I just finished reading Henry Scougal's The Life of God in the Soul of Man last night - a beautiful, encouraging, and convicting book that I would heartily recommend. Originally written as a letter, Scougal concluded each section with a prayer, and I found the final prayer very heart-warming.
"And now, O most gracious God, father and fountain of mercy and goodness, who hast blessed us with the knowledge of our happiness, and the way that leadeth unto it, excite in our souls such ardent desires after the one, as may put us forth to the diligent prosecution of the other. Let us neither presume on our own strength, nor distrust thy divine assistance; but while we are doing our utmost endeavours, teach us still to depend on thee for success.
"Open our eyes, O God, and teach us out of thy law. Bless us with an exact and tender sense of our duty, and a knowledge to discern perverse things. Oh! that our ways were directed to keep thy statutes, then shall we not be ashamed when we have respect unto all thy commandments.
"Possess our hearts with a generous and holy disdain of all those poor enjoyments which this world holdeth out to allure us, that they may never be able to inveigle our affections, or betray us to any sin; turn away our eyes from beholding vanity, and quicken thou us in thy law.
"Fill our souls with such a deep sense, and full persuasion, of those great truths which thou hast revealed in the gospel, as may influence and regulate our whole conversation, and that the life which we henceforth live in the flesh, we may live through faith in the Son of God.
"Oh! that the infinite perfections of thy blessed nature, and the astonishing expressions of thy goodness and love, may conquer and overpower our hearts, that they may be constantly rising toward thee in flames of devoutest affection, and enlarging themselves in sincere and cordial love toward all the world for thy sake: and that we may cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in thy fear, without which we can never hope to behold and enjoy thee.
"Finally, O God, grant that the consideration of what thou art, and what we ourselves are, may both humble and lay us low before thee, and also stir up in us the strongest and most ardent aspirations toward thee. We desire to resign and give up ourselves to the conduct of thy Holy Spirit; lead us in thy truth, and teach us, for thou art the God of our salvation; guide us with thy counsel, and afterward receive us unto glory, for the merits and intercession of thy blessed Son our Saviour. Amen."
Showing posts with label The Lord Jesus Christ. Show all posts
Showing posts with label The Lord Jesus Christ. Show all posts
Render Unto Caesar
The concept of the Divine Right of Kings has largely gone out of vogue around here. It makes one think of the oppression of England's monarchs, the beheading of Louis XVI, and such ugly things - and yet we see from Scripture that while monarchs are not unaccountable for cruelty, there is the fact that kings are God-appointed. The same is true for all leaders, since no one gets where they are outside of the Providence of God. Jesus Himself accepts this in His answer to those servants of the Pharisees in the Gospels, who asked if it was lawful for Jews to pay taxes to the heathen Caesar. Jesus' memorable response? "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things which are God's."
On the surface this seems pretty straight forward, but it really demands some consideration. What, therefore, is Caesar's, and what is God's?
First, we know that all things are God's, for "in Him we live, and move, and have our being," and "apart from Him [Christ] nothing was made that was made." We know that as our King, our God, our Creator, our Savior, and our Lord, we owe Him our very selves. This includes both mind and bodies, as indicated by Paul's admonition to "present our bodies a living sacrifice"; it includes our worship, adoration, and love. The fact that everything is God's means that the most minute details of our lives should be dedicated to His glory, including the payment of taxes to our Caesars.
And what is Caesar's? That which belongs to Caesar is that which God has given him. Jesus in speaking to Pilate said, "You would have no authority over Me if it were not given to you from above." Clearly this shows the divinity and power of Christ, but it is true in other situations as well, for no created being can have any authority unless it is given to them from God Almighty. Rulers, whether they gain their situation by moral or immoral means, have authority which they could not have if it was outside of God's plan. Therefore, the laws which are theirs, the taxes which are theirs, and the allegiance which they demand, are all due them - always beneath the higher Kingship of God. But, unlike what we owe God, our homage and worship is not due to Caesar, which is something that may have come to the Jews' minds when they thought of the Romans' deification of their ruler.
There is not, I don't think, a hard and straight line between giving to Caesar and giving to God. As God has ordained that we are to "render to all their due," therefore our giving to Caesar with the object of doing right is also giving to God: we give to Him our obedience and submission to His will, by giving to Caesar what is his.
An earlier passage in the Gospel of Luke, which is what I'm currently reading, speaks of the widow and her two mites; Jesus exclaims that she has given all she possessed to God, and commends her for it. But why did she not use them to pay her taxes? While it is possible that she had already paid her taxes and used what was left to give in tithe, I don't think that is what the passage indicates. It simply shows that the woman understood that, first and foremost, all she had was due to the God who gave and sustained her life.
On the surface this seems pretty straight forward, but it really demands some consideration. What, therefore, is Caesar's, and what is God's?
First, we know that all things are God's, for "in Him we live, and move, and have our being," and "apart from Him [Christ] nothing was made that was made." We know that as our King, our God, our Creator, our Savior, and our Lord, we owe Him our very selves. This includes both mind and bodies, as indicated by Paul's admonition to "present our bodies a living sacrifice"; it includes our worship, adoration, and love. The fact that everything is God's means that the most minute details of our lives should be dedicated to His glory, including the payment of taxes to our Caesars.
And what is Caesar's? That which belongs to Caesar is that which God has given him. Jesus in speaking to Pilate said, "You would have no authority over Me if it were not given to you from above." Clearly this shows the divinity and power of Christ, but it is true in other situations as well, for no created being can have any authority unless it is given to them from God Almighty. Rulers, whether they gain their situation by moral or immoral means, have authority which they could not have if it was outside of God's plan. Therefore, the laws which are theirs, the taxes which are theirs, and the allegiance which they demand, are all due them - always beneath the higher Kingship of God. But, unlike what we owe God, our homage and worship is not due to Caesar, which is something that may have come to the Jews' minds when they thought of the Romans' deification of their ruler.
There is not, I don't think, a hard and straight line between giving to Caesar and giving to God. As God has ordained that we are to "render to all their due," therefore our giving to Caesar with the object of doing right is also giving to God: we give to Him our obedience and submission to His will, by giving to Caesar what is his.
An earlier passage in the Gospel of Luke, which is what I'm currently reading, speaks of the widow and her two mites; Jesus exclaims that she has given all she possessed to God, and commends her for it. But why did she not use them to pay her taxes? While it is possible that she had already paid her taxes and used what was left to give in tithe, I don't think that is what the passage indicates. It simply shows that the woman understood that, first and foremost, all she had was due to the God who gave and sustained her life.
