May 12, 2016

What Happened to the Body? by Brad Bromling, D.Min.


http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=10&article=1120

What Happened to the Body?

by Brad Bromling, D.Min.

Q.

Christianity is based in its entirety on the claim that Jesus arose from the dead. Is there any actual evidence to support such a claim?
A.
The unexpected happened. He told them it would; He even told them how. They simply refused to believe. Thursday, Jesus walked the streets of Jerusalem with His friends; Friday, He was dead. His battered, lifeless body was removed from the cross and carried away. Friday night it was there—undisturbed. All day Saturday it was there—under guard. Sunday dawned. The tomb was empty. What happened to the body?
Jesus Christ met death face-to-face, and defeated it. The tomb was empty Sunday morning because Jesus was alive. Tombs are for the dead—not the living. By His resurrection, every claim Jesus made regarding His deity was confirmed “with power” (Romans 1:4). He not only kept His word that He would be raised, but He fulfilled a thousand-year-old prophecy by David (cf. Psalm 16:1-2; Acts 2:24-36).
In an age devoid of active miracles, people often wonder if such a claim can be proved. The answer is “yes!” A compelling case for the resurrection can be made from the information contained in the Gospel records. This article will present some of that material, and will answer common alternative theories employed to explain away the resurrection.

THE EMPTY TOMB

If Jesus was raised, His tomb had to be emptied. His bodily resurrection is indefensible if He remained in the tomb even one hour of day four. If the tomb was occupied Monday, Jesus is less than divine, and there is no hope in Him as Savior. This makes the witness of the tomb all-important.
Before discussing the evidence from the tomb, however, two preliminary points call for attention. First, was Jesus placed in a tomb? The Bible is clear on this point. His interment was witnessed by at least four individuals. Joseph of Arimathea received permission from Pilate to bury Jesus (Mark 15:43-45). He and Nicodemus hurriedly prepared and entombed the Lord’s body (John 19:38). Their activities were observed by Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joseph (Mark 15:46-47). Then, on the next day, the chief priests and Pharisees requested of Pilate that a guard be provided for the tomb (Matthew 27:62-65). They necessarily believed Jesus’ body remained there at the time of their request. This request was granted and a guard was sent. It is inconceivable that Pilate (who was responsible for maintaining the body of Jesus) would have sealed and set watch over a tomb that he did not believe was occupied. Hence, at least four people saw Jesus’ body in the tomb on Friday. The Jews, Pilate, and the guards acknowledged its presence on Saturday.
Second, Jesus was not buried in just any tomb; it was a new tomb. This is significant when one remembers that a dead man was once miraculously revived when his body was placed into the tomb that contained Elisha’s bones (2 Kings 13:21). Instead, Jesus was put into a tomb “in which no one had yet been laid” (John 19:41). The Lord’s resurrection was a unique event that could not be attributed to such a factor.
With these facts established, consider how the tomb offers powerful evidence of the Lord’s resurrection. First, it was impossible for Jesus to escape from the tomb without being detected. This is seen in various ways.
  • All four of the Gospel records explicitly declare that the Lord was dead prior to entering the tomb (Matthew 27:50; Mark 15:44-45; Luke 23:46; John 19:32-34).
  • The tomb was cut out of solid rock (Matthew 27:60). Tombs, like caskets, generally are not equipped with back doors!
  • The cave opening was blocked by a massive stone (Matthew 27:60).
  • The stone was affixed with a seal, and watched by soldiers (Matthew 27:66).
Obviously, it was impossible for Jesus to leave that tomb (apart from the resurrection miracle), let alone to do so without detection.
Second, the tomb did not contain the body of Jesus after the dawning of Sunday. This evidence is gleaned from those on both sides of the issue.
  • The empty tomb was seen by at least six of Jesus’ followers: Mary Magdalene (Matthew 28:1-10), Mary (the mother of James) and Salome (Mark 16:1-8), Joanna (Luke 24:10), and Peter and John (John 20:2-8).
  • The empty tomb was probably seen by at least a few Roman guards (Matthew 28:2,11-15).
  • That the tomb was empty was not denied by the antagonistic Jews (they merely attempted to explain why it was empty).
  • That the tomb was empty was loudly proclaimed on the day of Pentecost in the presence of literally thousands of Jews who most certainly would have denied it if they could (Acts 2:24-36).

WHO MOVED THE STONE?

One of the tomb’s most impressive features was the immense stone that acted as its door. Matthew used the Greek phrase lithon megan to describe the stone (27:60). This two-word combination is the source of our modern term, “megalith” (i.e., large stone). Mark and Luke report that the four women who came to the tomb wondered who would move the stone for them (Mark 16:2-4; Luke 24:10). Mark calls the stone “very large.” How large is “very large”? While we may never know, it is safe to assume that four women could move a fairly large stone without help; yet, apparently the force needed to move this stone exceeded their combined strength (Mark 16:3). If these women didn’t move it, who did? Can we rationally conclude that it was moved by a brutally beaten, crucified, and allegedly dead man? The record indicates that an angel of the Lord was dispatched from heaven to accomplish the task (Matthew 28:2).
Someone might contend that the stone could not have been too heavy since Joseph rolled it in place by himself (Matthew 27:60). But this is only partially correct. The stones used for this purpose often were set in a sloping groove with the low point in front of the tomb’s opening. While it may have taken many men to move and scotch the stone up and away from the doorway prior to burial, one man easily could have removed the block and allowed gravity to draw the stone down the slope into its proper resting position. Also, it is possible that the stone was set in place by a number of men under the direction of Joseph. After all, when we say that Alexander conquered the world, we do not mean that he did so without the aid of an army!
Moreover, the stone was not just nudged aside to allow a single man to slip through, but it actually was moved completely away from the tomb (John 20:1). The moving of the great stone by the angel was an event of such magnitude that Matthew tells us the soldiers “shook for fear of him, and became as dead men” (28:4). It is no wonder they left their post and returned to the city to make a report to the chief priests! Adding to their fear of this supernatural sighting was the fact that the tomb they were guarding was opened and empty. Perhaps they reasoned that if the Jews knew the circumstances, they would not press charges against them for losing custody of the body.
The impressive evidence from the tomb and stone may be summarized as follows. On Friday, at least four witnesses saw Jesus’ dead body placed into a previously empty tomb. The tomb was sealed with a stone too large for four women to move. Jesus’ presence in the tomb was acknowledged by friend and enemy alike on Saturday, when the stone was affixed with a Roman seal (McDowell, 1981, p. 59). On Sunday the stone had been moved and Jesus’ body was gone!

WHY BRIBE THE GUARDS?

