Dread Not!

                The Dread

He comes to me in the night,

That ancient enemy of my soul.

He whispers in my sleepy ear

That I’m not up to the fight.

 

I tell my heart not to fear

When I wake in the valley of shadow;

I remind myself of God’s promise

Always to be near.

 

In the dark of night, it is good to know

That God has promised to bless me.

 And when I rise with morning light

He’s with me wherever I go.

I wrote this poem because recently I have been waking in the wee hours with an unexplainable sense of dread. Occasionally, the feeling might stem from a dark dream I have awoken from, but not always. When I find myself cowering under the covers, it is a seriously unpleasant feeling. Once I remember the promises of God that He will always be near; His angels keep watch over me; no weapon formed against me shall prosper, then I begin to pray against the darkness, and it recedes – as it must. John said, “There is no fear in love,” and I know absolutely that God loves me. That means fear – the dread – comes from somewhere else.

The Old Testament is full of admonitions to fear God. Often, teachers will insist that “fear” in many contexts means “respect,” rather than dread. And yet, the Psalmist wrote, “My flesh quakes for dread of You, and I am afraid of Your judgments.” I think the OT saints had a better understanding of God’s judgment than we do. They knew that their standing before God was dependent on their obedience to His law, the Torah. Torah taught them there were blessings for obedience and curses for disobedience. Their history held many examples of both.

Under the OT law, they were not entirely without comfort. The Psalmist also wrote, “Trouble and anguish have found me, Yet Your commandments are my delight. This is not unlike my nighttime dread. There are things in my world that might cause me trouble and anguish. However, I must not dwell on them; I must delight in the Word of God and recall this: “My help comes from Yahweh, Who made heaven and earth.” The “help” the Psalmist refers to is found in this: “If you should keep track of iniquities, O Lord, who could stand? But with you is forgiveness, so that you may be feared.” There is the “fear” again, but in this case, it is not a bad thing. Godly fear leads me to worship. Fear that causes me to dread is from my enemy, not God.

There is another aspect of our New Testament position that should help to relieve the dread. God had intended the nation of Israel to be, “a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.” Sadly, they failed in their duty to represent Yahweh God to the other nations. They became insular and self-important. Peter understood that the church is the priesthood God ordained, under the high priest Jesus, which has become what Israel was supposed to be. He wrote to believers, “You are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God’s possession, so that you may proclaim the virtues of the one who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light.” This is affirmed by what John saw in his heavenly vision: “[The Lamb] made them a kingdom and priests to our God, and they will reign on the earth.”

There will be those who disagree with what I am about to say, but I believe it is true. I am not waiting for a future millennial kingdom to reign with Jesus. I am royalty now; I am a priest of the Most High God now; I am seated with Christ at the right hand of God now. There are those who read the future tense, “will reign,” in what John saw as still in our future. I disagree. Like the Greek language, we also use future tense to refer to a present reality that extends into the future. For example, President Trump will be in the White House next year; that does not mean he is not there now. I may not be in the position of royalty in the kingdom of this world, but in the kingdom of Heaven, which Jesus initiated during His earthly ministry, I am all that Jesus re-created me to be.

When I was buried with Christ in baptism, the old me died, and I rose from the water as a new creature. I may still live in the world for a time, but I am not of the world. I am of the Kingdom of God. My citizenship is in Heaven. Peter said that: I am called out of the kingdom of darkness into the light to proclaim the virtues of my King, Jesus. More than that, I am commanded to invite others to join me in the Kingdom of Heaven. We pray God’s will be done on earth now as it is in Heaven now. Jesus told Peter that things they prayed for on earth would already have been done in Heaven according to the Greek verb tenses He used. Present and future are one with God.

Even King David expressed fear in the light of God’s judgment but declared his delight in God’s law. In my royal position, I no longer need to have any fear – no dread. The washing of regeneration Paul mentions mirrors the washing the OT priests experienced to make them acceptable for God’s service. The blood I am washed in is not of bulls and goats but of the precious Lamb of God. The anointing of the Spirit echoes the anointing of God’s chosen kings. The sword I carry is the invincible Word of God. My King and Commander is the Lord of Hosts with ten thousand times ten thousand mighty angels at His side. Instead of being afraid when I wake up each morning, I should expect the devil to say, “Uh oh! Clair’s awake. Run for it!” If you belong to Jesus Christ, you should get the same reaction – and no dread!

