Redeeming God

Liberating you from bad ideas about God

Learn the MOST ESSENTIAL truths for following Jesus.

Get FREE articles and audio teachings in my discipleship emails!


  • Join Us!
  • Scripture
  • Theology
  • My Books
  • About
  • Discipleship
  • Courses
    • What is Hell?
    • Skeleton Church
    • The Gospel According to Scripture
    • The Gospel Dictionary
    • The Re-Justification of God
    • What is Prayer?
    • Adventures in Fishing for Men
    • What are the Spiritual Gifts?
    • How to Study the Bible
    • Courses FAQ
  • Forum
    • Introduce Yourself
    • Old Testament
    • New Testament
    • Theology Questions
    • Life & Ministry

Why does Jesus say “Go and sin no more” when it is impossible to “go and sin no more”?

By Jeremy Myers
228 Comments

Why does Jesus say “Go and sin no more” when it is impossible to “go and sin no more”?

Go and Sin no MoreA reader recently sent in this astute question:

Why does Jesus tell people to “Go and sin no more” when He knew it was basically impossible for them to stop sinning?

This is a great question, and one that has been cropping up a lot in the comments on this blog recently. For example, check out some of the comments in my post about “How do I stop sinning?” 

“Go and Sin No More” Disclaimers

Before I attempt to answer this important question about what Jesus means when He says “go and sin no more,” let me state two disclaimers.

Yes, I know that Scripture contains numerous passages which seem to teach that sinless perfectionism is possible in this life (cf. Matt 5:48; 1 John 3:4-10). So please … don’t leave a comment below quoting all the text in the Bible which you think I haven’t read. I have read them, studied them, and believe them.  I simply have a different understanding of those texts than you do.

Second, just because I believe the Bible teaches that it is not possible in this life to go and sin no more at all ever again in any way, this is not at all the same thing as telling people to go sin all they want. I believe that Christians can and should stop sinning, but I approach the issue of sin differently than often encountered elsewhere. I think the primary reason God wants us to stop sinning is not because it offends Him, but because sin damages us.

So can we “Go and Sin No More”?

There are two times in the Gospels when Jesus tells people to “go and sin no more.” One is after Jesus healed the man by the Pool of Bethesda (John 5:14) and the other is after He rescued the woman caught in adultery from getting stoned to death (John 8:11).

“Go and Sin No More” in John 5:1-18

What is strange about the instance with the man by the Pool of Bethesda is that the text mentions no sin which had led to his condition. The text simply says he had been there for 38 years (John 5:5). We aren’t told why. We aren’t told what happened. Though most commentators say that the man must have sinned in some way to cause his condition, the text says nothing of the sort.

Bible scholars say, “Well, it must have been some sort of sin which led to the man’s condition, or else why would Jesus say, ‘Go and sin no more or else something worse will happen to you’?”

Really? I have major problems with this. First, if the man had been invalid for 38 years, how old could he have been when he committed this terrible sin which caused God to strike him down as an invalid for the next four decades? I mean, what sort of terrible sin had this child from 38 years ago (or possibly a teenager) committed, which would cause God to punish him in such a terrible way? 

And then, Jesus comes along and say, “Now don’t do that again, or I’ll have to punish you even worse!” 

Does that sound anything like Jesus? Not the Jesus I know. I don’t think that sin led to this man being an invalid for 38 years, and I definitely don’t think that Jesus was threatening this poor man with some greater punishment if he committed that sin again. 

So how then are we to understand Jesus’ statement, “Go and sin no more”?

Well, notice that it is not in the context of healing the man from being an invalid that Jesus says “Go and sin no more.” It is in the context of the religious leaders threatening the man’s life because he had the audacity to carry his bedroll on the Sabbath (John 5:10). Why do I say there were threating his life? I believe there is a parallel in John 5 with something that happens in Numbers 15:32-35.

There, man is caught picking up sticks on the Sabbath, so they arrest him and take him to Moses, who consults God on the matter. God (apparently) tells Moses that the community should stone the man for the high crime of picking up sticks on the Sabbath.

So when Jesus tells the man “Go and sin no more or else something worse might happen to you,” I think he says it with a sparkle in His eye, some satire in His voice, and a head nod toward the disapproving and judgmental religious leaders.

Essentially Jesus tells the man (read the following with soft sarcasm): “Oh no! You carried your bedroll on the Sabbath! How could you do such a terrible thing! You sinner! Stop it! If you don’t, they’re going to have your head.”

Of course, although Jesus was speaking to the man with satirical humor, the situation was deadly serious as well, and Jesus knew it. It was true that if the man was not careful, the religious leaders would try to kill him simply because he carried his bedroll on the Sabbath. In fact, in the very next verses, their murderous rage gets redirected toward Jesus because He is the one who told the man to carry His bedroll (John 5:15-18). The text says they sought for a way to kill Jesus. The “something worse” which was going to happen to the man is now directed toward Jesus.

So was Jesus telling the man to “Go and sin no more”? Well … yes, but it is more like this: “Go and ‘sin’ no more, or the sin police over there are going to kill you.”

That’s how I read John 5:15-18.

Based on this, you can probably predict how I understand John 8:1-11.

“Go and Sin No More” in John 8:1-11

I think John included this incident in his Gospel just a few chapters after the “grievous sin of bedroll-carrying incident” because unlike the carrying of the bedroll on the Sabbath, the woman in this event was truly sinning. She was caught in the act of adultery.

go and sin no moreThe religious leaders are about to stone her to death when Jesus shows up, scribbles in the sand, and when no one is left to condemn her, tells her to “Go and sin no more.”

