How is our burden light?
“My yoke is easy, and my burden is light” (Matt. 11:30)
“I am the vine; you are the branches. Whoever abides in me and I in him, he it is that bears much fruit, for apart from me you can do nothing” (Jn. 15:5)
“His commandments are not burdensome” (1 Jn. 5:3)
I don’t want to, as the Pharisees, lay on burdens too hard to bear; especially since I can’t carry them myself. I want us to see that Christ carried our burdens! Christ says His burden is light. John said that Jesus’ “commandments are not burdensome.” Yet, how is this true in light of the all-encompassing call to which He calls us? Does He not tell us to take up our cross and follow Him? How is an instrument of torture light or easy?
Jesus is the image of the glory of God, the exact imprint of His nature; our call to imitate Him is no easy calling. We are to conform our life to His life, and death. So how then could Jesus say, “My yoke is easy, and my burden is light” (Matt. 11:30)? It is because it is in Him that we have fulfilled His commandments and it is through Him that we’re empowered to fulfill His commandments. Our burden is light because Christ took our burden. Our burden is light because through Christ we have the Spirit who helps us. In Jesus, we find “rest for our souls” (v. 29)!
We will with Christian of Pilgrim’s Progress, find our yoke easy and our burden light when at the sight of the cross our burden falls off. When we realize that our true burden, namely sin, has been carried for us by none other than Jesus, the Son of God, we will cry out “His commandments our not burdensome!” They are but an overflow of joy. The grace of the call of Christ bursts all bonds of the burden of the Christian life. We do have burdens, you could say, but we carry them now with joy.[1] We carry them knowing Christ carried our sin on the cross!
While we must be faithful to carry our cross, we do so in light of the fact that Jesus died on the cross for us and bore the wrath of God in our place. We carry our cross, yet not to death but to victory! The cross for the Christian is not a sign of death but of victory. We run the race set before us, yes with a limp at times, but the pain flees, as with any runner, as we gaze upon the prize. Life, and even death, has purpose in and for Christ. Yes, there are many commands in Scripture, but they are blessings. They encourage us on towards joyous Christ-like conformity. It is only when we are in Christ that these commands can begin to be truly obeyed.
Many in the Old Testament saw God’s Law as burdensome. How then did David love and delight in God’s Law? It was because God gave David that delight. In the same way when we are in Christ the Spirit comes to reside in us and changes us. We begin to love the things that God loves. His commands become not merely demands but delights to our soul.
We could talk long about the ills of contemporary Christianity, but what is the prescribed cure? Christ is! It is through Christ that we are once-and-for-all holy in our standing before God and it is through Christ that we become holy, i.e. live holy lives. Christ is the cure. Though, that does not mean that the remedy is simplistic. The prescription for the cure has been wrought in Christ, but ultimate healing won’t come this side of Eden.
We have right standing before God in Christ. No, this does not change the fact that we must still conform ourselves (that is, by God’s empowering) to match our position. But we are right before God!
No, you and I do not rightly evangelize but praise God Jesus did, and now, in Him, it is as if we do evangelize rightly. Are we willing to suffer? Christ did suffer for us! Do you spend your time wisely? Jesus always did what pleased the Father! No, brother and sister we don’t measure up. But Christ does! And in Christ we do! In our call to imitate Christ, we are just to imitate our actual standing before God; we are to, paradoxically, be where we already are.
David Platt has rightly said,
“You will never be radical enough. No matter what you do—even if you sell all your possessions and move to the most dangerous country in the world for the sake of ministry—you cannot do enough to be accepted before God. And the beauty of the gospel is that you don’t have to. God so loved you that, despite your hopeless state of sin, he sent his Son—God in the flesh—to live the life you could not live. Jesus alone has kept the commands of God. He alone has been faithful enough, generous enough, and compassionate enough. Indeed, he alone has been radical enough.”[2]
Interestingly, the way of Christ is at the same time impossible (more than just hard) and tremendously easy. We cannot carry the burden, we cannot bear the cross yet that is why the way of Christ is easy. Because we can do nothing. It is all done in Him. Jesus said, “apart from me you can do nothing.” Thus, the call of Christ is paradoxically impossible and easy.