Related Posts: On the other hand: Fear God Much?; The wrong fear: Scaredy-cat Christians; The greatest fear: I’m Not Afraid to Die

The Grand Simulation

I just finished reading A Voice in the Dark by Barbara Nickless. The primary antagonist is a computer genius who develops a simulation game which he uses to compel troubled teens to commit murder. The premise of the game is that the world the teens inhabit is not real, but the world of the game is. The teens are convinced that the only way to enter real life is through death. This makes their act of murder or suicide a saving one because the victim is released from the horrors of this world and delivered into the true life of the game. If you can see in this the hints of another familiar story, you will understand why I found the book both fascinating and frightening.

Although I doubt Nickless had any biblical intentions, allegorical fiction which depicts Bible truth through imaginary characters and settings is not at all unusual. C. S. Lewis’ Narnia Chronicles is one of my favorites. Lewis’ deep Christian faith coupled with an amazing imagination allowed him to create an entertaining and thoroughly biblical imaginary world through which his characters present God’s truth. An older allegory, John Bunyan’s Pilgrim’s Progress, has long been revered for its depiction of the struggles common to anyone who wants to live as a Christian. The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings trilogy by J.R.R. Tolkien echo the biblical truth that the battle of good against evil is the inescapable reality that every one of us faces daily.

The pervasive influence of artificial intelligence has created a whole new sub-genre for the development of allegorical characters and plots. It has also opened a floodgate for Satan to twist the thinking of people who become immersed in computer simulations. When I wrote “Artificial Intelligence?” I commented, “We can expect that the enemy of our souls will use AI to further his ends just as he has with many technologies.” Search for “Christian books about AI” and you will get hundreds of examples, most with dire warnings. Nichole J. Suvar shared insights from her book, “I Don't Have to Hold It All Together,” on Moody Radio recently. One of her greatest concerns is that Gen Alpha is going to be drastically influenced by AI. She fears they will be changed elementally the same way cell phones affected Gen X to an even greater degree.

We know from neurological studies that human brains grow and change by doing mental “work” much the same way muscles are built by exercise. We also know that children who have excessive amounts of screen time develop a different brain architecture than those who pursue other activities. As a teacher, I have expressed my concern that AI is removing the need to do meaningful research. The development of critical thinking skills is essential for making logical decisions whether in a secular or religious context. Combine AI with the common teaching technique of providing answers rather than encouraging students to seek out the best answer and you have a recipe for dull soup. It is a prime factor in the dumbing down of American students.

I mentioned earlier that I was both fascinated and frightened by the premise of Barbara Nickless’ book about AI simulation games. I am frightened for all the reasons I have just mentioned. But I am fascinated by how thoroughly the concept of a simulation fits the truth we have revealed in Scripture. Follow me carefully. Read the Bible from cover to cover and you learn that a Being of superior intelligence created an alternative reality apart from His own. He then created players who were given rules and responsibilities to navigate the created reality. The first two players broke a cardinal rule and subsequently lost full access to everything the created reality had to offer. The Creator then began a sub-program that would eventually provide a way for players to regain full access.

Stay with me. Jesus came preaching the coming of an alternate reality, the Kingdom of Heaven. He told Pilate His kingdom was not of this reality. If it were from here, He said, His disciples would fight to free Him. He knew that His freedom was going to come from an exit strategy planned in the ages before this reality was even created. His death and subsequent resurrection and ascension reunited Him with the Creator with whom He had lived in that other reality, commonly called Heaven, prior to becoming a player in this reality.

There’s more. The Apostle Paul said this reality is passing away to be replaced by another reality. This one, he said, is temporary – temporal – time-based. The other reality is eternal “in the Heavens.” Soon after He was invited to play the role the Creator had planned for him, Paul was transported to the heavenly reality and given insights that were so incredible he wasn’t allowed to tell anyone about them. He did say he believed that when he died, he would immediately be in the presence of Jesus in the heavenly reality. He also said that those who trust Jesus in this reality will be given a new kind of body after their death – a body suitable for the reality that would be their eternal home. In that place, the Creator and all His chosen players would once again enjoy all the privileges and responsibilities that were forfeited in the original simulation.