The Jews’ primary effort to prevent the disciples of Jesus from making any resurrection claims for their Master served as one of the strongest evidences supporting those claims. Matthew recounts the incident:
The next day, after the Preparation, the chief priests and the Pharisees were gathered together before Pilate, saying, “Sir, we remember that the deceiver said, I will arise after three days. Command therefore that the tomb be made secure until the third day to guard against his disciples stealing the body and saying, He has been raised from the dead. The last deception will be worse than the first.” Pilate replied to them, “Take guards and go and make the tomb as secure as you can.” They departed and secured the tomb, sealing the stone, and stationing the guards (Matthew 27:62-66; McCord, 1988).
Although they did not believe Christ, the Jews realized the importance of His words. The passage implies that the Jews were obtaining a Roman guard. Some scholars contend that Pilate told the Jews to take their own temple guard for the task. This seems unlikely. In the Greek, the phrase, “Take a guard” is in the imperative. It was a “curt permission” to take guards (Robertson, 1930, 1:239). Why would the Jews approach Pilate to request a Jewish guard? If they used their own guard, they would have been open to criticisms should the body turn up missing. Why would the temple guard fear Pilate’s reaction (Matthew 28:14)? It seems more probable that the Jews wanted a Roman guard to prevent Jesus’ disciples from stealing their Lord’s body.
As noted above, the guards were terrified when the angel moved the giant stone away from the tomb. They left their post and some of them returned to the city to report the incredible event. No doubt fearful of what would become of them, they went to the Jews (to plead for help?). The record continues:
When they had assembled with the elders and taken counsel, they gave a large sum of money to the soldiers, saying, “Tell them, His disciples came at night and stole Him away while we slept. And if this comes to the governor’s ears, we will appease him and make you secure.” So they took the money and did as they were instructed; and this saying is commonly reported among the Jews until this day (Matthew 28:12-15).
The guards were left with an empty tomb, and the Jews were faced with a dilemma. They had to deal with not just an empty tomb, but also eyewitness accounts (from neutral witnesses) of the resurrection of Jesus. What could they do? Three options were possible: they could accept the testimony and believe in the One they crucified; they could complain to Pilate about his incompetent soldiers; or, they could enact a cover-up. They were not yet willing to accept this Jesus as the Messiah. If they complained to Pilate, he might either believe or slay the soldiers. If he believed them, the Jews would be defeated. If he slew them, the Jews would be left with an inexplicably empty tomb. There was really only one option for them—a cover-up. So they bought a false report and circulated it in all directions. However, contrary to their desire, everywhere that false report traveled, so went one important fact—the tomb was empty!

ALTERNATIVE THEORIES

Some persist in doubt. They reject the possibility of Christ’s resurrection and offer various explanations for the data.

The Swoon Theory

Some have suggested that Jesus did not actually die. He just fainted (“swooned”) and merely seemed to be dead. Thinking He was dead, His friends buried Him according to custom. After resting upon that cold stone slab, the Lord’s body naturally revived; thus revived, He moved the stone and exited the tomb (carefully avoiding being spotted by the guards). This view is utterly without foundation and collapses after even the most cursory glance at the evidence.
First, the body was acknowledged as dead by all parties involved. The Romans (who were experts at crucifixion) saw He was already dead and did not need to have His legs broken (John 19:33). Pilate was surprised to hear that Jesus had died so quickly, and investigated the matter (Mark 15:44-45). The followers of Jesus knew He was dead, for they began to prepare Him for burial, and even anticipated the coming of Sunday so they could finish the job. The Jews were sure He was dead, otherwise they would not have been so concerned with keeping His disciples from stealing His body (Matthew 27:62-66).
Second, no one who has been scourged, nailed to and hung upon a cross for six hours, and has had a spear pierce his side, is going to wake up capable of rolling away a stone that four women could not move!
Third, if this theory were true, the Jews would have been more successful claiming that Jesus had only swooned than in manufacturing an excuse for the empty tomb.
Fourth, where is Jesus now? The divine record has Him appearing for only forty days after His alleged swoon—what of the rest of His life?
Fifth, can any clear-thinking person really believe that the apostles lived persecuted lives and died as martyrs for a cause they knew to be false, or that Jesus would have been so cruel as to be the cause of such (either directly or indirectly)? Everything we know of Jesus mitigates against this thought.

The Wrong Tomb Theory

Some suggest that although Jesus was actually dead and buried, His followers accidentally went to another tomb that was empty. This theory hardly deserves mention; it defies nearly every detail of the resurrection narratives and leads to the absurd conclusion that not only His friends, but His enemies, and the Roman soldiers all went to the wrong tomb. On the contrary, the Gospel records mention that the interred body was seen by at least four people. How long would it take before someone recognized the mistake? After all, Joseph of Arimathea surely knew how to locate his own tomb, and easily could have corrected this error. Finally, Paul told of more than five hundred witnesses who did not see the empty tomb, but who had seen the risen Lord (1 Corinthians 15:6).

Friends Stole the Body

The most common theory suggests that Jesus’ friends stole His body while the guards slept. This was the story circulating when Matthew wrote his history (Matthew 28:15). But, where is the evidence that the guards slept? How could the disciples have moved the stone and kept from waking the guards? Why would the Jews have paid the guards to say the very thing that they tried to avoid in the first place? The whole reason the Pharisees asked Pilate to grant them a guard was to keep the disciples from stealing the body!
This view implies that the disciples knowingly devoted their lives to a falsehood. But, J.P. Moreland points out, “the disciples had nothing to gain by lying and starting a new religion. They faced hardship, ridicule, hostility, and martyrs’ deaths. In light of this, they could have never sustained such unwavering motivation if they knew what they were preaching was a lie” (1987, pp. 171-172).

Enemies Stole the Body

Some might aver that Jesus’ body was stolen by the Jews to keep the disciples from doing so. Hence, they took the body and hired a guard to watch an already vacant tomb. But this is ridiculous. If they stole the body, why did they not expose the disciples’ lie? Instead, they maintained the unprovable position that it was really the disciples who took the body. They never produced the body. What did they have to gain by concealing the most powerful evidence conceivable against the resurrection? Imagine how devastating it would have been for the disciples, had the Jews paraded Jesus’ rotting corpse before the many thousands on Pentecost. Such an act would have strangled the infant church in its crib.

God Stole the Body

One of the most unusual theories regarding the resurrection of Jesus was penned by Charles Taze Russell, founder of the Jehovah’s Witnesses:
Our Lord’s human body was, however, supernaturally removed from the tomb; because had it remained there it would have been an insurmountable obstacle to the faith of the disciples, who were not yet instructed in spiritual things—for “the spirit was not yet given.” (John 7:39.) We know nothing about what became of it, except that it did not decay or corrupt. (Acts 2:27,31.) Whether it was dissolved into gases or whether it is still preserved somewhere as the grand memorial of God’s love, of Christ’s obedience, and of our redemption, no one knows (1912, 2:129).
Obvious problems with this theory are numerous. Not only does it deny the plain teachings of Scripture, but it implies that the disciples’ faith in the resurrection was based upon a falsehood. In other words, they believed the Lord was raised, and had irrefutable proof of it—when in fact He wasn’t. This makes God guilty of deliberate deception.

