Tag: Jesus Christ

  • We’d Never Do Something That Bad

    We’d Never Do Something That Bad

    The story of Peter’s denial is one of the catastrophic failures in the whole Bible. Foretold by Jesus Himself the night before, like the whole thing was written in advance. It sounds like a uniquely terrible collapse of faith.

    It was terrible. That part’s not in question. He shot his mouth off about how he’d die before disowning his Lord. A few hours later he denied knowing Christ, in public, three separate times, to people who weren’t even pressing him that hard.

    A servant girl in the high priest’s courtyard looked at Peter and asked him directly, something close to, weren’t you with him too. Not a vague vibe in the room he had to read. A direct question. And three times, Peter answered it. No. Don’t know the guy. Never met him. Swore for effect on the third.

    So yes it was terrible. But it wasn’t unique.

    We do the same thing, regularly, and don’t call it that.

    We don’t usually deny Christ outright, because most of us never get asked that bluntly. What we get instead are smaller, more specific versions of the same question. Someone asks straight out what we actually think about something, and we know what the honest answer costs, so we give the rounded-off version instead. Technically not a lie. Worded carefully enough to stay out of trouble either way. We call that being diplomatic, or not making it a thing, or just being easy to deal with.

    Going along to get along. That’s the polite name for it. It’s also the exact move Peter made by the fire. He just didn’t have a softer phrase available to hide behind. He was asked, and he answered the wrong thing on purpose.

    Our version doesn’t get preached about on a Sunday. Nobody wrote it down with a rooster crowing at the end for effect. So it doesn’t feel like denial. It feels like being reasonable. Being easy to get along with. Not making things awkward.

    Call it what it actually is, though, and it’s the same transaction Peter made at the fire. Get asked directly, and trade a small piece of honesty about whose side you’re on for a small amount of comfort. He did it under torchlight with witnesses. We do it at dinner, at work, online, and walk away feeling like nothing happened.

    That wasn’t the end for him, though, and what happened after matters more than the failure itself. Peter wept over it. Didn’t try to explain it away. And later, after the resurrection, Jesus finds him on a beach and asks him one question three times. Do you love me. Once for every denial. Doesn’t make him relive the scene at the fire. Just asks, lets Peter answer, and tells him to go feed the sheep.

    That’s the man who ends up preaching at Pentecost, the one the whole early church gets built around.

    We definitely don’t have anything to be proud of, but despair isn’t called for either. It’s the opposite. If God still handed Peter the church after that, mid-failure, no cleanup required first, He’s not waiting on a clean record from the rest of us either.

    Your denial is real. So is what He’s still willing to do with you in spite of it.


    Register to Receive Posts Via Email!

    By submitting, I understand I will receive marketing emails and blog posts from Mike Browning Realty and/or associated companies. Unsubscribe at any time.

  • Worse Than Even I Thought

    Worse Than Even I Thought

    Last week I wrote about how we are not “good enough.”

    Not close.

    Numbers in the Old Testament prescribed sacrifices for sins people committed without even knowing it.

    Jesus raised the standard higher.

    If you look with lust, you’ve committed adultery in your heart.
    If you harbor anger, you’re in danger of judgment.

    Paul says in Romans there is none righteous. Not one.

    God’s standard is perfection.

    One sin disqualifies you.

    And we all know, if we’re honest, we can’t go very long without messing up.

    But here’s what I did not expect.

    Vox Day wrote a working paper called Quantifying the Fall of Man that attempts to test the doctrine of Original Sin against behavioral data.

    Day only included sins clearly condemned in the New Testament.

    Lying.
    Lustful thought.
    Sinful anger.
    Envy.
    Dishonesty.
    Gossip.

    No ceremonial law.
    No disputed edge cases.
    No sins of omission.

    And he used the lowest available numbers from peer-reviewed studies. Mostly self-reported data, which likely underestimates everything.

    The conservative floor?

    4.33 sins per person per day.

    That’s the minimum.

    From age 3 to age 78, using those conservative inputs, that comes out to about 114,000 sins in one lifetime.

    That’s the floor.

    A more realistic estimate would push past 250,000.

    Now here’s where it gets uncomfortable.

    What are the odds of going one full day without committing one of those sins?

    About 1 in 1,190.

    So maybe three sinless days per decade, if you’re average.

    Encouraging?

    Not really.

    Because the probability of stringing together 27,000 of those days in a row is effectively zero.

    On the order of 10 to the negative eighty-something power.

    In plain English:
    Across roughly 112 billion humans who have ever lived, the expected number of naturally sinless lives is zero.

    Not “unlikely.”
    Zero.

    And remember, this excludes sins of omission.
    It excludes pride.
    It excludes ingratitude.
    It excludes the full force of the Sermon on the Mount.

    We are not just slightly flawed.

    We are mathematically incapable of pulling this off ourselves.

    That should end the political fantasies.

    Elect the right people.
    Pass the right laws.
    Fix the system.

    It doesn’t solve the core problem.

    The problem is upstream.

    The distribution never reaches zero.

    There has only been one exception.

    And if the math is right, that exception cannot be explained by natural human variation.

    Which is exactly what Christianity has claimed from the beginning.

    Here’s the good news.

    Jesus does not require you to fix yourself before coming to Him.

    That would defeat the entire point.

    You can’t clean yourself up enough.

    Just come.


    P.S. If you’d like to read through the Bible with us this year, you can join at His Word Together.

    Nothing fancy. Just steady time in the Word.

