Peter Witkowski Christmas

Jesus’ Dad isn’t Larry: Why The Virgin Birth Matters

A popular theologian once said little Biblical truth would be lost if archaeologists discovered that Jesus’ father was Larry. In other words, he assumed that integrity of the gospel would not be harmed if Jesus’ came into the world through normal biological processes.

The idea of Jesus having an estranged father named Larry is so absurd the notion has become thought provoking. The concept of Larry forces evangelicals to answer the bigger question of: “Is the virgin birth significant?” Is it a topic akin to the discussions of choir robes and overhead projectors? Or is it a fundamental doctrine of the Christian faith? Can we have a credible faith without the virgin birth? Could Jesus’ dad really have been Larry or Joseph or any other human being?

The short answer is, “No.” If Jesus is Jesus, then Jesus could not have had an earthly dad. If archaeologist find Larry’s tomb, the gospel disintegrates into meaningless religious powder. The gospel stands and falls upon the credibility of the Virgin birth. God declared in Isaiah 7:14 that God would give his people a sign. The Messiah would come by a virgin birth. “Therefore, the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.” God stakes his credibility upon this claim. If Jesus’ dad is Larry, then either God is untrustworthy, and we have no reason to hope that Scripture’s promise of salvation is true and no reason to assume that Jesus is the Messiah. J. Gresham Machen hit the nail on the head when he wrote,

If the Bible is regarded as being wrong in what it says about the birth of Christ, then obviously the authority of the Bible, in any high sense, is gone.

A handful of scholars have pivoted to Hebrew and Greek dictionaries to prove that the virgin birth was nothing more than the byproduct of bad teaching and untrained religious zeal. These liberal scholars reminded us that both the Hebrew word and the Greek word for ‘virgin’ could also mean young woman or maiden. They claimed God was not predicting a virgin birth but rather the birth of a child named Immanuel who would be either Isaiah’s or King Ahaz’s kid.

Though these scholars correctly point out that the words translated ‘virgin’ have other meanings, they do not have compelling reasons to think that Isaiah is talking about just a young maiden. The prophecy is an attempt by God to show the doubting King Ahaz that God is powerful. Unless Ahaz was dumber than Professor Hinkle who lost his hat to Frosty-The-Snowman, Ahaz would not have been wowed by news that a young woman would have a baby and name the child Immanuel. And the failure of Isaiah to mention either his wife or Ahaz’s wife in this prophetic passage and the chapters surrounding the prophecy also cast a significant shadow of doubt upon the claim that Isaiah is talking only about a young maiden in his day. Modern assumptions that deny the possibility of supernatural occurrences have to be read back into Isaiah to arrive at the conclusion that Isaiah is talking about a normal biological event.

Moreover, Matthew clearly believed Isaiah was pointing to a future virgin birth. He presents the Holy spirit as the progenitor of Christ. Matthew reports, “that which is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit.” Matthew clearly claimed that Jesus was conceived supernaturally.

Liberal theologians have attempted to reinterpret Matthew’s clear meaning to defend their denial of the supernatural. These scholars argued that Matthew mentions the Holy Spirit as a nod to the presence of God in the normal procreative process. They claim Matthew is simply affirming that children arrive through sexual relations because the Holy Spirit blessed such and such moments. Thus, Matthew is said to be only recounting the normal sexual activity that spawned baby Jesus. Moreover, the Greek word used for virgin could also mean young woman, indicating that Matthew did not view Jesus’ birth to be miraculous.

But if this liberal interpretation is correct, then Joseph would also have had to been dumber than professor Hinkle. Why would Joseph decide to fulfill his marriage to Mary if the angel simply confirmed what Joseph already knew, that God makes babies by procreation? Why would Joseph marry Mary if he was even more sure of her sin and broken vows? Why would he be so protective of her chastity?

Matthew mentions Isaiah’s prophecy, the role of the Holy Spirit, and the whole birth narrative because Matthew clearly believed that the Messiah would be virgin born and that Jesus, the son of Mary and the adopted son of Joseph, was that Messiah. Matthew’s gospel makes the most sense if it is read as a historical account of the birth, life, death, and resurrection of Jesus.

Like Luke, Matthew compiled his narrative through interviews and historical exploration, desiring to provide a credible work. Matthew recorded the virgin birth because it was a historically attested fact that proved Jesus’ divinity. He did not create Jesus; he described him.

Moreover, the early church fathers affirmed the historicity of the virgin birth. The Old Roman Creed, the first creed of the church which appeared around 341 A.D, says, “I believe in God the father almighty; and in Christ Jesus His only Son, our Lord, Who was born from the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary.” The virgin birth was not seen to be a myth forced upon Christianity by overly zealous, religious neanderthals. It was a historical fact readily affirmed by the church.

Today, men and women deny the virgin birth because they deny the supernatural worldview that proclaims God to be the just and Holy ruler of the universe.