Most commentators note the connection here with the Levitical law that the punishment for adultery was death by stoning (Lev 20:10; Deut 22:22). Most commentators also point that the Levitical law required that both the man and the woman are to be stoned, but in John 8, only the woman is present. This was not because the religious leaders didn’t know who the man was, for they had caught the woman in the very act of adultery. Where is the man? We do not know.

There is some speculation that this woman was simply the innocent bystander in a malevolent plan by the religious leaders to accuse and attack Jesus (John 8:6). Since John 5:1-18, the religious leaders had been looking for ways to discredit and kill Jesus, and they had now found (or created?) a way in this poor woman. Could it be that her guilty partner was involved in the scheme himself?

It is likely that the woman was actually a prostitute, and the religious leaders saw this situation as a “win-win” opportunity for them. If Jesus did not defend her, then they got to stone a prostitute. Yay! If Jesus did defend her, then they could stone Him too as a bonus.

The plan, of course, didn’t go as expected, and Jesus wrote something in the sand which caused all the men to slink away. We don’t know what He wrote, though there is endless speculation about it might have been.

Anyway, once they have all left, Jesus tells the woman that He does not condemn her (and He is the only one present who could have!), and that she should “Go and sin no more.”

Why? For the same reason Jesus told the man in John 5 to go and sin no more: because the religious leaders were out to get her. Now that they had been rebuffed by Jesus and their righteous activity of stoning a prostitute had been denied them for the day, they would doubtless begin looking for a way to kill her again.

go and sin no moreBasically, Jesus is saying, “My beautiful lady, I am sorry you got caught up in this. They were after me; not you. They framed you to get at me. I want to protect you from them, so please, consider leaving your current profession. They are likely going to seek to frame you again, and the next time, they won’t bring you to me. They’ll just kill you. Neither one of us want that, so go … do something different with your life.”

Clearly, Jesus did not mean that the woman should never sin again in any way whatsoever. He knew, and we know, that this is impossible. He was simply warning her about the danger of continuing in her current lifestyle.

Can you “Go and Sin no More”?

So what does this way of reading these texts say to you and me? Several things.

First, please, please, please … don’t be a religious jackass. If Jesus is the only one who has the right to condemn and judge a person, but He chooses not to (cf. John 8:11, 15), then we all better think twice (and thrice!) before we cast the first stone. Don’t call for people’s jobs, or pray for their house to burn down, or tell them that because of their lifestyle they are headed for hell.

Such behavior looks less like Jesus and more like the religious leaders who sought to kill Jesus.

Second, recognize what sin is (and isn’t). Sin damages our relationship with God and with one another. Sin destroys our lives and causes emotional, financial, physical, spiritual, and psychological harm. The reason God wants us to stop sinning is simply because God wants what is best for us, and sin does not result in God’s best.

Our sin doesn’t cause God to turn away from us, reject us, hate us, or cast us out. Our sin grieves God because He knows how much sin hurts us, and as our loving Father, He doesn’t want us to get hurt.

God doesn’t care about our sin; He cares about us — which is why He wants to help us not sin.

Finally, as I’ve said before, we stop sinning not by trying to stop sinning, but by walking with Jesus and inviting God into the dark places of our life. When a room is dark, you don’t chase away the darkness by talking against it, praying against it, and commanding the darkness to leave. No, darkness naturally recedes when light enters the room. You want to stop sinning? Invite God into it, and watch the light of His love cast out all sin.

God is Uncategorized Bible & Theology Topics: adultery, Bible and Theology Questions, Discipleship, go and sin no more, Jesus, John 5, John 8, sin, Theology of Jesus, woman caught in adultery

Advertisement

What about those who have never heard the Gospel?

By Jeremy Myers
45 Comments

What about those who have never heard the Gospel?

The last couple weeks I have been working my way through dozens of Bible and theology questions which people have submitted through that “ask a question” area in the sidebar. This one deals with the age-old question of “What about those who have never heard?” Here is the question that was sent in:

If salvation was via sacrifices etc (Jews) and then via believing in Jesus; what happens to those outside these two faiths?

There is a hidden question within this question. The obvious question is the age-old dilemma, “What about those who have never heard the Gospel?”

what about those who have never heard the gospel

But the question behind the question is “How did people receive eternal life before Jesus?” The assumption is always that the Jewish people received eternal life through obedience to the Law and following the sacrificial system instituted by Moses.

I don’t believe that anyone ever received eternal life through following the Mosaic Law or through the Levitical sacrificial system. Though many people think the Bible teaches this, it doesn’t.

If we can understand how Jewish people were saved prior to the death and resurrection of Jesus, then we can begin to answer how other people around the world may be able to receive eternal life before they have heard about Jesus.

So how did people receive eternal life before Jesus came to earth? The same way we do: by faith alone.

The Mosaic Law Never Granted Eternal Life to Anyone

A careful reading of the Mosaic Law reveals that there was no such thing as a sacrifice for willful sin. Does this mean then that people back then never sinned willfully? Of course not! They sinned willfully just as much as we do. We often know that what we are doing is wrong, but we do it anyway. It was the same for them.

Since there was no sacrifice in the Mosaic Law for willful sin, what could they do when they sinned willfully? The same thing we do! We depend on God for His grace, love, and forgiveness.

The Mosaic Law and the sacrificial system did not grant anybody eternal life.

People who lived before Jesus received eternal life the same way we do: by faith alone.

One purpose of the Levitical Law was to maintain community standards of health, safety, and well-being before God and before one another. As a theocracy, the Levitical laws functioned much like the laws in a democracy. Today, we have have national and local laws to help maintain order, peace, and security. But nobody thinks that by obeying the speed limit and paying your taxes you get to go to heaven.

sacrificial systemIt was the same for the Israelites. The Mosaic Law was to maintain peace, order, security, and safety. Because Israel was intended to be a theocracy, there were also numerous laws related to the worship of God, but again, these were not intended to grant a person eternal life, but simply to maintain fellowship with other members of the Israelite community.

