Jon Webb

Anonymous asked: Why has Satan chosen evil? How can anyone chose evil having experienced God's presence?

While the Bible tells us a lot about Satan’s attributes and behavior, it does not reveal in detail the specifics of his rebellion. You pose an interesting question. Wouldn’t the fear and awe inspired by the presence of God Himself prevent any thought of rebellion from entering the mind?

The Bible does not go into great detail about Satan’s rebellion. We do know, however a few key facts about Satan and his angels. First of all, we know that Satan is a created being. Colossians 1:16 tells us that by Jesus Christ “all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things have been created by Him and for Him.” This obviously includes angelic beings such as Satan. Also, Satan must be a creation because he can not be eternal. God alone is eternal, and for Satan to share in this eternality would introduce a duality to Christianity that is incompatible with the Bible.

We also know that Satan, must have rebelled against God at some point between his creation and his tempting of Adam and Eve in the Garden. Since God declared all things He had created “very good,” Satan, a created thing, must have also been “very good” at this point.

There is much debate on passages in Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 that are traditionally understood as referring to the fall of Satan. While these passages prophesy the downfall of earthly kings, many believe that there they may also refer to Satan’s rebellion. It is not unusual for prophetic passages to refer to two events, separated by a great length of time. This is true of many passages that refer both to King David and to Jesus Christ.

If these passages do refer to Satan, we learn a bit more about his character and history. Firstly, we learn that Satan was an unparalleled creation: incredibly wise, and highly privileged. Donald Barnhouse imagined the Satan’s position in heaven like this:

He awoke in the first moment of his existence in the full-orbed beauty and power of his exalted position; surrounded by all the magnificence which God gave him. He saw himself as above all the hosts in power, wisdom, and beauty. Only at the throne of God itself did he see more than he himself possessed, and it is possible that even that was in some sense not fully visible to the eyes of the creature.… Before his fall he may be said to have occupied the role of prime minister for God, ruling possibly over the universe but certainly over this world”

Secondly we learn the nature of his fall. According to Ezekiel 28:15-17, “sin was discovered” in Satan. He became proud because of his high position and beauty. In his incredibly foolish ambition, he wished to displace God Himself, claiming that he would “make himself like the Most High” (Isaiah 14:12-17). As a result he was cast out of heaven.

The covers what we know of the history of Satan’s rebellion. It does not, however, answer your question. Why did such a privileged being, so intimately acquainted with the glory of God, ever choose to rebel against him?

I have only one thought. God’s majesty probably motivated Satan’s sin in the first place. He was jealous of God, jealous of his position, his perfection, and his glory. He lusted after it. He sinned, in the presence of a perfectly holy God. Do I understand it? No. I can say this: God knew that Satan was going to rebel. He knew that Satan was going to tempt mankind. He knew that mankind would rebel just like Satan did. But before He ever created Satan He had a plan, one in which Satan played an important role.

Satan’s rebellion against God truly is foolish, isn’t it? He can’t win. There is no possible outcome where Satan wins. This was as true before Satan was ever created as it is now. And yet he still persists in his rebellion, and he always will.

05/29/12

The Gospel Coalition: 4 Ways to Fight Clean Over Doctrine

It’s the fall semester of the new year at the local Bible college.

Tim and Ted are brand-new, computer-selected, freshman roommates in the guys’ dorm. Tim became a Calvinist about six months ago. He reads Reformed books, listens to Reformed podcasts, talks incessantly about Reformed theology, and just got a “Soli Deo Gloria” tattoo.

Ted is his roommate. He is not Reformed. In fact, he actually doesn’t like Reformed people or their theology. He listens to Southern Gospel music on tape and opposes tattoos of any kind.

It’s going to be a long semester.

Were we to listen in on their conversations (a.k.a. significant disagreements) throughout their short journey together, we would likely hear a number of things loud and clear. First, we would hear two young men equally passionate about what they believe. This is truly a wonderful thing. Second, we would hear that they actually agree on much more than they disagree on. But they usually shout too loudly to hear it themselves.

I am not going to lead us in a chorus of “Love Can Build a Bridge” and say that things like polity and baptism don’t really matter or “love unites, but doctrine divides.” Yet I have seen over the years how Christians get so consumed with secondary issues that the gospel is obscured, the mission is sidetracked, and the body of Christ is injured.

There must be a better way to fight about the things we can’t seem to agree on. Consider these four ways to fight clean over doctrine.

