Scripture is a rule unto itself, a standard within a standard. Neither personal experience nor church tradition are formative for our understanding or belief system. Scripture stands as the final arbiter in the determination of the validity of individual or corporate experience.
Apart from this essential truth of the independence of Scripture, we would face doctrinal chaos. In fact, our modern Christian doctrinal landscape is littered with the trash of doctrinal confusion. When Scripture as normative ceases to be the sole factor in the determination of doctrine, a theological mess ensues.
The Truth of Scripture is not truth because we recognize it as such. The Truth of Scripture does not come into being only in the existential moment. The Truth of Scripture is not rooted in human existence or awareness. The Truth of Scripture is rooted and exists in the Person of God, and in him alone.
Thus, we must understand the complete independence of Scripture from human existence. Scripture defines us, we do not define the Word. Consensus did not deliver the Canon. The controlling Spirit did. God has never been content to rely on man as his hope for making himself and his plan known. So, human experience is not the ground of revealed Truth. Revealed Truth broke through human experience under the guiding hand of God’s Spirit.
Yet, God chose to reveal himself through the human race. He did so by using men who were free moral agents as his spokesmen. In that fact we can see the miraculous nature of inspiration. Without overriding man’s free will, God revealed himself through the inspired writers in a unique way. He led those biblical authors to an understanding and insight they could not have achieved apart from God’s intervention in their lives (cf. Matt. 16.17).
Further, without those men ever realizing the full scope of what they were doing, each of the documents that comprise Scripture was written, preserved, and finally compiled in the Canon. What we have now we call the "Holy Bible." Paul’s words were "sacred writings" (2 Tim. 3.15). Fundamental to this concept of Holy Bible or Sacred Writings is divine inspiration. Scripture is not sacred because any assembly or council declared them to be so; Scripture is sacred and holy because it is "God-breathed."
Again, the sacredness of Scripture, the uniqueness of its Truth, is such as a result of God’s direct intervention through inspiration. Remember, God put "his words" into Isaiah’s mouth (Isa. 59.21). Because what Isaiah received was the "word of the Lord," the "words" out of his mouth were reliable and authoritative for Israel’s experience; they would accomplish their purpose; they would not pass away.
The Word came to Isaiah, not from or out of Isaiah. He delivered what he was given; he was doing far more than simply sharing his thoughts. A central message in Isaiah is that the words of God given to Isaiah were credible, because God himself, who had spoken the words to Isaiah, was himself believable.
Upon that foundation, God’s believability, his reliability, the Book of Isaiah and the whole of Scripture stands. Could Israel believe, while in exile, that God would deliver them as he had promised beforehand? For believers today, the question looms no less significantly in our lives. How much credibility does God have? Can we, yea, will we rely totally upon the Word of God?
The issue we all face is what must be done about Scripture. Do we believe it? Are we willing to stake our very existences upon its Truth? Do we find understanding in the Word for who we are and what we should do? Or, do we seek to define Truth by what we experience and see? Such is the test of our time.
Tuesday, December 12, 2006
Study 35 “Who Is Wise?” Part 6
Years ago, a young man I had known in high school telephoned one day. He told me he had sensed a call from God to vocational Christian ministry and wondered if I would let him preach in my church. To put me at ease, supposedly, he assured me "I don’t preach doctrine. I just preach Jesus."
I was aware then of what is etched now even more keenly on my heart: to preach Jesus is to preach doctrine. I have learned that not every "Christian" "believes in Jesus" as I do, which I hope is in a manner consistent with Scripture.
Early Christianity had to fight for its very life against what has come to be termed as Gnosticism. The heart of Gnosticism was a radical redefinition of Jesus. Men like Cerinthus and Valentinus took the Church’s teaching about Jesus and sought to make him into something far different from and far less than the Incarnate Word really was. Ultimately, the church rejected the views of this heretical movement.
Doctrine is not, as we can see, a bad thing. We Baptists have certain doctrinal distinctives that characterize our life and practice. Our self-understanding as a denomination and as individual believers is formed upon a biblical foundation articulated from a Baptist perspective.
Paul commended Scripture to Timothy as being "profitable for doctrine" (2 Tim. 3.16). Now, let us understand what doctrine is. The Greek word translated doctrine is didaskalia, a noun based on the Greek verb didaskÅ, meaning "to teach." So, didaskalia means "teaching," and also, "what is taught." Therefore, didaskalia encompasses both the idea of the teaching event and the content of teaching.
Paul told Timothy inspired Scripture is "profitable" as a source and foundation for Christian instruction. One teaches upon the authority of the Word and one teaches the Word. The "all Scripture is inspired" statement delineates clearly the boundaries for profitable doctrine. We need look no further than the Bible for our source of truth or wisdom.
What we must reaffirm at this point is the scope of "all Scripture." Are we to restrict ourselves to the Hebrew Scriptures for our doctrine as Paul did? Surely not. The early church realized that not only was the Hebrew Bible inspired, but certain writings from the first century, which had the mark of Apostolic authority, were binding for believers as well. Upon that basis, the NT Canon was developed.
Consequently, believers have at their disposal both Old and New Testaments, each co-equal with the other; each equally inspired; each equally authoritative; each equally beneficial for doctrine. The OT and the NT together constitute the revealed Truth of God. The OT was not replaced by the NT. They complement and augment one another. They are together the sufficient Word of God.
One must be warned, though, that no believer is free to randomly and indiscriminately "interpret" Scripture. While we Baptists have our doctrinal distinctives, we do not depart from the traditional core beliefs of historic Christianity. At the same time, we understand those central doctrines from the Baptist perspective.
We, as do all Christians, accept the admonition to be baptized. We, though, approve only of immersion as the biblically acceptable mode. Our form of church government is congregational, not episcopal (bishops) or presbyterian (elders), although all have biblical support as forms of ecclesiastical governance. We have a de-centralized view of denomination life: authority flows from the local congregation to the denomination, not the opposite.
We also see something unique and singular in Scripture. In God’s Word, we find our justification for belief and practice.
I was aware then of what is etched now even more keenly on my heart: to preach Jesus is to preach doctrine. I have learned that not every "Christian" "believes in Jesus" as I do, which I hope is in a manner consistent with Scripture.
Early Christianity had to fight for its very life against what has come to be termed as Gnosticism. The heart of Gnosticism was a radical redefinition of Jesus. Men like Cerinthus and Valentinus took the Church’s teaching about Jesus and sought to make him into something far different from and far less than the Incarnate Word really was. Ultimately, the church rejected the views of this heretical movement.
Doctrine is not, as we can see, a bad thing. We Baptists have certain doctrinal distinctives that characterize our life and practice. Our self-understanding as a denomination and as individual believers is formed upon a biblical foundation articulated from a Baptist perspective.
Paul commended Scripture to Timothy as being "profitable for doctrine" (2 Tim. 3.16). Now, let us understand what doctrine is. The Greek word translated doctrine is didaskalia, a noun based on the Greek verb didaskÅ, meaning "to teach." So, didaskalia means "teaching," and also, "what is taught." Therefore, didaskalia encompasses both the idea of the teaching event and the content of teaching.
Paul told Timothy inspired Scripture is "profitable" as a source and foundation for Christian instruction. One teaches upon the authority of the Word and one teaches the Word. The "all Scripture is inspired" statement delineates clearly the boundaries for profitable doctrine. We need look no further than the Bible for our source of truth or wisdom.
What we must reaffirm at this point is the scope of "all Scripture." Are we to restrict ourselves to the Hebrew Scriptures for our doctrine as Paul did? Surely not. The early church realized that not only was the Hebrew Bible inspired, but certain writings from the first century, which had the mark of Apostolic authority, were binding for believers as well. Upon that basis, the NT Canon was developed.
Consequently, believers have at their disposal both Old and New Testaments, each co-equal with the other; each equally inspired; each equally authoritative; each equally beneficial for doctrine. The OT and the NT together constitute the revealed Truth of God. The OT was not replaced by the NT. They complement and augment one another. They are together the sufficient Word of God.
One must be warned, though, that no believer is free to randomly and indiscriminately "interpret" Scripture. While we Baptists have our doctrinal distinctives, we do not depart from the traditional core beliefs of historic Christianity. At the same time, we understand those central doctrines from the Baptist perspective.
We, as do all Christians, accept the admonition to be baptized. We, though, approve only of immersion as the biblically acceptable mode. Our form of church government is congregational, not episcopal (bishops) or presbyterian (elders), although all have biblical support as forms of ecclesiastical governance. We have a de-centralized view of denomination life: authority flows from the local congregation to the denomination, not the opposite.
We also see something unique and singular in Scripture. In God’s Word, we find our justification for belief and practice.
Wednesday, November 29, 2006
Study 34 “Who Is Wise?” Part 5
Paul’s reliance upon the written Word is undeniable. "For whatsoever was written in earlier times was written for our instruction" is as clear a statement of Paul’s view of the value of Scripture. For the Apostle, instruction in the Word was the basis for his approach to church planting and development.
Probably the strongest declaration Paul made about the sufficiency of Scripture is found in 2 Timothy 3. Paul’s instructions to Timothy regarding "the sacred writings" are found in verses 14-17. Timothy’s mother and grandmother had instructed him in the Hebrew Scriptures from the time he was a child. He had been taught and had "learned and become convinced" of the truth and reliability of the principles of the Word.
Timothy, Paul said, was to "go on abiding" in what he had learned. Similarly, in John 15, Jesus speaks of abiding. In verse 4, the Lord commanded his followers to "abide in me." In verse 7, he declared, "if you continue in me, and my words abide in you, ask whatever you wish and it will be to you." So, we can conclude, among others things, that apart from the truth of Scripture, we are unable to pray effectively.
Now, what must be pointed out here is that the only way we can learn what Jesus told his followers in the first century is by reading the Gospels, the written accounts of the life of Jesus. No one knows what access if Paul or Timothy had to any early written stories of Jesus’ life and teachings. One thing that is certain is that they read the Hebrew Scriptures.
In the Hebrew Bible, Paul found the authority for his ministry and the context for his life. In those sacred writings, Paul declared, Timothy was to abide, or dwell. And, Timothy was reminded by Paul that he had learned the truth of the Scripture and "firmly believed" what he had learned. Paul was not concerned with opinion or feelings, but with conviction and certainty (To ask, "What do you feel the Scriptures are saying to you?" is entirely unbiblical).
These sacred writings to which Paul pointed Timothy were what that young believer had "known" from childhood. The word Paul used for "know" indicates at least two things. First, Timothy’s knowing meant he had insight into or a perception of the truths of Scripture. Timothy knew more than the facts; he understood the significance the principles he had learned.
By understanding the principles, Timothy knew to some extent the practical applicability of scriptural truth. If one only has an academic or intellectual grasp of the truth, he is able to state the truth only in formal terms. If he understands and has insight into a truth, that person is able then to apply what he knows to his life. Paul had instructed the Philippians, "whatever you have learned and received and heard and seen in me, do these things" (Phpp. 4.9). The Apostle taught and modeled the truth of Scripture; he showed how one applies scriptural principles in his daily living. "Whatever was written in earlier times was written for our instruction."
Paul made several affirmations to Timothy about Scripture. Each of the affirmations was rooted in Paul’s concept of the sufficiency of Scripture. Indeed, for Paul, his ministry found validation in the written Word. All he taught and did was rooted in the revealed Word of God.
As we will come to see, Paul accepted the Hebrew Scriptures, what he termed in his letter to the Romans "the oracles of God," as the special revelation of God to his people, The Lord had spoken clearly and undeniably, and for Paul, the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings were the special revelation of God to his people about himself and his plan . "To the law, to the testimony."
Probably the strongest declaration Paul made about the sufficiency of Scripture is found in 2 Timothy 3. Paul’s instructions to Timothy regarding "the sacred writings" are found in verses 14-17. Timothy’s mother and grandmother had instructed him in the Hebrew Scriptures from the time he was a child. He had been taught and had "learned and become convinced" of the truth and reliability of the principles of the Word.
Timothy, Paul said, was to "go on abiding" in what he had learned. Similarly, in John 15, Jesus speaks of abiding. In verse 4, the Lord commanded his followers to "abide in me." In verse 7, he declared, "if you continue in me, and my words abide in you, ask whatever you wish and it will be to you." So, we can conclude, among others things, that apart from the truth of Scripture, we are unable to pray effectively.
Now, what must be pointed out here is that the only way we can learn what Jesus told his followers in the first century is by reading the Gospels, the written accounts of the life of Jesus. No one knows what access if Paul or Timothy had to any early written stories of Jesus’ life and teachings. One thing that is certain is that they read the Hebrew Scriptures.
In the Hebrew Bible, Paul found the authority for his ministry and the context for his life. In those sacred writings, Paul declared, Timothy was to abide, or dwell. And, Timothy was reminded by Paul that he had learned the truth of the Scripture and "firmly believed" what he had learned. Paul was not concerned with opinion or feelings, but with conviction and certainty (To ask, "What do you feel the Scriptures are saying to you?" is entirely unbiblical).
These sacred writings to which Paul pointed Timothy were what that young believer had "known" from childhood. The word Paul used for "know" indicates at least two things. First, Timothy’s knowing meant he had insight into or a perception of the truths of Scripture. Timothy knew more than the facts; he understood the significance the principles he had learned.
By understanding the principles, Timothy knew to some extent the practical applicability of scriptural truth. If one only has an academic or intellectual grasp of the truth, he is able to state the truth only in formal terms. If he understands and has insight into a truth, that person is able then to apply what he knows to his life. Paul had instructed the Philippians, "whatever you have learned and received and heard and seen in me, do these things" (Phpp. 4.9). The Apostle taught and modeled the truth of Scripture; he showed how one applies scriptural principles in his daily living. "Whatever was written in earlier times was written for our instruction."
Paul made several affirmations to Timothy about Scripture. Each of the affirmations was rooted in Paul’s concept of the sufficiency of Scripture. Indeed, for Paul, his ministry found validation in the written Word. All he taught and did was rooted in the revealed Word of God.
As we will come to see, Paul accepted the Hebrew Scriptures, what he termed in his letter to the Romans "the oracles of God," as the special revelation of God to his people, The Lord had spoken clearly and undeniably, and for Paul, the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings were the special revelation of God to his people about himself and his plan . "To the law, to the testimony."
Study 33 “Who Is Wise?” Part 4
The importance of the written Word in the life of Judaism cannot be overstated. In his ongoing debates with the Jews, Jesus asserted that his message was from God. "Which one of you convicts Me of sin? If I speak truth, why do you not believe Me? He who is of God hears the words of God; for this reason you do not hear them, because you are not of God" (John 8.46-47). A most telling response to Jesus is found in John 9.29. "We know that God has spoken to Moses, but as for this man, we do not know where He is from." In other words, the law of Moses, written on scrolls was a sure word from God. That the Jews were skeptical of Jesus is an understatement.
How did God speak to Moses? According to Exodus 33.11, "the Lord used to speak to Moses face to face." Numbers 12.8 states, "with [Moses] I speak mouth to mouth, even openly, and not in dark sayings, and he beholds the form of the Lord." Based on Numbers 12.6-8, we must conclude that God spoke to Moses in a unique manner, differently from how he spoke to any other person.
For that reason, the Law of Moses took on incredible significance to Israel. After their return from Babylonian captivity, the people of God made an astounding request. "They asked Ezra the Scribe to bring the book of the law of Moses which the Lord had given to Israel" (Neh. 8.1). So, from early morning till midday, Ezra read from the law, and "the people were attentive to the book of the law" (Neh. 8.3).
Now, Ezra was a superb scholar and teacher. He had "set his heart to study the law of the Lord and to practice it, and to teach His statutes and ordinances in Israel" (Ezra 7.10). While Ezra read, others assisted him by reading "from the book, from the law of God, translating to give the sense so that they understood the reading" (Neh. 8.8). What was the response of the people? They wept.
Ezra and the Levites read and taught from Torah, the Law, and the people were convicted of their sinfulness. Few believers today ever hear a sermon out of the law, much less read from it themselves. We tire of "thou shalt not," and the endless genealogies that tell us that so and so begot so and so who begot so and so, and so on. For many believers, most of the OT, and in particular the Pentateuch, remains a mystery, and is of secondary usefulness to them.
In the same manner, God had told Joshua to "be careful to do according to all the law which Moses my servant commanded you; do not turn from it to the right or to the left, so that you may have success (meaning to be prudent, or to act wisely) wherever you go." Further, the law was not to depart from Joshua’s mouth. He was to memorize it, meditate on it, and mind it in all matters personal and public. Thereby, he would insure prosperity (from a word meaning to advance; the word does not mean to become rich) and success for himself and God’s people.
How can any of us do any less than Ezra or Joshua? Should we not also give ourselves diligently to the study and practice of the Word? Paul told Timothy to "continue in the thins he had learned" from childhood. What had he learned? His mother and grandmother had taught him the law of the Lord, the sacred writings. And, those writings were "able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus."
The writings to which Paul referred were the Hebrew Scriptures. He declared them to be inspired by God and profitable, or advantageous, or sufficient within themselves for all doctrine, reproof, correction, and training in righteousness leading to the thorough equipping of every saint for every work. Christians extend that sufficiency to include the New Testament.
Clearly, what Paul was declaring to Timothy was a kind of hierarchy for the work of God in a person’s life. That same structure is found in Romans 12.1-2. God’s first priority for believers is who they are, the nature of their character. Reproof and correction are more about showing character weaknesses and changing them than anything else. God’s second priority is our behavior, or the nature of our conduct. The Lord knows that only as we first become who he wants us to be will we then do what he wants us to do. We can know who God wants us to be only through the diligent study of Scripture. "To the law, and to the testimony."
How did God speak to Moses? According to Exodus 33.11, "the Lord used to speak to Moses face to face." Numbers 12.8 states, "with [Moses] I speak mouth to mouth, even openly, and not in dark sayings, and he beholds the form of the Lord." Based on Numbers 12.6-8, we must conclude that God spoke to Moses in a unique manner, differently from how he spoke to any other person.
For that reason, the Law of Moses took on incredible significance to Israel. After their return from Babylonian captivity, the people of God made an astounding request. "They asked Ezra the Scribe to bring the book of the law of Moses which the Lord had given to Israel" (Neh. 8.1). So, from early morning till midday, Ezra read from the law, and "the people were attentive to the book of the law" (Neh. 8.3).
Now, Ezra was a superb scholar and teacher. He had "set his heart to study the law of the Lord and to practice it, and to teach His statutes and ordinances in Israel" (Ezra 7.10). While Ezra read, others assisted him by reading "from the book, from the law of God, translating to give the sense so that they understood the reading" (Neh. 8.8). What was the response of the people? They wept.
Ezra and the Levites read and taught from Torah, the Law, and the people were convicted of their sinfulness. Few believers today ever hear a sermon out of the law, much less read from it themselves. We tire of "thou shalt not," and the endless genealogies that tell us that so and so begot so and so who begot so and so, and so on. For many believers, most of the OT, and in particular the Pentateuch, remains a mystery, and is of secondary usefulness to them.
In the same manner, God had told Joshua to "be careful to do according to all the law which Moses my servant commanded you; do not turn from it to the right or to the left, so that you may have success (meaning to be prudent, or to act wisely) wherever you go." Further, the law was not to depart from Joshua’s mouth. He was to memorize it, meditate on it, and mind it in all matters personal and public. Thereby, he would insure prosperity (from a word meaning to advance; the word does not mean to become rich) and success for himself and God’s people.