There were other purposes for the law as well, but I won’t get sidetracked with that issue here. (A new book is coming out by Maxine Armstrong soon which helps shed light on the purpose of the Law… ).

How Jewish People before Jesus Received Eternal Life

Once we understand the purpose and function of the Mosaic law for Israel, we can begin to understand how people receive eternal life, even if they have not heard about Jesus. While I firmly believe the truth of Acts 4:12 that there is no other name under heaven by which we must be saved, I have to argue that at least prior to the ministry of Jesus, people could have received eternal life by believing in God’s promises to rescue and deliver them, even if they didn’t know the name “Jesus.”

In other words, prior to the advent, ministry, death, and resurrection of Jesus, God gave eternal life to people who believed in Him for it. This does not mean that they simply believed that He existed any more than “believing in Jesus” means nothing more than that Jesus existed.

No, to believe in God means to believe that purely by His grace and out of His love, He gives eternal life freely to anyone and everyone who believes in Him for it.

That, I believe, is how Jewish people received eternal life in Old Testament times.

By faith, the Israelites placed themselves in the hands of God to do with as He wished. They did not know the name of Jesus, but they knew some things about God, and they believed what God had said. They believed the revelation that God had given.

But what about non-Jewish people who lived before Jesus?

So if God gave eternal life to the Jewish person who simply believed in Him based on the revelation He had been given, I think it is likely that something similar took place all around the world. I am not saying that if people simply believe what they learn about God from nature that this will be enough for God to grant them eternal life.

I do not think that natural revelation is enough revelation to bring anyone to eternal life.

However, if a person responds positively to the revelation which God has placed in creation and in the human conscience, I believe that God will make sure that this person receives more revelation.

Romans 1 and other biblical texts state that God has revealed certain truths about Himself in nature so that men are without excuse. I think that as people respond to the revelation they have received, God obligates Himself to provide more revelation to them, so that they receive enough revelation from God to either accept the offer of eternal life by faith alone, or to reject such an offer.

This then helps us understand what may be going on to people today who have never heard about Jesus.

What About Those Who Never Hear the Gospel?

So what about those who have never heard? Again, I believe that if they respond to the revelation they have received, God has obligated Himself to make sure they receive more revelation, until they get to the point where they have enough revelation to receive eternal life.

what about those who never hear the gospelNote that this level of revelation might be different for different people of different ages and of different mental capacities.

Note as well that my proposal here says nothing about children who die before they are old enough to understand the Gospel, nor does it say anything about people who are mentally handicapped who can never understand much of anything about the Gospel. Those are related, but different, questions.

How does God make such revelation available to others?

There are a variety of ways in which God can provide further revelation to those who respond to the revelation they have. Some of these forms of revelation are even mentioned in Scripture.

If a missionary is available, God could send a missionary. If a missionary is not available, God could send angels to teach these people, or through the Holy Spirit moving like wind upon the earth, God could simply whisper more revelation to those who are responding to the truth they have received. Then, of course, there are dreams and visions. We often hear reports even today of people who have dreams and visions about Jesus who may have never heard of Him before.

Bottom Line on Those Who Have Never Heard

I fully admit that some of what I have written above is speculative. The Bible is relatively silent about the eternal destiny of those who have never heard. While some people say that all those who have never heard receive eternal life (universalism), I cannot accept this idea.

Others teach a form of Christian reincarnation so that before a person’s eternal life is finally determined, they get to live a life in which they have the opportunity to hear and respond to the Gospel. I reject that view as well.

Then there are some who say that God, in His infinite foreknowledge, looks into the possible futures of a person’s life to see what that person would have done if they had heard the Gospel. This view sounds a bit like that Tom Cruise movie “Minority Report” where people are condemned for crimes they haven’t yet committed.

Some say that God gives people who die without hearing the Gospel an opportunity after death to hear and believe it. This has a bit of merit from Scripture (depending on how you understand Abraham’s bosom in Luke 16:19-31, and the statement in 1 Peter 3:19 about how Jesus preached to the spirits in prison), but again, this view is highly speculative.

The bottom line is this: We don’t know for sure exactly what happens to those who have never heard the Gospel.

But we do know that God is loving, kind, merciful, gracious, and resourceful.

Based on what I know of God, I don’t think it is within the character or nature of God to separate anyone from Him eternally simply because they were unlucky enough to live in an area that didn’t have a Bible. The Bible serves God’s purposes; God does not serve the Bible. God’s work in the world is not limited only to where the Bible is available.

Ultimately and finally, we can do nothing more than depend on the grace of God, that He will do what is right.

What do you think? Weigh in below with your own perspective on what happens to people who have never heard the Gospel.

God is Uncategorized Bible & Theology Topics: Bible and Theology Questions, eternal life, faith, gospel, grace, Jesus, law, never heard the gospel, Theology of Salvation

Advertisement

Why did God wait thousands of years to send Jesus?

By Jeremy Myers
76 Comments

Why did God wait thousands of years to send Jesus?

I have been working my way through dozens of Bible and theology questions which people have submitted through that “ask a question” area in the sidebar. Here is one about why God delayed to send Jesus.

Why did God wait so long to send Jesus?

I have answered similar questions before regarding the apparent “delays” in God’s timetable. For example, we have previously considered the question, “Why did Jesus wait three days to rise from the dead?” and “Why is Jesus waiting so long before He comes again?” Obviously, those questions are different than this particular question, but the answers are similar, which is why I reference them here.

Why did God wait to send Jesus

So why did God wait to send Jesus?

As with many of the Bible and Theology questions I answer, I find it helpful to step back a little bit and get the big picture for this question.

The question is not just about why God waited so long to send Jesus, but about all the seeming delays in the redemptive plan of God. That is, why does God “wait” to do anything?

