The Unbelievable Truth: God Is Trustworthy

The Unbelievable Truth: God Is Trustworthy July 30, 2018

Part 3 in the Unbelievable Truth series.

Image: Pixabay

One of the hardest truths for Christians to accept is the idea that God is trustworthy. They can believe in Him – that He exists and that He created the Universe – but to surrender control of their lives to Him? Not so much.

To me this is the most tragic of all the unbelievable truths, because if we cannot trust God then who can we trust?

Our inability to trust God, I think, says more about our need to be in control, or our fear of relinquishing control, than it does about our belief that God isn’t worthy of our trust.

In other words, if we think about it, God is the most trustworthy being in the Universe. He created us. He laid aside His power to become one of us. He allowed us to have power over Him. He forgave us as we were killing Him. He loved us enough to die in our place. He rose again to ensure that we could spend eternity together. He’s preparing a place for us to be with Him forever. So, how could we ever consider someone like this to be unworthy of our trust?

I think it has to be because we just prefer to be the ones in control of our lives. We don’t like the idea of letting go of the steering wheel for anyone else, not even a God who went as far as this to demonstrate His complete and utter trustworthiness. Which is sad.

If we could actually believe this truth that God is trustworthy, and prove it by surrendering our lives to Him, then we’d experience all the sweet joys and wonderful blessings that He intends to share with us. We would rest in Him and trust that He has everything under complete control.  We would experience the sweet peace that only comes from allowing this loving Father to take us with Him on an amazing adventure of life that He has planned in advance for us to follow.

A person who truly trusted God with everything in their life would have no worries about tomorrow, no stress about finances, no concern for what will happen next, and have nothing but complete peace and joy on a daily basis. Much the same was how we imagine winning the lottery might make us feel, actually. Except that those who win the lottery seldom find actual peace and those who are wealthy and famous have just as much (if not more) angst and pain and worry in their lives. 

If we believed that God was trustworthy we could obey Jesus when He says that we should “not worry about tomorrow” or about “what we will eat or drink, or about our body and what we will wear” but simply trust that “Your Heavenly Father knows that you need these things” and let go of our worry in order to “seek first the Kingdom of God”.


If only we could trust God with everything. If only we really believed that He was trustworthy.

If only.

**

Keith Giles’s new book Jesus Unbound: Liberating the Word of God from the Bible”, is available now on Amazon and features a Foreword by author Brian Zahnd.

JOIN ME IN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: Sept. 15 at “Proactive Love: How Loving Our Enemies Changes Everything”Register HERE>

I also co-host the Heretic Happy Hour Podcast on iTunes and Podbean and I live in Orange, CA with my wife of 28 years and our two sons.

BONUS: Unlock exclusive content including blog articles, short stories, music, podcasts, videos and more on my Patreon page.

"I experienced Jesus Christ as the consciousness of the Sun. I wrote an ebook about ..."

How To Respond When They Call ..."
"I experienced Jesus as the consciousness of the Sun. I wrote an ebook about my ..."

No, Jesus Was Not Separated From ..."
"I experienced Christ as the consciousness of the Sun. I wrote an ebook about my ..."

What Gospel Did Paul Preach? [Hint: ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Progressive Christian
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Daphne Posselt Myers

    I have come to question whether God wants my unconditional surrender. Would I, as a parent, want my grown children to come to me and say that they will not make their own decisions but wait on me to tell them what to do? If I made all the decisions for them, am I not robbing them of the chance to grow and learn? Would God do that to us?

  • Widuran

    Yes he is trustworthy so we should believe his word the Bible like a child.

  • if we cannot trust God then who can we trust?

    I dunno, because the Bible says that he’s not trustworthy. I’ve written more about God’s lies here:
    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/2018/04/george-washington-couldnt-tell-a-lie-but-god-can-2/

  • Kevin R. Cross

    “When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.”

    Even an Atheist can find some wise sayings in the Bible.

  • Widuran

    Because the Bible is dictated by almighty God!

  • Kevin R. Cross

    Actually, I suspect it’s more that the book’s so full of aphorisms that one can always find something appropriate.
    As to the dictation, I’d suspect an almighty god would have dictated a single, accurate depiction of the events of the New Testament rather than four rather tenuously connected narratives.

  • Widuran

    They are well connect I assume you think a witness in a court must give perfect accounts and all accounts given by different people must be the same….

  • Kevin R. Cross

    No, but close approximations should be expected. That isn’t what we get. And that said, if, as you claimed, they were “dictated” by an almighty being, I would expect a much higher level of equivalence, if not absolute identicality.

  • Widuran

    Does not disprove God at all and it seems you will not answer the question about law courts. This is telling

  • Kevin R. Cross

    I DID answer the question about law courts, are you incapable of reading? “No, but close approximations should be expected.”
    And equally, no, it doesn’t disprove the existence of God. One of the major errors in the hypothesis of “God” is that it is unfalsifiable – no group of facts or points of logic are capable of creating a definitive disproval of the concept. (Of course, this extends to ALL gods, not just the Christian one).
    Absent that possibility, one must see the facts that exist and weigh the evidence. And while there are no methods to disprove the “God” hypothesis, neither is there any significant evidence in it’s favour. (Again, this applies to all such “supernatural” beings.)

