Jesus Answer Knocks Them Off Their Feet

 

“…they drew back and fell to the ground.” ~John 18:6

The quotation above is from John’s account of Jesus’ arrest. Judas leads a group of soldiers and Pharisees to a grove of olives and Jesus steps out from his group and asks who they are seeking. They said, “Jesus of Nazareth;” and he answered, “I am he.” And then John tells us that at the words, ‘I am he;’ they fell to the ground. I’ve quoted the NIV (or ESV) above; The Message version adds a different dimension, “He said, “That’s me.” The soldiers recoiled, totally taken aback. Judas, his betrayer, stood out like a sore thumb.”

This detail about the soldiers is singular to John’s gospel. (He doesn’t mention the betrayal with a kiss at all.) I’ve often wondered what caused this particular reaction.

• The Life Application Bible suggests that they were startled by the boldness of his question
• The Wycliffe Bible Commentary suggests he unnerved his captors, some of whom may have been the ones previously unable to lay hands on him (John 7:43-46);
  
• Though the Pharisees had seen Jesus teaching in the temple, it’s possible the soldiers had never seen him up close and personal. As they came into proximity with him he was either not what they expected, or they sensed something “wholly other” about him. (Matthew Henry adds that the term ‘Jesus of Nazareth’ was used derisively, and that Jesus could have simply answered “No” for technically he was ‘Jesus of Bethlehem.’)
  
• The Life App. and various other commentaries tell us that his “I am he” answer used the “I AM” form of God’s name; it indicated his claim of divinity. There are many pivotal turning points in John’s text, but this is one where we often miss the full impact;
• The above, combined with what they where about to do; they suddenly felt the impact of their own actions. Were they arresting an innocent man? Were they arresting God?
  
• If the full force of his answer registered at all; Matthew Henry points out they would realize that he could simply strike them dead at that point. Was there any limit to his potential response?
  

Without taking away from any of these explanations, I want to introduce a new dimension to the narrative that had never struck me before in this context. I picked this up reading Michael Card writing in an older issue of the Our Journey devotional booklet.

“When Jesus was arrested in Gethsemane, He was already bloody before anyone laid a hand on him. He had been fighting a battle that would make certain the final outcome on Calvary. The blood and water that flowed from his wounds on the cross were preceded by bloody sweat that poured from His pores as He suffered the agony of a death more painful than the physical death of the cross, the death of the will... The painful crushing began appropriately enough, in the garden…” ~ Michael Card (Italics added)

What do you do if you are the soldiers, sent to arrest someone, who looks more like a victim than a criminal? What do you do if the plan calls for flogging or torture and the person seems to be already spent? Could that be part of what caused them to draw back and fall to the ground?

Zacchaeus Meets The Christmas Story

Ever wondered what you were thinking when you wrote something years earlier?  This was first published at Thinking Out Loud in November, 2009.  I read this three times before I finally noticed what the reference is to the Christmas story. This has actually appeared here before as well, in 2011; I hope you don’t mind a repeat.

The story of Zacchaeus in Luke 19: 1-9 is the ultimate children’s Bible story. Think about, it’s got:

• a short key character; kids can identify
• a parade — or something similar — about to pass by
• tree climbing; what kid doesn’t like that?
• unlikely guy gets singled out for special treatment
• Zacchaeus and Jesus have a tea party, at least according to the children’s song; actual serving of tea may have been unlikely
• restitution of unfair trade practices; he did something bad and is going to make it right

But the tree climbing is the fun part of the story, so much so that we omit to notice the fact that respectable adults in the culture don’t climb trees. In the book Preaching the Parables to Postmoderns, Brian Stiller reminds of another story where we miss the cultural nuances.

Stiller notes that in the story of the prodigal son, the father sees his returning son in the distance and runs to meet him. To run meant to lift the lower hem of the tunics worn at that time, which would expose the ankles and lower leg. While that may not seem out of line with the bathrobes worn in most church plays you’ve seen, it in fact is out of line with norms in that society. Besides, the patriarchal head of household doesn’t run, period.

Zacchaeus climbs up a tree because he doesn’t want to miss Jesus. The father in the story of the two brothers runs because he doesn’t want to miss a moment with or hide his enthusiasm for the return of his lost son. Both actions involve a considerable loss of dignity on the part of both parties.

David understood this. Consider this account from II Samuel 6:

¹⁴ David, wearing a linen ephod, danced before the LORD with all his might, ¹⁵ while he and the entire house of Israel brought up the ark of the LORD with shouts and the sound of trumpets.

¹⁶ As the ark of the LORD was entering the City of David, Michal daughter of Saul watched from a window. And when she saw King David leaping and dancing before the LORD, she despised him in her heart.

¹⁷ They brought the ark of the LORD and set it in its place inside the tent that David had pitched for it, and David sacrificed burnt offerings and fellowship offerings before the LORD. ¹⁸ After he had finished sacrificing the burnt offerings and fellowship offerings, he blessed the people in the name of the LORD Almighty. ¹⁹ Then he gave a loaf of bread, a cake of dates and a cake of raisins to each person in the whole crowd of Israelites, both men and women. And all the people went to their homes.

²⁰ When David returned home to bless his household, Michal daughter of Saul came out to meet him and said, “How the king of Israel has distinguished himself today, disrobing in the sight of the slave girls of his servants as any vulgar fellow would!”

²¹ David said to Michal, “It was before the LORD, who chose me rather than your father or anyone from his house when he appointed me ruler over the LORD’s people Israel—I will celebrate before the LORD. ²² I will become even more undignified than this, and I will be humiliated in my own eyes. But by these slave girls you spoke of, I will be held in honor.”

The line I like is verse 22: I will become even more undignified than this. Nothing reinforces this like the Matt Redman song,

I will dance I will sing
To be mad for my King
Nothing Lord is hindering
The passion in my soul

And I’ll become even more
Undignified than this
Some would say it’s foolishness but
I’ll become even more
Undignified than this

David’s removal of his outer garment ought to remind you of something else. Think about this moment from John 13:

¹It was just before the Passover Feast. Jesus knew that the time had come for him to leave this world and go to the Father. Having loved his own who were in the world, he now showed them the full extent of his love^.

²The evening meal was being served, and the devil had already prompted Judas Iscariot, son of Simon, to betray Jesus. ³Jesus knew that the Father had put all things under his power, and that he had come from God and was returning to God; ⁴so he got up from the meal, took off his outer clothing, and wrapped a towel around his waist. ⁵After that, he poured water into a basin and began to wash his disciples’ feet, drying them with the towel that was wrapped around him.

