Eternal Perspectives

One of the things that has made me want to laugh derisively at times - or smack someone at other times - has been listening to the complaints and tales of “suffering” by people who had the grave misfortune of growing up in the church. You see, I didn’t grow up in the church - not by a long shot - so my perspective is just a little bit different.

If I understand these martyrs correctly, growing up in the church was one of the worst things that has ever happened to them in their lives. They were fed false and misleading information about such things as alcohol, movies, dancing, dating, profanity, and such. As a result, these folks didn’t get into much trouble in their earlier years. What a shame.

In listening to these greatly deprived believers, I’m reminded of some of the Christians that I grew up and went to school with back in the ’60s. Some were nice and easy to be around; I don’t think they became the whiners I’m talking about here. The whiners were the ones who hated and condemned me and my friends. Why did they detest me? Because I was doing all the things they didn’t do but really, really wanted to do.

The church restricted these people from engaging in many of the behaviors that I plunged into without restraint. As a result, these people didn’t get to have the experiences that I had or the memories that I still reflect on. Things like being arrested for underage drinking, almost getting busted numerous times for drugs, being watched by the police, known as a bully by classmates. They have been denied the privilege of having memories of immoral relationships and one-night stands; they don’t get to look back on a dark history of breaking the law, lying to parents, stealing money, malicious trespassing, drunk driving; they don’t get to wonder about blocks of time for which they have no memories due to taking a few too many sopers at once.

These poor souls didn’t get to take over college administration offices, destroy brain cells, do permanent psychological and physical damage to themselves, or come close to dying in any number of ways. They don’t get to feel bad for having turned others on to drugs, being ridiculed and ignored as a Christian, and then getting to bury these same friends years later. Betraying best friends, trust, and relationships.

The church and their rigid Christian upbringing denied them all of this.

Forgive me if I don’t have a lot of compassion for such whining believers. They think they had it so terrible, so horrible because their parents tried to protect them from the perils of strolling ignorantly through Satan’s domain, of consuming his pleasures and being consumed in return, of choosing freely but not getting to choose the consequences.

Sometimes I’m torn. Part of me wishes that I had, like these fellow believers, grown up in a church so that I wouldn’t have the memories, scars, and history that I do. Maybe growing up would have kept me from ruining the lives of friends and strangers alike who had the misfortune of running into me back then. I have to think that it would have.

Another part of me isn’t sure about it, though. I’m afraid that, if I had grown up in the church, I’d be as ungrateful and bitchy as they are. I wouldn’t want that. I know what I’ve been saved out of; they need to think about what they’ve been saved from. It’s not pretty.

Their horrible churches - and maybe some of them were bad - kept them safe within the fold while some of us were being thrown to the wolves. I’m not saying churches shouldn’t do it better; I’m saying that it’s better for those churches to do the right thing badly than to do nothing and allow bad things to happen to ignorant people like me.

It’s better to grow up deprived than depraved. Trust me on this one.

[On the other hand, see my post Losing My Way for my sorry discernment and life in the church.]

Jn 19.22

 

Rita is supposed to come knocking on my door sometime Saturday morning.

Actually, the hurricane will not only knock on my door but will pound my roof, windows, walls, and everything else on my little turf of dirt here on the planet. Rita is a serious threat: think of an F-3 tornado a couple hundred miles across. In F-3 tornados, the only place that’s safe is underground or out of its way.

I think I know that by the time Rita arrives here she will have lost some of her strength: my home is over a hundred miles inland, north and west of Houston. If she casts her eye to the east of me, it shouldn’t be too bad. But who knows where she’s looking to land?

Events like this tend to focus my attention on the weightier matters of living. I don’t have a lot of energy right now for discussions or debates on the finer points of theology: somehow proper modes of baptism or the presence of Christ in communion aren’t so pressing. I’m thinking about other things - like water and food for the next few days. Forget about gasoline: the migration of folks from Houston to higher ground has decimated the local supply of fuel. It’s as if Joel’s locusts drove into town and ravaged all the service stations. It doesn’t really matter: you can’t drink gasoline.

Rita has also caused me to reflect on former things, too. Specifically, it has made me recall some conversations and statements following Katrina; it has made me recall older things I don’t think about too often.

There were too many Christians - actually just one would be too many - who knew the mind of God and proclaimed that Katrina was God’s judgment on New Orleans for its sin. Apparently God was judging the people of Mississippi and Alabama, too, since the hurricane destroyed those areas even more.

There was an apparent ease with which such pseudo-spiritual judgments were made, an ease that reveals an remarkable shallowness and ignorance. At times the proclamations sounded triumphant, as though it was a great victory for the “righteous” people who weren’t like the reprehensible publicans residents of the Crescent City. “Ha, ha!” they seemed to imply, “You got what you deserved!”

Some of my ordinarily-suppressed memories also make an appearance at times like this. Those recollections are of a period of my life decades ago when I was witness to more than enough death and dead bodies. It was not from war but from human error, stupidity, evil, and bad weather. Losing a race with a train, dying in a house fire, traffic accidents, murders. And the autopsies: the autopsies are particularly haunting.

There’s something about the frozen expression on the face of a corpse that arrests your attention. It’s as though the eyes can see right through you, into your soul, somehow searching for something that’s been lost. The cold, naked body in the morgue, sliced open for an autopsy, eyes fixed in an empty gaze at the ceiling. Or the smell of someone whose death went unnoticed for days or weeks, or the bloated remains of a life floating face-down in a pool of water.

When you’ve smelled those things, touched the bodies, seen the looks of horror, and tried to comfort the survivors, statements about God’s judgment seem cruel and hateful. Death isn’t just a concept at such times: it’s staring you in the face, brushing against you, reminding you of the eternal realities of life.

