A Comparison of Karma and Judgment

There are several views of the world which populate the human landscape.  Each of these views wrestle with the various questions we face in our existence. One of the most perplexing issues is that of our own mortality. In fact, death has been said to be the great equalizer, the fate of the rich and powerful and the poor and destitute alike. One of the great mysteries is what happens when we die. Various beliefs have been held throughout time regarding life after death, but none greater than the big two. The eastern philosophy of karma/reincarnation and the widely believed philosophy of divine judgment. People in our culture today are fixated with the idea of Karma. You see it in the obsession of a regular guy named Earl on television, in the writings of Oprah Winfrey show superstar Gary Zukov, and it even appears in a line of Ben and Jerry’s low carb ice-cream.1 In our culture Karma has become kool and divine judgment is well, too judgmental for many. In this little essay, I want to compare the two and actually show that judgment is much more humane and coherent, though the consequences perhaps more serious.

Karma 101

Karma is one of the main tenants interwoven in the diversity of philosophical views from the east. Eastern philosophy is a literal smorgasbord of ideas, practices, and religious concepts, but there are a few ideas which are universal in the various systems. The Law of Karma, the endless cycle of reincarnation, and the oneness of all things are common threads throughout the various genres of eastern thought. The law of Karma will sound familiar in part to people in the west. At its most basic level it is a teaching that says that all our actions, whether good or bad, have consequences. These consequences form a chain creating your reality into the future. What you do, the choices you make literally “create” your future. The idea of Karma goes beyond a mere understanding that “whatever a man sows, he also reaps” for Karma extends between subsequent lives and existences. Each person builds up positive or negative Karma over the course of this life which then determines their subsequent lives after being reincarnated. A person moves “up” through a succession of being in the lives they live with the hope of escaping the endless cycle of birth and rebirth, which is known by the term samsara. If you have bad Karma you may come back as a dung beetle, good karma may have you return as an upper class Brahman. So judgment is seen in the movement “upward” and “downward” in this chain of existence. Many western people fail to see that reincarnation is not a good thing to the eastern mind, but a cycle from which the soul desires to escape, to be absolved into the oneness of the universe finally eliminating the illusion of individual existence. I find the karmic view offers true insights on several fronts. First, it acknowledges that we do indeed reap what we sow and our actions do have consequences. Second, it realizes that our actions and choices are moral in nature. Though the eastern view sees good and evil as two sides of the same coin, part of one reality, it is in the view of Karma that eastern philosophy is a bit more honest. Good is good and bad is bad and you better work towards the good or your Karma gauges will be spinning in the wrong direction. Though many put forth the view of Karma as a pathway towards moral living without any view of judgment, Karma has some serious bad Karma of its own.

Problems with Karma

There are several major philosophical and theological problems with Karma but I will only elaborate here on a very short list. First, Karma is a sort of score card for your life, where your good and bad tally up against each other. The problem I see in this is that there is literally “no one” there to keep score. Who is watching your life? Usually the answer is that the universe has a built in law that regulates these things, but there is no discussion on how this could be the case. If your good and bad “add up” it seems that somewhere this reality must be “known” by someone. This makes sense in a world in which God himself is taking our lives into account. Second, the law of Karma knows absolutely no grace. It is an unforgiving brutal taskmaster by which your life is determined by your previous lives. If you have a bad run now, it could be the result of previous incarnations where you were a real jerk. The problem is you know nothing of your former lives and are sort of screwed by them. There is no grace extended to sinners by Karma, sin becomes a millstone around your neck forever and ever through perhaps infinite reincarnations. Finally, there is an unexpected, but inevitable unjust result of Karmic thinking. You would think that this view only holds one responsible for our actions, but in fact it has unbelievably unjust societal consequences. Think about it. Who are the good guys in this life? The ones who had good Karma in previous lives. Who are these people? The upper classes, the “successful” people, the wealthy and the rulers are in their stations in life because they were good in past lives. So it is no coincidence that the system of caste, where the poor and low caste “deserve” their station in life and should not aspire better, arose from a Karmic philosophical tradition. They are working out bad Karma; these are the views that made the high caste Brahman in India, oppose the work of Mother Teresa with Indian low caste untouchables. She was interfering with them paying for their karma by serving them and helping them. The god of Karma, is the god of caste, which is a system of long term systemic oppression of those who were bad in “previous lives” nobody knows anything about.

On Divine Judgment

Temporal and Eternal Justice

Before moving to a biblical understanding of divine judgment I want to make a few things clear.  When we speak of the judgment of God we are talking about a judgment that has finality to it.  We realize that during our time on earth it can temporally seem as if injustice triumphs and the wicked prosper. In fact, the biblical authors wrestle with this reality (Jeremiah 12:1-4, Habakkuk 1:1-4, Psalm 73:1-3, Psalm 94:1-5).  Even though this age is mingled with justice and evil we trust and know that when all is said and done, the creator will judge the world with equity.  This judgment will be altogether righteous and all the failures of justice in the courts of men will be set right for eternity. The following description is a succinct summary of the biblical teaching on final judgment.

The biblical concept is that at the end of history Jesus Christ will return in glory to earth, the dead will be raised, and they, together with all the living, will be finally judged by Christ and assigned their eternal destiny in heaven or hell. This great eschatological event will be a visible, public, and universal judgment; Christ’s glory and His victory over sin, death, and Satan will be fully manifest; righteousness will be exalted; the perplexing discrepancies of history will be removed, and the mediatorial reign of Christ will reach its ultimate triumph as believers inherit the kingdom prepared for them.2

With this in view let’s compare the view of divine judgment with that of Karma/Reincarnation.

Divine Judgment 101

The biblical view of life after death is a very different than the view of Karma. Like the view of Karma, our actions, both good and evil have consequences, but in our view God is the observer and judge of our lives. He treats us as responsible moral agents in relationship to Him, creation, and other people. We are responsible to God and others for our actions and their consequences. All persons, rich or poor, “successful” or not, powerful or not, are all completely equal and responsible for their lives. We live this life before God and when we die our lives will be judged by God and his appointed one, his own Son Jesus Christ (Acts 17:30-31). God does not show favoritism in that he will take our sins into account and does not turn a blind eye towards the sin done on the earth.

Wonderfully, the God who is our judge chose to take our place and receive the judgment we deserve for our sins.  It is in the gospel that God extends to us the hand of mercy and grace.  The very one who will judge our wrongful deeds, against whom we have committed sin, is the one who pays our debt and freely forgives. This is the view of the Bible. God treats us as responsible human beings but willingly provides payment for our sins, atonement is the biblical word, so that we can be reconciled with God and be judged as righteous because of the work of Christ.

The book of Hebrews teaches us that it is appointed for us to live and die once and then be judged with impartiality (Hebrews 9:27). We either face God in our sin or with an advocate and substitute for our sin. Jesus is the one who delivers us from just wrath and judgment of God and all glory and honor goes to him.

The path of Karma makes you the one who receives glory for your good and blames everything bad that happens to you directly on you. In the gospel we see that God works by the law of the Spirit of life to set us free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death. You might even say he sets us free from the tyranny of the taskmaster of Karma. 3

Notes

1. See Karb Karma at http://www.benjerry.com/our_company/press_center/press/bfyfactsheet.html

2. Geoffrey W. Bromiley, The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Revised (Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1988; 2002), 2:1162.

3. For more on Eastern philosophy you can read the sections by LT Jeyachandran in Norman Geisler and Ravi Zacharias, Who Made God? And Answers to Over 100 Tough Questions on Faith (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003). Additionally, though I heartily disagree with his views of election and predestination, Paul Copan’s Chapter Why Not Believe in Reincarnation from That’s Just Your Interpretation (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2001) is an excellent treatment of some problems in Eastern philosophy.

Mr. Un-Clean and the Gospel

Coming to certain portions of the Scriptures can be an adventure when it is your first time reading them.  For instance, the first time I read through the book of Leviticus I found a bizarre world of food regulations and lots of talk about who was clean or unclean.  As an American, I was familiar with the proverbial phrase Cleanliness is next to godliness¹ and I knew about Mr. Clean from an unforgettable bald guy advertising campaign. However, I knew very little about the aspect of being “clean” or “unclean” that is all over the book of Leviticus in the Old Testament. I thought it would be an interesting discussion for us to undertake in light of our study of lepers in Luke 17.11-19.

In our study of the 10 lepers we see the afflicted crowd is standing at a distance from the other people.  Many times lepers, those affected with various forms of skin diseases  or infections would be quarantined from the rest of the community.  The reasons are obvious in that the disease (s) would be kept from spreading through the rest of the population.  There is something about this separation that is a parable or type of our spiritual condition before God. 

In this essay I want us to learn a few things.  First, we will look at the symbolism God teaches us by separating his people from the other nations in the Old Testament by dietary laws and cleanliness codes. Second, we will look at the way in which God told the Israelites to live and worship after their exodus from Egyptian slavery. The role of the tabernacle (tent of meeting) and the structure of the Israelites camp will be discussed here as well.  Finally, we will look at the issue of our spiritual condition before God and how it is illustrated by the brokenness and fragmentation of our physical bodies—even with various nasty skin infections.  With that said, lets jump in and get our hands dirty…or, uh, unclean.

The Purpose of the Levitical Codes

The book of Leviticus is not as well known today and it is at times a chore for modern readers to grasp its meaning without a broad knowledge of the larger biblical narrative.  Yet, did you know that America’s Liberty Bell takes its name from Leviticus 25:10? In fact, inscribed on the bell itself are the words “Proclaim Liberty Lev 25:10.”²  Seriously, read the verse, it is pretty sweet. The second greatest commandment (Matthew 22:39), quite the favorite of Jesus himself, is found in the pages of Leviticus. “Love your neighbor as yourself” is from in Leviticus 19:18. Yet also in the book we read stuff like this in Leviticus 13.

¹The Lord spoke to Moses and Aaron, saying, ²“When a person has on the skin of his body a swelling or an eruption or a spot, and it turns into a case of leprous disease on the skin of his body, then he shall be brought to Aaron the priest or to one of his sons the priests, ³and the priest shall examine the diseased area on the skin of his body. And if the hair in the diseased area has turned white and the disease appears to be deeper than the skin of his body, it is a case of leprous disease. When the priest has examined him, he shall pronounce him unclean.

There are also verses about sexual immorality as well as very specific dietary regulations.  The book also has detailed descriptions of various sorts of sacrifices God’s people were to offer with a mind towards atonement³ for sins. We do need to ask the question, what is up with all the clean and unclean talk?  Scholar and Pastor Mark Dever gives a very succinct summary of the book of Leviticus and in it we find a bit of a clue for what is up with all the quirky, strangeness in this inspired book from God:

First, we see that God’s people are distinct; so they should live holy lives.  Second, we see that God’s people are sinful; so they should offer sacrifices. 

For our study, we have the first purpose of the book in view.  God gave his people certain cleanliness codes to display to the people his holiness and how they are to be a people set apart (made holy) for him. 

The cleanliness codes of the Old Testament have obvious and helpful public health purposes.  They are for the common good of the community to limit the spread of disease and infection through unwise behavior.  Yet to stop the discussion there would entirely miss the point God is making in this book and in the instruction of the ancient community.  Leviticus 10:10 gives clarity to this issue: You are to distinguish between the holy and the common, and between the unclean and the clean. 

Some of you might remember the movie, Meet the Parents, where the lowly male nurse Gay Focker was meeting the somewhat psycho Dad of his fiancé.  In the movie the father tells Gay about his “circle of trust” that he would either be in that circle or outside of it.  Mark Dever uses a similar analogy of circles to describe the notion of clean or unclean things.  In this case, a large circle would represent all that is clean and the normal state of things.  Outside of this circle God placed certain foods, certain behaviors and certain temporary states like curable diseases.  Outside the circle would be all that is “unclean.”Furthermore, unclean things were not always and necessarily the result of sinful activities but activities that made one ceremonially and temporarily unclean for worship. Dever calls all things clean and unclean things that are “common” to being human. One more category is brought to bear on life in Leviticus.  There were things that could be set apart (or sanctified) as holy. To take a holy thing and connect it to anything unclean was forbidden and the gravest of offenses.⁴   The diagram below illustrates these ideas.

In giving these categories to Israel God is teaching them that all of life matters to God and that he is not to be worshipped by perverse sexual practices, religious prostitution, sacrificing children or the abuse of human beings. It is interesting that Leviticus speaks about how all these make one unclean for worshipping God.  They are not to worship as the idolatrous nations which surround them.⁵  In summary, God is teaching his people in Leviticus that he is holy so he is setting them apart as holy.  The law shows them that they are to worship the one true God differently that the way others will pursue idolatrous spiritualities.  God has declared things clean and unclean, holy and profane.  His people should see all of life this way and seek to live and worship in the way that he shows us. 

One more aside is necessary before moving on.  Do all these laws apply to us now? The simple answer is no.  Many of the Old Testament teachings had a purpose to point forward to the coming Messiah and are literally fulfilled in Jesus Christ.  Jesus himself now “sets apart, sanctifies, and makes holy God’s people” (See 1 Corinthians 6:11; Hebrews 10; Hebrews 13:12). Another example relates to the Old Testament sacrifices. Jesus is the very lamb of God; he was God’s own sacrifice for sin so animal sacrifice is no longer necessary. The Old Covenant sacrifice was a shadow that pointed to the reality of the coming one who would give his life for the sins of the world (See Isaiah 53, Hebrews 8-10). It is not that these laws were bad in their time, their purpose in pointing us towards Jesus has been fulfilled. Further, we are free to eat all foods with thanksgiving as we come to God in Jesus (Mark 7:14-23).  Jesus made it clear that the point of the Levitical law was to show us that clean/unclean are actually pointing to issues of the heart; in fact, this was the point of Leviticus all along.

The Camp and the Unclean

After God delivered his people from slavery in the Exodus (see Story in the biblical book of the same name) he led them in the dessert to teach them how to worship and about his character and nature.  Part of this education was in the very way they lived, traveled and set up for worship.  God gave very clear instructions of how to design a tabernacle/tent for worship.  This tent was a series of courts/chambers that were progressively more set apart from the people.  The further you went in, the holier the place was in which the person traveled.  The outer courts contained the holy place, then further inside was the most holy place where the very presence of God was said to dwell.  Outside of this tabernacle was the camp, the place where the people lived in smaller tent dwellings.  The whole structure looked as follows, of course much less SIM⁶ like.

The Israelite would be very aware of proximity to God as being holy.  To be outside of the camp would be a separation from the community of God and far away from the presence and worship of God.  To be outside the camp was to be an “outcast” - a place where the unworthy and the unclean would be found. 

Now, lets go back to the story of the 10 lepers.  In the Old Testament and the New the leper, whatever form of skin disease one had, would be separated from the people and thereby be seen as stricken by God.  Let me be clear.  The Scriptures do not teach that the leper was afflicted and cursed by God but it was a common idea in the mind of the Jew and the non Jew.  In light of the social and religious stigma, in light of having to dwell outside of the camp until deemed “clean” again by the priests, ten lepers cried out to Jesus in Luke 17. 

Jesus, Going Outside of the Camp

What does Jesus do when he hears the cry for mercy coming from outside the camp?  The incarnate son of God, who has left the holy of holies at the right hand of the Father goes outside of the camp to show mercy to the outcast.  He tells them to go show themselves to the priest, the very action they would do if they were already healed.  He calls them to trust him and act by faith on his words.  As they were going, Luke’s gospel tells us, they were healed of their affliction.  At this point the most scandalous thing occurs in our story.  Almost all of the lepers who were healed did not come back to thank the one who had healed them. Only one of nine returns in order to express praise and gratitude. He is the outcast of outcasts for he was not simply a leper, he was a Samaritan. He was doubly “unclean.” 

Spiritual Lepers—He Suffers and Calls us Outside of the Camp

The tabernacle was not a bad set up, but it was a teaching aid for God for all time.  It was to show us the amazing grace and radical nature of the love of God in the gospel.  God is holy, he is separated from us and we dare not enter the holy place in our sins and spiritual leprosy.  Yet what does God do for humanity?  First, he goes outside of the camp and dies as a cursed man (Deuteronomy 21:22,23) for the sake of those under the curse of sin and death.  Galatians 3:10-14 says it clearly:

¹⁰For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, “Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them.” ¹¹Now it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law, for “The righteous shall live by faith.” ¹²But the law is not of faith, rather “The one who does them shall live by them.” ¹³Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree”— ¹⁴so that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promised Spirit through faith.

Furthermore, Jesus went outside of the camp to show mercy on the leper, the one separated from God due to sin and rebellion.  He shows mercy upon human beings who trust him by faith and as he told the Samaritan leper, he saves them. Hebrews 13 wraps all of these ideas together for us in a sweeping panorama of the grace of God shown to unclean sinners in Jesus Christ. 

⁷Remember your leaders, those who spoke to you the word of God. Consider the outcome of their way of life, and imitate their faith. ⁸Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever. ⁹Do not be led away by diverse and strange teachings, for it is good for the heart to be strengthened by grace, not by foods, which have not benefited those devoted to them. ¹⁰We have an altar from which those who serve the tent have no right to eat. ¹¹For the bodies of those animals whose blood is brought into the holy places by the high priest as a sacrifice for sin are burned outside the camp. ¹²So Jesus also suffered outside the gate in order to sanctify the people through his own blood. ¹³Therefore let us go to him outside the camp and bear the reproach he endured. ¹⁴For here we have no lasting city, but we seek the city that is to come. ¹⁵Through him then let us continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of lips that acknowledge his name. ¹⁶Do not neglect to do good and to share what you have, for such sacrifices are pleasing to God.

Hebrews 13:7-16 (ESV)

In this passage we see cleanliness by eating foods superseded.  We see that a final sacrifice has superseded the sacrifice of animals to cover and cleanse sins.  We see that Jesus sets us apart and then calls us outside of the camp to live on his mission to save sinful people through the gospel.  All of this is in light of the eternal camp, the eternal coming city of God in the Kingdom known to many simply as “heaven.”  In this age now we have been forgiven of sin through Jesus and now offer this same grace to others in the proclaiming of good news to those who need the love and mercy of God.   Finally, we see the purpose of our lives in Jesus.  We are to offer up a sacrifice of praise to God through our lips, through our service to others, through joyful generosity.  Why? For such sacrifices are pleasing to God who through Jesus was pleased to seat us with him in the most holy place.  None of this is of our doing, it is all the manifest, glorious, revealed plan of God in Jesus.  As such we must echo with the apostle Paul, that early leader of the church: For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen. 

Worship God you lepers! And say thanks, you have been healed and saved to the uttermost.

Notes

1. The phrase, much like God helps those who help themselves, is found nowhere in the Bible. It is not even in the book of 2^nd Opinions.  Apparently it dates back to 17th century England and the words of Francis Bacon.  We do know that the exact wording appeared in one of John Wesley’s sermons in 1791. See William and Mary Morris, Morris Dictionary of Word and Phrase Origins (HarperCollins, NY, 1977, 1988).

2. Mark Dever, The Message of the Old Testament (Wheaton, Crossway Books, 2006) 110.

3. The word atonement means to satisfy or repair an injury to a relationship or an offense given. It means the reconciliation of two estranged parties through sacrifice.

4. See the excellent discussion in Dever, 115-116.

5. Ibid 116.

6. SIM refers to a whole genre of computer simulation games made popular in the last few decades, particularly the series of games by designer Will Wright.

Let Jesus Speak - Vignettes in the Gospel

The following is an essay written for the people of Jacob’s Well associated with our fall launch into the series Let Jesus Speak…

Introduction

Many today love to talk smack about Jesus, speak for Jesus or comment about Jesus without stopping to listen to what he actually said to real people, in real time, in the the real world.  Jesus said many things to many people in all walks of life.  He spoke with hookers, conmen, religious people, busy people, adulterers, murderers, the powerful, his friends and people who were outcasts. His message is radical and will challenge our paradigms today.  

This fall we are going to take a look together at how this enigmatic figure of history interacted with real human beings.  There are many things which can be observed when looking at the life of Jesus of Nazareth.  One could focus purely on his identity, who was this man who broke history wide open long ago in the ancient Middle East?  One could focus on his works, what kind of things did he do and what are their significance? The person and works of Jesus are actually the central focus of our faith as Christians and could never be minimized. Yet I want us to peer into something quite interesting in the life of Jesus as we travel together this fall as Jacob’s Well. I want us to look at how Jesus treated people, interacted with people and instructed people who were from various stations and walks of life.

However, it must be made clear that what a person does is indeed an outflow of who that person is.  With that in mind, I want us to do a few things in this essay.  First, I do want to touch on the question of Jesus’ identity so we can see just exactly who it was that was interacting with a varied cast of characters in history. Second, I want to make a case that the canonical gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are the place we should be looking to observe Jesus.  This is not taken for granted in our day of Da Vinci Codes and wild speculation about Jesus. Furthermore we must ascertain which historical sources should be approached to find the ipsissima vox, the very voice of Jesus Christ. As a brief aside, we’ll discuss why we are using the gospel according to Luke as our primary text for the series. In looking at the gospels I hope we will see that Jesus is more radical than many assume. In fact, Scripture teaches that to look upon Jesus is to see the very being of God. Finally, I want to close with the focus of our series, namely that it is in the words and actions of Jesus that we see how God himself treats human beings. With that said, let’s look at perhaps one of the most important questions of history.  Just who was Jesus of Nazareth?

Who is Jesus?

Jesus is such a simple name but one that stirs the soul of humanity in a profound way.  He is venerated as God by adherents to one of the world’s largest faiths and is unavoidable when you draw up a short list of names of people who have quite literally changed history. Many people have an opinion about the identity of Jesus. Robert Bowman and J. Ed Kmoszewski begin their book, Putting Jesus in His Place with a profound observation:

Interpretations of Jesus are fraught with bias. He’s a powerful figure whom people want on their sides—and they’re willing to re-create him in their image to enlist his support. Animal-rights activists imagine a vegetarian Jesus. New Agers make him an example of finding the god within. And radical feminists strip him of divinity so that Christianity doesn’t appear sexist. “Frankly, it’s hard to escape the feeling that our culture has taken Jesus’ question ‘Who do you say that I am?’ and changed it to ‘Who do you want me to be?’”[1]

Various groups of people endeavor to assign an identity to Jesus, any identity, other than the one most uncomfortable and yet most glorious: God.  Let us look briefly at what various religions and philosophies have to say about this man.

The Humanist Jesus – Just Human

Those who believe phrases like “The Cosmos is all that is, or ever was or ever will be”[2] will only be able to see Jesus as a “a man, only a man and will always just be a man.” Many who have an anti-supernatural bias simply try to understand Jesus as a mere human.  Even if the evidence should point that he might be more, those with a commitment to philosophical naturalism will not consider anything more.  To some he may be seen as a wise and moral teacher, others may dismiss him as a religious nut, but the Jesus of the humanist is a dead man and they are tightly closed minded to any other options.

To the Islamist – He is ‘Isa, but Shirk not

To the follower of Islam, Jesus or Isa[3] is highly respected and honored. Jesus is a prophet second only to Muhammad in terms of prominence.  The Qur’an, written close to 700 years after Jesus, is the source Muslims use to arrive at their opinion of Jesus. The Islamic view of Jesus is quite exalted with Jesus being born of a virgin, said to be the Messiah, a performer of miracles.  Jesus was a Muslim who actually foretold the coming of the final prophet Muhammad.[4]  However, the idea that Jesus was God become a human is a severe blasphemy in the view of Islam. In fact, according to Islam, anyone who worships Jesus is guilty of shirk.  This sin is the worshipping of someone alongside the Muslim God Allah.[5] Furthermore, despite historical sources verifying the event, Muslims deny the very fact that Jesus was crucified and died on Roman cross.[6]  Jesus in Islam is a prophet, who did not die and who should never be worshipped as the Son of God. 

