There was a time in my life when I worked as a corrections officer. For me, this was a bitter sweet job. There were some really great moments and some really horrible ones too. Many inmates came and gone, most were harmless people full of empty threats. Others, a few, you could count on them carrying out their threats. There were always some that you feared. You knew they could and most likely would go off on you, lose their composure and attack. One such inmate, Jones, was this short fellow, a walking muscle I liked to call him. He bench pressed well over 300 pounds. I could envision him tearing a door off its hinges with little effort as well as my head.
Somehow, I become the designated person when it came time to lock inmates up. Yes, I know, sounds crazy, locking inmates up. After all I was working in a prison, how on earth do you lock someone up who is already locked up? Well, I worked in minimum security institute. Lock up meant sending them straight to maximum security. When an offender got into too much trouble, they became a flight risk and needed to be moved into a higher security setting. Locking up an inmate meant putting shackles on him; leg irons, waist chains and handcuffs. Don't let those movies fool you, it is very difficult to get cuffs on a person when they don't want to have them put on. Every time an inmate needed to be locked up, I was called. I always said, I hope that I am not around when and if the time ever came to lock up Jones.
When an inmate needed to be sent to lock up, the sergeant would place the inmate in the visitors room which was adjacent to our main control post. There was a huge viewing window between the two rooms so personal could keep an eye on inmates and their visitors. When an officer comes on duty, they have to sign in at the control post. When doing so, you get a clear view into the visitors room. Well, one day I come in to work the afternoon shift. Walking up to the control post, the serge hands me the sign in log. As I am signing in, I look up and over to the left and there he was. Jones, sitting in the visitors room. Crap, well, actually several other words went through my mind at that time. I looked up in into the eyes of my sergeant. He stared back, no words were exchanged at that moment.
Inmates who have been found guilty by the conduct adjustment board (C.A.B) for serious infractions are not told of the verdict if they are going to be sent to the main prison. That is, not until they are in shackles. Here is the rub. All inmates who have went before the C.A.B. knows that when they are called to the visitors room, it isn't going to be good. Furthermore, when an officer walks in carrying shackles, the message is clear. You are going to lock up. I asked my sergeant, "how long has Jones been sitting there." The sergeant replied, "three hours." They purposefully waited for me to come on duty. It was now my job to grab handcuffs, a waist chain, and leg irons, and then go into the room and tell the muscle, that is the inmate he is going to the other side. The other side being
maximum security.
I thought about this for a moment, then went into the control post and read the findings of the C.A.B. Setting the record down, I exited the control post and walked the five steps or so to the visitors room. I purposefully left the shackles in the control post. I entered the visitors room and sat down next to Jones. We sat there and said nothing for a few minutes. I took a breath and said, "You know what's up?" Jones answered, "Yes." I then said, "I have to put shackles on you, are you going to give me a problem?" To my relief Jones said, "no, it's not your fault, you are just doing your job." Magic words. We talked for a few more minutes and then I got up and went to the control post and came back with the shackles. I said, "I have to put this one you now." Jones stood up and turned around so I could put the waist chains on him. He turned, placed his hands together and lifted them so I could cuff him, quickly hooking his cuffs through a loop in the waist chains in case he changed his mind. Now he was secure. Jones kept his word. I shackled him without a problem.
Moral of the story
The first time I had to lock a man up, after depositing him in lock up, I returned to the center with just the chains. I felt as if I had taken my dog out and shot him. It was a horrible feeling. Soon though, I began to enjoy the challenge. No, not the challenge of fighting with inmates, but rather the thrill or I should say, adrenaline rush of facing the unknown and winning. To me, winning meant getting the shackles on the inmate without a fight. No one gets hurt. That was the desired outcome. Didn't always work but I had the best track record. What I didn't realize is that I had become very proficient at this and well respected for my abilities. Thus, the shift supervisor would hold the inmate in the visitors room until I came on duty.
Vietnam
I went to China in 2001 on a missions trip. I fell in love with China. I studied the culture and the language for a year prior to going. I continued to study the culture and language for another year. In 2002, I returned to China. I was now very familiar with China. In 2003, we were once again headed back to China but S.A.R.S broke out and so we were rerouted to Vietnam. I was not a happy camper. I didn't want to go to Vietnam. I knew nothing about it, didn't speak the language. God grabbed me by the back of my shirt collar and dragged me kicking and screaming to Vietnam. I soon learned that indeed, "the harvest is plentiful but the workers are few" (Matt, 9:38). Jesus, and the New Testament writers loved to use farming analogies, which were apropos for the times. I had forgotten that God is the farmer. He owns the farm, the fields, the very crops which are growing. We are but farm hands. I wanted to go and work in one field, the master of the farm wanted me to go to a different field. He knows best. He knows which crops need tending and who is best to tend to them. I was nonetheless, a grumbling farm hand.
God Calls us
God, as the master of the farm calls us to work in His fields. He knows who is right for the job at that given moment. Much like my story with the inmate. I was the right man for the job. I was called upon to do a special job because I was best suited. Likewise, we are called not to the field we want to work in, but the one God wants us to work in. This is a hard lesson for many to learn. I love China so that is where by gum, God is going to send me, right? Or, at least that is what I thought. No, it isn't about what country you love or where you want to go, but where God sees your talents and abilities will be the most effective that matters. Like me, locking up one particular inmate or serving in a country and having no desire to, you may, most likely will, be called to do something somewhere you don't want to do or don't like. God knows you better than you know yourself. He knows your strengths and abilities.
Ephesians 4:1
"As a prisoner of the Lord, then, I urge you to live a life worthy of the calling you have received." each and every person who is a Christian has a calling. Paul tells us to live a life worthy of that calling. Here, many will profess, some have been gifted to be pastors, deacons, teachers, and administrators. This is true, but each one of us are responsible for sharing the Gospel through words and deeds, be it in your little community, or in foreign missions. We are called to serve our Master and tend to his fields, flocks, and feed his sheep. We are all called to be lights in an otherwise dark world.