When a man or woman says that Jesus was the son of Larry or some other man, they are denying the trustworthiness of the gospel as revealed in the Scriptures. If Jesus was not born of a virgin, we have no reason to trust what the Bible says about sin, the cross, or the resurrection. The Bible is a complete package. If we remove one pillar, the entire building collapses. If there is no virgin birth, we have no need to be concerned about sin or salvation.  If Jesus’ dad was Larry, we have no gospel. Machen noted correctly,

It is not this or that element of the Christian religion that is here at stake, but all elements of it, or rather the Christian religion as an organic whole

Thankfully Jesus’ dad is not Larry. Both our heavenly father (as seen in the gospel of Matthew) and the early church affirmed the virgin birth. And though, we often have to strain to find time to contemplate the virgin birth as we swim through the busy swirl of the Christmas season, such theological meditations always prove beneficial.

When we realize that the God of the universe is trustworthy and that none of his words fall to the ground, we will find our hearts filled with hope this Christmas season. We will see that we have every reason to believe that God will deliver us from our trials. We will understand that we have every reason to believe that Jesus will save us from our sins. We will come to realize that Jesus is both fully man and fully God, the perfect sacrifice who pays the penalty for all our sins. We will find the truest of hopes!

The virgin birth is a wonderfully essential doctrine of the Christians faith. Don’t you agree?

Peter Witkowski Christmas

Jesus’s Story Beats Every Other Christmas Story

Christmas-storyIf we got to write the Christmas story, I believe we would flip the story upside down. Instead of God coming to us, we would go to God. Walking through a divine portal brought into existence through some form of trauma we would arrive in heaven to sing songs and to hand Jesus some presents. Books such as Heaven is For Real, 90 Minutes in Heaven, and My Journey to Heaven are just some of the many stories the describe humanity reaching up to God. Yay us!

We think God and heaven are within our reach because our fallen hearts are quick to deny their fallenness. Most every fictional Christmas story from The Christmas Carol to The Grinch That Stole Christmas believes humanity can save itself. If we give Ghosts, Christmas songs, magical snow, and goodwill a chance, we can be confident that our hearts will grow the three sizes needed to crave the roast beast at Christmas.

But despite all our hopes, we haven’t been able to grow our hearts even one size…much less the fix world at large. We are still singing Stevie Wonder’s song wondering when if ever, “we’ll see a land With no hungry children, no empty hand.” Despite the promises of Christmas fiction which resonate with our belief that heaven is within our grasp, we never achieve the “Peace on Earth,” promised in all those Christmas stories  Boys are still playing with bombs, kids in Africa are still hungry, and our families are still dealing with depression.

Should we give up on the whole Christmas Spirit thing, then?

No! Christmas Spirit exists because God got the story right. God knows we cannot reach heaven. He knows we are frail sinners living in a broken an distraught world. He knows we need help. We have all lied, cheated, stolen, gotten angry, or spread some office gossip at some point. And he who commits one sin deserves death. “The wages of sin is death (Rom. 3:23).” Because we are sinners infused with death and devoid holiness we cannot sneak into heaven. The magic portal is closed. We cannot live with our holy, loving and perfect God. We are fallen and he is not. If he allowed sinners into heaven, he would cease to be good, loving, and just.  For evil has no place with goodness. Drug dealers don’t belong in baby nurseries and sinners don’t belong in heaven. We need help!

It comes!

 And an angel of the Lord appeared to them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were filled with great fear.  And the angel said to them, “Fear not, for behold, I bring you good news of great joy that will be for all the people. For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord. – Luke 2:9-11. 

That is the beauty of the Christmas story. Christ came down to live with us. And he came down to poor parent and slept in a dirty manager in a stinky barn. As Paul David Tripp rightly notes: “Most of us would be in a complete panic if we had to birth a baby in such conditions.” Yet, God chose a manager because he came to suffer for us. His whole life and death was offering to good to pay for our mistakes and errors. He came to live the lives that we are supposed to live. He suffered all the disappointments that we suffer. But he always responded with faith and love; we often respond with disbelief and anger

British novelist Dorothy Sayer captured the true meaning of Christmas when she wrote:

 He himself has gone through the whole human experience – from trivial irritations of family life and the cramping restrictions of hard work and a lack of money to the worst horrors of pain and humiliation, death…He was born in poverty and…suffered infinite pain – all for us – and thought it worth his while.

Jesus died on the cross because he loved his children. He did not die for his sins. He died to pay for the sins of his of those who repent and believe. He died so that he could bring many sons to glory!

The Christmas story is worth celebrating precisely because we did not write it: we did not go up; Christ came down! Don’t you agree?

Peter Witkowski Discipleship

Eli’s Sin Will Be The Death of Your Church

preistGod despises bad pastors.

In the book of 1 Samuel, three corrupt priests receive a large amount of screen time. Eli and his worthless sons are condemned in 1 Samuel 2:12-16, and again in 1 Samuel 2:17-36, and again in 1 Samuel 3:11-24. And all of 1 Samuel 4 is dedicated to their destruction. They are mentioned more than Hannah, Jesse, and many other names that we are familiar with. Yet, we talk about them very little. I too was unaware of how much screen time they received until I started preaching though 1 Samuel.

Let’s talk about them.