Why Does God delay in anything?

I mean, if we pray for something, and God knows He is going to give us what we prayed for, why does He sometimes make us wait weeks, months, or even years before granting the request?

There are, of course, a thousand possible answers to this question. Maybe God’s apparent delay had something to do with God’s perfect timing. Maybe God did immediately answer our prayer request, but Satan temporarily stopped us from receiving God’s answer (cf. Daniel 10:12-13). Maybe God was waiting for us to be an answer to our own prayer, and we were the ones who slowed Him down.

There are other possibilities as well, but these go to show that when it comes to delays in God’s timetable, there is really almost no way to know why God does what He does when He does it.

God’s Strange Order of Events

Here is a basic timetable of God’s major redemptive works in history, counting from the fall of Adam and Eve in the Garden.  Note that in between each major event, there are larger periods of relatively uneventful history. (The number of years listed below is based on the the most conservative estimates. Obviously, there are more liberal estimates which extend these periods of time out to tens of thousands of years.)

  1. The Fall of Adam and Eve
  2. Wait 2000 years
  3. The Call of Abraham
  4. Wait 500 years
  5. Giving the Law to Moses at Mt. Sinai
  6. Wait 1500 Years
  7. Ministry of Jesus
  8. Wait 2000+ Years
  9. (in the Future) The Second Coming of Jesus
  10. The New Heavens and New Earth

Obviously, God is not silent and is not inactive during these waiting periods, but this outline of events is simply to show that God’s plan of redemption does seem to occur in small steps spread out over long lengths of time.

Rather than that order of events, we often think it would have been nice for the order of events to follow this outline:

  1. The Fall of Adam and Eve
  2. Wait 20 minutes
  3. The Death and Resurrection of Jesus
  4. Eternal Bliss

Honestly, from a human perspective, this second order of evens would have saved a lot of horrible grief, bloodshed, death, sorrow, and sadness. Nobody would have ended up in hell. There never would have been wars, or famines, or diseases. Adam and Eve would have sinned, Jesus would have immediately shown up to fix it, and that would have been that.

No Flood. No Hitler. No Atomic bombs. No raping of little girls.

That sounds like a much better plan, does it not?

So why indeed was there a delay in God’s redemptive plan? Why did He wait so long to choose Abraham? Why did He wait so long to give His law? Why did God wait so long to send Jesus? Why is He waiting so long to send Jesus back?

Some Traditional Answers to Why God Waited Thousands of Years to Send Jesus

People have often wondered why God waited so long before sending Jesus. Here are three of the more common answers:

1. It only seems long to us

The first answer some provide is really a non-answer. It is one of those pat answers to difficult theological questions which really does nothing to answer the question. It is a Christian cliche: “God’s timing is not our timing.”

Those who use this first answer quote 2 Peter 3:8 which says that with God, a day is like a thousand years, and a thousands years is like a day. So in other words, though it seems like God took thousands of years to send Jesus, from His perspective, it only seemed like a couple days.

Peter’s point is valid in the context, but I don’t think we can say that just because God is not restricted by time, this means that God doesn’t comprehend time, or that God doesn’t care that we struggle with how long His plan takes. I know that this is not what people mean when they say this, but to many, that is how it comes across.

To me, here is how this answer sounds:

“Oh, life is hard and you are wondering why God is taking so long to answer your prayers and set things right? Well, God’s timing is not our timing.”

This is a Christian way of saying, “Life sucks; then you die. Deal with it.” In other words, “Shut up. Nobody cares. Not even God.”

God does care. He knows that although our lives are less than mere breaths before His infinite existence, the years of our life are often full of pain, hardship, trials, burdens, sickness, fear, and sorrow.

2. To teach humanity about the depth of our sin.

If Jesus had shown up 20 minutes after Adam and Eve sinned, we never would have understood the depth and breadth of our sinfulness. Nor would we have understood how desperately we need God. It could be argued that one reason Adam and Eve sinned is because they didn’t fully comprehend how horrible it would be to live life disconnected from God.

Due to the long period of time in which we have wallowed in our sin, we now know — do we ever! — how wicked, evil, and brutal people can be.

One great benefit to this way of viewing God’s delay is that it seems to be supported by Scripture. Over and over again in Scripture we see this cycle:

  1. Human development (e.g., the Law, the Land, Judges, Kings, Prophets, etc.)
  2. Great expectations for human utopia
  3. Greater evil than ever before

I like this explanation, except that it seems like a bit of overkill. Pun intended. Do we really need thousands of years of bloodshed, rape, murder, torture, war, famine, pestilence, and disease to tell us that sin is bad? I don’t know… maybe we do. After all, human history reveals that every so often, people think that humanity has progressed to the point that worldwide peace and prosperity is just around the corner, that human utopia is almost assured. Usually, not long after these rosy predictions of our future are made, humanity enters into one of the most violent and bloody eras of its history.

In fact, you can almost predict future events based on how rosy of a picture is being painted about that future. The rosier the picture, the bloodier the future. (This is one reason I am not a postmillennialist.)

3. To teach the angels about God’s redemptive purpose

This idea comes from 1 Peter 1:12 and a few other verses which seem to indicate that one reason God created humanity and is carrying out His redemptive plan is to teach something to the angels. Nobody really knows what God might be trying to teach the angels that they don’t already know, but apparently, the angels are learning from watching how God deals with rebellious humanity.

Some have even suggested that God’s plan of redemption may eventually include the angels as well! If so, the Bible says absolutely nothing about this …

Anyway, if God is teaching the angels something, then apparently, it takes a long time to teach them.

4. To wait until the time when the Gospel could spread the quickest

Sometimes, and specifically in connection to why Jesus came when He did, some people say it had something to do with the Roman empire. The Roman empire built roads and had a common tongue which allowed the message of the Gospel to spread more quickly and with greater ease than it could have at other times.

