Chapter 4.13

The Insanity of Humanity I

The Suppression of Revelation

Overall Objective

To illustrate how dysfunctional unregenerated reason is even in the face of clear divine revelation.

Table of Topics

A) The Suppression of the Message of Creation: Rom 1:18-23

A.1) The Message is God’s lordship & wrath, not just His existence

A.2) Why is there no excuse? The message really is understood

A.3) The real reason they don’t believe: Hating scary truth

A.4) The insanity of evolution

B) The Suppression of the Message of Miracles: The insanity of Pharaoh & Pharisees

C) The Suppression of the Message of Conscience

C.1) The “unpardonable sin”

C.2) Reaching a “point of no return”

Extras & Endnotes

Primary Points

• Not understanding that God created everything perverts unregenerated humanity’s understanding of the nature and purpose of Creation and all of life.
• Creation does not simply declare that there is a god, but that there is one God worthy of our worship.
• All reasoning humans are not only capable of understanding the message of Creation, but actually do understand it.
• The real reason people reject the message of Creation is that they hate God.
• The effects of sin on the mind are in direct proportion to the distance of a certain academic discipline from spiritual or religious truths.
• There are no mere arguments strong or numerous enough to break the bondage and control that the sinful nature has over the unregenerated mind.
• Like the miracle of Creation, devil-darkened reason is prone to suppressing the reality or true meaning of any miracle.
• The domination of the sinful nature in unregenerated people will not allow them to accept any divine revelation that would dethrone it.
• “The unpardonable sin” is being exposed to so much clear revelation of who Jesus Christ is, and still refusing to accept Him for who He is. It reveals devil-darkened reason at a point of no return.
• It is because of the culminating depravity of devil-darkened reason that the Last Days will be the real Dark Age.

A) The Suppression of the Message of Creation:

Rom 1:18-23

A.1) The message is God’s lordship & wrath, not just His existence

Many unregenerate scientists and mathematicians have demonstrated remarkable logical reasoning abilities. But the affect of devil-darkened reason in their lives leaves them blind to particularly spiritual truths that effect many scientific truths. For example, ignoring that humans and all the Universe were created by an all-powerful personal God, leaves unregenerate humans at a distinct disadvantage in fully understanding the nature and purpose of Creation and all of life. The Apostle illustrates how the reasoning of the unregenerate is dysfunctional when he describes how they erroneously process the clear data provided by Creation:

The wrath of God is being revealed from Heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities–His eternal power and divine nature–have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

For although they knew God, they neither glorified Him as God nor gave thanks to Him, but their thinking [dialogismois: “reasoning”] became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles. (Rom 1:18-23)

Several vital truths are taught here. First, the “message” that Creation sends is a demonstration of God’s “eternal power and divine nature” (v. 20). In other words, Creation does not only demonstrate the existence of God, but His worthiness and right to be our only God. If it were enough to simply believe there was a god, than those who believe so would be excused. However, the message of Creation should have resulted in humanity recognizing not only that God exists, but that He should be “glorified” and honored as our rightful Lord, and given “thanks” for being our ultimate Provider and Sustainer (cf. v. 21). In other words, the message of Creation actually declares the First Commandment: “I am the LORD your God . . . You shall have no other gods before Me” (Exod 20:2-3).

The unbelief toward the full message of Creation results in idolatry because spiritually dead humanity misses the fact that God is to be worshipped above all, and instead they worship and serve other things before Him. Accordingly, the Apostle describes such idolatry a few verses later when he writes they, “exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images” (v.23). Even the most religious, but unregenerated person is guilty of idolatry if they do not submit to the message of God’s lordship in Creation.

It is tempting to apply the Apostle’s universal condemnation to only those who become particularly depraved as described in Romans 1:24-32, and conclude that moral, religious humans who actually do believe there is a God are not included here. While it is conceded that many humans live in accordance with a belief in God, even striving for morality, this is not enough. Even their “righteous acts are like filthy rags” (Isa 64:6) because they believe they can pay for their sin and earn their forgiveness, which ultimately is self-worship, not God-worship, and glorifies themselves, rather than the Savior.

In addition, the unregenerate who interpret Creation as merely revealing a Creator, usually interpret Him to their liking as a benevolent God Who loves them enough to create them and Creation. On the contrary, the Apostle states here that the intended message of Creation is not the love of God, but His “wrath” (cf. Eph 2:3; John 3:18, 36).

A.2) Why is there no excuse? The message really is understood

A second thing the Apostle teaches us in Romans 1 is that humanity is guilty, justly condemned, and “without excuse” (v. 20) for not responding correctly to the message of Creation. There are several reasons why. First, the message is unmistakable, “plain” (v. 19), and “clearly seen” (v. 20). Secondly, the God-given faculty of human reason is dependable and powerful enough to understand there is a Creator by recognizing His handiwork in the supernatural order and immensity of Creation. Like deciphering 1+1+1=3, God has made the mind fully capable of observing the data of Creation, concluding there is a Creator, and further deducing enough about His character, that they would infer that they owe Him their worship. And those theological conclusions are hardly more difficult or complex than a simple mathematical conclusion.

It should not be missed here that the Apostle is extolling the capabilities of human reason. We do not need some direct, supernatural communication from God to make us inexcusable for not believing in God. And it is precisely because God has given us a reasoning faculty with such great capabilities that we are justly condemned for not reaching the right conclusions. ^[1]

However, the ultimate reason we are “without excuse” is because all reasoning humans really do understand the message of Creation. This is precisely what King David is implying about Creation when he writes:

The Heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of His hands. Day after day they pour forth speech; night after night they display knowledge. There is no speech or language where their voice is not heard. Their voice goes out into all the Earth, their words to the ends of the world. (Ps 19:1-4)

While David insists that all humanity has “heard” the message of Creation, the Apostle insists they have “seen” it (Rom 1:20). Creation is not simply an opportunity to see God that some will miss, and others will recognize. On the contrary, the Apostle says that if a person has seen Creation, then they have also automatically and inexcusably “clearly seen” and “understood” both God’s “eternal power and divine nature” (Rom 1:20). Accordingly, NT scholar Douglas Moo comments:

Just what does the Apostle mean when he claims that human beings “see” and “understand” from Creation . . . that a powerful God exists? Some think that Paul is asserting only that people have around them the evidence of God’s existence and basic qualities; whether people actually perceive it or become personally conscious of it is not clear. Paul’s wording suggests more than this. He asserts that people actually come to “understand” something about God’s existence and nature. How universal is this perception? The flow of Paul’s argument makes any limitation impossible. ^[2]

J. I. Packer adds:

In all this, Paul’s point is not that of [Thomas] Aquinas [and other “Natural” theologians], that the existence of God is abstractly provable by argument from created things, but the much more fundamental point that God’s existence and law are actually known to all men, even where both are denied in theory and in practice. ^[3]

In other words, all reasoning humans have clearly understood that there is a God deserving their worship. They simply have not believed it. Accordingly, we have written elsewhere:

In simplest terms, our knowledge is what we understand. However, it is important to note here that we do not believe everything we know or understand. Accordingly, the Apostle Paul says that, in regards to unbelievers, the revelation of Creation has made God’s “eternal power and divine nature” “plain to them,” “clearly seen [kathorao ^[4]], being understood [noieo ^[5]]” such that “they knew [gnōntes: “had knowledge of”] God” (Rom 1:19-21).

