Word vs. World

"I have given them Your word, and the world has hated them, because they are not of the world, just as I am not of the world" (John 17:14 ESV). 

Jesus delivers His Father's message to His people. The sinful world promotes self-love rather than true love for God and His people.

Pay Your Way into Heaven?

I'm a movie geek who has also taught writing and literature classes to middle school students for a couple of decades. So one of my favorite YouTube channels is "Why the Book Wins: book vs. movie," hosted by Laura Jay. On an episode from about a month ago, Laura was comparing the monumental movie The Godfather with the trashy novel on which the film was based. (NOTE: whereas the language in most of Laura's videos has been fairly family friendly, her video for the R-rated Godfather and its book, which should be X-rated, is not family friendly at all.)

For the Mafia, family, ethnicity, and a type of religion are all blended into a type of organizing principle by which a kind of loyalty among criminals is maintained. Therefore, in her video on The Godfather, Laura ends up discussing religion. Comparing situations from The Godfather with the TV show The Sopranos, Laura discusses how mobsters (and their families) are often depicted as trying to pay the Catholic church in order to assuage their consciences. This leads Laura to observe:

The idea that you can pay your way into Heaven: so many religions–maybe like every single religion–thinks this. [It's] a bizarre thing to believe, [but] every religion does believe it in one way or another. Members of the Mormon church, for example, like to look at other religions and [say], 'We don't believe in that,' and yet they do, because in order to get a temple recommend, you have to pay 10% of your money to the church, and if you are not a full tithe-payer, you can't get a temple recommend, and if you don't get a temple recommend, you can't get all the blessings that get you into the top tier of Heaven.

My comment, re: Laura's statement, "pay your way into Heaven... every religion does believe it in one way or another" is that this is definitionally NOT true of Protestant Christianity. We believe that a person is justified (that is: counted right in God's sight, and thus counted fit for Heaven) on the basis of faith alone. Adding any works at all (including any kind of 'payment') is considered heretical. It is important to keep this in mind as we lovingly present the truth of what Jesus has done for us.

Power Belongs to God

...then we must conclude that the storms that blow against us are not from God. They are part of the natural order which follows a course of natural law. [Jim Evans, quoted in the Opelika-Auburn News, C1, 3 September 2005 under "Where is God in the Storm?"] 

In response to the above quote concerning Hurricane Katrina made by a pastor near Auburn, Alabama (where I used to live), Paul Stith, of Grace Heritage Church (where I was once a member), made the following comments:

Why is it that we feel compelled to let God off the hook, as it were? Why do we want to find comfort by saying that God had nothing to do with this? Are we really better off with a God who is little more powerful than the Red Cross, running to the disaster to hold our hand in the aftermath? This is the god that some have constructed in their imaginations.

In stark contrast to this "god of our imaginations" the Bible presents God as omnipotent [that is, "all-powerful"].

God’s omnipotence is majestically and undeniably demonstrated in the first act of creation in which the universe was created out of nothing by God's Word, but often we are distracted by the visible matter around us in such a way as to miss the continuing activity of God throughout creation. We may be quick to acknowledge God as Creator, as I am sure the pastor quoted from the article above would do, but fail to glorify God by declaring that “He sustains all things by His powerful word” (Hebrews 1:3). That ‘all things are sustained by God’s might’ should clue us in to what the phrase “all-mighty” really indicates, namely, that “God’s omnipotence brings out every phenomenon of existence. This is the essential and sufficient cause of all things.” [Fredrik Brosche, Luther on Predestination (1978).]

Therefore we see that God’s omnipotence is not a static phenomenon. God is not a clockmaker who builds and then leaves His invention to run according to the mechanics He has set in place. Nor is He an absentee parent who only visits on occasional holidays. Nor does He even act within our lives often. Rather He is constant–like the very breath we breathe and the beating of our hearts–the activity of nerves carrying information from our minds and the contracting and relaxing of our muscles–providing all power necessary for our every action–“For in Him we live and move and have our being” (Acts 17:28). So when the Bible declares, “He is before all things and by Him all things hold together” (Colossians 1:17), we can be sure that without Him all things would fall apart into oblivion.