Our burden is light because Christ carried our burden. He carried our cross. As we see from Isaiah 53, Christ has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows.
“He was wounded
for our transgression;
He was crushed
for our iniquities;
upon Him was the chastisement
that brought us peace,
and with His stripes
we are healed.”
Verse 11 of this chapter says that the Righteous One, Jesus Christ, will make many to be accounted righteous. We are not innately righteous. We have sinned, we do not rightly live for the Lord, yet we are accounted righteous in Christ. We have fulfilled all righteousness, but not in ourselves, but in Christ!
[1] Paul said he had many difficulties, many burdens, on top of all that he had anxiety for all the churches (2 Cor. 11:28 cf. vv.23-28) yet he also said, “We do not lose heart. Though our outer self is wasting away, our inner self is being renewed day by day” (4:16). “For as we share abundantly in Christ’s sufferings, so through Christ we share abundantly in comfort too” (2 Cor. 1:5). In fact, Paul was burdened to death. He said at one point, “We were so utterly burdened beyond our strength that we despaired of life itself.” (2 Cor. 1:8). We learn from 2 Corinthians 1:9-10 that at times we have burdens to teach us to rely on Christ, we learn to give Him our burden and find hope in Him. We carry burdens, but it is different now, we have Christ’s comfort abundantly now!
[2] David Platt, Radical Together, 27.
The Baptism, Filling, and Continual Filling of the Holy Spirit
Baptism of the Holy Spirit
First, I must say, this is a difficult question as there is much disagreement and misunderstanding on the topic. However, it is a very practical and important question.
“Pentecostal and charismatic theology generally maintains that baptism with the Holy Spirit is a second blessing, an experience of God’s grace subsequent to conversion.”[1] However, Allison demonstrates that “the New Testament vividly portrays the initial work involving the Spirit with several interchangeable expressions.”[2] To understand what our term, “baptized in the Spirit,” means we have to look at the extended context in which it is used. We also have to determine if Jesus’ followers were regenerate or not. If we believe that they were already regenerate then our term refers to a second or subsequent work of the Spirit. If they were not already regenerate then it does not refer to a subsequent work but to the conversion work of the Spirit. I believe that Allison has demonstrated that it refers to the conversion work of the Spirit and not to a subsequent work.[3]
If this is true then “baptized in the Spirit” means something akin to regenerated by the Spirit or the initial giving of the Spirit. However, I think this term brings in more meaning.[4] I believe that “baptized in the Spirit” (Matt. 3:11; Mk. 1:8; Lk. 3:16; Jn. 1:33; Acts 1:5; 11:16) means something close to immersed in the Spirit. It has to do with being engulfed in the glory and wonder of God by the Spirit. “Baptized” (Gk. baptizo) means dip, submerge, or plunge. So, the baptism of the Spirit, like the one at Pentecost, is an overwhelming experience (So, the LXX reading of Isaiah 21:4: “My heart wanders, and transgression ‘overwhelms’ [Gk. baptizo] me”).
It also seems that the baptism of the Holy Spirit, in Scripture, has partly to do with being incorporated into the people of God. We see this for example through Paul’s use of a similar phrase. He says, “In one Spirit we were all baptized into one body” (1 Cor. 12:13). Yet, we also saw this at Pentecost: Jew and Gentile, together, we’re baptized in the Spirit. They were brought together through the overwhelming experience of the Spirit.
In Scripture, I think baptism of the Spirit is used to refer to the initial giving and overwhelming effect of the Spirit. The Spirit was poured out and overwhelmed God’s people in accord with Joel 2. However, in popular parlance it has come to mean something else. This is not surprising since many believe that the baptism of the Spirit was and is a subsequent work and not a converting work. It is also not surprising since the term in many ways is synonymous with filled with the Spirit. The term does perhaps especially emphasize the overwhelming effect of the Spirit. So, for instance, I think it would be okay to say, the Great Awakening that Princeton’s Jonathan Edwards was involved in was a type of immersion of the Holy Spirit. People were dipped, as it were, into the reality of God and His truth; they were “baptized by the Spirit.”