God sent Jesus

I suppose in theory, this is somewhat true, but if God was waiting until there was a common language and good lines of communication before sending Jesus, He could have picked no better time than right before humans decided to build the Tower of Babel. There was only one language at the time, and it seems their communication was so good, there was nothing they could not accomplish. That is partly why the text says that God scrambled human communication (Genesis 11:6).

Furthermore, if God was really waiting for the quickest and most worldwide method of communication, He should have waited for Twitter.

Ha! I’m kidding.

Kind of …

Look, when we say that God waited to send Jesus until there was a common tongue and a good road system, what we are also saying is that the only part of the world that God really cared about was the part under Roman rule (Most of Europe, Northern Africa, and Western Asia). The rest of the world did not have access to the Roman road system, nor did they speak the common language of the Roman empire. So are we saying then that God didn’t care about most of Africa, most of Asia, and all of North and South America?

That was why I was kind-of only half-joking when I mentioned Twitter. If God was waiting until the quickest form of communication was available to all the world, then He could have waited until a worldwide system of instantaneous communication was in place … a system much like Twitter.

So anyway, while I do think the Roman road system and common language helped the spread of the Gospel, I don’t think we can say that this was why Jesus came at the time and place that He did.

5. To fulfill prophecy

Then there is the explanation that Jesus came when He did because He had to fulfill prophecy.

There is some truth to this, especially depending on how you understand the prophecy of Daniel’s 70 Weeks (Daniel 9:24-27). It may be that Jesus had to come when He did to complete the prophecy given 490 years earlier.

Also, in relation to this, Paul writes that Jesus came “at the appointed time” (Galatians 4:4). Other New Testament authors say similar things.

While there is truth with this answer, it really doesn’t answer the question. All it does it move the question back. If Jesus came at that time to fulfill prophesy, then why did God prophecy that Jesus would come at that time? Why didn’t God move prophets to predict that Jesus would come a two thousand years earlier … or later? Why then? Why there?

(My! This post is getting long … Let’s see if I can wrap it up.)

6. To wait until human theological development had evolved to the point where we could understand Jesus

One final view is that God waited for so long because mankind had  to develop socially and spiritually enough in order to understand and receive the revelation of Jesus Christ.

This idea is based on the concept of progressive revelation, that God has slowly explained Himself and unfolded His plan and purposes for the world over time. The reason is that we could not understand and grasp it all at once, and so He has had to teach us bit by bit, one step at a time.

God's timing in sending JesusI am teaching my daughters math, and while I know Calculus, I cannot attempt to teach them everything I know about math on day one, from basic arithmetic all the way to calculus. Not only is there not enough time to do this, they would not comprehend most of it, but would instead get overwhelmed and as a result, would not even understand the most basic concepts in math.

So also, this theory goes, God had to slowly teach humanity about Himself and His ways, so that over time, we would grow and develop into the people He wanted us to become.

Progressive revelation is a definite fact of Scripture, but I am a bit wary of this idea, for it seems to fall prey to what C. S. Lewis called “chronological snobbery.” Lewis often criticized other scholars for thinking that just because they lived in 1960, they knew more about how the world worked and what God was like than people who lived in say, 60 AD. Just because we are further along in years, C. S. Lewis argued, does not mean we necessarily know more. We may, in fact, know less.

But, for the most part, I think this view has some merit, and does help explain what Jesus might have meant in John 16:12 where He said He had much more to teach, but could not do so because they were not ready to hear it. Verses like this are everywhere in Scripture (cf. Matt 13:10-13), which seems to indicate that God only provides further revelation after we have incorporated His previous revelation into our thinking and practice (for the most part).

What is my view about why God waited thousands of years to send Jesus?

What is my view on all of this? I hold some strange mixture of all of the above. 

Essentially, I believe that whatever we say about God’s timing in sending Jesus is similar to what we should say about God’s timing in doing anything. There are a variety of answers at any given time, and any action of God can have a variety of explanations.

I know, I know. Such an answer is not neat, pretty, and tidy. But then, life is not neat, pretty, and tidy, and neither is theology. Theology, like life, is a big mess of guesswork and scrambled answers.

While I believe that faith in God includes faith in God’s timing, I am not always sure we can understand God’s timing …

How about you? Which of the answers above is most helpful to you? Which is least helpful? What did I leave out? Why do you think God waited so long to send Jesus for the redemption of mankind?

PS., This post turned out be so LONG (2500 words!!!), I will post something nice and short tomorrow (for my and yours).

God is Redeeming Theology Bible & Theology Topics: 1 Peter 1:12, advent, Bible and Theology Questions, Daniel 9:24-27, Galatians 4:4, gods plan, Gods timing, Jesus, Theology of God, Theology of Jesus, Theology of Salvation

Advertisement

Waving the White Flag Before the Onslought of God’s Violence

By Jeremy Myers
58 Comments

Waving the White Flag Before the Onslought of God’s Violence

RETREAT!!!!!

I give up.

I wave the white flag.

I surrender.

I hang my head in defeat.

I slink off into the woods with my tail between my legs.

waving the white flag

Over a year ago I set out to put a theory of mine down on paper about how to reconcile the violence of God with the self-sacrificial non-violence of Jesus Christ. The theory had been percolating in my mind for over a decade, and I finally decided to tackle the issue head on.

After 100,000 words, I give up.

If you read this blog much last year, it is almost the only thing I posted on… up until October 13. Then the posts stopped.

Why?

Because I hit a road block. A pot hole. A speed bump. A dead end.

What was the road block?

Only one little thing called…

…Scripture.