  • Widuran

    So your original point about perfect accounts is mute

  • Kevin R. Cross

    Why would you assume that? You’re comparing apples and oranges – the level of accuracy required by a court and that to be expected of a supreme being are light years apart.
    Oh, and the term is “moot”, not “mute”.

  • Widuran

    Thanks for the English lesson my point still stands it is oranges and oranges it is the same thinking

  • Kevin R. Cross

    No, it really isn’t. The level of inaccuracy a court would tolerate and the level that could reasonably occur should your hypothesis be considered would be two entirely different levels. I could accept a differentiation due to point-of-view – different people could well emphasize different events in terms of importance – but not a differentiation of the actual facts of the matter.
    Not disproof of god. Reasonably, disproof of a divine origins for the gospels.

  • Widuran

    the level of “inaccuracy “ is fine in proving God too then

  • Kevin R. Cross

    Well, no. If the gospels were sufficiently accurate, all that would indicate would be derivation from a single source with a high level of accuracy in copying. That doesn’t tell us anything about said source.
    On the other hand, if the gospels are NOT sufficiently accurate amongst themselves, which I strongly contend is the case, that would indicate that they are not originating from any source capable of correcting the writer.

  • Widuran

    They are sufficiently accurate and no worse then law court evidence which you admit is enough for upholding the law

  • Kevin R. Cross

    But less than sufficient and entirely unconvincing as being the dictation of a supreme being. Apples and Oranges.

  • Widuran

    That is your opinion for many other as the evidence is overwhelming

  • Kevin R. Cross

    I question the use of the word “evidence”. Really, it’s just a bunch of stories and promises it never needs to fulfil. Your opinion is your opinion, and as valid as anyone else’s, but I suspect you underestimate just how completely underwhelming it all is to an unbeliever.

  • Widuran

    It is evidence

  • Kevin R. Cross

    No, it really isn’t. To use your own analogy, it would be rejected by the courts in an instant as unreliable. There is no corroborative evidence for any of it’s claims, and a single source for any historical claim is less than persuasive; many of the Bible’s claims, even if we stick solely to the Gospels, are unbelievable on their face, provide no checkable details, and what details are given are contradicted by details in other Gospels. If we expand to the Old Testament, things get worse, as various claims are made that are demonstrably false, such as the captivity in Egypt.
    To be evidence requires versimilitude, and simply, the Bible lacks any such.

  • Widuran

    It would not be rejected by the courts you are wrong many historians admit Jesus existed. I trust the experts and you clearly are not one. You seem to have much confirmation bias

  • Kevin R. Cross

    First, don’t assume things about others. I have a degree in history, whether or not that makes me an expert or not depends on point of view, but you certainly don’t have sufficient evidence to say.
    Now, many historians agree Iesos Christos was a real person, but about equally many agree that such a person probably never existed. The only point of general agreement is that there is insufficient evidence for a definitive answer.
    You are also wrong regarding the courts. The four gospels have some fairly massive and glaring differences – The Sermon on the Mount, for instance, regarded by many as one of the most important speeches made by Jesus in the Bible, is found only in Mark, mentioned in passing in Luke, and entirely non-existent in Matthew and John. This is not fine detail, to be overlooked in favour of the broader picture, but large-scale disagreement. With even the Gospels themselves failing to uphold one another, and no evidence at all outside of them, no jurist could uphold the myth of Jesus as fact in any modern court.
    As to bias, all I can say is that I have gone where the evidence leads me. Your faith leads you elsewhere, and that is for you to consider, but do recall, that just because we have faith in something, that does not make it real.

  • Kevin K

    “Trust” is a meaningless concept in any event. Trust God™? About what? I’m trying to come up with an example of a instance where “trust” is a psychological state that needs to be invoked that wouldn’t be equally served by the notion of “believe without evidence”.

  • The Mouse Avenger

    Ah, if only it were that simple, my friend… 🙁

    The last 2-&-1/2 years, I feel, have been terrible enough to hurt my formerly-unshakable trust in God to an extent. I’ve been trying to send a guest article to Patheos about my struggles, & how I’ve been dealing with them…but, alas, no one at the site appears to have even looked at it. 🙁 I wish someone could help me get my troubling thoughts out to the world, so I may seek solace, support, & succor from all of you wonderful people!

  • The Mouse Avenger

    Very well-put! 🙂

  • The Mouse Avenger

    To use your own analogy, it would be rejected by the courts in an instant as unreliable. There is no corroborative evidence for any of it’s claims, and a single source for any historical claim is less than persuasive; many of the Bible’s claims, even if we stick solely to the Gospels, are unbelievable on their face, provide no checkable details, and what details are given are contradicted by details in other Gospels. If we expand to the Old Testament, things get worse, as various claims are made that are demonstrably false, such as the captivity in Egypt.

    To be evidence requires versimilitude, and simply, the Bible lacks any such.

    Amazing…Every word that you just said, was wrong.

  • Kevin R. Cross

    I would be extremely interested to know how that is the case. At the very least, the point that a single source for any historical claim is less than persuasive is standard operating procedure for ANY historian, and not merely for the Bible – as another instance, the history of the Second Punic War by Polybius is also unconvincing.

  • Kevin R. Cross

    Still waiting re: an explanation.