Katrina and Rita: judgments of God? We can say with certainty that death is a judgment of God. Sometimes it comes in the form of a hurricane, sometimes as cancer, sometimes at a familiar intersection. When someone dies of heart disease is it the judgment of God? When terrorists kill soldiers is the judgment of God? When a child overdoses or starves to death, is it the judgment of God?

Death is the judgment. Everything else is just a means to an end, a door that opens on eternity in our lives before closing again for awhile. When you see the dead looks on the lifeless faces, you know what judgment looks like. It’s not just a word to be thrown around recklessly: it’s the end of a life. Or many lives.

God’s judgment comes every day. Read the obituaries. Go by a cemetery. Volunteer in an oncology unit at a hospital. You’ll see the judgment of God. You won’t want to stand up and pontificate at moments like that. It will humble you and cause you to tremble.

And you will understand the death of Christ a little bit better, and the judgment of God upon your sin that caused Him to die. And maybe - hopefully - you’ll have a little more compassion for those upon whom the deadly judgments of God fall.

Jn 19.22

 

I have no official congregation, no ecclesiastical ordination, no pulpit, robes, or baptistry. No building or building plans. I don’t perform weddings or funerals, don’t visit strangers in the hospital, or wrestle in the political in-fighting of a denomination. The word “divinity” is not associated with my name. No one calls me “pastor” or even “brother Mike.”

In spite of all these absences in my life, I still regard myself as a shepherd. I think like a shepherd, talk like a shepherd, act like a shepherd. I am, if nothing else, a shepherd. Perhaps not always a good shepherd, but a shepherd just the same.

Here’s what precipitated this thinking and post.

A few days ago I came across the writings of an official, ordained, pulpit-owning, robe-wearing, baptizing minister of the gospel who said some things with which I strongly disagreed. I disagreed only a little bit for doctrinal reasons but a whole lot because of what I believed to be an unloving attitude toward people whom I consider to be my sheep - those who theologically think like I do.

The writings of this minister said, in no uncertain terms, that people like me couldn’t lay claim to certain appellations reserved for him and his flock. Now, I could really care less whether or not such titles could be apprehended by me and my kind; I do care, though, that somehow people in my flock were being relegated to the fringes of spirituality and doctrinal wholesomeness. Like Jephthah in the Book of Judges, we were proclaimed to be the bastard children of the community and didn’t really have a legitimate claim to the family name.

I responded with an intentionally sardonic post of my own that was decidedly focused on the character of the person dismissing us from the inner circle of true believers. Not only was the person hypocritical - he could disagree at some points and still belong, but we couldn’t - but he was employing a doctrinal shibboleth to create divisions in the body of Christ. I did not - and still don’t - understand what was to be gained by alienating those that didn’t think like him.

Doctrinal distinctions are inevitable in this lifetime, of course, and I have no problem with them. People of similar theological perspectives tend to congregate, worship, and serve together. That’s fine. But there’s really no need to puff ourselves up at the expense of others and parade around because we are the “real followers” of a particular doctrinal system.

The minister got wind of my post, read it, and wrote me to say that he was deeply offended and wanted me to remove my post. He did not apologize for what he said but did say he was sorry that it had upset me. I took it down and then discovered that he, too, had removed his post.

He then decided to take his entire blog down because of what had happened.

A part of me thinks that the “right” and “Christian” thing to do would be to feel guilty and take my blog down, too. I considered it for an evening before deciding otherwise the next morning. I am still unconvinced that I did anything wrong, but I am certainly open to rebuke if it can be demonstrated to me that I have, in fact, sinned.

I try not to attack peoplewithout provocation. There was a time when I would but I outgrew that decades ago. A shepherd does not go looking for the wolf.

The shepherd does, however, defend the flock when he believes it is being attacked. That means that I will respond to the threat with whatever force I deem necessary to remove the danger and restore a sense of safety and comfort to the flock. If and when the wolf retreats, I don’t track it down and inflict more injury. My hope is that the wolf will think better of coming around again.

Somehow, though, I’m the bad guy in this story. Because I reacted to an unloving post with a strong, defensive post of my own, I’m in the wrong. I’ve stepped over some invisible line or norm of Christian civility and niceness by striking back to defend those that needed to be defended. Particularly egregious, it seems, is that I attacked the man’s character. But since I believed it was his character and not his doctrine that was the problem, what should have I attacked? I found his originally post to be unloving, self-serving, self-gratifying, unnecessary, and unwarranted - a turf war, essentially. I regarded my reaction to be both necessary and warranted.

Part of me grows weary of having to respect the rights of perpetrators, of having to tread lightly because the bully on the block might be upset if I stand up and fight back. This is a pretty wimpy Christianity that I don’t tolerate very well: if someone is going to start a fight, they shouldn’t start whining and crying foul if the person attacked gives back better than he got.

If I’m wrong or over the line, I want to know. People that don’t want to know when they’ve crossed a line need to stay away from my lines. I don’t care so much if I’m attacked personally - which is not to say that it doesn’t hurt - but I simply cannot stand by while someone does harm to a flock for which I feel responsible.

If I’m wrong, I want to know biblically where I’m off. Until I discover or am taught that, I’m going to keep defending. Without apology.