I just pictured life for humans as a grand simulation. That is an analogy; it is so close to what is happening in today’s AI simulation games that it is spooky. There is one huge difference between AI sims and life as we know it: the Creator of the “game of life” is a Person who loves His creation so much that He literally died to save it. We also know that God created the earth perfectly good, and one day, He will banish sin and Satan from His creation. Then He will recreate it as He originally intended, and we will spend eternity there with Him.

Satan, the Great Perverter, has been luring people with his own simulations since the Garden of Eden. He convinced Adam and Eve that there was a better reality than what God had ordered. He infected early Christian thinkers with Platonic ideas that flesh is evil and only spirit is good; this allowed the Gnostics to believe that fleshly sin was acceptable as long as one’s spirit was pure. Some people still act that way today. By way of a lying spirit, he gave Joseph Smith, the founder of Mormonism, an alternative reality that sounded biblical, but was deceptively evil. There are other similar deceptions. Peter’s roaring lion has become today’s AI “friend” seeking someone to devour. Peter’s advice is still sound: “Stay alert! Watch out for your great enemy, the devil.” If you fall for one of his simulations, there is no coming back.

Related Posts: On the dumbing down of America: Read This or Die; Who is Jesus: Nailing Down Jesus; The true purpose of life: What Did You Do Today? What about when the “game” gets tough: Driven to the Cross

The Co-opted Rainbow

Everybody loves a rainbow. Young and old alike will stop to revel in the colorful display. There was a time when most people knew that the rainbow was originally assigned meaning by God as the token of His promise to Noah that He would never again destroy the earth with a flood. In that context, the rainbow became a symbol of hope. In ancient Irish folklore that idea was bastardized to mean a hope for wealth: the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. That connection is probably more well-known today than its original biblical meaning.

I am writing this in June which has become gay pride month for many. The LGBTQ+ community has also coopted the rainbow and given it a significance of their own. When the gay pride flag was originally designed in 1978, each of the colored stripes was assigned a value. If you ignore the LGBTQ+ context, most of the values are innocuous: sex, life, healing, sunlight, nature, magic/art, serenity, and spirit. Two raise some concern: magic and spirit. Magic is clearly off limits for Christians, and one assumes that “spirit” does not refer to God’s Holy Spirit.

I heard a teaching recently that suggested a more sinister relationship between the rainbow and homosexuality. When Ezekiel saw God’s throne in his vision at the river Chebar, there was a rainbow above it. When Satan’s pride drove him to attack God, he wanted that throne with its rainbow for himself. Look back at the values symbolized in the gay pride rainbow; except for magic, each of them might be employed in a way to glorify God. However, you can also see how each one has been perverted by the enemy of our souls and turned into an idol.

First of all, ever since the Garden of Eden, Satan has taken the good things of God’s creation and twisted them to serve his purposes. Sex is the most obvious one, and perhaps the most odious especially in June. I believe that God created sex to be a bonding agent for a man and a woman in marriage. In that context, it is a beautiful thing. Very early in human history, Satan began enticing men to fulfill their lust in ways that were not only damaging to themselves (AIDS, STD’s, etc.) but destructive to the purpose God had intended. De-sanctifying marriage and its restriction of sexual pleasure to one-man/one-woman for a lifetime has resulted in personal and social tragedy of mammoth proportions.

The other values represented in the gay pride flag have been similarly distorted or perverted. Life is certainly to be valued, but Christians recognize that true life comes from God and returns to Him; true life has a deeply spiritual component. The “life” Satan encourages is selfish and hedonistic. The Psalms teach us to glorify God for His creation of the sun and all nature. Satan leads men to worship creation in defiance of the Creator. Magic is simply the devil’s attempt to mimic God’s miracles; practicing it is plainly forbidden in Scripture. It is sad to see what the enemy has done to art. It was once a way to magnify God with beauty and order. Now, the atonal disturbing modern “music” and the emptiness of modern “art” reflect the hollow men who search for meaning in all the wrong places. Augustine was right when he said that there is restlessness in every man that can only be satisfied by God – a God of beauty and order, not ugliness and chaos.

Serenity is promised in God’s Word. We are counselled to meditate on the Word and recall God’s promises; as a result, we can have peace that passes understanding. The enemy’s brand of meditation encourages either completely emptying the mind or turning inward to focus entirely on oneself ignoring the divine image we bear. Finally, I suspect that the gay flag’s reference to “spirit” may have similarly twisted the truth. Satan, the prince of evil spirits, would have us elevate our own spirit and discount the Holy Spirit who represents the very presence of God in us when we give our lives to Christ.