The gnōsis (“knowledge”) word group of NT Greek does not automatically imply an acceptance of such knowledge such that it becomes belief. In general it means to merely understand, perceive, or know what a certain collection of data means. ^[6] However, such knowledge may fall short of believing that the data that we understand is also true.

Accordingly, understanding and knowing Creation’s message about God is not the same thing as accepting it as true and therefore believing it. It is because unbelievers adequately understand and have a knowledge of the message of God’s existence that they “are without excuse” (v. 20). It is because they do not believe the message that “they neither glorified Him as God nor gave thanks to Him” (v. 21). This is because anyone who truly does believe the message of Creation will do so. ^[7]

Simply put, such people do not actually accept or believe what they understand about God. While it is necessary to first understand a message to believe it, it must also be accepted. devil-darkened reason understands the message of Creation, it simply will not accept it. People act according to their beliefs, and because of what people do with the information they receive about God, it is clear they do not believe what Creation says about God. As noted above, Creation does not simply declare that there is a god, but that there is one God worthy of our worship. Because humanity does not act accordingly, it is obvious that while they understand, they do not really believe the message of Creation. ^[8]

A.3) The real reason they don’t believe: Hating scary truth

While the above can suffice for the philosophical answer as to why humans are not rightly affected by Creation’s message, the Apostle shares the answer in psychological terms as well when he says they “suppress the truth by their wickedness” (1:18). The suppression of truth by a person’s reasoning reflects a great deal of dysfunctionality. Accordingly, the Apostle says that as a result of such suppression of obvious truth to become belief, “their thinking [dialogismois: “reasoning”] became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened” (v. 21). As Dr. Moo notes: “It is in the “reasonings” of people that this futility has taken place, showing that, whatever their initial knowledge of God might be, their natural capacity to reason accurately about God is quickly and permanently harmed.” ^[9]

What does it mean then that this truth is suppressed “by their wickedness”? We would suggest that this does not refer so much to their wicked behavior, but to their wicked reasoning. The most obvious message that the wicked desire to “suppress” is the fact that, “The wrath of God is being revealed from Heaven” (v. 18). It is not that Creation might reveal “the wrath of God . . . from Heaven” but it, like any other divine revelation, fulfills the purpose God has for it, ^[10] and it universally, unrelentingly, and unmistakably does reveal God’s anger toward sinful humanity. The divine communiqué from Creation is that the One powerful enough to create the Universe we see, is also very angry about our wickedness. Such a scary truth is understandably repressed. How would you like to be reminded day after day by a big billboard in the sky that the Creator is really ticked off at you because of the way you are living?

In addition, unregenerated humans have reasoned to beliefs that simply will not allow them to believe the message of Creation. Such beliefs include the fact that if “God’s . . . eternal power and divine nature” were allowed to be a controlling belief in their life, the result would be the pain of guilt (and the loss of happiness), because of their “wickedness” (Rom 1:18-20). It is their “wickedness” that they desire to pursue for pleasure, security, and significance, and any data that would hinder that will be suppressed. For anyone not intending to make the Creator their Lord, the message of Creation is a threat to their ultimate pursuit of happiness. Accordingly the Apostle also says they “did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God” (Rom 1:28).

The Apostle describes this internal suppression of belief in the unregenerate when he writes:

Those who live according to the sinful nature [i.e. only unbelievers ^[11]] have their minds set on what that nature desires. . . . The sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God’s law [or the reasonable conclusions regarding God from Creation], nor can it do so. (Rom 8:5-7).

Essentially, mental dysfunction regarding the truths about God is not because there is something lacking in the reasoning faculties of unregenerate humans, but rather, it is because unregenerate humans hate God. ^[12] Along these lines, Blaise Pascal (1623-1662) wrote: “Human things must be known to be loved; but Divine things must be loved to be known.” ^[13] Accordingly, unregenerated humanity cannot know God because they hate Him and instead “love delusions and [therefore] seek false gods” (Ps 4:2).

Humans have a remarkable ability to believe what they want to believe, and reject what they want to reject, if it somehow serves themselves. Because the unregenerate mind is “set on what [the sinful] nature desires” it does not allow a place for God. Because “the sinful mind is hostile to God,” it commands and coerces unregenerated humans to ignore and repress what they know about God. More than this, the “sinful nature,” twists and redirects it to effectively and creatively reason against God, and for another god, really any god, except the God it hates. And because their mind will “not submit to God’s law” or His worship, “nor can it [even] do so,” it will not allow them to, “think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God” (Rom 1:28).

If the mind were allowed to retain the message of Creation, the sinful, God-hating nature would be dethroned. But it is not a willing martyr. Regardless of what truth about God is understood and even known by reason, the hostile, idolatrous, and satanically controlled nature will suppress such knowledge in order to maintain its lordship over its slave (cf. Rom 6:6, 16-17, 20; 7:14, 25). ^[14] And there are no mere arguments strong or numerous enough to break the bondage and control that the sinful nature has over the unregenerated mind. This is why apologetic arguments for unbelievers often have a limited value, and why we must be supernaturally regenerated by God before being able to have saving faith.

Others have described this process of suppression as follows. NT scholar John Stott explains regarding Romans 1:18-23: “[T]hey have made an a priori decision to live for themselves, rather than for God and others, and therefore deliberately stifle any truth which challenges their self-centeredness.” ^[15] It is because unbelievers believe that such God-ignoring self-centeredness will bring them happiness that they will not allow another belief to the contrary. ^[16]

Along these lines, nineteenth century theologians John McClintock (1814-1870) and James Strong (1822-1892) provide an interesting illustration of how our fundamental beliefs can suppress what data we accept as true:

Let a man who hears the forty-seventh proposition of Euclid announced for the first time and trace the steps of the demonstration, and he must believe it to be true; but let him know that as soon as he does perceive the evidence of that proposition, so as to believe it on that ground, he shall lose his right eye, and he will never trace the evidence, or come to that belief which results from the force of the only proper evidence. You may tell him it is true, but he will reply that he does not know — he does not see it to be so. . . .

Certainly, if God has provided evidence as convincing as that for the forty-seventh proposition of Euclid, so that all men have to do is to examine it with candor, then they must be without excuse if they do not believe. . . . The difficulty will not lie in their mental constitution as related to evidence, nor in the want of evidence, but in that moral condition, that state of the heart [i.e. belief of what would happen if they did believe it]. . . which prevented a proper examination. ^[17]

Likewise, theologians R. C. Sproul, John Gerstner, and Arthur Lindsey summarize our thoughts concerning the repression of the message of Creation in the unregenerated mind when they write:

The pagan’s problem is not that he does not know that God is, but that he does not like the God who is . . . Here [Rom 1:18-32] the apostle charges that paganism is generated not by intellectual causes but by moral ones. The problem is not that there is insufficient evidence to convince rational beings of the existence of God, but that rational beings in their present fallen condition have a natural antipathy to the being of God. In a word, the nature of God (at least the true God) is repugnant to humans–pagan and secular . . .

It is important to note that Paul does not deny the ability of natural man to reason or even to reason correctly if free of prejudice. The problem is not in the capacity for thought per se, but in the thought process that begins and is maintained by prejudice to the facts. The intellectual problem is produced by the moral problem, not the moral problem by an intellectual one. ^[18]

In other words, unregenerated humanity does not find God in Creation for the same reason a thief does not find a policeman. They do not want to!

A.4) The insanity of evolution

Thus far, then, we have noted that the message of Creation is unmistakable, and that humans are not only capable of understanding it, but actually do understand it. These facts make humanity’s response all the more incredible. Even though all humans perceive the message of Creation, unregenerate humans do not receive it. Instead of acting in accord with what they understand, they do the opposite. “For although they knew God, they neither glorified Him as God nor gave thanks to Him . . . and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles” (vs. 21, 23). It is as if they look at 1+1+1 and know that it adds up to 3, but refuse to accept the correct answer and insist that the answer is 5. If someone were to do mathematics the way humanity does “natural” theology, they would rightly be called insane, thus explaining the title to this chapter: The Insanity of Humanity.

More specifically, the twisted creativity of the spiritually dead mind is fully illustrated by the fact that in spite of the supernatural attributes of Creation, much of humanity has concluded that such data proves natural evolutionary theories. There is no philosophy or scientific theory in all the history of the world that violates and denies the observed facts more than this one. Accordingly, many a Christian has looked at those facts, and scratched their head wondering how could “reasonable” intelligent people believe such an obviously impossible myth?

Erwin Lutzer describes the illogical “mathematics” involved when he comments that we “marvel that there are actually some scientists who believe that nothing times nobody equals everything.” ^[19] Likewise, the widespread denial of the obvious geological evidence for a worldwide flood is inexplicable apart from the Bible’s teaching that spiritually dead humans are mentally blind to such things.

No atheist was more influential in the last century than the brilliant biochemist and author Isaac Asimov (1920-1992). Asimov marveled at the complexity of the human brain, but his commitment to evolutionary theory forced him to answer the question how such a wonder could develop from sea slime. His answer: energy from the sun somehow provided the information necessary to create life and ultimately the human brain. ^[20]

Likewise, another of the more famous atheists of the twentieth century, Bertrand Russell (1872-1970), wrote in his book, Why I Am Not a Christian:

God and immortality, the central dogmas of the Christian religion, find no support in science. . . . No doubt people will continue to entertain these beliefs, because they are pleasant, just as it is pleasant to think ourselves virtuous and our enemies wicked. But for my part I cannot see any ground for either. ^[21]

Was Mr. Russell’s failure to “see” any evidence for “God” due to the fact that there is none, or that his “eyes,” and more specifically, his “heart” were dysfunctional? The Apostle would say the latter.

More recently, the Oxford scientist Richard Dawkins, perhaps the most famous atheist living today, has demonstrated both the insanity of spiritually dead humanity and their misplaced arrogance when he writes: “It is absolutely safe to say that if you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid, or insane (or wicked, but I’d rather not consider that).” ^[22] His best theory for how life originated on Earth is that aliens planted it here, and this is only because aliens are less threatening to this scientist than God. ^[23]

Nonetheless, despite the fact that evolution is taught as science in all public education institutions, most humans are not as mentally insane as Dr. Dawkins, even many of the most respected scientists throughout history and the world today. ^[24] The fellow atheist and equally insane Sam Harris, in his Letter to a Christian Nation, seems confused that others do not share his insanity when he writes:

According to a recent Gallup poll [and in spite of all the public education!], only 12 percent of Americans believe that life on earth has evolved through a natural process, without the interference of deity. . . .

If our worldview were put to a vote, notions of “intelligent design” would defeat the science of biology by nearly three to one. This is troubling, as nature offers no compelling evidence for an intelligent designer and countless examples of unintelligent design. ^[25]

Is Mr. Harris offering himself as a prime example of unintelligence? Not surprisingly, Richard Dawkins endorses the book and writes: “Read it if it is the last thing you do.” Such men are not only insane, but they are wicked, and they will meet the Creator they mock someday soon.

Such insanity not only infects science, but philosophy as well. For example, the influential French philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-1980) answered the question of “Why are we here?” by claiming that “all of life is an empty bubble on the sea of nothingness.” ^[26] It is the philosophical insanity of devil-darkened reason that makes many unbelievers such horrible scientists. Philip Johnson in his critique of evolutionary theories of Creation, quotes the evolutionist Richard C. Lewontin, who explains why Creation Science should be rejected:

We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism.

It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counterintuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated [or the reasonable!]. Moreover, [we believe] that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door. ^[27]

In reality that “Divine Foot” is through the door and in their face, but they refuse to recognize it.

While devil-darkened reason certainly has its affects even on scientific reasoning, we would still suggest that they are most related to the spiritual realm instead of the scientific realm. Some have pointed out that the affects of sin on the mind are in direct proportion to the distance of a certain discipline from spiritual or religious truths. In other words, devil-darkened reason will be much more capable of processing mathematical truths, rather than theological ones. Neither the sinful nature, nor the devil cares about discoveries in calculus, but only those truths that threaten to rival their hold on the unregenerate mind.

Finally, unregenerated humanity’s suppression of the clear message of Creation has its moral affects. This may be demonstrated in the most graphic way by the fact that we continue to murder millions of babies in their mother’s womb. The great Presbyterian preacher D. James Kennedy (1930-2007) illustrated this insanity of humanity when he writes:

Evolution, which simply reduces man to the animal kingdom and ultimately makes him no different from an animal, leads to the kind of thinking today which prompts people to go to enormous lengths to save the eggs of turtles but do nothing to save an unborn human being! We have vastly greater penalties for anybody breaking or touching endangered turtle eggs than we have for killing a fetal human being, who is also in a sense in an egg. I am all in favor of people caring for animals, but the irony [insanity!] is that usually these people care little about the slaughter of millions of unborn children. ^[28]

B) The Suppression of the Message of Miracles: The Insanity of Pharaoh & Pharisees

Creation is not the only miracle of God that devil-darkened reason refuses to accept or seeks to redefine. We see this repression of evidence for God by the sinful, unregenerated mind being illustrated throughout Scripture. This explains the otherwise inexplicable insanity of Pharaoh. God’s purpose in this is described when we read:

The LORD had said to Moses, “Pharaoh will refuse to listen to you—so that My wonders may be multiplied in Egypt.” Moses and Aaron performed all these wonders before Pharaoh, but the LORD hardened Pharaoh’s heart, and he would not let the Israelites go out of his country. (Exod 11:9; cf. 14:4; esp. 9:15-17; Rom 9:16-18)

Pharaoh’s “hardened . . . heart,” simply allowed God to be more glorified. Indeed, Pharaoh witnessed perhaps the most convincing concentration of divine “wonders” in all of history, and yet his unregenerated sinful mind would not allow him to properly process the message of these miracles. His inability to repent is illustrated after the plague of “the worst storm in all the land of Egypt since it had become a nation” (Exod 9:24). Pharaoh exhibits some sanity when he responds:

This time I have sinned . . . The LORD is in the right, and I and my people are in the wrong. Pray to the LORD, for we have had enough thunder and hail. I will let you go; you don’t have to stay any longer. (Exod 9:27-28)

Yet, Moses replied, “I know that you and your officials still do not fear the Lord God” (v. 30) and sure enough:

When Pharaoh saw that the rain and hail and thunder had stopped, he sinned again: He and his officials hardened their hearts. So Pharaoh’s heart was hard and he would not let the Israelites go, just as the LORD had said through Moses. (Exod 9:34-35)

Pharaoh’s painful and desperate battle with his spiritually dead, deaf, and blind heart intensified as the plagues worsened, resulting in a repeated cycle of apparent repentance and then insane hardening pride (cf. Exod 10:7-11, 16-20, 24-28; 14:1-6). While God certainly displayed His glory and power in these events, He also revealed how stubborn, destructive, painful, and insane the heart of unregenerated humanity can be.

Yet it was not only God’s enemies who displayed such unbelief, but the Israelites themselves did as well. God did among them the most amazing miracles God has ever done. And yet their faith in Him was like wax that melts with the least bit of heat. The Psalmist provides a brief excerpt of the sad spiritual history of ancient Israel when we read:

The waters covered their adversaries; not one of them survived. Then they believed His promises and sang His praise. But they soon forgot what He had done and did not wait for His counsel. In the desert they gave in to their craving; in the wasteland they put God to the test. (Ps 106:11-14; cf. 78:32)

We would suggest that this is a graphic portrayal of the demonic influences against the worship of God, which work unceasingly and uninhibited on the unregenerate mind to suppress and squelch the retention of any evidence concerning who God really is. ^[29] Accordingly, it would seem Moses referred to their unregenerated state in the following passage:

Moses summoned all the Israelites and said to them: Your eyes have seen all that the LORD did in Egypt to Pharaoh, to all his officials and to all his land. With your own eyes you saw those great trials, those miraculous signs and great wonders. But to this day the LORD has not given you a [regenerated] mind that understands or eyes that see or ears that hear. (Deut 29:2-4)

One is obviously reminded as well of many of those who personally witnessed Christ’s miracle working. Along these lines, the Apostle John writes:

Even after Jesus had done all these miraculous signs in their presence, they still would not believe in Him. This was to fulfill the word of Isaiah the Prophet: “Lord, who has believed our message and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?” For this reason they could not believe, because, as Isaiah says elsewhere: “He has blinded their eyes and deadened their hearts, so they can neither see with their eyes, nor understand with their hearts, nor turn—and I would heal them.” (John 12:37-40)

The Pharisees were the ultimate example of such epistemological blindness. Their sinful nature so twisted and redirected their God-given reason that they concluded that a man with the virtues of Christ was actually performing His miracles, “by Beelzebub” (Matt 12:24). Accordingly we read:

The Jews gathered around Him, saying, “How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly.” Jesus answered, “I did tell you, but you do not believe. The miracles I do in My Father’s name speak for Me, but you do not believe because you are not My sheep. (John 10:24-6)

It was not because of a lack of evidence that these inquirers did not believe, but the King said it was because they did not belong to Him, and accordingly, were not regenerated.

Likewise, in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, the King remarks that if the rich man’s brothers, “do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead” (Luke 16:31). Accordingly, the great Dutch Reformed theologian Abraham Kuyper (1837–1920) wrote:

[T]he miracle alone has no convincing power. The unbeliever begins with denying it. He explains it from natural causes. He neither will nor can see God’s hand in it. And when it is so convincing that he can not deny it, he says: “It is of the devil.” But he will not acknowledge that it is the power of God.

Therefore to make the miracle effectual, the Holy Spirit must also open the eyes of them that witness it to see the power of God therein. All our reading of the miracles in our Bible is unprofitable unless the Holy Spirit opens our eyes, and then we see them live, hear their testimony, experience their power, and glorify God for His mighty works. ^[30]

For the Pharisees to accept the obvious reason for Christ’s miracle-working would have led to His recognition as their rightful Lord, and their sinful nature would have none of it. Likewise, they did not deny that Christ had performed the amazing miracle of raising Lazarus from the dead (cf. John 11:46-7). However, their sinful nature would not allow their unregenerated mind to accept the significance and meaning of Christ’s deeds and so, “from that day on they plotted to take His life” (John 11:53), instead of worship Him.

Imagine not having the least bit of fear or respect for a man able to give life to someone who has been dead for four days (cf. John 11:17). Imagine concluding that a man, who saved the life of another, should be killed. Such is the mental insanity and moral depravity that comes from the devil’s domination and oppression of our God-given reasoning faculties.

The Pharisees’ insanity is demonstrated every Easter by contemporary humanity as well. Millions celebrate the historical fact of Christ’s resurrection from the dead, but its miraculous message is obscured and distorted by devil-darkened reason such that it does not result in the reasonable conclusion that Jesus Christ is their Lord.

It is not only physical miracles such as healing that the unregenerate will deny, but also the ultimate and spiritual miracle of supernatural love. ^[31] We have argued elsewhere that only Christians are able to exercise unconditional agape love, ^[32] and that it is the ultimate supernatural proof of the exclusiveness of Christianity for the salvation of humanity. ^[33] Not surprisingly, God-hating humans have attempted to explain this away as well.

For example, Christian apologist Arthur Lindsey notes that Charles Darwin, the father of evolutionary theory, “maintained that any truly other-centered trait ‘would annihilate my theory, for such could not have been produced by natural selection.’” Accordingly, atheist Richard Dawkins believes, “Universal love and the welfare of the species as a whole are concepts which simply do not make evolutionary sense.” ^[34] The kind of supernatural, unconditional love that Christians can exhibit even toward their enemies is something mere materialism cannot explain. Nonetheless, Lindsey explains:

Dawkins knows that humans are capable of altruistic love, as we saw earlier. How does he explain his materialism and the “selfish gene”? The professor I spoke with maintains that Dawkins gives up pure genetic materialism. Dawkins postulates that, in addition to genes, there exist memes-nonmaterial entities that infect the human mind and make people do what they wouldn’t do otherwise. These memes seem to hop from person to person like a virus.

Dawkins makes up this vague, unsubstantiated, unverified meme to explain things like religion or agape love. The professor raises the somewhat facetious question, “How is a meme-something that inhabits human minds and makes people behave in ways their biology can’t explain-different from a demon? Or the Holy Spirit?”

In fact, Dawkins calls altruistic actions that are not done to kin or that are not motivated by direct or indirect reciprocal benefits misfires or Darwinian mistakes. It is equivalent, Dawkins says, to this kind of scenario: when a mother bird returns to her nest with food, her instinct tells her to put the food in whatever gaping mouths she sees, without noticing that another species of bird has mistakenly gotten into the nest. Thus, all of the most noble, self-sacrificing deeds of humanity are reduced to dropping worms into the wrong genetic mouths. Agape love is a genetic misfiring or a Darwinian mistake. Is not such an account suspect? ^[35]

More than suspect, it is insane.

The effects of devil-darkened reason is one reason why those who deny the authenticity of the miracles recorded in Scripture are hardly in a position to convincingly claim they are born again Christians. A denial of the biblical miracles normally exposes an spiritually dead mind that, underneath all the religious veneer, is actually “hostile to God” (Rom 8:7) and unwilling to give Him the glory He deserves. ^[36]

C) The Suppression of the Message of Conscience

C.1) The “unpardonable sin”

Christ’s response to the Pharisees’ accusation of demon possession was His opportunity to refer to the “unpardonable sin”:

And so I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come. (Matt 12:31-2; cf. Mark 3:22-23; Luke 12:9-10)

What then is “the unpardonable sin”? There has been a great deal of thought throughout the history of the Church on this issue. ^[37] In our opinion, simply put, the “unpardonable sin” is being exposed to so much clear revelation of who Jesus Christ is, and still refusing to accept Him for who He is. ^[38] Still, it is not so much the particular sin of blaspheming the work of the Holy Spirit like this that is unforgivable. Rather, it is that such sin reveals a conscience that is hardened beyond repentance, and a mind that is so distorted that it will not properly reason. Every sin that is truly repented of will be forgiven, it is just that such people are beyond such repentance, nor have any desire to do so.

Let it be added here that no Christian who is worried about whether or not they have committed this sin should think they have. The kind of person who has committed “the unpardonable sin” doesn’t care, and would do it again, given the opportunity. Obviously then, those who would worry that they have committed “the unpardonable sin,” haven’t, because those who have will not have a troubled conscience.

In addition, a belief that a regenerated Christian could commit an unforgiveable sin is incompatible with Scripture’s teaching of the promise of eternal life. Mark records Christ’s words as follows: “Whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; he is guilty of an eternal sin” (Mark 3:29). Whatever such sin is, regenerated Christians, who have already been given eternal life (cf. John 5:24) cannot be “guilty of an eternal sin” that will not be forgiven.

This same “point of no return” is described in Hebrews when we read:

It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened [been exposed to saving truth], who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age, if they fall away, to be brought back to repentance. (6:4-6) ^[39]

Jonathan Edwards (1703–1758) commented on this passage by saying, “Those that the apostle here has respect to, must be such as were guilty of the unpardonable sin.” ^[40] Again, we see a description of someone who has been exposed to a great deal of truth, but because their conscience is so dysfunctional, they reject that truth. A person with such a conscience could have never been saved, nor ever will be.

The Apostle John would also seem to be referring to this very kind of sin when he says, “There is a sin that [certainly] leads to [spiritual] death. I am not saying that he should pray about that” (1 John 5:16). This is because those with a conscience that will refuse repentance even after significant and clear revelations of God are beyond hope.

This is obviously a grievous spiritual condition, as the conscience is the instrument through which the Holy Spirit, “will convict the world of guilt in regard to sin and righteousness and judgment” (John 16:8). Accordingly, it is also the unbeliever’s conscience that is the target of evangelistic preaching (cf. Acts 2:37; 2 Cor 4:2). If then the conscience is hardened to such an extent that spiritual truth will no longer penetrate it, it is “impossible” (such a horrible word) for such a person to “be brought . . . to repentance” (Heb 6:4).

C.2) Reaching a “Point of No Return”

The Apostle tells us that:

When [unregenerated] Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the [Mosaic] law, since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them. (Rom 2:14-15)

As we have discussed at length elsewhere, God has implanted in every human a moral reasoning ability by which we learn right from wrong. ^[41] However, just like the sinful nature represses logical reasoning concerning Creation and salvation, it obviously does the same for moral reasoning as well. The Apostle describes the insanity that results when he writes:

Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them. (Rom 1:32)

Because God has ordained that a person’s reason will be the first point of contact between Him and humans, a perverted, suppressed reason is a dangerous thing. Apart from God giving us a new mind and restoring our reasoning ability to receive spiritual truth, there is no hope of salvation. It is our reason that is one of the things that makes us human and once a person’s moral reasoning has been distorted, they become something less than human. Thus theologian John Gerstner (1914-1996) writes: “Men were made in God’s image, rational creatures. . . . Nothing could possibly take that [reasonable] . ^[42]

Therefore, the Apostle writes: “Since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God [and rejected reason], He gave them over to a depraved mind” (Rom 1:28), and the result is that humans become for all practical purposes no better than beasts, “senseless . . . heartless, ruthless” (Rom 1:31). Or as we read in 2 Peter, “like unreasoning animals” (2:12 NASB). All of this because their God-given ability for moral reasoning is not properly functioning.

The Apostle Paul’s teaching on conscience here suggests two additional things. One, he is describing a very close link between logical reasoning and moral reasoning. In other words, in regards to Creation, a depraved reason leads to a depraved conscience and gross immorality. The Apostle speaks synonymously of the corruption of both logical and moral reasoning when he writes:

To the pure, all things are pure, but to those who are corrupted and do not believe, nothing is pure. In fact, both their minds [logical reasoning] and consciences [moral reasoning] are corrupted. They claim to know God, but by their actions they deny Him. (Titus 1:15-16)

Secondly, the Apostle suggests a downward spiral of immorality resulting from the improper functioning of moral reason. This is specifically a result of not heeding the conscience which results in a person becoming increasingly “hardened by sin’s deceitfulness” (Heb 3:13). ^[43] Eventually, the person’s inability to reason, particularly morally, results in a “point of no return” in which God gives “them over to a depraved mind” (Rom 1:28). God seems to have this same kind of depraved, dysfunctional moral reasoning in mind when He says:

Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter. Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes and clever in their own sight. (Isa 5:20-21, 24)

At such a point, just as depicted in Romans 1, God is ready to “give them over to a depraved mind” (v. 28), and He therefore says through Isaiah:

Make the heart of this people calloused; make their ears dull and close their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts, and turn and be healed. (Isa 6:10).

People who have reached such a “point of no return” are both destined and prepared for God’s judgment. It would seem the whole world reached this point in Noah’s day when we read, “The LORD saw how great man’s wickedness on the Earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time” (Gen 6:5), and God later adds that this state is even, “from childhood” (Gen 8:21).

Christ would seem to describe a state of moral insanity when He uses the imagery of the human eye to depict the place of moral and logical reasoning and says:

The eye is the lamp of the body. If your eyes [conscience, reason] are good, your whole body will be full of light [truth]. But if your eyes are bad, your whole body will be full of darkness. If then the light [reasoning faculty] within you is darkness, how great is that darkness!” (Matt 6:22-23).

As NT scholar D. A. Carson has commented on this passage: “That person’s darkness is greatest who thinks his darkness is light.” ^[44] When a human’s conscience, or the “eyes” through which moral decisions are evaluated and applied turns bad, rejecting moral truth and not allowing it to enter a person’s psyche, there is great moral darkness within such a heart and great evil will proceed from it. ^[45] Pharaoh obviously displayed such a heart when even after having his son miraculously killed, demonstrated both moral depravity and mental insanity when he decided to pursue the Israelites through the parted Red Sea (cf. Exod 14:3-8).

The Prophet Jeremiah describes the same kind of people when God says of the Jews of his day, “Are they ashamed of their loathsome conduct? No, they have no shame at all; they do not even know how to blush” (Jer 6:15). The same kind of person is no doubt in mind when the Apostle describes false teachers as, “hypocritical liars, whose consciences [moral reasoning] have been seared [presumably irreparably] as with a hot iron” (1 Tim 4:2). Even God needs a conscience to work with and if someone does not have one they are doomed.

It is this same condition that leads to the most horrific human events including the German Holocaust, the mass Russian executions under Stalin, the African massacres among various tribes, and the cold-blooded murders that occur every day. At this point, a society is in great danger and the “common grace” of a mutual understanding of morality has vanished. It is this type of depraved reasoning that allows the horrible tortures imposed on Christians in the first century, today, and in the coming Great Persecution (cf. Matt 24:9, 19-21). It is because of the culminating depravity of devil-darkened reason that the Last Days ^[46] will be the real Dark Age.

The Apostle, for example, warns:

Mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God–having a form of godliness but denying its power. (2 Tim 3:1-5)

While some may suggest this describes our own day, Christ warned that after the revealing of the antichrist:

Then there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now–and never to be equaled again. If those days had not been cut short, no one would survive, but for the sake of the elect those days will be shortened.” (Matt 24:21-22)

Notice that it will be a time of “great distress” for “the elect,” or Christians, because the rest of the world will be, “eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage” just like the days leading, “up to the day Noah entered the ark” (Matt 24:38). If those days of horrible persecution were not stopped by the rescue and return of Christ, none of God’s people would be left living (cf. 1 Thess 4:15-17; Matt 24:29-31). ^[47] The moral reasoning of people during this time will truly be insane, and this moral insanity will cover the whole Earth.

Accordingly, our King predicted that, “Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child; children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death. All men will hate you because of Me” (Matt 10:21-22; cf. 10:36). Likewise, He warns, “Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold” (Matt 24:12). The twisted and depraved moral reasoning of these days is illustrated as well when Christ says, “a time is coming when anyone who kills you will think he is offering a service to God” (John 16:2).

The insanity with which people will treat God’s people is one thing, but the insanity with which they will treat God is even more sobering. The most graphic portrayal of people who have had their reasoning faculty twisted and perverted by sin and satan is when we read in Revelation that: “they cursed the name of God, Who [they knew] had control over these plagues, but they refused to repent and glorify Him” (Rev 16:9). This in spite of the fact that God will apparently send an Angel over the Earth before His judgments begin. John reports:

Then I saw another Angel flying in midair, and he had the eternal Gospel to proclaim to those who live on the Earth–to every nation, tribe, language and people. He said in a loud voice, “Fear God and give Him glory, because the hour of His judgment has come. (Rev 14:6-7)

Another Angel will warn the whole world, “in a loud voice”:

If anyone worships the beast and his image and receives his mark on the forehead or on the hand, he, too, will drink of the wine of God’s fury, which has been poured full strength into the cup of His wrath. He will be tormented with burning sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment rises for ever and ever. There is no rest day or night for those who worship the beast and his image, or for anyone who receives the mark of his name. (Rev 14:9-11)

We are not told if anyone repents as a result of this message. However, only those who would be spiritually insane would refuse such a message. This is especially so after they had experienced some of these judgments with absolutely no doubt God was behind them.

Nonetheless, after describing the five month torture of every person on Earth “who did not have the seal of God on their foreheads” (Rev 9:4), with the sting of demonic beings (cf. 9:1-12), and the killing of “a third of mankind” by another hoard of supernatural beings, we would expect the rest of humanity to acknowledge the rightful place of God if they had any “freedom of the will” at all. Having absolutely no fear of a Being Who can do such things is insane. Nonetheless, we read at the end of these horrible judgments:

The rest of mankind that were not killed by these plagues still did not repent of the work of their hands; they did not stop worshiping demons, and idols of gold, silver, bronze, stone and wood—idols that cannot see or hear or walk. Nor did they repent of their murders, their magic arts, their sexual immorality or their thefts. (Rev 9:20-21)

Out of the millions, if not billions of people remaining after these judgments, no one in all “the rest of mankind” chose to fear God and try to make amends with Him in order to escape His wrath? And people want to claim that humans always have “free will” to choose? No way. At least these people won’t or else some of them surely would choose to repent. One day, all of humanity will be at a “point of no return.”

Neither their sinful nature, nor satan will allow unregenerated humanity to either fear Christ, or refuse the antichrist. The whole world will be past the “point of no return” and no evidence, no matter how clear and compelling, will persuade them from their wicked ways. Not even visible Angels. As we noted above, when humans lose their reason, they lose their humanity, and the world will be full of mere beasts, not humans. The hour before the end of this world will be the pinnacle and peak of the insanity of humanity.

Extras & Endnotes

1. A Devotion to Dad

Our Father, we are again reminded today to thank You for giving us a repenting, God-fearing, God-loving, Spirit-liberated mind and conscience. When we see You divide the sheep from the goats on that Day, we will realize what a horrible thing it is to have a mind that refuses to accept spiritual truth. We look to You to break the mental bondage that our unsaved friends are in, so that they may truly believe in You for salvation. Amen.

Gauging Your Grasp

1. Why isn’t merely a belief in the existence of God an adequate response to the message of Creation?
2. What are at least three reasons that humans are “without excuse” for not believing the message of Creation?
3. What is the psychological reason the Apostle gives in Romans 1:18 (cf. 8:1-9) for why people do not accept the message of Creation?
4. Why are apologetic arguments limited in value in relation to a person with devil-darkened reason?
5. Why are the affects of the sinful nature on reason greater in the spiritual realm than in the scientific?
6. What would be some verses of Scripture that describe the depraved mind of the unregenerate?
7. What is “the unpardonable sin”? What are some verses that describe people at such “a point of no return”?
8. What are some Scripture passages that would support our claim that it is because of the culminating depravity of devil-darkened reason that the Last Days will be the real Dark Age?

Publications & Particulars

1. Some have suggested that sin has not only affected our ability to reason, but the laws of reason in Creation as well. Gordon H. Clark replies:

   Logic, the law of contradiction, is not affected by sin. Even if everyone constantly violated the laws of logic, they would not be less true than if everyone constantly observed them. Or, to use another example, no matter how many errors in subtraction can be found in the stubs of our checkbooks, mathematics itself is unaffected. (A Christian View of Men and Things [Baker, 1981], 299). ↑

2. Douglas Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, (Eerdmans, 1996),105. ↑

3. J. I. Packer, God Speaks to Man (Westminster Press, 1965), 37. ↑

4. Kathorao is used only here in the NT and literally means “to look [horao] down [kata].” A strengthened form of “seeing” would seem to be implied and is universally reflected in the translations by adding the adverb “clearly.” ↑

5. Noieo is the common Greek word for, “perceiving with the mind,” as distinct from “perception by feeling” or simply perception by sight. (W.E. Vine, Vine’s Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words [Thomas Nelson, 1996], 650). Dr. Moo adds that the word “connotes an inner recognition, often without any reference to physical sight.” (105, n. 65). ↑

6. John Murray interprets the use of gnontes in Romans 1:21 as “cognitive perception.” (The Epistle to the Romans [Eerdmans, 1959, 1965; reprint 1997], 41.)

   While the ginōskō (“to know”) word group can mean a personal and certain knowledge as discussed elsewhere (cf. section 2.5.E.1.b), it still primarily refers to merely understanding, not believing. Accordingly, Dr. Vine defined the verb ginōskō as “to be taking in knowledge [data], to come to know, recognize, understand,” or “to understand completely.” (Vine’s Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words [Thomas Nelson, 1996], 346).

   Likewise, the New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology (NIDNTT) defines ginōskō as “know, come to know, understand, comprehend, perceive, recognize” none of which automatically implies belief of what is understood. (E. Schütz, “Knowledge,” II:392). Accordingly, we read elsewhere in the article:

   The statement in Rom. 1:21 that those who had known God had become futile in their thinking must have appeared as a contradiction in terms to Hellenistic thought. . . . Paul, however, considered that the knowledge [i.e. real belief] of God necessarily included proper glorification and gratitude. Hence, the heathen who rejected God reduced this knowledge to mere intellectual activity [understanding]. . . . The very fact that, though the heathen undoubtedly knew God [understood], they refused him due recognition [faith, belief], is the measure of their lack of excuse (Rom. 1 :19 f.; cf. also Jn. 1: 10; 1 Cor. 1: 21; Gal. 4:8. (II:399-400 ↑

7. Quoted from section 2.3.B.1. ↑

8. While we claim that the reason unbelievers do not properly act upon what they understand from Creation is because they do not believe what they understand, others might suggest that they do believe it, but only in their subconscious mind. Accordingly, the great Dutch Reformed theologian J. H. Bavinck (1854-1921) wrote regarding Romans 1:18:

   It seems to me that in this case we should translate it [“suppress” Gr.: katechontōn] by “repress.” We intentionally choose a word which has a specific meaning in psychological literature. Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary defines the word “repression” as the process by which unacceptable desires or impulses are excluded from consciousness and thus being denied direct satisfaction are left to operate in the unconscious. (ref. unavailable).

   The implication of “desires . . . left to operate in the unconscious” suggests that the unbeliever has come to some true beliefs and subsequent right desires regarding God, but that these reside in the subconscious and therefore do not affect the person’s behavior.

   While this may be true, it would seem to disregard the real and abiding affect that unconscious beliefs have on us (cf. section 4.3.A.2), and the fact that the Greek words used in this passage merely reflect cognitive understanding, not the type of mental acceptance that would result in desires, or the beliefs that such desires would depend on. ↑

9. Moo, 107. ↑

10. For further discussion on the fact that the condemning revelation of Creation is fulfilling precisely God’s purpose for it, see section 7.4.A.3. ↑

11. For arguments that the Apostle is contrasting unbelievers and believers in Romans 8:1-9, and does not have sinning unbelievers in mind, see section 4.14.B.3. ↑

12. See above endnote. ↑

13. Reference unavailable. ↑

14. For those who would suggest that we over-personify the sinful nature, we would refer them to such passages as Romans 7:17, 20. ↑

15. John Stott, The Message of Romans (Intervarsity, 1994), 72. ↑

16. For further discussion of the God-ordained and controlling nature of the pursuit of happiness in humans see section 4.1.C. ↑

17. John McClintock and James Strong, “Belief,” in Cyclopaedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature (M&S) (Ages Software, 2000), I:225-6. ↑

18. R. C. Sproul, John Gerstner, and Arthur Lindsey, Classical Apologetics: A Rational Defense of the Christian Faith and a Critique of Presuppositional Apologetics (Academie Books, 1984), 39, 52-3. ↑

19. Erwin Lutzer, Seven Reasons Why You Can Trust the Bible (Moody, 1998), 155. ↑

20. See Henry M. Morris, Miracles (Master Books, 2004), 133. ↑

21. Bertrand Russell, Why I Am Not a Christian (Simon and Schuster, 1957), 50-51. ↑

22. Robert J. Morgan, Evidence and Truth (Crossway, 2003), 35. ↑

23. William Hooper at TheOligarch.com writes regarding Dawkins:

    Intelligent Alien Design? You can’t be serious? Well actually I am. Richard Dawkins, one of the world’s most famous champions of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution and a staunch atheist, has recently been discussing the possibility that life on Earth could be the result of advanced alien engineering! 

    Dawkins has said that he still believes that life most likely originated on earth, but he has also said than an alien designed start is an “intriguing possibility”. Intelligent life, he has explained, could have evolved elsewhere in the universe according to modern Darwinian theory, and this intelligent life could have eventually learned to engineer new life, and an engineered seed could then have ended up on earth and subsequently evolved into all the life found here today.

    Dawkins appears quite serious about the possibility of Intelligent Alien Design and has mentioned it on a number of occasions. From a recent documentary called “Expelled” we have:

    Ben Stein: What do you think is the possibility that Intelligent Design might turn out to be the answer to some issues in genetics or in evolution.

    Dawkins: Well, it could come about in the following way. It could be that at some earlier time, somewhere in the universe, a civilization evolved, probably by some kind of Darwinian means, probably to a very high level of technology, and designed a form of life that they seeded onto perhaps this planet. Now, um, now that is a possibility, and an intriguing possibility. And I suppose it’s possible that you might find evidence for that if you look at the details of biochemistry, molecular biology, you might find a signature of some sort of designer. (“Richard Dawkins on Intelligent Alien Design,” 2008; online at http://www.theoligarch.com/richard-dawkins-aliens.htm. ↑

24. For a good start on quotes from respected scientists denouncing evolutionary theory see online at http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/quotes.html. ↑

25. Sam Harris, Letter to a Christian Nation (Vintage, 2008), forward. ↑

26. Norman Geisler, Introduction to Christian Philosophy (Baker, 1980), 70. ↑

27. Lutzer, 156-7. ↑

28. D. James Kennedy and Jerry Newcombe, What if Jesus Had Never Been Born?: The Positive Impact of Christianity in History (Thomas Nelson, 1997), 25. ↑

29. For further discussion of the affect of spiritual regeneration on the endurance of faith see section 4.16.E. ↑

30. Kuyper, 69. ↑

31. For further explanation of the important difference between physical and spiritual miracles see chapter 10.4. ↑

32. For arguments regarding the claim that only born again Christians can exercise supernatural unconditional love see section 5.1.B.1. ↑

33. For arguments that supernatural love is the ultimate apologetic for the Christians faith see relevant section of Book 5: Biblical Apologetics. ↑

34. Arthur Lindsey, Love the Ultimate Apologetic: The Heart of Christian Witness (Intervarsity, 2008), 81. ↑

35. Ibid., 83. ↑

36. For further discussion on an anti-supernatural perspective on miracles see chapter 10.12. ↑

37. John Gerstner relates: “Augustine considered the unpardonable sin the most difficult topic in Scripture . . . The unusually large amount of space devoted to this one topic indicates how important-if not difficult-Edwards considered it to be. (The Rational Biblical Theology of Jonathan Edwards, 3 vols. [Berea, 1991], II.362) ↑

38. D. A. Carson writes on “the unpardonable sin”:

    The distinction between blasphemy against the Son of Man and blasphemy against the Spirit is not that the Son of Man is less important than the Spirit, or that the first sin is prebaptismal and the second postbaptismal, still less that the first is against the Son of Man and the second rejects the authority of Christian prophets.

    Instead, within the context of the larger argument the first sin is rejection of the truth of the gospel (but there may be repentance and forgiveness for that), whereas the second sin is rejection of the same truth in full awareness that that is exactly what one is doing–thoughtfully, willfully, and self-consciously rejecting the work of the Spirit even though there can be no other explanation of Jesus’ exorcisms than that. For such a sin there is no forgiveness, “either in this age or the age to come” (cf. 13:22; 25:46)–a dramatic way of saying “never” (as in Mark 3:29). . . .

    This provides a clue for understanding how the unforgivable sin of which Jesus here speaks compares with the sins referred to in Hebrews 6:4-6; 10:26-31; and possibly 1 John 5:16. In each instance there is self-conscious perception of where the truth lies and the light shines–and a willful turning away from it. (The Expositor’s Bible Commentary (EBC), Frank E. Gaebelein, ed. CD-ROM [Zondervan, n.d.], Matt 12:31). ↑

39. That the writer of Hebrews 6:4-6 is not describing those who have been saved, is made clear in verse 9 where he says, “Even though we speak like this, dear friends, we are confident of better things in your case–things that accompany [real] salvation.” ↑

40. Gerstner, Edwards, I.310. ↑

41. For further discussion on the conscience see chapter 3.2. ↑

42. John Gerstner, A Bible Inerrancy Primer (Baker, 1965), 28-9 ↑

43. The context of Hebrews 3:13 makes it clear that its primary application applies to unbelievers, not believers. ↑

44. D. A. Carson, The Sermon on the Mount (Baker, 1978), 80. ↑

45. Christian philosopher Ronald Nash provides a more technical description of what Christ meant by the “eyes” in Matthew 6:22-3 when he writes:

    A conceptual framework is the pattern or arrangement of our concepts (ideas) that enables us to make sense of the world by organizing all that we believe. This framework, or worldview, is a comprehensive, systematic view of life and of the world as a whole . . . Conceptual frameworks function like eyeglasses to bring the world into clearer focus.

    Naturally, a realistic view of the world-a view that is true to the way the world is-requires the proper conceptual framework [in Christ’s words, “good eyes”]. When someone views the world through the lens of an inaccurate worldview, the world may seem to make sense to that person. But the sense that person makes of the world will be wrong in important and potentially dangerous respects [living in darkness]. (“Miracles & Conceptual Systems” in In Defense of Miracles, Douglas Geivett, Gary R. Habermas, eds. [InterVarsity, 1997], 116). ↑

46. We recognize that because of the near/far nature of biblical eschatology, that the “Last Days” have, in a sense, already begun (cf. Acts 2:17; Heb 1:2; James 5:3). We realize as well that our Preterist brothers and sisters, in particular, will object to our suggestion that the following verses primarily concern a yet future time that will culminate in the physical and universally visible return of Jesus Christ. ↑

47. We realize as well that this opens a can of worms with our Pretribulation Rapture friends. Hopefully, even a careful and honest comparison of the two passages referenced here will at least give some pause to their confidence in such a position. Regardless, even if one believes that it will be “some other group” of God’s people being persecuted in the Great Tribulation, rather than the possibility of any Christians living today, our discussion of the depravity of unregenerated humanity during this time is still valid. ↑