Jn 19.22

 

I found Israel like grapes in the wilderness; I saw your forefathers as the earliest fruit on the fig tree in its first season. But they came to Baal-peor and devoted themselves to shame; And they became as detestable as that which they loved.” - Hos 9.10 (NASB)

“They” in this verse is the nation of Israel on its 40-year journey from Egypt to the promised land; “Baal-peor” is likely a reference to Chemosh, a Moabite god known elsewhere as Ashtar. The worship of Chemosh at Peor - a mountain peak in Moab, east of the southern half of the Dead Sea - was where Balak had tried to get Balaam to curse God’s people (Num 23.28). Hosea’s reference, however, is to an episode recorded in Num 25:

1 While Israel remained at Shittim, the people began to play the harlot with the daughters of Moab.
2 “For they invited the people to the sacrifices of their gods, and the people ate and bowed down to their gods.
3 “So Israel joined themselves to Baal of Peor, and the LORD was angry against Israel.
4 “The LORD said to Moses, ‘Take all the leaders of the people and execute them in broad daylight before the LORD, so that the fierce anger of the LORD may turn away from Israel.’
5 “So Moses said to the judges of Israel, ‘Each of you slay his men who have joined themselves to Baal of Peor.’
6 “Then behold, one of the sons of Israel came and brought to his relatives a Midianite woman, in the sight of Moses and in the sight of all the congregation of the sons of Israel, while they were weeping at the doorway of the tent of meeting. [Talk about audacity and high-handed sin! - MR]
7 “When Phinehas the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron the priest, saw it, he arose from the midst of the congregation and took a spear in his hand,
8 “and he went after the man of Israel into the tent and pierced both of them through, the man of Israel and the woman, through the body. So the plague on the sons of Israel was checked.”

What is most troubling about Hosea’s words, understood in their context, is his pronouncement about the people who participated in cultic worship of Baal/Chemosh: “And they became as detestable as that which they loved.” This is a statement of being, not merely doing. It was not merely their sin that was vile; they were vile and profane.

Perhaps subconsciously subscribing to Greek dualism, Christians tend to be more comfortable with confessing our sins that confessing our selves. We view the flesh as somehow alien or foreign, something that used to be who we are but no longer is: the responsibility for sin, we reason, is in the weakness of our fallen flesh and not in our selves. We can bend the knee and confess (Gr. homolegeo, to say the same thing, to agree with) that behaviors or deeds in which we have engaged are sinful and unacceptable to God.

But Hosea does not stop with deeds or even attitudes. He goes after us, after who we are. Who we are, the prophet says, is as detestable to God as the object of our love and worship if it is anything or anyone other than Him. “Detestable” in Hebrew is the word siqqus which means - “detestable.”

The prophet Hosea (Hos 9:10) describes how Israel changed from a beloved nation to a . . . detestable nation. The unlikely discovery of grapes in the wilderness and the delicacy of the first figs produced by a fig tree depict the intensity of Yahweh’s delight in his covenant nation. However, after Israel encountered the Moabites, ‘the men began to indulge in sexual immorality with Moabite women’ (Num 25:1), a possible allusion to the sexual rites commonly associated with fertility cults. Consequently, Yahweh’s delight in the nation of Israel changed to loathing since they participated in worship acts that were reprehensible to him. As is seen in the commanded extermination of the Canaanites, the worshiper in pagan rituals faced the same divine wrath as the idolatrous objects. Before Yahweh, God’s children became just as detestable as the abhorrent immorality of Baal worship.” - Grisanti, in the New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology

Certainly this is not an eternal detestation of His children, but it is a strong statement of the temporal unacceptability of believers who sin in this fashion. It not only makes worship of God impossible, but also results in our sanctification and service coming to a screeching halt. When we love anyone or anything more than we love God, we are as unacceptable and vile to Him as whatever it is that we have put in His place. Or, should the object of our idolatry (for so it is) be something loved by God - a spouse or children, for example - we become as detestable as the practice of idolatry.

We must not allow ourselves to think that somehow the flesh or the body is divorced from who we are in our beings. We do, as Paul says, “have this treasure in earthen vessels,” but in this lifetime we are the vessel and the vessel is us. We sin, we rebel, we wander - and we are detestable and vile. It is not just the behavior that is so offensive to God: we, the agents of the sin, are no less reprehensible. We are Chemosh.

Our confession must not be relegated to the words and actions of omission or commission; it is not our behavior that is the heart of the problem. Our confession needs to be of ourselves, of who we are, of our problematic hearts. Christ died for our sins, it is true, but He came to save sinners. We must not for a minute think that we need the grace of God less because we have been declared righteous.

We need to be saved from - not merely our sins - but from our sinful selves. It is who you are, not merely what you do, that needs to be confessed.

Jn 19.22

 

I read this earlier today:

“‘I have no strategies in mind to give you a better marriage, better kids, a more complete recovery from sexual abuse, or quicker healing after your divorce. Nor, I believe, does God.’ He adds, ‘We can’t get life to work; it never will until heaven.’”
- Larry Crabb, in The Pressure’s Off, as cited in Christianity Today

Really? So, even as Christians, we are to resign ourselves to the fact that “this is as good as it gets”? The Holy Spirit cannot - or will not - work in our lives to bring about change, improve marriages, heal broken hearts, redeem shattered lives? The only difference between Christians and non-Christians, temporally speaking, is that we can draw near to God and they can’t?

Francis Schaeffer argued decades ago that, while total healing was not possible in this lifetime, substantial healing was: healing in our relationship with God, our relationships with others, and even our relationship with ourselves. Crabb, however, says no. Whom are we to believe? Schaeffer? Crabb? God?

It is somewhat remarkable to me that any psychologist would make such a statement, let alone a Christian psychologist who has sold thousands of books offering hope and relief to struggling believers. After The Marriage Builder, Effective Biblical Counseling, Inside Out, Connecting, Men & Women - now we find out that there’s really no hope of change? Do we get our money back?

