Words That Hurt Me

“Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can never hurt me.” So says the popular children’s rhyme. I think everybody understands that the little ditty is an ego defense mechanism; words can hurt – a lot! The best defense is not to pretend there’s no damage from hurtful words. Nor is retaliation the correct response. As Jesus’ followers trying to become more like Him, we can find examples in Scripture to guide us to a proper attitude.

One good example of how to react is found in 2 Samuel 16. When David’s son, Absalom tried to steal his father’s throne, David fled Jerusalem in fear of his life. A member of the tribe of former King Saul, Shimei, cast insults and literal stones at the fleeing king David. David’s friends wanted to thrash him. David said to let him be. Then when David returned as king after Absalom’s death, Shimei admitted his sin. David forgave him and allowed him to live peacefully in Jerusalem. (Later, Shimei did get his comeuppance in God’s time.)

When a certain town spoke ill of Jesus’ ministry, His disciples wanted to call down fire from Heaven. Jesus rebuked their violent intentions. He basically told them to let it be. Jesus knew there was much more vicious disrespect coming His way. His personal response to being rejected was to offer forgiveness to the very people who had sent Him to the cross. He predicted that the same kind of treatment would beset His followers, and He recommended that they follow His example. Jesus said we earn God’s blessing when men persecute us for doing what is right. If we hunger for revenge, we are reminded by Paul (quoting Moses) that vengeance belongs to the Lord.

Sometimes, those closest to us are the source of words that hurt. Parents’ words can cause life-long damage if they are not dealt with properly. I was the source of hurtful words when I made some ill-advised remarks to my son many years ago, and although I have regretted them and apologized to him, he still bears the pain of my words. I wrote some things of a political nature in my blog several years ago, and my daughter, who has a different view of things, took offense. Words from those we love can hurt worse than sticks and stones.

I have been the recipient of hurtful words. I had a prolonged debate with a friend about the Scriptural prohibition of homosexual behavior. (See “Clobber the Argument”) My brother in Christ read the same passages and suggested an interpretation that is diametrically opposed to mine. He went so far as to say I am doing the Devil’s work by denouncing homosexual behavior. One of us must be right and the other wrong. What do we do? Take it to the church, you say. Done. He has thousands of moderns who favor his interpretation, and I have millions from throughout church history who favor mine.

I could be hurt by my friend’s words, but I am not. I am quite certain that I am right, and he is wrong. I must ask myself if it is arrogant of me to say I have the mind of Christ on this. My friend would say it is. I wrote once about the difficulty of distinguishing arrogance from confidence. They can look identical on the surface. The Bible tells us that our faith gives us confidence; it also says we are to speak the truth in love. Sometimes it is difficult to see how to speak the truth without hurting someone. I don’t think keeping silent is the right approach if the truth needs to be spoken, but when and how to speak are not always easy to discern.

So, what is the end of the matter? If you are the hurt party, follow Jesus’ lead and let the words fall like water off a duck’s back. Let God take care of any necessary consequences like He did with Shimei. If your words have hurt someone else, first be certain that they needed to be said, and if not, apologize. If they were necessary, confirm that they were spoken in love and not for some selfish motive. It would be well to remember Peter’s words of advice to us when hurtful words are spoken on account of our righteous deeds. Give the “offended” party the reason for your words but do it with courtesy and respect demonstrating a clear conscience, so that if there is any shame, it will fall on them not you.

Living like Jesus is no easy thing. When it gets really hard, we must remember that Jesus, the only perfect human, faced the same difficulties. His task was a bit easier since He knew what was in the mind of His detractors, and He had a perfect grasp of His Father’s will. But Paul said if we remain in the Spirit – the Holy Spirit who Jesus promised would come to our aid – we can have the mind of Christ. The words that are meant to hurt us will be neutralized. Any hurt caused by our words will be among those things that work together as God’s good will for those who love Him. Whether my words hurt or help, if I am faithful to line them up with God’s Word, His promise in Isaiah prevails: His Word will accomplish His purpose. As for sticks and stones and broken bones and words meant to hurt you: listen thoughtfully; speak truthfully.

Related Posts: When Being Right is Wrong; The Importance of Being Right; Creating Chaos

Sex is a Big Deal

At the risk of beating a dead horse, as the saying goes, I am going to break another taboo and talk about sex again. This topic is important to me is because it is apparently quite important to God. I also believe that an echo of God’s level of concern is heard in the human tendency to make sex such a big deal. Due at least in part to the hormones God gave us, the so-called sex drive is one of our strongest impulses. This makes sense because procreation was among the first commands given to humans in the Garden of Eden. God wanted His human partners to fill the Earth with His family. He built them so that command would be as important to them as it was to Him. As a bonus, He also made it enjoyable.

That combination of hormonal need and physical enjoyment helps explain why sex has become such a hot topic. The fact that it was originally intended to be a private, intimate matter between married couples explains why we used to be told not to talk about it in polite company. In an earlier generation, even parents were uncomfortable having “the talk” with their post-pubescent offspring unless they lived on a farm where copulation was openly practiced among the animals, and with a little imagination, a child could infer what lay in his or her future. You just didn’t talk about it.

The development of mass media and its cancerous growth into every minute of our waking lives brought a new element to the mix. Because it is such a strong motivator in humans, sex became a marketing tool for unscrupulous people. I say “unscrupulous” because I believe biblical scruples would have deterred people from using sex to sell things. Sexual desire has been conscripted in the service of selling just about anything you can imagine. Advertisers use it shamelessly to sell all manner of products. Movie and television producers use it to improve the ratings of their productions which then add to their profitability. Because we have become such a media-hungry, consumer-driven society, the sexualization of our lives was inevitable.

The perfect storm of sexualization was strengthened by the introduction of easy, economical birth control in the 1960’s. The decoupling of sex from procreation tore away a big reason why women had avoided uncommitted sexual relationships. Casual sex became carefree sex when pregnancy was no longer a likely result. The thing that everybody was thinking about became the thing everybody was doing. Since everybody was doing it, it became less uncomfortable to talk about it.

Here enter the perverts. I know pervert is an old-fashioned word, but it is the perfect word. To be perverse is to behave “contrary to the accepted or expected standard or practice, often in spite of the consequences.” Nothing better describes the media onslaught driven by the LGBTQ+ community. Homosexual behavior is not new, nor is its acceptance among certain segments of some societies. What is new is the demand that perversion no longer be considered perverse – meaning contrary to accepted practice. We are being told we must accept homosexual relations as normal human behavior.

This perverse attitude has been adopted by some people who read the Bible and become uncomfortable with the proscription of homosexual relationships. Rather than do the honorable thing and abandon the Scripture as regulatory, they attempt to rewrite it to suit their perversion. They invent new categories of behavior that are not found anywhere in Scripture and then claim that since these new behaviors are never prohibited, they must be approved by God. (For more on this see “Things God did Not Say.”)

I don’t mean to turn this into another rant against homosexual behavior alone. (You can read my previous posts listed below.) Pre-marital and extra-marital sex are just as perverse. They are also more common, sadly, even among Christians. The difference is there is no sex lobby pushing for acceptance, unless you count the media. Name one television show or movie plot that discourages unmarried sex. The damage to the soul that is inflicted by extra-marital or pre-marital sex is plain for all to see.

