July 27, 2010: Faithful In Little
"It's a good thing I can't be tempted by money," I said to my mother, as I explained how I was bypassing a potentially lucrative job offer in order to be a missionary in South America.
"Of course you can be tempted by money!" she said.
I held my ground: "No, I really don't think so. If somebody offered me a million dollars to shove aside my plans to translate the Bible, I'd refuse it without a second thought."
"Oh Paul," she replied. "The devil is not going to tempt you with a million dollars. He is going to tempt you with a hundred dollars."
For 25 years now I have been calling to mind that soundbite of motherly wisdom because I have seen it prove prophetic time and time again. It is unthinkable that I would ever take a seven-figure bribe, or embezzle a vast sum, or defraud a deep-pocketed man. I can't see myself doing that. But I can waste small amounts on needless indulgences, and I have succumbed to the vice of giving less than I should. The devil chips away at my financial virtue in chunks of three figures or less.
Mom's insight into "small sins" came to mind the other day during a discussion among believers about whether we would have the courage to profess Christ if a gun were held to our heads. Of course no one knows what he would do in such a situation, but I maintained, "Actually, I think we'd all pass that test." It's big and stark and obvious, like the million-dollar payoff not to be a missionary. If we were told, "Deny Christ or I'll shoot you!" we'd respond, "Then I guess you'll have to shoot," and we'd wait to behold our Lord when next we opened our eyes.
But can we endure lesser trials? To me that's the really interesting question - not whether we would overcome some spectacular hypothetical temptation but whether we - in fact - fend off the little temptations that hit us every day. You could take a bullet for Christ, but can you take a little social ostracism, or rolled-eyes contempt, or belittling patronage, or offended morality? (Yes, offended morality. Sometimes I think that nothing makes a man want to hide his faith more these days than the accusation that his biblical view of sexuality is cruel.)
I certainly don't want anyone to regard me as dumb or mean or deluded or judgmental or socially inept. The devil knows my sensitivity in those things, and so he won't tempt me with a gun-to-the-head denial of Christ but rather with challenge-to-the-ego silences about Him. Such betrayals of Christ are not blatant and verbal and obvious, but quiet and subtle and hard to notice. They are among those tiny missteps that Satan loves to provoke, as the demon Screwtape explains to Wormwood in C. S. Lewis' "The Screwtape Letters":
You will say that these are very small sins; and doubtless, like all young tempters, you are anxious to be able to report spectacular wickedness. But do remember, the only thing that matters is the extent to which you separate the man from the Enemy. It does not matter how small the sins are provided that their cumulative effect is to edge the man away from the Light and out into the Nothing. Murder is no better than cards if cards can do the trick.
(It goes without saying that Lewis did not regard card-playing as sinful; he was just using it as an example of a device - even one that is innocent in itself - that could be used to turn a soul away from God.)
Jesus said, "Whoever is faithful in little is faithful also in much" (Luke 16:10). It occurs to me that the reverse is not necessarily true. There are people who can do great and virtuous acts but who stumble badly over the smallest of pebbles. John McCain, for example, refused to be released from a North Vietnamese prison because his fellow prisoners would not be released with him. His courage was worthy of a medal. But then he came home and chased a skirt and dumped his wife. What a cruel, undisciplined jerk.
I think that as Christians we need not concern ourselves with big splashy tests of virtue: the million dollar offer, the gun to the head, the battlefield call of duty. Pay attention instead to the small challenges to obedience that are right in front of your eyes today. Prove faithful in those, and the big things will take care of themselves. Pass the hundred dollar test, and the million dollar test will be no temptation at all.
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
July 20, 2010: In Praise Of Old Christians
Every other Thursday I go to a nursing home to help out with a chapel service that my church conducts. The old people there (ladies, mostly, because they live longer than men) are wonderful. They love to sing and worship God, and somehow they remain attentive to Bible preaching despite the fact that they've probably heard thousands of sermons over the years - and you'd certainly understand it if they were sick of them by now. The affection they show me is effusive and palpable, and they kindly appreciate everything our little group does for them.
Every other Friday I join in fellowship with a small group, half of whose members are north of 70. They are great, all of them: kind, loyal, disciplined children of God who go on adding decade to decade of faithful service to their King. Though I myself am technically past middle-age (family history suggests I won't live to 94), some of these folks have been walking with Christ since before I was born. It is an honor to worship with them, and learn from them, and hear them pray for me.
And about twice a month I meet for lunch with a retired couple, Ed and Nereida Chapman, whose Christ-like encouragement to me over the past few years has been a gift of grace straight from the throne of God.
I have a special reason for loving old Christians. The joy I receive from their patient endurance soothes the sorrow I've known from apostate friends who have left the faith. The steadfastness of gray-headed saints rebukes the cynicism that darkens my soul when I question the durability of young converts.
Do I dare tell you how cynical I've become? When baptizing earnest 14-year-old girls the thought crosses my mind, "Yes, you love Jesus now, but in 10 years you'll be living with your boyfriend (or lesbian partner), getting drunk at parties, shunning the church, and showing no regard at all for the Savior who bled and died for you." That's terribly unfair, of course - but it is a suspicion born of sad experience. Katy Perry - for example - a pop singer who extols all manner of fornication, started out as a teenager singing songs of praise to Jesus. There are plenty like her. There are also plenty of youth like the teenage boy I baptized who, in just a couple years, was spouting atheism and getting arrested.
I can remember when Andre Agassi, Gary Bussey, Mike Ditka, Bob Dylan, Larry Flynt, Horace Grant, John Lennon, BJ Thomas and Chris Webber were all born-again Christians. They dipped their toes in the pool of Christianity, maybe even jumped in and swam a bit, and then got out and toweled off. We naive Christians rejoiced for a time to see such star power join us, and some of us stupidly thought we could use their worldly influence to grow God's spiritual kingdom. But they decided not to age gracefully with us under the care of Christ.
Contrast the legions of those who "experiment" temporarily with Christian faith to the martyr Polycarp, who, when called to recant in AD 155, said, "Eighty-six years I have served Christ, and he never did me any wrong. How can I blaspheme my King who saved me?" Eighty-six years! And who knows how many more years there would have been had he not, in the next moment, been burned at the stake?
