Walking down the sidewalk in Baltimore. Looking for a place to eat after the company that was supposed to load me ran out of corn. It was too late to find anything else, so I’m stranded for the night without a shower since yesterday afternoon. I’m not sure how I feel about it. On one hand I could be annoyed that someone else cared that little about my inconvenience, loss of time and income, that they didn’t make the effort to know there was enough corn. I mean, it isn’t that difficult to know, the pile is there in the open and all they needed to do is look then make a call. But, on the other hand, although sticky and sweaty from two days of July weather, I’m still alive and well. I’m free to walk to a restaurant in what appears to be a nice part of the city. I’m the scruffy guy amongst the people out on their jogs. I probably don’t look to much worse than I typically do. So why not enjoy the moment? Still, I might rather be home doing nothing. However, I’m one of those Americans who does what they are told, it is what keeps the economy going and yet is it good? Should a guy my age be walking anonymously down the streets of a city where nobody knows him and nobody seems to care to know him? I don’t think I want to think about it. I will eat, maybe for a moment forget that I do not belong here and be quietly happy as the world passes by…
Bean Sprouts, Over-indulgence and Temperance
StandardAs a child I had a deep affinity and great appetite for a particular food item.
I no longer eat that particular food item.
I’m not sure how it started, but I sure know how it ended and it ended up with me staring at the evacuated contents of my stomach.
My indulgence?
It was bean sprouts, smattered in Thousand Island dressing, and consumed in large quantities.
During family outings to Bonanza (or whatever steak and salad bar restaurant franchise existed during my childhood) I would go to the salad bar and load up on bean sprouts and my favorite dressing.
Not sure the specifics, it might have a touch of the flu or food poisoning, maybe I just plain overdid it, but whatever the case I completely lost my appetite for the half growths and have avoided the sprouts ever since.
That experience taught me a lesson about over-indulgence. Too much of even a good thing can quickly become a bad thing. My mom would remind us children ‘everything in moderation’ and I will add that this means even moderation should be kept in moderation.
The tendency of the over-indulgent is to go to an equal and opposite extreme. This was the case with Augustine of Hippo who’s youthful debauchery gave way to his teaching of complete abstinence later in life. He said:
“Complete abstinence is easier than perfect moderation.”
Augustine went as far as to even recommend chastity within marriage, but easier isn’t necessarily better and frowning on sexual pleasure within marriage is an unnecessary extreme. Augustine’s extreme abstinence teaching seems an overreaction to his own lustful over-indulgence—It promotes an unhealthy view of sexuality and creates false guilt.
Just because a little is good does not mean more is better. Many people make the mistake of thinking that if a little of something is good then more of it is always better. They have the same mentality as Peter:
“He came to Simon Peter, who said to him, ‘Lord, are you going to wash my feet?’ Jesus replied, ‘You do not realize now what I am doing, but later you will understand.’ ‘No,’ said Peter, ‘you shall never wash my feet.’ Jesus answered, ‘Unless I wash you, you have no part with me.’ ‘Then, Lord,’ Simon Peter replied, ‘not just my feet but my hands and my head as well!'” (John 13:6-9)
Peter, after first completely refusing to have his feet washed because he considered it below Jesus, goes to a ridiculous opposite extreme.
Jesus responds:
“Jesus answered, ‘Those who have had a bath need only to wash their feet; their whole body is clean…'” (John 13:10)
In other words, it was a practical matter to clean feet after people journeyed on the dusty road in their sandals, but it was completely silly to wash the whole body of a guest and Jesus dismissed it as unnecessary.
Peter’s over-exuberance came into play elsewhere. He promised Jesus he would never betray him, even took a sword to the ear of a man sent to arrest Jesus, and then went on to betray Jesus three times as was predicted.
Peter had a problem with going from one extreme to the other. Peter lacked in good judgement and moderation. Don’t be like Peter. Learn about temperance.
What is temperance?
Temperance is an old word and a word found in older translations Scripture. It is something that is a sign of our sincere faith:
“But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.” (Galatians 5:22-23 KJV)
Temperance is not going to one extreme or the other, but practicing self-control, learning just how far to go and going no further. Temperance is perfect moderation.
Lack of temperance makes a person unstable, they go from extreme to extreme, over-indulgence to complete abstinence and often back again. Temperance is not being ruled by our emotions.
“None can be free who is a slave to, and ruled by, his passions.” (Pythagoras)
It is good to have passions, but only by practicing temperance are we assured that we are not blinded and ruled by our passions. Temperance is answer to the wild pendulum swings of emotional overreaction.
Temperance is not teetotalism. We are told in Galatians that we can practice temperance in extreme. However, extreme temperance is not teetolalism:
“Temperance is, unfortunately, one of those words that has changed its meaning. It now usually means teetotalism. But in the days when the second Cardinal virtue was christened ‘Temperance’, it meant nothing of the sort. Temperance referred not specially to drink, but to all pleasures; and it meant not abstaining, but going the right length and no further. It is a mistake to think that Christians ought all to be teetotallers; Mohammedanism, not Christianity, is the teetotal religion.” (C.S. Lewis)
Augustine argued teetolalism rather than temperance and many religious fundamentalists (including some in my own conservative Mennonite culture) go to this opposite extreme from over-indulgence to onerous regulation. But temperance is not prohibition or imposed standards, it is having self-control and learning to restrain passions.
Practice temperance. We will not stop the wild swings from extreme to extreme with rules. Rules only teach compliance and never address the heart issue. Temperance is the higher standard that cannot be forced and is only possible with a transformed mind:
“Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will.” (Romans 12:2)
Paul tells us that true non-conformity is a product of a transformed mind and not through external means.
It is the world that tries to manipulate behavior through threats and external controls. But those with the Spirit dwelling in them will develop beyond what could be imposed by rules or artificial non-conformity, they practice the perfect moderation called temperance.
So, enjoy your bean sprouts in appropriate moderation and practice temperance. That said, I will abstain.
Ken Ham’s Ark: Evangelical Outreach or Hammy Recreation?
Standard“You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled underfoot.” (Matthew 5:13)
Question: How to know the salt of a religion has lost its savor?
Answer: Religiously themed amusement parks that seem to be more about preserving pet dogmas (or boosting the ego of a charismatic personality who built them) than the actual Gospel preached by Jesus and lived out by the early church.
Encounters of the wrong kind send the wrong message.
An article on televangelist Jim Bakker’s abandoned ‘Christian’ amusement park prompted my reflection above. However, my mind soon went to another attraction now available to consumer Christianity, that being Ken Ham’s latest creation enterprise in Kentucky, the Ark Encounter.
Anyhow, other than the name reminding me of the Turkey Hill Experience (an actual attraction located in Columbia, PA) I’ve encountered some other thoughts about the 100 million dollar project: I’m not sure this edifice Ham boasts may be “one of the greatest Christian evangelistic outreaches of our day” will live up to the hype.
This tourist trap of mammoth proportions might end up more like Bakker’s now derelict ‘evangelical’ pleasure mecca. It actually seems more like a dead end of fundamentalist dogma than it does a truly faithful living witness of Christian love.
And, at 40 dollars a pop to enter, it is evident that our modern expressions of grace are not cheap—we might have already encountered a bit of a messaging problem.
Finding answers in Jesus, not Genesis.
Yes, the Ark Encounter and other expressions of faith, like charitable giving, are not necessarily mutually exclusive. But I see only one of the two endorsed by Jesus as an outreach and it is not the Genesis themed recreational Biblical tourism kingdom of Ham.
Perhaps, instead of creating hundred million dollar gimmicks, that may be as likely to win as many converts outside of blood relatives as Noah’s original did, we should be focusing our kingdom building efforts elsewhere? Could we do more to provide substantive help to those around us in need?
The problem with the modern ‘scientific’ attempts to bolster Biblical claims is that they often aren’t all that scientific nor do they well reflect the faith of Scriptural example. The Gospel of Jesus never needed to evolve or be adapted for our time. No, our time needs to adapted to actual life of spiritual reality that was once found in the early church:
“All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had. With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. And God’s grace was so powerfully at work in them all that there were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone who had need.” (Acts 4:32-35)
The truth of our faith is the truth that we live. That is our strongest argument and apologetic. Jesus never said we should try to prove the historical accuracy of Biblical narratives as a means to covert others to faith or convince ourselves. Jesus said to live we he taught and then the Spirit would reveal itself in and through us.
