Category: Theology

The greatest objection to Biblical faith is said to be the problem of evil.  Human beings are subject to terrible pain, suffering, loss, disease, and premature death.  How can God, who is described as good, all-loving, all-knowing, and powerful allow such evil?  Either God is not all-powerful or is not really good and loving.  Deism was a view in centuries past held by those who could not deny the marks of intelligent design in the world but who could not believe God cared about us.   He created the world but then just let it run on its own with little involvement.  We can make this argument against a loving and good God more powerful and colorful by describing many awful things.  One famous believer did so to show that Biblical faith still held up (Fyodor Dostoyevsky, in The Brother’s Karamazov) and Antony Flew in his classic essay God and Falsification.  

Yet amazingly some have argued powerfully that the problem of evil is actually evidence for the biblical faith. This includes the former atheist philosopher C. E. M. Joad.  Joad wrote a generation ago.  His two amazing books, God and Evil and The Recovery of Belief were powerful. C. S. Lewis also wrote powerfully in The Problem of Pain.  

When we deal with Biblical faith and the evidence, we have to realize that we are presenting a total world view whose parts are integrated or tied together as a whole.  Therefore, dealing with the issue of truth we have to compare world views.  Which world view is the best at explaining human existence and the universe around us in the most adequate way?   These writers and many others argue that the world as we find it, with amazing good, beauty, design, and more but also with terrible suffering, in that evil people do terrible things to others, and that there are natural disasters on earth are best explained by the biblical world view.  Naturalistic evolution and atheism do not explain;  it is all just chance or no explanation.  Buddhism opts out of an explanation.  So, what is the Biblical response?

The Bible tells us that we live in a fallen world.  Its basic concepts for explanation are creation, fall, and redemption.  God is good and brought into being a good creation.  However, the fall ruined it and opened the world to the human evil one to another.  In addition, the creation itself shows this truth and though providing wonderful things, it is also fallen and provides an environment that includes pain and suffering that is fitting to the fallenness and evil in human beings.  It is the lot of human beings under the fall that good things and bad things happen to good and bad people. However, there is in this life a partial escape through doing good and the principle of sowing and reaping, that one reaps what he or she sows.  However, in this world, the Bible teaches that full justice is not attained.  It is only attained in the life beyond this one (Ps. 73).  

The Bible defines God’s love as his desire that all be ultimately saved, but he knows that some will chose to rebel against him and be lost.  God is good in that he desires a good and fulfilling destiny for every human being.  He is also good in that he will bring about a redeemed community that lives forever.  However, what the Bible calls this brief time of sorrow will pale in light of the eternal life we will enjoy with God and with those who love him.  God’s goodness and love do not mean that He can save everyone because human free choice is the root of the evil that was brought on the world (both natural evil and human sin) and human free choice is God’s will.  Human beings can reject his love.  God does not want to be loved by robots but loved by people who freely choose Him and his will.  God’s goodness is also defined by God’s intent and accomplishment to bring about a redeemed community that will rejoice in love together forever.  That redeemed community is worth the price of allowing freedom that produced and will produce great suffering and ultimate loss for those who finally reject God.  In the light of that eternal fulfillment, the sufferings in this life will not seem so great.  Paul says that we will receive an eternal weight of glory in the light of which these sufferings on earth are light afflictions.  He could say that because he knew God and his great love personally. 

Joad also argues that only the biblical view of the fall explains how every gain humans make has an evil side.  How is it that there is usually a negative?  We create cars that give us the joy and freedom of travel but then lead to many deaths in accidents.  We refine oil for cars but then find that burning the oil pollutes.  We create the convenience of plastics and destroy the fish in the ocean.  We create nuclear power that can give unlimited energy but then creates bombs that can kill billions.  We experiment on viruses to create vaccines and medicines to prevent a pandemic and cause a pandemic when the more dangerous altered virus escapes from the lab.  We seek to limit fossil fuels and plunge many into poverty. 