Tuesday, August 23, 2011
Saturday, August 6, 2011
God is love and the state of the modern church in America
I want to share with you my pain and agony. let me start with this quote, "They then reduce the gospel to the least common denominator, 'God is love,' in this way they banish from the moral discussion not only the natural law, but the divine (revealed) law as well" Reverend Langlais Ph.D. Speaking about postmodernist, Dr. Langlais holds that some Christians have become confused in their understanding of the relationship between the Law and the Gospel. Failing to distinguish between moral laws, and ethnic (ceremonial) laws within the bible. In Dr. Langlais' words, "As a result, they throw the moral baby out with the ceremonial bathwater." Dr. Langlais is speaking on moral relativism of the modern church. While those who abide by the law, such as observant Jews, are extreme, so to, those who take the words, "God is love" are extreme, throwing out moral absolutes and opening the church to things not before allowed. Below are four examples of the use of these three simple words, "God is love," taken from various denominations. We must ask ourselves, are we aiding in perpetuating a moral decline in our churches by throwing out the moral baby with the legalistic bathwater?
1) This is the Good News taught by Yeshua of Nazareth, Jesus the Christ. God is the Father, not just the Source of all that is, but the loving Source of all that is. Or as St. John even more succinctly put it, God is love There is the idea that God is love, but will also torment all who "do not accept Jesus" (itself a gross misunderstanding of the gospel) forever. The resulting image is not only monstrous, but an impossible contradiction
2) Does Salvation Mean "Knowing Jesus?" No. The teaching that Jesus is the only path to salvation, contradicts the teachings of Jesus himself. In the three earlier Synoptic gospels, Jesus never suggests "believing in him" is the criterion for salvation. In fact, Jesus warns that it is not those who call him "Lord," who will enter heaven, but those who live the Kingdom life of love! (Mt. 7.21)
3) There is NO burning hell of torture where billions of souls who "sinned too much" or "chose the wrong religion" will suffer forever. Contrary to what most Christians today believe, such a horrible idea was not taught by Jesus and is not found anywhere in the original Hebrew Old Testament or Greek New Testament. Yes, people do "reap what they sow" (Gal. 6:7). But Jesus Christ will "draw all people" to himself (Jn. 12:32) until "in Christ all will be made alive" (1 Cor. 15:22). That's because "God is love"
4) Taken form a Universalist website: Are you searching for a faith that is based on the premise that in the end there will be no one left behind -- a faith that through this blessed hope can truly break down barriers and bring people together in a spirit of joy and "good tidings to all"? There is such a faith, and you have found it! It is called Christian Universalism. We are here to proclaim this Good News of the all-loving, all-saving God who was revealed through the grace-filled ministry of Jesus
It pains me greatly to see God used and abused in this fashion to further current postmodern cultural paradigms, not spiritual ones. In the 1920s, the U.S. began a sexual and cultural revolution. However, it was snubbed out because of the depression of the 1930s and followed by WWII. This same revolution picked up again in the 1960s and was this time successful. We switched from a nation of absolute morals, that is knowing what is right and what is wrong, to a nation of relative moral values. Sayings like, If it feels good, do it. God is dead. Sex, drugs, and rock and roll. Make love, not war. Drop acid not bombs and "Follow your bliss and the universe will open doors where there were only walls" Joseph Campbell.
I have to always ask, what effect did the baby boomers love fest have on our churches? What effect has the me, me generation, generation X had on our churches? If we are a product of these past eras what pressures have we, and subsequently our children, put on the church to change the church to reflect not a biblical standing but our culture, our postmodern, moral relativistic culture? If we are less of a moral people even as Christians, then does it not stand to reason so too are our churches?
What do you now tolerate and accept in your church vs. that which was not tolerated 50 years ago or acceptable to see in a Church? What do you see today, look around. How did the era of free love effect us? Did we change God into a hippy God? A god of only love? How does this god of love compare and contrast to the god in the OT who killed thousands, got angry, ordered the death of women, children, and their animals? In the bible, you can find seven things God hates. Did he change or have we changed him?
Notwithstanding the bending the church to the ways of the world so as to be acceptable to the world, take in consideration the following survey results.
State of the Church
George Barna has released his extensive survey of the well being of the church. He has looked at 14 items across geography, gender, generations, and racial lines. In general here is some of his findings.
• Bible study outside of church has dropped by 5%. Of those who attend church about 40% study their bible outside of church.
• Church volunteerism has dropped to just an average of 19% of church goers volunteering.
• Adult Sunday school attendance has dropped to just 15% of church goers attending Sunday school.
• Church attendance has dropped by 9%.
• Unchurched has risen by the same amount.
• Belief that the bible is God's word has falling from 46% to 38% believing the bible is the word of God.
• Among women, attendance is down 16%, bible reading down 10%, attending Sunday school down 7%, and volunteerism, down 9%.
In other studies,
• 40% of pastors drink
• 54 % of Pastors admitted to viewing porn within the past year
• 50% of professed Christian men vied porn within the week prior to attending a promise keepers event.
• 50% of professed Christian men viewed porn at least once a week
Today we are seeing thousands of people who call themselves Christians jump onto the Unitarian Universalist bandwagon, the Universalist bandwagon, or the Emergent Church bandwagon and now thanks to some evangelical pastors, the Social Justice bandwagon (Socialist utopia). The last three are effecting and infecting the Evangelical church as well as other mainstream protestant churches. The main question is, have we moved too far in the opposite direction from a strict legalistic church to one that almost knows no bounds, has no rules, no moral values save one, love? And if so, has this move injured the church? Consider the survey results, it appears churched people are no different than unchurched people, still giving into the way of the world. People need boundaries, this is why the bible is full of them. We really must take in consideration how our worldly desires force us to reshape the bible and Gods words. If we don't, after 2000 years of Christendom, and thousands of years of Judaism, God may die in the hearts and minds of men.
God does give us the choice does he not. after all, he could have easily foregone planting the tree of the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil. He could have kept us from being burden by sin. Instead, he gave Adam and Eve free choice to screw up and they did. Likewise, we too have the free choice to screw up. To be a church of relativistic moral values or to be a church who knows, understands and teaches absolute moral values.