1. Keep the cross at the center of your theological system. I have found it impossible to look up to Jesus and then down my nose at a brother or sister with whom I disagree. A cross-centered theology reminds us to keep the “main thing the main thing” and serves as a helpful compass to navigate the landscape of secondary issues. It also helps us see how much we actually share in common and what serves as the source of unity and hope. When the gospel is the center, everything else becomes appropriately resized.

2. Ask yourself some uncomfortable questions. We all like to assume that we are as cool as ice when the differences come to light, but is this really the case? Ask yourself these questions: What posture do I take in a doctrinal discussion? Do I quickly become agitated? Do I raise your voice easily? How would my wife or those closest to me people describe me during these kinds of situations? Take it a step further and actually ask them. Their answers may surprise you. And help you.

3. Remember that you probably held the other position not too long ago. Nearly all pastors and theologians I know continually refine their theology. Sure, we may have the “big things” down, but some theological shifting is natural as we learn, grow, and age. AIf, for example, if you subscribe to a more Reformed understanding of the “doctrines of grace,” there is a strong chance that you haven’t always stood where you stand now. The way you present your ideas has a lot to do with how they’re received. Don’t be another “angry Calvinist.” We have enough of them.

4. Pursue humility with the same passion that you pursue clarity. This may be the most difficult but necessary pursuit of all. Never forget that studying comes with a built-in occupational hazard: pride. It is so easy to live on the wrong side of 1 Corinthians 8:1b: “Knowledge puffs up but love builds up.” As we seek to be diligent in out study, we should seek to be equally diligent in our pursuit of humility. To this end, I try to devote myself to prayer, re-reading Philippians 2, and reflecting on Jesus’ finished work on the cross. As we see the great humility of Jesus, the Spirit will cultivate greater humility in us as well.

Tim and Ted were great guys, but they fought dirty and both lost. Too often we fall into the same trap. May God give us the grace today to begin fighting a different fight—-with our own sin—-so that we fight clean.

05/22/12

“Toward the end of the meal Jesus took a piece of bread, gave thanks to God, broke it, and said, ‘This is my body which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.’ In the same way he took a cup, saying, ‘This cup is the new covenant of my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.’”

What did Jesus mean by this “new covenant?” His words were an echo of the prophet Jeremiah who had promised a day when the covenant on tablets of stone would be replaced by a covenant written on the hearts of men.

“This is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after these days, says the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it upon their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people…for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.”

The time of the new covenant had come. A new people of God would become possible because of the shedding of his blood in this cup of suffering.

05/20/12

Why am I fascinated by this guy’s attempt to eliminate the entire internet from his life for a year? Because I would probably never be able to do the same. Paul writes for the tech blog, The Verge, and has spend 12 hours a day online his entire adult life. He’s 19 days into his fast and he still hasn’t cheated.

I’m tempted to try this myself. But I won’t.

I know I can quit whenever I want to.

05/19/12

“

We say, “Oh, we’re just sinners. Sinners saved by grace.” You want to get Biblical with the term “sinner”? In the New Testament that term is NEVER used for a Christian in relationship with God. “Sinner” is used for those who are unregenerate and “sinner” is used for those who are backslidden, double-minded. You know what we’re called? Saints. Not sinners. God doesn’t view you as a sinner. Yes, you struggle with sin, but you are not a sinner. You are a SAINT that struggles with sin. There’s a difference. You are not sinners. You are simply saints that are bound with sin in your flesh. But that will be overcome through the blood of Christ.

Jason Cunninghammer. (via faithology)

Deng straight up boss

(via profoundbound)

05/16/12

classyliving asked: And, sorry to be annoying again, but would you say it is more accurate to say evangelicalism came out of fundamentalism?

Annoying? Not a bit! :)

While fundamentalism did come out of evangelicalism, I believe the fundamentalist movement was an important factor in evangelicalism becoming the huge movement it is today. It was the force behind the momentum of early evangelicalism.

05/14/12

classyliving asked: This is a random note... but I saw you had a post on fundamentalism and evangelicalism. I'd say the divide, for some time, was quite fuzzy, but in recent years I'd say most in the fundamentalist camp have jumped into Evangelicalism, which can be said about the SBC, and the divide has grown very wide where they do not look similar at all... or there are churches that would affirm they are both. I say this not to criticize what you wrote but just some thoughts I had.

I think that would be quite accurate. Let’s remember that at first, fundamentalism and evangelicalism were barely distinguishable. It wasn’t until several decades ago that fundamentalism and evangelicalism were seen as distinct and opposing movements.

This split was largely a result of the different ways the two groups applied the fundamentals of the faith to their interactions with culture. So while almost all evangelicals are fundamentalists in the sense that they adhere to the fundamentals, fundamentalism now has extra baggage, an attitude toward the culture and toward other churches. It’s much more than it was back in the 30’s and 40’s.

There is a lot of diversity within both fundamentalism, and evangelicalism. There are evangelicals who avoid fundamentalism like the plague. There are evangelicals who consider themselves to be fundamentalists. There are fundamentalists who like to be called evangelicals. And there are fundamentalists who denounce evangelicals. It’s basically like a Venn Diagram.

I would say that the Southern Baptist Convention has been moving steadily toward that blend between fundamentalism and evangelicalism. So a lot of their churches are very evangelical.

With the Southern Baptists making up so much of fundamentalism, what we have left is basically the Bob Jones crowd and then more militant right wing fundamentalists.

So yes, you can definitely be a fundamentalist and an evangelical at the same time. I would go further than that and say that most fundamentalists are also evangelicals.

05/14/12

“He who receives you receives me, and he who receives me receives the one who sent me….And if anyone gives even a cup of cold water to one of these little ones because he is my disciple, I tell you the truth, he will certainly not lose his reward.”

Am I the only one who finds loving God hard sometimes? At times it’s pretty easy. We think about the sacrifice Christ made for us on the cross, or the thing he did for us, and the emotion overwhelms us. We feel love for God.

But what about when we don’t? What if we don’t feel like we love God? What then?

We love him by proxy. We love him by loving others. When we selflessly give our time and attention to others and love them, we love God.

What if we don’t feel like loving those people either? I have bad days where I really don’t feel like I love anybody. I think C.S. Lewis explained real love wonderfully in Mere Christianity:

“The rule for all of us is perfectly simple. Do not waste time bothering whether you love your neighbor; act as if you did. As soon as we do this we find out one of the great secrets. When you are behaving as if you loved someone, you will presently come to love him.”

I think the two great commandments are inseparable. We are to love the Lord our God with all that we possess. How do we do that? By acting like we do. What does this look like? It is when we love others more than we love ourselves. How do we do that? By acting like we do.

Love is not just a mushy feeling; it is an action that purifies our motives.

05/14/12

(image by Cindy Schultz/Albany Times-Union)

Obama announced he supported gay marriage last week. Romney disagreed quickly saying, “I believe marriage is between a man and a woman.” The nation itself is split almost down the middle on the issue, with about half of Americans supporting either camp.

While I believe that homosexuality is wrong, I also believe that government shouldn’t tell you what you can and can’t do. There are many things that I feel are wrong that I also feel should be perfectly legal. After all, we don’t have laws against adultery, lying, coveting, and the practice of Islam. This is because we do not have a theocracy, but a republic. Laws insure our liberty, to the extent that we do not harm others. They do not exist to make sure people do not sin.

I’m personally glad that our nation practices separation of church and state. Not only shouldn’t the Government interfere with the practice of peaceful religion, but religious groups should not interfere in the working of government. The mingling of government and the religions of man often leads to state religion, something that history proves over and over is conducive to oppression.

Answer or inbox me with your opinion. What’s your take on the legalization of gay marriage on the state or national level?

05/13/12

mynameistopher:

jonathonwebb:

“Believe the whole Bible? Yeah right, if you did that you would be stoning gays. You’re not stoning gays so you’re a hypocrite…it’s amazing how Christians don’t even understand the Bible.” - countless YouTube comments

quoting opponents = argument win?

Apparently this quote is so stupid that no argument is necessary. Problem is, it’s a good point!

It’s a matter of context. The commands in the Old Testament were addressed toward the nation of Israel. We are not the nation of Israel. So we don’t have to follow these commands. This doesn’t mean we don’t “believe” in these laws. They just don’t apply to us.

The maximum speed limit in most cities 100 years ago was 10 mph. Do you believe in these laws? In other words, do you accept the historical reality of these laws? Of course. Do you follow them? No. There is no reason to. The laws have been renewed and replaced. They do not apply to you.

05/10/12

Jon Webb

Questions?

Submit