⁶He came to Simon Peter, who said to him, “Lord, are you going to wash my feet?”

⁷Jesus replied, “You do not realize now what I am doing, but later you will understand.” …

¹²When he had finished washing their feet, he put on his clothes and returned to his place.

The outer garment that Jesus removed was the fine piece of clothing that symbolized his authority as a rabbi. Hours later, Roman soldiers would gamble for the chance to walk way with this prime specimen of clothing as a souvenir of their day’s work.

This action symbolized his servant leadership, but as he told Peter, there was a bigger picture yet to be grasped. I believe that the removal of his outer garment symbolizes something else entirely, as shown in Philippians 2:

⁵ You must have the same attitude that Christ Jesus had.

⁶ Though he was God,
he did not think of equality with God
as something to cling to.
⁷ Instead, he gave up his divine privileges;
he took the humble position of a slave
and was born as a human being.
When he appeared in human form,
⁸ he humbled himself in obedience to God
and died a criminal’s death on a cross.

⁹ Therefore, God elevated him to the place of highest honor…

Jesus gave up the splendor of heaven — took of his outer robe — to enter into our human condition. But then, as John 13:12 shows us, he puts that outer robe back on, i.e. he returns to the glory he had known before at the right hand of the Father.

There are lots of words we could use to describe this, but the key one for today is that he made himself undignified.

Now, he invites you to find a place where you can lose your own dignity in order to accomplish his purposes in your generation.

I Samuel and John passages – NIV; Philippians passage – NLT

A edgier version of Undignified by David Crowder appears here

Do Believers Need to Keep Confessing Their Sins?

This is from Currents, a new blog at Alltop which originates with Streams church in Red Deer, Alberta.  (Streams, currents, get it?) You’ll have to read this closely to catch what is and isn’t being said here, and regular readers will notice the nuances of this are somewhat opposite a principle we looked at here not too long ago, where classic authors talked about keeping short accounts with God.  So we present it for your consideration. Feel free to comment on how the two posts coincide. As always, you’re encouraged to read this at source where it appeared as Do We Need To Confess Our Sins to Be Forgiven?.

Do We Need To Confess Our Sins To Be Forgiven?

That depends on who is asking.

Confess means to agree with God (to agree with, concede or acknowledge).

Sinners cannot receive the free gift of salvation if they do not first realize they are sinners and that they need a saviour.  Yes, they need to confess their sins, to come into agreement with God regarding their need for salvation.

Saints, on the other hand, have already accepted the free gift of salvation. Jesus died once and for all, we don’t have to keep going back to the start every time we mess up. All our sin, forgiven and forgotten and destroyed utterly; we do not need to keep confessing.

That’s not entirely true, we do need to confess.  We need to confess, agree with God, that we have been made righteous. We are not ‘sinners saved by grace’ and confessing as much puts us under the law.  You are a saint saved and empowered by grace. Period.

But what about 1 John 1:9?

“If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”

This verse is the only place in the New Testament that ties our confession with forgiveness.  To build a doctrine of forgiveness on one verse would be unwise.

John says earlier, in verse 5, that ‘This is the message we have heard from him and proclaim to you…” and he then presents the Gospel to sinners. Yes, most of 1 John is written to believers, but in verse 6 John speaks to those who are walking in darkness, those who do not practice the truth. Verse 8 and 10 uses the royal ‘we’ to describe those sinners who do not acknowledge their need for a savior.

So, to sinners, yes you need to confess your sins. Once. Once you’ve been saved we do not need additional forgiveness.

But you saints,  don’t throw out confession all together!

We need to agree with God on many fronts, confessing what the Bible says about us is an exercise in faith and it helps us renew our minds. Saints should be confessing things like “For you did not receive the spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received the Spirit of adoption as sons, by whom we cry, “Abba! Father!”” (Romans 8:15)

Hebrews 13:15 exhorts us to “continually offer up a sacrifice of praise, that is, the fruit of lips that acknowledge(confess) his name.”
When snared in temptation, or condemnation, or when suffering, this type of confession does us good.

Confession within community is also healthy.
James 5:16 says “Therefore, confess your sins to one another and pray for one another, that you may be healed,”

That healing usually is physical, but can be spiritual.  Sin thrives in the dark. A guilty conscience is like a stomach ache, it’s a signal that something is wrong.  Just as it is wise to address physical symptoms, when guilt builds up and shame enters in, it’s a sign that we should deal with the sin issue in our lives.

Our bodies, spirits and minds are so interconnected that a chemical or hormonal imbalance can affect our moods (i.e. depression) and our minds can affect our bodies (i.e. the placebo affect). Things like bitterness or shame can manifest in our body as sickness.

Confessing sins in safe community brings about multi-faceted healing of our body and mind (our spirit is already a new creation!).

Confession is healthy and good. But to link the forgiveness of a saint’s sinful acts to confession is incorrect.  When we accept salvation (certainly through confession and faith) all our sins, past present and future, are wiped out and forgotten.  To maintain righteousness we do not need to confess. We cannot maintain righteousness, our righteousness is dependent on Jesus alone.

The place confession has in the life of a Christian is that of dealing with sin, not getting forgiveness. It is about bringing our thoughts more in line with what God says about us, that we are righteous, holy, loved, pure and powerful.

The confession of our sins for forgiveness is then a one time deal. After that confession remains a tool for saints in conquering their sin and faulty heart beliefs about their identity.

Do we confess to receive forgiveness? Depends who’s asking.

The Ever-Present Problem of Evil

Evil is inherent in the risky gift of free will.
~J.B. Phillips as cited in today’s reading.

Issues dealing with the Bible’s view of issues involving gender and sexuality are on the top of the list of issues the uncommitted have with Christianity, and also up there among their objections is the problem of why there is suffering and evil in the world. In his classic work, Know Why You Believe, the late Paul E. Little discusses this.

…We must also recognize that God could stamp out evil if he chose. Jeremiah reminds us, “It is of the Lord’s mercies that we are not consumed because his compassions fail not. (Lamentations 3:22 KJ) A time is coming when he will stamp out evil in the world. In the meantime, God’s love and grace prevail and his offer of mercy and pardon is still open.

If God were to stamp out evil today, he would do a complete job. His action would have to include our lies and personal impurities, our lack of love and our failure to do good. Suppose God were to decree that at midnight tonight all evil would be removed from the universe — who of us would still be here after midnight?