Grace
I recently reread some of A.W. Tozer's The Knowledge of the Holy and came across this beautiful passage in his chapter "The Grace of God."
"We can never know the enormity of our sin, neither is it necessary that we should. What we can know is that 'where sin abounded, grace did much more abound.' To abound in sin: that is the worst and the most we could or can do. The word abound defines the limit of our finite abilities; and although we feel our iniquities rise over us like a mountain, the mountain, nevertheless, has definable boundaries: it is so large, so high, it weighs only this certain amount and no more. But who shall define the limitless grace of God? Its 'much more' plunges our thoughts into infinitude and confounds them there. All thanks be to God for grace abounding."
What an inspiring truth! And one that we as Christians often take for granted and lose sight of altogether. But Tozer is right; if we would meditate on the "much more" of God's grace, it would overwhelm us and fill us with joy. I don't think we can read passages like Romans 5:20-21, or Ephesians 2, or I John 3:1-3, without some measure of delight in the love of Christ, which "surpasses knowledge." How great is the love of God.
"We can never know the enormity of our sin, neither is it necessary that we should. What we can know is that 'where sin abounded, grace did much more abound.' To abound in sin: that is the worst and the most we could or can do. The word abound defines the limit of our finite abilities; and although we feel our iniquities rise over us like a mountain, the mountain, nevertheless, has definable boundaries: it is so large, so high, it weighs only this certain amount and no more. But who shall define the limitless grace of God? Its 'much more' plunges our thoughts into infinitude and confounds them there. All thanks be to God for grace abounding."
What an inspiring truth! And one that we as Christians often take for granted and lose sight of altogether. But Tozer is right; if we would meditate on the "much more" of God's grace, it would overwhelm us and fill us with joy. I don't think we can read passages like Romans 5:20-21, or Ephesians 2, or I John 3:1-3, without some measure of delight in the love of Christ, which "surpasses knowledge." How great is the love of God.
The Hall of Faith
"Therefore we also, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which so easily ensnares us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us; looking unto Jesus, the Author and Finisher of our faith, who for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God."
It's funny that Merriette just posted something about this verse; I had worked out what I wanted to say about it last night during my dad's Thursday Night Bible Study (and a lot of this comes from what he said, so I can't take full credit), and then when I logged on today I saw her post. Mine, however, is looking at a different part of the passage and is really something of a continuation of my last "real" post, 'No Walk in the Park.'
The premise of those thoughts was that following Christ is no walk in the park - it's a race, a marathon. The author of Hebrews addresses that poignantly in chapter 10, where he instructs the Christians in Rome to hold fast to their confession and endure and to have faith in Christ. Those people were facing a great deal of persecution - physical and verbal - and were tempted to go back to the old ways of the Jews in order to avoid that. The author's whole point is to show them that they must not fall back, but must persevere. "Do not cast away your confidence," he tells them, and adds that they "have need of endurance." Don't we all?
Some of the worst persecution comes from unbelieving family members and former friends in the early years of being saved. It's difficult and painful to have your loved ones turn on you and mock what you believe, and that's part of what the audience of the book of Hebrews were facing in Rome from other, unbelieving Jews. It's the kind of persecution that we usually face today; we don't get fed to lions or drawn-and-quartered or hanged or burned at the stake, but we do get laughed at and shunned because of our faith. The author of Hebrews, however, tells his listeners to remember those days when they were persecuted in that manner (verses 32-34) and take comfort from that. How?
There's a certain something that comes with remembering being mocked or ridiculed for the faith. They're often sad memories, and sometimes bitter ones as well. It's hard to take delight in remembering a time when your mother or father scoffed at you, or your best friend started making fun of you. And yet there's something else that comes as well, which is what the author was pointing to when he tells them to remember those times; because when you look back (or around, if you're still in that situation), there's a knowledge that it's worth it.
The bearing of your cross and the undergoing persecution in various ways, shapes, and forms is all worth it when you consider what will result from that. Would the persecuted believer rather have Christ as their Heavenly Brother, or keep the friendship they once had with someone at school? Would they rather have the acceptance of their parents, or the secure knowledge that God is their Father? Would you rather be comfortable in this world, or know that you are following in Christ's footsteps? That's really the main point right there. Even when you're in the persecution, there is a realization that Christ was also ridiculed, mocked, abused - by His own family, too. When a believer faces and endures persecution, they are sharing with Christ in that - and I have no doubt that they would rather share persecution with Christ than have worldly comfort without Him!
There is no greater honour for a Christian than to be persecuted alongside Christ. Paul, that great apostle, thought it so; so did Peter and John - and the writer of Hebrews. To be persecuted for Christ's name is to put you in the same category as Abraham, Moses, and David, those great men of God whom we look up to. It is to place you alongside the Puritans in England, the Reformers, and the early Christians. It is to deny the world and follow Christ, as He commanded. It is to have you say like the man Athanasius, "If the world is against me, then I am against the world." Those are but a handful of those who are part of the "cloud of witnesses" that the author of Hebrews talks about, that surround us and support us and, in a sense, cheer us on.
Persecution is not merely something to be pushed through and borne: it is something to be seen as a gift. It probably will not last forever, as the believer's Christian acquaintance grows and it is no longer necessary for them to spend so much time with unbelievers; but no matter in what form it comes or for how long it lasts, persecution is a blessing from God - even though it doesn't seem like that at the time.
It's funny that Merriette just posted something about this verse; I had worked out what I wanted to say about it last night during my dad's Thursday Night Bible Study (and a lot of this comes from what he said, so I can't take full credit), and then when I logged on today I saw her post. Mine, however, is looking at a different part of the passage and is really something of a continuation of my last "real" post, 'No Walk in the Park.'
The premise of those thoughts was that following Christ is no walk in the park - it's a race, a marathon. The author of Hebrews addresses that poignantly in chapter 10, where he instructs the Christians in Rome to hold fast to their confession and endure and to have faith in Christ. Those people were facing a great deal of persecution - physical and verbal - and were tempted to go back to the old ways of the Jews in order to avoid that. The author's whole point is to show them that they must not fall back, but must persevere. "Do not cast away your confidence," he tells them, and adds that they "have need of endurance." Don't we all?
Some of the worst persecution comes from unbelieving family members and former friends in the early years of being saved. It's difficult and painful to have your loved ones turn on you and mock what you believe, and that's part of what the audience of the book of Hebrews were facing in Rome from other, unbelieving Jews. It's the kind of persecution that we usually face today; we don't get fed to lions or drawn-and-quartered or hanged or burned at the stake, but we do get laughed at and shunned because of our faith. The author of Hebrews, however, tells his listeners to remember those days when they were persecuted in that manner (verses 32-34) and take comfort from that. How?