Yet in all of this, the atheist cannot explain the grandeur of creation, the amazing love of a lasting marriage, the joy of a baby, or the wonder of a mountain height.   The problem of good is much more difficult for him to explain than our problem of evil and pain.  The problem of evil and pain is evidence for our faith because it fits well with the biblical worldview. 

The problem of pain and suffering also calls us to grow in depth of compassion and to fight pain and suffering to the extent that we can and to comfort those who mourn and suffer and to bring healing through the power of Yeshua for the traumas of life.  The trials of life produce character.  

The hope of life after death alone can adequately comfort us regarding the justice disparities of this life.  The great philosopher Immanuel Kant argued in his Critique of Practical Reason, that unless we believe in God, freedom, and life after death, the culture itself will go downhill. The belief in a judgment after death is a very important motivation to righteous behavior, that good behavior counts.  However, that justice ultimately prevails after death gives us hope and motivation that our actions for love and justice will not ultimately be meaningless (Meaninglessness as the ultimate end of all things was argued by the famous very pessimistic philosopher Bertrand Russell.)  These assertions are good as far as they go.  However, the biblical hope is more vivid and more wonderful.  We understand from the Bible that the resurrection of Yeshua shows us something of what life in a resurrection body will be like. 

The famous New Testament scholar, Bishop N. T. Wright of St. Andrews University in Scotland presents the case in his book Surprised by Hope.  His book is the best, to my knowledge, that there is on the resurrection, both the very strong evidence of the resurrection of Yeshua and the hope of our resurrection.  Wright argues that we are destined for the resurrection of our bodies, not just the continued existence of bodiless souls floating in the air with pleasant peace as in some eastern religions.  The best things of life on earth in this space-time dimension foreshadow the life of the Age to Come.  Yeshua grilled and ate fish after his resurrection.  He could be touched and hugged.  His body was not limited like ours but could walk through walls.  This is not, says Wright taking a cue from C. S. Lewis, because his body was ghostly but was other-dimensional.  He was more substantial, and for him the walls were ghostly.  

The Age to Come is not the destruction of the heavens and the earth but their total renewal. The saved, those who are his, enjoy the presence of God, of Yeshua, the Spirit within and all around.  We have the joy of fellowship, worship, art, beauty, music, nature, friendships, exploration and so much more of the best things in this life that point to eternity.  His resurrection and ours give us hope to go through the terrible times and know that we win.  We live happily ever after. 

Without God and the resurrection says the famous scholar and thinker Peter Burger, in his book, A Rumor of Angels, that every mother who tells her hurting and sometimes dying child that it will be all right is lying.  It won’t be all right without God and the afterlife but will be terrible without the resurrection hope. 

The hope of the resurrection is now more substantiated in the documented miracles of death and resurrection experienced by people in this world.  Often called “near-death experiences” there are many examples of people who have died and come back to life.  There are many books on this but the best I have found is John Burke’s, Imagine Heaven. Those who through prayer or by Divine decree come back from the dead often report the very same kinds of experiences.  Their soul separates from their body.  They are able to see all that is happening in the room around their dead body.  They accurately describe what medical personnel is doing to revive them or if they are giving up. They often accurately describe what is happening outside of their room.  They may have views of their towns and cities as they ascend.  They often then go through a tunnel.  They come out on the other side in heaven, meet departed relatives, sometimes an angel and sometimes Yeshua. Sometimes they are given new knowledge that proves accurate when they return.  They are often given a choice to stay or return to earth but are sometimes told that it is better for them to return.  Of course, their form is not their resurrected body that can interact on earth but a temporary manifestation that looks physical.  There is an objective quality to these stories, the information, and the parallels in the stories. 

The famous scholar Craig Keener, in his books on miracles, also documents amazing resurrections, even documenting some who had been dead for an unusual amount of time. 

So, the evidence of the resurrection is that Yeshua was resurrected, the meaning of our resurrection is compelling, and finally Yeshua was not the only one to come back from the dead. 