Almost everyone knows someone like an acquaintance of mine whose life was torn apart by the unfaithfulness of his parents. The he-said, she-said battle in the church turned against his mother, and although he was raised in a Bible-believing, church-going home, he has not been back to church since. The fact that he is on his third marriage could very well be a consequence of his wounded heart. The skyrocketing divorce rate and increasing acceptance of living together without the covenant of marriage reveal the attitude that what once was called perverse is now considered normal behavior.

The enemy of our souls knows how strong the sex drive is in us. He knows if he can pervert God’s purpose for sex, he can mess with God’s order in creation. He has proven to be a master at this; even formerly sound Bible preachers are falling for the lie that loving, monogamous, covenantal homosexual relationships are acceptable to God. “Good Christians” tell themselves they deserve a little “on the side” if things aren’t perfect at home. These lies strike at the core of God’s plan for His human family. Destroy the family, and you will destroy godly society. Satan knows that. That is why sex is a big deal to God!

Related Posts: The Bible on Homosexuality; Things God Did Not Say; The Uncomfortable Subject; Have You No Shame

Who’s Your Daddy?

Israel’s history of cyclical disobedience is well-reported. We read in 1 Samuel 4 that the Israelites went to meet the Philistines at Aphek, but Yahweh abandoned them because they had quit worshipping Him. They assumed their first defeat was because the ark was left behind at Shiloh. They brought the ark to the next battle thinking they would be triumphant. It didn’t work; they trusted in the ark like a talisman without understanding its true importance. Their disobedience had caused God to remove His power; they were clueless.

Ironically, God proved His power to the Philistines. When they captured the ark and put it in their temple of the demon-god, Dagon, God smashed the idol and brought a plague on the Philistines. When they were tired of being abused by the God of the Israelites, they sent the ark back to a man called Abinadab. God taught Israel a further lesson at the house of Abinadab; he prospered him greatly. In spite of this display of God’s power, in their ignorance, Israel still begged for a king, “So we can be like other nations.” God was displeased, but He promised not to abandon them if they followed Him. We know the sad result of that situation.

Scripture records that God gave His Spirit to Saul when he was anointed as King. Sadly, we also learn that God removed Saul’s special anointing when he repeatedly failed to obey God. David was anointed in Saul’s place, and he too was given a special measure of the Spirit. Although he too failed to be obedient to the law of God, his dynasty remained all the way down to the One King who was prophesied: Jesus. What is the difference between Saul and David? Saul made excuses for his disobedience; David repented in tears and returned to His Heavenly Father.

 I can’t help thinking that God must be disappointed in His people, the Church. In some ways, we’re just like Israel; we want to be like the world; popularity is more important to some than piety. I would hate to say God has abandoned the Church, but the power evident in the first century church is sadly lacking. We cling to forms of religion like Israel did with the Ark of the Covenant, but we fail to notice that God is missing from the forms. We don’t notice that “Ichabod” is being written on the church wall.

The only “Christian” thing in many believers’ lives is Sunday church attendance, as if that is what God requires. That is so far from the truth. The only thing God required of Israel was that they love Him with all their heart, soul, and strength. The pages of the Old Testament reveal God’s stern but loving response to His requirements. Jesus repeated the formula that Moses delivered, but He revealed a different type of reaction from God. Jesus said we can now call God Abba, Daddy, because He is not just near to us; He lives in us.

Scripture says to be a friend of the world is to be an enemy of God. Israel learned at Aphek and many other places what it means to have God as your enemy. It’s not pretty. Since we don’t have to battle Philistine armies the way Israel did, we may be lulled into thinking that God is still in our corner. We may be blind to the reality that Satan roams through our lives like a lion devouring what we have left unprotected. We won’t be resisting the devil if we are cozying up to his worldly attractions. If you feel like you are missing the blessing of God, check your friendships.

Paul told the Romans that Jesus, “condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the requirement of the law would be fulfilled in us, who do not live according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.” He went on to explain, “the mindset of the flesh is enmity toward God, for it is not subjected to the law of God, for it is not able to do so, and those who are in the flesh are not able to please God.” Living according to the flesh is another way of saying living as a friend of the world. Living according to the Spirit means we look away from the world and its attractions look toward Jesus where He sits at the right hand of the Father.

Except for a few unique individuals, the Old Testament Jews had to meet God at His special place – first the tabernacle, then the temple. We have the incredible privilege to be the temple of our God. Jesus shows us what it means to have a loving, Abba relationship with our Heavenly Father. A. W. Tozer reminds us: “When we come to Christ we enter a different world. The New Testament introduces us to a spiritual philosophy infinitely higher than and altogether contrary to that which motivates the world.”^[1]  Why would anyone want to be like the world – like wayward Israel – when we can be like Jesus?

Our Lord was in constant, loving fellowship with His Heavenly Father – His Abba. God is love; He is forgiving, but He is just. How do you see God? Can you imagine sitting at His feet and looking up with affection at your Abba? Or do you fear He may be frowning with displeasure at the nature of your friendship? In His love, God grants His children the right to choose where they place their affections. So, I ask, “Who’s your Daddy?”

Related Posts: Friendship With the World; Merely Christian; What are Friends For?

---

^[1] A. W. Tozer and Gerald B. Smith, Evenings with Tozer: Daily Devotional Readings (Chicago, IL: Moody Publishers, 2015), 85.

Holy Moly!

In a recent post, I quoted A.W. Tozer’s comment that many Christians think God is “distant and looking the other way.” In one sense, they are correct to think that God is distant if by that they mean that He is vastly different from us, distance being a measure of that difference. Theologians call this quality God’s transcendence. The reality is that God transcends not just our humanity; He transcends even our universe. The Bible word for transcendence is holiness. To be holy in the biblical sense is to be separated from something – to be different.

God is certainly separate from His creation. He existed in eternity past before He created what we think of as reality. That is where our thinking often goes astray: we tend to think of this world/universe as reality. It is “real,” but it is a temporary, created reality that exists within the greater reality that is God. Paul teaches us repeatedly that this world is temporal – time related. It had a beginning, and it will have an end. He challenges believers to think outside of time (and space) to focus on what is permanent: the Reality that is God. He calls us to think on things “above” where God is. Where true Reality is.

It is common for people to look into the night sky at the billions of stars God placed there and contemplate our smallness. This is the physical beginning of understanding God’s holiness. “The heavens declare the glory of God,” says the Psalmist. To declare God’s glory is to exalt His character; holiness is an overriding aspect of God’s character. He is holy, separated to Himself, in all His ways. This is what gives Him the right to do what He does with His creation. Someone has said, “God's holiness isn't just a passive attribute; it's actively manifested in all that He is and does, meaning everything He thinks, speaks, desires, and acts upon is imbued with His holy character.”

Another aspect of God’s character is His justice or righteousness. To be righteous is to do what is right. Clearly, God can never do anything wrong since He is the final arbiter of right and wrong. Tie His holiness to His justice and we stumble upon one of the hardest things to swallow about God: whatever He chooses to do with us represents His holy justice. Years ago, I wrote that I had become slightly disillusioned with my Bible reading as I was confronted with God’s harshness toward the unrighteous which is portrayed in most of the Old Testament record. I had to come to grips with the wrath of God – another one of His immutable attributes. I finally surrendered saying, “The Old Testament is bloody; get over it!”