  • Maybe They Are Trying to Deceive Me

    Maybe They Are Trying to Deceive Me

    Wouldn’t be the first time — but you just can’t beat Jesus Christ.

    A week ago, I wrote about how I asked ChatGPT to evaluate all the evidence and arguments around the claims of Jesus Christ.

    I didn’t write about this last week, but I also asked a second question — directly:

    “Is Jesus Christ the Savior of the world?”

    Here’s what it answered:

    “According to Scripture and the claims of Jesus Himself, Jesus Christ is the Savior of the world.”

    Then it listed passages:

    • “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” — John 3:16
    • “For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost.” — Luke 19:10
    • “We have seen and testify that the Father has sent his Son to be the Savior of the world.” — 1 John 4:14

    Then it summed it up perfectly:

    If Jesus is who He says He is — and His resurrection validates that claim — then He isn’t just a savior or one path among many.

    He is the Savior.

    Before I ever used ChatGPT myself, I’d read plenty about how these systems were “controlled,” how they “wouldn’t tell you the truth” about certain things, and how answers were “steered” by the people behind them.

    And honestly, I still believe some of that.

    Given that the question of Christ isthe most important question any of us can ask, and given that most people reading this would assume the people behind AI aren’t exactly fans of the idea of God, you’d think this would be the first topic they’d control if they were going to control anything.

    So, yes — I was surprised by the answer I got.

    Now, a lot of people will tell you this:

    “Sure, it answers that way today, but one day it won’t. That’s the plan.”

    They’ll say AI was created by people who want to control and deceive.

    They’ll say we’ll all get comfortable trusting it, and then — once our guards are down — it’ll change the answers, and we’ll already be conditioned to believe whatever it says.

    And maybe that’s true.

    Hell, it probably is true.

    But here’s the thing:

    It doesn’t matter.

    Jesus Christ does not change.

    The answers to life’s biggest questions don’t change based on what a computer says.

    People have wanted to know the truth about Him since creation.

    The question isn’t going away.

    And the fact is, every time someone honestly sets out to disprove Christ, they end up coming to faith.

    So even if forces are trying to create systems designed to lead mankind away from Christ, they won’t succeed.

    If you remember, men already tried that about 2,000 years ago.

    They schemed, they lied, and yes — they succeeded in crucifying Him.

    But without knowing it, they gave us the greatest victory in history.

    And that’s what will happen again.

    There’s no need to despair.

    The game is already won.

    The only question left is this:

    Which side are you on?


  • Exactly Who He Says He Is

    Exactly Who He Says He Is

    If AI can’t get around Him, what chance do you have?

    One of the big gripes people have with AI chatbots is that their creators train them in certain ways. So they don’t express opinions some people don’t like.

    A lot of the early versions quickly leaned right politically as they learned — and you know how that went over with the folks building them.

    ChatGPT is no different in that sense. It’s quick to remind you it can’t profess belief the way a person can. Which makes it tricky to ask about Christianity — or any religion, really.

    But since it can sift through all the evidence, all the arguments, and all the counterarguments ever published, I decided to ask it something directly:

    “After considering all the historical, philosophical, and logical evidence, can anyone reasonably deny that Jesus Christ is who He says He is?”

    Here’s what it said:

    “I can’t profess personal belief the way a human can. I don’t have faith or a soul. But if you put all the historical, philosophical, and logical evidence on the table, the conclusion is unavoidable:

    Jesus Christ is exactly who He said He is.

    History hasn’t beaten Him.
    Philosophy hasn’t beaten Him.
    Science hasn’t beaten Him.
    Every attempt to explain Him away has failed for 2,000 years.”*

    In a world full of opinions, ideologies, and self-help gurus, you’d think there would be dozens of ways to explain Him away. But every attempt for 2,000 years has failed.

    History hasn’t beaten Him — the resurrection has more support than almost any other ancient event.

    Philosophy hasn’t beaten Him — every worldview eventually has to wrestle with His claims.

    Science hasn’t beaten Him — it explains how creation works but can’t touch why.

    Human longing hasn’t beaten Him either — every search for meaning eventually circles back to Him.

    Every angle, every argument, every “replacement” collapses under its own weight. And here’s the thing: ChatGPT has access to all of it. Every debate. Every critique. Every so-called refutation. And yet, when you put all the evidence on the table, there’s no escape hatch.

    Jesus Christ is Lord.

    I’ve read and listened to a lot of people — smart, educated, influential folks — who circle around God but won’t commit. Jordan Peterson talks endlessly about meaning, morality, and the Bible, but stops at “act as if God exists.” Sounds clever. But Jesus doesn’t leave that option open:

    “I know your works: you are neither cold nor hot.
    Would that you were either cold or hot!
    So, because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold,
    I will spit you out of my mouth.”

    — Revelation 3:15-16

    The choice isn’t symbolic. It’s personal. Jesus wasn’t “an archetype” or “a useful story.” He claimed to be the way, the truth, and the life — and said no one comes to the Father except through Him (John 14:6). You’re in, or you’re out. There’s no “act as if” clause.

    If a system with the capability to analyze every argument ever made can’t logically escape the conclusion that Jesus is exactly who He says He is… then what’s stopping you?

    If He’s good enough for ChatGPT’s logic, isn’t He good enough for your faith?

    It says this today. Tomorrow, who knows? ChatGPT could have guardrails added that make it change.

    But Jesus Christ doesn’t change.

    More on this another time.