Or contrast fallen apostates with my mother, who gave her life to the Lord around the age of 10 and, as she lay dying at 76, asked for a cross that she could clutch in her hand while she waited to be ushered into the presence of God. Among her last words to her pastor: "My hope is in Christ."
When sweet Lisa Krausfeldt agreed to marry me about a year ago I emailed her the opening lines of Robert Browning's "Rabbi Ben Ezra":
Grow old along with me!
The best is yet to be,
The last of life, for which the first was made:
Our times are in his hand
Who saith, "A whole I planned,
Youth shows but half; trust God: see all, nor be afraid!"
You who have been followers of Christ with me for 40 years or less may only be half way through this our (earthly) journey. Grow in grace along with me. If the Lord tarries and you do not die, then be an old, feeble, sick, forgetful, dependent - yet still faithful - servant of Christ. Be an inspiration and not a byword. Join the ranks of those I love who demonstrate how to walk the path all the way to the end.
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
July 13, 2010: A Time To Rant
During the French Revolution many nobles went to the guillotine with their dignity intact, refusing to give roiling mobs the satisfaction of hearing them beg for mercy or scream in fear. Stoic aristocrats kept their cool as they lost their heads.
Not Madame du Barry. When dragged to her execution on December 8, 1793, she kicked and screamed and begged onlookers to rescue her. She collapsed repeatedly and cried out, "You are going to hurt me! Why?!" On the scaffold she struggled with her executioners, who rushed their work because her shrieks had sucked all the merriment out of the crowd. Her last words were, "One moment more, Mr. Executioner, I beg you!" She was no fun to kill.
Artist Louise Elisabeth Vigée-Lebrun, who painted du Barry's portrait, later wrote "she was the only woman, among all who perished in those dreadful days, unable to face the scaffold with fortitude...This has always confirmed my belief that if the victims of that period of execrable memory had not had the noble pride of dying with fortitude the Terror would have ceased long before it did."
If Vigée-Lebrun was right, du Barry's undignified ranting probably saved the lives of some aristocrats who were next in line to die. Screams and shrieks stimulate the sadist but not the ordinary person who has been caught up in mob cruelty. He may actually have a conscience that the victim's expressed outrage will arouse. ("Hmm. This woman seems really upset. Maybe we're doing something wrong here?")
I thought of du Barry when reading a Facebook friend's outburst against an evil ex-husband. In the comment section I chimed in with other supporters and commended her fighting spirit. In Christian circles I often see that spouses of demon scum are advised to "forgive unconditionally" and "not give in to bitterness" and "show yourself to be strong." I do not think this kind of response is always biblical or wise. There is a time to rant. A stoic refusal to complain can make you look noble, but it can also provide cover for bad men to go on messing up people's lives. For the sake of other victims - if not for yourself - it is good to stuff your pride and shriek out loud.
King David sure didn't "take it like a man" when victimized by treacherous people. "If only you would slay the wicked, O God!" he cried. "Away from me, you bloodthirsty men!" (Psalm 139:19). St. Paul didn't let Alexander's betrayal roll off his forgiving back without slinging this word of judgment: "Alexander the metalworker did me a great deal of harm. The Lord will repay him for what he has done" (2 Timothy 4:14). St. John ranted about a church-wrecker: "Diotrephes, who loves to be first, will have nothing to do with us...I will call attention to what he is doing, gossiping maliciously about us" (3 John 9-10). And, somewhat surprisingly, even the departed saints are not envisioned as having "gotten over" all the injustices done to them on earth. They plead, "How long, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, until you judge the inhabitants of the earth and avenge our blood?" (Revelation 6:10).
I don't recommend living in a constant state of anger and resentment over wrongs suffered. That would be a wretched way to waste your life, and it would hide you from joy. What sane person would want to be your friend if you were chronically bitter, and who would be inspired by your example if you simply become the hourly denouncer of fiends and villains who made you miserable?
There is a difference, though, between "refusing to dwell on it" and "refusing to express it at all." The writer of Ecclesiastes said that there is a time for everything - "a time to be silent and a time to speak" (3:7) - and I have learned that there is certainly a right moment to raise bloody hell about bad people and the awful things they have done to us and our loved ones.
I can personalize this. When my first wife rejected her Christian faith and left to go pursue lesbian relationships, I wanted to be the best single dad I knew how to be. One thing I didn't want to do was convey to my sons an attitude of "Well, that's all right. Things go that way sometimes. I'll be fine. I'm not angry or bitter. This will work out for the best." I think that kind of noble fortitude just sends more marriages to the guillotine! I don't want my sons to grow up thinking, "If someday I lie, scheme, renounce my vows, dump my wife and pursue other lovers, my ex will be fine. After all, Dad was cool with it." No he wasn't. My sons saw my moral outrage and despair. I didn't scream like Madame du Barry, but I certainly grieved like David when he lost Absalom (2 Samuel 19:4). May the image of my sorrow be ingrained in their minds should they ever be tempted to betray their wives. May they think, "How could I ever do that to someone?"
May God give you wisdom to know when, and how, and how long, to rant about the abuse you have suffered at the hands of evil men. (Or evil women.)
During the French Revolution many nobles went to the guillotine with their dignity intact, refusing to give roiling mobs the satisfaction of hearing them beg for mercy or scream in fear. Stoic aristocrats kept their cool as they lost their heads.
Not Madame du Barry. When dragged to her execution on December 8, 1793, she kicked and screamed and begged onlookers to rescue her. She collapsed repeatedly and cried out, "You are going to hurt me! Why?!" On the scaffold she struggled with her executioners, who rushed their work because her shrieks had sucked all the merriment out of the crowd. Her last words were, "One moment more, Mr. Executioner, I beg you!" She was no fun to kill.
Artist Louise Elisabeth Vigée-Lebrun, who painted du Barry's portrait, later wrote "she was the only woman, among all who perished in those dreadful days, unable to face the scaffold with fortitude...This has always confirmed my belief that if the victims of that period of execrable memory had not had the noble pride of dying with fortitude the Terror would have ceased long before it did."
