Habakkuk Bible Study – Problem of Evil

This is a Bible Study that I wrote for group discussion reading the book Habakkuk.  I think we all ask questions about why God allows suffering, pain, and evil.  Our questions are nothing new, as you’ll see from this study of Habakkuk.


Read Habakkuk 1:1-4. 

Can you relate to Habakkuk’s complaint to God?  How do you see his complaint as a modern day problem or a question that you have concerning God’s action, or apparent lack of action?

Read Habakkuk 1:5.

What type of work would you expect God to be doing in response to such a complaint?

Read Habakkuk 1:6-11 to see the type of work God is claiming he will do.

Read Habakkuk’s response to God in Habakkuk 1:12-2:1. 

Is that how you would respond to God?

Vs. 13 – It’s good to see that we are not the first people to have questioned the existence of an all-powerful, loving God and the existence of evil.

Vs. 2:1 – When you pray to God, especially about troubles, do you stand at the watchtower?

Read or skim through Daniel 10:1-14.  How long did Daniel pray to God before he heard the answer to his prayers?  What can we learn about Daniel and Habakkuk when it comes to prayer and waiting for God’s reply?

Read Habakkuk 2:2-4.

God will end the suffering but it will seem slow to us.

What does 2 Peter 3:1-13 say about God’s slowness?  Why is he being “slow” in ending our suffering and fulfilling all of his promises?  What promise awaits us?

Vs. 4 – The righteous shall live by faith!  What is the object of our faith?  How does the object of our faith relate to our righteousness and how does the object of our faith provide an answer to the problem of evil in the world?

Read Habakkuk 2:18-20.

Do we turn to our inventions for safety, help, and prosperity?

Habakkuk 3:1-16 – Habakkuk reflects on a terrifying manifestation of God’s glory and power, he prays for mercy, and is confident in God’s ultimate deliverance.  Much in our lives brings anguish, fear, and feelings of helplessness to our hearts.  God humbles us under his mighty hand, but he does so in order to exalt us in him.

Read Habakkuk 3:17-19 to see Habakkuk’s final response in his dialog and struggle with the Lord. 

What do you think about Science and Darwinian Evolution?

I periodically get asked the question, “What do you think about Science and Evolution?”

I am being asked this because the person thinks that “Evolution” beliefs and “Christianity” beliefs based on God’s divinely revealed Word contradict one another.  I like to clarify that I believe the question is not asking simply about “evolution,” change over a period time, which I believe is evident in nature, but the question is asking what I think about the “Darwinian Model of Evolution,” which is quite different.

English: "A Venerable Orang-outang",...
English: “A Venerable Orang-outang”, a caricature of Charles Darwin as an ape published in The Hornet, a satirical magazine


What about Science and Darwinian Evolution?


I know that the scientific enterprise has greatly blessed us with knowledge that has improved our lives in so many aspects that to enumerate all the ways science has benefited mankind to date would be a life-long endeavor.  I know that the Darwinian model of Evolution is often presented as possessing a plethora of irrefutable proof, and since the existence of God doesn’t gel with the naturalistic worldview that accompanies Darwin’s theory it appears as if Christians are living on blind faith, ignoring the evidence, and derailing the advancement of scientific discovery!


Option 1 – Science and Christianity are not at Odds AnswerIn the Jack Black movie, Nacho Libre, there is a scene where his wrestling monk character wants to pray with his partner before a tag-team match and his partner refuses, on the grounds that he “believes in science.”  I think this is a common sentiment that if a person believes in God, he or she must then discard Science, and vice versa, that if a person embraces Science, subsequently he or she must reject God.  This simply is not the case!  The process of experimentation that is the hallmark of Science sprang to life, took root, and flourished within the Christian cradle of Europe in the Seventeenth century.  Early founding fathers of Science such as Johannes Kepler, Galileo Galilei, Blaise Pascal, and Isaac Newton were Christians and their study of the Bible and their faith in its teachings of the world and God propelled their research and ideas, and since Darwin, there have still been many Christian scientists who have offered much in scientific theory, philosophy, and discovery, such as Charles Townes, who invented lasers and won the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1964.  A simple search on-line will reveal large lists of reputable, accomplished scientists who hold position in academia.  Science and Christianity are only at odds, if certain scientists claim that God has no place in Science whatsoever.