The Eastern Jesus – A Master, Yogi, Guru

At the core of many eastern philosophies such as Buddhism and Hinduism is the teaching that all reality is of one essence and individual entities are illusory. The technical term for this idea is monism.  Some flavors of Buddhism do not believe in any divine reality to this oneness of being but other forms certainly do.[7]  Furthermore, various Hindu philosophies see all of life as one and all as part of a divine reality.  The technical term for the all is one and all is god view is pantheism.  This divine reality is revealed to us by many enlightened masters or yogis throughout history. Jesus is one of many revelations of the divine in the eastern mind but he is not the one transcendent creator God. Interestingly enough, many in contemporary Western culture, are merging ideas from the east and at times using the terminology of Christianity to do so.  The results usually end up on the Oprah Winfrey show.

New Age Jesus – A Spark of Christ Consciousness

A strange amalgam of ideas is being mixed together in a day where we no longer seek truth but float through a myriad of ideas and experiences.  There are some today who are into creating spiritualities from various concepts and our bookstores are full of such volumes. Centered on merging self help, eastern spirituality and an obsessive inward focus, America is concocting new religious ideas every day. In its pure forms, the eastern mind was about self-denial and becoming one with reality through meditation.  Today those in the west have taken eastern ideas and married them with self-actualization. If you can learn certain laws of self-actualization, you can acquire the secret of unleashing the god within you. Books about this sort of thing sell well in America.[8] When you throw this thinking together with Christian language and ideas of evolutionary theory something interesting emerges. You arrive to the idea that we are cosmically evolving towards a higher state of “Christ consciousness” by spiritually moving to higher planes of reality. In this view, Jesus is more of an idea of becoming one with the universe and revealing your inner god rather than a unique person and savior through whom we reconnect in relationship with God.  Jesus Christ is reduced to a divine “you” that is deep down inside which just needs to be actualized and set free.[9]  It is very American when you think about it, but this tells us nothing about Jesus.[10]

The Skeptic – What Jesus?

A healthy skepticism about truth claims is a good thing when evaluating ideas that others tell us are “true” about the world. However, there is a flavor of skepticism that refuses to accept or believe anything.  For instance, there are skeptics who try to say that the historical person of Jesus of Nazareth never even existed. This sort of historical doubt is in no way helpful to anyone, but there are those who make sport out of denying even the most readily available historical realities. Beware of those who revel in being “deniers” of clear historical facts. Just saying.

The Gnostic and Da Vinci Code Jesus

Over the last several decades there has been an increasing interest in other writings from the first few hundred years of Christianity.  Sensational stories about the recovering of “lost gospels” have made their way from the scholar’s tomes into the mainstream press.[11]  These “lost gospels” are said to represent a different story from the one we find in the New Testament of the Bible.  We’ll comment on why these records are not reliable guides to the person of Jesus in a section below, but people like to take ideas from these books and make cool, fantastic stories from them.  Seriously, Dan Brown has sold lots of books and movie tickets with the Da Vinci Code Jesus. This Jesus is a weird mixture of Gnostic ideas, conspiracy theories and a creative imagination. The only problem is this Jesus has little bearing on reality.  Even one of the most skeptical, non Christian New Testament scholars has shown Dan’s Brown fiction to be a terrible twisting of history.[12]

Scientology Jesus

Just kidding.  Though they do have a view of Jesus it is just too weird and involves galactic war lord aliens and psychological implants. Anyone else bummed out that Tom Cruise’s movie career has been struggling ever science he went scientology weird on TV a few times? Let’s move on friends, nothing to see here.

Jesus, According to Jesus?

Perhaps the best source to learn about Jesus would be from the man himself, yet here we find a problem.  Jesus himself never wrote a book and he did not leave a YouTube video for the world. We must ask an important question: Just what did Jesus leave us from his time on the earth?  The answer is both simple and astounding. Jesus left behind disciples; women and men who followed him, who proclaimed and wrote down his teachings.  His followers walked away from his empty tomb and began to take his message, quite literally, to the whole world.  Christ is raised from death and is the savior of all people. Turn from sin, receive forgiveness, trust in him and follow him as God and king. Their testimony about Jesus is uniquely found in the words of his apostles (messengers), in the writings of the New Testament.

In these texts, we find a Jesus that is much less a creation in our own image.  It is not a humanistic, Islamic, Eastern, new age or Gnostic Jesus.  In the gospels of the New Testament we find the glorious creator God being born in a rustic animal stall.  We find the one who spoke galaxies into existence, the one who designed the intricacies of physics and biology, became a human being and walked among us.  Jesus in his own words is much less tame than we at times make him to be. The late Scottish preacher and theologian James Stewart wrote powerfully to describe this untamable figure.

He was the meekest and lowliest of all the sons of men, yet he spoke of coming on the clouds of heaven with the glory of God. He was so austere that evil spirits and demons cried out in terror at his coming yet He was so genial and winsome and approachable that the children loved to play with Him and the little ones nestled in His arms. No one was half so kind or compassionate to sinners yet no one ever spoke such red-hot scorching words about sin… His whole life was love. Yet on one occasion he demanded of the Pharisees how they ever expected to escape the damnation of hell…He saved others but at the last, Himself He did not save. There is nothing in history like the union of contrasts which confront us in the Gospels. The mystery of Jesus is the mystery of divine personality.[13]

Why We Look to the Gospels?

Finding the Voice of Jesus in the Canonical Gospels

The New Testament contains the earliest and most reliable witness to the life, teaching, death and resurrection of Jesus. What one believes about the existence of God and the supernatural may affect how one reads or believes these texts, but they are the primary place where all go to learn about Jesus. Period. At Jacob’s Well we trust the gospels, as both a theologically and historically accurate accounting of the life of Jesus, but I wanted to take some time to unpack why we place our trust in them. To do so we will do two things.  First, we’ll look at the recent buzz about “lost gospels” and “gospels” outside of the Bible. In doing so, we will see that these documents are archaeologically and historically interesting, but they are in no way reliable guides to the life and words of Jesus.  Second, we’ll unpack the reasons why we do look with trust and anticipation to the canonical gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.  

What about other Gospels?

There have been some amazing archaeological finds in the last six decades dealing with the early centuries of the Christian movement. Many may be familiar with the Dead Sea Scrolls[14] found at Qumran which contain the scrolls of an apocalyptic sect of Judaism known as the Essenes. This find in 1947 was of particular interest to Old Testament Scholars. What the scrolls provided was a look at copies of many books of the Old Testament which date back to the time just before Christ. Due to the fact that the earliest existing Hebrew manuscripts dated only to the 10th century AD, the scrolls of Qumran gave us an opportunity to examine the transmission of the books over a gap of some 1000 years. What we found is that the text had been copied quite faithfully even over this long period of time. The Old Testament has been handed down with astounding accuracy.

Perhaps a less known discovery took place in 1945 in the Egyptian dessert at Nag Hammadi. It had been known for millennia that in the 2nd-4th centuries the Christian church countered a false teaching known as Gnosticism. Local farmers pulled an earthen jar from the ground at Nag Hammadi which contained some fifty Gnostic gospels and writings. Gnostic held a radical dualism between matter and spirit with spirit being good and matter evil. Through secret gnosis (Greek for knowledge) people could escape the bondage of the physical world and achieve salvation. The Christian version of Gnosticism held that Jesus was not really a human being, but merely appeared as such. As the human Jesus suffered and died, the divine Christ hovered above laughing at the confusion of people taken in by the appearance. This hyper-divine Christ would reveal secret knowledge to his elect via religious experience rather than conveyed truth in the apostolic writings.[15] Early church leaders such as Iraneus wrote against certain 2nd century teachings.  Iraneus actually speaks of these Gnostic writings by name. For example, you can read his reference to the content of the gospel of Judas in this segment of his work Against Heresies.[16] Additionally, the early church historian Eusebius also named many of these writings. The point to be made is that these writings: Gnostic gospels, epistles and apocalypses were well known to the church and rejected by the Christians as false teachings. The great interest of the archaeological find at Nag Hammadi is that some codices (early books) of these mentioned works were actually dug up. Believe it or not the discovery was made by a guy named Mohammed Ali (no, not the one who floats like a butterfly and stings like a bee).  This of course shed light on the early debates within Christianity and the sources of the doctrines which the church rejected.  It was a great archaeological find of actual copies of documents that we already knew existed.

Why then all the buzz about the “Lost Gospels” of Thomas, Judas, Mary etc.?[17] First, many people including most Christians, are uninformed of church history and have no idea about the world in which the church was birthed, grew and confronted these false teachings. Second, there is a new school of scholars and practitioners who paint the early Christian world as a battle between equally valid, possible expressions of Christian faith.[18] Therefore the poor Gnostics, losing the popularity contest years ago, need a new hearing today. Third, the media sensationalizes these things with misleading titles like “Lost books of the Bible” being recovered, etc.  These books were never in the Bible and they were never lost, but titles like this apparently sell magazines.

What we need to know is this. The first several centuries of the church were filled with theological spaghetti and a myriad of writings. This in fact led the church to recognize and canonize the apostolic witness found in the 1st century gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. That which was false, which did not match the tradition handed down from the apostles, was rejected and not included in what eventually became the collection of the 27 books of the New Testament. The gospel of Thomas, The Apocalypse of Peter, and the gospel of Judas were never part of the Christian Bible, nor will they be. They were lost to history, but not lost from the Word of God. They were lost to us in manuscript form, many of which we have now recovered. This is a great thing for our understanding of the Gnostics, who they were and what they taught. But it is not ground shaking in that it gives us a “new Christianity.” It simply gives us an up close look at beliefs that were deemed not Christianity at all. And that was decided a long time ago; by the Christians. 

Now don’t get me wrong, people are welcome to believe the Gnostic teachings if they so choose (they are pretty wacky and convoluted); but let us not come up with some nonsense that the Gnostic way is just another way of being a Christian. This is simply not the case. Therefore, if we will not find Jesus and his words in the Gnostic gospels, what reasons do we have to place confidence in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John?  To this issue we now turn our attention.

Why Look to the Canonical Gospels?[19]

Skeptics throughout the ages have asked whether the gospels are to be trusted because they were written by supposedly biased people, the followers of Jesus himself.  They surely must have had a skewed point of view as to who this Jesus is.  After all, you cannot trust someone’s biggest fans to give an objective account of someone’s life…Can you?  This skepticism has been found unwarranted for a couple reasons.  First, we know that eyewitness accounts are always the most reliable when looking at events that we ourselves did not observe.  If the gospels demonstrate themselves to be the testimony of eyewitnesses they are then the most trustworthy views of Jesus we possess.  Second, the claim that someone is unable to correctly convey a story because they are “biased” is highly unwarranted.  We will look at each of these issues.

Eyewitness Testimony in the New Testament

When asking the question “What happened with this Jesus guy?” the first persons we should ask are those who walked with him, talked with him and lived their lives with him.  Or as 2 Peter 1:16 rightly records, those who were eyewitnesses of his majesty.  This requires us to look at the claims of the gospels to be just that – a written record of eyewitness testimony.  This was a view taken for granted for years until the advent of critical scholarship in the 19th century where the origin and source of all the gospel writings was brought into question.  Revisionist historians and liberal New Testament scholars began to claim the gospels were 3rd or 4th century compilations of Christian communities which did not reflect anything close to eyewitness testimony. 

However, there has been much movement in New Testament studies over the last several decades which has ruled out the revisionist ideas of liberal theology.  The late 3rd and 4th century dates have been utterly repudiated and we have been able to date all the gospels conclusively to the first century.  This has been due to amazing archaeological discoveries such as a fragment of John’s gospel dating to around 125 AD.  Additionally, recent scholarship has shown that there are very good reasons to understand the gospels as testimony.  In 2006 Scottish New Testament scholar Richard Bauckham published Jesus and the Eyewitnesses – the Gospels as Eyewitness Testimony which makes a strong case for our understanding the gospels as containing the testimony of those who knew the life and teaching of Jesus directly.  More and more scholars are coming to the position which the church has always held.  The gospels are the most reliable portrait of the life and teaching of Jesus because they contain the accounts of the people who were there.[20]  But were these people just Jesus fan boys, too biased to be trusted?  Good question.

Bias is not Always Bad

The question of bias is important, after all, the gospel writers did not leave us with a simple narrative that records nothing more than rote historical facts.  No, they were convinced of the truth of Jesus’ teaching and their account of history contains the teaching of theology about Jesus as well as historical data.  Yes, there are towns, rulers, times and places mentioned, but also teaching as to the identity of Jesus and his mission from God.  But does this one sided account, that of Jesus’ followers, disqualify their testimony as being valid?  In fact I will argue that if you want to know anything about something or someone, you are better off asking people who are passionately committed to the story he shares.  A few examples can help us see that Bias is not always bad.

One example comes from the world of technology and through a simple question.   If you desire to know about the ins and outs of Macintosh computers, would you ask someone has never touched a Mac to be your teacher?  Of course not…who would you ask?  You probably would ask one of those MacIdolaters who are loyal subjects of the cult of Steve Jobs.  You know that crazy Apple guy who has to put down Windows every time the subject arises.  You know the guy who is flossing[21] his iPhone for all to see.  You may be that guy.  My point is this.  The people from whom you will get the best information about Macs are probably the ones who are the most biased; the ones who are passionate about their elite computers.  In like manner, NASCAR fans should be consulted on the intricacies of Stock car racing, indie rockers should be the ones you talk to about what is happening in that music scene and his original followers are the ones we should consult about Jesus Christ. 

One final example of a more serious kind should be mentioned.  To exclude a person who was involved with an event, who passionately cares that the story be told, as being a reliable witness would be quite odd indeed.  This sort of reasoning would rule out the accounts of Jewish historians of the Holocaust.  They are most interested as they were the ones most closely involved with this horrific course of events.  We would not think of discounting someone’s testimony because they are “biased” against the Nazi’s because their family went through the Holocaust.  No, rather we trust them as they were the closest people to the events and care most passionately about conveying and passing on this history.[22] 

Until someone is shown to be an unreliable witness we ought to take their word for something until they are shown to be not trustworthy.  The philosopher Immanuel Kant rightly showed some time ago that an assumption that all people are lying all the time is self-refuting.  We should assume truth telling unless we have good reason to think that someone is not telling the truth.[23]  If we find that someone is in their right mind and capable to tell the truth, is willing to do so, his words are recorded and preserved with integrity and his testimony is validated by other witnesses, we should trust the words of that person.[24]  It seems that this is precisely the sort of reality that we find in the writers of the gospels.

It was their intention to tell the truth

Most of them were religious Jews who thought that intentional falsification (lying) was a direct violation of one of the Ten Commandments.  Lying was not a virtue in their community.  This does not mean there were not religious Jews who were liars at the time, but it was not a virtue extolled in the community.

The New Testament writers were concerned with “delivering” the teaching of Jesus and the gospel to the next generation in their writing.  The Apostle Paul specifically says that he delivered or passed on to the Corinthian church the gospel.  This gospel was considered by the early Christians as a matter “of first importance.” See 1 Corinthians 15:1-3.  There is good evidence that they believed they were passing on what they saw as a holy tradition through their writings.[25]

They were able to tell the truth

They were a culture steeped in a tradition of oral teaching and memorization.  In fact, scholars have shown that ancient peoples could memorize massive amounts of information, with an important focus on maintaining the very words of their teachers.[26]

If they experienced any external pressure it was against the preaching of their message. They gained nothing in the way of position, power and possessions for faithfully telling the Jesus story.  To the contrary most of them were killed for it. 

Their Words Preserved Accurately

It is beyond the scope of this paper but there is good textual evidence that we have the New Testament documents today in a form that is extremely close to the original manuscripts.  This is non controversial.  Most scholars agree that the current Greek texts of the New Testament are very accurate.  To put it simply, we have pretty much what was written. 

Additionally, there was very little time between the actual events of Jesus and the writing of the New Testament.  The less time that passes the less likely legendary development occurs.  The gospels were all finished by around 90AD with Mark and Matthew likely within just a few decades of the resurrection of Jesus.  In the period in which the gospels were written down many eyewitnesses of the events would have still been alive.  As Richard Bauckham states, “The Gospels were written within living memory of the events they recount.  Mark’s gospel was written well within the lifetime of many of the eyewitnesses, while the other three canonical Gospels were written in the period when living eyewitnesses were becoming scarce, exactly at the point in time when their testimony would perish with them were it not put in writing”[27]

They are Corroborated/Validated by Others

If an author shows that he tells the truth on matters that are verifiable externally, he is thought to be a reliable witness.  The New Testament writers note at least thirty historically confirmed people in their works. The gospels in general and the passion narrative in particular find corroboration in several ancient sources outside of the New Testament.[28]  In addition, we find quotations at length from the gospels in the sermons and writings of the early church fathers.

When the gospels are examined, they show a strong historicity which is only doubted when a bias against the supernatural is brought to bear.  Many skeptics have written off the testimony of the gospels because they were written down by men who believed in God, who record the occurrence of the miraculous and the resurrection of an incarnate Savior God.  Yet such bias against the supernatural is just the work of a closed mind.  Someone who says – I cannot believe the words of the New Testament because I don’t believe in God or miracles – is already closed off to any amount of evidence.  They are saying “I don’t believe because I don’t believe.”  Such views are intellectually stifling and hardened to what God might say if they simply read the gospels with an open heart and mind to see the unparalleled life of Jesus on display.

In closing, the gospel literature is unique indeed.  It is part biography, part history, part theology yet passionately what Bauckham simply calls testimony.

Understanding the Gospels as testimony, we can recognize this theological meaning of the history not as an arbitrary imposition on the objective facts, but as the way the witnesses perceived the history, in an inextricable coinherence of observable event and perceptible meaning.  Testimony is the category that enables us to read the Gospels in a properly historical way and a properly theological way.  It is where history and theology meet.[29]

In this series we will be looking at testimony which records the interactions of Jesus with people from various stations and walks of life.  Our primary source for these narratives will be the gospel according to Luke.  We will observe a few stories from Matthew and John as well but primarily we will walk with Luke to hear the voice of Jesus.  With that said, we’ll take a little time together to learn a bit about the gospel written by the one who historically became known as the beloved physician.[30] 

The Gospel of Luke

As with any work of literature there are some pertinent questions we ask when approaching a text and there are additional questions when coming to a work of Scripture. Some questions we want to discuss briefly about the gospel of Luke.

• Who wrote it?

• When was it written?

• What is the subject and theological focus?

As we approach Luke several of these questions will be directly related to the book of Acts as we have very good reasons to see Luke/Acts as a large work by one author in two parts.  Luke and Acts, have similar prologues that connect them overtly and they also share a similarity in style and language. In the discussion below we may refer to this as “Luke/Acts.”  

Authorship

The oldest traditions and writings we have all ascribe authorship of this gospel to a gentile follower of Jesus and companion of the apostle Paul.  He was an educated person who was referred to in Scripture as being a physician.  We have no good reason to doubt this as the internal evidence (what is said in the New Testament) and external evidence (what is said about this book by others) all point to Luke being the one who compiled the story of Jesus from eyewitness accounts from those in the early church. In fact, Luke’s gospel is introduced in the following manner.

1Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us, 2just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us, 3it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught.[31]

The reasons for holding to Luke’s authorship are as follows. First, the earliest existing manuscript of Luke ascribes authorship to Luke and there is no other author in the early tradition mentioned but Luke.[32] With Luke being directly addressed to someone, in this case someone referred to as Theophilus, M. Dilebus makes the point that it is highly unlikely that the book was ever anonymous.[33]  It is clear that Luke’s name has been connected to this work from very early in tradition. The external evidence is equally convincing as Lukan authorship for this gospel is found in the Muratorian Canon, the anti-Marcionite Prologue to Luke, Ireneus, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Tertullian, Eusebius, and Jerome.[34]  All of these early literary works speak of Luke as the author for the gospel bearing his name. Finally, the book of Acts provides some interesting internal evidence to corroborate Luke as the author of this two-volume work.  There are four passages in Acts (16:10-17, 20:5-16, 21:1-18, 27:1-28:16) that record “we” did this or that suggesting the author’s own presence in these situations.[35]  The final passage in Acts has the author with Paul in Rome so he must be one of people mentioned as to being with Paul in Rome. This leaves Demas, Crescans, Jesus called Justus, Luke, Epaphras, and Epaphroditus. There has never been any reason given to assume authorship to any of these, so Luke’s authorship is again reinforced.[36] One final note, many have discussed the nature of the medical language used in this gospel as evidence that “the beloved physician” (Colossians 4:14 ESV) was indeed the author.  New Testament Scholars DA Carson, Goug Moo, and Leon Morris agree that this argument from medical language has suffered recently in some circles, but the linguistic nature of the book does show that the author was an educated person.  Luke, the doctor, would certainly fit this description.[37]  Both internal and external evidence shows that the traditional attestation of authorship to Luke is accurate and trustworthy.

Dating the Gospel of Luke

There are certain events in New Testament chronology that are largely uncontested by historians and NT Scholars (whether skeptical or confessionally oriented).  The following list gives the events and approximate dates:

Table1: Basic First Century Chronology

Event                              Date (AD)

End of the Frist Century          100

Fall of Jerusalem                     70

Martydom of Peter and Paul    64-68

Epistles of Paul                      45-68

Some Oral Tradition                 32-70

Crucifixion of Jesus                  32

It is these dates that serve as external references or historical markers for our discussion of the four canonical gospels.   These are major events in church history and some, like the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD, are so well documented as to be without dissent.  These dates are important as we investigate the relationship to early church history recorded in Acts and these well established first century dates.   Acts is important in dating the gospels due to the fact that it is the second volume of the two-part Luke/Acts work.  If one can zero in on a good date for Acts, then the composition of Luke must be at least written at a similar time if not earlier. 

Though some make an argument for placing Luke in the AD 80-90 range the most central argument for this is that Luke’s gospel (Luke 19:41-44; 21:20-24) seems to predict future events surrounding the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70 there are good reasons to prefer an earlier date in the 60s.[38] The book of Acts concludes with Paul under house arrest in Rome a situation which lasts two years according to Acts 28:30-31.  This two year time period comes after the rise of Festus to power in Judea recorded in Acts 24:27 in AD 59. This places the time of Paul’s imprisonment at precisely 60-62, which implies Acts was completed in the early 60s around this same time period.  If so, then we must place Luke no later than that, with the Luke/Acts work completed before A.D. 62.  It may also be noted that there is no mention of the widespread persecution in the mid sixties at the hands of the Roman emperor Nero, as well as no mention of Paul’s death by martyrdom of which Luke certainly would have mentioned had it already taken place.[39] Furthermore, there is no direct mention of the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70 in the book of Acts which features a Jerusalem setting on two occasions (Acts 6-7 and 21-23).[40] Thus, a date in the early 60s explains this absence of these events in Acts; they simply had not taken place at the time of its writing.

Subject and Theological Focus

Along with Matthew and Mark, Luke’s work is one of the canonical gospels known collectively as the synoptics.  The word synoptic is derived from two Greek terms that when combined mean to see together.  When examined together, these gospels present a multifaceted view of the life and teaching of Jesus.  So put simply, Luke’s subject in writing is Jesus, his life, his works, his death and resurrection.  Though we do not have time to investigate all the themes explored in Luke’s gospel here, a few are worth mentioning.  First, the gospel has a strong focus on good works and justice for the poor.  This is typified by Luke’s accounting of Jesus beginning his ministry with the reading from Isaiah in Luke chapter 4:

18“The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed,19 to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”[41]

Jesus is seen often in Luke as a compassionate servant who cares about broken people and people in need.  Women, children, the poor and the socially outcast were groups of people in the first century who would have been seen as marginal.  Jesus is seen associating and serving all of them in Luke’s gospel.[42] Second, there is a focus in Luke on the prayer life of Jesus and his dependence upon the Father as well as the importance of prayer in our lives. Finally, Luke has been called the gospel of the Holy Spirit due to his focus on the work of the third person of the Trinity.  The Spirit led Jesus in his ministry on earth and the Spirit now leads us in continuing the work of Jesus in our time. 

Shall we Let Jesus Speak?

In closing I do pray that when we look to Jesus we see him as he actually is.  He is much more than man, guru or prophet.  He is much more than the divine you that has yet to be discovered.  He is the incarnate God, the living and breathing Savior who walked the earth, died a sacrificial death for sin, rose from death and today is leading his people. As we know who he is we can encounter him through the gospels.  As we see him interact with various people in our series together we truly see the great answer to one of the great questions facing human beings.  How does God treat people? How will God treat me?

As we walk forward together I pray that in a world where voices about Jesus are in abundance we would stop and hear his voice to us today.  It is my hope that the risen Christ will shape us, move us forward in mission and connect us deeply to God through the gospel.  God put his feet on planet earth in a small, obscure area of the Middle East some two thousand years ago.  He left behind an empty tomb, a living people and good news for the world.  God is a forgiving God, a just and holy God and a God who conquers sin, death and suffering through his own sacrificial love for us.  He is there and he is not silent – he is bursting through barriers and speaking to hearts and lives today. As we look to the stories of people’s encounters with Jesus this is our passion. We want to clear out all the noise and our own preconceived notions of him and simply Let Jesus Speak.

To that end let us listen well,

Reid S. Monaghan

Lead Pastor, Jacob’s Well

NOTES

[1] Robert M. Bowman and J. Ed Komoszewski, Putting Jesus in His Place : The Case for the Deity of Christ (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Kregel Publications, 2007), 17.

[2] This, of course, is the famous dictum of the late humanist astronomer Carl Sagan who popularized this line on his public television show Cosmos. The book with the same name begins with these same words. See Carl Sagan, Cosmos, 1st ed. (New York: Random House, 1980), 1.

[3] Muslims refer to Jesus as Isa (from the Arabic for Jesus).

[4] See Mark Durie, “‘Isa, the Muslim Jesus.” http://www.answering-islam.org/Intro/islamic_jesus.html [accessed September, 18 2009].

[5] Norman L. Geisler and Abdul Saleeb, Answering Islam : The Crescent in Light of the Cross, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2002), 20.

[6] See Tacitus, Annals 15.44

[7] Theravada Buddhism holds not concept of the divine while Mahayana does. For a comparison of the two see the  chart in Huston Smith, The World’s Religions : Our Great Wisdom Traditions ([San Francisco]: HarperSanFrancisco, 1991), 126.

[8]One thinks of the bestselling book The Secret where the idea that if you learn a secret spiritual law of the universe you can have “the ability to transform any weakness or suffering into strength, power, perfect peace, health, and abundance.”  Rhonda Byrne, The Secret, 1st Atria Books/Beyond Words hardcover ed. (New York, Hillsboro, Or.: Atria Books; Beyond Words Pub., 2006).

[9] See Douglas R. Groothuis, Unmasking the New Age (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1986), 27-29; 144-146.

[10] For a very thorough treatment of the relationship of the biblical worldview to the myriad of new age ideas see John P. Newport, The New Age Movement and the Biblical Worldview : Conflict and Dialogue (Grand Rapids, Mich.: W.B. Eerdmans, 1998).

[11] See for example Maggie Sieger DAVID VAN BIEMA, Chris Taylor, “The Lost Gospels,” Time Magazine  (2003). http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1006499,00.html.

[12] See Bart D. Ehrman, Truth and Fiction in the Da Vinci Code : A Historian Reveals What We Really Know About Jesus, Mary Magdalene, and Constantine (Oxford ; New York: Oxford University Press, 2004). Ehrman is a skeptic about biblical Christianity but does a good job showing the sensationalism in Dan Brown’s work.  For a critique from Christian historians see Darrell L. Bock, Breaking the Da Vinci Code : Answers to the Questions Everyone’s Asking (Nashville: Nelson Books, 2004); Ben Witherington, The Gospel Code : Novel Claims About Jesus, Mary Magdalene, and Da Vinci (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 2004).

[13]James Stewart, The Strong Name.

[14] See Paul D. Wegner, The Journey from Texts to Translations : The Origin and Development of the Bible (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 1999), 186-188.  For basic information even the wiki can get you up to speed here - “The Dead Sea Scrolls,” Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Sea_Scrolls.

[15] See Darrell L. Bock, The Missing Gospels : Unearthing the Truth Behind Alternative Christianities (Nashville: Nelson Books, 2006). Bock lays out the underlying texts and ideas surrounding these early Gnostic documents.

[16] Philip Schaff, “The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus,”  (Public Domain, Electronic Version Logos Research Systems, Inc.). http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.ix.ii.xxxii.html.

[17] Greg Koukl has a brief and helpful commentary on how there can simply be “no lost books of the Bible” Greg Koukl, “No Lost Books of the Bible,”  (1994). http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5473 [accessed Septermber 25, 2009].

[18] Bart D. Ehrman, Lost Christianities : The Battles for Scripture and the Faiths We Never Knew (New York ; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003).

[19] The following is a discussion adapted from my previous work Reid S. Monaghan, An Introduction to the New Testament, 2007.  Available online at www.JacobsWellNJ.org/resources/theology-booklets.

[20] A really good recent book on the trustworthy nature of the canonical Gospels is Mark D. Roberts, Can We Trust the Gospels? : Investigating the Reliability of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John (Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books, 2007), 39-51.

[21] See the Urban Dictionary for a definition of the word floss - Schaff.

[22] For a more sophisticated look at the uniqueness of Holocaust testimonies see the treatment in Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses : The Gospels as Eyewitness Testimony (Grand Rapids, Mich.: William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 2006), 493-502.

[23] James Porter Moreland, Scaling the Secular City : A Defense of Christianity (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Book House, 1987), 137-138.

[24] Ibid., 138.

[25] Ibid., 144.

[26] See particularly chapters 10 and 11 of Bauckham, 240-263.

[27] Ibid., 7.

[28] See the chapter “The Corroborating Evidence” interviewing history professor Edwin Yamauchi in Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ : A Journalist’s Personal Investigation of the Evidence for Jesus (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1998), 73.

[29] Bauckham, 5,6.

[30] Luke the beloved physician greets you, as does Demas. Colossians 4:41. The Holy Bible : English Standard Version : Containing the Old and New Testaments,  (Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Bibles, 2001).

[31] Ibid. Luke 1:1-4 (ESV)

[32] Douglas J. Moo and Leon Morris D.A. Carson, An Introduction to the New Testament (Grand Rapids: MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992), 113.

[33] Ibid., 115.

[34] Leon Morris, Luke : An Introduction and Commentary, Rev. ed. (Leicester, England Grand Rapids, Mich.: Inter-Varsity Press ; Eerdmans ;, 1988), 19-20.

[35]Craig Blomberg and William Lane Craig, “The Historicity of the New Testament,” in Reasonable Faith - Christan Truth and Apologetics (Wheaton: IL: Crossway Books, 1994), 205.

[36] D.A. Carson, 114.See the following of Paul’s epistles for references to these individuals Philemon 23,24; 2 Tim 4:10,11; Col 4:11-14; and Philippians 4:18.

[37] Ibid., 114

[38] Darrell L. Bock, Luke, 2 vols. (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 1994), Volume 1 - 17, 18.

[39] Morris, 29.

[40] Bock, Luke, 18.

[41] The Holy Bible : English Standard Version : Containing the Old and New Testaments, Luke 4:18,19.

[42] Morris, 50-51.

Bibliography

Bauckham, Richard. Jesus and the Eyewitnesses : The Gospels as Eyewitness Testimony. Grand Rapids, Mich.: William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 2006.

Bock, Darrell L. Luke. 2 vols. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 1994.

________. Breaking the Da Vinci Code : Answers to the Questions Everyone’s Asking. Nashville: Nelson Books, 2004.

________. The Missing Gospels : Unearthing the Truth Behind Alternative Christianities. Nashville: Nelson Books, 2006.

Bowman, Robert M., and J. Ed Komoszewski. Putting Jesus in His Place : The Case for the Deity of Christ. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Kregel Publications, 2007.

Byrne, Rhonda. The Secret. 1st Atria Books/Beyond Words hardcover ed. New York, Hillsboro, Or.: Atria Books; Beyond Words Pub., 2006.

Craig, Craig Blomberg and William Lane. “The Historicity of the New Testament.” In Reasonable Faith - Christan Truth and Apologetics. Wheaton: IL: Crossway Books, 1994.

D.A. Carson, Douglas J. Moo and Leon Morris. An Introduction to the New Testament. Grand Rapids: MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992.

DAVID VAN BIEMA, Maggie Sieger, Chris Taylor. “The Lost Gospels.” Time Magazine  (2003). http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1006499,00.html.

“The Dead Sea Scrolls.” Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Sea_Scrolls.

Durie, Mark. “‘Isa, the Muslim Jesus.” http://www.answering-islam.org/Intro/islamic_jesus.html [accessed September, 18 2009].

Ehrman, Bart D. Lost Christianities : The Battles for Scripture and the Faiths We Never Knew. New York ; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.

________. Truth and Fiction in the Da Vinci Code : A Historian Reveals What We Really Know About Jesus, Mary Magdalene, and Constantine. Oxford ; New York: Oxford University Press, 2004.

Groothuis, Douglas R. Unmasking the New Age. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1986.

The Holy Bible : English Standard Version : Containing the Old and New Testaments. Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Bibles, 2001.

Koukl, Greg. “No Lost Books of the Bible.”  (1994). http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5473 [accessed Septermber 25, 2009].

Moreland, James Porter. Scaling the Secular City : A Defense of Christianity. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Book House, 1987.

Morris, Leon. Luke : An Introduction and Commentary. Rev. ed. Leicester, England Grand Rapids, Mich.: Inter-Varsity Press ; Eerdmans ;, 1988.

Newport, John P. The New Age Movement and the Biblical Worldview : Conflict and Dialogue. Grand Rapids, Mich.: W.B. Eerdmans, 1998.

Roberts, Mark D. Can We Trust the Gospels? : Investigating the Reliability of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books, 2007.

Sagan, Carl. Cosmos. 1st ed. New York: Random House, 1980.

Saleeb, Norman L. Geisler and Abdul. Answering Islam : The Crescent in Light of the Cross. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2002.

Schaff, Philip. The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus: Public Domain, Electronic Version Logos Research Systems, Inc. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.ix.ii.xxxii.html.

Smith, Huston. The World’s Religions : Our Great Wisdom Traditions. [San Francisco]: HarperSanFrancisco, 1991.

Stewart, James. The Strong Name.

Strobel, Lee. The Case for Christ : A Journalist’s Personal Investigation of the Evidence for Jesus. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1998.

Wegner, Paul D. The Journey from Texts to Translations : The Origin and Development of the Bible. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 1999.

Witherington, Ben. The Gospel Code : Novel Claims About Jesus, Mary Magdalene, and Da Vinci. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 2004.

Mawidge...mawidge is what bwings us togewer today...

Most people who have seen the movie The Princess Bride simply cannot forget the scene where the impressive clergyman begins the rushed wedding between Buttercup and Prince Humperdink. If you have never experienced such delights you can grab the scene here. Marriage itself however, is not just a goofy matter in life. It is perhaps the source of humanities deepest delights and most profound relational struggles. It truly is a realm of both joy and pain, sunshine and rain.¹

In this essay we will have some overly ambitious goals. First, we will endeavor to define marriage biblically. Second, we will look at the teaching about the roles and responses of men and women in marriage as seen in Ephesians 5. Finally, we discuss our struggle as men and women to follow God in his designs for marriage before making a hopeful conclusion. We have but a small space here for our discourse, so we must get right to work.

What is Marriage?

Marriage finds its beginnings with the first man and woman in the book of beginnings in the sacred Scriptures. After the creation of the human beings, male and female in his image and likeness, God gives a second detailed accounting of how he joins the first two people together. God brings the animals to Adam (which is simply Hebrew for “man”) and he is giving them all names. As much as dogs are a man’s best friend there was not a helper suitable for him. The man realized that none of these creatures were like him and certainly did not complete him. The Scriptures then teach that out of the man God fashions or forms a woman as a helper suitable to him. This creature is presented to Adam naked and he did not ask her to put on flannel pajamas. The man and woman were indeed made for one another in every way so at this point in the story we read the following description of marriage:

 ²⁴Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. Genesis 2:24 (ESV)

Marriage is described as a man leaving, then cleaving to his wife and then weaving their bodies together in intimacy. The symbolism is clear. A man must grow up and step away from Mommy and Daddy. He forms a new family with his wife and the union is consummated by the self-giving of one another’s bodies in the act of marriage. The formation of a new family through the union man and woman is also foundational in the bringing of new human beings in the world. It is also the best context to teach and raise them.

Interestingly Genesis 2:24 is repeated by Jesus in the gospels and stresses the permanence of this relationship on the earth (Matthew 19:4-6). Finally, it is cited once again by Paul the apostle in Ephesians 5:31.

Marriage is a Covenant

In our world there are many opinions about what marriage is and how it should function in society. The most prominent views in western culture is that marriage is either about a couple’s romance, their social contract for societies good or an institution that is all together outdated. Scripture however presents marriage as a covenant, something much deeper than mere love or social utility. Let’s look quickly at these differing views.

Marriage as Coupling

Many today have a fun, warm fuzzy view of marriage. It is about amore, true love taking place on a balcony covered with roses. Anyone who has been married more than a few months knows something else must enter the equation for marriage to have more meaning and staying power than mere “love.” What happens many times to couples marrying for emotions or youthful lust is that divorce quickly follows when we “fall out of love.” There are even new inventive marriage vows that reflect this sort of thing where couples promise on their wedding day to be married “as long as love lasts” or “as long as our marriage serves the greater good” Let’s just say that romantic love is a gift from God; it is a good thing. Yet it is not the only thing and it certainly is not the tie that binds us together. It is a wonderful product of a good relationship but not the sum total of marriage.

Marriage as Contract

Another view today is that marriage is simply a legal agreement between two people that affords certain mutual benefits upon couples. Health care rights, rights of survivor-ship, financial dealings, the ownership of goods and the custody and raising of children are defined by this thing called marriage. These things have been associated with marriage but they are certainly not what marriage is. Couples who have long lost that loving feeling may remain arranged in marriage for contractual reasons. It is better for the kids or it is better for the bottom line.

In a culture which tends to disparage marriage, people can look at this social arrangement as nothing more than a piece of paper. Movies such as “He’s Just Not That Into You” proclaim this view boldly. The romantic coupler says “our love is more than a piece of paper” and the “contractual negotiator” seeks to have sharing agreements without going through with marriage. Selfish men particularly like these sorts of arrangements because they get all they want from women without having any sort of real commitment. Women for some reason, maybe because they like men more than cats, play along with this “we have more than a piece of paper” shtick.

Marriage as Covenant

Though marriage certainly involves love, even romantic love, it is more than this. Though marriage certainly involves certain social and legal arrangements, it is more than this. Marriage at its essence is a covenant, a promise of two people to one another before God. New Testament scholar Andreas Köstenberger defines the covenantal view of marriage as follows:

Marriage is a sacred bond between a man and a woman instituted by and publically entered into before God (whether or not this is acknowledge by the married couple), normally consummated by sexual intercourse. ²

Scripture presents a challenging yet beautiful view of marriage. Men and women are each equal in value and standing before God. No one sex is superior or inferior but equally made in the image of God. Further, men and women are not the same in how God made us. We are designed as compliments to one another, have different roles in marriage designed with potential harmony in mind and not a battle of the sexes. Marriage also is designed to shape and mold our lives, bring us to confess and repent of sin and become more like Jesus together.

Furthermore, marriage is actually more about God and his purposes than it is about us. God in his kindness has chosen to bless human beings with marriage for their good and as a reflection of his faithful covenant love for his people. This is seen most clearly in the New Testament letter to the Ephesians. In this teaching we find both a blueprint for living our marriage covenants and God’s ultimate mysterious purpose for creating human beings to bond in this way.

Ephesians 5:22-33

Instruction for Wives

Paul’s instruction to wives is that they submit to and order their lives under the leadership of their husbands. The verb submit in Ephesians five is actually in the middle voice, indicating the wife’s voluntary choice to be on her husband’s team. She is called to this by God, not commanded to do so by her husband. Submission should never be the demand of a man but rather a response of a wife to the design and plan of God for marriage. Furthermore, Scripture does not teach that all women submit to men. This is only for her husbands so let me encourage the young women like I am already teaching my own daughters. If a man is not the type of person you want to follow, don’t marry the fool. What sort of man then should the Christian woman seek—one that is committed to Jesus and walking in his way. Which leads to the exhortation for husbands.

Instruction for Husbands

Husbands are called to love their wives. Yet not just any sort of definition of “love.” Rather, husbands are called to love their wives as Christ loves the church. This means that a husband should lead his wife not as a lord of the manor but as a sacrificial servant. Leadership in marriage should be in the way of Jesus not in the way of the world. Jesus described this sort of leadership to his followers in this way:

²⁵But Jesus called them to him and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. ²⁶It shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant,²⁷and whoever would be first among you must be your slave,²⁸even as the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”

Matthew 20:25-28 (ESV)

His own example was to put a towel around his waist and wash the feet of his disciples (see John 13). Husbands should follow his lead with their wives. Just for the guys, I wrote a little bit on how I seek to love my own wife here on the blog. Take it for what it is worth.

Our Struggles

The teaching of Scripture is clear but this does not mean that our hearts willfully submit to God and his designs for our marriages. In fact, our sinful nature struggles deeply to follow this teaching. Men and women both wrestle with submission and service. Both our struggles flow from our desire to be self-focused, self-guided, individuals rather than one flesh in covenant with God. The following charts illustrate for both wives and husbands the uniqueness of being a husband or a wife and the struggles with sin we face as we seek to be faithful to God’s designs and purposes for our marriages.

Wives
Calling by God	Out of reverence for Christ follow him by respecting your husbands (Ephesians 5:21, 33)
Role we live	Helper (Genesis 2:18)
Response to our Spouse	Submission (Ephesians 5:22-24)
Temptation and Sin	Belittling your husband, disrespecting him, nagging, being overly critical and beating him down Being passive and not being helpful by using your gifts, passions and leadership in the family

Husbands
Calling by God	Out of reverence for Christ follow him by loving your wives (Ephesians 5:21, 25-30)
Role we live	Servant Leader (Ephesians 5:23, 25)
Response to our Spouse	Praise (Proverbs 31, particularly verse 28)
Temptation and Sin	Being a tyrant with your wife. Being heavy handed and an authoritarian who abuses his leadership role Being passive and absent from your leadership role. Abdicating your responsibility. Frustrating your wife with your lack of action, planning, prayer and leadership

God’s vision for marriage is designed to deeply bless us. If we trust him with our lives and follow his Word, marriage can be a resounding joy to our lives. Living life apart from his Word can make marriage a massive mess. Furthermore, God is mysteriously displaying his gracious love as is shown in Ephesians 5:31-33.

31Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.32This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church. 33However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.

As we live in marriage, we may experience the love of a husband or the respect of a wife and by doing so LIFE will illustrate DOCTRINE. Faithful covenant love is seen in and through a relationship on the earth. It is a great and gracious vision for our lives.

Notes

1. Cheesy use of the lyrics of Rob Base and DJ E-Z Rock, “Joy and Pain”, It Takes Two, Profile Records, 1988.
2. Andreas J. Köstenberger and David W. Jones, God, Marriage and Family—Rebuilding the Biblical Foundations (Wheaton: Crossway Books, 2004) 85.   

Watch your mouth...

In the book of Ephesians it is clear that followers of Jesus are called to walk in a manner congruent with their calling to God in the gospel. We are a forgiven people, a people who have been shown grace, a people who were once alienated from God and under his just wrath but now reconciled and adopted into his family. We have a new life to live and everything is now shaped by our relationship with God.

Some of the interesting exhortations we are given in the middle of this New Testament letter have to do with our mouths—what we say to people and what our speaking should really be about. In this essay our goals are too ambitious. First, we are going to look at what our speech is for; why we should be speaking creatures saying things to one another. Second, with that purpose in mind, we will look at ways we dishonor God with our mouths. Finally, and please don’t skip to this part, we will cover the use of strong language and the diverse subject of “bad words.” I told you not to skip down yet, keep reading right here.

On Talking

Ephesians 4 and 5 give us some strong counsel as to how our speech is to be exercised. Chapter 4 gives us the commands to put aside falsehood and speak the truth to our neighbors (Ephesians 4:25). It should not be shocking, but lying is a big deal. It goes against God’s very nature as truthful and runs over one of his central commandments (Exodus 20:16, Deuteronomy 5:20). Further, Ephesians 4:29 gives resounding clarity as to the purpose, or telos, of our talk. It is worth repeating:

 ²⁹Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear.

Our mouths are to be used not to tear down and corrupt but rather to build others up, to give grace to them, as is fitting for the moment of speaking. With this in mind, it is easy to see why elsewhere Scripture encourages us to be “quick to listen, but slow to speak” (James 1:19). Though some more than others, each of us can tend to pipe off in ways that are not always helpful or uplifting. Anyone else guilty here? Thankfully God, uses his speech to say “I will forgive you through Jesus.”

We do not have the space here to get into all the ways God speaks and his purposes in doing so. It is clear from Scripture that God’s speaking brings life, brings joy, brings fear of judgment, leads to repentance, forgives and gives hope to those who come to him in need of grace. We are called to follow God in the way we speak to others bringing life and grace to our hearers rather than evil doing with our mouths. We need to repent of using our mouths for purposes that are just wicked. What follows is just a small look at how we use our mouths to talk schmack rather than build others up, worship God and bring peace to situations.

Talking Schmack

In several places the Scriptures teach us about the use and abuse of our mouths. The wisdom literature in the Old Testament book of Proverbs, the teachings of Jesus in his sermons and the book of James come to mind. First, on more than one occasion Jesus taught that it is out of the overflow of the heart that the mouths speaks (Matthew 12:34, Luke 6:45). What is in our hearts is the source of the outflow of our mouths. The heart is central in this matter and hear are a few ways the our hearts lead us to sin with our lips.

Lying Tongues (Psalm 5:9; Psalm 120:1,2; Proverbs 6:16-19, John 8:44)

God simply hates lying and we do it all the time. We lie to protect our image, to try to be nice to others, to increase our financial wealth, to cover up all manner of other sins. Jesus said the native language of the Devil was to lie and we do have this family resemblance (John 8:44). Repentance always involves us putting away falsehood and confessing what is true. It also involves stepping out of darkness into the light. Yet in this very act of confession, we find freedom again. No more lies…let us speak truthfully with one another and give grace to them when they fall short of God’s ideal.

Slander, Gossip and Tearing Up People (Psalm 50:19, 20; Romans 1:28-32; 1 Timothy 5:13)

Slander is lying on people in a way that directly hurts and damages them. It is maliciously aimed speech which is designed to tear down someone in the perceptions of others. Gossip is the revealing of personal information about someone to others when there is no authority or permission to do so. Even when gossip is the true, it is a betrayal, it hurts community and relationships and is sin. Gossip breaks trust and creates confusion and can cause deep divisions that can take years to heal.

Profanity and Obscenity (Proverbs 30:7-9; Ephesians 5:4)

The English word profane is derived from Latin terms meaning “before or outside the temple” (pro-before + fanum temple). It means to deal with that which is unholy. Profane speech is defiling or making something unholy. God has made certain aspects of life holy. His name, his people, our bodies and sexuality come to mind. To speak of such things in a way that degrades, mocks, tears down and dishonors that which is holy is what we call “profanity” - it should be avoided. Obscenity is a specific subset of profanity whereby we degrade human sexuality, sex organs and acts of a sexual nature. Ephesians 5:4 calls this foolish talk and crude joking—people do this sort of thing often, particularly young men. Remember, to understand whether something is being profaned or made obscene we must know the purpose for which something exists. Perversion and profanity flows from deviating from God’s designs for something. Be it our bodies, marriages, our sexuality or the worship of God.

Cursing Folk (James 3)

This one is actually pretty easy to understand—we call down curses, or ill desires upon others with our mouths. Many times, people will use the Lord’s name in doing so (see blasphemy below) as if they are invoking God to aid in the sins of their mouths. For followers of Jesus, the book of James gives striking clarity to us here:

For every kind of beast and bird, of reptile and sea creature, can be tamed and has been tamed by mankind, but no human being can tame the tongue. It is a restless evil, full of deadly poison. With it we bless our Lord and Father, and with it we curse people who are made in the likeness of God. From the same mouth come blessing and cursing. My brothers, these things ought not to be so.

Blaspheming God

Blasphemy is to speak against and profane God and his name. Using God’s name to curse others, using his name as an expletive is to speak about God in a blasphemous way. His name is not to be used as if it is some magic trick to accomplish our will nor is it to be used to back up the truthfulness of your words.

I hope this treatment of sins of the mouth will help give us pause in how we utilize speech. We also should not overestimate the urge to pop off at the mouth—James taught us “no human being can tame the tongue.” This ought to lead us humbly to God for his help in realigning our hearts towards the gospel and the reeling in of careless words.

Up until this point I have made no comment about “bad words” as I find such discussions far too simple and not always helpful. God is far more concerned with our hearts than with creating a list of “banned words in heaven.” We will close this discussion with a meandering around the use of strong words and language. It is my hope to help us avoid both a silly legalism and serious sin with our mouths.

On the Use of Strong Language

We live in a culture quite polarized about the way we speak. Dana White, president of the mixed martial arts Ultimate Fighting Championship has no pause in dropping F-bombs on camera and in his personal video blogs. James V. O’Conner is doing his part in publishing his book Cuss Control—The Complete Book on How to Curb Your Cursing. Connor’s book and his associated Cuss Control Academy are examples of how even the secular world is wrestling to curb the tide of base language. On the other hand I have met some Christians who seem to want to make every word into banned speech unable to be used by those who are truly holy. Which usually means people just like them. In the small bit of space we have remaining I want to do a few very ambitious things. First, to look at the nature of speech how a word is considered bad.  Second, I want to look at the shifting meaning of terms over time and the question of acceptable vernacular (everyday, common speech). Finally, I want to close by challenging some misunderstandings among Christians on all sides of the issue of cussin.

Let me begin by saying that there simply is no eternal list of bad words in heaven somewhere. Each language and culture has words that are unsavory and people typically know what they are. However, we must acknowledge the fluid nature of language in that it is spoken in a sociolinguistic context. Many of us would not recognize a curse word spoken in Farsi or Tagalog. Most of us would not even recognize a curse word spoken in Old English in 1000AD. Now don’t go searching the Internet for Tagalog cuss words to use with your friends. That would be immature. So how do we use wisdom in deeming words appropriate and inappropriate today? It is a question that is not always so simple. Some Christians love to say see Ephesians says “no corrupting talk…no filthy language” as if that solves the issue. It does not because we have to say that THIS SPEAKING fits the description of the Ephesians exhortation.

Moral philosophers such as Thomas Aquinas deemed all actions to be made of both an internal act including motive and intent and the external acting out of said intent (See his treatment in the Summa here) Speech acts are no exception to this. All speech has intent, motive, sociolinguistic context and meaning. It is spoken with a purpose and it has effect and meaning to the people who hear the speech. We must consider this when looking at how we speak and whether it is corrupting, filthy or crude. It is my contention that someone can do more evil without speaking a four letter word than by using one. Imagine for a moment of a young man, broken because of his sins, weeping and confessing to a Christian friend “I have really f-ed up my life…I’m so sorry.” Are we really going to focus on the fact that the guy used the f-word in this case? Imagine another case where a husband is sarcastically belittling his wife or mocking her physical appearance without a single four letter word. I think you see my point. In Scripture, God seems much more concerned with the heart and use of language than simply the terminology employed. I am not saying certain words should be used, I am just trying to keep us from massively missing the point that Scripture actually teaches about the use of our tongues.

We have to think hard about certain words today as the meaning of terms does shift over time in a particular culture. A word with a less than ideal origin may evolve into a harmless word that has a different meaning today. Sometimes words that have less than savory origins make their way into the vernacular. A friend this week asked me if I knew the origin of the word “snafu.” I did not but I knew it roughly meant a situation of confusion—it’s etymology is a little rougher. You may disagree with me but many words that some would consider bad simply are not any longer. If you told me this essay sucked I would know what you meant and would not be offended by the term. I would just need to try and do better next time.

One last note on speaking within cultural settings. Adults may use strong language at times in certain circumstances and settings. I remember pastor John Piper’s use of the term “God kicks your ass” with a group of college students in 2007. Some understood his use of the word, some…not so much. It was controversial and he sort of apologized; you can read that letter here. However, I think the students understood exactly what he meant in a clear and compelling way. We all realize that young children do not have the experience, wisdom or maturity to comprehend something an adult would easily grasp. There is language appropriate in adult conversation that is not for children. I do not find this controversial.

In closing, there is nothing quite as silly as a Christian cursing because he thinks it is cool or because he has escaped from a Christian College and is trying to make up for lost time. It is equally silly to obsess about words that nobody considers bad in our culture and try to avoid people who speak in a gritty fashion. Anyone in sports, the military, construction or just alive today will be hard pressed to keep ones ears virgin. More importanly, mission demands us be present with people.

God considers the heart, motive and context of our speech. We need to ask if it builds up, does it honor God, does it give grace to the hearer, does it accomplish what is needed in that moment. These issues should be our concern. We should all watch our mouths and this goes far beyond vocabulary. My hope is that we might love people around us, build them up, communicate effectively with people in culture and bring honor to God with our lips. If you disagree, I would love to hear some positive interactions…

Amen?

Monkey See, Monkey Do?

Many are familiar with the proverbial saying of “Monkey see, Monkey do.” The fundamental insight here is that we all imitate something or someone in our lives. People by nature want to imitate or be like others that they see. Guitar players would love to rock it out like Clapton or Mayer, little boys used to want to be like Mike on the court while today Kobe or Lebron will do. Many desire to mimic the style of a celebrity or the success of a person in business. Though some are more leaders and some more followers, human beings, by nature, are made to imitate or emulate others. There is nobody who has taught themselves everything they know.

The 19th century German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche, rightly observed something profound in human nature. Though his application of this observation went tragically wrong, Nietzsche spoke of human beings as having a sort of herd mentality. People tend to mindlessly mimic and follow one another. He erroneously applied this to morality and ethics, declaring all morality to be an illusion created by other humans then followed mindlessly by the herd. ¹ What he did rightly observe is that human beings do indeed mimic one another and it seems very built into our nature.

However, we can be so consumed with the exploits of other people we can completely miss the one we were truly designed to imitate. In the middle of his exhortation of Christians to live a life that is congruent with their calling to God in the gospel, Paul makes it clear who we are to imitate in Ephesians chapter five. Without blushing, the apostle writes the following: “Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children.” This is a massively humbling idea and also one of the simplest articulations of the raison d’être of human beings.

In this essay we are going to discuss the imitation of God by human beings. We will first distinguish imitating God from trying to be a god. Second, we will look at our unique design as human beings to be reflections of God on the earth. This makes Paul’s call for us to imitate (or mimic) God quite appropriate due to what we are. We will then look at how we must “see God” and “know God” in order to imitate him. This requires God’s assistance to help us to understand who he is in order to follow him. Finally, we will close with a brief discussion of the relationship between adoration, imitation and worship.

Imitate God, Don’t Try to be One

The story of the world begins with the wonderful created acts of God. It then quickly moves to a tragic error made by the first human beings. People, created in the image and likeness of God, decide they would rather be as God. Tragically, this has been the course of human history. People are made wonderfully intelligent, moral, creative and willful creatures. We were made by God and for God yet we choose to exalt ourselves as little divinities rather than worship our creator.

When Scripture calls us to imitate God the word means to reflect or mimic the character of God in our own lives. It does not mean that we should aspire to follow that Satanic plea “you shall be as gods.” Scripture calls us to be conformed to the image of Jesus Christ, to become like God in our lives, but we should never see ourselves as becoming divine beings. Though Scripture does teach that we will be transformed to become “partakers of the divine nature” (2 Peter 1:4) it stops short of man climbing the metaphysical ladder up into godhood. Our Mormon friends notwithstanding, ² human beings are only called to be reflections of God as we follow him, never ascending to god-status ourselves.

Uniquely Created to be a Reflection

Though not divine, human beings are completely unique in all creation. We are different than rocks, trees, lizards and even those monkeys that share 99% of our DNA. In fact, many non Christian thinkers making the case that modern science is revealing the profound uniqueness of human beings. David Berlinski’s The Devil’s Delusion, Atheism and its Scientific Pretensions and James Le Fanu’s Why Us? How Science Rediscovered the Mystery of Ourselves come to mind. ³ In the face of recent understandings of the genome of various animals and the baffling ignorance of consciousness in light of modern neuroscientific brain studies, many are realizing anew just how exceptional nature of the human being being.

Theologically, this uniqueness of humanity is no surprise to those who never bought into the materialistic reductions of human nature. You see the Scriptures teach us very clearly that humans and humans alone are created in the imago dei, the image of God.

Uniquely Created to Image God

Throughout the history of the church, theologians have discussed the profound description given in Genesis chapter 1:

 ²⁶ Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”  ²⁷So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.  

There are many ways in which this teaching has been understood. Some have articulated that image of God means that we are made like God in our make up in that we have emotions, intellect and will just as God does. Others have looked to the ancient context of Genesis to understand the phrase image of God. In the ancient world, someone was “image of God” when they represented God on the earth as his vice rulers. The passage above does indicate that rulership over the realm of creation is part of the mandate human beings posses. Finally, others have sought to say that image of God means that we are beings in relationship, much as God the Trinity is one God in three persons. The text tells us that image of God is male and female, designed in and for relationship with God and one another. I find it best to put all these together.

We are created with certain capacities in order to rule and reign this earth with God in relationship with him and one another. This is what it means to be image of God. As such we are designed to reflect God in our nature, in our service and in our relationships. So in one sense, there is a reflection of God in his human creation, so a call for human beings to imitate God is very appropriate. It is the part of the reason we exist; it is why we were made. One question quickly emerges, in order to imitate God we must truly know what God is like. If we cannot see God directly, how do we imitate him?

How can we imitate that which is not physically seen?

To imitate someone we must know what they are like and the way they flow. God has not left us with empty skulls relating to the question of who he is and what he desires. The truth is that God reveals himself to us in various ways so that we might follow after him.

We see God’s Works—God’s works of creation display to us the power and nature of God. Additionally, he places a moral law in our consciences so that we may know right and wrong at a basic level. We may deny this knowledge and act in contraction to it, but it is not because we do not know right from wrong.  

We receive God’s Words—In addition to showing us in creation and our consciences God tells us who he is and what he desires for human life in the Scriptures. The Bible contains written accounts of the words of his prophets and messengers through whom God reveals himself to people. By the Scriptures we are fully instructed in the character and ways of God so that we may follow him during our lives. The most important testimony of Scripture is about the person of Jesus. His followers wrote down his works and words so we could clearly imitate and follow him.  

We see Jesus and imitate him—God became a human being so we could see most clearly what he is like (John 1:1-3,14; Hebrews 1:1-3). In Jesus Christ we see a full revelation of God in human form so that in the imitation of Jesus, we find the imitation of God.  

We see the body of Christ and we imitate the faith of others—Finally, we see in the New Testament Christian leaders calling others to imitate them, as they imitate Jesus (1 Corinthians 4:9, 11:1). We are to imitate their faith and trust in Jesus in the way that they followed him with their lives (Hebrews 13:17). In the church we can see Christ living in others as he works his character into them and we can imitate their faith as well.

Worship—Adoration and Imitation

It has been often said that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. The late secular thinker Ayn Rand once said it this way, “admiration is the rarest and best of pleasures.” ⁴ If we imitate someone it means we respect and admire them. Through this simple insight we can peer into the heart of Christian worship. We were made to give honor, glory, love, adoration and praise to God; we were made to desire to be more like him and imitate him. In doing so, God enjoys our worship and delights in his people. In turn, we find our greatest joy in seeking to be more like the one who is fully good, right and true.

Imitation in human life is a reality which will never go away. We cannot help but see excellence in something and want to imitate this. Unfortunately, there is also a dark side to human nature in that we imitate that which is self-exalting and sinful rather than imitating God. Imitation is a reality that cuts either in the direction of idolatry, worship that which is not God, or in true worship.

We live in a world of Monkey See, Monkey Do. When we see the lives of others we must ask whether they are resembling God or exhibiting the folly of men. We must wisely choose who we imitate because we become like the things we worship. So many times we follow one another like lemmings over the cliffs of life. Let us choose to follow Jesus who followed the beat of a different drummer. We too can imitate his love, sacrifice and service to others; laying down our lives so that many can break free to find joy in the forgiveness of God.

There will be a cacophony of voices calling to us as we travel the roads of our lives. Calls from the left and the right to take a path other than the one to which God calls.

Sometimes we need to realize that the herd is not always wise, but in following Jesus there is life and peace.

Yours in following him in our time,

Reid S. Monaghan

Notes

1. See Nietzche’s two works, Beyond Good and Evil and Genealogy of Morals for his constructing of his view of the “herd mentality” – A concise summary of these two works is available here: http://people.bu.edu/wwildman/WeirdWildWeb/courses/wphil/lectures/wphil_theme18.htm
2. Mormon doctrine does indeed teach that human beings can actually become gods. The classic statement of this was from the fifth Latter Day Saints president Lorenzo Snow “As man is, God once was, as God is, man may become” This is a doctrine articulated by LDS founder Joseph Smith in his King Follet discourse as well.
3. See David Berlinski, The Devil’s Delusion—Atheism and Its Scientific Pretensions (New York: Crown Forum 2008) 155-165 for an entertaining look at the differences between men and apes. Additionally, see James Le Fanu’s Why Us? How Science Rediscovered the Mystery of Ourselves (New York: Pantheon Books, 2009) 254-256. Fanu’s work is a intriguing look into recent discoveries surrounding the human genome and neuroscience. His thesis is that humans are much more unique than the typical “evolution explains everything” idea.
4. See John Piper, An Open Letter to Michael Prowse, online at http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibrary/TasteAndSee/ByDate/2003/1245_An_Open_Letter_to_Michael_Prowse/ accessed March 4, 2008.

Spiritual Gifts from the Trinity

It is a wonderfully clear teaching of the Bible that our God is a giver. He is generous and his nature is to lavish good gifts upon his kids. God is kind in giving us Jesus as our rescuer and king and he gives the gift of the Spirit to empower us for service and be an ever present help to us in the struggles of life. Furthermore, God gives spiritual gifts and callings to his people to help them fulfill his ministry on the earth to build them up individually and as a community.

In this essay we are going to look at how the triune God of Scripture gifts his church. We will do this by first looking at the biblical doctrine of the Trinity and learning together about Father, Son and Spirit. We will then look at three major biblical passages on spiritual gifts and how each person of the Trinity is involved in gifting his church. Finally, we will conclude with a focus on the reason or purpose for which God gives gifts to his people. One note is in order as we begin.

Depending upon what sort of spiritual situation you grew up in, the term “spiritual gifts” could mean absolutely nothing, absolutely everything!!! or simply be a strange term of confusion. This essay is not getting into the issues which separate charismatic and non charismatic Christians. If that doesn’t mean a thing to you, no worries, just read on. If you have a spiritual gifts fight to pick about “those spiritually dead churches” or “those crazy charismatic people” drop the gloves and read on; there is something bigger going on with spiritual gifts that we all need to hear and heed. Now to something much simpler, the Trinity—uh, yeah right.

On the Trinity

The creator God is completely unique; God is holy, there is simply no one and no thing like Him. The God revealed to us in our ancient writings is marvelously one, yet a loving community of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The book of Ephesians is one of the most Trinitarian writings in the Bible. Father, Son and Spirit seem to pervade all Paul’s thoughts of God. We notice this profoundly in his prayer which closes chapter three.

14For this reason I bow my knees before the Father, 15from whom every family in heaven and on earth is named, 16that according to the riches of his glory he may grant you to be strengthened with power through his Spirit in your inner being, 17so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith—that you, being rooted and grounded in love, 18may have strength to comprehend with all the saints what is the breadth and length and height and depth, 19and to know the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled with all the fullness of God. Ephesians 3:14-19 (ESV)

The mystery of the triunity of God is one of the most precious, deep, holy and wondrous truths of our faith.1 Though this will be but a miniscule treatment of the wonder of the Trinity, please see the notes for two recent works on the subject for further reading.2 We will first briefly describe each person and role of the Triune God and then move towards how this God gifts his church.

The Glorious Father

The Bible often refers to God as “Father” and this was the preferred description used by Jesus to describe him. The Father is the initiator of creation, the sovereign sustainer of creation and the all wise ruler of all things. The Father is also the one who decreed to redeem the world through the Son. The Father is the blessed one, a spiritual being who is worshipped and praised in spirit and in truth (John 4:23,24). When the New Testament speaks of “God” in a general sense, it is usually the Father which is in view.

The Preeminent Son

The Son is second person of the Trinity and the one through whom creation came into being (Colossians 1:16, Hebrews 1:1-3). The Son is also the one who was sent by the Father into our world to be its Savior. The Son fully reveals the character of the Father (John 14:1-11; Hebrews 1:1-3), is our redeemer who died for sins and was raised from the dead by Father and Spirit (Acts 13:26-33; Romans 8:11; Galatians 1:11). The Son is the head of the church which is his body (Ephesians 4:15,16; Colossians 1:15-24) and he is LORD, God’s appointed King who will rule and reign forever. The Son is the world’s appointed judge and only savior (John 5:22-30; Acts 17:31).

The Empowering Spirit

The Holy Spirit is the person of the Trinity who was the active agent in creation (Genesis 1:2). The Spirit is given to the church by the Father and sent by the Son (John 14:26, 15:26) to teach us, help us, comfort us and empower us for service (John 14:15-26; 1 Corinthians 12; 1 John 2:26,27). The Holy Spirit convicts the world of sin (John 16:8-11), makes believers alive to God (John 3:1-8; Titus 3:5) dwells in the believer and the church (2 Timothy 1:14) and represents a foretaste of the coming Kingdom. The Spirit is a deposit guaranteeing the promise of God and our coming inheritance with him (2 Corinthians 5:5; Ephesians 1:14).

This God Gifts His Church

There are four main passages in the New Testament which speak of God’s giving of spiritual gifts to his people. Interestingly enough, God the Father, Jesus the Son and The Holy Spirit are said to be the giver of these gifts to his people. We will look at these three passages in turn.

The Holy Spirit—1 Corinthians 12

In the ancient church in the city of Corinth there was a church that was a mess. People were getting drunk at communion, a dude was having sex with his Dad’s wife and the churches gatherings were a bit chaotic. People were showing off with certain spiritual gifts (Greek term—charismas) which caused Paul to address questions concerning these things . A few quick observations about Paul’s teaching are in order. First, he clearly says that the main point of the gifts is to honor Jesus as Lord. Second, the gifts should be exercised in a way that unifies and serves the common good of the church. The gifts are not to exalt the gifted person. Third, the gifts unify because they are given by one Spirit and are given out in diversity to his people. Finally, the giving of the gifts is by the will of the Spirit as he sees fit so we need not despise the gifts given to us nor covet the gifts of others. On the contrary, we should rejoice in the diversity of the body and use our gifts to build up the family of faith to serve in Jesus’ ministry and bring him glory. All of this should be done in love for God and one another otherwise we will be completely missing the point.

Gifted Leadership is the Gift of the Son—Ephesians 4:7-16

In Ephesians 4 we find that God gives grace in various forms to members of his church. In particular, he gives his church gifted leadership to help equip Christians to do the ministry of Jesus and to grow up the church towards maturity. Whereas the gifts of the spirit to individuals is the subject in 1 Corinthians 12, God’s gift of people to the church is in view in Ephesians 4. In our day where “organized religion” is the object of public and personal disdain, we should observe that leadership (apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers) is actually a gift of Jesus to his church. The grace of Christ is the source of leaders in the church. Furthermore, these people are gifted by God with various abilities (teaching, service, leadership etc.) to fulfill their ministry. So in a sense, gifted people, are great gifts to the church. We also want to be clear that every person God adds to his church are gifted gifts for the body and when anyone’s gifts are not exercised the church’s life and ministry will gradually become impoverished.

One note should be made at this point. Leadership in Christ’s church is an act of service and should be exercised in the way of Jesus. This means two things: proper exercise of authority in the manner of a servant. Many pastors and leaders today are passive and will not exercise humble, godly authority. They will not preach and teach the truth, confront sin or guide others because of a fear of people and a need to be liked. Furthermore, many church leaders today act as if they are little gods wearing CEO hats and do not see their roll as servants of the people. Peter’s exhortation to church leaders is so needed in our day; I’ll simply quote him here:

1So I exhort the elders among you, as a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, as well as a partaker in the glory that is going to be revealed: 2shepherd the flock of God that is among you, exercising oversight, not under compulsion, but willingly, as God would have you; not for shameful gain, but eagerly; 3not domineering over those in your charge, but being examples to the flock. 4And when the chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the unfading crown of glory. 5Likewise, you who are younger, be subject to the elders. Clothe yourselves, all of you, with humility toward one another, for “God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble.” 1 Peter 5:1-5 (ESV)

Gifts are Measured to us by God— Romans 12

In Romans 12, Paul is encouraging Christians to think of themselves in humility and to realize that the measure of faith they have is indeed a gift of God the Father. The metaphor of a body is once again employed to urge us towards unity in the diversity of people in the church. We should use and exercise our uniqueness and our giftedness in line with the faith we have been given. Once again, the context is in a loving community where we use our lives and gifts to serve others so that God would be honored and our community would reflect his goodness in the midst of a world darkened by evil and sin.

We will now close with an all to brief discussion of who and what God’s gifts are for. Why does he gift his church and individuals therein. I do pray that some clarity is beginning to emerge from the texts we have been discussing.

Who are Gifts are For?

As Americans we are simply soaked and saturated with individualism. Even the subject of spiritual gifts has been turned into a pursuit for individuals to “discover their gifts” through personal tests and assessments. I am not saying these sorts of tests are wrong; I have used them myself. What I am saying is that they can be reflective of an excessive individualism in relation to God’s gifting of the church. Spiritual gifts are simply never to be about “me” but always about “us” and how we can honor God and fulfill his ministry on the earth. I hope you have heard the language of the Bible throughout our discussion—gifts are given for the common good, to build up the body, to joyfully serve one another in Jesus name.

Furthermore, spiritual gifts are never for some supernatural magic show where spiritual super people can show off on television. The Role of the Spirit is to bring glory to Jesus. (John 16:14) Jesus was clear he came to do the will of the Father.(John 4:34; 5:30; 6:38) The Father created the world to display majesty, glory and wonder to creatures made to worship him (Revelation 4:11). So let me give you a short, hopefully memorable, raison d’être for spiritual gifts as a bottom line in our short journey here:

Spiritual gifts are given by the Trinity, for the good of his people, to build them up so that they might display the glory of God together.

The final passage in the New Testament referring to Spiritual gifts is found in the first letter written by Peter, an early apostle and central leader of the Christian movement. His words summarize well what God would have us know about his gifting of his church. We’ll give him the last word:

10As each has received a gift, use it to serve one another, as good stewards of God’s varied grace: 11whoever speaks, as one who speaks oracles of God; whoever serves, as one who serves by the strength that God supplies—in order that in everything God may be glorified through Jesus Christ. To him belong glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen. 1 Peter 4:10-11 (ESV)

And amen.

Notes

1. For an excellent treatment of the importance of the Bible’s teaching on the triunity of God see Chapter 1—”Beholding the Wonder of our Triune God: The Importance of this Doctrine” in Bruce A. Ware, Father, Son & Holy Spirit—Relationships, Roles and Relevance (Wheaton: Crossway Books, 2005) 13-22.
2. Two recent works we recommend for the importance of the Trinity are Bruce A. Ware, Father, Son & Holy Spirit—Relationships, Roles and Relevance (Wheaton: Crossway Books, 2005) and Timothy George, editor God the Holy Trinity, Reflections on Christian Faith and Practice (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2006). Of particular interest is JI Packer’s fine essay on the perspective of the puritan John Owen.
3. I found Klyne Snodgrass’ discussion of gifts, talents and the church in Ephesians: The NIV Life Application Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996) 212-214.

Three Tough Questions

As we look to find an enduring hope there are many questions that human beings must face in order to build a foundation in a relationship with God. First, we must know that God is real; this is the metaphysical question. Second, we must know how we might be in relationship with God and to know God in our own experience; this is the existential question. Finally, we must face a massive problem in our own nature. Even if we know that God exists and that he loves and desires relationship with us we still resist and turn away. This is the anthropological question. Human beings by nature are rebels and sinners; we do what we want with our lives rather than that which for God has made us. This is reflected by either active rebellion or passive indifference towards God in our attitudes in actions. In today’s essay we will wrestle with these three questions and marvel together how God has graciously answered them all in his incarnate Son, Jesus Christ.

The Metaphysical Question

From the beginning of history until now, human beings have been asking about the nature and reality of the universe. We probe the outer world and the inner world of our own souls searching for what is good, right, true, just and ultimate. Various cultures and peoples seem to all be called towards some transcendent reality as a cacophony of voices echo the names of various goddesses and gods throughout the ages. Yet our search seems to prove futile for many and some retreat into a blasé agnosticism being content to only say “I don’t know what is out there.” Such frustration is warranted for to be able to ascend the heights to look upon the face of God seems to be a daunting task. I once remember hearing one teacher describe the difficulty of describing God when someone posed to him a rather strange challenge: “define God and give two examples.” God is utterly unique so there simply are no examples of what God is—there is only God. So in order for us to wrestle with the metaphysical question we must ask if there is any help given from above. As such many traditions have held that we need God to self-define or self-reveal in order for us to know him.

Our Scriptures teach that God has been kind to human beings to do just this, to reveal himself to us in many ways. The first way God reveals himself is what we call general revelation. In some simple ways we can all know that God exists from looking at nature and conscience. The apostle Paul in the book of Romans teaches us that God can be clearly seen from what has been made (Romans 1:18-24) and that we know our moral responsibility to God from the moral law written on the heart (Romans 2:12-16). The skeptical German philosopher Immanuel Kant even realized nature and conscience as a place of profound reflection in describing his awe at the starry hosts above and the moral law within.¹

Furthermore, both the every day person and philosophers have inferred from our world and conscience that there is indeed a God. Over the years I have done informal surveys with college students and other adults as to why they believe in God. The answers usually fall along these lines:

• We are here—there must be an explanation for the existence of the universe
• We are unique—the universe and human life gives evidence of design
• We are moral creatures—the universe and ourselves have a moral nature
• There must be justice—many seem to believe that there is a higher court of appeals
• I just know—personal religious experience of God

Interesting enough philosophers for years have developed intellectual arguments along many of the same lines.² God reveals his existence and our moral responsibility to him to all through what he has made and by impressing his law on our hearts. Yet this sort of general revelation³ only gives us a knowledge that God is real, but many still suppress this knowledge. Though all can know something of God through nature and conscience this is still not enough to definitively answer the metaphysical question.

The Existential Question

Even when we come to the conclusion that there is a God, there is still the question as to how we relate to God. Is God personal? Is God loving? Does God relate to people at all or is God a distant deity or force lurking behind the curtains in the universe. We long for there to be a path shown to us, a way demonstrated and a connection with God made. The existential question is ultimately related to how we might know God personally, rather than simply know about him.

In our experience we find life to be a mixture of good times and bad, joys and pains, struggling to find meaning and purpose. Many times life can just leave us numb, longing to be more alive than our current experiences. Most of the time we just medicate our emptiness with shopping, substances, relationships, food, drinks and toys. In doing so we place things other than God at the center of our lives and build the foundation of our hope on things which do not last.

In the ancient world, the Hebrew King Solomon had more money, power, women and influence than anyone. He would make the finances of a Bill Gates and the activities of Hugh Heffner look smallish. He had tried everything in life and all that money and power could afford. Yet his conclusion after doing it all was that life was quite empty, quite meaningless all together. The book of Ecclesiastes in our Old Testament records his meditations and reflections on the emptiness and vanities of life lived apart from our creator.

Our modern world is filled with example after example of the very rich and very successful making it “to the top” only to realize emptiness still pervaded life. The existential question longs for meaning and relationship that is stable; it reveals the longing of the human heart for a connection with the divine. Whereas the metaphysical question wrestles with the question of God’s existence and identify, the existential question is the soul begging to be connected to God in meaningfully, loving relationship.

The Anthropological Question

If we think for a minute about the human struggle, we will realize something quite strange. If someone knows God is real and knows it is possible to relate to God in loving communion and worship, why doesn’t everyone jump in. Why are people still resistant to the idea of God?

The Scriptures teach that we are not honest seekers of God and his goodness and truth. In fact, human beings rebel against God’s rule in their lives and choose to live apart from him. Even if intellectual answers to God’s reality are given to solve the metaphysical question people still will not love God. Even if a person hears of God’s love for them they may not drawn near to him. The most massive problem that needs to be overcome is the problem of our own sinful resistance to God. The anthropological problem demands that forgiveness for sin and reconciliation must happen before someone really becomes a follower of the living god.

Jesus Christ—Revelation, Relationship and Reconciliation

I have always found it fascinating that in the incarnation of Jesus, God answers deeply the longings of the human heart and overcomes our deepest problem of sin. Let me explain.

Jesus—The Revelation of God

As we wrestle with the existence of God, he chose to give very specific evidence of his nature by becoming one of us. God gives a special and detailed revelation of himself by becoming a human being and actually showing us what he is like. Jesus Christ is the image of the invisible God (Colossians 1:15), God become a human (John 1:1-14) and the imprint of God’s nature (Hebrews 1:3). His apostles and prophets have told his story, conveyed his teaching and explained his message to us in authoritative Scripture. God could have written in lasers across the heavens “I am like this and I am like that” but instead he became one of us to show us his love for us in a form we most easily understand. His portrait is painted for us in the gospels of the New Testament.

Jesus—The Way to Relationship with the Father

The gospel according to John tells us that God is actually seeking out worshippers and desires to be known by them. John 17:3 declares And this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent. Jesus came to show to us the Father (John 14:9) and to connect us in a real relationship with our creator. Our longing for significance and purpose is fulfilled in a love relationship with God. God himself, in Jesus Christ, through the Holy Spirit, becomes the answer to all our existential longings.

Jesus—Reconciliation and Pardon with Him

Finally, and most importantly, Jesus over comes our sin by dying for us so that we can find peace and reconciliation with God. Whereas the metaphysical question is answered by the revelation of God in Christ and the existential questions is answer in knowing him, Jesus death actually makes it all possible. In Christ’s death on the cross God reconciles us with him providing full pardon and forgiveness for our sin. Our resistance to God is removed and we are given a deep desire for God that only finds culmination in worship. Former archbishop of Canterbury William Temple described the fulfillment of the human soul in worship as follows:

Worship is the submission of all of our nature to God. It is the quickening of conscience by His holiness, nourishment of mind by His truth, purifying of imagination by His beauty, opening of the heart to His love, and submission of will to His purpose. And all this gathered up in adoration is the greatest of human expressions of which we are capable.

Conclusion

So it is in the incarnation that God became human so that we might see a revelation of God. It is also in the incarnation that we come to know God face to face. Finally, it is through the work of the incarnate Son that we are reconciled to the Father. The late British journalist Malcom Muggeridge so eloquently described the marvelous effects of the incarnation of Jesus:

Thereby [by the incarnation], He set a window into the tiny dark dungeon of the ego in which we all languish, letting in a light, providing a vista, and offering a way of release from the servitude of the flesh and the fury of the will into what St. Paul called the glorious liberty of the children of God.⁴

The question of God’s existence was answered fully when God put his feet on planet earth. The knowability of God was established fully when God stretched out hands and feet to die for us. As Scripture teaches us, God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. (Romans 5:8)

I will close with a small stanza of a hymn written by the 18th century song writer Charles Wesley.5 It’s words describe the amazing depth of the gospel whereby God would reveal himself, lovingly encounter us and set us free into a relationship of joy and worship.

Long my imprisoned spirit lay,
Fast bound in sin and nature’s night;
Thine eye diffused a quickening ray—
I woke, the dungeon flamed with light;
My chains fell off, my heart was free,
I rose, went forth, and followed Thee.

Following with you,

Reid S. Monaghan

Notes

1. Immanuel Kant, Critique of Practical Reason, 1788. This was also the phrase inscribed on his tombstone.
2. For those interested see “The Five Ways” of Thomas Aquinas in Summa Theologica, CS Lewis’ Mere Christianity and the modern philosophical arguments of Alvin Plantinga—Two Dozen (or so) Theistic Proofs found here—http://bit.ly/14bimm and William Lane Craig in Reasonable Faith-Christian Truth and Apologetics 3rd Edition (Wheaton: Crossway, 2008)
3. J. Budziszewski, What We Can’t Not Know: A Guide (Spence Publishing, 2004)
4. Malcolm Muggeridge and Cecil Kuhne, Seeing through the Eye : Malcolm Muggeridge on Faith (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2005), 5-6. Emphasis in original.
5. Charles Wesley, Psalms and Hymns, 1738.

On Prayer...

Prayer is the great privilege and joy of the believer in Christ but it can also be a source of frustration and mystery as we seek God. In one sense prayer is quite simple in definition - it is coming before God to speak with him and interact in relationship with him. On the other hand, it is hard to carve out time to pray and to understand how prayer functions. In this essay we will look very briefly at the vast subject of prayer in Scripture and in our lives. For those who want to read more I highly suggest Paul E. Miller’s new work A Praying Life.¹

For our brief purposes here we will take the following path together. First, we will look at some pagan understandings of prayer and how believers in Jesus can at times treat prayer in the same manner. Second, we will look at a few ways in which prayer is described in Scripture and then close with some guiding principles and practical suggestions relating to living a life of prayer.

Pagan Prayer

In many religions and philosophies of the world prayer is used to either please or appease some deity. Those who believe in multiple gods have always believed in prayer. If you prayed the right way, at the right times, with the right trinkets you could get a god on your side. Not a bad gig save one problem. There is one God who is sovereign ruler of the world and he does not exist to obey our commands or be manipulated by our “prayers” and rituals. There are several ways prayer becomes pagan even in the mouth of believers in Jesus. We’ll just look at three.

The first is something Mark Driscoll has humorously called piñata prayer. Prayer in this way treats God as if he is a big piñata in the sky. If we whack him with the stick of prayer, lots of candy and goodies fall out. Lets just say that prayer not just trying to get goodies out of God but many times we approach it this way. Second, is something I am calling dancing prayer. When I was a little kid we had a dog; a short haired miniature schnauzer named Gretchen to be more precise. My brother and I loved to make that dog dance in order to get a treat from us. We would make her jump on her hind legs, spin around and do back flips (well, maybe not). When she performed we would give her a treat. I think many times we can think if we do the right things, say the right prayers and dance a little that God will give us a reward for our performance. This is an odd way to see God, but we can get into that way of praying. If I pray “correctly” then God will give me treats.

The final way in which we can pray like pagans is what I’ll call Trading Places. In the early 1980s there was a movie where Eddie Murphy and Dan Aykroyd “traded places” in life. Murphy was a homeless con man who became the rich tycoon and Aykroyd became the homeless guy. I think sometimes we think by praying we can “trade places” with God. We act as if we are God and can give orders to get what we want. We are his servants and we exist for his glory not the other way around. I know it is silly to think of prayer as telling God what to do, but that doesn’t keep us from doing it. There are even preachers on TV that encourage this sort of telling God what to do. If we do not want to pray in these ways, we must look at how Scripture presents a life of prayer. We’ll look at this issue by describing biblical prayer and then close with some practical stuff.

Biblical Prayer

In Scripture we find descriptions of people praying, recorded prayers, as well as commands and instruction about prayer. Although this will be far from complete there are several ways we see prayer described in the Bible. First, we see that prayer is approaching God and desiring to be relationally in his presence. In Psalm 42:1-2 we read the following:

As a deer pants for flowing streams, so pants my soul for you, O God. My soul thirsts for God, for the living God. When shall I come and appear before God?

We see the same idea in the New Testament in we are encouraged to approach the throne of God with confidence to find mercy and help in our time of need (Hebrews 4:16). So prayer involves approaching God, through Jesus Christ, in the middle of the joys, pains, triumphs and sufferings of every day life. Secondly, prayer is seen as intercession and supplication, coming to God with petitions and requests. Philippians 4:6, 7 teaches us not to be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God. We must remember, we do not come into the presence of God to command him, but rather to find mercy and help in our lives. Yet prayer does include making requests of our Father.

Third, prayer is a time to share our hearts cry with the Father. The Psalms are full of both thanksgiving and lament (sadness expressed). In 1 Thessalonians 5:16-18 we are commanded to rejoice and give thanks in all circumstances, whether good or bad. We can have confidence that nothing in our life is meaningless, even our suffering or the evil done to us by others can be redeemed by God. If we belong to Him, he will work it all out for his purposes in the end. Romans 8:28 teaches us that we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose. We need to know this truth before our times of suffering as we are disoriented in our pain. When our friends are mourning we are instructed to “mourn with them” and not treat others’ suffering with frivolity. Yet Romans 8:28 is no trite phrase in the Bible; it is our greatest hope and his great promise in a world full of madness and sin.

Fourth, prayer is confession where we come before God to get honest about our sins and shortcomings. Confession is not telling God some secret that you are hiding from him. Believe me, God knows all things even the mistakes we make and the sin we commit against him and others. The word confession is actually a compound of the Greek prefix “homos” which means “same” and “logeo” which means “word.” It literally means, to say the same word. To confess means to agree with God about something, to say the same thing about our sin that he does and turn from our sin. It is to come clean and experience the grace and forgiveness of God purchased by Jesus. Confession restores closeness in relationship with God and keeps us from drifting away from him over time.

Finally, prayer is the fuel and language of relationship. Just as Paul begins Ephesians 1 in praise to God for his saving work, he follows it with praying for his friends that they would know God. Prayer is coming to God in hope as he is our Father. We come near to him he draws near to us. In the ups and downs of our lives what we need more than anything is a close relationship with God. He is the anchor in every story, the author of our journey and the one we trust to bring us safely home to his Kingdom in the end. Prayer is the expression of the human soul crying out for its creator. In Jesus Christ we have access to God as his kids and there is no other power who has greater control over our lives. As a brand new Christian I found myself wanting to pray, wanting to talk with God, wanting to learn his ways. Yet I didn’t have a clue. The following are just a few principles I have learned along the way that have helped me understand a life of prayer.

Prayer Principles

The first principle to keep in mind as we pray is that we are seeking the will of God for our lives, not just our own purposes. So many times we can hear “the will of God” and immediately jump to thinking about a detailed road map for our future. This is not what I mean by “seek the will of God.” What we ought to seek is how God desires our life to be lived in whatever circumstances as well as what sort of people he wants us to be. We find the will of God in his character and commands as revealed in Scripture. Jesus taught us to pray for God’s will to be done on earth as it is in heaven (see Matthew 6:9-13) and 1 John 5:14-15 promises that God hears and answers prayer that is according to his will. Here are some simple examples of prayers that would be according to the will of God:

God make me a good friend…God help me be more patient and kind…God help me to serve others…God help me leave my selfishness…God help me be a thankful person…God help me rejoice in you, even when my life seems to suck…God give me wisdom for the choices and decisions I face tomorrow…God provide for my basic needs…God open a door for your gospel with my friends…God help me be a better wife/husband, mother/father, sister/brother, daughter or son….God make me more like Jesus in my character and actions

Second, we need to come to God with the right motives. James 4:2,3 teaches us that we should not come to God with a selfish heart just asking God for stuff to fit our current passions. Oh God, if you don’t give me a boat, you must hate me! People do pray this way-DON’T. Third, when we pray, we must believe. We trust he is our good father who wants to hear from us and answer in the way the he deems best for us. Finally, we should not just come to God trying to get a spiritual buzz. Sometimes there are deep spiritual experiences, other times there are not. God’s presence is not your emotions. Paul E. Miller sums this up well in his excellent new book, A Praying Life:

You don’t experience God; you get to know him. You submit to him. You enjoy him. He is, after all, a person.²

As we close, I want just drop a few practical ways to help us to pray amidst our hurried lives.

Prayer in Practice

Did you realize that Jesus’ friends actually asked him to teach them how to pray? His reply, found in Matthew 6:9-13, has been called “The Lord’s Prayer” or the “Our Father”. Though many say this as a prayer from memory, his response is actually a pattern to follow. Looking at this pattern we find several things that we can include in our prayers:

• Hallowed be your name. We want to praise God in our prayers for who he is. We want to love him, respect him and honor him. Tell God what you love about him as you get to know him better.
• Forgive us our sins as we forgive those who sin against us.
• Give us this day our daily bread. Thanking God for life and provision.
• Lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil. We ask God to lead us in what is good, right and true.

The acrostic ACTS has helped many to remember some basics about prayer that are seen in Jesus’ pattern. The acrostic stands for Adoration, Confession, Thanksgiving and Supplication and can be helpful in praying.

• Adoration-praising God for who he is, that he is our treasure and joy
• Confession-coming clean with our Father and receiving grace and forgiveness
• Thanksgiving-thanking him for good time and hard times
• Supplication-bringing your needs and the needs of others before the Father.

To close, I want to be honest with you. Prayer is hard. We are busy people who are surrounded by the hum of cars, trains, cell phones, IM, chats and social media. Furthermore, human beings are so intent on living apart from God that we don’t naturally want to pray. We pray when things go bad and ignore God when things are good. I am often amazed by my own self-centeredness and desire to do life on my own without the guidance and wisdom of God. Yet when I come to God in prayer I find life, relationship and hope for the day. I will leave you with an excellent quote about the effects of a prayerful life on the soul:

The quest for a contemplative life can actually be self absorbed, focused on my quiet and me. If we love people and have the power to help, then we are going to be busy. Learning to pray doesn’t offer us a less busy life; it offers us a less busy heart. In the midst of outer busyness we can develop an inner quiet. Because we are less hectic on the inside, we have a greater capacity to love…³

When Paul began his letter to Ephesians he reminded them of the great work that God had done in saving them. Then he prayed. He prayed that they would have the most important thing in life-depth in relationship with God and an understanding of every good thing we have in him. We ought to pray in the same way for one another-that all of us would deepen with God.

Praying for you to that end and hoping that you seek your Father in prayer,

Reid S. Monaghan

Notes

1.Paul E. Miller, A Praying Life: Connecting With God in a Distracting World (Colorado Springs, NavPress, 2009)

2.Ibid, 21.

3.Ibid, 25.

On Theosis

Some friends of mine from Jacob’s Well, aka The JW, aka JWeezy are kicking about the subject of theosis - which wikipedia defines for us as - theosis (written also: theiosis, theopoiesis, theōsis; Greek: Θέωσις, meaning divinization, or deification, or making divine).  Basically, it is a teaching that we in some way become partakers of the divine nature as we are transformed from sinners into new creatures in Christ.

Anyway, if you have never heard the word “theosis” - rejoice!!! you are not weird.  But for all the theological weirdos of the world, here is a reply that I sent to my good brothers.  I will ask them if they will be so kind to leave their thoughts here in the comments.  They had some good things to say. 

Oh yeah, one more thing - Jacob’s Well is nothing like this on Sunday mornings - well, maybe a little, we do like questions but we do the nerdy stuff offline (or er, on blogs too) and try to keep it real at church.

————————————————

Men,

I have enjoyed you guys’ thoughts and hearing your wrestle out loud about such issues. Deification is not a new issue in theology, but it is “new to us” in the sense that the West in general and western Protestantism in particular has not dealt with it using the Athanasian grammar. We have tended to talk of “Union with” Christ, sanctification as progressive (but Wesleys perfectionism has to be addressed I suppose) and glorification being to be made as much “like God” and participatory in his nature as a human can be. I know this discussion is primarily Pauline but Peter’s words in 2 Peter 1:4 seem quite relevant to the discussion as well - though I am guessing with all the hatred of Petrine authorship and the popularity of Paul/Justification that this text isn’t going to be playing much on the academic theology top 40.

My thoughts on this issue is to keep ourselves metaphysically separated but relationally in union with Christ and in communion with the triune God. Relational theology seems proper for Christians and taking these sorts of things metaphysically seems to produce massive problems.

• I am “one flesh” with my wife - this is a physical and relational reality but we do not become one person metaphysically
• Christ marries his church - he becomes one with her, but he remains head, we remain body - so there is union and distinction - the union must be understood relationally as to neither obliterate my identity or that of our Lord.
• We are partakers of the divine nature (Peter’s words are the strongest) in such a way to fully participate relationally in the divine life of God, but we share it “as a human” not as gods. We are filled with his fullness but we do not become all that he is.

Piper touches on Athanasius and “deification” a bit here.

As to justification and relating to theosis, I’ll just read like you guys are doing. I do think that our union with Christ, he in us and us in him is inseparable from salvation but I agree with Scott in not placing one facet of God’s saving act “at the center” - I am fine with having Father, Son and Spirit as the center…and as far as we are concerned, Jesus is at the center. He is the center of the Fathers action, his work on the cross is the redemptive outworking of the determined decree of God and he is the sender of the Spirit to glorify him and the Father. He is our relational touchstone.

To me to blend us too much in union will end in pantheism…which is a gross heresy. To speak to little about the intense knowledge God has for us and we for him in Christ is to not go far enough. So perhaps Jesus envelopes us with his love and being…he takes us fully in to himself without us becoming him and he becoming us (individually speaking, for in the incarnation he did indeed become “us”). So I like the metaphors in Scripture to speak of these things, but peering behind metaphors only seeks to make one lost.

• Bridegroom/Bride
• Head/Body
• Indwelt Temples
• The Intimate Family

These we ought to use well for in them God has stooped low and used human language, from human life to reveal to us “to know the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled with all the fullness of God” - Ephesians 3:19

Love you men

Reid

Theology and Practice

I am a big fan of both thinking and doing...in fact, I get frustrated with my own life if I don't do enough of either. Too much thinking and no doing accomplishes little...too much doing without much thinking accomplishes shallow things that blow away like the wind.  This week I found a couple of posts that called me towards depth in both

For Thinking

Paul Helm, with whom I studied in January, has a interesting post on the view about compatabilist middle knowledge.  Not sure I agree with him but he has me thinking. In this post he interacts with one of my favorite books, by one of my favorite professors...Dr. Bruce Ware. Happy thinking.

For Doing

Jonathan Dodson, who is planting a church in capital city of the great nation of Texas, has some great thoughts for doing.  In his post Simplified Missional Living Dodson offers some great insight for being a good friend and neighbor in your community.  Happy doing.

For all my Jacob's Well peoples I encourage you to read the Dodson piece, it will be very helpful as we continue to live our lives together on mission here in Jersey.  Life/Doctrine - Living/Thinking...this is where we are rolling in Ephesians as well.

Ordo Salutis - Guest Post by Scott C. Jones

Today we have a guest posting by Scott Jones - a friend of mine from Jacob's Well.  Scott did his undergraduate studies at Cornell University and then a ThM from Gordon Conwell Theological Seminary.

Enjoy - RSM

------------------------------------------------

Have you ever asked a doctor or dentist what they are about to do to you? I do this constantly. I don't like to be pricked, prodded, or generally be in pain without knowing why. Asking these sorts of questions allows me to anticipate and understand the pain I am currently experiencing. I imagine others feel the same way and like to generally know what is being done to their bodies before they lay prostrate on the surgeon's table or the dentist's chair. I wonder if you've ever had similar questions about the process of Christian conversion. What exactly happens when we are converted, saved, born again, come to faith, accept Christ, welcome Jesus into our hearts or whatever other term you'd use for becoming a Christian? You may be surprised to learn that Scripture actually suggests that there is a discernible and universal process to becoming a Christian. While the way in which we arrive at conversion varies widely in terms of circumstances and timing, the spiritual process of conversion - so Scripture suggests - is the same in each case. Read, for instance, Romans 8:29-30:

²⁹ For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.  ³⁰ And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.

These verses outline, in part, the process of salvation. However, the elements mentioned in these verses, so the rest of the New Testament suggests, are a partial list at best. As such, theologians have discussed for centuries about how exactly to order all the elements we'll discuss below. The largest disagreements concern the proper causal relationships between the various parts of salvation. The fancy Latin phrase that describes this classic teaching of the Church is ordo salutis (literally: order of salvation).

There are two prominent schools of thought on the ordo salutis, the Reformed view and the Arminian view. The classic Reformed order is (we'll outline each of these elements, in detail, below): election / predestination, followed by effectual call, regeneration, conversion, justification, sanctification, and glorification. The Arminian view is as follows: evangelistic call, followed by conversion, regeneration, justification, sanctification, and glorification. The crucial difference in these systems is primarily the ordering of conversion and regeneration. In the Reformed view, faith and repentance are solely possible if the unbeliever is first acted upon by God. God gives a person the spiritual ability to confess their sin and put their trust in Christ. In the Arminian view the initiative is taken by the individual, rather than by God. In this view, fallen humanity retains the ability to receive or reject the gospel within ourselves. In the Reformed view God, so to speak, flicks on the spiritual lights, while to the Arminian, we have the power to decide to flick the switch or not. Given that the New Testament seems to emphasize God's role in salvation and his initiative in calling us to himself (see below), I prefer the Reformed view. Let's look at each of the elements in the Reformed ordo salutis.¹

Effectual Call

The term itself - and related terms like predestination, unconditional election, and foreknowledge - refers to God's sovereign choice of believers. Those whom God has elected, he calls and his calling is always effective in bringing about repentance (thus, effectual call). Paul emphasizes the calling of believers to repentance throughout his letters, for example in 1 Corinthians 1:9, "God is faithful, by whom you were called into the fellowship of his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord." So also, Eph 1:4-5, "even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love he predestined us for adoption through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will." Salvation is wholly the work of a sovereign God who chooses us solely out of grace and adopts us as his children not due to any merit we ourselves possess. God chooses and God calls.

Regeneration

Once God has called an individual to himself, God also provides the spiritual capacity to respond to that call. Here we are directed to such texts as John 6:44, "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him" and Acts 16:14 in which God opens the heart of Lydia to hear the message of Paul. The concept of "new birth" or being "born again" is related to the doctrine of regeneration. As Murray puts it, "Faith is a whole-souled act of loving trust and self-commitment. Of that we are incapable until renewed by the Holy Spirit."²

Conversion

The call and new birth of the individual then leads to the act of conversion, normally spoken of in terms of faith and repentance. One scholar defines conversion as, "our willing response to the gospel call, in which we sincerely repent of sins and place our trust in Christ for salvation."³ Acts 16:31 puts it simply, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved." Far from merely a mental assent to a set of facts, this belief is a complete reorientation of one's life. In James 2 we have the fullest explanation of what is meant by "faith" in the Scriptures. To summarize the argument of that chapter: saving faith is a faith that is evident in how one lives.

Justification

Because of our faith, the most radical of things happens: God proclaims that we are righteous before him. Exactly how and when this happens is a matter of heated debate in current Biblical scholarship. Some prefer to define justification as the reality that because of our faith, we are joined with Christ and given his righteousness as the basis of our acceptance before God. In short, when God looks at us, he sees Jesus and thus, we are acceptable before him.⁴ This view is most nearly expressed in 2 Cor 5:21, "For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God." Others prefer to see justification as something that follows our union with Christ. Acts of faith that result from our initial conversion provide evidence of our membership in the people of God.⁵ Such texts as James 2:21, in which Abraham is said to have been "justified" when he offered Isaac on the altar, are given to support this view. Whichever view is held, the reality that Christ's work on the cross provides the means for our being acceptable before God is an undeniable Biblical concept and a breathtaking reality. There are many other things that happen as a result of our union with Christ and Scripture uses myriad images to describe them including: adoption, redemption, propitiation, expiation, and reconciliation, among others.⁶

Sanctification

One of the great benefits of our salvation is the gift of the Holy Spirit. At our conversion, the third person of the Trinity comes to dwell in us and empowers us to begin living out the implications of our reconciled relationship with God. As a result of the Holy Spirit's presence, the believer now increasingly experiences the reformation of both her outward behavior and inward desires. The believer is encouraged to increasingly take advantage of this new way of life (Eph 5:18). The old patterns of sin and the enslavement to past desires are progressively replaced by new patterns of righteous living and a renewed passion for God's way of life (Galatians 5). As one of my seminary professors liked to say, the Christian is not guaranteed perfection overnight but progression over a lifetime.

Glorification

This is the final stage of our salvation in which we once and for all eternity are resurrected to new life in the new heavens and the new earth (Rom 8:23; 1 Peter 1:3-5). Aspects of this final stage include full, uninhibited communion with the Triune God (1 John 3:2), the perfection of our bodies (1 Cor 15:35-49), ultimate, lasting and unmistakable vindication (Rom 5:9-10) and our spiritual, moral, and intellectual perfection (Col 1:22; 1 Cor 13:12).⁷ This glorious truth is once again best framed by Murray who says of glorification:

God is not the God of the dead but of the living and therefore nothing short of resurrection to the full enjoyment of God can constitute the glory to which the living God will lead his redeemed.⁸

Conclusion

This is what has happened, is happening, and will happen to those who put their trust in Christ for salvation. No matter what circumstance brings us into his family, the reality of God's initiative and the remarkable benefits of the salvation he accomplished for us deserve nothing short of our utmost worship. If you are a member of the people of God, these are his benefits to you and we should live joyously and with great hope in light of them. There is nothing better than being called, regenerated, converted, justified, sanctified, and ultimately glorified by God. This is what it means to be the Church, this is who we are because of what Christ has done, what the Holy Spirit is doing and what God will do on the last day. Praise God for his grace to me, to you, to Jacob's Well and to all the people of God!

Praying that you share in the riches of God's salvation,

Scott C. Jones

Notes

¹ The classic reference on this system is John Murray, Redemption Accomplished and Applied (Eerdmans: Grand Rapids, 1955)

² Ibid., 86.

³ Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology (Zondervan: Grand Rapids, 1994), 709.

⁴ For this view see John Piper, The Future of Justification (Crossway: Wheaton, 2007), in which Piper defends a more orthodox view of justification, largely against Wright's view (see below).

⁵ For this view see N.T. Wright, Justification (SPCK Publishing: London , 2009), which is a response to Piper's book above.

⁶ For a description of each of these (and several others) see Mark Driscoll and Gerry Breshears, Death by Love (Crossway: Wheaton, 2008)

⁷ Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology 2^nd Ed. (Baker Academic: Grand Rapids, 1998), 1010-1011.

⁸  Murray, Redemption, 175.

On Divine Election and Adoption

Divine election.  In our day some may think this is a reference to the political ascendancy of Barak Obama; Oprah Winfrey seemed to have such an opinion.¹ Yet as much as we like (or maybe not like) our president, in Scripture there is a different sort of election that is spoken of that is much more mysterious and glorious than the rising and falling of political regimes.  In Ephesians 1:3, 4 we read the following passage:

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him.

The word translated “chose us” is the Greek word eklegein.  It has a range of usage but its meaning is to choose out, select or elect for some purpose.² The biblical teaching on election is that God chooses to save people from sin, death and hell completely by his grace and not because people are so fly. This is an issue that followers of Jesus have wrestled with, debated over the centuries and around which there have been various agreements and disagreements.  With the doctrine of divine election we would be wise to avoid two extremes.  First, we cannot claim to know too much about what God knows and how he does everything.  Second, we cannot be silent where God reveals to us in Scripture, the truth about his grace being poured out on people.

There have been several views over history as to what it means for God to choose and save people.  What we must not say is that God plays favorites or chooses people based on their merit or anything about them.  We will cover three views on election that Christians hold in a moment, but now I just want to reference both Old and New Testament passages which teach that God does indeed show grace and mercy to those who are undeserving.

The Old Testament

In the Old Testament we read the background for God’s work to save and redeem a people from sin and death from all nations on the earth.  He begins by making a covenant, a promise, to a guy named Abraham. His promise was to bless him and make him a great nation and that his descendants would be innumerable.  Furthermore, all the nations of the world would be blessed through his offspring (See Genesis 12 and 15). This of course foreshadowed the coming of Jesus, who descended from Abraham, to be the savior of the world. His saving work is applied in time and history to all those who believe in him, trust him and follow him. In the Old Testament we also read the following in Deuteronomy 7:7-8 regarding Israel:

It was not because you were more in number than any other people that the Lord set his love on you and chose you, for you were the fewest of all peoples, but it is because the Lord loves you and is keeping the oath that he swore to your fathers, that the Lord has brought you out with a mighty hand and redeemed you from the house of slavery, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt.

Why did God choose Abraham? Why did God choose Israel? Because they were a great people, or were better than anyone else? No, God simply chose them to be his own because of his goodness, love and redemptive purposes.

The New Testament

In the New Testament there are three primary words that speak to God’s choosing of his people.  The first, as mentioned before is ekloge (and its associated word group) which carries the meaning of being chosen or elected, being chosen by God.  We find it here in Ephesians 1:4 and nineteen other times in the NT. Second, the word pro orizein, or predestined, is also used to speak of God’s people.  Predestination deals with God’s determining something before the fact or to ordain that something would come to pass in time. This word is used in Ephesians 1:5, 11; Romans 8:29, 30; Acts 4:28; 1 Cor 2:7. Finally, the word foreknow or pro ginoskein is used to speak of all who belong to God. He knows people will come to him before it happens in history and this word is used in Romans 8:29, 11:2; 1 Peter 1:1,2.

Three Views about How/Why God Elects

There have been several ways that Christians have attempted to understand God’s choosing of his people. The following are but three ways others have attempted to grasp this deep truth.  All of these have been held by people who deeply trust Jesus in the gospel so though I favor one of them, they are all respectable views. Yet as will be seen, all cannot be true.

Unconditional Election

In this view, God chooses to save people based only upon his grace and nothing else.  There is no merit or condition in us, that requires God to save and forgive us. This does not mean that God’s election is also the basis for people’s condemnation. Scripture is clear that we are guilty before God and are separated from him due to our sin and our own choices (see Isaiah 53, Psalm 51:1-5; Romans 1-6). We are saved by God’s grace, but we are quite lost on our own. Unconditional election teaches that God intervenes through the gospel to rescue us from our self deceived, self destructive, blind and selfish ways that alienate us from God and one another. We deserve his opposition/wrath, yet he lavishes upon us grace and mercy through Jesus Christ.  Finally, the motifs used to describe us apart from God are revealing. We are seen as lost, blind, spiritually dead, enemies of God, not wanting or able to submit to God. Something had to change in our condition and it was the purpose and action of God which found us, opened our eyes, gave new life, made us friends with God now wanting to worship and follow him.  The late theologian Anthony Hoekema sums up this view well:

God the Father chose us to be saved not because of any merit he foresaw in us but only on the basis of our predetermined oneness with Christ.³

The problem some have with this view is that it leaves unanswered the question as to why God chooses certain people and could appear arbitrary. Of course, this view gives no other reason but God’s grace and mercy for his forgiveness offered to the guilty.

Election based on Foreseen Faith

Others hold that God does indeed choose to save people but he makes this choice based upon the faith he foresees they will have.  God knows all events, choices and people in all times and knows which ones will choose to believe in him and follow him. In other words, God chooses people based on what they will choose in their lives.  This view is sometimes called election according to foreknowledge. This actually sounds great because our destiny is really up to us.  There is only one problem with this. The prophets of the Old Testament, Jesus himself and the writers of the New Testament simply never teach this.  There are three places in the New Testament where God speaks of his foreknowledge and the salvation of people: Romans 8:26-30, 1 Peter 1:1, 2 and Romans 11:2.  In each case what is foreknown is the people not simply whether or not they will have faith.  Romans 8:26-30 actually teaches that God foreknows, predestines, calls and saves his people. 1 Peter speaks of “the elect exiles” in various parts of the world who are being saved, changed and coming to obedience to Jesus “according to the foreknowledge of God the Father”.  Finally, Ephesians 1 is very clear that God’s choosing took place in eternity past, before any of us even existed. He chose us in him before the foundation of the world.  God was at work before we  even were. That blows up my head in a good way.

Corporate Election “in Him”

Finally, another very interesting view is that God chooses all people who are “in Him”. In other words, he elects or chooses to save people through Jesus, but not particular individuals.  This view is attractive for several reasons.  First, Scripture does speak of election in corporate terms.  God saves a people, God saves a church, not just isolated individuals.  Ephesians 1 teaches that God chose us, Romans 8 teaches that he saves those whom he foreknew. Secondly, this view teaches that we are saved “in Him” or by our union with Jesus Christ. This is a biblical truth that should be highlighted as we are not chosen or saved apart from Jesus.⁴ However, it seems that this view misses a very significant point. The church is comprised of individuals so if he knows the group of those who will be saved, he also knows the individuals who make up the group.  Second, there are many passages that deal with Gods calling of individuals. Furthermore, the Scriptures do show us that God chooses, calls and saves individuals thereby grafting them into the church. The apostle Paul did not choose Jesus when Jesus knocked him down, put a light in his eyes and told him that he would be God’s messenger to the non Jewish world (See Act 9 for the story).  Acts 13:48 describes a scene where many Gentiles (non Jewish people) heard the gospel and it records that “as many as were appointed to eternal life believed”. This was a group individuals. Finally, the gospel of John teaches us that “that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out” (John 6:37) and “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.” (John 6:44). So while I find this view attractive⁵ in some ways, it seems to fall short regarding some important issues with election.

Some Strong Warnings

Christians in history, specifically in traditions that have followed the biblical doctrine of unconditional election, have acted as if they were God and knew who was and was not chosen. Only God knows his own mind on these matters. We have zero knowledge, let me said that again, we have zero knowledge as to who, how many, when, where or why God will save people from this moment forward.  To act like we know the mind of God and who he will ultimately save is arrogant, proud and smells of some sick religious elitism. Additionally, many followers of Jesus have taken pride in “being of the chosen folk” which is an attitude in direct contradiction to Ephesians 1.  We have no pride, no boasting, nothing special about us-we are only thankful to God for his love and grace. Furthermore, we know God has chosen and saved his people, so that we might worship God for his mercy. What we do know is that God is at work saving a multitude from every tribe, tongue and nation on the earth (Revelation 5:9,10).  For all we know, every soul on earth today could be chosen.  We do not have a black light which we use to scan people’s foreheads for some hidden fluorescent word “chosen”. Rather, we love and share the gospel with all people, trusting God that the gospel is the power of God for salvation of all who believe (Romans 1:16). One final warning on the other side of the coin.  To make ourselves the source of our own salvation belittles the grace and glory of God in the cross.  In Jesus, God is rescuing sinful people who then become worshippers knowing that they are not worthy of such lavish grace. So what shall be our path?  Another word in Ephesians one provides great insight for how we should see ourselves and the world around us.

On Adoption

God uses some wonderful language to describe his relationship to his people.  He presents himself as a loving Father who adopts children into his family by pardoning their sins and welcoming them home. This is the work of Jesus in the world today, he is adopting a big family which he loves.  All who hear the gospel and respond to him in faith he welcomes home with open arms. Rather than getting into worthless theological debates about who exactly is chosen and who is not, we should live on his mission of sharing life changing good news.  We then let the Father be the Father as his mercy is displayed in people’s lives.  We become his children by faith and worship together in the knowledge of his adopting love that rescues us out of sin and death.  

Humbled by the gracious gift of God in Jesus-in whom we are blessed with every spiritual blessing,

Reid S. Monaghan

Notes

1. Oprah referred to President Obama during the 2008 presidential campaign with the rather odd title of “the one” - http://edition.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/08/oprah.obama/index.html

2. Timothy Friberg, Barbara Friberg and Neva F. Miller, vol. 4, Analytical Lexicon of the Greek New Testament, Baker’s Greek New Testament library (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 2000), 138.

3. Anthony Hoekema, Saved by Grace (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989) 56,.

4. See Hoekema, 56, 57. His treatment rightly incorporates unconditional election with that of union with Christ. We recommend this book for any library for those wrestling with these issues.

5. I find Paul Copan’s short summaryof this view helpful. That’s Just Your Interpretation —Responding to Skeptics who Challenge Your Faith (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2001) 84-89. Copan follows the work of William K. Klein, The New Chosen People: A Corporate View of Election (Grand Rapids: Zondervan 1990).

Relating to Caesar - Christians and Governments

In the book of Daniel we see our central protagonist serving God and Babylon faithfully under Nebuchadnezzar.  When we arrive to chapters five and six we see that a regime change is brought about and Daniel is now serving under the government of the Medo-Persian Empire.   I thought it might be interesting to discuss a little bit of how Christians are to live and flourish under various governments and systems as the sands of time continue to fall. 

In a previous essay we discussed the role civil disobedience1 in the life of a follower of Jesus.  The Scriptures are clear that we are to relate to government in an orderly fashion and even pray for our leaders.   A quick summary:

• Government is given by God to give order and punish evil (Romans 13)

• We are to pray for those in authority over us-even those with whom we disagree (1 Timothy 2)

• We are to respect and honor those in authority while keeping God as the highest authority in our lives (1 Peter 2:13-17)

• We are to obey God and not people when human authorities require us to sin against God. In such cases, non violent civil disobedience is our pathway (Exodus 2, Acts 4)

Governments have taken diverse and variegated forms throughout history and it seems some governments might be easier to live under than others.  After all, humans have been governed by monarchies of Kings or Queens, aristocracies where lords and landowners held power, oligarchies where small groups govern the many, socialist schemas where the state owns the means of production, fascist dictators have roamed the earth, communist have offered classless utopias and free market democracies have raced around the world.  Let it be known that I do like freedom, democracy and representative republics; I am not a fan of big brother or a massive centralized government.2  I am also for the separation of church and state (more on that later) and not for any sort of theocracy until the Kingdom comes and Jesus is the fully reigning King.  In this essay I have no interest in advocating for a particular system of human government.  Furthermore, the question as to how politically involved those who belong to God's kingdom should be I will also save for another time. My goal here is much simpler.  I only want to demonstrate that followers of Jesus can and should seek to follow the above commands of Scripture under whatever government they live.  

Jesus was clear that the human state and the Kingdom are not the same thing when he told his disciples to "give to Caesar what is Caesars and to God what is Gods."  In other words, we should obey just laws, pay taxes and seek to be good citizens in all the places God sends us.  Furthermore, we should seek to act justly and follow Jesus as the highest authority in whatever circumstance at whatever costs to our lives.  To demonstrate this I want to briefly survey a few different political settings in which God's people have faithfully lived out these principles.  The final government will be our own American situation. In discussing our own cultural situation I want to hit a few issues.  First, an understanding of state/church separation.  Second, some of the deep blessings afforded to us in our historical situation along with some risks we face living under our system in the 21st century.  In closing I want to encourage us in our sojourn here in New Jersey to live in light of the gospel so that God is glorified and our communities are blessed.

Examples of Christians under Governments

Under Roman Imperialism - Perpetua and Felicitas

The person of Jesus was born the son of carpenter in the middle east.  This area of the world was under the vast and powerful rule of Rome and much of early Christianity was birthed in this context.  The gospel took root among both the poor and the titled in the urban contexts of the port cities of the Empire.3  Both slaves and nobility became worshippers of Jesus and lived gospel life together.  At the dawn of the 3rd century, a noblewoman named Perpetua lived in the North African city of Carthage with her husband, son and a slave who was named Felicitas.  Under the edict of Emperor Semptimius Severus in AD 202,4 Roman power sought to suppress the Christian movement and aimed its efforts at the growing Christian community in North Africa.  Perpetua and several of her friends were cathechumen, new believers studying the faith to prepare to be baptized.  They were arrested and imprisoned under imperial rule and given opportunity to worship the emperor by sacrificing to him.  Her father begged her to say she was not a Christian but she could only confess that she was indeed a follower of the risen Jesus.  Her words to here father are instructional to our understanding of living under oppressive governments:

It will all happen at the prisoners dock [her trial] as God wills, for you may be sure that we are not left to ourselves but are all in his power.5

Perpetua and Felicitas were put before wild beasts to be attacked and then ultimately publically executed by the sword.  Under a state that persecuted them, they lived and then died as faithful followers of Jesus.

Under Clans and Kingdoms - Patricus in Ireland

After the sack of Rome by the Visigoths under the leadership of Alaric I much of the western Roman empire was in disarray.  The church brought stability and eventually the barbarian conquerors were converted to the Christianity of those they befell.  Yet in the outlying areas of the British isles, much of the government was based on clan affiliation, power landowners which were small Kingdoms unto themselves.  North of Britain were the pagan Celts of Ireland who were nothing like the "civilized" continentals of the Roman way.  A young 16 year old boy from Wales named Patricus was ripped from his home and made a shepherd-slave by Irish raiders.  For some six years he labored in isolated servitude and it was during this time that he met deeply with God and was formed spiritually.   After such years he escaped back to his homeland only to be called by Christ to return.  Patricus recounts a vision where a man from Ireland appeared to him begging him "to come and walk among us once more."  The visions continued and Ireland would not leave him.  At this point Christ began to speak within him "he it is who gave his life for you, is he that speaks within you."6  Patrick would go establish a mission in Ireland to bring the gospel to the clans and Kingdoms of the Celts.  A barbaric people who once cut their captives heads off to wear them dangling from ropes around their waists, would soon tie books and Bibles to the same.   Patrick brought the gospel to a people who lived under a clan-like government structure brought many into the Kingdom of God.