I back-peddled from that statement in a subsequent post admitting that it is good to remember another of God’s character traits: He is a God of wrath. His justice demanded that Adam’s rebellion be accounted for; that accounting took place on the Cross of Calvary. There Christ paid for Adam’s sin and all the sin that we would ever commit. That is God’s holy justice being played out in our little reality. The wrath I deserve as Adam’s offspring was poured out on God’s One-and-Only Son. Through my belief in Christ’s sacrifice on my behalf, I am adopted into the family of God and released from my subjection to Adam’s curse.

Although God’s overall plan for His creation may always remain something of a mystery, Paul reminded the Ephesians that a part of that plan was that the church would become a demonstration of His love to His heavenly host, those other created beings of His. And this demonstrates another of God’s character traits that must overlay all the others: love. John said that God is love. Yet, in the same letter he reminded believers that we are expected to echo God’s righteousness in our lives. It is what Jesus meant when He said, “If you love me, you will keep my commandments.”

This is the essence of what Peter meant when he repeated the Old Testament command: “You will be holy because I am holy.” People are often alarmed by that statement. How in the world can I attain God’s holiness? The short answer is, “You cannot!” At least, not in your own power. That is because we are still bound to this earthly body with its fleshly desires. We are reminded throughout the New Testament that our flesh will continue to be at war with our spirit. (Romans 7:13-25; Galatians 5:16-24)

The great, good news is what Paul declared in Romans 8: “Consequently, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.  For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and death…. But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, this person does not belong to him^. But if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin, but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.” The Apostle describes this condition more fully to the Galatians: “But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, [and] self-control. Against such things there is no law. Now those who belong to Christ have crucified the flesh together with its feelings and its desires.”

So, if the Holy Spirit of God lives in me, He is not distant nor is He looking the other way. If I am living in the Spirit, His fruit delivers all His righteous attributes into my life. If I walk in the Spirit, I will be holy as He is holy. It is a shame that so many believers do not seem to believe this simple fact: the Christian life is – must be – life in the Spirit. Jesus told Nicodemus that one had to be born “from above” to see the kingdom of God. Paul said that to live as baptized-into-Christ’s-death-risen-again believers we must set our minds on “things above where Christ is seated at the right hand of God.” That’s amazing! We are told to look at God.

R.C. Sproul notes that the only attribute of God that receives the Hebraic emphasis of being repeated thrice is God’s holiness. In Isaiah’s vision at the temple when King Uzziah died, the angels around God’s throne proclaimed, “Holy, holy, holy is Yahweh of hosts! The whole earth is full of His glory.” Isaiah’s reaction was, “Woe to me! I am undone…. For my eyes have seen the King.” We who are in Christ will have the privilege one day to see the King face to face once our unholy flesh is fully glorified by His cleansing holiness. All I can say to that is holy moly!

Related Posts: People of the Flame; Answering Rob Bell; Lies We Have Been Told

House of David - House of Cards

My wife and I started watching the television series House of David. The producers show a disclaimer before each episode. It says that the writers attempted to remain true to the Bible record of David’s life although they admit to having taken literary license to enhance the drama. This is to be expected whenever we moderns turn the bare bones of the biblical record into a fuller portrayal of life in Bible times. This tactic was present in King of Kings, The Ten Commandments, The Passion of the Christ, The Chosen, and every popular Bible-based drama. These presentations and many more like them have their place in helping us see Bible characters as real people.

I mention King of Kings because it was that movie that made ten-year-old me realize that the Bible was about men and women who actually lived long ago, and they were not just paper cut-outs on a Sunday school flannelgraph. It wasn’t long after seeing that movie that I gave my life to Christ. Many years later, it was that same realization that motivated me to write a bible-based novel about Noah’s life. (Wings of Mentridar) There is very little in Scripture about Noah’s life, especially prior to God’s call to build the Ark. I researched ancient Mesopotamian culture and overlaid what we have in the Genesis record to imagine the daily life of Noah. Then I went way out on a limb and tried to imagine what it would have been like if God enlisted the aid of His angels to get the ark built and everyone safely on board. What I wrote was fantasy, but I tried to write only what I thought could be supported by biblical truth.

Presentations like House of David and The Chosen are doing something similar. A friend of mine once said he couldn’t watch shows like that because they weren’t “biblical.” I understand what he means. We certainly should not build any theology on the musings of Hollywood. The value of historical fiction, even when it verges into fantasy, is that it may help us get a grip on what it means to live for God in the real world. The imaginative portrayal of the struggles of David or Jesus’ disciples can encourage us to live like we really believe God exists.

I must say that some of the liberties taken by the writers of biblical fiction are troubling. In House of David, for example, the writers chose to portray David as an illegitimate child of Jesse. There is a hint in the biblical record that Jesse may have taken a second wife who brought two daughters from another man into his household. However, nowhere does Scripture suggest that David was not the biological son of Jesse. This is important to me because the prophets and the writers of the New Testament say that David was Jesse’s son and Jesus’ legal ancestor. I know there are some curious wiggles in the line of the Messiah (Rahab, Ruth, Perez), but I don’t see the point in inventing a cause to doubt David’s legitimacy.

I can put up with minor inconsistencies like that as long as they don’t contradict what we know from Scripture. The Christian faith is a propositional faith, meaning that there are facts, propositions, that form the basis of our belief. It is a fact that David is a historical character. It is a fact that Jesus descended from David’s line. It is also a fact that David was far from perfect; remember Bathsheba and all the trouble that followed. Watching dramatic presentations of historical figures should remind us of their humanity – their reality. Taken correctly, the stories of biblical people can bolster our faith.

House of David, like many similar productions, can build faith. This is valuable because too many Christians live in a fictional house of cards instead of a real house of faith. A.W. Tozer laments that, “It can hardly be denied that the average Christian thinks of God as being at a safe distance, looking the other way!”^[1] If we think like that, thinking God is “in Heaven,” and we are somewhere out of His sight, we are too likely to behave inappropriately. The truth is that God is not at a distance; He lives in us if we are in Christ. The Bible calls a believer’s body a tabernacle, a temple – the house of God. If a fictional drama can help me grasp that reality, I’m all for it.

  ^[1] A. W. Tozer and Gerald B. Smith, Evenings with Tozer: Daily Devotional Readings (Chicago, IL: Moody Publishers, 2015), 70. 

Scaredy-cat Christians

Throughout the Bible record, people who got close to God trembled with fear. Many simply fell on their face. On their way out of Egypt at Mt. Sinai, the Children of Israel were so afraid of what they saw and heard that they begged Moses to intercede with God for them. Moses did not chide them for their fear but reinforced it by telling them that their God is a consuming fire. The context of that dire statement was a recital of the law and the consequences of disobedience. There are times when it is right to fear God.

Often though, the Bible records God saying, “Fear not.” An obedient person, like Mary who found favor in the Lord’s sight, was told not to fear. That is somewhat ironic because it was Mary’s righteous fear of the Lord – the beginning of wisdom (Ps. 9:10) – that brought her into favor. Here we see the difference between being frightened of God and having healthy respect for God. The person who has trusted Christ does not need to be frightened because God sees only the righteousness of Christ when He looks; His perfect love casts out fear.