How can any of us do any less than Ezra or Joshua? Should we not also give ourselves diligently to the study and practice of the Word? Paul told Timothy to "continue in the thins he had learned" from childhood. What had he learned? His mother and grandmother had taught him the law of the Lord, the sacred writings. And, those writings were "able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus."
The writings to which Paul referred were the Hebrew Scriptures. He declared them to be inspired by God and profitable, or advantageous, or sufficient within themselves for all doctrine, reproof, correction, and training in righteousness leading to the thorough equipping of every saint for every work. Christians extend that sufficiency to include the New Testament.
Clearly, what Paul was declaring to Timothy was a kind of hierarchy for the work of God in a person’s life. That same structure is found in Romans 12.1-2. God’s first priority for believers is who they are, the nature of their character. Reproof and correction are more about showing character weaknesses and changing them than anything else. God’s second priority is our behavior, or the nature of our conduct. The Lord knows that only as we first become who he wants us to be will we then do what he wants us to do. We can know who God wants us to be only through the diligent study of Scripture. "To the law, and to the testimony."
Study 32 “Who Is Wise?” Part 3
How do we believers determine God’s personal plan for our lives? Should we expect to hear a clear and audible voice declaring the Lord’s directions for us? Do we interpret our dreams? Should we hope for a messenger to come along who will deliver a "word from the Lord" to us? Or, as too many do, will we stumble along hoping circumstances will work-out in such a way as to lead us to the open door of God’s will? Does any chance exist of our coming to understand what God expects from us? If yes, how?
Our best hope for understanding God’s will for our lives comes by relying solely upon His Word. The psalmist posed the question, "How can a young man keep his way pure?" In other words, how can a person know how to live his life in a such a manner as to honor God? How can we find direction so that we might conform to God’s plan? His answer? "By keeping [one’s life] according to Your word." Walk according to the Word, and you will fulfill God’s plan for your life.
We are enjoined by the Bible to understand God’s will. Paul wrote in Romans, "Do not be fashioned by this age, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may determine the good, acceptable, and perfect will of God." To the Ephesians, he declared, "know what the will of the Lord is." So, how do we come to know God’s will for our lives?
Paul recognized that all kinds of pressures come to bear on believers. Some are overt and hostile, some subtle and deceptive, but all of the world’s influences are directed towards making all people on earth conform to some way of living. Thus, the Apostle declared, "Do not let yourself be fashioned by the world." Living in a manner consistent with any lifestyle other than a biblical one means to be out of conformity with God’s wishes.
What Paul commanded ("be transformed" was stated by Paul as a command, not a suggestion) the Romans to do was to fight against the outside pressures of the world and instead be changed from the inside out. The difference in the two verbs conform and transform is distinct and definite. To be conformed means to be changed by external forces. To be transformed, though, is another reality altogether.
To be transformed means one is changed by internal forces. The change a believer should experience every day of his life begins at the point of conversion. "If anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old is passed away, behold the new has already come into existence" (2 Cor. 5.17). Earlier, Paul had written to the Corinthians, "the outer person (the flesh) is decaying, but the inner person is being made new day by day . . . so we do not pay attention to what can be seen, but to what is unseeable; for seen things are temporary, but unseeable things are eternal" (2 Cor. 4.16, 18).
So, what is eternal? The things of God (Psa. 107.43; 111.7, 10). More specifically, what are the eternal matters about which we should be concerned most? Foremost in our minds are to be the principles and truths of Scripture. God described his Word when he said to Isaiah, "My words which I have put in your mouth shall not depart from your mouth, nor from the mouth of your offspring, nor from the mouth of your offspring’s offspring, . . . from now and forever" (Isa. 59.21).
The words put into Isaiah’s mouth were from God. How did they end up in the mouths of the prophet’s descendants? The words were written down and preserved, even to this day. And Paul the Rabbi, the master interpreter of Scripture, wrote, "For whatever was written in earlier times was written for our instruction" (Rom 15.4). So, heeding the command of Isaiah, we must go "to the Law, to the testimony" (Isa. 8.20).
Our best hope for understanding God’s will for our lives comes by relying solely upon His Word. The psalmist posed the question, "How can a young man keep his way pure?" In other words, how can a person know how to live his life in a such a manner as to honor God? How can we find direction so that we might conform to God’s plan? His answer? "By keeping [one’s life] according to Your word." Walk according to the Word, and you will fulfill God’s plan for your life.
We are enjoined by the Bible to understand God’s will. Paul wrote in Romans, "Do not be fashioned by this age, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may determine the good, acceptable, and perfect will of God." To the Ephesians, he declared, "know what the will of the Lord is." So, how do we come to know God’s will for our lives?
Paul recognized that all kinds of pressures come to bear on believers. Some are overt and hostile, some subtle and deceptive, but all of the world’s influences are directed towards making all people on earth conform to some way of living. Thus, the Apostle declared, "Do not let yourself be fashioned by the world." Living in a manner consistent with any lifestyle other than a biblical one means to be out of conformity with God’s wishes.
What Paul commanded ("be transformed" was stated by Paul as a command, not a suggestion) the Romans to do was to fight against the outside pressures of the world and instead be changed from the inside out. The difference in the two verbs conform and transform is distinct and definite. To be conformed means to be changed by external forces. To be transformed, though, is another reality altogether.
To be transformed means one is changed by internal forces. The change a believer should experience every day of his life begins at the point of conversion. "If anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old is passed away, behold the new has already come into existence" (2 Cor. 5.17). Earlier, Paul had written to the Corinthians, "the outer person (the flesh) is decaying, but the inner person is being made new day by day . . . so we do not pay attention to what can be seen, but to what is unseeable; for seen things are temporary, but unseeable things are eternal" (2 Cor. 4.16, 18).
So, what is eternal? The things of God (Psa. 107.43; 111.7, 10). More specifically, what are the eternal matters about which we should be concerned most? Foremost in our minds are to be the principles and truths of Scripture. God described his Word when he said to Isaiah, "My words which I have put in your mouth shall not depart from your mouth, nor from the mouth of your offspring, nor from the mouth of your offspring’s offspring, . . . from now and forever" (Isa. 59.21).
The words put into Isaiah’s mouth were from God. How did they end up in the mouths of the prophet’s descendants? The words were written down and preserved, even to this day. And Paul the Rabbi, the master interpreter of Scripture, wrote, "For whatever was written in earlier times was written for our instruction" (Rom 15.4). So, heeding the command of Isaiah, we must go "to the Law, to the testimony" (Isa. 8.20).
Friday, November 24, 2006
Study 31 “Who Is Wise?” Part 2
What is biblical wisdom? Further, as the psalmist stated the issue, "Who is wise?" How does the psalmist answer this question? The wise person is the one who "gives heed" to the things of the Lord.
Paul clearly understood the meaning of wisdom. In his counsel to the Ephesian believers (5.15-18), Paul addressed specifically this issue. "Therefore, watch carefully how you walk, not as unwise, but as wise, . . . do not be ignorant, but understand what the will of the Lord is."
Paul established two categories: the wise and the unwise. How is the wise person distinguished from the unwise? The Apostle described each in terms of four pairs: wise and unwise, aware and unaware, perceptive and imperceptive, and disciplined and undisciplined.
Before going further, let’s understand the Greek word for wisdom: sophos. This term is concerned with propositional truth, as opposed to experiential truth (the Greek gnosis). Sophos would be used in statements of scientific, philosophical, and mathematical truths and theorems. Sophos, then, should be understood as principle, statute, law, et alia.
Thus, Paul was enjoining the Ephesian believers to walk in light of certain truths and principles. No doubt, Paul meant the truth of Scripture. Those who did not grasp these truths, those who did not employ them were the unwise. The wise built their lives on a foundation of biblical truth.
The second pair of descriptors is aware and unaware. A wise person seizes the time, makes the most of the moment. "Making the most" (NASB) and "redeeming" (KJV) are both translations of a Greek word meaning literally "to buy out of." The word means "to set free; make the most of, make good use of." The idea of setting free provides the basis for the translation "redeeming." Yet, "making the most of, or making good use of" communicate better Paul’s meaning. Wise people make the most of the moment, or make the best use of their opportunities.
Since the days are evil, a wise person, being aware of himself, his situation, and God’s purposes, sees the opportunity and seizes it. The wise person walks in a state of readiness (Rom. 13.11-14; 1 Thess. 5.1-8; 1 Pet. 5.8). Thus, being prepared for and alert to any chance for witness or ministry, or any test, trial, or temptation, the wise man can make the most out of any unanticipated opportunity. The unaware miss the moment, and thus, are caught in the web of sin and failure.
The wise are also perceptive: they know what the will of the Lord is. Clearly, without knowing God’s plan, no child of God can have a workable design for his life. Without a knowledge of God’s purposes, we are left to our own ideas, which are imperfect and doomed to fail. As a believer interacts intimately with God through His Word, he gains an increasing perception of and insight into God’s mind and revealed will. The unwise do not perceive, understand, or have insight into God’s plan at all. The unwise fail.
The last pair is disciplined and undisciplined. The unwise are not in control of their lives. In fact, the unwise are under the control of their feelings and passions. The unwise seek understanding and solutions through sensually based experiences. Alcohol, drugs, meditation, sex, being "in touch" with one’s feelings, and such are the tools of enlightenment for the unwise. Sadly, all these "solutions" are simply short-cuts. All are doomed to fail in their promise and become, in the end, sensual prisons.
The wise person is in charge of his life. He realizes that one must discipline himself and control his urges if he is to have intimacy with God and victory in living (Gal. 5.24; Col. 3.5-10). We are not excused from taking charge of our selves. God will not magically take sin out of our lives. The wise person knows this and commits himself to being aligned with the purposes and demands of God. If we are engaged in sin, then the work of God in our lives by his Spirit will be discipline. But, if we have brought our lives under control and into conformity with God’s will (1 Cor. 9.27), the work of the Spirit will be to enlighten and edify us.
What is wisdom? Who is the wise person? The wise person is the one who knows God’s will and obeys God in all things.
Paul clearly understood the meaning of wisdom. In his counsel to the Ephesian believers (5.15-18), Paul addressed specifically this issue. "Therefore, watch carefully how you walk, not as unwise, but as wise, . . . do not be ignorant, but understand what the will of the Lord is."
Paul established two categories: the wise and the unwise. How is the wise person distinguished from the unwise? The Apostle described each in terms of four pairs: wise and unwise, aware and unaware, perceptive and imperceptive, and disciplined and undisciplined.
Before going further, let’s understand the Greek word for wisdom: sophos. This term is concerned with propositional truth, as opposed to experiential truth (the Greek gnosis). Sophos would be used in statements of scientific, philosophical, and mathematical truths and theorems. Sophos, then, should be understood as principle, statute, law, et alia.
Thus, Paul was enjoining the Ephesian believers to walk in light of certain truths and principles. No doubt, Paul meant the truth of Scripture. Those who did not grasp these truths, those who did not employ them were the unwise. The wise built their lives on a foundation of biblical truth.
The second pair of descriptors is aware and unaware. A wise person seizes the time, makes the most of the moment. "Making the most" (NASB) and "redeeming" (KJV) are both translations of a Greek word meaning literally "to buy out of." The word means "to set free; make the most of, make good use of." The idea of setting free provides the basis for the translation "redeeming." Yet, "making the most of, or making good use of" communicate better Paul’s meaning. Wise people make the most of the moment, or make the best use of their opportunities.
Since the days are evil, a wise person, being aware of himself, his situation, and God’s purposes, sees the opportunity and seizes it. The wise person walks in a state of readiness (Rom. 13.11-14; 1 Thess. 5.1-8; 1 Pet. 5.8). Thus, being prepared for and alert to any chance for witness or ministry, or any test, trial, or temptation, the wise man can make the most out of any unanticipated opportunity. The unaware miss the moment, and thus, are caught in the web of sin and failure.
The wise are also perceptive: they know what the will of the Lord is. Clearly, without knowing God’s plan, no child of God can have a workable design for his life. Without a knowledge of God’s purposes, we are left to our own ideas, which are imperfect and doomed to fail. As a believer interacts intimately with God through His Word, he gains an increasing perception of and insight into God’s mind and revealed will. The unwise do not perceive, understand, or have insight into God’s plan at all. The unwise fail.
The last pair is disciplined and undisciplined. The unwise are not in control of their lives. In fact, the unwise are under the control of their feelings and passions. The unwise seek understanding and solutions through sensually based experiences. Alcohol, drugs, meditation, sex, being "in touch" with one’s feelings, and such are the tools of enlightenment for the unwise. Sadly, all these "solutions" are simply short-cuts. All are doomed to fail in their promise and become, in the end, sensual prisons.
The wise person is in charge of his life. He realizes that one must discipline himself and control his urges if he is to have intimacy with God and victory in living (Gal. 5.24; Col. 3.5-10). We are not excused from taking charge of our selves. God will not magically take sin out of our lives. The wise person knows this and commits himself to being aligned with the purposes and demands of God. If we are engaged in sin, then the work of God in our lives by his Spirit will be discipline. But, if we have brought our lives under control and into conformity with God’s will (1 Cor. 9.27), the work of the Spirit will be to enlighten and edify us.
What is wisdom? Who is the wise person? The wise person is the one who knows God’s will and obeys God in all things.
Study 30 “Who Is Wise?” Part 1
What does being “wise” mean? While wisdom as a topic is not addressed frequently in the Psalms, wisdom as a fundamental and assumed truth is foundational to the Book of the Psalms. In Psalm 107 the question raised is, "Who is wise?" The poet did not answer his question directly, but did advise the wise on how to act. "Let him pay attention to these things." What are "these things"?
Psalm 111 offers insight into what "these things" are. "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom; a good understanding have all those who do His commandments." "His commandments" are words not found in the Hebrew text of Psalm 111. Instead, the literal translation is "those who do all these things." So, we are back to "these things." The antecedent for "these things" in Psalm 111 appears to be verse 7. "The works of his hands are truth and justice; all His precepts are sure." To me, the clear intention of the psalmist as stated in 111.10 is that the people of God are to do truth, justice, and the precepts of the Lord.
In other words, God’s people are to be obedient to all God has commanded. If we are to obtain wisdom, and obedience is the prerequisite for that transaction, then we can see the utter necessity of doing “these things." Now, in understanding obedience, we must put 111.10 in perspective. "The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom" What is "the fear of the Lord."? Are we to believe that we must cower in dread before God, obeying in some mechanical way for fear that God will crush us in his anger if we do not do what we are told?
Somehow, such a thought does not lend itself to a healthy pursuit of wisdom. One should seek wisdom because of the beauty and benefit wisdom brings. If we seek wisdom out of fear, we will do so only as an antidote to God’s anger, not for the benefit we derive. But, if we seek wisdom because of its worth, we will willingly and joyfully obey God.
So then, what is the fear of the Lord? The concept has to do more with acknowledging God’s significance than with being afraid of him. If I am afraid of God, I will avoid him at all costs. I will do whatever is necessary to keep him at a distance. But, if "the fear of the Lord" speaks to something else, my response to God will be somewhat different. "The fear of the Lord," then, is about taking God seriously. If I believe God is of ultimate significance, and if I believe he has a plan for me, then I will make no decision and take no action without taking into account God and his will.
To take God seriously means that I believe that he is more than a figure of speech, a character in a holy book, or, some genetic urge. If God is, and if he is the God of Scripture, then I must have as my first priority in life knowing Him. If my life is consumed by the desire to be in his presence and to be in fellowship with him, then I will do whatever is necessary on my part to foster that relationship. Consequently, all the issues in my life, all my priorities will be determined by the fact of God’s being. Then and only then will I begin the process of obtaining wisdom.
So, the wise person makes God the overriding reality in his life. Everything in the wise person’s life, his attitudes and actions, his principles and practices, his values and vocation, his relationships and realities, is determined and defined by who God is. No decision, no determination in life will be taken apart from the reality of God.
Indeed, according to Paul, God is at work in believers leading each one to determine and to do "his good pleasure." The Lord’s plan is that each of his children be an obedient child. "God is at work in you." He does not leave up to us the accomplishment of his plan; he is bringing us into complete conformity with his "good pleasure."
The wise person will recognize these truths. In admitting to them, he will obey willingly "these things." He will be engaged willfully in the transformation of his life by the power of God’s grace. The wise person will not resist God, he will work with God.
Who, then, is the wise person? Over a period of time, I will seek to answer that question in light of Scripture.
Psalm 111 offers insight into what "these things" are. "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom; a good understanding have all those who do His commandments." "His commandments" are words not found in the Hebrew text of Psalm 111. Instead, the literal translation is "those who do all these things." So, we are back to "these things." The antecedent for "these things" in Psalm 111 appears to be verse 7. "The works of his hands are truth and justice; all His precepts are sure." To me, the clear intention of the psalmist as stated in 111.10 is that the people of God are to do truth, justice, and the precepts of the Lord.
In other words, God’s people are to be obedient to all God has commanded. If we are to obtain wisdom, and obedience is the prerequisite for that transaction, then we can see the utter necessity of doing “these things." Now, in understanding obedience, we must put 111.10 in perspective. "The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom" What is "the fear of the Lord."? Are we to believe that we must cower in dread before God, obeying in some mechanical way for fear that God will crush us in his anger if we do not do what we are told?
Somehow, such a thought does not lend itself to a healthy pursuit of wisdom. One should seek wisdom because of the beauty and benefit wisdom brings. If we seek wisdom out of fear, we will do so only as an antidote to God’s anger, not for the benefit we derive. But, if we seek wisdom because of its worth, we will willingly and joyfully obey God.
So then, what is the fear of the Lord? The concept has to do more with acknowledging God’s significance than with being afraid of him. If I am afraid of God, I will avoid him at all costs. I will do whatever is necessary to keep him at a distance. But, if "the fear of the Lord" speaks to something else, my response to God will be somewhat different. "The fear of the Lord," then, is about taking God seriously. If I believe God is of ultimate significance, and if I believe he has a plan for me, then I will make no decision and take no action without taking into account God and his will.
To take God seriously means that I believe that he is more than a figure of speech, a character in a holy book, or, some genetic urge. If God is, and if he is the God of Scripture, then I must have as my first priority in life knowing Him. If my life is consumed by the desire to be in his presence and to be in fellowship with him, then I will do whatever is necessary on my part to foster that relationship. Consequently, all the issues in my life, all my priorities will be determined by the fact of God’s being. Then and only then will I begin the process of obtaining wisdom.
So, the wise person makes God the overriding reality in his life. Everything in the wise person’s life, his attitudes and actions, his principles and practices, his values and vocation, his relationships and realities, is determined and defined by who God is. No decision, no determination in life will be taken apart from the reality of God.
Indeed, according to Paul, God is at work in believers leading each one to determine and to do "his good pleasure." The Lord’s plan is that each of his children be an obedient child. "God is at work in you." He does not leave up to us the accomplishment of his plan; he is bringing us into complete conformity with his "good pleasure."
The wise person will recognize these truths. In admitting to them, he will obey willingly "these things." He will be engaged willfully in the transformation of his life by the power of God’s grace. The wise person will not resist God, he will work with God.
Who, then, is the wise person? Over a period of time, I will seek to answer that question in light of Scripture.
