Improving the Gospel

There is one aspect of the Gospel that God has continuously brought to my mind over the last couple of days, and I would love to share it with whoever would care to read this. I'd like to bring your attention to the simplicity of it. In 1. Corinthians, Paul really stresses the fact that you can be dumb as a doorknob, and still be able to receive it. In some cases that can even be an advantage:

For consider your calling, brethren, that there were not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble;but God has chosen the foolish things of the world to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to shame the things which are strong, and the base things of the world and the despised God has chosen, the things that are not, so that He may nullify the things that are, so that no man may boast before God. (1Cor 1:26-29)

This is why it makes me wonder what is going on when people say we need to tweak the Gospel, so that people will be able to understand it.

The Gospel, in it's simplest form, is that God punished his own son for the sins that we had committed. Christ took our guilt on himself, and we are free.

If you are able to take something as simple as that and complicate it to a point where people in general are unable to understand it, you are either the most ungifted preacher alive, or you have already "tweaked" it to a point where it's no longer the Gospel.

The Bible speaks in many places of those who do not understand the Gospel, but it's never because of any lack of mental capacity. The hindrance is always pride. They don't want to understand. For those who are willing to humble themselves it couldn't be more simple. Christ died for your sins.

The proud will mock it, the humble will ask "how do I get in?" The answer is as simple as it could be:

- Just believe it!

Humans being humans, always eager to add works to salvation, the next question is as as predictable as sin itself:

- How do I do that?

- Well, you do already, don't you.

- I guess I do, don't I. How did that happen?

- God did it.

- It can't be this simple. Don't I have to do something?

- Look at what you have to show for yourself this far! A lifetime of selfish decisions, self-worship and rebellion against God. Wouldn't it be better if you would refrain from doing anything more and let God do the doing from now on?

It's not hard to understand. But it takes humility to accept it. Salvation is from beginning to end a work of God.

If those you are trying to reach lack the mental capacity to understand it, then you are preaching a faulty gospel. Preach the Biblical one, and there will be no need for tweaking.

If however you are trying to reach those who are too proud to see the Gospel, tweaking it would make sense, but be aware that you are working against God. He has taken great pleasure in hiding it from the proud. (Luke 10:21) Are you absolutely sure you want to mess with that?

So you think you're smart, huh? - Notes on 1. Corinthians 1:18-31

Verse 18-19:

For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written, "I WILL DESTROY THE WISDOM OF THE WISE, AND THE CLEVERNESS OF THE CLEVER I WILL SET ASIDE."

This is where we left off last time. God's rejection of the wisdom of men. This wisdom is not what Paul preached in Corinth, and it is not the means God has ordained for salvation. Today we will learn why not. And if not wisdom, then what is the means that he has ordained for salvation?

Verse 20-21:

Where is the wise man? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not come to know God, God was well-pleased through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe.

Wisdom of the world

I think it would be helpful before we move any further to define what exactly we mean when we talk about the wisdom of the world.

When God created us in his image, one of the attributes he chose to let us inherit from him was the ability to reason. None of the animals have been given this gift, it is only for us. When there's a dispute about some fact, we are able to hear different arguments, consider any evidence presented to us, and from that draw a logical conclusion. This mechanism is built into our souls by our Creator, and it is not meant to be bypassed. It is unnatural for us to go anywhere else than the evidence takes us.

Many mistakingly think that Christian faith stands in opposition to this gift of reason. That faith is believing what you know isn't true, and the more evidence there is against what you believe in, the stronger your faith is. Many Christians even advocate such an idea of faith when, faced with hard questions, they offer answers like “I guess this is just on the level of faith”, or “It's just what I chose to believe”.

When they say that, they are saying “I'm under some compulsion that forces me to ignore the evidence and make an irrational conclusion”. While they might imagine it's a very spiritual answer it's obviously not a very satisfying one. An atheist, rejecting such a testimony would actually be right in doing so, because he is only using his God-given gift of reason to conclude that they themselves don't even believe what they believe. The Bible does not afford us cop-out answers like that. To the Contrary, 1Peter 3:15 says

“but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence;”

So if we are called to use the gift of reason in defense of our faith, we cannot possibly at the same time be asked to ignore reason to acquire this faith. Not to mention that this gift of reason is so central to everything we do that it is very hard to ignore. If you don't believe me, try surviving for one day without using logic and reasoning. It is in every way a completely unreasonable request. No matter how persuasive and winsome we may be, we should not expect to be taken seriously if we go around asking people to believe in God in a way that is contrary to the gift of reason that God has given them.

So if logic and reason is not the wisdom of the world, then what is?

Atheists seem to take great pride in the delusion of their own superior ability to reason, independently from what they see as the bondage of religious doctrine. They imagine themselves to be completely objective, since they do not work from a predefined set of unchangeable truths established by divine authority.

Of course they are delusional on several levels. Firstly by inconsistency, because the very laws of logic and reason are borrowed from the set of divinely authoritative truth that they take such pride in claiming to avoid. Secondly by presumption, because in establishing their freedom from divine truth, they must by necessity enslave themselves to the lie that there is no divine truth. They throw out a true presupposition, replace it with a false presupposition, and then pretend that there is no presupposition at all.

How do I know this?

Romans 1:18 to 25 teaches us that an objective mind, never having heard the Gospel, following the evidence to it's natural conclusion would not only know that there is a God, but would even know some of his attributes. And that anyone who comes to a different conclusion is in fact “suppressing the truth in unrighteousness”

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.

For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
Professing to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures.

Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

And here, my friends, you see a picture of the wisdom of man. You start with our God-given gift of reason, exchange the truth of God for a lie, worship whatever you think most worthy of your devotion, and live life with no other moral compass than your own personal preference. God is out of the picture and you are at the center. There's no higher law than your own.

Here we have the sinner that we want to reach. Now let's look at our two options. We can either try wisdom, or we can try supernatural power.

I'd like to see you reason with the sinner, starting at their presupposition that there is no divine truth, and build on that until you end up at the conclusion that the Bible is divine truth. It is a logical impossibility. The only way I could imagine it being done is if you at some point got so entangled in the argument that you both forgot what was the original presupposition.

So that alone would explain why God has rejected that way of salvation, but more important in todays text is the pride aspect.

Verse 22-29

For indeed Jews ask for signs and Greeks search for wisdom; but we preach Christ crucified, to Jews a stumbling block and to Gentiles foolishness, but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.

Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men. 

For consider your calling, brethren, that there were not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble; but God has chosen the foolish things of the world to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to shame the things which are strong, and the base things of the world and the despised God has chosen, the things that are not, so that He may nullify the things that are, so that no man may boast before God.

God's pleasure in crushing human pride

We will not repeat to much of what we have gone through earlier on the subject of God's calling and it's effect on us, but what we will consider is the fact that God takes such pleasure in crushing human pride. Verse 21 said He is “well-pleased” to save those who believe through the foolishness of the message preached.

Foolishness here does not mean that it's illogical, or irrational. It just means that it's simple, and easily understood, even by common people. Those that the Greek debaters and philosophers would look down upon and call fools. I believe that when Paul is choosing to use the word foolishness, he is making a sarcastic reference to this prideful attitude in the Greek elite. In other places the Bible says the same thing using other words than foolishness.

For example in Matthew 11:25-26, after Jesus has preached, and His hearers have pridefully rejected Him and walked away, rather than being discouraged He is filled with praise to His Father, when He says:

“I praise You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and intelligent and have revealed them to infants. Yes, Father, for this way was well-pleasing in Your sight.”

There it is again. “This was well-pleasing in Your sight”. Are you shocked that this is in the Bible? We just witnessed Jesus himself praising the Father because it literally pleased Him to hide the truth of the Gospel from certain people, effectively sealing their eternal destiny in Hell.

Are you shocked or outraged by that? That might be because you take the sin of pride much more lightly than God does.

If I asked you to write down for me on a note the five worst sins you could imagine, I could predict with some certainty what your notes would say. Murder, various sexual perversions, abuses, and so on. And I dare propose that the sin of pride would not make it to your list at all.