I do not intend for this to be an attack on Crabb: I have been fortunate to have gotten to know him through a mutual friend, have talked casually with him about things, sat under his teaching, read his books, and listened to him preach. I have never questioned his sincerity, passion, or love for God. I like him. He’s an intriguing person. But I don’t always agree with him.

Now, in fairness to Crabb, I must admit that I have not read this particular book from which the quote was taken. Maybe the article took his quote out of context and Crabb is actually very optimistic and enthusiastic about - not just the possibility but - the inevitability of change for the Christian. Maybe, but this quote really does not strike me as being out of character for him. Like the Moody Blues, he’s a melancholy man.

The church unfortunately has been influenced by some beliefs from psychologists without always evaluating them biblically or theologically. There is a prevalent notion in many pews that - even for Christians - some situations are genuinely intractable and hopeless. God either won’t or can’t overcome our internal and external conflicts or the consequences of them, leaving us to suffer through life.

My concerns about this concept are legion, but foremost is the “I’m-a-poor-victim”/”I’m-such-a-martyr” attitude adopted by more than a few believers. If Crabb is correct, then we are all doomed by the vagaries of life. Until heaven, what has been is what is and what is is what will be. Get used to it.

Now, certainly suffering is a reality for Christians and times of difficulty are, as Crabb says, opportunities to seek comfort from God. A theology of suffering is woefully absent from most doctrinal statements and very much needed. I am not denying that. But if there is no hope in this lifetime, then there are some passages that make absolutely no sense to me. Consider, for example, Paul’s words to the believers at Corinth:

“Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.” -
1 Cor 6.9-11

Perhaps I’m eisogeting, but Paul seems to be implying that change is possible and that we can escape from past behaviors. If he’s not saying that, then we would have to conclude that it would be acceptable to continue in the behaviors - fornication, homosexuality, coveting, drunkenness - since there is no strategy to overcome them. I find that hard to believe.

And if Paul isn’t holding forth the hope of change in that passage, then perhaps he’s saying it in Rom 6-8 when he teaches about being conformed - changed - into the image of Christ. If that process of conformation does not change things, then I’ve been a fool for over 30 years in thinking that God has made a difference in me and my relationships.

Contrary to what Crabb appears to be saying, there is hope - even in this lifetime. The Christian life is not primarily about improving our relationships and emotional state, but the presence of the Holy Spirit, the community of believers, the resurrection power within each of us does make a difference.

There is great reason to have hope in this lifetime and in the life to come. There is no need for an attitude of defeatism or resignation to circumstances. God does change people, God does answer prayer, God does have strategy. Paul wrote,

“If we have hoped in Christ in this life only, we are of all men most to be pitied.” - 1 Cor 15.19

He does not say we are to be pitied if we have hoped in Christ in this life, but that we are pitiful if we have hoped in Him in this life only. There is hope in Christ in this life, and it’s not only because of an eye to the future or intimacy with God now. Our greatest benefit surely comes with our glorification, but there is enormous benefit and change possible even now.

(Also available at Theologica.)

Jn 19.22

 

Stories of pain similar to what follows are not uncommon in my work, but they still are difficult to hear. This one comes from an anonymous lady who is wrestling with the consequences and questions caused by her decisions in the past; she wrote this comment in response to my post Having Your Reward in Full:

I have been reading this blog for quite awhile and decided today to “de-lurk” and leave a comment. The entry was very sobering, and, as usual, well-written, clear and concise. I am now wondering about the biblical status of my own marriage, inasmuch as I initiated my divorce from my first husband, after three separations and multiple “indiscretions” - he actually wanted to come back three or four months after he had departed for the last time but I refused to allow him to once again use the revolving door the marriage had become. Hmmmm.

Two marriages later (entered into with unbelievers at a time when I was so angry I didn’t care what happened to me; flagrant acts of disobedience that ended when both departed and filed for divorce), I am now married to my 4th husband, a believer, who was divorced by his wife, also a believer, after she had committed her own acts of indiscretion, probably out of desperation and need, and SHE is married to ANOTHER believer who was also divorced by HIS wife (God must be truly appalled - I am, just reading these words)…everyone involved this sad drama bears some measure of responsibility and some burden of blame. There is much, much more to the story - but I now wonder…should we be in this arrangement at all? I have long since repented of my actions and have come to understand what was driving my behavior in those days. Even though the damage is done and I can in no way undo what happened then, I STILL wonder if I am NOW in a sinful arrangement and if so, what should be done to rectify the situation.

The pain and confusion are obvious. It is risky to respond since I have just a smattering of information, but here’s the best counsel I can come up with. I’m pretty sure it’s biblical.

First, the situation you are now in is the situation you are in. Stay in it. There is no warrant to divorce: it will not erase the past and will only further complicate the future. Thank God for what you do have - a believing husband who (hopefully) is willing to work on the marriage and remain true to you. It is not wrong to stay in your present marriage; divorce likely would be less-than pleasing to God.
It is true that God required the priests in Ezra to divorce their foreign wives, but that was necessary for their ritual and ceremonial purity. The priests could not minister in the temple on behalf of the people if they remained in the unbiblical marriages. Before the temple was rebuilt, this was not a problem; once Ezra oversaw the rebuilding of the temple and the re-institution of the sacrifices, however, the need for a cleansed priesthood arose.

As Christians, we are cleansed by the blood of Christ following repentance. We are priests, it is true, but we have a High Priest - Jesus - who intervenes for us and all believers. We can be in marriages with unbelievers or divorced people and still be in fellowship with God: that is grace upon grace. Divorce would be unwise and unnecessary for you.