There is no need of an edifice built of wood as an evangelical tool to share true faith. What there is need of is a body of believers who acts in unison as the hands and feet of Jesus. A church that literally feeds the hungry, clothes the naked, shelters the homeless, meets the practical needs of their own communities and leads in genuine love:
“If you love me, keep my commands. And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another advocate to help you and be with you forever—the Spirit of truth. […] The one who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love them and show myself to them.” (John 14:15-21)
The truth of our love for God (expressed in our obedience to love other people as Christ commanded) will reveal the truth of God to us and the world. It is really that simple.
Either Jesus is the answer or He is not.
I recall my own hope based in apologetics and my taught mistrust of mainstream science. I remember my own hopeful glances over at the secular neighbors, who attended an Evolution versus Creationism debate with my family, and at the time not realizing then that my own confirmation bias shaded glasses were as blinding as theirs.
It was a well-meaning yet misguided effort. My trying to prove Christianity through study of history and using theories (often more flimsy and unscientific than the ones they mocked) only left me thirsty for truth. My religious indoctrination actually caused me to doubt. The deeper I got into the available evidence the less I believed anything.
It was only through an encounter with Jesus that I realized the error in my ways. It was when I stopped resting in my own knowledge and started to live more obediently to the simple unadulterated teachings of Jesus. It has been a transformative spiritual experience that cannot be duplicated through intellectual, artificial or forced means.
If you want to encourage faith be faithful.
Save what you would spend on Ark Encounter, find someone in your own community with a need (perhaps a single mother or elderly person) and fill it—that will do more for the faith of your family than feeding Ham’s Answers in Genesis empire.
If you wish to encourage your children in faith, show them how to be salt and meet the needs of their neighbors in Christian love. That is the obedience to the law of Christ that will show them real truth and bolster your own faith.
If you have not encountered any real needs around you, then I pray you have an encounter with the Spirit of God and your eyes opened.
Don’t be yesterday’s news, be today’s salt.
Will the Luddites have the last laugh?
StandardTechnological advancement has always come at the expense of jobs.
Today one farmer (with machinery and modern practices) is able to do the work that would have taken a hundred people to do a century ago.
Did this mean ninety-nine people are now out of work?
No.
For every person who lost a job in farming there was opportunity gained to do something else. Because of technology one farmer can feed 155 people and these 155 are now free to produce other things.
The progress of the past century would never have been possible without the layers upon layers of technological innovations that cost jobs and created opportunities for people to employ themselves elsewhere.
At each step of the way there were Luddites (those who resist labor saving technologies and innovation that might cost them their current job) and thankfully they could not hold back the march of progress or we might all still be subsidence farmers barely able to feed ourselves.
Those who lost employment due to technological advancement found other profitable work. Not only did we gain the added production of the machines that replaced human labor, we also gained through freeing people (who once did the work the machines took) to do other profitable things.
The result has been exponential economic growth and an era of prosperity unprecedented in recorded human history. Automation may temporarily cost jobs, but the long-term result is greater productivity and with that greater wealth overall. We have tremendous opportunity over our ancestors because of technological advancements.
Despite this, like the meme above, modern Luddites still resist technology trying to protect jobs. They do not understand how jobs lost to machines leads to new opportunities and greater productivity that benefits them.
They would rather do like New Jersey did to protect jobs by making self-serving gas stations illegal. It is quite literally a counterproductive economic policy because it keeps people tied down to jobs that can easily eliminated without much loss.
Innovations like vending machines, ATM’s and Redbox dispensers have added convenience. No longer do we need to bank during banking hours or wait until Blockbuster opens to rent and return a movie.
Sure, in each case there was a potential job opportunity lost, but with each lost opportunity is an opportunity gained to do something else and a chance to add more value to the economy than would otherwise be possible.
The result is quite obviously good in overall terms…
This is not to say there hasn’t been pain for some along the way. Technological advancements (like globalization and trade) benefits the whole economy, but it also can cause suffering for those who are unemployable because they are unable to adapt and take advantage of the created opportunity.
Not every factory worker who had their job replaced with a machine (or outsourced) is intelligent or skilled enough to take advantage of the opportunity to do something else. Sure, they do benefit from the lower prices, but also might not earn the wages they once did and can come out on the losing end.
However, most people, and certainly the economy as a whole, benefit from the greater production, the lower cost for goods and the opportunities created. Few would actually wish to return to a time before the Industrial Revolution and our age of technological advancement.
For every job eliminated there has always been new opportunities created for more skilled labor and professional work. That is how things have gone until this point and one might assume this is how it would continue ad infinitum.
But do all good things come to an end?
Up until now machines have been useful for eliminating back breaking and repetitive physical tasks. As a result more people have been freed to do mental or creative work rather than manual labor.
Technology has now advanced to where we might soon reach a tipping point where all human work can be replaced.
According to the analysis of some (please watch this: Humans Need Not Apply) we are nearing a point when even the most skilled professionals and best of creative minds will be outclassed by technology…
What then?
What happens when there is zero opportunity to do something that can’t be done cheaper, more efficiently and better in every way by machines?
What happens when all human labor is worth next to nothing and only capital like land, mineral resources or machines have value?
Our future seems a paradoxical combination of utopia and hell…
On one hand, in this future we will have the capability to produce more than ever with great ease, innovation and efficiency will reach levels humanly unachievable. This will mean more wealth than ever before and theoretically we could all eventually go on a permanent vacation.
On the other hand, most people (unless they already own land and machines with productive value) will have little to offer in economic terms and no way to advance. The price of goods would drop, but wages would drop faster and followed to conclusion we would all be unemployed, unemployable and most of us would have nothing at all.
But it would likely never get to that point. The real tipping point would be when a critical mass of people become unemployed, know they are unable to compete with those (who by good fortune or superior intelligence) who already are established.
There would be a revolt against the establishment. Capital of production (machines and land) would almost need to become the property of all people. Goods and services created would need to be distributed evenly amongst the people.
At this point, once the revolution is over, assuming the machines don’t rise up against us, all we would have left to do is contemplate our existence in a world where all other work is done. We would spend our time exploring, being entertained by our machines, building relationships and reproducing—there would nothing else left for us to do.
That will not happen overnight. But, with self-driving vehicles right around the corner, my current occupation (transportation) will be the first in line to go the way of the horse. So, at very least, I need to think of what my next move will be…
Your thoughts?
Is a second marriage ever permissable for a Christian?
StandardAs an idealistic person, one raised in a purity culture, and unmarried, I rarely have needed to question my indoctrination on the issue of remarriage. Likewise, those who are happily married (or who have never been married) have the luxury of easy absolutism on this issue and can draw a hard line with no need to take a closer look.
However, having been asked my opinion on divorce and remarriage on a couple of occasions, I have been pondering the question for several months. The opinions of modern commentators are as varied as those I have found in the writings of those in the early church and onward.
What do the commentators say about divorce and remarriage?
Some of the conclusions of early church writers differ dramatically from what I’ve been taught. For example, divorce was not only recommended in the case of an unfaithful spouse—it was required. Some taught remarriage, in any case, was wrong for a Christian and forbid all second marriages even if the first spouse died.
Tertullian, however, did make an exception when the prior marriage ended (by death or divorce) before conversion. Menno Simons and other notable early Anabaptists also allowed divorce and remarriage in the case of unrepentant adultery, but only with the council of the church body:
“In the fourth place, if a believer and an unbeliever are in the marriage bond together and the unbeliever commits adultery, then the marriage tie is broken. And if it be one who complains that he has fallen in sin, and desires to mend his ways, then the brethren permit the believing mate to go to the unfaithful one to admonish him, if conscience allows it in view of the state of the affair. But if he be a bold and headstrong adulterer, then the innocent party is free–with the provision, however, that she shall consult with the congregation and remarry according to circumstances and decisions in the matter, be it well understood.“ (Wismar Articles)
That is in sharp contrast to the conservative Mennonitism that opposes all divorce, recognizes the marriages of even unbelievers as valid, and yet allows remarriage if the prior spouse has died. Many teach that a second marriage (besides those ended by death) should be broken up even if there are children involved and it creates a hardship.