After his resurrection but just before his ascension (where Yeshua was taken up to God and seated at His throne) Yeshua instructed his Disciples to stay in Jerusalem and to wait until they would be clothed with power from on high.  They would be immersed in the Holy Spirit.  On the Jewish Feast of Shavuot or Pentecost, this took place, but not only with the 12 Disciples but with 120 gathered disciples.  They spent ten days after his ascension seeking God in prayer.  On the morning of Pentecost, I believe they gathered in the Temple in Solomon’s Portico, their place for larger meetings. Then it happened.  The Spirit was poured upon them with a mighty rushing wind.  Flames of fire appeared on them.  Then they spoke in foreign languages that they never had learned.  The people on the Temple Mount platform heard the strange loud sounds and gathered.  Jewish people from many nations heard them proclaiming the Good News in the languages of these nations.  Two aspects of this major miracle are usually noted by scholars.  First that this miracle parallels God coming down in fire on Mt. Sinai when the covenant was given to Moses for the people.  Secondly, some think that the barrier of language differences was overcome through the Gospel in a reversal of the confusion of languages at the tower of Babel.  Some who did not understand that they spoke in foreign languages thought they were drunk.  

Peter then stood up and proclaimed the Gospel.  He began by saying that they were not drunk, but it was only 9:00 A. M.  Rather this was the miracle prophesied by the prophet Joel in Joel 2:28-30, where God promises to pour out the Spirit on all flesh, and the sons and daughter will prophesy.  Then he proclaimed the story of Yeshua, his life of miracles, his death, and resurrection.  He also noted the culpability of the leaders and those who followed them who gave him over to death.  The people were deeply convicted and wondered what they should do.  Peter then tells them to repent, be baptized, and to be filled with the Spirit.  The text says 3,000 men came to faith that day, baptized no doubt in the many immersion pools by the entrances to the Temple.  

We now read of the progress of the new movement.  It grows by leaps and bounds, from major miracle to major miracle.  Peter and John see a man crippled from birth healed at the Gate Beautiful entrance to the Temple.  The Disciples supernaturally escape jail.  Signs, miracles, wonders, and healing are characteristic.  There are healings from paralysis and even a resurrection from the dead (Acts 9:39-42).   The movement among Jewish people and Samaritans (Acts 8) became very large though, alas, it did not gain the majority in ancient Israel.  The religious leaders thwarted its progress.  

Then we read of the amazing conversion of Saul of Tarsus (Paul) who took the Gospel to the nations.  Amazing miracles continued, prophecy, healings, and a resurrection from the dead.  The power of the Spirit that accompanied the preaching of the Gospel was as nothing ever seen before. Mark 16 is the prophecy of what would happen, “These signs shall follow those who believe.” (v.17)   It then summarizes what happened, “They went out and proclaimed everywhere, the LORD working with them confirming the word by the signs that follow.”  (v. 20)   

The power of preaching the word in the Synagogues of the Mediterranean world and then in the marketplaces of the cities of the Roman Empire with such power with signs and wonders produced a huge movement.  The miracles in the ministry of Barnabas and Paul and then Paul and Silas and their team continued to produce the same kind of fruit that we saw in the early ministry of the 12 in Israel.  Congregations were planted and grew in city after city. 

Only the fact that the Spirit was poured out at Pentecost in the Temple and the confirming signs being so numerous and amazing in the rest of the book of Acts (some 30 years)  can explain why the Yeshua movement conquered the Roman Empire.   There were some other periods that were amazing, for example, St. Patrick in the British Isles and Ireland.  However, in history, there was nothing again quite as grand as what we see in the book of Acts.  However, that is until our day.  Today we are seeing the closest parallels to the first century.  That is for another essay. 

An over-emphasis on the difference between how God appears in the days of the Old Testament and how God appears in the text of the New Testament has been common historically but seems to be more pronounced today.  Those who have departed from our faith and some who were never among us, claim that the God of the Old Testament is harsh, vengeful, and violent.  On this basis, they claim, they reject the Gospel. How is that apparent discrepancy dealt with by believing scholars? 