Yet all of those other sins are only mentioned briefly a handful of times in the Bible. But the sin of pride is treated in length, from every possible angle, again and again and again. It is so often repeated that we would tend to not take note of it anymore when we see it, like in this passage.

Pride is not merely a sin among other sins. It is the sin of sins. It is evil in its most basic and undiluted form. Every other sin on your note flows from it.

Pride was the sin that got Lucifer kicked out of Heaven:

How you have fallen from heaven, O star of the morning, son of the dawn! You have been cut down to the earth, You who have weakened the nations! But you said in your heart, 'I will ascend to heaven; I will raise my throne above the stars of God, And I will sit on the mount of assembly In the recesses of the north. I will ascend above the heights of the clouds;' (Is 14:12-14)

Likewise it was with pride Adam and Eve were tempted, and fell, casting the curse of sin over all of mankind:

The serpent said to the woman, "You surely will not die! For God knows that in the day you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil." (Gen 3:4-5)

And would you not have to agree that it is pride—yourself usurping God's role as law-giver, and deciding for yourself—that has been at the foundation every single time you yourself have fallen into some sin?

This then, is why God has taken pleasure in hiding the truth of the Gospel from the proud. A proud heart would do nothing else with the Gospel than twist it into an instrument of their own self-worship. So even if it had been logically possible to grasp the gospel by worldly wisdom, those who got it would take great pride in having conquered such a magnificent concept by the power of their own intellect.

God will not cooperate on such terms. He is the creator of everything, the infinite, all-powerful, all-knowing, self-existing supreme being, totally fulfilled and satisfied in himself. He alone is worthy of worship, and he is not an idolater. God does not bow down to anything lesser than himself. Least of all weak and insignificant men pridefully reaching for his crown.

So he made sure that no one would have any occasion to boast before him. He chose a simple way for simple people to be saved. Faith is the most basic intellectual mechanism there is. Even a child is able to practice it, and will do so gladly with everything they are told. You hear, and you believe. It's that simple.

And still, in our natural state we are all so proud that it takes a miracle of God to enable us to do it.

Verse 30-31

But by His doing you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification, and redemption, so that, just as it is written, "LET HIM WHO BOASTS, BOAST IN THE LORD."

By his doing:

This seems to be another thing we keep coming back to. Salvation by His doing, and not ours. Even such a simple thing as faith is out of our reach, and we can only receive it as a gift from God. This ensures that everyone who comes to him comes on their knees. Humble, offering noting on his own.

What do we say then when we are asked why, all of a sudden, we're so different? “I cleaned up my life”? “I pulled myself together and became a better person”? “I found Jesus, and he helped me take responsibility for my life”? All of those are out of the question. Let him who boasts boast in the Lord.

All we can do is point to Christ and say “He did it”.

Jake's Fortune book review

I don't think it's an exaggeration to say Ray Comfort is one of the most influential preachers today when it comes to personal evangelism. His message of law before grace is loved and hated all over the world. I count myself among those who love it. When I first heard him preach on Hell's best kept secret, and true and false conversion about a decade ago, it drastically changed my understanding of God, my understanding of man, and my view on evangelism.

In addition to his preaching ministry, his open air preaching, his training academy, and his TV-Show, he finds time to write more books than most people will ever hope to read. Jake's fortune is his first fictional work though. And if I tried describing it I wouldn't do it justice. Let me just say that Ray is Ray, and while it's a book about gunfights, betrayal, gold, love and much more the gospel is brilliantly woven into every story and subplot.

My wife and I have both been reading it this last week, and from the very first page we have hardly been able to put it down. It is most absolutely among my favorite books ever.

And if you are not familiar with Ray Comfort, then please, please, please click on the links above and listen to those two  sermons. You'll never regret it.

Invalid argument: The "potential person"

Someone told me that a fetus is not a person because it can't think, feel and be self-aware. It's merely a potential person until it possesses those qualities. Therefore it is not immoral to end it's life.

By that logic, if the same person tripped over his ego and knocked himself temporarily unconscious, he too would be unable to think, feel and be self-aware. Now he could potentially wake up again and regain his personhood, but until he does he's only a potential person, and therefore it is not immoral to kill him.

Paul's contextualization fail - Notes on 1. Corinthians 1:17-18

Verse 17

For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not in cleverness of speech, so that the cross of Christ would not be made void.

Cleverness of speech

Paul makes the transition from the previous topic of divisions to the power of the Gospel. Last time we spoke about Not picking apart the picture of God painted by all those who preach his name in truth. This time we will take a closer look at what appeal this picture has to us. What is the power that draws us to it?

The power of Paul's message was not in his cleverness of speech. That's certainly not because of any lack of intellectual ability on his part. When we read through Paul's writings that is abundantly clear. There's no doubt that the man is brilliant and quite able to preach the Gospel with cleverness of speech. So why didn't he? And out of all places he might decide not to speak cleverly, why did it have to be in Corinth?

You see, Corinthians—and Greeks in general—were people who had an appreciation for clever speech. Carefully crafted arguments and high-minded philosophy was highly esteemed in their culture. The elite members of society would devote most of their time to political and philosophical discourse. This is the culture that brought us such names as Plato and Aristotle, still famous today for their handling of what the Greeks called the “Logos” – The word.

We see a snapshot of this Greek culture in Acts 17, as Paul runs into some of these Greek philosophers in Athens, on his way to Corinth.

Now while Paul was waiting for them at Athens, his spirit was being provoked within him as he was observing the city full of idols. So he was reasoning in the synagogue with the Jews and the God-fearing Gentiles, and in the market place every day with those who happened to be present. And also some of the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers were conversing with him. Some were saying, "What would this idle babbler wish to say?" Others, "He seems to be a proclaimer of strange deities,"--because he was preaching Jesus and the resurrection. And they took him and brought him to the Areopagus, saying, "May we know what this new teaching is which you are proclaiming? For you are bringing some strange things to our ears; so we want to know what these things mean." (Now all the Athenians and the strangers visiting there used to spend their time in nothing other than telling or hearing something new.) (Acts 17:16-21)

So why, out of all places, did Paul not preach with cleverness of speech here in Corinth? The city where cleverness of speech was alpha and omega?

What is the one thing everybody knows about evangelism? We need to put the message in a cultural context if we want the culture to listen. We need to make it appealing to them. If the culture you're trying to reach listens to a certain type of music, you need to make that kind of music with Christian lyrics. If the culture likes dance, you need to have Christian dance performances in church. If the culture likes to watch TV, you make Christian TV programs or start a Christian TV channel, and so on. So following this logic, if the culture likes cleverness of speech, than you need to preach the Gospel with cleverness of speech. If that current paradigm for gospel preaching is correct, than we're witnessing a monumental failure on Paul's part. How could he get something this simple wrong?

He gives us the reason: So that the cross of Christ would not be made void. You see, true faith is not something that you can be persuaded into. It is a gift given from God.

That's not to say that it's impossible to persuade someone to become a Christian by natural means. I'm sure Paul would have been able to convince many of the truthfulness of the Gospel if he had used cleverness of speech. Likewise, in our cultural context, multitudes make a profession of faith after Christian concerts, after watching Christian TV programs, and so on. So the problem isn't that it lacks the power to persuade. Rather the problem is that it indeed has this power.

You see if anyone is persuaded to come to Christ by any other power than God's calling, he will still go to hell when he dies. If he came because the preaching made sense to him or because he liked the music, and not because he has been born again by the power of God, then he may be religious, but he's still spiritually dead.
We can not afford to let the power of how we preach replace the power of what we preach.

If Paul had done that, he would be in danger of voiding the Gospel of it's power—the Gospel would have no life-changing effect on them—and producing many false converts, who would add dead weight to the church and eventually fall away. Potentially becoming very deadly weapons in Satan's hands as the persecution of the church was increasing.

