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.

 

 

 

 

Why Couldn’t God Simply ‘Declare’ Our Sins Forgiven?

In the spirit of this blog’s official tag line — Digging a Little Deeper — we go to a question I hadn’t considered before. Why couldn’t God in his grace simply make a declaration of forgiveness without involving the cross? Will G. wrote the following nearly a year ago from Melbourne, Australia at Weblog of a Christian Philosophy Student under the title Why can’t God just forgive sin?

People sometimes ask: why can’t God just forgive sin? Why did Jesus have to die on the cross for us?

My answer to this would be that there are two kinds of forgiveness, one of which is a lot more ‘powerful’ than the other, and God needed to use this second, more powerful kind of forgiveness. Moreover, giving this kind of forgiveness required Jesus to die on the cross.

How so?

Imagine a thief who keeps stealing some guy’s stuff – let’s say John’s stuff. John is so nice that whenever the thief steals from him, he forgives the thief. But the thief never changes his behaviour. John can forgive the thief all he wants, but it doesn’t stop the thieve from stealing. Forgiving the thief doesn’t make the thief a better person.

John’s kind of forgiveness could be called the first kind.

The story shows that John’s kind of forgiveness doesn’t do that much. John’s forgiveness won’t make the thief stop stealing, it will only prevent John from seeking justice and might also relieve some emotional tension from his anger. John’s kind of forgiveness won’t change the thief’s behaviour.

If God’s forgiveness is like John’s forgiveness then God’s forgiveness won’t change people’s behaviour. If God’s forgiveness is like John’s forgiveness then we’ll act in heaven the way we do on earth. This could lead to heaven having such things as people really disliking one another, splits between different groups, cliques, and so on. Not really a great picture of heaven.

The Christian idea is that to solve humanity’s problems, God needed a more powerful ‘second’ kind of forgiveness – one that changes behaviour. That’s the kind of forgiveness you need to really deal with humanity’s issues.

See Col 2:13:

“You were dead because of your sins and because your sinful nature was not yet cut away. Then God made you alive with Christ, for he forgave all our sins.”

The Bible says that when God forgave us He managed to change our behaviour as part of the forgiveness. Our sinful nature was ‘cut away’ by God’s forgiveness, although we will still fight against it until Jesus comes (Gal 5:17).

Imagine John forgiving the thief with such ‘power’ (somehow) that the thief decided never to steal again! That would be similar to the second kind of forgiveness.

So how does it work?

The Bible says that the mechanism for God’s more powerful kind of forgiveness must involve Jesus dying for us (Matt 26:39). I’m not too clear on the details of how it works, but I suspect it involves some kind of exchange between sinners and Jesus. 1 Peter 2:24 says, “He personally carried our sins in his body on the cross so that we can be dead to sin and live for what is right. By his wounds you are healed”, in Romans 6:6, “our old sinful selves were crucified with Christ”, and in Gal 2:20, “It is no longer [my old sinful self] that lives, but Christ lives in me”.

Seeing God Face To Face

^{NIV Ex. 33: 18} Then Moses said, “Now show me your glory.”

¹⁹ And the Lord said, “I will cause all my goodness to pass in front of you, and I will proclaim my name, the Lord, in your presence. I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. ²⁰ But,” he said, “you cannot see my face, for no one may see me and live.”

The inspirational gospel singer Sandy Patti once had a song out called “We Shall Behold Him.”* Have you ever wondered what that might be like when we first see him, as the song says, “face to face in all of his splendor?”

In his earthly body, Moses returned from Mt. Sinai severely sunburned — so to speak — after being in close contact with God. In the New Testament, when Jesus became “transfigured,” he appeared in dazzling white.

Exodus 33 says that no man — i.e. no human being in their present state — can look at God and live. The image and presence of God is simply too much. However, the Bible in Deuteronomy suggests something else. Even Moses in other encounters spoke face-to-face with God.

Still; lying in bed the other night unable to sleep, I wondered about the whole subject of what will strike us the first time we do in fact behold Him. Usually the verse is quoted that suggests that God made us to look like Him. I have a hard time taking this literally. In fact, in one period of my life, I was convinced this would be better interpreted that “God made us out of his imagination.” I still believe there are fewer similarities than most of us think.

