Judaism is a healthy religion. Jews don’t see the world as intrinsically evil or denounce marriage or call for self-renunciation. Christians, on the other hand, see the world as evil, advocate celibacy, and say, “Deny yourself, take up your cross, and suffer.”

This is an exaggerated and inaccurate statement. Traditional Jews see this world as the corridor to the world to come but stress the importance of life in this world. As for Christians, while stressing the importance of the world to come, they have been responsible for the building of more hospitals, the feeding of more hungry people, and the establishment of more educational institutions than adherents of all other religions of the world combined.

The difference between the two is not one of substance but of emphasis. So the real question is, Which emphasis makes more sense? If this life is only a passing shadow (as Psalm 90 teaches), and if we are only pilgrims and strangers here (as Jacob and David said), isn’t it logical to live out our few days here in the light of eternity? If we are on this earth for seventy or eighty years and then we enter eternity—either under God’s favor or God’s judgment—doesn’t it make sense to give serious thought to the world to come, making sure we are ready to enter our eternal home?

Also, both Judaism and Christianity recognize the sinful tendencies of the human race; Christianity just puts greater emphasis on subduing those tendencies, calling on its adherents to “put to death the harmful desires of the sinful nature.” Finally, Jesus emphasized that we are not here primarily for ourselves but for God and for others, not to be served but to serve. God’s kingdom is advanced through suffering and sacrifice, and that too is part of our calling as mature followers of the Messiah.

In order to respond fairly to your objection, I’ll divide my answer into three parts: First, we’ll consider what the Tanakh, the New Testament, and the Rabbinic writings say about this world and the world to come. Second, we’ll look at how these viewpoints have played themselves out in Christianity and Judaism. Third, we’ll ask if the New Testament approach to life makes sense in the light of eternity.

There is no question at all that the primary emphasis in the Hebrew Scriptures was on this world rather than on the world to come, but that was mainly because God gradually revealed the truth about the resurrection of the dead and the world to come.⁴¹⁶ In other words, even though it appears the patriarchs believed in some kind of life after death, we still have to admit that the Torah was not explicit about any of the details.⁴¹⁷ For this reason, groups such as the Sadducees, basing their beliefs only on the Torah, incorrectly denied that there would be a resurrection of the dead. (See Yeshua’s refutation of this in Matt. 22:23–33.) However, by the time of Daniel, the revelation was clear: “Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt. Those who are wise will shine like the brightness of the heavens, and those who lead many to righteousness, like the stars for ever and ever” (Dan. 12:2–3).

Still, in spite of this gradual revelation of the world to come in the Hebrew Bible, there was a clear understanding that this life was fleeting at best. The patriarch Jacob, as an old man, said to Pharaoh, “The years of my pilgrimage are a hundred and thirty. My years have been few and difficult, and they do not equal the years of the pilgrimage of my fathers” (Gen. 47:9). The psalmist David, a man who literally lived in a king’s palace, said, “We are aliens and strangers in your sight, as were all our forefathers. Our days on earth are like a shadow, without hope” (1 Chron. 29:15).

According to Psalm 90 (identified as a psalm of Moses in the superscription), “The length of our days is seventy years—or eighty, if we have the strength; yet their span is but trouble and sorrow, for they quickly pass, and we fly away” (v. 10). Psalm 103 contains similar language: “As for man, his days are like grass, he flourishes like a flower of the field; the wind blows over it and it is gone, and its place remembers it no more” (vv. 15–16).

Isaiah 40:6–8 sums it up well: “A voice says, ‘Cry out.’ And I said, ‘What shall I cry?’ ‘All men are like grass, and all their glory is like the flowers of the field. The grass withers and the flowers fall, because the breath of the Lord blows on them. Surely the people are grass. The grass withers and the flowers fall, but the word of our God stands forever.’ ”

The New Testament uses almost identical descriptions: Peter exhorted the believers to live their lives on this earth “as strangers” (1 Peter 1:17), while Paul—in the midst of suffering and persecution for his faith in the Messiah—could write that “we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen. For what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal” (2 Cor. 4:18).

The language of Jacob (James) is also reminiscent of the language of the Tanakh: “Now listen, you who say, ‘Today or tomorrow we will go to this or that city, spend a year there, carry on business and make money.’ Why, you do not even know what will happen tomorrow. What is your life? You are a mist that appears for a little while and then vanishes. Instead, you ought to say, ‘If it is the Lord’s will, we will live and do this or that’ ” (James 4:13–15).

Rabbinic Judaism also has much to say about the fleeting nature of this life and the importance of belief in the afterlife. According to Rabbi Simcha Paull Raphael, “teachings on life after death have always been part and parcel of the Jewish spiritual legacy.”⁴¹⁸ While acknowledging that “Judaism does value life, here and now, over and above a future death and eternal life,” he is careful to point out that “this does not imply there is no Jewish belief in afterlife” (13). Rather, “there exists a profound and extensive legacy of Jewish teachings on the afterlife.