Study 29 “Who Is Wise?” Prologue
Over the years, I have developed several sermon series I try to preach periodically. Each time I do so, I attempt to update the series as my own understanding develops and grows. One of those series is entitled, "Who Is the Wise Man?" The sermons are based upon five psalms: 1, 15, 24, 32, and 112. I intend to do a lengthy study under the above title, slightly altered. I will lay a foundation consisting of studies of a variety of texts prior to interpreting these particular psalms.
Understanding the biblical concept of wisdom is critical if we are to attain insight. Obviously, biblical wisdom is found in Scripture and Scripture alone. Therefore, if we are both to know about and know God (knowing about Him and knowing Him are two entirely different things), and understand his plan, we must look to His Word. The course of this study of wisdom will be, then, a search of Scripture. Using the Psalms I have listed above as our base of operations, we will venture out into every part of the Word in order to find the answer to the question, "Who Is Wise?"
Understanding the biblical concept of wisdom is critical if we are to attain insight. Obviously, biblical wisdom is found in Scripture and Scripture alone. Therefore, if we are both to know about and know God (knowing about Him and knowing Him are two entirely different things), and understand his plan, we must look to His Word. The course of this study of wisdom will be, then, a search of Scripture. Using the Psalms I have listed above as our base of operations, we will venture out into every part of the Word in order to find the answer to the question, "Who Is Wise?"
Wednesday, November 08, 2006
Study 28 “The Mystery of God” Part 3
Psalm 11.7-11
A noted TV Evangelist explained his decision not to host an event in a major city in the following way. "Given more time, we can plan more effectively for what we always believe are opportunities for God to move mightily."
What are "opportunities for God to move mightily"? If we do not create the opportunity, is God unable to "move mightily"? Further, what does one mean by the phrase "move mightily"? Does God ever move in a manner that would not be described as mighty?
The attitude suggested by the evangelist’s statement concerns me. Regardless of the author’s intent, the implication of his statement is that God cannot, or will not move mightily without the cooperation of human beings. A sort of "if we do not build it, he will not come" mentality. Seemingly, those who had hoped the evangelist would visit their city will be left without a movement of God. Poor people, poor God.
Does the Bible’s portrayal of God and his activities indicate he is limited in any way by humanity? When the Lord instructed the disciples to gather in Jerusalem for Pentecost, he did so in order that they might be where he would act in a special way. The Lord did not indicate that the disciples’ being in Jerusalem was the key to God’s acting. God intended to pour out the Spirit in spite of what people might be doing. Peter declared that on that Pentecost day, the prophecy of Joel was being fulfilled. Hundreds of years earlier, God had stated what he would be doing at a point in the future. He did not condition his actions on the response of the Twelve. He asked no one’s permission to send the Spirit, nor did he wait for them to create the right circumstance.
Modern man has reduced God to explainable and understandable categories. As shown in an earlier post, some secular scientists view God as a function of human genetics. For one TV evangelist, God will not act till some human has provided him with the right venue. Some theologians are convinced that God is dependent on man, not the other way around. In fact, open theology (see previous post) grew out of one man’s inability to understand God’s sovereignty and foreknowledge. So, he created a new way to understand God.
"The Lord is in his Holy Temple. The Lord’s Throne is in Heaven." Neither his temple nor his Throne are upon the earth. Otherwise, the phrase from the Model Prayer, "Your kingdom come, Your will be done, on earth as it is in Heaven," would make no sense at all. We should seek the heavenly reality, not the earthly one.
If God can act only insofar as we have prepared the setting, he must not be much of a God. If spiritually hungry people in any city must wait for a TV personality to come to town before they can be changed by God, they are, of all people, to be pitied. What, by the way, happened to the Holy Spirit?
Pride goes before a fall, the writer of Proverbs declared. The problem with pride is that as an attitude, it masquerades. Most proud people do not realize they are prideful. Some see themselves as confident, others as humble. When any person believes God is dependent on him, he is guilty of pride. Thus, the need for the fall. Falling gives us an entirely different perspective on our selves.
David was not proud when he wrote Psalm 11. He was suffering one of life’s humiliations. He had found himself in need of help. He looked to the transcendent God, the One who knows all things, sees all things, and acts in such a way as to bring benefits to his children. David was at his wit’s end; he did not know what to do to change his circumstances; he did not have a plan that would enable God to act. He simply turned to the God of Heaven and Earth in his time of need, believing God to be able to meet any and every need in his life.
A noted TV Evangelist explained his decision not to host an event in a major city in the following way. "Given more time, we can plan more effectively for what we always believe are opportunities for God to move mightily."
What are "opportunities for God to move mightily"? If we do not create the opportunity, is God unable to "move mightily"? Further, what does one mean by the phrase "move mightily"? Does God ever move in a manner that would not be described as mighty?
The attitude suggested by the evangelist’s statement concerns me. Regardless of the author’s intent, the implication of his statement is that God cannot, or will not move mightily without the cooperation of human beings. A sort of "if we do not build it, he will not come" mentality. Seemingly, those who had hoped the evangelist would visit their city will be left without a movement of God. Poor people, poor God.
Does the Bible’s portrayal of God and his activities indicate he is limited in any way by humanity? When the Lord instructed the disciples to gather in Jerusalem for Pentecost, he did so in order that they might be where he would act in a special way. The Lord did not indicate that the disciples’ being in Jerusalem was the key to God’s acting. God intended to pour out the Spirit in spite of what people might be doing. Peter declared that on that Pentecost day, the prophecy of Joel was being fulfilled. Hundreds of years earlier, God had stated what he would be doing at a point in the future. He did not condition his actions on the response of the Twelve. He asked no one’s permission to send the Spirit, nor did he wait for them to create the right circumstance.
Modern man has reduced God to explainable and understandable categories. As shown in an earlier post, some secular scientists view God as a function of human genetics. For one TV evangelist, God will not act till some human has provided him with the right venue. Some theologians are convinced that God is dependent on man, not the other way around. In fact, open theology (see previous post) grew out of one man’s inability to understand God’s sovereignty and foreknowledge. So, he created a new way to understand God.
"The Lord is in his Holy Temple. The Lord’s Throne is in Heaven." Neither his temple nor his Throne are upon the earth. Otherwise, the phrase from the Model Prayer, "Your kingdom come, Your will be done, on earth as it is in Heaven," would make no sense at all. We should seek the heavenly reality, not the earthly one.
If God can act only insofar as we have prepared the setting, he must not be much of a God. If spiritually hungry people in any city must wait for a TV personality to come to town before they can be changed by God, they are, of all people, to be pitied. What, by the way, happened to the Holy Spirit?
Pride goes before a fall, the writer of Proverbs declared. The problem with pride is that as an attitude, it masquerades. Most proud people do not realize they are prideful. Some see themselves as confident, others as humble. When any person believes God is dependent on him, he is guilty of pride. Thus, the need for the fall. Falling gives us an entirely different perspective on our selves.
David was not proud when he wrote Psalm 11. He was suffering one of life’s humiliations. He had found himself in need of help. He looked to the transcendent God, the One who knows all things, sees all things, and acts in such a way as to bring benefits to his children. David was at his wit’s end; he did not know what to do to change his circumstances; he did not have a plan that would enable God to act. He simply turned to the God of Heaven and Earth in his time of need, believing God to be able to meet any and every need in his life.
Study 27 “The Mystery of God” Part 2
Psalm 11.3-7
The mapping of the human genome is one of the most significant scientific achievements of the modern era. Completed in 2003, the Human Genome Project sought to identify all the approximately 20,000-25,000 genes in human DNA and to determine the sequences of the 3 billion chemical base pairs that make up human DNA. This year’s Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine went to Andrew Fire and Craig Mello for their discovery of "RNA interference—gene silencing by double-stranded RNA. Basically, what they discovered was a way to control the flow of genetic information. RNA interference can be used to participate in defense against viral infections and may lead to novel therapies in the future.
With these advancements, especially the mapping of the human genome, many thought disease was a thing of the past. Unfortunately, such has not been the case. For instance, fetal stem cell research has run into a wall. One study of the use of fetal stem cells to combat muscular dystrophy in lab rats arrived at a frightening conclusion. The implanted cells, though being effective in controlling MD, turned into rapidly growing tumors.
The problem we have as human beings is our limited knowledge. We believe we can solve any problem by applying creative solutions. Yet, we are unable to envision or anticipate all the consequences of the corrective actions we take. For instance, in the early sixties, a well-intentioned public welfare system was devised by the US government. That system, intended as a tool to eradicate poverty, almost single-handedly destroyed the black family in America. Today, nearly two-thirds of all black births are to unmarried mothers.
In the Bible, God is portrayed as having unlimited knowledge. Isaiah 46.9-11 states, "For I am God, and there is no one like me, . . . Declaring the end from the beginning, . . . I have planned it, surely I will do it." From the perspective of Scripture, God’s knowledge has no bounds.
God, in his sovereignty and omniscience, is able to know intimately and completely the hearts of men. That knowledge, by the way, does not determine our decisions. God simply knows, from his vantage point, what we will do. Thus, the Lord has never been ambushed; he has never been taken by surprise. God is at the beginning and the ending. Otherwise, how could he know "what you need before you ask him"? (Matt. 6.8)
A new theology of our time is called "open theism." Simply described, this approach to God states that he does not know all things, only the grand scheme. God is unable to anticipate the decisions we humans might make. Therefore, he must wait upon us. God is limited in his knowledge, restrained by time, and powerless to act unilaterally.
The whole thrust of Scripture, though, is that God is indeed sovereign. The point of our faith is that we trust more completely in the God who is not limited. We face dilemmas for which we have no solution. What do we do? We pray because we believe God has the right answer. But, if the assertion of Matthew 6.8 is false, then God can have no answer for us when we pray. If he must wait until we act, either wisely or unwisely, before he can respond, then why pray? If we, by our own design, do the right thing, what, then, is the point of praying at all?
Psalm 25.1-3 sums things up in the following way. "To you O Lord, I lift up my soul. O my God, in You I trust. Do not let me be ashamed; do not let my enemies exult over me. Indeed, none of those who wait for You will be ashamed." If God, though, is waiting on me to act, and if he cannot anticipate my decisions, we are at a stalemate. I am afraid to act without guidance, he can do nothing until I proceed. Thus, the psalmist’s assertion, "none of those who wait for You will be ashamed," is patently false. To be ashamed means to be let down; to have one’s hope be insufficient. If I wait on God, and he cannot act till I do, I will be let down and shamed.
Yet, if David got it right, then the Lord’s eye indeed is upon the righteous. When he tries me (11.4), he does so to bring me to greater trust in him and his concern for me. The Lord is in his Holy Temple; the Lord’s Throne is in heaven. He is not limited by time and space. He transcends all the limitations we know. He sees me in the midst of my problems, and knows the solution long before I do. Thus, I will wait upon the Lord; in the Lord put I my trust.
The mapping of the human genome is one of the most significant scientific achievements of the modern era. Completed in 2003, the Human Genome Project sought to identify all the approximately 20,000-25,000 genes in human DNA and to determine the sequences of the 3 billion chemical base pairs that make up human DNA. This year’s Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine went to Andrew Fire and Craig Mello for their discovery of "RNA interference—gene silencing by double-stranded RNA. Basically, what they discovered was a way to control the flow of genetic information. RNA interference can be used to participate in defense against viral infections and may lead to novel therapies in the future.
With these advancements, especially the mapping of the human genome, many thought disease was a thing of the past. Unfortunately, such has not been the case. For instance, fetal stem cell research has run into a wall. One study of the use of fetal stem cells to combat muscular dystrophy in lab rats arrived at a frightening conclusion. The implanted cells, though being effective in controlling MD, turned into rapidly growing tumors.
The problem we have as human beings is our limited knowledge. We believe we can solve any problem by applying creative solutions. Yet, we are unable to envision or anticipate all the consequences of the corrective actions we take. For instance, in the early sixties, a well-intentioned public welfare system was devised by the US government. That system, intended as a tool to eradicate poverty, almost single-handedly destroyed the black family in America. Today, nearly two-thirds of all black births are to unmarried mothers.
In the Bible, God is portrayed as having unlimited knowledge. Isaiah 46.9-11 states, "For I am God, and there is no one like me, . . . Declaring the end from the beginning, . . . I have planned it, surely I will do it." From the perspective of Scripture, God’s knowledge has no bounds.
God, in his sovereignty and omniscience, is able to know intimately and completely the hearts of men. That knowledge, by the way, does not determine our decisions. God simply knows, from his vantage point, what we will do. Thus, the Lord has never been ambushed; he has never been taken by surprise. God is at the beginning and the ending. Otherwise, how could he know "what you need before you ask him"? (Matt. 6.8)
A new theology of our time is called "open theism." Simply described, this approach to God states that he does not know all things, only the grand scheme. God is unable to anticipate the decisions we humans might make. Therefore, he must wait upon us. God is limited in his knowledge, restrained by time, and powerless to act unilaterally.
The whole thrust of Scripture, though, is that God is indeed sovereign. The point of our faith is that we trust more completely in the God who is not limited. We face dilemmas for which we have no solution. What do we do? We pray because we believe God has the right answer. But, if the assertion of Matthew 6.8 is false, then God can have no answer for us when we pray. If he must wait until we act, either wisely or unwisely, before he can respond, then why pray? If we, by our own design, do the right thing, what, then, is the point of praying at all?
Psalm 25.1-3 sums things up in the following way. "To you O Lord, I lift up my soul. O my God, in You I trust. Do not let me be ashamed; do not let my enemies exult over me. Indeed, none of those who wait for You will be ashamed." If God, though, is waiting on me to act, and if he cannot anticipate my decisions, we are at a stalemate. I am afraid to act without guidance, he can do nothing until I proceed. Thus, the psalmist’s assertion, "none of those who wait for You will be ashamed," is patently false. To be ashamed means to be let down; to have one’s hope be insufficient. If I wait on God, and he cannot act till I do, I will be let down and shamed.
Yet, if David got it right, then the Lord’s eye indeed is upon the righteous. When he tries me (11.4), he does so to bring me to greater trust in him and his concern for me. The Lord is in his Holy Temple; the Lord’s Throne is in heaven. He is not limited by time and space. He transcends all the limitations we know. He sees me in the midst of my problems, and knows the solution long before I do. Thus, I will wait upon the Lord; in the Lord put I my trust.
Thursday, September 14, 2006
Study 26 “The Mystery of God” Part 1
Psalm 11.1-7
I came of age at the end of the age of mystery. As a child, I heard the stories my Dad and his generation told about mysterious events they had experienced in their youth. In the days before space travel, computers, the Internet, and the Information Age, some things dwelt in the realm of mystery. No longer!
Science has destroyed all the mystery of life. Everything has been reduced to the sum of biological or physical processes. Now, we have a factual explanation for all of the seemingly unexplainable, anomalous happenings we witness. Only the uncivilized and uneducated look at nature as the realm of mystery. Even God has been explained as a function of human genes. The Lord and all we think we know of him are nothing but a biological urge.
When the original "King Kong" and "Tarzan" movies were made, many believed in the possibility of a South Seas island where gigantic behemoths dwelt. An ape-man who was Lord of the Jungle was for many not myth, but a matter of reality. The radio broadcast of H. G. Wells "War of the Worlds" caused widespread panic in America. My Dad told the story of some country cousins who, when they first saw the contrails of high-flying B-17 bombers, thought the Second Return of Jesus was happening. In a state of panic, they raced into town as fast as their mule and wagon would carry them. Today, we do not even pause any longer to watch the Space Shuttle lift off.
So, has life been swept clean of myth and mystery by the broom of science? Are we all so scientifically astute that we are embarrassed to speak of a God who dwells in the heavens? Indeed, has the mystery of God become so absurdly simplistic to our cosmopolitan minds that we no longer are comfortable with such concepts? Are we so comfortable with our down-to-earth, guy-next-door kind God, that we demand to worship in a kind of "homey family-room" and not the majestic Temple of God?
The Psalms have the capacity to restore a sense of divine wonder. "The Lord is in his holy Temple! The Lord’s Throne is in Heaven!" One form of the Hebrew word for throne is used to describe the full-moon. I remember as a child seeing the rising of the full moon in the summer. With the right atmospheric conditions (which I did not know about then and do not understand now), the moon would appear on the horizon almost as large as the earth itself. Such is the beauty and majesty of the Lord’s throne.
Isaiah, in his vision in the Temple (Isa. 6), saw "the Lord sitting upon his throne, high and lifted up." The scene in the heavenly Temple, as the prophet described it, was detailed in terms of otherworldly mystery. Fiery beings (seraphim means being of fire) floated eerily around the throne of God. As they soared through heaven’s atomosphere, they sang out to one another, "Holy, Holy, Holy is the Lord of hosts! The earth is filled with his glory!"
Heaven and earth are full of God’s presence. Modern astronomers can give clear, concise, scientific explanations for the atomic storms that produce the sun’s heat, light, and energy. Yet, we as believers know that the sun burns and glows only because God exists. The solar firestorms will one day cease and the glory of the Lord will light the universe (Rev. 21.23). What a great mystery!
The whole of Psalm 11 revolves around verse 4: "The Lord is in his holy Temple, the Lord’s throne is in heaven. For David, the ultimate reality was not the earth upon which he lived, but the eternal reality of heaven itself. So, when David was threatened, he flew not as a bird to the hills, but in confidence to the throne room of heaven. Explain that with scientific data.
I came of age at the end of the age of mystery. As a child, I heard the stories my Dad and his generation told about mysterious events they had experienced in their youth. In the days before space travel, computers, the Internet, and the Information Age, some things dwelt in the realm of mystery. No longer!
Science has destroyed all the mystery of life. Everything has been reduced to the sum of biological or physical processes. Now, we have a factual explanation for all of the seemingly unexplainable, anomalous happenings we witness. Only the uncivilized and uneducated look at nature as the realm of mystery. Even God has been explained as a function of human genes. The Lord and all we think we know of him are nothing but a biological urge.
When the original "King Kong" and "Tarzan" movies were made, many believed in the possibility of a South Seas island where gigantic behemoths dwelt. An ape-man who was Lord of the Jungle was for many not myth, but a matter of reality. The radio broadcast of H. G. Wells "War of the Worlds" caused widespread panic in America. My Dad told the story of some country cousins who, when they first saw the contrails of high-flying B-17 bombers, thought the Second Return of Jesus was happening. In a state of panic, they raced into town as fast as their mule and wagon would carry them. Today, we do not even pause any longer to watch the Space Shuttle lift off.
So, has life been swept clean of myth and mystery by the broom of science? Are we all so scientifically astute that we are embarrassed to speak of a God who dwells in the heavens? Indeed, has the mystery of God become so absurdly simplistic to our cosmopolitan minds that we no longer are comfortable with such concepts? Are we so comfortable with our down-to-earth, guy-next-door kind God, that we demand to worship in a kind of "homey family-room" and not the majestic Temple of God?
The Psalms have the capacity to restore a sense of divine wonder. "The Lord is in his holy Temple! The Lord’s Throne is in Heaven!" One form of the Hebrew word for throne is used to describe the full-moon. I remember as a child seeing the rising of the full moon in the summer. With the right atmospheric conditions (which I did not know about then and do not understand now), the moon would appear on the horizon almost as large as the earth itself. Such is the beauty and majesty of the Lord’s throne.