When I wrote the previous post, I had in mind those remarried Christians who have not repented for their own sins that led to the end of previous marriages. My target were those who hold up divorce as a way to be happy and “get it right” this time. People such as yourself - who are aware of their sins and repentant - are not necessarily consigned to rewards in this lifetime only. With repentance, such as you have expressed, there is forgiveness and the hope of future rewards.

God is certainly able to bless your present marriage and all that grows out of it. He forgives when we confess, washes us clean, and restores us to fellowship with Him.

Personally, I would much rather hear the kind of testimony you gave in your comment than what I discussed in the post. Yours is honest, humble, and - as strange as it might seem to you - edifying. You seem to be honoring God with you lips and your heart seems to be very close to Him, too.

Remember what was said of our Messiah: “a battered reed He will not break off, and a smoldering wick He will not put out.” He has not given up on you or your present marriage; there is no need for you to give up, either.

Jn 19.22

 

The following posts originally appeared at World Magazine’s Theologica, where I am e pluribus unum. Although it may seem that this is a dead horse, I can assure you that - to the thousands of people still trying to fathom (absolutely no pun intended) what happened to them - this is still an important issue. Further, this is not the last disaster that will prompt such statements or raise questions. I would encourage you to read the related posts over at Theologica by some of the other contributors and commenters, as their insights and different perspectives are quite heuristic.

Why Katrina Was Not God’s Judgment

As is typically the case following any disaster - man-made or otherwise - there is no lack of voices declaring that Hurricane Katrina was God’s judgment upon New Orleans. The Crescent City has a well-earned reputation for debauchery and ribald behavior, it is argued, and God decided to wipe them out just like He wiped out Sodom some four thousand years ago.

Well, unless someone has new revelation to the contrary, I don’t see how Katrina could have been an act of God’s judgment. Here’s why I believe that, and how you can figure out for yourself if it’s a judgment of God the next time some tragedy like this occurs.

Throughout the Bible, in both testaments, there is a pattern to God’s judgment that seems consistent enough to be a general principle: there may be exceptions, but usually not. Here are a sampling of verses to whet your appetite:

Then God said to Noah, “The end of all flesh has come before Me; for the earth is filled with violence because of them; and behold, I am about to destroy them with the earth. Then the LORD said to Noah, “Enter the ark, you and all your household, for you alone I have seen to be righteous before Me in this time.” - Gen 6.13, 7.1

Abraham came near and said, “Will You indeed sweep away the righteous with the wicked? Suppose there are fifty righteous within the city; will You indeed sweep it away and not spare the place for the sake of the fifty righteous who are in it? Far be it from You to do such a thing, to slay the righteous with the wicked, so that the righteous and the wicked are treated alike. Far be it from You! Shall not the Judge of all the earth deal justly?”

So the LORD said, “If I find in Sodom fifty righteous within the city, then I will spare the whole place on their account.” - Gen 18.23-26

. . . and if He condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to destruction by reducing them to ashes, having made them an example to those who would live ungodly lives thereafter; and if He rescued righteous Lot, oppressed by the sensual conduct of unprincipled men . . . - 2 Pet 2.6-7

“Son of man, if a country sins against Me by committing unfaithfulness, and I stretch out My hand against it, destroy its supply of bread, send famine against it and cut off from it both man and beast, even though these three men, Noah, Daniel and Job were in its midst, by their own righteousness they could only deliver themselves,” declares the Lord GOD. - Ezek 14.13-14

For it is time for judgment to begin with the household of God; and if it begins with us first, what will be the outcome for those who do not obey the gospel of God? AND IF IT IS WITH DIFFICULTY THAT THE RIGHTEOUS IS SAVED, WHAT WILL BECOME OF THE GODLESS MAN AND THE SINNER? - 1 Pet 4.17-18

The clearest and most powerful illustration of this principle is found in the Book of Exodus during the plagues that fell upon the Egyptians because of Pharoah’s refusal to let Israel leave the land. In at least three instances - the pestilence upon livestock, hail that destroyed the crops, and the angel of death who visited the firstborn - Egypt was afficted but Israel was not.

More examples could be adduced, but the pattern seems pretty clear: whenever God judges, the righteous are saved. The means of their deliverance may vary - saved out of, in the midst of, or through - but God spares the righteous when He judges evil. He doesn’t seem to allow the unrighteous to escape or the righteous to perish: God accomplishes His purposes in His judgments.

Clearly Katrina’s devastation of New Orleans - indeed, its devastation of a huge swath of the Gulf Coast - was not an act of Yahweh’s judgment, unless He suddenly became reckless or sloppy! Not all who escaped were righteous; not all who perished were unrighteous. It obviously was not God’s judgment.

If it wasn’t God’s judgment, then what was it? It was a disaster - an unnatural disaster - caused by the fallen condition of the world. People, animals, and nature are other than they might have been because of the Fall. It is profitable to distinguish between “Sin” - a state or condition of people, nations, and nature - and “sins,” which are specific manifestations of the reality of Sin. Hurricane Katrina was the result of Sin, but it was not a judgment on sins.

Jesus acknowledged this reality when He said to the people,

Now on the same occasion there were some present who reported to Him about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices. And Jesus said to them, “Do you suppose that these Galileans were greater sinners than all other Galileans because they suffered this fate? I tell you, no, but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish. Or do you suppose that those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them were worse culprits than all the men who live in Jerusalem? I tell you, no, but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.” - Lk 13.1-5

In the present world, there have been and always will be disasters. People will die; some unrighteous people will die and some of the righteous - positionally and forensically - will die. Such disasters and deaths are not evidence of the judgment of God; they are evidence of a fallen world, out which Jesus Christ endeavors to save us.

Thus, the next time a disaster strikes, ask yourself these questions: Were the righteous delivered and spared? Did any unrighteous people escape? Unless the answers are “Yes” and “No,” respectively, then it is probably the case that it was a manifestation of Sin and not a judgment upon sins.