Over the course of four millennia, Judaism evolved and promulgated a multifaceted philosophy of postmortem survival, with doctrines comparable to those found in the great religions of the world” (14). In fact, Rabbi Raphael argues that many Jews today do not believe in an afterlife because of modern secular and rationalistic thinking, historic persecution from the church (which thereby caused Jews to react strongly against the church’s beliefs in heaven and hell), and the tragedy of the Holocaust, among other factors. Rabbi Dan Cohn-Sherbok can also state that “as with Heaven, Jewish sources contain extensive and elaborate descriptions of Hell.”⁴¹⁹

“But how do these beliefs play themselves out?” you ask. “Rabbinic Judaism didn’t produce nuns who never married or monks who whipped themselves for their sins. Christianity is filled with such unhealthy practices, and they all flow from Jesus’ command that his followers must deny themselves.”

Let me first respond to the beginning of your question, namely, How do these beliefs play themselves out in Christianity and Judaism? No doubt, there have been many extreme, other-worldly Christians throughout the centuries, and I have no reason to deny this fact. There have been men such as Simon Stylites (c. 390–459), who lived for years perched atop a pillar fifty feet high (and greatly impacted his generation at the same time), or others, almost too many to name, who lived for years in caves.⁴²⁰ And to this day, Roman Catholicism forbids its priests or nuns to marry, following the example of Paul (see also his teaching in 1 Corinthians 7, discussed below).

But is this what Jesus and Paul intended? Are you aware that the other apostles were married and that Paul’s celibacy was the exception (see 1 Cor. 9:5)? Are you aware that Paul expected leaders in the church to be married with children? (See 1 Tim. 3:1–5; Titus 1:6; he even asks the question in 1 Tim. 3:5, “If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God’s church?”) In fact, he warned of false teachings that would infiltrate the community of believers, speaking of “hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron,” people whose teachings had been inspired by deceiving spirits and demons (1 Tim. 4:1–2).

What strong words he used! And what were the teachings he considered so dangerous? You can read Paul’s words for yourself: “They forbid people to marry and order them to abstain from certain foods, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and who know the truth. For everything God created is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, because it is consecrated by the word of God and prayer” (1 Tim. 4:3–5).

Here Paul is warning believers not to follow those who forbid to marry and command people to abstain from certain foods that God created for us to eat and enjoy.⁴²¹ And it was Paul who penned some of the most beautiful teaching about marriage—as well as true, godly love—in the ancient world (see Eph. 5:22–32; 1 Corinthians 13).

Why then did he encourage the Corinthian believers not to marry? This would seem to be in stark contrast to the Rabbinic dictum that man is not complete until he marries (b. Yebamot 67a; cf. also b. Yebamot 62b), and to the first commandment given—“Be fruitful and multiply”—which could not be fulfilled without marriage.⁴²²

Actually, Paul made this “anti-marriage” statement only one time—in contrast with his teachings on husbands, wives, and children, which are found in a number of his letters (e.g., Eph. 5:22–6:4; Col. 3:18–21; Titus 2:1–6)—and it was simply stated as a preference. There was also a specific context to his teaching, namely, what he called “the present crisis” (1 Cor. 7:26), apparently a reference to the distresses and troubles the Corinthians were experiencing. At such a time, it’s much easier to be single than to be married with children.⁴²³ That’s why God commanded Jeremiah not to marry or have children his entire life:

Then the word of the Lord came to me: “You must not marry and have sons or daughters in this place.” For this is what the Lord says about the sons and daughters born in this land and about the women who are their mothers and the men who are their fathers: “They will die of deadly diseases. They will not be mourned or buried but will be like refuse lying on the ground. They will perish by sword and famine, and their dead bodies will become food for the birds of the air and the beasts of the earth.”

Jeremiah 16:1–4

Who wants to get married and have a family if that will be their fate?

Paul also added another dimension to his discussion with the Corinthians about marriage:

I would like you to be free from concern. An unmarried man is concerned about the Lord’s affairs—how he can please the Lord. But a married man is concerned about the affairs of this world—how he can please his wife—and his interests are divided. An unmarried woman or virgin is concerned about the Lord’s affairs: Her aim is to be devoted to the Lord in both body and spirit. But a married woman is concerned about the affairs of this world—how she can please her husband. I am saying this for your own good, not to restrict you, but that you may live in a right way in undivided devotion to the Lord.