There's a certain something that comes with remembering being mocked or ridiculed for the faith. They're often sad memories, and sometimes bitter ones as well. It's hard to take delight in remembering a time when your mother or father scoffed at you, or your best friend started making fun of you. And yet there's something else that comes as well, which is what the author was pointing to when he tells them to remember those times; because when you look back (or around, if you're still in that situation), there's a knowledge that it's worth it.
The bearing of your cross and the undergoing persecution in various ways, shapes, and forms is all worth it when you consider what will result from that. Would the persecuted believer rather have Christ as their Heavenly Brother, or keep the friendship they once had with someone at school? Would they rather have the acceptance of their parents, or the secure knowledge that God is their Father? Would you rather be comfortable in this world, or know that you are following in Christ's footsteps? That's really the main point right there. Even when you're in the persecution, there is a realization that Christ was also ridiculed, mocked, abused - by His own family, too. When a believer faces and endures persecution, they are sharing with Christ in that - and I have no doubt that they would rather share persecution with Christ than have worldly comfort without Him!
There is no greater honour for a Christian than to be persecuted alongside Christ. Paul, that great apostle, thought it so; so did Peter and John - and the writer of Hebrews. To be persecuted for Christ's name is to put you in the same category as Abraham, Moses, and David, those great men of God whom we look up to. It is to place you alongside the Puritans in England, the Reformers, and the early Christians. It is to deny the world and follow Christ, as He commanded. It is to have you say like the man Athanasius, "If the world is against me, then I am against the world." Those are but a handful of those who are part of the "cloud of witnesses" that the author of Hebrews talks about, that surround us and support us and, in a sense, cheer us on.
Persecution is not merely something to be pushed through and borne: it is something to be seen as a gift. It probably will not last forever, as the believer's Christian acquaintance grows and it is no longer necessary for them to spend so much time with unbelievers; but no matter in what form it comes or for how long it lasts, persecution is a blessing from God - even though it doesn't seem like that at the time.
No Walk In the Park
A friend of mine has been having a very hard time lately with having her faith laughed at, frowned upon, and basically treated badly. She knows who she is, and some of you do too. I went to comment on her page, but as I began to type out my thoughts I realized that they would fit much better in a post than a comment box; so this is dedicated to her, though I hope others who look at it may also find it encouraging.
When we as Christians in the 21st Century think of persecution, we usually think of the great martyrs of past ages - the apostles Peter and Paul and James (and many others); Christians sent to the arenas in Rome to be killed by wild animals; Protestants burned at the stake during the Reformation. This is automatically what our minds turn too, which is not necessarily a bad thing. It is certainly good for us to remember that those men and women had a much harder time of it than we do now, as we live in fairly comfortable nations that have a high tolerance for most religions.
But there is another type of persecution that Jesus addresses in His Sermon on the Mount -
"Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are you when they speak ill of you and persecute you, and say all kinds of evil against you falsely for My sake. Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for great is your reward in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you."
The "speaking ill of you" and "saying all kinds of evil against you" refer to a more verbal persecution than the physical deaths that Christians faced and which some still face today. This is a persecution that comes from the tongue, which James says later in the New Testament is "a fire, a world of iniquity." (James 3:6) It is the abusing of ourselves and our faith by unbelievers - something that does hurt a great deal, and is indeed a kind of persecution. It is never easy to hear other people mock us and make fun of us for what we believe.
And yet, Christ says that we are blessed by God Himself when they do. These things that other people do to us now are only storing up treasures for us in Heaven. The persecutions will not last forever, but while they do we know that we are suffering, not for our own sakes, but for Jesus Christ's - and I believe that in our hearts we would rather suffer for Christ than live in comfort for ourselves.
Following Christ is not a walk in the park. Paul and the author of Hebrews both describe it as a "race," not a mere walk. Jesus told the rich young ruler to "take up the cross and follow Him." A cross is a burden; it is not easily carried. But Christ carried His so that we might be able to carry ours, whatever it may be, and we are blessed for carrying it.
When we as Christians in the 21st Century think of persecution, we usually think of the great martyrs of past ages - the apostles Peter and Paul and James (and many others); Christians sent to the arenas in Rome to be killed by wild animals; Protestants burned at the stake during the Reformation. This is automatically what our minds turn too, which is not necessarily a bad thing. It is certainly good for us to remember that those men and women had a much harder time of it than we do now, as we live in fairly comfortable nations that have a high tolerance for most religions.
But there is another type of persecution that Jesus addresses in His Sermon on the Mount -
"Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are you when they speak ill of you and persecute you, and say all kinds of evil against you falsely for My sake. Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for great is your reward in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you."
The "speaking ill of you" and "saying all kinds of evil against you" refer to a more verbal persecution than the physical deaths that Christians faced and which some still face today. This is a persecution that comes from the tongue, which James says later in the New Testament is "a fire, a world of iniquity." (James 3:6) It is the abusing of ourselves and our faith by unbelievers - something that does hurt a great deal, and is indeed a kind of persecution. It is never easy to hear other people mock us and make fun of us for what we believe.
And yet, Christ says that we are blessed by God Himself when they do. These things that other people do to us now are only storing up treasures for us in Heaven. The persecutions will not last forever, but while they do we know that we are suffering, not for our own sakes, but for Jesus Christ's - and I believe that in our hearts we would rather suffer for Christ than live in comfort for ourselves.
Following Christ is not a walk in the park. Paul and the author of Hebrews both describe it as a "race," not a mere walk. Jesus told the rich young ruler to "take up the cross and follow Him." A cross is a burden; it is not easily carried. But Christ carried His so that we might be able to carry ours, whatever it may be, and we are blessed for carrying it.
I Shall Be Your God
"'But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days,' says the LORD: 'I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. No more shall every man teach his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, 'Know the LORD,' for they all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them,' says the LORD. 'For I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more.'"
This is the beautiful covenant promise that God lays out for us through the prophet Jeremiah (Jeremiah 31:33-34) and that is reiterated by the author of Hebrews in the New Testament. It was given originally, of course, to the Israelites, but now we know that it has been given to Christians and is the covenant brought by Christ - rejected by the Jews and offered to the Gentiles. Not only was this a radical thing for the Hebrews of Jeremiah's day to hear (if they had been listening), but it was a still more dramatic thing to be presented to the Gentiles as something in which they could participate. For the Jews, having as they did Moses' famous tablets of the Commandments and the constant reiteration of the Law, this must have been strange indeed - to hear that the Law would be written upon their hearts instead of on stone, and placed in their very mind instead of merely in the mouth of the priests and prophets. To hear that there would be utter remission, utter cleansing, of sins, instead of the daily killing of animals in the Temple. To hear - yes, to hear that the Holy God would truly put away and not remember their iniquities!