Verse 18

For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

Are perishing … are being saved

Notice how Paul here uses the present tense of perishing and being saved. He did not say us who have been saved, or will be saved, although the Bible speaks of salvation both as a past and a future event in other places. Here he choses to speak about it as something present and ongoing. He sees two types of people: Those who are in the process of being saved and those who are in the process of perishing.

It's like a man who has fallen into a deep hole, and is in the process of being pulled out. He could say that he was saved when someone threw him a rope and started pulling him up. He could say that he is being saved, because after all he is still in the hole. And he could say that he will be saved once he reach the top of the hole and has solid ground under his feet again.

We need to be careful that we never think of our salvation as a past event that we're done with. It is a past event, but it's also an ongoing present event, and a future event. And we can never say that we got saved at a time in the past if we're not today holding on to the rope that is pulling us up.

This is all much clearer from Gods perspective. After all he sees our past, present and future all at the same time. He will never be confused by someone who seem for a time to be heading in the right direction, yet end up perishing, or someone who seems for a time to be on a highway to hell and ends up being saved.

To us humans, experiencing the world one moment at a time, can not speak definitively about who is perishing and who is being saved. We can only speak about what direction someone appear to be traveling in at those moments when we have observed them. Over time we can make qualified assumptions about which category they belong in, based on experience and our limited knowledge of God's plan. But only God has the full picture.

The power

Notice how this verse does not say the word of the Cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but wisdom to us. It says wisdom later on, in verse 24, so it wouldn't by any means be wrong to say wisdom. But before this message will be wisdom, it is power. The word of the Cross is the Power of God. And this power opens our minds to the wisdom of God.

It might not be a completely impossible task to use natural wisdom to persuade someone of the truthfulness of the gospel, but it can never lead anyone to it's power. It is not the method that God has prescribed. To the contrary he says in the next verse:

For it is written, "I WILL DESTROY THE WISDOM OF THE WISE, AND THE CLEVERNESS OF THE CLEVER I WILL SET ASIDE." 

God has rejected the wisdom of the world as a means to salvation. He's given us a message that the world will generally find foolish. Yet combined with God's calling it becomes a power that bypasses our natural intellect and reveals a different kind of wisdom. We'll look more into that next time, which is why you need to come back.

Notes on 1. Corinthians 1:10-16

Divisions is the topic that the Bible takes us to today. From what we read in this letter it seems to have been a major issue in the church in Corinth.

Verse 10-12

Now I exhort you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all agree and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be made complete in the same mind and in the same judgment. For I have been informed concerning you, my brethren, by Chloe's people, that there are quarrels among you. Now I mean this, that each one of you is saying, "I am of Paul," and "I of Apollos," and "I of Cephas," and "I of Christ."Has Christ been divided? Paul was not crucified for you, was he? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?

That you all agree:
That is the exhortation. We all have to agree, and there should be no divisions among us. Pretty straightforward, so let me count to 3 and them we all agree... 1... 2...

Wait there are a few things we need to figure out first, if we're going to do this right.

First of all, what is the disagreement in the first place? In the Corinthian church Paul spends most energy on their tendency to divide up according to who was their favorite preacher. It seems they may have acted somewhat like our modern day soccer hooligans, except in stead of dressing up in the team colors and have bar-fights, they would identify spiritually with one preacher and have church-fights. I don't know which is worse. In our setting the disagreements may be different, but I'm sure we won't have to look too long and hard to find at least something that we might disagree on

Then, when we know what we disagree on, we need to figure out who we all agree with. Now, I vote that we all agree with me. Anyone who is for that raise their hands... The problem is, though, that you want everyone to agree with you. And so does everyone else. So the irony of the situation is that in order to agree we don't only need to agree to agree, but we need to agree on what to agree on. And that's a bit more difficult.

I know what you're thinking: Maybe a more spiritual approach will help... Let's figure out what God thinks of the matter, and we'll all agree with him. Well I would not think what I think if I didn't think God agreed with me, so obviously he does, and you should all agree with me. Right?

Wrong. We'll all claim God is on our team, so we really didn't solve any problem. We just moved it. From agreeing on what to agree about to agreeing on what God thinks. And we're basically still fighting about the same thing. Only now we have pulled God into our fight, imagining we're fighting on his behalf and that's a sure way to raise the temperature in any fight.

We need some more help on how to find this agreement can be achieved, because right now things are looking bleak. We're both in our separate camps, each seeing a part of the full picture, and fighting like there's no more picture outside of our field of sight.

No, I haven't gone postmodern, and I'm not saying that everything goes. I'm talking about how we treat legitimate disagreements among brethren. Such as which preacher you prefer. Or something that may be closer to our mind after the last session, the question of whether or not someone can loose their salvation. The kind of question that a reasonable, clear-headed, God-loving, Bible-reading Christian can come out on either side of.

We don't want to compromise on truth, but we need to agree. So how do we do that? The answer is right here in this verse.

That you be made complete:
Let's face it. You don't see the full picture. I don't either. The Bible says “For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I will know fully just as I also have been fully known.” (1Cor 13:12) This is our condition for the duration of our stay on earth. Seeing parts of a larger picture.

The full picture is much larger than anything that could ever fit into a mortal human's scope of vision, because it's a picture of God. The promise that we will one day see in full is unimaginable to us now. The little He has shown us in the Bible is already enough to blow us away. Like when we talked about his sovereignty in electing us and saving us last week. Those were deep and big thoughts that stretched our minds more than what was comfortable. Imagine all of the other things that he hasn't even bothered to try explaining to us.

The full picture is not for this life, but the prescription that Paul offered for fostering agreement and healing divisions was to be made complete in the same mind and in the same judgment. The Corinthians were looking at the different parts of the same picture, the revelation that God had given them of himself through the preaching of Paul and Apollos and Cefas. But they didn't understand that those were all parts of the same picture. They didn't see them together, but as competing. Paul was urging them to stop picking the gospel into pieces and setting them up against each other. They should in stead be putting them together to see the complete picture.

Verse 14-16:

I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, so that no one would say you were baptized in my name. Now I did baptize also the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I do not know whether I baptized any other.

Baptized in my name:
Paul had been chosen and sent by God, entrusted with the ministry of proclaiming the name of Christ. If the object of his mission was to spread the fame of Christ's name, than the greatest possible failure would be if he spread the fame of Paul's name in stead.

Idolatry was rampant all throughout Greece, and Paul has to deal much with the Corinthians' relationship to idol-worship later in this letter. We're talking literal bowing down to statues, and sacrificing meat to demons-type idolatry here. He had probably caught on to this idolatrous tendency in the Corinthians early on, and wisely chosen not to perform baptisms himself, so that he would avoid some special status being associated with that, and the divisions that would come with it.

The people he did baptize himself were some of the first people who came to Christ in Corinth. Crispus, as we remember, was the leader of the synagogue in Corinth; “Crispus, the leader of the synagogue, believed in the Lord with all his household, and many of the Corinthians when they heard were believing and being baptized.” And the household of Stephanas is described as the first-fruits of Achaia in 16:15. Verse 16 seems to indicate he had a leading position in the church of Corinth; “Now I urge you, brethren (you know the household of Stephanas, that they were the first fruits of Achaia, and that they have devoted themselves for ministry to the saints), that you also be in subjection to such men and to everyone who helps in the work and labors.”

It seems that after those first baptisms, Paul handed over that responsibility to others. I would guess it was given to someone who did not have a preaching role in the church, so that Apollos and Cephas also would avoid that type of followers. Paul did not want to create Paulians. He wanted to create Christians.

The well-known French theologian John Calvin said “The human heart is a factory of idols...Everyone of us is, from his mother’s womb, expert in inventing idols.” It's ironic that today, 500 years later, many will identify themselves as Calvinists rather than Christians. Now I understand that it's a short and convenient way to say that you're a Christian who hold to certain beliefs about the sovereignty of God, and I even agree with those beliefs myself. I'm not even saying it's wrong to call yourself a Calvinist. I'm saying the picture is too big to be painted with one brush. Calvin was a brush. So was any other preacher that people tend to identify with. Joseph Arminius, Martin Luther, Charles Spurgeon and so on. While these have all said things that were true and good, they were also humans with faults and weaknesses. There's reason to check your heart if you find yourself quarreling with those who don't have the same favorite preacher as you, or forming little exclusive cliques where you get each other all worked up over what the others are doing wrong.