Sadly, fear is evident in many modern Christians, but I don’t think it is godly fear; it is fear of people. Too many Christians are afraid of what people might think of them if they stand up for what they believe. They have lost the boldness evident in the lives of the first Christians. A.W. Tozer points out: “Whatever else happened at Pentecost, one thing that cannot be missed was the sudden upsurging of moral enthusiasm. Those first disciples burned with a steady, inward fire. They were enthusiastic to the point of complete abandon…. The low level of moral enthusiasm among us [Christians] may have a significance far deeper than we are willing to believe!”^[1] Few Christians today exhibit that “complete abandon” Instead, they hide inside a holy huddle on Sunday and seldom rock the boat outside the church.

There is another type of fear that can be seen in Christians today: fear of dying for Christ. I am not referring to dying a martyr’s death but dying to self in heartfelt submission. The Apostle Paul reminded the Romans if they died with Christ, they would also live with Him. We portray that death and resurrection in the waters of baptism, but there is another meaning that must be played out in a believer’s daily life. Jesus said that His true followers would be required to take up their cross daily. The cross He spoke of is meant for the crucifixion of the old self. Paul explained to the Colossians that they had, “taken off the old man together with his deeds, and [had] put on the new man that is being renewed in knowledge according to the image of the one who created him.”

Tozer hits the nail on the head again: “Do you realize that many, many persons now take it for granted that it is possible to live for Christ without first having died with Christ? This is a serious error, and we dare not leave it unchallenged! The victorious Christian has known two lives. The first was his life in Adam which was motivated by the carnal mind and can never please God in any way.” (Rom. 8:5–8)…. The second life of the Christian is his new life in Christ (Rom. 6:1–14). To live a Christian life with the life of Adam is wholly impossible. Yet multitudes take for granted that it can be done and go on year after year in defeat. Worst of all, they accept this half-dead condition as normal!”

“Another aspect of this attitude is the effort of many to do spiritual work without spiritual power. David Brainerd once compared a man without the power of the Spirit of God trying to do spiritual work to a workman without fingers attempting to do manual labor. The figure is striking but it does not overstate the facts. The Holy Spirit is not a luxury meant to make deluxe Christians…. The Spirit is an imperative necessity. Only the Eternal Spirit can do eternal deeds!" The fear of dying to self leads to powerless Christianity – if it can even be called that.

Another fear that hobbles the church is fear of the past. All Christians have past failures to one degree or another. The Apostle Paul denied Christ and murdered His followers until he saw the light – literally. But he said he didn’t focus on his past; he looked to the future. Tozer again: “Spiritual life cannot feed on negatives. The man who is constantly reciting the evils of his unconverted days is looking in the wrong direction. He is like a man trying to run a race while looking back over his shoulder! There is an art of forgetting, and every Christian should become skilled in it. Forgetting the things which are behind is a positive necessity if we are to become more than mere babes in Christ.”

Babes in Christ are like literal babies who are frightened by their own shadow. Believers who want to mature in their faith must leave the baby bottle behind and move on to solid food as the writer of Hebrews counsels. The “meaty issues” of God’s Word push us to train our faculties to distinguish good from evil. There is good fear; it’s the fear of the Lord leading to wisdom. Then there is evil fear leading to stunted spiritual growth and powerless witness. Our enemy wants us to be afraid. Our God calls us to be strong and courageous. Don’ be a scaredy-cat.

Related Posts: The Faithful Have Vanished; Wise up, America; I’m Not Afraid to Die; Do I Really Believe?

---

^[1] A. W. Tozer and Gerald B. Smith, Evenings with Tozer: Daily Devotional Readings (Chicago, IL: Moody Publishers, 2015)

The Blessing of Religious Liberty in America

An important lesson from history is lost when we don’t recognize the significance of America’s founding principles. We should not think that America was founded as a Christian nation as some people try to say. However, the founders did look to a unique source for political authority. The Declaration of Independence declares that proper human government stems from “the laws of nature and of nature’s God.” It was their intention to establish political authority based on Judeo-Christian tradition without establishing state approved church.

What the American founding fathers created was something unknown in human history. All ancient civilizations were theistic, and they believed their gods ruled over their daily lives. If they had a poor harvest, it was because their god was not pleased. If they lost a war, it was their god who was defeated by the rival god. We see vestiges of this in the Old Testament when Israel’s God “defeated” the various Egyptian gods as demonstrated by the ten plagues. We see it again when the Philistines captured the Israelite’s “god” and took the Ark of the Covenant into their temple. If you remember, that didn’t work out too well for their god, Dagon.

At the time of Christ’s advent, the Roman emperor held his position as one of the gods his subjects were required to worship. Political and religious authority were invested in one man. When Christianity spread throughout the empire, a conflict arose because Christians refused to worship the emperor. That issue was solved when Theodosius made Christianity the state religion in 380 AD. With the fall of Rome to the Barbarians soon after, the Roman church, led by its pope, inherited both civil and religious authority.

That situation continued throughout Europe almost universally until the Protestant Reformation. The church wasn’t the only thing that got reformed in the sixteenth century; when the Roman church was weakened, local authority rose to fill the vacuum. Many of the European states chose a brand of Protestantism to continue the church/state rule that Rome had modeled for centuries. It was revolt against those state churches that brought many of the first pilgrims to America in the seventeenth century.

In 1776, the descendants of those early pilgrims rejected the right of English rule the colonies in America. While their revolution was not based entirely on religious principles, they realized the need to form a government that would not perpetuate the errors of the Europeans. They did not deny the need for religious principles as a foundation for civil government; they simply wished to prevent the government from insisting on a certain type of religious observance. It was John Adams who said that the experiment he and his peers were embarking on would not succeed without moral and religious citizens.

Now we have come two centuries later to a situation where a faction of government is again trying to dictate a certain type of religion: secular humanism. The proponents of this modern religion may flinch at the assertion that their policies are religious, but the fact remains that the progressive political agenda has all the trappings of religion. They demand adherence to a dogma known as DEI: diversity, equity, and inclusion. They espouse critical race theory. They believe they can alter human nature by supporting gender reassignment. They attack traditional family values by approving same-sex marriage. They consider opposition to their mandates to be heresy. They call anyone who differs with them haters.

These practices are reminiscent of the totalitarian religions of the past. They are also in direct conflict with the principles which our founding fathers enshrined in our Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. The task facing Christians in America today is not to form a Christian government. That would be Christian Nationalism, and it is not what the founders of this country wanted. What they wanted, and what we must fight for, was identified by Glenn Ellmers in a recent speech at Hillsdale College. “The American Founders’ invocation of the transcendent moral authority of nature is one of the most remarkable acts of statesmanship in human history.” Bear in mind that Ellmers considers “nature” to be the creation of God, and its “moral authority” to be Bible based.

It is often said that you can’t legislate morality. While that is true, it does not preclude the establishment of a legal framework that dictates moral boundaries. Legislation that follows the last six of the Ten Commandments, for example, commend moral behaviors and are not unique to Judeo-Christian thinking. Aristotle recommended very similar things, quite apart from any religious framework. You can go as far back as the Code of Hammurabi and find the same injunctions. These things are true and right because they comport with what Ellmers called “the moral authority of nature.”