And God is not like some computer program that simply allows a video game to run–neutral to the outcome of the game–He is not passive in His sustaining power. Rather the Bible declares that He is the “One who works out everything in agreement with the decision of His will” (Ephesians 1:11). And this is to our great benefit as He works all things “together for the good of those who love God: those who are called according to His purpose” (Romans 8:28).

God’s active power over His creation is seen throughout the Scriptures:

· In inanimate creation (Job 37:6-13; 38:12, 22-32; Ps. 104:4, 14; 135:6-7; 148:8 Matt. 5:45)

· In animals (Job 38:39-41; Ps. 104:27-29; Matt. 6:26; 10:29)

· In seemingly random or chance events (Prov. 16:33)

· In the affairs of nations (Job 12:23; Ps. 22:28; Dan. 4:34-35)

· In the will of kings (Ezra 1:1; 6:22; Ps. 33:14-15; Prov. 21:1)

· In the will of believers (Phil. 2:13)

· In every aspect of our lives (Job 14:5; Ps. 139:16; Prov. 16:9; Prov. 20:24; Jer. 10:23; Matt.6:11; Gal. 1:15; Phil. 4:19)

And so we see that all power belongs to God and that any power an individual may seem to have is actually derivative. John 19:10-11 and Romans 13:1 prove this concept and allow us to know that God establishes all authorities and works through ‘em: whether they be just or tyrannical.

Is God then, therefore, the author of evil? Not at all. God never creates evil, nor does He entice anyone to evil. This is made clear in passages such as James 1:13-17. But God can never be inactive in His creation, which is entirely dependent upon His sustaining and ordering activity, as examined above. Rather, God is constantly working out His purposes through His entire created order, regardless of the will of His creatures. And so we see that there are times in which God empowers men to work according to their own corrupt nature and achieve His good purposes (as in the cases of Pharaoh and Judas) and there are times when He transforms the nature of His creatures to achieve His good purposes (as in the cases of Rahab and Paul). As Luther also explains:

Here you see that when God works in and by evil men, evil deeds result; yet God, though He does evil by means of evil men, cannot act evilly Himself, for He is good, and cannot do evil; but He uses evil instruments, which cannot escape the impulse and movement of His power. The fault which accounts for evil being done when God moves to action lies in these instruments, which God does not allow to be idle. In the same way a carpenter would cut badly with a saw-toothed axe. Hence it is that the ungodly man cannot but err and sin always, because under the impulse of Divine power he is not allowed to be idle, but wills, desires, and acts according to his nature.This is sure and certain, if we believe that God is omnipotent [emphasis added]; as it is also certain that the ungodly man is a creature of God, but one which, being perverted and left to itself without the Spirit of God, cannot will or do good. God’s omnipotence makes it impossible for the ungodly man to escape the action upon him of the movement of God; of necessity he is subject to it, and obeys it; but his corruption, his turning of himself from God, makes it impossible for him to be moved and to act well. God cannot suspend His omnipotence on account of man’s perversion, and the ungodly man cannot alter his perversion. As a result he sins and errs incessantly and inevitably until he is set right by the Spirit of God. [Martin Luther, The Bondage of the Will, translated by J.I. Packer and O.R. Johnston (2002): 204-205]

And as God works out His perfect purposes through sinful people, He also sovereignly works out His purposes through the natural world, which has also been impacted by sin in such a way as to often be grossly inhospitable to the people for whom it was originally created to provide:

For the earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons of God. For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope; because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groans and labors with birth pangs together until now. Not only that, but we also who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, eagerly waiting for the adoption, the redemption of our body. For we were saved in this hope, but hope that is seen is not hope; for why does one still hope for what he sees? But if we hope for what we do not see, we eagerly wait for it with perseverance.

Likewise the Spirit also helps in our weaknesses. For we do not know what we should pray for as we ought, but the Spirit Himself makes intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. Now He who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the Spirit is, because He makes intercession for the saints according to the will of God. And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose. (Romans 8:19-25 NKJV)

[This blogpost is adapted from a post originally published on 9/7/05.]