I believe in Christ. As he's been proclaimed by Paul, Apollos, Cephas, Calvin and all other true preachers of Christ. The full picture, not just their individual contributions to it.

Notes on 1. Corinthians 1:4-9

What we're dealing with today is an extraordinarily long sentence that spans 4 verses. Long sentences are tricky to deal with, because they generally consists of several thoughts that are somehow connected to each other. And our job is to find out what is connected to what before we forget how the sentence started. And to top that off we're going to go through some pretty heavy theology today, so I'm going to need all of you to switch your brains on.

So here's the sentence that goes from verse 4 through 8:

I thank my God always concerning you for the grace of God which was given you in Christ Jesus, 

that in everything you were enriched in Him, in all speech and all knowledge,
 
even as the testimony concerning Christ was confirmed in you,
 
so that you are not lacking in any gift, awaiting eagerly the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ,
 
who will also confirm you to the end, blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.

So let me suggest the following, that:

• In verse 4, Paul expresses his thankfulness for the grace of God to the church.
• In verse 5, he talks about the effect of this grace for the church in speech and knowledge. Spiritual gifts that are especially important in evangelizing the lost.
• In verse 6, he finishes his thought from verse 4, building on verse 5, pointing back to the time when they themselves heard someone speak with knowledge about Christ, and the testimony was confirmed in them. The phrase “confirmed in them” is a very fascinating study, and we are going to spend some time looking into what it means.
• In verse 7, building on all of the previous verses, he says all of this has worked an abundance of spiritual gifts among them
• In verse 8, he asserts his trust that the same grace that he's been talking about up till this point will also cause them to persevere until the end.

Verse 4:

I thank my God always concerning you for the grace of God which was given you in Christ Jesus,

Thankfulness:
Is the mark of a person who trusts in Christ. It is in many ways the opposite of of pride. A proud person, who relies on himself, will puff himself up when he has success. A person who depends on God and knows he can do nothing in himself, will respond to success by thanking God, because he knows God is the only possible explanation for that success.

Verse 5 and 6:

that in everything you were enriched in Him, in all speech and all knowledge,even as the testimony concerning Christ was confirmed in you

This is the source of the gratitude that Paul was expressing in the previous verse. The Corinthians had by God's grace been enriched in Christ in speech and knowledge “even as” the testimony concerning Christ was confirmed in them. This is a difficult sentence to read. As best I understand the construction of it, after comparing several different Bible translations, is that the term “even as” implies two things at the same time. Both that this enrichment came as a result of God's saving work when the testimony was confirmed in them, and that it was by a similar enabling, that Paul and his co-laborers gave the testimony that they first believed in.

It's hard to say both of those things at once in English, So to make it clearer, let me rewrite these verses twice, saying one thing at a time.

(…) in everything you were enriched in him, in all speech and all knowledge, because the testimony of Christ was confirmed in you.

(…) in everything you were enriched in him, in all speech and all knowledge, just like the testimony of Christ was confirmed in you.

What Paul is getting at is how the Gospel spreads. Those who have it receive an enabling to share it with others, with a spiritual knowledge that is confirmed in the hearers. An they in turn receive the same enabling, and the Gospel keeps on spreading.

Confirmed in them:
This leads us to the most intriguing part of this passage in my opinion. What does it mean that the testimony is confirmed in them? It teaches us something about the nature of faith. Something we know already, because it's our experience and it's what we're living in, but still we have a hard time putting words on it.

But the fact of the matter is that we process spiritual things differently from other claims. When you believed the Gospel, it was a different kind of believe. We'll get to all of this in just a few weeks so I'm not going to spend much time on it in this session, but I'll let this serve as an appetizer for later on.

1Cor 1:22: “For indeed Jews ask for a sign, and Greeks search for wisdom” – This is our natural way of handling information. The way we process everything else.

1Cor 1:23: “but we preach Christ crucified. To Jews a stumbling block, and to gentiles foolishness” – Our natural mind is not receptive to the claims of the Gospel

1Cor 1:24: “but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.” – There it is! The calling of God is the key once again. When it is present the testimony of the Gospel bypasses our normal institutes, and are confirmed in us by something that surpasses our natural understanding.

So what then is this confirming power in the person that is being called by God? We find the answer in Chapter 2, verse 11 through 14

For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so the thoughts of God no one knows except the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God, which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words. But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised. 
 

The answer is the Holy Spirit. Without Him no one is able to understand or recognize spiritual truths. He does exactly what Jesus promised he would do, when he said “he will guide you into all the truth” (Jn 16:13)

Verse 7:

so that you are not lacking in any gift, awaiting eagerly the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ,

Not lacking in any gift:
When we read this letter we understand quite quickly that the Church of Corinth was exceedingly gifted. God had blessed them with all kinds of spiritual gifts, and Paul is quick to commend them for that. Yet he spends a very considerable portion of the letter (chapter 12-14) untangling some of their abuses of these gifts. In stead of using them to build up and help each other they are using them to show off and build up themselves on the expense of others. I'll be saying a lot more about that when we make it to those chapters.

Awaiting eagerly:
I think the reason why Paul says this in the context of spiritual gifts is to remind the Corinthians that the spiritual gifts are only temporary. And that when the Lord returns they will cease. There's no need for them in heaven. “Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away.” (1Cor 13:8)

Verse 8 and 9:

who will also confirm you to the end, blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. God is faithful, through whom you were called into fellowship with His Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.

Confirm you to the end:
Now we're getting into some heavy stuff. This is a question that has been dividing Christians for centuries. And our goal is to get through this in a way that makes sense without anyone being burned at the stake.

And people have been burned at the stake over this question of eternal security. One side will say that God is absolutely sovereign over our salvation, and that he will complete the work he has started. We're not saved because of our own own abilities, and we can't become unsaved because of our lack of abilities. We didn't get saved because of our own will, and we can't become unsaved because of our will.

The other side will put the emphasis of our free will, and say that it is possible for the believer to fall away from the faith. So what is the truth then? Which one is it?

If you weren't confused already, you will be now, so find something to hold on to in case you get dizzy. Both of those claims are true. At the same time. Let me explain.

At first, option two seems more intuitive. After all we humans do like to regard ourselves as the center of the universe, and our free will is something we don't let go of easily. And indeed we do have a free will. That's why there's such a place as hell to punish those who use their free will for evil. So we tend to see our salvation as a choice or a decision we made to believe. And often that's how we'll present it to others too, urging them to choose Jesus as well.

Well, all of that's not entirely wrong, but upon further examination of the Bible we see that it rarely talks of salvation as a matter of personal choice. It is pretty consistent in talking about salvation in terms of election and calling. In terms of Gods free will, and not our free will. We don't have to look further than last weeks study to find that.

This is a hard pill to swallow for most of us, because we would like to be in control. So we'll allow ourselves a small detour to Romans 9 to see how Paul deals with this dilemma in relation to God's election of Israel.

I am telling the truth in Christ, I am not lying, my conscience testifies with me in the Holy Spirit, that I have great sorrow and unceasing grief in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were accursed, separated from Christ for the sake of my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh, who are Israelites, to whom belongs the adoption as sons, and the glory and the covenants and the giving of the Law and the temple service and the promises, whose are the fathers, and from whom is the Christ according to the flesh, who is over all, God blessed forever. Amen.

But it is not as though the word of God has failed For they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel; nor are they all children because they are Abraham's descendants, but: "THROUGH ISAAC YOUR DESCENDANTS WILL BE NAMED." That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants. 
 

For this is the word of promise: "AT THIS TIME I WILL COME, AND SARAH SHALL HAVE A SON." And not only this, but there was Rebekah also, when she had conceived twins by one man, our father Isaac; for though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that God's purpose according to His choice would stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls, it was said to her, "THE OLDER WILL SERVE THE YOUNGER." Just as it is written, "JACOB I LOVED, BUT ESAU I HATED."