That is also in contrast to David Bercot who’s lawyerly approach to Scripture and early church writings led him to believe that remarriage after a divorce is NOT a perpetual sin:
“I have not found any situation in the early church where they ever broke up the second marriage. In other words, they said that it was an adulterous marriage, it was a wrong situation, but they didn’t say that it was just the same thing as living with someone in adultery. In other words, there was a union that had taken place there, and they don’t seem to have taken the position that breaking that up would be something good. Instead, it’s a second wrong that doesn’t make the first wrong right. It just makes things even worse, and we can see that today where there’s a family with children. To divorce a second time, break up a happy home, doesn’t seem to be the way God would normally work.”
That, of course, is Bercot’s opinion…
[Edited 11/2/2018 The quote above, attributed to David Bercot, was taken from a conversation on a defunct website called MennoDiscuss.com. The person posting the quote, as I recall, claimed to have transcribed it directly from a cassette tape of Mr. Bercot, I copied and pasted it because it was an interesting point. That much is now in dispute, I’m not going to go through every recording to properly attribute the quote, and that’s why I’ve crossed out the quotation. However, what is not in dispute: There is no record of the early church breaking up second marriages.]
[Edited 06/24/2022 I received a call, late one evening, from Jerry (see comments section) who informed me that he was the one who transcribed the text above, from a cassette that was put out by Scroll Publishing, where Bercot indeed spoke those words. I’m leaving the strikethrough in place because this does not reflect the current opinion of Bercot.]
So how does all that above stack up against the actual teachings of Scripture?
“It has been said, ‘Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.’ But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, makes her the victim of adultery, and anyone who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.“ (Matthew 5:31-32)
Jesus quoted the common practice and then corrects it. He states “anyone who divorces his wife,” then adds the caveat “except for sexual immorality” and continues with that qualification to describe remarriage as sin. From this one can conclude that remarriage is not adultery if there was infidelity (or “porneia” in the original Greek) discovered in the prior marriage.
In fact, if we take the Apostle Paul at his word, then a person applying his teachings must separate themselves from an unfaithful and unrepentant spouse or they are joined together in the sin:
“Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ himself? Shall I then take the members of Christ and unite them with a prostitute? Never! Do you not know that he who unites himself with a prostitute is one with her in body? For it is said, ‘The two will become one flesh.’ But whoever is united with the Lord is one with him in spirit.” (1 Corinthians 6:15-17)
To send an unrepentant sinner packing is NOT hardness of heart (as in what Jesus rebuked in Matthew 19:8) but an absolute necessity and why the church was directed by Paul (1 Corinthians 5:13) to cast out those who refused to repent of their immorality. It is not hard-hearted, it is something necessary to preserve the testimony of the church.
In the Old Testament, we read various places where God is portrayed as the husband of an unfaithful spouse. When the children of Israel break their covenant with God they are given their divorce papers and sent packing (Jeremiah 3:8) because their unfaithfulness could no longer be tolerated. It was not hard-hearted of God to divorce.
But, besides that one exception given by Jesus for sexual immorality, I see the clear indication in Scripture that marriage commitment is permanent and a change of status is not recommended. At the very least it seems second marriage (presumably any second marriage) has consequences. We are told a church leader must be “husband of one wife” (1 Timothy 3:2) and, since all should desire to be the best example of faithfulness, I would conclude remarriage is at least strongly discouraged.
In conclusion…
I believe grace triumphs over judgment and that we should love others as we wish to be loved. It is my opinion that one is to remain committed to their first spouse in every circumstance except in the case of unrepentant sexual sin. I believe death (or divorce of an unfaithful spouse) does unbind the living spouse and gives them the freedom to marry again. But, if there is any doubt, it is better to remain unmarried.
For those who have already divorced and remarried, there must be repentance of the broken marriage. I do not feel I have the authority to overrule those who believe it is permissible to remain in a subsequent or second marriage. But, we also should not continue in sin that grace may abound and should obey our conscience when in doubt. That said, I am also not of the position that there is any sin (past, present, or future) beyond the grace of God.
Anyhow, is a second marriage permissible for a Christian?
Maybe.
But it is nearly always undesirable, unpleasant, and not ideal. Those who have lost a spouse or have been abandoned by an unfaithful spouse know that pain all too well. Children of divorced parents often suffer terrible insecurity throughout life as a result. It is not ideal.
So, to married people, stay faithful if at all possible and don’t risk your own future or that of those who are your responsibility by taking the commitment lightly.
Christian Love Is Not Asceticism
StandardChristianity prioritizes the spiritual without sacrificing physical practicality. It is about faith that expands possibility and potential rather than limit it.
Many religious people teach some form of asceticism. This an idea that individuals who empty themselves totally of physical desire will find something spiritual and redemptive.
In the early church many did give up their material possessions (Acts 2:45) and were willing to sacrifice their all in faith as Jesus taught:
“If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters—yes, even their own life—such a person cannot be my disciple. And whoever does not carry their cross and follow me cannot be my disciple.” (Luke 14:26-27)
Paul builds further on the same theme while encouraging the early church:
“Therefore we do not lose heart. Though outwardly we are wasting away, yet inwardly we are being renewed day by day. For our light and momentary troubles are achieving for us an eternal glory that far outweighs them all. So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen, since what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal.” (1 Corinthians 4:16-18)
This is acknowledgement of reality. This world, our life in it, is temporal and will pass away. But in faith we can see what cannot be known through physical means. Through the Spirit, through the mysterious backdoor of our consciousness, we are able to see spiritual reality greater than what physical senses can detect. It is for this reason that we adjust our priorities according to what we know as the greater transcending reality.
But this is not asceticism in the sense of merely our emptying ourselves as an individualistic spiritual pursuit. No, this is intentional self-sacrificial love that compels us to go beyond our own individual gain and love as God loves. Our cross is not suffering for the sake of suffering, it is not a Gnostic self-loathing of our physical bodies, but is rather a means to the end and expression of deeper divine love.
Many practice asceticism as a means to judge their neighbors. Many deny themselves as to prove themselves superior to others and earn their salvation. However, this is not the way of Jesus. Jesus did not need to die to save Himself from sin or earn God’s favor. He did not sacrifice to prove our inferiority and bring judgement or condemnation:
“For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.” (John 3:17-18)
It is simply reality that we will all eventually die a physical death. That is true by default and not something inflicted upon us for sake of manipulation. This is scientific, a result of physical processes, something with causal explanation, and established. You will not physically die because you reject Jesus, but rather you will eventually physically die (with or without Jesus) and the only way to eternal life is faith in Jesus:
“For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” (John 3:16)
We are saved because we believe in Jesus and through our belief are empowered to love in a way that transcends individualism and becomes all things to all people (1 Corinthians 9:19-23) so they too might be saved. Jesus explains obedience succinctly:
“Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” (John 13:34-35)
It is that simple. This is not denial of physical desires for sake of individual spiritual gain or asceticism. This is denial of self for the collective good, as directed by the Spirit in those who believe, and so the lost can be saved.
It is not sin to enjoy life. It is in no way wrong to enjoy sexual pleasure (in appropriate context) and relationships based in biology. Having friends because of our physical proximity and the community we were born into is not inappropriate. However, when our preference for what is familiar supersedes Christian commitment, when we prioritize temporal pleasure over eternal gain, then we must repent.
Ultimately, what we do or do not possess individually and materially is of little consequence. It is not sin to have a successful business, big family or nice car. What ultimately does matter is that these pleasures of physical life do not distract and blind us. We must find our security in God rather than our possessions or other worldly pleasures.
To be in this world but not of it doesn’t mean a life of misery and complete abstinence from pleasure. Rather it is to possess the transformation of mind (Romans 12:2) that enables us to love more completely and experience greater joy than the world offers.
If you sell all or leave family behind, do it out of genuine love for your neighbor and not asceticism. Give freely because you believe in the eternal life Jesus promised and love God.
Jesus Always Trumps Politics
StandardI overestimated.
I had assumed my own conservative friends would spot a charlatan and choose a candidate with their own supposed values.