If Vigée-Lebrun was right, du Barry's undignified ranting probably saved the lives of some aristocrats who were next in line to die. Screams and shrieks stimulate the sadist but not the ordinary person who has been caught up in mob cruelty. He may actually have a conscience that the victim's expressed outrage will arouse. ("Hmm. This woman seems really upset. Maybe we're doing something wrong here?")
I thought of du Barry when reading a Facebook friend's outburst against an evil ex-husband. In the comment section I chimed in with other supporters and commended her fighting spirit. In Christian circles I often see that spouses of demon scum are advised to "forgive unconditionally" and "not give in to bitterness" and "show yourself to be strong." I do not think this kind of response is always biblical or wise. There is a time to rant. A stoic refusal to complain can make you look noble, but it can also provide cover for bad men to go on messing up people's lives. For the sake of other victims - if not for yourself - it is good to stuff your pride and shriek out loud.
King David sure didn't "take it like a man" when victimized by treacherous people. "If only you would slay the wicked, O God!" he cried. "Away from me, you bloodthirsty men!" (Psalm 139:19). St. Paul didn't let Alexander's betrayal roll off his forgiving back without slinging this word of judgment: "Alexander the metalworker did me a great deal of harm. The Lord will repay him for what he has done" (2 Timothy 4:14). St. John ranted about a church-wrecker: "Diotrephes, who loves to be first, will have nothing to do with us...I will call attention to what he is doing, gossiping maliciously about us" (3 John 9-10). And, somewhat surprisingly, even the departed saints are not envisioned as having "gotten over" all the injustices done to them on earth. They plead, "How long, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, until you judge the inhabitants of the earth and avenge our blood?" (Revelation 6:10).
I don't recommend living in a constant state of anger and resentment over wrongs suffered. That would be a wretched way to waste your life, and it would hide you from joy. What sane person would want to be your friend if you were chronically bitter, and who would be inspired by your example if you simply become the hourly denouncer of fiends and villains who made you miserable?
There is a difference, though, between "refusing to dwell on it" and "refusing to express it at all." The writer of Ecclesiastes said that there is a time for everything - "a time to be silent and a time to speak" (3:7) - and I have learned that there is certainly a right moment to raise bloody hell about bad people and the awful things they have done to us and our loved ones.
I can personalize this. When my first wife rejected her Christian faith and left to go pursue lesbian relationships, I wanted to be the best single dad I knew how to be. One thing I didn't want to do was convey to my sons an attitude of "Well, that's all right. Things go that way sometimes. I'll be fine. I'm not angry or bitter. This will work out for the best." I think that kind of noble fortitude just sends more marriages to the guillotine! I don't want my sons to grow up thinking, "If someday I lie, scheme, renounce my vows, dump my wife and pursue other lovers, my ex will be fine. After all, Dad was cool with it." No he wasn't. My sons saw my moral outrage and despair. I didn't scream like Madame du Barry, but I certainly grieved like David when he lost Absalom (2 Samuel 19:4). May the image of my sorrow be ingrained in their minds should they ever be tempted to betray their wives. May they think, "How could I ever do that to someone?"
May God give you wisdom to know when, and how, and how long, to rant about the abuse you have suffered at the hands of evil men. (Or evil women.)
Thursday, July 1, 2010
July 6, 2010: Christianity Has A Long List Of Do's and Don'ts.
Pastor John Ortberg recently met with a new Christian named Mike who had been the victim of bad preaching. Mike, who was "drawn to Christianity by the message of grace," complained, "I was told that being a Christian wasn't about anything I had to do; it was about a sacrifice that had already been done on my behalf. But now that I'm on the inside, I'm told I have to do stuff all the time. I have to go to church, I have to read the Bible, I have to give money, I have to volunteer. I feel like the victim of a bait-and-switch."
Hallelujah! Mike gets it. He has been the victim of a bait-and-switch, and his confusion constitutes a strong indictment of gospel presentations that shun the biblically simple words "do" and "do not," "thou shalt" and "thou shalt not."
More times than I can count I have heard preachers say, "Christianity isn't a list of do's and don'ts." They're wrong. Christianity is that and a whole lot more. That is, while our faith is more than a mere list of commands and prohibitions (there's also doctrine and relationship, for example), it is certainly not less than that. When a person like Mike bows the knee to Jesus Christ, he will find that there are lots and lots of things for him to do and not do. And we should not be afraid to tell him that. If you read the gospels, you will see that Jesus gave people do's and don'ts the very first day he met them. For example: "Follow me" (Matthew 4:19); "Stop sinning or something worse will happen to you" (John 5:14); "Go proclaim the kingdom of God" (Luke 10:60); "Sell everything you have and give it to the poor" (Luke 18:22); "Go and leave your life of sin" (John 8:11). Those are some pretty blatant do's and don'ts!
Here's a very short and incomplete list of biblical Do's if you want to be a Christian: Do believe in God (Hebrews 11:6); Do trust in Christ (John 14:1); Do take up your cross and follow Jesus (Mark 8:34); Do embrace the virtues of love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control (Galatians 5:22-23). And here are some Don'ts: Don't be immoral, impure or greedy (Ephesians 5:4); Don't be a coward, murderer, idolator, or liar (Revelation 21:8); Don't engage in drunkenness, swindling, slander, adultery, or homosexual activity (1 Corinthians 6:9-10).
Despite the biblical abundance of commands and prohibitions, many teachers in the evangelical tradition seem to cast invisibility cloaks over them in the hope that they won't get in the way of anybody coming to Christ. Hence that terribly misleading "Do" verses "Done" rhetoric that Mike refers to in his complaint. Have you heard it? I have, and boy am I sick of it. It goes like this: "The difference between Religion and Christianity is that Religion is spelled D-O. I have to DO all these things to please God and get into heaven. But Christianity is spelled D-O-N-E. Christ has already DONE everything necessary to secure my salvation by living a perfect life and dying for my sins. I only have to receive his free gift!" The "DO verses DONE" illustration appears in Willow Creek's popular Becoming a Contagious Christian program and in a thousand other books and sermons too.