What is their great sin? Eli’s sons stole God’s sacrifices. They picked the choicest meats. When God fearing people refused to defer to the priest, Eli’s sons threatened their church members with physical violence. They would say, “No you must give it to me now, and it not, I will take it by force (1 Sam. 2:16).” Taking note of their abuses, God declared that the “sin of the young men was very great in the sight of the Lord, for the men treated the offering of the Lord with contempt (1 Sam. 2:17).” And God deems these men beyond hope and kills them (1 Sam. 3:14; 4:11).

And though Eli’s sons experience the wrath of God, Eli received the majority of the blame. The prophet in 1 Samuel 2 was sent to Eli and asked Eli bluntly, “Why then do you scorn my sacrifices and my offerings that I command for my dwelling, and honor your sons above my by fatting yourselves on the choicest parts of every offering of my people Israel (1 Sam. 2:29)?”  God kills Eli, wipes out his family, and takes the Ark of God away from the tabernacle because Eli loves his sons more than God.

However, we should not write off Eli has some super-villain who always had it out for righteousness, love, and mercy. He was not going around pouring pepper in people’s coffee, slapping babies, and getting drunk every night. He blessed Hannah (1 Sam 1:17). He trained Samuel. He was not all bad. But when pushed came to shove, he chose to honor his sons instead of God. Instead of condemning his sons and overseeing their execution, Eli joined them. Consequently, he doomed himself, his family, and his ministry to destruction.

The Scottish theolog Alexander Maclaren noted:

But all was marred by a fatal lack of strong, stern resolve to tolerate no evil which he ought to suppress. Good, weak men, especially when they let foolish tenderness hinder righteous severity, bring terrible evils on themselves, their families, and their nation.

I fear many of our churches are dying for just this reason. These men are not all bad. These pastors preach some decent sermons. They show up at the hospital from time to time. But when sin arises in their midst, they look the other way. They lack the resolve to meaningfully apply what they preach.

Sure, they may encourage people to try to fix their marriage instead of divorcing; they may encourage the drunk to stop drinking; and, they may encourage the abuser to stop being angry. But if their light advise is rejected by the congregant, they back off like Eli did (1 Sam. 2:22-25). They refuse to discipline the man who is leaving his wife to pursue the sexier more understanding girl down the street. They refuse to bring a second witness to the drunk’s house to call him to change. They refuse to put out the sexual immoral, the covetous, the angry, the thieving ,the arrogant, and the prideful.

After all, won’t people talk? Won’t people get angry and leave? Won’t people in the community think our church is harsh, unkind, and unloving? Won’t people stop attending and stop giving? If we value the worship and holiness of God more than the feelings of men and women, we will lose the buts in our seats and dollar in our bank account. We can’t risk offending their people.

Thinking the above, many pastors refuse to address the unchecked sin in their congregation. They refuse to talk about sin outside of Sunday morning. They refuse to meaningfully counsel with those overcome with sin. They refuse to bring unrepentant sinners before the church, acting as if Matthew 18 and 1 Corinthians 7 did not exist. They refuse to honor God in heaven more than the people in their pews. And though God is gracious, he will eventually crush those who lead his church to make much of the emotions of men and women. God will not let Christian leaders mock his name forever. God will act; he will depose pastors and remove churches.

Brothers and sisters, I believe most of our SBC churches are in decline for this very reason. Many of the pastors in our convention are more concerned about not offending Susie, Sally, and Jim Bob than they are about worshiping God. And sadly, most of these pastors and their hand-selected leaders have no plans to change course. After all, they deem their failure to address sin to be mark of spiritual maturity. Ah how peaceful their dead churches seem to be.

“Your boasting is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump (1 Cor. 5:6)?”

Because these pastors do not address sin, their congregations become more and more sinful. People like Eli’s son begin to dominate business meetings, Sunday school classes, and benevolence ministries. Soon, the whole church is driven by man-centered goals and the gospel fades into the background. Those who love Jesus are shown the door.

Admittedly, most pastors will not stand idly-bye as their churches slide into decline. They will launch a new small group ministry. They will rebrand an existing program. And, they will seek to update the music ministry, calling the choir director their “Creativity Team Leader.” (Goosebumps anyone?)

But will these pastors make the glory of God the primary thing? Will they recover their first love? Will they risk all to obey and honor God? Sadly, the answer is no. As a result of their leadership, their church will be obliterated. God does not honor those who mock his word.

Brothers and sisters until we care about the glory of God, we have no reason to hope for change. We have no reason to expect our dying churches will once again breathe the life of the gospel. Evangelism programs won’t save us. As James MacDonaled noted,

Placing evangelistic ministries above the mission of the God’s glory is the single most destructive error in the church today.”

Cooperation with other SBC entities at the state and national level won’t save us. And updated contextualization strategies won’t save us. Repentance will save us. Once again honoring God above all else will save us!

God spent a lot of time discussing Eli and his sons, because he is deeply concerned about his glory and hates those who love people more than God. Are you willing to make the glory of God your main concern? Are you wiling to call you pastor or pastors to do that? Or are you content to wait for the coming judgment? God despises bad pastors.  Do you? Their churches will die. Will yours?