Sinclair B. Ferguson has said,
“Revival is the unstopping of the pent-up energies of the Spirit of God breaking down the dams which have been erected against his convicting and converting ministry in whole communities of individuals, as happened at Pentecost and in the ‘awakenings’ which have followed.”[5]
I also believe that Pentecost was unique in some ways. Unique in that it may have been the first time that believers were indwelt by God the Spirit (there is much debate and necessary caveats regarding this statement). There were also prophecies that were fulfilled through Pentecost (Joel 2). It was also a very turbulent time and there was an especially significant need for God to demonstrate that He was behind the New Covenant and the inclusion of the Gentiles (cf. Acts 10:44-48; 11:15-18; 15:8-11). This is not to say, that God does not still work in significant and similar ways. I believe He does at times. I do not believe that the miraculous gifts of the Spirit have seized. This is only to say that we must see the special uniqueness of that time in the life of the Church.
I believe that the baptism of the Holy Spirit is closely related to the filling of the Holy Spirit and may or may not result in the sign gifts of the Spirit. That, briefly, is how I understand the baptism of the Holy Spirit. I would, however, like to further study this subject.
Filling of the Holy Spirit
From the point of our new birth we are filled with the Holy Spirit. We are, amazingly, temples of the Living God (e.g. 1 Cor. 3:16; Eph. 1:13). However, we can still be filled with the Spirit. We need this filling for instance to be powerful witnesses, to put to death the wicked deeds of the body, and to know and love God as we should.
Paul wrote to the saints (who thus were indwelt by the Spirit) at Ephesus (Eph. 1:1) and yet he prayed that they would be filled with all the fullness of God (notice “filled,” “all,” and “fullness”) (Eph. 3:19). He prayed that they would have strength to comprehend the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge, this happens through the Spirit’s power (Eph. 3:16). So, I think the filling of the Spirit has to do with tasting the reality of God’s truth. It is more than cognitive consent.
So, for instance, I think Jonathan Edwards is getting at this when he says, “There is such a thing as a spiritual and divine light immediately imparted to the soul by God, of a different nature from any that is obtained by natural means… There is a difference between having an opinion, that God is holy and gracious, and having a sense of the loveliness and beauty of that holiness and grace. There is a difference between having a rational judgment that honey is sweet, and having a sense of its sweetness.”[6]
Yet, being filled with the Holy Spirit is not just about having this “sense.” It is also about being prepared for significant ministry. However, I think the two tend to go hand in hand. We see this in Scripture; it’s clear in the book of Acts. Many earlier church leaders were “filled with the Holy Spirit” before or as they carried out the Lord’s work (cf. Acts 4:8; 4:31; 7:55; 13:9; 13:52). “Furthermore, the same vocabulary is sometimes used to describe an honorable Christian lifestyle. The table servers (Acts 6:3), as exemplified by Stephan (Acts 6:5), and Barnabas (Acts 11:24) were characterized as being ‘full of the Holy Spirit.’”[7]
So I agree with Allison, I think “the sense of the filling or fullness of the Spirit is being thoroughly and regularly pervaded by or permeated with the Spirit resulting in fruitfulness, seen in productive ministry and proven godly character.”[8] We should all greatly desire, pray for, and seek this filling of the Spirit. We want to both have a sense of the great sweetness of God and His truth (cf. Ps. 34:8; 1 Pet. 2:3) and be empowered for significant ministry to God’s glory.
Continual Filling of the Holy Spirit
I believe that the Spirit fills us through a collaboration of means. He works as we sing songs, and hymns, and spiritual songs (Eph. 5:18-19; Col. 3:16). He speaks through Scripture. He works as we pray (Eph. 1:17ff; 3:16ff). We come to God as our good Father and ask Him to fill us with the Spirit (Lk. 11:5-13). “Sam Storms explains, baptism with the Spirit at salvation ‘does not preclude multiple, subsequent experiences of the Spirit’s activity… The New Testament endorses and encourages multiple subsequent experiences of the Spirit’s power and presence.’”[9] We see this in Scripture. We’ll take our example from Ephesians.