Trump’s rise came as a surprise to many on the left. However, the bigger surprise was probably for conservatives who are principled, conscientious and consistently liberty-minded.
Trump is everything conservatives have complained about in liberals. He’s divisive like Barack Obama, a serial womanizer like Bill Clinton, arrogant like Al Gore and a waffler like John Kerry. Yet somehow it is all okay when Trump does it?
Why?
Well, I suppose it is because Trump is one of ‘us’ and is ‘our’ guy…?
Which, in translation, is tribalism or identity politics and the same thing conservatives have claimed to loath in liberals. This loathsome behavior has now become acceptable to some self-described conservatives because it suits their political agenda.
When you can’t beat them join them?
Conservatives, in fear of being marginalized and feeling unheard by the political establishment, have abandoned traditional conservativism en-masse to follow their own audacious Pied Piper who promises to give them a voice again.
Conservatives can no longer blame liberals for dividing the nation with a man as divisive as Trump as their choice for leader. They can no longer point a finger at Hollywood for promoting evil when they themselves pick an obscene and angry man to represent them.
No matter what the outcome of the election (Trump, Clinton, or other) it is safe to say that irrationality has won, tribalism has won, and we all together will lose. Something once anathema to American greatness has now come to define us both right and left.
Trump’s ascendency as a ‘conservative’ is a watershed moment. Now no side can claim moral high ground. Conservatives are now as guilty of rank partisanship and hypocrisy as their rivals. They fall for fear-mongering propaganda as quickly as anyone else.
So where do we go from here?
First we must identify the problem in us, not them. Jesus said that before we judge others we must judge ourselves, because how we judge others is how we will be judged (Matt. 7:1-5) and this is something that should sober up any honest person conservative or liberal.
Both sides identify the same problems.
Both see the divisiveness, bullying and irrationality of the other side.
But, can we see it in ourselves? Have we actually heeded the warning of Jesus, seen our own hypocrisy and repented?
Or do we hold onto our imagined right to a sanctimonious judgmental and entitled attitude? Do we think it is okay for our side to be divisive because they are? Is it fine to be a bully when it suits our own agenda? Can we abandon a rationality of self-sacrificial love and somehow save ourselves?
#1) Simple labels lead to more division and greater irrationality.
Trump wins using what Scott Adams (who makes a case why the billionaire celebrity will win) has explained as the “linguistic kill shot” or taking an opponent’s most notable attribute and redefining it in a memorable and negative way.
The presidential characteristics of diplomacy and reasonableness embodied by Jeb Bush were turned into “weak” and “low energy” by Trump. Ben Carson’s political outsider status, unique life story and calm demeanor were turned into comparison to a child molester and a cause for mistrust. Ted Cruz, a skilled debater and political strategist, he demolished by calling into question his credibility.
Of course, this is not anything new, political partisans and activists have long tried to define their opponents in a negative way. The language in the abortion debate, for example: Those in favor self-identify as “pro-choice” while those against call themselves “pro-life” and both imply the other side as against life or choice. It presents an intentional oversimplification of a complex topic. It is often language representative of a false dichotomy and strawman argument.
This was also the most frustrating part of the healthcare debate early in President Obama’s first term. You were either for a massive new government intrusion into the healthcare industry or you were pigeonholed as a cold hearted and angry racist.
It was not conducive of a constructive dialogue. It marked the end of any chance for bipartisan cooperation and in many ways forced otherwise reasonable people to choose a side. Many conservatives have apparently decided to embrace the labels rather than rise above them.
Perhaps it is because there is enough truth to the accusations against conservatives? It does seem, in retrospect, that some of the opposition to Obama’s policies may have been partially rooted in bigotry and prejudice. This could be in need of correction.
Political correctness came to be for a reason. Unfortunately, the purveyors of political correctness have not overcome the same tendencies that they identify in others. They, like those whom they deride as racists and sexists, have resorted to their own forms of the same ugliness.
Trump has mastered this art of oversimplification of opponents. He uses language that creates a negative image and the more the identifier is resisted the more it is reinforced at a subconscious level.
Trump relies on irrational human tendency to judge ‘outsiders’ collectively. This leads to more mistrust, creates deeper division and leads to more tribalism.
#2) More tribalism (or identity politics) will never make America great.
Trump promises to make America great again. But in reality he represents a more advanced stage of the cancer destroying our strength as a nation. Namely the problem is tribalism (or identity politics) and this is not helped more angry partisan rhetoric.
Just the other day I was told (by a left-leaning friend) it was “politically toxic” to get lunch at Chick-fil-A. And on the other side we have Joshua (coffee cup controversy) Feuerstein and a less than meek spirited woman marching through Target (submissive man and family in tow) demanding people leave or be in league with the devil.
Tribalism blinds us to the sins of those with whom we identify with and leads to a vengeful self-perpetuating tit for tat cycle. Both sides have convinced themselves the other side is getting what they deserve when the government encroaches on their freedom. It might be described as revenge for what their tribe did to ours, but it is really just hatred and hypocrisy.
Democrats described conservatives of being unpatriotic for opposition to tax hikes and other liberal policies. Now Trump supporters have turned tables and claim you aren’t a patriot unless you support their vile mouthed candidate. This is utter nonsense, nevertheless it is believed by many on both sides—it keeps us divided, easily manipulated, and weak.
“If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. If a house is divided against itself, that house cannot stand.” (Mark 3:24-25)
Abraham Lincoln paraphrased that bit of Scripture in his House Divided speech to point out the double-mindedness of those seeking to be on both sides of the slavery issue. Lincoln lost that round, nevertheless his point was well made and our own prideful hypocrisy today (on both sides) must be addressed or we will fall.
The tendency to demonize or marginalize those who disagree is expression of identity politics. Rather than respect each other we are driven to mistrust. Rather than build a common unity around our shared values, we are encouraged to divide into competing tribes of race, gender or religious affiliation. The result is a predictable never-ending conflict where nobody ever wins and everyone comes out as loser.
We cannot promote divisiveness, demagoguery and disunity then claim to love a nation that values freedom. We cannot expect tolerance for ourselves or our tribe while demanding others share our opinions and being completely intolerant of those who do not.
#3) The answer to abuse and bullying is not more abuse and bullying.
Every abuser feels justified. Men, child molesters or rapists, will often blame immodesty of women and the innocent for their own sinful lusts. Likewise looters and rioters feel their own violent outbursts against are excused because of police brutality or other historic injustices.
People bully and abuse others because it works. It may even get Trump elected according to some. It is easier to manipulate others into compliance with fear of violence than it is to convince them with a rational argument. The civil conversation is over when the mob arrives shouting demands with torch and pitchfork in hand.
Trump has encouraged mob spirit in his political rallies. His supporters gleefully cheer on rough treatment that they feel is justified and it is dangerous.
For years conservatives have put up with the disruptions and disrespect for those expressing their perspective, so perhaps some of us think this makes it right for us to act out?
It might be cathartic to see some elbows thrown on behalf of our own perspective. However, repaying evil with evil is a path to greater evil. It is a positive feedback loop that produces greater evil with each cycle. It is a march towards civil war and a path to our mutually assured destruction.
We can’t overcome evil with evil. We must overcome evil with good (Rom. 12:21) and forgive. Real moral leadership leads by example rather than use of reciprocal violence and political force.
Jesus trumps partisan politics.
Politics is about power. Political leaders often use fear to motivate and threat of violence to manipulate those who stand against them, they feed discontentment rather than promote peace, but this is not the way of Jesus.
I’ve heard some exclaim: “We’re electing a president not a pastor!”
This is double mindedness. Those who believe a thuggish leader is necessary to control their neighbors should not be surprised when the same rationale is used by their adversaries to subjugate them. It is not reconcilable with Christian love.
Jesus is the answer or our profession of faith is a lie. Jesus is the right example of leadership, is the only appropriate basis for measurement, or he’s not our Lord and Savior.
And, furthermore, if the standard for leadership established by His example can’t be reconciled with politics, then I recommend those who claim to be Christian choose their master and remove themselves from the process entirely or admit their unbelief in Jesus.
