal message and its collection of historical works from a wide variety of authors over a long period of time, would be a likely place for that Creator and His purposes to be revealed, and the more I read it and live it out the more convinced I am that this is the case. The Bible also reveals why these truths that seem so obvious to believers seem so implausible to sceptics. Ephesians 4:18 tells us “They are darkened in their understanding and separated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them due to the hardening of their hearts.” This darkened understanding and ignorance toward the things of God begins with a “hardened heart” to the foundational idea that there is a Creator in the first place. A cross-reference to this passage is found in 1 Tim. 4, where those with this hardness of heart are described as people “whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron.” But what does it mean to have a “seared conscience”? Those with barbecuing experience, like Chip was doing in the alley as we talked, would understand that this refers to the high heat one uses when they begin to cook in order to create a sort of outer barrier or skin on the meat that serves to seal in the juices and flavor while it continues to cook more slowly. A person whose conscience is “seared” and whose heart becomes hardened or calloused is indifferent and unaffected even to obvious truths, such as the implausibility of nothing creating everything as compared to the plausibility of a Creator, made obvious by all the evidence around us. Friendly as he was, I sensed this indifference and rejection of biblical truths in Chip; yet he seemed to have an interest in almost anything but the Bible when it came to spiritual things. Paul attributed these sorts of alternative teachings to “deceiving spirits and things taught by demons”, and said that they come “through hypocritical liars”. These would be people who purposely reject obvious truths in order to support their own selfish agenda. For his part, Chip seemed like a sincere sort of guy who simply wants to enjoy life without the burdens of religion. He didn’t seem to be one of the hypocritical liars Paul was writing about, who go out of their way to deceive others. Yet, his indifference told me he might be headed in that direction, and it started with the rejection of the most obvious truth of all, our Creator God made evident by His creation.

I’ve met many people who view God as being like the peak of a mountain with many paths leading up to it. Is Christianity just one of those many paths? Oprah Winfrey thought so, when she famously said “Well, I am a Christian who believes that there are certainly many more paths to God other than Christianity.” This creates a problem, however, when we read what Jesus had to say about it: “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” Hmmm. Should we listen to Oprah, or Jesus? Actually, Oprah was by no means the first to embrace universalism. Many “new age” religions have rejected the exclusive claims of Christ and other religions in favor of the belief that all religions are valid and lead toward some sort of heavenly reward in the end. One of the oldest of these “new” religions is Sihkism, which developed in India not much more than three hundred years ago. It was an attractive alternative to the exclusive claims of Hinduism and Islam, which were in conflict with each other at the time. There are about 6 million Sikhs in the world, and Sonny, a man I spoke with at the park, is one of them. Sonny grew up in a Buddhist household in Burma, before converting to Sikhism and moving to the United States. He says that the beliefs of Sikhism are flexible enough to accommodate his strong belief in science and that he still holds to a scientific worldview, while believing in a universal God and the validity of all religions. I talked with him about how Christianity is both exclusive and universal. It is exclusive in that Jesus claims to be the only way to a right relationship with God, but it is universal in that this right relationship with God is available to all who put their trust in him. But there is another way that Christianity is universal. It is universal in that we are all descendants of Adam who have all inherited the same God-given moral conscience, and we have all rebelled against it, doing what we know we shouldn’t, and failing to do what we know we should. All the major religions recognize this, and offer many paths with the goal of resolving this universal problem. Some offer an exclusive way to God through religious ritual . Others offer an enlightened leader who will teach us the truth. Still others teach us to live a moral life through various lifestyles and work toward meaningful causes. But the universalism of the new religions is to offer all three – an exclusive way, an enlightened truth, and a meaningful life by embracing all religions at once. Not so with Jesus. Instead of a way, a truth, or a life to bring us to the top of the spiritual mountain - or even all three – Jesus IS the way, the truth, and the life. And instead of requiring us to somehow find our path up that mountain, He comes down to join us, right where we are, and loves us, just as we are. It’s only human that we should think we somehow need to discover the right path to God. Thomas, one of Jesus’ disciples, told him ““Lord, we don’t know where you are going, so how can we know the way?” Jesus’ response was his well-known declaration: “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” Notice that Jesus didn’t say “I will teach you the way, or teach you the truth or how you are to live life” – He said I AM the way. In the same way God identified Himself to Moses hundreds of years earlier by saying “I AM”, Jesus declared himself to be the great “I AM”. He followed his statement to Thomas by saying “If you really know me, you will know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him.” Oprah, Sonny, and all those who believe in universal religion - Jesus is not just another path up the mountain of God. He is God, and in Him the “mountain” has come to us.

How did God create the world? Did he create every different kind of plant and animal directly, or did he use some kind of evolutionary process, guiding the development of living things from the simplest to the most complex? And how quickly did God bring about creation? Was it all completed within six twenty-four-hour days, or did he use thousands or perhaps millions of years? How old is the earth, and how old is the human race? These questions face us when we deal with the doctrine of creation. Unlike most of the earlier material in this series, this lesson treats several questions on which evangelical Christians have differing viewpoints, sometimes very strongly held ones. This chapter is organized to move from those aspects of creation that are most clearly taught in Scripture, and on which almost all evangelicals would agree (creation out of nothing, special creation of Adam and Eve, and the goodness of the universe), to other aspects of creation about which evangelicals have had disagreements (whether God used a process of evolution to bring about much of creation, and how old the earth and the human race are). This is Lesson 7, based on chapter 7 of Dr. Wayne Grudem’s “Bible Doctrine” – an abridged version of his longer work – “Systematic Theology”. Anyone who reads the Bible on a regular basis has begun to develop a “theology” of who God is and what he has revealed of Himself to man down through history. But is it organized to the point where you can confidently say “this is what the Bible teaches” on a particular topic, or do you just base your beliefs on random verses that could well be misunderstood because they are taken out of context? My confidence in going out to share the Gospel with others comes largely from my study of “Systematic Theology”, which I’ll define as learning what the whole Bible teaches us about a given topic. I’m confident that I’m not misrepresenting God as revealed in his Word, and I’m confident when people make unbiblical claims about God that challenge my own beliefs. I’m increasingly amazed by the consistency of the Bible, written by so many human authors but without contradiction, that I can only conclude it was written by divine inspiration. I’ve gained so much personally from my systematic study of theology that I’m teaching a 34-week class on it at church, based on Dr. Wayne Grudem’s books “Systematic Theology” and “Bible Theology”. I’m excited to dig deeper personally as I prepare the outlines and lessons, and I want to take as many people along with me on this journey as possible. So I am recording the class and posting the videos to my YouTube channel, and making downloadable PDF chapter outlines and audio recordings available on a Google Drive folder as well. Care to join me? Links to my YouTube channel and shared resources are as follows: Video: YouTube.com/c/JeffReiman​ Shared Resources folder: https://tinyurl.com/yxy2kb56