Isaiah, in his vision in the Temple (Isa. 6), saw "the Lord sitting upon his throne, high and lifted up." The scene in the heavenly Temple, as the prophet described it, was detailed in terms of otherworldly mystery. Fiery beings (seraphim means being of fire) floated eerily around the throne of God. As they soared through heaven’s atomosphere, they sang out to one another, "Holy, Holy, Holy is the Lord of hosts! The earth is filled with his glory!"
Heaven and earth are full of God’s presence. Modern astronomers can give clear, concise, scientific explanations for the atomic storms that produce the sun’s heat, light, and energy. Yet, we as believers know that the sun burns and glows only because God exists. The solar firestorms will one day cease and the glory of the Lord will light the universe (Rev. 21.23). What a great mystery!
The whole of Psalm 11 revolves around verse 4: "The Lord is in his holy Temple, the Lord’s throne is in heaven. For David, the ultimate reality was not the earth upon which he lived, but the eternal reality of heaven itself. So, when David was threatened, he flew not as a bird to the hills, but in confidence to the throne room of heaven. Explain that with scientific data.
Tuesday, September 05, 2006
Study 25 “Of Justice and Mercy” Part 3
Psalm 9. 3-10
David’s view of judgment as an event that happens within time must be fully understood. The issue of eternal judgment is not a idea that should weigh as heavily upon us as God’s judgment of us in time. Peter declared, "For it is time for judgment to begin with the household of God." If the time for judgment in Peter’s day was the present moment, how much more is "now" the time of judgment for believers in our day.
What is judgment? Let’s dispense with the views of harsh, cold, cruel rulings and find a more realistic definition in Scripture. We begin with the Parable of the Stewards in Matthew 25.14-30. Briefly, the story is about three slaves who were given control of differing degrees of their master’s property. Two of the slaves showed themselves to be trustworthy; they invested their master’s wealth, made a profit for him, and were rewarded for their good stewardship. One slave proved to be untrustworthy. Out of fear, he hoarded what his master had entrusted to him. He made no profit, was declared to be undependable, and lost everything, including his privileged position. What can be learned about judgment from this story?
First of all, with the Master’s return came a time of accounting. Each person had to give a detailed report of how he had managed his master’s resources. Each had to relate what he had accomplished, not what the other slaves had done. Each had to be truthful because the master was demanding that his goods be returned. So, each slave, in giving back to the master what was rightfully his, had to account for his own stewardship. As the slaves gave an account, both motives and actions were related.
Second, with the accounting came accountability. Each slave had to tell what he had done and why. Each had to take responsibility for what he had done or not done. Two slaves knew what their master was like, what his motives and practices were. The master was the model for their actions. Since the master was a good business man, he expected those to whom he had entrusted his goods to act as he had acted. So, the first two slaves proudly declared, "See, we have made money for you!" The third slave, knowing as the other two the business practices of his master, was afraid to act. So, he made excuses. He tried to shift the blame for his failure onto his master. "Since you are a hard man, I was afraid to try, I was afraid to fail. If you were a little more lenient, I would have tried harder," he might as well have said. Nonetheless, in the end, he was held accountable.
Third, judgment is a time of re-ordering. Each of the two faithful slaves came away from the time of accounting with greater wealth and greater responsibility. To the one who had been given the most and who had made a 100% profit, the master gave what the third slave was afraid to invest. To the one who feared failure, all was lost. He was sent into the darkness outside, the place of regret and remorse.
Remember that the three characters in this story were all slaves, servants of the master. Because of their continued responsible behavior, they had earned higher and higher positions. With success, came success. With failure came loss. Yet the loss was not permanent.
Judgment is also a time of redemption. The slave who was cast outside was still a slave. This parable is not about eternal judgment and damnation. This parable is about stewardship and accountability. Good and faithful stewards are rewarded and promoted. Unfaithful stewards lose. Yet, God is concerned that his servants learn. So, the unfaithful steward, facing up to his own poor behavior, could learn to do better. He would be given a chance to try again.
Sometimes, judgment is not final. At other times, judgment is a "trial by fire." But, the fire is intended to purify and purge, not to destroy and demoralize.
David’s view of judgment as an event that happens within time must be fully understood. The issue of eternal judgment is not a idea that should weigh as heavily upon us as God’s judgment of us in time. Peter declared, "For it is time for judgment to begin with the household of God." If the time for judgment in Peter’s day was the present moment, how much more is "now" the time of judgment for believers in our day.
What is judgment? Let’s dispense with the views of harsh, cold, cruel rulings and find a more realistic definition in Scripture. We begin with the Parable of the Stewards in Matthew 25.14-30. Briefly, the story is about three slaves who were given control of differing degrees of their master’s property. Two of the slaves showed themselves to be trustworthy; they invested their master’s wealth, made a profit for him, and were rewarded for their good stewardship. One slave proved to be untrustworthy. Out of fear, he hoarded what his master had entrusted to him. He made no profit, was declared to be undependable, and lost everything, including his privileged position. What can be learned about judgment from this story?
First of all, with the Master’s return came a time of accounting. Each person had to give a detailed report of how he had managed his master’s resources. Each had to relate what he had accomplished, not what the other slaves had done. Each had to be truthful because the master was demanding that his goods be returned. So, each slave, in giving back to the master what was rightfully his, had to account for his own stewardship. As the slaves gave an account, both motives and actions were related.
Second, with the accounting came accountability. Each slave had to tell what he had done and why. Each had to take responsibility for what he had done or not done. Two slaves knew what their master was like, what his motives and practices were. The master was the model for their actions. Since the master was a good business man, he expected those to whom he had entrusted his goods to act as he had acted. So, the first two slaves proudly declared, "See, we have made money for you!" The third slave, knowing as the other two the business practices of his master, was afraid to act. So, he made excuses. He tried to shift the blame for his failure onto his master. "Since you are a hard man, I was afraid to try, I was afraid to fail. If you were a little more lenient, I would have tried harder," he might as well have said. Nonetheless, in the end, he was held accountable.
Third, judgment is a time of re-ordering. Each of the two faithful slaves came away from the time of accounting with greater wealth and greater responsibility. To the one who had been given the most and who had made a 100% profit, the master gave what the third slave was afraid to invest. To the one who feared failure, all was lost. He was sent into the darkness outside, the place of regret and remorse.
Remember that the three characters in this story were all slaves, servants of the master. Because of their continued responsible behavior, they had earned higher and higher positions. With success, came success. With failure came loss. Yet the loss was not permanent.
Judgment is also a time of redemption. The slave who was cast outside was still a slave. This parable is not about eternal judgment and damnation. This parable is about stewardship and accountability. Good and faithful stewards are rewarded and promoted. Unfaithful stewards lose. Yet, God is concerned that his servants learn. So, the unfaithful steward, facing up to his own poor behavior, could learn to do better. He would be given a chance to try again.
Sometimes, judgment is not final. At other times, judgment is a "trial by fire." But, the fire is intended to purify and purge, not to destroy and demoralize.
Study 24 “Of Justice and Mercy” Part 2
Psalm 9. 3-10
The concept of God’s judgment is often viewed in terms of the end of time. God will judge everyone at the end of days, we say. Yet, when we consider the statements of Scripture, a different picture emerges. God has judged, is judging, and will judge all within the limits of time. What do I mean?
David declared that God had sat judging: past tense. God had rebuked the nations, destroyed the wicked, blotted out their name, brought their end to pass, uprooted their cities, and cause their names to disappear from memory. David spoke of what God had already done.
Not only had the Lord judged the nations and persons, he had judged in favor of the righteous. David’s "just cause" had been maintained by God. Literally, the statement in verse 4 is that God had "done justice" for David. The Lord had ruled according to the facts and had upheld David as the innocent party.
The Lord "has established His throne for judgment." The throne is the point from which God’s sovereign rule and righteous judgment emanate. He firmly founded his throne for those purposes. Thus, David concluded, God "will judge the world in righteousness; He will execute judgment for the peoples with equity." Before God’s throne, any and all can expect a decision that is righteous and just.
For David, the righteous rule of God meant that at God’s throne, the guiltless would find "a stronghold in times of trouble." David knew not a God who was cold and dispassionate: he knew the God of mercy and comfort. Did David see himself as a perfect man? Far from it! David knew his own sinfulness and all his ethical imperfections. What he also understood was that when he was falsely accused, he would find justice in God’s courtroom.
When David’s enemies charged him with scurrilous crimes, they thought the final determination of justice would be found in the court of public opinion. Yet, the truth David knew and his enemies ignored was that any charge against God’s elect would be adjudicated in the heavenly courtroom. In the final accounting, God would rule against those who made false charges. The innocent man would find mercy and justice before God.
What David found in God, and what any believer can discover, is that in times of oppression and trouble, God is a stronghold, a place of safety. Anytime a person is falsely accused and is attacked by any enemy, he has a sense of being crushed. Oppression means to be crushed; trouble means to be in distress. We cannot understand why anyone would wish to charge us with things we and they know are untrue. How do we defend ourselves in such times?
We retreat to God; we go to the one whose judgments are merciful as well as just. God does not listen to the baseless charges of the enemy; he knows the truth about us. So, when we are under assault, we must rely upon the God who knows the truth. In the end, he will "maintain our just cause," he will do justice for us.
David made an incredible claim in verse 10: "And those who know Your name will put their trust in You, For You, O LORD, have not forsaken those who seek You." What do those who trust God know? They know the Lord’s name, his true character. Those who rely upon the Lord know he is trustworthy; they know he is merciful; they know he is the righteous judge who always judges righteously.
The concept of God’s judgment is often viewed in terms of the end of time. God will judge everyone at the end of days, we say. Yet, when we consider the statements of Scripture, a different picture emerges. God has judged, is judging, and will judge all within the limits of time. What do I mean?
David declared that God had sat judging: past tense. God had rebuked the nations, destroyed the wicked, blotted out their name, brought their end to pass, uprooted their cities, and cause their names to disappear from memory. David spoke of what God had already done.
Not only had the Lord judged the nations and persons, he had judged in favor of the righteous. David’s "just cause" had been maintained by God. Literally, the statement in verse 4 is that God had "done justice" for David. The Lord had ruled according to the facts and had upheld David as the innocent party.
The Lord "has established His throne for judgment." The throne is the point from which God’s sovereign rule and righteous judgment emanate. He firmly founded his throne for those purposes. Thus, David concluded, God "will judge the world in righteousness; He will execute judgment for the peoples with equity." Before God’s throne, any and all can expect a decision that is righteous and just.
For David, the righteous rule of God meant that at God’s throne, the guiltless would find "a stronghold in times of trouble." David knew not a God who was cold and dispassionate: he knew the God of mercy and comfort. Did David see himself as a perfect man? Far from it! David knew his own sinfulness and all his ethical imperfections. What he also understood was that when he was falsely accused, he would find justice in God’s courtroom.
When David’s enemies charged him with scurrilous crimes, they thought the final determination of justice would be found in the court of public opinion. Yet, the truth David knew and his enemies ignored was that any charge against God’s elect would be adjudicated in the heavenly courtroom. In the final accounting, God would rule against those who made false charges. The innocent man would find mercy and justice before God.
What David found in God, and what any believer can discover, is that in times of oppression and trouble, God is a stronghold, a place of safety. Anytime a person is falsely accused and is attacked by any enemy, he has a sense of being crushed. Oppression means to be crushed; trouble means to be in distress. We cannot understand why anyone would wish to charge us with things we and they know are untrue. How do we defend ourselves in such times?
We retreat to God; we go to the one whose judgments are merciful as well as just. God does not listen to the baseless charges of the enemy; he knows the truth about us. So, when we are under assault, we must rely upon the God who knows the truth. In the end, he will "maintain our just cause," he will do justice for us.
David made an incredible claim in verse 10: "And those who know Your name will put their trust in You, For You, O LORD, have not forsaken those who seek You." What do those who trust God know? They know the Lord’s name, his true character. Those who rely upon the Lord know he is trustworthy; they know he is merciful; they know he is the righteous judge who always judges righteously.
Study 23 "Of Justice and Mercy" Part 1
Psalm 9. 3-10
Many times, the presentation of God in the OT is misunderstood. Typically, the Lord is viewed as the God of Judgment, meaning he is cold, cruel, and uncaring. Only a partial reading of the OT presentation of God could result in such a distorted understanding of God.
Psalm 9 presents God as sitting upon his throne judging the nations. Now, we cannot ignore God as judge. The world and all that is in it is his. He created the universe for his own purposes, so, he has both the right and the authority to judge. God is unwilling to allow individuals and nations to act in ways that are inconsistent with his plan. He has established laws for the governance of this world and he expects those laws to be honored.
What kind of judge is God? Is he cold and cruel? Is he unfair or unjust? Does he care more for the legal standard he has established than for those who are required to live under that standard. How does God judge?
We must not forget that every judgment has a precedent. God judges because of an infraction, because his law is broken. God does not call the ignorant or the innocent into account. Only those who have willfully committed a crime must appear before the Judge of the Universe.
How did David describe God as judge? "You have sat upon the throne judging righteously." Actually, the text can be read to say that God sits "as a righteous judge." God is not unfair, unjust, or unrighteous.
What is the significance of the word "righteous"? To be righteous is to be innocent of either wrong motives or wrong actions. The Hebrew word tsedeq, translated righteous, means to conform to an ethical or moral standard. In order to qualify as judge, God, then, must conform to his own ethical demands. He cannot compromise even the most minor point of his law. Otherwise, he would be an unjust judge.
As a judge, God sits on his throne as a ruler, the head of government. He rules the universe, the heavens and the earth. The kingdom is his. Thus, he adjudicates all matters of controversy involving those who live in his kingdom. Even Satan, whom Paul described as the ruler of this age, is accountable to God. When God makes a decision, he enforces that decision. Plea bargains and commuted sentences are not a part of his justice system.
Further, in his kingdom, God is aware of all that transpires. Nothing escapes his sight. He does not execute judgment based upon hearsay or circumstantial evidence. All the facts are known to him: who acted, why they acted as they did, and what they did are all know to him. To rule in a controversy upon any basis other than the absolute truth would make God’s judgments unjust. Thus, his rulings would be illegitimate and null.
So, God as judge means he is the divine, omnipotent, just, and righteous ruler. When God tries a case, whether involving a nation or an individual, his justice is both just and righteous. Any charge of cruel, cold, uncaring actions on God’s part is baseless. To call God unfair or unjust is a claim without foundation. We might not know all the facts, but God does. Our inability to know all things does not mean we are correct in viewing God as unjust and merciless. God is the righteous judge; he always judges righteously, with justice, and with equity.
Many times, the presentation of God in the OT is misunderstood. Typically, the Lord is viewed as the God of Judgment, meaning he is cold, cruel, and uncaring. Only a partial reading of the OT presentation of God could result in such a distorted understanding of God.
Psalm 9 presents God as sitting upon his throne judging the nations. Now, we cannot ignore God as judge. The world and all that is in it is his. He created the universe for his own purposes, so, he has both the right and the authority to judge. God is unwilling to allow individuals and nations to act in ways that are inconsistent with his plan. He has established laws for the governance of this world and he expects those laws to be honored.
What kind of judge is God? Is he cold and cruel? Is he unfair or unjust? Does he care more for the legal standard he has established than for those who are required to live under that standard. How does God judge?
We must not forget that every judgment has a precedent. God judges because of an infraction, because his law is broken. God does not call the ignorant or the innocent into account. Only those who have willfully committed a crime must appear before the Judge of the Universe.
How did David describe God as judge? "You have sat upon the throne judging righteously." Actually, the text can be read to say that God sits "as a righteous judge." God is not unfair, unjust, or unrighteous.
What is the significance of the word "righteous"? To be righteous is to be innocent of either wrong motives or wrong actions. The Hebrew word tsedeq, translated righteous, means to conform to an ethical or moral standard. In order to qualify as judge, God, then, must conform to his own ethical demands. He cannot compromise even the most minor point of his law. Otherwise, he would be an unjust judge.
As a judge, God sits on his throne as a ruler, the head of government. He rules the universe, the heavens and the earth. The kingdom is his. Thus, he adjudicates all matters of controversy involving those who live in his kingdom. Even Satan, whom Paul described as the ruler of this age, is accountable to God. When God makes a decision, he enforces that decision. Plea bargains and commuted sentences are not a part of his justice system.
Further, in his kingdom, God is aware of all that transpires. Nothing escapes his sight. He does not execute judgment based upon hearsay or circumstantial evidence. All the facts are known to him: who acted, why they acted as they did, and what they did are all know to him. To rule in a controversy upon any basis other than the absolute truth would make God’s judgments unjust. Thus, his rulings would be illegitimate and null.
So, God as judge means he is the divine, omnipotent, just, and righteous ruler. When God tries a case, whether involving a nation or an individual, his justice is both just and righteous. Any charge of cruel, cold, uncaring actions on God’s part is baseless. To call God unfair or unjust is a claim without foundation. We might not know all the facts, but God does. Our inability to know all things does not mean we are correct in viewing God as unjust and merciless. God is the righteous judge; he always judges righteously, with justice, and with equity.
Friday, August 25, 2006
Study 21 "Praise to Yahweh" Part 2
Psalm 9.1-2
Worship is like love: if we are concerned mainly with our own sensual experience of either, we have made them both self-seeking. Why do we worship? How do we love? How do we know we have done either? Must we have an emotional response in worship or love in order to know our experience in either arena is legitimate?
Many pastors and counselors have sat with a husband or wife who have, with grief and guilt, confessed to not loving their spouse any longer. When questioned about the meaning of such an admission, most answer that they do not "feel" for the other person what they once did. Therein lies the confusion. Feeling has been equated with love. Feeling is not love; feeling results from love. Indeed, the great mistake many make is to root their love for another solely on the basis of emotion.
A question that should be asked of those who declare they no longer feel for another what they once did. If we require a feeling in order to love, then who is love all about? If a feeling is absent, then I have declared that I am the focus of my love, not the person whom I am supposed to love. If I do not feel, then I am mourning the loss of my feeling; thus, love of that sort is self-centered.
If I am able to love solely because I feel something, then I have no concern for the person I am supposed to love. Their needs are meaningless to me; only my emotional need matters. Such a view totally distorts the biblical definition of love. First Corinthians 13 includes no sensual terms at all. Every defining word is cast in terms of commitment and loyalty. When I marry a couple, I challenge them in the following way. I ask each if they will take the other to "to have and to hold from this day forward, in sickness and in health, in poverty or in wealth; to love and to cherish so long as we both shall live. To this I pledge to you my faith." I have never, nor will I ever, ask anyone to base their marriage commitment on something as foolish as "as long as I love," or "as long as I feel love." Paul declared that "love never fails."
We have done the same injustice to worship. If I have been told once, I have been told hundreds of times by so many that worship was boring and they had not been fed. If people stopped long enough to consider the logic of such statements, they would slink away in shame. No one can make worship boring for a believer other than the individual himself. Now, a congregation’s worship may not be inspiring and may be bland, but I control my own enthusiasm. If I have been experiencing the works of God in my life, no one will be able to hinder my joy and gladness as I worship.
Seemingly, those who find worship boring are those who have idea what being a Christian means. Paul told the Philippians, "He who began a good work in you will perfect it . . . ," and "it is God who is at work in you . . ." If these verses be true, as we affirm them to be so, then each of us who has been saved is being perfected every passing day as God is at work in our lives. Now, the person who misses that may not be under construction by the Divine Architect. Further, if he is a person bored in his worship, he is bored in his life. Such a person’s life is static and unchanging, giving proof of no activity by God in him. God is bringing us to Christ-likeness through every moment and circumstance of life. How can one not be excited by that fact.