…To speculate about the origin of evil is endless. No one has the full answer.  It belongs in the category of “the secret things [that] belong to the Lord our God” (Deut 29:29)…

…[quoting Hugh Evans Hopkins] “The problem arises largely from the belief that a ‘good’ God would reward each man according to his deserts and that an ‘almighty’ God would have no difficulty in carrying this out. The fact that rewards and punishments, in the way of happiness and discomfort, appear to be haphazardly distributed in this life drives many to question either the goodness of God or his power.”

But would God be good if he were to deal with each person exactly according to his behavior? Consider what this would mean in your own life! The whole of the gospel as previewed in the Old and New Testaments is that God’s goodness consists not only in his justice, but also in his love, mercy and kindness. How thankful all men should be that “He does not deal with us according to our sins, or requite us according to our iniquities. For as the heavens are high above the earth, so great is his steadfast love toward those who fear him” (Ps. 103:10, 11).

The concept of the goodness of God in which he deals with a person on the basis of “just deserts” is also based on the faulty assumption that happiness is the greatest good in life… Sometimes in his infinite wisdom, God knows there are things to be accomplished in our character that can be brought only through suffering. To shield us from this suffering would be to rob us of a greater good. Peter refers to this when he says, “And after you have suffered a little while, the God of all grace, who has called you to his eternal glory in Christ, will himself restore, establish and strengthen you” (I Pet. 5:10).

…That there may be a connection between suffering and sin is evident, but that it is not always so is abundantly clear. There is the unambiguous word of Jesus himself on the subject. The disciples apparently adhered to the direct retribution theory of suffering. One day when they say a man who had been blind from birth, they wanted to know who had sinned to cause this blindness — the man or his parents. Jesus made it clear that neither was responsible for his condition, “but that the works of God might be made manifest in him” (John 9: 1-3).

…[O]ne of the profound truths of the whole of scripture is that the judgment of God is preceded by warning. Throughout the Old Testament we have the repeated pleading of God and warning of judgment. Only after warning is persistently ignored and rejected does judgment come. God’s poignant words are an example: “I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked… turn back, turn back from your evil ways; for why will you die, O house of Israel” (Ez 33:11).

From there, Little goes on to discuss the issue of judgment, justice and God’s wrath in general, and the issue of hell in particular. With over a million copies in print, this book continues to be helpful to many, and I would recommend making a print copy part of your library.

I want to end with the first two scriptures in updated translations:

^{AMP – Lam. 3:22} It is because of the Lord’s mercy and loving-kindness that we are not consumed, because His [tender] compassions fail not.

^{CEB – Lam. 3:22} Certainly the faithful love of the Lord hasn’t ended; certainly God’s compassion isn’t through!

^{NLT – Deut. 29:29} “The Lord our God has secrets known to no one. We are not accountable for them, but we and our children are accountable forever for all that he has revealed to us, so that we may obey all the terms of these instructions.

^{MSG – Deut. 29:29} God, our God, will take care of the hidden things but the revealed things are our business. It’s up to us and our children to attend to all the terms in this Revelation.

Christianity as the Early Church Defined It

David Rudel is a theoretic mathematician, writer, editor, mathematical modeler, and theologian working on church and science education reform. He is the author of four chess books, two science books, and one book on Christian Theology.  This appeared several years ago at his blog, Fire In The Bones under the title, What is a Christian?

---

A lot of energy is spent by Christians trying to tell one another what a real Christian is. This is not a new phenomenon. It’s eerily similar to political mouthpieces trying to say who really represents the beliefs of one party or another.

Were you to ask people What does it mean to be a Christian? or What are the minimal requirements for someone to qualify as a Christian? You could get any number of responses. Some common essential properties of being a Christian you might hear are:

A. Believes the Bible (Or some variation on in what way someone “believes the Bible.”)
B. Goes to Church (For Catholics, I would enlarge this to include certain practices like eating fish on Fridays, etc.)
C. Believes “Jesus died for my sins.”
D. Believes Jesus was/is God
E. Believes only Christians go to Heaven
F. Believes “You cannot make it to Heaven on your own.”
G. Believes in the Resurrection
H. Is a member of my denomination
I. Believes God created the world in 6 days

(What answer would people you know give?)

It seems to me that most, if not all, the above have serious problems. For example, “E is self-referential…saying that a Christian is someone who believes that only Christians go to Heaven does nothing to define who a Christian is. If I believed I was a Christian and believed I was the only one going to Heaven, then “E” would apply to me…but yet I have done nothing to explain by that belief what it means to be a Christian.

Many of the above make no sense historically. We have to assume that the early apostles and their churches should count as “Christians,” yet they did not have “The Bible,” (indeed, the Church disagreed among itself for centuries as to which books belonged in the Bible and which did not) so one could hardly say that a requirement for Christianity is that you believe the Bible [though one could draw the conclusion that the Old Testament, at least, was accurate, as we see no account of Jesus suggesting otherwise.]

Similarly, the doctrine of atonement in its current state didn’t even exist until the 11th century, and early believers did not have the trinitarian formulas the modern church holds so dear. Indeed, Origen, the most important Christian theologian of the 2nd century, would not even be allowed in the church today by that standard.

In addition to historical problems, significant biblical problems stand out from the above list as well. Where do we see early evangelists stressing to non-believers any of these things? If you want to see what makes a Christian a Christian, I think you should look at what the early apostles preached to non-Christians in an effort to have them join the Faith.

A study of acts can be rather revealing here. I’ve put together the following chart to illustrate what teachings you find in Acts regarding Christianity. I’m focusing on Acts because that is the only book where the focus is on Evangelism to non-believers and new believers.

Passage in Acts	Jesus is Messiah	Jesus Arose	Jesus  is King	Jesus will Judge All	Repent!	Believers go to Heaven	Heathens go to Hell
2: 14-41	x	x	x		x
3: 12-26	x	x	x		x
4: 8-12	x	x
5: 30-32	x	x	x
5: 42	x
7: 1-53	x
9: 22	x
10: 34-43	x	x	x	x
13: 16-41	x	x	x		x
14: 14-17					x
17: 2-4, 6-7	x	x	x
17: 18-31		x		x	x
18: 5	x
18: 28	x
20: 20-22			x		x
22: 1-21	x	x
26: 1-29	x	x

Based on the above, I’d say that other than emphasizing the Resurrection, the church has rather struck out when it comes to defining who or what a Christian is.

It seems, at least if Paul, James, Peter, and Stephen are good sources, that a Christian is someone who has chosen to follow Christ’s practices, repenting of unloving acts that God hates, and believes Jesus is the Christ (as shown by his Resurrection) who has been given power over Heaven and Earth, including the office of Judge.

While none of the above are things that most Christians would disagree with, they are also unlikely to be the first thing out of their mouths when asked What does it mean to be a Christian?

I think Christians in general do not like the idea that repentance is an absolute requirement as opposed to a goal. I would further say that merely believing Jesus is the Christ who sits in power over Heaven and Earth would strike many as “too easy,” allowing too many fringe groups in. And in particular, the idea that “Christians, and only Christians, go to Heaven” is such a basic tenet to many that seeing it as not a required one just seems odd. The truth is that the word for Hell does not even show up in all of Acts. One wonders what that says about modern day evangelists and missionaries who start off their message with “Do you know where you are going when you die?”

But what do you think? What does it mean to be a Christian? Are there any passages you believe suggest there is some aspect fundamental to being a Christian that is missing from the message given by the apostles in Acts?

G. K. Chesterton Quotations

“Christianity is at one with common sense; but all religious history shows that this common sense perishes except where there is Christianity to preserve it.”

From Wikipedia:

Gilbert Keith Chesterton,  was an English writer.   He wrote on philosophy, ontology, poetry, plays, journalism, public lectures and debates, literary and art criticism, biography, Christian apologetics, and fiction, including fantasy and detective fiction.   Chesterton is well known for his reasoned apologetics, and even some of those who disagree with him have recognized the universal appeal of such works as Orthodoxy and The Everlasting Man. Chesterton wrote around 80 books, several hundred poems, some 200 short stories, 4000 essays, and several plays.  The Everlasting Man contributed to C. S. Lewis’s conversion to Christianity.

“The object of a New Year is not that we should have a new year. It is that we should have a new soul and a new nose; new feet, a new backbone, new ears, and new eyes. Unless a particular man made New Year resolutions, he would make no resolutions. Unless a man starts afresh about things, he will certainly do nothing effective. Unless a man starts on the strange assumption that he has never existed before, it is quite certain that he will never exist afterwards. Unless a man be born again, he shall by no means enter into the Kingdom of Heaven.”

“To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it.”

“You say grace before meals. All right. But I say grace before the concert and the opera, and grace before the play and pantomime, and grace before I open a book, and grace before sketching, painting, swimming, fencing, boxing, walking, playing, dancing and grace before I dip the pen in the ink.”

“The Bible tells us to love our neighbors, and also to love our enemies; probably because they are generally the same people.”

“To love means loving the unlovable. To forgive means pardoning the unpardonable. Faith means believing the unbelievable. Hope means hoping when everything seems hopeless.”

A child kicks its legs rhythmically through excess, not absence, of life. Because children have abounding vitality, because they are in spirit fierce and free, therefore they want things repeated and unchanged. They always say, Do it again; and the grown-up person does it again until he is nearly dead. For grown-up people are not strong enough to exult in monotony. But perhaps God is strong enough… It is possible that God says every morning, Do it again, to the sun; and every evening, Do it again, to the moon. It may not be automatic necessity that makes all daisies alike: it may be that God makes every daisy separately, but has never got tired of making them. It may be that He has the eternal appetite of infancy; for we have sinned and grown old, and our Father is younger than we.

“The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and left untried.”

“According to most philosophers, God in making the world enslaved it. According to Christianity, in making it, He set it free. God had written, not so much a poem, but rather a play; a play he had planned as perfect, but which had necessarily been left to human actors and stage-managers, who had since made a great mess of it.”

“The truth is, of course, that the curtness of the Ten Commandments is an evidence, not of the gloom and narrowness of a religion, but, on the contrary, of its liberality and humanity. It is shorter to state the things forbidden than the things permitted: precisely because most things are permitted, and only a few things are forbidden.”

“…The obstinate reminder continues to recur: only the supernaturalist has taken a sane view of Nature. The essence of all pantheism, evolutionism and modern cosmic religion is really in this proposition: that Nature is our mother. Unfortunately, if you regard Nature as a mother, you discover that she is a stepmother. The main point of Christianity was this: that Nature is not our mother: Nature is our sister. We can be proud of her beauty, since we have the same father; but she has no authority over us; we have to admire, but not to imitate.”

QuotationsPage, Think Exist, Chesterton Society, Wisdom Quotes, Daily Christian Quote,  Footnote Generator, Qwerky Quotes

Today’s text:

^{(NLT) Ps. 24: 1} The earth is the Lord’s, and everything in it.
    The world and all its people belong to him.
² For he laid the earth’s foundation on the seas
    and built it on the ocean depths.

³ Who may climb the mountain of the Lord?
    Who may stand in his holy place?

 

 

What Can I Do Next? versus What Must I Do Next?

Ephesians 2: 8-9

^{(KJV) 8} For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:  ⁹ Not of works, lest any man should boast.

^{(AMP) 8} For it is by free grace (God’s unmerited favor) that you are saved (delivered from judgment and made partakers of Christ’s salvation) through [your] faith. And this [salvation] is not of yourselves [of your own doing, it came not through your own striving], but it is the gift of God; ⁹ Not because of works [not the fulfillment of the Law’s demands], lest any man should boast. [It is not the result of what anyone can possibly do, so no one can pride himself in it or take glory to himself.]

^{(MSG) 8-9}   Saving is all his idea, and all his work. All we do is trust him enough to let him do it. It’s God’s gift from start to finish! We don’t play the major role. If we did, we’d probably go around bragging that we’d done the whole thing!

Earlier this week I had a conversation with someone who is moving from passive to active faith. I use that terminology because I don’t believe that his faith was non-existent prior to the past year, but rather, it was probably dormant.

So he asked about things like what is required in terms of tithing, and does he need to be baptized. I tried to give him good answers while at the same time being very aware of the fact he was wanting to do things instead of resting on what Christ has already done.

(Sometimes people coming from a Roman Catholic background wrestle with these things more acutely. I don’t know if that’s the case here. It’s interesting that the Catholic Church refers to certain days in the church calendar as “Days of Obligation.” In a sense this defines “religion;” the idea of obligation overshadowing all else. No wonder many Christians say that Christianity isn’t a religion it’s a relationship.)

Andy Stanley talks about surveys done among people who have been attending North Point Community Church for less than five weeks. Let’s just stop there. Imagine having enough new people constantly streaming through the doors that you can engage a survey company to ask them questions. But that’s a topic for another day.