Under 20th century Communism-Richard Wurmbrand

Communism was founded on the philosophical and historical political theories of many thinkers, most prominently Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels.  Marx once wrote that religion is the opiate [drug] of the masses7 which kept them subservient to the power brokers and rulers of a culture.  If people only cared for the life to come they would endure any misery in the here and now.  Communism was in no way friendly to the Christian faith.  In fact, communist regimes have systematically sought to suppress and eliminate faith to set about its atheistic, secular agenda to create a classless society.  Dictators of all stripes have never liked followers of Jesus who found his rule and reign higher than that of government commissars.  Jesus told people he would set them free no matter what situation and government they lived under; communists typically did not like this sort of thinking.  Yet as the Soviet power of the 20th century seized power in Romania, one Richard Wurmbrand, would choose the freedom of Jesus in jail cells over the oppression of a godless society.   Wurmbrand was a preacher who continued his work in the underground church in Romanian despite communist oppression.  He was arrested and jailed in 1948 and spent over eight years in various prisons and labor camps.  He resumed his work in the underground church in 1956 only be arrested again in 1959.  During his imprisonments he was tortured and suffered greatly spending years in solitary confinement.  Upon his release he began to speak for the persecuted church and founded Voice of the Martyrs a ministry which continues to this day.  Wurmbrand was a Jewish Christian who knew that Jesus was a good king who would guide him through his darkest hours.  He faithfully served under communist regimes and then lived in freedom before finally going to be with his Lord in February 2001.8

Under American Democracy

Our own situation is one in which we currently have freedom of religion.  We assemble in our homes, rent public meeting spaces and have every right that any one else has regardless of our religious beliefs.  This is a rare occurrence in the history of the world and one for which we need to be thankful.  This country was founded by those seeking religious freedom and many of them argued to keep it by desiring the church to be free from state control.  The first clause of the first amendment to our constitution reads:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

There is no state church for our country and we have no official religion.  Yet in recent times some have began to interpret this clause to mean that it demands a public square free from all religion and only a strict secularism is to be permitted for citizens when they are relating to "public" issues such as education and law.  Spiritual beliefs and philosophical opinions should be kept a private matter and not be brought up in public company.  It is with great joy that we live in a culture where we have such great freedoms for our faith, yet I'm not sure that we can assume that it will always be this way. 

Today our culture can see evangelism as invasive and intolerant. Today many seek to silence teaching about Jesus and relegate it to the private halls and houses of worship.  It is not by force of arms or rule of law but by intellectual and social pressure and ridicule that Christians are subtly urged to keep quiet in the streets. 

Our freedom also brings great risks as we live under our current government.  It is easy to value Americanism and its values over the Kingdom and what Jesus wants for his people.  We can value riches and political influence over the gospel and loving others.  We can be seduced to thinking that America is somehow a divine nation rather than simply a nation that God has ordained for this time and place.  Please don't misunderstand me, I love this country and our systems of government.  Yet America ≠ The Kingdom of Heaven.  Nancy Pearcy, in her book Total Truth, even has a chapter with a revealing title "Christianity met America and Guess Which Won?"9  We must not confuse Christian faith with a particular political party, system of human government or nation.  We must always remain citizens of two realms, our own nation and the Kingdom of Heaven.  As Paul told the Christians in the ancient city of Philippi our citizenship is in heaven, and from it we await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ.

Conclusion

Our call has been clear in sojourning in Babylon with Daniel and his posse.  They lived in a culture in which the structures of power were profoundly not in submission to the creator God.  Their media, art and educational systems were in honor of false gods and human potentates.  Yet like Daniel, we too can walk with Jesus, remain faithful to God, be humble in our service to others and work diligently for the transformation of our culture.  We are not called to be powerful oppressors pushing our will upon others, but citizens of an in breaking Kingdom where we stand for justice, seek mercy and hold out the saving gospel of God as the only hope for all people.  Jesus suffered unjustly under a governor named Pontius Pilate even though he was the rightful ruler of the universe.  As we follow him we are reminded that our weapons are not of this world but rather comes through the powerful truth of the gospel.  God forgives, makes new and justifies the wicked through the work of Jesus Christ.  All who come to him are set free from sin, death and hell and will inherit eternal life.  We now live as sojourners in light of the cross, living for the glory of God and the good of others.  This is our way.

Notes

1. Essay on Civil Disobedience available online here: https://www.powerofchange.org/blog/2009/2/22/to-obey-or-not-to-obeythat-is-the-question.html

2. UVA Sociologist Brad Wilcox recently discussed in the Wall Street Journal how a growing state usually corresponds with a shrinking church-http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123690880933515111.html

3. For more on the early spread of Christianity see Rodney Stark, Cities of God-The Real Story of How Christianity Became an Urban Movement and Conquered Rome (HarperOne, 2006).

4. Justo Gonzalez, The Story of Christianity (HaperSanFrancisco, 1984) 83.

5. Perpetua, in Mark Gali and Ted Olson 131 Christians Everyone Should Know (Broadman and Holman, 2000) 363.

6. Summary of the account in Thomas Cahill, How the Irish Saved Civilization (Anchor Books, 1995) 105, 106.

7. In the introduction of Marx's Introduction to A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right, 1843.

8. An interesting historical video on Wurmbrand is actually online at http://www.persecution.tv/media/tfc/player.html

9. See Chapter 10 in Nancy Pearcey, Total Truth (Crossway, 2004) 273.

Who is in Charge around here?

As human beings we are in love with the idea that we are in control of things.  I think it is an especially acute problem for human beings in America. We think we can make it happen, win the day, command our destinies...it is a fun ride until reality smacks us around a bit.  The truth of the matter is that much of life is utterly out of our control.  We did not choose where we would be born, who would be our parents and a myriad of other things about our lives.  Yet we want to be in control and we know that our choices do matter greatly in how our lives turn out.

In Daniel chapter four we witness the final chapter of God's education of the Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar.  The lesson which is taught is quite clear: God rules in the affairs of people and nations on the earth.  Theologically we use the term Sovereignty to describe God being the highest rule and authority known.   There is simply no throne or power above that of the creator God. Yet this does bring questions.  If God is Sovereign and is accomplishing his purposes how do my choices affect the outcomes of life?  Are my choices subject to God's direction as well?  How free is my free will? If God is Sovereign, then why does he permit certain things to go down?

In a previous junk drawer we discussed God's sovereignty and rule over both good and evil.  You can read that online if you like. This week we want to do something just a bit different; we want to discuss the relationship of God's Sovereignty and our responsibility.  In other words, how does God's rule over all things interact with my choices to do some things.  To do this I want to begin by defining what we mean by these two terms.  I will then discuss the scope of these and how we avoid any sort of contradiction by setting one authority above another.  Next I want us to chew on the nature of our free will and several philosophical definitions.  Finally, we will close by discussing our nature as creatures and how we respond to God in humility , faith and following.

Some Definitions

Sovereignty of God- As briefly stated above, when we say God is sovereign, we mean that there is  no higher rule, reign or authority that exists.  God is in control of all things and by providential leading brings them towards his desired ends.  There is great wonder, glory and mystery in the Sovereignty of God.  It is a teaching that brings great comfort to believers as well as a deep sense of human dependence.  Yet when seen in a skewed manner, God's sovereignty can cause some to think that his rule makes our choices, our lives, our journeys as somewhat inconsequential or unimportant . 

Human Responsibility- Though God is sovereign, he has created human beings, male and female in his own image (Genesis 1:26, 27).  Furthermore, God calls us to co-rule and reign with him on the earth as stewards.  He has vested us with dominion in the created order and we are to follow him in what he has called us to be.  By our very nature, we have been created to be responsible to God for how we represent him and steward our lives and the created order.  There is high human responsibility to a Sovereign God which is taught in the Scriptures.  

In Scripture we see God's sovereignty and our responsibility clearly taught in many places.   In the narrative of Daniel we see quite plainly that God is teaching us as well as various players in the story that he rules and reigns supreme over all.  He is the one who changes the times and seasons and sets up kings and removes them (Daniel 2:21).  His is the dominion which is an everlasting dominion and his Kingdom will last through all generations (Daniel 4:34).   Additionally, the prophecy of Isaiah teaches us that  there is no God but God who rules over all things and declares the end from the beginning in the story of history (Isaiah 45).  His purposes will stand, all that he wishes to accomplish will be accomplished (Isaiah 46); he is the Sovereign Creator God. 

At the same time, our lives are lived actively by either following him or in rebellion against  him.  To bow the knee, to follow him, to love him, worship him, trust him is an act of our wills, but our wills are hardened so that we need his enabling grace.   We are truly guilty before God for our sins and we are responsible for the choices we make.  We are responsible and God is still in control of all things.  At this some might think that sovereignty and human decisions are at odds with one another or produce some sort of contradiction.  There is no contradiction as long as we are not ultimately free and God ultimately sovereign.  The scope of our freedom is either limited by God's rule or God's rule is limited in some sense by the scope of human freedom.  I think is helpful to look at the scope of sovereignty and our freedom as a way to understand this a little better.

Scope-What's on Your Plate?

If we think in terms of ownership and responsibility the tensions between sovereignty and our responsibility resolve much more easily.  It is clear from Scripture that God created and is therefore the owner of all things.  Psalm 24:1 teaches us that the earth is the Lord's and the fullness thereof, the world and those who dwell therein.  Furthermore, Scripture teaches us that all things were created by him and for him (Colossians 1:16).  If God is the owner of all things, then he is responsible for all things. 

• Everything is on God's plate-he is responsible and sovereign in all things
• Some things God places on your plate-we are responsible for our lives and that which is entrusted to us as his stewards

Think about it.  If I were absolutely free to do anything and everything, then God could not accomplish anything in my life contrary to my will.  Absolute human freedom and absolute sovereignty actually are contradictory.  Yet if God is absolutely sovereign and I am responsible for what he puts before me then we have no contradiction.  Yet the nature of human free will and responsibility has puzzled thinkers in every age and I think looking at some things philosophically is appropriate.  So I want to pose what may sound like a crazy question-do we really have free will?

Do we have Free Will?

A question such as this can usually be a bit unnerving to us as we know we set alarm clocks, choose to get up (mostly), go to work and make decisions about how we act and treat others, et al.  It seems that I will likely choose to buy a new Palm Pre smart-phone some time 2009.  It is just self-evident that human beings posses something that many times is called free will.

As we begin a discussion of free will, it should be known that among secular philosopher types the belief that we have free will is laughable.  Most people who do not believe in God or any spiritual reality such as human souls, simply believe we are biological machines predetermined by causal chains of events determined by the laws of physics.  For instance the Center for Naturalism, an organization dedicated to promoting naturalistic thought and policies, makes the following statement on their web site:

Practically speaking, naturalism holds that an individual's development and behavior are entirely the result of prior and surrounding conditions, both genetic and environmental. Naturalism, therefore, denies that persons have contra-causal free will - that something within them is capable of acting as a first cause.

As a Christian, I do not believe we are simply determined by genetics and environment and that the world itself is not a closed system of cause and effect based on the laws of physics.  We hold that both God and human beings are capable of meaningful actions in the world.  Yet this quote brings up a distinction in discussions of free will in that it uses the term contra-causal free will to distinguish its views.  This brings up an important distinction in discussions about human choice, one that even Christians differ with one another about.  First two quick definitions:

• Contra Causal or Libertarian Free will...this is a version of free will you might call: really, really free, free will.  It holds that that a person can make genuinely free decisions without any other causation but the person's will.  Christian philosopher J.P. Moreland defines it this way: "When an agent acts freely, he is a first or unmoved mover; no event causes him to act.  His desires, beliefs and so on may influence his choice, but free acts are not caused by prior states in the agent."¹
• Compatibilism-Our choices are in accord with other factors and never uncaused or unconditioned.  Past choices, our environment, our character development and virtue, God's working, our current desires all weigh into our decisions. 

While the naturalistic determinist believes our choices are compatible (or more precisely dictated to us by) with genetic and environmental determinism, there are also Christians who believe our choices are free, yet God may guide them when he chooses to do so in order to achieve his purposes.   Another way of looking at this is that God has freer, free will than we do.  I do not find this troubling as it seems evident that God is God and we are not.  

In arguing that human freedom and God's sovereignty are compatible, Christian philosopher and theologian Bruce Ware makes an excellent point:  "human freedom that is compatible with God's meticulous sovereignty², then, cannot be libertarian or contra-causal freedom, but must instead truly be a freedom of one's strongest inclination, desire, and volition. That is, our freedom consists in our choosing and doing according that what we are inclined most, or what we desire most, to do."³ Dr Ware's contention is not that we do not choose to do anything, but rather human beings choose what they are most inclined to do or what they desire most.

We do not wish to say that our choices are not free in a limited sense; we do make choices and we are responsible for them.  Yet we do want to say is that God can indeed act in the lives of human beings, changing their minds and wills.  In fact, Scripture teaches us that human beings, if left to their own desires, will not seek God and will not submit to his rule.  People become followers of Jesus precisely because he intervenes to change us and give us new desires and inclinations (See Romans 3 and Romans 8 in particular).   Whereas one day we did not desire to love God, read Scripture, worship Jesus, etc. something happens and we are changed.  We now find Jesus to be a treasure and we actually desire to love and follow him.  This is not dependent on our free will but is rather a sovereign work of God.  Jesus told his closest friends on earth: you did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you to bear much fruit, fruit that will last (paraphrase of John 15:16).  We are indeed chosen by God, saved by God and changed by God to become followers of Jesus.  All of this is by grace, not because of anything we are or anything we do (Ephesians 2:1-10). 

Unlike the secular determinist, we do believe that God can act in the world and we can make choices.  Yet we also believe that God is in control and bringing about his will, a purposeful working in history.  So in some sense, God is sovereign and determines everything, yet uses the choices of our lives as means to accomplish his ends.  

How God's Sovereign rule and our choices and responsibility interact is a puzzling mystery around which followers of Jesus have wrestled for years.  We do not intend to solve the issue here.  Yet as we see in the story of Daniel and Nebuchadnezzar, God wants us to know without question that God rules and his Kingdom will be established despite our pride and rebellion.  We far too often think we are the masters of the universe and the captains of destiny; we are not, and it is good news to realize this and follow the one who graciously leads all things.

Our Response to God's Initiative

One of the  most difficult things about becoming a follower of Jesus is realizing that you are not in control.  It sometimes makes us afraid to let go of the steering wheel of life and trust someone else with ultimate things.  Yet our wise and loving Creator desires for us to come to him by faith, to put our hand of trust into his and then follow. The irony of it all is that by yielding to a sovereign God we find our greatest joy.  We may go to sleep at night knowing that God is on point and that we can rest.   We need not persist in our self-deception that we are the little god of our own lives; such small deities always disappoint.  Yet knowing the God who made us, leads us and forgives us in Christ leads us to a place of life and peace forever.

God freely came to the earth in person of Jesus to show us who he is.  God freely came to the earth in Jesus to die for rebels and bring them home into a relationship that truly satisfies.  God loves freely, he is calling to you, if you sense his Spirit beckoning you to come home, then freely respond with the desire and the grace he is giving.  

Notes

¹ J.P. Moreland and Garrett J. DeWeese, Philosophy Made Slightly Less Difficult (Downers Grove: Intervarsity Press, 2005) 124. Emphasis added.

^2. Meticulous Sovereignty means that God is in control of all things in life, not just a few things here and there.

^3. Bruce Ware, God's Greater Glory-The Exalted God of Scripture and the Christian Faith (Wheaton: Crossway, 2005) 27.  Dr. Ware's discussion of Sovereignty and Free will in this book is a must read for Christians who desire to take seriously the teachings of Scripture regarding the sovereignty of God.   See pages 24-26 in summary and  chapter 3 in detail.

To Obey, or Not to Obey...That is the Question

In Daniel 3, Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego were given an order to obey a law which demanded all leaders of the Babylonian empire to bow down in worship before a golden image set up by Nebuchadnezzar.  They willfully disobey the order and get themselves into a bit of trouble for doing so.  This brings up an important question for followers of Jesus in every time period.  Is it right to disobey governing authorities?  As Americans, who revel in individualism and whose country was born by throwing off the rule of a European monarch, this is hardly a question.  Yet there is a great tension in the teaching of Scripture and in human society in general. 

Practical Tensions

In order to have a culture that experiences anything less than chaos, there must be some order.  It has been demonstrated time and again that human beings are quite capable of bringing havoc upon the world.  In light of this, government has been necessary.  Yet at the same time, governments are made up of the same human beings who can tyrannically and unjustly oppress those whom they serve.  Hence we have a tension that must be resolved.  First, we need government and we need to follow certain rules or laws in order to have a peaceful and meaningful existence.   Second, it is true that a government can be wicked or ask its people to do unjust tings.  In such cases that government's rules ought to be disobeyed. Or should they?

Biblical Tensions

There is clear teaching in Scripture regarding obeying government and the nature of rebellion.  Many are surprised that the Bible actually commands followers of Jesus to obey governing authorities.  For instance, Romans 13:1-5 gives this strong exhortation:

¹Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. ²Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. ³For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, ⁴for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer.

It also goes on to say we should pay taxes, but that is painful to read being a resident of New Jersey.  The point is that we should follow the laws of our land because the state is appointed by God to  correct and punish wrong doing so a peaceable society can flourish.   Furthermore, to go against right authority appears to be sin in light of God's strong words about rebellion (1 Samuel 15:22, 23) That is one side of the tension.

The other side of the tension arises from some clear biblical examples of people who in fact disobey governing authorities.  The Hebrew midwives disobey Pharaoh's commands to destroy Hebrew babies in Exodus 1.  In Acts 4 the early leaders of Jesus' church disobey a command from the ruling council in Jerusalem.  They are asked by the authorities to no longer preach or teach about Jesus; their response was clear:

Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you rather than to God, you must judge, for we cannot but speak of what we have seen and heard. 

Equally clear was the response of our guys here in Daniel 3.  Their response to Nebuchadnezzar was strong and resolute:

O Nebuchadnezzar, we have no need to answer you in this matter. 17 If this be so, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and he will deliver us out of your hand, O king. 18 But if not, be it known to you, O king, that we will not serve your gods or worship the golden image that you have set up.

So it seems we have to reconcile God's commands to obey government and some clear cases where God has displayed his blessing upon the disobedience.  The solution to this problem is actually quite simple, the application of that solution can be quite complex requiring wisdom.  Is it OK to disobey the government? Yes, it seems, when it wants you to sin against God. 

Higher Authority

It is clear from Scripture that we are to listen to God's word above the commands of human beings.  We are to submit to a law that transcend the borders of nations and cultures. As the apostles in Acts 4 show us, we are to live in a manner that pleases God and not blindly obey a sinful law from government.   How we are to live this injunction in a world of complex situations and circumstances must be considered.  Additionally, whether the law of the land should be the law of God is a difficult subject which various Christians approach differently.  To proceed into some of the complexity of this I will take two paths.  First, we will simply look at the relationships of God's law to the laws of the state.  This is necessary if we are to be able to compare the two and if the state is to rule justly.  Finally, we will look at two different camps regarding civil disobedience and close by giving a positive encouragement from Scripture.

Laws, Higher and Lower

Both church and state have been called by God to govern and have authority in the lives of Christians.  The church is a body of believers called out by God together as a covenant people by the gospel.  As such, the highest authority in our lives is the Word of God, the Scriptures.  Yet each church is in a realm of state authority as well so the lines of separation must be discussed.  Historically, the Roman Catholic Church and the magisterial reformers (Luther, Zwingli and Calvin) held to a unification of church/state.  The state was legitimized by God and the church endorsed this legitimacy.  Additionally, the state enforced and permitted the establishment of religious authority and unity in a realm. This view had long standing back into Greek and Roman times.  A state and its gods were one.  However, this was questioned by many reformers and evaluated in light of Scripture.  Did not Jesus teach that the rule of Caesar was different than the rule of God?  Does not a marriage between worldly power and the church have a corrupting influence on both?  Such questions in Western culture led the founders of the American experiment to articulate clearly the relationship between church and state.  It is found in the well known establishment and free exercise clauses of the first amendment of the US Constitution.  Here is how it reads: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.  The meaning of this statement is quite clear but the implementation has always been a bit fuzzy.  What it means is that there will be no official state religion or church in our country.  Additionally, the government will not prohibit law abiding citizens from freely practices their religion.  It does not make a religion free zone in any portion of society nor does it create a religion of which all citizens must participate.  It means we have freedom of religion - a gracious gift to the people of America.   I take this to be a just solution but it leaves unanswsered how the authority of the church and state are grounded.

The Authority of State - Natural Law

Many thinkers in history, particularly Aristotle, Thomas Aquinas and John Locke have taught that there is a law built into human existence which dictates to conscience basic categories of a just society.  I do not have time here, but I discussed various types of law elsewhere¹.  Natural law would be defined in the Christian tradition as follows: Natural law is the law "written on the heart" (Romans 2:13) - the conscience by which people know good and evil - right from wrong. Sin mars this faculty in man, but it remains none the less. These are things that people "can't not know" which flow from the moral nature of God and presses upon the conscience. People suppress this and hold it down in wickedness, many becoming callous as to be seared against God's witness in conscience (See Romans 1,2). This is shared by both Christian and Non Christian. Some recent works on Natural law would be found in the writings of Princeton scholar Robert George and J. Budzizewski of the University of Texas at Austin.²

The state then governs in accord to the law written on the heart expressed in basic morality found in all cultures.  The so called "second tablet" (commands 5-10) of the Ten Commandments is reflective of such basic moral foundations.  The natural law is an expression of God's authority on all peoples and we disobey this moral law to our own peril.

The Authority of Church - The Word of God

Christians however are called to a higher authority than even the state, the authority of the Word of God.  Scripture is the Supreme Court in all matters of life and teaching for Christian believers.  It is to be obeyed and heeded out of love for Jesus Christ who is revealed in this Word.  It reveals the laws of God which demonstrate to us our sinfulness and need of grace.  It reveals the gospel by which we are saved and restored to right relationship with God.  It reveals the mission of the church in the world as the in-breaking of the ultimate rule and reign of God in the Kingdom of Heaven.  It reveals that we are citizens of two realms...the Kingdoms of earth and the Kingdom of God. Scripture instructs us as to when civil disobedience is warranted while simultaneously calling us to submit to just and reasonable laws.

In this age church and state are separate spheres of authority with Scripture guiding the church.  When Jesus returns he will set up a perfect divine monarchy with himself as King of Kings.  Aristotle once wrote that the best government would be by a perfect and virtuous ruler.  Yet none of this metal is to be found among the sinful throng of humanity.  In the current state of affairs it has been said that democracy is the best of all bad forms of government.   Yet a day will come when authority will be always good, kind and just. 

In summary, the state is called to have just laws and believers are called to follow all such laws.  When the state passes unjust laws we are compelled to obey a higher standard.  The question of the application of this principle has typically found Christians in two camps.  We should disobey a government when it promulgates unjust laws or we should only disobey when it compels us by law to act in a sinful manner.  Let's close by looking at this distinction.³

Promulgation or Compulsion?

The Antipromulgation Position-this position simply states that the law is king and the state is not above the law.  If a government rules contrary to just laws than it is illegitimate or tyrannical, failing in its God given duty to promote and protect the common good.  Such governments that promote and promulgate evil should be resisted by protest and self-defensive force if necessary.  Some advocates of this view have even gone as far to recommend revolution against such tyrannical and unjust governments.