Joy Fulfilled

"But now I am coming to you, and these things I speak un the world that they may have my joy fulfilled in themselves." (John 17:13 ESV) 

For the joy set before Him–and before us!–Jesus endured the Cross, despising the shame, calling upon His Father, preaching hope. 

On the Non-hypocrisy of Calling out Homosexual Activity As an Abomination

The West Wing:
a Democratic Party fantasy

The West Wing was a political drama television series created by Aaron Sorkin that was originally broadcast on NBC from September 22, 1999, to May 14, 2006. The primary location for the events in The West Wing took place in the West Wing of the White House, where the Oval Office and offices of presidential senior personnel are located. The primary time-setting for The West Wing was the fictional two-term Democratic administration of President Josiah (Jed) Bartlet. In reality, the Republican administration of President George W. Bush was in office during this time, so The West Wing served as a kind of escapist fantasy for Democrats. 

In a key scene from the show (one that I've seen referenced a couple of times in a Reddit forum even this past week, from people offering it up as "the best monologue/speech in a film or TV show ever"), President Jed Bartlet confronts Dr. Jenna Jacobs, a conservative Christian radio talk-show host, whose character is based on Dr. Laura Schlessinger: a conservative Jewish radio talk-show host who was known for calling out homosexuality as an abomination.

President Bartlet: I like your show. I like how you call homosexuality an abomination.

Dr. Jenna Jacobs: I don’t say homosexuality is an abomination, Mr. President. The Bible does.

President Bartlet: Yes, it does. Leviticus.

Dr. Jenna Jacobs: 18:22.

President Bartlet: Chapter and verse. I wanted to ask you a couple of questions while I had you here.

I’m interested in selling my youngest daughter into slavery as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. She’s a Georgetown sophomore, speaks fluent Italian, always cleared the table when it was her turn. What would a good price for her be?

While thinking about that, can I ask another? My Chief of Staff Leo McGarry insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly says he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or is it okay to call the police?

Here’s one that’s really important ’cause we’ve got a lot of sports fans in this town: Touching the skin of a dead pig makes one unclean. Leviticus 11:7. If they promise to wear gloves, can the Washington Redskins still play football? Can Notre Dame? Can West Point?

Does the whole town really have to be together to stone my brother John for planting different crops side by side?

Can I burn my mother in a small family gathering for wearing garments made from two different threads?

---

Aaron Sorkin:
perhaps the greatest living screenwriter;
not the best theologian 

Notice that in the above dialogue, Bartlet (as a mouthpiece for the writer of this show: Aaron Sorkin) doesn't understand the distinction between moral, civil, and ceremonial laws from the Old Covenant, nor the difference between "sanctioned" and "regulated," and he falsely implies that burning is the penalty for wearing garments from two different kinds of threads.

The Distinction between Moral, Civil, and Ceremonial Laws

Old Testament law contains moral, civil, and ceremonial aspects, and the moral aspects are everlasting, as reflective of God's character, while the civil and ceremonial aspects were specifically, directly applied only in the Old Covenant era.

Some people deny the distinction as described above, and they question where such a distinction is found in the biblical text.

While it is acknowledged that there is no specific verse spelling out distinctions in the Mosaic Law in so many words, the three-fold distinction of the Law can be discerned through a systematic reading of Scripture. As there is no single verse or passage of contiguous verses spelling out a full doctrine of the Trinity or the hypostatic union, yet Christians receive these concepts as “biblical” due to careful synthesis of texts, so Christians have historically received the three-fold distinction of the Law without a specific proof-text.

Let us suppose that God intended to set apart a certain portion of the Law as specially reflecting an everlasting moral law. God could have fulfilled this intention through inspiring a verse or series of verses in which Moses tuaght about distinctions in the Law. On the other hand, God could have chosen to set apart a certain portion of the Law in a more dramatic, historical way. He could have:

1. Allowed all the people to hear his voice announcing certain laws,

2. Chosen to write certain laws with His finger upon stone tablets,

3. Commanded His chosen nation to carry around those stone tablets for decades within an ornate, gold-plated box,

4. Made the golden box containing those laws the center of worship for His chosen nation.

Christians who believe that there is a three-fold distinction in the Law, with a special, enduring place given to the moral law, believe that God, in fact, established a distinction in the Law historically, in the way just described.