Of those in that category, a large percentage of them were interested in what they call “discerning next steps.” They wanted to grow. They wanted to serve. They wanted to understand what it means to be a disciple.

But there are sometimes dangers inherent in wanting to do. The story of Mary and Martha is a juxtaposition of two attitudes: spending time with Jesus and doing things for Jesus.

Coincidentally, it is Andy Stanley who has this verse posted in his office from Acts 15:

^{(NIV) 19} “It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God.

^{(AMP) 19} Therefore it is my opinion that we should not put obstacles in the way of and annoy and disturb those of the Gentiles who turn to God…

We discussed this verse in detail previously here in February, 2011.

I think there are two different ways we approach the challenge of what it means to follow Christ:

• We can ask, “What can I do;” and thereby focus on offering our lives as a response to the grace we have received and the love that has been poured out to us. “How can I express my gratitude?” “I want to give something back.”
• We can ask, “What must I do;” and thereby miss the point. “What is this going to cost me?” “What am I going to have to give up?”  Or even, “I have a few hours free; how long is this going to take?”

As we said in the Feb ’11 post, this journey of following Christ should certainly involve counting the cost. In Luke 9 we read:

^{(NIV) 23} Then he said to them all: “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross daily and follow me.

But I do not believe it should be about the cost.

The person I spoke with definitely should start a program of percentage giving and definitely should consider being baptized. But it should be done joyfully and willingly.

 

 

 

 

What the Bible Means by ‘Redeemer’

K. W. Leslie is doing a series on his blog on Christianese, the words we in the church toss out as a type of code that is largely not understood by the world at large. You might think you know what the Bible means by ‘redeemer’ until you read this, which I encourage you to do at his blog, More Christ, where this appeared recently.

Redeemer. [ri·DĒ·mər, noun] Rescuer. One who atones for sin, error, or evil. Usually Jesus.

To most people’s minds, “redeem” is a word we use when talking about recycling cans or bottles: The redemption value of a recyclable container is the extra amount we paid when we bought the item, which we’re supposed to get back after we’ve taken the container to a recycling center.

Christian redemption isn’t quite like that. (Though I’ve actually heard a sermon about Jesus recycling sinners.) The original word for redeemer, ga’al, was a family member who, when you were in trouble, helped get you out of it.

If you were in debt and had to sell your property, your redeemer would buy it back. (Lv 25.25) If you were obligated to sell yourself—for slavery was an option in bible times—your redeemer would buy you back. (Lv 25.48) If you were a poor widow or orphan, your redeemer was expected to look after you, or even marry you. (Ru 4.1-10) If you were murdered, your redeemer was obligated to find your murderer and execute him (Nu 35.21) —unless your murderer went to a nearby city and requested a trial. But if found guilty, the redeemer would still execute him. (Nu 35.25)

For the Christian, Jesus is our redeemer. We were slaves to sin, but God has adopted us as his children, (Jn 1.12) and our brother and redeemer Jesus has purchased us out of that slavery. Yes, Paul described us as slaves to God, (Ro 6.22) but that’s because he was mixing his metaphors. If you prefer the idea we’ve been bought by God as his slaves, fine. If you prefer the idea we’ve been freed by Jesus so we can now freely follow him, fine. (Ga 4.5) There’s no specific formula for how God’s salvation works, so the scriptures describe it in a few different ways. And most Christians like the redemption idea ’cause it means we’re free. “If the Son sets you free, you are truly free.” (Jn 8.36)

When we talk or sing of how our Redeemer lives, that’s actually a quote from Job:

But as for me, I know that my Redeemer lives,
and he will stand upon the earth at last.
And after my body has decayed,
yet in my body I will see God!
I will see him for myself.
Yes, I will see him with my own eyes.
I am overwhelmed at the thought!

—Job, Job 19.25-27 NLT

Job was an Edomite, so the customs of Edomite redeemers were a bit different from the rules for Israelite redeemers. Nevertheless, they were family members who would rescue you from your troubles—and here Job clearly recognized God was his rescuer, and that he’d come to save him. Christians sometimes interpret this as a Messianic prophecy, though it’s not: Everyone who believes in resurrection understands how after we’re raised, we’ll see God with our own two eyes. Christians just happen to know he’ll be Jesus. Job didn’t necessarily know this. All he did know—correctly—is God was his redeemer: He was an adopted son of God, so God was family.

As are we. That’s why we can borrow Job’s quote and say the same thing: Jesus is alive, he’s bought our freedom, and at the End we’ll see him with our own two resurrected eyes. Eventually.

K. W. Leslie

You Are Among The Saints

This appeared recently at the blog of Kevin Sanders aka Kuya Kevin — an American living in The Philippines for a decade — under the title, What is a Saint in the Bible?

“Do you believe in saints?”

I’ve been asked this question many times since moving here to the Philippines. I always affirm my belief in the saints since they are mentioned in the Bible. But I also do my best to clarify what the Scriptures really mean when this term is used.

Many people believe that saints are an elite group of Christians who did remarkable acts of piety before dying. This is a common teaching in some religious traditions. But I would simply encourage you to look at the way this word is used in the Scriptures.

To put it simply, the word “saint” or “saints” is always used as a general reference to God’s people. Anyone who is a true follower of Christ is, according to the Bible, a saint.

Let’s look at a few New Testament references for the sake of simplicity. Notice who Paul is writing to and how he addresses them:

To the church of God that is in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints together with all those who in every place call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, both their Lord and ours 
-1st Corinthians 1:2

Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, To the saints who are in Ephesus, and are faithful in Christ Jesus: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. 
-Ephesians 1:1-2

Paul and Timothy, servants of Christ Jesus, To all the saints in Christ Jesus who are at Philippi, with the overseers and deacons: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. Philippians 1:1-2

A couple of things are clear from these Scriptures:

1. Paul was not addressing dead people.
2. Paul was addressing the entire church—all believers.

Why does this teaching matter? Let’s study a little more deeply.

The word translated “saint” literally means “holy one” in the original language of the New Testament. This is why some English translations (New Living Translation, for example) use “God’s holy people” instead of “saint” for the before-mentioned verses.

We should not overlook the significance of this adjective. “Holy” is a word that belongs exclusively to the God. He alone is holy, therefore only He can make someone holy. The Scriptures never present sainthood/holiness as something that is achieved through good works or religious service. You also won’t find “saint” used as a title given to a select few by the church leadership.