A President is indeed like a pastor (read more if interested) to a nation. His morality and ethics will is the example for the nation (or so that was the claim of conservatives in response to Clinton’s infidelity) and cannot be ignored. We cannot separate the character of a person from their politics nor can we seperate our own personal morality from those whom we choose to represent us.
Politics, or at very least the politics of division, violence and tribalism, is antithetical to sincere profession of faith in Jesus. Politics that leads by force rather than example is a direct contradiction to what Jesus taught.
“Go and do likewise.” (Luke 10:25-37)
That quote is the final answer given by Jesus to a legal expert (perhaps the equivalent of a Constitutional conservative today) who asked what he must do to inherit eternal life. Jesus first ask what the law says, the man responds with a summary of the law—love God and love your neighbor.
But the expert, evidently unsatisfied, wanting to be justified, pushes for further definition and asks Jesus: “And who is my neighbor?”
It is at this point that Jesus tells a story of the ‘good Samaritan’ who treated an enemy (his political and ethnic or social rival) with loving care and respect. Jesus does not answer the question of who is our neighbor, instead he answers how to be a good neighbor.
That is the way of Jesus. We are to love our enemies, to lead others by showing them by example how we wish for them to treat us and through this overcome evil with good. This brings unity and love rather than more fear and divisions.
If there is no candidate attempting to lead with Christian love? Stay home election day and pray. When given a choice between two corrupt and unrepentant people? Choose neither!
We should choose to transcend the tribal political warfare. We can love our neighbors as faith requires without casting a ballot.
So, when in doubt, choose Jesus and love your neighbor.
From Death To Life: The Testimony Of A Biblically Religious Fraud Found By Jesus
StandardSometimes the most religiously educated minds are the most spirituality ignorant.
Jesus confounded the religious teachers and authorities of His day. Like the time Jesus asked a perplexed Nicodemus (John 3:3-21) why he “Israel’s teacher” could not understand the basics of spiritual birth.
Nicodemus was a religious expert. He had no doubt studied Scripture his entire life. Yet his mind was dull to spiritual things, his existing knowledge clouded him, and he clearly was not understanding what Jesus was trying to explain.
What was Jesus trying to explain to Nicodemus?
Nicodemus is not the only religious authority totally ignorant of spiritual matters. Many professing Christians have the same dullness of mind of Nicodemus because they have yet to be born of the Spirit and to realize the fullness of truth.
The religiously minded tend to think they gave birth to themselves. They believe they were saved by their own study and understanding of a book. No, they will never say this in so many words, but it is evident in what they claim as the foundation of their faith and attitudes towards those who try to give credit to God alone.
The thoroughly indoctrinated church borns, those who are the cream of the crop in their own minds, are the most difficult to convince.
How do I know?
I was one of them. I was raised in a bastion of Biblical fundamentalism and religious pride. I was born in a conservative Mennonite home. (We are the best of the best and know it—Don’t let our initial humble appearance fool you!) I went into public high school arrogant enough to think I knew more about biology than the college educated teacher of the class.
This is not unusual, Biblical fundamentalist children are often ‘big fish in a little pond’ and the smartest person they know. To make matters worse, they are often isolated from outside influences (home schooled or raised with like-minded people) and too sheltered to realize how sheltered they are.
The result is that many things are just presumed to be true and never questioned. Yes, we are fed a steady diet of information to make us feel knowledgeable about everything from science to theology and philosophy. But most of it is a strawman of the other side and an attempt to vaccinate us from further questions.
But I had the misfortune of being born with a question “why” on my lips. I delved deep into apologetics, slipped on a personal tragedy, and found I could not (despite my dedicated effort and mental strain) prove the existence of God. I thrashed, gasped for that last saving breath, then disappeared into doubt and despair.
“Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.” (Friedrich Nietzsche)
A mother’s wail ripped a hole in my heart. All of my pretense of knowledge couldn’t save her children or keep me from my plunge into spiritual darkness. I stared at the lifeless body that had come to represent my hope for my close friend. There was no resurrection of the dead that day. My little hope died.
I had reached an end. All of the religious cliché and trite assurances were swallowed up in a tsunami of fear and hopelessness. Over the same period of time I had a falling out with the religious community that was a big part of my identity and security. I gave up. My attempts to find faith through my diligent religious effort had totally failed me.
Passing from death to life by the Spirit’s power.
Many who profess faith in Jesus believe they were saved through their religious knowledge and reading the Bible. But Scripture does not support their delusional claims. There is no evidence that we can be born of Spirit or come to faith through our own religious knowledge and effort.
Just as a child doesn’t give birth to themselves, the spiritually dead cannot bring themselves to life and this is what Scripture describes was our reality before God saved us:
“As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins… But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved. […] 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. For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.” (Ephesians 1-10)
There’s no such thing as half dead.
There’s no way for a fully dead person to bring themselves to life.
Those who claim to be saved through their Bible study have somehow missed the obvious. They may have read, but they clearly do not understand that dead is dead and the dead to not rise by their own accord. No, if you are spiritually alive today “it is by grace you have been saved” and “not by works” or Paul is a liar.
What I had failed to comprehend in my diligent study and dedicated pursuit of faith is the simplest spiritual truth of them all. Because of my religious education I had no grasp of my own hopelessness. I had always assumed faith was a product or result of my own knowledge of Scripture and religious devotion.
I was blinded by my pretense of knowledge. I had reasoned that I could be saved because of what I had learned about Jesus in church and in reading the Bible. I thought this was faith in God, but it was really only ever a trust of my own human rationality and circular reasoning at best. I really only had faith in my own ability to understand and believe the content of a book.
But my attempt to bootstrap my way into heaven this way failed me. It was a false hope built on presumption and self-righteous delusion. By assuming that my Bible reading was my salvation I had actually rejected Jesus and real spiritual life. Despite my sincerity and ability to argue Bible-based dogma, I was nothing but a 2D cardboard cutout of a 3D faith.
It was only after my faith in my own abilities had died that there was a realization out of the blue. The epiphany was the sudden understanding that it wasn’t my faith that saved me. No, it was God’s faith expressed through Jesus that saved me while I was yet a sinner. I was miraculously raised from the dead with Him.
“For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, and in Christ you have been brought to fullness. He is the head over every power and authority. In him you were also circumcised with a circumcision not performed by human hands. Your whole self ruled by the flesh was put off when you were circumcised by Christ, having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through your faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead. When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made you alive with Christ.” (Colossians 2:9-13)
My Biblical ‘Christian’ indoctrination did not save me. No, it had blinded me. I was too full of religious pride, intellectual assumptions and the pretense of spiritual knowledge to know the truth. However, despite this pretense of faith that had taken root, I had believed in Jesus as a child and was baptized in sincerity of faith.
And now that spiritual seed of my Baptismal faith was ready to emerge from the water. Suddenly the words of the Jesus and the Apostles came alive in a new way as I read them. I was astonished, what had once confused and confounded me was now clear as day. I could finally understand the book that had caused me (and others like this guy) to fall into agnosticism.
Are we saved by our book knowledge or saved by Jesus?
I can hear the howls of protest from both the book worshipping religious people and other unbelievers: “How could I know about Jesus and come to faith without reading the Bible?!?”
But these religious cynics and skeptics lack understanding of their own spiritual ignorance:
“No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day. It is written in the Prophets: ‘They will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard the Father and learned from him comes to me.” (John 6:44-45)
This is the mystery those who reject the Bible and those who think their own knowledge saves them refuse to understand. They have both (tacitly or openly) rejected the resurrection of the dead and, in their self-reliance, dismiss the promise of Jesus and cling to what is reasonable to their spiritually dead mind.
But Jesus never promised we would be saved or taught by a book. That idea is a misunderstanding of Biblical terminology and causality at best. It is spiritual idolatry or rejection of the person of Jesus and blasphemy again the Spirit of God at worse. This is what Jesus did promise:
“But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.” (John 14:26)
Now, lest any of you protest and attempt to credit your own understanding of the Bible for saving you. Go back and read the passages I’ve quoted previously, dead people do not come to understanding and life by their own reading comprehension. We are told the real teacher is the Spirit and that it is only through the spiritual anointing promised by Jesus that we avoid deception:
“I am writing these things to you about those who are trying to lead you astray. As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit—just as it has taught you, remain in him.” (1 John 2:26-27)
At first glance it might seem paradoxical to write to warn someone about deception if they don’t need to be told. However, faith is not individualistic effort or personal project and God uses many means to encourage us through the collective body of believers. Only those with the Spirit know that the words of a writer originate from the Spirit.
