Time, in Light of Eternity

God is eternal; He has no beginning or end; He is limitless. You may say, “But I don’t understand that; I can’t conceive or comprehend something being limitless.” Of course you can’t! The very nature of God’s limitlessness requires that it not be limited, or held, within the bounds of our puny imaginations.

Did you know that you will spend 100% of your life in the eternity that follows this world? That sounds crazy, but if you think about it, any amount of time, no matter how large is nothing when compared to eternity. Our minds, though brilliant and complex as they may be, cannot begin to even grasp the smallest edge of eternity. Does that mean eternity doesn’t exist—since we can’t understand it?
Obviously, not only is it impossible for our mind to grasp the existence of eternity, it is equally if not more so, impossible to imagine the absence of eternity. I endeavor to believe that many of us have tried to understand the vastness of eternity, but how many of us have tried to get a handle on a concept that depicts the absence of eternity? If you were to set out on a quest to understand this absence, here are some good questions to ask yourself.

1. If there was a beginning, when was it?
   
2. If you come to a conclusion of a beginning, what was before that?
   
3. If you’re still considering trying to figure this out, you might as well ask yourself, when will time end?
4. If you find an answer to the last question, ask yourself, what is after that?

In my mind, after trying to imagine the absence of eternity, I would say that the argument for its presence wins by default. So whether we like it or not, we have come to a conclusion of the existence of something that we cannot understand.
If you believe that we came from and are headed to eternal oblivion, it would seem that the blackness of eternity past and eternity future would engulf and completely swallow our existence to the point that we could say that it never logically existed. The line between eternity past and eternity future is so small that we could easily zoom out to the point that it completely and totally vanishes.

Eternity cannot be understood, compared to, or measured by time; and any attempt to do so is sheer nonsense. When we measure something, we generally try to measure it with something that is bigger than the object. For instance, we wouldn’t try to measure a ten-foot wall with a two-foot tape measure. Trying to measure eternity with time is like trying to measure the surface area of the world with grains of sand. And that illustration applies no matter how large the sections of time may be by which you try to find the end of eternity. Moral of the story: time and eternity have to be thought of in separate leagues, otherwise time will completely lose its meaning and value because eternity "doesn’t play fare."

Some have contended that hell is not forever. That notion is impossible! If hell at any point ended, eternity would continue on to the point that the punishment of hell would eventually disappear into utter darkness, as if it had never happened. But know this: at the point where a million years of hell would vanish in the rear view mirror of eternity, the sinners will still be paying the eternal punishment of the sins that they have committed against an eternal God. Probably the best explanation of this concept was summed up by the great evangelist Jonathan Edwards:

The crime of one being despising and casting contempt on another, is proportionably more or less heinous, as he was under greater or less obligations to obey him. And therefore if there be any being that we are under infinite obligations to love, and honor, and obey, the contrary towards him must be infinitely faulty.

Our obligation to love, honor, and obey any being is in proportion to his loveliness, honorableness, and authority.... But God is a being infinitely lovely, because he hath infinite excellency and beauty....
So sin against God, being a violation of infinite obligations, must be a crime infinitely heinous, and so deserving infinite punishment.... The eternity of the punishment of ungodly men renders it infinite . . . and therefore renders no more than proportionable to the heinousness of what they are guilty of.

Lastly, since we’re talking about eternity, I would like to mention one other eternal aspect, and that is the perfect Sacrifice of God Who freely gave of His eternal perfection to cover our eternal imperfections. Of course the One I’m speaking of is Jesus. The Bible refers to Him as the spotless Lamb of God. First Peter 1:18-19 says that we are “not redeemed with corruptible things, like silver or gold from our aimless conduct received by tradition from (our) fathers, but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a Lamb without blemish and without spot.” When it speaks of “corruptible things,” it is speaking of things that measure worth.

Yet, just as time cannot breach eternity, so corruptible objects cannot breach perfection. In the same manner that time is swallowed by eternity, anything short of eternal perfection will be swallowed by God's eternal wrath over sin. See, eternity and perfection are equal; they are the same distance, length, width, and breadth. Like eternity, perfection cannot be outdone, overspent, or underestimated. Therefore, the perfect Lamb of God is the perfect substitute for the eternal evil that we have done, and it is the only thing that can save us from the eternal wrath that we are sentenced to.

Why are There so Many Goats in the Sheep's Pasture?