The Hallucination Theory

Another alternative theory is that the disciples never actually saw the Lord’s risen body—they only imagined they did. However, the biggest hindrance to this view is that many of these eyewitnesses were not easily convinced. Thomas was hardly alone in his skepticism concerning the resurrection. When the women went to the tomb on Sunday they found it empty. Their first reaction was one of bewilderment, not belief (Luke 24:4). Remember the disciples’ reaction to Mary’s incredible report? They had been with Jesus and had no doubt heard Him say many times that He would rise again, and yet Mark wrote: “And when they heard that He was alive and had been seen by her, they did not believe” (Mark 16:11). Jesus later rebuked them for this unbelief (Mark 16:14). They should have expected His resurrection, but obviously they did not. Jesus was also disappointed in the two disciples from Emmaus for failing to believe in the resurrection claims (Luke 24:25). Even at nightfall of the resurrection day the disciples were still doubting (Luke 24:38). The point is this: at first, these witnesses were unwilling to accept the fact of the resurrection.
Had they been predisposed to believe the reports of the resurrection, we might wonder if they simply believed what they wanted to about the matter. On the contrary, here were people who initially were skeptical and required evidence for belief. If they had believed all along that they would see the Lord alive again, then isolated hallucinations might have taken place among the mentally unstable disciples (if there were any). But, hallucinations do not occur in people of stable mental condition (unless artificially induced). Regardless, the empty tomb remains unexplained by this theory.

CONCLUSION: THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE RESURRECTION

If compelled by the evidence to believe the resurrection, what is its relevance? First, the resurrection is the strongest single argument for the deity of Jesus (Romans 1:4). If He was raised from the dead as David prophesied, and as He so often promised, then He must have been deity! If He was not raised, then David spoke of another, and Jesus was a liar.
Second, the resurrection is the foundational principle upon which Christianity is built. Paul linked the reality of salvation to the fact of the resurrection; refute that fact, and Christians are a truly pathetic lot (1 Corinthians 15). Christianity is either the one true religion of the one true God, or it is a farce—the reality of the resurrection determines which.
Third, the fact of the resurrection is the greatest source of genuine hope available in this transient and confusing world. If Christ was raised, Christians will be raised (1 Corinthians 15). Since Christ was raised, He took away the power of death. His resurrection made it possible for Him to keep His promise to prepare a heavenly home for the faithful (John 14:1-4). No one fact offers more hope or assurance than does the truth of the resurrection of Jesus Christ!

REFERENCES

McCord, Hugo (1988), McCord’s New Testament Translation of the Everlasting Gospel(Henderson, TN: Freed-Hardeman College).
McDowell, Josh (1981), The Resurrection Factor (San Bernardino, CA: Here’s Life Publishers).
Moreland, J.P. (1987), Scaling the Secular City (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker).
Robertson, A.T. (1930), Word Pictures in the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker).
Russell, Charles Taze (1889), Studies in the Scriptures (New York: Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society).

Do Natural Disasters Negate Divine Benevolence? by Bert Thompson, Ph.D.


http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=1102

Do Natural Disasters Negate Divine Benevolence?

by Bert Thompson, Ph.D.

Q.

The Earth is plagued with all kinds of natural disasters (tornadoes, hurricanes, floods, etc.). How can these tragedies be reconciled with a supposedly good, benevolent God?
A.
September 21, 1989—Hurricane Hugo strikes the southeastern coast of the United States. Over 25 people are killed, and over $10 billion worth of damage results. One month later—October 17, 1989—an earthquake registering 7.1 on the Richter scale strikes the San Francisco Bay area in California. At least 62 people are killed, and damage estimates are placed at well over $1 billion. August 24, 1992—Hurricane Andrew hits three counties in southern Florida. More than a dozen people lose their lives, and damage estimates are set at over $20 billion. A year later, on September 11, 1992, Hurricane Iniki devastates the Hawaiian islands. At least four people die, and damage is set at over $1 billion. In June 1993, huge portions of numerous states along the Mississippi River and its tributaries experienced the worst flooding in their history. Entire cities were covered with water measured not in inches, but in feet. At least 47 people died, and more than 25,000 were evacuated from their homes.
Do these types of natural disasters represent merely isolated, infrequent events? Hardly. Throughout history, man has recorded many such tragedies. In 526, an earthquake hit the country now known as Turkey and left 250,000 dead. A similar earthquake in China in 1556 killed over 830,000 people. Another quake in India in 1737 annihilated 300,000, and quakes in Central China in 1920, 1927, and 1932 killed 200,000, 200,000, and 70,000 people respectively. In 1889, the famous “Johnstown Flood” occurred in Pennsylvania. The dam of the South Fork Reservoir, twelve miles east of the city, burst during heavy rains. Over 2,000 people were killed, and property damage was estimated to be over $10 million. In 1969, Hurricane Camille killed more than 250 people in seven states from Louisiana to Virginia, leaving behind over $1.5 billion in damage. In 1983, Hurricane Alicia struck near Galveston, killing 21 and causing over $2 billion in damage.
It is rare indeed, it seems, for a single generation in a given locale to be spared at least some kind of natural disaster. Without warning, tornadoes sweep down from the afternoon sky and destroy in a moment’s fury what took decades or centuries to build. Floods cover “old home places,” and remove forever any vestige of what were once storehouses of hallowed memories. In a matter of seconds, earthquakes irreparably alter once-familiar landscapes. Hurricanes come from the sea, demolish practically everything in their paths, and then dissipate as if they never had existed. Each time humanity suffers. And each time there are those who ask “Why?”

THE “WHY?” QUESTION

In the face of disasters such as those described above, there is hardly any question likely to be asked more routinely than “why?” But the question is not always asked in the same way, or with the same intent. Some stand on the charred remains of what was once their home and ask, “why me?”—and mean exactly that. Why them and why now? All they want is to understand the physical events that have changed their lives, and to learn what they can do to correct the situation and avoid a repeat of it. They are not looking to assign blame; they merely want an explanation of the prevailing circumstances.
Others view the destruction around them and ask “why?,” but their inquiry is brief and their response immediate. They correctly view the Earth as a once-perfect-but-now-flawed home for mankind. Rather than their faith in God being diminished by the ravages of ongoing natural phenomena, it is strengthened because they: (a) know that there are rational biblical and scientific explanations for such events; (b) understand that after all is said and done, “the Judge of all the Earth will do that which is right” (Genesis 18:25); and (c) put their faith into action as they work to help themselves, or those around them whose lives have been affected by a disaster.
Still others view natural disasters and ask “why?,” when what they really mean is: “If a benevolent God exists, why did He allow these things to happen?” The implication of their statement is clear. Since these things did happen, God must not exist.

THE BIBLICAL RESPONSE TO THE “WHY” QUESTION

It is not my purpose here to address the “why me, why now?” question that seeks a physicalexplanation as to what kind of swirling wind current spawns a tornado, or what kind of geological phenomena may be responsible for an earthquake. Much has been written on these topics that can provide adequate answers for those willing to research the problem. Instead, I would like to answer the more pressing philosophical questions of why the Earth experiences natural disasters in the first place, and why such disasters are not incompatible with a benevolent God.