But, wait, isn’t that circular reasoning, how do you know?
I’ve mentioned that predisposing the Bible to be true because it says so is circular reasoning or an argument based in two unproven premises that rely on each other to be true. So, isn’t saying that I know the Spirit because I have the Spirit the same thing?
Of course, the only way it is the same thing is if we believe a book is equal in ability and power to the Spirit of God. Many Christians do this when they describe the Bible as “word of God” and claim it saved them. But the Scripture is indeed different from the word of God and we can know this as fact.
“As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts. As the rain and the snow come down from heaven, and do not return to it without watering the earth and making it bud and flourish, so that it yields seed for the sower and bread for the eater, so is my word that goes out from my mouth: It will not return to me empty, but will accomplish what I desire and achieve the purpose for which I sent it.“ (Isaiah 55:9-11)
That word translated as “word” in the passage above is the Hebrew דָּבָר (dabar) and in the New Testament Greek comes out as λόγος (logos) or ῥῆμα (rhema) and does not refer to Scripture. If it did refer to Scripture, and Isaiah is true, then it would be impossible for those who knew the Scripture to reject the word of God:
“Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life. […] And the Father who sent me has himself testified concerning me. You have never heard his voice nor seen his form, nor does his word dwell in you, for you do not believe the one he sent. You study the Scriptures diligently because you think that in them you have eternal life. These are the very Scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life.” (John 5:25-40)
These people Jesus says studied the Scripture diligently. Yet, despite their religious dedication to a book, according to Jesus, they did not have God’s “word” in them and therefore would not come to Him for life. If Scripture is the word of God and they knew the Scripture, then how could they not know the truth standing literally in front of them?
The answer is that they knew Scripture and not the word. The two are not one and the same. One is divinely inspired writing useful to a true believer (2 Timothy 3:16) and the other is divinity embodied and a promise that cannot fail. One is infallible while the other can be twisted and misused as Peter warns:
“Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.“ (2 Peter 3:15-16)
Scripture can be distorted the “ignorant and unstable” but God’s word is always true. Satan can quote Scripture, but we also know he always lies, has “no truth in him” (John 8:44) and this is a problem if you presume that “word” is synonymous with Scripture.
Fortunately we need not make such a presumption. Scripture and the word of God are related to each other. God’s word is what inspired Scripture. I will even venture to say that Scripture can become as God’s word to the believer. However, we must get first things first or we are deceived and Jesus always comes first.
Salvation is through faith and Jesus, not in our religious devotion to a book.
I am saved because Jesus saved me. If I were to make any other boast I would only out of ignorance of both Scripture and the word of God which inspired it. My faith and eventual salvation is entirely a gift of grace (Ephesians 2:8) and rest in the mystery of God’s power.
It was knowledge apart from God that drove Adam away from the tree of life—I believe (after the fact) that it is God’s word or Spirit who “quickened” me to salvation.
There is no faith without obedience and there is no obedience outside of hearing God’s word. This is the paradox of the promised Spirit. We hear because we are made alive in the grace of Christ Jesus (Ephesians 2:5) and must be faithful in the very little we know before we can expect to get very much.
I believe salvation is totally the work of God. God makes the initial payment through grace and we continue to grow in faith through obedience to to what we know. My faith is not a presupposition based in something I read in a book or a product of religious indoctrination. My faith is personal relationship and something experienced in the heart of those who believe.
I believe the word comes to us through revelation of the Spirit. It is not our mere knowledge of Scripture that saves us, but also always an act of God and work of the Spirit. It was only after Jesus revealed himself to the disciples on the road to Emmaus that they were finally able to understand:
“[Jesus] said to them, ‘This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.’ Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures.” (Luke 24:44-45)
If the very men who spent all that time with Jesus teaching them needed His help to understand the Scripture, how can we expect to do better?
But the most compelling case for direct revelation is how Paul’s explanation of how we (as believers) understand the Scripture when others with the same written texts did not:
“We do, however, speak a message of wisdom among the mature, but not the wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are coming to nothing. No, we declare God’s wisdom, a mystery that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began. None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. However, as it is written: ‘What no eye has seen, what no ear has heard, and what no human mind has conceived’—the things God has prepared for those who love him—these are the things God has revealed to us by his Spirit. The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God. For who knows a person’s thoughts except their own spirit within them? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. What we have received is not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may understand what God has freely given us. This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, explaining spiritual realities with Spirit-taught words. The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit. The person with the Spirit makes judgments about all things, but such a person is not subject to merely human judgments, for, ‘Who has known the mind of the Lord so as to instruct him?’ But we have the mind of Christ.” (1 Corinthians 2:6-16)
Scripture is only useful for those of the Spirit and those who do not accept the Spirit “considers it foolishness” because they have yet to experience the indwelling of the word. They are spiritual blind and often the most religiously arrogant hard-headed people. If they profess Jesus Christ and seek to obey Him, I do believe they will be saved. However, because of their refusal to fully acknowledge or accept the gift of God’s Spirit they may be as those who have built a foundation somewhat on the works of men rather than completely on Christ—who will see their work burn but still be saved (1 Corinthians 3:10-15) because God is gracious to the ignorant.
For those who think the Bible is the best way of sharing the Gospel I will again point to the explanation of Paul who writes (2 Corinthians 3) we ourselves are a letter from God and it is the Spirit that makes us competent. The Gospel of Jesus Christ is always best learned through application. Bible study has it’s place for certain, in fact that is probably one of the first places the Spirit will take us. However, reading without loving as Christ loved to our best ability will limit our deeper understanding of the book.
What am I… a Calvinist?
I make no such allegiance. I have not studied John Calvin enough to know where I stand in relation to his teachings.
I believe in free will and still acknowledge the clear pattern of causality and determinism in the universe. I also do not ignore the language of predestination and election in Scripture.
I do believe in paradox.
There are many cases where dualities of both/and (as opposed to either/or dichotomies) offer the better explanation. Dualities are found in both the uppermost, lowermost and outermost limits that define the universe as we currently know it.
The singularity of a black hole, on the scale of the very big, is an object both infinity small and massive, a place where time itself ceases, defies normal reasoning. Quantum mechanics, the world of the extremely small smallest parts of the universe, brings us to an irrational bizarreness where particles behave as waves until observed and time ceases to matter.
Advanced physics is now making the long held assumptions of materialists obsolete, we can now look beyond these constraints and to possibilities once unimaginable.
Our rationality is time based.
God’s is not.
Time is an illusion.
This has huge implications.
This might explain the language of ‘is and is yet to come’ in Scripture. Jesus explained “my kingdom is not of this world” and pointed to a higher spiritual dimensionality that is beyond the reach of normal human reasoning or natural science.
Perhaps the question of free will and predestination is answered by a paradoxical both. If we are adopted by God, sons and daughters according to His word, then we will eventually become one with the Father, our Father who exists in timeless reality, and therefore we participate in our own coming to salvation through the Spirit.
Who knows? Only Jesus.
I don’t pretend to know the answers to those questions. I don’t need to know the answers to those questions. All I know I need to know is Jesus. Even if I were not a Christian I am convinced Jesus, his way of self-sacrificial love and leadership by example, is the answer.
“And so it was with me, brothers and sisters. When I came to you, I did not come with eloquence or human wisdom as I proclaimed to you the testimony about God. For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. I came to you in weakness with great fear and trembling. My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit’s power, so that your faith might not rest on human wisdom, but on God’s power.” (1 Corinthians 2:1-5)
That is the testimony I have. Only by the love of Jesus and the Spirit’s power am I saved.
Jesus is the answer that found me.
Who Are The True Children Of Abraham?
StandardOver half a century ago there was a refugee crisis.
Vast numbers of people crossed the Mediterranean Sea. These refugees landed in a place where the inhabitants viewed them as illegal aliens, a threat to their way of life and dangerous.