First, there are those who do not believe in the full trustworthiness of all the biblical texts (inerrancy).  They do believe that God’s revelation is in the Bible and that this revelation is the highest revelation we have.  Yet, they argue that not all that is in the Bible, claimed as God’s command is really that, but is a misperception of God’s will by people.  According to these thinkers, God did not destroy humanity in the flood, and He did not call Israel to destroy all the Canaanites.  This was a projection of their human understanding.  Yet these also argue that the ethical teaching and standards of the Torah and the prophets is far beyond that of the nations of those days.  (G. Ernest Wright, The Old Testament Against its Environment, Reuven Hammer, The Torah Revolution).  The standards of the Law and the teaching of the prophets on God’s heart for the poor and marginalized is outstanding and wonderful.   Brevard Childs of Yale argued that the Bible provides us with a progression of better understanding as we pass through the Old Testament unto the New. The trajectory toward a much greater understanding of the heart of God begins with the Torah but then gets better and clearer until its climax in the life and teaching of Yeshua.  He calls this the canonical approach to biblical theology and says we are bound by the truth of the trajectory of the whole canon.  This is where he finds true and trustworthy biblical theology.  Those who hold to a high view of the whole Bible (inerrancy) believe that there is a progressive revelation such that we see God most clearly and fully only when we come to the revelation in the New Testament.  For whatever reason those harsh and violent commands and history are recorded in the Tenak (Old Testament) especially continuing through to II Kings.  God’s will for us today is not to destroy the Canaanites but to love our enemies.  The center for us today is the Sermon on the Mount. Whatever we think of the harsh commands given to ancient Israel, today we are confronted with the life, death and resurrection of Yeshua.  Offense over the Old Testament passages can be a defense to not face the claims of Yeshua.  That is the highest revelation of God and his will. 

However, there is another important aspect to this subject.  Is the gulf between Yeshua in the New Covenant revelation with the teaching of the whole New Testament really as wide as claimed?  An Andy Stanley may reject the Old Testament as relevant today, but then what of Isaiah 2 and 11 and its revelation of world peace, or Isaiah 42, 49 and 53 and the amazing portrait of Yeshua.  He probably does not mean that he rejects the whole thing as irrelevant.  The best social justice teaching is found there.  Again, the gulf is not as wide if we read the judgment passages in the teaching Yeshua and the rest of the New Covenant Scriptures.  There are many texts. 

Yeshua enjoins us to not fear him who kills the body but to fear Him who destroys both the body and soul in Hell.  Those of the goats in Matthew 25 are told to depart from him, even into eternal death and separation from God.  His words of judgment on Capernaum and Bethsaida are fearful and terrible.  In John 5:24, the wrath of God remains on those who reject Yeshua. The judgments in the book of Revelation are also fearful and terrible as is the final judgment in Rev. 20.  Yeshua warns of a harsh judgment again and again for those who do not repent and turn to God. 

Yes, the ethical way of life and love taught by Yeshua is amazing, the highest and the best.  However, a hard judgment part is still present.  He himself is now the norm by which we measure all things.     

My book Heaven, Hell and the Afterlife provides a survey of the whole Bible and its teaching. The Bible’s teaching is both wonderful, hopeful, and hard. 

It has become quite a pattern today for some who left the Christian faith to rail against Christians, quite viciously sometimes, sometimes with a lot of hate.  This may be fueled by actual abuse from their past.  The claim is made that Christians are all a bunch of hypocrites.  These claims may also be simply a way to suppress the truth, to continue in rebellion against Him, and to not face His claims.  However, revivalists like Dr. Mike Brown have also been very strong about the condition of the Church in America.  His base for criticism is the truth of the Bible.  We could ask what is the standard by which people criticize.  My point here is not to defend or critique the American Church.   I will say there are stellar examples, both individuals and communities.  One can find them if one desires. Again, for some this railing is simply a way of fighting against Yeshua’s claims upon us.  If we are too harsh to the Church, which is part of Messiah’s bride, we can offend God and find Him opposing us.  