Let us consider as well the different ways in which the New Testament applies specific laws from the Mosaic Law. For example, consider the following three New Testament quotes from the Old Testament.

#1. 9 For it is written in the Law of Moses: “Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain.” Is it about oxen that God is concerned? 10 Surely he says this for us, doesn’t he? Yes, this was written for us, because whoever plows and threshes should be able to do so in the hope of sharing in the harvest. 11 If we have sown spiritual seed among you, is it too much if we reap a material harvest from you? 12 If others have this right of support from you, shouldn’t we have it all the more? But we did not use this right. On the contrary, we put up with anything rather than hinder the gospel of Christ. (1 Corinthians 9:9-12 ESV)

#2. …without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins. (Hebrews 9:22b ESV)

#3. Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. “Honor your father and mother” (this is the first commandment with a promise), that it may go well with you and that you may live long in the land.” (Ephesians 6:1-2 ESV)

Notice the different way in which these various laws are treated.

In #1, the law which is cited had regulated the civil actions of people within ancient Israel; a principle is gleaned from this law and is applied to the Church.

In #2 [the reader will have to look at the context of both Hebrews and Leviticus to see this], the law that is cited had regulated the ceremonial actions [especially] of the priestly class in regard to animal sacrifices; in the surrounding verses, this law is treated as a type, which is fulfilled by the sacrifice of Christ upon the Cross.

In #3, the Apostle cites the fifth of the Ten Commandments and directly applies it to individuals in the church who received his letter.

Please note:

1. In these examples, we see the three-fold distinction of the Law. The above examples provide a model by which we are to understand how Old Covenant laws apply today. Principles should be gleaned from civil laws and applied, primarily to the Church, but also to society as a whole. The ceremonial laws should be seen (at least primarily) as typical of Christ, and we should worship and depend upon Him as the fulfillment of these laws. Moral laws should be embraced, and believers should seek to keep these laws by the power of the Holy Spirit, out of a heart of gratitude toward God. (Just as Paul said to “obey” the fifth commandment, we should seek to “obey” the other commandments of the moral law.)

2. In most cases it is not difficult to distinguish civil, ceremonial, and moral laws. Those who object to the three-fold distinction of the Law often act as if, because the laws are often not divided out in the biblical text, it is impossible to determine into which category a specific law should be placed. But notice that the attentive reader can make distinctions without much problem at all though a series of basic questions, such as:

a. Is the law about family property rights or rules of ownership and reimbursement?

b. Is the law under consideration about sacrifices or forms of worship in the temple/tabernacle?

c. Is the law part of the Ten Commandments?

Given these considerations, we should understand Leviticus 18:22 and the other Old Testament laws mentioned by Bartlet/Sorkin not as ancient relics to be dismissed, nor as current legal mandates to be  directly implemented into American laws, but as containing principles that should be applied according to either their ceremonial or civil uses. We should look at these laws as containing principles that direct us to Christ Himself, and that direct us in discerning principles of how to live for Him.

The Difference between "Sanctioned" and "Regulated"

In seeking to undermine the idea that homosexual activity could rightly be called an "abomination," Sorkin seeks to highlight how offensive the Old Testament law sounds to all Americans, so that he can then say that Leviticus 18:22 is equally offensive. To this end, he has Bartlet say (ironically): "I’m interested in selling my youngest daughter into slavery as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7..."