First, Paul says, “Be filled with the Spirit” (Eph. 5:18), he says it as a command, not an option. We must also realize that he says it to believers, believers that are already temples indwelt with the Spirit of God (1 Cor. 3:16; Eph. 1:13 cf. Titus 3:5; Jn. 3:3, 5). So there must be a way that we can be more filled (notice Paul’s language in Eph. 3:19). Second, the tense is present, so we could say that we are called to “keep on being filled with the Spirit.” It is not simply a once and done type of thing. We continually need to pursue the filling of the Spirit. Third, it is in the passive voice, we are filled and we cannot do the filling on our own. The Spirit does the work of filling us and we cannot fabricate or conjure His presence. However, that does not mean that we are inactive in our pursuit of being filled with the Spirit. Remember, Paul says “be filled.” It’s a passive imperative. Thus we pray (Lk. 11:5-13) and we sing (Eph. 5:18-19; Col. 3:16). We kill sin (mortification) and live towards God (vivification). We purify ourselves to be worthy vessels (Rom. 8:4-6; 1 Cor. 3:16-17; 6:19-20; Gal. 5:16-25; 2 Tim. 2:21).
____________________________________________
[1] Gregg R. Allison, “Baptism with and Filling of the Holy Spirit,” 8.
[2] Ibid., 11. Sinclair B. Ferguson also says that “Luke-Acts speaks of being filled with or being full of the Spirit as an ongoing condition, but also describes particular occasions when individuals appear to experience distinct fillings” (The Holy Spirit, 89).
[3] see Ibid., esp. 10-14.
[4] Max Turner gives a good and brief biblical analysis of what the term means to different authors. He says:
“The phrase, ‘baptize in (the) (Holy) Spirit (and fire)’ in the NT is found on the lips of John the Baptist, Jesus (Acts 1:5) and Peter (Acts 11:16) and, perhaps, in the writings of Paul (1 Cor 12:13). It is only just beginning to be realized (cf. Hummel, Fireplace chap. 14) that these usages are not uniform but amount to different metaphors-topic and illustration being subtly different in each case:
(a) John the Baptist uses the phrase as a metaphor for the end-time ‘deluge’ of Spirit-and-fire that will destroy and recreate the world (Mt. 3:11 f.). All will experience that. (b) Jesus uses the same language, this time as a metaphor for the deluge of Spirit experienced by the 120 at Pentecost (Jesus’ re-use of end-time language in connection with events in salvation history is characteristic: cf. his use of ‘kingdom of God’ language at Lk. 11:20 for example). At Acts 1:5 there is no suggestion that any further such mighty deluge of Spirit (before the end) is actually indicated.
(c) Peter (Acts 11:16) sees Cornelius’ experience and ‘remembers’ Jesus’ vivid metaphor. (The inference is that this was not the usual experience and ‘baptize in Spirit’ not the usual language of Peter’s circle: this surprising experience recalled that metaphor.)
In conclusion we can say that the speakers in Luke-Acts use ‘baptize in Holy Spirit’ as a metaphor for being ‘deluged’ or ‘overwhelmed’ by the Spirit (albeit in different ways). Luke, like Josephus (see Turner, ‘Spirit Endowment’ 50ff.), uses ‘baptize’ metaphorically to compare an experience of the Spirit (or wine, or sleep or whatever) with how a deluge or floodtide overcomes and engulfs a man. The phraseology is used to denote a dramatic experience which overwhelms. Few in the NT are described as having such an overwhelmingly powerful experience of the Spirit as to suggest the metaphor (Pentecost and Cornelius in Luke-Acts); and few today have such a powerful experience that this language commends itself.
(d) Paul’s use in 1 Cor. 12:13 ‘for by one Spirit we were all baptized into the one body’ means God, in spirit, ‘immerses’ us into Christ’s body. All experience this, but Paul’s metaphor is not Luke’s. He is using ‘baptize’ language to compare the Spirit’s placing of us into the body of Christ with the way a man immerses or sinks an item into a fluid. The point of comparison is ‘total incorporation’, not ‘overwhelming experience’. Stott, Dunn and Bruner are right to insist (in Pauline terms) that all Christians are baptized by the Spirit into Christ: but they wrongly read Luke’s language this way. Charismatics rightly see that Luke’s phrase denotes overwhelming experience, but wrongly assume Luke thinks it happens to all before the parousia (then, of course, it will happen to all!) and wrongly apply it to many experiences today for which the language can only charitably be called a gross exaggeration.”