1) This is the Good News taught by Yeshua of Nazareth, Jesus the Christ. God is the Father, not just the Source of all that is, but the loving Source of all that is. Or as St. John even more succinctly put it, God is love There is the idea that God is love, but will also torment all who "do not accept Jesus" (itself a gross misunderstanding of the gospel) forever. The resulting image is not only monstrous, but an impossible contradiction
2) Does Salvation Mean "Knowing Jesus?" No. The teaching that Jesus is the only path to salvation, contradicts the teachings of Jesus himself. In the three earlier Synoptic gospels, Jesus never suggests "believing in him" is the criterion for salvation. In fact, Jesus warns that it is not those who call him "Lord," who will enter heaven, but those who live the Kingdom life of love! (Mt. 7.21)
3) There is NO burning hell of torture where billions of souls who "sinned too much" or "chose the wrong religion" will suffer forever. Contrary to what most Christians today believe, such a horrible idea was not taught by Jesus and is not found anywhere in the original Hebrew Old Testament or Greek New Testament. Yes, people do "reap what they sow" (Gal. 6:7). But Jesus Christ will "draw all people" to himself (Jn. 12:32) until "in Christ all will be made alive" (1 Cor. 15:22). That's because "God is love"
4) Taken form a Universalist website: Are you searching for a faith that is based on the premise that in the end there will be no one left behind -- a faith that through this blessed hope can truly break down barriers and bring people together in a spirit of joy and "good tidings to all"? There is such a faith, and you have found it! It is called Christian Universalism. We are here to proclaim this Good News of the all-loving, all-saving God who was revealed through the grace-filled ministry of Jesus
It pains me greatly to see God used and abused in this fashion to further current postmodern cultural paradigms, not spiritual ones. In the 1920s, the U.S. began a sexual and cultural revolution. However, it was snubbed out because of the depression of the 1930s and followed by WWII. This same revolution picked up again in the 1960s and was this time successful. We switched from a nation of absolute morals, that is knowing what is right and what is wrong, to a nation of relative moral values. Sayings like, If it feels good, do it. God is dead. Sex, drugs, and rock and roll. Make love, not war. Drop acid not bombs and "Follow your bliss and the universe will open doors where there were only walls" Joseph Campbell.
I have to always ask, what effect did the baby boomers love fest have on our churches? What effect has the me, me generation, generation X had on our churches? If we are a product of these past eras what pressures have we, and subsequently our children, put on the church to change the church to reflect not a biblical standing but our culture, our postmodern, moral relativistic culture? If we are less of a moral people even as Christians, then does it not stand to reason so too are our churches?
What do you now tolerate and accept in your church vs. that which was not tolerated 50 years ago or acceptable to see in a Church? What do you see today, look around. How did the era of free love effect us? Did we change God into a hippy God? A god of only love? How does this god of love compare and contrast to the god in the OT who killed thousands, got angry, ordered the death of women, children, and their animals? In the bible, you can find seven things God hates. Did he change or have we changed him?
Notwithstanding the bending the church to the ways of the world so as to be acceptable to the world, take in consideration the following survey results.
State of the Church
George Barna has released his extensive survey of the well being of the church. He has looked at 14 items across geography, gender, generations, and racial lines. In general here is some of his findings.
• Bible study outside of church has dropped by 5%. Of those who attend church about 40% study their bible outside of church.
• Church volunteerism has dropped to just an average of 19% of church goers volunteering.
• Adult Sunday school attendance has dropped to just 15% of church goers attending Sunday school.
• Church attendance has dropped by 9%.
• Unchurched has risen by the same amount.
• Belief that the bible is God's word has falling from 46% to 38% believing the bible is the word of God.
• Among women, attendance is down 16%, bible reading down 10%, attending Sunday school down 7%, and volunteerism, down 9%.
In other studies,
• 40% of pastors drink
• 54 % of Pastors admitted to viewing porn within the past year
• 50% of professed Christian men vied porn within the week prior to attending a promise keepers event.
• 50% of professed Christian men viewed porn at least once a week
Today we are seeing thousands of people who call themselves Christians jump onto the Unitarian Universalist bandwagon, the Universalist bandwagon, or the Emergent Church bandwagon and now thanks to some evangelical pastors, the Social Justice bandwagon (Socialist utopia). The last three are effecting and infecting the Evangelical church as well as other mainstream protestant churches. The main question is, have we moved too far in the opposite direction from a strict legalistic church to one that almost knows no bounds, has no rules, no moral values save one, love? And if so, has this move injured the church? Consider the survey results, it appears churched people are no different than unchurched people, still giving into the way of the world. People need boundaries, this is why the bible is full of them. We really must take in consideration how our worldly desires force us to reshape the bible and Gods words. If we don't, after 2000 years of Christendom, and thousands of years of Judaism, God may die in the hearts and minds of men.
God does give us the choice does he not. after all, he could have easily foregone planting the tree of the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil. He could have kept us from being burden by sin. Instead, he gave Adam and Eve free choice to screw up and they did. Likewise, we too have the free choice to screw up. To be a church of relativistic moral values or to be a church who knows, understands and teaches absolute moral values.
Friday, July 29, 2011
The Law and the Gospel and Nomoclasts
I really love this statement in that it states my spiritual feelings, "They then reduce the gospel to the least common denominator, 'God is love,' in this way they banish from the moral discussion not only the natural law, but the divine (revealed) law as well."
This one sentence has a ton of stuff packed into it. However, let me start with 'God is love.' by no means am I trying to say this is not so, nor is the author of the sentence, Rev. Langlais Ph.D. This quote comes from a article written by Rev. Langlais in response to an article written by Robert Benne who was writing in regard to the Evangelic Lutheran Church in America's (ELCA) moral ethical position on certain aspects of sexuality.
This article and response are apropos for a segue into a discussion on the subject of the law and gospel. Benne was writing in regard to the loosening of the ELCA's moral position on human sexuality. Rev Langlais is postulating that the modern church has abandoned a modernist agenda for a postmodern agenda. In Rev Langlais' opinion is, that this move by the ELCA, and I would add other denominations, "represents an ideological decay and doctrinal confusion in the church wide body" Langlais continues, "The whole head is sick and the whole heart faint" (Isaiah 1:5-6).
A misunderstanding of unconditional love is at the core of the problem. A foundational principle is being thrown away, Sola Scriptura (by scripture alone), the belief that the bible contains all the knowledge one needs for salvation and holiness. This concept demands that only those doctrinal principles found in the bible are used, but demands reason and deduction when creating manmade doctrine based upon scripture. Current postmodernism equates to what Langlais calls, "ideologies of epistemological pluralism and moral relativism." Because of this, postmodernist are not properly using the concept of the separation of the law and gospel. In fact, Langlais believes that they are reducing the gospel to the lowest common denominator, "God is love." By doing so, any discussion about natural law and divine law can be discarded. For example, certain sexual sins are no longer sins but acceptable practices by some denominations and by many believers. This Langlais states is "the reduced gospel of universal love, that is without responsibility toward the law." He adds, "This is classic antinomianism" (Anti-law which was held as heretical by many churches, and was a belief held by Gnostics and some early churches. In the postmodern church, antinomianism has raised its head once again. Such believers want all of the privileges and rights of the gospel while not having any obligation to the law (Langlais n.d.) Luther called such believers, nomoclasts. That is, destroyers of the law.