How the Church has Facilitated Unbelievers

Probably more now than ever, our churches house many professing Christians whose lives depict a scarce difference from those in the world—from those who are on the “broad road” (Mat. 7:13). II Corinthians 6:17 says, “Come out from among them and be separate, says the Lord. Do not touch what is unclean, and I will receive you.” There are many members even in our more “conservative” churches who only differ from the world on Sunday morning when they’re struggling to stay awake in church, as opposed to their neighbor who is at home sleeping in.

The true Christians’ desire
I don’t think it’s a stretch to say that our main purpose is to glorify God. Most of us hold to what the Westminster Shorter Catechism says when it states that “the chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoy him forever.” All true believers should be able to confer that there is true peace and joy in God. This happiness and fulfillment in the glorification of God is natural to the new man (Eph. 4:22-24). This form of pleasure was originally designed to facilitate worship of God. Adam was created for the purpose of having sweet fellowship with God, but when he fell, he lost that communion. After we come to know Christ, we are reborn into the type of person that we were made to be, which is one that is able to find joy in God, and who seeks for this joy above any other.
Everything about us in some way was made for the purpose of glorifying God through worship. Idolatry is the act of placing something above God. Our God is depicted as a “jealous God” (Exod. 34:14). God wants us to use our emotions for things that honor Him. Even our feelings of happiness, sorrow, and excitement are to be used in the glorification of God. When we get excited, happy, or sad over a television show, a sport, or a movie, we are wasting the use of our instruments of praise.
Some will say that this view is legalistic or unfounded. I’m sure that the same person who would say this, would be someone who would time and time again choose to watch a movie, watch a sport, or go to the theater rather than do something that glorified God. I would ask this person: “Is God not good enough for you?” “Are you saying that you find more pleasure and fulfillment in these activities than you do in things of God?” If he says no, then I would ask, “Why then did you choose to do them, did you get bored of God?” It seems harsh and unheard-of to require that someone not take part in the entertainments of the present age. Have we forgotten that our Christian forefathers went without these amusements? Do we pity them because they had so much time to worship and serve God? If we find true joy and fulfillment in Christ, why do we need so many earthly pleasures? Do we truly have God’s joy?

The difference between “Christians” and the world... or the lack thereof
In this age we have so many professing Christians who doubt their salvation. I can’t say that this surprises me; I doubt their salvation too. They spend their entire day with scarcely a thought of God passing through their mind; they talk to their friends and act in the manner that they do. When they come home from work or school, they do what the wicked of this world are doing: they immerse themselves in the entertainments and desires of the flesh. Oh but we are legalistic to tell them that they should turn their television off, and pray and read the Bible. Is it wrong to tell someone that they should get more joy and fulfillment from things of God than from our advanced forms of amusement? Have the entertainments of this present age risen to a point that they can now take the place of God and leave us full and satisfied, lacking nothing?! If the answer to that question is no, then why do you still insist on partaking of it? If there is more pleasure and fulfillment in the things of God, then why don’t you shut off your television and pick up your Bible? If you realize that there is more pleasure and fulfillment in carnal entertainment, then I would say that you are not a new man. A new man will constantly seek for the pleasures that are found in God.
Try this next time you go to turn on your television. Ask yourself: which do I desire more, watching TV or immersing myself in spiritual things? Before you turn on the radio to listen to worldly music, ask yourself: would I rather listen to Godless music, or would I rather think about my Creator or listen to something that lifts my heart in worship to Him? Contrast all your entertainment with what you could be doing spiritually, and see if you don’t completely forsake these worldly pastimes in a few weeks. I dare say that if a true Christian were to search their heart on these matters, their television would be sitting in a dumpster somewhere within a few weeks.
I know that some Christians say that they use this or that worldly pleasure to get away from everything and relax. What, do you need a break from God? Do the things of God wear you down? It’s funny that you don’t get worn out doing other things that you take pleasure in—I mean you do get pleasure from the things of God, don’t you?
I do realize that you can be a Christian and not desire the things of God. That simply means that you should be praying for God to give you that desire; you should do that instead of watching television. If after praying for this desire for a good period of time, you don’t notice any improvement in this area, perhaps you are not saved. I believe that a Christian should forsake worldly amusements. In fact, I believe this to be imperative for proper Christian growth. Also, by seeking to rid yourself of these earthly pleasures, you will find where you’re true joy comes from.
Since I will inevitably be called a legalist for saying that you shouldn’t watch TV, go to the movies, or be sport spectators, I’ll let a more prestigious person say it. Here’s what Charles Spurgeon had to say about this matter:

I believe that one reason why the church of God at this present moment has so little influence over the world is because the world has so much influence over the church. Nowadays, we hear nonconformist pleading that they may do this and do that—things that their Puritan forefathers would rather have died at the stake than have tolerated. They plead that they may live like worldlings. My sad answer to them when they crave this liberty, is, "Do it if you dare. It may not do you much harm, for you are so bad already. Your cravings show how rotten your hearts are. If you have a hungering after such dog's meat, go dogs, and eat the garbage!"
Worldly amusements are fit food for mere pretenders and hypocrites. If you were God's children, you would loathe the very thought of the world's evil joys. Your question would not be, "How far may we be like the world?" but your one cry would be, "How far can we get away from the world? How much can we come out from it?" Your temptation would be rather to become sternly severe, and ultra-Puritanical in separation from sin in such a time as this, than to ask, "How can I make myself like other men and act as they do?"

He goes on to say later:

Was Jesus found at the theater? Did He frequent the race course? Do you think that Jesus was seen in any of the amusements of the Herodian court? Not He. He was “holy, harmless, undefiled, [and] separate from sinners” (Hebrews 7:26). In one sense, no one mixed with sinners as completely as He did when, like a physician, He went among them healing His patients. But, in another sense, there was a gulf fixed between the men of the world and the Savior which He never attempted to cross, and which they could not cross to defile Him.

Man’s desire
Man by nature seeks to be happy. The unsaved man will not try to find fulfillment of this happiness in God because he is still subject to the flesh, so he will seek to be filled with carnal things. An unsaved person in our day will not be happy without television, movies, sports, video games, worldly music, and material goods. If you took away from a lost person these things—If you told them they couldn’t watch TV, go to the movies, and play video games; if you told them that they couldn’t listen to rock, rap, or country music; and if you told them that they couldn’t have certain cars, clothes, or gadgets, they would throw a fit! They would be miserable if they didn’t have those things. Would you be miserable without them? Would you throw a fit if they were taken away from you? Be careful what you answer. If you answer yes, then I say: “Why do you love the things of the world?!” “The love of the Father is not in you, unredeemed sinner (not carnal Christian)!” (I John 2:15)

Why there are so many goats in the sheep’s pasture
So now to my point: Why are there so many unbelievers in the church? The simple answer goes like this: because they can. It’s easy for an unbeliever to be comfortable in just about every church in this nation as long as they profess to be a Christian. Why is that? It’s because they can profess to be a Christian while still finding their fulfillment ultimately in the things of the flesh. As long as they can call themselves a sheep while grazing in the pastures of the devil, they can be happy. Take away the amusements of this age, and see if they survive. Tell them that they should constantly be in the practice of growing closer to God through spiritual edification, and communion with Him. Tell them that they should desire to seek God with every spare moment they have. Tell them that God should be uttermost in their thoughts throughout the day. If they follow this practice, they will not have time for useless entertainment. Of course they will say, “I don’t need to do all those spiritual things because I’m under grace, so I have freedom.” I would respond to this extend: “So you don’t desire the things of God; you don’t enjoy God more than these worldly pleasures?” “Are you sure you’re ‘under grace’?” “I’m not convinced you are.”
The amusements and activities of the world are goat’s feed. Our churches have become littered with it, and that is the reason so many unbelievers are in our services. The goats will remain in the sheep’s pasture as long as they can survive, and goat’s feed is plentiful in our churches. We need to cast out this devil’s meat, and maintain only those who desire to graze in the pleasant pastures that are filled with God’s word and true, joyful worship of Him. The goats will then have only two options: (1) Leave the pasture, or (2) be transformed into a sheep of the Great Shepherd’s pasture.