There were terrorist bombings and assassinations perpetrated by those emerging from the sea—trying to gain a foothold. The native people were overwhelmed, they were unable to repel the invasion—driven from their ancestral homes and into poverty.
To many this happening is a fulfillment of prophecy and miracle from God. They use success in battle as evidence that God is on the side of the victors, they use Scriptural promises made to Abraham as proof texts, and urge the Christian church to fall in line.
But Jesus warned of false prophets who “will appear and perform great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect.” (Matthew 24:24)
So, how do we know the difference between a miracle of God and deception? Are the nationalistic ambitions of some today reflective of the new covenant or is that a return to bondage? Is our new covenant one of physical reality or spiritual? Who are the true children of God?
#1) Jesus says clearly that children of Abraham by blood (who do not believe) are children of the devil, not God…
“‘Abraham is our father,’ they answered.
‘If you were Abraham’s children,’ said Jesus, ‘then you would do what Abraham did. As it is, you are looking for a way to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. Abraham did not do such things. You are doing the works of your own father.’
‘We are not illegitimate children,’ they protested. ‘The only Father we have is God himself.’
Jesus said to them, ‘If God were your Father, you would love me, for I have come here from God. I have not come on my own; God sent me. Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies. Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me! Can any of you prove me guilty of sin? If I am telling the truth, why don’t you believe me? Whoever belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God.'” (John 8:39-47)
Jesus tells these ‘Jews’ that the true children of Abraham do as he did. Jesus suggests they are illegitimate children. They claim to be children of God because of their biological lineage and Jesus dismisses them as children of the devil.
Do we agree with them? Is God and Abraham their father? Or do we agree with Jesus?
#2) Paul says the old covenant will “soon disappear” and be replaced by the new and superior covenant of Jesus…
“But in fact the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, since the new covenant is established on better promises. For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another. But God found fault with the people and said: ‘The days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and with the people of Judah. It will not be like the covenant I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, because they did not remain faithful to my covenant, and I turned away from them, declares the Lord. By calling this covenant ‘new,’ he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear.“ (Hebrews 8:6-13)
This is where historical context matters.
The text above was written before the destruction of the temple and final ending of the inferior covenant’s sacrificial system.
Jesus represented the ending of the age, the fullness of a time, and a better way. The old covenant has disappeared, we live in the fulfillment of that prophecy above and should not look backwards.
A covenant is an agreement only good when both sides keep the terms. Paul clearly says that the old covenant was broken and God “turned away” from the people who broke the contract.
Nobody under the new covenant should be pining for a return of the old…
“We are not like Moses, who would put a veil over his face to prevent the Israelites from seeing the end of what was passing away. But their minds were made dull, for to this day the same veil remains when the old covenant is read. It has not been removed, because only in Christ is it taken away. Even to this day when Moses is read, a veil covers their hearts. But whenever anyone turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away. Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.“ (2 Corinthians 3:13-17)
Do you live in the freedom of the new covenant or do you remain with Moses in dullness of mind and persistent lacking of understanding?
#3) The physical or outward circumcision does not mean anything to God, the true circumcision is something internal and spiritual…
“A person is not a Jew who is one only outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. No, a person is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a person’s praise is not from other people, but from God.” (Romans 2:28-29)
Paul harkens back to the conditional promise given in Deuteronomy (chapter 30) where assurance is given “when you and your children return to the Lord your God and obey him with all your heart and with all your soul” that He “will circumcise your hearts and the hearts of your descendants, so that you may love him with all your heart and with all your soul, and live.”
What circumcision is important to you? That of religious devotion and performed by human hands?
Or that circumcision of heart performed by spiritual means?
Physical circumcision is a cultural and religious tradition only—it is a ritual performed by men and has not real value to God. The true circumcision is the one performed by God when people “return” to Him and live in obedience to His voice.
#4) The true sheep hear His voice, the false teachers are unable to comprehend and despite their diligent study of Scripture…
“The Jews who were there gathered around him, saying, ‘How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Messiah, tell us plainly.’
Jesus answered, ‘I did tell you, but you do not believe. The works I do in my Father’s name testify about me, but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me.'” (John 10:24-27)
“And the Father who sent me has himself testified concerning me. You have never heard his voice nor seen his form, nor does his word dwell in you, for you do not believe the one he sent. You study the Scriptures diligently because you think that in them you have eternal life. These are the very Scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life.” (John 5:37-40)
We see these descendants of Abraham, even with their diligent study of Scripture, did not know God’s word or voice and did not accept Jesus. They are not heirs of the promise to Abraham and are not the true children of God.
#5) The book of Revelation and 1 John tells us physical descendants of Abraham who did not obey Jesus are not children of the covenant, they are damned liars…
“Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a person is the antichrist—denying the Father and the Son. No one who denies the Son has the Father; whoever acknowledges the Son has the Father also.” (1 John 2:22-23)
“I will make those who are of the synagogue of Satan, who claim to be Jews though they are not, but are liars—I will make them come and fall down at your feet and acknowledge that I have loved you.” (Revelation 3:9)
Can the language of Scripture be anymore explicit?
Those who have rejected Jesus are the “antichrist” and seperated from God the Father. These are people who “claim to be Jews” yet really “are of the synagogue of Satan” and liars. We want to share no part in their self-deception.
#6) Those who accept Jesus are the true seed of Abraham and the rightful heirs, not an ethnic group determined by bloodline…
“So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.“ (Galatians 3:26-2)
The early church dealt with the same issues we do today. Some wanted, due to religious heritage and ethnic background, to think of themselves as superior. But that is an idea in direct opposition to Scripture.
In Jesus the importance of physical bloodlines is wiped away completely. All who share the faith of Abraham are the real heirs of the promise and true children of God.
#7) So, what about Zionism and the resurrected state of Israel?
Many are bewitched and made fools (Galatians 3) by those in the church peddling the old covenant. Sensational claims grab our attention and sensational eschatology has become the biggest distraction from teaching true obedience to Jesus in many churches.
The book of Revelation does give a prophecy of the resurrected and seemingly invincible beast that emerges from the sea…
“One of the heads of the beast seemed to have had a fatal wound, but the fatal wound had been healed. The whole world was filled with wonder and followed the beast. People worshiped the dragon because he had given authority to the beast, and they also worshiped the beast and asked, ‘Who is like the beast? Who can wage war against it?'” (Revelation 13:3-4)
In the prior chapter we learn it is at war with the true offspring of God’s promise…
“Then the dragon was enraged at the woman and went off to wage war against the rest of her offspring—those who keep God’s commands and hold fast their testimony about Jesus.” (Revelation 12:17)
I don’t claim to know for certain what the beast is in the passages above. But I see that the “offspring” are defined as those who have a testimony about Jesus. I do also know that the antichrist is clearly defined in Scripture as those who have rejected Jesus as the son of God and we should have no part in their deception.
According to Scripture true descendants of Abraham are those who have heard, believed and followed after Jesus. The real circumcision is not one of a religious ritual, not one of a physical nation, but one of obedience and heart.
Coincidentally the modern state of Israel was formed May 15, 1947 or precisely 69 years and a day ago from the date of this post.
What Are ‘Christian’ Values?
StandardThe culture war continues.
The latest salvo in the fight is over the current segregation of public restrooms. The proponents of change and traditionalists battle it out for control on social media and in the public arena.
Both argue the moral inferiority of the other side. Both claim to be defending the security of their loved ones. Both threaten to take punitive measures against those who do not comply with their demands.
It is a fight where nobody seems to win and everyone comes out a loser. But what if this two sided debate is actually false dichotomy? Could there be a third option solution where all could win?
Perhaps, if all sides of this struggle for control could put down their rhetorical and political weapons for a moment, there is a better example to follow?
I believe there is a better ‘third’ way that is neither dogmatically religious nor demandingly progressive. I believe there is an alternative where all can win and none lose.
However, before I can get to the solution I need to discuss where the other options fall short and to do this I have defined a few categories.
(Please understand in advance that there is overlap between my categories and many people may not fall neatly into one or another.)
1) Liberal ‘progressive’ or secular values are marketed as love, tolerance, inclusion and open-mindedness. The promise is a more fair or high-minded society, but the result is often as petty and even more divisive than what it seeks to replace. It is morally incoherent, in one breath claiming to be non-judgmental and making more allowance for free expression, but in the next moment enforcing strict dogmas of politically correct language and behavior.