---

Katrina and Judgments

My earlier post stating that it was improbable that Hurricance Katrina was a judgment of God elicited some interesting comments and questions, some of which I want to respond to here. Before doing so, I want to make sure that everyone understands that I am not claiming to have the final word or definitive answer to this issue. At least not yet. But I still stand by my earlier comments.

Bill, you asked (rhetorically, I assume),

“when we say that disasters are “evidence of a fallen world” but not the judgment of God are we not denying the very statement of Jesus in your Luke example, “I tell you, no, but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.”? Is not every evil thing that happens in this “fallen world” part of either the judgment of God or a situation orchestrated for his purpose? (John 9:1-2)”

Not necessarily.

Because we live in a fallen, sinful world there are natural consequences that occur. One of those consequences of Sin (as a principle, not sins as specific deeds) are so-called natural disasters. I don’t think God supernaturally intervened in history via Hurricane Katrina, but He did indirectly “cause” Katrina by establishing consequences for Sin (and Adam’s sin in particular). Jesus’ warning, in this light, is a statement about Sin, not sins, and the natural consquence of perishing if there is no repentance.

Arch’s observations and objections are a bit more involved, as you might expect coming from him. After citing some acts of judgments wherein righteous people may have died, he asks rhetorically (again with the rhetorical questions!),

“Would it not be better to distinguish between God’s Special Acts of Judgment wherein we know the reasons for God’s actions and His General Acts of Judgment which serve as wake up calls for repentance (cf. Rev. 9:20-21)?”

We certainly could create additonal categories for God’s judgments, but a name doesn’t necessarily change the haphazard nature of the “General Acts of Judgment.” I would prefer, instead, to call it simply a natural consequence - established by God in the ordering of the creation - of Sin. Rev 9.20-21 (for those of you who don’t have it committed to memory) says:

“The rest of mankind, who were not killed by these plagues, did not repent of the works of their hands, so as not to worship demons, and the idols of gold and of silver and of brass and of stone and of wood, which can neither see nor hear nor walk; and they did not repent of their murders nor of their sorceries nor of their immorality nor of their thefts.”

The context is the sounding of the sixth trumpet during the tribulation period. But since the tribulation is a specific act of judgment upon the entire earth, I don’t see how it can be a general act.

We cannot say with absolute certainty that no righteous people died in the judgments Arch mentions - but we cannot say they did, either. It must be kept in mind, too, that it is not always forensic or eternal salvation that is in view in the judgments: sometimes it is behavioral righteousness. If the people in Jerusalem had heeded the preaching of Jeremiah, for example, they would have escaped with their lives. I’m not saying that everyone who died went to hell; I am saying that those who listened to the warning and repented were saved, at least temporally.

In response to Peter, Bill asked,

“Do you have timeframe for sequential incidents to assume they are connected? ”

Yes: anything less than six days. If God can create the world in six days, then He should have no problem whipping up another hurricane or shaking an earthquake loose in the same amount of time.

David T certainly raises some interesting (albeit unconvincing to me) points, but a point-by-point refutation or response would be a bit long for this post. I’ll either do it in a separate post, respond to it on my own site, or ignore it. If the latter, it’s nothing personal, David. Just busy.

Jn 19.22

 

Shane at Wesley Blog makes the following announcement that might be of interest to readers of this - and a lot of other - blogs:

Today is the launch date for Theologica, a new weblog maintained by World Magazine, the conservative Christian newsweekly. I will be a regular contributor, along with Adrian Warnock, Mark D. Roberts, David Wayne (JollyBlogger), and a few others.”

Yours truly is one of those “players to be named later,” having been invited to join the forum by the editor, David Wayne of Jollyblogger. For the record, the “few others” are Tim Challies, Rebecca Stark, Warren Kelly, Bill Meisheid, and Arch Van Devender.

Unless there’s some sort of copyright restriction, I’ll probably post most of my articles here as well as there. To keep redundancy and repetition to a minimum and avoid similar conversations, I’ll do most of my commenting over there so that most of my comments will be over there and not here.

Hope to see you there.

Jn 19.22

 

The Deliberate Church
Building Your Ministry on the Gospel

Authors: Mark Dever and Paul Alexander

Publisher: Crossway Books
ISBN: 1581347383
Pages: 176
Recommended: Yes

Disclaimer: This book was provided free of charge through the Diet of Bookworms as part of a book review program.

Overview

The authors provide three clarifications about their book in the
Forward before explaining what their purpose was in writing the book. First, they explain, what they are proposing in The Deliberate Church (TDC hereafter) is nothing new but rather something quite old. Second, they are not presenting a program that churches can “plug in” and implement. Third, TDC is not a quick fix for churches hoping to grow overnight, whether spiritually, numerically, or both.

The authors explain that

the deliberate church is careful to trust the Word of God, wielded by Jesus Christ, to do the work of building the local church. It is an attempt to put our money where our mouth is when we say that we believe in the sufficiency of Scirpture for the life, health, and growth of the local church . . . In short, God’s Word, encapsulated in the Gospel, builds the church.”

TDC argues that the gospel and the Bible provide the foundation for the local church and that methodology must grow out of both:

The uniqueness of the church is her message - the Gospel . . . That Gospel is visualized in the ordinances of baptism and the Lord’s Supper, both instituted by Christ. The distinguishing marks of the church, then, are the right preaching of this Gospel and the right administration of the biblical ordinances that dramatize it.”

TDC argues that four principles guide the building of the church: (1) theology drives methods, (2) God’s methods are to be our methods, (3) the gospel enables and informs how we participate in God’s purposes, and (4) the measure of success is determined not by numbers but by how faithful the church is to the gospel.