A rainbow is visible because light is refracted, broken down into its parts. To me, this signifies the many aspects of God’s holy character spread before us in awe and wonder. There are some other physical aspects of light that I think are interesting to consider. God Himself is said to be light and to dwell in unapproachable light. The first thing God is said to have created is light. Throughout Scripture, light symbolizes goodness and knowledge. Darkness, represented by the Prince of Darkness, is evil and deceptive. What we call color is the reflected portion of the light spectrum. God’s creation is bursting with color. If his followers are any indication, Satan’s favorite color is black – the absence of color via light.

The Father sent Jesus to the world because “In him was life, and the life was the light of humanity.  And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not overcome it.” Jesus said His followers were to be the light of the world. John said if we walk in the light, we have fellowship with one another and forgiveness of sin. Paul told the Corinthians that Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. It looks to me like that is exactly what he has done with the rainbow he tried to steal from God. Don’t be fooled by him. Jesus said that true life, the true light of humanity, was found in knowing God. Study His Word; meditate on it; get to know God intimately. Then you can take back the rainbow.

Related Posts: More about the nature of light: And the Light was Good; E=mc² in Genesis

Who Paid for David’s Sin

When I wrote “What Happened in the Fall,” I suggested that the worst damage done by Adam’s sin was the loss of intimate fellowship with God. Where once Adam could stroll throughout the Garden with his Creator at his side, suddenly the Garden was off limits and the relationship between Creator and creation was altered dramatically. Of all people, Adam could surely feel the distance between himself and God caused by his disobedience. That distance was still there when David wrote his psalms. “My God! Why have you forsaken me,” was the psalmist’s lament over the broken fellowship which Adam caused.

David did not always feel isolated from God though. Throughout his psalms, he reveled in the reality of God’s presence and provision. If all we knew of David was prior to his dalliance with Bathsheba, we might understand why God called him “a man after my own heart.” Truthfully though, we begin to understand that heart-to-heart relationship after the sin with Bathsheba was exposed through the prophet Nathan. David wrote Psalm 51 sometime after the prophet called him out. He made a puzzling declaration to God in that psalm:

Against You, You only, I have sinned

And done what is evil in Your sight,

So that You are justified when You speak

And pure when You judge. Psalm 51:4

When we consider the totality of David’s actions, it is hard to believe that the sin was against God alone. The adultery, deception, and murder ensnared not only the couple at the center of the drama, but also Uriah (Bathsheba’s husband), Joab (David’s general), the child conceived in adultery, and eventually, most of David’s family. Even so, David recognized that ultimately, the sin he committed was against God; the consequences roped in the rest of the people who were affected.

Writing in defense of capital punishment, R. C. Sproul says, “There is a sense in which the commission of murder is regarded by God as an indirect assault on Him. Just as an attack on an ambassador of a king is seen as an affront to the king, so the act of murder is an assault against the very life of God, inasmuch as it desecrates one made in God’s image.” (How Should I Live in This World?, vol. 5, The Crucial Questions Series, Lake Mary, FL: Reformation Trust Publishing, 2009, 75.) One could make a similar statement regarding any sin. By definition, sin is a deviation from God’s order as expressed in His character. David understood that, and so he said:

For You do not delight in sacrifice, otherwise I would give it;
You are not pleased with burnt offering.

The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit;
A broken and a contrite heart, O God, You will not despise. (Ps. 51:16-17)

David realized that the most important thing in his life was his relationship with God. In Old Testament Hebrew, the word heart refers to the innermost part of human existence. With Spirit led insight, David equated heart with spirit, a distinction the New Testament makes clear. David’s desire to have his relationship with God made whole is evident:

Create in me a clean heart, O God,
And renew a steadfast spirit within me.
Do not cast me away from Your presence
And do not take Your Holy Spirit from me.
Restore to me the joy of Your salvation
And sustain me with a willing spirit. (Ps. 51:10-12)

We don’t know exactly when David wrote Psalm 51. The initial consequences involving Bathsheba, Uriah, and Joab had surely taken place. Yet David could say his sin was against God only (v.4). I can’t imagine that he discounted the impact on those he harmed. However, he seemed to realize that the effects of his sin on others were less troublesome than the effect on his relationship with God. He also recognized the spiritual nature of things.