What if C.S. Lewis’ depiction of God as Lion is more accurate than what many of us have in mind: “He’s not safe, but he’s good” — referring to Aslan, the Lion, in The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe?

Or what if God is able to shape-shift or transform or morph into a second form, or many different forms? (Well, of course “is able” isn’t the question…)

I just wonder if some day, as we stand there and God makes His first appearance to us if we will just stand there going, “Holy mackerel;” or “Holy smokes;” or… well I know I’ve probably got the “Holy” part right.

I can guarantee it won’t be a Wizard of Oz moment with God simply being a man — who looks like us — behind the curtain. The concept scares the hell out of me. Literally. It’s supposed to.

So what do you think God looks like?

---

*I always thought “We Shall Behold Him” would be best performed at the Rogers Centre (aka Skydome) in Toronto or any other stadium with a retractable roof. (At night, of course.) As the roof unexpectedly unlocks and begins to divide into two sections, a powerful soprano begins the lyric of the first verse, “The sky shall unfold…” Even more cool if at that exact moment God makes the whole sky light up like it was daytime. He could do that.

(The picture is a daytime shot with the roof partly opening or closing. )

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

God is Not Always Ordinary

This post is from C. Michael Patton and Tim Kimberley at the Credo House blog, Parchment and Pen.  Click here to read at source, and then explore the rest of the blog.

1 Kings 8:10-11
It happened that when the priests came from the holy place, the cloud filled the house of the LORD, 11 so that the priests could not stand to minister because of the cloud, for the glory of the LORD filled the house of the LORD.

I don’t know why, but I am possessed by this passage this morning (or as we say in Oklahoma, “this smorning”). Two subjects: 1) the glory of the Lord, 2) the service of the priests.

Get this: the glory of the Lord overwhelmed the service of the priests.

Now this seems unfair to the priests. After all, they are only doing as God had instructed. Why does God come in and mess things up? “So that the priests could not stand to minister because of the cloud.” They could not minister? Their religious candles blew out. The smell of incense was diluted. The ram got loose. The prayers were silenced due to a distracting and overwhelming noise. All that the Lord had been doing through them was brought to cessation as it was replaced with something else. Something breathtaking. Something that buried the service they had become accustomed to.

One priest went to a growing line before the king to log his complaint.

Another priest went home believing this excused him for day off.

Another priest looked at the glory with entertainment, happy to have the monotony of his days interrupted.

Another priest say to his friend, “Don’t believe what you see. This is not how it normally happens. We only adore the normal.”

Only one priest stepped aside to observe and partake in the awe and hope that was coming into being. Only one allowed the curtain to be rent, the locks to be broken, and the glory to be shown.

Theological thought: How often to I allow God to step into my life and do something different, something extraordinary?

How often do you? Or are we too set in the ways that we think the Lord must do things? But sometimes God is not ordinary.

~C. Michael Patton

More at Parchment and Pen: Follow the series Ten Myths About God with Tim Kimberley and C. Michael Patton. When this blog was scheduled they were up to #5, click here to watch.

More about the “not ordinary-ness” of God: Check out the post yesterday at Thinking Out Loud –  God Doesn’t Do Boxes.

Taking a Screenshot of Faith

You’re 100% sure it was there. You know what you saw. But now the website has changed.

“If only I’d taken a screenshot of the page;” you say.

Websites are constantly being revised. Bloggers change, delete or add sentences. Or entire posts.

Church history is the same. While we usually think of revisionism in terms of the facts of history, with church history, it’s possible to change the actual theology, to suggested that people understood things differently than perhaps they did, or to read the old through the filter of the contemporary.  But often the issue is not a failure of the current generation to grasp the nuances of their faith fathers, but the failure of those who go before to pass on the substance of their beliefs.

At the blog Parchment and Pen, Michael Svigel’s post title really expresses the issue clearly,

Why Study Church History? Reason #3: Studying church history will conserve the faith for the future

The Lord’s brother, Jude, urged Christians “to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 1:3). The Greek verb translated “delivered” refers to a sacred trust or tradition. Paul described this tradition as he handed it down to the Corinthians: “Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand. . . . For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received” (1 Cor. 15:1, 3). Jude used the same language as Paul for receiving the tradition and sending it forward to the future. In this case the things “received” and “handed down” were the central truths of the Christian faith.