[5] Sinclair B. Ferguson, The Holy Spirit, 90.
[6] “A Divine and Supernatural Light.”
[7] Allison, “Baptism with and Filling of the Holy Spirit,” 14.
[8] Ibid., 15.
[9] Ibid., 14.
Good Communication
If you are like me, you have had times when you have thought that good communication is not possible. You may have even said, “We’re too different,” “We just think on different wavelengths,” or “I can’t stand that person.” However, the truth is we can have good communication and further Scripture tells us to (see for example Eph. 4:25, 29, 31-32; Ps. 141:3; Prov. 18:13, 17; 21:23; 25:11). I have been reading a little pamphlet by Stuart Scott called Communication and Conflict Resolution, and yes, I am mainly reading it for my own marriage but I hope that this helps you as well; at work, at home, and aboard.
There are many negative effects to poor communication. I could list them but I am sure that you acutely feel many of them already. However, I will remind you, and myself, that our horizontal relationships between friends and family are not the only relationship effected by our communication. Our vertical relationship with God can also be greatly effected by our communication. If we dishonor God by what we say it hinders not only human fellowships but also our fellowship with God (cf. Matt. 5:23-24). If we speak unkindly or lie to someone that is also not a good testimony before an unbelieving world. However, the opposite is also true, we can greatly honor God by our communication with our fellow humans. All of this is to say that there is more at stake than just being polite or culturally appropriate in our communication (see James 3:5-6 to be reminded of the importance of what we say).
As we think about communication; what we say, and how we say it. We must understand why we say it, i.e. where it comes from. So, where does it come from? The Bible says that what we say comes out of our heart (cf. Matt. 12:34). From the overflow of the heart the mouth speaks. Thus, it is vital that we not merely fix what people say (the external) and gloss over what is going on inside (the internal).
Stuart Scott gives six prerequisites to good communication that don’t gloss over what is going on inside. I will give each of his points with Scripture reference:
1. You must want to please God more than anything else (2 Cor. 5:9). Our desire in conversation must not be to make much of ourselves, to prove we’re right, but to honor and make much of God.
2. You must be humble (Eph. 4:1-3). We must realize that we are sinful and it is very likely that we have done wrong. We must acknowledge that even if we have not done wrong in this particular instance, we have before and we will again soon.
3. You must be aware that you are accountable to God for everything you communicate (Matt. 12:36). As we talk, no matter the conversation, we should not take it lightly for we will stand before the Judgment Seat of Christ to give an account.
4. You must know how to listen (Prov. 18:13; James 1:19). Not only should we attentively listen to others because it is the right thing to do, not only because it is in line with the Golden Rule, but because without it there can be no meaningful conversation.
5. You must know that communication involves more than just words (James 4:17). Whether we know it or not, or like it or not, the volume of our voice, the gestures of our hands, the ruling of our eyes, the posture of our body, and numerous other things communicate to people.
6. You must be willing to put forth the effort and spend the time it takes to communicate (Rom. 12:10-12). In Romans, we are told to be “devoted to one another.” This devotion takes time and intentionality.
Scott also gave four specific principals for biblical communication: 1) Speak the truth (Eph. 4:25, 29-32), 2) Speak with purpose (1 Cor. 10:31; Eph.4:29; Col. 4:6), 3) Speak clearly (Prov. 10:19; 15:28; Matt. 5:37), and 4) Speak at the right time (Prov. 25:11).
There is a lot more that I could say and a lot more that Scott said that was helpful. However, I think a good start is simply realizing that good communication is important and something that the Bible is not silent on. Second, good communication is something that we must be intentional about. It takes time. It takes work.
Take time now and evaluate your communication. Will you put these points into practice to improve your communication? Will you honor God by working at communication?