Further discussion (Added later)
I’ve already met opposition over this, and I expected that. I certainly wouldn’t expect the goats to be too happy about this proposal (although I wouldn’t take it upon myself to say whether or not for sure these people are lost). Maybe we just need a little more persuasion.
These people seem to be contending that requiring that someone give all their spare time to God is just a little bit over the top; they think it’s too much. Let me ask you this: “Is He worthy?” Isn’t God worthy of all our time; does He not at least deserve our spare time? You see, people have the wrong view about television. See if this isn’t your thinking as well: Shutting of the TV and doing things that honor and glorify God is really righteous. At the same time they think that watching television is neither righteous nor sinful. But wait, we just said that God was worthy of all our spare time. So in other words, He deserves that time. We’re not doing something really righteous by shutting of the TV and worshiping God; worshiping our Creator is what we were made for! By putting aside vain amusement and glorifying God with our time, we’re simply giving Him what He deserves. So you see, it’s not that turning off the TV and worshiping God is really righteous, and watching TV is amoral; giving all our spare time to God is what we’re supposed to do, and wasting our time in useless entertainment is sin. If you’re a believer you should realize that God is worthy of all our spare time because saving us from our sin was an amazing thing, to say the least. If you owed me $10 million, and you gave me a dollar of your $100 of spending money, do you think I would just be totally elated that you had given me one hundredth of your spare cash? Obviously, I couldn’t expect you to pay me everything you owed, but I would at least expect you to give me what spare money you had. Of course this illustration doesn’t quite match up to the magnitude of the situation, but I just want to get the point across that spending time worshiping God instead of watching TV really isn’t that righteous—it’s required. So that’s why I think Christians should be forsaking useless entertainment. And we don’t do this to earn points with God; the true Christian does this out of love and gratitude, and because we realize that He is worthy.

Barabbas: The Rest of the Story

Matthew 27:21-22: The governor answered and said to them, “Which of the two do you want me to release to you?” They said, “Barabbas!” Pilate said to them, “What then shall I do with Jesus who is called Christ?” They all said to him, “Let Him be crucified!”

We’re all probably familiar with the story of Barabbas in the Bible who was released instead of Jesus. One thing that I have until now failed to see is that Jesus was taking the place of Barabbas. In effect, Jesus died in the place of Barabbas. There are three things to be taken from the picture that is drawn here in the story of the crucifixion.

First, Jesus is taking the place of Barabbas. As the story continues on from the place where Jesus was condemned to die, we tend to forget about the person who should be there. In the story, it was Barabbas. Barabbas is a perfect picture of every person before they are saved. The Bible depicts this man as a notorious criminal. When we read the story, are we not quick to judge Barabbas as being evil and disserving of death? In reality we are no better than he was. Romans 3:10 says: “There is none righteousness, no, not one.” Perhaps none of us have done anything that merits death according to the law of our nation, but Jesus says twice in Luke 13: “Unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.” It’s clear that in God’s court, we are all sentenced to death. However, if we do repent and believe, we can accept Christ’s death to be the sacrifice to take our place.

Next, there is something that may be easy to overlook in this story, and that’s the fact that not only did Jesus die in Barabbas’s place, but Barabbas was set free. And that brings me to my second point which is highlighted in Matthew 27:26: “Then he released Barabbas to the people.” Here again we see a picture of ourselves. In John 8:34 Jesus says, “Most assuredly, I say to you, whoever commits sin is a slave of sin.” Are we not all prisoners of sin before Christ comes along? Not only does Christ die in our place for the evil that we have committed, but He allows us to be freed from the bondage of it. If Jesus had died for our sins, but did not free us from it, that would be similar to Him dying in the place of Barabbas, and Pilot putting him back in prison. But Pilot didn’t put Barabbas back in prison, and God doesn’t leave us in the prison of our sin.

Lastly, as if being saved from death and released from bondage weren’t enough, there’s one other point to be noted here. My third point is made known in the meaning of Barabbas’ name. The first part of the name (Bar) means “son of” (similar to son at the end of names like Johnson). The second part of the name is abbas, which is translated to mean father (Abba, as used in the phrase “Abba Father” spoken of in Romans 8:15 is a word meant to convey a close relationship between a father and his child). So now we come to the conclusion that Barabbas means “son of the father.” This fact demonstrates the amazing thing that Jesus accomplished on the cross—that we should be called sons of the Father.
In the story of the crucifixion, the inclusion of Barabbas in Christ’s path to the cross paints a very detailed picture of what Christ’s sacrifice meant for condemned sinners, from Adam to men and women in our present age. And if we take a close look, we should be able to see ourselves in Barabbas. We are condemned to die as notorious sinners and enemies of God, but we are relieved of our punishment by the atonement of Christ. We are thus set free from the consequences of sin and from its bondage, and, as if that weren’t enough, are made “children of God, and if children, then heirs—heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ together (Romans 8:16-17).”

Abortion in America

The subject of abortion is something that I have been passionate about for a long time. I’m not particularly comfortable with living in a country that allows such an indignant form of so-called “convenience.” Abortion has been legal long enough now that people have become callused to its reality . Every once in a while it is imperative to our country’s conscience to take a deep look into its essence and what it really is. And that is murder.
One of the biggest calumnies that pro choice advocates use is : What if the mother won’t have enough money to raise the child? Well, if you’re a murderer and someone is going to negatively affect your life, you should kill him/her because that’s what murderers do. If you’re not a murder, have the baby! Mother Theresa once said, “It is a poverty to decide that a child must die so that you can live as you wish.” Yes, there are many poverty stricken homes in our nation, but rarely do you see a case of poverty in America equaling that of some of the even less severe cases in third world countries. But yet the suicide rate in these countries is somewhat lower than it is in some of our inner cities. Why is this? People want to live. It doesn’t matter how rich or poor they are. It doesn’t even matter how well they’re fed. Life is an endeavor; it’s a challenge. Liberals want to take away the opportunity for some because there chance of comfort and success is low. Abraham Lincoln was born in a one-bedroom log cabin (and people think big city apartments are primitive). Liberals would have told Abe’s mother, “Mrs. Lincoln, you really don’t want to have this baby. It’s sure to live a life of poverty and misfortune. It’s chance of success is much lower than that of babies born in more fortunate homes. Plus, you can’t afford to raise this baby; you would have to work more to take care of it, and your husband would have to work harder to feed it. It’s just not worth it.”
Most cases of abortion display the ultimate manifestation of inward selfishness even in the cases of "poverty." But what’s really sad is that there are many cases where the mother is a successful businesswomen who didn’t want to get pregnant in the first place, so she decided to kill her baby. This scenario takes place every day in our nation. Did anyone ask the baby whether or not he/she wanted to live? I’ve always liked that bumper sticker that said, “smile, your mom chose life.” Ronald Reagan once said, “I’ve noticed that everybody that is for abortion has already been born.” Mothers act like their babies belong to them. Well, God created the baby, so guess what? It belongs to God. A mother does not own her baby anymore than she owns her next door neighbor. Who are we to decide whether or not a life should be lived out in it’s fullness and where it should end? That is for God to decide. God, through His love and patients has allowed us to live. We are not to decide when someone's life will end, with the exception of those who choose to take the life of another human being. Some nitwit by the name of Loesje once said: “How can anyone be against abortion but for the death penalty?” In other words: how can you say that the most despicable, retched people in our nation deserve to die, and the very most innocent people on earth should live? Unthinkable! I guess this is a Liberal’s idea of a good pro choice argument.
I think we all know what the Bible has to say about abortion (hint: “You shall not murder” -- Exodus 20:13), but what does the constitution say about it? Yes, Liberals, nowhere in the constitution does it say: “Hey if you ever decide that it is good, moral, and completely not savage to kill your babies, don’t do it anyways; that’s not what we’re about here in America.” On the other hand, it also doesn’t state: “if at any time in this great nation founded on Christian principles, a mother decides that it would be inconvenient to have the baby that she is pregnant with, she may halfway deliver the child, stick a tube in the baby’s head, and suck his/her brains out (partial birth abortion).” The Preamble to the Constitution states: “We the people of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, secure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense , promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” One of the main purposes of the Constitution was to “secure the blessings of liberty… to [the founders’ and current citizens‘] posterity.” It’s seems evident that if the creators of the constitution could have ever imagined that this nation would reach a level of wickedness where we would deny our unborn children the opportunity to enjoy “the blessings of liberty” by killing them, they would have said something about it. There is no doubt in my mind about that. Yet the supreme court, which is supposed to interpret the law and discern what the constitution implies, could not understand this simple axiomatic truth. Instead they made the choice to allow murder to be overlooked in a nation that was originally founded on godly values. Another quote from Mother Theresa: “What is taking place in America is a war against the child. And if we accept that a mother can kill her own child, how can we tell others not to kill one another?… Any country that accepts abortion is not teaching people to love, but to use any violence to get what it wants.”
It’s estimated that 32.5 million abortions have taken place in the United States. That means gone are approximately 300 thousand millionaires; hundreds of professional athletes (some of which would have been greats); millions of success stories; roughly 32.5 million first words (millions of which would have been “mommy” --the only word they have for their mommy now is… “why”); millions of best friends; but most importantly, 32.5 million human beings grafted in the image of God… However, the mothers of these children did not see all of this, all they saw were 32.5 million “problems.”