Our Once-Perfect-But-Now-Flawed Planet

At the end of His six days of creation (Genesis 1:31), God surveyed all that He had made, and proclaimed it “very good”—Hebrew terminology representing that which was both complete and perfect. Rivers were running, fish were swimming, and birds were flying. Pestilence, disease, and human death were unknown. Man existed in an idyllic paradise of happiness and beauty where he shared such an intimate and blissful covenant relationship with his Maker that God came to the garden “in the cool of the day” to commune with its human inhabitants (Genesis 3:8). Additionally, Genesis 3:22 records that man had continual access to the tree of life that stood in the garden, the fruit of which would allow him to live forever.
The peacefulness and tranquillity of the first days of humanity were not to prevail, however. In Genesis 3—in fewer words than an average sportswriter would use to discuss a Friday night high school football game—Moses, through inspiration, discussed the breaking of the covenant relationship between man and God, the entrance of sin into the world, and the curse(s) that resulted therefrom. When our original parents revolted against their Creator, evil entered the world. Moses informs us that as a direct consequence of human sin, the Earth was “cursed” (Genesis 3:17). Paul, in Romans 8:19-20, declared that the entire creation was subjected to “vanity” and the “bondage of corruption” as a result of the sinful events that took place in Eden on that occasion. Things apparently deteriorated rapidly. Just three chapters later, Moses wrote:
And Jehovah saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And it repented Jehovah that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. And Jehovah said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man and beast, and creeping things, and birds of the heavens (Genesis 6:5-7).
Genesis 6-8 records the global destruction resulting from the Great Flood sent by God as His instrument of judgment. The text indicates that the waters which caused the Flood derived from two sources: (a) “the fountains of the great deep”; and (b) “the windows of heaven” (Genesis 7:11). Water fell for forty days and nights (Genesis 7:12,17), and eventually covered “all the high mountains that were under the whole heaven” (Genesis 7:19). We may only surmise the changes that the Flood wrought upon the Earth. Local floods can cause tremendous damage in very brief periods. Imagine, then, the damage that water covering every mountain fifteen cubits (Genesis 7:20; approximately 22½ feet) must have caused. As one writer has suggested:
The destructive power of flood-waters is evident from what flood waters in recent years have done. They moved blocks of granite weighing 350 tons more than a hundred yards. Boulders weighing 75 to 210 tons have been moved by flood waters only 15 to 20 feet deep.... What vast devastation must have been created when all those forces of the earth worked together; rain gushing down from the canopy above the firmament, earthquakes shaking the earth, many volcanoes erupting and exploding at one time, continents shifting, mountains lifting up, tornados, hurricanes and wild windstorms raging, gigantic tidal waves with crosscurrents and whirlpools raising havoc.... Truly, the Flood was the greatest and most violent catastrophe in the history of the world, with total destruction of all forms of life and of the entire surface of the earth (Sippert, 1989, pp. 78-79).
What were conditions like on the Earth prior to the Great Flood? Numerous biblical scholars have suggested that conditions were radically different than those we see today, and that the Earth was devoid of the many natural disasters that it presently experiences (see Rehwinkel, 1951; Whitcomb and Morris, 1961; Dillow, 1981). Whitcomb and Morris have stated, for example:
This is inferred from the fact that the “breaking-up of the fountains of the great deep” (Genesis 7:11), which implies this sort of activity, was one of the immediate causes of the Deluge; therefore it must have been restrained previously.... Thus the Biblical record implies that the age between the fall of man and the resultant Deluge was one of comparative quiescence geologically. The waters both above and below the firmament were in large measure restrained, temperatures were equably warm, there were no heavy rains nor winds and probably no earthquakes nor volcanic emissions (1961, pp. 242,243).
It is not unreasonable to suggest, knowing the changes caused by local floods, that the global Flood of Genesis 6-8 not only radically altered the face of the Earth, but simultaneously produced circumstances that are responsible for many natural disasters experienced since that time. New, higher mountains and lower valleys were produced by God after the Flood (Psalm 104:6-10). Approximately 71.9% of the Earth’s surface remained covered with water. Temperature changes occurred, producing seasonal variations unlike any before. No doubt other factors were involved as well.
What causes natural disasters on the Earth today? One cause is the vastly different geological and meteorological phenomena now present. Tall mountains and deep valleys may be conducive to localized extremes in weather. The drastically changed components of the Earth’s crust (e.g., fault lines, etc.) give rise to earthquakes. Vast bodies of water, and large global climatic variations, spawn hurricanes and tropical storms.
Taken at face value, then, the wickedness of mankind in Noah’s day (which precipitated the Flood) is responsible ultimately for the changes that now produce various natural disasters. As Brad Bromling has observed:
While we may never know with precision what conditions prevailed between the Edenic period and the Flood, it seems that the weather systems with which we are familiar were largely absent at that time. The fossil record bespeaks a period when the entire Earth enjoyed a temperate climate. This storm-free era most certainly predates the Flood. Since that event, man has been imperiled by tornadoes, blizzards, monsoons, and hurricanes.... Upon whom should we heap blame for the suffering resultant from such weather? Is it fair to accuse God, when He created man’s home free from such things (Genesis 1:31)? In all honesty, the answer is no. Sin robbed us of our original garden paradise, and sin was responsible for the global deluge (Genesis 3:24; 6:7) [1992, p. 17].
One writer concluded: “[T]he cause of all that is wrong with the earth is not godliness but ratherungodliness” (Porter, 1974, p. 467, emp. in orig.). The matter of man’s personal volition has much to do with this. The Scriptures speak to the fact that since God is love, and since love allows freedom of choice, God allows freedom of choice (cf. Joshua 24:15; John 5:39-40). God did not create mankind as robots without any free moral agency. Mankind now reaps the consequences of the misuse of freedom of choice (i.e., the sin) of previous generations. Surely one of the lessons here is that it does not pay to disobey the Creator. In his second epistle, Peter made a clear reference to “the world that then was,” and its destruction by the Flood (3:6). That world no longer exists. Today we inhabit a once-perfect-but-now-flawed Earth. Man—not God—bears the blame.