But please, please, just read the imperative-laden messages of Jesus and John the Baptist in the gospels, and of St. Peter and St. Paul in the book of Acts, and see if for one moment you can imagine any of them preaching that you don't have to do anything to please God because it's already been done for you! They would all face-palm themselves over the absurdity.
Imagine Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5, condemned to death for the sin of lying, protesting (with their last breaths), "But Peter, I thought you said that the difference between Religion and Christianity was that Religion insisted I DO things (like tell the truth) to please God, but Christianity says that's all been DONE for me by Christ!" Peter would respond "I never said no such thing."
Or imagine Simon the Sorcerer in Acts 8, peeved that Peter just told him to go hell after trying to buy the Holy Spirit, objecting, "But I thought this wasn't about works! I thought God accepted me just the way I am! Since when do I have to DO some good work (like revere the Holy Spirit) in order to please God? Gaining favor with God is something already DONE for me by Christ!" I could see Peter responding with the same words that Jesus once knocked him down with: "Get behind me, Satan" (Mark 8:33).
Thomas Jefferson once produced a New Testament with all miraculous elements literally scissored out of it. We know not to do that. But some of today's evangelicals, carried away by their own rhetoric, come close to cutting all the do's and don'ts out of the gospel. Stop it! Leave those commands and prohibitions in there just where Jesus and the apostles put them. They don't contradict grace. And if they bar people from coming to Christ, if they stop dead in their tracks people who "kind of like" Jesus but who hate to submit to him, then so be it. Jesus wants followers, not fans. Don't deceive the Mikes of this world by teaching, suggesting, or even hinting that there is nothing you have to do to be a Christian. That's not biblical.
Pastor John Ortberg recently met with a new Christian named Mike who had been the victim of bad preaching. Mike, who was "drawn to Christianity by the message of grace," complained, "I was told that being a Christian wasn't about anything I had to do; it was about a sacrifice that had already been done on my behalf. But now that I'm on the inside, I'm told I have to do stuff all the time. I have to go to church, I have to read the Bible, I have to give money, I have to volunteer. I feel like the victim of a bait-and-switch."
Hallelujah! Mike gets it. He has been the victim of a bait-and-switch, and his confusion constitutes a strong indictment of gospel presentations that shun the biblically simple words "do" and "do not," "thou shalt" and "thou shalt not."
More times than I can count I have heard preachers say, "Christianity isn't a list of do's and don'ts." They're wrong. Christianity is that and a whole lot more. That is, while our faith is more than a mere list of commands and prohibitions (there's also doctrine and relationship, for example), it is certainly not less than that. When a person like Mike bows the knee to Jesus Christ, he will find that there are lots and lots of things for him to do and not do. And we should not be afraid to tell him that. If you read the gospels, you will see that Jesus gave people do's and don'ts the very first day he met them. For example: "Follow me" (Matthew 4:19); "Stop sinning or something worse will happen to you" (John 5:14); "Go proclaim the kingdom of God" (Luke 10:60); "Sell everything you have and give it to the poor" (Luke 18:22); "Go and leave your life of sin" (John 8:11). Those are some pretty blatant do's and don'ts!
Here's a very short and incomplete list of biblical Do's if you want to be a Christian: Do believe in God (Hebrews 11:6); Do trust in Christ (John 14:1); Do take up your cross and follow Jesus (Mark 8:34); Do embrace the virtues of love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control (Galatians 5:22-23). And here are some Don'ts: Don't be immoral, impure or greedy (Ephesians 5:4); Don't be a coward, murderer, idolator, or liar (Revelation 21:8); Don't engage in drunkenness, swindling, slander, adultery, or homosexual activity (1 Corinthians 6:9-10).
Despite the biblical abundance of commands and prohibitions, many teachers in the evangelical tradition seem to cast invisibility cloaks over them in the hope that they won't get in the way of anybody coming to Christ. Hence that terribly misleading "Do" verses "Done" rhetoric that Mike refers to in his complaint. Have you heard it? I have, and boy am I sick of it. It goes like this: "The difference between Religion and Christianity is that Religion is spelled D-O. I have to DO all these things to please God and get into heaven. But Christianity is spelled D-O-N-E. Christ has already DONE everything necessary to secure my salvation by living a perfect life and dying for my sins. I only have to receive his free gift!" The "DO verses DONE" illustration appears in Willow Creek's popular Becoming a Contagious Christian program and in a thousand other books and sermons too.
But please, please, just read the imperative-laden messages of Jesus and John the Baptist in the gospels, and of St. Peter and St. Paul in the book of Acts, and see if for one moment you can imagine any of them preaching that you don't have to do anything to please God because it's already been done for you! They would all face-palm themselves over the absurdity.
Imagine Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5, condemned to death for the sin of lying, protesting (with their last breaths), "But Peter, I thought you said that the difference between Religion and Christianity was that Religion insisted I DO things (like tell the truth) to please God, but Christianity says that's all been DONE for me by Christ!" Peter would respond "I never said no such thing."
Or imagine Simon the Sorcerer in Acts 8, peeved that Peter just told him to go hell after trying to buy the Holy Spirit, objecting, "But I thought this wasn't about works! I thought God accepted me just the way I am! Since when do I have to DO some good work (like revere the Holy Spirit) in order to please God? Gaining favor with God is something already DONE for me by Christ!" I could see Peter responding with the same words that Jesus once knocked him down with: "Get behind me, Satan" (Mark 8:33).
Thomas Jefferson once produced a New Testament with all miraculous elements literally scissored out of it. We know not to do that. But some of today's evangelicals, carried away by their own rhetoric, come close to cutting all the do's and don'ts out of the gospel. Stop it! Leave those commands and prohibitions in there just where Jesus and the apostles put them. They don't contradict grace. And if they bar people from coming to Christ, if they stop dead in their tracks people who "kind of like" Jesus but who hate to submit to him, then so be it. Jesus wants followers, not fans. Don't deceive the Mikes of this world by teaching, suggesting, or even hinting that there is nothing you have to do to be a Christian. That's not biblical.