1 Corinthians 7:32–35

How true this is! Still, Paul fully realized that even in the present crisis the Corinthians were experiencing, and even in light of his practical teaching about single-minded devotion to the Lord, many of those he was writing to would not have the ability or calling to remain single. So he stated clearly that if they got married they were not sinning (1 Cor. 7:36). Unfortunately, his words to the Corinthians have been quoted out of context.⁴²⁴

I should also point out to you the unusual example of Ben Azzai, a Talmudic rabbi who never married because his only love was for the Torah (b. Yebamot 63b). This kind of love—for God, for the Messiah, for a dying world—has prompted Christians through the years to choose a celibate life, undistracted by the cares of this world and unhindered by a family, given completely over to the service of God and man, often in perilous, life-threatening situations. In what sense is this wrong, unscriptural, or unhealthy?

Having said this, however, I need to emphasize to you that the overwhelmingly vast majority of Jesus’ followers around the world embrace marriage for themselves as a God-given, wonderful institution, recognizing the importance of children and family. As it is written in the New Testament, “Marriage should be honored by all” (Heb. 13:4). In fact, you could say that Christians basically follow Jeremiah’s words to the Jewish exiles living in Babylon. Having informed them that their captivity would last seventy years, he gave the following counsel:

Build houses and settle down; plant gardens and eat what they produce. Marry and have sons and daughters; find wives for your sons and give your daughters in marriage, so that they too may have sons and daughters. Increase in number there; do not decrease. Also, seek the peace and prosperity of the city to which I have carried you into exile. Pray to the Lord for it, because if it prospers, you too will prosper.

Jeremiah 29:5–7

This is essentially how followers of Jesus have lived throughout the centuries. We understand that we are living in exile from the Promised Land (heaven) but that we will be here in this world for some time. Therefore, we seek to live out our seventy to eighty years on earth as practically as we can.

But it doesn’t stop there. Followers of Jesus take his words very seriously when he refers to us as the light of the world and the salt of the earth (Matt. 5:13–16), exhorting us to “let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven” (v. 16). That is why the church has always led the way in humanitarian efforts around the world. As pointed out by D. James Kennedy and Jerry Newcombe in their book What If Jesus Had Never Been Born?, the positive contributions made by Christianity throughout the centuries include hospitals; universities; literacy and education for the masses; capitalism and free-enterprise; representative government; the separation of political powers; civil liberties; the abolition of slavery, both in antiquity and in more modern times; pioneering developments in modern science; the elevation of women; benevolence and charity; the good Samaritan ethic; higher standards of justice; the elevation of the common man; the condemnation of sexual perversions; high regard for human life; the civilizing of many violent, primitive cultures; the codifying and setting to writing of many of the world’s languages; greater development of art and music; countless changed lives transformed from liabilities into assets to society because of the gospel.⁴²⁵

Consider the following:

• The church has taken the lead in providing health care and emergency help to those in need. How do you think groups such as the Red Cross and the Salvation Army got their names?⁴²⁶
• Christian charitable organizations such as World Vision and World Relief are among the first to provide food and practical help in famine-stricken areas, while Christian families actively help in caring for refugees.⁴²⁷
• It is Christian money and Christian effort that have enabled tens of thousands of Jews from impoverished countries to return to the land of Israel.⁴²⁸
• American universities such as Harvard, Yale, and Princeton, along with British universities such as Oxford and Cambridge, were all founded by and for Christians, while universities such as Wheaton—which remains Christian today—were founded along slave escape routes.
• We actually have a name for the industrious business practices of Christians, namely, the Protestant work ethic.
• Missionaries worldwide have taught uneducated peoples to read and write, instructing them also in proper nutrition and hygiene.
• It was the Christian political leader William Wilberforce who successfully fought to abolish slavery in England, helping to pave the way for its subsequent demise in the United Statest.⁴²⁹
• Christians lead the pro-life movement, arguing that even life in the womb is sacred to God and ought not to be snuffed out.⁴³⁰
• Some of the world’s greatest composers, such as Bach and Handel (just think of Handel’s Messiah), were Christians, while it was a Benedictine monk who developed the do-re-mi-fa-so-la-ti system for memorizing the notes c-d-e-f-g-a-b.
• Christian, biblical themes have inspired some of the world’s greatest works of art, including the works of Michelangelo and Raphael.
• Tribes who used to be cannibals and headhunters have become civilized and peace-loving through hearing the gospel. In fact, it was the gospel that tamed the ferocious, marauding Vikings.⁴³¹
• It is especially through the efforts of Christian Bible translators that we now have hundreds of languages in written form, enabling formerly illiterate peoples to become educated (not to mention enabling them to read the Word of God in their native tongue).
• In the inner cities of America, it is the church that is most active in feeding the poor, setting up homeless shelters, and caring for wayward children.