If one comes away from worship without the feeling he believes should have resulted from worship, he did not carry with him into the worship event the requisite emotions. We worship God because we are glad, joyful, excited, and enthusiastic about who He is, not in order to find joy. We have had his character affirmed to us daily as God has dealt with us through grace and mercy.
Love "rejoices in the truth." Worship must be "in spirit and in truth." Love and worship share a deep bond. We worship God because we love him. We are to be committed and loyal to him in all things. Our love for God is our purpose for existence. Even on days when we "feel bad," we can still worship. If we just consider for a moment what God has done for us, we can get over the bad feelings and find great joy.
Worship is like love: if we are concerned mainly with our own sensual experience of either, we have made them both self-seeking. Why do we worship? How do we love? How do we know we have done either? Must we have an emotional response in worship or love in order to know our experience in either arena is legitimate?
Many pastors and counselors have sat with a husband or wife who have, with grief and guilt, confessed to not loving their spouse any longer. When questioned about the meaning of such an admission, most answer that they do not "feel" for the other person what they once did. Therein lies the confusion. Feeling has been equated with love. Feeling is not love; feeling results from love. Indeed, the great mistake many make is to root their love for another solely on the basis of emotion.
A question that should be asked of those who declare they no longer feel for another what they once did. If we require a feeling in order to love, then who is love all about? If a feeling is absent, then I have declared that I am the focus of my love, not the person whom I am supposed to love. If I do not feel, then I am mourning the loss of my feeling; thus, love of that sort is self-centered.
If I am able to love solely because I feel something, then I have no concern for the person I am supposed to love. Their needs are meaningless to me; only my emotional need matters. Such a view totally distorts the biblical definition of love. First Corinthians 13 includes no sensual terms at all. Every defining word is cast in terms of commitment and loyalty. When I marry a couple, I challenge them in the following way. I ask each if they will take the other to "to have and to hold from this day forward, in sickness and in health, in poverty or in wealth; to love and to cherish so long as we both shall live. To this I pledge to you my faith." I have never, nor will I ever, ask anyone to base their marriage commitment on something as foolish as "as long as I love," or "as long as I feel love." Paul declared that "love never fails."
We have done the same injustice to worship. If I have been told once, I have been told hundreds of times by so many that worship was boring and they had not been fed. If people stopped long enough to consider the logic of such statements, they would slink away in shame. No one can make worship boring for a believer other than the individual himself. Now, a congregation’s worship may not be inspiring and may be bland, but I control my own enthusiasm. If I have been experiencing the works of God in my life, no one will be able to hinder my joy and gladness as I worship.
Seemingly, those who find worship boring are those who have idea what being a Christian means. Paul told the Philippians, "He who began a good work in you will perfect it . . . ," and "it is God who is at work in you . . ." If these verses be true, as we affirm them to be so, then each of us who has been saved is being perfected every passing day as God is at work in our lives. Now, the person who misses that may not be under construction by the Divine Architect. Further, if he is a person bored in his worship, he is bored in his life. Such a person’s life is static and unchanging, giving proof of no activity by God in him. God is bringing us to Christ-likeness through every moment and circumstance of life. How can one not be excited by that fact.
If one comes away from worship without the feeling he believes should have resulted from worship, he did not carry with him into the worship event the requisite emotions. We worship God because we are glad, joyful, excited, and enthusiastic about who He is, not in order to find joy. We have had his character affirmed to us daily as God has dealt with us through grace and mercy.
Love "rejoices in the truth." Worship must be "in spirit and in truth." Love and worship share a deep bond. We worship God because we love him. We are to be committed and loyal to him in all things. Our love for God is our purpose for existence. Even on days when we "feel bad," we can still worship. If we just consider for a moment what God has done for us, we can get over the bad feelings and find great joy.
Study 20 "Praise to Yahweh" Part 1
Psalm 9.1-2
David addressed this psalm to the worship leader "on Muth Laben." The meaning of "Muth Laben" is not known, although one scholar has suggested the term means "female voices." So, this hymn could have bee written for a women’s choir. Such a conclusion is entirely speculative, and should not be wholeheartedly adopted.
Nevertheless, this hymn was written for worship, not as a poem for contemplation. The nature of the worship as described by the psalm can be discerned in the five verbs used in the first two lines: to praise, to call out, to be joyful, to exult, and to sing.
Fundamentally, the character of worship as portrayed in Scripture almost always is joyful and enthusiastic. Contemplative, quiet worship is not a style presented often, if at all, in the Bible. Meditation on and intimacy with God are generally reserved for prayer; praise is typically lively and active.
The reason for worship having such an extroverted nature is tied to the object: the Most High God. David declared, "I will praise Yahweh with all my heart." The word praise is a term with the basic meaning of "to throw." What did the twenty-four elders do, as pictured in Revelation 4.10? They "threw" their crowns before the One Seated on the Throne. They praised him. That kind of activity is not what I would call passive worship.
Secondly, David spoke of "enumerating your extraordinary deeds." Again, we find a New Testament parallel in Revelation. In both chapters 4 and 5, the twenty-four elders declare the great works of both God and the Lamb. God had created and sustains all things (Rev. 4.11). The Lamb had "been slain . . . and made them to be a kingdom and priest to our God" (Rev. 5.9-10). Thus, both God on the Throne and the Lamb before the Throne are worthy to receive "blessing and honor and glory and dominion forever and ever" (Rev. 5.13). One can sense in the text of Revelation, in all the descriptions of worship found in that book, the vibrancy and enthusiasm as God’s great deeds are proclaimed and he is worshiped.
Third, David wrote that he would be joyful and glad "in You." The Westminster Shorter Catechism poses the question "What is the chief end of man." The answer given is, "Man's chief end is to glorify God, and enjoy Him forever." To glorify God is to direct attention to him. To talk about him is to glorify him. Now,if one focuses only upon the Lord’s deeds, he will fail to see the true person of God. In other words, if we are interested only in what God can do for us, he is nothing more than an idol. But, if God’s deeds are understood as the lense through which to see his real character, then we can see the Most High God. We must do more than talk about what God has done; we must praise him for who he is, which is the basis for his great acts. To rejoice and be glad in only what God has done is selfish; we are interested in ourselves. To rejoice and be glad in him is to worship in spirit and in truth.
Lastly, David stated, "I will sing to Your Name, O Most High One." Here again, we can see, as in Psalm 8, that "name" is much more than a mere tag used for identification. Thus, to sing to the Lord’s name is to sing to God as he is known. In fact, the content of the songs we sing in our worship should consist of the praiseworthy character traits of God Scripture reveals. "Worthy of worship, worthy of praise, worthy of honor and glory." "Holy, holy, holy, merciful and mighty." "Immortal, invisible, God only wise, . . . Great Father of glory, pure Father of light." "Joyful, joyful, we adore Thee, God of glory, Lord of love."
Worship surely can and should contain songs about what God has done. Yet, to not sing to "His Name" is to miss the greatest joy of all: praising him for who he is, and, thus, to enjoy him forever.
David addressed this psalm to the worship leader "on Muth Laben." The meaning of "Muth Laben" is not known, although one scholar has suggested the term means "female voices." So, this hymn could have bee written for a women’s choir. Such a conclusion is entirely speculative, and should not be wholeheartedly adopted.
Nevertheless, this hymn was written for worship, not as a poem for contemplation. The nature of the worship as described by the psalm can be discerned in the five verbs used in the first two lines: to praise, to call out, to be joyful, to exult, and to sing.
Fundamentally, the character of worship as portrayed in Scripture almost always is joyful and enthusiastic. Contemplative, quiet worship is not a style presented often, if at all, in the Bible. Meditation on and intimacy with God are generally reserved for prayer; praise is typically lively and active.
The reason for worship having such an extroverted nature is tied to the object: the Most High God. David declared, "I will praise Yahweh with all my heart." The word praise is a term with the basic meaning of "to throw." What did the twenty-four elders do, as pictured in Revelation 4.10? They "threw" their crowns before the One Seated on the Throne. They praised him. That kind of activity is not what I would call passive worship.
Secondly, David spoke of "enumerating your extraordinary deeds." Again, we find a New Testament parallel in Revelation. In both chapters 4 and 5, the twenty-four elders declare the great works of both God and the Lamb. God had created and sustains all things (Rev. 4.11). The Lamb had "been slain . . . and made them to be a kingdom and priest to our God" (Rev. 5.9-10). Thus, both God on the Throne and the Lamb before the Throne are worthy to receive "blessing and honor and glory and dominion forever and ever" (Rev. 5.13). One can sense in the text of Revelation, in all the descriptions of worship found in that book, the vibrancy and enthusiasm as God’s great deeds are proclaimed and he is worshiped.
Third, David wrote that he would be joyful and glad "in You." The Westminster Shorter Catechism poses the question "What is the chief end of man." The answer given is, "Man's chief end is to glorify God, and enjoy Him forever." To glorify God is to direct attention to him. To talk about him is to glorify him. Now,if one focuses only upon the Lord’s deeds, he will fail to see the true person of God. In other words, if we are interested only in what God can do for us, he is nothing more than an idol. But, if God’s deeds are understood as the lense through which to see his real character, then we can see the Most High God. We must do more than talk about what God has done; we must praise him for who he is, which is the basis for his great acts. To rejoice and be glad in only what God has done is selfish; we are interested in ourselves. To rejoice and be glad in him is to worship in spirit and in truth.
Lastly, David stated, "I will sing to Your Name, O Most High One." Here again, we can see, as in Psalm 8, that "name" is much more than a mere tag used for identification. Thus, to sing to the Lord’s name is to sing to God as he is known. In fact, the content of the songs we sing in our worship should consist of the praiseworthy character traits of God Scripture reveals. "Worthy of worship, worthy of praise, worthy of honor and glory." "Holy, holy, holy, merciful and mighty." "Immortal, invisible, God only wise, . . . Great Father of glory, pure Father of light." "Joyful, joyful, we adore Thee, God of glory, Lord of love."
Worship surely can and should contain songs about what God has done. Yet, to not sing to "His Name" is to miss the greatest joy of all: praising him for who he is, and, thus, to enjoy him forever.
Wednesday, August 16, 2006
Study 19 "Who Is Man?" Part 2
Psalm 8.3-9
Those who view life from the perspective of evolutionary thought have an essentially negative perspective on life and mankind. Humans are the product of an impersonal process directed by spurious, unplanned circumstances. Ironically, from the view of evolution, man is a victim. We have evolved this strange sense of self-awareness, yet, are no better than a bug. We can try to clean up the world and reverse global warming, yet, as we try to fix the earth’s environment, some unexpected, unforeseen event still could wipe us all out. Talk about sad!
Since we can claim no right to supremacy, then no particular product of man’s thoughts should be viewed as superior in its concepts. Democracy is not better than dictatorship, capitalism is not more worthy than communism. Further, no religion can claim ascendency. Islam, Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, animism, Confucianism, et al are all the same: man’s misbegotten ideas about a god who is not there. Thus, let us all eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die. As John Lennon sang, "nothing to live or die for." How sad and pointless.
The biblical view of life is diametrically opposed to the concept of life intrinsic to evolution. Christianity and Judaism are essentially positive in their outlooks. For the Jews, one could live well in the land by obeying the commands of God. For Christians, Jesus has promised an abundant life (not to be confused with material prosperity). For all who believe the truths of the Old and New Testaments, God is in control of all things and will, in the end, bring his purposes to pass. As bad and inept as mankind might be, God insures the viability of all life.
God has shown incredible interest in the welfare of his creation. He has put man in control of it, while at the same time insuring that creation itself cannot be wholly destroyed by the human race. What man must understand, and generally does not, is that he is steward, not owner. Since man is the steward of creation, he is accountable to God for his management of his resources. How we use what we have determines how we live. Tithing, by the way, is the believer’s admission of God’s ownership and man’s stewardship.
History is replete with examples of man’s poor stewardship. Take the Mayans, for instance. Located in Central America and the Yucatan, their kingdoms once flourished and dominated that region. The ruins of their great cities still engender amazement in tourists as they flock to places such as Chichen Itza. When the Mayans built those great edifices, they coated them with a kind of lime plaster. Unfortunately, massive numbers of trees had to be cut down to fuel the fires needed to make the lime. Ultimately, their commitment to the decoration of their buildings depleted the trees. Mayan civilization imploded and the cities died.
Ironically, archeologists face an unusual hurdle in their attempts to study the Mayan ruins: trees. The tropical forests returned with a vengeance. They literally ate up the cities, covering them in a sea of green leaves. The Mayans failed as stewards; they mismanaged their resources for foolish reasons. God did not fail; the trees returned. The natural world will survive with man, without man, or in spite of man.
Evolutionists have a fundamental lack of confidence in humanity (their only hope is their own elitist schemes). Man has made a mess, and as a collective, cannot be trusted to fix it. Scripture also teaches that man is, at times, untrustworthy: all sin. Yet, even in our evident failure, we have hope in God. Since the evolutionists reject the very idea of god, they are without hope and desperate. As human beings themselves, how can they believe their idea of survival is any better than anyone else’s?
Did David conclude than man, with respect to his position in the world, was worthy of adulation and adoration? No, his answer was, "O Lord, our Lord, how majestic is Your name in all the earth" (Psa. 8.1,9). God and God alone is to be worshiped. In God, man finds meaning for himself.
NOTE: Please go to Edmond's Study Helps and view the post of the lyrics of the song "Imagine" by John Lennon along with comments. The song illustrates well the evolutionary mindset.
Those who view life from the perspective of evolutionary thought have an essentially negative perspective on life and mankind. Humans are the product of an impersonal process directed by spurious, unplanned circumstances. Ironically, from the view of evolution, man is a victim. We have evolved this strange sense of self-awareness, yet, are no better than a bug. We can try to clean up the world and reverse global warming, yet, as we try to fix the earth’s environment, some unexpected, unforeseen event still could wipe us all out. Talk about sad!
Since we can claim no right to supremacy, then no particular product of man’s thoughts should be viewed as superior in its concepts. Democracy is not better than dictatorship, capitalism is not more worthy than communism. Further, no religion can claim ascendency. Islam, Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, animism, Confucianism, et al are all the same: man’s misbegotten ideas about a god who is not there. Thus, let us all eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die. As John Lennon sang, "nothing to live or die for." How sad and pointless.
The biblical view of life is diametrically opposed to the concept of life intrinsic to evolution. Christianity and Judaism are essentially positive in their outlooks. For the Jews, one could live well in the land by obeying the commands of God. For Christians, Jesus has promised an abundant life (not to be confused with material prosperity). For all who believe the truths of the Old and New Testaments, God is in control of all things and will, in the end, bring his purposes to pass. As bad and inept as mankind might be, God insures the viability of all life.
God has shown incredible interest in the welfare of his creation. He has put man in control of it, while at the same time insuring that creation itself cannot be wholly destroyed by the human race. What man must understand, and generally does not, is that he is steward, not owner. Since man is the steward of creation, he is accountable to God for his management of his resources. How we use what we have determines how we live. Tithing, by the way, is the believer’s admission of God’s ownership and man’s stewardship.
History is replete with examples of man’s poor stewardship. Take the Mayans, for instance. Located in Central America and the Yucatan, their kingdoms once flourished and dominated that region. The ruins of their great cities still engender amazement in tourists as they flock to places such as Chichen Itza. When the Mayans built those great edifices, they coated them with a kind of lime plaster. Unfortunately, massive numbers of trees had to be cut down to fuel the fires needed to make the lime. Ultimately, their commitment to the decoration of their buildings depleted the trees. Mayan civilization imploded and the cities died.
Ironically, archeologists face an unusual hurdle in their attempts to study the Mayan ruins: trees. The tropical forests returned with a vengeance. They literally ate up the cities, covering them in a sea of green leaves. The Mayans failed as stewards; they mismanaged their resources for foolish reasons. God did not fail; the trees returned. The natural world will survive with man, without man, or in spite of man.
Evolutionists have a fundamental lack of confidence in humanity (their only hope is their own elitist schemes). Man has made a mess, and as a collective, cannot be trusted to fix it. Scripture also teaches that man is, at times, untrustworthy: all sin. Yet, even in our evident failure, we have hope in God. Since the evolutionists reject the very idea of god, they are without hope and desperate. As human beings themselves, how can they believe their idea of survival is any better than anyone else’s?
Did David conclude than man, with respect to his position in the world, was worthy of adulation and adoration? No, his answer was, "O Lord, our Lord, how majestic is Your name in all the earth" (Psa. 8.1,9). God and God alone is to be worshiped. In God, man finds meaning for himself.
NOTE: Please go to Edmond's Study Helps and view the post of the lyrics of the song "Imagine" by John Lennon along with comments. The song illustrates well the evolutionary mindset.
Study 18 "Who Is Man" Part 1
Psalm 8.3-9
Are the heavens the work of God’s "fingers?" If God did create the heavens and the earth, as Genesis 1.1 affirms, what can be concluded about man’s place in the created order?
In the modern age, the twentieth and twenty-first centuries in particular, man has been living under the delusion of evolutionary theory. As a result, the place of humanity in the natural world has been significantly redefined from what Scriptural declares.
For the psalmist, man’s ascendent position in creation was a paradox. Relative to the heavenly realm, man is entirely insignificant. David wondered why God had given mankind even a second thought. The enigma for David was the exalted role of human beings in the natural world, and their seeming insignificance relative to the star-filled heavens.
David realized man’s role in the world did not correspond in any way to his essential nature and physical being. David was keenly aware of man’s weaknesses and limitations. Yet, he saw that humanity ruled in the natural and physical realm. Humans can manipulate material resources to their advantage in a manner wholly inconsistent with his being. Why? How did man gain such an advantage. Why had God put man in the position he holds?
To those who accept the unproven, counterfeit claims of evolutionary theory (What great or not-so-great scientific discovery can evolution claim?), man is a mere accident of circumstance. Human beings possess no greater significance than any other living creature.
"A rat is a pig is a dog is a boy," a statement made by Ingrid Newkirk, President, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), is a logical extension of evolutionary philosophy. How does a boy differ from any other animal? To the honest evolutionist, man, in his essential being, is not better than a beetle, a beaver, or a brook trout. Consequently, we have no inherent claim over the natural world. Of course, one wonders what the evolutionists at PETA claim as the basis for their authority to speak for animals other than man?
Ironically, the biblical definition of mankind’s essential nature is not so different from the definition offered by evolution. Genesis declares that God brought forth "living creatures" in the sea and on the land. Later, when Adam was made, God defined him as a "living being." Interestingly, "living creature" and "living being" are the translation of the same Hebrew word, nephesh. So, even the Bible recognizes the bond we share with the beasts of the fields and seas.
At that point, thought, the biblical and evolutionary models part ways. Since the fundamental precept of evolution is that God does not exist (we all know God and science cannot interfere with one another), man cannot assert his superior position in the natural order. Since humans, as with all other living things, are products of an impersonal process, we are locked into and limited by that process.
The biblical view is vastly different. God exists and has created all things. Scripture declares that truth as certain. The Bible does not argue for God’s existence, the Word affirms God’s existence. If the two truths of Genesis 1.1 are in fact not true, then the rest of Scripture becomes meaningless speculation with no more authority than the works of Dr. Seuss.
Yet, man’s role in the world is clear; we are superior. But, why and in what way are we superior? Upon what basis does mankind rule over the earth and all that is in it?