Most of what I had written was a hypothesis, a theory, about how to reconcile the violence of God in the Old Testament with the sacrificial love of Jesus in the New. My book was called When God Pled Guilty, and I was basically arguing that just as Jesus took the sins of the world upon Himself on the cross, so also, somehow, the violent portrayals of God in the Old Testament is God taking the sins of Israel upon Himself through the testimony of inspired Scripture.

In other words, to the outside observer, Jesus hanging on a cross looks guilty (even though He wasn’t). So also, a casual reading of the Old Testament makes God look guilty (even though He isn’t).

I thought that there were enough hints and clues scattered through the Bible to show that the violent portrayals of God in the Old Testament are really just Him taking the blame and shouldering the responsibility for the bad things that happen in this world which He does not prevent from happening.

I thought I had a pretty good theory going…. until I tried to get the theory to match with the violent portrayals of God in Scripture. I soon found that all my theorizing hadn’t gotten me past the 1 yard line… of my own side of the field. I still had 99 yards to go, and the defense was shutting me down faster than the Seahawks shut down Peyton Manning…. (sorry Bronco fans…. I wanted Manning to win too).

Sigh.

Honestly, I should have seen it coming. Want to know why?

My wife was never convinced.

My wife is the greatest theologian and Bible scholar I know.

She has what I call “intuitive theology.” She doesn’t read a lot of books or spend dozens of hours each week studying… but she always knows more theology than I do, and always asks penetrating questions which shoot holes through all my acadamagician ideas (Yes, I just coined that term… it’s a cross between academic and magician… because that’s what most theology is. We throw some verses in a pot, mix in some fancy Greek and Hebrew and a quote from Barth, mix it up, blow smoke in people’s faces, and then Voila! — A book that everyone must buy!)

Anyway, my wife was never convinced of my theory, and so I should have known it was doomed from the start.

Another nail in the coffin though, was when I was recently interviewed by Drew Marshall (listen to the audio) and when I briefly mentioned this idea to him, he asked if I had been smoking marijuana. Ha!

But aside from my wife and Drew, there are a few other reasons I am abandoning this theory.

1. Occam’s Razor

No, this is not a new razor put out by Gillette (Now with 8 Blades!!!).

Occam’s razor is a principle used in science and other problem-solving fields which states the simplest solution is often right. Specifically (according to Wikipedia), Occam’s razor states that among competing hypotheses, the hypothesis with the fewest assumptions should be selected.

If you did any reading of my hypothesis, you know that it was not simple. It is not a hypothesis with the fewest assumptions. To the contrary, my hypothesis was so complex, so difficult to grasp, and so full of details, I myself had trouble keeping it all straight in my own head!

Heck, I had already written 100,000 words on the topic, and was only about half-way done. (A typical 200 page book is about 60,000 words.)

2. Modern Disasters

A second reason I am giving up is because ultimately, I had no good explanation for the most difficult question of all… which is why bad things happen today. My hypothesis did very little to provide an explanation for this.

In my (abandoned) theory, I argued that the Old Testament portrays God holding back disasters upon people until, as a result of their great evil, they departed from God’s protective hand. I think that this can actually be seen time and time again in Scripture.

But then, what does this mean for the victims of Hurricane Katrina, or the December 26, 2004 tsunami that killed almost 250,000 people? How does my theory explain people like Hitler and Mussolini getting to live so long while they brought incredible amounts of evil upon the world? How comes they seemingly hadn’t departed from God’s protective hand? 

What did my theory have to say to the millions and millions of little girls who are sold into sex slavery to be raped by as many as 40 or 50 men every single day?

Nothing.

Other than that “God didn’t do it,” my hypothesis could say nothing helpful, loving, kind, or hopeful to such situations or such people caught in a living hell.

3. Couldn’t Even Refute the Calvinists

I am actually not that interested in “refuting” Calvinists, but one area of Calvinistic theology which has always troubled me is the insistence by some that since God is sovereign, He is the cause of everything. If you press them, some will say that while God is not the “author” of evil, He is the primary cause behind all evil, sin, and suffering in the world. (For examples, see John Piper’s quotes here and here.)

John Piper slaughter women and children

Calvinists say that everything that happens in the world is because God’s wills it to happen.

So when a family gets in a car accident and the husband and wife escape, but their children die in a ball of flame when the car explodes, their Calvinistic pastor says that while we don’t understand why such things are God’s will, we must trust that God knows what He is doing because everything happens is according to His will. (This really happened, by the way).

The same argument is applied to Katrina, tsunamis, Hitler, and the raping of little girls.

In my opinion, such a god is monstrous, and is not worthy of worship.

But in the hypothesis I was presenting, I was saying that God “inspired” human authors to write negatively about Him in Scripture so that He could take responsibility for the bad things which happened on earth which He did not prevent from happening.

If that is true, then why I am upset at Calvinists for saying that God caused the bad things that they were ascribing to Him? If my hypothesis is true, isn’t saying “God willed your children to die in a burning car while you watched” the same thing as saying, “God sent a flood upon the earth so that everything which had breath died a horrible death by drowning”?

In my view, of course, God didn’t actually do either thing, but also in my view, God is willing to take the blame for that which He does not prevent, so I shouldn’t get too upset when people blame God for the evil things that happen in the world. After all, God apparently inspired some biblical authors to say the very same things about Him!

If God takes the blame for that which He does not prevent, then it is not wrong to blame God for the horrible events which happen in the world which He does not prevent.

This I could not accept.

4. Back to Ignorance

ignoranceLast month I spent several days reading, editing, revising, and arguing with myself about the 100,000 words I had written.

I got the end (which was actually the middle, because the second half hadn’t been written yet), I realized I could have saved myself 99,997 words, and just written, “I don’t know.”