What we need in our leaders and our laws is respect for some type of moral authority. They don’t have to be “Christian” to meet those criteria. For over two hundred years, America has prospered while remaining tied to that kind of authority. Jews and Muslims and Hindus and Buddhists and Sikhs have come to this country and prospered under that kind of authority.  What we have endured for that last few decades is an attempt to abolish any sort of moral authority and the establishment of a kind of moral and even civil anarchy. I do not believe that granting religious freedom goes as far as condoning anarchy – civil or moral.

I believe that John Adams was correct: we cannot survive as a country without moral citizens. You don’t have to be religious to appreciate that need and to fight for it. However, as Christians, we should be “religiously” committed to seeing the tradition of American religious freedom maintained. If the country keeps going in the direction the progressive element in America is headed, our freedom to practice our religion will be outlawed and replaced with the tenets of secular humanism. All that is necessary for that to happen is for “good men to do nothing.”

As they were preparing to enter the Promised Land, Moses told the Israelites, “Observe [God’s laws] carefully, for thus will you give evidence of your wisdom and intelligence to the nations, who will hear of all these statutes and say, ‘This great nation is truly a wise and intelligent people.’” (Dt. 4:6 NAB) They used to say that about America. Not so much anymore, I think.

Related Posts: Christian Nationalism; How to Pray for America; The Best of Times; The Worst of Times; Diogenes Shrugged; Critical Race Theory

Things God Did Not Say

I recently published an article titled, “The Bible on Homosexuality.” My reason for writing was to clarify for myself (and my readers) what the Bible says on this controversial subject. One reason I enjoy writing is because it forces me to gather my thoughts in an orderly way. The reason I wanted to do this with the topic of homosexuality is because a friend and former pastor has challenged my position since he has fallen under the influence of the LGBTQ+ teaching that approves of intimate same gender relationships. I wanted to clarify for myself the core biblical principles that are the foundation of my belief. When my friend read my post, he accused me of committing the logical fallacy of assuming my conclusion. This means he believes my opinion that God prohibits homosexual behavior colors my interpretation of the Bible passages that treat the subject.

My friend’s accusation is ironic because it is exactly what I accuse the LGBTQ+ interpreters of doing. Simply put, they claim that God never prohibited loving, monogamous, covenantal relationships between two people of the same gender. Then they overlay this opinion on the few Bible passages on the subject and interpret them in their own unique way. For example, they say that the verses in Leviticus 18 and 19 which say a man shall not lay with a man as with a woman are in the same passage as the prohibition of adultery. Therefore, since the context of the passage is about adultery, only married men are prohibited from lying with men. The passage says nothing about single men lying with men in a loving, monogamous relationship. So they say.

The LGBTQ+ view of Paul’s condemnation in of men lying with men Romans chapter one takes a similar turn. They take Paul to mean that God’s wrath is revealed against ungodliness (v. 18), and He condemns ungodly men for lying with men. They say that Paul says nothing about godly men lying with men, so that situation is neither approved nor disapproved. God did not openly state that godly men could not lie with men in a loving, monogamous relationship. Hmm.

These defenders of men lying with men hear Paul’s injunction in 1 Corinthians concerning pedophilia to be aimed at men who force themselves on children. They say what God disapproves of is anyone using a position of power over another to take advantage of them. God says nothing about children who consent to lying with older men. The LGBTQ+ interpreters make a similar claim about the men of Sodom raping Lot’s guests. They say it was not homosexual behavior that God condemned in Sodom; it was the gang rape committed by heterosexual men against other men. They claim that nothing specific is said against Sodomites who willingly practiced same gender intimacy. Really.

I could almost accept these different interpretations as examples of debates over disputable issues. Almost. However, when I consider the larger implications of their position, I have real trouble believing it is a dispute over a gray area of Scripture. For example, if the passage in Leviticus is primarily about adultery which then controls the rest of the prohibitions, that means an unmarried man could lie with an animal. The same goes for incest which is mentioned in the same passage. A brother could lie with his sister as long as neither is married. I don’t think so.

The same trouble arises with the LBGTQ+ interpretation of Paul. God said nothing about godly men lying with other men; God said nothing about willing children lying with older men. They maintain that because these situations are not mentioned, we must assume they are neither approved nor disapproved. If they are not disapproved, they must be acceptable to God under certain conditions. This is how my friend comes up with his opinion that men are allowed to lie with men in a loving, monogamous relationship. This is the logical result of saying that if God didn’t specifically prohibit something, it implies tacit approval. That is nonsense.

For one thing, that position stretches credibility to the breaking point. Are we really expected to believe God approves of incest or beastiality in some situations? Are we really expected to believe pedophilia is alright if the child consents? It is true that some issues are not explicitly covered by the Scripture. When we encounter one of those issues, we must use our knowledge of the broader scope of God’s Word to come to a reasonable conclusion.

Christian tradition has always interpreted Leviticus and Paul to mean that God considers homosexual behavior to be sinful. As Hodge says, “We are governed by this tradition of truth running through the whole sacred volume. All is consistent. One part cannot contradict another. Each part must be interpreted so as to bring it into harmony with the whole. This is only saying that Scripture must explain Scripture.”^[1]

I am going to repeat what I wrote previously. “While it is true that first century culture was very different from ours, I believe the reason both Old and New Testament passages express God’s disgust with homosexual behavior is not simply cultural; I believe that all sexual perversion tears at the fabric of God’s intention for sexual intimacy…. God created male and female humans in His image and commanded them to be fruitful and multiply. That alone eliminates the possibility that same sex relations would fulfill God’s intention. Beyond that, God established the bond of marriage between man and woman as a ‘one flesh’ union.” Paul uses this to explain why sexual sin is in a different category from all others.

We are on shaky ground when we build a theology on what God did not say. If we believe that God’s Word is eternally true, no amount of cultural difference will alter the basic truth it teaches. My friend likes to point out that Christian tradition has been proven wrong on several occasions throughout history. The Crusades represent a centuries-long misinterpretation. The supporters of slavery claimed biblical foundation for their error. Yet when these views were corrected, it was by a large majority of the church which brought unity through its general acceptance. Today’s argument in favor of homosexual behavior is being put forth by a tiny minority, and it is causing broken fellowship wherever it is accepted.

As I wrote years ago in “The Uncomfortable Subject,” the church has a poor track record dealing with sexual sin. We sit alongside gluttons and gossips and scofflaws with little thought for their sins. Yet we recoil at the mention of reaching out to homosexuals with the gospel; perish the thought that we might invite them to join us in the pew. I do not agree with my friend that we must reinterpret the Bible on this sensitive topic. I do agree that the church must find ways to embrace all sinners while not denying God’s judgment of their sin. God does say we should do that.

Related Posts: The Uncomfortable Subject; The Importance of Being Right; Disagree Agreeably

---

^[1] Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, vol. 1 (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997), 113.

The Bible on Homosexuality

God did not – could not have – directed the Bible to our generation or any specific generation except the one to whom it was originally delivered. So, when we say that we believe the Bible was inspired in every word (plenary verbal inspiration) in its original form, we mean that the Holy Spirit prompted the writers to use words that could be understood by their contemporary readers and applied to their situation. Beyond that, we must draw inferences that will apply God’s inspired Word to our modern situation. This is what we call Bible interpretation. To interpret a passage properly, we must consider the context: historical, literary, linguistic, and thematic (the theme of all Scripture).