Are the heavens the work of God’s "fingers?" If God did create the heavens and the earth, as Genesis 1.1 affirms, what can be concluded about man’s place in the created order?
In the modern age, the twentieth and twenty-first centuries in particular, man has been living under the delusion of evolutionary theory. As a result, the place of humanity in the natural world has been significantly redefined from what Scriptural declares.
For the psalmist, man’s ascendent position in creation was a paradox. Relative to the heavenly realm, man is entirely insignificant. David wondered why God had given mankind even a second thought. The enigma for David was the exalted role of human beings in the natural world, and their seeming insignificance relative to the star-filled heavens.
David realized man’s role in the world did not correspond in any way to his essential nature and physical being. David was keenly aware of man’s weaknesses and limitations. Yet, he saw that humanity ruled in the natural and physical realm. Humans can manipulate material resources to their advantage in a manner wholly inconsistent with his being. Why? How did man gain such an advantage. Why had God put man in the position he holds?
To those who accept the unproven, counterfeit claims of evolutionary theory (What great or not-so-great scientific discovery can evolution claim?), man is a mere accident of circumstance. Human beings possess no greater significance than any other living creature.
"A rat is a pig is a dog is a boy," a statement made by Ingrid Newkirk, President, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), is a logical extension of evolutionary philosophy. How does a boy differ from any other animal? To the honest evolutionist, man, in his essential being, is not better than a beetle, a beaver, or a brook trout. Consequently, we have no inherent claim over the natural world. Of course, one wonders what the evolutionists at PETA claim as the basis for their authority to speak for animals other than man?
Ironically, the biblical definition of mankind’s essential nature is not so different from the definition offered by evolution. Genesis declares that God brought forth "living creatures" in the sea and on the land. Later, when Adam was made, God defined him as a "living being." Interestingly, "living creature" and "living being" are the translation of the same Hebrew word, nephesh. So, even the Bible recognizes the bond we share with the beasts of the fields and seas.
At that point, thought, the biblical and evolutionary models part ways. Since the fundamental precept of evolution is that God does not exist (we all know God and science cannot interfere with one another), man cannot assert his superior position in the natural order. Since humans, as with all other living things, are products of an impersonal process, we are locked into and limited by that process.
The biblical view is vastly different. God exists and has created all things. Scripture declares that truth as certain. The Bible does not argue for God’s existence, the Word affirms God’s existence. If the two truths of Genesis 1.1 are in fact not true, then the rest of Scripture becomes meaningless speculation with no more authority than the works of Dr. Seuss.
Yet, man’s role in the world is clear; we are superior. But, why and in what way are we superior? Upon what basis does mankind rule over the earth and all that is in it?
Friday, August 11, 2006
Study 17 "How Majestic Is Your Name" Part 4
Psalm 8.2
In Psalm 8, the poet made some significant affirmations regarding the acts of God. First, the Lord has displayed his name throughout the earth and above the heavens. Thus, God has declared his omnipresence. God is not "in" the natural world; the Psalmist was not an animist. God is understood in what he has done, but is not limited by his creation. He dwells not in rocks and trees, birds or butterflies; he lives in and through his people.
Second, the Psalmist affirmed the omnipotence, or sovereignty, or God. "You have established strength." Two possibilities exist for understanding God’s establishment of his strength. First, one might see this phrase as describing how God accomplished, or brought into being, his strength in the world: through the mouths of children and nursing infants.
A second possibility presents itself. God established the fact of his strength, in that, he proved or displayed convincingly his power. The key to choosing either proposal rests in how one understands the role of children and adversaries.
Who is the enemy of God? We immediately respond, "Those who hate God." That is correct as far as it goes. Yet, we must realize that all of God’s enemies do not "hate" him, if we mean hate as a deep, visceral anger.
Many of God’s worst enemies are good, moral, religious people. To hate is to reject. Religious people have in fact disregarded God. What they focus on is their ability to properly carry out certain prescribed rituals. So, anyone who has attempted to manipulate God by their "programs" has, in fact, hated him. If we believe we can make churches grow and work by our own efforts, we have disregarded God; we have ignored, or hated him.
In the NewsMax article I cited in an earlier blog, the observation was made that "Once a congregation reaches a critical mass of around 2,000, its numeric strength alone becomes a powerful attraction. It becomes self-generating. Size begets growth."* So, the overriding concern for any church, then, is to become big in order to become bigger. "It becomes self-generating" is a truth rooted in mass-marketing principles, not Scripture. Has bigness become a god?
Ironically, the goal of any congregation should be the development of its membership into greater Christ-likeness. Being a big church can become an end in itself, and the spiritual growth of believers an adjunct of size. We may have lost sight of what kind of growth is more important.
Seemingly, we are attempting, by our proven effectiveness at "growing" churches, to "establish" God’s power. Our programs, location, worship style, and ministerial personalities have replaced biblical principles as the foundation for the church. As a result, pastors and ministerial staffs experience incredible anxiety due to the pressure to "grow" the church.
Yet, the Psalmist stated that God proves his power through children and nursing babies, not sophisticated media personalities and marketing specialists. Why children? When the issue of greatness in the kingdom was raised, Jesus observed that "unless you . . . become like children, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven. Whoever then humbles himself as this child, he is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven."
Paul was perplexed by being unable to rid himself of his "thorn in the flesh." He had prayed diligently, but to no avail. Odd, Paul prayed for the "thorn" to be removed, but God did not take it away. Instead, he let Paul’s disability remain. Why? "My grace is sufficient for you, for power is perfected in weakness." God is not so much concerned with our ability to make churches big as he is with our willingness to trust him as a child. Then and only then will the real strength of God be revealed.
The italics are mine.
In Psalm 8, the poet made some significant affirmations regarding the acts of God. First, the Lord has displayed his name throughout the earth and above the heavens. Thus, God has declared his omnipresence. God is not "in" the natural world; the Psalmist was not an animist. God is understood in what he has done, but is not limited by his creation. He dwells not in rocks and trees, birds or butterflies; he lives in and through his people.
Second, the Psalmist affirmed the omnipotence, or sovereignty, or God. "You have established strength." Two possibilities exist for understanding God’s establishment of his strength. First, one might see this phrase as describing how God accomplished, or brought into being, his strength in the world: through the mouths of children and nursing infants.
A second possibility presents itself. God established the fact of his strength, in that, he proved or displayed convincingly his power. The key to choosing either proposal rests in how one understands the role of children and adversaries.
Who is the enemy of God? We immediately respond, "Those who hate God." That is correct as far as it goes. Yet, we must realize that all of God’s enemies do not "hate" him, if we mean hate as a deep, visceral anger.
Many of God’s worst enemies are good, moral, religious people. To hate is to reject. Religious people have in fact disregarded God. What they focus on is their ability to properly carry out certain prescribed rituals. So, anyone who has attempted to manipulate God by their "programs" has, in fact, hated him. If we believe we can make churches grow and work by our own efforts, we have disregarded God; we have ignored, or hated him.
In the NewsMax article I cited in an earlier blog, the observation was made that "Once a congregation reaches a critical mass of around 2,000, its numeric strength alone becomes a powerful attraction. It becomes self-generating. Size begets growth."* So, the overriding concern for any church, then, is to become big in order to become bigger. "It becomes self-generating" is a truth rooted in mass-marketing principles, not Scripture. Has bigness become a god?
Ironically, the goal of any congregation should be the development of its membership into greater Christ-likeness. Being a big church can become an end in itself, and the spiritual growth of believers an adjunct of size. We may have lost sight of what kind of growth is more important.
Seemingly, we are attempting, by our proven effectiveness at "growing" churches, to "establish" God’s power. Our programs, location, worship style, and ministerial personalities have replaced biblical principles as the foundation for the church. As a result, pastors and ministerial staffs experience incredible anxiety due to the pressure to "grow" the church.
Yet, the Psalmist stated that God proves his power through children and nursing babies, not sophisticated media personalities and marketing specialists. Why children? When the issue of greatness in the kingdom was raised, Jesus observed that "unless you . . . become like children, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven. Whoever then humbles himself as this child, he is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven."
Paul was perplexed by being unable to rid himself of his "thorn in the flesh." He had prayed diligently, but to no avail. Odd, Paul prayed for the "thorn" to be removed, but God did not take it away. Instead, he let Paul’s disability remain. Why? "My grace is sufficient for you, for power is perfected in weakness." God is not so much concerned with our ability to make churches big as he is with our willingness to trust him as a child. Then and only then will the real strength of God be revealed.
The italics are mine.
Tuesday, August 08, 2006
Study 16 "How Majestic Is Your Name" Part 3
Psalm 8.1-2
In an earlier posting, the use of parallelism by the authors of the Psalms was noted. Psalm 8.1 is another example of that literary device:
"How majestic is your name in all the earth,
Who have displayed Your splendor above the heavens!"
First, let’s look at the two words majestic and splendor. At first sight, we might think these terms are synonymous. Yet, that is not the case. Actually, name and splendor are the synonyms, or, parallel terms.
Majestic has the sense of broadness or loftiness. So, throughout the earth, the name of God can be discerned. What further proof do we need in order to see that "name" implies more than an identifying tag. We know "the name" of God through the revelation of that name in Scripture. We can know about God’s name, his character, by considering the natural world.
Paul stated, "that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made."
Now, God’s love and grace are not expressed or known through the created order. Those are known, in their highest expression, through the Son. As John stated the case, "And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth. . . grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ."
Paul clearly stated that what has been shown to the human race is the "eternal power and divine nature" of God. In other words, the loftiness of God, his wide, unfathomable nature. While school boards and faculty councils debate the relative merits of the theory of evolution over against the theory of intelligent design, Scripture simply affirms that in creation, God has expressed a certain part of his character in order that human beings might place the proper value on themselves. God is the one who is charge, he is the magnificent one. So, this Psalm poses a sobering question. Having considered God’s majesty, David asked, "What is man, that you give him even a thought?"
David and Paul agreed: one need only consider the complex beauty of the natural world to know of God’s existence. Further, one can see, in the vastness of the heavens, more proof of God’s great name. Splendor can mean the light and glory God wears as a king. Thus, the splendor of God which is above the heavens, is visible for those who would see it. His splendor is "above the heavens" not in a spatial way, in the sense of being over or on top of, but in a transcendent way. God’s splendor is of greater significance than the heavens. When one looks at the stars, one sees beauty that points to a greater reality. The sun, moon, planets, stars, and galaxies are merely expressions of the power and divine nature of God.
The Tower of Babel was a testimony to mankind’s over-estimation of himself. In building that edifice of egotistical delight, the people declared, "Let us make for ourselves a name, otherwise we will be scattered abroad over the face of the whole earth." Those ancient architects sought to establish their own power in order to define their own destiny. Sadly, the Lord was left out of their calculations.
How shallow and vain we are in our worship when we are concerned only for our temporary, physical comfort and well-being. Isaiah "saw the Lord sitting on a throne, lofty and exalted, with the train of His robe filling the temple." What do we "see" when we worship the Lord? Do we see the "majesty of His Name?"
In an earlier posting, the use of parallelism by the authors of the Psalms was noted. Psalm 8.1 is another example of that literary device:
"How majestic is your name in all the earth,
Who have displayed Your splendor above the heavens!"
First, let’s look at the two words majestic and splendor. At first sight, we might think these terms are synonymous. Yet, that is not the case. Actually, name and splendor are the synonyms, or, parallel terms.
Majestic has the sense of broadness or loftiness. So, throughout the earth, the name of God can be discerned. What further proof do we need in order to see that "name" implies more than an identifying tag. We know "the name" of God through the revelation of that name in Scripture. We can know about God’s name, his character, by considering the natural world.
Paul stated, "that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made."
Now, God’s love and grace are not expressed or known through the created order. Those are known, in their highest expression, through the Son. As John stated the case, "And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth. . . grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ."
Paul clearly stated that what has been shown to the human race is the "eternal power and divine nature" of God. In other words, the loftiness of God, his wide, unfathomable nature. While school boards and faculty councils debate the relative merits of the theory of evolution over against the theory of intelligent design, Scripture simply affirms that in creation, God has expressed a certain part of his character in order that human beings might place the proper value on themselves. God is the one who is charge, he is the magnificent one. So, this Psalm poses a sobering question. Having considered God’s majesty, David asked, "What is man, that you give him even a thought?"
David and Paul agreed: one need only consider the complex beauty of the natural world to know of God’s existence. Further, one can see, in the vastness of the heavens, more proof of God’s great name. Splendor can mean the light and glory God wears as a king. Thus, the splendor of God which is above the heavens, is visible for those who would see it. His splendor is "above the heavens" not in a spatial way, in the sense of being over or on top of, but in a transcendent way. God’s splendor is of greater significance than the heavens. When one looks at the stars, one sees beauty that points to a greater reality. The sun, moon, planets, stars, and galaxies are merely expressions of the power and divine nature of God.
The Tower of Babel was a testimony to mankind’s over-estimation of himself. In building that edifice of egotistical delight, the people declared, "Let us make for ourselves a name, otherwise we will be scattered abroad over the face of the whole earth." Those ancient architects sought to establish their own power in order to define their own destiny. Sadly, the Lord was left out of their calculations.
How shallow and vain we are in our worship when we are concerned only for our temporary, physical comfort and well-being. Isaiah "saw the Lord sitting on a throne, lofty and exalted, with the train of His robe filling the temple." What do we "see" when we worship the Lord? Do we see the "majesty of His Name?"
Thursday, August 03, 2006
Study 15 "How Majestic Is Your Name" Part 2
Psalm 8.1-2
"O LORD, our Lord," is both a declaration of God’s name and an admission of accountability. "You are the Lord, and you are our Lord. You rule all things, and, in particular, you rule over us." So, if the Lord is our ruler, how does that influence our public displays of worship?
We must understand the concept of "name" as that idea is used in Scripture. A name was not simply an identifying tag. A name told a story. When Esau and Jacob were born, Jacob got the name "supplanter." He gained his father’s blessing by "supplanting" his elder brother. Later, Jacob became Israel; he ceased being the supplanter and became the one who contended with God. Instead of gaining a blessing by devious measures, Jacob contended with God until the blessing was his. His unwillingness to let go till the blessing was given was proof of the change in his character. So, he needed a new name. He had shown God he was a changed man, not that he deserved a blessing.
The name of God, YAHWEH, is more than a label. The name is a declaration of God’s character. "God said to Moses, ‘I AM WHO I AM;’ and He said, ‘Thus you shall say to the sons of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.’" Jesus declared, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am." God declared the infinity of his being; the Son did likewise.
When we say we pray "in Jesus’ name," what do we mean? Are we attaching a magic talisman onto our prayers that compels God to act in a certain way? If we pray "in Jesus’ name," have we determined what God must do? Or, does praying in Jesus’ name signify some other greater truth. How did Jesus pray? "Yet, not as I will, but as You will." So, when we pray "in Jesus’ name," we are praying in a manner appropriate to Jesus’ character: not my will, but yours, O Lord.
Therefore, when we gather in Jesus’ name, we are gathering in such a way as to characterize and honor the very person of Jesus. When the angel announced the birth of Jesus to Joseph, he said, "you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save His people from their sins." The Hebrew name is Yeshua or Joshua or Hosea (all are the same Hebrew name). The word means salvation. So, using Jesus’ name means being aware of his saving from sin.
To gather in Jesus’ name is a declaration by a group of its coming before God in recognition of who Jesus is and what he accomplished on the cross. When the power of Jesus to save from sin is ignored, nothing much is left. If Jesus does not save from sin, then what does he do? Maybe he doesn’t even save. Perhaps, Jesus just makes living prosperously and in health a reality. Thus, Jesus becomes sort of a combination health care and financial investment plan, all rolled into one.
When God gave the Ten Commandments to Moses, one of those commands stated, "You shall not make for yourself an idol." Now, most of the time, we believe if we have not bowed before or offered a sacrifice to a real, honest to goodness idol made of stone, metal, or wood, we have not been idolatrous. Let’s look beyond the physical reality to the spiritual.
What is the purpose of an idol? Basically, to have an idol meant you controlled your God and could manipulate his power. Israel worshiped Baal in order to insure rain for their crops. They did the correct rituals before the "idol," and the god had to respond in an appropriate manner. So, if we hang a nameplate on the door that says Jesus, sing the right songs, raise our hands, give our tithe, and do a few other prescribed rituals, we can force Jesus to "bless" our bodies and our budgets. We’ll be able to live well and feel good about ourselves and our wealth.
Is that what "gathering in his name" means? When Isaiah saw the Lord in the Temple, "high and lifted up," his immediate response was to cry out in despair, "Woe is me, for I am ruined! Because I am a man of unclean lips, and I live among a people of unclean lips; For my eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts." Only then did Isaiah receive cleansing and a commission.
Do we feel good about ourselves when we gather to worship? How often do we sing the song of praise from Revelation, "Worthy is the Lamb who was slain"? Are we afraid to face ourselves when confronted with the holiness of the Living God? Something is wrong with our worship when we come away from the event convinced of our right to wealth and health and healthy self-esteem.
"O LORD, our Lord," is both a declaration of God’s name and an admission of accountability. "You are the Lord, and you are our Lord. You rule all things, and, in particular, you rule over us." So, if the Lord is our ruler, how does that influence our public displays of worship?
We must understand the concept of "name" as that idea is used in Scripture. A name was not simply an identifying tag. A name told a story. When Esau and Jacob were born, Jacob got the name "supplanter." He gained his father’s blessing by "supplanting" his elder brother. Later, Jacob became Israel; he ceased being the supplanter and became the one who contended with God. Instead of gaining a blessing by devious measures, Jacob contended with God until the blessing was his. His unwillingness to let go till the blessing was given was proof of the change in his character. So, he needed a new name. He had shown God he was a changed man, not that he deserved a blessing.
The name of God, YAHWEH, is more than a label. The name is a declaration of God’s character. "God said to Moses, ‘I AM WHO I AM;’ and He said, ‘Thus you shall say to the sons of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.’" Jesus declared, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am." God declared the infinity of his being; the Son did likewise.
When we say we pray "in Jesus’ name," what do we mean? Are we attaching a magic talisman onto our prayers that compels God to act in a certain way? If we pray "in Jesus’ name," have we determined what God must do? Or, does praying in Jesus’ name signify some other greater truth. How did Jesus pray? "Yet, not as I will, but as You will." So, when we pray "in Jesus’ name," we are praying in a manner appropriate to Jesus’ character: not my will, but yours, O Lord.
Therefore, when we gather in Jesus’ name, we are gathering in such a way as to characterize and honor the very person of Jesus. When the angel announced the birth of Jesus to Joseph, he said, "you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save His people from their sins." The Hebrew name is Yeshua or Joshua or Hosea (all are the same Hebrew name). The word means salvation. So, using Jesus’ name means being aware of his saving from sin.
To gather in Jesus’ name is a declaration by a group of its coming before God in recognition of who Jesus is and what he accomplished on the cross. When the power of Jesus to save from sin is ignored, nothing much is left. If Jesus does not save from sin, then what does he do? Maybe he doesn’t even save. Perhaps, Jesus just makes living prosperously and in health a reality. Thus, Jesus becomes sort of a combination health care and financial investment plan, all rolled into one.