I believe the New Living Translation of 1st Corinthians 1:2 is particularly helpful for clarifying this:

I am writing to God’s church in Corinth, to you who have been called by God to be his own holy people. He made you holy by means of Christ Jesus, just as he did for all people everywhere who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, their Lord and ours.

I’ll point out two truths from this verse:

1. God has made all His children holy through Jesus Christ.
2. God has called all His followers to live in holiness

Tragic consequences come from altering the original meaning of “saint.” First and foremost, the focus has been taken off of God and placed it on human beings. Some go so far as to pray to the saints, even though the Scriptures teach that Jesus alone is our intercessor to God the Father (see 1st Timothy 2:5). This is a form of idolatry.

Some may object to my last statement, claiming they are only honoring or venerating the departed people of faith. But let’s think about this: how can a mere mortal answer hundreds (or thousands) of prayers? Can an American saint who has passed away now understand Tagalog and Mandarin prayers? Is the Lord God not the only one who has the power to understand and answer millions of prayers? Is it right to attribute this kind of power to mere flesh and blood?

This leads into a second, yet equally important issue: salvation. According to the Scriptures, salvation is a gift of God’s grace. We are made holy in the sight of God by trusting Christ—not due to our own efforts. Here’s what Paul told the Ephesian believers:

For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast. 
-Ephesians 2:8-9

But canonizing an individual shifts the emphasis from grace to good works. I’ll clarify something here: there’s nothing wrong with celebrating the lives of God’s servants. But what I have seen goes far beyond celebration by claiming an elite group has achieved special status/favor with God by their own merits.

The last consequence has to do with Christian living. Just as all believers are made holy, we are also called to live and grow in holiness (a process known as sanctification). Creating an artificial category of “super-Christians” sends the message that only a select few can really live holy lives. The rest of us are thus demoted to second-class citizen status in God’s kingdom.

Final Thoughts/Summary:

A saint is anyone who has trusted Christ and chosen to follow Him. We are made holy in God’s eyes through our relationship with Christ. We can be inspired by the lives of faithful believers who have gone before us. But we should not give them exclusive titles, pray to them, or do anything else that may rob God of the glory He fully deserves.

I am the Lord; that is my name;
 

my glory I give to no other,
 

nor my praise to carved idols. 

-Isaiah 42:8

Unpacking “Seated in Heavenly Places”

This is from Peter at The King’s Presence where it appeared as a question, Where in Heavenly Places are We Seated?

But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, – [Eph 2:4-6 NASB]

Dear saints, you may not feel like it, but you are seated with Christ in the heavenly places. Since you have believed into Christ, you have been utterly and eternally united with Christ. When our Father looks at you He just sees Christ. In Christ, you have been resurrected, ascended, and seated in the heavenly places.

But, what does it mean that we are seated in the heavenly places?

Where in the heavenly places are we seated?

Paul makes it clear that we are seated with Christ and in Christ. So the real question is: Where is Christ seated?

…Jesus Christ, who is at the right hand of God, having gone into heaven, after angels and authorities and powers had been subjected to Him. – [1Pe 3:21-22 NASB]

O yes, dear brothers and sisters! Let’s shout with joy that Jesus Christ is seated at the right hand of God. Do you see the implications of this? Since Jesus Christ is seated at the right hand of God, we are seated at the right hand of God.

Everything that is true of our beloved Lord Jesus, is true of us. When you are seated, you are resting. We are resting, in Christ, at the right hand of God!

I hope that you are enjoying Christ and resting in Him, as that is your rightful place. This doesn’t have to be a distant objective reality. We have His Spirit, within us. Turn your mind to the Spirit within you. Love Him and enjoy Him. God is not only in you, but you are in Him. Take pleasure in being in Him. The simplest way I know of turning to the Spirit, is to focus on Him and say, “Lord Jesus, I love You!” But, do not take this as a rule or a method. It doesn’t even require words. Just let the love that God has poured into your heart, flow back to Him. Tell Him how lovable He is. He is the delight of the nations! He is the healing of the nations! O glorious and beautiful Lord Jesus, you are our delight and enjoyment. Make our hearts burn within us, for You. Shine Your Face on us. May we be Your enjoyment. May we be Your delight. O thirsty and hungry Lord, enjoy a feast of our enjoyment of Christ.

I pray that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened, so that you will know what is the hope of His calling, what are the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints, and what is the surpassing greatness of His power toward us who believe. These are in accordance with the working of the strength of His might which He brought about in Christ, when He raised Him from the dead and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly places, far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come. And He put all things in subjection under His feet, and gave Him as head over all things to the church, which is His body, the fullness of Him who fills all in all. – [Eph 1:18-23 NASB]

Going Against The Flow; Swimming Against The Tide

Another Canadian blogger, Kim Shay posted this quotation from Martin Luther recently at her blog, The Upward Call. I can’t begin to imagine the conflict Luther would have felt has he formulated beliefs that went totally against everything commonly held. This from the Faith Alone devotional collection:

Trusting Christ Instead of People

But Jesus would not entrust himself to them
for he knew all men
John 2:24

No one understands how difficult it was when I first realized that I had to believe and teach an idea that was contrary to the teaching of the church fathers. This was especially shocking to me when many outstanding, reasonable, and educated people shared their views. The church fathers include many holy people, such as Ambrose, Jerome, and Augustine. Despite that, my dear Lord and Savior Jesus Christ must be worth more to me than all the holy people on earth – yes, even more than all the angels in heaven. When I read Augustine’s books and discovered that he also had been in error, I was greatly troubled. Whenever this happens, it’s very difficult for me to calm my own hart and differ with people who are so greatly respected.

But I dare not accept something just because a respected person says it. A person can be holy and God-fearing and still be in error. That’s why I don’t want to rely on people. As this passage says, the Lord Christ didn’t rely on people either. Furthermore, in the book of Matthew, Jesus earnestly warns us to beware of false prophets, who will come and not only claim to be Christians, but also “perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect – if that were possible (24:24).

Rather than trusting the church fathers and their writings, we should crawl under the wings of our mother hen, the Lord Christ, and look to him alone. the heavenly Father said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well-pleased. Listen to him!” (Matthew 17:5). God wants us to listen to Christ alone.

Here’s a bonus Faith Alone devotional from Luther that appeared a week prior at Kim’s blog.