I would encourage you to step back and consider the far-reaching, positive effects of Christianity on the world. They have hardly been unhealthy. And by caring for the sick, building hospitals, feeding the poor, fighting for the rights of the unborn, Christians clearly affirm the value of life in this world. And who fights for traditional family values in America more than Bible-believing Christians? Of course, you could say that religious Jews are also pro-family and pro-life, active in charity and engaged in good works, and I would agree with you here.⁴³² But that subject is not being debated right now. Our discussion has to do with the practical outworking of the teachings of the New Testament in this world—and it is undeniable that these teachings have produced an overwhelming amount of good fruit in society.⁴³³ In fact, to illustrate the extent to which Christianity is known as the religion of good works, the Dalai Lama, the most important religious leader in Buddhism today, recently “urged his own monks to emulate ‘my Christian brothers and sisters’ in transforming Buddhist compassion into concrete acts of social service.”⁴³⁴ Even Buddhists recognize the compassionate, humanitarian actions of the church.

It may also surprise you to know that far from always hindering scientific development, the church throughout the centuries has often fostered it. Kennedy and Newcombe, drawing on the work of Dr. Henry Morris, list the following “outstanding Bible-believing scientists who founded the following branches of science”:

And this is just a sampling.⁴³⁵

Regarding medicine and health care, while working on my book Israel’s Divine Healer, I was struck by the impact that Jesus and his followers have had on that aspect of compassionate, applied science. I wrote there that

as far as the impact of Christianity on the medical profession is concerned, [Dr.] J. W. Provonsha hasargued that Jesus, and not Hippocrates, should be viewed as the “Father of Medicine,” since Jesus “was more often engaged in acts of healing than in almost anything else … [and it] was the humble Galilean who more than any other figure in history bequeathed to the healing arts their essential meaning and spirit.”⁴³⁶ And, while [medical scholars] D. J. Guthrie and P. Rhodes could point out that, “It is sometimes stated that the early Christian Church had an adverse effect upon medical progress,” their conclusion is that “the infinite care and nursing bestowed under Christian auspices must outweigh any intolerance shown toward medicine in the early days.”⁴³⁷ Moreover, in the opinion of [medical historian H. E.] Sigerist, “It remained for Christianity to introduce the most revolutionary and decisive change in the attitude of society toward the sick. Christianity came into the world as the religion of healing, as the joyful Gospel of the Redeemer and of Redemption. It addressed itself to the disinherited, to the sick and afflicted and promised them healing, a restoration both spiritual and physical.” Thus, “It became the duty of the Christian to attend to the poor and the sick of the community.”⁴³⁸

In this regard, I also quoted the words of Korean physician D. J. Seel:

Early in my manhood I said I could not be a physician unless I were first a disciple of Jesus Christ.… Jesus healed. It follows that the gospel of Jesus cannot be complete without that compassionate ministry. Jesus demonstrated that our God is compassionate, that He is moved by human suffering. And therefore Christ’s disciples must seek to be instruments of healing, in one or more of the various avenues available for medical ministry. Christian medicine must be above all else an exhibit, a demonstration, of the character of God.⁴³⁹

Such quotes and illustrations could be reproduced endlessly, but the lesson from all this is clear: The gospel of Jesus has had a wonderfully positive influence on life in this world, and looking around the globe today, it is nations with a true Christian legacy that have the best track record of providing rights for all—minorities, people of different religious faiths, women—whereas countries ruled by Islam or godless Communism are the most repressive.⁴⁴⁰ Even in Israel, to the extent that the ultra-Orthodox Jews gain political power, they are bent on restricting the religious freedom of other Jews.⁴⁴¹

This last observation leads to me another point. As I said earlier, I agree with you that traditional Jews are actively involved in various good deeds and acts of charity, and I recognize that the nation of Israel is known for its humanitarian acts around the world. But it seems to me that the more religious a Jew becomes, the less practical influence he or she has on this world. In other words, it seems that those Jews who have made the greatest impact on society (such as Dr. Jonas Salk, who discovered the polio vaccine, or Albert Einstein the scientist) or who are known for their art or music (such as Marc Chagall the painter, or Itzhak Perlman the virtuoso violinist) were not observant in the traditional Jewish sense. Can you imagine a deeply religious Jewish man practicing violin for ten hours a day when he could be studying Talmud instead? Of course, I know there are Orthodox Jewish scientists and Orthodox Jewish doctors and Orthodox Jewish professors and Orthodox Jewish musicians. On the other hand, I know that the most Orthodox Jews—called haredim in Israel—care almost nothing about developing life in this world, unless it pertains to bringing Jews into a Talmudic lifestyle. Where is the “this-worldliness” among the very Orthodox? And what normally happens to traditional Judaism outside of a cloistered environment? It assimilates. These are issues to consider as well.

Regardless of how much you agree with my last points about traditional Judaism and this world, you cannot deny the truth of my points about the outworking of the teachings of the New Testament on the world as a whole: They have greatly enhanced and enriched the quality of our lives here.

The fact is, however, we are only passing through this world, and that brings us to our last question, namely, Does the New Testament approach to life make sense in the light of eternity? The answer, to anyone who believes in the resurrection of the dead, can only be yes.