We sometimes speak romantically of giving our heart to someone. My wife and I have wedding bands that incorporate the Irish claddagh, a pair of hands offering a heart. Worn with the heart offered inward, it symbolizes our heart-to-heart commitment to one another. This is how David felt toward God, and it explains why he could say his sin was against God alone. You can only share your heart with one person.

Jesus said, “If you love me, keep my commandments.” If we fail to keep His commandments, it casts doubt on the depth of our love for Him. The devil has done a good job convincing people, even some Christians, that Jesus’ commands are conditional. In certain situations, the tempter says, it is better to disobey a command for the good of someone or something. This is a damnalbe lie from the father of lies. Only God knows what is good in any situation, and it is a clear violation of His good Word to take His prerogative as our own. That is precisely what Adam and Eve did that threw us into the mess we are in. (See “The Knowledge of Good and Evil”)

Nothing I have said should be taken to mean that the consequences of sin are not important. Look at the widespread results of the HIV virus being shared through illicit sex. Another virus, COVID 19, ravaged our entire healthcare and economic well-being. The perpetrators there were careful to clothe their sin in false proclamations of the good of the masses. One man’s adultery can destroy a family, and if he is a public figure, the effects spread to the larger society. Look at the consequences of John Wilkes Booth’s single shot in Ford’s Theater. Or the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand in 1914.

David couldn’t undo the results of his sin. What he could do was make a heartfelt confession. The word confess in the New Testament means to say the same. In verse four, David says what God says, and calls it justified. That is true confession. Although you may not have strayed as far from God’s commands as David did, you would be a liar if you said you have no sin, according to the Apostle John. There were those in David’s life, as in yours, who were made to pay for the sin of another by suffering the consequences.

Ultimately, Jesus paid for David’s sin and yours and mine on the cross of Calvary. That payment is available to all who are willing to confess, repent, and throw themselves into the merciful arms of their loving Savior. God stamps the balance due as paid in full. Then as debt-free children of God He restores to us the joy of our salvation. Just like David.

Related Posts: The Cry of Sin; David Stayed in Jerusalem; Despising the Downpayment 

Pure and Undefiled Religion

This is pure and undefiled religion in the sight of our God and Father: to look after orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained by the world. (James 1:27).

This verse in James describes religion that is pleasing to God. I would like to do a little exegesis from the Greek text to see if it will help to understand what James was getting at. Remember that although this was written in Greek, the common language of most of James’ readers, he was born and raised a Jew, and he addressed his letter to “the twelve tribes in the dispersion,” aka Jewish people. To follow the cardinal principle of trying to read the Bible as the original audience would have done, we must think like a first century Jew.

The word James chose for “religion” appears only four times in the New Testament. It is translated “religion” three times, and once as “worship,” although that occurrence refers to false worship. (Col. 2:18) According to Vine’s Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words (Vines), the word religion emphasizes concern for “the externals of divine service.” The Jews were very familiar with this type of religion. Think of the focus on the temple, priests, sacrifices, and hundreds of rules that defined their religion. It could easily become external; this is precisely why Jesus blasted the Pharisees. I believe that James used this word to draw a sharp contrast between pure religion and the external sham that Judaism had become for many.

The words pure and undefiled are similar in meaning to us, but there may have been a distinction for James’ audience. Looking at Vines again, the word pure means “ethically [pure], with the significance being free from corrupt desire, from guilt.” This is an internal evaluation – having a pure heart. The Jews would also recognize the allusion to the ritual purity required of all who served at the temple. The ceremonial cleansing of the priests and Levites with blood and water was the external picture of the internal purity God required.

 The word undefiled speaks more to the outward aspect. Vines says “undefiled, free from contamination.”  The Jews would have remembered that their sacrificial animals were to be spotless, free from imperfections just as the Old Testament law required. Something as simple as a scar or discoloration would render the animal unclean for the purpose of sacrifice. The application of these two words to Christian religion would suggest that both our inner motivations and our outward actions must be in line with God’s demands of believers.

The first of James’ two admonitions describing acceptable religion concerned widows and orphans; this is drawn directly from the Hebrew Scriptures. Time and again God chastised Israel for ignoring the needs of these people. Certainly, He hated their idolatry, but He expressed similar disapproval of their abuse of widows and orphans. We may miss the significance of this in our wealthy welfare society. In our day, orphans become wards of the state which feeds, clothes, and houses them until they reach eighteen in most cases. In ancient Israel, right up until the time of Christ, orphans were often left to fend for themselves unless someone in their clan adopted them. Barring that, they would have to sell themselves as slaves or starve.