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
June 29, 2010: When Rightly Rebuked
Today I have a word of counsel that I hope none of you will ever have to use: if you are ever caught in a sin and rightly condemned for it, acknowledge that you have done wrong. Do not deny your sin, excuse it, or explain it, and for heaven’s sake don’t say, “I’ve put that behind me,” or, “I think we should just move on,” or, “I don’t want to dwell on the past.” Say these three words: “I have sinned,” and then be silent and wait for questions and further consequences. Answer all questions honestly and take all consequences humbly. Time – maybe years and years of time - will determine the sincerity of your remorse and the validity of your repentance.
The Bible shows a striking contrast between King Saul and King David when they were rebuked for their sins. When Samuel condemned Saul for disobedience regarding the Amalekites, Saul at first said, “But I did obey the Lord!” (1 Samuel 15:20). Bold-faced denial always seems to be the scoundrel’s first tactic. Who knows – maybe, if nobody presses him for details, he can get away with it just that easily. Unfaithful drug-abusing sodomite liar Ted Haggard tried the denial strategy for a few days in November of 2006 until it got crushed down by a ton of facts. I think that people like King Saul or Ted Haggard or Bill Clinton or Barry Bonds could pull a security fire alarm, get their hand sprayed with dye, and then raise that hand in your face and swear it was not red. See Proverbs 30:20: "This is the way of an adulteress: She eats and wipes her mouth and says, 'I've done nothing wrong.'"
When Samuel did not fall for Saul’s blanket denial, Saul switched to explanation. He said in verse 24, “I was afraid of the people and so I gave in to them.” There is a thin line between explanation and excuse. If you are asked, "Why did you do this?", then I suppose it is legitimate to outline the thought processes that led to your downfall while still taking responsibility for your action. But volunteering such information in advance sounds a lot like you are excusing it, or least softening it. ("You see, I had a good reason for acting as I did - I was under a lot a pressure, etc. If you had all those people clamoring in your ear and threatening mutiny you probably would have done the same.") Confess before you explain. I do not know that I have ever heard an explanation for sin that did not sound a lot like "This is not really as bad as it seems."
Finally, Saul decided he would apologize and get it over with so they could move on like nothing happened. In verse 25 he said to Samuel, "Now I beg you, forgive my sin and come back with me, so that I may worship the Lord." Essentially Saul was asking Samuel for a photo op. The people respected Samuel: if he appeared together with Saul it would confirm Saul's good standing. Saul made his request explicit in verse 30: "Please honor me before the elders of my people and before Israel; come back with me...". An insincere repenter always seeks to avoid the consequence of public shame. He wants to be honored just as he was before, and for that he needs you to forget everything quickly and not make a big deal out of it. Remember this, if you are fallen and dependent on others' grace: no offender ever has the right to say "Let's move on." Forgiveness may be given to you, but you cannot demand it; honor may never be given to you, and you should not even ask for it.
Compare Saul's response to David's when he was condemned for committing adultery with Bathsheba and killing her husband. 2 Samuel 12:13: Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord."
There it is. His words were very simple. There was no denial, no excuse ("Come on Nathan, she was taking a bath on the roof for crying out loud"), no rush to restoration ("You're right, Nathan, and I'm very, very sorry. Now I think we should all just put this unpleasantness behind us and move on, don't you agree?"). David's sin was evil, pure evil, and he acknowledged that plainly without trying to shift blame or negotiate terms of grace.
You will never fall as badly as Saul or David. But if you do fall, remember the following words so that you can say them without qualification and without looking to anyone's transgression but your own. "I have sinned. I have sinned against the Lord. God be merciful to me the sinner."
Today I have a word of counsel that I hope none of you will ever have to use: if you are ever caught in a sin and rightly condemned for it, acknowledge that you have done wrong. Do not deny your sin, excuse it, or explain it, and for heaven’s sake don’t say, “I’ve put that behind me,” or, “I think we should just move on,” or, “I don’t want to dwell on the past.” Say these three words: “I have sinned,” and then be silent and wait for questions and further consequences. Answer all questions honestly and take all consequences humbly. Time – maybe years and years of time - will determine the sincerity of your remorse and the validity of your repentance.
The Bible shows a striking contrast between King Saul and King David when they were rebuked for their sins. When Samuel condemned Saul for disobedience regarding the Amalekites, Saul at first said, “But I did obey the Lord!” (1 Samuel 15:20). Bold-faced denial always seems to be the scoundrel’s first tactic. Who knows – maybe, if nobody presses him for details, he can get away with it just that easily. Unfaithful drug-abusing sodomite liar Ted Haggard tried the denial strategy for a few days in November of 2006 until it got crushed down by a ton of facts. I think that people like King Saul or Ted Haggard or Bill Clinton or Barry Bonds could pull a security fire alarm, get their hand sprayed with dye, and then raise that hand in your face and swear it was not red. See Proverbs 30:20: "This is the way of an adulteress: She eats and wipes her mouth and says, 'I've done nothing wrong.'"
When Samuel did not fall for Saul’s blanket denial, Saul switched to explanation. He said in verse 24, “I was afraid of the people and so I gave in to them.” There is a thin line between explanation and excuse. If you are asked, "Why did you do this?", then I suppose it is legitimate to outline the thought processes that led to your downfall while still taking responsibility for your action. But volunteering such information in advance sounds a lot like you are excusing it, or least softening it. ("You see, I had a good reason for acting as I did - I was under a lot a pressure, etc. If you had all those people clamoring in your ear and threatening mutiny you probably would have done the same.") Confess before you explain. I do not know that I have ever heard an explanation for sin that did not sound a lot like "This is not really as bad as it seems."
Finally, Saul decided he would apologize and get it over with so they could move on like nothing happened. In verse 25 he said to Samuel, "Now I beg you, forgive my sin and come back with me, so that I may worship the Lord." Essentially Saul was asking Samuel for a photo op. The people respected Samuel: if he appeared together with Saul it would confirm Saul's good standing. Saul made his request explicit in verse 30: "Please honor me before the elders of my people and before Israel; come back with me...". An insincere repenter always seeks to avoid the consequence of public shame. He wants to be honored just as he was before, and for that he needs you to forget everything quickly and not make a big deal out of it. Remember this, if you are fallen and dependent on others' grace: no offender ever has the right to say "Let's move on." Forgiveness may be given to you, but you cannot demand it; honor may never be given to you, and you should not even ask for it.