But Exodus 21:7 does not sanction selling one's daughter into slavery. Being a distinguished writer, Sorkin should be a careful enough reader to see that Exodus 21:7 begins with the words "and if..." (rendered as "when..." in some modern translations). Sorkin should certainly understand the difference between a command and a conditional statement. In context, it is clear that Exodus 21:7 is dealing with a situation that is already happening among people at the time. The verse does not sanction that situation, but it regulates it to make sure that the girls suffering under that situation are not left homeless and destitute. Other Old Testament regulations (such as Lev 23:22) create a situation in which the poor are better cared for, so that they would not feel forced into participating in the indentured servitude system. In the New Testament, there are verses (such as Gal 3:28, Phil 2:3, and Philemon 15-16) that undermine slavery as a whole.

Burned for the Wrong Clothes?

Perhaps the clearest indication that Sorkin's treatment of Old Testament law is made in bad faith (rather than just being a case of misunderstanding) is when he has Bartlet ask: "Can I burn my mother in a small family gathering for wearing garments made from two different threads?" From this question, viewers who have not carefully read Leviticus or Deuteronomy would assume that the Old Testament prescribes the death penalty (and specifically burning) for wearing mixed-cloth garments. It simply does not.

Conclusion

In certain atheist/agnostic circles, mocking statements like those made by President Bartlet on The West Wing are prevalent. Christians should be equipped and ready to give a defense of God's Word. More than anything, we must be confident in pointing others to Christ. Whatever the specific modern-day application of a particular biblical law might be, the law as a whole shows us that when God gives us standards, we fall short of those standards. We are all sinners in need of a Savior. Jesus perfectly kept the law that we could not keep, He paid the penalty for our sins on the Cross, and He rose again on the third day, conquering sin, death, and Hell for all who believe in Him.

Jesus' Prayer and Our Hope

"While I was with them, I kept them in your name, which you have given me. I have guarded them, and not one of them has been lost except the son of destruction, that the Scripture might be fulfilled" (John 17:12 ESV) 

Jesus has the authority and power of His Father. He faithfully preserves His people. God honors His Word. This is believers' hope. 

Comfort in Affliction

3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies and God of all comfort, 4 who comforts us in all our affliction, so that we may be able to comfort those who are in any affliction, with the comfort with which we ourselves are comforted by God. 5 For as we share abundantly in Christ's sufferings, so through Christ we share abundantly in comfort too. 6 If we are afflicted, it is for your comfort and salvation; and if we are comforted, it is for your comfort, which you experience when you patiently endure the same sufferings that we suffer. 7 Our hope for you is unshaken, for we know that as you share in our sufferings, you will also share in our comfort.

8 For we do not want you to be unaware, brothers, of the affliction we experienced in Asia. For we were so utterly burdened beyond our strength that we despaired of life itself. 9 Indeed, we felt that we had received the sentence of death. But that was to make us rely not on ourselves but on God who raises the dead. 10 He delivered us from such a deadly peril, and he will deliver us. On him we have set our hope that he will deliver us again. 11 You also must help us by prayer, so that many will give thanks on our behalf for the blessing granted us through the prayers of many. (2 Corinthians 1:3-11 ESV) 

When believers suffer affliction, as we prayerfully endure, God comforts us, so that we may be able to comfort others in affliction.

Service to Others in Trials

22 But be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves.  23 For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who looks intently at his natural face in a mirror. 24 For he looks at himself and goes away and at once forgets what he was like. 25 But the one who looks into the perfect law, the law of liberty, and perseveres, being no hearer who forgets but a doer who acts, he will be blessed in his doing. 

26 If anyone thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this person’s religion is worthless. 27 Religion that is pure and undefiled before God the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world. (James 1:22-27 ESV)

As clear from context, James' teaching is given to suffering people. In our suffering, we gain maturity by ministering to others well.

Warning Re: Anger

19 Know this, my beloved brothers: let every person be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger; 20 for the anger of man does not produce the righteousness of God. (James 1:19-20 ESV) 

In trials, we must pray for wisdom so our thoughts, words, and actions are motivated by godliness–not pain, anger, and frustrations.

Tempted to Blame God?

13 Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am being tempted by God,” for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself tempts no one. 14 But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. 15 Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death. (James 1:13-15 ESV) 

We need wisdom in trials. When in trials, we may be tempted to blame God for our trials, becoming bitter against Him.