Natural Disasters and a Benevolent God

The Bible teaches that God is both all-powerful and loving; thus He is benevolent, as love demands. How, then, can He allow natural disasters to occur? Do not natural disasters negate the benevolence of God, and strike at His very existence? In addition to the reasons listed in the section above, I would like to suggest the following reasons why they do not.
First, God created a world ruled by natural laws established at the Creation. If a man steps off the roof of a five-story building, gravity will pull him to the pavement beneath. If a boy steps in front of a moving freight train, since two objects cannot occupy the same space at the same time, the train will strike the child and likely kill him. The same laws that govern gravity, matter in motion, or similar phenomena also govern weather patterns, water movement, and other geological/meteorological conditions. All of nature is regulated by these laws, not just the parts that we find convenient.
Second, some disasters may be the by-product of something that itself is good. In addressing this point, Norman Geisler has noted:
In a physical world where there is water for boating and swimming, some will drown. If there are mountains to climb, there must also be valleys into which one may fall. If there are cars to drive, collisions can also occur. It may be said that tornadoes, lightning, hurricanes, and other natural disasters are likewise by-products of a good physical world. For instance, the purpose of rain is not to flood or drown, but the result of rain may include these disasters. Likewise, hot and cold air are an essential and purposeful part of the physical world, but under certain conditions they may combine to form tornadoes (1978, p. 72, emp. in orig.).
The natural laws that God created allow man to produce fire. But the same laws that enable him to cook his food also allow him to destroy entire forests. Laws that make it possible to have thingsconstructive to human life also introduce the possibility that things destructive to human life may occur. How can it be otherwise? A car is matter in motion, and takes us where we wish to go. But if someone steps in front of that car, the same natural laws that operate to our benefit will operate in a similar fashion to our detriment.
Third, natural laws are both inviolate and non-selective. Everyone must obey them or suffer the consequences. In Luke 13:2-5, Jesus told the story of eighteen men who perished when the tower of Siloam collapsed. Had these men perished because of their sin? No, they were no worse sinners than their peers. They died because a natural law was in force. Fortunately, natural laws work continually so that we can understand and benefit from them. We are not left to sort out some kind of haphazard system that works one day, but not the next.
Those who rail against God because of natural disasters often are overheard to ask, “But why can’t God ‘selectively intervene’ to prevent disasters?” Bruce Reichenbach has addressed this question:
Thus, in a world which operates according to divine miraculous intervention, there would be no necessary relation between phenomena, and in particular between cause and effect. In some instances one event would follow from a certain set of conditions, another time a different event, and so on, such that ultimately an uncountable variety of events would follow a given set of conditions. There would be no regularity of consequence, no natural production of effects.... Hence, we could not know or even suppose what course of action to take to accomplish a certain rationally conceived goal. Thus, we could neither propose action nor act ourselves (1976, p. 187).
If God suspended natural laws every time His creatures were in a dangerous situation, chaos would corrupt the cosmos, arguing more for a world of atheism than a world of theism! Further, as Geisler has remarked:
First, evil men do not really want God to intercept every evil act or thought. No one wants to get a headache every time he thinks against God. One does not want God to fill his mouth with cotton when he speaks evil of God, nor does he really desire God to explode his pen as he writes against God or destroy his books before they come off the press. At best, people really want God to intercept some evil actions.... Second, continual interference would disrupt the regularity of natural law and make life impossible. Everyday living depends on physical laws such as inertia or gravity. Regular interruption of these would make everyday life impossible and a human being extremely edgy! Third, it is probable that chaos would result from continued miraculous intervention. Imagine children throwing knives at parents because they know they will be turned to rubber, and parents driving through stop signs, knowing God will create crash-protection air shields to avert any ensuing collisions. The necessary intervention would finally grow in proportions that would effectively remove human freedom and responsibility (1978, p. 75, emp. in orig.).
How, then, exactly, would the unbeliever suggest that an understandable, dependable world be created, and operated, other than the way ours presently is? How could natural disasters be prevented, while maintaining natural laws and human freedom?

CONCLUSION

Those who suggest that the existence of a benevolent God is impossible as a result of “natural evil” often call for a better world than this one. But they cannot describe the details necessary for its creation and maintenance. When—in an attempt to “improve” it—they begin to “tinker” with the actual world around them, they invariably find themselves worse off.
Instead of blaming God when tragedies such as natural disasters strike, we need to turn to Him for strength, and let tragedies, of whatever nature, remind us that this world was never intended to be a final home (Hebrews 11:13-16). Our time here is temporary (James 4:14), and with God’s help we are able to overcome whatever comes our way (Romans 8:35-39; Psalm 46:1-3). In the end, the most important question is not, “Why did this happen to me?,” but instead, “How can I understand what has happened, and how am I going to react to it?” With Peter, the faithful Christian can echo the sentiment that God, “ who called you unto his eternal glory in Christ, after that ye have suffered a little while, shall himself perfect, establish, strengthen you. To him be the dominion for ever and ever” (1 Peter 5:10).

REFERENCES

Bromling, Brad T. (1992), “Who Sent the Hurricane?,” Reasoning from Revelation, 4:17, Semptember.
Dillow, Joseph C. (1982), The Waters Above (Chicago, IL: Moody).
Geisler, Norman L. (1978), The Roots of Evil (Grand Rapids MI: Zondervan).
Porter, Walter L. (1974), “Why Do the Innocent Suffer?,” Firm Foundation, 91[30]: 467,475, July 23.
Rehwinkel, A.M. (1951), The Flood (St. Louis, MO: Concordia).
Reichenbach, Bruce (1976), “Natural Evils and Natural Laws,” International Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 16.
Sippert, Albert (1989), From Eternity to Eternity (North Mankato, MN: Sippert Publishing).
Whitcomb, John C. and Henry M. Morris (1961), The Genesis Flood (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker).

From Whence Came Morals? by Eric Lyons, M.Min.


http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=2121

From Whence Came Morals?

by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

“[E]volutionary psychologists believe they are closing in on one of the remaining mysteries of life, the universal ‘moral law’ that underlies our intuitive notions of good and evil.” Such were the words of Newsweek senior editor Jerry Adler in his article, titled “The New Naysayers” (2006).
It has long been understood that morality exists (see Taylor, 1945, p. 83). Even the most renowned atheists have admitted such (see Simpson, 1967, p. 346): there is good and there is evil; there is right and there is wrong. Different people draw the moral line at different places, but “they all agree that there is such a line to be drawn” (Taylor, 1945, p. 83). Why?
Why are humans moral beings if, as evolutionists teach, we merely evolved from lifeless, mindless, unconscious matter over billions of years? Why do humans feel a sense of “ought” to help the poor, weak, and oppressed if we simply evolved by the natural law of “might makes right” (i.e., survival of the fittest)? Adler highlighted Richard Dawkins in his “New Naysayers” article as one of three scholars who “argue that atheism is smarter” (2006, p. 47). Apparently, one example of atheism’s superiority comes from evolutionists’ new explanation for morality, which they describe as “one of the remaining mysteries of life” (p. 48). According to Adler,
Dawkins attempts to show how the highest of human impulses, such as empathy, charity and pity, could have evolved by the same mechanism of natural selection that created the thumb. Biologists understand that the driving force in evolution is the survival and propagation of our genes. They may impel us to instinctive acts of goodness...even when it seems counterproductive to our own interests—say, by risking our life to save someone else. Evolutionary psychology can explain how selfless behavior might have evolved (pp. 48-49, emp. added).
And what exactly are these explanations? (1) “The recipient [of our acts of goodness—EL] may be a blood relation who carries some of our own genes.” (2) “Or our acts may earn us future gratitude, or reputation for bravery that makes us more desirable as mates.” (3) “The impulse for generosity must have evolved while humans lived in small bands in which almost everyone was related, so that goodness became the default human aspiration” (p. 49).
There you have it—atheism’s “smarter” explanations for morality. Although the “driving force” of evolution—natural selection—runs contrariwise to such moral, human impulses as empathy, charity, and pity, now we are told it “may impel us to instinctive acts of goodness...even when it seems counterproductive to our own interests” (p. 48). In summary, our sense of moral “oughtness” allegedly comes (1) from wanting to pass on our genes, (2) from a desire to be a hero and gain popularity, and/or (3) by default.
In actuality, “smarter” atheism is as foolish as ever (Psalm 14:1; 1 Corinthians 1:25). The desire to pass on one’s genes or to be a hero fails to explain the origins of human morality. When a person sees an unfamiliar child hanging from a six-story balcony and feels compelled to save that child from death (even though no one is watching), that sense of moral obligation must be explained in some way other than evolution. When a person is compelled to spend valuable time, money, and energy to help a poor stranger survive, even though such action may mean risking injury or death, naturalistic explanations simply will not do. To say, “goodness became the default human aspiration” is simply a copout for lacking an adequate naturalistic explanation.
Morality exists and makes sense only if there is a God, because only God could have created it. If all naturalistic explanations for the existence of morality have been shown to be inadequate, by default, the only logical explanation must be Supernatural (i.e., God).