Compare Saul's response to David's when he was condemned for committing adultery with Bathsheba and killing her husband. 2 Samuel 12:13: Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord."
There it is. His words were very simple. There was no denial, no excuse ("Come on Nathan, she was taking a bath on the roof for crying out loud"), no rush to restoration ("You're right, Nathan, and I'm very, very sorry. Now I think we should all just put this unpleasantness behind us and move on, don't you agree?"). David's sin was evil, pure evil, and he acknowledged that plainly without trying to shift blame or negotiate terms of grace.
You will never fall as badly as Saul or David. But if you do fall, remember the following words so that you can say them without qualification and without looking to anyone's transgression but your own. "I have sinned. I have sinned against the Lord. God be merciful to me the sinner."
Monday, June 21, 2010
June 22, 2010: The Negative And Judgmental Jesus Who Wants You To Suffer And Die (Part 2)
Yes, I know that the title of this week's and last week's Pastor's Page is provocative. That's deliberate. By speaking forcefully I honor the literary tradition of my apostolic namesake, who in Galatians 5:12 said that he wanted gospel opponents to cut off their penises, and who in Philippians 3:8 compared everything but Christ to a steaming pile of sh--. All that I write is tame in comparison.
I was asked last week to provide Scriptures to support my contention that Jesus is negative and judgmental and he wants you to suffer and die. Gladly:
Read any of Jesus' sermons (the one in Matthew 5-7 and Luke 6 will do), and you will see that he is very negative and judgmental about sin. He is so strict that he makes Old Testament commandments harder than ever to obey, expanding the definitions of murder and adultery, for example, to include anger and lust and unjustified remarriage. See Matthew 5:21-22; 27-28; 19:9. His standards are so high that he routinely dismisses potential disciples who want to follow him but who don't quite make the grade. For example:
1) A man says he will follow Jesus after his father dies. Jesus retorts, "Let the dead bury their own dead. You go and proclaim the kingdom of God." (Luke 9:60)
2) A man says he wants to follow Jesus, and Jesus immediately challenges his willingness to be homeless: "Foxes have holes and birds have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head." (Luke 9:58)
3) A man will follow Jesus after he says good-bye to his family. Jesus says, "No one who puts his hand to the plow and looks back is fit for service in the kingdom of God." (Luke 9:62)
4) In Matthew 19:16-22, Jesus turns away a morally upright man because he won't give all his money to the poor.
5) In Matthew 10:38, he says that anyone who does not take his cross and follow him is not worthy of him.
6) In John 6:66-67, a whole crowd of disciples walks away from Jesus after a difficult sermon. He not only lets them go, he asks the 12 if they want to leave too!
7) Even Peter, who by sheer grace made it through all that weeding out, is blasted for his lack of faith (Matthew 14:31), called the Devil (Mark 8:33), and threatened with excommunication (John 13:8).
And that's the disciples! Active opponents are called thieves and robbers (John 10:8), sons of Satan (John 8:44), sons of hell (Matthew 23:15), snakes (Matthew 23:33), carcass crypts (Matthew 23:27), blind guides (Matthew 23:16), and blind fools (Matthew 23:17). Among other things.
The point is frequently made that Jesus judges sin, not sinners, but that homiletic talking point does not hold up well under biblical scrutiny. It's not sin but sinners who need to have millstones hung around their necks (Luke 17:2), who will weep and gnash their teeth (Matthew 8:12), whose only reward will be earthly renown (Matthew 6:6).
I believe that Jesus is negative and judgmental because we keep giving him so much to be negative and judgmental about. We sin, and we sin, and we sin some more, and we live among sinners who corrupt us and whom we corrupt.
There is only one way out of this stinking mess, only one exit from this iniquitous maze, and that is through suffering and death. You could put it this way: Jesus wants you to suffer more so that you will sin less; he wants you to die so that you will be sinless. He himself "learned obedience from what he suffered" (Hebrews 5:8), because it was God's will to "make the author of [our] salvation perfect through suffering" (Hebrews 2:10). So, while the Buddha Siddhartha Gautama founded a religion on the basis of avoiding suffering, Jesus went the other way and embraced it, postponing the gratification of full joy until after he "endured the cross, despising its shame" (Hebrews 12:2). He insisted that his followers walk that Via Dolorosa behind him, taking either a figurative cross (Mark 8:34), or - in Peter's case - a literal one (John 21:18-19).
Early Christians were eager to share in the sufferings of Christ. Paul wrote that he wanted to know "the fellowship of sharing in his sufferings" (Philippians 3:10), and was committed to filling up "what is still lacking of Christ's afflictions" (Colossians 1:24). The apostles rejoiced in Acts 5:41 not because they were feasting luxuriously but because "they had been counted worthy of suffering disgrace for the Name."
By the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they taught us that being a Christian was a lot like death. Paul wrote, "our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be done away with" (Romans 6:6), and, "I've been crucified with Christ; therefore I no longer live, but Christ lives in me" (Galatians 2:20). Peter wrote, "He bore our sins in his body on the tree, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness" (1 Peter 2:24).
It is the absence of any rigorous proclamation about the cross that renders so insidious the crap preaching of gospel lite proponents I critiqued last week - Joel Osteen, Robert Schuller, Joyce Meyer, Andrew Wommack. There are many others. They do not see a holy Jesus who hates your sin, who died for it and insists that you die to it. They see an indulgent Jesus who wants to stuff you with goodies regardless of your spiritual condition. Rather than urging us to die to ourselves, take up our crosses and follow Christ, they tell us think positively and buy shoes. Actually, they want you to buy their books and send them money so that they can think positively and buy shoes. Lots and lots of shoes. But you would do better to contemplate the cross of Jesus Christ, and repent of your sins, and meekly plead for God's good and perfect will to purify you no matter what the cost.
Yes, I know that the title of this week's and last week's Pastor's Page is provocative. That's deliberate. By speaking forcefully I honor the literary tradition of my apostolic namesake, who in Galatians 5:12 said that he wanted gospel opponents to cut off their penises, and who in Philippians 3:8 compared everything but Christ to a steaming pile of sh--. All that I write is tame in comparison.
