Spreading the Fragrance

How to love your wife

2012-01-28T23:37:00.000+01:00

The Bible instructs husbands to love their wife like Christ loves the church. That's a wonderful verse for wedding speeches and other such occasions where love is dealt with on a merely abstract level, but there comes a day for every husband when the cake is all gone and he finds himself in the middle of real life, assigned with the seemingly impossible task of unconditionally loving a woman that he's frankly upset with at the moment. Does "love your wife as Christ loved the church" have any practical value in those situations?

I'm about to insist that it does. Here's how it works; every time you find yourself feeling mistreated by your wife, ask yourself how Christ loves you when you do the same thing to him. Then love your wife like that.

Maybe some examples will help:

How does Christ love you when you don't trust him, but doubt his ability or faithfulness to do what he's said he will do?
How does Christ love you when you don't submit to his better judgment, but keep tugging in the opposite direction of where he's leading you?
How does Christ love you when you're to tired, to busy, or not in the mood to sneak away and enjoy sweet intimate fellowship with him?
How does Christ love you when he's assigned you tasks in his kingdom, but your laziness keeps you from making more than a minimal effort?
How does Christ love you when you make poor stewardship decisions with the resources he has put at your disposal?

These are the types of questions I ask myself whenever I get upset with my wife. I find that it does three things:

It makes me focus on my own sin in stead of my wife's.
It humbles me. Do I esteem myself higher than Christ, since I hold her sin toward me against her, while Christ so willingly forgives me?
It gives me an example to imitate, of to how to love her in a way that brings about reconciliation.

On that last point, husbands, let me point out one aspect of Christ's love for his church: He doesn't love us because we first loved him. We love him because he first loved us. That is what makes his love so irresistible. Gentlemen, I am not interested in hearing a word about how impossible your wife is. You have the power to make her love you, by loving her first as Christ has loved you.

Here is our model. Here's how Christ has loved us.

By doing good to us when we deserved punishment.
By gently calling us back to him when we were pulling in the opposite direction.
By persistently wooing us when our first love had grown cold, and other things started catching our interest.
By proving his faithfulness again and again in response to our mistrust.
By continuing to provide for all of our needs even when we don't deserve it and don't bother thanking him.

I dare you to find a woman who will respond unfavorably to a man who consistently, over time, loves her like this.

Is pi different in the Bible?

2012-01-22T21:42:00.000+01:00

The gays didn't do it

2012-01-15T21:52:00.000+01:00

Weddings always afford me some opportunity to reflect on the demise of the institution of marriage in our culture.

In my humble opinion, marriage ranks among the finest of God's creation. And let me emphasize again that it is God's creation, not man's. However, man has taken upon himself to improve upon God's original design.

The last few years there's been a lot of controversy about legislation to change the definition of marriage to accommodate for marriages between two people of the same sex. Many Christians have, in response, rightly pointed out that marriage isn't ours to define; that if we're going to pretend that it is something else than God says it is, we'll do serious damage to the credibility and validity of the institution.

However, looking at divorce rates of more than 50 %, cohabitation rates in the same range, and the attitudes about marriage that are propagated through music, movies, TV-shows, jokes etc., do we really have any credibility in pointing our fingers at the pro-homosexual movement for changing marriage? Do we not already have laws on the books that change marriage from a life long covenant into a temporary contract that can be ended at our convenience? What's one more little change going to do?

So let's stop pretending like the homosexuals are to blame for the demise of marriage. It's been sliding downhill for a long time before they ever got their perfectly manicured hands on it. It was heading down long before divorce was legalized as well.

If we trace the slippery slope all the way to the top, I'm convinced we'll find that the first change made to marriage, triggering the drove of successive redefinitions, was when we decided that the husband and wife were the main characters in the institution. This is no small error. It is monumental, because once committed it will inevitably change every aspect of the relationship.

God created marriage as a picture of Christ and the church. Then secondarily, flowing from that picture, it is about the joy of the husband in his union with Christ as he shares in the experience of selflessly and sacrificially pouring out his love on his wife, and the joy of the wife in receiving this love and returning it by fearlessly and joyfully submitting to his caring leadership.

It is a great perversion when the primary focus of the marriage shifts to the husband and wife, and their needs, desires, and preferences. It inevitably puts the husband and wife at war with each other, over whose preferences get priority. It defaces the picture of Christ and his church and replaces it with one of a ruthless dictator fighting against his rebellious subjects.

And that is the cause of the demise of marriage. Everything else is just a symptom.

Yesterday I was blessed to attend the kind of wedding that make me hopeful for the future. The joining of a young man and a young woman who have consistently honored God in the way they have pursued and prepared for his gift of marriage, and whom I trust will honor God in how they steward this gift as well.

Congratulations, Stine and Jarmo. May your marriage always point to Christ.

What's up with all the aliens?

2011-12-28T23:30:00.000+01:00

I don't know if you've noticed the trend of new planets, that are almost certainly inhabitable, popping up in the news every few weeks. With much ado they proclaim that "we finally got one", followed by a much less publicized rebuttal a couple of weeks later when they discover that it is either too hot or too cold or doesn't have an atmosphere or is made up entirely of peanut butter or whatever.

Now to be generous I'll assume that the premature announcements of unconfirmed results are more due to the fear of someone else publishing it first, or grant money about to dry up, rather than dishonestly trying to promote certain worldview agendas. It's an issue I take with scientists in every field, not just this one.

But either way, It has struck me that the pattern seems to be exactly the same as that of the elusive "missing link" (that's still missing last thing I heard). But it took me a while to connect the dots. Because as christians, we don't really have much of a horse in the space race. However, evolutionists do.

To me, it hasn't been such a big deal whenever a telescope sees a sign of water on a celestial body. I'd be surprised to see them bring home a rock that contains primitive life like bacteria or amoeba, but it wouldn't really rock the foundations of my faith at all. Even if they should find a way to bypass the laws of physics and travel to a remote planet and discover a highly advanced civilization of space squirrels, It really wouldn't bother me theologically. The Bible doesn't say it's there, but nor can I see any reason it wouldn't be.

After all, there are beautiful flowers hidden in remote rain forests that will never be enjoyed by human eyes. There are gemstones and crystals hidden in the deep of the earth, which exist only to glorify the creative genius of God, without anyone else knowing of them. What he may have hidden away for himself in different worlds is a subject I'll want to explore in eternity when I have the time and occasion for it, but as of now whatever it may be won't affect me other than move to appreciate his creation more.

But while the issue is not too urgent for us, it is very much so for evolutionists. Since their theory is founded on the presumption that life will be brought into existence spontaneously from non-life and from there develop into more advanced life forms it is an embarrassment that not every planet is inhabited with at least some form of life. It does seem very conspicuous, doesn't it, that with so many billions upon billions of worlds ours is the only one where life has appeared.

Of course there are excuses. To hot, too cold, no water, toxic chemicals, and so on, but still they keep finding life here on earth in the most unlikely and hostile environments. Even places more hostile than other planets.

So it's easy to see why every uninhabited planet, just like every missing link, is a constant embarrassment to evolutionists. Because it's a constant reminder that the theory in which they have put their faith doesn't hold up to the evidence. And it's worth a few billion dollars of research grants to get that quieted, isn't it?

Nope, you still can't divorce (1Cor 7:15-16)

2011-12-26T23:30:00.000+01:00

Yet if the unbelieving one leaves, let him leave; the brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases, but God has called us to peace. For how do you know, O wife, whether you will save your husband? Or how do you know, O husband, whether you will save your wife? (1Cor 7:15-16)

This is a very controversial piece of text, since many are very eager to read into it something that isn't there. But let's start with the easy part. What everyone can agree on is that if the unbelieving spouse leaves, then let them leave. You don’t have to club them over the head and drag them to a dungeon in your basement so you can keep them around. When you have done everything you can to win them over, and at the end of it all they still decide to leave, then there’s nothing you can do about it.

The part that gets controversial is the question of what it means that the brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases. Most theologians say that it means they are free to divorce their unsaved spouse and marry someone else. The text doesn’t specifically say that though. It just says they are not under bondage. That could very well mean under bondage to live together as husband and wife. After all that was the command the whole chapter started with. That is the basic doctrine that Paul is expanding on in this context.

And from looking at the Greek text a very strong case could be made for saying that the bondage referred to is not the marriage bond that God has bound them together with. First of all the word used here, dedoulotai - a form of douloo, is not the same as the Bible uses elsewhere when it talks about the marriage bond. Actually the word used means slavery, which is why some translations instead say that the brother or sister is not enslaved. I’m sure you’ll all agree with me that being bound to a spouse is not the same thing as being enslaved, even if they are an unbeliever.

In addition the phrase “not under bondage” is written in the perfect passive indicative tense. And we all know what that means, don’t we?

*chirp, chirp*

Well if we don’t we can do like I did and read about it on the Internet. It means that it is a present condition arising out of a past action. Which means that the believing spouse neither is, nor has been enslaved in such cases.

That means that if you are going to say that not enslaved meas free to remarry, you are saying that the spouse is not bound to the marriage, and never has been bound to the marriage. Even before the unsaved spouse leaves. But that would totally contradict verse 12-13, which say a marriage to an unbeliever is still valid. And that means we have to discard that interpretation.

So that that all this verse says is that a believer is not enslaved to an unsaved spouse who leaves them. They are free to not live together as husband and wife. Nothing more, nothing less.

Verse 16 confirms this interpretation. “For how do you know whether you can save your spouse?” What interpretation of the previous verse makes sense in combination with this one? Try it! If they leave, you are free to remarry, because you don’t know that staying single is going to save your spouse? That doesn’t fit together. This does: If they leave, you are free to let them go. But am I not responsible for staying with them and bringing them to Christ? No. How do you know whether they ever will be saved, and whether you’ll be the instrument to bring them there?

Making sense of 1 Cor 7:14

2011-12-23T23:00:00.000+01:00

For the unbelieving husband is sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified through her believing husband; for otherwise your children are unclean, but now they are holy. (1Cor 7:14)

Now what do we have here? This is one of those verses that has always left readers scratching their heads. The lack of context has led to some strange interpretations, such as the idea that someone could achieve salvation simply by being married to a believer, or have a believing parent.

Others have used this to argue that there is clearly a transaction of holiness from parents to children, so therefore we should baptize infants.

But let’s take a closer look at the verse, and see if we can’t make better sense of it after all.

The verse starts with the word “for”, which binds it to the previous verse. You should not break off a marriage with an unbelieving spouse, for the unbelieving spouse is sanctified through the believing one. If that wasn’t so your children would be unclean.

I want you to notice that Paul doesn’t say “their children.” He says “your children.” That’s interesting. He is speaking in third person about those who are in mixed marriages, but then he switches to second person. So the children who would be unclean is not the children of an unbelieving spouse. It is the children of everyone in the Corinthian church.

Now that probably only made matters worse when it comes to understanding this verse. So let me explain how I read this verse.

I believe Paul is making a parallel between the relationship between a husband and wife, and the relationship between parents and children. He is saying that if those who are in mixed marriages can’t live with their spouse because they haven’t come to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ, then you couldn’t live with your children either. Not until they had been saved.

He is agreeing that there is a problem with being married to an unbeliever. The holy and the unclean under the same roof. What is set apart for God being mixed with what is unclean. But the issue isn’t limited to those mixed marriages. It is an issue that exists in every Christian home where there are children who haven’t come to know God.

But in God’s eyes that does not make the christian unclean, but rather it makes the non-christian set apart in a certain sense because of the christian.

Do not divorce! (1Cor 7:10-13)

2011-12-21T23:00:00.000+01:00

But to the married I give instructions, not I, but the Lord, that the wife should not leave her husband (but if she does leave, she must remain unmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband), and that the husband should not divorce his wife. (1Cor 7:10-13)

But to the rest I say, not the Lord, that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he must not divorce her. And a woman who has an unbelieving husband, and he consents to live with her, she must not send her husband away.

Now we move on to the instructions to those who are already married. First to those where both spouses are children of God, and then to those where one spouse is not saved.

So to those who are married, he doesn’t say anything on his own, but reminds them of the words of the Lord Jesus when he dealt with the same question. “What God has put together, let no man separate.” And “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her; and if she herself divorces her husband and marries another man, she is committing adultery”

I want you to look a little at the language used here though. It says the wife must not leave, or separate from, her husband. And then, remarkably it says “but if she does...” We’ll get back to that part later.

Then it says a husband must not divorce, or send away, his wife. There’s no “but if he does” in this case.

I don’t think the point here is to distinguish between men and women. I don’t see any hints of that elsewhere in the Bible. “Do not divorce” seems universal. Rather I think what Paul is doing is including both men and women, and distinguishing between divorce and separation.

So his command is the same as the Lords command: Do not divorce! And then he adds, do not separate either! But if you do, don’t further violate your marriage covenant, and seek to be reconciled to each other again.

Be careful so that you don’t interpret “but if you do” as a permission to break the command. “Do not separate” is still valid even if it is followed by “but if you do”. And the “but if you do” basically tells you to undo what has been done in the breaking of the commandment. It is a gracious provision to get you back on the track that you left, but you’d still be better off never leaving that track in the first place.

Then he goes on to address those who are married to someone who isn’t saved. When he says that these instructions are from himself and not from the Lord, he is not saying that this particular portion of scripture is not the word of God. That it’s just something that he made up on his own without any divine inspiration. What he’s saying is that Jesus didn’t specifically talk about the issue of mixed marriages during his ministry on earth..

This really is another case of “but if you do”, because as Christians we are commanded not to be bound together with unbelievers.

Do not be bound together with unbelievers; for what partnership have righteousness and lawlessness, or what fellowship has light with darkness? Or what harmony has Christ with Belial, or what has a believer in common with an unbeliever? (2Cor 6:14-15)

And in verse 39 in this chapter when we get to the instructions for widows, Paul says they can marry whomever they want to, but with one stipulation. They must be “in the Lord”. They have to be believers.

So this provision seems to have been made primarily for those who were already married before they were saved, and therefore had an unbelieving spouse, although there might have been some who had foolishly let themselves be bound together with an unbeliever after they had been saved as well.

This teaches us something about the nature of marriage. These are people who were married before they knew God, in a pagan temple, according to pagan customs. Their covenant was not established before God. But still he holds them to it. He considers their marriage to be valid, and expects them to honor it. In God’s eyes they are married even though it wasn’t a Christian marriage. I’m just pointing that out because you may find it useful when counseling people who come to Jesus with a complicated past when it comes to marriage.

Check back on Monday to see if there's an exception to this rule if you're married to someone who isn't saved (hint: There isn't)

God's word to the single (1Cor 7:8-9)

2011-12-19T22:07:00.001+01:00

But I say to the unmarried and to widows that it is good for them if they remain even as I. But if they do not have self-control, let them marry; for it is better to marry than to burn with passion. (1Cor 7:8-9)

Having laid out some principles about marriage and singleness, Paul now moves on to give more concrete advice, first to the unmarried and then to the married. We'll deal with the unmarried today, and move on to those who are married on Wednesday, Lord willing.

To the unmarried and to widows he says it is good for them to remain single. We talked a little about why last time, and we’ll talk more about it later. If you are single you don’t have to worry about all the things that married people worry about. You have fewer responsibilities, and more time to devote to serving God.

If I may be so bold, I want to point out one thing that Paul doesn’t touch on here, and that is that while some are called to be single and some are called to be married, all of us are called to be single in seasons of our lives. Even if you know you are ultimately called to marriage, you still have to be single until you get married. And since it is the exception that spouses die at the same time, there’s a good chance that you will go through another unmarried season as a widow or widower.

So if you are called to marriage, you are still called to seasons of singleness as well. And if you are in one of those seasons, in spite of your gifting and calling, God has a plan and purpose for that. A lot of us, myself included, wasted many of the extra opportunities that season brought by focusing too much on making it end.

There’s nothing wrong with wanting the single season to end, because along with unique opportunities it brings unique temptations. It is better to marry than to burn with passion. Marriage is a high calling, bu it is not your primary calling. Your primary purpose is to glorify God and enjoy him forever. Marriage is one way to do that. While you’re waiting to get there, you can still glorify God and enjoy him in other ways. If you can’t glorify God as a single person, you can’t glorify him as a married person. If marriage is the primary purpose of your existence, then God isn’t It’s as simple as that.

Marriage or singleness - What's best? (1 Cor 7:6-7)

2011-12-16T23:00:00.000+01:00

But this I say by way of concession, not of command. Yet I wish that all men were even as I myself am. However, each man has his own gift from God, one in this manner, and another in that. (1 Cor 7:6-7)

A concession means that an exception is made to the general rule. An accommodation made necessary by extraordinary circumstances. The rule that the exception is made to is the one we see in verse 2: Each man is to have his own wife and each woman her own husband.

Of course when a single man like Paul says that every man should have his own wife, it’s natural to ask why he doesn’t have one himself. If singleness is not spiritually superior to marriage, then why doesn’t he, as their spiritual father, take a wife.

Paul deals with this question with tremendous wisdom. He says he wishes everybody was like him; single and satisfied living his life in celibacy. But he also recognises that that his ability to be satisfied without a wife is a special gift from the Lord that not everybody has. From his vantage point he sees many advantages to being single. In stead of focusing on a wife and children he is able to devote his life totally and completely to Christ in ways that no married man can do. He is able to travel the world, to dangerous places where Christians are persecuted for Christ’s sake. All his time and energy can be put into proclaiming the Gospel.

It is important for us not to miss the last sentence in verse 7, though. Each man has his own gift from God, one in this manner and another in that. Like the Corinthians we’re inclined to ask the question “What is best?” The answer is that what is best depends on your calling and gifting.

If you are going to travel like Paul to preach the gospel in places where it’s likely that you and your family will face severe persecution, and in addition God has gifted you in a way that allows you to be satisfied as a single man without facing any great temptations because of it, then it is probably best for you to remain single, in the same way that it was best for Paul to be single.

However, if God has called you to be a husband and a father, or a wife and mother, then it’s probably best for you to marry.

As we go through the rest of this chapter over the next weeks, that will be a reoccurring theme. How you apply this chapter to your life depends on your particular calling and gifting. We don’t get absolute answers. Just the right questions to ask, so that we can find the right answer for ourselves in our unique situations.

Don't quote this verse to your wife (1 Cor 7:3-5)

2011-12-14T23:00:00.000+01:00

The husband must fulfill his duty to his wife, and likewise also the wife to her husband. The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does; and likewise also the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. Stop depriving one another, except by agreement for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer, and come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control (1 Cor 7:3-5)

Paul goes on to warn married Corinthians, that there is no spiritual gain in abstaining from sex with your spouse. To the contrary, you owe it to each other, and depriving each other will put both of you in serious spiritual danger. If you do, you’ll be tempted to fulfill your God-given desires for marital intimacy in less God-honoring ways.

So false gnostic ideas of spirituality is what is in view here. That is what the verse talks about, and that’s the context in which we are to use it. But there is another use that is very tempting to some, and I want to take a couple of minutes to warn you against that use in hopes to bless your marriages and point out the importance of always practising good hermeneutics.

If you are blessed to be married, you’ve probably noticed that you are two separate people, and as such you are almost certainly different. And one of the differences that most often cause conflicts in marriages are the different levels of physical desires and needs.

I’ll direct this advice to the husbands, although some times it’s reversed. This is my challenge to you, men: If this is an area of conflict in your marriage, then make a commitment today to never quote this verse to your wife. You may win the argument with it, but you’ll lose your wife’s heart. In stead be a man and sacrifice for her. You be the one who yields to her! You find out what her needs are and meet them. Study your wife. Love her like Christ loves the church. Make her want you by loving her sacrificially. Not by legalistic duty.

Now notice that I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with this Bible verse. What I’m telling you is that this verse is not for this use. The issue Paul is addressing is the idea that abstaining from sex in marriage makes you more spiritual. If that is the issue in your marriage, feel free to make an exception to my rule, and quote this verse to your wife every day. In that case this truth would liberate her to fully enjoy all of God’s gifts in marriage.

But most likely that is not your issue. That is not an idea that is very prevalent in our culture at all. So all you would achieve by quoting this verse is using guilt to pressure your wife to do something she for some reason is reluctant to do. There are two great dangers here. First you put her soul at risk by leading her into legalism. Second, you take away any inclination she might have to enjoy it. If you make sex a duty it will cease to be a joy.

With this in mind, we get to the exception that Paul makes. That is, that you may by mutual consent abstain for a period of time for the sake of prayer. There are times in our christian walk when we pray about certain things with great urgency. Often when we or someone we love are going through a great trial, or we have an important decision to make that we don’t feel a peace about. Whatever the situation is, God puts this urgency on our hearts and draws us into prayer in such a special way that everything else becomes unimportant. Even food. And this can go over a period of hours or days or longer.

I’m sure you would agree with me that if you are in such a state it’s not a good time for your spouse to come and suggest you take a trip to the bedroom. The good and understanding husband or wife will in stead join their spouse in prayer, and agree to put their immediate physical needs on hold until God has released their spouse from their calling to urgent prayer.

Abstaining from sex, in itself, is not spiritual, just as abstaining from food in itself is not spiritual. But some times you do it, not for the sake of false spirituality or legalism, but because God moves you to do it.