REFERENCES

Adler, Jerry (2006), “The New Naysayers,” Newsweek, September 11, pp. 47-49.
Simpson, George Gaylord (1967), The Meaning of Evolution (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press), revised edition.
Taylor, A.E. (1945), Does God Exist? (London: Macmillan).

Hidden Hittites by Kyle Butt, M.Div.


http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=13&article=888

Hidden Hittites

by Kyle Butt, M.Div.

Almost fifty times in the Old Testament, we can read about a people known as the Hittites. They were major players in Jewish history, and were listed as one of the nations that the children of Israel needed to conquer when entering the Promised Land (Joshua 11:3-4). Also, King David had among his army a valiant Hittite named Uriah, who was murdered by David because the king had committed adultery with his wife, Bathsheba. Without a doubt, the Old Testament frequently mentions the Hittites as a very real group of people. But for many years in secular history and in archaeology, the Hittites were as invisible as men from Mars. No solid archaeological evidence could be found that verified the existence of the Hittites. For this reason, many people scorned the biblical record and insisted that the absence of information concerning the Hittites proved that the Bible was filled with incorrect material.
However, the year 1906 saw many people changing their minds about both the Hittites and the Bible. An archaeologist, Hugo Winckler, visited a city in Turkey named Boghaz-Köy. Upon excavating portions of the city, he found a breathtaking number of human artifacts—including five temples, many sculptures, and a fortified castle. But more important, he found a huge storeroom filled with over 10,000 clay tablets. After completing the difficult task of deciphering the tablets, it was announced to the world that the Hittites had been found. The sight at Boghaz-Köy had been the Hittite capital city, Hattusha (see Price, 1997, p. 83).
All the people who had used the absence of archaeological evidence about the Hittites to mock the Bible’s accuracy were shamefaced and silent, and another small piece of evidence was added to the ever-growing mass of facts verifying the Bible’s accuracy.

REFERENCES

Price, Randall (1997), The Stones Cry Out (Eugene OR: Harvest House).

M.C.... "THE BOOK OF JOB" Introduction


                           "THE BOOK OF JOB"

                              Introduction

The Book of Job has long been praised as a masterpiece of literature.
Consider these quotes:

   "Tomorrow, if all literature was to be destroyed and it was left to
   me to retain one work only, I should save Job." (Victor Hugo)

   "...the greatest poem, whether of ancient or modern literature."
   (Tennyson)

   "The Book of Job taken as a mere work of literary genius, is one of
   the most wonderful productions of any age or of any language."
   (Daniel Webster)

What is it about the book that prompts such praise?  Most Christians I
know don't feel that way about the Book of Job.  Perhaps it is because
many tend to neglect the Old Testament altogether.  Yet Paul wrote of
the value of the Old Testament scriptures:

   For whatever things were written before were written for our
   learning, that we through the patience and comfort of the
   Scriptures might have hope. (Ro 15:4)

Note that the Old Testament was written for our learning, that it
provides patience and comfort, and as such can be a source of hope.
This is especially true with the story of Job, to whom James referred
when seeking to instill patience (cf. Jm 5:10-11). Because the Book of
Job is so often neglected, yet presents a valuable lesson and is so
highly praised by even people of the world, Christians should certainly
take the time to study this portion of God's Word!

THE PLACE OF JOB IN THE OLD TESTAMENT:  Job is the first of five books
commonly referred to as "The Books Of Poetry".  These include Job,
Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Solomon.  Called such
because they are written in poetic style in contrast to the narrative
style of most other books, they are also often referred to as "Wisdom
Literature" (especially Job, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes).  Oswald
Chambers (1874-1917) offered this concise summary of the five books:

   * Job - How to suffer

   * Psalms - How to pray

   * Proverbs - How to act

   * Ecclesiastes - How to enjoy

   * Song of Solomon - How to love

Now let's take a look at the Book of Job in particular...

AUTHOR AND DATE OF WRITING:  Who wrote the book, and when?  No one
really knows.  Jewish tradition attributes the book to Moses, and other
authors have been suggested (Job, Elihu, Solomon, Isaiah, Hezekiah, and
Baruch, Jeremiah's scribe).  "All that can be said with certainty is
that the author was a loyal Hebrew who was not strictly bound by the
popular creed that assumed suffering was always the direct result of
sin" (Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown).  Because the author is unknown,
it's date has been hotly debated among scholars.  Some think it was
written before Moses (pre 1500 B.C.).  Others put it at the time of
Solomon (ca. 900 B.C.), and some even as late as the Babylonian Exile
or later (post 600 B.C.).

The uncertainty of author and date does not nullify the book's
inspiration, for it is affirmed in the New Testament.  Paul quotes from
it on several occasions in his writings (cf. 1Co 3:19 with Job 5:13;
and Ro 11:35 with Job 41:11).  For the Christian who accepts the
inspiration of the New Testament, such evidence is sufficient.

THE HISTORICITY OF THE BOOK:  Even though inspired, are we to take the
events described in it as historically true?  There are several reasons
for believing that they are:

   * The style of the opening and close of the book certainly conform
     to other Biblical narratives that are historical (cf. 1:1 with
     1Sa 1:1 and Lk 1:5).

   * In Ezekiel 14:14, Job is mentioned along with Noah and Daniel,
     two other figures of history.

   * James, the Lord's brother, refers to Job as an example of
     perseverance (Jm 5:11).

THE SETTING OF THE BOOK:  The historical events appear to be set in
the "Patriarchal" period (i.e., sometime between Noah and Moses). There
are no allusions to the Law of Moses in the book, but there is a
mention of a flood (22:16). Job functions as a priest in offering
sacrifices for his family (1:5), similar to what we find with Abraham
(cf. Gen 12:7).  His longevity is typical of the patriarchs (42:16;
cf. Gen 11:22-26,32).  For such reasons I would place him somewhat
contemporary with Abraham (i.e., ca 2000 B.C.).

THE PURPOSE OF THE BOOK:  It is common to suggest that the purpose of
the book is to answer the age-old question, "Why does God allow the
righteous to suffer?"  That is certainly the question Job raises, but
it is worthy to note that he himself never receives a direct answer.
Nor is one given by the author, other than to answer Satan's challenge,
"Does Job fear God for nothing?".  We are privileged to know of the
challenge of Satan, and that God allows Job to suffer in answer to that
challenge, but Job is never told of this.  Therefore, I suggest that
the purpose of the book is:

    To answer the question, "How should the righteous suffer?"

While Job's questions and complaints often come close to charging God
with wrong, he never crosses the line and humbly submits to God when
told that the answers to his questions are beyond his ability to
understand.  Thus the book shows us how the righteous should bear up
under suffering ("You have heard of the perseverance of Job" - Jm 5:
11)

SOME LESSONS FROM THE BOOK:  In his study on the book (The Book Of
Job, Quality Pub.), Wayne Jackson offers the following lessons to be
gleaned:

   * The book defends the absolute glory and perfection of God - It
     sets forth the theme echoed in Ps 18:3 ("I will call upon the
     Lord, who is worthy to be praised").  God is deserving of our
     praise simply on the basis of who He is, apart from the blessings
     He bestows.  Satan denied this (1:9-11), but Job proved him
     wrong (1:20-22; 2:10).