Though most of the Jews did not see it as we do now, this change from old covenant to new was as different as a shadow is from the real thing. But how much greater must the new covenant have been for the believing Gentiles, who had never even had the shadow! Except for the relatively few proselytes before Christ, it had pleased God to let the Gentile world live in darkness, and now suddenly, through the preaching by the apostles and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, a light was being shown to them. The perfect law, that no pagan philosopher or teacher could fully grasp, was to be placed in the believer's heart and mind; the far-off God, who "covers Himself in light as with a garment," was now showing to the darkened nations that He would be their God, and they would be His people.
This is the covenant that we as believers dwell under now, and it is a beautiful and glorious one...but one that we often take very much for granted. I think that perhaps looking at how strange and brilliant it must have been for the believing Jews and Gentiles of the early Church might show us how to appreciate it more.
This is the beautiful covenant promise that God lays out for us through the prophet Jeremiah (Jeremiah 31:33-34) and that is reiterated by the author of Hebrews in the New Testament. It was given originally, of course, to the Israelites, but now we know that it has been given to Christians and is the covenant brought by Christ - rejected by the Jews and offered to the Gentiles. Not only was this a radical thing for the Hebrews of Jeremiah's day to hear (if they had been listening), but it was a still more dramatic thing to be presented to the Gentiles as something in which they could participate. For the Jews, having as they did Moses' famous tablets of the Commandments and the constant reiteration of the Law, this must have been strange indeed - to hear that the Law would be written upon their hearts instead of on stone, and placed in their very mind instead of merely in the mouth of the priests and prophets. To hear that there would be utter remission, utter cleansing, of sins, instead of the daily killing of animals in the Temple. To hear - yes, to hear that the Holy God would truly put away and not remember their iniquities!
Though most of the Jews did not see it as we do now, this change from old covenant to new was as different as a shadow is from the real thing. But how much greater must the new covenant have been for the believing Gentiles, who had never even had the shadow! Except for the relatively few proselytes before Christ, it had pleased God to let the Gentile world live in darkness, and now suddenly, through the preaching by the apostles and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, a light was being shown to them. The perfect law, that no pagan philosopher or teacher could fully grasp, was to be placed in the believer's heart and mind; the far-off God, who "covers Himself in light as with a garment," was now showing to the darkened nations that He would be their God, and they would be His people.
This is the covenant that we as believers dwell under now, and it is a beautiful and glorious one...but one that we often take very much for granted. I think that perhaps looking at how strange and brilliant it must have been for the believing Jews and Gentiles of the early Church might show us how to appreciate it more.
Repentance
"'Rid yourselves of all the offenses you have committed, and get a new heart and a new spirit. Why will you die, O house of Israel? For I take no pleasure in the death of anyone,' declares the Sovereign LORD. 'Repent and live!'" (Ezekiel 18:31-32)
We all stumble and sin, even after we have been saved; some of us fall in "little" ways, others of us fall in what we consider "big" ways. But no sin is beyond the power of God to forgive. He forgave David's adultery as surely as He forgave Hezekiah's pride, and returned them to their former place before Him. How much more can we, as believers on this side of the Cross, trust that He will forgive us when we repent! For we know that all of our sins are paid for and washed away in Christ's blood; not that we don't still repent when we commit a sin, but that we can put our trust in the Lord Jesus and know that He is our Great High Priest, who offered up the sacrifice of His body once for all and now "ever lives to make intercession for us."
The Old Testament ritual of repentance and forgiveness can be seen in Leviticus 5:5-6: "'When anyone is guilty in any of these ways, he must confess in what way he has sinned and, as a penalty for the sin he has committed, he must bring to the LORD a female lamb or goat from the flock as a sin offering; and the priest shall make atonement for him for his sin.'" In a way, this is the same thing that we do, in that we do confess our sin to God and there is a sin offering involved - but the sin offering is not lifted up by us, but by Jesus Christ, who lifted it up on the cross for His chosen ones. Therefore, by confessing our sins we now know that atonement will be made by our High Priest for our sin.
God is the One who gives a spirit of repentance. There can be no repentance in an unregenerate heart unless God first makes that heart alive, for one who is dead in their trespasses and sins cannot and has no desire to ask forgiveness of God. By our very act of true repentance, we know that He will respond to it with forgiveness, because it was He who made us to repent in the first place. There is no need to fret over whether or not God will remember our sin or not; is He not a "forgiving God, gracious and compassionate, slow to anger and abounding in love"? Does He not "delight to show mercy"? He is holy and will not let the guilty go unpunished, yes, but all our sin has been fully paid for by the perfect Man, Jesus Christ, and if we believe on Him there is now "no condemnation" for us.
It's a paradox and a mystery: all our sin has been atoned for and removed from us, and yet because we still dwell in what Paul calls "this body of death," we still sin. There is no condemnation, yet we still must and do repent when we see our sin. We can't fully understand it, even as believers, but we can know this:
"If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness." (I John 1:8-9)
We all stumble and sin, even after we have been saved; some of us fall in "little" ways, others of us fall in what we consider "big" ways. But no sin is beyond the power of God to forgive. He forgave David's adultery as surely as He forgave Hezekiah's pride, and returned them to their former place before Him. How much more can we, as believers on this side of the Cross, trust that He will forgive us when we repent! For we know that all of our sins are paid for and washed away in Christ's blood; not that we don't still repent when we commit a sin, but that we can put our trust in the Lord Jesus and know that He is our Great High Priest, who offered up the sacrifice of His body once for all and now "ever lives to make intercession for us."
The Old Testament ritual of repentance and forgiveness can be seen in Leviticus 5:5-6: "'When anyone is guilty in any of these ways, he must confess in what way he has sinned and, as a penalty for the sin he has committed, he must bring to the LORD a female lamb or goat from the flock as a sin offering; and the priest shall make atonement for him for his sin.'" In a way, this is the same thing that we do, in that we do confess our sin to God and there is a sin offering involved - but the sin offering is not lifted up by us, but by Jesus Christ, who lifted it up on the cross for His chosen ones. Therefore, by confessing our sins we now know that atonement will be made by our High Priest for our sin.