Abortion: This Subject is a Matter of Life or Death
Thinking about abortion is very difficult but very important. I hope to look at it with grace and candor. So, out front, I want to say two things: First, abortion is wrong and a grave sin against a holy God. Second, there is grace and forgiveness and reconciliation through Jesus Christ! So even as we think about this difficult subject, I do not want us to have a holier-than-thou mind set. We are all sinners saved by the grace of God. 1 John 1:9 gives us all hope: “If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”
I also want us to realize that the problem of abortion cannot be fixed by mere legislation (abortion was happening when it was against the law and infanticide has sadly been around for thousands of years). Legislation is important however. Yet, the fundamental problem that needs to be addressed is people’s hearts; people need to be transformed by God from the inside out. So, the problem is not just abortion, that is a fruit, albeit perhaps the ugliest fruit, of this society’s worldview.[1] This fruit is seen all over the place just in different flavors. However, the underlying problem is the same, idolatry. People worship convenience, their unhindered sexual lifestyle, their accomplishments, or a thousand other things above the one true God. We know from Romans chapter one the chaos that ensues when things usurp God’s place on the throne. When we make a god out of what is no god, it is its own punishment. God gives people up to a debased mind; to do what ought not to be done.
Society often paints things in a thin veneer. It looks attractive. When examined closely, however, it is most worthless, even poisons. It is interesting that many have abortions to escape consequences but end up instead sadly multiplying them as the Scriptures say (cf. Rom. 1). The immediate physical and psychological consequences of an abortion are often many, to speak nothing of long term affects. However, these sadly are just a foretaste of what awaits those who do not turn to Jesus for forgiveness.
Statistics Regarding Abortion in America
• Since 1973, there have been 53,000,000 reported and legal abortions. This is equal to the population of 19 western states.
• There are 1.21 Million abortions per year (2005)
• There are approximately 3,700 abortions per day.
• 1/3 of American women will have an abortion by the time they are forty-five.
• Reasons why women have an abortion:
o 1% of all abortion occur because of rape or incest
o 6% of abortions occur because of potential health problems
o 93% of all abortions occur for social reasons:
Some say they have responsibility to other people
Cannot afford a child
Having a child would interfere with work, school, etc.
Don’t want to be a single parent or would have problems with the father of the child
• Partial birth abortion (the name alone is sad) is used to abort women who are 20 to 30 weeks pregnant.
• Some studies report that up to 90% of women chose not to have an abortion after seeing an ultrasound.
• The heartbeat begins on the 21st day after conception.
• Babies of 22 weeks gestation have survived, though this is still very rare.
• Electrical brain waves have been recorded as early as forty days.
• There are several health risks for the woman:
o Breast cancer
o Ectopic (tubal) pregnancy
o Bad effects on future pregnancies
o Becoming sterile
o Sexual dysfunction
o Mental health risks
(From The Village Church)
Why is Abortion Wrong?
First, because Genesis 1:26-27 tells us we are created in image of God. Second, because Exodus 20:13 tells us, “Thou shall not murder.”
However, are these texts enough? Or could people object that that is all well and good but what is inside a woman womb is not a human. What can we say about that from Scripture?
Exodus 21:22-25 says:
“When men strive together and hit a pregnant woman, so that her children come out, but there is no harm, the one who hit her shall surely be fined, as the woman’s husband shall impose on him, and he shall pay as the judges determine. [23] But if there is harm, then you shall pay life for life, [24] eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, [25] burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe” (See Grudem, Politics According to the Bible, 159-60, 160n2 and Frame, 718-21).
There is quite a few things to note on this significant passage. First, notice what the result is if there is no harm to the child (see v. 22)? Just a fine. However, what happens if there is harm? “Life for life,” it says. Notice that this still means it is an accident but the punishment is still life for life. In other cases of accidental manslaughter this was not the mandate but provision of “house arrest” and protection was made. Therefore, this shows the seriousness of protecting unborn life. If God has such hatred for the accidental death of an unborn child what is His reaction to intentional death? Wrath (cf. Jer. 7:30-34).
