Trusting God in Uncertainty

By Mark McCrary

Life can become burdensome almost every day for some people. The book of Habakkuk wrestles with the sovereignty of God in the face of suffering and injustice. Habakkuk teaches us how to embrace deep, unshakable joy in God, even when our circumstances seem overwhelming.

The Painful Cry of the Faithful (Habakkuk 1:2-4)

Habakkuk begins with a prayer of frustration with the wicked. How could God allow their violence on the poor? Why wouldn't He intervene and save? God’s answer? You haven’t seen the worst of it yet. He would deal with the oppressors in Judah through the Chaldeans (Babylonians) (Hab. 1:6-9).

Three pressing questions arise: Why would a good God allow this? How could a good God allow this? Finally, what would Habakkuk do? Habakkuk’s cry resonates with anyone who has ever felt abandoned in their time of need. He was not turning away from God but earnestly seeking Him.

Here’s the good news: God allows questions, which are a desire for a deeper understanding of His ways. Doubts don’t mean one is unfaithful; they are a testament to deep faith. When we wrestle with our questions, we actively seek a greater understanding of God’s will and character.

God is Still in Control (Habakkuk 2:2-3)

God’s message to Habakkuk is that comfort isn’t necessarily found in the removal of problems but in the sovereignty of God. Either what has come upon us has been put there by God (2 Corinthians 12:7), or it is something God has allowed because of our fallen world: 1 Corinthians 10:13 - God will not allow something in our lives that we cannot, by His power, endure.

This can help us find peace in our struggles. We may not always understand His ways, but we can trust that His plans are for our ultimate good (Romans 8:28). Things are not out of control. God loves you (Romans 8:36-39).

Trustful Responses (Habakkuk 3:17-19)

Understanding that God wants to hear even our questions and that He is in control of everything, what should be our response?

First, maintain your faith in Him.  God declared, “The just shall live by faith” (Hab. 2:4). The idea here is more than simply believing in God; it is acting on what He says. 

Second, verbalize your faith in God.  At the conclusion of the book, Habakkuk wrote, “Though the fig tree should not blossom, nor fruit be on the vines, the produce of the olive fail and the fields yield no food, the flock be cut off from the fold and there be no herd in the stalls, yet I will rejoice in the Lord; I will take joy in the God of my salvation” (Hab. 3:17-18).  Saying something out loud makes it more real and commits you to it. Think of the first time you said, “I love you” to someone else. You probably thought about it a lot, but when you said it, things changed.  State your faith verbally to God, not just in thought. State it to a friend. State it to your faith. Habakkuk's faith and trust were deeply rooted in the character and salvation of God. His joy came from the character of God alone (Hab. 3:18-19), not from external conditions.

Finally, know God will strengthen you.  “God, the Lord, is my strength; He makes my feet like the deer's; He makes me tread on my high places” (Hab. 3:19).  Move past trust.  Know with confidence that God will be with you. Just as a deer nimbly moves along, know that in the midst of your uncertainty, God will give you the strength to do the same. Know.

Habakkuk’s name means “embracer.” He embraced God and trusted in Him. It is okay to question God and hurt when life isn’t as imagined. Trust in the sovereign God. Put your faith and confidence in Him, not in circumstances.

The Son of Man

By Paul Earnhart

When Jesus was speaking to Nicodemus, He spoke of Himself as the “Son of Man.” (Jn. 3:13)  Jesus used this expression many times to identify Himself.

It was an accurate description for He was most certainly human.  He was born of a woman, a descendant of Adam and of David.  At the same time, it was a description which His enemies could not use against Him.  If He had called Himself the Son of God in the early part of His ministry, they would have killed Him instantly, and His work of teaching could not have been done.