What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be!

For He says to Moses, "I WILL HAVE MERCY ON WHOM I HAVE MERCY, AND I WILL HAVE COMPASSION ON WHOM I HAVE COMPASSION."

So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy.

For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, "FOR THIS VERY PURPOSE I RAISED YOU UP, TO DEMONSTRATE MY POWER IN YOU, AND THAT MY NAME MIGHT BE PROCLAIMED THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE EARTH." So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires.

You will say to me then, "Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?"

On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, "Why did you make me like this," will it? Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use?

What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory, even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles. 
 

So what is the essence of Paul's answer? God is God, and he does whatever he pleases. If we get saved, then it is correct to say that we got saved out of our own free will. Because God, by his even freer will called us, and drew our will toward Him. If we don't get saved – well God never forced Pharaoh not to believe. He just didn't call him, and Pharaoh by his free will kept hardening his heart.

So now that we have established that God is sovereign to save whoever he wants let's get back to the question of eternal security. Our text said he is faithful, and he will confirm us blameless till the end. There are many other similar promises as well in the Bible.

This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day. For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day. (John 6:39-40)

My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me; and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand. I and the Father are one. (John 10:27-30)

For I am confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus. (Phil 1:6)

So the Bible forces us to conclude that both getting saved and staying saved is a gift that God Gives, and he gives them together. He does not play tricks with us, saving us and then loosing us again. And just as everything is starting to make sense to us, the birds start singing and the sun peaks out from behind the clouds we realize that there's one more problem... This doctrine is very biblically correct, but it doesn't fit very well with our experience. Because we all have seen people fall away from their faith, haven't we?

Well if it was just a question of our experience, we'd have to invoke the rule that Bible trumps experience, and be done with it. Bible wins, and our experience is wrong. End of story. But it's not just our experience. The Bible itself warns about the danger of falling away, and we even find some examples of it.

This command I entrust to you, Timothy, my son, in accordance with the prophecies previously made concerning you, that by them you fight the good fight, keeping faith and a good conscience, which some have rejected and suffered shipwreck in regard to their faith. Among these are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have handed over to Satan, so that they will be taught not to blaspheme. (1Tim 1:18-20)

for Demas, having loved this present world, has deserted me and gone to Thessalonica; (1Tim 4:10a)

So let's step back and get an overview of the situation. We have two camps here. Those who think it's possible to loose their salvation, and those who think it's not. And we have Bible-verses that seem to support each side. So then we also have two options. Either we can pick sides, build two forts and hide in them, shooting Bible verses at each other. If this is the option you go for, it doesn't really matter which side you pick. You'll end up ignoring or explaining away portions of the Bible that doesn't fit in. This is how it's done all too often. But there is another option. We can accept what the Bible says, believe it, and be satisfied that this is Gods domain. And say what the Bible says. Both that Christ will not loose any of his sheep and that we need to take care so we don't fall away.

The Bible, to the best of my knowledge, goes no further than this. It leaves us in the state of being assured of his salvation, yet careful not to presume upon it so we give occasion for sinning. If I were wiser, maybe I would leave it at that as well, but since I'm not I hope you will bear over with a little foolishness on my part as I share with you how I process it and seek to make everything fit with scripture when I see someone falling away. The claims I have made until now come from the Bible. I have proclaimed Gods eternal truth. Now I transition into my reflections on those truths, and while I hope they'll be helpful they're not infallible. You have been warned.

Now some cases of falling away are quite easy. Because it has been plain to see that they were never truly believers in the first place. They may have been dragged to the front of a church by some well-meaning friend during an emotional alter-call, prayed over and proclaimed to be saved. They may even try for a while to become a better person, and be sincere about it. Or they may have grown up in the church and feel very at home there. And fit in quite well without ever having truly known God.

This may be fully satisfactory in many cases, but there still are some that just don't fit in. We've all seen them. One of our most trusted brothers or sisters. The kind of person that you would call if you were ever uncertain if maybe the rapture happened and you were left behind, because if they were still there then it couldn't have happened yet. People who we have looked up to and admired. We've seen spiritual fruit in their lives. Looking at the strength of their faith has encouraged us in times when we have been weak. And then they're gone. Away from God. Faith shipwrecked.

Hymenaeus and Alexander suffered shipwreck in regard to their faith. That is what Paul says. They had the faith, and they wrecked it. And they had been handed over to Satan. Didn't Jesus say no one would snatch them out of his hand? What will he do? Snatch them back? No, Hebrews 6:4-6 says that's impossible. They can't be renewed to repentance if they fall away. He won't even touch them.

So Hymenaeus and Alexander, if they indeed had tasted of the heavenly gift and taken part in the Holy Spirit, would be damned for forever, with no hope of ever returning. That doesn't sound like the promises that Jesus made to keep them, does it?

Did Jesus try to keep them, but failed? Then he's not all-powerful. Did he not keep his promise? Then he's not trustworthy. So what are we left with then? They may have believed, but not empowered by the Holy Spirit. They were never born again. They may have had spiritual gifts,but not from the Holy Spirit. Either from their own flesh or from some other spirit. They may even have been called by God, in which case he'll save them and give them new birth later, but they have not yet been saved. Because if they were they wouldn't have been snatched away.

So faith is not a sure sign of salvation. Yes, we're saved by faith, but not any faith. We need to have faith in the right thing, but not even that is enough. We also need to have living faith. The kind of faith that is empowered by the Holy Spirit and is active in our lives. Hymenaeus and Alexander may have heard of these promises and been made confident in their sins, thereby proving that the promises were never for them. Because their faith was not alive. If it had been they would have never sinned in this way.

The people who we see fall away have believed in Jesus in the same way as a devoted Muslim believes in Islam. Or a devoted Buddhist believe in Buddhism. That faith can be strong. It can cause them to make great sacrifices. And they can be very pious and act in a way that is very consistent with what they believe. But it's not a living faith. Just a religion. And Christ is not meant to be believed in this way. There is a higher form of faith. It's called living faith. It's given as a gift of God, and, Romans 11:29 assure us that “the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.”

Notes on 1. Corinthians 1:1-3

Yesterday, by God's grace I had the privilege of hosting a small Bible study in our home. I decided to share my teaching notes on this blog as well, so that the saints that are spread around all over the world may take part of our journey through this epistle, and hopefully be edified and blessed. I will keep doing so for as long as God allows me, maybe even through the entire book. Our first session focused on the three introductory verses to the book. This is a section that we generally just tend to skim through, but keep reading, and you might be surprised how much is in there.

Verse 1

Paul, called as an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother,

The senders of this letter are Paul and Sosthenes. We'll get back to Sosthenes later on, but first we'll consider Paul

Paul was an apostle:
The word apostle literally means a sent out one. So what Paul is saying is that he is a “sent out one” of Jesus Christ by the will of God. Neither he nor any of the other apostles were shy about calling themselves apostles of Christ, and Paul even spends considerable time in 2. Corinthians defending his apostleship.