To help us build on a sound biblical foundation, let’s consider some parallels between the Hebrew Scriptures and the New Testament concerning our orientation toward this world: Both affirm that every good thing comes from God (Ps. 84:11; James 1:17) and that he richly gives us these things to enjoy (Eccles. 5:19; 1 Tim. 6:17). Both, however, also warn us about the danger of forgetting the Lord in the midst of earthly abundance (Deut. 8:1–20; Luke 12:13–21; Rev. 3:17), recognizing the peril of putting our trust in riches (Prov. 23:5; 27:23–27; Luke 16:13–31; 1 Tim. 6:3–10, 17–19), and cautioning us to beware of covetousness (Exod. 20:17; Col. 3:5; Heb. 13:5). Both also encourage us to be circumspect in our time here on earth, numbering our days (Ps. 90:12; Eph. 5:15–16) and considering the certainty of our death (Eccles. 3:1–2; Heb. 9:27). In light of this, it is not surprising that even in the Hebrew Bible it is written, “It is better to go to a house of mourning than to go to a house of feasting, for death is the destiny of every man; the living should take this to heart” (Eccles. 7:2).

Now, it is true that all of the Scriptures, both Tanakh and New Testament, recognize the importance of this world in and of itself. Jesus even said, “I have come that they [namely, God’s people] may have life, and have it to the full” (John 10:10). However, in light of eternity—fully revealed in the New Testament—we can say that this world is especially important because it prepares us for the world to come. Again, to use the Rabbinic phrase, this world is only the corridor to the world to come (see m. Avot 4:16).⁴⁴² And we dare not be carnally minded like Esau, who sold his birthright because he was hungry and wanted a piece of bread (Gen. 25:29–34; Heb. 12:16–17). How he lived to regret his decision! He forfeited lifelong blessing because of a momentary lust for food—just like many of us. We forfeit God’s eternal blessing in the world to come because we just have to satisfy our earthly lusts. This makes no sense at all. (If you agree with me here, then you are in agreement with the perspective of the New Testament.)

You can consider this world as the place of preparation. A young woman who is about to go on an important date with her fiancé spends a great deal of time putting on the right clothes, doing her hair, and making sure she looks her best. Why? Because the dressing room is important? Hardly! It is because her fiancé is important, because her night out is important. So also, we have a “date” to stand before God one day, and then, hopefully, to spend the rest of “forever” with him. This is our time to get ready.

I recently came across the Humanist Manifesto II (published in 1973), well known for its overt stance against traditional religion. It states, “Promises of immortal salvation or fear of eternal damnation are both illusory and harmful. They distract humans from present concerns, from self actualization, and from rectifying social injustices.”⁴⁴³ Is this the position you espouse? Then your problem is not only with Christianity but with Judaism as well, since the secular humanist philosophy articulated by the Manifesto flies in the face of mainstream religious beliefs. Eternal bliss and eternal misery are weighty subjects indeed (see below, 3.27), and the fact that all of us have only one of two fates—eternal blessing in the presence of God or eternal destruction shut out from his presence—should influence the way we live every day of our lives. That is the viewpoint of the New Testament.

But there is more. The New Testament makes it clear that this world is a battleground, and that as followers of the Messiah we must lay our lives down to help save a dying world. It is a call to spiritual warfare—that is, to be soldiers in God’s spiritual army (Eph. 6:10–18; 2 Tim. 2:3; see also Psalm 144)—a call to deny ourselves, die to the grip of sin, and glorify God by life or by death (Matt. 16:24; Luke 9:23; Rom. 6:1–23; Phil. 1:20–21). You might look at it like this: Religious Jews have died in every century for kiddush hashem, meaning, for the sanctification of God’s name, believing that by standing firm for what they believe, they will honor God and ultimately save their people from assimilation. They live and die for a principle. In the same way, followers of Jesus have made a commitment to give themselves for people who are lost without God, knowing that it could cost them their own lives. We are here not to be served but to serve, following in Yeshua’s footsteps (Matt. 20:17–28; Phil. 2:5–11).

Of course, Jews attempt to make everything in this world sacred and holy; Christians see the world itself as God’s beautiful creation while viewing the world system as utterly corrupt (see 2 Cor. 4:3–4; 1 John 2:15–17; 5:19). Therefore, Christians do not share Judaism’s optimism about the possibility of making this world sacred and holy. Instead, they possess a determination to do whatever is necessary to relieve suffering in the present while preparing people for the world to come. In doing so, they ennoble human life and human death. (This is not to say that Jews have failed to ennoble human life and death; it is only to say that Christians most certainly have.)

