Author Archives: John Samson

Book Endorsements

Posted on by

These are not genuine endorsements, but reading them might just bring a smile to your face:

“Useful only as a doorstop, but then again, in that it’s paperback, my advice is that you wait for the hardback edition.”

“This book is perfect for insomniacs and people who have a low view of their own writing ability. The perfect encouragement to give to a friend who thinks they don’t have what it takes to get something in print.”

“An incredibly original work by…. I’ve never read anything like this and probably won’t ever again, Lord willing.”

“This is a bold book! The author clearly wasn’t afraid to take risks, even ones that provided no hope of paying off.”

A Day Without a Sun: MacArthur on the First Three Days of Creation

Posted on by

If God made the sun, moon, and stars on the fourth day of creation, what exactly governed the first three? A congregant named Andrew put that question to John MacArthur, and the answer turns on a distinction we tend to collapse: light is not the same thing as the sun. What follows is his reply:

ANDREW (questioner): Hello, Pastor John. My name is Andrew, and I have a question on the first seven days of creation in Genesis.

DR. MACARTHUR: On what?

ANDREW: The first seven days of creation in Genesis.

DR. MACARTHUR: Sure. Six days. Sure. Seventh day, God rested.

ANDREW: So Genesis 1:14 through 19 describes how God made the sun, moon, and stars on day four of creation, and then he put them in the sky for signs, seasons, days, and years. A day, scientifically, is defined as the rotation of the earth around its axis one time. So before day four, there was no sun, so you wouldn’t have what we think of today as a day. So can you shine some light on what this means, from other passages in Scripture, on what a day is?

DR. MACARTHUR: Well, a day is one cycle that you just described, of the earth’s rotation, right? That’s a day, morning and evening. Your question, of course, is that you don’t have the creation of the sun at the very beginning. So you have to have a day without a sun, right? Correct? That is the question.

And my answer is, okay, you have a day without a sun. I don’t see that as a problem. You don’t have, until verse 14, the actual lights, the sun and the moon, and yet you have three days of creation leading up to that. So you have light then, the existence of light without a sun and without a moon. That simply means that light existed. It existed in some form that was consistent with a single rotation of the earth.

In the beginning of Genesis, “Let there be light,” there was light. Now, light is not the body from which it is reflected. Light is not the sun, and light is not the moon. Light is light. Light was created, and darkness was created also, on the first day. So there was light and darkness.

Without the celestial bodies, there was still light, there was still darkness and light, there was still morning, there was still evening. That’s as far as I can take it. But again, I think it’s so explicit that God is intending to communicate to us this actual one rotation of the earth kind of cycle that we know as morning and evening.

The phenomenon itself doesn’t have to be explained scientifically. For what reason? Because creation cannot be explained scientifically. But to help you with that: when scientists try to explain creation, they are trying to do the impossible, because there is no scientific explanation for creation. Let me tell you why.

Once, there was only God, and there was nothing. And then, instantaneously, there was light. And then there was water. Then there was heaven. Then there was dry land. Then there were plants. Then there were celestial bodies. Then there were living creatures. Then there were humans. And that all happened in six days. There is no scientific explanation for that. Anybody who thinks you could explain that scientifically is out of their mind. Nothing existed, and then the entire universe came into existence in six days. That is a divine miracle.

There is no scientific explanation for the resurrection of Lazarus. There’s no scientific explanation for the resurrection of anybody, including our Lord. There’s no scientific explanation for Jesus creating food to feed probably 20,000 people. There’s no scientific explanation for that.

Science is out of the discussion when you have a miracle. And the most massive miracle was the creation of the entire universe in six days. That has no scientific explanation. So to pose a question into the first chapter of Genesis about the science of it is alien to the entire event itself. You start with nothing, and ex nihilo, out of nothing, comes everything, by the massive power of God. That’s all we need to know. And if God says it was evening and morning, it was equal to the rotation of that one cycle that’s so familiar to us. If it was equal to that, then even before those bodies existed, then that’s exactly what God intended us to understand. Okay?