Option 2 – Science Depends on God Answer – It might appear as though God and Science clash, and that Christianity and Science are irreconcilable due to theories of Evolution, but in fact, Science depends on God to even function.  Science emerged out of a society dominated by the Christian worldview and it arose there instead of elsewhere because of specific beliefs that accompany the Christian worldview, namely that God created the world to be good and orderly and that he preserves his creation in such a way that there is uniformity and consistency across all the universe.  These beliefs are essential to the Scientific Enterprise that depends on the ability to repeat tests in the exact same manner again and again.  This can only happen if we can trust that the laws of nature are the same today as they were yesterday and that they’ll be the same tomorrow and forever, not just where we are at where we are conducting the test, but anywhere in the universe.  Other worldviews didn’t provide the basis for believing there are consistent, unchanging laws of nature.

Option 3 – Naturalism Provides no Basis for Science Answer – If there is no God and nothing supernatural resides in the universe; all that exists would have to be natural, purely physical material.  This naturalistic model of the world reduces all things to constantly progressing, shifting, evolving matter.  There is no purpose or design behind the universe or our lives, and any indication towards this is solely coincidental. Such a worldview cannot provide any basis for the uniform laws of nature that are necessary for the Scientific Method of repeatable testability.  If our sensory organs are the product of chance, can their relayed observations and data be trusted?  Such a worldview provides no reason to explore and pursue a deeper understanding of the world; we already know that the cosmos is purposeless and in constant flux; we’re here today and gone tomorrow; what is now will no longer be; we might as well eat, drink, and be merry; enjoy our material possessions and freedom, drinking deep of the well of hedonism for as long as we have the means to do so.  Naturalism must borrow from Christian theology to obtain the required presuppositions necessary to practice Science.

Option 4 – Show Me Answer –Darwin’s theory, although labeled, “The Origin of Species,” is used to provide a model for the “Origin of Life,” and even the “Origin of the Universe.”  Such hypothetical models can never be proven via Science, since none of them can be submitted to the necessary modes of testing required under the Scientific Method to verify a hypothesis.  We have to admit that we can observe evolution today, people are gradually getting taller and stronger, just look at the rise of concussions in American Football!  I can see that people who have ancestry closer to the equator are darker skinned, and that people with ancestry from Asia have dark hair and dark eyes.  Such visible signs today support evolution within the human race, but there is no evidence that we are evolving into something more than human, such as the mutants of Marvel’s X-Men or mutants with telekinetic abilities as displayed in the Bruce Willis movie, Looper.  As of yet, such degrees of evolution, one species changing into a new, different species, isn’t observable except in the realm of Science-Fiction.

Other problems also emerge with the model of Darwinian Evolution and Science.  Has it ever once been observed that organic material can come from non-organic material?  In other words, can life come from non-life? Has it ever been observed that a random pile of scrap material can explode and form a city of skyscrapers with an infrastructure of roads and utilities complete with humans, pets, birds, and insects to populate it, and function?  In other words, can the Big Bang produce the world we see now?  Has it ever been observed that material can come from the immaterial?  In other words, can the primordial soup that exploded in the Big Bang have popped into existence from nothing?  If you can show me any observable evidence to fit any of these questions, then there might be some credibility to your worldview.  Since there is none, I want you to consider the Christian worldview to such answers instead as they fit with what we have observed as being possible: the universe was created by a Creator, not nothing, life came from the highest form of Life, God, not non-life, universal order, design, and laws of nature came from a divine Orderer, not mindless chaos!

Option 5 – Game On Answer – If you are correct, and there is no God, that everything is the product of purposeless, mindless, random chance, that there is no objective basis for morality, that when I die I’m good and gone, and that survival of the fittest is truly what makes the world go round, then Game On – Viking Status!  I’d take whatever I want and do whatever I want and the only way to stop me would be to kill me, at which point, I would no longer exist to know my past or to have a cognitive future.  I’d be worm-food, nothing else, nothing more.  However, I’ve believed in God and I’ve worshipped him since my earliest memories, and I like to think that he saved me at such a young age, because he knew what I would do if I had a worldview like yours.  You ought to be very thankful that I have a relationship with Jesus, because if I truly believed what you confess to believe concerning Darwinian Evolution, I’d be the world’s worst nightmare.

Back to the Gospel:

The Darwinian worldview provides no purpose for life besides survival and it offers no hope after death, besides escape from pain and suffering, at the cost of annihilation.  The Bible shows that God created humanity in his image, which sets us apart from the animal kingdom.  It’s the reason Scripture provides for why we are not to harm, curse, or murder our fellow humanity.  Being made in his image, we had eternal life, perfection, intellectual abilities for decision moral decision making, discovery, and creativity that the rest of creation lacked.  We also had relational capabilities for intimate relationship with God that the animal kingdom was missing.  When Adam and Eve sinned in the Garden of Eden, the image of God was tarnished; we became sinful, subject to death, and cut-off from God.  We retained aspects of the image of God however, which is evident through our creation and use of the Scientific Enterprise. It is through Jesus, that a way back to God has been established and in him that the Image of God is being restored within us.  Repent comes from a Greek word that actually means to change one’s mind. Repent – turn from your evil ways and turn to Jesus for the cleansing of your sins and the renewal of your mind.