In fact, as Paul wrote more than nineteen hundred years ago, death has now lost its sting (see 1 Cor. 15:51–58).⁴⁴⁴ Because of this, even martyrdom has become sacred. In the words of missionary Jim Elliot, martyred by the Auca Indians of Ecuador in 1956, “He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose.” This world is fleeting and fading away; the world to come is eternal. That’s why Nate Saint, Elliot’s colleague and fellow martyr, could say, “People who do not know the Lord ask why in the world we waste our lives as missionaries. They forget they too are expending their lives and when the bubble has burst they will have nothing of eternal significance to show for the years they have wasted.”⁴⁴⁵ I for one want to have something to show for my years in this world, something that will endure, something that will make sense in the light of eternity, something that will bring joy to the heart of my Father God.

The fact is that God’s kingdom has always been advanced through suffering and sacrifice, and so we deny ourselves for the good of a dying world. Through laying down our lives, we bring life to millions who would otherwise have lived and died without God and without hope. In my opinion, that makes all the sense in the world, and I can think of no better way to spend the few short years I have here—even one hundred years pass in a moment—than in giving myself selflessly to further the purposes of God. What do you think?

⁴¹⁶ Scholars calls this progressive revelation. It would be similar to teaching children to count before you teach them to add, or teaching them algebra before teaching them calculus. As explained by Greek scholar and theologian B. B. Warfield, “The Old Testament may be likened to a chamber richly furnished but dimly lighted; the introduction of light brings into it nothing which was not in it before, but it brings out into clearer view much of what is in it but was only dimly or even not at all perceived before.” Cited in Cotrell, God the Redeemer, 134–35, from his article, “The Biblical Doctrine of the Trinity,” reprinted in his Biblical and Theological Studies (Nutley, N.J.: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1952), 30–31.

⁴¹⁷ For relevant discussion of the hope of afterlife in the Tanakh, cf. Brown, Healer, 141–45 (with bibliography).

⁴¹⁸ Simcha Paull Raphael, Jewish Views of the Afterlife (Northvale, N.J.: Aronson, 1994), 33.

⁴¹⁹ Cohn-Sherbok, The Jewish Messiah, 55.

⁴²⁰ For some extreme examples, presented more with wit than with sympathy, see Andrew Dickison White, A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology (Gloucester, Mass.: Peter Smith, 1978), especially vol. 1. For positive reflections on the life of solitude, including the paradoxical observation of Thomas Merton that the more he withdrew from the world, the more he was forced to deal with the world’s pain, see Henri J. M. Nouwen, Reaching Out: The Three Movements of the Spiritual Life (New York: Doubleday, 1986), 59–60.

⁴²¹ There is a debate concerning the meaning of Paul’s teaching here concerning food. Did he mean that the false teachers told their followers not to eat certain kosher food (food “which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and who know the truth”), or was he saying that the false teachers told people not to eat certain unkosher food (whereas “everything God created is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, because it is consecrated by the word of God and prayer”)? For discussion of this, see vol. 3, 5.29, 5:33.

⁴²² For an extensive discussion of all Rabbinic sources, see Joseph Babad, Minhat Hinuch (Netanyah, Israel: Miphal Torat Hakhemei Polin, 1988), 1:1–7.

⁴²³ As explained by Gordon D. Fee, a leading New Testament and Greek scholar, “In light of all the troubles we are already experiencing, who needs the additional burden of marriage as well?” See his 1 Corinthians, New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987), 329; for a balanced discussion of the whole issue, cf. 334–49.

⁴²⁴ I refer especially to 1 Corinthians 7:1–2, the beginning of the passage I’ve been discussing: “It is good for a man not to marry. But since there is so much immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband.” Thus, Paul has been wrongly accused of grudgingly accepting marriage rather than seeing it as a healthy and necessary gift from God.

⁴²⁵ D. James Kennedy and Jerry Newcombe, What If Jesus Had Never Been Born? (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1997), 3–4.

⁴²⁶ For the theology of William Booth and his emphasis on twofold salvation (i.e., spiritual and physical), see Roger J. Green, War on Two Fronts: The Redemptive Theology of William Booth (Atlanta: The Salvation Army Supplies, 1989).

⁴²⁷ By way of personal example, I was involved in a church on Long Island from 1977–1982 when there was a refugee crisis from Southeast Asia (in particular, from Vietnam and Cambodia). These “boat people,” as they were called, fled their homelands at great personal sacrifice—as many as half of them died at sea, and many of them who survived lost everything—only to be housed in massive refugee camps in countries like Hong Kong. When our church heard the news, almost every member began to take in one or more refugees—and most without receiving government or charity compensation—and we lived with these precious people for years as if they were our own brothers or sisters or sons or daughters. It was the natural thing to do! Why? We were followers of Jesus. (The most active organization in the area working with the refugees was, not surprisingly, Catholic Charities.) This then raised our awareness of other world needs, and we began to sponsor Ethiopian refugees, even setting up wide-ranging food and housing programs for them. Again, this was our natural response to New Testament teachings such as Matthew 25:31–46. For a recent study, see Mark and Betsy Neuenscwhander, M.D.’s, Crisis Evangelism: Preparing to Be Salt and Light When the World Needs Us Most (Ventura, Calif: Regal, 1999). On page 106 they state, “The greatest Search and Rescue Team of the universe is God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, because God so loved the world that He gave His only Son.… The qualities of these spiritual genes are transferred to us when we are ‘born again.’ ”