The Lamb of God

The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him
and said, “Look, the Lamb of God
who takes away the sin of the world!”
John 1:29

God’s laws tell us how we should live. They command us: “Never desire to take your neighbor’s wife. Never murder. Never commit adultery. Give to the poor.” It’s good to follow God’s laws in order to guard against outward sins. Before God, however, it won’t work to try to get rid of sin by obeying God’s laws. What does work is stated in this verse: “Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” Isaiah explains that “the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all” (Isaiah 53:6) and “for the transgression of my people he was stricken” (v.8). Everything points to Christ.

As a Christian, you should hold tightly to these words and not let them be taken away from you. Then you will know that godless people and religious people who hope to satisfy God with their pilgrimages and good works are blind. Many boast of the good works and console themselves by thinking they will get a second chance to be saved. The Holy Scripture, in contrast, says that the sins of the world aren’t laid on the world. John’s sins weren’t laid on John, and Peter’s sins weren’t laid on Peter, for no one can bear their own sins. Rather, the sins of the world were laid on Christ. He is the Lamb of God. He stepped forward to become a sinner for us, to become even sin itself, and to act as though he had committed the sins of the entire world from the beginning of its creation (2 Corinthians 5:21). The Lamb’s mission, role, and function were to take away the sins of the world. The Lamb carried them all.

The Gospel: Definition and Goals

^{NIV Jn. 5:39} You study the Scriptures diligently because you think that in them you have eternal life. These are the very Scriptures that testify about me, ⁴⁰ yet you refuse to come to me to have life.

Today’s teaching is from Christianity Today’s Skye Jethani who also edits the blog Out of Ur.

Ending On Affirmation

When they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives. ~Matthew 26:30 (NIV)

Some of the most important words in a church service are spoken at the very beginning and at the very end. Like bookends, they frame everything that takes place in the middle. Michael F. Bird wrote the following at the blog Euangelion under the title After the Sermon.

What do you do in church straight after the sermon?

A. Sing the final hymn.
B. Listen to announcements.
C. Receive the benediction.
D. Run out the door for the nearest restaurant

I’m starting to think that the moment after the sermon is a great time to confess our faith by reciting either the creed or rehearsing the regula fidei.

There is a reason for this. After hearing about particular passage from scripture or listening to specific piece of God’s story, it is appropriate that we relate it to the wider story of scripture narrated in the regula fidei, or else situate the sermon in the context of the holy, catholic, and apostolic faith. In other words, the creed and regula fidei provide the prime context to accept and understand the sermon.

You can read the Apostles’ Creed here, but here is the regula fidei according to Tertullian:

[T]he Creator of the world, who produced all things out of nothing through His own Word, first of all sent forth; that this Word is called His Son, and, under the name of God, was seen “in diverse manners” by the patriarchs, heard at all times in the prophets, at last brought down by the Spirit and Power of the Father into the Virgin Mary, was made flesh in her womb, and, being born of her, went forth as Jesus Christ; thenceforth He preached the new law and the new promise of the kingdom of heaven, worked miracles; having been crucified, He rose again the third day; (then) having ascended into the heavens, He sat at the right hand of the Father; sent instead of Himself the Power of the Holy Ghost to lead such as believe; will come with glory to take the saints to the enjoyment of everlasting life and of the heavenly promises, and to condemn the wicked to everlasting fire, after the resurrection of both these classes shall have happened, together with the restoration of their flesh. This rule, as it will be proved, was taught by Christ, and raises amongst ourselves no other questions than those which heresies introduce, and which make men heretics.[1]

Now obviously Tertullian has certain specific heretics in mind here, so his rendering of the regula fidei is polemical and contextual. But the wonderful thing about the regula fidei is that it had no exact or precise formulation, though it had several common threads and recurring themes, it was variable. Which means, if you ask me, that it is possible to faithfully restate the regula fidei in our own contemporary language. I would suggest something like this:

God the Father, the maker of the universe, who, through Word and Spirit, made all things out of nothing, planned all things for the demonstration of his love and the satisfaction of his glory. He created Adam and Eve in his own image and after their rebellion, He also revealed himself as the Lord in diverse ways to the patriarchs, to Israel, and in the prophets, to call to himself a people worthy of his name, among and for the nations. When the time had fully come, He sent his Son, born of a woman and born under the Law, a Son of David, enfleshed as a man in the womb of the Virgin Mary through the Holy Spirit, and who came forth as Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus was baptized and in the power of the Holy Spirit he preached the hope of Israel and the kingdom of God, he proclaimed good news to the poor, did many miraculous deeds, was crucified under Pontius Pilate, he was buried and rose again on the third day according to the scriptures. Then, having made purification for sins, he ascended into the heavens, where he sat down at the right hand of the Father, from where he shall come again in glory to judge both the living and the dead, and after the great resurrection, he shall take his people into the paradise of the new creation, and condemn the wicked to everlasting fate. The church now works in the mission of God, in dependence upon the Father, in the power of the Holy Spirit, bearing testimony to Jesus Christ, to preach good news and to show mercy, until the day when God will be all in all.

Would that be a good thing for the congregation to recite after each and every Sunday sermon?

True Versus Truth

Charles Price is the senior pastor of The Peoples’ Church, Toronto — once Canada’s one and only megachurch — and the host of the Living Truth TV and radio broadcasts. Charles is a the former head of Capernwray in the U.K. and author of several books.

¹The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming—not the realities themselves. For this reason it can never, by the same sacrifices repeated endlessly year after year, make perfect those who draw near to worship. ¹¹Day after day every priest stands and performs his religious duties; again and again he offers the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. ¹²But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God. ~ Hebrews 10: 1, 11-12 (NIV)

The message that came through the prophets, through the priests, through the angels and through Moses was all true but it was not the truth. Remember Jesus, in the upper room said “I am the truth.” John 14:6 records Jesus saying, “I am the way and the truth.” These previous messengers spoke truth, but Jesus was the truth.

Perhaps you travel frequently by train. You may have a timetable that tells you a train will leave the station and ten o’clock on Saturday morning and arrive at your destination at two fifteen. That may be true, and if you’re planning to catch the train, you hope it is — but the timetable, although it’s true, is not the truth. The timetable bears witness to the truth. What is the truth? The truth is the train. A timetable won’t get you anywhere. You can read the timetable, underline it, memorize it, sing it: it won’t get you anywhere. It’s true, but it’s only true in the sense that it bears witness to the truth which is the train. That’s the truth, that’s what the timetable is talking about. God’s revelation through the prophets, through the priests, through angels, through Moses is true but it’s like the timetable, which is pointing to the train.