Meredith G. Kline points out that
“Induced abortion was so abhorrent to the Israelite mind that it was not necessary to have a specific prohibition dealing with it in the Mosaic law. The Middle Assyrian laws attest to the abhorrence that was felt for this crime even in the midst of the heathendom around Israel, lacking though it did the illumination of special revelation. For in those laws a woman guilty of abortion was condemned to be impaled on stakes. Even if she managed to lose her own life in producing abortion, she was still to be impaled and hung up in shame as an expression of the community’s repudiation of such an abomination. It is hard to imagine a more damning commentary on what is taking place in enlightened America today than that provided by this legal witness of the conscience of benighted ancient paganism” (“Lex Talionis and the Human Fetus,” 200-01).
Psalm 139:13-16 (cf. Job 31:15-18; Ps. 22:9; Hos. 12:3; Gen. 25:23-26) says:
“For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother’s womb. [14] I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Wonderful are your works; my soul knows it very well. [15] My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately woven in the depths of the earth. [16] Your eyes saw my unformed substance; in your book were written, every one of them, the days that were formed for me, when as yet there was none of them.”
Psalm 51:5 says: “Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.” Remember the context? David is repenting of his sin. What is David saying here? He is saying he has a sinful nature inherited from Adam. He is not saying it was his mother’s fault. Note, “Sin in Scripture is a personal quality, never an impersonal one. It is never a property of things, only of persons” (Frame, The Doctrine of the Christian Life, 722). Thus, we see here a very strong argument for personhood beginning at conception. If he had a sin nature in his mother’s womb than it follows that he was a real human being with a soul. “Fetal tissue” or any type of tissue or inanimate object for that matter is not sinful, people alone are sinful. Do you see the conclusion here? David was a person, a real human person, in his mother’s womb.
We could also look at Judges 13:3-5 and Luke 1:35. Jesus too was a divine-human person from conception (cf. Heb 2:17-18; 4:15; Lk. 41-44 cf. 2:16).
We see in Scripture that we should take precautions so as to avoid the possible destruction of life (Deut. 22:8 cf. 19:5). Thus, even if you are not entirely persuaded by these arguments the principle that we see in Scripture would lead us not to agree with abortion. As Frame says, “Even if the above arguments are only, say, 80 percent certain, they make it highly probable that abortion destroys human lives. And God’s law clearly tells us not to take that risk. So our practical response should be exactly the same as if we were persuaded 100 percent” (Frame, 724).
To illustrate this point imagine I go hunting with you. We go out into the thick woods and after a while I hear a rustling in the grass so I do what any hunter should do, I don’t hesitate, I point in that general direction, and fire a few shots hoping I hit my intended target. Would you hunt with me very long if that was my practice? No, because you would be either to scared or dead. Do you see the principal? You don’t just shoot at any rustling noise because a human could be making the noise and not a deer. We take precautions to protect life!
The United States Military goes by an ROE, Rules of Engagement. They for instance have to have positive identity before they engage an enemy force. Or they have to use escalation of force. Our military personnel take great precautions to not destroy innocent life, even to the point of putting their own self in great harm, and yet in our own country we do not take these same precautions with our unborn. We do not have “positive identity” and yet many are okay with taking life. Should we not rather take great precautions even if we are not exactly sure when life begins? If we as a country make people put hand rails up on their own house and enforce all sorts of other codes, should we not also protect the unborn even if their is disagreement when life begins?
DNA: “From the point of conception, unborn children have a full complement of chromosomes… Therefore, the child is not ‘part of his mother’s body.’ His genetic makeup is different from hers. So we should not treat the unborn child as we treat hair or fingernails, or even as we treat organs like the gall bladder or liver. The unborn child is a separate and unique human being” (Frame, 725). Yes the child is dependent on his mother yet he will also be after he is outside of the womb and that in no way gives his mother the right to kill him. Though there are helpful scientific observations, “Personhood is a metaphysical, religious, theological, and ethical category, not a scientific one. There are no scientific observations or experiments that can detect a difference between a person and a nonperson” (Frame, 726). Yet, as we saw above, if we have a ROE for combat how much more should we go to great lengths to protect human unborn life!
I read an article about a teenage boy that falsely admitted to a crime and later was proven innocent from DNA. People are sometime proven guilty and proven innocent by their DNA and yet not proven to be human by their DNA this does not make sense to me.