Hands off the ladies? (1 Cor. 7:1-2)

2011-12-11T22:26:00.001+01:00

Now concerning the things about which you wrote, it is good for a man not to touch a woman. But because of immoralities, each man is to have his own wife, and each woman is to have her own husband. (1 Cor 7:1-2)

Paul’s first sentence in this chapter invites us to do a little bit of speculation. What were the things about which they wrote? Actually it doesn’t take too much speculation to get a rough idea. In the rest of the chapter he answers questions about marriage versus singleness. Although the questions aren’t stated, the answers give us a pretty good idea of what kind of questions they might have been.

He answers that while singleness is good, marriage is also good, and each have their strengths and weaknesses based on the particular gifting you have, what your calling is, and other circumstances. He answers that those who are married to unbelievers should do their utmost to preserve those marriages. And he says that while those who are single have more freedom to serve the Lord, those who are married should not divorce so that they can share in this privilege.

Apparently the idea that celibacy was superior to marriage had gained some traction in Corinth. In some ways it’s easy to understand, considering the prevalence of sexual immorality there as we have seen in the last two chapters. And Paul himself was a single man, so perhaps they thought he would agree with them that, for the sake of avoiding such carnal pleasures, it was better to avoid sex altogether, even in the context of marriage.

That idea stems from a heresy known as gnosticism, and the basic premise it that the material world is inherently evil, and that there is a special knowledge (gnosis) that allows us to break free from the physical realm into the spiritual. This usually involves various practices of self-denial and self-abasement. Paul confronts this more directly in his letter to the Colossians:

If you have died with Christ to the elementary principles of the world, why, as if you were living in the world, do you submit yourself to decrees, such as, “Do not handle, do not taste, do not touch!” (which all refer to things destined to perish with use)—in accordance with the commandments and teachings of men? These are matters which have, to be sure, the appearance of wisdom in self-made religion and self-abasement and severe treatment of the body, but are of no value against fleshly indulgence. (Col 2:20-23)

So answering their first question he says yes, it is good for a man not to touch a woman. It is good for a man to live a celibate lifestyle, but only insofar as that doesn’t put him in a situation where he’s tempted to commit immorality. But because of the risk of immorality, every man who desires a wife should be allowed to have one, and every woman who desires a husband should be allowed to have one without being subjected to man-made commandments of self-abasement.

What you do to your body, you do to God's temple (1Cor 6:18-20)

2011-10-10T23:00:00.000+02:00

Flee immorality. Every other sin that a man commits is outside the body, but the immoral man sins against his own body. Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and that you are not your own? For you have been bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body. (1Cor 6:18-20)

Concluding this section dedicated to sexual immorality, Paul says flee from it. That means run. Run for your life. Run faster than you run from every other sin, because this one defiles you in a way that no other sin has the power to do.

If you’re like me, you’re tempted to say “Wait a minute. There are other sins that affects your body. How about drug abuse? Or suicide? That has to affect the body more than fornication”

If you still think of your body as merely a biological entity, you’d be correct in stating those objections, but Paul argues that since the Holy Spirit lives in you, your body is a temple. And the worst sin you can commit against a temple is not tearing it down. It is defiling it. Bringing that which is unclean into it.

The Lord never let fire rain down on the Roman army that destroyed the temple in Jerusalem in 70 AD. But when Nadab and Abihu approached God’s altar with a fire that wasn’t from God, he torched them alive (Lev 10:1-2)

Your body is a temple. It is holy, set apart for God. It doesn’t belong to you. It is his. He bought it at the price of his son’s blood. Therefore glorify God in it.

Don't prostitute Christ (1Cor 6:14-17)

2011-10-07T23:00:00.000+02:00

Now God has not only raised the Lord, but will also raise us up through His power. Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I then take away the members of Christ and make them members of a prostitute? May it never be! Or do you not know that the one who joins himself to a prostitute is one body with her? For He says, “THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH.” But the one who joins himself to the Lord is one spirit with Him. (1Cor 6:14-17)

The stomach and the food in it will pass away, we learnt in the last verse. But you are a member of the Body of Christ. And that is not temporary, but eternal. God raised him from his grave, to live eternally, and he has promised to raise us up to eternal life with him as well.

As members of the Body of Christ - his hands and his feet, his eyes and his ears and mouth - whatever we do with our bodies we also do with his body. If we prostitute our own bodies, we prostitute his body.

Now when Paul says “he who joins himself with a prostitute”, you need to know how common prostitution was in Corinth. In our culture prostitution is considered immoral, but it is not considered immoral to sleep with just about anyone you’re not married to as long as there’s no exchange of money involved. In Corinth it was almost the other way around. Ancient Greece was a society very much divided by class, and to defile a free woman was a very serious matter. A slave or a prostitute on the other hand was no big deal. So with the average age of marriage for men being 30 years, you can probably imagine how common this sin was.

In addition Corinth had a temple to the goddess Aphrodite. Like with modern paganism, Aphrodite worshippers saw sexuality as a pathway to religious experiences, and their ceremonies were very sexual in nature. That made the temple a natural marketplace for those who sold such services.

So when Paul is talking about joining oneself to a prostitute, he is not saying that prostitution is the only form of fornication that is wrong. But he’s addressing the most common form of fornication that took place in their culture.

While prostitutes were looked down upon, their clients were not accustomed to being under the same stigma. And telling them that if they sleep with prostitutes they are no better than them would be as strange to them as saying if you eat beef you’re no better than a cow.

But sex has the power to create a very unique and powerful union between a man and a woman. Indeed that was the purpose for which God created it. To tie a wife and a husband together for life with unbreakable bonds. Those who treat it as just another biological process soon end up discovering the pain for those bods being torn apart as you move from one partner to another. You have joined yourself to them. In Biblical terms, you have become one flesh with them.

Now when you make yourself one with a prostitute, than you’ve made yourself a prostitute. And if you are one spirit with Christ, if you are a member of his body, then you have prostituted him.

On eating forks (1Cor 6:13)

2011-10-05T23:00:00.000+02:00

Food is for the stomach and the stomach is for food, but God will do away with both of them. Yet the body is not for immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord is for the body. (1Cor 6:13)

Some things are made for each other, and others aren’t. The stomach is for food. A couple of years ago, a dutch medical magazine published an article about a 52 years old woman who came to the hospital complaining about a stomach ache. They ended up giving her an x-ray that revealed that her stomach contained no less than 78 spoons and forks that she had swallowed.

When asked about it she gave the following explanation: “I don't know why but I felt an urge to eat the silverware - I could not help myself.” (Source: The daily mail)

I think you’d join me in saying that woman was insane.The stomach is not for forks and spoons. And if you swallow them it has serious repercussions for your health. Yes indeed. But don’t let yourself get of any easier. The body is not for immorality, and if you use it for that you are no less insane than that woman. And if I ask you about it, you’ll answer with sorrow-filled eyes, those words that so many have uttered before you: “I don’t know why but I felt an urge to commit immorality - I could not help myself”

The particular type of immorality in view in this verse is sex outside of marriage, as we talked about last time. It’s the same Greek word “porneia”.

My hope today is to get you to the point where you’d rather eat a fork than commit fornication. Not because I’m against sex, but because I’m for it. If you love food, you will not eat forks. Because you know that a stomach full of forks will hinder your ability to eat, enjoy and digest food. Now if I may be so blunt as to say this: If you love sex, you ought to know that a past full of sin will limit your enjoyment of it. Those old fork-wounds will add a constant pain of shame and regret to that aspect of your life that will follow you for many years.

Every hint of immorality counts. Don’t console yourself by saying “I haven’t gone all the way”, as if that is all that counts. I’ll tell you that if you’ve gone half the way you have half the wounds. And if you’ve gone half the way twice - well it doesn’t take more than two half forks to make a whole one, does it?

Now what you do with your stomach doesn’t really matter in the big picture. It is a temporal matter of appetite and biology. God will do away with both your stomach and the food in it. But as we will see in the next verse, sex is not merely a temporal matter of appetite and biology. It has eternal significance.

The wrong question (1Cor 6:12)

2011-10-03T23:00:00.000+02:00

All things are lawful for me, but not all things are profitable. All things are lawful for me, but I will not be mastered by anything. (1Cor 6:12)

Does God allow us to sin?

It’s always hard to find right answers to wrong questions. And this question, that has apparently been posed in some form or another by the Corinthians, is most definitely wrong.

No doubt Paul had taught the Corinthians about Christian liberty when he worked among them. He would have preached the good news of a new covenant, where your relationship with God is not founded on works of the law, but on the Grace of God poured out on them through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ.

So if we asked “will God punish us for our sins”, the answer -- according to the Gospel -- is a loud, clear no! If God has given you new birth through his Spirit, then he also has by his sovereign decree chosen to love you unconditionally. No matter what you’ve done in the past, and no matter what you do in the future.

So doesn’t that mean the same as allowing us to sin?

The question still sounds odd, doesn’t it? It’s odd because it presumes that you want to sin. And as a born-again believer in Christ, you are overjoyed by the fact that God allows you not to sin. And you’re not -- or at least you shouldn’t be -- looking for a way back into the misery that God saved you from.

It’s kind of like asking “will God allow me to knock myself over the head with a two-by-four and then poke out both of my eyes with a rusty shrimp-fork?” Well, he may not have loved you any less if you were to do that, but that doesn’t mean that it’s not still stupid. And it doesn’t mean that there won’t be any consequences if you do it. Your head will still hurt, and you’ll still be blind, even if God still loves you.

Sin is the same way, only a lot more stupid, and with much greater potential to hurt both you and everyone you come into contact with. So are you “allowed” to do it? Is it lawful? If you still insist on asking the wrong question, than yes, it is “lawful”. But it’s not profitable. And it will master you.

I was born this way (1Cor 6:11)

2011-09-28T23:00:00.000+02:00

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. (1Cor 6:11)

We all have issues with the way we were born. That’s why Jesus said that unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God (John 3:3)

“Such were some of you”. Yet something happened to you, so that you’re not defined by your past sins and inclinations any more.

You were washed. You’re not dirty anymore. Your past sins no longer defile you. There is no need for you to feel dirty, because God has washed your old dirt away.

You are sanctified. That means you are in a process of becoming more and more holy. Gradually those sins become less appealing to you. And in place of the inclination to sin you’ll find an increasingly strong inclination toward serving and obeying God.

You were justified. That is a legal term, which means you are declared not guilty. Yes, you have sinned, but Jesus took on himself the guilt for your sin. He took the punishment that belonged to you. Jesus was punished to the full extent of your guilt. Now you’re free to go. No punishment, no grudges. Your guilt is erased, and your record is clean. It is just as if you had never committed those sins in the first place.

I know many of us have things in our pasts that we are deeply ashamed of. But if you have been born again, let these truths penetrate the way you think about those sins. There’s no need to feel dirty. There’s no need to hide your guilt, or to explain yourself, or justify yourself. Doing that only serves to hold on to what you were, and hinder you in what you now are.

Let it go!

180 movie / Join the abolition movement

2011-09-27T20:04:00.000+02:00

It is easy to admire people who in the past have risen up against great evils. Brave men like William Wilberforce who put an end to the slave trade, Dietrich Bonhoeffer known for his bold stand against Nazism, or the reformers who sacrificed their lives to free the people of God from the bondage of the Catholic Church.

But have you ever wondered where you would be if you lived in those times? Whether you would have stood your ground next to them or run for cover? Perhaps you have secretly wished yourself back to a time when there were great cultural evils to fight against, as a hero looking for a cause.

Well no time travel is needed. Ray Comfort has done an excellent job in revealing the greatest evil of our day. The worldwide legalized massacre of unborn children. There is a movement on the rise for the abolition of abortion. Do you want to stand with us? Help spread this movie to your friends. You just might save the life of one of their future children.

You'll probably read this, cause it is about sex... (1Cor 6:9-10)

2011-09-26T23:00:00.000+02:00

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. (1Cor 6:9-10)

One of the great blessings of studying the Bible verse by verse as we have done, is that our understanding of each verse becomes so much richer. So in these verses we find more than a list of sins that bring on the judgment of God.

We already saw in chapter 5 the connection between Gods condemnation and Church discipline. If God has rejected someone the church should not accept them. That is connected in here.

Another thing that is connected is our discussion last time about law suits. “Do not be deceived” takes on two different meanings here: Do not be deceived into thinking that if some brother has sinned against you, justice won’t be done unless an earthly court rules in your favor. God will certainly bring them to justice.

And do not be deceived into thinking you can get away with anything either. If you are taking your brother to court with the intention to defraud him, God knows your heart.

And on top of all that, these verses also transition us into a longer discussion on sexual immorality. We have here roughly the same list of sins that we found in chapter five, when we talked about church discipline. Except this time Paul is a bit more specific about some sexual sins that apparently must have been prevalent in Corinth.

First in the list is Fornicators, or “pornos” in Greek, that we discussed briefly back in chapter 5. The word means someone who commits any kind of sexual immorality.

What's in a word?

A question that has been much debated over the last few decades is what is actually immoral and what is not. For the first 1900 years or so after these words were written, “pornos” was more or less universally understood to mean any sex outside of marriage. Over the last 50 to 100 years, our culture has gone through a massive paradigm shift when it comes to sexual morality. And we seem to be almost at the point where it is considered immoral to even suggest that sex is limited only to marriage. But at the same time we know that God is unchanging, and what he considered immoral 2000 years ago, he still considers immoral today. So someone must be wrong here. It’s either us or everyone who lived before us.

So given our cultural context, I find myself being forced to look for a Bible verse that explicitly states that sex is immoral outside of marriage, without understanding the word “pornos” to mean what it has meant for nearly two millennia. It is a bit of a challenge, but even if we reduce the semantic range of the word to mean only marital unfaithfulness as many have suggested, we still have a rich supply of arguments and implications that support the traditional view of sex.

The true meaning of marriage

First we can look to God’s original design for marriage. The first marriage took place as early as Genesis 2:21-25:

So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that place. The LORD God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man. The man said, “This is now bone of my bones, And flesh of my flesh; She shall be called Woman, Because she was taken out of Man.” For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh. And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed.

When God instituted marriage he did it for a very specific reason. He didn’t let us know what that reason was right away, but in Paul’s letter to the Ephesians he makes it very clear:

Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body. But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything.

Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her, so that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, that He might present to Himself the church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that she would be holy and blameless. So husbands ought also to love their own wives as their own bodies. He who loves his own wife loves himself; for no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ also does the church, because we are members of His body.

FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND SHALL BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH. This mystery is great; but I am speaking with reference to Christ and the church. Nevertheless, each individual among you also is to love his own wife even as himself, and the wife must see to it that she respects her husband. (Eph 5:22-33)

What I want to impress on your minds is how highly God esteems marriage, and how profound that union really is. It is more than a couple of signatures on a document. Yet in our culture that is what it has been reduced to, and thus it’s easy to argue that those signatures make no significant difference. If you love one-another and are committed to one-another, what is really the difference morally if you sign a contract that you can get out of anyway if you want to?

That’s not what God designed marriage to be though. It is an unbreakable, life-long covenant between a man and a woman, where they play out a small-scale version of the unbreakable life-long covenant between Christ and the Church.

So marriage is a relation unlike any other. This is so lost in our culture, that I dare to say that many who are married on paper are still committing fornication because they are not married according to God’s definition of what marriage is. And God’s definition is what goes, no matter what documents our government decides to issue.

In light of what marriage is then, God commands us to esteem it, and keep the physical relation that comes with it undefiled:

Marriage is to be held in honor among all, and the marriage bed is to be undefiled; for fornicators and adulterers God will judge. (Heb 13:4)

Does all of this combined, even without the word “pornos” meaning what it actually means, add up to an explicit command not to have sex outside of marriage? I’d say we’re at least getting very, very close. And I chose to take you down this road because understanding the reason for a command is the best way to be convinced of it. It is a lot easier to obey commands when we understand why they exist.

What "pornos" means elsewhere...

But with this foundation being laid, I also want to take a few seconds to convince you that the Greek word “pornos” also includes sex out of marriage, and that Paul would uses that word to mean sex out of marriage just a few sentences away from where we’re at. We’ll jump a bit ahead of ourselves to chapter 7, verse 1 and 2:

Now concerning the things about which you wrote, it is good for a man not to touch a woman. But because of immoralities, each man is to have his own wife, and each woman is to have her own husband.

The word immoralities here is the “porneia” in Greek. It is a different form of the same word, both from the common root “porneo”. What Paul is saing here, is that there are some advantages to being unmarried (and we’ll learn more about that when we get here in our studies), but that because of the temptation to have sex outside of marriage, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband. It can not mean anything else. Try substituting it for adultery, and the sentence doesn’t make sense.

Homosexuality and scripture twisting

Having laid a solid foundation with God’s original design for marriage and sex, we are now better suited to understand the reasoning behind the two other sins that we didn’t already go through in chapter 5. We see that included in the list of people who will not inherit the kingdom of God are effeminate and homosexuals.

Of course the meaning of these words have been subject to some controversy as well. They refer to the passive and the active partner in a homosexual relationship. In Ancient Greek culture homosexuality was very common, and young boys were even dragged into this and abused by older men. Knowing this, many have tried to argue that it is only this practice Paul was forbidding. Not relationships between consenting adults.

So if this verse only forbids older men (the active parner) from abusing young boys (the passive partner, or the effeminate), let’s try to insert that meaning into the text: “...nor children who are molested, nor the people who molest them … shall inherit the kingdom of God.” How’s that interpretation working out for you?

God's unpopular stance on homosexuality

It is not politically correct to say this, and it is not unlikely that it will soon become illegal to say this, but we need to say it anyways. The Bible is crystal clear that homosexuality is a sin. Our culture has trained us from childhood to be abhorred at such a suggestion, and to automatically ascribe a motive of hatred, prejudice and self-righteousness to whoever dares say it. It is a sin worse than not rinsing and folding your milk cartons before you put them in the recycling bin.

But the Bible is still insistent:

You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination. (Lev 18:22)

For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. (Rom 1:26-27)

These and several other passages are very clear in their condemnation of homosexuality. Not because God hates them, but because is is a sin which by nature obscures God’s original purpose for marriage. The picture of Christ and the church is obscured when marriage becomes anything else than a life-long covenant between a man and a woman.

That being said, it is a fact that many still find themselves primarily attracted to someone of the same sex. It is much debated whether they are born that way or become that way through cultural influence. The argument is that if they are born that way, then certainly God cannot blame them for being that way. So many feel like if we can prove that they weren’t born that way that would absolve God of responsibility in the matter.

On closer examination though, we realize that God holds us responsible for following all kinds of inclinations that we were born with. God commands us not to lie, yet we were all born with the inclination to lie. No one had to teach me how to do it. I figured it out all on my own the first time I found myself in a situation where the truth was to my disadvantage. My parents didn’t have to teach me how to do it, they had to teach me not to lie. Now just because I was not born with any inclination toward homosexuality, I discovered fairly early in my life that I had an inclination to be attracted to girls. I was born that way. But that doesn’t mean I’m not guilty for the sinful thoughts and actions that have resulted from that inclination.

Now I don’t mean to be insensitive to those who are experiencing same-sex attraction, because at the very least I had the hope of some day living out those inclinations that I had in a righteous and God-honoring way, even though I had to wait for a bit. They do not. Still the truth is we all at some level have to deny the inclinations we were born with to obey God. And the key to being able to do that comes to us in the next verse...

Stay tuned!

Why not rather be wronged? (1Cor 6:7-8)

2011-09-23T23:00:00.000+02:00

Actually, then, it is already a defeat for you, that you have lawsuits with one another. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be defrauded? On the contrary, you yourselves wrong and defraud. You do this even to your brethren. (1Cor 6:7-8)

Jesus said some very radical things about the attitude a believer should have toward being wronged. He said:

You have heard that it was said, ‘AN EYE FOR AN EYE, AND A TOOTH FOR A TOOTH.’ But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. If anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, let him have your coat also. (Matt 5:38-40)

So then it becomes obvious that going to court against anyone is already a defeat. By doing so we put on display a heart that seeks revenge, rather than reconciliation. We reveal that we are not like Jesus, who by his death opened up the door to heaven for his killers. In fact one of the Roman centurions who conducted his execution, when he saw the supernatural events that followed Jesus’ death, he said “Truly, this was the son of God”. I would not be shocked to one day see this roman centurion in heaven. That is the grace of Christ.

“Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be defrauded?” Those are indeed strange questions for those who do not have this mindset that our savior has, who died praying for the for forgiveness for those who killed him.

Having this mindset is a statement of trust in the supreme, eternal justice of God. It means setting aside your desire for immediate justice, knowing that God will not let any wrongdoing go unpunished:

Never take your own revenge, beloved, but leave room for the wrath of God, for it is written, “VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY,” says the Lord. (Rom 12:19)

Do you believe in the wrath of God? When someone does wrong to you, God is angry. And he will make sure justice is done in the end. Even if they live a long and happy life, and die in peacefully at old age without ever seeing any retribution, God will pour out his wrath on them in Hell.

Or even better, if they repent from their sins they will have part in the atoning death of Christ, when God poured out his wrath over their sin on his own son. And they will have part in the same undeserved salvation that we have.