The situation was not much better for widows. Although Levitical law mandated some care for widows, it was often forgotten or ignored. Jesus chided the Pharisees specifically for tithing their spices and ignoring their duty to others. The instructions that God had commanded through Moses regarding support for both widows and orphans were systematically disobeyed. This is one reason why God heaped such wrathful judgment on Israel through most of His prophets. God cared deeply for people in difficult circumstances, and His people were supposed to mirror His concern. They failed to do so much of the time.

In the early years of the Protestant Reformation, Christians began to rectify some of Israel’s failures. Schools, orphanages, and hospitals were built to care for the less fortunate. Beginning in the twentieth century, some of the wealth of the two-thirds-world began to be directed toward the poor. In the years following the Great Depression in America, a welfare structure was constructed that now accounts for almost 25% of GDP. To gain perspective on that, consider that military spending reaches only 3%, and between 5 and 6% goes toward education. In spite of the government’s largess, No Kid Hungry reports that “In the United States alone, an estimated 14 million children live in food-insecure households, meaning up to 20% of all kids face daily uncertainty about where their next meal is coming from.”

I realize these statistics do not represent widows and orphans specifically, but they represent the needy in our society similar to those in James day. I suspect that most sincere Christians believe the needs of the poor are taken care of by the safety net of government programs. The statistics disprove that notion. I have no trouble suggesting that people who fall through or disregard the government safety net are precisely the people toward whom Christians must demonstrate pure religion. If American Christians would simply tithe from their wealth, there would be enough money to feed, clothe and house every person who truly needs it. If only those Christians who wish to demonstrate pure religion by James’ definition set about to find the “orphans and widows” in their circles, a huge bite would be taken out of the problem.

The second element of true religion mentioned in James 1 is separation from the world. Keeping yourself “unstained by the world” is an important test of your spiritual condition. The Apostle John said, “Do not love the world, nor the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him.” Love for worldly things, otherwise known as materialism, may be the biggest “stain” James was referring to. When recommending proper Christian behavior, Peter warned his readers to “make every effort to be found at peace, spotless and unblemished in him” when the destruction of worldly people occurred at the end of the age.

I am going to quit preachin’ and go to meddlin’ as someone used to say. The use of our money is not the only way Christians demonstrate their religion. What we have to offer is time, treasure, and talents. I have dealt with treasure. We must also look carefully at how we spend our time. Employment and entertainment probably consume the lion’s share of Christians’ time these days. The question you must ask is whether your time is “unstained” by worldly things. The workaholic or the sports fanatic may want to consider how much time is stained by the world. One could ask what percentage of the 168 hours granted each week is spent in “pure religion.” For some, the answer would be embarrassing.

Look at your talents. I wrote several articles recently about spiritual gifts and natural talents. (See Related Posts) Natural talents and spiritual gifts are given by God with the understanding that they will be used in His service. Finding a way to use them in your local church is an essential part of your responsibility to the Giver. If your religion is “pure,” acceptable to God, it would seem reasonable to assume that a good share of your blessings from God (time, treasure, and talents) would be directed to the advancement of God’s kingdom on earth. Evaluate the purity of your religion by James’ standard. Then make the necessary corrections.

Related Posts: Natural Talents in Service to God; Spiritual Gifts

I Think I Love Jesus

This is going to be an autobiographical, philosophical ramble. If the thought of poking around inside my head is not a pleasant one for you, you are excused. My wife, Karen, regularly chides me for thinking too much. She is usually correct; when I imagine bad motives for someone’s action, or when I create a dilemma of my own making, I am probably overthinking. It is the latter case that I am going to sort through in this piece.

I want to start by defending philosophy. The word scares or bores some people because they picture dusty classrooms and boring lectures. That’s understandable but not fair. A philosophy is merely a way of seeing things. It is often called a world view. Everyone has one whether they know it or not. We all look at the world through a filter of some kind. If we didn’t, the jumble of unrelated data would drive us crazy. We make sense of things by choosing to see them through our world view – our philosophy. Socrates said the unexamined life is not worth living. I recommend examination. Commenting on James 1:25 John MacArthur says, “If you desire to be like Christ… you must continually examine your life in the light of Scripture.” (Drawing Near—Daily Readings for a Deeper Faith (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 1993)

I am not going to categorize all the potential philosophies that people choose from. I will simply say that there are worldly world views and biblical world views. I choose the biblical. I attempt to make everything fit into a biblical framework. I hope to operate according to the truth as I understand it from God’s Word. This is how I sometimes stumble into a dilemma of my own making. Some things are easy to sort: murder is wrong, so abortion is wrong; hate is wrong, so homophobia, xenophobia, misogyny, and a host of other things are clearly not biblical. Materialism places things above God, so that is idolatry – very wrong. Those are some of the easy ones.