My fancy 100,000 word answer turned out to be little more than a long way of saying, “I have no idea how to reconcile the violence of God in the Old Testament with the self-sacrificial love of Jesus Christ in the New while still maintaining a conservative view of inspiration and inerrancy.”

Yes, I know. Many of you think I should just abandon inerrancy.

I would really hate to do that.

Pray for Me, Please?

Believe it nor not, this is a crisis of faith for me.

I cannot, CANNOT believe that the God revealed in Jesus Christ is the same God who drowns millions, burns cities, and commands His people to slaughter women, children, and animals.

Something else is going on in the text, but I just cannot figure out what.

My wife, with her intuitive theology, says it is something that cannot ever be figured out.

But my brain, which God gave me, cannot live with the tension. Something must give.

I seem to be left with only two options: Either Jesus truly is violent like God and He was hiding this dark side from us during His ministry, or Jesus truly revealed God to us and the violent portrayals of God in the Old Testament are in error.


The day after writing that post, when I was at work, a new thought occurred to me. A key, I’ll call it. It allowed much of the original hypothesis to remain intact, but organized it all around a central thesis which simplified and clarified the entire idea. 

Although… just as I am writing this paragraph… a new thought has occurred to me…. what if? No. It can’t be.

Hmmm….

A brand new theory has just presented itself…

It seems simple…

Memorable…

Elegant…

…Heretical.

Hmm. I better run it by my wife…

If I decide to share it, you’ll be the first to know!

As a side note, many who read my blog tell me that Greg Boyd is coming out with a book later this year that sounds similar to what I was arguing. When I first heard this, I read some of his blog posts and listened to some of his sermons, and honestly, I cannot tell if he is arguing the same thing or not. I guess we will see. Apparently, if the ideas are similar, he has not hit the same road blocks I have… I look forward to reading his book… I think it is called The Crucifixion of the Warrior God.


Note: I wrote the preceding post last Saturday. As you see at the end, in the process of writing the post, a new idea occurred to me. I thought more about it on Sunday, prayed about it, looked at some key biblical texts, and (maybe most important of all – ha!) talked to my wife. She is still not convinced, but she sees promise in the idea. So, I’m back in the saddle again. Hopefully some new posts on understanding the violence of God will be published soon… I am still not sure my new approach has adequate answers to the four problems I stated above, but I think it is a move in the right direction.

God is Uncategorized Bible & Theology Topics: Calvinism, evil, Greg Boyd, Jesus, John Piper, suffering, Theology of Jesus, violence of God, When God Pled Guilty

Advertisement

Is it wrong for Christians to call God “Allah”? You might be surprised at my answer…

By Jeremy Myers
86 Comments

Is it wrong for Christians to call God “Allah”? You might be surprised at my answer…

Call God Allah

Most think of Allah as the god of Islam. And yet there are many Eastern and Middle-Eastern Christians who call God “Allah.” Is this wrong? Recently a reader sent in this question: 

I love your newsletter and also the freedom to comment, so that I can read others people believe too…

Anyway, the reason I sent you this email is that I would like to ask you about something. In Indonesia, there are some Christian people who are trying to tell people it is wrong to call God “Allah.” They say we should use God’s original name, YHWH. The reason they say this is because Allah is the name used by Muslim’s  for their god.

Personally, I do not mind using the name Allah, since I know which Allah I am talking and praying too… I pray to the Allah who sent Jesus to redeem us…

Would you maybe talk about this? Have you heard about this before?


As with most of my attempts at answering theological questions, I want to approach this question somewhat backwards. 

The Traditional Answer is NO. You cannot call God Allah.

The traditional way of handling the difficult question of whether or not it is okay to call God Allah is by comparing Christianity and Islam, and then saying that since the religions are so different, it would be wrong to name the Christian God Allah. 

call God Allah

For example, here is an article where Albert Mohler says pretty much this very thing. Here is a quote:

“If Allah has no son, Allah is not the father of our Lord Jesus Christ…This is no mere ‘discussion and bickering.’ This is where the Gospel stands or falls,” the theologian concluded.

Then there is this informative article which shows all the differences between the God of the Christianity and Allah of Islam. 

In some ways, I am in agreement with those two articles. To say that God can be called “Allah” risks causing a lot of confusion in the minds of many people. There are vast differences between the God of the Christian Bible and the Allah of the Muslim Quran. 

Furthermore, can you imagine asking a Muslim to name their god Yahweh? Of course not! Imagine the outrage! 

Can you imagine asking Muslims to accept the idea that Allah had a son, or became flesh in Jesus Christ? Never! 

So if Muslims know and recognize that Allah and Yahweh are so radically different, isn’t it odd that some Christians are willing to call God Allah? 

This is the traditional way of answering this theological question about whether or not it is right to call God Allah. The traditional answers have a lot going for them.

And yet…. 

My Backwards Way of Answering…

(Here we get into the backwards way of answering this question about whether or not you can call God Allah… you’ve been warned). 

I often think that one of the problems with a lot of theological debates centers not around the various opinions, but in how the question itself is asked. The way a question is asked often frames the debate. 

The question for this debate is asked this way: “Is it wrong to call God Allah”? 

Those who say it is wrong point to all the questionable activities and commands that Allah gave in the Quran. They say that Allah could not have had a son. That Allah could not have become flesh. That Allah is not a Trinity. 

Hmm…

So let me ask the question a completely different way, to see if we can get a different answer. 

Is it wrong to call God Yahweh? 

Before you answer, I invite you to think through all the violent and questionable commands and activities of Yahweh in the Old Testament. I invite you to consider whether or not a Jewish person would think that Yahweh could have a son. I invite you to consider what a Jewish person would think about Yahweh becoming flesh. I invite you to think about what a Jewish person would say about Yahweh being a Trinity. 