Taking your own revenge is denying these realities. So in stead of trusting in God’s justice, you put yourself in his place, and execute your own judgment. You may get the immediate satisfaction you’re looking for, but God’s perfect will is always best, and sin always takes you out of God’s perfect will.

So in light of this, Paul offers another way of dealing with evil. Not combating it with further evil, but defeating it with good:

BUT IF YOUR ENEMY IS HUNGRY, FEED HIM, AND IF HE IS THIRSTY, GIVE HIM A DRINK; FOR IN SO DOING YOU WILL HEAP BURNING COALS ON HIS HEAD.” Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. (Rom 12:20-21)

So then going to court against a brother is an act of unwillingness to forgive and to show another the same kind of grace that God has shown us. And it is an act of deliberate injustice, by circumventing the church and seeking mediation from those who do not know God, hoping that they will rule unjustly in your favor, rather than the church ruling justly in favor of your opponent, or telling you to let it go. And finally it is an act of distrust in the supreme eternal justice of God. It is shoving God out of the courtroom to deal with things on our own, in ways that fall short of God’s perfect justice.

See you in court? (1Cor 6:1-6)

2011-09-21T21:26:00.001+02:00

Does any one of you, when he has a case against his neighbor, dare to go to law before the unrighteous and not before the saints? Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? If the world is judged by you, are you not competent to constitute the smallest law courts? Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more matters of this life? So if you have law courts dealing with matters of this life, do you appoint them as judges who are of no account in the church? I say this to your shame. Is it so, that there is not among you one wise man who will be able to decide between his brethren, but brother goes to law with brother, and that before unbelievers? (1Cor 6:1-6)

Usually in literature chapters come at natural breaks in the text, and changes of topic. That’s true most of the time in the Bible as well, but we need to keep in mind that the division into chapters and verses were added to the text 1500 years later.

So then we need to ask ourselves, does this break considerably from what we were talking about in chapter five with church discipline, or is it just a natural extension of it?

Last time we were talking about how the church deals with a member who sins, and this time we’re talking about how the church deals with a member who sins. The difference is this time the sin has caused a deep disagreement between two members of the church, and it is not immediately clear which one of them actually is the sinner and which one is the victim.

So, being the Greeks they are, and being children of their time, the most natural thing for them to do is to take their brother to court to have the dispute settled. The courts of the time were called the dikastic courts, and were run by fairly simple principles. There was an assembly of 200 to 500 men, depending on the type of case. These men held the title of dikastai. They were appointed at the beginning of every year. To become a dikastai, you had to be a legal citizen over the age of 30, and you had to be willing to take a dikastic oath.

The accuser would make a speech before the court, and then the defendant would do the same. Then the dikastai, would vote in favor of one of them. If it was a crime that required punishment, they would have another round afterward, where the accuser and defendant both proposed what they saw as an appropriate punishment, and they would decide that as well by vote.

The democratic courts were the pride and joy if the Greek civilisation. The symbol of their civility and wisdom. In most other cultures at the time, you would take them before a regional leader appointed by the king, or even just someone who had great power because he was rich, and the verdict and punishment would be completely at this one mans discretion.

But the wisdom of the world is not like the wisdom of God. And what is right in the eyes of a democratic assembly is not necessarily what God wants.

God’s laws are written on every man’s heart, and this is reflected in every law text of every country in the world to some degree. But sin clouds our judgment and causes us to collectively make up provisions for it. And those compromises make it into law as well. So even though the laws and morals of unbelievers are influenced by God, they are not a perfect reflection of his righteousness.

So Paul poses the question, why would you not rather go to those who have the spiritual wisdom to judge? Why do you go to those who lack an intimate knowledge of the heart of God, and ask them to decide? The implication being, maybe the unregenerate are more likely to rule in your favor. Maybe they will not see your subtle “legalized” sin in all of this, but rather rule against the one you’re disagreeing with. While in God’s eyes you yourself are the offender. It is probably in this sense Paul say that you wrong and defraud your brethren, when you go to court against them in verse 8.

The saints will rule the earth with Christ in the millennial kingdom. And angels will be subject to us as well. So is the spiritual state in Corinth so poor that there isn’t even one in the church who has the wisdom to pass good judgments? Do they need to get an unbeliever to decide in even the most minor of disagreements?

Paul is not proposing here, that we should set up a Christian court system, like the Muslims do with their sharia courts. What would have been the right response is for the man who feels he has been defrauded, to go about the normal procedure for church discipline. After all this man would probably have committed a sin that would warrant church discipline. So first he would need to talk to the offender and see if he would repent. Then take with him one or two other brothers, and finally, if he refused to repent, take him before the whole church.

Now if this man was expelled from the church, I suppose by this text, it wouldn’t be unlawful to then open a court case against him, but as we will see soon that is not really the heart of a believer. Stay tuned for the next post!

Listen, then Speak

2011-08-04T22:58:00.001+02:00

If one gives an answer before he hears, it is his folly and shame. (Prov 18:13)

How quick are you to voice your opinion in matters of doctrine, morals or politics? The public debate of our day is replete with strongly held, yet poorly thought through opinions, voiced with great aggression. Sadly, Christian debate is no exception. I say "sadly" because being quick to speak and quick to anger is a mark of ungodliness. We are commanded to be the opposite: Slow to speak and slow to anger (Jas 1:19)

I recall my first steps into christian online debate forums around a decade ago. Full of self-confidence I would revile against anyone who held differing doctrinal understandings on issues like baptism, the ministry of the Holy Spirit, or forms of worship. I was shocked to find that those who were older and wiser than me were able to destroy my arguments with the greatest ease. Why? Because I hadn't thought it through. I was just parroting what I'd heard other people say. And I really hadn't taken the time to understand the position of those who disagreed with me. No wonder then, that every arrow I fired at them seemed to miss.

While I've revised some of my opinions since then, most of them still remain the same. My problem was not that I was wrong. My problem was a lack of thoughtfulness. I was quick to speak, but I was not wise. I would have done well to heed the advice of the Bible; If you just shut up, people won't know you're stupid.

Whoever restrains his words has knowledge, and he who has a cool spirit is a man of understanding. Even a fool who keeps silent is considered wise; when he closes his lips, he is deemed intelligent. (Prov 17:27-28)

There is a time to speak, but before that time ever comes around there is a time to be quiet and just listen, so that you can gain understanding and wisdom. And if you get this order wrong, you will almost certainly end up looking like a fool.

The Weeds - A Parable Against Church Discipline?

2011-08-01T23:59:00.000+02:00

You may regard this as a bonus feature to my ongoing Bible study on the book of 1. Corinthians. As I've been working my way through the doctrine of Church Discipline, as presented in chapter 5, I'm increasingly aware of the fact that most churches either ignore it or actively resists it.

Some have tried to present the parable of the weeds as an argument against the Biblical doctrine of Church discipline. Of course pitching scripture up against scripture like this is an absolutely dreadful hermaneutic. The true Christian is not willing to loose a jot or tittle of God's written revelation, so trying to invalidate a scripture with another goes against every fiber of our being. But that apparently doesn't stop people from doing it. So let's deal with it. Here's the text from Matthew 13:24-20:

He put another parable before them, saying, "The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a man who sowed good seed in his field, but while his men were sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat and went away. So when the plants came up and bore grain, then the weeds appeared also. And the servants of the master of the house came and said to him, 'Master, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then does it have weeds?' He said to them, 'An enemy has done this.' So the servants said to him, 'Then do you want us to go and gather them?' But he said, 'No, lest in gathering the weeds you root up the wheat along with them. Let both grow together until the harvest, and at harvest time I will tell the reapers, Gather the weeds first and bind them in bundles to be burned, but gather the wheat into my barn.'"

So the argument goes, that we should not go plucking people out from the church just because we think they may be weeds. We may be wrong about them, so we should let them stay in the church until God judges them. It might at the outset seem like a fair interpretation of the parable, but it does not align with Jesus' own interpretation of it a few verses down.

You see in this interpretation the field is the church, and gathering up the weeds is setting them outside of the church. But when Jesus explains the parable, the field is the world (verse 38) and gathering up the weeds would mean to eliminate them from the world. This is what Jesus is speaking against. He is warning against establishing a religion of the sword, trying to cleanse the world of unbelievers. That is his own job, that he will send forth his angels to do at the close of the age (verse 39)

Introducing Anya Mae Ravatsås

2011-07-30T15:00:00.000+02:00

On July 26. 2011, at 2:54 PM, the Lord was pleased to make this precious addition to our family. Our first child, Anya Mae is 3430 g and 49 cm (7 lbs 9 oz and 19 in.) of pure cuteness. My wife was amazing, delivering her at home in water without medical intervention. They are both strong and healthy.

Do judge! (1Cor 5:12-13)

2011-07-29T23:59:00.000+02:00

For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Do you not judge those who are within the church? But those who are outside, God judges. REMOVE THE WICKED MAN FROM AMONG YOURSELVES. (1Cor 5:12-13)

Matthew 7:1 has become one of the most quoted verses in the entire Bible. “Do not judge so that you will not be judged”. It’s commonly used as an attack against Christians who are willing to say that the Bible condemns certain sins. If someone ever throws this verse at you, ask them if they think it’s wrong for you to judge others. When they say yes, ask them to kindly stop judging you. And if you feel up for it, try to explain to them the difference between judging someone and telling them what the laws are.

We understand from the context of Matthew 7, that the kind of judgment Jesus is talking about, is a self-righteous hypocrisy that sets up a higher standard for others than for self. But that doesn’t mean we have to stop differentiating between right and wrong. To the contrary, not only do we have to differentiate, but when someone claims to be a christian, and consistently acts in a way that brings reproach to the name of Christ, then the church is not only authorized but commanded to judge them. Not with an arrogant attitude, and not with a higher standard than we use on ourselves, but with humility, concern and genuine fear for the eternal destination of their souls.

When it comes to those who are outside of the church, they are not under the church’s jurisdiction. We are not commanded, or even allowed to pass similar judgments on them.

If you think about it, that should be quite obvious. You can’t kick someone out of the church if they’re not in it. And excluding someone from the church is as far as our authority goes. Once someone is outside of the church - whether they are under church discipline, or they have never been part of the Church - God has it from there. The church doesn’t make eternal judgments. It doesn’t decide who goes to Heaven and Hell. That is God’s office.

When to bind, and when to loose? (1Cor 5:11)

2011-07-27T23:59:00.000+02:00

But actually, I wrote to you not to associate with any so-called brother if he is an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler—not even to eat with such a one. (1Cor 5:11)

It is time to look at what kinds of transgressions that would warrant disciplinary action from the church. Just to make sure, Paul again specifies that this is for those who call themselves brothers. And then he goes on to give a list of six specific categories of sinners. We’re going to look closer at them.

Immoral people: (gr. “pornos”) The literal meaning of the word is a male prostitute, but in the Bible it is used of all kinds of sexual immorality (which in itself implies that all sexual immorality is of the same nature as prostitution).
Covetous people: People eager to have more, especially what belongs to others. Covetousness is really a form of the next sin, which is Idolatry (Eph 5:5, Col 3:5)
Idolaters: Idolatry is when God is not of primary importance to you. You don’t determine this by your ability to manipulate yourself into a certain state of emotion, but rather by what you tends to fill up your mind, what your actions are aiming toward and what gives you comfort, security and pleasure.
Revilers: A reviler is one who assaults and abuses with words. He will make harsh insults and accusations, intended to humiliate someone or damage their reputation.
Drunkards: No further explanation is needed, except perhaps to point out that any compulsive or addictive behavior, that inhibits your sound judgment, would be a form of this sin.
Swindlers: (gr. “harpax”) It can mean a swindler, robber or extortioner. Basically anyone who by violence, threats or deceit takes something that rightfully belongs to another.

Keep this list in mind, and let’s go to a couple of other passages:

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. (1 Cor 6:9-10)

For this you know with certainty, that no immoral or impure person or covetous man, who is an idolater, has an inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. (Eph 5:5)

What I want you to notice here is how well the list of sins that qualify for church discipline correlates with the list of sins that disqualify a person from inheriting the kingdom of God. Not because we earn our entrance there by avoiding certain sins, but because sins of that type are symptoms of a heart that has not been transformed by God.

Church discipline is about the church on earth accurately reflecting who has their names in the book of life and who doesn’t (Matt 18:18). We do not want to include those who God has excluded, but nor do we want to exclude those who God has included.

Spiritual discernment is rarely cut-and-dry. It would be nice if it could be condensed into a six-point checklist that applied to every possible situation, but that’s just not the case. Paul gave us six examples of sins that qualify for church discipline, but without doubt there are more. (for example he left out murder from the list). And we can’t really apply a one strike and you’re out policy to the ones he did mention either, because that’s not what God does. He gives grace and second chances to those who are repentant.

So when Jesus teaches about this in Matt 18, he makes sure to set up a “procedure” that gives the sinner several opportunities to turn:

If your brother sins, go and show him his fault in private; if he listens to you, you have won your brother. But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you, so that BY THE MOUTH OF TWO OR THREE WITNESSES EVERY FACT MAY BE CONFIRMED. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. (Matt 18:15-17)

Possibly it was this Peter had in mind when he asked in verse 21: “Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me and I forgive him? Up to seven times?” Maybe seven times sounded very generous to Peter, but Jesus was not impressed, and went on to tell the parable of the king who settled accounts with his servants to help Peter put forgiveness in the proper perspective. We commit a great sin if we throw a repentant sinner out of church because of an unwillingness to forgive, no matter how great his guilt is. We can not withhold forgiveness from our fellow servants, and still expect to be granted forgiveness ourselves.

The "Christianity" of the Oslo terrorist

2011-07-25T19:04:00.000+02:00

Yesterday I posted my response to the claims that the Oslo terrorist was a Christian. Many others have written about this much better than I have. One I want to point out is Tim Challies, who offers an excellent analysis on his blog Another one is the piece below, written by my friend Conrad Myrland, who has taken the time to analyse what the terrorist says about his own faith in his manifesto. He has graciously allowed me to republish it on this blog

---

The terrorist who committed the horrible atrocities in Oslo and Utøya 22 July 2011 recorded his faith as "Christian" in the Facebook-profile he designed short time before the attack.

He has therefore being portrayed as a "Christian terrorist" or a "Christian fundamentalist" in both Norwegian and international media.

NO RELATIONSHIP TO GOD OR JESUS

But this is how the terrorist describes his own Christianity in his 1500 pages "manifest":

If you have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and God then you are a religious Christian. Myself and many more like me do not necessarily have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and God. We do however believe in Christianity as a cultural, social, identity and moral platform. This makes us Christian. (Quote page 1307)

He is saying that he doesn't have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and God. So HE IS NOT a Christian, according to Jesus and the apostles. He is NOT a Christian according to the New Testament. HE IS NOT a Christian, according to the doctrine of the church(es) through two millenniums.

The terrorist has created a Christianity in his own image.

It reminds me of a note to self I made 12 July 2011: When you study Christianity you will either become proud to partake of its uniqueness and its blessed effect in the Western world, or you will be humbled by it's great God. The former path leads to hell. The latter to eternal life.

The great danger is that many people in the West has the terrorist's kind of "Christianity".

Dear reader: Is this the Christianity YOU follow?

NO RELATIONSHIP TO THE HOLY SPIRIT

The Holy Spirit is mentioned twice in 1500 pages (according to a limited search). One time as a name of a local church, the second time where the terrorist declares that a personal relationship to the Trinity is not important. (See further down.)

A person with no relationship to the Holy Spirit is NOT a Christian.

The great danger is that many people who regard themselves as Christians is in the same situation as the terrorist.

PERVERTED UNDERSTANDING OF THE CROSS

Moreover, a Christian will always have somehow an understanding and a personal experience of the cross. This is the terrorist's understanding of the cross: European Christendom and the cross will be the symbol in which every cultural conservative can unite under in our common defense. It should serve as the uniting symbol for all Europeans whether they are agnostic or atheists. (Quote page 1307)

This is such an affront to Jesus and the cross on which he died, that no words can describe it. The terrorist believed in the supremacy of Europe, and hated marxists and Muslims. This should disqualify him as a Christian in itself. The one who hates, is a murderer, and has no eternal life. Moreover, there is no little dot in his manifest suggesting that he was a Christian with a personal relationship to God the Father, Jesus the Son and The Holy Spirit.

A PERVERTED UNDERSTANDING OF MARTYRDOM

The terrorist believed in "fighting for the cross". It was a fight for the perverted cross, and therefore also a perverted fight. He writes on page 1360: If you want to fight for the cross and die under the “cross of the martyrs” it’s required that you are a practising Christian, a Christian agnostic or a Christian atheist (cultural Christian). The cultural factors are more important than your personal relationship with God, Jesus or the holy spirit. Even Odinists can fight with us or by our side as brothers in this fight. Followed by the quote from page 1362: You don’t need to have a personal relationship with God or Jesus to fight for our Christian cultural heritage. It is enough that you are a Christian-agnostic or a Christianatheist (an atheist who wants to preserve at least the basics of the European Christian cultural legacy (Christian holidays, Christmas and Easter)).

No true Christian martyrs throughout the centuries would have accepted a definition of martyrdom anywhere like this. Christian martyrs die because of their loyalty to Jesus Christ, being ready - because their Savior and Lord lives in them - to forgive their killers, even love them.

Dear reader! May God's grace bring all of us under the Lordship of Jesus Christ and renew our hearts by His Holy Spirit every day.

God bless you! One day he will sweep away every tear from the eyes of those who belong to Him!

Conrad Myrland
conrad@myrland.com

How antinomianism causes hypocrisy (1Cor 5:9-10)

2011-07-25T12:00:00.001+02:00

I wrote you in my letter not to associate with immoral people; I did not at all mean with the immoral people of this world, or with the covetous and swindlers, or with idolaters, for then you would have to go out of the world. (1Cor 5:9-10)

Let’s take a moment to deduce what is going on here; Earlier in the chapter we learned that the Corinthians were not only tolerating sin in Church, but were actually celebrating it. Here we see that Paul has written to them about this in the past. And that upon receiving that message from him, the Corinthians had limited it to only demand a higher standard of unsaved people, while still allowing for immorality in the church.

As easy as it is to point out the blatant hypocrisy in that, recall our discussion on antinomianism from chapter 4. antinomianism, as you may remember is the doctrine that says there is no longer any value in obeying God’s commands because we are free from the law. Antinomianism is grace abuse. And it is a very short leap to go from antinomianism to demanding a higher moral standard for unsaved people. Since the unsaved are not under grace, they would still be under the law, so if you are going to be consistent you’ll have to go there. You really can’t avoid it.

Anders Behring Breivik - Fundamentalist Christian?

2011-07-25T00:28:00.003+02:00

In the wake of the bomb in Oslo, and following massacre at the Labour Party youth camp at Utøya, I've noticed a very peculiar thing about the coverage of the event in American media. Many of them seem to be perpetuating the idea that the terrorist, Anders Behring Breivik is a fundamentalist Christian.

While I suspect that this misinformation is being perpetuated on purpose by a small group of secularist journalists who intend to exploit this tragedy to spread their agenda of hatred against Christians, I still feel obliged to make one clarification to my American friends, and help them see this through Norwegian eyes.

Breivik has authored (largely by copying and pasting) a 1500 page manifesto, where he uses some rhetoric around preserving our christian culture and heritage. European journalists, even the most left-leaning of them, understand what this means. We are immersed in the idea that our nations are "Christian nations", because we have state churches. They understand that the Christianity he talks about is the same Christianity they practice themselves when they take their children before the priest to get sprinkled, and when the go to Church on Christmas eve to get into the proper Christmas mood. It's what Norwegians do. They don't mean anything by it, and the moment they are out of those church doors they proceed to go about their secular lives as usual. This Christianity does not spring from a sincerely held faith in Christ. It's just a wholesome tradition that is closely tied to our national identity. And who knows, maybe there even is a God out there who will look on us favorably for jumping through these hoops, right?

This type of nationalistic Christianity lends itself perfectly to this type of abuse. Increasing numbers of Arab immigrants are spreading Islamic culture, so what is the remedy? We need to fight for our Christian cultural heritage!

And so it was that the name of Christ was dragged into this atrocity. Breivik may see himself as a Christian. It's a delusion he has in common with most of the Norwegian population. It seems he might even at occasions have prayed. Most people tend to do that whenever they're in a pinch, even if they don't really believe anyone is listening.

But I can say one thing for certain. Breivik does not have anything in common with the people who are generally labeled fundamentalist Christians. These are people who let the teachings of Christ have genuine influence in their lives. They love their enemies, bless those who persecute them, and the sword with which they spread their message is the Word of God. And they all share my disbelief and disgust with the atrocities that have been committed.

Please feel free to spread this around as a counterweight to the false information that is being spread.

An introduction to kicking people out of Church (1. Cor 5:1-8)

2011-06-28T20:55:00.000+02:00

It is actually reported that there is immorality among you, and immorality of such a kind as does not exist even among the Gentiles, that someone has his father’s wife. You have become arrogant and have not mourned instead, so that the one who had done this deed would be removed from your midst. (1 Cor 5:1-2)

In this chapter, Paul addresses something that has grieved him deeply to hear. He has received reports of a certain sin in the church. Now of course, sin in the church is nothing new. Where there are humans in the church, there is bound to be sin. And there will be grace for the sinner to find forgiveness for it and freedom from it. That doesn’t mean that there’s something wrong with the church, but only that it’s operating normally, and doing what it’s supposed to: Putting redeemed rebels together for their common sanctification.