What postmodernist, antinomians, nomoclasts, fail to distinguish is that there is a vast difference between ceremonial law and moral law. A very large portion of denominations hold to the idea that the moral law is still in effect. Something the early reformers postulated. While the ceremonial laws are not required to be observed. It is these ceremonial laws that were at the center of the works the Jews had to do for atonement of sin. Postmodernist are making a mistake in not distinguishing between the moral law, and the ethnic laws meant only for the Jews. Langlais puts it this way, "As a result, they throw the moral baby out with the ceremonial bathwater."
Early reformers such as Luther, saw the law as absolutely being needed to be separated into two distinct messages. One is a message (The law) that almost consists solely of commands, threats and therefore, fear. The other message is a message, (the gospel) of promise and comforts. However, these two messages are not mutually exclusive. Commands are almost always followed by promises. Think of this, with God's promise of salvation comes a command to repent of one's sin. Let me further ask you this, is God's love unconditional? Romans 10:8-9 states, "If you declare with your mouth 'Jesus is Lord,' and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved." Is this not a condition that precedes the promise? Mega author, biblical teacher, and Calvinist theologian John Frame, states that the gospel contains law in the form of the commands, "believe and have faith." Consider this, Law includes gospel, God first states to the Israelites, " I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery." After affording the Israelites salvation from slavery, he lays down the law (Frame, n.d.). Frame states that the law drives us to Christ, this is what Luther states as well. Frame further states, "The children of God live in the law and walk according to the law of God." This is the moral law, not the ceremonial law that he is referring to.
The book of Concord boiled Luther's ideas on the law down to this,
1)To restrain external evil
2) To show us our sin
3) To show us God's character and will as a rule and guide to holy living empowered by the gospel.
Calvin distinguished the law this way
1) By "exhibiting the righteousness of God, — in other words, the righteousness which alone is acceptable to God, — it admonishes every one of his own unrighteousness, certiorates, convicts, and finally condemns him."
2) It acts "by means of its fearful denunciations and the consequent dread of punishment, to curb those who, unless forced, have no regard for rectitude and justice."
3) "The third use of the Law. . .has respect to believers in whose hearts the Spirit of God already flourishes and reigns. . . . For it is the best instrument for enabling them daily to learn with greater truth and certainty what that will of the Lord is which they aspire to follow, and to confirm them in this knowledge. . ."
In the end, it isn't so much the point that we are not saved by the law, but rather it is our postmodernist beliefs that are caving in, as Langlais stated, " ideologies of epistemological pluralism and moral relativism." and that we are "reducing the gospel to the lowest common denominator," that is destructive. It leads to a do as you please, you are saved mentality. We don't have to live our lives by any set of rules and no one can judge us but Christ.
This one sentence has a ton of stuff packed into it. However, let me start with 'God is love.' by no means am I trying to say this is not so, nor is the author of the sentence, Rev. Langlais Ph.D. This quote comes from a article written by Rev. Langlais in response to an article written by Robert Benne who was writing in regard to the Evangelic Lutheran Church in America's (ELCA) moral ethical position on certain aspects of sexuality.
This article and response are apropos for a segue into a discussion on the subject of the law and gospel. Benne was writing in regard to the loosening of the ELCA's moral position on human sexuality. Rev Langlais is postulating that the modern church has abandoned a modernist agenda for a postmodern agenda. In Rev Langlais' opinion is, that this move by the ELCA, and I would add other denominations, "represents an ideological decay and doctrinal confusion in the church wide body" Langlais continues, "The whole head is sick and the whole heart faint" (Isaiah 1:5-6).
A misunderstanding of unconditional love is at the core of the problem. A foundational principle is being thrown away, Sola Scriptura (by scripture alone), the belief that the bible contains all the knowledge one needs for salvation and holiness. This concept demands that only those doctrinal principles found in the bible are used, but demands reason and deduction when creating manmade doctrine based upon scripture. Current postmodernism equates to what Langlais calls, "ideologies of epistemological pluralism and moral relativism." Because of this, postmodernist are not properly using the concept of the separation of the law and gospel. In fact, Langlais believes that they are reducing the gospel to the lowest common denominator, "God is love." By doing so, any discussion about natural law and divine law can be discarded. For example, certain sexual sins are no longer sins but acceptable practices by some denominations and by many believers. This Langlais states is "the reduced gospel of universal love, that is without responsibility toward the law." He adds, "This is classic antinomianism" (Anti-law which was held as heretical by many churches, and was a belief held by Gnostics and some early churches. In the postmodern church, antinomianism has raised its head once again. Such believers want all of the privileges and rights of the gospel while not having any obligation to the law (Langlais n.d.) Luther called such believers, nomoclasts. That is, destroyers of the law.
What postmodernist, antinomians, nomoclasts, fail to distinguish is that there is a vast difference between ceremonial law and moral law. A very large portion of denominations hold to the idea that the moral law is still in effect. Something the early reformers postulated. While the ceremonial laws are not required to be observed. It is these ceremonial laws that were at the center of the works the Jews had to do for atonement of sin. Postmodernist are making a mistake in not distinguishing between the moral law, and the ethnic laws meant only for the Jews. Langlais puts it this way, "As a result, they throw the moral baby out with the ceremonial bathwater."
Early reformers such as Luther, saw the law as absolutely being needed to be separated into two distinct messages. One is a message (The law) that almost consists solely of commands, threats and therefore, fear. The other message is a message, (the gospel) of promise and comforts. However, these two messages are not mutually exclusive. Commands are almost always followed by promises. Think of this, with God's promise of salvation comes a command to repent of one's sin. Let me further ask you this, is God's love unconditional? Romans 10:8-9 states, "If you declare with your mouth 'Jesus is Lord,' and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved." Is this not a condition that precedes the promise? Mega author, biblical teacher, and Calvinist theologian John Frame, states that the gospel contains law in the form of the commands, "believe and have faith." Consider this, Law includes gospel, God first states to the Israelites, " I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery." After affording the Israelites salvation from slavery, he lays down the law (Frame, n.d.). Frame states that the law drives us to Christ, this is what Luther states as well. Frame further states, "The children of God live in the law and walk according to the law of God." This is the moral law, not the ceremonial law that he is referring to.