Paul also wrote letters to his younger disciple, Timothy, for the purpose of encouraging the next generation to faithfully convey the core Christian tradition into the future. Paul wrote, “Continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it” (2 Tim. 3:14). He also said, “What you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also” (2 Tim. 2:2). By observing what our spiritual forefathers fought to preserve and pass on, we come to understand and appreciate the need to continue the pattern established by 2 Timothy 2:2. By looking back, evangelicals today can learn how to conserve and convey the timeless message through time-tested methods.

Today the evangelical church is facing numerous serious crises directly related to their inability to make disciples who are passing the faith on to the next generation. To put it bluntly: evangelicals today are dropping the baton but still running the race! According to a 2006 Barna Group study, 40 to 50 percent of kids who were “equipped” in church youth groups walk away from the faith or the church in their college years. Study after study shows that evangelicalism itself is shrinking in America. Mega church and multi-site ministries mask the problem, as far too many of those big box churches grow in number by weakening smaller churches, not by converting the lost or restoring the un-churched. This kind of model of ministry is simply unsustainable. In many respects, American evangelicals are simply failing to pass the faith on to the next generation. Unless this trend is halted, the disaster will be epic.

The incredible challenges we’re facing today aren’t new. Pluralism, cynicism, paganism, immorality, political corruption, war, persecution, social unrest, atheism, skepticism, and me-theism—the early church thrived in that kind of culture, while we’re doing all we can to simply survive. As we look back at the history of the church, the pre-modern, pre-Christian models and methods of evangelism, catechesis, initiation, and life-long discipleship can help us re-think how we face the current challenges in our increasingly post-modern, post-Christian world. By studying church history we can rediscover and restore wise and effective ways to conserve the faith for the future.

It’s not too late.

Here’s a link to previous articles at P&P by the same author.

What Theologians Talk About: Grafted In

So when theologians and seminary academics get together, I somehow doubt they turn on the television to watch 30 Rock or The Voice.  And definitely not The Simpsons. Chances are it’s more like the item we chose to post here today.  Actually, this one is too long to post in full, even with a page break, so you must link; but even if you only get halfway through, it’s important to know that:

1. There is still not consensus about the interpretation of every single Bible passage, even among Evangelicals,  however…
2. We can learn a lot in the discovery process of looking at the Biblical evidence that supports different positions, and hearing the heart behind each commentary.
3. We presently see through a glass darkly; we’re not all theologians…

For example, consider this passage in Romans:

^{NIV 11:17} If some of the branches have been broken off,  and you, though a wild olive shoot, have been grafted in among the others  and now share in the nourishing sap from the olive root, ¹⁸ do not consider yourself to be superior to those other branches. If you do, consider this: You do not support the root, but the root supports you. 

and this, earlier in Romans:

^NIV9:6 It is not as though God’s word  had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel.^{( 7} Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham’s children. On the contrary, “It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.”⁸ In other words, it is not the children by physical descent who are God’s children,  but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham’s offspring.

Questions arise

• Are we grafted in to the promises given to Abraham and Old Testament Israel or are we grafted in to the church?
• Is Israel the ethnic, national Israel or does it refer to a spiritual Israel?
• Is there a relationship between the olive tree in Romans and John’s vine and branches narrative?
• Biblically speaking, is every Jew an Israelite?
• If Israel is in unbelief, how can we be grafted in to that?

Hey, I didn’t say this was easy.

Calvin L. Smith of King’s Evangelical Divinity School in the UK attempts to answer this. He posted his answers on February 12th.  He begins:

In Romans 11:17-24 the Apostle Paul likens Gentile believers to a wild olive shoot grafted into a cultivated olive tree.  The obvious question is, what is it that Gentiles are grafted into? Less obvious, it would appear from the widely differing interpretations, is the answer. Consequently there is considerable division among Christians over the relationship between the Church and Israel. This post explores this issue. It is rather lengthy (I do, eventually, get to an answer), but that’s because I’m often asked about this so it makes sense to post something with a little detail I can people them to…

Continue reading here…  Even if you only scan this or only dig deep into three or four paragraphs, there is value to this, because God’s word is living and active… and sometimes challenging.

HT: Living Journey