But you wouldn’t expect to find the type of sins that shock and disgust even unregenerate people, simply because as Christians we are not who we used to be, but we are in the process of becoming holy like God is holy. So there is bound to be an improvement compared to what we were. And as we come further and further in that process, our conscienes grow more and more sensitive, and the sins that we’re dealing with are usually things that we as unregenerate people would not even think twice about.

So when a transgression of this magnitude had happened, you’d expect the church to be at least as shocked and disgusted as the world, and to mourn this atrocity. But in stead, Paul says, they had become arrogant. In stead of being ashamed, they were proud. How could that be?

It seems like the Corinthian Church seems to have fallen into a heresy that uses grace as a means to sin in stead of to holiness. That says Christ died so that I could keep sinning, and not be punished for it, in stead of Christ died to take my punishment and set me free from the power of sin.

They would see their freedom in Christ as a freedom to sin, rather than a freedom from sin. So when they saw what they perceived to be freedom flourishing in such abundance in their church, then in stead of grieving, they became arrogant toward those whom they perceived as slaves to the law of God.

For I, on my part, though absent in body but present in spirit, have already judged him who has so committed this, as though I were present. In the name of our Lord Jesus, when you are assembled, and I with you in spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus, I have decided to deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of his flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

Your boasting is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump of dough? Clean out the old leaven so that you may be a new lump, just as you are in fact unleavened. For Christ our Passover also has been sacrificed. Therefore let us celebrate the feast, not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. (1 Cor 5:3-8)

We already saw it in verse 2: “so that the one who has done this deed would be removed from your midst”. Now we are going to get in to what that entails. What Paul is about to teach the Corinthians here has become one of the most unpopular doctrines in the entire Bible. Partly because in some circles it has been abused and misapplied, and partly because it’s not a pleasant or easy thing to do.

But the church has both a right and an obligation to publicly disassociate themselves from anyone who claims to be a brother, but persists in unrepentant sin.

Since this is such a controversial issue, I will be very careful to limit myself to saying what the Bible says, and not draw any conclusions and implications, except for those that are so painfully obvious that there’s no way to avoid them. So with that in mind we are going to make three observations in these verses.

1. Church discipline happens in the context of the church being gathered together:
The church is to carry out this task in unity. Paul orders them to gather the church together and pronounce a judgment on this man in unison. And though he’s absent, he adds his consent to this judgment. Another key passage on church discipline says the same:

If your brother sins, go and show him his fault in private; if he listens to you, you have won your brother. But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you, so that BY THE MOUTH OF TWO OR THREE WITNESSES EVERY FACT MAY BE CONFIRMED. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. (Matt 18:15-17)

Jesus goes on to say, in Matthew 18, that when the church is gathered together in unison like this then he is gathered with them. When they are judging according to his word, they are acting as his agents, pronouncing his judgments. And they are as valid in heaven as on earth:

Truly I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven. “Again I say to you, that if two of you agree on earth about anything that they may ask, it shall be done for them by My Father who is in heaven. For where two or three have gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst.” (Matt 18:18-20)

So church discipline is not something we tuck away and deal with privately. And that public process will benefit everyone in the church, as they are reminded of the dangers of starting down a path of sin. Every one present, if their hearts are right with God, will walk out of that meeting, not with a sense of pride, but with a renewed commitment to fight any appearance of evil in their own hearts.

2. The aim of church discipline is restoration:
The explanation Paul offers for his decision to put this man out of the church is so that he might have a hope of being saved: “I have decided to deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of his flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.” The word flesh, can mean two things. It can mean our actual body, but it is more often used about our natural inclination toward evil. And that seems to be the most natural understanding here as well, because putting someone out of the church doesn’t really do any harm to their body.

It is also worth noting here, that Satan serves as a tool in this process. Martin Luther said something profoundly true when he said “The devil is God’s devil”. God and Satan are not equal forces battling against each other. God is the only God and infinite creator, and Satan is merely a created being in rebellion to his master. And God is keeping him on a tight leach for as long as it serves his divine purposes. Always remember that!

3. The aim of church discipline is to purify the church:
The third observation from these verses is that church discipline purifies the church. A leaven is a peace of sourdough, that was kept from one batch to the next, to get the new dough to start rising. Once the leaven was kneaded into the dough, the whole dough would take on those same properties, and you could even take a new lump from that dough and keep for the next one.

That is what happens with sin when it gets to exist within the church. It inevitably spreads to the whole church, and no one can remain unaffected by it.

Paul points to the symbolism that God installed into the passover celebration 1500 years earlier, as he freed his people from their captivity in Egypt. On the day when he told them to slaughter a lamb and put its blood on the doorposts of their house. So that the angel that God sent to execute Gods punishment over Egypt would see it, and pass over their house. And then to bake a loaf of unleavened bread, as a sign of his promise of a new nature.

At the time this provided a very real way of salvation from God’s judgment for Israel, but it was yet to be revealed that all of this was pointing to a much greater salvation. 1500 years later God slaughtered a lamb himself. And that lamb was his only son. And the blood from this lamb, his blood shed to atone for sins, covers all those who believe in him and receive him, so that on the day of judgment, God will pass over us. But if God has put the blood of his lamb on our doorposts, he has also transformed us to unleavened bread, and we are not to change that by mixing ourselves with the leaven of malice and wickedness.

Church discipline purifies the church. It helps us by freeing us from a sinful influence that would otherwise pull us down, and it also helps our outward testimony. Isn’t one of the main accusations that are leveled against the church that there are so many hypocrites in it? How many people have been turned off from the Gospel because the church has not done it’s job and cleansed out those who only claim to be Christians, but really aren’t?

I repeat that this is not a pleasant thing to do, but it is important. It’s usually not perceived as a good thing, but we can not afford not to do it. The truth is that some people are of Christ and some are of the devil. And if we allow the latter to infiltrate the church and muddle the line between the two categories, that is a wicked thing to do.

Next time we'll look more into what exactly qualifies for church discipline, so if this is all new to you, please don't go to church this Sunday applying this teaching on everyone you don't like. So please hold off at least until you get the full picture.

Porn and lentil stew

2011-06-17T22:07:00.000+02:00

No one really believes in the popular rationalization that porn is a victim-less crime. But few understand the full cost of it in their own lives and the lives of those they love the most. At least until it's too late.

I'd like to address especially the single men today, for two reasons. First of all they need it the most. A man is never as vulnerable to this temptation as when he is young, inexperienced, burning with passion and yet without any legitimate outlet for it. Secondly, because they have the least resources available. Most men who write about this are married men, writing to other married men. And their solution, of directing their passions toward their wives seems very unhelpful to someone who doesn't have one.

What I'd like to get across to you is this: Watching porn is like selling your birthright for a mouthful of lentil stew. You're trading in one of Gods most valuable gifts to you for something essentially worthless. Read this passage with me, from Genesis:

When Jacob had cooked stew, Esau came in from the field and he was famished; and Esau said to Jacob, “Please let me have a swallow of that red stuff there, for I am famished.” Therefore his name was called Edom. But Jacob said, “First sell me your birthright.” Esau said, “Behold, I am about to die; so of what use then is the birthright to me?” And Jacob said, “First swear to me”; so he swore to him, and sold his birthright to Jacob. Then Jacob gave Esau bread and lentil stew; and he ate and drank, and rose and went on his way. Thus Esau despised his birthright. (Gen 25:29-34)

Esau was a game hunter. A man with a taste for red meat. But he was hungry. So hungry that even lentil stew looked good to him. I believe many of you reading this would be able to identify with this. you're the kind of man who has an appetite for what God originally created sex to be. Yet somewhere along the way you became so famished that even the pathetic pictures that perverted pornographers throw after you start to entice you.

Your hunger is as real as Esau's. I understand your temptation. Now I want you to understand this: That the satisfaction porn offers lasts no longer than it would take Esau to get hungry again, and the price you pay for it is as high as the one he paid.

What is the price exactly? First of all, porn is as addictive as any narcotic. You'll want it more, and find less satisfaction in it for every time. You essentially sell yourself into a lifetime of slavery. Secondly, it will warp your view of sex, and leave you unable to find satisfaction in the real thing as well. As a single man hoping to get married, you need to be aware that the future pleasures God has reserved for you to enjoy together with your wife are what you give in exchange for that mouthful of stew.

If you lend Satan your eyes, and let him train you to find pleasure in perversions, it won't take long before sex the way God intended it seems boring to you. When you do get married you'll quickly find yourself dissatisfied with your wife, because somewhere along the way your appetites switched. And you're no longer longing for sex and trying to substitute it with porn. You're longing for porn and trying to substitute it with sex.

Not only have you traded in your satisfaction in marriage, but also your future wife's satisfaction. You will deprive her of the deep intimacy she needs and desires, seeking to play out your own pornographic fantasies. And it still won't satisfy, because sex really isn't very much like porn at all. Porn actors are just that. Actors. They act as if what they do is pleasurable, while in real life most of it it's usually uncomfortable or straight-out painful.

Easu's choice had repercussions for his children and his children's children until this very day. Had he not given up his birthright, they - instead of Israel - would have been the nation through whom God manifested his power in the old covenant. With the click of a mouse you can deprive your future children of a happy, harmonious home, and lead them on a path of destruction. Because, make no mistake about it, apart from divine intervention they will follow.

Don't go down that path! When Jesus said it's better to gauge out your eyes, he wasn't kidding. Yes, the hunger to love and be loved in that special way is real. But like all the best things in life, you have to wait for it. And you can. Do not believe the devil when he says it's impossible, and tells you you can't take it any longer. Believe that "no temptation has overtaken you but such as is common to man; and God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will provide the way of escape also, so that you will be able to endure it." (1.Cor 10:13)

Hold on to that, until God again grants you a moment of sanity and clarity of mind,and renews your strength before the next battle.

Every word counts

2011-06-02T20:01:00.000+02:00

You can't have a Bible website without a search function. Well you can, and it would be great for people who have the whole text of scripture memorized, and know where to find things, but the rest of us would just give up and go somewhere else.

MySQL offers a very advanced search algorithm, that allows you to do all kind of fancy things, like ignore very common words (stopwords), short words and a number of other things. The problem though, is that it doesn't only allow you to do fancy things. Unless you're on a dedicated server where you can edit the settings any way you want to, MySQL forces you to do all of those fancy things, whether you want to or not.

Now if you're building the next Google, than all of those functions are somewhat useful. But if you're building a Bible, every word counts. Which is why "SELECT * FROM Bible WHERE MATCH Text AGAINST 'search string'" just isn't going to cut it.

So is there way to disable the fanciness on a shared web host, and just do a plain old search? Not really. Most forums I've seen seem to suggest dropping the match function altogether, and use the LIKE function, like this:

SELECT * FROM Bible WHERE Text LIKE '%search%' OR Text LIKE '%string%'

And it works. The only problem is it matches partial words as well. Which is fine if that's what you intended it to do, but if your users put a short word like 'a' or 'I' in there, they're going to get a lot of matches. (Every word that contains the letter 'a' or 'i'.)

So for the Expositor's Bible I want a checkbox that sets whether or not to allow partial matches. Now what? Add a space to each side of the word? Close, but no. It won't match words at the beginning or end of the string, or words followed by a comma, period, or any other non-word character except for space.

So do we add an OR clause for every possible variation? That's one long query, and not a very pretty one either. But what we're looking for is starting to sound an awful lot like regular expressions. And lo and behold, MySQL indeed has a REGEXP operator. *cue calm, pleasant music* Some developers fear and hate them, but I for one love them.

Now if you have no idea what a regular expression is, that is beyond my scope, but the above link is a good starting point to see what they can do. I'll concentrate on what they can do specifically for what I want here and now, which is to match the exact words, and not produce partial matches. Thankfully the MySQL implementation even has a specific set of markers predefined for that exact purpose: [[:<:]] and [[:>:]]

So what does our query end up looking like? Not bad at all, really. Very clean and readable, and fast enough at least for my use. Drumroll please...

SELECT * FROM Bible WHERE Text REGEXP '[[:<:]]search[[:>:]]' OR Text REGEXP '[[:<:]]string[[:>:]]'

That's all, folks. Now go build excellent search functions.

The joy of fathering a belly

2011-05-27T21:37:00.000+02:00

One of the highlight of my days in this season of life, is at night when Amber and I go to bed, and our little baby wakes up and start kicking and squirming around in her belly. I'm sure we could keep ourselves entertained for hours just looking at it, and feeling those little movements, and trying to imagine what it's up to in there.

It is a tremendously joyful thing, but also one of the most sobering experiences I've ever had. It really shouldn't come as a surprise, since it's universally attested to by everyone who has walked this path before me; that there is something uniquely special that happens in a man's heart when he becomes a father.

It's sobering because this fallen world is a hostile and dangerous place. It's the kind of place one would look at and say "that's no place for children". It's plagued with all forms of sufferings and evil you can imagine, and some that you probably couldn't imagine. Our child will come into a world that conspires to train it diligently in the craft of sinning. And it will find within itself a strange attraction to the allure of evil.

Three decades ago, another brother walked this path and wrestled with these thoughts before me, and wrote this beautiful song for his son.

There's something very peculiar about fatherhood. It's hard work and much responsibility, not to mention that the whole world has conspired to abolish any notion of biblical fatherhood. It's the kind of thing that you wouldn't think of enjoying unless you are a father. But I am one now. And I'm loving it.

A Father's Discipline (1 Cor 4:18-21)

2011-05-16T20:00:00.002+02:00

Now some have become arrogant, as though I were not coming to you. But I will come to you soon, if the Lord wills, and I shall find out, not the words of those who are arrogant but their power. For the kingdom of God does not consist in words but in power. What do you desire? Shall I come to you with a rod, or with love and a spirit of gentleness?

The final aspect of spiritual fatherhood that we’ll look at today is that of authority. Take careful note of the fact that this is the last one Paul mentions, after the loving care, and the godly example he has provided for them. It is in this context that Paul now has gained the right to exercise authority.

Just like with natural children, if you try to exercise authority without loving and caring for them, and leading by example, you’ll find that your authority and discipline only serves to harm them and provoke them to anger. That is not strange, because apart from love and godliness your only other possible motives for exercising authority and disciplining would be your own selfish desires.

I’m sure most of us growing up can remember a few days when we dreaded the sound of dad’s car pulling up in the driveway, because we knew that he would learn of something that we had done during the course of the day, and deal with us accordingly. It is something very similar Paul is threatening here. He’s saying to those who are arrogant that they’d better have the power to substantiate their words, because he’s coming back. And depending on their response he’s either coming with a rod or with love and gentleness.

Now they have the choice to respond in a way that removes the need for discipline, or if they truly do think themselves to be spiritually superior to Paul, to face his rod with divine power that matches their big words.

This is the last of a 3 part series on Spiritual Fatherhood Check out the other ones as well:

1 Cor 4:14-15 - The Forgotten Doctrine of Spiritual Fatherhood

1 Cor 4:16-17 - A Father's Example

1 Cor 4:18-21 - A Father's Discipline

A Father's Example (1 Cor 4:16-17)

2011-05-13T20:00:00.001+02:00

Therefore I exhort you, be imitators of me. For this reason I have sent to you Timothy, who is my beloved and faithful child in the Lord, and he will remind you of my ways which are in Christ, just as I teach everywhere in every church.

You may have heard a failing father, seeing his children fall into the same vices as he himself is captive of, pleading with them to follow what he says, and not what he does. As surely as that tactic will fail with natural children, it will fail with spiritual children. Every father leads by example, whether he wants to or not.

Paul does not merely tell them what to do. He lives it. And since he does, he can say “be imitators of me”. There are many words in this epistle, but Paul knows he can not lead by words alone. But being prevented from coming himself, he sends another. Timothy is another of his spiritual children, who has walked with him and followed his ways thoroughly. In 2 Timothy, written some years later Paul says to him:

(10) Now you followed my teaching, conduct, purpose, faith, patience, love, perseverance, (11) persecutions, and sufferings, such as happened to me at Antioch, at Iconium and at Lystra; what persecutions I endured, and out of them all the Lord rescued me! (...) (14)You, however, continue in the things you have learned and become convinced of, knowing from whom you have learned them (2 Tim 3:10,11,14)

Timothy had been so conformed to Christ that in stead of Paul coming himself to remind them of his ways in Christ, he could send Timothy to refresh their minds on the very same thing. He had walked with Paul for a long time, and grown into a level of maturity where he was able to represent Paul. He was a faithful, mature child that Paul could send to set an example for his younger brothers and lead them into the same maturity.

This is part 2 of a 3 part series on Spiritual Fatherhood the last one is being posted on Monday

1 Cor 4:14-15 - The Forgotten Doctrine of Spiritual Fatherhood
1 Cor 4:16-17 - A Father's Example
1 Cor 4:18-21 - A Father's Discipline

The Forgotten Doctrine of Spiritual Fatherhood 1 Cor 4:14-15

2011-05-11T21:16:00.002+02:00

I do not write these things to shame you, but to admonish you as my beloved children. For if you were to have countless tutors in Christ, yet you would not have many fathers, for in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel.

God loves family. He loves it because he invented it, and purposefully crafted every relationship and every natural emotion involved in each of those different relationships as pictures of spiritual realities. And throughout the Bible he continuously keeps pointing to different family relationships to explain things in terms that we can understand. Christians are called God’s Children, and are taught to see him as our Father. We are to see each other as brothers and sisters. In relation to Christ the church is a betroth bride waiting for the wedding feast. And now we come upon another such picture that is replete all throughout scripture, but sadly almost completely overlooked.

Paul has become a “father” to the Corinthians. How did he become their father? Certainly not the natural way, but rather through the Gospel. That was his instrument of labour when he worked among them, and that was what caused them to be born into the family of God.

Paul went through the pains of birth with these men and women as he prayed for them, witnessed to them, was rejected by them and was persecuted by them. These birth pains were not unique to Corinth. In the Galatian church he even at one point wrote and told them that he was going through this labour with them once again because they had embraced false teachers (Gal 4:19).

After suffering for them, Paul had rejoiced with the angels to see each of them take their first breath as a new creature in Christ. He had carefully instructed them and paid close attention to them. I’m sure he shared the sentiment of the apostle John, who said “I have no greater joy than this, to hear of my children walking in the truth.” (3 John 1:4)

Paul loved his children dearly, and took personal responsibility for them and their growth in Christ. A responsibility that extended deeply into his wallet. Speaking in 2. Corinthians of his plan to make a third visit to them he said:

“Here for this third time I am ready to come to you, and I will not be a burden to you; for I do not seek what is yours, but you; for children are not responsible to save up for their parents, but parents for their children.” (2Cor 12:14)

God loves fathers. One would expect nothing less from one who has taken Father as his title. And conversely, the devil hates fathers, and has created a culture where the vast majority of families don’t have one. They may have an adult male family member, but not one that fulfils the biblical role of fatherhood.

The same is true in the church. Spiritual children are born, and left as defenseless orphans. Some churches try to patch things up with discipleship programs, counseling and various classes and courses, but the real problem goes unaddressed. Their spiritual fathers have abandoned them.

We’ve been conditioned to see evangelism as a short term job. We preach the word, get the largest possible number of “decisions” and then move on to the next place. That is not how Paul operated. He knew that once a spiritual child was born into his hands he had become a father.

This is part 1 of a 3 part series on Spiritual Fatherhood based on 1 Corinthians 4 stay tuned for the other parts:

1 Cor 4:14-15 - The Forgotten Doctrine of Spiritual Fatherhood
1 Cor 4:16-17 - A Father's Example
1 Cor 4:18-21 - A Father's Discipline

Evil is always evil (1.Cor 4:11-13)

2011-04-22T16:00:00.001+02:00

To this present hour we are both hungry and thirsty, and are poorly clothed, and are roughly treated, and are homeless; and we toil, working with our own hands; when we are reviled, we bless; when we are persecuted, we endure; when we are slandered, we try to conciliate; we have become as the scum of the world, the dregs of all things, even until now. (1.Cor 4:11-13)

What Paul is describing here is the application of a proverb that he also quotes in his letter to the Romans. Proverbs 25:21-22 says:

If your enemy is hungry, give him food to eat; And if he is thirsty, give him water to drink; For you will heap burning coals on his head, And the LORD will reward you.

Jesus commanded this in the sermon on the mount, when he said

You have heard that it was said, 'AN EYE FOR AN EYE, AND A TOOTH FOR A TOOTH.' But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. If anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, let him have your coat also. Whoever forces you to go one mile, go with him two. Give to him who asks of you, and do not turn away from him who wants to borrow from you. You have heard that it was said, 'YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR and hate your enemy.' But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. (Matt 5:38-45)

This is not optional behavior for particularly spiritual people. But it is a command, founded in who our Father in heaven is. We are saved today, because God is a God who blesses his enemies. We were enemies, and he blessed us to become his children. Now as children we are to be imitators of him. We are to bear his image in this world, and when we return evil for evil we are presenting an incorrect image of our Father.

Not only that but we make ourselves servants of evil. When we return evil for evil, what is the common thread? Evil! What wins? Evil. What’s missing? Good.