By the will of God:
You would think that would be obvious, but Paul still finds it worthwhile to specify it. And not only in this epistle, but several others. (Gal, Eph, Col, 1+2Tim and Tit (bond-servant)) Perhaps this was especially essential for the Corinthians, in view of their unhealthy tendency to takes pride in spiritual gifts and positions. Paul was not an apostle because he wanted to be. He was not in it for the prestige, or to be honored by men. He was not not applying for the Job–in fact he hated everyone who named the name of Christ–but God called him. He struck him down on the way to Damascus and sent his servant Ananias to him. Not to offer him a lucrative job in the apostolic ministry, but to announce that God had chosen him to suffer. “Go, for he is a chosen instrument of Mine, to bear my name before the Gentiles and kings and the sons of Israel; for I will show him how much he must suffer for My name's sake” (Acts 9:15-16)

Paul fought against God and lost. God defeated him. But here is the miracle of God's election: Not only does he choose an enemy, and defeat him. But those he defeat come to love him and praise him for doing so. I'm sure there were many that were praying for God to kill Paul. He easily could have done that. But instead he put his power on display by doing something no one else could do. He made Paul a new person. One who counted everything he was and everything he worked so hard for as rubbish, so he could gain what was infinitely more important to him. The object of his absolute and undivided affection, Jesus Christ. (Php 3:8)

Paul knew that he was on the one hand a slave. He says “I am under compulsion; for woe is me if I preach not the Gospel. For if I do this voluntarily, I have a reward; but if against my will I have a stewardship entrusted to me” (9:16-17) But on the other hand he's not an unwilling slave. His greatest joy was serving his master. Listen to how Paul talks about the paradox of being elected, both a slave, yet an object of grace, in Galatians 1:10-17:

For am I now seeking the favor of men, or of God? Or am I striving to please men? If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a bond-servant(slave) of Christ. For I would have you know, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ. For you have heard of my former manner of life in Judaism, how I used to persecute the church of God beyond measure and tried to destroy it; and I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my contemporaries among my countrymen, being more extremely zealous for my ancestral traditions. But when God, who had set me apart even from my mother's womb and called me through His grace, was pleased to reveal His Son in me so that I might preach Him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately consult with flesh and blood, nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me; but I went away to Arabia, and returned once more to Damascus.

How can this be? How can a prisoner of war, held as a slave, speak so affectionately about his captor? When Jesus blinded Paul's physical eyes on his way to Damascus, he also opened his spiritual ones. He had been blinded to his sin, thinking he was doing God a favor in persecuting the church. He took great confidence in his Pharisaical obedience to God's law. (Pharisees would stay obedient to the letter of the law, and still always find loopholes for their own sins) Now he saw that he was an evil man, and and that every breath God had allowed him to take was an act of patience and grace. He saw Gods infinite goodness in extending an offer of full redemption to him, the chief of sinners. He saw the price that God had purchased this redemption at. He sent his son to take human form and die as a sacrifice, bearing Paul's sin and ours. Seeing his own sin in contrast to the goodness God extended to him, he became a Christian. One who lives and breathes Christ. “It is no longer I who live”, he said, “but Christ lives in me.” (Gal 2:20)

And so it was that Paul became an apostle “by the will of God”. It was not his own will, he nurtured a deep hatred to those who were apostles and to all who followed them, but God set him apart before he was born, and at the time right time he called him, and then he transformed him and started working through him. At no point was Paul's own will or anyone else's will consulted in these matters. And had they been none of this would probably have ever happened. It was an act of God from one end to the other.

Sosthenes:
Was for a time the leader of the Synagogue in Corinth, probably replacing the previous Synagogue leader, Crispus, after he became a Christian. Apparently Sosthenes himself must have turned to Christ as well, and followed Paul to Ephesus, where Paul wrote this epistle.

Verse 2:

To the church of God which is at Corinth, to those who have been sanctified in Christ Jesus, saints by calling, with all who in every place call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, their Lord and ours:

The church in Corinth:
The church was founded by Paul himself, during his second missionary journey. Here's the story from Acts 18:1-17:

After these things he left Athens and went to Corinth. And he found a Jew named Aquila, a native of Pontus, having recently come from Italy with his wife Priscilla, because Claudius had commanded all the Jews to leave Rome.

He came to them, and because he was of the same trade, he stayed with them and they were working, for by trade they were tent-makers. And he was reasoning in the synagogue every Sabbath and trying to persuade Jews and Greeks. But when Silas and Timothy came down from Macedonia, Paul began devoting himself completely to the word, solemnly testifying to the Jews that Jesus was the Christ.

But when they resisted and blasphemed, he shook out his garments and said to them, "Your blood be on your own heads! I am clean. From now on I will go to the Gentiles." Then he left there and went to the house of a man named Titius Justus, a worshiper of God, whose house was next to the synagogue.

Crispus, the leader of the synagogue, believed in the Lord with all his household, and many of the Corinthians when they heard were believing and being baptized. And the Lord said to Paul in the night by a vision, "Do not be afraid any longer, but go on speaking and do not be silent; for I am with you, and no man will attack you in order to harm you, for I have many people in this city." And he settled there a year and six months, teaching the word of God among them.

But while Gallio was proconsul of Achaia, the Jews with one accord rose up against Paul and brought him before the judgment seat, saying, "This man persuades men to worship God contrary to the law." But when Paul was about to open his mouth, Gallio said to the Jews, "If it were a matter of wrong or of vicious crime, O Jews, it would be reasonable for me to put up with you; but if there are questions about words and names and your own law, look after it yourselves; I am unwilling to be a judge of these matters." And he drove them away from the judgment seat.

And they all took hold of Sosthenes, the leader of the synagogue, and began beating him in front of the judgment seat. But Gallio was not concerned about any of these things.

Paul is writing this letter to the Corinthians about three years after he left the city. And it's in fact not the first one. He says in 5:9, “I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with immoral people”, so we know that there is to be at least one letter before this one. And the letter we know as 2. Corinthians is actually at least the 4^th one he wrote to them, because in 2. Corinthians he mentions a severe letter that made them sorrowful.

Sanctified in Christ:
It it interesting that he would open his letter with such a description of the church, because the rest of the letter is mostly about all the things they are doing wrong. There were divisions, worldliness, all kinds of sexual sin, abuse of spiritual gifts, disorder in the meetings, and many other things that we will look in to in more detail as we read through the letter. But still he says they are sanctified. How can he say that?

To understand that we need to look into what the word sanctification means. It means to be made holy. Whenever we talk about holiness we need to keep in mind that the word has a much deeper meaning than just living morally. It means to be set apart. It literally means to be separated or divided from something. When we talk about the holiness of God we are not saying that he has high morals, but we are saying that God is something entirely different from everything else that exists. That there is nothing that is like him.

Now in the old testament when there is talk about something or someone being sanctified, it means to be set apart for serving God. The vessels and different tools of the temple were only for serving God. Not for baking bread or carrying water. They were not for common use. And likewise the priests of the old covenant. They had their work in the temple, and there were strict regulations on what they were allowed to do or touch. Because they were to be holy.

Now, in the new covenant, sanctification takes on a whole new meaning. In the old covenant the believers did not have the Holy Spirit living in them. He could “come upon them” and give them power in certain special situations, yet those situations were few and far between. But to the new covenant believers Jesus made an enormous promise in John 14: “I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may be with you forever; that is the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see Him or know Him, but you know Him because He abides with you and will be in you.” And it should not be any surprise that this has a very significant effect on the believer. Galatians 5 says:

But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not carry out the desire of the flesh. For the flesh sets its desire against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; for these are in opposition to one another, so that you may not do the things that you please. But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the Law.

Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, envying, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law. Now those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. If we live by the Spirit, let us also walk by the Spirit.

To the old covenant believers holiness meant being set apart for God. To the new covenant believer, holiness means being set apart like God. The old testament commandment is “You shall be holy, for (because) I the LORD your God am holy”, but the new testament commandment is “but like the Holy One who called you (or 'like he who called you is holy'), be holy yourselves also in all your behavior;” (1Pe 1:15). For us sanctifications means taking on some of the nature of Christ, and becoming like him.

But this is looking less and less like the Corinthian church, isn't it? The problem with sanctification is that while we do have the Holy Spirit living in us, we at the same time have a body and a mind with habits and thought patterns and even somewhat of a natural resistance against the things of God. And we are fighting a spiritual war against the devil and his angels, not to mention that we are under the influence of a world that does not care about God, and that too tends to rub off on us.

Sanctification is not thing that happens once and then we're done with it. It's a process that begins when we are saved and lasts for our entire lives. Not until we stand in heaven and see God face to face will we be completely transformed to his image. But that is where we are heading. And even with all the problems in the Corinthian church, that was where they were heading as well. Paul is not writing them to say that they are not growing, but he is rebuking them for growing so slowly. There is some sanctification in their lives, but they are still infants in Christ even after this time He says in c 3. “And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual men, but as to men of flesh, as to infants in Christ. I gave you milk to drink, not solid food; for you were not yet able to receive it. Indeed, even now you are not yet able” They were in Christ, they had the Holy Spirit, and they were being sanctified. But they were letting the world and their flesh hold them back from growing. Three years after the church was founded they were not supposed to still be at the stage of infants, barely being able to drink milk.