I could paraphrase Hebrews 1:1 “In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the timetable at many times and in various ways, but in these last days He’s given us the train.” Does that make sense? Everything that went before, pointed to Christ, but it didn’t take you anywhere. The priests could tell the people there was someone to go to, but they could not take them because the message of the Old Testament is that one day the train is going to pull into the station. But the problem is that when the train came, they did not receive him. They did not catch the train.

There’s nothing wrong with the law at all, but it’s only a shadow, it’s not the substance, it’s the timetable, it’s not the train. It won’t get you anywhere as Hebrews 10:1 explains: “it can never, by the same sacrifices that are continually offered every year, make perfect those who draw near.” Was it a waste of time? No, it was preparing people for what was coming.

One day the train will come.

Charles Price writing in the Our Journey
devotional booklet for August 2, 2009

On The Nature of Sin

There’s a whole lot of reading available to you today if you’re up for it!!

The first place to start would be a collection of five quotations posted this morning at Thinking Out Loud under the title What is Sin?

Then, we go to today’s source an article in a series entitled Three Errors About Sin at the blog Counted for Christ, written and edited by a group of Christians in Nigeria.  The links for the full series are:

• 3 Errors About Sin: Error 1 — A Denial That Sin Affects Our Relationship With God
• 3 Errors About Sin: Error 2 — A Denial of the Sinful Nature
• 3 Errors About Sin: Error 3 — A Denial of Acts of Sin

This is an excerpt from the second part — mostly for those of who I know may not click through! — but it does read better in full.

Sin in a Narrow Sense

 “Everyone who sins breaks the law; in fact, sin is lawlessness” (1 John 3:4).

In this passage we have a definition of sin. Sin is lawlessness. The word “lawlessness” here is the word anomia which literally means without the law. To make this a bit simpler, we could simply say that sin is breaking the law or ignoring the law. It is lawlessness.

In response to this, the first question we ask is “what law?”

• Is this the Mosaic Law?
• Is this the law of Christ?
• Is this some internal law of the Holy Spirit who dwells with us?

Let us not worry about that particular question right now but focus on the concept of law.

A law is an objective standard. It is something that is known or should be known.

• If I drive on the left side of the road, I know I am breaking the law.
• If I cheat on an examination, I know I am breaking the law of the school.
• If I tell a lie, I know that I am breaking the Ten Commandments which tell me not to bear false witness.

In each of these cases, when we break the law, we do so willingly and knowingly. Breaking the law implies an objective standard that one knows and then a deliberate decision to ignore or reject that standard. It is true that breaking the law can become so habitual that we do not consciously made a choice every time we break the law but we certainly did at one time.

Therefore, the first way the word sin is used is as a deliberate decision to reject some law or rule or principle that is known. This is a very narrow definition of sin. It implies that the person knows the law but that he deliberately and consciously ignores or breaks it. When one understands sin in this way, the immediate following context makes perfectly good sense.

But you know that he appeared so that he might take away our sins. And in him is no sin. No one who lives in him keeps on sinning. No one who continues to sin has either seen him or known him. Dear children, do not let anyone lead you astray. He who does what is right is righteous, just as he is righteous. He who does what is sinful is of the devil, because the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil’s work. No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God’s seed remains in him; he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born of God (1 John 3:4-9).

Before reading this passage of scripture, I will often ask my students, “How many of you sinned today?” Practically the whole class will raise their hands. I will then point out that according to John if they are regularly practicing sin . . .

• They are not living in him.
• They have not seen him or known him.
• They are of the devil.
• They are not born again.

The reason my students answer positively is because they tend to have a broad definition of sin. However, when I ask, “How many of you have stolen something today?” or “How many of you have cheated today?” I get few hands. They have not willfully and deliberately sinned but they assume they must have done something wrong in a broad sense of the word.

It seems quite obvious a broad definition of sin does not fit here. Therefore, one of the common ways the word “sin” is used in the Bible is as a deliberate willful ignoring or rejection of one of the known laws of God. This kind of sin always involves the will.

• This is not necessarily accidental sin.
• These are not sins of the attitude.
• This is not unconsciously offending someone else.

These are deliberate acts of sin.

Sin in a Broad Sense

If anyone sees his brother commit a sin that does not lead to death, he should pray and God will give him life. I refer to those whose sin does not lead to death. There is a sin that leads to death. I am not saying that he should pray about that. All wrongdoing is sin, and there is sin that does not lead to death (1 John 5:16-17).

Verse 16-17 are very difficult verses. Theologians have struggled for centuries trying to understand what it means to sin a sin that does not lead to death. I will not attempt to resolve that question either because I am not sure of the answer. The thing I wish to point out in this passage is another definition of sin.

In 1:17 John says “All wrongdoing is sin.” The word “wrongdoing” is adikia which literally means “without righteousness.” To say this in a way that we can understand, John is simply saying “Everything that is not right is sin.”

• It does not matter if it is willful or it is not willful.
• It does not matter whether the law was known or not known.
• It does not matter whether the person thought about it or not.

The only issue here is whether it is right or wrong. As you can see, this is a much broader definition of sin.

If I tell you I will meet you somewhere at 8 AM and I get busy and forget and you go there and wait for me, have I sinned? Did I deliberately cause you to waste your time? Was this a willful decision on my part? No, it was an unintentional offense. However, was it right? It was not right and, according to this definition of sin, that kind of wrong doing is also called sin. Therefore, it is clear, just from the little epistle of 1 John that the Bible uses the word “sin” in more than one way.

How do you know when the Biblical writer is using the word sin to refer to sin in a narrow sense or a broad sense? The context will tell you. Unfortunately, the context can sometimes support either interpretation so it is not always easy to distinguish.

Sin of the Nature

However, there is a third use of sin. John says “If we claim to be without sin . . .” (1:8). This is the verse that is part of the three errors about sin. Although this passage does not give us a definition of sin like the other two passages, it does use sin in a different way than the other two. Note that the word “sin” is a noun used in the singular here. Although this may not be an absolute rule, whenever you see the word “sin” as a noun in the singular it often if not normally refers to the sin nature. A good example of this is Romans 7:15-24:

 I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me . . . Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it . . . but I see another law at work in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members. What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death?

Paul recognized that there was something in him that kept him from doing the right thing. He identified it as “sin” in the singular.

I believe that this is what John is talking about in this passage. Apparently there were some Christian believers who were denying that there was anything like a sinful nature.

[finish reading this section of the series here]

~Danny McCain