Why Do We Keep Moving Churches?

Posted on by

Jeffrey Johnson writes:

Finding a Church

The Son: “Dad, why do we keep moving from one church to another? Just when I was making friends at the church in Ephesus, we moved to Smyrna, then to Pergamum, then to Thyatira, then to Sardis, and then to Philadelphia. I really loved that church. And now we’re leaving the church in Laodicea? I just wish we could settle down and remain part of a church family.”

The Father: “Son,” the wise father replied, “the church is not what it used to be. When I was your age, the apostles were still alive and overseeing the churches. Now only one apostle remains—John—and there isn’t much he can do, for he is imprisoned on the island of Patmos. But when I was young, the apostolic church was vibrant and full of life. I remember when the believers were fully devoted to the apostles’ teaching and to breaking bread together. Back then, no one lacked anything because they took care of their own. Those were the good old days.”

The Son: “But I thought you and Mom really liked the church in Ephesus. Didn’t you agree with its doctrine? And unlike the other churches, it takes personal holiness seriously and practices church discipline.”

The Father: “All those things are true, and they are very important to your mother and me. We didn’t leave because of those things. It had all the marks of a healthy church without being healthy. We left because the church had left its first love. There was something missing—something very important. Sometimes, my dear son, a person can do everything right on the outside and still be missing something vital on the inside. Though your mother and I couldn’t quite put our finger on it, we both agreed that we could not remain in such a church.”

The Son: “So that’s why we left Ephesus. But what about Smyrna? I thought that church was one of the best we had ever attended.”

The Father: “In many ways, it was. But, son, your mother and I couldn’t stay there. We were too concerned for your safety. We learned that the authorities were watching the pastors and even some members of the congregation. The church was too provocative, and the preacher couldn’t leave controversial topics alone. It was no longer safe for us to stay.”

The Son: “Then why didn’t we stay in Pergamum?”

The Father: “At first, we really enjoyed the more relaxed atmosphere. Coming from Smyrna, it was refreshing. Yet, in time, it became evident that the atmosphere was a bit too relaxed. There were no safeguards over the teaching ministry. There was no way your mother and I could remain in a church where false teaching was welcomed.”

The Son: “And Thyatira?”

The father sighed deeply.

The Father: “Thyatira was a difficult place. There were many loving and devoted believers there. In fact, their works of service were increasing. But it seemed that the more the church sought to impact the world, the more the world impacted the church. There was little accountability and no real church discipline.”

The Son: “I never understood why we left Sardis. Wasn’t it a growing and thriving church?”

The Father: “Yes, the church was growing, but it was hard for your mother and me to find true spiritual fellowship. We stayed as long as we could, but in the end, it became evident that we needed to leave, even if it meant moving again.”

The son walked quietly for a moment.

The Son: “Philadelphia was my favorite.”

The father smiled.

The Father: “Yes, but just as Sardis was too big, Philadelphia was too small. There were no special programs for the youth, and for years the church had hardly grown at all. We simply didn’t feel that we could get plugged in there.”

The Son: “Then why are we leaving Laodicea?”

The father paused before answering.

The Father: “To be honest, son, your mother and I can’t tell whether it is cold or hot. At times it seems zealous, but for the most part it appears content to remain lukewarm.”

The son looked at his father thoughtfully.

The Son: “Dad, do you think the church will ever get back to the good old days? Do you think we’ll ever be able to settle down and remain faithful to one church? Do you think there will ever be a church that you and Mom are completely happy with? Will there ever be a church without sin to overcome or tribulation to endure?”

The Father: The old man was silent for a moment.

“Maybe not in our lifetime, son. But I’m sure that 2,000 years from now, things will be different.”

The Son: “Dad, until then, don’t you think it’s better to remain faithful to an imperfect church—one that Christ continues to speak to, rebuke, and correct—than to forsake the local assembly altogether?”

The Father: The old man smiled.

“My boy, shouldn’t you be fetching some fresh water for your mother so she can get dinner started?”