But for those who believed in Jesus, the expression, Son of Man, had special significance.  For one thing, it tended to identify Him with the prophet Ezekiel who was also called the “Son of Man”.  But more than this, it identified Jesus with two Old Testament scriptures which were recognized as prophecies of the Messiah.  One is Psalm 8:4 where the Psalmist wrote: “What is man that You are mindful of Him or the Son of Man that you visit Him?”  The other is Daniel 7:13 where Daniel wrote: “I kept looking in the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven One like the Son of Man was coming.  And He came up to the Ancient of Days and was presented before Him.”  When Jesus called Himself the Son of Man, He was discreetly claiming to be that Son of Man mentioned in the Psalm and in Daniel.  He most certainly was not denying that He was also the Son of God.

We should be grateful that Jesus is both the Son of God and the Son of Man.  It is this that makes Him our perfect high priest, our mediator and God.  We were separated from God by our sins.  We needed a mediator to plead our case before God, but no man could qualify.  A mediator must be unrelated or equally related to both parties.  As the Son of God, Jesus could stand before God as His equal, and as the Son of Man He understands our weaknesses and can plead with God on our behalf.  He is our pathway to God. (Jn. 14:6)

Can One Believe in Science and God? - Part 2

By Tom Rose

Some scientists realize there are serious intellectual problems with macro-evolution, but still they do not want to accept Creation, perhaps because in accepting Creation they would have to deal with The Creator. On the other hand, if a scientist truly believes in God, doesn’t it seem illogical for him/her to accept what the Bible teaches about sin and salvation and reject what it says about Creation? Such are some of the dilemmas facing each individual as he/she decides on how the world and all its multiple life forms came into existence .

In addition, these individuals must also account for the complexity of man if he is not a special creation. Today, science affirms that man has the largest of all brains (to compensate for duller senses compared to other animals), is able to converse and communicate with true speech, can learn multiple languages, achieves based on the learning of his ancestors, and lives a reasonably lengthy life-span yet has the longest period of parental dependence (18-25 yrs.). These traits, common to all mankind, leave a huge gap between man and other animals in the primate family.  Also, those who believe in the Bible and macro-evolution will have to explain the origin of man’s soul, his desire for worship, and a belief in the hereafter.  Taken side by side, creation and macro-evolution are both belief systems.  Neither creation nor evolution is truly a scientific theory, because neither can be proved nor disproved by the evidence available.  In truth, both positions require faith: one theistic, the other atheistic or materialistic.   

If one goes outside on a clear dark night and glances up into the starlit skies, what do they see?  Order and beauty.  If one looks into the regions of smaller and smaller objects, what is seen there?  Order and beauty.  Whether in the far reaches of space or in the sub-atomic world of matter, scientists will forever be impressed with the detail, intricacy and energy that comes into their fieId of view. Moreover, throughout history man has been curious about his origin along with other elements in the natural world.  Even Job asked, “Has the rain a father?  Who has begotten the drops of dew?” (Job 38:28)

Ladies, did you ever see a beautiful afghan or quilt and fail to ask: who made it, where did you get the pattern, how long did it take?  Gentlemen, did you ever gaze on a refurbished antique automobile and fail to ask: where was it manufactured, how did you find all the parts, can you start it up?  Why don’t we ask the same questions when we look through a telescope or a microscope?  I suggest that modern culture separates out a belief in God from our scientific discoveries.  Thus, I worry as much about the atheist who denies the existence of God, as the Christian who works so hard in his attempt to control his destiny that he fails to truly need and trust God.