The book is organized into four sections and twenty-one chapters, plus a forward, introduction, and conclusion. Interspersed throughout the chapters are various questions under the heading of “Think Tank” that will help the reader and his/her congregation reflect upon and apply the material to their own local body of believers.

Section and Chapter Summaries

Section 1 - Gathering the Church

Ch. 1: “The Four P’s”
- Preaching, praying, personal discipleship, patience.
Ch. 2: “Beginning the Work”
- Clarifying the gospel, cultivating trust, cleaning the rolls, conducting reverse membership interviews.
Ch. 3: “Doing Responsible Evangelism”
- Including essentials, extending invitations, avoiding entertainment, avoiding manipulation, being God-centered.
Ch. 4: “Taking in New Members”
- Biblical teaching on membership, new members’ class, church covenants, membership interviews, ministry of new members, the margin of error.
Ch. 5: “Doing Church Discipline”
- Formative and corrective, the preventative function of accountability, context, the care list, and removing a member from the rolls.

Section 2 - When the Church Gathers

Ch. 6: “Understanding the Regulative Principle”
- The regulative principle, worship as the purpose of redemption, worship in the Old Testament, worship in the New Testament.
Ch. 7: “Applying the Regulative Principle”
- Read, preach, pray, sing, and see the Bible; about multiple services.
Ch. 8: “The Role of the Pastor”
- Practitioner of the marks, teaching is everything, the day-to-day, the three Gs.
Ch. 9: “The Roles of Different Gatherings”
- Adult education, Sunday morning service, Sunday evening service, Wednesday evening service, member meetings.
Ch. 10: “The Role of the Ordinances”
- Baptism, the Lord’s Supper.
Ch. 11: “Loving Each Other”
- A live and active culture, a corporate witness.
Ch. 12: “Music”
- Congregational singing, accompaniment, variety, getting there.

Section 3 - Gathering Elders

Ch. 13: “The Importance of Elders”
- Biblical background, practicality of plurality.
Ch. 14: “Looking for a Few Good Men”
- Recognizing before training, what elders are not, what elders are, qualification quadrants.
Ch. 15: “Assessment”
- Assessing character, ability, and fit.
Ch. 16: “Why Character is Crucial”
- Modeling, meetings, the great meeting.
Ch. 17: “Getting Started”
- Exposition, recognition, nomination, election, installation, cooperation, rotation.
Ch. 18: “Staffing”
- Specialization, alternatives, intrastaff relationships.

Section 4 - When the Elders Gather

Ch. 19: “The Word and Prayer”
- The word, prayer.
Ch. 20: “The Agenda: What to Talk About”
- Preparation, categories for conversation, the budget process, others in the room.
Ch. 21: “Decision Making: How to Talk about It”
- The pastor’s role, speaking graciously, observing order, voting.

Conclusion
- A Godward-looking church, an outward-looking church.

Review

The worse the book, the longer the review; the shorter, the better. This will be a short review.

Setting out on an honorable and biblical quest, Dever and Alexander accomplish their goals admirably. They provide a thorough, albeit not exhaustive, treatment of the biblical teaching concerning the form and function of the local church. Eschewing formulaic or numerical growth-focused programs, the authors have developed a veritable manual for church leaders to use as a guide in establishing and/or maintaining a Scriptural church.

The book should be read in its entirety but, having done that, TDC can then be used almost as a reference to address specific issues in the church. It is also likely that the reader of TDC will find some chapters to be more timely than others: it is difficult not to evaluate one’s own church when reading through this book and some chapters will address problem areas in almost every church.

By way of example, this reviewer was very taken with the chapter “Music.” Perhaps feeling the need to explain or justify a chapter on this subject, the authors begin:

Music in the context of the corporate gathering is only a subset of corporate worship. Listening to the preached Word of God is one of the most important ways we worship God together; in fact, it is the only way we can learn how to worship Him acceptably . . . worship is a total life orientation of engaging with God on the terms that He proposes and in the way that He provides.

“This reflection reminds us that our audience in corporate worship is not people . . . Worship in the corporate gathering is about renewing our covenant with God by meeting with Him and relating to Him in the ways that He has prescribed.”

Three principles are offered for congregational singing:

It is public, not privatized . . . we would be wrong to encourage people to think of corporate worship in terms of shutting out the rest of the congregation to have a privatized emotional experience with God.

“It should be theologically rich . . . we want to avoid songs that encourage us to reflect on our own subjective emotional experience more than on the objective truths of God’s character and implications of the cross.

“It should be spiritually encouraging. The result of theological richness will always be increasing accuracy in worshiping God as He really is, which will in turn result in increasing spiritual encouragement for us.”

What is true for the chapter on music is true for almost all the chapters in the book. Reading through the brief description of each chapter provided in the “additional material” above demonstrates the breadth and depth of this book. It will make the reader carefully think through the forms and functions of the local church and to evaluate their own church - shall we say? - more deliberately.

For those attempting to bring about change in an existing church, this book is a must-read; for those just beginning a church, The Deliberate Church is invaluable.

Jn 19.22

 

Beware of practicing your righteousness before men to be noticed by them; otherwise you have no reward with your Father who is in heaven. So when you give to the poor, do not sound a trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, so that they may be honored by men. Truly I say to you, they have their reward in full . . .

“When you pray, you are not to be like the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and on the street corners so that they may be seen by men. Truly I say to you, they have their reward in full . . .