Those who do not comply with the moral edicts of progressives should be prepare to be shamed, belittled and bullied into silence. Those who fall away, question or challenge the new orthodoxy will be labeled as a bigot, racist, homophobe, misogynist, hateful or insensitive. The shouts of “don’t judge me” are often only a tool to drown out dissent and not a consistently applied principle. These bleeding hearts are out for blood as much as those they accuse of lacking understanding or compassion.
2) Conservative ‘nationalistic’ or established values are the present cultural norms and current notions of common sense. This is the flag waving proud patriotic perspective held by those who believe their own values (football, freedom and frequent beer consumption) represent the greatness of the American past, present and future. These are the biggest defenders of the status quo, their status quo, and never minding that their current cherished culture was formed yesterday.
These are the people who complain about outsourced jobs while simultaneously shopping at Walmart and criticizing as lazy those who aren’t as successful as them. This is the moral majority of the moment that sees their own privileges and preferences as fundamental rights without respect or consideration of those who see differently. They have also abandoned the traditional values of their parents and grandparents yet still condemn those who go a step further than them.
In their eyes America was almost always right. Historic injustice is white washed with a brush of romanticism. Slavery, racial inequality, segregation of schools, massacres and other abuses against native people are forgotten. The sins of our modern imperialistic aggression and global hegemony are downplayed. “It’s ‘merica, baby, land of the free, home of the brave!”
3) Religious ‘fundamentalist’ or traditional values are those out of the mainstream who claim to represent God’s will and freely judge all people—especially those outside of their own sub-cultural group. These self-proclaimed sanctimonious gatekeepers to the realm of moral truth annoy everyone who doesn’t share their own interpretations. People call them the “Bible-thumpers” and they come with a “holier then thou” attitude that is a major turn off to those outside their own cult.
They pose as authorities on spiritual matters. However, their knowledge doen’t seem to know much beyond their proof-texting and dogmas. They use “the Bible says” and selectively quote the Old Testament when it suits their own agenda. But gloss over and don’t deal honestly with other culturally inconvenient Biblical realities like captured brides, naked prophets and daughters sacrificed in God’s name.
They make fun of the sensitivity of the progressives and then cry “persecution” when they themselves are opposed. They feel entitled to a special privileged position in society as God’s favorites. They use grace as a cover for their own sins without extending the same to those who sin differently or disagree.
4) Faithful ‘Spirit And In Truth’ followers are those who pick up the cross and live to be a consistent example of self-sacrificial love. These are those who seek to be the literal embodiment of Jesus Christ. This means they follow his commandments to love their neighbors as themselves, to do unto others as they would have them do for us and, while seeking to purify themselves of evil, leave judgment outside to God.
It is a way that doesn’t seek power to impose on others and instead is committed to self-sacrificial love and leadership by example. It is the beautiful alternative to the endless cycles of reaction, retaliation and repeat again. It forgives and frees others of their sin debt to us. It builds a new identity in Jesus and is a truth that is lived more than preached.
How are Christian values different from progressive values?
There are some similarities. Jesus broke from the established religious and cultural standard. He identified with the societal outcasts and was full of compassion for hurting people.
But Jesus did not turn to more law or greater regulation of offending behavior as the solution. He did not urge a political fight or demand his voice be heard by government authorities. He did not lead massive protests against the privileged and powerful. Instead Jesus showed the example to follow, he offered his own life as atonement for the sins of others and forgave offenses.
How are Christian values different from ‘traditional’ American values?
There are many who characterize America as a ‘Christian’ nation and really do a disservice to the truth in this. America does have some ‘Christian’ values reflected in its history and did certainly provide a haven of religious freedom.
However, this conveniently glosses over the fact that founding fathers were not faithful. Thomas Jefferson, for example, cut out portions of the Bible he found disagreeable. Ben Franklin lived immorally according to a Christian standard.
The individualism, materialism and entitlement mentality of modern America is not in the least bit reflective of the teachings of Jesus.
How are Christian values different from religious and Biblical fundamentalist values?
Oftentimes it seems those who are closest to the truth who are the furthest away. Or, at least, this was the case with those who inherited the Scripture in Jesus day and thought of themselves as experts in morality. But human efforts, even the most diligent of human efforts, cannot bring anyone a step closer to the truth.
The truth, as found in Jesus, is not an accumulation of knowledge and careful application that leads to moral superiority. No, the way of Jesus is acknowledgement of our inability—it is humble, repentant and is fully dependent on the grace of God.
Putting down Peter’s sword…
We could have everyone forced to use the ‘right’ restroom without accomplishing anything more than Peter’s sword:
“Then Simon Peter, who had a sword, drew it and struck the high priest’s servant, cutting off his right ear. (The servant’s name was Malchus.) Jesus commanded Peter, ‘Put your sword away! Shall I not drink the cup the Father has given me?'” (John 18:10-11)
Peter thought he was defending the truth and mission of Jesus, but actually stood in the way of God’s plan. Peter, who was rebuked on several occasions for his lack of understanding and overzealousness, treated the servant as sword practice.
By contrast, the John’s account treats the man Peter wounded as a unique individual with a name: Malchus. And, in a parallel account (Luke 22:51) Jesus demonstrates a different way, he heals the ear of Malchus—a man sent to bring him to his death—and showed the true Christian value.
Peter was fighting a losing battle. He had his own vision different from that of Jesus. He thought he was defending truth when in reality he was a part of the problem. He thought his act was one of total commitment to the cause when it was in fact the opposite.
Peter’s act is perfect a metaphor of what happens when those of us who claim faith in Jesus go out militantly defending our own religious values with political force—we cut off ears.
And picking up the cross to follow Jesus…
“From that time on Jesus began to explain to his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, the chief priests and the teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and on the third day be raised to life. Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. ‘Never, Lord!’ he said. ‘This shall never happen to you!’ Jesus turned and said to Peter, ‘Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns.'” (Matthew 16:21-23)
Here Peter was completely willing to fight for the kingdom of God, but for his enthusiasm is called small minded, a stumbling block and mouthpiece for Satan.
Can you imagine how Peter felt?
Jesus continues…
“Then Jesus said to his disciples, ‘Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me. For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will find it. What good will it be for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul? Or what can anyone give in exchange for their soul?'” (Matthew 16:24-26)
This was not what Peter or the other disciples had in mind. They pictured themselves as co-rulers of a worldly kingdom and had been arguing things like who would sit on the right hand of Jesus on his earthly throne when they finally defeated Rome.
But Jesus paints a picture entirely different. He’s predicting his death, a painful and humiliating death on a Roman cross, while urging them to follow the same path of self-sacrificial love. He was trying to explain a reality bigger than their worldly political visions and values.
What are Christian values?
Jesus, after being baptized, after receiving the Spirit’s anointing and being tempted in the wilderness, announced the start of his ministry by quoting the prophet Isaiah:
“The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to set the oppressed free, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.” (Luke 4:18-19)
That is where we start. That is Christian values in a nutshell.
“For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already…” (John 3:17-18)
That’s the good news. Jesus didn’t come to condemn anyone, but to heal the sick, restore sight to the blind, forgive impossible debts, reconcile relationships with God and bring freedom to those condemned to death. It was a message of restoration and hope, not condemnation.
Christian values begin and end in living out the example of Jesus Christ. Jesus was not a progressive, not a defender of cultural status quo nor a religious fundamentalist, his values were higher and spiritual. He was not seeking legal power or political advantage so he could impose on others, that wasn’t his fight.
“Jesus said, ‘My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders. But now my kingdom is from another place.'” (John 18:36)
Having Christian values means one shares the same priorities as Jesus. It means talking up the cross of self-sacrificial love and showing the way of grace. Jesus was not a cultural warrior seeking to impose values by force of law or a sword, instead he is an advocate for those lost in sin.
Ultimately it doesn’t matter what restroom your neighbor uses, that is an argument where both sides lose and a distraction. What matters is how our own attitudes and actions reflect those of Jesus Christ.
We must put our rhetorical swords down. We must love our (political) enemies and heal rather than cut off ears.