God is the One who gives a spirit of repentance. There can be no repentance in an unregenerate heart unless God first makes that heart alive, for one who is dead in their trespasses and sins cannot and has no desire to ask forgiveness of God. By our very act of true repentance, we know that He will respond to it with forgiveness, because it was He who made us to repent in the first place. There is no need to fret over whether or not God will remember our sin or not; is He not a "forgiving God, gracious and compassionate, slow to anger and abounding in love"? Does He not "delight to show mercy"? He is holy and will not let the guilty go unpunished, yes, but all our sin has been fully paid for by the perfect Man, Jesus Christ, and if we believe on Him there is now "no condemnation" for us.
It's a paradox and a mystery: all our sin has been atoned for and removed from us, and yet because we still dwell in what Paul calls "this body of death," we still sin. There is no condemnation, yet we still must and do repent when we see our sin. We can't fully understand it, even as believers, but we can know this:
"If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness." (I John 1:8-9)
Bad Things? Good People?
One of the most common complaints that Christians hear from unbelievers these days is, "If God is so good, why do all these bad things happen?" Or, alternatively, "If there is a God, then why is there so much starvation and so many wars?" What a person really means when they say this is, "Why do bad things happen to innocent people?" No one really expends much brain power on the question of why tragedies happen to bad people - either because they don't believe in bad people (difficult to do, considering history, but not impossible), or because it seems fitting that bad things should happen to bad people. It's when a person who doesn't seem to have done anything wrong is effected that we ask the question, "Why did it happen, if God is so good?"
Theologians and philosophers, and a few random preachers and such, have written on the problem; a well-known book nowadays that deals with the subject is transparently entitled When Bad Things Happen to Good People. However, the question is a rather simple one to answer in the end and can be refuted from a number of different angles. The first is that all those who ask the question will freely admit that they are saying that bad things do happen, and so "bad" exists. Obviously. If asked if they then believe that there is good in the world - the way things ought to be - they will say yes again.
From here, the argument is fairly easy. The existence of bad things, the complainer will admit, does not negate the existence of good things and just plain Good - rather it proves it, because "bad" cannot exist in a person's rational thinking without there being "good" for the bad to be compared to. Similarly, you cannot speak of darkness without assuming the existence of light; a blind man does not call what he is in "darkness," because he is unable to compare it with something else - light. Therefore, following this logic, the presence of bad and bad things can no more negate the existence of the One Supreme Good than it can the existence of the goodness we see around us; it actually strengthens the case for God's existence and His Goodness.
There's also another point to be made about the question (which is usually meant rhetorically), and that is that the person is assuming that there are good people in the world. From a Christian perspective, this cannot be accepted as true. While it's obvious from experience that not all people are as bad in their actions as they could be, it is clear from Scripture that there is no one who is "good" - Jesus states that when the rich young ruler calls Him "Good Rabbi"; Christ replied with, "Why do you call me good? There is no one good but One, that is, God." (Mat. 19:17) There are other passages that deal with this doctrine (known as total depravity), including Paul in Romans 3:
"There is none righteous, no, not one; there is none who understands; there is none who seeks after God. They have all turned aside; they have together become unprofitable; there is none who does good, no, not one."
Once a person can wrap their mind around the fact that we are all evil at heart, with no redeeming qualities in us (as the Bible teaches), it becomes clear that we all truly deserve the things we call tragedies. Most of us realize that bad people deserve punishment; when we then grasp the fact that we are all "bad people," then we are logically forced to concede that we all deserve punishment as well. It is only by the goodness of God that they are trying to disprove that any of us are saved from suffering the fruits of our sin.
This argument is best used with those who profess to believe the Bible, and then it takes the wind out of their sails. Not, of course, that it is terribly easy to change a person's opinion, even if you have bucketloads of fine arguments and logic to back you up; unfortunately, the response is usually either irrational anger or the common phrase, "Well, you believe what you want to and I'll believe what I want to" (which is irrational enough in itself). However, these are two of the arguments that I learned in philosophy class and reasoned through, and I've actually used the first on someone who thanked me and said it made sense. I don't know if she actually meant it or was just trying to end the conversation, but I'll hope for the best.
Theologians and philosophers, and a few random preachers and such, have written on the problem; a well-known book nowadays that deals with the subject is transparently entitled When Bad Things Happen to Good People. However, the question is a rather simple one to answer in the end and can be refuted from a number of different angles. The first is that all those who ask the question will freely admit that they are saying that bad things do happen, and so "bad" exists. Obviously. If asked if they then believe that there is good in the world - the way things ought to be - they will say yes again.
From here, the argument is fairly easy. The existence of bad things, the complainer will admit, does not negate the existence of good things and just plain Good - rather it proves it, because "bad" cannot exist in a person's rational thinking without there being "good" for the bad to be compared to. Similarly, you cannot speak of darkness without assuming the existence of light; a blind man does not call what he is in "darkness," because he is unable to compare it with something else - light. Therefore, following this logic, the presence of bad and bad things can no more negate the existence of the One Supreme Good than it can the existence of the goodness we see around us; it actually strengthens the case for God's existence and His Goodness.
There's also another point to be made about the question (which is usually meant rhetorically), and that is that the person is assuming that there are good people in the world. From a Christian perspective, this cannot be accepted as true. While it's obvious from experience that not all people are as bad in their actions as they could be, it is clear from Scripture that there is no one who is "good" - Jesus states that when the rich young ruler calls Him "Good Rabbi"; Christ replied with, "Why do you call me good? There is no one good but One, that is, God." (Mat. 19:17) There are other passages that deal with this doctrine (known as total depravity), including Paul in Romans 3:
"There is none righteous, no, not one; there is none who understands; there is none who seeks after God. They have all turned aside; they have together become unprofitable; there is none who does good, no, not one."
Once a person can wrap their mind around the fact that we are all evil at heart, with no redeeming qualities in us (as the Bible teaches), it becomes clear that we all truly deserve the things we call tragedies. Most of us realize that bad people deserve punishment; when we then grasp the fact that we are all "bad people," then we are logically forced to concede that we all deserve punishment as well. It is only by the goodness of God that they are trying to disprove that any of us are saved from suffering the fruits of our sin.
This argument is best used with those who profess to believe the Bible, and then it takes the wind out of their sails. Not, of course, that it is terribly easy to change a person's opinion, even if you have bucketloads of fine arguments and logic to back you up; unfortunately, the response is usually either irrational anger or the common phrase, "Well, you believe what you want to and I'll believe what I want to" (which is irrational enough in itself). However, these are two of the arguments that I learned in philosophy class and reasoned through, and I've actually used the first on someone who thanked me and said it made sense. I don't know if she actually meant it or was just trying to end the conversation, but I'll hope for the best.