Some of the thorniest interpretive difficulties arise when we are attempting to make moral applications from the ancient biblical text. The principle of reading in context still applies, but we must be careful how we move from the original situation to our own. A perfect example of this is raging through the modern church like a California wildfire. What does the Bible say about homosexuality? The Old Testament law delivered through Moses is unambiguous. The Hebrew text in Leviticus 18:22 literally says, “You [men] must not lie with a man as bedding a woman.” Going to bed with someone meant the same thing then as it does now; it implies sexual relations. Men were forbidden to have sex with men.

There are two important factors to consider when interpreting Old Testament law in our modern context. First, we ask if it is something that was unique to the Mosaic Covenant that no longer applies, or is it a universal principle that became encoded in the written law? Regarding homosexuality, there is a cultural issue that was present in ancient Israel. The cultures they were going to displace did practice all manner of perverted sex; it may be that God wanted this prohibition stated explicitly to keep His people from following the ways of their neighbors. This makes sense, but I believe there is a more general basis for God’s prohibition in this case as I will explain momentarily.

The second factor that must be considered when interpreting the Old Testament is whether the subject is treated in the New Testament. In the case of homosexuality, there are three passages in Paul’s epistles that clearly state God’s opinion of the behavior. (Romans 1, 1 Corinthians 6, 1 Timothy 1) The interpretive difficulty we are facing today arises from the efforts of the LGBTQ+ community to redefine the biblical proscription of same sex relations. The main thrust of their argument asserts that Paul wrote to a culture radically different from our own. They believe that Paul was referring to the cultish pagan practices of his day when he declared that God’s wrath was upon those who practiced perverted sexual behaviors. They maintain that not all modern homosexuals fall under God’s judgment.

While it is true that first century culture was very different from ours, I believe the reason both Old and New Testament passages express God’s disgust with homosexual behavior is not simply cultural; I believe that all sexual perversion tears at the fabric of God’s intention for sexual intimacy. This understanding encompasses the larger biblical context of God’s relationship with us. God created male and female humans in His image and commanded them to be fruitful and multiply. That alone eliminates the possibility that same sex relations would fulfill God’s intention. Beyond that, God established the bond of marriage between man and woman as a “one flesh” union. Jesus carried that concept into the New Testament in His discourse on divorce saying that what God has joined together, man should not attempt to separate.

Paul singled out inappropriate sexual intercourse as different from all other sin because it has a spiritual component. He says that when a believer (a vessel of the Holy Spirit) joins himself to a prostitute, he is entwining Jesus Christ in the process. While Paul does not mention homosexual unions in this passage, it does raise questions about the nature of any sexual encounter outside of the biblical institution of marriage. Sexual intercourse creates a oneness that is spiritually similar to the oneness of God in His trinitarian nature. Any time we pervert the husband/wife (male/female) intimacy God designed, I believe we diminish the image of God. That is my interpretation of what the Bible says about homosexuality.

Anyone who spends much time in discussion of God’s Word will eventually hear “That’s just your interpretation” at some point. In his seminal work, Systemic Theology, Charles Hodge explains why this is true. “It is admitted that theologians are not infallible in the interpretation of Scripture. It may, therefore, happen in the future, as it has in the past, that interpretations of the Bible, long confidently received, must be modified or abandoned, to bring revelation into harmony with what God teaches in his works. This change of view as to the true meaning of the Bible may be a painful trial to the Church, but it does not in the least impair the authority of the Scriptures. They remain infallible; we are merely convicted of having mistaken their meaning.” (p.59)

I believe the LGBTQ+ community has mistaken the meaning of God’s words concerning homosexual behavior. As Hodge predicted, we are going through a painful trial in the church over this. There are other important positions based on differing interpretations that are troubling the church: the meaning of inspiration; doubts about biblical inerrancy; how Jesus will return; the nature of heavenly existence; the reality of hell. Unfortunately, it is never enough to say, “I believe the Bible.” What you believe the Bible says is a result of your interpretation. Pray that God will give you the wisdom and spiritual guidance to discover the original intent of God’s Word.

Related Posts: The Uncomfortable Subject; Here Comes the Judge; Truth Dysphoria; Clobber the Argument; You Have Heard That it was Said; How do you Read Paul

How to NOT Watch TV

Some friends recommended a TV series called Black Sails; they said they really enjoyed it. We found the first episode and started watching it. I should have stopped as soon as I saw “18+” in the introduction. Apparently, that means X-rated in Netflix language. The series pretends to portray the life of pirates in the 18^th century Caribbean. For all we know, their depictions may be accurate; the behaviors of Sodom and Gomorrah did not disappear from human society after God’s judgment fell on those wicked cities. Sadly, there are pockets even in today’s “enlightened” culture where their debauchery is still celebrated.

I was enjoying the first few scenes of the old square-riggers sailing the bounding main. I love watching anything that reminds me of one of my greatest pleasures. Unfortunately, the drama soon left the sea scenes and focused on the lives of the pirates. The violence depicted in Black Sails is no worse than many current popular dramas; truthfully, it was tame compared to some. I refuse to watch the really gruesome scenes typical of many R-rated movies – even some TV dramas have become rather bloody. While they may be honest depictions of real life, I don’t find it entertaining to watch.

Studies show that the increasing violence portrayed on screens large and small is responsible for mass desensitizing of our society. A disturbed teenager can walk into his school and wreak bloody havoc on his peers and teachers without a qualm. The same goes for the rampant gang violence that scars our cities, although I suspect their embrace of violent behavior is due more to direct exposure in their underworld culture than to media influence. In whatever way they come to it, their apparent lack of conscience regarding violent behavior is the devil’s work to undermine natural human disgust. I don’t need to bathe in muddy water to know it won’t cleanse me.

Black Sails reveals another of the devil’s schemes to turn men to his ends: greed. From what I saw in my short exposure to this drama, the theme seems to be that greed is the motivating force in their culture. Greed pushes the pirates to seek treasure without regard for either law or conscience. Sinking ships and mutilating or abandoning the crews is done without a trace of regret or shame. When the goal is treasure, the milk of human kindness is swapped for the blood of their unfortunate targets. It would be comforting to think that that kind of behavior died with the last pirate, but one look at Wall Street or Capitol Hill quashes that idea. The enemy of our souls doesn’t need drama to feed the flame of greed in the human heart. There is good reason why greed is one of the seven deadly sins.

Another type of slime that pours out of the TV from Black Sails is uncensored filthy language. Listening to unsavory speech has a subtle effect on its hearers. The more we hear something, the more likely it is that it will slip into our vocabulary. I can attest to this from my experience as a truck driver. Many of my fellow drivers and almost every dock worker would find it difficult to form a sentence without words beginning with the letter “F.” Coupled with this, their continual reference to sexual subjects either directly or indirectly made it uncomfortable for anyone with a moral compass. The Bible warns against “coarse language” for good reason. Hear enough of it, and you will begin saying it yourself.

The only thing that might trump greed or violence in Black Sails' theme is sexual lust. There was enough inuendo, frontal nudity, and gratuitous sex in the first half-hour of the season opener to satisfy any porn addict. I am ashamed to say I watched as long as I did. I certainly won’t be watching another episode. Sadly, you don’t have to venture into the “freedom” of cable networks to find fornication, adultery, and all forms of perverted sex on TV. It has become so ubiquitous that even commercials on broadcast television feature same-sex intimacy. Advertisers proudly declare that their products allow homosexuals to have sex without fear of transmitting HIV. How wonderful for them! Some advertisements for women’s clothing approach the level of soft porn.