⁴²⁸ It is no surprise that Rabbi Yechiel Eckstein, an Orthodox rabbi, airs a nightly thirty-minute infomercial on Christian television, seeking to raise funds to bring poor and/or persecuted Jews back to Israel.

⁴²⁹ It is true that there were Christian slave owners in early America, and many of them based their theological position on the Old Testament laws of slavery coupled with the fact that the New Testament did not explicitly tell masters to release their slaves (for thoughts on this usage of Scripture, see John Bright, The Authority of the Old Testament [Nashville: Abingdon, 1967], 49–51). However, it is equally true that Christian leaders such as Charles Grandison Finney, the most prominent American evangelist in the first two-thirds of this century, were at the forefront of the anti-slavery movement in America, that slave traders like John Newton (famous for writing the hymn “Amazing Grace”) after conversion to Christianity, abandoned the slave trade and even fought against it, and that the “liberation” message of Jesus laid the theological groundwork for complete emancipation (for related theological perspectives, see Brown, Healer, 217–18, with bibliography).

⁴³⁰ Even if you hold to a pro-abortion (called pro-choice) position, my point here is simply that Christians fight for the rights of the unborn because of their high view of the sanctity of life.

⁴³¹ One of the most striking examples of such a transformation occurred this century in Nagaland in northernmost India. This state was known for its brutal tribal warfare, and headhunting was commonly practiced there. Today, roughly 90 percent of its people profess Christianity, and their warring ways have been abandoned. Not only do I have associates who labored there as missionaries in recent decades, but our School of Ministry welcomed its first student from Nagaland in 1999. What a joy it is to hear their stories firsthand! For a recent assessment of the impact of the gospel on the Vikings, see “The Vikings,” Christian History 62, vol. 18, no. 3 (1999).

⁴³² For the New Testament’s emphasis on good works, see Matt. 5:13–20; Acts 9:36; Eph. 2:10; 1 Tim. 2:9–10; 5:9–10; 6:17–19; Titus 2:7, 14; 3:1, 8, 14; Heb. 13:16; James 3:13; 1 Peter 2:12, 15; 3:10–17. Remember, it was Jesus who taught us that “it is more blessed to give than to receive” (Acts 20:35)!

⁴³³ Regarding the “sins of the church,” see Kennedy and Newcombe, What If Jesus Had Never Been Born?, 205–23. The authors offer this honest assessment: “The Church has never been perfect, but its track record in history should be remembered for the good as well as the bad. Its sins should not be taken out of their context, blown out of proportion and remembered forevermore, as if this has been the only activity of the Church. Furthermore, the Church has seemed to learn from many of its past sins and then it moves on. We no longer engage in Crusades, except the Billy Graham type! We no longer torture alleged heretics on the rack to get them to change to more orthodox doctrine. We no longer burn or hang alleged witches” (222). Of course, while I am not absolving the church of its many sins, I would be quick to point out that most of the abuses spoken of here, in particular the Inquisitions and Crusades, were perpetrated by people who were Christian in name only, holding to a completely corrupt form of the faith. For more on this, see vol. 1, 2.4–7.

⁴³⁴ Kenneth L. Woodward, “A Lama to the Globe,” Newsweek, 16 August 1999, 34.

⁴³⁵ Kennedy and Newcombe, What If Jesus Had Never Been Born?, 101; see Henry Morris, The Biblical Basis for Modern Science (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1984), 463–65.

⁴³⁶ Brown, Healer, 66, citing Provonsha, “The Healing Christ,” in Morton T. Kelsey, Healing and Christianity (New York: Harper & Row, 1973), 361, 363. Provonsha contends that the Hellenistic body-soul dichotomy that strongly influenced the post-New Testament church brought about a decreased emphasis on the importance of ministry to one’s physical needs, noting also that “the Post-Apostolic Church often saw the healing ministry of Jesus, and that committed to the Church, as radically opposed to the methodology of ‘pagan’ physicians of the period. It was miracle against scientific method—Christ’s healings were miraculous, not scientific! But the early Church often failed to distinguish between ‘miracle’ and ‘magic’ ” (363). On the tendency to disdain proper care of the body in certain wings of the church, see White, History, 67–96.

⁴³⁷ “Medicine,” Encyclopedia Britannica, 23:890.