There are many that are not so easy. For the last many months, perhaps years, I have been troubled by my lack of emotion when I consider my love for Jesus. I desire to love Jesus, but I find it difficult. I “feel” I am not worthy to love Jesus. I find it difficult to imagine Jesus wanting my love. If a cockroach expressed love to me, what would it mean? If that sounds outrageous, remember that in God’s Word humans are likened to worms. I love what Jesus did for me culminating in His horrible death on the cross. I understand what that means for me intellectually, but I don’t usually “feel” love when I consider it.

Here then is my dilemma. I put “feel” in quotes because my biblical world view places feelings in my soul. My relationship with Jesus is primarily spiritual, at least in my present state. If I love Jesus only for what He did for me, that is transactional love – love based on an exchange. He did something wonderful for me, so I love Him for it. It’s a trade. There are no feelings involved on my part; that worries me. I sense that something is missing because I believe the Bible teaches that humans consist of body, soul, and spirit. If my love for Jesus is merely transactional, I fear it is not genuine love.

Karen and I were discussing this the other day and she helped me to see that the love the Bible speaks of, agape love, is given to us by the Holy Spirit. It is even called a fruit of the Spirit. Paul says that kind of love is poured out in our hearts by the Spirit. That being the case, biblically, I might have genuine love flowing out of my spirit to Jesus and not necessarily “feel love” in my soul.

While I am comfortable with that thought, I still think I am missing something. I wrote “More Than a Feeling” some time ago to correct myself for thinking that agape love wasn’t supposed to “feel” like love. The Bible is full of examples of God’s pure agape love for His people that are fraught with feeling. Agape may not be primarily a feeling, but in its richest form, it is not devoid of feeling.

I remember reading years ago about Mother Theresa in her final years. She admitted that she had lost the feeling that drove her earlier ministry. Still, she persisted in her calling to the end. John of the Cross speaks of the dark night of the soul when one might wonder if God has abandoned him. What did Jonah feel in the belly of the fish; what did Paul think as his ship was dashed upon the rocks; what did Jesus Himself think in the Garden of Gethsemane or on the cross when He cried, “My God, why have you forsaken me?” I am beginning to think that one of our deepest human frailties is the imperfect interface of soul and spirit within us. One day, after our resurrection to eternal life, they will be perfectly united; until that day, philosophers like me will question the legitimacy of our love.

You don’t have to go there with me. Karen, bless her soul, does not. She is perfectly happy with her experience of loving Jesus without questions. I envy her. Jesus said unless I become like a little child, I will never see the kingdom of heaven. I parsed that through my biblical philosophy and came up with the idea that simplicity is the hallmark of true faith. I have a tendency to complicate things that are really quite simple. That’s the philosopher in me. Perhaps it is just as Karen keeps telling me: I have to stop thinking so much.

However, through this process, I have come up with another word that plays into the concept of loving Jesus: devotion. I believe devotion leans into the side of agape love that requires an act of our human will. Jesus didn’t shy away from it when He declared, “If you love me, keep my commandments.” In the same way that my devotion to my marriage vows demands sacrificial obedience on my part, my devotion to Jesus requires obedience driven by love.

John MacArthur, in his commentary on Jesus’ dismissal of those who claimed to serve Him but were rejected, says, “Matthew 7:21–23 records the tragic results of spiritual delusion…. Jesus made a clear distinction between those who merely claim to be Christians and those who truly are. The difference is, true believers do the will of the Father from a pure heart. In the words of James, they are doers of the Word, not merely hearers who delude themselves.” If my motivation to follow a biblical world view (aka to obey Jesus) is from a pure heart, I think I am safe within the fold. I think I really do love Jesus.

Related Posts: On transactional love: To Love Mercy; More on delusion: Are You Qualified? Also Weak-day Christians

You’re It!