How do religions contradict each other?

If someone says that all religions have the same teachings, and same basic principles, and you share that this is not the case; religions contradict each other in ways that are irreconcilable to anyone who is an orthodox adherent to their religion of choice.  To be able to back up your assertion, simply have memorized a few doctrinal categories and several of the world’s religions’ positions for each of those categories.  Spitting out a few examples of what different religions teach, say, in the categories of who God is, what the source and focus of revelation is, and what lies after this life, should be enough to demonstrate some very stark contrasts in beliefs.  Clearly, all religions don’t teach the same views on life, God, and the destiny of mankind, but can you quickly demonstrate it?

The following image is a photo I took of a student’s test that asked this basic question.  Check out how he answered the question (click the image to enlarge):

Religious Contradictions

Contradict #14 – God Bless All Nations and Postmodernism

This is the first Contradict – They Can’t All Be True video that does not present the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  For that, I apologize.  Watch the other videos to hear the Gospel message.

Before the Modern world, we blindly trusted in authority.  For God, that meant we just trusted the Bible as the Word of God and believed whatever the Church taught us.

In the Modern world, we trusted in logic, reason, and science. These were helpful tools in helping us interpret the Bible.

In the Postmodern world, an emerging worldview that hasn’t yet fully replaced Modernism, we are confronted with many opposing beliefs, religions, morals, and customs and many of us can’t apply our logic and reason to justify why one belief system is true and another false, especially since we can see elements of truth in all of them.  This has led to relativism.  We now trust in experience and intuition to guide our beliefs concerning God.

I found a God Bless All Nations bumper sticker.  This is a good depiction of postmodernism.  Words and symbols can be deconstructed to mean anything an individual wants.  In relativism, everything goes.  What’s true for you is true for you.

Overtime this can leave us in a state of being dazed and confused, and when it’s been so long, we can’t tell what’s true anymore.  God Bless All Nations!  If God is blessing nations why don’t we see flags representing countries?  Are religions now nations?  Or it is trying to say that religions are now so spread out over the world that these religions can be found in many  nations, and since God blesses all nations, then he must therefore be blessing all religions too?  Of is it trying to say that God can be found in all of these religions and that that God blesses all nations?  Or is it saying that America isn’t a Christian nation?  Or is it saying that Americans shouldn’t say “God Bless America,” they should say “God Bless all Nations?”  In postmodernism, it can mean anything I want it to mean, and you can’t tell me I’m wrong, except I think words do have meaning, and so do symbols… these meanings can change overtime, but we still have to be able to recognize the different definitions, but in postmodernism changes can happen overnight based on some video or image going “viral,” and we don’t have to recognize the contradictions anymore, since everything is now true! So I am left in complete frustration.  Come Lord Jesus, Come!


Why did Jesus not say, “I am God,” if he is God?

I made a blog post addressing how Jesus claimed to be God without using the exact words I am God.  I received a question on that post from someone wanting to know why he didn’t actually use the words, “I am God,” if he actually is God.  I think it’s a great question.  Usually I have heard answers like,”Even though he didn’t say, “I am God,” the Jews of his day recognized that he was saying he was God.  We just miss it not knowing the culture and theology of 1st century Judaism.”

Well, here’s a reply that came to my mind recently when this question was asked in my apologetics class.  Let me know what you think of this answer, because, I don’t think I’ve ever heard or read anyone else use this reply:

It’s troublesome to us that he didn’t actually say “I am God.” However, I think he didn’t say this because he isn’t God, he’s Jesus the Son. Whenever Jesus said God, and when the apostles wrote God in their letters, they were referring to the Father, and not the Trinity, a majority of the time. If he said that he is God, it might be taken to mean that he and the Father are the same person, which they are not. God exists in three distinct persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, all of whom share in the same divine essence (nature).


I think his language is used this way because part of his role as Savior was to reveal the Father to us, and I think his use of Trinitarian language does just that.


In John 10:30-33, Jesus says that He and the Father are one. I have read that the Greek indicates that He and the Father are one not in person, but in deity. The translation might be read in English as “I and the Father, we are one.” The word used for one is neutered. The Greek language is like Spanish in that words have gender. Using the neutered, asexual “one” instead of the masculine one, indicates they are one in nature, not personhood.


As difficult as it may be for us to understand why Jesus didn’t say, “I am God,” the Jewish leaders of the 1st Century had no problem understanding that he was making himself equal to the Father and thus they wanted to kill him for blasphemy!


Read the previous article about how Jesus claimed to be God: