In Christian theology, a debate exists as to whether miracle spiritual gifts have ceased (i.e. cessationism) or whether they are still available to the church (i.e. continuationism). This essay does not attempt to prove either cessationism or continuationism, an interpretational disagreement within Christendom, but rather explores present-day Christian prophecy from the perspective of continuationism.

Cessationism arose during the Protestant Reformation (1517-1648 CE) in response to claims of Roman Catholic miracles. Christian Cessationist scholars exist in both Reformed and dispensational evangelicalism, in Lutheranism, and others. Christian Continuationist scholars exist in Pentecostalism, the charismatic movement, The Third Wave movement, and others. Additionally, many evangelicals who hold the older Protestant Cessationist view with respect to spiritual gifting concede they are open to the idea of spiritual gifting existing today (Gaffin & Grudem, 1996).

As McGrath (2008) wrote:

"The belief that such gifts had died out (known as ‘Cessationism’) was widespread within mainline Protestantism from the sixteenth to the end of the nineteenth century. There was no reason to think otherwise, in the absence of any significant evidence of such spiritual gifts being experienced within the church. The outbreak of charismatic phenomena-such as speaking in tongues-on the first day of the twentieth century in the United States, followed by sustained global growth in such phenomena, raised questions about Cessationism and convinced many that such spiritual gifts remained at the disposal of the church…

…Here, the decisive factor in changing the corporate mind of Protestantism over the best part of a century was not a new way of interpreting the Bible but renewed experience of something that had been believed to be extinct." (p. 226).

Gaffin et al. (1996) Are Miraculous Gifts for Today?: 4 Views is suggested for readers looking to compare and contrast the various mainstream Christian views on spiritual gifting and research that debate further.

Christian prophecy is the announcement of divine communication with respect to prediction or foretelling given by creator God of the Bible to a person. Those receiving genuine prophecies from creator God have often been able to interpret prophecy given them, but not always.

Payne (1973) called scriptural prophecy a "medium of divine communication." (p. 3). Easton (1893) wrote that it is a “miracle of knowledge, a declaration or description or representation of something future, beyond the power of human sagacity to foresee, discern, or conjecture” (p. 561).

About one-quarter of the Bible is prophetic. "The importance of predictive prophecy... for the people of God is evidenced... that [approximately] fully one quarter of the Bible is prophecy... for the entire Bible's 31,124 verses, 8,352 contain predictive material, or 27 per cent of the whole" (Payne, 1973, pp. 12-13).

Payne (1973) pointed out that "Both Old Testament and New Testament teach that the inscripturated language of the prophets [inscribed in the closed canon of the Old and New Testament] possesses an authority equivalent to that of the words of God Himself" (p. 6).

Inscripturation is the writing of truth revealed by God to inspired men while inspiration is when God grants unique insight conveying His revelation to them (2 Pet 1:20-21). Finny (2017) wrote, “Through inscripturation, these revealed truths were permanently written down in the books which compose the Old and New Testaments of the Christian Bible. Such a close connection exists between God's conveying revelation to the inspired writers and their committing this revelation to writing that the written Scriptures are declared to be ‘God-breathed’ (2 Tim 3:16)” (p. 27).

The Bible is the canonical authority for all Christians, Cessationists and Continuationists alike, and it explains what prophecy is, what a true prophet is, and what a false prophet is.

So, what of Christians alleging divine prophetic revelation today?

First, all the books in the Bible together form the biblical canon which is recognized to be closed, nothing new may be added. So, if the canon is closed then how does present-day non-canonical prophecy (and other New Testament spiritual gifting) work today?

C. Samuel Storms provided the Continuationist answer:

"In the same way as Christians responded to it in their first-century, open-canonical world, namely, by evaluating it in light of Scripture (which was emerging, and therefore partial, for them, but is complete for us). Such revelation would carry for us today the same authority it carried then for them. Furthermore, we are in a much better position today than the early church, for we have the final form of the canon by which to evaluate claims to prophetic revelation. If they were capable of assessing prophetic revelation then (and Paul believed they were; witness his instruction in 1 Cor. 14 and 1 Thess. 5 to do precisely that), how much more are we today!

…if noncanonical revelation was not a threat to the ultimate authority of Scripture in its emerging form, neither should it pose a threat to Scripture in its final form.” (Gaffin & Grudem, 1996, p. 82).

All alleged present-day Christian prophecy must fall within Christian orthodoxy (i.e., biblical truth) to be valid. There are no exceptions. Christian prophecy today cannot contradict scripture and be valid.

A simple example would be if someone claiming to be a prophet falsely asserts they have received a prophecy from God that Jesus is never going to return. That is heresy contradicting the canonical scriptural revelation of the Bible, not a prophecy. Again, present-day Christian prophecy must fall within Christian orthodoxy (i.e., biblical truth) to be valid.

Another example would be the classical encounter between true prophets and a false prophet in the New Testament, namely “Paul and Barnabas's rebuke of the Jewish magician Bar-Jesus on the island Paphos (Act 13:6-10) in which the Holy Spirit informed Paul that Bar-Jesus was full of deceit and a false prophet. Bar-Jesus belonged to the same line as the prophetess Jezebel from the church of Thyatira (Rev 2:20)” (Elwell, 1997).

Here, the lesson is to discern between genuine Christians who have a prophetic gift from the creator God of the Bible and non-Christians who are claiming to be prophets. Bar-Jesus was not a Christian but rather an occult sorcerer. Even if he made statements that sometimes came true, the source was never God. The topic of false prophets and the occult is covered in The Kingdom of the Occult by Walter Martin (2008).

Genuine Christian prophecy comes from genuine Christians who have the New Testament gift of prophecy. It does not come from non-Christians, including people merely professing to be Christian but who are not.

That said, it needs to be stated that genuine Christians who do not know if they have the New Testament gift of prophecy (or think they do when they do not) may attempt prophesizing and discover they are wrong. These are not false prophets in the New Testament sense but rather genuine Christians attempting to engage in spiritual gifting, often to learn more about what gifts they may have and what gifts they do not have. Even well-known reputable church leaders and authors who are genuine Christians have done this with good intention. These are genuine Christians bound for heaven.

The Bible describes actual false prophets as another matter entirely. In 2 Peter 2:1, these false prophets are defined by the Greek compound noun (pseudo-didaskaloi) for “false teachers.” They were not restricted to false prediction but were also false teachers alleging a message from God. The biblical presentation of false prophets is those who introduce heresies and promote behavior which is not of God, in addition to whatever false prophecies they make, which they incorrectly attribute to God (Steward, 1904, 2 Pet 2:1; Spence-Jones & Excell, 1919, 2 Pet 2:1).

Since the life, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus Christ; many false prophets have arisen generating cults and new religions predicated on false systems of belief around their heresies, peopled by those they deceived. Jesus Christ predicted this as recorded in Matthew 24:11 stating, “And many false prophets will rise up and mislead many people” (NASB, 1997).

In Matthew 7:15-16, Jesus stated that false prophets “come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes, nor figs from thistles, are they?” Their heresy and behavior reveal who they are. In Matthew 7:23, Jesus turns them away at the final judgement saying "I never knew you; leave Me, you who practice lawlessness" (NASB, 1997).

Again, genuine Christian prophecy conforms to biblical truth (i.e., orthodoxy). Furthermore, genuine Christian prophecy comes from genuine Christians who God imparts a divine predictive message to. Also note that while various interpretational disputes exist among genuine Christians who hold to the essential doctrines of Christianity, these interpretational disputes do not cross-over into heresy as they are within orthodoxy (Pothier, 2024, pp. 38-49).

For the Christian who holds that spiritual gifting is available to the church today (i.e., continuationism), a necessary aid to qualify present-day prophecy is to find whether or not a prophecy aligns correctly with the essential doctrines of Christianity which have defined Christianity for over 2,000 years.

Norman Geisler (2007) listed and correctly articulated the 14 essential doctrines of Christianity in an easy-to-read pamphlet titled Essential Doctrine Made Easy which is recommended reading. They are listed in the following order: God’s Unity, God’s Tri-unity, Human Depravity, Christ’s Virgin Birth, Christ’s Sinlessness, Christ’s Deity, Christ’s Humanity, The Necessity of God’s Grace, The Necessity of Faith, Christ’s Atoning Death, Christ’s Bodily Resurrection, Christ’s Bodily Ascension, Christ’s Intercession, and Christ’s Second Coming (see appendix).

A correct understanding of these essential doctrines is instrumental to qualifying whether a doctrine, a prophecy, etc. exists within or outside of Christian orthodoxy (i.e., biblical truth).

Next, it is important to understand the context of prophecy both in the Old Testament and in the New Testament.

“Prophecy and the prophets form the greatest line of continuity between the Old and New Testaments. This is evident from the attitude of Christ and the apostles to Old Testament prophecy, from the continuance of the phenomenon of prophecy both up to and after the ministry of Jesus, from the prophetic character of his own ministry, from the placing of the inspiration of New Testament apostles and prophets alongside that of Old Testament prophets, and from the general outpouring of the Holy Spirit—the spirit of prophecy—upon the church, leading to a continuing acceptance of prophets and prophesying in New Testament churches.” (Wood & Marshall, 1996, p. 972)

Wood and Marshall (1996) are correct. That said, the Old Covenant (i.e., the Mosaic covenant) was to remain in force until the prophesied Messiah appeared to establish a New Covenant (Jer. 31:31-34). Jesus Christ is the Messiah prophesied in the Old Testament and He established the New Covenant that exists today (Heb. 8:13, 2 Cor. 3:6, etc.).

Specifically, Christ initiated the New Covenant at the Last Supper stating “This cup, which is poured out for you, is the New Covenant in My blood" (Luk 22:20). Christ explained that prophecy would continue under the New Covenant in verses such as Matthew 10:41.

As Grudem (2018) stated:

"The Mosaic Covenant—which began under Moses’s leadership in Exodus 20 where God gave these laws to the nation of Israel—was terminated when Christ died. Hebrews 8 and 9 are very clear about that. Christians are no longer directly subject to the laws of the Mosaic Covenant, but instead live under the provisions of the New Covenant" (para 2-3).

God implemented the Mosaic law at the time He did for His reasons, one of which was to shepherd a people through the debauchery of an ancient world fallen into deep wickedness in preparation for the appearance of a promised Messiah who would usher in a far superior new covenant which Christians enjoy today (Johnson, 2019; Geisler, 2002).

In addition to those holding to the religion of Judaism, there are religious cults that claim to still be under the Mosaic Covenant (i.e., the Old Covenant). Often, the latter appeal to God’s immutability (i.e., unchanging nature) and eternality to justify their misunderstanding.

Geisler (2002) stated:

"God's immutability and eternality are firmly grounded in Scripture, church history, and sound reasoning. Contemporary attempts to undermine these fundamental teachings about God have not made their case. Other than the fallacious procedure of taking anthropomorphism literally, there is no biblical support for a changing God.

On the contrary, there are numerous affirmations that God does not and cannot change" (p. 110).

But while the immutability (i.e., unchanging nature) of God is taught throughout scripture (see Mal 3:6; Num 23:19; 1 Sam 15:29; Isa 46:9-11; Eze 24:14; etc.), this should not be a point of confusion for Christians. God’s unchanging attributes, such as His holiness and morality, do not mean that God has not fulfilled the Old Covenant with a New Covenant for He certainly has (Rom 10:4, Gal 2:16, Gal 3:13, etc.). Read the Pauline epistles of Romans and Galatians.

Christians are under the New Covenant, the law of Christ. Read the book of Hebrews. When Christians sin, they repent and seek to make amends. They do not sacrifice animals on alters to atone for their sin as occurred under the Mosaic Law of the Old Covenant. Christ’s sacrifice under the New Covenant is sufficient (Heb 9-10).

Similarly, today false prophets are refuted using scripture in biblical truth with the understanding that New Testament accountability allows for New Testament church discipline by church leaders in the case of such, seeking to correct but ultimately exercising excommunication if such refuse to repent.

In the Old Testament, prophecy was explicit (Deu 4:2; 18:18; 18:20, etc.) and true prophets spoke what God told them to speak. Also, under the Mosaic law of the Old Covenant, false prophets could face governmental punishment (Deu 13:1-5; Num 23:19).

However, in the New Testament prophecy is a gift of the Holy Spirit and regular part of the local assembly rather than a pseudo-government role as part of the public life of the nation of Israel (1 Cor. 12:10; Act 13:1; Eph. 4:11-12; etc.). Though prophecy in both the Old and New Testaments is proclamation of divine word, the gift of prophecy in the New Testament is in the context of the New Covenant established by Jesus Christ.

The Continuationist perspective for present-day noncanonical New Testament prophecy is:

“Prophecy is the human report of a divine revelation… The key in recognizing that with every prophecy there are four elements, only one of which is assuredly of God: There is the revelation itself; there is the perception or reception of that revelation by the believer; there is the interpretation of what has been disclosed or the attempt to ascertain its meaning; and there is the application of that interpretation” (Gaffin & Grudem, 1996, p. 207).

While the revelation God imparts is infallible, the person receiving the revelation is fallible and may error with respect to it. Misperception, misinterpreting, misapplying does happen in the New Testament church. A prophet may or may not correctly understand a revelation God has imparted to them. When they do not understand it correctly, they might deliver it imperfectly. “The mere existence of a divine revelation does not in itself guarantee that the interpretation or application of God’s revealed truth will share in its perfection (Gaffin & Grudem, 1996, p. 208)

Furthermore, "we know in part and we prophecy in part" and "we see in a mirror dimly" (1 Cor 13:9-12). Steward (1904) states with respect to verse 9, “All inspired utterances are but partial revelations of Divine Truth.” Which is why in 1 Corinthians 14:29 it says "let two or three prophets speak and let the others judge" for any New Testament claimed prophecy must be correctly qualified by scripture and submitted to scripture's limitations and guidelines before acceptance (NASB, 1997; Steward, 1904, 1 Cor 13:9).

And it is not unusual to observe Christians speak prophetically but also share their own feelings, beliefs, opinions, biases in addition to whatever God has communicated to them.

Humans are fallible. That said, prophecies that God imparts eventually come to pass. Christians need pay close attention to what God is communicating to them and remain within Christian orthodoxy (i.e., biblical truth). This is true whether they choose to espouse their personal fallible viewpoints and ideas, in addition to any infallible revelation which God imparts. This is true whether they choose to write down noncanonical prophecies they receive in a journal or use some other method of recording them.

From the theological viewpoint of continuationism, the benefits of both canonical biblical prophecy and noncanonical present-day prophecy from genuine Christians whose prophecy is authentic remains with Christians today.

Bibliography

Cousland, J. R. C. (2000). Prophets and Prophecy. In Dictionary of New Testament background: a compendium of contemporary biblical scholarship (electronic ed., p. 835). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.

Cessationists View | Monergism. (2021). Monergism by CPR Foundation; Christian Publication Resource Foundation. https://www.monergism.com/topics/spiritual-gifts/cessationists-view

Easton, B. S. (1893). Illustrated Bible dictionary; and treasury of biblical history, biography, geography, doctrine, and literature. Harper & Brothers.

Ellis, G. (2016). Prophecy. In J. D. Barry, D. Bomar, D. R. Brown, R. Klippenstein, D. Mangum, C. Sinclair Wolcott, L. Wentz, E. Ritzema, & W. Widder (Eds.), The Lexham Bible dictionary. Lexham Press.

Elwell, W. A. (1997). Evangelical dictionary of theology. Baker Academic. "Entry for 'False Prophet'".

Finny, T. (2017). The understanding of spiritual gifts by the Cessationists and Continuationists: The understanding of spiritual gifts by the Cessationists and Continuationists. A Theological Analysis for Enhanced Contemporary Construal, (pp. 1–75) [Pdf]. REG. NO: AA4913, Luther W. New Jr. Theological College Dehradun.

France, R. T. (1998). Jesus and the Old Testament. Regent.

Gaffin, R. B., Saucy, R. L., Storms, C. S., & Oss, D. A. (1996). Are miraculous gifts for today?: 4 views. Gundry, S. N. & Grudem, W. A. (eds). Zondervan.

Geisler, N. L. (2004). Systematic theology, (Vols. 3-4). Minneapolis, MN: Bethany House.

Geisler, N. L. (2007). Essential doctrine made easy. Hendrickson Publishers

Geisler, N. L. (2009). The essential doctrines of the Christian faith (part one): a historical approach. Christian Research Journal, 28(5). JAE100‐1. https://www.equip.org/articles/the-essential-doctrines-of-the-christian-faith-part-one/

Geisler, N. L. (2009). The essential doctrines of the Christian faith (part two): a logical approach. Christian Research Journal, 28(6). JAE100-2. https://www.equip.org/articles/the-essential-doctrines-of-the-christian-faith-part-two/

Grudem, W. A. (2000). Prophecy, Prophets. In T. D. Alexander & B. S. Rosner (Eds.), New Dictionary of biblical Theology (electronic ed., p. 701). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.

Grudem, W. (2018, July 15). Are the old testament's moral laws still binding on us today? Crossway. Retrieved April 11, 2023, from https://www.crossway.org/articles/are-the-old-testaments-moral-laws-still-binding-on-us-today

Hawthorne, G. F. (1992). Prophets, Prophecy. In J. B. Green & S. McKnight (Eds.), Dictionary of Jesus and the gospels (p. 641). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.

Johnson, J. (2017, April 20). 9 ways the New Covenant is better than the old. Retrieved January 31, 2021, from https://www.crosswalk.com/faith/Bible-study/9-ways-the-new-covenant-is-better-than-the-old.html

Kaiser, W. C. Jr. (1995). The Messiah in the Old Testament. Zondervan.

Martin, W., Rische, J. M., & Van Gordon, K. (2008). The Kingdom of the occult. Thomas Nelson.

McGrath, A. E. (2008). Christianity's dangerous idea the protestant revolution: A history from the sixteenth century to the twenty-first. New York, NY: HarperOne.

New American Standard Bible. (1997). (Original work published 1960). The Lockman Foundation

Payne, J. B. (1973). Encyclopedia of biblical prophecy: the complete guide to scriptural predictions and their fulfillment. Harper & Row.

Pothier, P. L. (2024). Essays you need to read: on Christianity. (n.p.).

Ryken, L., Wilhoit, J., Longman, T., Duriez, C., Penney, D., & Reid, D. G. (2000). In dictionary of biblical imagery (electronic ed.). InterVarsity Press.

Shapiro, M. B. (2004). The messiah would bring in a New Covenant. Retrieved March 07, 2021, from https://jewsforjesus.org/jewish-resources/messianic-prophecy/the-messiah-would-bring-in-a-new-covenant/ | Marc B. Shapiro, The Limits of Orthodox Theology: Maimonides’ Thirteen Principles Reappraised (Oxford; Portland, OR: Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, 2004), p. 122.

Spence-Jones, H. D. & Exell, J. S. (1919). The pulpit commentary. London.

Stein, R. H. (1992). Last Supper. In J. B. Green & S. McKnight (Eds.), Dictionary of Jesus and the gospels (p. 445). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.

Steward, J. (Ed.) (1904). The Cambridge Bible for schools and colleges. Cambridge University Press.

Thomson, W. H. (1884). The great argument: Jesus Christ in the Old Testament. Harper & Brothers.

Wikipedia contributors. (2023, March 10). Cessationism versus continuationism. In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 19:03, April 5, 2023, from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cessationism_versus_continuationism

Wood, D. R. W., & Marshall, I. H. (1996). New Bible dictionary (3rd ed.). Intervarsity Press.

Fair Use: Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act in 1976; Allowance is made for "Fair Use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statue that might otherwise be infringing. All rights and credit go directly to its rightful owners. No copyright infringement intended.

Notice: Content on this page (including reviews, business, theology, and technology commentary) is provided for informational and opinion purposes only and does not constitute professional, legal, financial, medical, or pastoral advice. Reviews may include quotations or summaries under fair use. All views expressed are those of the author alone. While every effort is made to ensure accuracy, no warranties are provided. Use and rely on this content at your own risk. For important decisions, consult qualified professionals. For copyright takedown requests or corrections, please email ppothier@substack.com with the subject “Takedown/Correction” and include full details. Effective: 2026-05-08.

Copyright © 2024 Paul L. Pothier. All rights reserved.

Subscribe now

Share

“The Bible tells the story of evil-its origin, its battle against good and its ultimate defeat at the hands of an eternally good God” (Ryken et al, 2000, p. 248) with both the Old and New Testaments of the Bible revealing, “a God of love who is also a God of justice” (Kaiser et al, 1996, p. 47).

This essay introduces some of the discussion around God leading the ancient Israelites into the land God promised Abraham and his descendants, after their release from slavery in Egypt, and their subsequent conflict with the Canaanites from a biblical perspective.

Please note that while the theological and philosophical topic of the problem of evil, which is the “difficulty posed by the existence of evil (both moral evil and natural evil) in a world created by a God who is both completely good and all-powerful,” is relevant and aspects are included from a biblical perspective; a formal introduction of the problem of evil exceeds the scope of this essay (Evans, 2002, p. 42).

Whatever the magnitude of an ancient flood affecting the region (Ross, 2014, pp. 145-182), the Old Testament informs that Canaan was Noah's grandson (Gen 10:6), and that Canaan was cursed by Noah for some shameful act recorded in Genesis 9:20-27. Afterward, tribes of Canaan’s descendants arose and then dispersed. A number of these tribes are identified with areas around ancient Syria and Canaan where they settled (Gen 10:15-19) (Canaan, 2024).

In Genesis 9:26 Noah had blessed his son Shem from who Abraham (i.e. Abram) descended (Gen 11:10-26), in such a way “that the knowledge and practice of the true religion should continue among his descendants” (Spence-Jones & Excell, 1919, Gen 9:26). The knowledge of the holy one true supreme creator God that created the universe, was preserved from Shem to Abraham and from Abraham’s descendants to Moses (Gen 5:1-32, 11:1-26, Exo 1-2; Rose Publishing, 2005).

By the time Abraham entered Canaan, the Canaanite’s knowledge of Noah’s original monotheism was still present with at least some, such as the Canaanite prince Melchizedek (Gen 14:18-20) who spoke “of God as Creator and deliverer” (Corduan, 2013, p. 326; Ryken et al, 2000, p. 546).

However, most Canaanites had already rejected the holy one true creator God of Noah (and Melchizedek and Abraham) as supreme to descend into a state of wickedness in service to a pantheon of fictional false gods and goddesses in conjunction with socio-religious depravity (Jones, 2009).

Geisler (2013) summarized the body of archeological discoveries regarding “the dark religious practices of the Canaanite peoples in the land prior to Joshua’s conquest. These wicked practices offer confirmation of the Canaanite deities, practices, and religious customs described in the Old Testament, including:

1. The suffocation of children, who were buried alive, evidenced by the discovery of thousands of clay jars containing the remains of children who were sacrificed.

2. Absence of morality among the gods.

3. Orgiastic worship of nature.

4. Male and female religious prostitution.

5. Malice and jealousy among the gods.

6. Other types of child sacrifice.

7. Pornographic nudity with serpent symbols.

8. High religious mythology.

9. Sensual idol worship.

These finds give new meaning and significance to the divine command given to Joshua and the Israelites to amputate the moral gangrene of the Canaanites and their religion" (p. 71).

Genesis 18 and 19 describes the events around the destruction of two Canaanite cities, Sodom and Gomorrah, during Abraham’s stay there. Presumably the centuries following the destruction of these two cities was an opportunity for the remaining Canaanites to repent of their depravity; however, they failed to do so.

As an aside, intriguingly the Collins (2016) excavation of Tell el-Hammam has unearthed a city that aligns with the biblical description for the city of Sodom. And the debate around articles discussing a possible airburst destroying Tell el-Hammam is interesting (Bunch et al, 2021, 2022, 2023; Jaret & Harris, 2022; Silvia et al, 2024) as are artifacts such as the Sumerian K8538 tablet at The British Museum. [These are shared as interesting asides; however, please note that no assertion is made here for such being the literal city of Sodom].

Eventually, centuries after the death of Abraham the ancient Israelites ended their period of wandering in the desert after escaping from slavery in Egypt and prepared to enter and take possession of Canaan (Deu 1-34; Rose Publishing, 2005).

At this juncture, the land of Canaan is populated by various cultures of people groups that are sometimes referred to by their individual identities, sometimes altogether as Canaanites, and sometimes by both (Trimm, 2022, p. 39) who live “in the land between the Mediterranean Sea on the west and the Jordan Rift (which includes the Sea of Galilee and the Dead Sea) on the east. The southern border was the desert area, while the northern boundary most likely included much of modern-day Lebanon" (Trimm, 2022, P. 35).

The book of Deuteronomy records the period preceding the offensive, emphasizing total commitment to the holy one true supreme creator God, to love God and obey His commandments. Directions are given. Separation from the depravity and idol worship of the Canaanites is mandated in the strongest terms with blessings promised for obeying God’s commandments and warnings for not obeying God’s commandments. Note that Heiser (2001) confirms the monotheism of Deuteronomy 32:8-9 (pp. 52-74).

The ancient Israelites are ordered to drive out the seven nations (e.g. Hittites, Girgashites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites) in the Promised Land (Deu 7:1-2) destroying those who remain and resist (Copan & Flannagan, 2014, pp. 76-83). They are not to make treaties with them or intermarry, they are to demolish all their idols and places of worship. If possible, they were to avoid military conflict with the Edomites, Moabites, and Ammonites who were ancestrally related to the ancient Israelites (Deu 2:4-8, 2:9, 16-23).

In Deuteronomy 9:5, Moses emphasizes that their victory is not due to their righteousness “but it is because of the wickedness of these nations that the Lord your God is driving them out from before you, and in order to confirm the oath which the Lord swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob” (NASB, 1997).

Moses also communicates internal discipline for Israelites who fall into Canaanite practices that lead them away from the holy one true supreme creator God; however, only after due diligence is taken to ensure that such has occurred. Examples include if an Israelite false prophet arises to lead the people astray or an Israelite city falls into idol worship (Deu 13).

The separation given to the ancient Israelites was so complete that verses like Leviticus 19:19 prohibits even the mixing of items which modern readers may initially find confusing. Such passages forbid the Israelites from associating with the pagan fertility cult practices of the Canaanites who believed in occultist sympathetic magic which was the idea that symbolic actions could influence their pantheon of false gods and goddesses (also see Deuteronomy 32:17) which they believed could influence nature. The Canaanites believed the mixing of animal breeds, seeds, or materials would marry them and magically produce offspring, an agricultural bounty. The Israelites were to be separate, a people consecrated to the holy one true supreme creator God (Kapelrud, 1952, pp. 93-98; Baal, 2015).

Yet, though Moses knew the Israelites would settle the land they were about to enter, he, also knew they would eventually fail to love God and keep His commandments as evidenced in Deuteronomy 31:29 which states, "For I know that after my death you will behave very corruptly and turn from the way which I have commanded you; and evil will confront you in the latter days, because you will do that which is evil in the sight of the Lord, provoking Him to anger with the work of your hands” (NASB, 1997).

The historical record of ancient Israelite backsliding is firmly established in the Old Testament. Israel became more of an offender than Judah, with exceptions. Throughout this history prophets arise and call for a return to God and repentance from false idols, foreign religious practices, intermarrying with foreigners, etc. This struggle dominates the history of the ancient Israelites until judgement finally comes in the form of subjugation, exile, and diaspora (e.g. Assyrian exile, Babylonian exile, Roman diaspora) (NASB, 1997; Gilbert, 1978, pp. 3-12; Bergren, 1974; Rose Publishing, 2005).

As the Israelites prepare to enter and work to possess their Promised Land, difficult verses are found such as Deuteronomy 7:1-2; 20:16-17 and Joshua 6:21; 8:24-26; 10:28, 40; 11:11, 14, 20-21.

Trimm (2022) asserted that many scholars can be categorized into one of four ways of viewing these Old Testament verses and their context while (Cowles et al, 2003) presented four ways many scholars look at the relationship between these Old Testament verses and their context in relation to New Testament thought. Both books benefit the discussion; however, the why and to what end appear understated. Such aspects of theodicy should not be undervalued.

The seven ancient Canaanite kingdoms were deeply wicked. For centuries they practiced the worst immoralities, engaged in deep occultism, sacrificed their children to false gods, mistreated the vulnerable in horrific ways, and refused to repent even though, if only as a distant echo, the existence of the holy one true supreme creator God of Noah was still known to some of them as an unknown deity above El, Baal, and all of their gods (Jones, 2009; Corduan, 2013, p. 329).

Eventually, the holy one true supreme creator God helped the Israelites codify a religious legal system which mandated separation from Canaanite depravity in the land they were to take possession of while simultaneously executing divine judgement (Kaiser, 1996, pp. 206-207; Jones, 2009, 2010; Craig, 2007).

And when the Israelites failed to maintain their separation from worshipping false Canaanite gods, goddesses, and depravities they faced divine judgement as well.

Jones (2010) stated:

"Israel’s response to Canaanite sin is a parable of how their own sinfulness empowered them to ape the sin of the Canaanites and thereby procure God’s judgment on them. For God does not show favoritism. Israel was warned not to let the Canaanites live in their land, but to completely destroy them (Exod. 23:33; Deut. 20:16–18), lest the Israelites learn the Canaanite ways (Exod. 34:15–16). If they did not destroy them, the land would “vomit” them out just as it had vomited out the Canaanites (Num. 33:56; Lev. 18:28; Deut. 4:23–29, 8:19–20)." (para. 3)

Such verses remind us that God’s sovereignty is not only good news for those who strive to do what is right, those who take a high view of the importance of right and wrong; but as Baker (2000) stated:

"In what must be terrifying words to hear, Yahweh can also say (Nahum 2:13) ‘I am your enemy’ (NLV), ‘I am against you’ (NIV). While Yahweh’s patronage shields… those who honour him (Gen. 12:2-3a; Rom. 8:31), those who oppose him (Gen. 12:3a; 2 Pet. 3:3-10) experience unmitigated woe." (p. 252).

This is reflected in the book of 2 Peter. The greater biblical context; however, is of God working to shepherd a people within covenants (e.g. Noah, Abraham, Moses, and David) from which Jesus Christ would later emerge and usher in the preeminent covenant (Ferguson & Packer, 2000, pp. 173-176; Geisler, 2004b).

Reader’s note: the following book reviews are relevant and provide greater context for this article. Simply click on the following pictures to open these two book reviews in new tabs:

Bibliography

Ahlstrom, G. (1993). The History of Ancient Palestine. Augsburg Fortress.

Ahlstrom, G. (2002). Ancient Palestine: A Historical Introduction. Fortress Press.

Baal. (2015). Encyclopedia of The Bible. Retrieved on July 1, 2024 from https://www.biblegateway.com/resources/encyclopedia-of-the-bible/Baal

Baker, D. W. (2000). Nahum. In T. D. Alexander & B. S. Rosner (Eds.), The message. New dictionary of biblical theology (electronic ed., p. 252). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.

Bergren, R. V. (1974). The prophets and the law. Hebrew Union College Press

Bible Hub. (2019). Bible Hub: Search, Read, Study the Bible in Many Languages. Biblehub.com. https://biblehub.com/

Buck, M. E. (2019). The Canaanites: their history and culture from texts and artifacts. Wipf & Stock.

Bunch, T.E., LeCompte, M.A., Adedeji, A.V. et al. A Tunguska sized airburst destroyed Tall el-Hammam a Middle Bronze Age city in the Jordan Valley near the Dead Sea. Sci Rep 11, 18632 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-97778-3

Bunch, T.E., LeCompte, M.A., Adedeji, A.V. et al. Author Correction: A Tunguska sized airburst destroyed Tall el-Hammam a Middle Bronze Age city in the Jordan Valley near the Dead Sea. Sci Rep 12, 3265 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-06266-9

Bunch, T.E., LeCompte, M.A., Adedeji, A.V. et al. Author Correction: A Tunguska sized airburst destroyed Tall el-Hammam a Middle Bronze Age city in the Jordan Valley near the Dead Sea. Sci Rep 13, 8280 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-35266-6

Canaan. (2024). In Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/place/Canaan-historical-region-Middle-East

Collins, S. (2016). Discovery the city of Sodom: the fascinating, true account of the discovery of the Old Testament's most infamous city. Howard Books.

Collins, S., Holden, J. M., & Kaiser, W. C. (2020). The Harvest handbook of Bible lands: a panoramic survey of the history, geography, and culture of the scriptures. Harvest House.

Coogan, M. D. (Ed. & Trans.). (1978). Stories from ancient Canaan. The Westminster Press.

Copan, P., & Flannagan, M. (2014). Did God really command genocide? Baker Books.

Corduan, W. (2013). In the beginning God: A fresh look at the case for original monotheism. B&H Academic; Illustrated edition.

Cowles, C. S., Merrill, E. H., Gard, D. L., & Longman III, T. (2003). Show them no mercy: four views on God and Canaanite genocide (Stanley N. Gundry, Ed.). Zondervan.

Craig, W. L. (2007, August 06). Slaughter of the Canaanites: Reasonable Faith. Retrieved January 31, 2021, from https://www.reasonablefaith.org/writings/question-answer/slaughter-of-the-canaanites

Craig, W. L. (2015, August 04), The “slaughter” of the Canaanite tribes by ancient Israelites. Retrieved January 31, 2021, from: The “slaughter” of the Canaanite tribes by ancient Israelites.

Evans, C. S. (2002). Pocket dictionary of apologetics & philosophy of religion. InterVarsity Press.

Fee, G. D., & Stuart, D. (2014). How to read the Bible for all its worth. Zondervan.

Ferguson, S. B., & Packer, J. I. (2000). In New dictionary of theology (electronic ed.). InterVarsity Press.

France, R. T. (1998). Jesus and the Old Testament. Regent.

Geisler, N. (2004a). Systematic theology: volume 2: God and creation. Bethany House.

Geisler, N. (2004b). Systematic theology: volume 3: sin and salvation. Bethany House.

Geisler, N. L. (2013). The popular handbook of archaeology and the Bible. Harvest House Publishers.

Gibson, J. C. L. (2004) Canaanite myths and legends (2nd ed.). T & T Clark International.

Gilbert, M. (1978). Exile and return: the struggle for a Jewish homeland. Lippincott.

Gray, J. (1964). The Canaanites. Thames and Hudson.

Hallo, W. W., & Younger, K. L. (Eds.). (2003). The context of scripture: canonical compositions from the biblical world (Vols. 1-3). Brill.

Heiser, M. S. (2001). Deuteronomy 32:8 and the sons of God. Bibliotheca Sacra, 158, 52–74. Retrieved on July 1, 2024 from https://drmsh.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Heiser-Deuteronomy-32-8-and-the-sons-of-God.pdf

Hess, R. S. (2007). Israelite religions: An archaeological and biblical survey. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic.

Hinnells, J. R. (Ed.). (2007). A handbook of ancient religions. Cambridge University Press.

Houdmann, M. S. (2024). Why did God command the genocide of the Canaanites? Got Questions. Retrieved June 2, 2024, from https://www.gotquestions.org/Canaanites-extermination.html

Jaret, S.J., Scott Harris, R. No mineralogic or geochemical evidence of impact at Tall el-Hammam, a Middle Bronze Age city in the Jordan Valley near the Dead Sea. Sci Rep 12, 5189 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-08216-x

Jones, C. (2009). We don’t hate sin so we don’t understand what happened to the Canaanites. Philosophia Christi, 11(1), 53–72. https://doi.org/10.5840/pc20091115

Jones, C. (2010). Killing the Canaanites: a response to the new atheism’s “divine genocide” Claims. CHRISTIAN RESEARCH JOURNAL, 33(04), Article JAF3334. https://www.equip.org/articles/killing-the-canaanites/

Kaiser, W. C. Jr. (1995). The Messiah in the Old Testament. Zondervan.

Kaiser, W. C., Jr., Davids, P. H., Bruce, F. F., & Brauch, M. T. (1996). Hard sayings of the Bible. InterVarsity.

Kapelrud, A. S. (1952). Baal in the Ras Shamra Texts. G.E.C. Gad.

Kapelrud, A. S. (1965). The Ras Shamra discoveries and the Old Testament. Alden Press.

Kennedy, T. (2024). The Essential Archaeological Guide to Bible Lands: Uncovering Biblical Sites of the Ancient Near East and Mediterranean World. Harvest House.

Landman, I. (ed.) (1939-1943). The universal Jewish encyclopedia (vol 1-10). KTAV Publishing House.

Malamat, A., Tadmor, H., Stern, M. Safrai, S., Ben-Sasson, H. H., & Ettinger, S. (1976). A history of the Jewish people. Harvard University Press.

Melchizedek. (2024). The Jewish Encyclopedia. Retrieved from https://jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/10602-melchizedek

New American Standard Bible. (1997). (Original work published 1960). The Lockman Foundation

Papyrus Anastasi 1 (10247-1 to 10247-16). (2024). The British Museum.

Paton, L. B. (2014). The Early History of Syria and Palestine. CreateSpace.

Pfeiffer, C. F. (1962). Ras Shamra and the Bible. Baker Book House.

Rose Publishing. (2005). Rose Book of Bible Charts, Maps, and Time Lines. Rose Publishing.

Ross, H. (2014). Navigating Genesis: a scientist's journey through Genesis 1-11. Zondervan. Ryken, L., Wilhoit, J., Longman, T., Duriez, C., Penney, D., & Reid, D. G. (2000). In dictionary of biblical imagery (electronic ed.). InterVarsity Press. Silvia, P. J., Collins, S., & LeCompte, M. A., et al. Modeling how a Powerful Airburst destroyed Tall el-Hammam, a Middle Bronze Age city near the Dead Sea. Airbursts and Cratering Impacts. 2024. Vol. 2(1). DOI: 10.14293/ACI.2024.0005

Smith, W. R. (1972). The religion of the Semites: the fundamental institutions. Shocken.

Spence-Jones, H. D. & Exell, J. S. (1919). The pulpit commentary. London.

Strong, J. (2001). New Strong’s exhaustive concordance of the Bible expanded red letter edition. Thomas Nelson.

Sumerian K8538 tablet: the planesphere. (2024). The British Museum.

Trimm, C. (2022). The destruction of the Canaanites: God, genocide, & biblical interpretation. William. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

Fair Use: Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act in 1976; Allowance is made for "Fair Use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statue that might otherwise be infringing. All rights and credit go directly to its rightful owners. No copyright infringement intended.

Notice: Content on this page (including reviews, business, theology, and technology commentary) is provided for informational and opinion purposes only and does not constitute professional, legal, financial, medical, or pastoral advice. Reviews may include quotations or summaries under fair use. All views expressed are those of the author alone. While every effort is made to ensure accuracy, no warranties are provided. Use and rely on this content at your own risk. For important decisions, consult qualified professionals. For copyright takedown requests or corrections, please email ppothier@substack.com with the subject “Takedown/Correction” and include full details. Effective: 2026-05-08.

Copyright © 2024 Paul L. Pothier. All rights reserved.

Subscribe now

Share

Modern scholars have directed much attention to the problem of evil with a resulting body of work that is considerable, though the most prominent contemporary de facto objection of "the argument from suffering and evil goes all the way back to Democritus in the ancient world" (Plantinga, 2000, p. 4).

While philosophical debates on the problem of evil take the form of assessing categorical statements and their relationships using reasoning (Churchill, 1990), this essay merely introduces the topic to a general audience from an orthodox biblical perspective by which any incorporation of “theology proper” (the study of the creator God of the Bible, His attributes, and His activities) in this essay is understood (1 Joh 1:5) (see Geisler 2004, vol 2).

And as the book of Job implies, human cognitive abilities are limited in fully grasping God's eternal purposes in temporarily permitting the existence of evil (also Isaiah 55:8). However, some understanding may be had.

Evans (2002) described the theological and philosophical topic of the problem of evil as the “difficulty posed by the existence of evil (both moral evil and natural evil) in a world created by a God who is both completely good and all-powerful” (p. 42).

Moral evils “result from the intentions or negligence of moral agents” while natural evils are “are bad states of affairs which do not result from the intentions or negligence of moral agents” (Calder, 2022, para. 2). A moral agent is “a being who is capable of acting with reference to right and wrong” (Porter, 1913, p. 943).

Meister and Moser (2017) stated, “The problem of evil has two major theoretical versions: the logical problem and the evidential problem. The logical problem concerns whether the basic claims of theism about God are inconsistent with the reality of evil” (p. 20) and “the evidential problem of evil suggests that, given the reality of evil, theism is probably not true, even if it is logically consistent” (p. 21).

Theists rebut the logical problem by arguing that if God has a (possible) "morally acceptable reason for allowing evil to occur, the logical problem of evil fails to show the nonexistence of God"; while rebutting the evidential problem with various defenses (e.g. theodicies) (Mesiter & Moser, 2017, p. 21). Cary et al. (2017) examines four of the defensive views: the classical view, the Molinist view, the open theist view, the essential kenosis view, and the skeptical theist view.

A famous example addressing the logical problem is the Plantinga (2002) free will defense which asserts that the existence of God is compatible, both logically and probabilistically, with the existence of evil in which he stated:

“A world containing creatures who are significantly free (and freely perform more good than evil actions) is more valuable, all else being equal, than a world containing no free creatures at all. Now God can create free creatures, but He can't cause or determine them to do only what is right. For if He does so, then they aren't significantly free after all; they do not do what is right freely.

To create creatures capable of moral good, therefore, He must create creatures capable of moral evil; and He can't give these creatures the freedom to perform evil and at the same time prevent them from doing so. As it turned out, sadly enough, some of the free creatures God created went wrong in the exercise of their freedom; this is the source of moral evil.

The fact that free creatures sometimes go wrong, however, counts neither against God's omnipotence nor against His goodness; for He could have forestalled the occurrence of moral evil only by removing the possibility of moral good” (p. 30).

Geisler (2004, vol 2) conveyed both God’s incommunicable attributes (which cannot be transmitted to creatures as they necessitate infinitude) and God’s communicable attributes (which can be transmitted to creatures). With respect to the latter, “They include holiness, righteousness (justice), jealousy, perfection, truthfulness, goodness (love), mercy, and wrath (although these last two may be activities, not attributes as such, which flow from God's goodness and justice, respectively)” (p. 313).

In the Bible, (Gen 1:1; Job 38:4-7; Psa 82; etc.) God originally presides over an ordered heavenly host (Heiser, 2019; Geisler, 2004, vol 2, pp. 475-499) which exists in harmony with God’s divine law, of which divine morality is a form (NASB, 1997; Andrews, 2009, pp. 123-135, 264-278; Lewis 1974; Lewis 1996; etc.).

God made all things good (also very good) (Gen 1:31; 1 Tim 4:4). Geisler (2004) wrote that, “This would include the angel Lucifer, who became known as Satan [i.e. the devil]. In God and in His heaven, there was no sin (Hab 1:13; Jam 1:13), yet Lucifer sinned and rebelled against God (1 Tim 3:6), leading one-third of the angels with him (Rev 12:4).

God made Lucifer perfectly good; Lucifer made evil. God gave him the fact of freedom (which is good); Lucifer performed the act of freedom to rebel against God (which is evil). God provided the good power of free will, but Lucifer performed the bad action of free will.” (vol 2, p. 496-497).

Wanting to be like God, Lucifer (e.g. Satan, the devil) rebelled against God (Isa 14:12-14; Eze 28:15-17) and disconnected from God’s divine law, of which divine morality is a form, falling into wickedness with those spiritual beings who chose to follow him (Mat 13:36-43; John 8:44; 1 Joh 3:4-10; Rev 20:10; etc.).

Jones (2017) noted how great their fall was and as the holy angels watched this “horror” of a rebellion “plunge into depravity,” it became a “heavenly education of good and evil” confirming that “God was right all along.” There was sin in heaven, before there was sin on earth (p. 214).

Concerning this origin of sin, Geisler (2004, vol 3) discussed topics such as God cannot produce or promote sin; however, God can permit sin. God can also use the problem of sin to accomplish a higher purpose of an eternal greater good than would otherwise have existed while preserving the gift of freedom to His creatures (also Corduan, 1993, pp. 123-145) (pp. 81-99).

In the sixth creation period (e.g. Yom, “day”) (Geisler, 1999, pp. 270-272; Whitefield, 2003), Genesis 1:26 states “God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them” (NASB, 1997).

The first humans find themselves in a refuge protected against natural evil which they are eventually expelled from as judgement for choosing to disobey God, at Satan’s enticement (Gen 2-3). They find themselves contending with moral and natural evil in a world that “lies in the power of the evil one [e.g. Satan]” (NASB, 1997, 1 Joh 5:19), until a future time when Satan will be cast out (Joh 12:31, 14:30, 16:11; 2 Joh 2:13-14, 4:4; Rev 20:10) and evil eradicated for eternity (Isa 65:17, 66:22; Mat 13:24-43; 2 Pet 3:13; Rev 20:11-15, 21:1-8) (Geisler, 2004, vol 4, pp. 557-558).

They can still interact with God, though not as before due to their new sin nature, yet with a promise of preservation (Gen 3:15) and a future victory through God Himself in Christ (Gal 3:16; Heb 2:14-15; 1 Joh 3:8; Rev 12:9). Things are much harder than before, yet the world contains provision and even death works to hold the extent of evil in check (Ross, 1996, p. 178).

Ross (1996) wrote, "God's purpose in the Incarnation goes far beyond breaking through the dimensional barrier to communicate with us face-to-face, to help us understand and believe His message, to show us His love, and to give us hope. He came to break the sin barrier, to repair the damage done in the Garden of Eden. Christ came in human flesh to be the second Adam... In perfectly obeying the Father, even to the point of death, He would finalize God's victory over the original and most powerful insurrectionist, Satan. The author of Hebrews explains at length why our Redeemer, the mediator between God and humankind, had to share in our humanity to be made like us in every way, tempted in every way as we are, and yet without any sin" (p. 120).

Romans 8 and Revelation 20-22 reveal that this temporary world (Isa 24, 51; Mat 24:35; 2 Peter 3; Ross, 2006, pp. 160-162, 70-71; Krauss & Starkman, 2000, pp. 22-30) is part of God’s divine plan to ultimately conquer evil forever and that this divine plan benefits all humanity redeemed, all holy angelic beings, and all future creation for eternity.

In Why the Universe Is the Way It Is, Ross (2008) maintained this writing the "present universe is ideally suited for bringing about an efficient and rapid end" to suffering forever (p. 24), within the context of biblical revelation. He discusses God's obscurity; the mysteries of life, death, and decay; the universe; the world; humanity, etc. all within the context of time, location, and intent. He dispels numerous misconceptions while articulating numerous purposes for why God made the universe the way He did which makes his book essential reading for those looking to delve further into those topics beyond this brief introductory essay. However, an example. A great deal of natural activity in this world is beneficial for the survival of life (Ross, 2006, pp. 125-175).

With respect to "natural catastrophes," Ross (2009) introduced the benefits to life on earth’s survival from events such as "hurricanes, tornadoes, volcanoes, earthquakes, wildfires, ice ages, floods, and droughts," despite "damage” and “suffering” to “plants, animals, and humans" while noting that a material amount of suffering caused by natural catastrophes can be prevented or minimized if humans adjust and modify their activities (pp. 204-208).

Human agency matters, as does correct correspondence. When humans do actual good while refraining from actual evil (also Gen 5:3-7), evil and human suffering can be lessened in the world; even when people are persecuted for actualizing good. God commonly works through human agency to accomplish objectively good purposes through people who choose to genuinely align with Him, which is not to be confused with those who merely exploit His name (Mat 7:15-23).

Geisler & McCoy (2014) is suggested reading concerning moral evil and human autonomy. They dismantle much of the atheist argumentation on that topic while analyzing the contradictory and impossible demands atheists make of God, and their unreasonable demand that God Himself resolve their inconsistencies.

And as Craig (2010) reminded us, “We are not God’s pets (see Imago Dei) … the purpose of life is not happiness as such but rather the knowledge of God which in the end will produce ultimate human happiness and fulfillment” (para. 35).

Contained in the knowledge of God that is available to humanity through natural and divine revelation is the knowledge needed for salvation, regeneration, sanctification, and ultimately glorification; the divine law, of which divine morality is a form, which can aid people and the societies they create to be godly, moral, and ethical; etc. and, so much more.

Craig (2010) continued, “God’s ultimate goal for humanity is the knowledge of himself, which ultimately can alone bring happiness to people, history cannot be seen in its true perspective apart from the Kingdom of God. The purpose of human life is the Kingdom of God. God’s desire is to draw as many people as possible freely into His Kingdom. And it may well be the case that suffering is part of the means by which God draws people freely into his Kingdom” (also see Craig, 2024) (para. 35).

While the Bible teaches that evil (biblically defined) is bad and to be prevented, mitigated, and eliminated where possible and that God has made provision available for that (including personal salvation, regeneration, and the divine law of which divine morality is a form); Craig (2010, para. 35) reminds that God is working out all things ultimately for a higher purpose, a greater eternal good for all humanity redeemed, all holy angelic beings, and all future creation (Romans 8, Revelations 20-22).

In the meanwhile, much natural evil presents itself as humans fail to accommodate nature and much moral evil arises as humans choose to disconnect from God’s divine law, of which divine morality is a form, and behave wickedly.

Examples are manifold and a comprehensive list would be long indeed. But for the sake of this discussion think along the lines of building in areas where severe natural catastrophes occur or failing to take care of one’s health in a consistent manner as inviting natural evil. An example of moral evil would encompass the genocidal and democidal depravity that occurred last century (e.g. twentieth century).

It was human agency that did that: not God. Humans chose to disconnect from the holy one true supreme God and His divine law, of which divine morality is a form, and plunged into depravity.

However, the Bible asserts that final justice is coming, when all accounts will be entirely settled. Jesus Christ sometimes put this in the form of parables. For example, in the book of Matthew (Mat 13:24-30), Jesus spoke of a wicked enemy sowing weeds in a righteous landowner’s wheat field. When the wheat sprouts, the weeds become evident. So, the landowner's workers ask him if they should gather up the weeds.

The landowner; however, says not to lest they harm the wheat in the process. He tells them to wait until the harvest and then first gather up the weeds and burn them, and then gather the wheat into his barn.

Later Jesus explains to His disciples that He is sowing good seed while the devil is sowing bad seed, and at the end of this age God's holy angels will gather those who chose the devil’s bad seed which includes "all stumbling blocks and those who commit lawlessness" and they will be thrown into an eternal fire while those who chose His good seed ("the righteous") will "shine forth like the sun in the kingdom of their Father" who is the one true creator God (Mat 13:36-43) (also see McDermott, 2007).

Interestingly, this parable also speaks of redemption: for sinners to repent and be forgiven, to become wheat. Though universalism, the idea that everyone will be saved, is false (see Geisler, 2004, vol 3); another important reason why both are permitted temporarily in the world is that God “wants all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth” (1 Tim 2:4).

God wants everyone to choose His good seed during their life here, including those presently choosing the bad seed. The stakes are eternal and He is prepared to wait until the harvest to maximize the number of souls who choose God’s offer for salvation, for regeneration, for sanctification, and ultimately for glorification (Rev 21-22).

This brief introductory essay is not a typical philosophical examination of logical categorical statements with respect to the traditional problem of evil debate, which the reader is encouraged to explore. Rather this is a personalized introduction from biblical revelation emphasizing the provision God has made for humans in this world through Himself in the risen Jesus Christ which is available to all who choose it.

Bibliography

Abraham, W. J., Audi, R., Brooke, J. H., Burrell, D., Caputo, J. D., Coakley, S. Corte, S., Craig, W. L., Creel, R., Draper, P. Esmail, A. A., Evans, C. S., Ferre, F., Flannery, K. L. Flew, A., Flint, T. P. Frankenberry, N., Ganeri, J. Garcia, L. L... Zagzebski, L. (2010). A companion to philosophy of religion (2nd ed.). Taliaferro, C., Draper, P. & Quinn, P. L. (eds.). Blackwell.

Adams, M. M. (2006). Christ and horrors: the coherence of Christology. Cambridge University Press.

Andrews, E. (2009). Who Made God? EP Books.

Aquinas, T. (1995). On evil. University of Notre Dame Press.

Archer, G. L. (1982). Encyclopedia of Bible difficulties. Zondervan.

Augustine, S. (1948). The happy life; answer to skeptics; divine providence and the problem of evil; soliloquies. CIMA Publishing.

Augustine. (2000). The city of God. Random House. Calder, T. (2022). The Concept of Evil, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2022 Edition), Zalta, E. N. & Nodelman, U. (eds.), https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2022/entries/concept-evil/

Cary, P., Craig, W. L., Hasker, W., Oord, T. J. & Wykstra, S. (2017). God and the problem of evil: five views. Meister, C. & Dew Jr. J. K. (eds.). IVP Academic.

Churchill, R. P. (1990). Logic: an introduction. Palgrave Macmillan.

Corduan, W. (1993). Reasonable faith: basic Christian apologetics. Broadman & Holman.

Cory, T. S., Dahl, D. E., DeYoung, R. K., Dougherty, M. V., Dressel, A., Furlong, P., Hoffman, T., Jensen, S. J., Kent, B., O'Rourke, F., Osborne Jr., T. M., Still, C. N., Wippel, J. F. (2013) Aquinas's disputed questions on evil: a critical guide. Dougherty, M. V. (ed.). Cambridge University Press.

Craig, W. L. (2010). The problem of evil and suffering: Willian Lane Craig speaks at Gracepoint Church | Reasonable Faith. https://www.reasonablefaith.org/videos/video-lectures/the-problem-of-evil-and-suffering-gracepoint-church

Craig, W. L. (2024). Suffering and Evil. Reasonable Faith. https://www.reasonablefaith.org/suffering-and-evil

Evans, C. S. (2002). Pocket dictionary of apologetics & philosophy of religion. InterVarsity Press.

Geisler, N. L. (1999). Baker encyclopedia of Christian apologetics. Baker Books.

Geisler, N. L. (2004). Systematic theology (Vols. 1-4). Bethany House.

Geisler, N. L. & McCoy, D. J. (2014). The atheist's fatal flaw: exposing conflicting beliefs. Baker.

Heiser, M. S. (2019). The unseen realm: recovering the supernatural worldview of the Bible. Lexham Press.

Houdmann, M. S. (2024). Why did God command the genocide of the Canaanites? Got Questions. Retrieved June 2, 2024, from https://www.gotquestions.org/Canaanites-extermination.html

Jones, C. (2017). Why does God allow evil? Harvest House.

Krauss, L. M. & Starkman, G. D. (2000). Life, the universe, and nothing: life and death in an ever-expanding universe. Astrophysical Journal 531:22-30.

Lewis, C. S. (1974). The abolition of man. HarperCollins.

Lewis, C. S. (1996). Mere Christianity. Simon & Schuster.

Lewis, C. S. (2001). The Screwtape letters. HarperCollins.

McDermott, G. R. (2007). God's rivals: Why has God allowed different religions? InterVarsity Press.

Meister, C. & Moser, P. K. (2017). The Cambridge companion to the problem of evil. Cambridge University Press.

New American Standard Bible. (1997). (Original work published 1960). The Lockman Foundation

Plantinga, A. (1993a). Warrant: the current debate. Oxford University Press.

Plantinga, A. (1993b). Warrant and proper function. Oxford University Press. Plantinga, A. (2000). Warranted Christian belief. Oxford University Press.

Plantinga, A. (2002). God, freedom, and evil. Eerdmans Publishing.

Plantinga, A. (2015). Knowledge and Christian belief. Eerdmans Publishing.

Porter, N. (1913). Websters Revised Unabridged Dictionary. G & C Merriam Company.

Ross, H. (1996). Beyond the cosmos. NavPress.

Ross, H. (2006). Creation as science: a testable model approach to end the creation/evolution wars. Navpress.

Ross, H. (2008). Why the universe is the way it is. Baker Books.

Ross, H. (2009). More than a theory: revealing a testable model for creation. Baker Books.

Steward, J. (Ed.) (1904). The Cambridge Bible for schools and colleges. Cambridge University Press.

Stump, E. (2012). Wandering in darkness: narrative and the problem of suffering. Oxford University Press

Templeton, J. M. (1995). The humble approach: scientists discover God. Continuum Publishing.

Thieme Jr., R. B. (2012). The angelic conflict. The Lockman Foundation.

Whitefield, R. (2003). Reading Genesis one. Whitefield Publisher.

Zimmerman, J. (1927). The problem of evil and sufferings. Stratford Company.

Fair Use: Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act in 1976; Allowance is made for "Fair Use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statue that might otherwise be infringing. All rights and credit go directly to its rightful owners. No copyright infringement intended.

Notice: Content on this page (including reviews, business, theology, and technology commentary) is provided for informational and opinion purposes only and does not constitute professional, legal, financial, medical, or pastoral advice. Reviews may include quotations or summaries under fair use. All views expressed are those of the author alone. While every effort is made to ensure accuracy, no warranties are provided. Use and rely on this content at your own risk. For important decisions, consult qualified professionals. For copyright takedown requests or corrections, please email ppothier@substack.com with the subject “Takedown/Correction” and include full details. Effective: 2026-05-08.

Copyright © 2024 Paul L. Pothier. All rights reserved.

Subscribe now

Share

This essay introduces argumentation around Romans 13, found in the Bible, from a historical orthodox Christian doctrinal perspective.

A typical statement might be, “You cannot persecute someone by asking them to obey the law. Everyone is expected to obey the law.”

A typical response to this might be, “Would you have argued that to someone hiding you from deportation to a death camp? Do you mean all the laws existing in Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union and communist China, the Khmer Rouge, Sodom and Gomorrah, etc.? Are you arguing that the prophet Daniel should have disobeyed God to worship King Nebuchadnezzar II’s golden statue?”

Norman Geisler's 2004 Systematic Theology: Volume Two discussed the subject of God and His creation and is recommended for a requisite theological understanding concerning God and His creation.

In chapter 13, "God's Holiness and Righteousness," Geisler (2004) discusses God's moral and non-moral attributes and characteristics. In chapter 23, Geisler (2004) discusses God's sovereignty over creation.

First, God’s holiness and righteousness: With respect to holiness, Geisler (2004) wrote "Holiness is both a metaphysical and a moral attribute: It refers to His [God's] absolute moral uniqueness as well as His total separateness from creatures. As established above, in one sense holiness is an overall attribute of God that distinguishes Him from everything else that exists. God's righteousness refers to His absolute justice or rightness. Righteousness is the intrinsic characteristic of God wherein He is the ultimate standard of just and right actions and because of which He must [ultimately] punish all unjust and evil acts" (p. 336).

Second, God’s sovereignty: In chapter 23, Geisler (2004) discusses God's sovereignty over creation writing "Technically, sovereignty is not an attribute of God, but rather an activity of God in relation to His universe. Sovereignty is God's control over His creation, dealing with His governance over it: Sovereignty is God's rule over all reality. Sovereignty should be distinguished from other related activities of God" (p. 536). Geisler concludes with, "The biblical, theological, and historical foundation of God's complete and sovereign control over all human events-past, present, and future- stand firm. Challenges both from within and without are easily answered" (p. 561).

The point here is that it is within the context of the one true holy, righteous, and sovereign creator God that the Bible teaches (de facto) human-made laws which genuinely oppose creator God's sovereign (de jure) moral law are ungodly and to be resisted (in some cases disobeyed) until they can be overturned.

This is why the Dutch Ten Boom family was morally justified in breaking human-made laws when they hid Jews from arrest and deportation to death camps, for example, while the ungodly human-made laws created by the Nazis to facilitate the murder of such innocents constituted a misuse of government and Romans 13 (Boom et al., 2008).

This is why Brother Andrew was morally justified in delivering Bibles to persecuted Christians in areas under the control of authoritarian state atheists while the human-made laws the state atheists created to prevent people from obtaining a Bible constituted a misuse of government and Romans 13 (Andrew et al., 2015).

The biblical model is that people are not to work against creator God, even when a human-made law (or body of laws) has been established to do so. Jesus and His apostles broke human-made laws. The Bible lists examples that include Jesus violating human-made laws to supernaturally heal sick people and the apostles violating human-made laws by spreading the Christian message.

The apostle Paul’s ministry to convert Gentiles in the Roman Empire went against Roman law. Acts 16:21 states Paul was "proclaiming customs that are not lawful for us to accept or to practice, since we are Romans” (NASB, 1997). Paul was imprisoned (and likely killed) by the Roman government for such acts of civil disobedience (demonstrating that while the Roman government did not have the moral right to imprison and kill him for spreading creator God's gospel of Jesus Christ, they appear to have had the ability to imprison and kill him for doing so).

In fact, all the apostles were involved in spreading the Christian gospel. Revelations 13, 18, and Acts 17:6-7 describe the apostles as "men who have upset the world" and who "all act contrary to the decrees of Caesar, saying that there is another king, Jesus" (NASB, 1997).

Understand; however, the Bible records that Jesus conformed to human law (including Roman law) which did not impede God's will (and plan of salvation for humanity in which His life, death, and resurrection are instrumental, as chronicled in orthodox Christian history). A well-known example of this is Mark 12:17.

It is also important to understand that Jesus refused to align with the Jewish revolutionaries of the period who would go on to mount three Jewish revolts against the Roman Empire, which were ultimately crushed by the Romans between 66 and 135 CE. Jesus demonstrated to the Roman prefect Pontius Pilate in John 18:36 that He was not sent by God to establish an earthly kingdom with a military to take over the world as is often attributed to Islam (see Warner, 2014) and Marxism (see Lee & Bullivant, 2016).

Governments (i.e., higher powers) are ordained by the creator God of the Bible for the benefit of humanity within the parameters of normative morality but are always superseded by the de jure highest power (e.g., the creator God of the Bible) when they conflict.

God does not cosign, support, nor promote wickedness even when certain people manage to have it codified into law and engage in fallacious argumentation attempting to justify it. In whatever form government takes, higher powers are always beneath the creator God of the Bible. It is with this understanding that the biblical record makes clear Jesus did not accept every human-made law by governing authorities as ultimately equivalent with God’s will. Jesus often upset the status quo and challenged the authorities’ claim to what is right and true. And, so have his disciples.

In Romans 13: The True Meaning of Submission (Baldwin & Baldwin, 2011) and the referenced video lectures (Baldwin, 2019), Baldwin argues that a genuine view of scripture prevents us from viewing the demands of society and its rulers with uncritical acceptance and automatic approval arguing that the government which persecutes genuine Christians; which passes laws to harm the righteous on behalf of the immoral; which dispenses injustice instead of justice; which perpetrates moral decay and spiritual deception has been usurped by forces diametrically opposed to the creator God of the Bible’s intents and purposes.

Christ nor his apostles ever taught, nor would ever have taught, that Christians are morally obligated by the holy creator God of the Bible to perform wicked acts to satisfy ungodly human-made laws.

Brauch (1990) summarized the apostle Paul’s argument in Romans:

“It is God’s intent that human life in the context of community will be life in harmony and peace and order. Since life in community becomes chaotic and anarchistic without the presence of regulatory laws enforced by authorities, the presence of these is part of God’s overall intent for human existence... Insofar as the state and its rulers exercise their authority in keeping with God’s intent, they act as God’s ministers for the common good of society. If, however, the authority of the state runs counter to this divine intent, then that authority should not be understood as God-given and Christians may expect to suffer for honoring God in disobeying laws which are ungodly” (p. 82).

While some cases of Christian resistance are clear, such as the previously mentioned case of the Ten Boom Family (Boom et al., 2008) working in the Netherlands to save innocent lives during World War II, others are not. A debated example is the American Revolution. Some Christians argue that it was biblically justified; however, other important voices in Christian scholarship argue that it was not biblically justified.

There is a consensus; however, around the exercise of moral self-defense to protect and preserve innocent human life when it becomes necessary.

Also, consensus exists around “Just War Theory,” as interpreted by Church fathers like Saint Augustine (2015) and Thomas Aquinas (1948), with respect to individuals in law enforcement and the military being empowered to discharge their lawful duties in a moral manner.

Whichever example is reviewed, Baldwin & Baldwin (2011) believe that “Romans chapter 13 presumes that a person's submission is conducted towards true and real government" (p. 13) and "as government's actions become more and more evil, the cause of resistance towards government becomes more and more righteous” (p. 16).

Ideally, this is understood in the context of peaceful resistance which Brach (1990) summarized and only when necessary. As the apostle Paul wrote, "If possible, so far as it depends on you, be at peace with all people" (NASB, 1997, Romans 12:18).

Bibliography

Aquinas, T. (1948). The Summa Theologica of St. Thomas Aquinas (Fathers of the English Dominican Province, Trans.; Vols. 1–5). Christian Classics. (Original work published 1274 C.E.).

Andrew, B., Sherrill, J. L., & Sherrill, E. (2015). God's smuggler. Chosen Books.

Baldwin, C. (2019, December 4). The true meaning of Romans 13 (Parts 1-4). | Liberty Fellowship

Baldwin, T., & Baldwin, C. (2011). Romans 13: The true meaning of submission (2nd ed.). Liberty Defense League.

Boom, C. T., Sherrill, E., & Sherrill, J. L. (2008). The hiding place (35th Anniversary edition ed.). Chosen Books.

Brauch, M. (1990). Hard sayings of Paul. Hodder and Stoughton.

Geisler, N. (2004). Systematic theology (Vols. 1-4). Bethany House.

Kaiser, W. C., Jr., Davids, P. H., Bruce, F. F., & Brauch, M. T. (1996). Hard sayings of the Bible (pp. 574–576). InterVarsity.

Lee, L., & Bullivant, S. (2016). A dictionary of atheism. Oxford University Press.

New American Standard Bible. (1997). (Original work published 1960). The Lockman Foundation

Runge, S. E. (2014). Romans: A visual and textual guide. Lexham Press.

Runge, S. E. (2015). Discourse grammar of the Greek New Testament: A practical introduction for teaching and exegesis. Hendrickson.

Saint Augustine of Hippo. (2015). Reply to Faustus the Manichaean. Aeterna Press. (Original work published 400 C.E.).

Warner, B. (2014). Political Islam. https://www.politicalislam.com/

Fair Use: Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act in 1976; Allowance is made for "Fair Use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statue that might otherwise be infringing. All rights and credit go directly to its rightful owners. No copyright infringement intended.

Notice: Content on this page (including reviews, business, theology, and technology commentary) is provided for informational and opinion purposes only and does not constitute professional, legal, financial, medical, or pastoral advice. Reviews may include quotations or summaries under fair use. All views expressed are those of the author alone. While every effort is made to ensure accuracy, no warranties are provided. Use and rely on this content at your own risk. For important decisions, consult qualified professionals. For copyright takedown requests or corrections, please email ppothier@substack.com with the subject “Takedown/Correction” and include full details. Effective: 2026-05-08.

Copyright © 2024 Paul L. Pothier. All rights reserved.

Subscribe now

Share

Historically, the application of Marxism and associated heterodoxic strains as primacy in nation-states (and the unions they form) have been authoritarian or totalitarian in practice as is the metaphysical worldview of State Atheism that Karl Marx intertwined into his theory. State Atheism briefly occurred during the French Revolution before fading and then resurging in the world under Marxist Communism (Marx, 1997; McGrath, 2006).

A Dictionary of Atheism (Bullivant and Lee, 2016) defined State Atheism as follows, “State Atheism is the name given to the incorporation of positive (i.e., strong) atheism or non-theism into political regimes” (p. 74).

Review the 1929 cover of the Soviet magazine Bezbozhnik (Bezbozhnik, 2022) displaying the first five-year plan of the atheist state to crush Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.

State Atheism was first attempted on a large-scale by Marxists in the Soviet Union and most of eastern Europe. As Stark (2007) explained, “Almost immediately after they seized power in Russia in 1917, the communists embarked on a massive campaign to stamp out all traces of all religions… The communist regimes imposed by the Russian army on most of eastern Europe at the end of World War II also instituted efforts to eliminate religion. Although enforcement efforts generally were less vigorous and brutal than those initiated in Russia following the revolution, they were as fully intended to wipe out religion” (pp. 404-405).

Atheism was systemically forced into the educational curriculum, official discrimination and persecution was implemented against those suspected of being religious, almost all religious centers were closed with many destroyed or converted to non-religious uses though some were left open under strict state control with their leadership subverted by secret police agencies. This was useful to the Marxist communists in their propaganda efforts with the West and to aid their anti-religious secret police operations on the populace (Stark, 2007; Adelman & Bacon, 2019).

Stark (2007) wrote, "If one wanted to get ahead, one either professed atheism and stayed away from churches or kept one's religious propensities a secret. Never before in human history has there been such a concerted effort to stamp out not merely a religion but all trace of religion. Atheistic Communism thought of itself as pushing forward the inevitable process of secularization in which religion would disappear from the face of the earth" (pp. 404-405).

In Matthew 6:24, Jesus Christ asserted that "No one can serve two masters." The context speaks to the idolization of wealth accumulation; however, the diversity of conflicting interests regarding the “two masters” gives the point a metaphorical dimension for this discussion as wherever Marxism has been implemented as a dominant form of government, it is always accompanied by discrimination against and persecution of religious people (NASB, 1997).

This even includes Christians today being increasingly targeted in Western nations influenced by socialism for engaging in religious speech acknowledging God’s holiness within traditional orthodox biblical standards when done in public or online. Social pressure and the governmental censorship targeting of Christians in Europe is intensifying and Christians should take note of this (OIDAC, 2022).

Marx mistakenly painted all religion as negative ignoring the great advances made by Christians operating from the Christian worldview. For example, the intellectual climate that gave rise to modern science, the principles underlying the scientific method (e.g. testability, verification/falsification), etc. were decisively shaped by Christians operating within the Christian worldview while competing non-Christian civilizations often suffered material stagnation, in comparison, due to impediments associated with their worldviews (Hannam, 2011; Samples, 2007; Stark, 2004, 2015).

Marx viewed religion, rather than unregenerate human nature operating in an environment of economic scarcity, as driving inequity (Sociological Approach to Religion, 2021). He saw religion as a competitive threat to the adoption and propagation of his theory that he desired to subjugate humanity’s hearts and minds to, apart from the Judeo-Christian creator God or any other worldview (Stark, 2007).

The predictable result has been the permanent Marxist effort to subjugate and destroy religion which naturally encompasses targeting religious people. As stated, this behavior is systemic to Marxism and so the forever-persecution and forever-attempt to subjugate religion for elimination continues including where freedom-of-religion verbiage is written into communist constitutions as seen in communist China. (Adelman & Bacon, 2019; Pew Research Center, 2023).

As Stark (2007) noted this is because State Atheism and all metaphysical worldviews active in the world are in competition. The resulting conflict is inherent. He refers to this in terms of a religious economy but it is best put for this discussion as a metaphysical worldview economy.

Nee (2021) explained how the People’s Republic of China (PRC) provides a 21st century example of a Marxist government that censures and persecutes religious people under their control while simultaneously working to corrupt religious doctrine to subjugate it to the Chinese atheist state.

Regarding the strict centralization of power, China is a nation of over 1.4 billion people that is ruled by an authoritarian plutocracy of 25 very wealthy elitists comprising the Politburo of the Chinese Communist Party which is headed by a Politburo Standing Committee of just seven individuals from among them (Politburo of the Chinese Communist Party, 2022). Xi Jinping rose to the top of the seven in practice “as the ultimate arbiter of its specific values, morals, ethics, and societal goals” (Nee, 2021, para. 32). Xi Jinping echoed Zhou Enali’s “We Communists are atheists” (Noebel, 2001).

Scholars are still debating the actual number that died because of State Atheism as liberal academics want to exclude the Marxist state-sponsored famines, forced deportations, and hard labor political prison deaths but it is clear that a large number of people perished under these government’s religious purges while many more were persecuted. Their stories are deeply personal (Rummel, 1994).

For example, it was not uncommon for religious people to be arrested by communist secret police, badly beaten, relieved of their property, and led off to hard labor camps (or state mental institutions) where some were never heard from again. Their children were placed in state run orphanages where they also experienced persecution for being the progeny of religious parents when no relatives willing to take them in could be found.

Such stories and accompanying documentation are stored in microfilm collections like the Archives of the Soviet Communist Party and Soviet State and the Boris Nicolaevsky Collection, both of which are located at the Hoover Institute.

As the late Romanian pastor Richard Wurmbrand (1967) observed:

"The cruelty of atheism is hard to believe. When man has no faith in the reward of good or the punishment of evil. There is no reason to be human. There is no restraint from the depths of evil which is in man. The torturers often said, ‘There is no God, no Hereafter, no punishment for evil. We can do what we wish.’ I have heard one torturer even say, ‘I thank God, in whom I don’t believe, that I have lived to this hour when I can express all the evil in my heart.’ He expressed it in unbelievable brutality and torture inflicted on prisoners” (p. 34).

Those professing to be Christian may fail to live up to Christ's teaching, to whatever degree they do in this world, while those atheists who claim to hold to secular humanism may fail to live up to its tenants but it is the Christian worldview that posits an ultimately meaningful accountability. A worldview which asserts a relationship between nature and a loving yet holy transcendent creator God at work for good, but against evil which is to ultimately suffer defeat.

And though invading Muslims are reputed to have killed tens of millions during the centuries-long Islamic expansionary period in places like Hindu dominated India (Bostom & Warraq, 2010), what was then a Christianized North Africa (Speel II, 1960), etc., conservative scholars argue that the number killed by their own governments (democide) under Marxism in a single century materially exceeds this (Rummel & Horowitz, 1994).

In comparison, most scholars estimate the total number of deaths in all the crusades on both sides at between one million and nine million with the likely number somewhere in the middle (Rist, 2020, para. 20; Stark, 2010).

And as an aside, while the long history of infectious diseases causing sweeping epidemics around the world are intertwined with the movement of humanity; it varies with most of the Old-World diseases originating in Africa and Asia and being carried to Europe before the period of European colonization began (Magner, 2009).

When communist regimes collapse, polling shows a rapid resurgence of religion in these areas. Stark (2007) wrote, "With the recent breakup of the Soviet Union and the collapse of communist regimes in eastern Europe, religious repression subsided" and that "Atheists are few in eastern Europe and Russia, and large numbers identify themselves as religious. This is not what surveys would have found when the communists were still in power, for then many people were (rightfully) too suspicious of survey interviewers to tell them the truth" (p. 405).

Stark (2007) cited Sergei Borisovich Filatov and Dmitrii Efimovich Furman's 1993 research showing "an abrupt growth in religiosity and the disappearance, equally abrupt, of atheism" (p. 405).

They used old Soviet surveys and newer post-Soviet surveys in large Russian cities revealing that in 1990 only 24 percent still said they were atheists and only two years later in 1992 only 8 percent were still atheists. Stark noted that it is plausible "that a similar rapid drop in the percent of atheists would take place in China if the government were to permit religious freedom" and that “massive religious revivals currently are under way in the nations of the former Soviet Union and in the former Soviet-controlled nations of eastern Europe as well” (Stark, 2007, p. 405).

Despite a decrease in organized attendance documented in the West (Davis et al., 2023), globally it appears that most people like religion (Pew Research Center, 2015). They look to “systems of thought that include belief in the supernatural” when addressing problems of magnitude that might benefit from transcendence (Stark, 2007, p. 406).

Conservative scholars also note that while colonialism and Christianity may each start with the letter "c," in the English language, they are not the same thing. They remind us that every major worldview has had adherents represented in colonizing (i.e. the sending of people to live in and govern others in a particular area) and that includes Marxism (with its atheist view of the world).

Societies should legislate a right economic equity for their vulnerable citizens (e.g. orphans, the disabled, the sick, the elderly); assist the poor (see the Epistle of James); and allow debt forgiveness for those who become impoverished. But, societies should do so without ever invoking the tyranny and state atheism inherent in Marxism. In fact, not providing a reasonable economic equity for such invites the problem.

One much needed place to begin is to remove the economic incentives that politicians presently enjoy to destabilize the domestic labor market for the citizens of whichever nation they are elected to represent. Political representatives currently benefit from corporatist and globalist interests seeking to lower labor costs to increase their wealth as rapidly as possible in a non-symbiotic manner.

They facilitate the mass offshoring of the nation’s jobs they are elected to preserve; the mass outsourcing of domestic work to foreign firms; the mass in-sourcing of foreign replacement labor; a rapid acceleration of automation; and unfair trade agreements all of which destabilize the domestic labor markets for the nation’s citizens they are elected to represent. This results in high “functional unemployment;” high non-entitlement social service costs; increasing income inequality; escalating government debt; lower real-wages; etc.

And such reform should be accompanied by correctly strengthening election integrity to avoid the serious problems evidenced in recent federal elections.

Bibliography

Adelman, J. R., & Bacon, W. (2019). Terror and communist politics. Routledge.

Bezbozhnik (Soviet newspaper). (2022, October 21). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bezbozhnik_(newspaper)&direction=prev&oldid=1121234232

Bostom, A. G., & Warraq, I. (2010). The legacy of Jihad: Islamic holy war and the fate of non-Muslims. Prometheus Books.

Bourguina, A. & Jakobson, M. (1989). Guide to the Boris I. Nicolaevsky collection. Hoover Institution Press.

Bullivant, S., & Lee, L. (2016). A dictionary of atheism. Oxford University Press.

Courtois, S., & Kramer, M. (2004). The black book of Communism: Crimes, terror, repression. Harvard University Press.

Cult of Reason. (2023, November 20). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cult_of_Reason&direction=prev&oldid=1191440496

Davis, J., Margaret Bloy Graham, & Burge, R. P. (2023). The Great Dechurching. Zondervan.

Finke, R., & Stark, R. (2006). The churching of America, 1776-1990: Winners and losers in our religious economy. Rutgers Univ. Press.

Greeley, A. (1994). A religious revival in Russia? Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 33(3), 253. https://doi.org/10.2307/1386689

Hannam, J. (2011). The genesis of science: How the Christian Middle Ages launched the scientific revolution. Regnery. Hoover Institution. (n.d.). Archives of the Soviet Communist Party and Soviet State Microfilm Collection. https://www.hoover.org/library-archives/collections/archives-soviet-communist-party-and-soviet-state-microfilm-collection Kengor, P., & Knowles, M. (2020). The devil and Karl Marx: Communism's long march of death, deception, and infiltration. Tan Books.

LISEP Ludwig Institute for Shared Economic Prosperity. (n.d.). https://www.lisep.org

Madden, T. F. (2014). The concise history of the crusades. Rowman & Littlefield.

Magner, L. N. (2009) A history of infectious diseases and the microbial world. Praeger.

Marx, K. (1848). The communist manifesto. Workers’ Educational Association.

Marx, K. (1997). Class struggles in France, (1848-1850). International Publishers. (Original work published 1850).

Mass killings under communist regimes. (2022, October 30). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mass_killings_under_communist_regimes&oldid=1119058164

Mcgrath, A. E. (2006). The twilight of atheism: The rise and fall of disbelief in the modern world. Doubleday.

Mitchell, J. (2024). Episode 8: The Imago and politics [online course]. In Zorzi, G., James, S., Richards, J., Thompson, K., Luskin, C., Mitchell, M., McKinley,

M., Mitchell, J., The Imago Dei. Patrick Henry College. https://courses.phc.edu/courses/take/the-imago-dei/lessons/54955053-8-the-imago-and-politics

Nee, W. (2021, August 17). In China, 'xi jinping thought' is the only accepted religion. The Diplomat. https://thediplomat.com/2021/08/in-china-xi-jinping-thought-is-the-only-accepted-religion/

New American Standard Bible. (1997). (Original work published 1960). The Lockman Foundation

Noebel, D. (2001). The battle for truth: defending the Christian worldview in the marketplace of ideas. Harvest House Publishers.

Observatory on Intolerance and Discrimination against Christians (OIDAC). (2022). OIDAC Europe Annual Report 2021 (P. Chavez, M. Enzlberger, & M. Kugler, Eds.) OIDAC Europe. https://www.intoleranceagainstchristians.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/publications/files/Annual_Report_2022_-_ONLINE_Web_View_Final.pdf

Pew Research Center. (2023). Measuring religion in China. https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/20/2023/08/PF_2023.08.30_religion-china_REPORT.pdf

Pew Research Center. (2015). The future of world religions: population growth projections, 2010-2050. https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2015/04/02/religious-projections-2010-2050/

Politburo of the Chinese Communist Party. (2022, October 31). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Politburo_of_the_Chinese_Communist_Party&oldid=1119291723

Rist, R. (2020, June 1). Your top questions about the crusades – answered. https://www.historyextra.com/period/medieval/crusades-causes-history-when-how-many-were-there-death-toll/ The official website for BBC History Magazine and BBC History Revealed

Rummel, R.J., & Horowitz, I.L. (1994). Death by government: Genocide and mass murder since 1900 (1st ed.). Routledge.

Rummel, R. J. (2002, November 23). Freedom, democracy, peace; power, democide, and war. https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/LINKS.HTM#COMMUNISM | Links to material on democracy, democide, and war

Rummel, R. J. (2017). China's bloody century: Genocide and mass murder Since 1900. Routledge.

Samples, K. R. (2007). A world of difference: Putting Christian truth-claims to the worldview test. Baker Books.

Sociological Approach to Religion. (2021, February 19). https://socialsci.libretexts.org/@go/page/1087

Speel II, C. J. (1960). The Disappearance of Christianity from North Africa in the Wake of the Rise of Islam. Cambridge University Press, 29(4), 379–397. https://doi.org/10.2307/3161925

Stark, R. (2004). For the glory of God: How monotheism led to reformations, science, witch-hunts, and the end of slavery. Princeton Univ. Press.

Stark, R. (2007). Sociology (7th ed.). Wadsworth.

Stark, R. (2010). God's battalions: The case for the Crusades. Harper One.

Stark, R. (2015). How the West won: The neglected story of the triumph of modernity. ISI Books.

Solzhenitsyn, A. I. (2007). The gulag archipelago: An experiment in literary investigation, complete 3 volumes collection (volume 1, 2, 3). Harvill Press.

State Atheism. (2024, May 28). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=State_atheism&direction=prev&oldid=1226134186

Tortured for Christ - Richard Wurmbrand. (2019, December 04). https://www.brighteon.com/40ebfdd0-ae3e-4a8b-bf0b-43bb11e0ccb0

Welfare Budget. (n.d.). Federal Safety Net. https://federalsafetynet.com/welfare-budget/

Wurmbrand, R. (1967, February 28). Tortured for Christ. Independently published.

Fair Use: Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act in 1976; Allowance is made for "Fair Use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statue that might otherwise be infringing. All rights and credit go directly to its rightful owners. No copyright infringement intended.

Notice: Content on this page (including reviews, business, theology, and technology commentary) is provided for informational and opinion purposes only and does not constitute professional, legal, financial, medical, or pastoral advice. Reviews may include quotations or summaries under fair use. All views expressed are those of the author alone. While every effort is made to ensure accuracy, no warranties are provided. Use and rely on this content at your own risk. For important decisions, consult qualified professionals. For copyright takedown requests or corrections, please email ppothier@substack.com with the subject “Takedown/Correction” and include full details. Effective: 2026-05-08.

Copyright © 2024 Paul L. Pothier. All rights reserved.

Subscribe now

Share