“For God is not a God of confusion but of peace.” 1 Corinthians 14:33a
This passage is one I enjoy because it sorts out so much. Paul writes it in the midst of a discourse on spiritual gifts. The difference is that this statement is the proof to that which passed before it. God is a God of peace and order so the worship of God should also be peaceful and orderly. When doing an exposition of the passage we note the context, always. But this statement is not dependent on the context. We know this because Paul uses it as a proof. A proof cannot be dependent on what it proves.
Peace, here, is used in contrast to confusion. The Greek word translated confusion also carries the meanings of tumult and unquietness. God is orderly, not confused or disorderly.
This is in direct opposition to evolution’s theory of the more complex growing out of the less complex by way of random change. This is simply not the way God works. God is a God of peace, not tumult, not confusion, not randomness but order.
Yet evolution is what our children learn. Many schools, whether out of good will or ill, teach evolution. Then our children return home and act “randomly”, seek the “random”, even praise the “random” (“that’s so random”, “he’s so random”). Should we be surprised? Through their entire day the random-god is praised. Review the current cartoons and websites (www.homestarrunner.com). I was helping with the church’s youth group one Sunday and overheard normal girl chat about this guy and that guy. What caught my attention was that one guy was described as “so funny” because “he’s so random”. Now, don’t get me wrong, the unexpected can be funny but the nonsensical and purposeless lacks humor.
So when we continue to accept and endorse teachings like evolution and fail to teach the Christian God of order, we should not be surprised that our children imitate the god they know.
In Dr. Albert Mohler’s latest blog post he reviews the Atheistic ad campaign on the side of London buses. The ads read, “There’s probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life”.
Dr. Mohler’s post points out the feebleness of the argument that God probably doesn’t exist. I’d like to look briefly at the second part – “Now stop worrying and enjoy your life”. This is the conclusion they reach with probably no God in their life. Not only is their argument weak but they fail to see that most of the world, e.g. 95% of the United States, believes that there is some type of god in existence.
In that light I think the atheistic conclusion is actually helpful to Christianity. If the result of there being probably no god is a life without worry [about God] and with self-centered enjoyment then what about those who do believe there is a God and are living their lives without any worry or concern toward Him and with a complete enjoyment of their lives apart from God?
Hopefully a wayward Christian or a person just calling themselves a Christian will realize that they are living like atheists when they have no worry before God and enjoy their lives apart from Him. Hopefully this marketing campaign will raise awareness for people – “Wait, I call myself a Christian and live like an atheist”. Then they can resolve their life before God by trusting that Jesus removed the punishment for all the actions they may otherwise worry about and that they should not live for their own pleasure but should enjoy God and live for Him because of His provision for us in Jesus Christ.
I try to be optimistic. But this story struck me. An east coast lighthouse was lost. Historians assumed it was dismantled and destroyed. It was later found on the west coast.
Often when historians review the New Testament they use today’s standards to do so. If there is a quote in the New Testament then they assume the writer copied down word-for-word the contents of that quote. That wasn’t the standard in New Testament times. There weren’t even quotation marks in the Greek language.
Now I’m not saying that the Holy Spirit would not inspire direct quotes. But in an time when a lighthouse can be lost, it might not be feasible for historians reflecting on a 1900 year old history to hold it to a higher standard than what is held today.