The Anticompulsion Position -  this view holds that a Christian should submit to a government until it actively compels a person to follow an unjust law or disobey God.  In this view the follower of Jesus can submit to the just laws of the state while not participating in the evil behavior the state permits.  A modern example would be a doctor refusing to obey a government which might compel him to perform abortions against her conscience. Typically, non violent⁴ resistance is the path followed by the person resisting  an unjust state in this position.⁵ The following table from Norman L. Geisler illustrates the differing views⁶:

Antipromulgationist	Anticompulsionist
When it permits evil	When it commands evil
When it promulgates evil laws	When it compels evil actions
When it limits freedom	When it negates freedom
When it is politically oppressive	When it is religiously oppressive

In closing, it is my conviction that Christians should be good citizens of any realm in which they are living (See 1 Timothy 2:1-3). We should be seek to be helpful to all who govern justly and even do good to those who treat us badly (Matthew 5:43-47). The only trouble we should be starting is the sanctified kind.  If we get in trouble for proclaiming the love of God towards sinners, the forgiveness of God the repentant and the salvation of God which comes through Jesus Christ alone-bring it on.  If we get in trouble for disobeying an evil law, then throw us in the flames.  But if you suffer for law-breaking and doing stupid things...well, that's on you.

As to the myriad of questions surrounding the use of force in self defense, or for a people to wage a violent rebellion against an unjust state...that will have to be junk left for discussion on another day.  

For Jesus,

Reid S. Monaghan

Notes

¹ See my Christianity and Nation States...Law and a Just Society at http://www.powerofchange.org/2005/5/3/christianity-and-nation-stateslaw-and-a-just-society.html

² See J. Budzizewski Written on the Heart-The Case for Natural Law and What We Can't Not Know-A Guide  and Robert P. George The Clash of Orthodoxies-Law, Religion and Morality in Crisis.

^3. This is a synopsis of the treatment in Norman Geisler's Christian Ethics-Options and Issues (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1989) 241-246.

^4. Note: This is a separate issue from the discussion of just war vs. pacifism. 

^5. For a good treatment on why Christians should not favor the use of violence see John S. Feinberg, Paul D. Feinberg Ethics for a Brave New World (Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books, 1996, c1993), 402-405.

^6. Geisler, 243.

Pluralism(s), Universalism(s) and the Gospel

In Daniel chapter 2, Nebuchadnezzar receives a dream and Daniel explains it to him and gives its interpretation.  Relieved to know the mystery that had troubled his psyche, Neb then begins to give props to Daniel and unexpectedly mad props to Daniel's God.  In verse 47 he makes the remarkable statement:

⁴⁷The king answered and said to Daniel, "Truly, your God is God of gods and Lord of kings, and a revealer of mysteries, for you have been able to reveal this mystery."

All religious traditions on the earth that are theistic in orientation have always believed in a most high God.¹ Whether it was Zeus of the Greeks, Odin of the Norse, RA of the Egyptians, Baal of the Philistines, the Great Spirit of Native Americans thinking that there is a "God of gods" is quite common in the earth.  The difference between these beliefs and that of Jews, Christians and Muslims is that they are all polytheistic-believing in a myriad of "gods."  However, Daniel is monotheistic and the Babylonians were aware of the Jewish religion and its belief in one, true creator God.  Nebuchadnezzar's exclamation is that Daniel's God is both  preeminent and sovereign.  He is above the other gods and rules above earthly kings.

In every age there has been a plurality of "gods" and I do not imagine this will ever really change.  One Bible teacher during the Protestant reformation declared that the human heart is like an "idol factory" always cranking out little gods for us to worship out of our own imaginations.² So plurality in religions is simply a fact of human experience.  The truth of all of these crafted and created deities is another matter all together.

Pluralism(s) and Universalism(s)

In our day we have moved beyond the belief in the simple fact of plurality in religious ideas, we have embraced a pluralism in their truth.  Each faith tradition believes in various Gods and nobody is to question their existence or reality.  If someone believes in pink bunny rabbits who rule the world, or little white mice for that matter, we should just all smile.

There are actually several flavors of pluralism today, some religious, some very much opposed to religious ideas.  The religious version of pluralism would say that all gods are equally valued expressions of the human attempt to reach the divine or ultimate reality.  This is a friendly bunch and tends to see contradictory ideas about God as a fun little game of no real consequence to our lives.  Important, yes, but not dealing with truth.  The question of God to the religious pluralist is one that is unknowable; so they see all religious talk as ways of groping towards an unknown, ineffable "real."³

A classic illustration of this is the parable of the blind men and an elephant.  The story traces back to an ancient Indian folk tale where several blind men are examining and elephant when the King asks them what they think an elephant is.  One who is holding on to its tail, confidently exclaims "An elephant is like a rope!" Another blind man pushing on the body of the elephant  proclaims with equal confidence "An elephant is like a wall!" Still another holding its trunk snottily weighs in "No, an elephant is like a wet hose!"  The moral of the story is supposed to illustrate the reality of religious pluralism.  Not the fact that different religious ideas teach different things about deities, but rather they are all just talking about the same thing in different ways.⁴ 

The religious pluralist in the west is typically a universalist in that he believes that all people, everywhere will ultimately end up in heaven.  Let's call them optimistic.   All will end up in a blessed state of heaven even if they don't believe in such places at all.  Religious pluralists love to make statements on the behalf of all religious people.  They say things like "All religions teach the same things on the big issues, they just differ on the details."  Of course no Muslim, Hindu, Christian or Buddhist who understands his philosophy would agree to this.  After all, the phenomena is quite the opposite.  We all agree on things like "be nice and good" but we disagree on God, heaven, hell, salvation, our problem as humans and what nice and good really mean.   Religious pluralists are nice people-I think they just want to give the world a coke and a smile.  I like that.  They are just profoundly mistaken and then they seek to impose their beliefs about everyone's faith on everyone else....which maybe isn't so nice and respectful after all.

There is another form of pluralism that is very similar that emerges from our secular minded friends.  While they see a plurality in religious ideas, they think they are somehow immune from such silly talk.  They see no truth in religion and feel it all a big chasing down a metaphysical rabbit hole as it were.  The bold and obnoxious ones revel in telling the big wide religious world that they all are, well... "stupid." Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and their tribe come to mind⁵.   They are universalists too, only of course they think we are all heading for a long dirt nap rather than heaven, paradise or nirvana. We will be ultimately gone from existence once our fragile bodies fade away.  Let's call them pessimistic.  Here is the catch. They are very religious, very dogmatic people when it comes to their own ideas.  They hold to fundamental truths and claim that everyone is blind and that they see the truth about "religions."  They worship their own minds and technological abilities and are not really a fun bunch.  After all, this sort of folk have this life changing message to bring to the world "There probably isn't a god...get over it..."  Cool.  They probably are wrong.

Let us revisit the story of the elephant and the blind men one more time.  There is a fatal problem with the whole story in my mind.  How do we even know we are talking about "an elephant"? Obviously, someone in this story can see very well and not everyone is blind. Behind the reality of the groping men grasping trunk and tail is a King who can see.  There is someone who knows what an elephant is and could tell all the blind men they are not touching rope, hose and wall.   What if the King, the one being spoken about, could tell us  and show us who he really is? What if blind eyes can be opened and elephants could be seen? In simpler terms, what if God chose to actually speak to us?  Furthermore, the problem of pluralism is that we are not all talking about elephants-some religions believe God is one and others think there are millions of Gods.  We need God to define himself for us and this is in fact what Jesus came to do...to reveal to us our creator. 

Jesus' Teaching-Inclusive and Particular

The person of Jesus and his followers had something more interesting to say; something that was both inclusive of all human beings and calls us particularly to the creator God.  The Christian message is clear that God made all things and placed people in time and history so that they might reconnect in relationship with God (See Genesis 1-3; Acts 17). Furthermore, God has kindly given all of us evidence that he exists and has certain attributes.  Psalm 19 of the Hebrew bible (what we call the Old Testament) teaches us that God is speaking to us through creation and that this witness is available to all peoples. Romans 1 teaches us that what can be known about God is clear to us from what has been created.  We can see from looking at the stars, the vast oceans, high mountains, and the intricacies of RNA and DNA that there is indeed a powerful intelligence behind the universe.   Acts 14 of the New Testament also teaches us that God kindly provides for creation and Jesus taught the same in declaring that he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust (Matthew 5:45).  So God gives to all people a universal display of his existence and common grace.   The Christian message is inclusive in this way.

Yet at the same time people have rejected God, desire to live without him both in their attitudes and actions on the earth (Read Romans 1-3).  We want to do things our way and deny that we were created by God for God.  We worship ourselves rather than the maker of all things.  Scripture calls this sin-and it is universal.  So God in his kindness reveals to us in Jesus Christ that he is "God of gods and Lord of Kings."  All who come to him in repentance (turning from sin/self to God) and faith (trusting him fully) he will not turn away.   The gospel is particular in this way.  We must come to God as God, not make him up in our minds and then come to the alter of an imaginary deity.

God shows something to us all by placing us in creation to see that there is a God to whom we give an account.  Inclusive.  Yet humanity in sin will resist his kindness so he enters the world in order to save some who will believe. The Bible does not teach that every person from every nation will be rescued from sin, death and hell.  Nor does God favor any group of people in that all from only some nations will be saved. The Scriptures are clear that there will be some from every people, tribe and language in the Kingdom of heaven (Revelation 7:9-12).  In a unique way, Jesus' message was as open as can be imagined yet only some respond.  His open call is clear:

• All who are weary and heavy burdened...come to Jesus (Matthew 11:25-30)
• All who are thirsty...drink (Revelation 22:17)
• All who are in darkness...he is light (Matthew 4:12-17; 2 Corinthians 4:1-6)
• All who are hungry...come eat and be satisfied (John 6:35-40)

Yet his message is also a call, a summons, to those who have "ears to hear."  All that have been given to Jesus he calls.  Those who "hear him" do come to him.  This is the mystery of grace; God saves, we respond.  He calls to all, yet all do not respond.   As followers of Jesus it is not our goal to prove everyone is wrong or dispute with deities. Yet we are called to present the truth-that there is one God and one mediator between God and people-the man Christ Jesus (1 Timothy 2:5,6).  This Jesus is no normal man nor simple prophet; he is God of gods and Lord of Kings and his Kingdom will last forever.

God of gods and Lord of Kings?

The most controversial figure in the New Testament is Jesus.  Yes, sweet, nice Jesus. The fact of the matter is that he made such radical claims about himself that he has always been a fork in the road for many.  Some would peddle him off as being a nice moral teacher, but this begs the question as to why he was unjustly murdered as a criminal.  He did seem to hack people off a bit no?  Jesus was utterly compelling to some while utterly repelling to others.   Part of the reason for this is that he claimed to be God incarnate (become human).  This is not what you hear people saying about themselves at Starbucks...

Followers of Jesus have been clear for centuries about the identity of Jesus.   He was not "a god of gods" he is the God of gods and Lord of Kings.  If you look at what some of his earliest followers said about him it becomes quite clear.  This is  necessarily a small sampling and I recommend further reading in this area for those who are interested.⁶

• He claimed to forgive sin, only what God could do (Mark 2:1-12)
• He claimed to be the divine "Son of Man" (Daniel 7:13, 14; Mark 13:24-27)
• He claimed to exist before Abraham was born as the "I AM" - the unique name of God in the Old Testament (John 8:48-59)
• He claimed that he was "one" with the Father (John 10)
• He claimed that if you saw him, you saw the Father (John 14)
• He was called "King of Kings and Lord of Lords" superseding the grandeur and authority of all earthly kings and rulers (Philippians 2:9-11; 1 Timothy 6:11-16; Revelation 9:11-16)

Scripture teaches us  that God became a human being  to reveal to us his nature and his ways.  Furthermore, God then died the death that we deserved on the cross-a death for sin.  He then gives to us forgiveness, grace and peace based upon his own merit.  This person, Jesus of Nazareth, is the one who is called King of Kings and Lord of Lords.  He is the God of gods revealed to us in living flesh so that we might follow and worship him.  

We proclaim him and him alone in our world, 

Notes

¹ Huston Smith, The World's Religions : Our Great Wisdom Traditions (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1991) 378.

² Hence we may infer, that the human mind is, so to speak, a perpetual forge of idols. Jean Calvin and Henry Beveridge, Institutes of the Christian Religion, Translation of: Institutio Christianae Religionis.; Reprint, With New Introd. Originally Published: Edinburgh : Calvin Translation Society, 1845-1846. (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997), I, xi, 8.

³ John Hick A Pluralist View in Dennis Okholm and Timothy R. Phillips, More Than One Way? : Four Views on Salvation in a Pluralistic World (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 1995) 47-51.

⁴ The Blind Men and the Elephant is a very old Indian folk tale.  John Godfrey Saxe (1816-1887) wrote a poem based on the story which you can read at http://www.wordinfo.info/Blind-Men-and-Elephant-crop.html

⁵ See Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion and Sam Harris Letter to a Christian Nation as exhibits A and B.

⁶ See Robert M. Bowman and J. Ed Komoszewski Putting Jesus in His Place-The Case for the Deity of Christ (Grand Rapids: Kregal, 2007) and Mark Driscoll and Gerry Breshears Vintage Jesus (Wheaton: Crossway, 2007) 11-31.

Thoughts on Plurality

What do you think of these statements:

• A plurality of persons and ideas is good...
• A plurality of religions is a brute fact...
• A plurality of gods is an idolatrous fiction...
• A plurality of contradictory "truths" is an impossibility...

Thoughts?

The Question of Dreams and Visions

There is an occurrence in Scripture where God's people are given the ability to interpret dreams and visions.  This was a common practice among the Chaldeans, and in Daniel's case, God gives him this ability.  Though there is much goofy, yes even wicked, stuff associated with dreams and visions it is one of the means by which God has revealed himself in Scripture.  The Christian doctrine of revelation teaches that God truly reveals himself or makes himself known to people.  We typically speak of his natural revelation whereby God displays something of himself through created things and conscience (See Romans 1-2 and Psalm 19).  Additionally we speak of God's special revelation where he clearly and explicitly  makes himself known.  This primarily comes through the incarnation, God becoming a human to reveal himself in the person and work of Jesus.   Furthermore God has spoken through prophets, apostles and Jesus and these are all preserved and given to us in Holy Scripture (See Hebrews 1:1-3).  So God reveals himself to all through nature and conscience.  He shows who he is and that we are accountable to him.  God reveals himself uniquely to some through his Word (the Bible) and Jesus Christ who is revealed therein.   So what of dreams?  Some theologians place dreams and visions in the category of special revelation as they are only give to some people.  They are not the normative way God speaks. 

Though dreams and visions are not something we expect, need or something that happens every day, God does use them for his purposes.  He gave Joseph the ability to interpret dreams in the book of Genesis and here in Daniel we find our exiled young man with the ability as well.    Additionally there have been documented cases of God giving dreams and visions to his people today to further his purposes. Particularly in countries where access to gospel preaching and the Scripture is limited or prohibited by law or cultural pressure, God has given people visions and dreams of Jesus.¹ Now, one caveat and caution is in order.  Any dream that does not accord with the revealed word of God we have in Scripture is not to be assumed to be "from God."  We should test any such dreams or visions by the revealed truth of the Bible and the counsel of mature leaders.   After all, while some dreams and visions can be from God, others could be demonically inspired or the byproduct of eating a bad burrito.   God has given us his Word as a sure and guiding testimony so that we can test prophecies (1 Thessalonians 5:16-22) and hold on to what is good.   There are many who seek after dreams, visions and experiences only to be led away by con men who revel in psychosomatic trickery.  We need to be guided by Scripture.  Be aware of this but also do not put God in a box, let his Word speak to you daily so that you can discern authentic visions from the poor peddling of TV prophets and nightmares brought on by an ill advised midnight snack.

Notes

1.  There are many testimonies from the Islamic world which recount dreams and visions-see http://www.answering-islam.org/Testimonies/ - See also the bibliography at the end of that page. Also, a DVD entitled More than Dreams distributed by Vision Video, has chronicled this as well.

Saying and Saving Grace

Saying and Saving Grace

Grace. There is no better word to use to describe the uniqueness of the message of Jesus than this one word.  Biblical grace is a concept not found in the religions of humanity and it is one that is often misunderstood or simply missed completely in contemporary culture.  Today when one hears the term it is likely provoke thoughts of a prayer said before meals or a character on a popular television drama.  Many Christians may talk of grace, but few of us actually live in light of the grace of God. 

In this essay I want to do a few things.  First, I want to contrast biblical grace with most ideas of religious observance found throughout our world.  After doing so I wish to offer a simple definition. Then I will breakdown several different ways in which the Bible talks about grace in God's relationship to human beings.  It is my fear that we could be too narrow in our understanding of the Scriptures teaching on grace.  Finally, I will conclude with some practical guidance on living in grace in relationship to what we might call habitual or besetting sins. 

Biblical Grace vs. The Chains of Religion

Before we make a positive definition of what we mean by grace, I want to first prepare us for its meaning by way of contrast with human religious traditions.  We might think of religion as humanity's attempt to please, connect with and commune with transcendent reality. Simply put religion is a human exercise - an attempt to please God or align with the universe etc.  It is an enterprise founded on the devotion, actions and morality of human beings.  Religion would teach us that God will like you if you say, do, believe all the right things.  The more perfect you are, the more favor you will find with God (or the karmic universe in some ways of thinking).  Many are the mantras of religion: keep the law, follow the eight fold path, observe the five pillars or sow towards good karma.  Perhaps then you will find a right standing with the transcendent or divine.  Biblical grace is a stark contrast to these sorts of ideas. 

There are many worthy definitions of the concept of grace, but for the sake of brevity I will offer a basic definition given by Millard Erickson in his Christian Theology:

By this [grace] we mean that God deals with his people not on the basis of their merit or worthiness, what they deserve, but simply according to their need; in other words, he deals with them on the basis of his goodness and generosity.¹

It is tempting to look into the mirror to tell oneself I'm good enough, I'm smart enough and dog gone it, people like me.  The wonderful truth of the grace of God is that he accepts sinners, not perfect people, he gives grace to the needy, not to those looking to be full of themselves.  The teaching of the Bible about grace reveals that God's acceptance of broken, imperfect people is not based upon them getting their act together.  God accepts those who come to him in the knowledge that they are undeserving and in great need. He does not turn away those who come to him with a trusting soul.  Those with a spiritual hunger and thirst may come to him and be accepted in grace.

³⁵Jesus said to them, "I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst. ³⁶But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe. ³⁷All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out. ³⁸For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. ³⁹And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day. ⁴⁰For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day."

Species of Grace

The Bible teaches us that there are several kinds of grace which God lavishes on his creation and human beings.  God is always expressing kindness to a world which is living in rebellion from Him.  One of the most fascinating truths of Scripture is that God showers grace even upon his enemies.  The following are a sampling of the kinds of grace God expresses to his world.

Widespread (or Common) Grace

First, there is an aspect of grace that is widespread and given to all human beings.  God's design of the universe and our planet provides that the sun rises² on all people equally and the just and unjust receive rain and physical provisions for life. (Matthew 5:44-45). Furthermore, God's widespread, or common, grace bears daily witness to his loving care by giving us fruitful seasons and harvests and allowing people to have satisfied, glad hearts in our food and drink (Acts 14:15-17).  Finally, God graciously reveals himself to all of us through creation and conscience (See Romans 1:18-23 and Romans 2:14-16).  He does this for all so that they might know that he is God and we are accountable to him.

Saving Grace

Yet in addition to God's widespread grace, he additionally gives saving grace to those who believe.  We are saved from sin, death and hell by the kindness and grace of God. His rich mercy towards us brings us to trust in his grace rather than our own works to make us justified and forgiven (Ephesians 2:4-9)before Him.  God's grace is lavished upon his people so that their sins are forgiven and they are made right with him.  He brings us back into a close relationship of love and trust through the work of Jesus (Romans 3).

Sanctifying (Life Changing) Grace

God's grace does not simply save us so that we get on a life waiting list for heaven. No, his graces transforms our lives to be more like Jesus.  His grace teaches us to renounce worldly passions and to now live our lives for the glory of God.  His grace purifies us and places in us a strong desire for good works where we may not have given a rip before (Titus 2:11-14). 

Persevering Grace

Finally, all followers of Jesus who have received widespread grace, been rescued by saving grace and who are being transformed by sanctifying grace are also kept by grace until the arrival of the Kingdom of Heaven.  God preserves his people by grace (John 10:27-29) and he holds a coming reward for all he is guiding towards his Kingdom.  He guards and keeps his people by his sustaining grace until our temporal death or the coming of Jesus in fullness at the end of time (1 Peter 1:3-5).

One of the beautiful teachings of the New Testament has really connected with me over the years. In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul writes the following: It is the grace of God that I am what I am, and this grace was not without effect, no I worked harder than them all, but not I, but the grace of God within me (1 Corinthians 15:10).  This passage teaches us the centrality of grace in shaping our lives and giving strength to labor in the purposes of God.

Grace in the Trenches

A strong concept of the grace of God is needed to keep us from the edges and extremes of prideful self righteousness or despair from our own sin.  Martin Luther's classic reformation theology teaches us that Christians are Simul Justus et Peccator-we are simultaneously justified yet at the same time sinful.  God's grace has accepted us, justified us through the work of Jesus.  Yet throughout life we battle with what some have called indwelling sin.  We must daily yield our lives to his grace and trust him to lead us away from temptation.  Romans 8:1-17 teaches us that the new life we have in God must be lived by his Spirit and power every day.  While at the same time we work to put to death the sin in our lives.  This tension must be embraced or we will become either proud or despairing. 

If we think we have made ourselves better, or our good works have made us somehow more pleasing to God then we will think too much of ourselves.  If we forget the unconditional acceptance of God through the work of Jesus we will despise ourselves and despair at our brokenness.   The middle way is the way of the cross whereby we daily die to our sins and ask God to help us live in newness of live (Romans 6).  We do this by practicing confession (See Psalm 51 and 1 John 1:9) and repentance.  By confessing our sins to God we walk in the light with him and experience the truth of grace.  As Jesus once said to an adulterous woman-neither do I condemn you.  Then we turn from our sin back into (not run away from) fellowship with God and his people.  As Jesus said to that same woman-go and sin no more.  

As we struggle with habitual sins of pornography, self-image, pride, self-exaltation, eating disorders, lying, gossip, slandering our neighbors, rebelling and just being punks, we must remember that we are saved by grace.  Only then will we have the courage necessary to be changed by grace.  Confession and repentance are great gifts to the believer.  They are like a scuba tank of live giving oxygen for those suffocating in the deep oceans of the soul. As you struggle with sin, remember Jesus-he is able to sympathize with you and change your life.  If you go it alone, denying the grace of God, you are literally up the creek without a paddle.

Learning to walk with you towards our gracious God,

Reid S. Monaghan

Notes:

1. Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Book House, 1998), 320.

2. Jesus and the Scriptures, as many others, use phenomenological language to describe the relationship of the earth to the sun. It is common in all times in history to speak of “the sun rising” and is in no way “unscientific or inaccurate” to speak this way. In fact, every time the weather person is on the news you will hear talk of the sunrise. Plus, watching sunsets and sunrises with a friend at the beach is much better than “lets go observe the well timed planetary rotation of our earth.” That won’t get you too many dates. God has given us certain “means of grace” or practices by which he transforms our lives.

3. To read about these practices see Reid S. Monaghan Spiritual Disciplines at the book table or online at —http://www.powerofchange.org/blog/booklets.html.