The Knowledge of the Holy
"Can you by searching find out God? can you find out the Almighty unto perfection? It is as high as heaven; what can you do? deeper than hell; what can you know? The measure thereof is longer than the earth, and broader than the sea." Job 11:7-8 (Zophar)
"Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts; let him return to the LORD, and He will have mercy on him; and to our God, for He will abundantly pardon. 'For My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways My ways,' says the LORD. 'For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways, and My thoughts than your thoughts.'" Isaiah 55:7-9
It's pretty clear from the Bible that Man is incapable of "finding out," or completely knowing, God. How can we? He is infinite, and we are finite; He is eternal, and we are mortal; He is perfection, and we are broken and sinful creatures. We cannot even fully know our own hearts; how can we understand the Almighty God? We can't.
And yet, for the very reason that His ways are not our ways, God has blessed us with a means of knowing Him in part. He sent His Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, who is "the image of the invisible God," and in whom "dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily," that we might know Him. And when Christ ascended, He sent the Holy Spirit to "lead us into all truth." We have the Scriptures so that we may know the God we worship. Through the guidance of the Spirit who indwells us, we can now "discover" God through His Word - not fully, of course, but we can have a taste of the unfathomable wonders of God.
A.W. Tozer, who lived from 1897 to 1963, wrote and published an innumerable amount of books and essays on God, the Christian life, and all manner of theological issues - really stupendous works, like "The Root of the Righteous" and "Jesus: Our Man in Glory." He's known as a true prophet, because the things he wrote at the turn of the 20th Century are still true and needed now. When he died, the only thing written on his gravestone was "A.W. Tozer: A Man of God." Now that is a wonderful thing to be known for!
Late in his life, he published a work under the title The Knowledge of the Holy. It's a little book that delves into the perfections, or attributes, of God; each chapter deals with a different aspect of God, but Tozer weaves them all together and shows clearly that none of His "attributes" are really separate from one another. We know that God is One, and all His perfections are One. God is not at odds with Himself; all His thoughts are unified.
The book is a wonderful, beautiful look at God. We can't plumb the depths of His thoughts or ways, but we are called to know Him better all the same, and this little work by a Man of God is perfect for that. It is absolutely a must for all believers, young and old in the faith, because how can we worship or love God without longing to know Him better?
"Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts; let him return to the LORD, and He will have mercy on him; and to our God, for He will abundantly pardon. 'For My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways My ways,' says the LORD. 'For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways, and My thoughts than your thoughts.'" Isaiah 55:7-9
It's pretty clear from the Bible that Man is incapable of "finding out," or completely knowing, God. How can we? He is infinite, and we are finite; He is eternal, and we are mortal; He is perfection, and we are broken and sinful creatures. We cannot even fully know our own hearts; how can we understand the Almighty God? We can't.
And yet, for the very reason that His ways are not our ways, God has blessed us with a means of knowing Him in part. He sent His Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, who is "the image of the invisible God," and in whom "dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily," that we might know Him. And when Christ ascended, He sent the Holy Spirit to "lead us into all truth." We have the Scriptures so that we may know the God we worship. Through the guidance of the Spirit who indwells us, we can now "discover" God through His Word - not fully, of course, but we can have a taste of the unfathomable wonders of God.
A.W. Tozer, who lived from 1897 to 1963, wrote and published an innumerable amount of books and essays on God, the Christian life, and all manner of theological issues - really stupendous works, like "The Root of the Righteous" and "Jesus: Our Man in Glory." He's known as a true prophet, because the things he wrote at the turn of the 20th Century are still true and needed now. When he died, the only thing written on his gravestone was "A.W. Tozer: A Man of God." Now that is a wonderful thing to be known for!
Late in his life, he published a work under the title The Knowledge of the Holy. It's a little book that delves into the perfections, or attributes, of God; each chapter deals with a different aspect of God, but Tozer weaves them all together and shows clearly that none of His "attributes" are really separate from one another. We know that God is One, and all His perfections are One. God is not at odds with Himself; all His thoughts are unified.
The book is a wonderful, beautiful look at God. We can't plumb the depths of His thoughts or ways, but we are called to know Him better all the same, and this little work by a Man of God is perfect for that. It is absolutely a must for all believers, young and old in the faith, because how can we worship or love God without longing to know Him better?
More Dark Than Light
The easiest way to find a good book these days is to dig one up that was published more than fifty years ago. Modern books can almost always be counted on to have some bad content in them, whether or not they're published by Christian editors.
What is it with Americans' current love of gory, creepy suspense? Gross romances? Admittedly, even in the 1800s Gothic novels were in vogue among the younger generation (as addressed by Jane Austen in her Northanger Abbey), but that was more of a fad. Now it's a settled thing. Everybody reads these books, and almost everybody writes them; they're everywhere, populating the Amazon website and the Barnes & Noble bookshelves.
It's to be expected from non-Christian authors and publishers, but it's very galling when it comes from writers who purport to be Christian. Some examples that spring to mind are Francine Rivers, Stephen R. Lawhead, and Ted Dekker; very popular names, but you can't open one of their books without expecting something bad in the pages. Is it right that books under the genre of "Christian" should have such shock-value?
Generally the excuse that people use is that the books are darkening the "evil" to make the "good" appear even brighter. But it isn't really necessary. A reader can get a feel for a villain's evil character without the author having to go into gritty detail. What happens in a lot of good-against-evil stories in which the writer has tried to do this is that the accentuated evil overpowers the righteousness. Sure, you probably have the redemption in the end, but most readers will come away with a clearer memory of the bad things than of the good. Teenagers read Ted Dekker's and Frank Peretti's books for the suspense, the dark murders, the horror aspects - not for the light and the beauty of God's Word. Readers come away from many "Christian" romances with more information than they needed.
These books and authors aren't salt and light in the world. What's more, they don't help readers in their faith. Whatever happened to Paul's exhortation in Philippians?
"Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things." (Philippians 4:8)
What is it with Americans' current love of gory, creepy suspense? Gross romances? Admittedly, even in the 1800s Gothic novels were in vogue among the younger generation (as addressed by Jane Austen in her Northanger Abbey), but that was more of a fad. Now it's a settled thing. Everybody reads these books, and almost everybody writes them; they're everywhere, populating the Amazon website and the Barnes & Noble bookshelves.