The topic of the election of the saints is prickly to some people. As I have written previously, my view has evolved over the years. (See Related Posts.) Having been raised in the Restoration Movement and having attended one of their Bible colleges, I began my journey with an Arminian view, which is to say that human will plays a substantial role in salvation. Years of Bible study and exposure to other views caused me to gravitate toward a more Calvinistic understanding of election which elevates God’s sovereignty. (See Calvinist or Arminian)

I think part of the reason for people’s resistance to placing God’s will over human will is our innate desire for independence. Even though Paul makes it clear that salvation is a gift of God’s grace, through faith with no work on our own, some of us insist on taking credit. If the elect of God were chosen before the foundation of the world as Scripture declares, it is hard for me to see how my will had much to do with it. In addition, I think many Christians have a lopsided view of what salvation is. Salvation is not about going to Heaven when you die; it is all about bringing Heaven to earth while you live here.

I like the way Carmen Joy Imes put it in her book, Bearing God’s Name: Why Sinai Still Matters. “Too often we think of ‘election’ as a matter of ‘being picked to be saved.’ But in Scripture, election is more like a game of blob tag, where if I’m ‘it,’ and I tag you, then we’re both it. We run around together and try to tag as many others as we can, who join hands with us and continue tagging others until everyone has been tagged. In this game, the essence of ‘it-ness’ is to tag others. So, too, the essence of election, and therefore the essence of the believer’s vocation, is to represent God by mediating his blessing to others. Once we are ‘it’ we don’t lean back in our recliners, glad that someone picked us. No, to be ‘it’ is to tag others. And to be elect – to be His – is to bear His name among the nations, to demonstrate by our lives that He is king and to mediate His blessing to others. That is the whole point of being the elect.”

I said earlier that I have adopted a somewhat Calvinist view of election to salvation. The hardline view speaks of irresistible grace – I cannot not be saved if I am elect by God. I temper that thought with this: as God’s chosen one, I must surrender to His choosing. Like the game analogy Imes uses, many of us were running from God when He “tagged” us. I would like to say that once I was tagged, I joined hands with Jesus and ran with Him consistently. I cannot say that. I run; I fall; I get up to run again. Falling is okay in this analogy. If I trip involuntarily, God is there to give me a hand up.

If I purposely let go and run off on my own, a different set of rules apply. Either I was never really tagged in the first place, and I pretended to join the game. Or, and here is where I depart from pure Calvinism, I was tagged, but something caused me to tire of the game, or something bothered me so much that I rejected the whole idea of the game and walked away of my own “free will.” I don’t see a way to read the admonitions of Paul or Hebrews chapters six and ten without accepting that as a possibility. In the either scenario, going back to Bible language, I must assume that I was not “elect” at all. God will never lose one of His own.

I think the reason it is so hard for us to wrap our minds around this concept is because our minds are finite; God’s mind is infinite. I put “free will” in quotes before because I believe in a totally sovereign God: He numbers my days; He knit me together in my mother’s womb; He knows the end from the beginning. I only know what my five natural senses can tell me plus whatever the Holy Spirit shows me supernaturally. When I get up in the morning (if God grants me another day), I must decide what to wear, where to go, what to do, and that feels like I am exercising my “free will.”

But the Scripture says my steps are “ordered” by God. God allows me to make choices, but everything I “decide” is already programmed into His will for my life. This is how I can harmonize the total free will of humans with the total sovereignty of God. Back to the subject of election. The elect are revealed by their actions. “By their fruits you shall know them,” Jesus once said. The New Testament writers could speak to “the elect” because their fruit was obvious. In his first epistle, John said that some people had appeared to be elect, but their actions ultimately proved that they were not.

This makes being elect a matter of ethics; we reveal our ethos through our behavior. In his book, How Should I Live in This World?, R.C. Sproul reminds us that “The purpose of divine commandments is redemption. The law of the Old Testament and of the New Testament is fundamentally person-oriented. To isolate this law from its basic concern for people is to fall into the abyss of legalism. Christian ethics is built on the obedience of people to a personal God.” The elect will embrace that ethos and willingly choose to obey its demands. Those who are not among the elect will chafe at having anyone tell them what to do. This is how you can know whether or not you’re it.

Related Posts: Election: God’s Choice; God’s Choice or Man’s; More about Calvinism: Understanding the TULIP Doctrine; On sovereignty: Disrespecting God’s Sovereignty