I was asked last week to provide Scriptures to support my contention that Jesus is negative and judgmental and he wants you to suffer and die. Gladly:
Read any of Jesus' sermons (the one in Matthew 5-7 and Luke 6 will do), and you will see that he is very negative and judgmental about sin. He is so strict that he makes Old Testament commandments harder than ever to obey, expanding the definitions of murder and adultery, for example, to include anger and lust and unjustified remarriage. See Matthew 5:21-22; 27-28; 19:9. His standards are so high that he routinely dismisses potential disciples who want to follow him but who don't quite make the grade. For example:
1) A man says he will follow Jesus after his father dies. Jesus retorts, "Let the dead bury their own dead. You go and proclaim the kingdom of God." (Luke 9:60)
2) A man says he wants to follow Jesus, and Jesus immediately challenges his willingness to be homeless: "Foxes have holes and birds have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head." (Luke 9:58)
3) A man will follow Jesus after he says good-bye to his family. Jesus says, "No one who puts his hand to the plow and looks back is fit for service in the kingdom of God." (Luke 9:62)
4) In Matthew 19:16-22, Jesus turns away a morally upright man because he won't give all his money to the poor.
5) In Matthew 10:38, he says that anyone who does not take his cross and follow him is not worthy of him.
6) In John 6:66-67, a whole crowd of disciples walks away from Jesus after a difficult sermon. He not only lets them go, he asks the 12 if they want to leave too!
7) Even Peter, who by sheer grace made it through all that weeding out, is blasted for his lack of faith (Matthew 14:31), called the Devil (Mark 8:33), and threatened with excommunication (John 13:8).
And that's the disciples! Active opponents are called thieves and robbers (John 10:8), sons of Satan (John 8:44), sons of hell (Matthew 23:15), snakes (Matthew 23:33), carcass crypts (Matthew 23:27), blind guides (Matthew 23:16), and blind fools (Matthew 23:17). Among other things.
The point is frequently made that Jesus judges sin, not sinners, but that homiletic talking point does not hold up well under biblical scrutiny. It's not sin but sinners who need to have millstones hung around their necks (Luke 17:2), who will weep and gnash their teeth (Matthew 8:12), whose only reward will be earthly renown (Matthew 6:6).
I believe that Jesus is negative and judgmental because we keep giving him so much to be negative and judgmental about. We sin, and we sin, and we sin some more, and we live among sinners who corrupt us and whom we corrupt.
There is only one way out of this stinking mess, only one exit from this iniquitous maze, and that is through suffering and death. You could put it this way: Jesus wants you to suffer more so that you will sin less; he wants you to die so that you will be sinless. He himself "learned obedience from what he suffered" (Hebrews 5:8), because it was God's will to "make the author of [our] salvation perfect through suffering" (Hebrews 2:10). So, while the Buddha Siddhartha Gautama founded a religion on the basis of avoiding suffering, Jesus went the other way and embraced it, postponing the gratification of full joy until after he "endured the cross, despising its shame" (Hebrews 12:2). He insisted that his followers walk that Via Dolorosa behind him, taking either a figurative cross (Mark 8:34), or - in Peter's case - a literal one (John 21:18-19).
Early Christians were eager to share in the sufferings of Christ. Paul wrote that he wanted to know "the fellowship of sharing in his sufferings" (Philippians 3:10), and was committed to filling up "what is still lacking of Christ's afflictions" (Colossians 1:24). The apostles rejoiced in Acts 5:41 not because they were feasting luxuriously but because "they had been counted worthy of suffering disgrace for the Name."
By the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they taught us that being a Christian was a lot like death. Paul wrote, "our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be done away with" (Romans 6:6), and, "I've been crucified with Christ; therefore I no longer live, but Christ lives in me" (Galatians 2:20). Peter wrote, "He bore our sins in his body on the tree, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness" (1 Peter 2:24).
It is the absence of any rigorous proclamation about the cross that renders so insidious the crap preaching of gospel lite proponents I critiqued last week - Joel Osteen, Robert Schuller, Joyce Meyer, Andrew Wommack. There are many others. They do not see a holy Jesus who hates your sin, who died for it and insists that you die to it. They see an indulgent Jesus who wants to stuff you with goodies regardless of your spiritual condition. Rather than urging us to die to ourselves, take up our crosses and follow Christ, they tell us think positively and buy shoes. Actually, they want you to buy their books and send them money so that they can think positively and buy shoes. Lots and lots of shoes. But you would do better to contemplate the cross of Jesus Christ, and repent of your sins, and meekly plead for God's good and perfect will to purify you no matter what the cost.
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
June 15, 2010: The Negative And Judgmental Jesus Who Wants You To Suffer And Die (Part 1)
No, I do not intend the title above to be taken ironically. Read it at face value. I believe that our Lord Jesus Christ is negative and judgmental and he wants you to suffer and die. Of course, he wants to give you life too (John 10:10: "I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full"), but that life tends to come after all the pain, suffering, death, and - worst of all - crushing blows to your self esteem.
There are people with huge churches and notable ministries who teach differently, but they are all wrong. For some reason I've bumped into their influence a lot in the last few days. For example:
- I was just asked to read a book written by a woman who would race home after her church service to listen to Robert Schuller's "Hour of Power" TV program, and who later joined his staff. Schuller is the guy who famously stuck his middle finger in the face of God and the Scriptures by defining sin as "any act or thought that robs myself or another human being of his or her self-esteem," and saying that our "real problem is that deep down we feel we're not good enough to approach a holy God." Sin, in the Bible, is lawlessness - 1 John 3:4 - and our real problem is that deep down we do think we're good enough to approach a holy God. By the way, among other scandals, Schuller is now estranged from his minister son, and his Crystal Cathedral has a budget shortfall of 55 million dollars.
- Recently at church someone commended to me the ministry of Joyce Meyer. Meyer, author of Eat The Cookie...Buy The Shoes funds a decadent lifestyle with tax-free contributions from gullible followers she has succeeded in swindling. A short list of her indulgences: an $11,000 French clock, a $105,000 Crownline boat, a $19,000 pair of vases, French crystal valued at $18,500, two curio cabinets worth $5,700, a table worth $30,000, and a $14,000 custom bookcase. Not to mention 4 houses and a $10-million Canadair jet. I'm not a Meyer fan.