   * The question of suffering is addressed - Why do we suffer?  Who
     or what causes it?  Why doesn't God do something?  Not all
     questions are answered, but some important points are made:

     - Man is unable to subject the painful experiences of human
       existence to a meaningful analysis - God's workings are
       beyond man's ability to fathom.  Man simply cannot tie all
       the "loose ends" of the Lord's purposes together.  We must
       learn to trust in God, no matter the circumstances.

     - Suffering is not always the result of personal sin - The
       erroneous conclusion drawn by Job's friends is that suffering
       is always a consequence of sin.  Job proves this is not the
       case.

     - Suffering may be allowed as a compliment to one's spirituality
       - God allowed Job to suffer to prove to Satan what kind of man
       he really was.  What confidence God had in Job!

   * The book paints a beautiful picture of "patience" - The Greek word
     is "hupomone", which describes the trait of one who is able to
     abide under the weight of trials.  From the "patience of Job", we
     learn that it means to maintain fidelity to God, even under great
     trials in which we do not understand what is happening.

   * The book also prepares the way for the coming of Jesus Christ!
     - His coming is anticipated in several ways.  Job longs for a
     mediator between him and God (9:33; 33:23), and Jesus is one
     (1Ti 2:5).  Job confessed his faith in a Redeemer who would one
     day come (19:25); Christ is that Redeemer (Ep 1:7)!

BRIEF OUTLINE (adapted from Warren Wiersbe)

I. JOB'S DISTRESS (1-3)

   A. HIS PROSPERITY (1:1-5)

   B. HIS ADVERSITY (1:6-2:13)

   C. HIS PERPLEXITY (3)

II. JOB'S DEFENSE (4-37)

   A. THE FIRST ROUND (4-14)
      1. Eliphaz (4-5)_Job's reply (6-7)
      2. Bildad (8)_Job's reply (9-10)
      3. Zophar (11)_Job's reply (12-14)

   B. THE SECOND ROUND (15-21)
      1. Eliphaz (15)_Job's reply (16-17)
      2. Bildad (18)_Job's reply (19)
      3. Zophar (20)_Job's reply (21)

   C. THE THIRD ROUND (22-37)
      1. Eliphaz (22)_Job's reply (23-24)
      2. Bildad (25)_Job's reply (26-31)

   D. YOUNG ELIHU SPEAKS (32-37)
      1. Contradicting Job's friends (32)
      2. Contradicting Job himself (33)
      3. Proclaiming God's justice, goodness, and majesty (34-37)

III. JOB'S DELIVERANCE (38-42)

   A. GOD HUMBLES JOB (38:1-42:6)
      1. Through questions too great to answer (38:1-41:34)
      2. Job acknowledges his inability to understand (42:1-6)

   B. GOD HONORS JOB (42:7-17)
      1. God rebukes his critics (42:7-10)
      2. God restores his wealth (42:11-17)

REVIEW QUESTIONS FOR THE INTRODUCTION

1) What are Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Solomon,
   often called?
   - Books of Poetry
   - Wisdom Literature

2) Who wrote the book, and when?
   - We do not know

3) What evidence is there that this book describes an event that
   actually occurred?
   - It both starts and ends like other books of history in the Old
     Testament
   - Job is included with Noah and Daniel, as figures of history, in
     Ezek 14:14
   - James refers to the example of Job in teaching on perseverance
     (Jm 5:11)

4) In what historical time frame is the story of Job possibly set?
   - During the period of the patriarchs, perhaps contemporary with
     Abraham

5) What is the purpose of this book, as suggested in the introduction?
   - To answer the question, "How should the righteous suffer?"

6) According to the outline suggested above, what are the three main
   divisions of the book?
   - Job's Distress (1-3)
   - Job's Defense (4-37)
   - Job's Deliverance (38-42)


Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2015

eXTReMe Tracker 

M.C.... "THE BOOK OF JOB" Prologue - Job Is Tested (1-2)


                           "THE BOOK OF JOB"

                     Prologue - Job Is Tested (1-2)

OBJECTIVES IN STUDYING THIS SECTION

1) To see the stage set for the "great controversy" that will occur
   between Job and his friends

2) To consider the challenge that Satan made concerning Job; would God
   have as much confidence in our faithfulness?

3) To appreciate the integrity of Job in the midst of his great
   suffering

SUMMARY

The first two chapters set the stage for the great controversy that
will take place between Job and his friends, which is precipitated by a
controversy between God and Satan.  We are first introduced to Job in
the land of Uz (likely Edom, SE of the Dead Sea, cf. Jer 25:20-21; Lam
4:21).  A man of remarkable character, he was blessed with a large
family and many possessions.  As an example of his piety, mention is
made of his sacrifices in behalf of his children (1:1-5).

We then learn of the controversy between God and Satan concerning Job.
On an occasion when Satan came before the Lord, God asked him whether 
he had considered His faithful servant, Job.  Satan responded with an 
attack on Job's character, that his fear of God was only because God
blessed him.  Satan then said that Job would curse God if everything he
had was taken away.  In response, God put all that Job had in Satan's
power, with the exception of Job himself (1:6-12).

In one day, then, Job lost all his material possessions through various
calamities.  His sons and daughters, also, were killed when a great
tornado destroyed the house in which they were partying.  Though deeply
grieved, Job worships God and does not charge Him with wrong (1:13-22).

When Satan appeared before God again, the Lord asked whether he had
considered how Job had remained faithful despite his losses.  Satan
then made another challenge, saying that Job would curse God if he
himself were harmed.  God then allowed Satan power over Job, but only
up to the point of actually taking his life.  With such power, Satan
strikes Job with painful boils (cf. 2:7-8; 7:5; 30:30) over his entire
body.  Job's wife lost what faith she might have had, and told him to
curse God and die.  Job, however, refuses to sin with his lips
(2:1-10).

At this point, three of Job's friends (Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar)
come to mourn and try to comfort him.  However, they are shocked when
they see Job (whom they did not recognize because of the boils), and
sit dumbfounded for seven days and nights without a word in reaction to
the magnitude of his grief (2:11-13).