Thomas Dubay, the late and amazing Catholic theologian from Catholic University in Washington, D. C, says a religion best known by its best representatives.  They show great evidence of the truth of biblical faith. In Catholic thought, these are the saints.  G. K. Chesterton and C. S. Lewis made the same argument.  Protestants and Messianic Jews don’t think much about saints.  We say all believers are saints, though we have some examples we always point to (Hudson Taylor in China and George Mueller in England).  Dubay’s argument is found in his amazing apologetic book, The Evidential Power of Beauty.  I read it once every year!!

I have reflected upon this and realized that this argument is true.  I credit both the communities that attain a level of love, godliness, and service that is outstanding and individuals. They show what is possible in Gospel.  However, I want to point to those stellar individuals that are signs of God’s reality on earth.  When you are in the presence of holy godliness in a person, the reality is amazing.  My spiritual father at Wheaton, Chaplain Evan Welsh is one such example. He was living proof of the existence of God and the reality of Jesus.  Kindness was etched on his face. Love came through continually.  There was joy and confidence that was wonderful.  I could not get enough of being in his presence.  I had a spiritual father in High School who also ended up as such a saint!  He led many to Yeshua. This is characteristic of saints.  Some rebellious did not see it that way.  Chaplain was too simplistic, too simple (he had a master’s from Princeton!) When my mother came to Wheaton for my graduation in 1969, she entered his home with me. Chaplain was not yet there. She said she felt a wonderful presence.  Does the Spirit dwell in greater measure in the homes of saints?  I think so.  I named my son after him. I have known a few others whose love, joy, holiness, humility, and grace were outstanding.  One such person I see today, in whose presence I have a similar response, is Heidi Baker who ministers in Africa.  She and her husband Rolland wrote the book “Always Enough.” They have rescued thousands of orphans and planted thousands of churches. But it is not the greatness of the ministry only, but the quality of her presence.  One story is told of Smith Wigglesworth. A  man ran into him on a train.  He did not know him.  He sensed the Holy Presence.  He turned to him and said his presence made him feel the depth of his own sin.  Amazing. On the spot conviction due to the Presence.

Yes, faith is known best by the very best among us, the saints.  Thank God for them. 

This little phrase is packed with truth.  It can be used as a trite response to those who reject our biblical worldview, but when rightly applied it is powerful.  It is most powerfully manifest in the ministry of Yeshua.  He told the woman caught in adultery and released from punishment, “Go and sin no more.”  A crippled was healed and Yeshua exhorted him to depart from sin lest a worse thing come upon him.  Yeshua was known to eat with sinners.  He gave his life to rescue them and defended his involvement with the famous words, “Those who well do not need a physician.”  He came to seek sinners. 

The best ministries do not just proclaim the standard of God and define sin but invest in healing the sick, the sinner, the marginalized.   We can think of the amazing ministry of David Wilkerson in the classic story, The Cross and the Switchblade.”  Love for the addicts and pushers in a tough and dangerous area of Brooklyn produced amazing fruit.  One of the best stories is the biography of the early years of Nikky Cruz.  Countless stories of those rescued from prostitution, deviant lifestyles, and the self-centered pursuit of wealth (the tax collectors in the Gospels) show the amazing power of loving the sinner and hating the sin. 

Some do not perceive their own sin or defend their sin.  Biblical Law defines sin. (I John 3:4)  The ideal of that Law is in the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5-7).  Some say that if their chosen path does not harm others, there should be no concern from believers.  However, a biblical Yeshua-centered person has love and compassion for those who claim that their sin is not sin and that it does not hurt others. Their claim is not true.  it, first of all, hurts them.  It robs them of true joy the most important of which is a relationship with the creator.  All who live lives of practicing sin live lives headed for destruction.  Yeshua came that sinners would repent of sin and be changed by his supernatural power. 

Practicing sin is connected to idolatry.  This is the foundational sin.  Idolatry is found in “I am” statements that define self-identity that denies our primary identity in God.  I am “a wealthy businessman,” I am “an actor,” “a homosexual” a “transexual” a “professor.”  The issue is not that all these patterns are sin, but any self-identity that is not based In who we are in God leads to this.  In his book Logo Therapy, Victor Frankel, noted that those who self-identified as their primary identity with higher meaning and purpose, a religious identity, survived the holocaust much better than those who self-identified with pride of position (external and positional meaning).  The latter became camp zombies, but the others preserved their personalities.  This was confirmed in Bruno Bettelheim’s, The Informed Heart.  Two famous psychiatrists saw the truth.  