It's to be expected from non-Christian authors and publishers, but it's very galling when it comes from writers who purport to be Christian. Some examples that spring to mind are Francine Rivers, Stephen R. Lawhead, and Ted Dekker; very popular names, but you can't open one of their books without expecting something bad in the pages. Is it right that books under the genre of "Christian" should have such shock-value?
Generally the excuse that people use is that the books are darkening the "evil" to make the "good" appear even brighter. But it isn't really necessary. A reader can get a feel for a villain's evil character without the author having to go into gritty detail. What happens in a lot of good-against-evil stories in which the writer has tried to do this is that the accentuated evil overpowers the righteousness. Sure, you probably have the redemption in the end, but most readers will come away with a clearer memory of the bad things than of the good. Teenagers read Ted Dekker's and Frank Peretti's books for the suspense, the dark murders, the horror aspects - not for the light and the beauty of God's Word. Readers come away from many "Christian" romances with more information than they needed.
These books and authors aren't salt and light in the world. What's more, they don't help readers in their faith. Whatever happened to Paul's exhortation in Philippians?
"Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things." (Philippians 4:8)
Love
We have a stupid journal in our city; that's an undisputed fact in our household. It's not just that the articles themselves are boring, either, because that could be because nothing much happens around town that is worth a proper news column; it is usually the writing style itself, which, to use the modern vernacular, "sucks." However, there was one article in the edition several weeks ago that was so bad in and of itself that I, nicknamed the Grammar Nazi by friends and family, was so irritated as to not even be interested in the possible spelling or grammar problems.
The article, in essence, was about how the religions of the world are not as irreconcilable as most people think. It was about how they all basically teach the same principles, and how if we were to just lay aside our biases, we could all get along. It's a common theme in today's New-Age steeped society, but it drives me batty every time I see it. It is no surprise that the author of this column is a preacher at a Unitarian church who regularly writes articles addressing world peace, living together in harmony, and "loving" everyone; indeed, the only thing that was slightly encouraging about the section was that it was not written by a professing member of the true Church. Unfortunately, the majority of the world looks about Unitarians, Latter Day Saints, Jehovah's Witnesses, etc., as all part of the Church, and therefore opinions expressed by any of those sects are thought to reflect the view of reformed Christianity.
But on to the actual article. The man used as illustrations of his point the religions of Islam and Christianity (not surprising, considering the current war between the "Christian" United States and Muslim Middle East), and made a point of stating that perhaps neither Muhammad nor Jesus came to - as he put it - start a religion, but rather to show people how to live good lives. And if this is so, then we're all really just trying to live good lives and we should help one another instead of being enemies. He even ended his article by addressing those who would disagree with the exhortation to consider Christ's words in the Gospels when he instructed us to love our enemies.
Setting aside the fact that even orthodox Muslims would scorn such a call for peace and unification between our religions, Mr. Author's arguments themselves leave something lacking. First, he has seriously misused the words of Christ and twisted them to his own use. We are indeed to do good to those that hate us, to love or neighbours, and to strive to be at peace with all men as far as possible. These are all Biblical truths that we ought to follow, and I am in no way advocating that we resurrect the Crusades or any such thing. But we must consider the words of Christ in the light of other Bible passages and realize that this call to love is not a call to "oneness."
I believe one of Mr. Author's first problems is a false view of the Gospel itself, so I'll try first to set that right. It has become a view of the World that the Sermon on the Mount is Christianity's gospel - the Beatitudes, especially. This is not correct at all. Jesus did teach there what all men ought to know already, and that is that we are to be perfect: it's what we were created to be. In the same Sermon on the Mount that unbelievers like so often to quote He says, "Be perfect, as your Father in Heaven is perfect." Perfection is something that we cannot attain, however; not now, not in our current state. That's the bad news of the Good News.
But God, in His infinite mercy, did not leave it there. He sent His Son, that "those who believe on Him should not perish, but have eternal life." God has brought to life those formerly dead souls and given them the ability to believe and be saved. That's the good news of the Good News, and that is what true Christianity teaches - "Christ," as Paul said, "and Him crucified." That's the Gospel, not the Sermon on the Mount itself.
So, did Jesus come to start a religion? Not in the way Mr. Author meant the phrase, I am sure, for he does not believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ. He did not teach His teachings in order to draw a gathering - no, indeed, for many left Him because of the hard things He said! He came and He taught the words of eternal life, and He died to reconcile Man to God. That was the purpose of Jesus' life. He did not come to "start a religion", but He came to be a sacrifice for the sins of those that God chose.
There is the Gospel. Mr. Author's second problem is a wrong definition of the word "love" - another common problem in the World today. Love has come to mean a kind of pat-on-the-head, a hug-and-a-kiss, a live-and-let-live feeling from one person to another; it has lost the power contained even in the concept of chivalry in the Middle Ages, where the man went to war and into battle to fight for the one he loved. Love is now considered weak, where it once was strong. Love is now considered live a sapling that breaks in the wind, instead of the oak that stands firm against it. Love has lost its meaning.
This calamity has affected many passages of Scripture (notably the "God is love" verse), but since this post is dealing with Mr. Author's article, I'll only address the problems it poses in Jesus' command for us to love our enemies. Mr. Author believes this verse means that we are to embrace the religious differences of other people groups and never disagree with them outwardly or rebuke them for their beliefs. This is his definition of what it means to love our enemies. But other passages of the Bible will support me when I say that this was not Jesus' meaning in the least. Paul says that we are not to be conformed to this world; Jesus says that the disciples (and all believers) will encounter persecution for their beliefs, and that they should count it a blessing; and we see countless examples of the apostles and Jesus Himself preaching the falsity of all other religions. You need not look far to find chapters and verses that say that Christianity alone is true, so I will not go into all the ones that are kicking about in my head.
Mr. Author's definition of love is incorrect - even blasphemous. So what did Jesus truly mean? C.S. Lewis gives good insight into this in his work Mere Christianity, where he addresses the verse that says that we are to love our neighbours as ourselves. Well, says Lewis, how do I love myself? Simple enough, but rarely looked at. He starts by saying that loving oneself does not always mean that "you", or your conscience, agrees with the actions you take. It doesn't mean that you always actively love yourself; sometimes you can downright hate yourself. It doesn't mean that there aren't things that you want to change about yourself. But it does mean that you want the best for yourself, no matter your other feelings.
Looking at it this way, we see that the passage doesn't mean that we always agree with our neighbour/enemy, it doesn't mean that we don't sometimes "hate" our neighbour/enemy (in the same way we "hate" ourselves), and it doesn't mean that we don't try to change our neighbour/enemy. But it does mean that we seek the best for them - the best for them in the long run. It's the same principle that comes into play when a mother doesn't let her child eat all the chocolate he wants (in the long run he'll be glad he doesn't have a stomach-ache) or play outside in the snow barefoot (in the long run he'll be glad he doesn't have the flu).