Call God Yahweh

If we are completely honest with ourselves (and with the Old Testament text), I think the answer we give to the question “Is it wrong to call God Allah?” should be the same answer we give to the question “Is it wrong to call God Yahweh?” 

Can I put it bluntly? The God depicted in the Old Testament often seems more bloody, devious, and vengeful than any depiction of Allah in the Quran. 

But what about Jesus? What about the New Testament? Jesus looks nothing like Allah!

Yes. that is true. But again, if we are honest, Jesus doesn’t look a whole lot like Yahweh either.  

(I should say at this point that I am currently writing a book about how Yahweh looks exactly like Jesus, but only when viewed through the lens of Jesus dying on the cross. But the book is less than half-way finished… and if I cannot prove the thesis to my satisfaction, I see no way out of the dilemma about how to reconcile the love of Jesus with the violence of Yahweh  other than to say that in some way or another, the Old Testament is wrong in its portrayal of God. Anyway, stay tuned for more about this book…)

Yahweh vs. Jesus vs. Allah

If we can say that Jesus reveals Yahweh to us when Yahweh looks nothing like Jesus, I don’t have too much difficulty saying that maybe Jesus reveals Allah to us as well, even though Allah looks nothing like Jesus. When it comes to both Yahweh and Allah, I would say that there seems to be both good things and bad things about both, but Jesus came to show us what God is really like… and to help us separate the truly divine nature from the blood-bathed human trappings we have clothed God in. 

Does this mean that Yahweh and Allah are the same? No! Nobody can logically make that comparison. Sure, there are a few similarities, but their differences are too vast. 

So while I would never ever ask a Muslim to call Allah “Yahweh,” so also, I would never ask a Jewish person  or a Christian to call Yahweh, “Allah.” 

Is it wrong to call God Allah?

I invite all Christians, whether they are Western, Eastern, or Middle-Eastern Christians, that when they pray to God, they picture Jesus. Why? Because Jesus is the center of our faith and practice, and (more importantly for this question), Jesus reveals God to us!

Jesus says that if we have seen Him, we have seen the Father (John 14:7). Paul writes that Jesus is the image of the invisible God (Col 1:15) and that in Jesus dwelt all the fullness of God (Col 1:19). The book of Hebrews says that Jesus is the exact representation of God (Heb 1:3). 

So if, when you think about God, you picture the God revealed in Jesus Christ, but use the name Yahweh, I have no problem with that. It might be confusing to Jewish people, but we are not asking them to picture Jesus when they talk about ha shem (the way they pray and speak about Yahweh). But if they ask if you are Jewish, you can say no, that you are a follower of Jesus. 

And if, when you think about God, you picture the God revealed in Jesus Christ, but use the name Allah, I have no problem with that. It might be confusing to Muslim people, but we are not asking them to picture Jesus when they talk about Allah. But if they ask if you are Muslim, you can say no, that you are a follower of Jesus.

And if, when you think about God, you picture the God revealed in Jesus Christ, but use the generic name “God,” I have no problem with that either. Most people might wonder which God you are referring to, and if they ask, you can point them to Jesus. 

What are your thoughts on this? Is it wrong for Christians to call God Allah?


Note: After I wrote this post, I decided to search the internet to see what others might be saying about this topic, and discovered, much to my dismay, that violence is erupting in Malaysia because Christians want to call God Allah. I imagine that maybe this is why someone sent the question in to me…

Ironically, this changes my answer somewhat. Though theologically, I stand by what I have written above, from a practical standpoint, I am not sure calling God Allah is worth dying over… If Muslims are offended by us referring to the God revealed in Jesus Christ with the name “Allah,” but Christians feel it is our “right” to refer to God however we want, I echo Paul’s words in 1 Corinthians 6:7: “Why not rather be wronged?”

Of course, having said that, many early Christians were killed and persecuted by Jewish people (Read the book of Acts) because they equated Jesus with Yahweh… but the Christians thought the risk of arrest and death was worth it… And yet, the biblical case for equating Jesus with Yahweh is much stronger than the case for equating Jesus with Allah (there is no biblical case for it).

So what is my NEW final (tentative) answer? It’s this: Follow your own conscience and the leading of the Holy Spirit and the wise counsel from other mature Christians in your local community of believers…

God is Uncategorized Bible & Theology Topics: Allah, Bible and Theology Questions, Discipleship, God, Jesus, Muslims, prayer, Theology of God, Yahweh

Advertisement

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • …
  • 17
  • Next Page »
Join the discipleship group
Learn about the gospel and how to share it

Take my new course:

The Gospel According to Scripture
Best Books Every Christian Should Read
Study Scripture with me
Subscribe to my Podcast on iTunes
Subscribe to my Podcast on Amazon

Do you like my blog?
Try one of my books:

Click the image below to see what books are available.

Books by Jeremy Myers

Theological Study Archives

  • Theology – General
  • Theology Introduction
  • Theology of the Bible
  • Theology of God
  • Theology of Man
  • Theology of Sin
  • Theology of Jesus
  • Theology of Salvation
  • Theology of the Holy Spirit
  • Theology of the Church
  • Theology of Angels
  • Theology of the End Times
  • Theology Q&A

Bible Study Archives

  • Bible Studies on Genesis
  • Bible Studies on Esther
  • Bible Studies on Psalms
  • Bible Studies on Jonah
  • Bible Studies on Matthew
  • Bible Studies on Luke
  • Bible Studies on Romans
  • Bible Studies on Ephesians
  • Miscellaneous Bible Studies

Advertise or Donate

  • Advertise on RedeemingGod.com
  • Donate to Jeremy Myers

Search (and you Shall Find)

Get Books by Jeremy Myers

Books by Jeremy Myers

Schedule Jeremy for an interview

Click here to Contact Me!

© 2025 Redeeming God · All Rights Reserved · Powered by Knownhost and the Genesis Framework