Our Father does good to everyone, and it is not in his nature to do evil. Some times when someone does something evil to us we might feel justified to return the disfavor with a similar evil. This is not of the Holy Spirit. Some times when we’re in a difficult situation we might feel like we have the right to try to solve it in a sinful manner. This does not come from the nature of Christ in us.

Evil is always evil, no matter how justified we might feel in it, and the fact that this is such a strange and foreign concept to us just serves to testify about how much evil still remains in our hearts even after God has redeemed us.

It's normal to suffer (1. Cor 4:11-13)

2011-04-20T16:00:00.001+02:00

To this present hour we are both hungry and thirsty, and are poorly clothed, and are roughly treated, and are homeless; and we toil, working with our own hands; when we are reviled, we bless; when we are persecuted, we endure; when we are slandered, we try to conciliate; we have become as the scum of the world, the dregs of all things, even until now. (1.Cor 4:11-13)

It is not abnormal for Christians to be hungry and thirsty, poorly clothed, roughly treated, homeless, toiling with their hands, being reviled, persecuted and slandered. It is nice not to be, but we must resist the modern idea that a healthy spiritual life involves being comfortable, and that any discomfort we experience is a symptom of a lack of faith or prayer.

so many preachers add to the burdens of their suffering brothers and sisters by preaching a gospel of ease and comfort if you’re only spiritual enough, or follow some legalistic steps in a book.

Christians don’t stand out from the world when it comes to the amount of suffering. Where we do stand out is in how we deal with it.

Will they cheer when we die? (1.Cor 4:8-10)

2011-04-18T16:00:00.000+02:00

You are already filled, you have already become rich, you have become kings without us; and indeed, I wish that you had become kings so that we also might reign with you. For, I think, God has exhibited us apostles last of all, as men condemned to death; because we have become a spectacle to the world, both to angels and to men. We are fools for Christ's sake, but you are prudent in Christ; we are weak, but you are strong; you are distinguished, but we are without honor. (1. Cor 4:8-10)

When Paul says the apostles are exhibited last of all, as men condemned to death, the picture that would have formed in the minds of the original readers is the picture of a roman arena, and the grand finale of their gladiator show. He saw the world standing up and on the tribunes and cheering as the main attraction is dragged out by thick iron chains and released.They are prisoners, condemned to die a violent and gruesome death.

The world is not content just disliking, or being mildly annoyed with Christians. Throughout the history, in every part of the world, they have suffered persecution from Pagans, Muslims, Catholics, Atheists and everything in between. The relative peace that European and American Christians have enjoyed over the last few centuries is really an anomaly. So these verses seem strange to us. Maybe a little bit outdated. But both history and current developments with Islam and militant atheism would lead us to be prepared for times to get harder.

Christians have always been misrepresented and hated. If you read news you can hear the echoes of it. Evangelism is hate speech, teaching your children Christianity is child abuse. This is not new. And it is not extreme, compared to the accusations against Christians in atheist countries like China and North Korea, and Muslim countries in the Middle East and North Africa.

It is a rarity that the world in general does not cheer when we die. And we should not take it for granted.

Illusions of grandeur (1.Cor 4:8-10)

2011-04-15T16:00:00.025+02:00

You are already filled, you have already become rich, you have become kings without us; and indeed, I wish that you had become kings so that we also might reign with you. For, I think, God has exhibited us apostles last of all, as men condemned to death; because we have become a spectacle to the world, both to angels and to men. We are fools for Christ's sake, but you are prudent in Christ; we are weak, but you are strong; you are distinguished, but we are without honor. (1.Cor 4:8-10)

Wait... Who put that picture here?

If Paul had had the common sense to end this section after his initial remarks, he could have been quite a successful mega-church pastor or TV-preacher. “You are already filled, you have already become rich, you have become kings...” Just add something about turkey-bacon, and you’re pretty much set. But of course he has to go and ruin it, by saying he wished it all was true.

Of course, we don’t panic yet, because surely Paul will offer some kind of solution for this predicament? How to become filled, rich and reign as kings so they won’t be lacking all of this anymore? Perhaps they need to have more faith? Or maybe they haven’t been faithful tithers, and Paul will instruct them to sow their seed into his ministry? Do they need to pray harder, do a 40 day fast, or just speak it into existence? Because surely God wouldn’t want anything less for his servants.

To the contrary, dear fried. Look at how Paul contrasts his own christian walk to the proclaimed grandeur of the Corinthians:

For, I think, God has exhibited us apostles last of all, as men condemned to death; because we have become a spectacle to the world, both to angels and to men. We are fools for Christ's sake, but you are prudent in Christ; we are weak, but you are strong; you are distinguished, but we are without honor.

Paul is not complaining here. He’s setting forth himself and the other apostles as examples to be followed. If you want to follow Christ in the same way as the apostles, be prepared to be a weak, dishonored fool in the eyes of everyone else.

Impressing a deity

2011-04-13T16:00:00.001+02:00

A few years ago I had the opportunity to spend two months in Kenya doing missions work. In the small town where we spent the main portion of our time, we decided to go for one of the nicer hotels. It was a relatively new establishment, with prices that by Norwegian standards were still very affordable.

In Norway, we have certain expectations when we enter into a nice hotel. For example, you'd expect that the steps in a staircase are of roughly the same height. Not so in Kenya. There each step was whatever height they felt like building it that day. When we entered into the bathroom we expected the tiles to be arranged into straight lines. There, the mere presence of tiles was plenty impressive. They would make the walls look nicer by painting the lower part in a different color from the upper part, and it took Norwegian eyes to even notice that the height of the lower part fluctuated wildly across the wall.

Of course all of these superficial observations driven by western vanity have no true significance in the big picture. But they do point out an interesting facet of human nature; that two men can look at the same thing, and depending on what they're accustomed to one can be wildly impressed while the other will shake his head and snicker.

I know someone who from eternity past reigned with his Father in a kingdom that was flawless. A place where nothing had ever seen decay, and no object ever got a dent or a scratch. A place where every smallest detail was handmade by God, and every curve on every blade of grass reflected his endless glory. The kind of place where you could pick up a rock from the ground and be brought to tears by the mere perfection of it, and wherever you turn them, your eyes would be filled with sights so glorious that you would have a hard time holding back from singing improvised songs of praise and worship to the Creator of it all.

Yet this person that I know, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.

Can you imagine what it would be for someone who existed eternally in perfection to come down to this fallen earth? To lay down his omnipotence and subject himself to corruption and death? If the contrast between the wealth of Norway and the poverty of Kenya stood out to me, imagine how unimpressed he must be with even the finest this earth has to offer. Will he not look at everything I find magnificent and amazing and think to himself that it is only a faint shadow of what he once created it to be?

While the cross was the pinnacle of Jesus' sacrifice, we often miss that even being present on this earth would have been a sacrifice much greater than we could ever imagine. And when we do that, then at the same time we deprive ourselves of imagining the glory and the grandeur of heaven.

What do you have that you did not receive? (1. Cor 4:7)

2011-04-11T16:00:00.001+02:00

For who regards you as superior? What do you have that you did not receive? And if you did receive it, why do you boast as if you had not received it? (1. Cor 4:7)

Here, Paul makes it personal. They can’t hide their pride behind their preachers anymore. Paul demands an answer to what would lead them to see themselves as superior to anyone else. He does so with the piercing question “what do you have that you did not receive?”

No question could be more deadly to pride and arrogance. So you claim to have discernment, do you? Who did you get it from? So your preacher is better than his preacher? Who created your preacher? Who called him into the ministry? Who died on a cross to give him something to preach about? Was it you?

Try to think about the most evil and wicked human being you can possibly imagine. Someone who’s committed sins that would make the devil himself blush. Now ask the question. What separates you from him? Nothing but the grace of God. Left to yourself you’d not only be as bad as him. You’d be worse.

“Wait”, you say. “I’m not like that. I don’t have those same inclinations to sin.” That is right, and the reason you don’t is because of God’s grace. Even if you’re a first rank atheist, you still have some remnant of god-given grace in your life too keep you from going where you would go left to yourself. His grace is to some degree restraining even the most evil person you can think of.

For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them, (Rom 2:14-15)

So what do you have that you have not received? Name one thing you’ve earned by your merits, or created yourself from nothing.

God resists the proud and gives grace to the humble. Becoming arrogant because of what you have received, is to take God’s gracious free gifts to you and turn them into something he detests. “But he who boasts is to boast in the Lord” (2.Cor 10:17).

Thank you Lord that I'm not like that Corinthian (1. Cor 4:6)

2011-04-07T16:00:00.001+02:00

Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively applied to myself and Apollos for your sakes, so that in us you may learn not to exceed what is written, so that no one of you will become arrogant in behalf of one against the other. (1. Cor 4:6)

Yesterday, we saw how the Corinthian pride in preachers was really just a disguise for pride in self. So today is an excellent opportunity for us to shake our heads at the silliness of the Corinthians, and pat ourselves on the back for not being like them. Let’s go up to the temple and lift our eyes toward heaven and say “Thank you God that I’m not like those arrogant Corinthian sinners.”

Well maybe you, like the Corinthians, would be to humble to say that out loud. But you might very well still be susceptible to have the same proud thoughts and arrogant feelings enter your heart. If not about preachers, then about some other worthy, spiritual sounding cause.

“My doctrine is better than yours”. It goes without saying, for those of us who are conscious of what we believe about God, that we would believe those beliefs to be true. And that if someone then disagrees, they would be wrong. But who gave you your doctrine? Was it not a gift by God’s grace? Then why would you act like you were the one who invented God? Why would you think those who don’t see it your way are just stupid or difficult? Am I saying that we should just toss all doctrine out the door, and start watching nooma videos? Not by any means. But when we know that the doctrines we believe, the ability to understand them, and the will to accept them were gifts given to us from God, we tend to treat those who disagree with us with a little more patience and grace.

“My church is better than yours”. Yes, but you are not the rock on which the Church is built. (Neither was the apostle Peter, by the way, but I won’t get into that here). If you keep that in mind you will not be slandering the bride of Christ down the street. You will humbly seek to serve them and show them more fully the things they fail to see.

There’s a million things a christian can use as a cover for arrogance. Things like Bible translations, how or when or how much to pray, how to witness, what music to listen to, what music to play in church, and the list just goes on and on. It is all fine and dandy to have an opinion about such things, and seek to convince others that you’re right. That doesn’t make you arrogant. But that feeling of superiority when you discuss these opinions with those who disagree with you, that most certainly does make you arrogant.

When your heart is filled with anger against someone else, and you start thinking “I don’t need him anyways”. When your mind starts thinking up accusations against him, and your mouth starts speaking harsh and hurtful words. Then it doesn’t matter if you’re right and he’s wrong. God resists the proud, and gives grace to the humble. He doesn’t resist the wrong and give grace to the right. So even if he’s wrong, if he’s humble about it he’s still better off than you.

Hiding pride behind preachers (1. Cor 4:6)

2011-04-06T16:00:00.007+02:00

Over the last few weeks we have seen Paul and Apollos as farmers, builders and stewards. Paul applied those word-pictures to himself and Apollos with a specific goal in mind. He wanted the Corinthians to humbly see themselves and their fellow servants in light of what is written.

In writing these things he emphasised three things in particular. First that their assignments were from God. Not from their own ambitions. Secondly, that it is a work of cooperation. And third, that they would be judged by God for their faithfulness.

This is Paul’s prescribed antidote to carnal Corinthian pride. But how does that work? Paul talked about his own and Apollos’ ministry, and their responsibilities to God. How does that cure the Corinthians of their arrogance?

By pulling their preachers down from their pedestals and pointing out that they are nothing but servants, Paul achieved two things. He set them up as examples of humility, and he took away the Corinthians’ possibility to hide their own pride behind them.

You see, pride in preachers is really just a disguise for pride in self. Of course, like other Christians, the Corinthians would have been very humble. Much too humble to be puffed up on their own behalf. They knew they couldn’t get away with that. But under this humble surface was a heart still filled with carnal arrogance, and it leaked out through the cracks. It sure looks much better to those around you to be puffed up on behalf of someone else, rather than on your own behalf. But Paul was not fooled. He knew that puffed up is puffed up, no matter how it’s disguised.

“My preacher is better than your preacher” is just another way of saying “I’m better than you” After all I am the one who is spiritual and smart enough to chose the right preacher over the wrong one. After knocking their disguise down, he goes on to address their real problem of a proud heart in the next verse.

This blog post has been proven by science

2011-04-05T15:00:00.002+02:00

There are many things that annoy me. One of them is a vice that is as popular among Bible-believing preachers as well as atheist university professors. What is it?

Making unspecific claims to scientific support.

A claims to scientific support demands at the very least a footnote with a reference that someone might be able to look up. Preferably there should be a short description of how the study was conducted as well so that you can quickly discern whether it's applicable to the claim made.

Over the years I have adapted to attach no significance to such claims as "Science proves", "we now know", "studies have shown", or even more vague "studies suggest". Usually they just mean the author is just expressing his own opinion and trying to sound smart at the same time. At best he might be referring to some internet rumor or something that he at least feels ought to be proven.

It annoys me when atheists do it, but it infuriates me when Christians sink to their level. (Especially when they do it to perpetuate one of the 5 worst arguments for Christianity ever). Does not the ninth commandment forbid bearing false witness? Leave lying to the atheists. Leave vague unsupported claims to fictional evidence to those who have no truth.

When the master comes back (1.Cor 4:5)

2011-04-04T15:00:00.000+02:00

Therefore do not go on passing judgment before the time, but wait until the Lord comes who will both bring to light the things hidden in the darkness and disclose the motives of men's hearts; and then each man's praise will come to him from God. (1.Cor 4:5)

When Jesus returns it will not matter whether our fellow servants thought we were wrong or right. It won’t even matter if we ourselves in a moment of weakness started wondering whether we had gone crazy. What will matter is if our Lord is satisfied with our service to him.

On that day he will put everything right. Many who may have appeared to others to be doing poorly will be praised by God because they were doing exactly what he told them to do. Others who seem to be doing great will be rebuked, or even rejected by Him because of wrong motives, secret sin or disobedience.

Let’s live for that day, and those words out of our master’s mouth. Well done, you good and faithful servant.

The dangers of an indifferent conscience (1.Cor 4:4)

2011-04-01T15:00:00.002+02:00

For I am conscious of nothing against myself, yet I am not by this acquitted; but the one who examines me is the Lord. (1.Cor 4:4)

Paul is not aware of any past or present sin that he has not brought before God, and that is an exceedingly restful position to be in. However, cultivating godliness and intimacy with God is not the only way to get there. There is another way, properly labeled antinomianism. You know what anti means, and nomos means law in Greek, so the word would describe those who are against the law. Those who accuse anyone who is obedient to the commands of God of being a legalist.

The antinomian would say along with Paul, I know of nothing against myself. After all Jesus died to forgive me all of my sins, so I can indulge in whatever I would like. We’re free from the law. “What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin so that grace may increase?” (Rom 6:1) The antinomian would say “sure, why not?” Christ shed his blood to free them from the power of sin, and they see it as an occasion to increase their sin.

So here we have Paul, the obedient servant with a good conscience, and the antinomian with a dead conscience, both making the same claim. “I know nothing against myself”. Are they thereby acquitted? “No”, Paul says.The one who examines us it the Lord. We can not acquit ourselves. We can not declare ourselves to be right with God because we feel like we are. God is our judge, and we need to withstand his scrutiny.

The blessing of an undefiled conscience (1. Cor 4:4)

2011-03-31T15:00:00.001+02:00

For I am conscious of nothing against myself, yet I am not by this acquitted; but the one who examines me is the Lord. (1.Cor 4:4)

What a blessing it is to be able to say “I don’t know of anything against myself”. It is a statement of complete rest. It is from this firm standing point that Paul can say, like he does in the previous verse, “You can think what you want about me, I don’t even care about my own opinion”. If you are able to make this statement, there are only two possible explanations. You’ve either deceived yourself to a point where your conscience is completely dead, or you’ve been cleansed by the blood of Christ.

Paul is not making this claim from a pharisaic standpoint, as one who has redefined and twisted the law to fit with his lifestyle. Nor did he make it from a standpoint of sinless perfection. This is the same man, after all, who claimed the title of chief of sinners.

So what is Paul saying here? The same thing as every Christian should be able to say. I don’t know of any past sin that I haven’t brought before Christ and been granted forgiveness for. And I don’t know of any present sin that I am not battling to the full extent of my capabilities. My soul is resting before God. I’m not hiding anything from him, and there’s no area of my life that I’m trying to keep him out of. Yes, I am a wretch, but all my faults are in God’s hands.

Everything you need to know about unicorns

2011-03-30T15:00:00.002+02:00

If you've ever been subject to the popular atheist canard of unicorns in the Bible, you'll find this video very informative.

I don't care what you think about this blog post (1.Cor 4:3)

2011-03-29T15:00:00.002+02:00

But to me it is a very small thing that I may be examined by you, or by any human court; in fact, I do not even examine myself. (1.Cor 4:3)

What people think...
At first glance it seems almost arrogant of Paul to make a statement like this. In essence what he says is “I don’t care what you think of my service to God”. Wouldn’t it be more appropriate for Paul to welcome the accountability of his brethren?

There is a time for accountability, but accountability before men is subordinate to accountability to God. And when you obey God, you will inevitably have men taking on the role of God and examining your work, not by God’s standard, but by their own.

I’m sure you’re able to see the difference if you put it in a workplace context. When my boss sits me down in his office for my annual employee evaluation, then he does it as one who has authority over me. And whenever he walks into my office with some job for me I’ll do it, no questions asked.

Now every once in a while one of my colleagues may have an opinion of the quality of my work, or they will tell me I should be doing something else than what I’m doing. Some times that is helpful, but only insofar as their input is consistent with what my boss has told me to do. If the cleaning lady comes to my office and tells me she has a burden for cleaner bathroom mirrors, and that I should look into that, I’ll feel free to ignore her. Because I know that’s not my job, and if I used my work time to do other things than what my boss hired me to do he would be displeased.

It is not arrogant for Paul to say it’s a small thing to be examined or judged by his fellow servants. He’s not employed by them, and he’s not about to act like he is.

What you yourself think...
Not only does Paul put little emphasis on other’s opinion of him, but he doesn’t even care what he thinks himself. Some times we may not see the benefit or wisdom in what God has us doing. We’re in a season where we do not see any increase. Does that mean we’re not doing what we should?

Maybe, but not necessarily. Paul had an undefiled conscience before God, and that allowed him the luxury of saying “I don’t care how my work looks to you, in fact I don’t even care how it looks to me, because I know I’ve done what I was told to do by God.”

A steward must be faithful (1.Cor 4:1-2)

2011-03-28T15:00:00.002+02:00

Let a man regard us in this manner, as servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God. In this case, moreover, it is required of stewards that one be found trustworthy. (1.Cor 4:1-2)

In Matthew 25, Jesus told a parable of a man who went away on a journey, and entrusted a sum of money to each of his servants:

For it is just like a man about to go on a journey, who called his own slaves and entrusted his possessions to them. To one he gave five talents, to another, two, and to another, one, each according to his own ability; and he went on his journey. Immediately the one who had received the five talents went and traded with them, and gained five more talents.In the same manner the one who had received the two talents gained two more. But he who received the one talent went away, and dug a hole in the ground and hid his master's money. (Mat 25:14-18)

It is with such a slave Paul compares himself. He has been entrusted by his master with something that is not his own. Not money, but something far more valuable. He has been entrusted with the mysteries of God. The saving message of the Gospel, that the prophets before him, and even the holy angles had longed to look into. His mandate was to go out and create increase by preaching it. And he did so knowing that just as the master in Jesus’ parable, his master would return and there would be a settling of the accounts. “it is required of stewards that one must be found trustworthy”.

Now after a long time the master of those slaves came and settled accounts with them. The one who had received the five talents came up and brought five more talents, saying, 'Master, you entrusted five talents to me. See, I have gained five more talents.' His master said to him, 'Well done, good and faithful slave You were faithful with a few things, I will put you in charge of many things; enter into the joy of your master.' Also the one who had received the two talents came up and said, 'Master, you entrusted two talents to me. See, I have gained two more talents.' His master said to him, 'Well done, good and faithful slave. You were faithful with a few things, I will put you in charge of many things; enter into the joy of your master.'

And the one also who had received the one talent came up and said, 'Master, I knew you to be a hard man, reaping where you did not sow and gathering where you scattered no seed. And I was afraid, and went away and hid your talent in the ground. See, you have what is yours.' But his master answered and said to him, 'You wicked, lazy slave, you knew that I reap where I did not sow and gather where I scattered no seed. Then you ought to have put my money in the bank, and on my arrival I would have received my money back with interest. Therefore take away the talent from him, and give it to the one who has the ten talents.’ For to everyone who has, more shall be given, and he will have an abundance; but from the one who does not have, even what he does have shall be taken away. Throw out the worthless slave into the outer darkness; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. (Matt 25:19-30)

A steward must be found trustworthy, Paul said. What God has entrusted you with is a serious matter. It is your responsibility to steward it in a way that will bring increase. Digging it down is considered treachery.