When God gave the Ten Commandments to Moses, one of those commands stated, "You shall not make for yourself an idol." Now, most of the time, we believe if we have not bowed before or offered a sacrifice to a real, honest to goodness idol made of stone, metal, or wood, we have not been idolatrous. Let’s look beyond the physical reality to the spiritual.
What is the purpose of an idol? Basically, to have an idol meant you controlled your God and could manipulate his power. Israel worshiped Baal in order to insure rain for their crops. They did the correct rituals before the "idol," and the god had to respond in an appropriate manner. So, if we hang a nameplate on the door that says Jesus, sing the right songs, raise our hands, give our tithe, and do a few other prescribed rituals, we can force Jesus to "bless" our bodies and our budgets. We’ll be able to live well and feel good about ourselves and our wealth.
Is that what "gathering in his name" means? When Isaiah saw the Lord in the Temple, "high and lifted up," his immediate response was to cry out in despair, "Woe is me, for I am ruined! Because I am a man of unclean lips, and I live among a people of unclean lips; For my eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts." Only then did Isaiah receive cleansing and a commission.
Do we feel good about ourselves when we gather to worship? How often do we sing the song of praise from Revelation, "Worthy is the Lamb who was slain"? Are we afraid to face ourselves when confronted with the holiness of the Living God? Something is wrong with our worship when we come away from the event convinced of our right to wealth and health and healthy self-esteem.
Study 14 "How Majestic Is Your Name" Part 1
Psalm 8.1-2
Have you ever sung the chorus "How Majestic Is Your Name"? "O Lord, our Lord, how majestic is your name in all the earth!" What an affirmation! If we want one verse to guide us in our worship theology, Psalm 8.1 is that verse.
An article entitled "Supersized Faith" was featured in the latest edition of NewsMax magazine. Let me note some statements from the piece. "Advocates of the big churches, . . . point out that large churches simply reflect broader trends occurring in society at large. The church, they say, must change with the times." One megachurch pastor’s messages were described as "being less about religion and more about being healthy and prosperous." He was quoted as saying, "I don’t get deep and theological." Sermons "tend to avoid divisive issues and heated oratory about sin." The message is "more upbeat, one of empowerment, and it seems to be working—these churches are packed." "The worship services are high quality, entertaining and well planned." One "authority" was quoted as saying "‘There’s more to spirituality than Scripture, and the megachurches are addressing the full needs of human beings’ while giving them what they want in their everyday lives."
By comparing the quotes from the NewsMax article with the single verse from Psalm 8, we find a real disconnect between modern concepts of worship and the biblical definition. What can be learned from Psalm 8 that would inform our approach to worship?
We begin with the opening word: "LORD." Traditionally, the Jews have been reluctant to pronounce the name of the Lord because of their fear of taking God’s name in vain. So, in reading Scripture, when the Jewish reader arrives at the name of God, YAHWEH, the word Adonai is read instead of YAHWEH. A profound respect guides the Jewish worshiper in his approach to God, even to the point that he will not pronounce the name of God.
Are we in the modern setting as respectful of God? The sense of the NewsMax article was that the worshiper and his "needs" are of paramount concern to the megachurch leadership. But, what about God? What of his expectations from worship?
The NewsMax article closed with a quote from the Gospel of Matthew: "Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I." This verse begs the question, "What does ‘in my name’ mean?" For many, the name of the Lord is nothing more than an identifying tag, "YAHWEH," "Jesus," "Christ," "El Shaddai," and so forth.
If we hang one of those titles on the door of our building, we must be gathering in that name. Israel labored under such a misconception. They streamed in and out of the Temple and with great fanfare, pomp, and grandeur, worshiped and made offerings to the Lord. Yet, God, speaking through Isaiah stated, "When you come to appear before Me, who requires of you this trampling of My courts?" In other words, is a big crowd in a big building a sign or true worship?
Israel had forgotten that when they came to the Temple, they were gathering in God’s actual presence. For them, "God’s presence" was a spiritual abstraction of sorts. That God was in reality in the Temple had escaped their attention. They came for reasons of self-preservation; their "needs" were of the greatest of importance. Seemingly, only by paying attention to the needs of the worshiper could the worshiper actually worship God. The vision of Isaiah in Isa. 6 showed how misguided such worship was. God was indeed in the Temple, and Israel had missed that most important point. His presence was the chief reality; everything else should have flowed from that truth.
"O LORD, our Lord, how majestic is your name in all the earth." So, when we declare we are gathered in the "name of the Lord," what do we mean? And, when we declare that we are gathered in his name, is the Lord required to show up? Further, does being "gathered in his name" mean that everything we do is acceptable to him?
Paul made an insightful comment to the church in Rome. "For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man." When the worshiper replaces God as the focus of worship, we have entered the realm of idolatry.
Have you ever sung the chorus "How Majestic Is Your Name"? "O Lord, our Lord, how majestic is your name in all the earth!" What an affirmation! If we want one verse to guide us in our worship theology, Psalm 8.1 is that verse.
An article entitled "Supersized Faith" was featured in the latest edition of NewsMax magazine. Let me note some statements from the piece. "Advocates of the big churches, . . . point out that large churches simply reflect broader trends occurring in society at large. The church, they say, must change with the times." One megachurch pastor’s messages were described as "being less about religion and more about being healthy and prosperous." He was quoted as saying, "I don’t get deep and theological." Sermons "tend to avoid divisive issues and heated oratory about sin." The message is "more upbeat, one of empowerment, and it seems to be working—these churches are packed." "The worship services are high quality, entertaining and well planned." One "authority" was quoted as saying "‘There’s more to spirituality than Scripture, and the megachurches are addressing the full needs of human beings’ while giving them what they want in their everyday lives."
By comparing the quotes from the NewsMax article with the single verse from Psalm 8, we find a real disconnect between modern concepts of worship and the biblical definition. What can be learned from Psalm 8 that would inform our approach to worship?
We begin with the opening word: "LORD." Traditionally, the Jews have been reluctant to pronounce the name of the Lord because of their fear of taking God’s name in vain. So, in reading Scripture, when the Jewish reader arrives at the name of God, YAHWEH, the word Adonai is read instead of YAHWEH. A profound respect guides the Jewish worshiper in his approach to God, even to the point that he will not pronounce the name of God.
Are we in the modern setting as respectful of God? The sense of the NewsMax article was that the worshiper and his "needs" are of paramount concern to the megachurch leadership. But, what about God? What of his expectations from worship?
The NewsMax article closed with a quote from the Gospel of Matthew: "Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I." This verse begs the question, "What does ‘in my name’ mean?" For many, the name of the Lord is nothing more than an identifying tag, "YAHWEH," "Jesus," "Christ," "El Shaddai," and so forth.
If we hang one of those titles on the door of our building, we must be gathering in that name. Israel labored under such a misconception. They streamed in and out of the Temple and with great fanfare, pomp, and grandeur, worshiped and made offerings to the Lord. Yet, God, speaking through Isaiah stated, "When you come to appear before Me, who requires of you this trampling of My courts?" In other words, is a big crowd in a big building a sign or true worship?
Israel had forgotten that when they came to the Temple, they were gathering in God’s actual presence. For them, "God’s presence" was a spiritual abstraction of sorts. That God was in reality in the Temple had escaped their attention. They came for reasons of self-preservation; their "needs" were of the greatest of importance. Seemingly, only by paying attention to the needs of the worshiper could the worshiper actually worship God. The vision of Isaiah in Isa. 6 showed how misguided such worship was. God was indeed in the Temple, and Israel had missed that most important point. His presence was the chief reality; everything else should have flowed from that truth.
"O LORD, our Lord, how majestic is your name in all the earth." So, when we declare we are gathered in the "name of the Lord," what do we mean? And, when we declare that we are gathered in his name, is the Lord required to show up? Further, does being "gathered in his name" mean that everything we do is acceptable to him?
Paul made an insightful comment to the church in Rome. "For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man." When the worshiper replaces God as the focus of worship, we have entered the realm of idolatry.
Monday, July 24, 2006
Study 13 "Remorse to Rejoice"
Psalm 6.6-10
Remorse without repentance leads to further failure and guilt. To "feel sorry" for some wrong deed might be an admirable emotion, but without further action, remorse is a counterproductive response. But, without remorse of some degree, repentance will not take place. We must have some kind of sense of remorse or regret for ethical lapses.
David detailed a series of remorseful actions: weariness, sleeplessness, anxiety, alienation, and the like. David rolled in his sleep, consumed with grief over his misdeeds. Added to his own guilt were the accusations of his enemies. The King’s adversaries were quick to point out where he had gone wrong. They were also willing to use David’s sin for their own advantage (typical of most political types). Those who opposed David were not concerned with helping him correct his error, they wanted to use his sin to define him in the public eye.
So, David wept day and night. His "eye [had] wasted away with grief." David had wept so at his regret and the pain he experienced by the hand of those who hated him that his vision was beginning to fail.
David had alternatives available for changing his situation. He could have sued for peace with his enemies, agreed to their charges, and been in their debt. He could have determined to redefine himself to Israel by reforming his own character and thus become a model of virtue. What he did, though, was to reject the charges of his enemies and resort to God’s grace. So, he declared, "Depart from me, all you who do iniquity, for the Lord has heard the voice of my weeping."
No longer would David allow himself to be victimized by his own guilt and remorse or by the hateful treatment of his adversaries. He had called out to God, and the Lord had heard his prayer. He had rejected the course of rationalization, self-reform, and retreat. He had faced up to what he had done in his life, held himself accountable before the Lord, and taken responsibility for his life.
David knew that the Lord had not only heard the voice of his weeping (his deep prayer of contrition), he had heard his supplication and received his prayer. God not only listened, he responded. If God received David’s prayer, that means he looked with favor on the content and the motive of his prayer. David took responsibility for what he had done, he did not shift blame or whine at the unjust treatment he had received from his enemies. David had prayed because he knew that above all other concerns, his sin had alienated him from the God whose heart he sought.
David trusted God to restore him to a right relationship, and, so, he rejoiced at the frustrated plans of his enemies. Whatever harm they had sought to bring upon David had been turned aside by the Lord. His adversaries would be ashamed; because their plans failed, they would themselves be held up to ridicule, not David. His enemies’ disappointment would be all the more evident because of David’s rejoicing.
David did not rejoice because his antagonists had failed in their bid to do him harm; he rejoiced because their defeat was proof of his restoration to fellowship with God. God had protected David even when he failed to be the man God wanted him to be; God preserved him even in the error of his way. For, God intended to show himself faithful in David’s life even as many declared that God had deserted David in his sin.
The writer of Hebrews reminded his readers of a great promise of God. "‘I will never desert you, nor will I ever forsake you,’ so that we confidently say, ‘The Lord is my Helper, I will not be afraid. What will man do to me?’" (Hebrews 13.5-6)
Remorse without repentance leads to further failure and guilt. To "feel sorry" for some wrong deed might be an admirable emotion, but without further action, remorse is a counterproductive response. But, without remorse of some degree, repentance will not take place. We must have some kind of sense of remorse or regret for ethical lapses.
David detailed a series of remorseful actions: weariness, sleeplessness, anxiety, alienation, and the like. David rolled in his sleep, consumed with grief over his misdeeds. Added to his own guilt were the accusations of his enemies. The King’s adversaries were quick to point out where he had gone wrong. They were also willing to use David’s sin for their own advantage (typical of most political types). Those who opposed David were not concerned with helping him correct his error, they wanted to use his sin to define him in the public eye.
So, David wept day and night. His "eye [had] wasted away with grief." David had wept so at his regret and the pain he experienced by the hand of those who hated him that his vision was beginning to fail.
David had alternatives available for changing his situation. He could have sued for peace with his enemies, agreed to their charges, and been in their debt. He could have determined to redefine himself to Israel by reforming his own character and thus become a model of virtue. What he did, though, was to reject the charges of his enemies and resort to God’s grace. So, he declared, "Depart from me, all you who do iniquity, for the Lord has heard the voice of my weeping."
No longer would David allow himself to be victimized by his own guilt and remorse or by the hateful treatment of his adversaries. He had called out to God, and the Lord had heard his prayer. He had rejected the course of rationalization, self-reform, and retreat. He had faced up to what he had done in his life, held himself accountable before the Lord, and taken responsibility for his life.
David knew that the Lord had not only heard the voice of his weeping (his deep prayer of contrition), he had heard his supplication and received his prayer. God not only listened, he responded. If God received David’s prayer, that means he looked with favor on the content and the motive of his prayer. David took responsibility for what he had done, he did not shift blame or whine at the unjust treatment he had received from his enemies. David had prayed because he knew that above all other concerns, his sin had alienated him from the God whose heart he sought.
David trusted God to restore him to a right relationship, and, so, he rejoiced at the frustrated plans of his enemies. Whatever harm they had sought to bring upon David had been turned aside by the Lord. His adversaries would be ashamed; because their plans failed, they would themselves be held up to ridicule, not David. His enemies’ disappointment would be all the more evident because of David’s rejoicing.
David did not rejoice because his antagonists had failed in their bid to do him harm; he rejoiced because their defeat was proof of his restoration to fellowship with God. God had protected David even when he failed to be the man God wanted him to be; God preserved him even in the error of his way. For, God intended to show himself faithful in David’s life even as many declared that God had deserted David in his sin.
The writer of Hebrews reminded his readers of a great promise of God. "‘I will never desert you, nor will I ever forsake you,’ so that we confidently say, ‘The Lord is my Helper, I will not be afraid. What will man do to me?’" (Hebrews 13.5-6)
Wednesday, July 19, 2006
Study 12 "Mercy, not Merit"
Psalm 6.1-5
Psalm 6 is a preacher’s delight. An alliterative outline almost leaps off the page. By using a series of Rs, the truths of this psalm can be extracted, examined, and explained.
David’s opening plea was "O LORD, do not rebuke me in Your anger." Two observations can be made about the word rebuke. First, the Hebrew word translated rebuke can mean to adjudge or to decide. If David wanted to avoid a decision based in the Lord’s anger, he must have expected God to judge him guilty.
Second, in the Septuagint (abbreviated LXX), the word used means to convince. The sense seems to be "a clear argument showing a case to be true." In 2 Tim. 3.17, Paul spoke of Scripture as being sufficient for reproof, or to convince a person of his errors. The word Paul used is the noun form of the verb found in the LXX version of Psalm 6.1. Clearly, David expected God that to convincingly declare him guilty of sin.
Further evidence of David’s expectation of a guilty verdict is found in the second part of the verse: "Nor chasten me in Your wrath." David hoped that God would not carry out the punishment resulting from a guilty verdict. Obviously, David had a deep sense of his own sinfulness. He knew what he deserved, but David hoped for something else from God.
What was the hope upon which David made his plea to the Lord? He resorted to God’s gracious and merciful character. Sometimes, we Christians seem to think we have cornered the market on grace. Clearly, David knew about grace. He had experienced God’s grace before, and hoped for that grace again. Indeed, grace was his only hope.
What did David want God’s response to him to be? "Heal me, O LORD!" was his plea. The particulars of David’s predicament are not made clear in this psalm. Yet, the fundamental issue was plainly stated: sin is a disease only God can heal. Only God can restore a sinner to health.
The results of David’s sinfulness were tragic. "My bones are dismayed, even my soul is dismayed," David cried out. His despair reached to the depths of his being. Perhaps nothing frightens a person more than the word cancer. For many, cancer is an incurable disease. For others, even though surgery and therapy have "cured" them of cancer, the dread of a reoccurrence is a haunting, daily reality.
Regarding sin, a disease no human can cure, God can restore one to spiritual vitality by rescuing him from his hopeless condition. David felt alienated and isolated from God. In the psalmist’s mind, because he had sinned, God had withdrawn from him. David wanted the Lord to return to him so that he, David, could experience rescue and restoration.
David relied upon God’s faithfulness and loyalty. David looked to God’s loving kindness and his grace. The psalmist confidently expected the Lord to act and be gracious. He knew if God did not intervene, his disease would result in his death. Once in the grave, all hope would be gone. For, in the grave, no remembrance of God’s goodness. In Sheol, no one offers praise or worship to God.
For believers, the consequence of God’s rescue is total. Paul wrote to the Colossians Christians, "for in Him you have been made complete." God does not rescue or restore or return in a partial way; what he does to us and for us is comprehensive and total. God rescues and restores based upon the work of Christ upon the cross. By his grace, the Lord offers total, eternal, and absolute forgiveness of sin. Sin no longer separates because sin’s power has been cancelled once and for all.
Psalm 6 is a preacher’s delight. An alliterative outline almost leaps off the page. By using a series of Rs, the truths of this psalm can be extracted, examined, and explained.
David’s opening plea was "O LORD, do not rebuke me in Your anger." Two observations can be made about the word rebuke. First, the Hebrew word translated rebuke can mean to adjudge or to decide. If David wanted to avoid a decision based in the Lord’s anger, he must have expected God to judge him guilty.
Second, in the Septuagint (abbreviated LXX), the word used means to convince. The sense seems to be "a clear argument showing a case to be true." In 2 Tim. 3.17, Paul spoke of Scripture as being sufficient for reproof, or to convince a person of his errors. The word Paul used is the noun form of the verb found in the LXX version of Psalm 6.1. Clearly, David expected God that to convincingly declare him guilty of sin.
Further evidence of David’s expectation of a guilty verdict is found in the second part of the verse: "Nor chasten me in Your wrath." David hoped that God would not carry out the punishment resulting from a guilty verdict. Obviously, David had a deep sense of his own sinfulness. He knew what he deserved, but David hoped for something else from God.
What was the hope upon which David made his plea to the Lord? He resorted to God’s gracious and merciful character. Sometimes, we Christians seem to think we have cornered the market on grace. Clearly, David knew about grace. He had experienced God’s grace before, and hoped for that grace again. Indeed, grace was his only hope.
What did David want God’s response to him to be? "Heal me, O LORD!" was his plea. The particulars of David’s predicament are not made clear in this psalm. Yet, the fundamental issue was plainly stated: sin is a disease only God can heal. Only God can restore a sinner to health.
The results of David’s sinfulness were tragic. "My bones are dismayed, even my soul is dismayed," David cried out. His despair reached to the depths of his being. Perhaps nothing frightens a person more than the word cancer. For many, cancer is an incurable disease. For others, even though surgery and therapy have "cured" them of cancer, the dread of a reoccurrence is a haunting, daily reality.
Regarding sin, a disease no human can cure, God can restore one to spiritual vitality by rescuing him from his hopeless condition. David felt alienated and isolated from God. In the psalmist’s mind, because he had sinned, God had withdrawn from him. David wanted the Lord to return to him so that he, David, could experience rescue and restoration.
David relied upon God’s faithfulness and loyalty. David looked to God’s loving kindness and his grace. The psalmist confidently expected the Lord to act and be gracious. He knew if God did not intervene, his disease would result in his death. Once in the grave, all hope would be gone. For, in the grave, no remembrance of God’s goodness. In Sheol, no one offers praise or worship to God.
For believers, the consequence of God’s rescue is total. Paul wrote to the Colossians Christians, "for in Him you have been made complete." God does not rescue or restore or return in a partial way; what he does to us and for us is comprehensive and total. God rescues and restores based upon the work of Christ upon the cross. By his grace, the Lord offers total, eternal, and absolute forgiveness of sin. Sin no longer separates because sin’s power has been cancelled once and for all.
