Skip to main content

What Do We Make of The Supposed Conversion of Chris Watts? | Quick iApologia

What do we make of the supposed conversion of Chris Watts, the one who murdered his wife and three kids?

This is my sandbox blog. I created it so I can get my thoughts out fast. Thus, there may be many mistakes. Please forgive me if my thoughts are incomplete, my spelling may need help and my grammar may be poor.

First, we have to remember that Jesus can and does save. If Jesus can't save, then what's the worth of Christianity?

Second, this does not mean this guy is really repentant. He likely could be lying, but he also could be telling the truth. We may never know for sure on this side of the grave. However, just because someone identifies with or claims Christ does not mean it is so. Many identify as a Christian. However, being a Christian is more than just identifying as one. The word "Christian" means something; it means one has turned from sin to being a follower of Jesus and his ways. This means many who identify as one but don't live it are not really Christian. We have to remember Jesus' words to the ones who claim him but don't do what he says, "I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness." An excellent example is Hitler. Many historians deny Hitler was a Christian, and for good reason. However, let’s say he identified as one. Did Hitler fit the definition of a Christian? No. Sitting in a garage and identifying as a car doesn’t make you a car. Nor does sitting in Church and identifying as a Christian make you a Christian.

Third, just because one is forgiven by Christ does not mean there are no consequences for sin. Just because we as individuals forgive a sinner does not mean one does not have to bear the consequence of his or her actions. A truly repentant person will take responsibility and make restitution to his or her fellow human beings ... including taking the punishment that is due him on earth. That is the role of govement on earth. Consider what Paul said in Romans 13:3-4 "For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to [execute] wrath upon him that doeth evil." Sin, though it can be forgiven, still leaves scars.

Fourth, his actions were evil, pure evil. But, without excusing him, so were King David's and even Paul's! Both were repentant and received pardon from God, but there still were consequences. David lost a child and had many other family issues. David Wood would be a modern example of one who was evil but turned to Christ. As an atheist, he bashed in the head of his dad! He paid for his crime, and eventually became a Christ follower. We also must not forget that there are many abortionist who are murdering thousands and thousands of lives unrepentant and never receiving earthly retribution. What a double standard our society holds!

Fifth, we each have to look at ourselves, each have done evil. No, maybe not to the extent of this guy or Hitler or Stalin or to the level of an abortionists, but we still have done evil and need saving too. We have to remember we have been saved from our sins. Jesus says this in Matthew 6:14-15 "For if you forgive others their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you, but if you do not forgive others their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses."

Sixth, we have to remember that Christianity is full of paradoxes. Society thinks Christians are too soft and other times they think Christians are to hard. No wonder, on one end Christians are full of mercy, but on the other full of justice. On one end Christians are full of forgiveness, but on the other they are full of judgment. Christianity promotes both faith and reason, seemly opposites. These are not flaming opposites, rather they run in parallel. These types of paradoxes come from the nature of Christianity, based upon Jesus himself. Jesus was both fully man and fully God, seemly opposites. John says Jesus was full of grace and truth, seemly opposites. Jesus is one with the Father in nature, but separate in person, seemingly opposite but not. This is also why the word tolerance is not strong enough in Christian theology. Christianity rather teaches love. Love is a word in tension. It describes one dying for another while at the same time it is quick to point out evil, sin and badness.

Check out a good article on the Chris Watts case below. https://www.faithwire.com/2019/03/06/what-murderer-chris-watts-alleged-religious-experience-can-teach-us-about-last-minute-conversions/

 

Feel free to visit my main site, www.iApologia.com

Stay connected! Sign up to for the latest at iApologia

Thank you to those who donate to keep iApologia going. Any amount is appreciated! Donate to iApologia on Paypal.

 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Are There Contradictions Between Matthew and Luke's Nativity Accounts? | Quick iApologia

Often people say there are contradictions between the Nativity accounts in Mathew and Luke, is this true? I don't think so. Below I lay out the accounts in a rational and reasonable way that helps bring both accounts together. As you read the below biblical accounts, it may help if you consider the following thoughts: I put some of the verses in bold text. I think of those verses a little like headers or lines that highlight big ideas that need to be expanded on. When we look at the other account, we often find that there are expanded facts that happened at the birth of Jesus that helps give more detail. Mary traveled to the hill country to see her cousin, possibly a week's walk from her town, she stayed for three months. The walk from Nazareth to Bethlehem may have been a week too. So, it would only seem logical that Mary and Joseph were at Bethlehem for at least a few months. To add to that, the Bible also says that Herod slew all the babies of Bethlehem two years and under...

What Grounds Pro-Abortionist’s Claim Of “My Body, My Right”? | Quick iApologia

Pro-abortionists say "my body, my choice" or "my body, my right." Since the fetus is "my body" or the fetus is "living in my body," I have the "right" to cut it out if I want. In their mind, what grounds that "right"? To answer this, I'm going to really make some controversial claims that some may not like. First, we know that it is scientifically false to think that the fetus is the "mother's body," if one thinks that. Second, we really don't have the right to do anything with our body as we please. First, some things can hurt other people, such as we should not go too fast or there are smoking laws. But even ourselves, we don't really seem to have the right to commit suicide, even though some are trying to make that too a "right." ​ This is my sandbox blog. I created it so I can get my thoughts out fast. Thus, there may be many mistakes. Please forgive me if my thoughts are inco...