Saints by calling:
Contrary to popular belief, a saint is not a dead catholic with a yellow ring around his head. A saint is anyone who is justified in Christ. This is not exclusive to the Corinthian church, but it is for “all who in every place call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ”. All of us who are in Christ have been declared righteous, and we are saints. And this verse says we became saints in the same way that Paul became an apostle; by calling. The Bible says in Romans 8:

For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.

It is all a matter of Gods calling. Jesus said “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day.” (Jn 6:44)

Verse 3:

Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

Paul starts his letter with this blessing, and I'll end this session with it. We've already seen Gods grace richly in these verses, in electing, calling, justifying, and sanctifying. May his grace do it's work in all of you and produce in you the peace that comes with it.

I don't like it on my facebook news feed

I started noticing a couple of days back some of my female facebook friends starting to post suggestive status updates like "I like it on the floor" and "I like it on the kitchen table". If you haven't seen them yet, chances are that 1) you have better friends than me, 2) you don't have any friends at all, or 3) you will.

Now to state the obvious, "it" does not refer to sex. Although the sexual innuendo is undoubtedly intended on their part, they are in fact disclosing where they like to put their handbags. And it's apparently an unofficial campaign related to breast cancer awareness month.

Now that the cat's out of the bag, let's talk about both the cat and the bag shouldn't have existed in the first place. First let's talk about the cause.

"Now you're not saying that breast cancer awareness is an unworthy cause, are you ?"

Well it's unworthy of you sacrificing your chastity on it's altar for sure. That aside, I'd say breast cancer awareness is an obsolete cause, as people are largely already aware that 1) there is such a thing as breast cancer and 2) that it's bad.

Secondly, let's consider the method. Neither the coordinates of your purse nor the sexual innuendo implied in the campaign has anything to do with breast cancer to begin with. And seeing such a status on facebook does not make anyone more aware of breast cancer. Possibly with the exception of the girls who respond to it and thus are let in on the secret.

But whatever awareness they receive by this is far exceeded by the price they pay for it by perpetuating this meme. Because by doing so they are cheapening something that is exceedingly precious: Their sexuality. And while some women might see themselves as nothing more than a piece of meat, and thus be comfortable exploiting their own sexuality like this; the vast majority of the women I've seen perpetuate this campaign are women who in the past have shown at least some semblance of discretion.

Which leads us to our third and final analysis. This is the most important one. This is first and foremost an issue of the heart. What does the perpetuation of these status updates tell us about the motives and the heart of the women posting them? Here are some observations:

Observation 1) None of the women who I've seen post this status have previously approached me about breast cancer awareness. Nor have I seen any of them wearing pink ribbons, handing out literature in the streets, or anything else that might suggest the cause is important to them.

Conclusion 1) Either this campaign has made them urgently aware of the cause, or their true motive is something else than breast cancer awareness. If they have truly been awakened to the cause, that will be proven by further involvement in it. I dare predict that this will only be the case for the vast minority of them

Observation 2) I pointed out that the campaign is exceedingly deficient in bringing attention to the cause of breast cancer. This is because the campaign explicitly relies on the cause being kept a secret. If the cause was their true motive one would expect that they would chose a more effective means to that end. What the campaign does raise awareness of though, is the women who perpetuates it.

Conclusion 2) Since the campaign has very little potential of bringing attention to breast cancer, one cannot help but wonder if the women posting this are really motivated by the campaign's potential to bring attention to themselves. Specifically male attention.

Observation 3) I already mentioned most of these women are not women who will sit around the lunch table telling dirty jokes, or whistle at good looking guys on the street. They would normally exhibit at least some basic propriety and discretion. So when they post "I like it on the floor" they are acting out of character. Which is exactly why the campaign raises attention.

Conclusion 3) Building on our last two conclusions, may I dare to imply that the propriety they generally exhibit is not a true reflection of their hearts? They are only outwardly conforming to religious or societal standards of chastity and modesty. Yet when they come across this excuse, the willingly overlook it's obvious deficiencies, and compromise their standards. They would not be able to do so if those standards were rooted in their heart.

So what to do... Well here's what I'm going to do. I'm going to post this to my facebook wall. You're free to do the same. Maybe we can make our own counter meme.

Oh, and here's the bonus. I saved the best for last. What I have described for you is only one appearance of human nature. What theologians refer to as original sin. We do it in countless other ways, hurting those in our path, and ignoring God in the process. Maybe the only reason you bothered reading this far is because you enjoyed the feeling of superiority that you got from analyzing the faults of others. I've got news for you, you're driven by the same desire to elevate yourself.

Before a pure and holy God, we all stand guilty as charged. And justice demands that guilt leads to punishment. Most people will take that punishment themselves after the final judgment. Yet you don't have to. 2000 years ago God sent his only son Jesus Christ to die a gruesome death in your place. He became the final sacrifice that all the lambs slaughtered in old testament times were pointing forward to. He did it to atone for thieves, liars, slanderers, adulterers, women who post inappropriate facebook statuses and all those who self-righteously revel in the criticism of said women.

He took your guilt so that you can not only escape hell, but live a life in freedom from sin, and then enjoy all of his blessings eternally in heaven. That is an infinitely gracious offer, and you may receive it if you are willing (I did not say able - just willing) to lay down your life as you know it - sins self-righteousness, self-sufficiency, pride and all - and pray for him to give you a new life and new desires.

Passing arguments to an event handler in Javascript?

Okay, so you want to pass an argument to an event handler in your script? Should be easy, right? let's try...

function buttonClick(buttonNr)
{
    alert('You clicked button nr ' + buttonNr);
}

var button1 = document.createElement('div');
var nr= 1;
button1.onclick = buttonClick(nr);

Piece of cake. Now what's the fuss about, you may be asking. Well try running it...

"You clicked button nr 1"

But you didn't, did you? See the problem?

"But I specifically told it to run buttonClick with parameter 1 when I click the button"

Nope, you didn't. That's what you think you told it to do, but you actually told it to call the function buttonClick with parameter 1 right away (hence the popup), and assign  whatever that function returns to the onclick event. In this case it returns nothing, which means that when you try to click the button, nothing is exactly what happens.

Function name with parenthesis means run the function
Function name without parenthesis is a reference to the function

Take two...

Okay, so we need a function reference. Well, let's just make one on the fly like this then... No parenthesis. We should be good.

button1.onclick = function() { buttonClick(nr) };

Take that, javascript! I passed  a reference to a function that calls the function I want, with the parameter I want. Case closed! problem solved. Now let's call it a day and go home.

Not so fast, mate. Why don't you run a quick test first?

"Undefined???" But I defined it right there!


That may be true, but your event doesn't run right there. It's just assigned there. It's context when it actually runs is whatever element invoked it. In our case the button1 div. So your nr variable is not acessible.

"Well, let's just make the stupid variable global then and go home before dinner gets cold!"

That will work for a while. Until you introduce button 2.

You see you didn't pass the literal number 1 to the function. You passed a reference to the variable containing the number 1. Then you change it to contain the number 2 before you assign it to button 2, and suddenly it's 2 for button 1 as well.

Don't you hate the word reference by now?

Okay, before you start ripping your computer apart, I'll give you the magic formula. here you go. Do this, and nobody has to get hurt:

button1.onclick = (function (nr) {return function() {buttonClick(nr);} })(nr)

Huh?

Okay, let's break it down. A good programmer learns from his mistakes. What have we learned from our two previous mistakes?

1. That when you put a parenthesis after a function it is called right away, and the result is assigned to the event handler.
2. That the event handler function needs to run in a scope that has the parameter as a local variable.