The book of Concord boiled Luther's ideas on the law down to this,
1)To restrain external evil
2) To show us our sin
3) To show us God's character and will as a rule and guide to holy living empowered by the gospel.
Calvin distinguished the law this way
1) By "exhibiting the righteousness of God, — in other words, the righteousness which alone is acceptable to God, — it admonishes every one of his own unrighteousness, certiorates, convicts, and finally condemns him."
2) It acts "by means of its fearful denunciations and the consequent dread of punishment, to curb those who, unless forced, have no regard for rectitude and justice."
3) "The third use of the Law. . .has respect to believers in whose hearts the Spirit of God already flourishes and reigns. . . . For it is the best instrument for enabling them daily to learn with greater truth and certainty what that will of the Lord is which they aspire to follow, and to confirm them in this knowledge. . ."
In the end, it isn't so much the point that we are not saved by the law, but rather it is our postmodernist beliefs that are caving in, as Langlais stated, " ideologies of epistemological pluralism and moral relativism." and that we are "reducing the gospel to the lowest common denominator," that is destructive. It leads to a do as you please, you are saved mentality. We don't have to live our lives by any set of rules and no one can judge us but Christ.
Thursday, June 30, 2011
The Core
Is my church better than yours?
What a question. We are human after all are we not. I wonder how many so-called Christians hold pride in their hearts for their church. Again, we are only human. My pastor is the best, he is on fire, filled with the Holy Spirit, have you ever heard someone say this? Oh, our church has the best kids programs, an awesome worship band and so on?
The better question is, has church become a social event?
So many churches now have coffee stands built into the foyer, some offer up doughnuts. Worship services have become a Sunday morning concert. In my profession, teaching, I have come to recognize a truth. That truth is this, "If I cannot teach my subject inside a bamboo classroom, using nothing more than a piece of slate and chalk then I don't need to be teaching." What I mean by this is that there is a tremendous amount of technology at my disposal. None of which will make me a better teacher. My core is my teaching skills. If my core is correct, then I am already a good teacher and technology only accents what I already have. Likewise, coffee, doughnuts, great programs, professional music, and so on accents what should be a God filled, God focused, God led core.
Matt Redman wrote, "I'm coming back to the heart of worship and it's all about you, Jesus." and When the music fades, and all is stripped away, and I simply come, longing just to bring something that is of worth that will bless your heart." These are the lyrics to the song, The Heart of Worship. The song dates back to the 1990s when Matt's church was struggling with apathy in worship. The pastor saw that people were worshiping the music, singing robotically, trained to perform, so he unplugged the sound system. They went Puritan. They went to the core, their bamboo classroom. The pastor stated, "We'd lost our way in worship, and the way to get back to the heart would be to strip everything away." The pastor asked, "When you come through the doors on Sunday, what are you bringing as your offering to God." How many of us seek out churches that fill our needs as opposed to asking, what are we bringing into the church, what is our offering?
God isn't losing the battle, we are. We've allowed ourselves to be influenced by the world. Our core is clogged with thousands of books telling us how to be more godly, more spiritual, more prayerful. We gauge our churches not based upon the if they are doing Kingdom work but rather if they are a good fit for us, based upon our needs. Pastors bend and twist to fit society rather than allowing themselves to be shaped by God and His spirit. We are losing the battle because of human desire, the very thing that got us into trouble to being with. No, my church isn't better than yours, just different. We need to strip away the humanism, the manmade doctrine and get back to the heart, the core of worship.
When we can sing together, pray together, and take communion together without worry as to slight doctrinal differences and procedures, then we will be strong and begin to push the enemy back.
What a question. We are human after all are we not. I wonder how many so-called Christians hold pride in their hearts for their church. Again, we are only human. My pastor is the best, he is on fire, filled with the Holy Spirit, have you ever heard someone say this? Oh, our church has the best kids programs, an awesome worship band and so on?
The better question is, has church become a social event?
So many churches now have coffee stands built into the foyer, some offer up doughnuts. Worship services have become a Sunday morning concert. In my profession, teaching, I have come to recognize a truth. That truth is this, "If I cannot teach my subject inside a bamboo classroom, using nothing more than a piece of slate and chalk then I don't need to be teaching." What I mean by this is that there is a tremendous amount of technology at my disposal. None of which will make me a better teacher. My core is my teaching skills. If my core is correct, then I am already a good teacher and technology only accents what I already have. Likewise, coffee, doughnuts, great programs, professional music, and so on accents what should be a God filled, God focused, God led core.
Matt Redman wrote, "I'm coming back to the heart of worship and it's all about you, Jesus." and When the music fades, and all is stripped away, and I simply come, longing just to bring something that is of worth that will bless your heart." These are the lyrics to the song, The Heart of Worship. The song dates back to the 1990s when Matt's church was struggling with apathy in worship. The pastor saw that people were worshiping the music, singing robotically, trained to perform, so he unplugged the sound system. They went Puritan. They went to the core, their bamboo classroom. The pastor stated, "We'd lost our way in worship, and the way to get back to the heart would be to strip everything away." The pastor asked, "When you come through the doors on Sunday, what are you bringing as your offering to God." How many of us seek out churches that fill our needs as opposed to asking, what are we bringing into the church, what is our offering?
God isn't losing the battle, we are. We've allowed ourselves to be influenced by the world. Our core is clogged with thousands of books telling us how to be more godly, more spiritual, more prayerful. We gauge our churches not based upon the if they are doing Kingdom work but rather if they are a good fit for us, based upon our needs. Pastors bend and twist to fit society rather than allowing themselves to be shaped by God and His spirit. We are losing the battle because of human desire, the very thing that got us into trouble to being with. No, my church isn't better than yours, just different. We need to strip away the humanism, the manmade doctrine and get back to the heart, the core of worship.
When we can sing together, pray together, and take communion together without worry as to slight doctrinal differences and procedures, then we will be strong and begin to push the enemy back.