OUTLINE

I. THE PERSON AND CHARACTER OF JOB (1:1-5)
 
   A. HE LIVED IN THE LAND OF UZ...
      1. Somewhere in the East (cf. 1:3)
      2. Near a desert (1:19)
      3. Likely the land of Edom, SE of the Dead Sea (Jer 25:20-21; Lam 4:21)

   B. A MAN OF REMARKABLE CHARACTER...
      1. Blameless and upright
      2. Feared God
      3. Shunned evil
      -- "There is none like him on the earth." (1:8)

   C. A MAN GREATLY BLESSED...
      1. With a family of seven sons and three daughters
      2. With 7000 sheep, 3000 camel, 500 yoke of oxen, 500 female 
         donkeys
      3. With a large household
      -- "this man was the greatest of all the people of the East"

   D. THE SPIRITUAL LEADER OF HIS FAMILY...
      1. His sons liked to "party"
      2. Yet Job sought to sanctify them and offer burnt sacrifices

II. SATAN ATTACKS JOB'S CHARACTER (1:6-12)

   A. SATAN APPEARS BEFORE GOD...
      1. When the "sons of God" (angels?) came before God
      2. After Satan had been "going to and fro on the earth" (cf. 1 Pe 5:8)

   B. GOD ASKS SATAN ABOUT JOB...
      1. "Have you considered my servant Job?"
      2. A man of remarkable character

   C. SATAN'S ACCUSATION CONCERNING JOB...
      1. "Does Job fear God for nothing?"
         a. Does Job fear God selflessly?
         b. Does he not do it because of what he gets out of it?
            1) I.e., Job is simply self-centered
            2) By implication, God is not worthy to be praised on His 
               merits alone
         c. Stop blessing Job, and he will curse God!
      2. By such a test, Satan seeks to prove:
         a. There is no such thing as unselfish piety
         b. Men do right only when it is profitable to do so
         c. God is not worthy of service on the basis of His nature 
            alone
      -- Therefore Satan is not only accusing Job, but God as well!

   D. GOD ACCEPTS THE CHALLENGE...
      1. He allows Job to be severely tried, but Satan cannot harm his
         person
      2. What God is trying to prove:
         a. There is such a thing as "noncovetous righteousness"
         b. There are people with a true devotion to God Almighty
            1) For Who He is
            2) Not for what they can get out of it

III. THE FIRST SERIES OF JOB'S MISFORTUNES (1:13-22)

   A. JOB'S LOSSES IN ONE DAY...
      1. His oxen, donkeys, and their servants to Sabean raiders
      2. His sheep and their servants to "fire from God from heaven"
      3. His camel and their servants to Chaldean raiders
      4. His sons and daughters are killed in a tornado

   B. JOB'S REACTION TO THESE LOSSES...
      1. He mourns, of course
         a. Tears his robe
         b. Shaves his head
         c. Falls to the ground
      2. But then he worships!
         a. In grief, he still praises God
         b. Even though he considers God as the One who has done all 
            these things
            1) He blesses the name of the Lord
            2) He does not charge God with wrong

IV. SATAN ATTACKS JOB'S CHARACTER A SECOND TIME (2:1-6)

   A. SATAN APPEARS BEFORE GOD AGAIN...
      1. The Lord asked Satan, "Have you considered my servant Job...?"
      2. Despite punished without cause, "He still holds fast to his
         integrity"

   B. SATAN CLAIMS THE TEST HAS NOT BEEN SEVERE ENOUGH...
      1. "...touch his bone and his flesh, and he will curse You to 
         Your face!"
      2. God accepts the challenge, allowing Satan to do anything but
         take Job's life

V. THE SECOND SERIES OF JOB'S MISFORTUNES (2:7-10)

   A. JOB IS AFFLICTED WITH A TERRIBLE DISEASE...
      1. Possibilities:  elephantiasis, leprosy, or a leukemia of the 
         skin
      2. Characterized by:
         a. Boils (2:7)
         b. Itching (2:8)
         c. Drastic change of appearance (2:12)
         d. Worms and running sores (7:5)
         e. Corroding bones and gnawing pain (30:17)
         f. Blackened skin and fever (30:30)
      3. The indication is that this horrible condition continued for 
         months (7:3; 29:2)

   B. JOB'S WIFE LOSES FAITH...
      1. She calls upon him to "curse God and die"
      2. Several conclusions might be drawn:
         a. Job's wife was not of the same spiritual caliber as Job
         b. To a degree, she endorsed Satan's accusation that God is 
            not worthy of service when things are bad
         c. She labored under the delusion that death ended it all
      3. Job's response to his wife further illustrates his faith in 
         God

VI. THE ARRIVAL OF JOB'S FRIENDS (2:11-13)

   A. ELIPHAZ THE TEMANITE...
      1. Perhaps the oldest, certainly the most prominent of the three
      2. His name is of Edomite origin
         a. One of Esau's sons was named Eliphaz (Gen 36:15)
         b. From Teman, a city of Edom, known for its wise men (Jer 49:7; Ob 8,9)

   B. BILDAD THE SHUHITE...
      1. Not much know about him
      2. May have been a descendent of Shuah, son of Abraham and 
         Keturah, who lived in the "east" (Gen 25:2,6)

   C. ZOPHAR THE NAAMATHITE...
      1. Little is known of him
      2. May have been from Naamah, a city "toward the border of Edom
         in the South" (Josh 15:21,41)

   D. THEIR ARRIVAL...
      1. They came to mourn with him, and to comfort him
      2. At first they did not recognize Job
      3. So overwhelmed at the sight of Job and his grief...
         a. They cried out and tore their robes
         b. They sprinkled ashes on their heads
         c. They say down and remained speechless for seven days and 
            nights

REVIEW QUESTIONS FOR THIS SECTION

1) Where did Job live?  What country might that have been? (1:1)
   - Uz; the land of Edom

2) How is Job described regarding his character? (1:1)
   - Blameless and upright, one who feared God and shunned evil

3) How many children did he have? (1:2)
   - Seven sons and three daughters

4) What were his possessions? (1:3)
   - 7000 sheep, 3000 camels, 500 yoke of oxen, 500 female donkeys, a 
     very large household

5) What did Job do whenever his sons would throw a party? (1:4-5)
   - Sanctify them and offer burnt offerings

6) What was Satan's accusation to God concerning Job? (1:9)
   - Does Job fear God for nothing?

7) What was Satan's initial challenge to God concerning Job? (1:11)
   - Destroy what Job has, and he will curse God to His face

8) What did God allow Satan to do? (1:12)
   - Destroy all that Job had, but not lay a hand on his person

9) What did Job lose in one day? (1:13-19)
   - All his possessions, and his sons and daughters

10) What was Job's reaction to this great lose? (1:20-21)
   - Tore his robe, shaved his head, fell to the ground and worshipped
     God
   - "Naked came I from my mother's womb, and naked shall I return 
     there. The Lord gave, and the Lord has taken away; Blessed be the
     name of the Lord."

11) What was Satan's second challenge to God concerning Job? (2:5)
   - Touch his bone and flesh, and Job will curse God to His face

12) What did God allow Satan to do? (2:6)
   - Whatever he wanted, up to the point of killing Job

13) With what did Satan afflict Job? (2:7)
   - Painful boils from head to toe

14) What did Job's wife want him to do? (2:9)
   - To curse God and die

15) What did Job ask his wife? (2:10)
   - "Shall we indeed accept good from God, and shall we not accept
     adversity?"

16) What three friends came to mourn with him, and to comfort him?
    (2:11)
   - Eliphaz the Temanite
   - Bildad the Shuhite
   - Zophar the Naamathite

17) How did they react when they saw Job? (2:12-13)
   - Lifted their voices and wept, tore their robes, sprinkled dust on
     their heads
   - Sat with him speechless for seven days and nights

18) What summary statements are made of Job in response to his
    suffering? (1:22; 2:10)
   - In all this Job did not sin nor charge God with wrong
   - In all this Job did not sin with his lips

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2015

eXTReMe Tracker