- A friend indicated support of Andrew Wommack, the author of God Wants You Well. Wommack writes "I believe the message the Lord has entrusted me to deliver will change the way the body of Christ perceives God" - and when was the last time you read something more arrogant and cultish than that? Wommack teaches that the doctrine of God's sovereignty "is the worst doctrine in the church today...The belief that God controls everything that happens to us is one of the devil's biggest inroads into our lives," and he condemns praying to God about illness, saying, “You have a tumor? Don’t pray to God about the tumor. Talk to the tumor itself!” Wommack's god is one who only wants nice things to happen to you in this life - and I actually know of a god like that. He offered Jesus a pain-free, luxurious lifestyle [Matthew 4:8-9]. He's called Lucifer.
- I read an enthusiastic endorsement of Joel Osteen by well-known atheist Hemant "I Sold My Soul On E-Bay" Mehta. Mehta said, "[Osteen] makes you feel good...He just reaches out to people, whether or not you really believe in God. And he doesn't reference God or the Bible a lot. I think that's for good reason." I don't know where to start with Grinning Joel Osteen. How about if I put it this way - it is impossible to do all three of these things: (1) Read your Bible a lot, (2) Listen to Joel Osteen, (3) Not puke. Now I happen to know Mr. Mehta personally - he was my son's speech coach - and I can vouch for him as a cordial, pleasant, well-spoken atheist who rightly regarded my son as a wicked sharp impromptu speaker. Good guy. But Joel Osteen? Dang. Please listen, Christians: leave mind-numbingly vapid platitudes about achieving your best life now to atheists who will find them inoffensively compatible with their philosophy. We who love Christ must feast on meatier fare than that in order to have strength to bear the cross that our Lord lays upon us.
Dietrich Bonhoeffer wrote, "When Christ calls a man, he bids him come and die," and there is more biblical wisdom in those 11 words than in every sermon the prosperity vendors have ever preached. Forget health and prosperity and long life and self-fulfillment. Your goal must be to please Christ, not yourself. Trust Christ, exalt Christ, bow the knee to Christ, and live for his glory and pleasure rather than your own. He must become greater, you must become less (John 3:30).
No, I do not intend the title above to be taken ironically. Read it at face value. I believe that our Lord Jesus Christ is negative and judgmental and he wants you to suffer and die. Of course, he wants to give you life too (John 10:10: "I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full"), but that life tends to come after all the pain, suffering, death, and - worst of all - crushing blows to your self esteem.
There are people with huge churches and notable ministries who teach differently, but they are all wrong. For some reason I've bumped into their influence a lot in the last few days. For example:
- I was just asked to read a book written by a woman who would race home after her church service to listen to Robert Schuller's "Hour of Power" TV program, and who later joined his staff. Schuller is the guy who famously stuck his middle finger in the face of God and the Scriptures by defining sin as "any act or thought that robs myself or another human being of his or her self-esteem," and saying that our "real problem is that deep down we feel we're not good enough to approach a holy God." Sin, in the Bible, is lawlessness - 1 John 3:4 - and our real problem is that deep down we do think we're good enough to approach a holy God. By the way, among other scandals, Schuller is now estranged from his minister son, and his Crystal Cathedral has a budget shortfall of 55 million dollars.
- Recently at church someone commended to me the ministry of Joyce Meyer. Meyer, author of Eat The Cookie...Buy The Shoes funds a decadent lifestyle with tax-free contributions from gullible followers she has succeeded in swindling. A short list of her indulgences: an $11,000 French clock, a $105,000 Crownline boat, a $19,000 pair of vases, French crystal valued at $18,500, two curio cabinets worth $5,700, a table worth $30,000, and a $14,000 custom bookcase. Not to mention 4 houses and a $10-million Canadair jet. I'm not a Meyer fan.
- A friend indicated support of Andrew Wommack, the author of God Wants You Well. Wommack writes "I believe the message the Lord has entrusted me to deliver will change the way the body of Christ perceives God" - and when was the last time you read something more arrogant and cultish than that? Wommack teaches that the doctrine of God's sovereignty "is the worst doctrine in the church today...The belief that God controls everything that happens to us is one of the devil's biggest inroads into our lives," and he condemns praying to God about illness, saying, “You have a tumor? Don’t pray to God about the tumor. Talk to the tumor itself!” Wommack's god is one who only wants nice things to happen to you in this life - and I actually know of a god like that. He offered Jesus a pain-free, luxurious lifestyle [Matthew 4:8-9]. He's called Lucifer.
- I read an enthusiastic endorsement of Joel Osteen by well-known atheist Hemant "I Sold My Soul On E-Bay" Mehta. Mehta said, "[Osteen] makes you feel good...He just reaches out to people, whether or not you really believe in God. And he doesn't reference God or the Bible a lot. I think that's for good reason." I don't know where to start with Grinning Joel Osteen. How about if I put it this way - it is impossible to do all three of these things: (1) Read your Bible a lot, (2) Listen to Joel Osteen, (3) Not puke. Now I happen to know Mr. Mehta personally - he was my son's speech coach - and I can vouch for him as a cordial, pleasant, well-spoken atheist who rightly regarded my son as a wicked sharp impromptu speaker. Good guy. But Joel Osteen? Dang. Please listen, Christians: leave mind-numbingly vapid platitudes about achieving your best life now to atheists who will find them inoffensively compatible with their philosophy. We who love Christ must feast on meatier fare than that in order to have strength to bear the cross that our Lord lays upon us.
Dietrich Bonhoeffer wrote, "When Christ calls a man, he bids him come and die," and there is more biblical wisdom in those 11 words than in every sermon the prosperity vendors have ever preached. Forget health and prosperity and long life and self-fulfillment. Your goal must be to please Christ, not yourself. Trust Christ, exalt Christ, bow the knee to Christ, and live for his glory and pleasure rather than your own. He must become greater, you must become less (John 3:30).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)