 There used to be safe places to go on TV, but most of them have fallen into the disgusting pit of violence and debauchery. Disney long ago abandoned Walt’s family-oriented programing. Even safer alternatives like Hallmark and Lifetime are slipping somewhat. The woke culture is so pervasive that everyone seems to think they must portray intimate homosexual and extra-marital relationships positively or be branded hatemongers.

I am not a hatemonger, but I am a truth lover, and the truth is that television has become fraught with all things worldly and demonic. I say this plainly because Scripture says that in the end times, the doctrines of demons will be taught to God’s people. James says that worldly wisdom fills our souls with demonic ideas. We should not be surprised because Paul said, “we are not ignorant of [the devil’s] schemes.” Unfortunately, I think “we” are, in fact, largely ignorant today.

God instructed the Israelites to slay all the Canaanites in the Promised Land. He said explicitly that this was to remove the evil influence from their lives. You have only to read their history to see what effect the failure to complete God’s command wrought among them. Time and again they were drawn into idolatry and sinful behavior because of the worldly people they didn’t exterminate. We need to use the remote to exterminate the vermin that would infect our homes with worldly, demonic “entertainment.” By doing that judiciously, you will be following the command to do everything to the glory of God as most television falls woefully short of that aim.

Truthfully though, the only entirely safe way for a Christian to watch TV is to unplug it. When you get tired of looking at the blank screen, pick up your Bible or some other wholesome literature and read. Paul says that when we understand what it means to live for Christ, we must cease being conformed to this world and become transformed by the renewing of our mind. Scripture is the source of that renewal. There is precious little on TV that will accomplish that.

Related posts: How to Watch TV series: (1) -  (2) -  (3) – (4); Woke TV

What Will You Do?

 Imagine this:

People all over town are getting sick – some have died from a strange ailment. Public health officials and doctors are working night and day to discover the cause. Because of the recent outbreaks of viruses, they focus their attention there but cannot identify any viral infection in those who are affected.

Finally, someone decides to look for a common toxin rather than a viral infection. Voila! Each individual they test has a high level of arsenic in their system. Then the search begins to find the source of the arsenic. It has to be something that is widely used because so many people across various social and economic divisions in the city are being affected.

One day, you begin to feel sick. Soon, you can barely stand on your own, so you go to the hospital. You are in such bad shape that they have to feed you intravenously. The only thing that you take by mouth is water, yet your condition worsens. At last, someone asks if it could be in the water. The official answer is no; the concentration of arsenic in the water supply is below the acceptable level for human consumption.

You are doubtful. You ask to be given only bottled water rather than water from the city system. You drink gallons of bottled water, and within days your symptoms subside. The doctors see your improvement and prescribe an arsenic antidote. You recover fully. 

When you get home you are so thankful to be able to return to your normal life. As you begin to consider the people you know who are not getting sick, you realize that all of them had been drinking bottled water because they didn’t like the taste in the city water. Naturally, you drink only bottled water from that point on. You don’t think much about it until one of your neighbors is taken to the hospital with the same symptoms you suffered from. You are confident that the doctors will know what to do, so you ignore it.

A few days later, a friend of yours is taken to the hospital with arsenic poisoning. When you go to visit him, you notice a cup of water on the bedside table. You ask if he is drinking it, and he says that the doctors insist that he drinks lots of water to wash the arsenic out of his system. They are administrating an antidote, but the symptoms are not abating. You are flabbergasted! You tell your friend to request only bottled water.

You march to the nurses’ station and ask why they are giving patients city water after your experience with the arsenic poisoning. They tell you that the hospital has been assured by the city that there is not enough arsenic in the water to cause a problem. Your case was an anomaly. Now you are dumbfounded! How can they say that after your experience proved the water was the source of the poisoning?

You go back home deflated. You can’t understand how everyone could be so blind. Either the acceptable arsenic levels are wrong, or the city is not being truthful about how much arsenic is in the water. You are confident that your experience coupled with that of your bottled-water-drinking friends proves your theory. The city water is the cause of the poisoning. What will you do?

Because most of my readers are aware of my purpose for writing this blog, they have probably already figured out where this is going. The Bible teaches that all of us are sick with sin. “No one is sinless; no not one,” says Paul to the Romans. Paul also tells them that “the wages of sin is death.” In other words, every human being is born with a terminal illness, but there is good news: God has provided an antidote for our sickness. If we “take the cure” offered by God ie. believe in His Son, He promises not only to cure our sickness but to give us eternal life as well.

If you have chosen to follow Christ – decided to place your trust (faith) in His sacrificial death on your behalf – you are reaping the benefits of the cure now, and you are looking forward to a life after this life living with God for eternity. Nothing could be better than that. Nothing! Nothing? What if you let your neighbors know about the “cure?” Then you could know they will have peace now, and they will be joining you in a blissful eternity. Do you need to be reminded that Jesus gave every believer the responsibility to make the “cure” known? Remember what He said about hiding your light under a basket.

Sharing your faith is not an optional activity or something only certain professionals are asked to do. “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation” was not directed to Jesus’ Apostles alone; everyone who claims Jesus is Savior must also obey Him as Lord. You have the gospel, the good news, the cure for sin’s disease. Failure to share it is disobedient. Disobedience will result in one of two things: If are following Jesus, you will suffer chastisement from your Heavenly Father for ignoring His commands. The other possibility is that your disobedience may prove that you are not a true believer at all. Again, what will you do?

Related Posts: Why Witness? Necessary Obedience; Strict Obedience

AAA+ Love for God

What is the greatest commandment? It is identified in the Jewish Shema: love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might. Jesus answered with these words when a young man asked this question; the writers of the New Testament repeated His answer more than once. There can be no doubt that love for God is our number one priority. But to fulfill our duty we must know exactly what it means to love.

There are many different ways we use the word love in today’s English language, none of which correctly convey the meaning of the Greek word Jesus used in His answer about the greatest commandment as recorded in the Gospels. Although there were several words that might be translated “love” in first century Greek, the writers of the New Testament actually had to repurpose a word that was not in common usage. You may have heard the word: agape in noun form and agapao as a verb. (ἀγάπη - ἀγαπάω).

The best way to understand what a biblical Greek word means is to undertake a word study to see how the Bible authors used it. The study of agape reveals that it has an unusual meaning, which explains why a new word had to be found. The Greek language had words for affection, lust, and the family bond of love. When you see that agape was used to describe the relationship with God, with spouses, with fellow believers, with strangers, and even with enemies it is clear that another word had to be found for the meaning Jesus intended for “love.”

I believe the best word in present-day English to translate agape is care – to take care, to care about, to care for. This fits all the categories of people we are commanded to agapao. It is important to mention that this is not a word of affection or desire. It is not an emotion. In essence, it is a function of the human will. This makes sense because it is commanded of us. It would be irrational to command a person to feel something. Feelings come unbidden; they are a reaction to a cause. The agape of the Bible is something that must be poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit. It is not a natural human condition. We must choose to agapao someone.