This being said, do not fall into the trap of comparing your investments and increase with others. The one entrusted with five talents made five more, the one with two talents made two, and they were both considered faithful. Furthermore there are different ways to steward the talents God has given. Even putting it in the bank for interest would have been acceptable.

So you want to be careful of having too much of an opinion of the investment plan of your fellow servant. God is his master, not you. And his calling might be very different from yours. Also be careful of letting others impose their stewardship on you, so you don’t have to make the same sad confession as the bride of king Solomon:

They made me caretaker of the vineyards, But I have not taken care of my own vineyard. (Song 1:6)

A lazy foot may have a strong God-given burden that the body needs to walk, but in stead of doing his job he tries to get the arm to do it for him. When you have a burden for something it usually means it’s your job to do it. Not your job to get someone else to do it.

Blondes with wings

2011-03-25T15:00:00.004+01:00

As a kid I used to have a picture hanging over my bed, of an angel protecting some children who were walking over a rather unsafe-looking bridge. It might actually have been this very picture:

How do I know it was an angel, you ask? Well it was a blonde woman with wings. That's how you tell. Kind of like Jesus is a long haired white man with a beard, a halo and a lamb hanging around his neck. (Don't tell the PETA, they get uptight about stuff like that)

Most of us are so influenced by silly pictures like this that we wouldn't recognize an angel if they saw one. Here's some facts on angels from the Bible:

They are always described as men. Never women. (f.ex. Luk 24:4)
Never ever is an angel described as having wings (Other celestial beings, such as cherubims however do have wings) (f.ex. Gen 3:24)
They look so similar to humans that they aren't even recognized as angels at first.
Angel means messenger. Their role is to bring messages to mankind (Gen 19:1, Num 22:35), and perform God's work (Acts 5:17-20) often including killing people. That's right. We often see God sending angels to kill people (2.Sam 24:15-17, 2.King 19:35, Acts 12:23). Bet you've never seen that cross-stitched on anyones wall.

Yeah, so I'm sorry for completely ruining your childhood illusions of winged blondes hovering over little children (although Mat 18:10 does lend some credibility to the idea of guardian angels). Let me finish with this cartoon I made ages ago, pondering what would happen if mice had similar ideas.

Wife FAQ

2011-03-24T15:00:00.004+01:00

This one goes out to all of my married brothers. It's a FAQ that you can print out and hang on your fridge for your wife. Just wait till you see the smile on her face the next time she wants to ask you a question, but realizes she can save time by referring to the FAQ. You can thank me later.

Q: What are you thinking about?
A: Nothing.

Q: Should we stop and ask someone?
A: No.

Q: Are you OK?
A: Yes, I'm feeling wonderful. Thank you for asking.

Q: What do you want to do tonight?
A: I don't know. What do you want to do?

Q: Does this make me look fat?
A: No.

Q: Do you think this will be enough food?
A: Yes.

Q: Do these shoes match my shirt?
A: I have no clue. Ask someone who owns more than one pair of shoes.

Feel free to share any that I've left out in the comment section.

The very first Expositor's Bible screenshot

2011-03-23T15:00:00.001+01:00

It's been so long since I started this project that I'm starting to feel the need to prove that I'm actually doing something productive. So I submit to you the very first screenshot of the Expositor's Bible

There is a lot that still remains to do at this point, but I am aiming toward a closed beta test some time this summer. My wife and I are expecting a baby in the end of July, and I want to have something up and running before then.

Reverse thinking

2011-03-22T15:00:00.003+01:00

I came across this video, and it was simply so brilliant that I had to share it.

Awkward Angels

2011-03-21T15:00:00.001+01:00

Don't you just hate it when you're sitting there minding your own business, reading your Bible, and everything is making sense. And then, just out of the blue, an angel comes and messes you up?

Hasn't happened to you you say? Allow me to refresh your memory. You remember when Peter was miraculously delivered from prison, and knocked at the door of Mary, the mother of John, where the disciples were gathered for prayer? What was their reaction when Rhoda, the servant girl came and said thew one they were praying for were outside at the door? "It is his Angel", they insisted. (Acts 12:15) It's his his what? It could be just the neighborhood I live in, but I never have people's angels knocking at my door in the middle of the night. It seems a little strange, doesn't it, that this should be the first explanation they could think of?

Or How about the much discussed passage in 1. Cor 11, where Paul instructs the women to wear a head covering? I think both sides of the head covering debate are, if nothing else, united in their common bewilderedness as to the reason Paul states for this practice: "Because of the angels"

Maybe it will all make a little more sense if we learn what "aggelos", the Greek word for angel means. Let me just first make the disclaimer that I have no formal education in the Greek language, and that this should not substitute your doctor's advice, and so on and so forth. I just looked stuff up with e-Sword, like any regular bonehead can do.

That being said, aggelos means messenger. That's why you often see it modified with "of the Lord" or "from Heaven" in the Bible, making it clear that this particular messenger was a supernatural being sent from God. Other times the very same word, aggelos, is used for a human messenger. It was used for John the Baptist ("Behold, I send my messenger [aggelos] before your face, who will prepare your way before you", Mat 11:10). It was used for the messengers that Jesus sent before him to a Samaritan village ("And he sent messengers [aggelos] ahead of him, who went and entered a village of the Samaritans, to make preparations for him. ", Luk 9:52). Even Joshua and Caleb were angels ("And in the same way was not also Rahab the prostitute justified by works when she received the messengers [aggelos] and sent them out by another way?", Jas 2:25).

So I submit the following for your consideration: What about translating aggelos with messenger in those challenging Bible verses I mentioned? Does it not fit a lot better? Could the disciples have thought that Rhoda had misunderstood and that the man knocking at the door must be a messenger Peter had sent? Could Paul's instruction to the Corinthian church have been to act appropriately for the sake of the messengers he had sent with the letter? Or could it be about the message they were sending to the culture around them when the rumor of their feminist revolt were carried on the wings of gossips to the rest of the city?

I'm not about to start a new religion over this, but take it into consideration as you go about studying your Bible. Maybe a piece or two will fall into place.

The one you're fighting belongs to Christ (1.Cor 3:21-23)

2011-03-18T15:00:00.001+01:00

So then let no one boast in men. For all things belong to you, whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world or life or death or things present or things to come; all things belong to you, and you belong to Christ; and Christ belongs to God. (1.Cor 3:21-23)

We've established that the bride of Christ is provided for. There’s no need that compels you to fend for yourself against your fellow servants. You, the church, belongs to Christ. You are his bride, and all that is His is yours.

What’s more, consider who you’re fighting against. They are your fellow servants, and the bride of Christ. Now if I were to come home from work and find someone attacking my wife, what do you think would happen? I would fight until death if I had to (and considering my physique that is not an unlikely outcome). What do you think will happen if Jesus finds you attacking your fellow servants when he returns? His most priced possession, paid for in his blood. Actually the Bible tells us.

But if that evil slave says in his heart, 'My master is not coming for a long time,' and begins to beat his fellow slaves and eat and drink with drunkards; the master of that slave will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour which he does not know, and will cut him in pieces and assign him a place with the hypocrites; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. (Matt 24:48-51)

Do not let him return to find you beating your fellow servants over nothing.

When kings act like beggars (1.Cor 3:21-23)

2011-03-17T15:00:00.002+01:00

So then let no one boast in men For all things belong to you, whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world or life or death or things present or things to come; all things belong to you, and you belong to Christ; and Christ belongs to God. (1.Cor 3:21-23)

At the core of the conflicts and divisions in Corinth, was their possessiveness of preachers. Paul is my preacher one would say. Another would claim Apollos. Another Cephas. It is in our nature to fend for our possessions. We don't want anyone messing with our stuff. That worked when you weren’t part of God’s church, but now it doesn’t anymore. Because now, everything is ours.

What would you say to a king if you found him in a dirty back alley fighting with someone over a half-eaten sandwich from a trash can? You’d say “Come to your senses! You own everything. Why do you fight over nothing?” That is in essence what Paul is saying to the Corinthians.

Why would you fight over Apollos, or Paul, when every preacher of righteousness who ever lived belongs to you? Including the one you’re fighting against!

The entire world world, though it is in the grip of the Devil, belongs to you. Your aim is to recue it, and not destroy it. Because if you do, you destroy what is yours.

Life and death belongs to you. It is no longer death to die. “Death where is your victory? Death where is your sting?” (1Cor 15:55). “I am the resurrection and the life; he who believes in Me will live even if he dies, and everyone who lives and believes in Me will never die” (John 11:25-26) Death has become your servant, who carries your soul into the presence of Christ?

Things present and things to come belongs to you.The riches and glories of Heaven are awaiting you. We are seated with him in heavenly places (Eph 2:6). Is not the bride of Christ provided for? So why are you fighting over crumbs?

Don't fool yourself (1.Cor 3:18-20)

2011-03-16T15:00:00.000+01:00

Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you thinks that he is wise in this age, he must become foolish, so that he may become wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness before God For it is written, "He is THE ONE WHO CATCHES THE WISE IN THEIR CRAFTINESS"; and again, "THE LORD KNOWS THE REASONINGS of the wise, THAT THEY ARE USELESS." (1.Cor 3:18-20)

The difference between the wise men and the fools of the world is this: The fool is deceived by others. The wise man deceives himself. And neither of them is really any better off than the other. The wisdom of the world is foolishness to God, and so it is that the worldly wise and the fool stands before God, they both stand there as fools. Either self-made or deceived by others.

Let no man deceive himself. Worldly wisdom is useless to God, with the exception of one use described in this passage. He will use it against you. He catches the wise in their own craftiness.

Don't mess with God's temple (1.Cor 3:17)

2011-03-15T15:00:00.001+01:00

If any man destroys the temple of God, God will destroy him, for the temple of God is holy, and that is what you are. (1.Cor 3:17)

The only time in the Bible that we see Jesus truly angry, is when he came into the temple and saw it filled with moneychangers and animals. That is what provoked Jesus to a point where he turned over their tables, made himself a whip, and drove them out. And the disciples, after they had witnessed the incident, remembered the words from Psalm 69:9, “zeal for your house has consumed me”. You don’t want to mess with God’s house. He is consumed with zeal for it.

Jesus loves his church. He loves it so much that he’s going to marry it. If we as Christians are to love what God loves, and hate what God hates, we need to love the Church and hate those who seek to destroy it. And we must never under any circumstances allow ourselves to become one of them.

No solo Christianity (1.Cor 3:16)

2011-03-14T15:00:00.001+01:00

For the last few months I've been doing a regular exposition of 1. Corinthians on this blog. To adapt it a little more to the blog format, I've decided to cut each study up into little snack-size portions, which are easier to read and digest.

Do you not know that you are a temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? (1.Cor 3:16)

Remembering the context of our last study, we are still talking about the building that’s being built, that Paul and Apollos are laborers on together. This building, the church, is a temple for God. It is His Dwelling place. His physical presence on earth.

That means that we’ll have a hard time getting away from the fact that the church is important? You can not do just as well without it? Christianity is not just a thing between yourself and God? Not by any means. Yes, his Holy Spirit dwells in the individual Christian. In Chapter 6, your body is called a temple of the Holy Spirit.

But while the Holy Spirit dwells in the individual Christian as well, He dwells more fully in the Church. Actually that is one of the main points of chapter 12 when we get that far. Each Christian get their spiritual gifts, for the edification of the Church. When the church comes together, the gifts are set into effect, and God takes his seat in the temple.

The 5 worst arguments for Christianity ever!

2011-03-11T16:30:00.020+01:00

It is not difficult at all to defend the Christian faith. There are plenty of good arguments. Then again there are some that are so monumentally bad that we really need to drive a stake through them once and for all. Here's my top 5.

5. Russian miners accidentally drilled a hole into hell and recorded the sounds of people screaming

This one is all over the internet, complete with audio and all. And it is, as you might expect, a complete hoax. Biblically Hell is still empty. Those bound there are in a holding place right now, until after judgment day.

4. Darwin recanted his theory of evolution on his deathbed

No one close to him, including his wife who was a Christian, have confirmed this story, so there's no reason to believe there's any truth to it. And even if there were, what difference would it make? It wouldn't prove evolution false any more than it would prove evolution true if he died still believing in it.

3. We lose 21 grams of mass when we die

Since Dr. Duncan MacDougall first conducted the experiment in 1907, no one else has been able to reproduce these results. Nothing about how the soul is described in the Bible would lead us to believe that it has any mass at all.

2. NASA has found the missing day of Joshua

Another myth, spread by gullible Christians. Even a basic knowledge of astronomy would be enough to know that you couldn't look at the position of celestial bodies today, and from that find out that some time before their positions were ever recorded the earth and sun stood still in relation to each other. If you don't believe me, call NASA, and ask to talk to the guy who found the missing day. It'll make their day.

1. Men have one less rib than women, which prove the account of the woman being made from a rib in Genesis

Take your significant other to the doctor's office and get X-Rays together. Then we'll talk.

Invalid argument: You're not a woman

2011-03-10T16:30:00.000+01:00

I love how often, when people say this, they say it as if they are bringing new information to the table. As if they have discovered something that no one else is aware of. As if they have just seen through my clever disguise, and point their accusatory index finger against and say "AHA! You're not a REAL woman"

Well I have never claimed to be a woman, and I've never really felt a need to claim to be a woman, because if something is true when a woman says it, it is true when a man says it. Truth is not related to the gender of the one who speaks it.

I'll some times feel emboldened to speak on moral issues that concern women. Such as for example abortion. If abortion is wrong, it doesn't become right because I'm a man and can't become pregnant. So it seems strange to bring that up in an abortion debate. It would be similar to saying that black people are disqualified from saying slavery is wrong because they didn't qualify to own slaves.

Overcome evil with good

2011-03-09T16:30:00.001+01:00

"Never take your own revenge, beloved, but leave room for the wrath of God, for it is written, "VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY," says the Lord. "BUT IF YOUR ENEMY IS HUNGRY, FEED HIM, AND IF HE IS THIRSTY, GIVE HIM A DRINK; FOR IN SO DOING YOU WILL HEAP BURNING COALS ON HIS HEAD." Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good." Rom 12:19-21

I recently had the most exquisite joy of doing an unexpected favor, requiring a minor sacrifice on my part, for someone who's been falsely accusing me and talking about me behind my back. And I was amazed and delighted to see the mouth that's been bashing me shut under the power of God's goodness.

I cannot fully describe the satisfaction of it, but it far surpassed any satisfaction I could have ever derived from taking my own revenge. And the effect of all my attempts to defend myself combined was negligible in comparison to the effect of a simple act of Christian kindness.

Never take your own revenge, beloved. Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

Real men rescue women from fire-breathing dragons

2011-03-08T16:30:00.003+01:00

Let's face it. Nowadays it is a rare privilege for a man to happen to be riding his stallion by a dragons nest and hear the screams of a damsel in distress. Today's knights need to use a little more creativity in finding a way to prove his manhood and stand out from the crowd as a hero, sweeping the fair maiden off her feet.

Fortunately for those who venture to try, true manhood is nearly obliterated from our culture, and rising above the crowd really doesn't take much effort at all. I recently read an article on Slate.com called Sex Is Cheap - Why young men have the upper hand in bed, even when they're failing in life. Mark Regnerus did an excellent job in analyzing the situation. Boys are not growing up to be men. Into their thirties they are still a crowd of Xbox-playing, commitment-fearing, unemployed losers who party their way through their fifth attempt at graduating from college, while still depending on mommy for their weekly allowance.

And at the same time, the girls (at least some of them) are growing up into young women with the desire to find a husband and start a family, and they face a market that is void of suitable men. Sex is cheap. The internet is offering it, TV is offering it, so the only way for the girls to get their attention is to lower the price. Which further drives the deflation of the worth of a woman. She's selling out to get some loser to commit to her, while he has no reason to, because he is already getting what he wants from her. And he knows if she takes off he can get it from someone else.

Here, my friends, is your fire breathing dragon. If it is one thing I hear consistently from godly, prudent, and attractive young women it is a cry for a real man to come along. One who will not take advantage of a market in his favor, but value her as she ought to be valued. Who will not try to push her into selling out, but who will commit to her for life and never look any other way. Will you be that knight in shining armor to a woman? Will you make the extra effort to be a real man? It's a little more work, but you would make a young woman very, very happy.

The Dark side of Discernment

2011-03-07T18:03:00.004+01:00

I'll be the first to tell you all about the necessity of discernment. The Bible is filled with warnings against false teachers and various heresies. The church as a whole is tragically lacking in this area, and welcome everyone and everything. So maybe it seems a little counterintuitive for me to write a blog post warning against discernment.

Well I'm not warning so much about discernment really as I'm warning against using discernment as a disguise for sinful attitudes like jealousy, pride or selfish ambition.

It is frustrating for a warrior of Christ watching most of the church cuddle up to the enemy and then turning around to see the few that are left are busy firing at other Christians over some minor disagreement.

Now I'm all for firing at wolves in sheep's clothing infiltrating the church, but that's not what we're talking about here. We're talking about men who have something bad to say about everyone, perhaps with the exception of themselves and one or two dead preachers. They sit in the back row of your church and take mental notes of every real or imagined flaw in the sermon, and make the most minor of disagreements into a question of heaven and hell. They tear good preachers apart over nothing, and do everything they can to tarnish the name of good ministries.

Their motives? If you can point out a flaw in someone that others esteem highly, you put yourself in a position over them. You step on them to gain recognition for yourself. It is pride in action.

For those of us who have rejected the I'm-OK-you're-OK-approach to truth, I do believe this mixture of pride, jealousy and selfish ambition is the greatest danger remaining. Brothers, we are in a spiritual war. Act like it! It is acceptable for soldiers to have disagreements between them, but don't treat your fellow soldiers as the enemy. Do not fire your gun at your friends. If you do, you'll have to answer for your treachery before God's own war tribunal.

Invalid argument: I'm older than you

2011-03-04T20:54:00.000+01:00

So here's my problem. At 27 years old I'm still a whipper snapper, and frequently I find myself in a debate with someone older than myself. If you have ever been in that situation I'm sure you are familiar with the ultimate debate-killer: "I'm older than you, so I know better."

Well alright, if you want to play that game, then all I need to do to get the upper hand again is find someone who takes my side who is even older than you. I'll say "this guy is a fossil, and he agrees with me. Now what do you have to say?"

But that's not how truth works. If it was we should all get on the phone and ask this lady to resolve all the questions for us.

Besse Cooper, at 114 years is the oldest person alive today. So if you can get this lady on your side, you can win every debate you'll ever find yourself in.

While it's true that some wisdom comes with age, and generally older people have had more experiences to draw wisdom from, there is not an absolute link between age and being right. If two people disagree on something it is not always the oldest one that is right

So let's talk about actual arguments, and not about seniority.

Does a woman have an absolute right over her own body?

2011-03-03T21:53:00.000+01:00

If every red lamp on the dashboard of your brain is flashing after reading that title, chances are your thinking has been wired by feminism.

We are talking about the holy cow of the abortion debate. The argument that no one dares to question. "Abortion is the the woman exercising her right over her own body". It is socially unheard of to ever ask by what authority the woman claims such a right. But today we'll do it. Today we will shoot the holy cow and have a steak dinner. So get your forks out.

It is almost universally agreed that women, as well as men, possess a certain right over their own bodies, such as the right to life, to liberty and so on. In no way am I disputing that. What I do dispute is that any individuals right to their own body, be it a woman or a man, is elevated to a point of absolute primacy.

I define this point of absolute primacy to be reached when the perceived right to ones own body has trumped every other moral or legal claim made by any other party. When you lay a claim to the right to spill the blood of others in order not to be inconvenienced yourself. This is the pinnacle of selfishness. Yet feminism has made it a virtue. This virtue is no different from the one Muammar Gaddafi is exercising on the people of Libya, or Joseph Fritzl exercised on his family.

So I'm here to make the audacious claim that no one else dares make: It is morally preposterous for a woman to claim that her right to her own body extends to ending the life of her unborn child.

There goes the bullet. If you disagree, you are welcome to take the bullet in the comment section, but I'm not holding my breath. If you need me I'll be in the kitchen warming up the frying pan.

The blessed curse of pain in childbirth

2011-02-27T14:21:00.001+01:00

One of my early childhood memories that has stuck with me into adulthood is the day our pregnant cat started acting funny. I followed her into my bedroom where she made herself comfortable right in the middle of my bed, and started giving birth. I think within an hour or so the whole ordeal was over, and she was licking her kittens clean as they were nursing.

It really seemed like no big deal to her. There might have been some discomfort, but I've seen cats in pain (ten kids and a cat, you do the math), and what I saw on that day looked nothing like a cat in pain. Since then I have learned that this seems to be true for most animals. The only creature who seems to consistently experience any significant pain in childbirth is the human.

We find the reason for this difference in Genesis 3, as God deals with Adam and Eve after they have introduced sin into God's perfect creation. We refer to it as "the curse", and rightly so because this is where God "breaks" his creation, subjecting it to futility, pain, corruption and death as a physical picture of the spiritual reality that just took place.

Hang with me here, because this is the part that most people don't get: As such pictures, each of the curses that is put on creation, and on humans in particular, also serve us as blessings. It is God reaching out to us in our fallen state, saying "Look around you. This is what sin is like. Now come back to me". For example the curse for the man was strenuous work, pointing to the labor under the law to please God, with the sabbath as a day of rest to point to the new covenant of Grace ushered in by the death and resurrection of Christ.