Any identity that is not secondary to our identity in God ultimately will lead to destruction, either of the individual or the individual and his partners in sin or the society that endorses sin.  Love offers the Gospel way out.  “Repent for the Kingdom of God is available to you.”  Idolatry is the root.  The answer is our self-definition in God, that we are created him his Image and are new creations in the Messiah.  The first is what we all are by creation and the second what we are in Him when we are born again.  

False self-definitions are sin.  The sinner sometimes identifies his sin itself as his identity.  “I am a ________ “  Then fill in the blank.  If you say they are in sin, the anger wells up because you put your finger on self-defining idolatry. 

In a recent post, I told the story of my return from agnosticism/skepticism so many years ago.  I used to say, “I am a skeptic.”  Then God showed up in my car on what was a dark country road in those days, Route 59 in Illinois.  The voice said, “You have gained an identity as a skeptic.”  It had become my identity.  Indeed, when I was at Wheaton College, a few charismatics used to cross themselves after they passed me so that they would not pick up my demon of doubt.  God said that I no longer needed to be a skeptic.  The evidence was sufficient, and I could now be a believer again.  It took some time yet, but I was on the way back. 

At 19 years old, in November 1966, I experienced a spiritual crash, an emotional breakdown.  I came home to my mother (I was a dorm resident in College) in unbelief and feeling like my whole world had blown up.  I ended up with a fine Psychiatrist, a believer.   He kept me alive. I now declared myself a skeptic, an agnostic. 

In this state, I visited my history of philosophy professor at The King’s College in New York (before I transferred to Wheaton College).  Dr. David Wolfe was a brilliant thinker.  When I declared myself an agnostic, he asked what kind of agnostic I would be.  Would I be an open or  closed agnostic?  The open one says, “I do not know and doubt that others know, but I am open to new evidence and argument that can convince me of the truth about the nature of reality.”  Then there is another divisions.  One is the agnostic without integrity.  He just asserts his agnosticism.  He does not seek out the evidence or reasons given by proponents of different world views, and having seriously studied them, concludes that he is still an agnostic.  However, if still open, new considerations may yield a different conclusion.  The agnostic without integrity does not go on a real search for the truth, but just asserts a stance.  It seems as if he desires agnosticism as his stand, a pre search heart commitment.  

There were two more important David Wolfe statements. One was that if we seek to find the truth we have to set the bar so it is not so high that evidence can not count. So for example, if you conclude God is either not good or existent due to evil and suffering in the world, then no evidence can count from intelligent design, the resurrection or miracles. We have to have a pre search standard whereby we will go one way or another. Also, the second is that all world views have problems. The issue is to choose the best among world views with the least amount of problems. So the problems in a materialistic world view are much greater.  One key is that people set themselves against God and want to live in their own way according to their desires.  Yeshua said, “If any man wills to do God’s will, he will know of the teaching.” (John 7:17)

Dr. Wolf convinced me to be an open agnostic with integrity.  But even so, there now was a proclivity to agnosticism, a pattern of thinking that was ingrained, what C. S. Lewis called the ruts of the brain.   However, I was serious enough that I started to read and study intensely.  I transferred to Wheaton College and studied philosophy of religion for two years plus other relevant courses in psychology, history and theology.  By the end of that two years, it was my conclusion that Christianity had more to accredit it than other religions.  However, it might be the best among all false religious views and that nihilism might be right.  At this point I spent two more years in graduate school majoring in philosophy of religion.  I also looked for miracles, to see proof of the supernatural realm.   In the Spiring of 1970, near to the end of that first grad school year, I concluded to the best of my ability that Christianity was true.  I had the help of spiritual father, the Chaplain of the student body at Wheaton, Dr. Evan Welsh.  I had some professors that were very helpful.  I had some experiences with God.  Today the evidence available is much stronger than when I was searching in those years.  I could explain how this is so at another time.