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
Milk instead of solid food, infants instead of mature adults. Part two
In the last post, part one, I asked nine questions:
1. That does it mean to move beyond the elementary teaching about Christ?
2. What does it mean to be taken forward into maturity?
3. What does it mean, not laying again the foundation of repentance and acts that lead to death and of faith in God?
4. Why is Paul telling the believers in Corinth that they are still worldly?
5. That they are mere infants in their belief?
6. What does he mean by "I gave you milk"
7. Why does he tell them they are not ready.
8. What is going on in Hebrews that the author tells them they should be teachers but still need teaching, of the elementary truths?
9. Why does this author also tell them the need milk and not solid food?
Let us look at judgment. Each and every day we apply judgment to inanimate objects and people as we move through the day and make decisions. No matter how much one may say, "Who am I to judge." Yet, when we pick out a church to attend, when we decide to call someone pastor, elder, or teacher, we are making judgments. Truly, it isn't a question of someone's salvation when we use judgment, rather it is their walk with God that we inevitably and rightfully judge. One's salvation is becoming sanctified. The word means set aside generally for a holly purpose. This form of the word is a verb, an action. Sanctification is a noun, a process. Sanctification is the way in which we walk out our relationship with God. Sanctified, and sanctification means, a) growing in grace, b) being set apart for a sacred purpose, c) being freed from sin, d) and to be made productive of holiness and or piety. Is this not what judge in others?
The nine questions deal with one's process of sanctification. More specifically definition a) growing in grace and d) be made productive of holiness and or piety. Henry P.Van Deusen said "sanctification is s great and neglected aspect of Christian truth." Luther saw sanctification as an a necessary act of love, while Calvin look at sanctification as a striving to follow God's laws. In Calvin's eyes, a justified person has no choice, they will do their best to suppress their earthly desires. Adolf Koberle states, “The doctrine of justification establishes a new relationship between God and man, the spiritual gift introduces a new vitality. The first is an act of divine compassion (misericorida) the second is the beginning of the activity of divine training. So without detracting in any way from the reality and divine power of sanctification we can truly say that justification is complete, sanctification is always something incomplete” Another author, Murray stated, "We are always liable to distort emphases. Out of deference to all the stress that falls upon God's agency in sanctification we must not fall into the error of quietism and fail to take account of the activity of the believer himself."
We must not fall into the trap of quietism, we should ensure we are not neglecting sanctification!
When sanctified, we are set aside, but make no mistake, we are not safe from being led astray. The nine questions are derived from Paul trying to keep churches from going astray, being misled by other Christians with different ideas. These people were not growing. They basically said no to the process of sanctification. Sanctification demands you grow in your maturity in your relationship with God. Not to stand still holding your fire insurance policy in your hand but rather to step out of the boat as Peter did. Part of sanctification is letting go of the material world. A baby drinking milk cannot let go. They desire to stay wrapped up, warm and safe in a blanket of Godly love, drinking formula. Yet we are called to eat solid food, which means moving away from the elementary teachings of Jesus and into a more spirit led life. As Jesus said to the rich young man, sell everything you have, give it to the poor and follow me. A spirit led life is not necessarily a monetarily rich life, nor healthy life but it can be, very much so, a life of risk. Where are you in the process of sanctification?
1. That does it mean to move beyond the elementary teaching about Christ?
2. What does it mean to be taken forward into maturity?
3. What does it mean, not laying again the foundation of repentance and acts that lead to death and of faith in God?
4. Why is Paul telling the believers in Corinth that they are still worldly?
5. That they are mere infants in their belief?
6. What does he mean by "I gave you milk"
7. Why does he tell them they are not ready.
8. What is going on in Hebrews that the author tells them they should be teachers but still need teaching, of the elementary truths?
9. Why does this author also tell them the need milk and not solid food?
Let us look at judgment. Each and every day we apply judgment to inanimate objects and people as we move through the day and make decisions. No matter how much one may say, "Who am I to judge." Yet, when we pick out a church to attend, when we decide to call someone pastor, elder, or teacher, we are making judgments. Truly, it isn't a question of someone's salvation when we use judgment, rather it is their walk with God that we inevitably and rightfully judge. One's salvation is becoming sanctified. The word means set aside generally for a holly purpose. This form of the word is a verb, an action. Sanctification is a noun, a process. Sanctification is the way in which we walk out our relationship with God. Sanctified, and sanctification means, a) growing in grace, b) being set apart for a sacred purpose, c) being freed from sin, d) and to be made productive of holiness and or piety. Is this not what judge in others?
The nine questions deal with one's process of sanctification. More specifically definition a) growing in grace and d) be made productive of holiness and or piety. Henry P.Van Deusen said "sanctification is s great and neglected aspect of Christian truth." Luther saw sanctification as an a necessary act of love, while Calvin look at sanctification as a striving to follow God's laws. In Calvin's eyes, a justified person has no choice, they will do their best to suppress their earthly desires. Adolf Koberle states, “The doctrine of justification establishes a new relationship between God and man, the spiritual gift introduces a new vitality. The first is an act of divine compassion (misericorida) the second is the beginning of the activity of divine training. So without detracting in any way from the reality and divine power of sanctification we can truly say that justification is complete, sanctification is always something incomplete” Another author, Murray stated, "We are always liable to distort emphases. Out of deference to all the stress that falls upon God's agency in sanctification we must not fall into the error of quietism and fail to take account of the activity of the believer himself."
We must not fall into the trap of quietism, we should ensure we are not neglecting sanctification!
When sanctified, we are set aside, but make no mistake, we are not safe from being led astray. The nine questions are derived from Paul trying to keep churches from going astray, being misled by other Christians with different ideas. These people were not growing. They basically said no to the process of sanctification. Sanctification demands you grow in your maturity in your relationship with God. Not to stand still holding your fire insurance policy in your hand but rather to step out of the boat as Peter did. Part of sanctification is letting go of the material world. A baby drinking milk cannot let go. They desire to stay wrapped up, warm and safe in a blanket of Godly love, drinking formula. Yet we are called to eat solid food, which means moving away from the elementary teachings of Jesus and into a more spirit led life. As Jesus said to the rich young man, sell everything you have, give it to the poor and follow me. A spirit led life is not necessarily a monetarily rich life, nor healthy life but it can be, very much so, a life of risk. Where are you in the process of sanctification?