Our solution is really a combination of those two lessons. Let's look at what we are in essence doing, by wasting some space. What if I put it like this?

contextWrapper = function(nr)
{
    var getEventHandler = function()
    {
        buttonClick(nr);
    }

    return getEventHandler;
}

button1.onclick = contextWrapper(nr);

So what we're doing is repeating our first mistake, but this time taking advantage of the fact that it calls the function and assigns it's return value to the event handler. And we're executing buttonClick in a context that retains its proper value for the nr variable.

So what is the value of button1.onclick after this? It's "function () { buttonClick(nr) }", where nr is fetched from the contextWrapper object surrounding it. So it retains its original value, no matter what you do.

Smart, eh? Now go make some crazy dynamic menus and tab bars and stuff and put it to use. Enjoy!

A psalm for the psingle

Yes, I know how to spell single, but i felt like I needed another P there... Well anyways, a year ago, I was 25, single, lonely, without prospects of finding someone to share my life with. I had been obedient to the best of my knowledge and ability, and done things Gods way, but it didn't seem to bear any fruit. To the contrary, things seemed to go better for those who were disobedient.

Maybe you are in the same situation. You have prayed, done your very best, but time is passing and your friends are getting married and staring families one by one. The ungodly seem to be making progress, while the righteous are put to shame.

You are not the first one to think like that. I wasn't either. Probably even King David wasn't first, but he's the one who has articulated it best. Granted he's not writing in the context of having a hard time finding a wife, but the principle is still the same.Ungodliness might appear to yield the best return, but only short term. God will reward your faithfulness if you remain steadfast in him and do what is right. Hear David out:

Do not fret because of evildoers,
Be not envious toward wrongdoers.
For they will wither quickly like the grass
And fade like the green herb.
Trust in the LORD and do good;
Dwell in the land and cultivate faithfulness.
Delight yourself in the LORD;
And He will give you the desires of your heart.
Commit your way to the LORD,
Trust also in Him, and He will do it.
He will bring forth your righteousness as the light
And your judgment as the noonday.
Rest in the LORD and wait patiently for Him;
Do not fret because of him who prospers in his way,
Because of the man who carries out wicked schemes.
Cease from anger and forsake wrath;
Do not fret; it leads only to evildoing. 

Trust in the Lord, no matter what happens. He will not fail you. More than that: Rejoice in him! Understand that true joy is only found in him. Let your heart desire his way. When I experienced various temptations, I could not give in to them, because there was something I desired more. My goal was a marriage according to Gods will. And I knew no shortcuts would take me there. And that by trying such a shortcut I would in fact take my eyes off the goal and loose it.

God's will for you is good. When your heart desires Gods ways, your desire converges with what God desires most of all to give you. Commit your way to the Lord; obey his commands, down to the smallest detail. By doing that you walk the way that he has marked out for you. The way that leads to what your heart desires: His will.

Is all hope gone? It seemed like it for me this time last year. But we serve a sovereign God. And in a small church in Wisconsin there was a young woman thinking in similar terms. We knew each other a bit already, and knew we had many goals and desires in common. But because of the minor detail of the Atlantic ocean separating us, neither of us had thought anything would happen between us. But when I was going to a conference in Atlanta, her family invited me to visit them and drive down there together with them. we started talking more, and June 18. 2009 an email landed in her fathers inbox where I expressed my interest for her (I'll write more about that later). September 3. we got engaged, and on November 21. 2009, and the rest is, as they say, history. History that confirms that God is faithful.

Never read a Bible verse!

Greg Koukl from Stand To Reason has a rule about Bible verses. It goes thusly:

Never read a Bible verse. That's right, never read a Bible verse. Instead, always read a paragraph at least. (str.org)

That's one of the best pieces of advice you can ever get when it comes to reading the Bible. Many don't realize that, while the concepts of chapters and verses are useful tools to reference scriptures, they are not part of the original inspired canon. In fact the Bible didn't even have verses until around the 15th or 16th century. (You can learn more about that on wikipedia).

So why can isolated bible verses be a bad thing? Consider what would happen if you tried to read any other form of communication in the same way as many read the Bible. Imagine if you for instance would divide this blog post into different units, each consisting of one or two sentences. And then in stead of reading it through from beginning to end would randomly select a sentence from it to read whenever you felt so inclined. Do you think you'd ever come to know what I was actually trying to communicate to you?

Yet that is how many read their Bibles. They'll pick verses here and there and view them as an isolated unit. Each verse is completely detached from its context and interpreted merely on its own. In stead of letting the text of scripture explain itself, they might pray about it or meditate on the verse, and then settle for some arbitrary interpretation that they feel God has shown them. They even regard this as the more spiritual approach to the Bible since they imagine it must involve close interaction with the Holy Spirit. Yet at they same time they might be unsettled about the amount of contradictions they seem to be finding in the Bible.

Consider, if you would, a jigsaw puzzle of roughly 32 000 pieces. Each piece represents a Bible verse. There are two ways to approach the individual piece. In both cases you would carefully look at the picture on each piece. You'll study it to see what it might be. An eye, a part of a flower, or what keeps every jigsaw puzzler up at night; a light blue piece that goes somewhere in the huge sky that makes up for half the puzzle.

So we've studied the piece. Now what? Well, one approach would be to select a handful of puzzle pieces that you think are particularly beautiful. The ones that "speak to you". And then put the rest of the puzzle back in the box before you lay out your pieces in different patterns until you "have a peace about it". And behold, there's your picture of God. It's a rather small one, and not quite rational. The pieces don't seem to fit very well together. But perhaps you see that as beautiful in itself. Like in a postmodern piece of art, the impossibilities and unintelligibility of it is a part of the artwork. And it allows you the luxury of interpreting it any way you want. After all, nobody can speak authoritatively of the meaning of a picture like that.

Then there's another approach. But few chose it, because it involves a lot of hard work, and the result isn't really open for interpretation. You don't get to put the plain or gray or dark colored pieces back in the box to devote your attention to the pretty and colorful ones. No piece can be left out. You don't merely study the pieces on their own, but you study other pieces that look like it, and find which ones go together, and which ones go in a different portion of the puzzle. There's no other way around it than to say it's a tedious task.

Yet shortly into the puzzle you start to see details emerging. Beautiful things, that you would never have gathered from staring at the individual pieces. You start to see that even the boring pieces when seen together forms a picture of beauty beyond what you could have ever imagined. And for each piece you put in you see a fuller picture of the glory of God. And have greater and greater assurance that once the last piece is in there that glory will be enough to keep you occupied for all eternity. This is how you should read the Bible. Not a piece here and a piece there, but paragraphs, chapters and books seen together. That's how you come to truly know what God is like.

Sunday trip with the wife

Spring is in the air, and my wife and I had a lot of fun stretching out legs a little on sunday. And we cracked ourselved up putting together a little vlog about it.



Make sure you visit our vlog-site to be the first to get the latest videos and updates.

Does this picture offend you?

As a child, I remember watching, with great facination, a TV show about heart transplants. In spite of the degree of blood and gore, nobody felt that I needed to be shielded from that. I didn't feel particularly violated by it either. And I don't carry with me any lifelong scars from the experience.

This picture shows a kidney. If you browsed by this post with your child sitting on your lap, I doubt that you would feel any need to hastily cover their eyes while you browse away from it. If I put this picture on a sign, or on the side of a truck to protest kidney transplants, I doubt i would create much disgust among the general public. Although we usually prefer kidneys to be inside of our bodies, this picture simply isn't offensive enough to create any puplic outrage.

But what if it was a fetus?

Many try pass aborition off as just another surgical procedure where a piece of tissue is removed from a womans body. If that is true, than why would a picture of that piece of tissue offend you more than the picture if this piece of tissue?

Maybe because no matter how much we are able to decieve our minds there is something in out guts that says that piece of tissue is not much different than the piece of tissue I call my body. It's not a kindney, it's not an appendix, it's a murder victim.

How I met my wife

I promised in my post earlier today that my lovely wife and I would share a bit about how we got to know each other. And here it is. Our love story






If you want to keep up with our vlogs, follow us at for-ever-his.blogspot.com.