In conclusion, scientific knowledge should increase our faith and belief in God because the more we understand about the universe and how it works, the more we should be convinced that the universe could not have "just happened" by chance.  “For by Him (Christ) all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers.  All things were created through Him and for Him.” (Col. 1:16)

Therefore, for those who believe in God, science becomes the means by which we can explain how the universe was created and now functions.  Rather than using science to explain away God’s existence, one may view science, coupled with God’s Word, to point to a marvelously designed creation. One planned by an all-powerful Creator whose existence and etemal power “is before all things and in Him all things consist.” (Col. 1:17)

Can One Believe in Science and God? - Part 1

By Tom Rose

We live in an age in which people all but worship the word 'science.’  In essence, science enables us to explain and understand how the universe, and the world in which we live, works and operates.  Yet because of this knowledge many have come to believe that science has made a belief in God unnecessary or obsolete.  Some think that one no longer needs to believe that God is behind the origin of life since many of its operations can be understood and explained by modern scientific inquiry and analysis.  Is such thinking valid?  What would you think if someone told you that airplanes did not have to be made by anyone, because we can understand and explain how they work and operate?

When one considers the topic of evolution, it is important to establish the meaning of several words.  Micro-evolution (also termed specialization) is easy to envision as a part of the natural world.  Varieties of flowers or domestic animals account for diversity within their kind.  For example, a breeder’s new rose creates a new species, but it is still a rose!  Macro-evolution, on the other hand, is a theory that all of the varieties of creatures we observe today developed by a gradual set of changes, over a very long time, from common ancestors.  Usually this theory includes the concept of life itself having developed from lifeless chemicals.  Micro-evolution is often mistakenly used as evidence for macro-evolution, but these are two vastly different concepts. There is no evidence that large changes above the “family” level (a taxonomy term) could occur or have ever occurred (e.g. the cat family with lions and tigers are distinct from the horse family with family with asses and zebras).

When Curt Sewel, a respected scientist, read The Genesis Flood, by John Whitcomb and Henry Morris, he stated, “It made the entire Genesis account reasonable, in terms that were compatible with my knowledge of science .”  He then added, “I saw that the problem wasn’t with any kind of scientific measurement; the basic problem was the set of assumptions behind the theories.”  To illustrate, a foundation stone of modem science proclaims that everything in nature has always followed the laws of nature, and that these laws have always behaved in the same ways they do now.  This is known as the “Law of Uniformity.”  Implicit in this assumption, though seldom stated, is the belief that a supernatural event never took place.  Arguing that any such supernatural action, such as creation or a Noah flood, would have been a “singular event” that obviously could not be repeated in a scientific experiment, it must be placed outside the domain of science. In this way, the Genesis account is put aside as a non-scientific story, and is automatically ruled out of any scientific explanation.

(To Be Continued)

Three Persons of Godhead

By Paul Earnhart

Many people are puzzled by the thought of one God being in three persons.  Many efforts have been made to explain this difficulty.  Some have concluded that there is only one person who is God.  They say that the Father and the Son and the Holy spirit are all the same person.  They tell us that Jesus was all three of these.

At the baptism of Jesus, there were three distinct divine persons present.  Jesus was in the water.  At the same time the Holy spirit was seen descending as a dove.  And at the same time, God the Father spoke from heaven saying, “This is My beloved Son” (Mt. 3:16-17).  If there were not three persons involved, the whole scene was a deception, and God does not deceive us.

When the Bible says there is one God, it is saying that there is one divine Godhead or Godhood.  There is one human manhood, composed of billions of people now living, and there is one Godhood, composed of three persons.  Anyone who is the son of a human is human.  In the same way, the Son of God is God.  The Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are the one God.

From the baptism of Jesus onward we see the Holy Spirit working in Jesus and accomplishing mighty works.  We also see evidence that Jesus was in constant communication with the Father, saying exactly what the Father wanted said and doing exactly what He wanted done.  God the Father is a Spirit who cannot be seen, but because of the perfect union between Him and Jesus, we see in Jesus everything that can be seen of the Father.  That is the reason Jesus could later say, “He who has seen Me has seen the Father…Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me?  The words that I speak to you I do not speak on My own authority: but the Father who dwells in Me does the works.” (Jn. 14:9-10).  If you would know God, you must know Him through Jesus Christ, His Son.  Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth and the life.  No one comes to the Father except through Me.” (Jn. 14:6)