And in the long run, what is best for our enemies? Their eternal salvation. And if their current beliefs are leading them to Hell, what should we do - stand by and watch, thinking that we thus show love, or speak the Truth and preach the Gospel and try to show them that they are wrong? Right now they may be quite mad that we have messed with their paradigm, but in the long run they may realize that it was for the best and done in true and godly Love.
God convicted us of sin and led us to Christ, which is no pleasant process. But it's Love - true Love, that seeks the good of its object foremost.
The article, in essence, was about how the religions of the world are not as irreconcilable as most people think. It was about how they all basically teach the same principles, and how if we were to just lay aside our biases, we could all get along. It's a common theme in today's New-Age steeped society, but it drives me batty every time I see it. It is no surprise that the author of this column is a preacher at a Unitarian church who regularly writes articles addressing world peace, living together in harmony, and "loving" everyone; indeed, the only thing that was slightly encouraging about the section was that it was not written by a professing member of the true Church. Unfortunately, the majority of the world looks about Unitarians, Latter Day Saints, Jehovah's Witnesses, etc., as all part of the Church, and therefore opinions expressed by any of those sects are thought to reflect the view of reformed Christianity.
But on to the actual article. The man used as illustrations of his point the religions of Islam and Christianity (not surprising, considering the current war between the "Christian" United States and Muslim Middle East), and made a point of stating that perhaps neither Muhammad nor Jesus came to - as he put it - start a religion, but rather to show people how to live good lives. And if this is so, then we're all really just trying to live good lives and we should help one another instead of being enemies. He even ended his article by addressing those who would disagree with the exhortation to consider Christ's words in the Gospels when he instructed us to love our enemies.
Setting aside the fact that even orthodox Muslims would scorn such a call for peace and unification between our religions, Mr. Author's arguments themselves leave something lacking. First, he has seriously misused the words of Christ and twisted them to his own use. We are indeed to do good to those that hate us, to love or neighbours, and to strive to be at peace with all men as far as possible. These are all Biblical truths that we ought to follow, and I am in no way advocating that we resurrect the Crusades or any such thing. But we must consider the words of Christ in the light of other Bible passages and realize that this call to love is not a call to "oneness."
I believe one of Mr. Author's first problems is a false view of the Gospel itself, so I'll try first to set that right. It has become a view of the World that the Sermon on the Mount is Christianity's gospel - the Beatitudes, especially. This is not correct at all. Jesus did teach there what all men ought to know already, and that is that we are to be perfect: it's what we were created to be. In the same Sermon on the Mount that unbelievers like so often to quote He says, "Be perfect, as your Father in Heaven is perfect." Perfection is something that we cannot attain, however; not now, not in our current state. That's the bad news of the Good News.
But God, in His infinite mercy, did not leave it there. He sent His Son, that "those who believe on Him should not perish, but have eternal life." God has brought to life those formerly dead souls and given them the ability to believe and be saved. That's the good news of the Good News, and that is what true Christianity teaches - "Christ," as Paul said, "and Him crucified." That's the Gospel, not the Sermon on the Mount itself.
So, did Jesus come to start a religion? Not in the way Mr. Author meant the phrase, I am sure, for he does not believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ. He did not teach His teachings in order to draw a gathering - no, indeed, for many left Him because of the hard things He said! He came and He taught the words of eternal life, and He died to reconcile Man to God. That was the purpose of Jesus' life. He did not come to "start a religion", but He came to be a sacrifice for the sins of those that God chose.
There is the Gospel. Mr. Author's second problem is a wrong definition of the word "love" - another common problem in the World today. Love has come to mean a kind of pat-on-the-head, a hug-and-a-kiss, a live-and-let-live feeling from one person to another; it has lost the power contained even in the concept of chivalry in the Middle Ages, where the man went to war and into battle to fight for the one he loved. Love is now considered weak, where it once was strong. Love is now considered live a sapling that breaks in the wind, instead of the oak that stands firm against it. Love has lost its meaning.
This calamity has affected many passages of Scripture (notably the "God is love" verse), but since this post is dealing with Mr. Author's article, I'll only address the problems it poses in Jesus' command for us to love our enemies. Mr. Author believes this verse means that we are to embrace the religious differences of other people groups and never disagree with them outwardly or rebuke them for their beliefs. This is his definition of what it means to love our enemies. But other passages of the Bible will support me when I say that this was not Jesus' meaning in the least. Paul says that we are not to be conformed to this world; Jesus says that the disciples (and all believers) will encounter persecution for their beliefs, and that they should count it a blessing; and we see countless examples of the apostles and Jesus Himself preaching the falsity of all other religions. You need not look far to find chapters and verses that say that Christianity alone is true, so I will not go into all the ones that are kicking about in my head.
Mr. Author's definition of love is incorrect - even blasphemous. So what did Jesus truly mean? C.S. Lewis gives good insight into this in his work Mere Christianity, where he addresses the verse that says that we are to love our neighbours as ourselves. Well, says Lewis, how do I love myself? Simple enough, but rarely looked at. He starts by saying that loving oneself does not always mean that "you", or your conscience, agrees with the actions you take. It doesn't mean that you always actively love yourself; sometimes you can downright hate yourself. It doesn't mean that there aren't things that you want to change about yourself. But it does mean that you want the best for yourself, no matter your other feelings.
Looking at it this way, we see that the passage doesn't mean that we always agree with our neighbour/enemy, it doesn't mean that we don't sometimes "hate" our neighbour/enemy (in the same way we "hate" ourselves), and it doesn't mean that we don't try to change our neighbour/enemy. But it does mean that we seek the best for them - the best for them in the long run. It's the same principle that comes into play when a mother doesn't let her child eat all the chocolate he wants (in the long run he'll be glad he doesn't have a stomach-ache) or play outside in the snow barefoot (in the long run he'll be glad he doesn't have the flu).
And in the long run, what is best for our enemies? Their eternal salvation. And if their current beliefs are leading them to Hell, what should we do - stand by and watch, thinking that we thus show love, or speak the Truth and preach the Gospel and try to show them that they are wrong? Right now they may be quite mad that we have messed with their paradigm, but in the long run they may realize that it was for the best and done in true and godly Love.
God convicted us of sin and led us to Christ, which is no pleasant process. But it's Love - true Love, that seeks the good of its object foremost.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