Sunday, July 16, 2006
Study 11 "Have a Blessed Day? Part 3"
Psalm 5.12
Bless in Psalm 5.12 is the Hebrew word used most frequently in the OT for bless, blessed, and blessing. In English, this word would be spelled barak. Literally, the word means "to kneel, to bless." Seeing how kneeling and blessing came to be connected is not immediately clear.
Hebrews 7.7 states, "But without any dispute the lesser is blessed by the greater." The Lord blessed Abraham and Isaac, Melchizedek blessed Abram and Jacob blessed his sons. Perhaps, one connection between to kneel and to bless rests in this recognition of the greater blessing the lesser. The lesser might kneel in the presence of the greater. Thus, one possibility for the connection might be kneeling before the one who blesses.
In Genesis 49, the account of Jacob’s blessing of his sons is found. The blessings of each were honest assessments of each son. The fact that the positive and negative declarations concerning Jacob’s children were both blessings is affirmed by the statement of 49.28: "this is what their father said to them when he blessed them. He blessed them, every one with the blessing appropriate to him."
Three times in the Hebrew text of Gen. 49.28 the word for bless is used. Each son was blessed with a blessing appropriate to him. The blessings, which were to determine the futures of the twelve tribes, were rooted in the characters of each of Jacob’s sons.
Generally, one does not think of a blessing as having any negative content. When we look at the Greek equivalent to barak, eulogia, we can understand why blessing is thought of solely in a positive sense. As observed in an earlier posting, eulogia literally means "good words." Thus, we think of a blessing in a positive way, and rightfully so. The blessing of the sons of Jacob does not serve, necessarily, as a standard for our understanding of blessing.
In fact, the Septuagint version of Genesis 49.28 uses eulogia for blessing. Yet, some of the sons of Jacob were not blessed in a positive way. Maybe the "good" of Jacob’s blessing was the honesty upon which the blessing was based.
In Psalm 5.12, barak is used. David wrote, "For it is You who blesses the righteous man, O LORD." The Lord is the one who blesses the upright and the innocent. But what did David mean when he declared that God blesses? The second part of the phrase in 5.12, the parallel statement is, "You surround him with favor as with a shield." So, to be blessed is to be favored, to experience something good from God that is protective in its nature. But, what is the good that God gives?
In Genesis 49, the basis of the blessing of Jacob upon his sons appears to have been their characters. In a sense, they got what they deserved. The basis of the blessing in Psa. 5.12 is God’s grace. God grants the blessing, the favor, according to his choice. Obviously, the person receiving the blessing is righteous, but the granter or bestower of the blessing is God. He blesses because of who he is, not because of who or what a person is within themselves.
Paul had a keen insight into blessing. He advanced his position in Galatians 3.7-9 in the following way. First, those who are "of faith . . . are the sons of Abraham." To Abraham, God had said, "All the nations will be blessed in You." He concluded with the assertion, "those who are of faith are blessed with Abraham."
Some seem to believe that blessing for the believer is an on again, off again thing. Only if we pray and ask for a blessing will we receive one. Nothing could be further from the truth. As believers, being "of faith," we are blessed. Paul wrote to the Ephesians, "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ." Beyond a shadow of a doubt, you are blessed because you are a believer, and everyday, for you, is a blessed day.
Bless in Psalm 5.12 is the Hebrew word used most frequently in the OT for bless, blessed, and blessing. In English, this word would be spelled barak. Literally, the word means "to kneel, to bless." Seeing how kneeling and blessing came to be connected is not immediately clear.
Hebrews 7.7 states, "But without any dispute the lesser is blessed by the greater." The Lord blessed Abraham and Isaac, Melchizedek blessed Abram and Jacob blessed his sons. Perhaps, one connection between to kneel and to bless rests in this recognition of the greater blessing the lesser. The lesser might kneel in the presence of the greater. Thus, one possibility for the connection might be kneeling before the one who blesses.
In Genesis 49, the account of Jacob’s blessing of his sons is found. The blessings of each were honest assessments of each son. The fact that the positive and negative declarations concerning Jacob’s children were both blessings is affirmed by the statement of 49.28: "this is what their father said to them when he blessed them. He blessed them, every one with the blessing appropriate to him."
Three times in the Hebrew text of Gen. 49.28 the word for bless is used. Each son was blessed with a blessing appropriate to him. The blessings, which were to determine the futures of the twelve tribes, were rooted in the characters of each of Jacob’s sons.
Generally, one does not think of a blessing as having any negative content. When we look at the Greek equivalent to barak, eulogia, we can understand why blessing is thought of solely in a positive sense. As observed in an earlier posting, eulogia literally means "good words." Thus, we think of a blessing in a positive way, and rightfully so. The blessing of the sons of Jacob does not serve, necessarily, as a standard for our understanding of blessing.
In fact, the Septuagint version of Genesis 49.28 uses eulogia for blessing. Yet, some of the sons of Jacob were not blessed in a positive way. Maybe the "good" of Jacob’s blessing was the honesty upon which the blessing was based.
In Psalm 5.12, barak is used. David wrote, "For it is You who blesses the righteous man, O LORD." The Lord is the one who blesses the upright and the innocent. But what did David mean when he declared that God blesses? The second part of the phrase in 5.12, the parallel statement is, "You surround him with favor as with a shield." So, to be blessed is to be favored, to experience something good from God that is protective in its nature. But, what is the good that God gives?
In Genesis 49, the basis of the blessing of Jacob upon his sons appears to have been their characters. In a sense, they got what they deserved. The basis of the blessing in Psa. 5.12 is God’s grace. God grants the blessing, the favor, according to his choice. Obviously, the person receiving the blessing is righteous, but the granter or bestower of the blessing is God. He blesses because of who he is, not because of who or what a person is within themselves.
Paul had a keen insight into blessing. He advanced his position in Galatians 3.7-9 in the following way. First, those who are "of faith . . . are the sons of Abraham." To Abraham, God had said, "All the nations will be blessed in You." He concluded with the assertion, "those who are of faith are blessed with Abraham."
Some seem to believe that blessing for the believer is an on again, off again thing. Only if we pray and ask for a blessing will we receive one. Nothing could be further from the truth. As believers, being "of faith," we are blessed. Paul wrote to the Ephesians, "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ." Beyond a shadow of a doubt, you are blessed because you are a believer, and everyday, for you, is a blessed day.
Monday, July 10, 2006
Study 10 "Have a Blessed Day? Part 2"
Psalm 5.12
In Psalm 1.1 and in Psalm 5.12, the psalmists included bless in their songs. "How blessed," is the affirmation in Psalm 1; in Psalm 5, "it is You who blesses" is the assertion. Seemingly, the words are identical, but they are not (thus, revealing the shortcomings of the English language, and the paradox of translation). A look at the Hebrew text reveals an entirely different reality.
Psalm 1.1 uses the Hebrew word asher. What is the fundamental meaning of this term? In Genesis 30.13, this word for bless makes its first appearance in the Old Testament. The text relates the response of Leah to the birth of another son to her handmaid Zilpah. She joyfully declared, "happy and I, for women will call me happy; so I will call his name Asher [Happy]." Here, then, is a benchmark passage for understanding the sense of the word asher.
In Psalm 1.1, a "happy" man is one who rejects the wisdom and ways of the world, and who delights in and does the Law of the Lord. Interestingly, the KJV provides some telling facts about asher. In the KJV, asher is translated bless only twice, 20 times as happy, and 32 times as blessed. Asher is never translated as blessing, nor is asher ever used in reference to God. Of the 56 OT uses of asher as happy, bless, or blessed, 28 of those, 50% of all uses, are in the Psalms.
One of the most notable features of the use of asher is the context of its usage. Whether translated happy or blessed or bless, the context always suggests a state of existence or frame of mind resulting from obedience or conformity to God’s purposes and demands. This kind of happiness or blessedness, once experienced becomes a constant reminder of the value of doing the right thing. This kind of happiness is never material in its expression or in its essence. This happiness is God’s gift of a contented, fulfilled spirit.
Now, when the Greek equivalent of asher is considered, similar conclusions are reached. The Greek term is makarios, a word meaning happiness as well. The most well-known use of makarios is in Matthew 5.3-11, the Beattitudes. Nine times, blessed is used. Happy, though, as a legitimate alternative reading. "Happy are the poor in spirit, . . . those who mourn, . . . the gentle, . . . ," etc.
Those described in the Beattitudes are the persons whose lives are shown to be progressing towards godliness. The ultimate expression of godly spiritually is to become a peacemakers, for then one becomes a child of God. To be a "child" of someone is an idiomatic expression meaning someone is acting as the parent acts, living in a manner consistent with the character of the parent. So, to be a child of God is to act as God acts. So, to be a child of God, a peacemaker, one will be persecuted because of their righteous character and behavior. Yet, the child of God will be happy nonetheless.
The happiness of the one described in Psalm 1.1 or in Matthew 5.3-11 is not a happiness based upon externals. Those pronounced blessed in this biblical sense are not happy because they are popular, healthy, rich, famous, or powerful. Their happiness is based upon and results from their obedience and conformity to the will and plan of God. Thus, their happiness, their contented state of mind, is wholly internal, and is never influenced by external issues. Indeed, their blessed state of being allows them to overcome the temporary inconveniences of life, whatever those situations and circumstances might be.
God’s plan for all his children is for them to be obedient. Thus, Paul wrote, "for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure." God is determined that his people will desire and do his will. Thus,"those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, [will] be satisfied."
In Psalm 1.1 and in Psalm 5.12, the psalmists included bless in their songs. "How blessed," is the affirmation in Psalm 1; in Psalm 5, "it is You who blesses" is the assertion. Seemingly, the words are identical, but they are not (thus, revealing the shortcomings of the English language, and the paradox of translation). A look at the Hebrew text reveals an entirely different reality.
Psalm 1.1 uses the Hebrew word asher. What is the fundamental meaning of this term? In Genesis 30.13, this word for bless makes its first appearance in the Old Testament. The text relates the response of Leah to the birth of another son to her handmaid Zilpah. She joyfully declared, "happy and I, for women will call me happy; so I will call his name Asher [Happy]." Here, then, is a benchmark passage for understanding the sense of the word asher.
In Psalm 1.1, a "happy" man is one who rejects the wisdom and ways of the world, and who delights in and does the Law of the Lord. Interestingly, the KJV provides some telling facts about asher. In the KJV, asher is translated bless only twice, 20 times as happy, and 32 times as blessed. Asher is never translated as blessing, nor is asher ever used in reference to God. Of the 56 OT uses of asher as happy, bless, or blessed, 28 of those, 50% of all uses, are in the Psalms.
One of the most notable features of the use of asher is the context of its usage. Whether translated happy or blessed or bless, the context always suggests a state of existence or frame of mind resulting from obedience or conformity to God’s purposes and demands. This kind of happiness or blessedness, once experienced becomes a constant reminder of the value of doing the right thing. This kind of happiness is never material in its expression or in its essence. This happiness is God’s gift of a contented, fulfilled spirit.
Now, when the Greek equivalent of asher is considered, similar conclusions are reached. The Greek term is makarios, a word meaning happiness as well. The most well-known use of makarios is in Matthew 5.3-11, the Beattitudes. Nine times, blessed is used. Happy, though, as a legitimate alternative reading. "Happy are the poor in spirit, . . . those who mourn, . . . the gentle, . . . ," etc.
Those described in the Beattitudes are the persons whose lives are shown to be progressing towards godliness. The ultimate expression of godly spiritually is to become a peacemakers, for then one becomes a child of God. To be a "child" of someone is an idiomatic expression meaning someone is acting as the parent acts, living in a manner consistent with the character of the parent. So, to be a child of God is to act as God acts. So, to be a child of God, a peacemaker, one will be persecuted because of their righteous character and behavior. Yet, the child of God will be happy nonetheless.
The happiness of the one described in Psalm 1.1 or in Matthew 5.3-11 is not a happiness based upon externals. Those pronounced blessed in this biblical sense are not happy because they are popular, healthy, rich, famous, or powerful. Their happiness is based upon and results from their obedience and conformity to the will and plan of God. Thus, their happiness, their contented state of mind, is wholly internal, and is never influenced by external issues. Indeed, their blessed state of being allows them to overcome the temporary inconveniences of life, whatever those situations and circumstances might be.
God’s plan for all his children is for them to be obedient. Thus, Paul wrote, "for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure." God is determined that his people will desire and do his will. Thus,"those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, [will] be satisfied."
Study 9 "Have a Blessed Day? Part 1"
Psalm 5.12
Blessing* has become a popular concept among believers. We wish for others a "blessed day" (as in, "Have a nice day!"). Someone who does us a favor is a "real blessing," and what they do for us or give us is also a blessing. The meaning of the word bless has become about as blurry as the meaning for the word love. We love our spouses, children, dogs, vacation spot, and peanut butter all with the same fervor. So, how should we believers understand the concept of bless, blessed, and blessing? Is being blessed a material thing, an event in time, or a person?
Probably, we all share some kind of general understanding of what blessed means. When we speak of being blessed or experiencing a blessing, most understand this as having something beneficial happen to us. Yet, are we being faithful to the biblical concept of blessing as we employ the modern concept of the word?
We must be clear and certain on one central point. If a concept is presented in a particular manner in the Bible, we each would be wise to be true to the biblical usage. We are keen to follow the command to witness, gather as worshiping communities, not steal, kill, lie, etc. Should we be any less avid in how we employ bless?
I think we should be as consistent with this word as with any other. As I will hope to show in several articles about bless, we might be denying ourselves great comfort and advantage if we misunderstand the biblical term bless. To water down any biblical concept or principle leads to the polluting and rationalizing of others. Remember, a central truth of stewardship is that faithfulness in small things leads to responsibility in larger ones. To misuse what appears to be a small theological point has implications for our handling of more significant issues. The following illustrates the problem in the most tragic terms.
George Barna reported on-line the following in "The Barna Update" about the results of a post 9-11 survey. He stated, "The groups most likely to endorse the existence of absolute moral truths include Baby Boomers (i.e., people 37 to 55 years of age - 28% of whom embrace absolute truth), adults who attend non-mainline Protestant churches (32%) and born again individuals (32%). . . . Interestingly, when people were further queried as to the source of the principles or standards on which they base their moral and ethical decisions, the post-attack survey discovered that only one out of eight adults - just 13% - cited the Bible. The most common sources of guidance regarding moral decisions trusted by Americans are feelings (25%) and the lessons and values they remember from their parents (14%)."
What can we learn about bless from Psalm 5.12 that will protect us from error? Note the construction of the verse. David used the literary device called parallelism when he wrote this particular poem. "For it is You who bless the righteous man, O Lord, You who surround him with favor as with a shield."
For God to bless is to have him grant favor. The word favor means "to pleasure, to delight." We could say that to favor someone, or as in the Psalm, to surround one with favor, is to grant goodwill. So, God surrounds the righteous person with his goodwill. In the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament, Psalm 5.12 includes an interesting word play with the terms for bless and favor. The word for bless in Greek (as used in Psa. 5.12) would be transliterated into English as eulogia. The word for favor is eudokia.
Both these terms are compound words. In each word, the small Greek adverb eu, meaning well is used. In bless, the second part of the word is logia (similar to logos), meaning words. So, eulogia literally means "good words." To favor uses a Greek word that means either to accept someone or something or to find favor. So, we might say the word means to find favor, or, to favor someone with good. Thus, goodwill.
So, to bless is to grant something good to another person. "O Lord, You bless, You grant goodwill as protection to the righteous person." Interestingly, by the way, favor surrounds as a shield, so when a person experiences the blessing and favor of God, he experiences the protection of God. Psalm 5.11 speaks of God’s care as a shade that provides relief. Psalm 5.12 describes God’s blessing and favor as protection.
What about the Hebrew word for bless? Interestingly, two words for bless are found in the Hebrew Scriptures. A look at these words and their Greek equivalents and the contexts in which they are found is quite revealing and illuminating. In the next study, we will begin our study of these important words.
*I will use blessing, bless, and blessed interchangeably.
Blessing* has become a popular concept among believers. We wish for others a "blessed day" (as in, "Have a nice day!"). Someone who does us a favor is a "real blessing," and what they do for us or give us is also a blessing. The meaning of the word bless has become about as blurry as the meaning for the word love. We love our spouses, children, dogs, vacation spot, and peanut butter all with the same fervor. So, how should we believers understand the concept of bless, blessed, and blessing? Is being blessed a material thing, an event in time, or a person?
Probably, we all share some kind of general understanding of what blessed means. When we speak of being blessed or experiencing a blessing, most understand this as having something beneficial happen to us. Yet, are we being faithful to the biblical concept of blessing as we employ the modern concept of the word?
We must be clear and certain on one central point. If a concept is presented in a particular manner in the Bible, we each would be wise to be true to the biblical usage. We are keen to follow the command to witness, gather as worshiping communities, not steal, kill, lie, etc. Should we be any less avid in how we employ bless?
I think we should be as consistent with this word as with any other. As I will hope to show in several articles about bless, we might be denying ourselves great comfort and advantage if we misunderstand the biblical term bless. To water down any biblical concept or principle leads to the polluting and rationalizing of others. Remember, a central truth of stewardship is that faithfulness in small things leads to responsibility in larger ones. To misuse what appears to be a small theological point has implications for our handling of more significant issues. The following illustrates the problem in the most tragic terms.
George Barna reported on-line the following in "The Barna Update" about the results of a post 9-11 survey. He stated, "The groups most likely to endorse the existence of absolute moral truths include Baby Boomers (i.e., people 37 to 55 years of age - 28% of whom embrace absolute truth), adults who attend non-mainline Protestant churches (32%) and born again individuals (32%). . . . Interestingly, when people were further queried as to the source of the principles or standards on which they base their moral and ethical decisions, the post-attack survey discovered that only one out of eight adults - just 13% - cited the Bible. The most common sources of guidance regarding moral decisions trusted by Americans are feelings (25%) and the lessons and values they remember from their parents (14%)."
What can we learn about bless from Psalm 5.12 that will protect us from error? Note the construction of the verse. David used the literary device called parallelism when he wrote this particular poem. "For it is You who bless the righteous man, O Lord, You who surround him with favor as with a shield."
For God to bless is to have him grant favor. The word favor means "to pleasure, to delight." We could say that to favor someone, or as in the Psalm, to surround one with favor, is to grant goodwill. So, God surrounds the righteous person with his goodwill. In the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament, Psalm 5.12 includes an interesting word play with the terms for bless and favor. The word for bless in Greek (as used in Psa. 5.12) would be transliterated into English as eulogia. The word for favor is eudokia.
Both these terms are compound words. In each word, the small Greek adverb eu, meaning well is used. In bless, the second part of the word is logia (similar to logos), meaning words. So, eulogia literally means "good words." To favor uses a Greek word that means either to accept someone or something or to find favor. So, we might say the word means to find favor, or, to favor someone with good. Thus, goodwill.
So, to bless is to grant something good to another person. "O Lord, You bless, You grant goodwill as protection to the righteous person." Interestingly, by the way, favor surrounds as a shield, so when a person experiences the blessing and favor of God, he experiences the protection of God. Psalm 5.11 speaks of God’s care as a shade that provides relief. Psalm 5.12 describes God’s blessing and favor as protection.
What about the Hebrew word for bless? Interestingly, two words for bless are found in the Hebrew Scriptures. A look at these words and their Greek equivalents and the contexts in which they are found is quite revealing and illuminating. In the next study, we will begin our study of these important words.
*I will use blessing, bless, and blessed interchangeably.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)