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Milk instead of solid food, infants instead of mature adults. Part one
Hebrews 6
Therefore let us move beyond the elementary teachings about Christ and be taken forward to maturity, not laying again the foundation of repentance from acts that lead to death, and of faith in God.
What was the author of Hebrews talking about when he wrote this passage? Let us first understand the contexts of the letter. The author was writing to a church that was mostly if not completely made up of Jewish converts. This was a time of persecution and in fear, some may have been reverting to old Jewish ways in order to hide. The author was trying to open their eyes, to help them stay strong in their faith in the Lord Jesus.
There are many commentaries with varying perspectives on Hebrews and especially on chapter six. We could draw a parallel between Hebrews chapter six and Isaiah 53. For the Jews, Isaiah 53 has been very problematic because this passage clearly speaks of Jesus. One explanation Jewish theologians have offered is that there were two Isaiahs, and that the second half of Isaiah was written by someone else. Likewise, Hebrews six poses problems for some Christians. We really must move away from personal ideology, and fears and embrace the word of God in its entirety, not just those parts that we agree with or those parts that make us feel good. We must embrace the whole.
I've often heard Christians say, if one word in the bible is false, the whole bible is false. I have also heard them say that the bible does not contradict itself. Yet, in discussions with fellow Christians, they are more than willing to pick passages that contradict other passages in order to support their opinions. I must ask, which is it? I believe, Hebrews poses a problem with modern day Christian ideology. Think about the following questions and answer them?
1.That does it mean to move beyond the elementary teaching about Christ?
2.What does it mean to be taken forward into maturity?
3.What does it mean, not laying again the foundation of repentance and acts that lead to death and of faith in God?
Now let us throw in a couple more passages into the mix and ask some more relative questions.
1 Corinthians 3:1-3, Brothers and sisters, I could not address you as people who live by the Spirit but as people who are still worldly—mere infants in Christ. I gave you milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it. Indeed, you are still not ready. You are still worldly. For since there is jealousy and quarreling among you, are you not worldly? Are you not acting like mere humans?.
Hebrews 5:12-13, In fact, though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you the elementary truths of God’s word all over again. You need milk, not solid food! Anyone who lives on milk, being still an infant, is not acquainted with the teaching about righteousness.
4.Why is Paul telling the believers in Corinth that they are still worldly?
5.That they are mere infants in their belief?
6.What does he mean by "I gave you milk"
7.Why does he tell them they are not ready.
8.What is going on in Hebrews that the author tells them they should be teachers but still need teaching, of the elementary truths?
9.Why does this author also tell them the need milk and not solid food?
Hebrews talks about believers who are falling away. Can a believer fall away? Apparently so. We see immorality, Judaizers heresies, and Gnostics in Hebrews, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Colossians, 1, 2, and 3 John, and Jude as being forces (False teachings) that can draw believers away. The believers in these churches were moving away from true doctrine and towards false teachings. Another point of reference is found in Hebrews 6:4-6
It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age and who have fallen away, to be brought back to repentance.
This is a very strong message to those who are believers and continue in worldly ways, sinful ways and not God's ways, they risk "Falling away." Note the words, those who have been enlightened," and "who have tasted the heavenly gift," there is no ambiguity here, the author is talking about people who knew of and believed in Jesus. What's happening then. They are being led away for varying and different reasons. Some out of fear, others by false teachings. The bible tells us to beware of false teachings and false prophets as seen in Matt 7:15, 24:11, 24:24, 2 Peter 2:1 is very telling about the destructive nature of false teachers.
But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them—bringing swift destruction on themselves.
After 2000 years, do we still see persecution of Christians? Yes we do. Do we still see Judaizers, Gnostics, heretics, immorality? Yes we do. Are there more these days perhaps? We have the Universalist, Emergent's, and Unitarians to add to the list. So, are there false teachers today? I would dare say yes. But, while one could talk and write about that all day, the more pertinent piece here is not in false teachings, rather the nine questions asked early. Can you answer them?
Therefore let us move beyond the elementary teachings about Christ and be taken forward to maturity, not laying again the foundation of repentance from acts that lead to death, and of faith in God.
What was the author of Hebrews talking about when he wrote this passage? Let us first understand the contexts of the letter. The author was writing to a church that was mostly if not completely made up of Jewish converts. This was a time of persecution and in fear, some may have been reverting to old Jewish ways in order to hide. The author was trying to open their eyes, to help them stay strong in their faith in the Lord Jesus.
There are many commentaries with varying perspectives on Hebrews and especially on chapter six. We could draw a parallel between Hebrews chapter six and Isaiah 53. For the Jews, Isaiah 53 has been very problematic because this passage clearly speaks of Jesus. One explanation Jewish theologians have offered is that there were two Isaiahs, and that the second half of Isaiah was written by someone else. Likewise, Hebrews six poses problems for some Christians. We really must move away from personal ideology, and fears and embrace the word of God in its entirety, not just those parts that we agree with or those parts that make us feel good. We must embrace the whole.
I've often heard Christians say, if one word in the bible is false, the whole bible is false. I have also heard them say that the bible does not contradict itself. Yet, in discussions with fellow Christians, they are more than willing to pick passages that contradict other passages in order to support their opinions. I must ask, which is it? I believe, Hebrews poses a problem with modern day Christian ideology. Think about the following questions and answer them?
1.That does it mean to move beyond the elementary teaching about Christ?
2.What does it mean to be taken forward into maturity?
3.What does it mean, not laying again the foundation of repentance and acts that lead to death and of faith in God?
Now let us throw in a couple more passages into the mix and ask some more relative questions.
1 Corinthians 3:1-3, Brothers and sisters, I could not address you as people who live by the Spirit but as people who are still worldly—mere infants in Christ. I gave you milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it. Indeed, you are still not ready. You are still worldly. For since there is jealousy and quarreling among you, are you not worldly? Are you not acting like mere humans?.
Hebrews 5:12-13, In fact, though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you the elementary truths of God’s word all over again. You need milk, not solid food! Anyone who lives on milk, being still an infant, is not acquainted with the teaching about righteousness.
4.Why is Paul telling the believers in Corinth that they are still worldly?
5.That they are mere infants in their belief?
6.What does he mean by "I gave you milk"
7.Why does he tell them they are not ready.
8.What is going on in Hebrews that the author tells them they should be teachers but still need teaching, of the elementary truths?
9.Why does this author also tell them the need milk and not solid food?
Hebrews talks about believers who are falling away. Can a believer fall away? Apparently so. We see immorality, Judaizers heresies, and Gnostics in Hebrews, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Colossians, 1, 2, and 3 John, and Jude as being forces (False teachings) that can draw believers away. The believers in these churches were moving away from true doctrine and towards false teachings. Another point of reference is found in Hebrews 6:4-6
It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age and who have fallen away, to be brought back to repentance.
This is a very strong message to those who are believers and continue in worldly ways, sinful ways and not God's ways, they risk "Falling away." Note the words, those who have been enlightened," and "who have tasted the heavenly gift," there is no ambiguity here, the author is talking about people who knew of and believed in Jesus. What's happening then. They are being led away for varying and different reasons. Some out of fear, others by false teachings. The bible tells us to beware of false teachings and false prophets as seen in Matt 7:15, 24:11, 24:24, 2 Peter 2:1 is very telling about the destructive nature of false teachers.
But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them—bringing swift destruction on themselves.
After 2000 years, do we still see persecution of Christians? Yes we do. Do we still see Judaizers, Gnostics, heretics, immorality? Yes we do. Are there more these days perhaps? We have the Universalist, Emergent's, and Unitarians to add to the list. So, are there false teachers today? I would dare say yes. But, while one could talk and write about that all day, the more pertinent piece here is not in false teachings, rather the nine questions asked early. Can you answer them?
Friday, April 8, 2011
Sin in the camp
We often talk about and sing a song that states, God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow, unchanging. If this is so, then we need to heed the Old Testament. We need to know it and understand it and what God did and why he did it. Let us have a look at an Old Testament Story, Joshua Chapter seven.
What a time it is. You are an Israelite, God is active all round you. He has sent the very commander of his army to fight alongside you. You've seen miracles as you wondered in the desert now, this same God is helping to destroy your enemies. As these places fall, he gives you one command, do not take devoted things from Jericho. Sadly, Achan took some devoted things from the ruined city of Jericho. His greed and desire got the best of him. The bible says the Lord's anger burned against Israel.
The Lord's anger burned not just against Achan but all of Israel. Joshua sent a small army out to attack another city, AI, but this small city managed to defeat the Israelite's army killing them all. When Joshua heard this he pleaded to the Lord and the Lord answered him, telling Joshua that some had sinned by disobeying God's commands. Because of the sin of at least one person, Israel could not stand against its enemies, 7:12 That is why the Israelites cannot stand against their enemies: They turn the and run because they have been made liable to destruction. In order to avoid this, Joshua had to clean his camp.
Achan was called out and he confessed his sins, saying he coveted a robe, two hundred shekels of silver and a bar of gold. For this, he and his possessions were taken out. He was stoned to death and then everything burned. Then and only then did the Lord turn from his anger Joshua 7: 26.
The lord is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow. A man who I wholeheartedly disagree with, a Unitarian Universalist, posted this, "Any relationship worthy of the name is one of interdependence not independence. This statement I must agree with. Our relationship with the Lord is not one of independence, not one of a personal god that I can place upon my mental as do the Pagans. If our relationship with God is worthy then it is interdependent, and dependent upon others. Just like we see in Joshua, one person sinned and the whole was held accountable. Therefore, we are our brothers keeprs
We speak of the "Body of Christ" is the church but then we cherish our independence so much that we separate ourselves from that body. Sure, we go to church, we take our kids to activities, and we fellowship. But do we hid things, do we covet things? Do we have stuff hidden under the rug in our tents? Can we function as a body of Christ if one of us is sinning? Do we remain silent knowing a brother or sister is in sin? If so, then there is sin in our camp. Is not God the same today, as he was in Joshua's time? As independent worshippers, as people who don't want to be held accountable to others, what then is the difference between us and Achan?
Does not Matthew 28 state, not only for us to go and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the father, son and holy spirit, but also teach them to obey everything that God has commanded? Should we not then clean our own house before trying to clean someone else's house? It is time to pick up the rugs and sweep out the dirt that has collected there.
What a time it is. You are an Israelite, God is active all round you. He has sent the very commander of his army to fight alongside you. You've seen miracles as you wondered in the desert now, this same God is helping to destroy your enemies. As these places fall, he gives you one command, do not take devoted things from Jericho. Sadly, Achan took some devoted things from the ruined city of Jericho. His greed and desire got the best of him. The bible says the Lord's anger burned against Israel.
The Lord's anger burned not just against Achan but all of Israel. Joshua sent a small army out to attack another city, AI, but this small city managed to defeat the Israelite's army killing them all. When Joshua heard this he pleaded to the Lord and the Lord answered him, telling Joshua that some had sinned by disobeying God's commands. Because of the sin of at least one person, Israel could not stand against its enemies, 7:12 That is why the Israelites cannot stand against their enemies: They turn the and run because they have been made liable to destruction. In order to avoid this, Joshua had to clean his camp.
Achan was called out and he confessed his sins, saying he coveted a robe, two hundred shekels of silver and a bar of gold. For this, he and his possessions were taken out. He was stoned to death and then everything burned. Then and only then did the Lord turn from his anger Joshua 7: 26.
The lord is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow. A man who I wholeheartedly disagree with, a Unitarian Universalist, posted this, "Any relationship worthy of the name is one of interdependence not independence. This statement I must agree with. Our relationship with the Lord is not one of independence, not one of a personal god that I can place upon my mental as do the Pagans. If our relationship with God is worthy then it is interdependent, and dependent upon others. Just like we see in Joshua, one person sinned and the whole was held accountable. Therefore, we are our brothers keeprs
We speak of the "Body of Christ" is the church but then we cherish our independence so much that we separate ourselves from that body. Sure, we go to church, we take our kids to activities, and we fellowship. But do we hid things, do we covet things? Do we have stuff hidden under the rug in our tents? Can we function as a body of Christ if one of us is sinning? Do we remain silent knowing a brother or sister is in sin? If so, then there is sin in our camp. Is not God the same today, as he was in Joshua's time? As independent worshippers, as people who don't want to be held accountable to others, what then is the difference between us and Achan?
Does not Matthew 28 state, not only for us to go and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the father, son and holy spirit, but also teach them to obey everything that God has commanded? Should we not then clean our own house before trying to clean someone else's house? It is time to pick up the rugs and sweep out the dirt that has collected there.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)