A few months ago, when I found out my lovely wife was pregnant with our first child, among the many thoughts that entered my mind were these words from Genesis 3:16:

To the woman He said,"I will greatly multiply Your pain in childbirth, In pain you will bring forth children; (...)"

To a woman there is really no other blessing in life that comes close to the experience of becoming mothers. Why did God attach a curse of pain to it? Certainly it was not out of malice. What is the spiritual reality that God wants to show us by drawing a picture of the greatest blessing in a womans life resulting from excruciating, unbearable pain?

We find the answer in Romans 8:18-23, where God explains it all to us:

For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that is to be revealed to us.

For the anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly for the revealing of the sons of God. For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God.

For we know that the whole creation groans and suffers the pains of childbirth together until now. And not only this, but also we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body.

So from these verses we can derive a list of at least three things that God is teaching us through greatly multiplying the womans pain in childbirth:

That the world after the curse is a place of excruciating pain and suffering.
That this suffering is not in vain. It is the pains of a birth process that will result in a new creation.
When all things have been restored to their right order, and the pain is over, we will look back at it like every mother looks back at her birth with her newborn baby in her arms saying even if it was ten thousand times worse it still would have been worth it.

Our union in Christ is not a trade union - Notes on 1. Corinthians 3:8-13

2011-02-26T13:48:00.002+01:00

Last time was all about the unity we as Christians have in the Spirit, and we learned that the more spiritual we are, the more unified we will be. However, God also created us as unique individuals, and what we learned last time should not lead us to minimize that. Individuality is a part of God's divine design for his own glory. Showing off that he is so unique that he could create billions upon billions of completely unique people, all in his own image.

His Spirit doesn't take away our individuality. To the contrary he makes us more into the unique individuals we were created to be at the same time as he draw us all together. And in heaven when our sanctification is complete and we are perfectly unified in Christ, we will still be individuals. And we will even be rewarded individually for the labor we do for God.

Verse 8

Now he who plants and he who waters are one; but each will receive his own reward according to his own labor.

Laboring as one:

Working together toward a common goal is something that comes quite naturally to us humans. At least when our common goal is making money. In our workplaces we have very little issue with understanding that our coworkers may have different jobs, requiring a different set of skills, and being rewarded differently. We accept it, and appreciate their contribution to the value chain, because in the end we know that by doing so we will all make more money.

One plants and another waters. Those are two jobs among many others in the Kingdom of God. One maybe helps support the planter with money for seeds, another helps the ones who waters by helping him carry his buckets back and forth.

We could choose to look around us, wondering who is the most important, who contributes the most, and why the guy working next to me doesn't do the same job that I'm doing. But out time would certainly be better spent looking around to see what contributions we ourselves could make with the unique set of skills that God has equipped us with. Because he is going to reward us individually according to our own work.

Receiving rewards:

Did you know that for each contribution we make to this work, God will reward us? Apparently God is not a communist, giving the same reward to everyone regardless what they do. More work means more reward in Heaven.

We are in a time of great financial insecurity. In fear of another global financial crisis, many of the people who still have money left after the last one are investing in gold. They do this because any currency could potentially become worthless due to hyperinflation. If you had a million Zimbabwe dollars in 1980, you would be pretty well off. They were worth more than US dollars. Now you couldn't even buy a bowl of rice for a million Zimbabwe dollars. Now if they believe that that will happen to their currency, it makes sense to exchange their wealth for another form of wealth that will not lose its value.

Their problem is that they are too short-sighted, because the gold that they invest in is perishable gold. This present world will come to an end, and it's gold will be worth less than the Zimbabwe dollar. Now if we believe that, it makes very little sense to store up treasures in any earthly currency. Even gold. Jesus said:

Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys, and where thieves do not break in or steal; for where your treasure is, there your heart will be also. (Matt 6:19-21)

I'm so tired of hearing people use legalism and guilt to make people give their time and money to the Kingdom of God. Worldly businessmen motivated by nothing but greed don't need to be guilted into investing their wealth in gold to preserve it, and only keep what they need for running expenses.

Likewise I'm tired of those who promise unrealistic short term returns on what you give to God. You'd be better of investing in lottery tickets or handing your money over to shady ponzi-schemer than to give something to God out of a greedy heart.

When you do God's work, by laboring yourself or by supporting others who do it, you are making a wise investment. You are putting the wealth that God has entrusted you with into the treasury of Heaven. And whatever wealth you have there will be yours for eternity. Whatever wealth you have on earth will be lost for eternity.

So... what do we get?

Let's allow ourselves a little sidetrack to speculate in what these heavenly rewards or treasures might consist in. The Bible gives us a little hint in 1. Peter 1:3-9 (ESV):

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! According to his great mercy, he has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance that is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven for you, who by God’s power are being guarded through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.

In this you rejoice, though now for a little while, if necessary, you have been grieved by various trials, so that the tested genuineness of your faith—more precious than gold that perishes though it is tested by fire—may be found to result in praise and glory and honor at the revelation of Jesus Christ.

Though you have not seen him, you love him. Though you do not now see him, you believe in him and rejoice with joy that is inexpressible and filled with glory, obtaining the outcome of your faith, the salvation of your souls.

The greatest thing awaiting us in heaven is Jesus Christ. All of us who are saved will see him, but our ability to enjoy him and rejoice in him. When we see him in heaven, we will all enjoy him to the fullest of our capacities. When the recipients of this letter went through different trials, it says it resulted in a greater appreciation for Christ. They had been united with Christ in his suffering, and by sharing that in common the loved him more. It does not seem unreasonable that the same would be true for those who have been united with Christ in his labor to build his church.

Verse 9-10

For we are God's fellow workers; you are God's field, God's building. According to the grace of God which was given to me, like a wise master builder I laid a foundation, and another is building on it. But each man must be careful how he builds on it.

Building a temple:

Now Paul switches metaphors, and calls the church a building. A building for which he had laid the foundation, and others were building on. Laying the foundation was the job that had been assigned to Paul, according to the grace of God that was given to him, and he executed it faithfully. Then he went on to other cities to lay other foundations. That was his job, and when he entered heaven the rewards for the job he had done was waiting for him there.

Apollos and others came along later on and continued to build on that foundation. Paul did not forbid that. He encouraged it. He just had one stipulation. He said this building belongs to God, and if you're going to build on it, you'd better do it right. “Each man must be careful how he builds on it.” There are two things he particularly says to be careful about

Verse 11:

For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

The divine building code:

First of all, don't mess with the foundation. Because the foundation is Jesus Christ. That is his sovereign act of election for himself a group of people, saving them and indwelling them with the Holy Spirit, and drawing them together in worship of himself. If you try to start out a church with any other foundation than that, it really doesn't matter how you build it because it will fall anyways.

Verse 12:

Now if any man builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw, each man's work will become evident; for the day will show it because it is to be revealed with fire, and the fire itself will test the quality of each man's work. If any man's work which he has built on it remains, he will receive a reward.

Secondly, with the foundation being completed, you have options of how to build on it. Every builder will have his work tested by fire. Knowing that should lead us to chose wisely what building materials we use.

I'm sure we're all familiar with the fairy tale of the tree little piggies each building their houses. One out of straw, one out of sticks and one out of stone. Each of their buildings were tested by the big bad wolf, and in the end only the one built by stone was left standing.

Our work will not be tested by a big bad wolf, or even Satan, but by the fire of God himself. What can withstand the fire of God? Only the materials which he has provided.

There are many straw churches being built today. You can recognize them by their rapid growth, and light, fluffy preaching. Many are drawn in and become part of the church, but there is very little substance in any of them. What happens when God allows some trial to come and test them? They just blow away. They aren't solid believers, who have been transformed by the Spirit of God. They are merely carnal men having been persuaded by some preacher to try to become better people by going to church and hearing self-help messages. And if the pastor was sick one Sunday, Dr. Phil could easily have come and filled in for him without anyone noticing the difference.

Even though I point to churches with rapid growth, we aren't safe from this in a small church either. It is so easy to be tempted by the schemes of different church-growth gurus, and start imitate their deceptive and man-centered evangelism. Even a small church can be made up of mostly straw and flammable materials. People who may have a confession of faith, but who will not withstand the fiery judgment of God because they are not in Christ.

The judgment:

God does not reward us according to effort, but according to result. You can wear yourself out building a straw church, only to see all of it burn to the ground when Jesus returns. You will not receive rewards for those you led in a man-made sinners prayer, or persuaded to sign a “decision card”, or manipulated into raising their hand and walking an isle, if at the end of it all they go to hell. No one will look to you on that day and applaud you because your straw church was so big that the flames of it could be seen from the neighboring city. The years of your life that you put into it will have been utterly wasted. There is only one thing that remains for you: God's grace.

Verse 13:

If any man's work is burned up, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire.

The foundation for your salvation is not your work. Salvation is not a reward for what you have done, but for what Christ has done. So even if all of your work proves to have been in vain, and you lose every reward, you still don't lose your salvation, if your salvation is built on the finished work of Jesus.

5 ways to sweep challenging Bible verses under the rug

2011-02-23T23:51:00.001+01:00

Every now and then when we read our Bibles, we'll come across verses that we don't want to deal with. Either because it would cause us some imposition, or might cause conflict with the predominant worldview. So for the purpose of making their own life easier and shying away from potential confrontations, innovative Christians have devised methods to make it as though those parts of God's infallible revelation never existed.

I arranged it in a list format because you have a short attention span and are more likely to click on something and read it if it's enumerated. I can write that because I know you'll probably skip this paragraph anyway to get to the list faster.

1. Make history
The events in the Bible took place a long time ago, and as the nice folks who made up evolution knows, you can make people believe almost anything if it was a really, really long time ago. So go ahead. Use your imagination, and make up some historical context that would explain away your difficult verse. Even if some discerning soul tried, it would be nearly impossible for them to gather enough historical evidence to disprove any claim you may have made. You'll find that almost no one will even want to challenge you, but welcome your explanation and start spreading it to sound smart.

Example: 1. Cor 14 says women should remain silent in church. But that's just because in Corinth the women would sit on one side of the church and shout questions about the sermon to their husbands on the other side, not realizing that it might be disruptive to the service until Paul wrote that to them.

No one will buy it you say? Actually that is a real example of made up history making it's rounds in a church near you as you read it. Get the drift? Let's go on.

2. Spiritual interpretation
If you don't like what the verse actually says, how about trying to replace the actual meaning of it with some symbolic interpretation. If someone challenges you on it, say that the reason they can't see it is because they're not as spiritual as you. After all your interpretation is a spiritual one, while theirs is just literal (practice saying the word "literal" with contempt in your voice). This will discourage any further inquiry into the matter.

Example: Someone recently wrote to me that divorce was not a sin, because marriage is symbolic of Christ and the church (that part is true), and thus that command only applied to the relationship between Christ and the church, and not actual marriage. (What puzzles me about that is I don't think this man would hold to the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints either. But since he clearly was not being rational I did not pursue that glaring contradiction any further.)

3. Inferences trump everything
If you keep reading verse after verse explicitly contradicting a doctrine that you want to perpetuate, how about trying a different path? Make an inference, or better yet, a series of inferences from ambiguous texts, leading to the conclusion that your doctrine is correct. I have to warn you that it will require a lot of work, but the payoff is great. You get to spread false doctrine, while at the same sounding knowledgeable and educated.

Example: Yes, there's a lot of verses that say homosexuality is a sin. But David and Jonathan were sure good buddies. From that I infer that they were gay, and based on that I further infer that God must be okay with homosexuality.

4. Make exceptions
Every once in a while you might find yourself in a situation that our all-knowing God didn't really think of before he wrote his commands. That's when you make an exception for yourself in your special situation. This allows you to feel better about your own sin, while at the same time allowing you to self-righteously judge others who sin.

Example: No sex before marriage? Well except if you really love them, and you really think this will be the person you marry some day.

5. Put an expiration date on it
This is a good one, because there are commands actual commands in the Bible that are legitimately limited to a certain covenant and time (for example the commands about sacrifices and ritual cleanliness). So who would notice if you added a little bit to that system?

Example: Everything Jesus said before his death and resurrection (or better yet - before the day of Pentecost) was under the old covenant, so it must be discarded. At least most of it. We can keep the don't judge thing.

Alright. Hope you all got some new and fresh ideas for how to twist scripture. Have fun, and remember to always have a grownup help you if you try to do any of this at home.

5 things I've learned in my first year of marriage

2011-02-09T20:26:00.003+01:00

My wife recently made an excellent blog post about five things she had learned over the first year of marriage. Now of course I feel obligated as well to make some claim of having learned a thing or two. Or actually five, since I figured if I can't top my wife, at the very least I should match her. But enough chit-chat, let's get on with the list.

1. It's not about me
I can already hear you going "You didn't know that already?". Well, yes... In a way. I'd read Ephesians 5 before we married, and learnt that I was to love her like Christ loved the Church, and sacrifice myself for her. I knew it wasn't all about me. But then we got married, and guess where my focus went? Right to me. You see there's a difference between knowing and knowing. I'm slowly learning to readjust my focus away from myself and what fits me at the moment.

2. It's not really about her either
I love my wife dearly, but our marriage can't be about us. It was ordained from eternity past to be about Christ. So while trying to focus on her is better than focusing on me, it still falls very much short of the true purpose of our marriage. It is easy for me to make an idol out of my wife (after all, she is pretty amazing), but as wonderful as she is, she can't really live up to the expectations that one would have of a deity. I have learnt that our marriage works best when we both derive our love for each other, our motivation and our satisfaction from Christ, and neither of us try to ascend the throne he's set up for himself in each other's hearts.

3. Passive anger is just still sinful
I've never really had anger issues. I'm not saying I never had anger, I just said I really didn't have any issue with it. I figured it was okay since I don't have a very aggressive personality. In stead of yelling or punching, I'll pout, go into some mood and walk around feeling sorry for myself. However, to nobody's surprise except my own, it turns out that anger is anger no matter how it expresses itself. The same pride and selfishness that makes another man hurt his wife by yelling at her, makes me hurt my wife by ignoring her or go sit on the couch and "read" with that special look on my face.

4. The tongue is a fire
On a similar note, I'm not one to scream obscenities from the top of my lounges against my wife. So I figured that whole thing in the book of James about the tongues being set on fire by hell didn't really apply to me. Well, seeing the effect my words can have on my wife has led me to rethink that. Even a small criticism from one you love dearly can tear down very much. And to be frank, whenever one of my afore mentioned moods have led me to open my big mouth, I've rarely thought to my self later on "hey, I'm sure glad I got that off my chest".

5. Frugality isn't always a virtue
Believe it or not, I think this has been the hardest one. No I'm serious. You see I'm more or less frugality incarnate. My wife is not. My frugality probably stems partially from the way I was raised (10 kids, plus a stay-at-home mom leaves little room for waste), and partially from my time of living on my own as a student with minimal income. So my m.o. is to go with the cheapest option for everything, and don't let anything go to waste. I was shocked to learn that this behavior is not the most effective way to make my wife feel treasured (cf. the "cheap plate incident"). I think one wake up call (although I'm a snooze button kind of guy) was when after a few weeks of marriage my wife saw me intently studying a used coffee machine capsule (for scientific purposes), and spontaneously burst out "DON'T eat that!". Now there is a place for frugality, after all, we live on one income, and have to get by on a tight budget, but I'm slowly learning to lighten up at least every once in a while.

Alright, that's all folks. Stay tuned to see if next year I'll finally learn to close that toilet seat and put the cap on the toothpaste as well.

Team Paul and team Apollos - Notes on 1. Corinthians 3:1-7

2011-02-05T22:49:00.001+01:00

Verse 1:

And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual men, but as to men of flesh, as to infants in Christ.

It's all connected

We are starting a new Chapter of 1. Corinthians today. But we need to be aware of the fact that Paul has no idea about that. When he sat down and wrote this letter, he didn't turn the page and write the number three and a chapter title in big letters across the top. He just kept writing. The chapter and verse divisions were created about 1500 years later, to make it easier to reference scriptures.

So let's read this the way Paul wrote it. As a continuation of what he was saying in chapter 2, about how those who have the Spirit share in this common wisdom of the Gospel, and speak about it with spiritual words (verse 13).

I could not speak to you

It is in this context Paul utters his complaint. “And I, brethren, could not speak to you as spiritual men”. As we will learn, there is something going on in the Corinthian church, that hinders this deep fellowship in the Gospel. Paul Couldn't speak to them the way spiritual men speak to each other, because they were lacking this maturity. And they were lacking it because they had not grown together by sharing in this spiritual unity among themselves.

Mature Christians always have unity with each other, because they all know and love the same God, by the same Spirit. There is only one Holy Spirit, so it is only natural that as He increases and we decrease, we share more and more in common with each other.

And the more we have in common, the more easily we talk about things. You do not talk the same way to a small child as you do to a grownup. You can't, because they wouldn't understand. You have to explain everything to them. And there are some things they would never understand no matter how much you explained it.

Verse 2-3:

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, for you are still fleshly. For since there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not fleshly, and are you not walking like mere men?

Milk to drink

It grieves Paul to have to talk to the Corinthians as infants, even though they've been saved for several years now. He wants to share in a deeper fellowship with them. There are deep spiritual truths he wants to share with them, but they are not able to understand or receive it. They desperately need the nutrition of solid food, but they still can barely digest milk.

Jealousy and strife:

It's hard to tell whether their spiritual immaturity was caused by their lack of unity or vice versa. Most likely it was both, creating a vicious circle of immaturity and disunity. Either way, one thing can be said with certainty: Where there is Jealousy and strife, there is flesh, because the Spirit is not jealous of Himself, and He never disagrees with Himself.

Verse 4:

For when one says, "I am of Paul," and another, "I am of Apollos," are you not mere men?

Following men:

It would seem that the subject matter of the jealousy and strife among the Corinthians was related to the preachers who had served among them. Verse 4 mentions Paul and Apollos. Back in chapter 1 verse 12, we find a similar list, including Cephas and Christ as well.

Of course we are not strangers to this sinful tendency to gather around a certain preacher to the exclusion of others. However, you'll remember what we've talked about concerning Greek culture and their particularly strong predisposition toward idolizing eloquent orators and philosophers. “I am of Paul” and “I am of Apollos” is the language of competition.

Apollos:

Let's take a detour for a moment to Acts 18 to learn about Apollos. When Paul left Corinth, he took with him Aquila and Priscilla, who had served with him there. They sailed to Ephesus. Here he left Aquila and Priscilla, while he himself sailed on to Cesarea. It was when Aquila and Priscilla were ministering in Ephesus that Apollos came to town. We can read of it in Acts 18:24-26

Apollos, an Alexandrian by birth, an eloquent man, came to Ephesus; and he was mighty in the Scriptures. This man had been instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in spirit, he was speaking and teaching accurately the things concerning Jesus, being acquainted only with the baptism of John; and he began to speak out boldly in the synagogue. But when Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they took him aside and explained to him the way of God more accurately.

After spending some time with Aquila and Priscilla in Ephesus, Apollos wanted to travel to Achaia, which is the region of Greece where Corinth is located. They gave him a letter of recommendation to the brethren in Corinth (27-28)

And when he wanted to go across to Achaia, the brethren encouraged him and wrote to the disciples to welcome him; and when he had arrived, he greatly helped those who had believed through grace, for he powerfully refuted the Jews in public, demonstrating by the Scriptures that Jesus was the Christ.

And so it was that Apollos ended up in Corinth, continuing the work that Paul had started there. Even though the two of them most likely hadn't even met each other, through the providence of God they had now become coworkers in building the church in Corinth.

The problem was the Corinthians didn't see them this way. They saw a new preacher in town, and some liked him better than Paul and became “of Apollos”. Others remained faithful to Paul, rejecting this new preacher and his ilk. They were “of Paul”, and these two fractions were teaming up against each other. You could probably let your imagination run wild with what kind of arguments and debates they might have had with each other.

Maybe you can imagine how grieved Paul must have been to receive the news that first of all he had a team, and second of all his team was fighting against his fellow servant in Christ. So he writes this letter to put an end to it.

Verse 5-6:

What then is Apollos? And what is Paul? Servants through whom you believed, even as the Lord gave opportunity to each one. I planted, Apollos watered, but God was causing the growth. So then neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is anything, but God who causes the growth.

Divine gardening:

To explain this concept to the Corinthians, Paul utilizes a gardening metaphor. Paul planted the Church. Apollos came along later and watered them. They are not competing philosophers, but fellow workers in God's garden.

Not only are they working together, but Paul Also points out that neither he who plants or he who waters can take any credit for the growth of the plant. So Paul is not looking to make them transition from idolizing them as individuals to idolizing them as a team. He is looking to turn them away from looking at flesh, and point them to God.

A warning against Ecumenism:

Unity in the Church is important, but there is a ditch on the other side of the road as well. We need to keep in mind that the same Bible who tells us to unite with each other, also tells us to separate ourselves from the world, and from false brethren.