When you plug this understanding of the word love into the greatest commandment you read: “You must care about or care for God….” If that sounds strange at first, imagine what you would do if you cared about a person. You might want to do any reasonable thing they asked. You might want to seek their good whenever possible. You might feel a sense of obligation toward them. That is precisely how we should “feel” about God, but it is not a feeling – not an emotion. We must choose to act in certain ways, perhaps contrary to our own interests, if we care enough about what another person wants or needs.

This all sounds very dry or “soulish” in biblical terms, yet we know that agape comes to us through the Holy Spirit. He puts it in our hearts; He brings it as an element of the fruit He gives. True biblical agape is spiritual. However, this does not preclude the possibility of an emotional element as well. It took me a few years before I came to this conclusion as I admitted in “More Than a Feeling.” As I wrote back then, “I have said frequently over the years that we are not commanded to like anybody, but we have to love (agape) everybody. Now I think that biblical love may not be fully mature if it lacks compassion. I struggle to picture this until I imagine what Jesus would be feeling.”

While agape is primarily spiritual, it can – perhaps should – have an emotional, soulish aspect as well in some instances. This is especially true of agape toward fellow humans. (Love your neighbor as yourself: the second greatest commandment.) I most certainly agapao my wife, but I will admit to having both affection and desire for her as well. These secondary traits are human responses, but they are not part of the commandment. You don’t have to like your neighbor to go help him rake his yard when autumn leaves fall. You don’t need to feel compelled to spend time with your Christian brother on the golf course if you don’t want “a good walk spoiled.”  You certainly don’t have to condone what Hitler or Hamas have done to the Jews to fulfill your responsibility to agapao them. In each case, you simply have to wish the best for them.

When it comes to our unlikeable neighbor or our enemies, the best we can hope for them is that they would come to know God and Jesus Christ whom He has sent. The same can be said for that disgusting uncle or wayward child or that unlovely person who sits in the pews with us or that political opponent we despise. We don’t have to feel guilty if we don’t want to spend time with these people or approve of their behavior; however, we are called to care about them and see to their needs when we are able.

The greatest commandment calls us to care whether God’s will is coming to pass on earth – our patch of it anyway – as it is in Heaven. The commandment asks us to strive to please God with our actions and attitudes. The commandment instructs us to make Christ visible in our lives to the best of our ability. As I said before, in fulfilling this command, we will properly have an emotional response at the foot of Jesus’ cross. These are three of the many ways we can love God with all our heart, soul, and might.

I begin my prayer time each day with a Triple A formula which reminds me of the greatest commandment. I look to God in Adoration because I cannot help feeling love for Him considering all He has done for me. I assert my Acclamation of His lordship over my life and all creation. I offer Admiration for His infinite excellency of character. In these I adore Him as my Savior; I acclaim Him as my Lord; I admire Him as the only One worthy of all my praise. After that, I add every effort I can manage to spend the rest of my day living like I mean it. That’s AAA+ love for God. I highly recommend it, and God commanded it.

 Related Posts: To Love Mercy; Loving Biblically; Truth Dysphoria

Meet at the Tree

I have recently been reminded of an interesting Bible symbol: the tree. I’m reading about the life of Abraham, and I have noticed how many times a tree plays a part in the account. One of his first stopping points was at a tree near Mamre. He met the Lord there before the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. He later purchased that plot for his wife, Sarah’s, burial plot which later served the same purpose for him and many of his descendants. There are other important points in the lives of the patriarchs that feature trees also.

That got me thinking about all the other times that trees are mentioned in Scripture. The first mention is the trees in the Garden of Eden. There we have the wonderful tree of life that would have allowed us to live forever in the perfection of Eden had Adam and Eve not broken God’s command not to eat of another tree: the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. (See Related Posts) It was God’s chosen trees that provided the building material for Noah’s ark. The superstructure of the tabernacle and its utensils was composed of lumber from certain trees chosen by God. Throughout the psalms and prophets, trees often appear in symbolic roles. Paul uses the analogy of the olive tree to picture the grafting of Gentiles into God’s family tree.

The most dramatic tree in the Bible is the one erected by the Romans on which to crucify our Lord and Savior. Legends have sprung from the roots of this tree. Some say that the cross was made from olive wood resulting in God’s curse of the tree to forever be small and twisted so that it could never again be used for execution. Another tale says the cross was made of the dogwood tree. Again, God is thought to have stunted its growth but blessed it with flowers that represent a cross with nail marks on each of the four petals. Surely, these are whimsical thoughts; no one knows for sure what type of wood the cross came from.

Still, the cross of Calvary is without doubt the most significant tree in human history. It was on that tree that the damage done by Adam’s sin with the tree in Eden was rectified. The horror that was inflicted on the Son of God on that tree reveals both God’s abhorrence of sin and His immeasurable love for His creation. We do well to consider both of those emotions when we come to the cross. Focusing on either one alone creates a warped view and diminishes the meaning of the cross.

A. W. Tozer comments on one false view: “All unannounced and mostly undetected there has come in modern times a new cross into popular evangelical circles…. From this new cross has sprung a new philosophy of the Christian life…. [it] tries to show that Christianity makes no unpleasant demands; rather, it offers the same thing the world does, only on a higher level. The modern view is that the new cross does not slay the sinner, it redirects him!” Tozer explains that this kind of thinking completely misses the whole meaning of the cross. “The old cross is a symbol of death…. The man who took up his cross… was not going out to have his life redirected: he was going out to have it ended!”

On the surface, this sounds terrifying, macabre even. Yet the entire thrust of the Bible is that Adam’s descendants must be slain and reborn as Jesus Christ’s new creation. Those who try to reinvent Christianity as an endlessly happy road to heaven must ignore the clear teaching of the Scripture that to be one with Christ we must become one with His death. In the waters of baptism, we symbolize our death to the old life and resurrection to new life. The Apostle Paul says numerous times that the way to real life is through death – death of the old self. “I died,” he says, “nevertheless I live, yet not I but Christ lives in me.”

Most Christian churches I have been in display the cross prominently inside and out. Few Christian churches today preach the cross with the fervor that Paul felt. “I decided to know nothing among you,” Paul told the Corinthians, “But Jesus Christ and Him crucified.” Ever since Adam ruined perfect human existence with his desire for independence, we have all paid the price. But God told Adam that one day, his offspring would make that perfect existence available again. The unimaginable price God paid to accomplish that, His One and Only Son, was drawn from His infinite, unconditional love for His creation. The only price we are asked to pay is repentance from our reckless independence learned from Adam and faith in God’s gracious provision. We demonstrate that repentance and faith with our death and resurrection pictured in the waters of baptism.

Paul says that we rise from our baptism to live a new way of life. After we put the old self to death, we set a new course on a different road. In his book, In Search of Common Good, Jake Meador remembers the road that C.S. Lewis pictured in the last book of the Narnia Chronicles. The children have reached Narnia after triumphing over evil, and they see a road leading “further up and further in.” Meador comments: “The road will lead to a cross. But only things that die can be resurrected. And so as sure as the road leads us to the cross, it leads us to the eternal city, to the home of the king, to the desire of all nations, to the joy of every longing heart.” It's time to hit the road. Meet me at the cross.

Related Posts: The Knowledge of Good and Evil; Suffering for Righteousness Sake; Why did God do That; For God’s Sake