The 1960s was a time among the youth of searching for the truth.  Philosophy classes at universities were packed with truth seekers, though I am not convinced that philosophy in secular universities is helpful.  There was an orientation of seeking.  I wonder if this is a reason for the outpouring of the Spirit that became known as the Jesus Movement. 

Today it seems that young agnostics and atheists, especially from Christian backgrounds and Messianic Jewish backgrounds are hard hearted.  They are being discipled in the prevailing culture on the internet and ideologically driven colleges.  Many cannot be bothered to read a book on the issues. They are not searching.  They are not open agnostics or agnostics with integrity.  I think of how the great scholar Rodney Stark became a believer in his later years after a lifetime of agnosticism.  He seemed an open searcher.  This is a great concern to me.  I think we will need lots of prayer to see this turned around.  The decline of the numbers of believers is serous.  But God can breakthrough and awaken young adults to care.  So many do not care.  They want to determine their own lives, not to be submitted to any higher power, to live as they desire, and then to die.  There is no ultimate purpose or meaning.  Can they meet believers who are filled with joy and power and be so touched that they awaken?  Let’s pray for this. 

The history of the early Church is amazing.  I use this term, early Church as the normal one for historians and recognize that we are speaking of a mostly Gentile movement, though Messianic Judaism continued for some time in Israel and Syria.  

I here describe the Church before Constantine (316 ff.) and the Council of Nicaea (325 A. D.).  

By the end of the sixth decade of the first century, Paul the Apostle could say that the Gospel had spread to all the world and was growing and triumphing everywhere.  (Col. 1:23) When Paul speaks of the whole world, he means the Roman ruled world, though there is evidence of spread even to India. The book of Acts gives us an accurate account of the development in Israel through chapter ten and then in the nations beginning in Acts 12 and 13.  Antioch was the center of what became a movement of faith among the Gentiles, though Paul first began his presentation in the synagogues.  There was a Jewish background in the synagogues of the Mediterranean world that enabled an easier understanding of the Gospel.  How do we account for this?  It can only be accounted for by the evidence of the resurrection of Yeshua from the dead, the event of the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost, and the amazing confirming signs and wonders done in the name of Yeshua, Jesus.  The Book of Acts describes this well so that powerful healing came even from the shadow of Peter (Acts 5:15, 16)  and the handkerchiefs of Paul  (Acts 19:12).  

The early Church fathers. bishops of the cities, present a Church that continues to grow by leaps and bounds.  Signs and wonders continued.  It was mostly organized in-house gatherings.  As of yet, there were hardly any buildings for large gatherings.  However, it was not only the miraculous but the quality of the lives of the believers, highly moral, but filled with love, reaching out to all.  In the third century, maybe 1/3 of the population of the Roman Empire died of plagues.  The response of pagans to their sick was to flee and simply leave them to fend for themselves and die.  The Christians took care of their own sick and nursed them.  They also nursed the pagans (polytheists) who were sick.  As a result of prayers for healing and caring for the sick, their percent of survival was much higher.  Thus, by the end of the third century in the Roman world, the battle of Christianity with Paganism was largely won.  People came to faith in Yeshua in droves.  You can read the inspiring story in Rodney Stark’s The Triumph of Christianity. There were other Christian behaviors that won the day: caring for infants given over to infanticide by exposure, caring for the crippled, the poor, the sick in general and so much more. They were disciples of the teaching of Yeshua. 

In 316 A. D., the emperor Constantine became a Christian.  People debate whether his conversion was genuine or not.  They also debate whether it was a good thing or a bad thing since a generation later, the State Church system came into being. However, we can say he saw the “handwriting on the wall.”  He certainly knew he could not defeat them, so he joined them so that the Christian faith would unify his rule.  

The story of the triumph of Christianity over Paganism is a story that only makes sense based on supernatural power and on the basis that the Biblical faith is true.