⁴³⁸ H. E. Sigerist, Civilization and Disease (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago, 1943), 69.

⁴³⁹ See The Proceedings of the Consultation on the Study Program of Healing Ministry, October 30–November 1, 1980 (Seoul: Asian Center for Theological Studies and Mission/Korea Christian Medico-Evangelical Association, n.d.), 3, 5, cited in Brown, Israel’s Divine Healer, 295, n. 4.

⁴⁴⁰ This is not to say that only Christian countries show tolerance. Hinduism in India has been largely tolerant throughout the centuries, although at the time of this writing there is intense, violent persecution against Christians there. On the other hand, Hinduism in Nepal—the world’s only “official” Hindu nation—is totally oppressive. As for Buddhism, one of the countries in which Christians are experiencing the most severe, government-sanctioned persecution is the Buddhist country of Myanmar (formerly Burma). As for America and its Christian legacy, the Princeton theologian Charles Hodge had this to say about our country’s reception of refugees (he wrote this more than one hundred years ago): “All are welcomed; all are admitted to equal rights and privileges. All are allowed to acquire property, and to vote in every election, made eligible to all offices, and invested with equal influences in all public affairs. All are allowed to worship as they please, or not to worship at all, if they see fit. No man is molested for his religion or for his want of religion. No man is required to profess any form of faith, or to join any religious association.” Cited in Kennedy and Newcombe, What If Jesus Had Never Been Born?, 89–90 (from Hodge’s Systematic Theology, 3:345–46). Regarding the sins of the church through history, see n. 433, above. As for the rise of Nazism in “Christian Europe,” while it is true that historic anti-Semitism in the so-called church helped pave the way for the Holocaust (see vol. 1, 2.9), it is important to note that Nazism was utterly anti-Christian, and its murderous philosophy stood in total opposition to all the fundamental tenets of the gospel.

⁴⁴¹ For more on this, see vol. 1, 2.7.

⁴⁴² As noted in “Death,” EJ (CD ROM), 5:1420–27, “Death itself, though imbued with mystery—contact with the corpse, for instance, meant defilement in the highest degree—was thought of as that moment of transformation from life in this world to that of the beyond. In terms of the mishnaic image, ‘This world is like a corridor before the world to come’ (Avot 4:16), death is the passing of the portal separating the two worlds, giving access to a ‘world which is wholly good’ (Kid. 39b).”

⁴⁴³ This manifesto, together with Humanist Manifesto I (1933) are reproduced in Harry Conn, Four Trojan Horses of Humanism, rev. ed. (Milford, Mich.: Mott Media, 1982); the quote here is taken from 125.

⁴⁴⁴

This was poignantly expressed in a poem that greatly inspired Betty Stam, who, together with her husband, John, were killed as missionaries in China in 1934 (their baby daughter was spared). See Ruth A. Tucker, From Jerusalem to Irian Jaya: A Biographical History of Christian Missions (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1983), 421–25. The poem was written by E. H. Hamilton after hearing of the courage of Rev. Jack Vinson, martyred in China in 1931:

Afraid? Of What?

To feel the spirit’s glad release?

To pass from pain to perfect peace

The strife and strain of life to cease?

Afraid—of that?

Afraid? Of What?

Afraid to see the Saviour’s face,

To hear His welcome, and to trace

The glory gleam from wounds of grace

Afraid—of that?

Afraid? Of What?

A flash, a crash, a pierced heart;

Darkness, light, O Heaven’s art!

A wound of His a counterpart!

Afraid—of that?

Afraid? Of What?

To do by death what life could not—

Baptize with blood a stony plot,

Till souls shall blossom from the spot?

Afraid—of that?

For further details, see James and Marti Hefley, By Their Blood: Christian Martyrs of the Twentieth Century, 2d. ed (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1996), 55–59; note that the authors refer to the day of the martyrdom of the young missionary couple as “Victory Day for the Stams” (56). They also note that the impact of their deaths was so great that a missionary with the China Inland Mission wrote to Betty’s parents and said, “A life which had the longest span of years might not have been able to do one-hundredth of the work for Christ which they have done in a day” (59). A full and productive life need not always be a long life! See Michael L. Brown, Revolution! The Call to Holy War (Ventura, Calif.: Regal, 2000).

⁴⁴⁵ For the quoted material of Jim Elliot and Nate Saint, see Vinita Hampton and Carol Plueddemann, eds., World Shapers: A Treasury of Quotes from Great Missionaries (Wheaton: Harold Shaw, 1991), 16, 10.

Brown, M. L. (2000). Answering Jewish objections to Jesus, Volume 2: Theological objections (235). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.

Judaism is a healthy religion. Jews don’t see the world as intrinsically evil or denounce marriage or call for self-renunciation. Christians, on the other hand, see the world as evil, advocate celibacy, and say, “Deny yourself, take up your cross, and suffer.”