“Whenever you fast, do not put on a gloomy face as the hypocrites do, for they neglect their appearance so that they will be noticed by men when they are fasting. Truly I say to you, they have their reward in full.” - Mt 6, NASB

We have all heard it, I suppose, or at least heard of it. The married couple gives a testimony and, somewhere in the midst of it, comes the announcement:

“I was married once before but got divorced after (insert one: 5/10/15/30) long and difficult (years/months/weeks/minutes). God has so blessed my present marriage and I just want to praise Him for it!”

Many times, maybe even most of the time, this is a legitimate praise to God: the person making the statement was mercifully allowed to escape a dead marriage and God has graciously coupled them with someone much better suited to live in a marriage that glorifies Him. Perhaps the person was not a Christian when they divorced or maybe the other spouse was unfaithful - regardless of the specifics, there were biblical grounds for the divorce or the person speaking was the unwilling recipient of divorce papers. Praise God for such marriages!

Sometimes, however, the story is different. Once in awhile it is discovered that the divorce was initiated by the speaker, who was a Christian at the time but had decided that there were compelling (but not biblical) reasons to end the marriage. The marriage was to an unbeliever who, though willing to stay, “hurt” the speaker’s relationship with God or didn’t allow them to “be myself.” Or they’ve suddenly met their “soulmate” - which is in reality just their “fleshmate” - and have been “led” or “told” by God that divorce is OK in this situation. And - look! - it’s turned out so wonderfully and now they’re doing such great things for God with their new partner. Praise God, eh?

The worst - and not many of you hear this regularly, I suspect - is the Christian who is unhappily married (like their spouse isn’t?!?) and has heard a “testimony” similar to the ones above. The conclusion is that if it worked for them, it will work for me. Surely God doesn’t want us in an unhappy, loveless marriage, does He? I’ll be rewarded, won’t I?.

Well, yes and no.

What I say to people in such situations is what Jesus repeats in the verses quoted above: “they have their reward in full.” I have no reason to question or doubt the honesty of such people who have been unbiblically divorced and remarried, who then proclaim their happiness and sense of fulfillment. In fact, I hope they squeeze all they can out of it. Because, I’m convinced, it’s all they’re going to get.

Any Christian in a loveless, hurtful marriage that lacks biblical warrant for a divorce has to make a choice: do I want rewards in heaven for faithfulness to God or rewards in this lifetime by divorcing and marrying someone else?

What is revealed at such times is whether or not a person really believes the Bible, really believes that God is a rewarder of those who seek Him, really believes that their life is not their own and thus they might have to suffer for the glory of God. If God wants to end a marriage, He can do it in a heartbeat - literally. Ask Ezekiel. As the widow or widower at a funeral. Ask thousands of suddenly single people all along the Gulf Coast right now. God not only can but does end marriages every day. He doesn’t hesitate. He has His purposes (without apology to open theists).

The depth or (perhaps) reality of a person’s faith is revealed in a loveless marriage. What is more important: your happiness or God’s purposes? What matters more: a bowl of porridge now or a birthright later on? Olympic sex or eternal crowns? You or God?

You can pursue an unbiblical divorce and/or remarriage and have your reward now or you can persevere and wait. But you can’t have it both ways: you will either suffer momentary, light affliction in order to lay hold of an eternal weight of glory, or enjoy the pleasure of sin for a season. If the latter, it will be all the reward you will ever get.

But you will, of course, have it in full.

---

These verses have another application for marriage, one that needs to be heeded by a lot spouses; in my experience, it especially needs to be applied by a lot of Christian husbands. It has to do with the principle of performing our acts of righteousness in the sight of God, not in the sight of our spouse.

I don’t know how many times I have counseled a husband to begin doing the things he should have been doing all along, things his wife has been nagging him about for years. Help with the housework. Be nice. Notice her. Talk to her. And (especially) actually listen to her. (I say these things as a reforming bad husband myself.)

And so Joe Christian, the suddenly enlightened husband, goes home and performs. He helps. He listens. He talks. He walks. When he has finished his heroic sacrifice, he says:

“I hope you noticed what I just did/didn’t automatically do/say/punch!”

And then he can’t understand why his wife doesn’t fall at his feet in utter adoration, crying out with praise to God for the blessing He has bestowed upon His humble daughter.

Anything and everything we do - and especially in marriage - must not be done with an eye on our earthly audience. It simply will not work. First of all, I don’t think God will bless such self-serving, self-aggrandizing motivations. He wants our service to be for Him and no one else.

Second, our wives are never fooled by such shallowness. They respond with scorn, mocking, and more anger than before - which causes husbands to conclude that they are misunderstood and unappreciated, truly called to martyrdom and suffering. In reality, our wives understand us all-too well and keenly appreciate what we’re trying to do.

I’m not talking about someone who sincerely but poorly tries to serve his wife as a manifestation of serving God. We all do badly, even on our best days. Grace and mercy are indispensable in marriage. No, I’m talking about behavior that is ultimately manipulative and selfish, designed to score points with our spouse and get what we want - which, for husbands, usually involves the bedroom and four minutes.

As an old Southern Baptist preacher said, “God is the audience. Everybody else is just eavesdropping.” All of us, although I speak most directly to husbands, are to live our lives in the sight of God and to look to Him and Him only for approval. We are to fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith, not on our spouse for her approval. When we seek to serve Christ and Him alone, we will lay up treasures in heaven.

Remarkably, if this is how a man loves his wife, he will not only have rewards in heaven but will also be rewarded in this lifetime. Even in the bedroom. And for a lot, lot longer than four minutes.

Jn 19.22

 

When is the United Nations going to spring into action to help the U.S. in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina?

Don’t we need a leader like Kofi Annan to lead us through this time (since W is obviously doing such a poor job of it)?

[Additional question at no extra charge: Am I cynical or what?]

Jn 19.22