Do not be bound together with unbelievers; for what partnership have righteousness and lawlessness, or what fellowship has light with darkness? Or what harmony has Christ with Belial, or what has a believer in common with an unbeliever? Or what agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God; just as God said, "I WILL DWELL IN THEM AND WALK AMONG THEM; AND I WILL BE THEIR GOD, AND THEY SHALL BE MY PEOPLE. Therefore, COME OUT FROM THEIR MIDST AND BE SEPARATE," says the Lord. "AND DO NOT TOUCH WHAT IS UNCLEAN; And I will welcome you. (2Cor 6:14-17)

For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. No wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. Therefore it is not surprising if his servants also disguise themselves as servants of righteousness, whose end will be according to their deeds. (2Cor 11:13-15)

We are seeing a movement today of historic proportions, away from the worship of Christ in Spirit and in truth, and toward the worship of Christian unity. This is a religion centered around man. You will hear them preach with great conviction about what we as a unified church can do if we only stand together, with little mention of the Power of God.

This movement looks to numbers as their source of power, and in order to increase it's power it must include as many people as possible in this unified church. To achieve this they ignore the Biblical warnings, and unite with every one who mention the name of Jesus, no questions asked about who they believe Jesus to be.

This is not the unity the Bible calls for, because it's a unity of flesh, and not a unity of Spirit. And if you should ever find yourself in the situation of having spiritual unity with such a wide variety of worldly people, you should not thereby assume that they are of Christ, but rather that you are of the world.

The only thing I know about being a father

2011-02-01T22:03:00.003+01:00

I am the proud father of a little baby boy or girl, about the size of a lemon. We are eagerly awaiting his or her arrival into the outside world around the end of July. Right now I might not be the man to turn to for parenting tips, because I really don't know much. But I know one thing, and I would dare to say that it is the most important thing one can ever know about being a father. Here it is:

God has ordained fatherhood as the role by which He would define Himself.

God calls himself father. And one day our child, either through preaching or through reading the Bible, will come to understand God as father. But what will my child understand by the word "father"? That depends almost exclusively on me.

That's right. God--in order to communicate to my child who He is--points my child to me, and say "Look at Your dad. That's what I'm like".

It is a common misunderstanding that the Bible has little to say about being a father. Just a few reminders in proverbs to spank them when they need it, and Colossians 3:21 telling us not to drive them crazy. But in fact everything in the Bible is about fatherhood, because it is about the Father. Everything that is about God is about what I as a father need to be for my children. Their souls depend on it.

For this reason I bow my knees before the Father, from whom every family in heaven and on earth derives its name... (Eph 3:14-15)

The wisdom that saves us - Notes on 1. Cor 2:6-16

2011-01-26T21:41:00.002+01:00

Verse 6-8:

Yet we do speak wisdom among those who are mature; a wisdom, however, not of this age nor of the rulers of this age, who are passing away; but we speak God's wisdom in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God predestined before the ages to our glory; the wisdom which none of the rulers of this age has understood; for if they had understood it they would not have crucified the Lord of glory;

Yet we do speak wisdom

We have talked so much about wisdom over the last few sessions, that by now you'd almost think that being a good Christian is a matter of being as unwise as possible. Not by any means. What Paul has been saying is that what the world calls wisdom isn't very wise at all. Today, Paul will drop that human definition of wisdom, and show us what wisdom really is.

When Paul is talking about wisdom, he is talking about something quite different than the carefully crafted speeches of the orators and wise men that were so highly esteemed in that culture. The ancient Greeks took great pride in the development of great philosophy and advanced culture in their age. No different really from our modern times. This is not a wisdom of the current age though. It's not a modern development, but a wisdom that is older than time itself. And the rulers, the great sages and wise men of this age, those who are looked to for guidance and leadership, are more often than not completely ignorant that such a wisdom even exists.

Predestined, for our glory

We attain this wisdom not by study, but by Gods election. He has predestined for us to have it, and the purpose for us having it is for our glory.

I don't know if that term “for our glory” is shocking to you. It was too me. Because most of the time when we see the word “glory” in the Bible it is an attribute of God. We are commanded to do all we do for His glory (1Cor 6:20: “For you have been bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body.”;1Cor 10:32: “Whether, then, you eat or drink or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.“). Glory is something that only rightfully belongs to God, and he is very particular about sharing it.

Yet by grace, he shares it with us. When we seek to glorify him, he glorifies us. Not in this present age, but in the age to come. Here is the promise from 1Cor 15:42-43:

So also is the resurrection of the dead It is sown a perishable body, it is raised an imperishable body; it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power;

The Lord of glory

We will be raised in glory, by means of freely receiving this wisdom as a gift from God. He however is described as the Lord of Glory. The rightful owner of it, the source of it, the master of it. When we are raised in glory, that glory doesn't flow from us. It flows from Christ in us.

Here is the contrast between those whom God have predestined for eternal glory by eternal wisdom, and those who have attained for themselves temporal glory by temporal wisdom. The rulers of this age in all of their temporal wisdom, not only missed the wisdom that could have brought them to true glory. But they hated the Lord of this glory so much that they crucified him.

Verse 9-10

but just as it is written,

"THINGS WHICH EYE HAS NOT SEEN AND EAR HAS NOT HEARD,
AND which HAVE NOT ENTERED THE HEART OF MAN,
ALL THAT GOD HAS PREPARED FOR THOSE WHO LOVE HIM."

For to us God revealed them through the Spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God.

Here is the contents of this wisdom. The depths of God. Those things that godly men of all ages have longed to look into. Verse 9 is actually a quote from one such man, the prophet Isaiah, expressing this longing. We'll read the lengthier quote from Isaiah. We'll read Chapter 64 in it's entirety to gain context for what Paul is saying by that quote. That may seem long, but I would actually have wished to continue on to chapter 65 as well. We see in those two chapters a plead for Gods intervention, to redeem and save the sinful people of Israel, ending in chapter 65 with God's answer. A promise of a new heaven and a new Earth.

Oh, that You would rend the heavens and come down, That the mountains might quake at Your presence--As fire kindles the brushwood, as fire causes water to boil--To make Your name known to Your adversaries, That the nations may tremble at Your presence! When You did awesome things which we did not expect, You came down, the mountains quaked at Your presence.

For from days of old they have not heard or perceived by ear, Nor has the eye seen a God besides You, Who acts in behalf of the one who waits for Him. You meet him who rejoices in doing righteousness, Who remembers You in Your ways. Behold, You were angry, for we sinned, We continued in them a long time; And shall we be saved?

For all of us have become like one who is unclean, And all our righteous deeds are like a filthy garment; And all of us wither like a leaf, And our iniquities, like the wind, take us away. There is no one who calls on Your name, Who arouses himself to take hold of You; For You have hidden Your face from us And have delivered us into the power of our iniquities.

But now, O LORD, You are our Father, We are the clay, and You our potter; And all of us are the work of Your hand. Do not be angry beyond measure, O LORD, Nor remember iniquity forever;

Behold, look now, all of us are Your people. Your holy cities have become a wilderness, Zion has become a wilderness, Jerusalem a desolation. Our holy and beautiful house, Where our fathers praised You, Has been burned by fire; And all our precious things have become a ruin. Will You restrain Yourself at these things, O LORD? Will You keep silent and afflict us beyond measure?

Does it strike anyone else that Isaiah's longing is exactly what was fulfilled in the Coming of Christ? What no eye has seen and no ear has heard. A God who Acts on behalf of those who wait for him. Furthermore, we see the description of Israel's sin, and recognize our own sin in it. Even our righteous deeds are like filthy rags to God. And while we were in this condition, he tore the heavens apart, that thick veil of God's silence in judgment of our sins. And he sent his son down to this earth to take our place and atone for our sins.

Love and righteousness in harmony

And no greater picture of the depths of God could ever have been given to us. In the Gospel we see Gods nature more than in anything else. God's judgment on those who hate him is a great and glorious expression of his righteousness, but the knowledge of it doesn't penetrate very deep into his divine nature. You can see it and know God a little, but you have only scratched the surface. Likewise, God's great rewards to those who love him and obey his commands is a great and glorious expression of his love and grace. But it's not deep knowledge. If that's all you know you know God a little. But he has not yet revealed the depths of his nature with you.

The depths of God is where his righteousness meets his love, without either of them being compromised or diminished in any way. The depths of God is where the impossible happens. That God, as Paul puts it in Romans 3:26, can be just andthe justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. You see, letting a guilty man go unpunished might be loving, but it wouldn't be righteous. Giving us what we deserve would be righteous, but he loved us so much that he wouldn't. So he took all the suffering that we deserve on himself in stead, and in so doing remained both completely just and completely loving.

The depths of God is love and righteousness in harmony. The Gospel is where we see it. And it is the wisdom by which he will glorify us. The Gospel is the wisdom that brings us to salvation. And having not only understood it, but taken part of it, we know the depths of God.

Yet the question remains of exactly how we have cometo take part of it. How have we received this knowledge? In verse 10 Paul says that it God has revealed it to us by the Spirit. Then he goes on to explain to us how that exchange works.

Verse 11:

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.

What the spirit knows

A very common conversation I'll have with my wife goes something like this. One of us will ask “What are you thinking about”, to which the other will invariably reply “nothing”. I sometimes wonder what will happen first. That we'll finally learn give up on trying to have that conversation, or that we'll grow in unity to a point where one of us will finally be able to answer the question?

There are some thoughts that can be put into words, and then there are some thoughts that are rooted so deep in your being that when you try to share them they come out the wrong way no matter how you say it. You have to be you to understand what you mean. That's what Paul means when he asks the question “Who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him?”

If you, being a human, sometimes experience this inability to communicate with another human who has a very similar nature to you, then imagine being God. By definition he is something completely different from anything we have ever known. So how can such a being communicate his thoughts to us? Nobody knows our thoughts except our own spirit. All the more, no one knows God's thoughts except for His own Spirit.

Verse 12-13:

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

What we can know

Nobody can know God except for the Spirit of God. However, the way God saves us is by bringing us into a union with Christ. And this union is a spiritual union. That means that the Spirit, who is from God, is now also in us. That means that in the same way that you in your natural state have knowledge about yourself that you can't communicate to others, you now have knowledge about God that you find yourself unable to explain to anyone who doesn't have the same Spirit. Paul goes so far as to say in verse 16 “we have the mind of Christ”.

Note however, that we don't know everything there is to know about God, but only the things God has freely given to us. God has chosen to reveal some things, and to keep other things a secret. He says in Deut 29:29 “The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our sons forever, that we may observe all the words of this law.“

What we can share

He says in verse 13 that not only do we know certain things, but we speak of them. That is, we who have the Spirit can share in this knowledge with each other, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words.

However, when we talk about what we know by the Spirit, a word of caution would be in place. Because human nature is so susceptible to pride. Many have fallen into the temptation of making themselves seem more spiritual than the rest, by making up new doctrines about God that are not supported anywhere in the Bible. They will claim that their own spiritual connection with God is the source of this knowledge, and if you disagree they will say you just aren't spiritual enough to see it. Even if you show them Bible verses that contradict their claims, straightforward, black on white, they will say that they have a “spiritual” understanding of the verse, and say you are wrong to read it literally, and think it means what it actually says.

You are almost certain to meet such people. Notice who they are, and don't listen to them. Pray for them, correct them when you can, and keep an eye on who they talk to, because they will go around spreading their venom to anyone who will listen, and they will do much damage. Especially to newer and immature believers, who might fall for their lies.

Verse 14-16:

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. But he who is spiritual appraises all things, yet he himself is appraised by no one. For WHO HAS KNOWN THE MIND OF THE LORD, THAT HE WILL INSTRUCT HIM? But we have the mind of Christ.

The natural man

The experience of those who are united with Christ stands in stark contrast to the experience of the natural man. Explaining to them the deep thoughts of God, would be like if a random stranger on the street asked me what I was thinking of, and in stead of having the common sense to say “nothing” I would start to pour out my inmost thoughts to someone who didn't even know my name. My thoughts would be foolishness to them. Gods thoughts, being so entirely different from anything human, would be even more foolish to them, until they come to know Him by His Spirit.

Appraised by no one

The word Appraised means discerned, evaluated or judged. The Spiritual man has received wisdom from God to know and discern between truth and falsehood. And at the same time he knows who he is in Christ, and doesn't need anyone else to affirm ore evaluate that connection. He is appraised by no one. He stands before God, and even if many might have differing opinions about his performance or spirituality or godliness, he is only worried about the opinion of one. The one who called him. And while he is humble toward rebuke from those who are spiritual, he does not take too much note of unfounded criticism.

The mind of Christ

The chapter ends with a Bold statement, and I've mentioned it briefly already. He quotes Isaiah again, this time chapter 40, verse 13, and asks the question “Who has known the mind of the Lord, that he will instruct him”. It was unthinkable to the old testament believers to know God in the same intimate way that we know ourselves. And we may have heard it so many times that we're starting to take it for granted, but I want to finish with Paul's shocking claim: But we have the mind of Christ!

Notes on 1. Corinthians 2:1-5: The weak apostle

2011-01-20T18:53:00.001+01:00

We will start out with a little repetition from a few weeks back, since I went a little bit ahead of myself speaking about how Paul did not win the Corinthians over with cleverness of speech. He repeats it here as a launching pad to another topic, and that's how we will treat it here too. Briefly, and not in as much detail as we did a few weeks ago.

Verse 1-2:

And when I came to you, brethren, I did not come with superiority of speech or of wisdom, proclaiming to you the testimony of God. For I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified.

I determined to know nothing

Paul is saying that his focus was sharp. He had determined to know only one thing when he was in Corinth. Christ and him Crucified. That was his message.

Does that mean that every Sunday in the Corinthian church Paul Ascended the pulpit and repeated the same sermon, reiterating Christ's sufferings on the Cross? Not by any means. You see, to someone who knows the true meaning of the Bible, every verse is about Christ and him Crucified. And whatever text you are teaching from, you're either preaching Christ and him Crucified or you're doing it wrong.

But Paul kept his focus on the cross. Not on elaborate arguments, philosophical speculations or other distractions. He had decided to discard that knowledge to give room for his vastly more important knowledge of Christ crucified.

Verse 3-5

I was with you in weakness and in fear and in much trembling, and my message and my preaching were not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, so that your faith would not rest on the wisdom of men, but on the power of God.

Weakness, fear, trembling

Some people picture Paul and the other apostles as some kind of half-angels walking around with a halo over their head, unaffected by anything happening around them. That's not the picture the Bible paints for us though. This is a real man, serving a real God in the midst of real suffering.

If we read in Acts, the chapters preceding Paul's arrival in Corinth, We see him and Silas beaten and imprisoned in Philippi in chapter 16. After their miraculous rescue they traveled to Thessalonica, where their opponents started an uproar against them. They escaped at night and went to Berea, and then Athens, where Paul's message was disregarded and scoffed at, and then finally after all of that, he arrived in Corinth.

We read in Acts 18 that shortly after his arrival, he and his followers were expelled from the synagogue, and in stead started meeting in the home of a brother who lived next to the synagogue. (v7) After this, the persecution apparently escalated to a point where God had to speak to Paul in a vision at night to keep him from leaving. (v9)

With that in mind, it should be no surprise to us that He was weak, fearful and trembling. Yes, Paul had learned to be content in whatever circumstances he was in (Phil 4:11-12), but that doesn't mean he was sailing through his trials with no effort. It rather meant that he had learned to appreciate how God used all of those trials to make him more like Christ.

There are two things I want to point out though, in regards to Paul's weakness, fear and trembling.

He still came

First, we can note that the verse starts with the words “I was with you”. In the midst of weakness, fear and trembling, Paul did not go home. He didn't give up his career in apostolic ministry to try to make it big in the tent-making business instead. And if he had, the Church in Corinth would have never existed, and we wouldn't have had this letter to learn from.

Paul continued serving God in spite of resistance, persecution and trials. Why? We know the answer from our first session in chapter one. He was called as an apostle by the will of God. He was a servant for better or for worse. He had not chosen to be an apostle, and he could not chose not to be one. It was who God had made him.

So even when he felt weak and fearful, giving up was not an option. He did not give in to it, he did not let it passify him, and he did not change any part of his message to please more people. He kept going in spite of his fears.

He had power

The other noteworthy detail is that in the very next verse after Paul said was with them in weakness it says his preaching was with demonstration of power. With little power on his own, Gods power became all the more evident. Paul was weak in himself, so that there would be room for God demonstrating his strength through the working of miracles.

The signs of a true apostle were performed among you with all perseverance, by signs and wonders and miracles. (2Cor 12:12)

It pleased God, by any means to keep Paul humble and weak, so that God's power could be shown. We see this most clearly in 2. Cor 12:7-10

Because of the surpassing greatness of the revelations, for this reason, to keep me from exalting myself, there was given me a thorn in the flesh, a messenger of Satan to torment me--to keep me from exalting myself! Concerning this I implored the Lord three times that it might leave me. And He has said to me, "My grace is sufficient for you, for power is perfected in weakness. Most gladly, therefore, I will rather boast about my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may dwell in me. Therefore I am well content with weaknesses, with insults, with distresses, with persecutions, with difficulties, for Christ's sake; for when I am weak, then I am strong.”

When I am weak I am strong. God's power is perfected through weakness. This is how God has chosen to work in this world. This is how God gets the glory, in stead of his servants being made into idols. In fact Paul was not strong in spite of being weak. He was strong because he was weak.

What faith rests on

Going back to our text in 1. Corinthians 2, Paul offers one more reason why he came in weakness, fear and trembling, and without persuasive words of wisdom: “so that your faith would not rest on the wisdom of men, but on the power of God.” He goes on to explain that there's certainly no shortage of wisdom in the message he has preached, and that for the mature there are unimaginable depths to delve into. We'll talk more about that next time though. For now we will limit ourselves to considering what faith should rest on.

This text is clear about one thing. It should not rest on persuasive words. You may be familiar with the term apologetics, which means to use logic and reason to argue that the Bible is true. There is a time for apologetics, to build up and strengthen each other in the faith, or to deal with reasonable objections someone raises when you witness to them. But the Bible does not allow us to talk people into becoming Christians. Faith should not rest on intellectual consent to an argument.

Why not? Because we humans are a great deal dumber than we tend to give ourselves credit for. And our mind is easily influenced and deceived. Something as valuable as faith needs a more substantial foundation. One that doesn't move no matter what. It needs to be built on the power of God.

What is the power of God?

If we are going to build our faith on something, we need to know what it is. So it would be good for us to ask the question, what is the power of God.

The most natural reading of the text – which is confirmed in 2. Cor. 12, which we read a little while ago – seems to be that the power Paul came with to the Corinthians was the power to perform supernatural signs and wonders.

Now the next question to naturally follow would be if our preaching today should be accompanied with the same type of signs and wonders. Or if the power of God is expressed in other ways in our time.

We have three options to chose from.

Preaching today ought to be accompanied with the same amount of miracles, signs and wonders. If this is the case, I would say today's church is in a dreadful condition, since I'm not aware of any preacher anywhere in the world today whose preaching is accompanied with signs and wonders of the magnitude and regularity of the apostles. It seems conspicuous that most claims to this kind of power today comes from blatant false teachers and heretics. And even more so that the types of miracles are very different from those that are mentioned in the Bible. In stead of sick being healed and demons being cast out, many are finding “angel feathers” and growing gold teeth in their mouths.
In response to this many have instead said that God stopped all miracles after the Bible was completed. That the miracles performed in the Bible was to make it obvious who were true apostles and who were not. At this time the Bible was still being written as God was working through his chosen apostles in the early church. Many false prophets also claimed to be speaking on God's behalf. As we have read already in 1Cor 12:12, Paul points to miracles as evidence that he is an apostle, and that his teachings are authoritative. That he was certified by God to lay the foundational teachings that the Church would be built on (Eph 2:20). With that foundation now being complete, and the apostolic teachings gathered in the Bible, no one has authority to add anything to this foundation. Therefore miracles would not serve any purpose today.
The third alternative is the one I would hold to. And it is something in between the other two. There is much truth in alternative 2. No one has the authority to add to the Bible anymore, and miracles served to authenticate those who had that authority back in those days. Therefore we should expect less of them. If someone makes a claim about doctrine we should not ask them to prove it by showing us a miracle. We should ask them to prove it by pointing it out in the Bible.

However, authentication of true apostles was not the only purpose that miracles served in the Bible. They were also acts of compassion from a kind and loving God to relieve suffering. Not to authenticate ministry. Jesus would be the best example of this as He is often quoted asking those He healed not to let anybody know about it. When Jesus met the widow in Nain, whose son was raised from the dead, it says “When the Lord saw her, He felt compassion for her”. (Luke 7:13). Likewise before He fed the 4000 He said “I feel compassion for the people because they have remained with Me now three days and have nothing to eat.” For this reason, as long as there is suffering in the world, there will be a place for miracles. And it is not wrong to pray for healing or for God to supernaturally meet any legitimate need we might have. However we should not expect miracles to be as regular and frequent as in the ministry of the apostles, simply because no one today serves in that capacity.

Improving the Gospel

2010-12-06T19:13:00.000+01:00

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

2010-11-27T21:08:00.001+01:00

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

2010-11-19T19:46:00.000+01:00

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"

2010-11-19T19:14:00.000+01:00

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

2010-11-13T20:18:00.001+01:00

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

2010-10-31T08:09:00.001+01:00

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

2010-10-24T12:40:00.002+02:00

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.”