Objections that People Raise (see Grudem, Politics, 162-63 regarding this section)
1. Unable to interact or survive on its own: I have already said how I think this argument is faulty above. A young baby is also unable to survive on its own and that in no way justifies starving it, for example.
2. Birth defects: The question here is whether we would think it is right to put a child to death after it is born because it may have problems. There have also been predictions about the capabilities of child that have been wrong. So, no, potential birth defect or known birth defects cannot justify an abortion (cf. Ex. 4:11; Jn. 9:2-3).
3. Pregnancies resulting from rape or incest: These situations, though few (around 1% or less of all abortions), should be treated with much sensitivity and love. However, the child should not be punished for the sin of the father (Deut. 24:16).
4. Abortion to save the life of the mother: People make it seem like this problem arises very often however the truth is it does not (less than 0.118% of all abortions). This situation is different from the ones above because the choice is between the loss of one life (the baby) and the loss of two lives (the baby and the mother). As we have seen, the Scriptures teach the importance of protecting human life. So if both lives cannot be protected I believe the right thing to do is protect the life that can be protected. I agree with Grudem, though this is a difficult subject.
“I cannot see a reason to say this would be morally wrong, and in fact, I believe it would be morally right for doctors to save the life that can be saved and take the life of the preborn child from the mother’s body (for example from the Fallopain tube in the case of an ectopic pregnancy) results from directly intending to save the life of the mother, not from directly intending to take the child’s life. If the medical technology exists to save the child’s life in such cases, then of course the child’s life should also be saved. But if abortion is necessary to save the mother’s life, this would seem to be the only situation in which it is morally justified” (Politics, 163-64).
5. If Abortion is not allowed it is a wrongful restriction of freedom: However, does that make any sense? I think not. Does not the government make restrictions, isn’t that what we have empowered them to do? Did you know I do not have the freedom to drink and drive, the madness! I am not allowed to shoot guns at people, the government is so restrictive… not even in the city limits… As we can see, the government restricts people and that is right and good. We should not be able to drink and drive, shoot guns at people, etc.
6. “All children should be wanted children”: This, to tell you the truth, makes me sick. Yes! Duh! All children should be wanted children. But the problem is with the parents. It saddens me that we have taken consumerism and applied to human life as a society. Today, there are many people that want to customize their children. However, once a child is born can you just put him or her to death because you don’t want them? Surely not (at least yet)! So, again, this argument holds no ground. It simply pushes the problem back. Children should be wanted. However, the child should not be killed because they are not wanted, the parent should change to want the child. Of course, there is also adoption which is also a good option for many people.
7. Others say, “I’m personally against abortion, but I just don’t support laws against abortion”: That is akin to saying, “I am personally against drunk driving (or murdering for that matter) and I recommend people not do it but don’t support laws against it because individuals should make that decision themselves.” Do you see how silly that is?! Let’s just have no laws! That is foolish and unbiblical. This is especially foolish in a country where we actually have a say.
8. Others say, “We should reduce the causes of abortion but not have laws against abortion”: That would be like saying lets reverse the laws on murder and just have more classes on anger management. That is ridicules. Yes, classes on anger management are important and we should have them but that alone will never do.
9. Yet others say, “Christians should not try to impose their moral standards on other people”: I would agree that we should not impose our religion on people. However, moral standards are a different thing, especially when we live in a country that essentially lets the consensus of the majority make the rules (See Gen. 41:37-45; 42:6; 45:8-9, 26; Dan. 4:27; Jer. 29:7; Neh. 1:1; Esther 5:1-8; 7:1-6; 8:3-13; 9:4,12-15, 20-32; 10:3 for the NT cf. Mark 6:14-20; Matt. 14:1-12; Acts 16:35-39; 24:25; 1 Tim. 2:1-4 for people “imposing” their moral standards). Plus, non-Christians saying this are acturally wanting to impose their moral standard on people. However, their moral standard says that their should be no moral standard, or it should be very low, or it should allow abortion, or it should allow everything except pedophelia.
[1] One person has said, “What an irony that a society confronted with plastic bags filled with the remains of aborted babies should be more concerned about the problem of recycling the plastic.”
The World She Whispers (spoken word)
So here’s my first attempt at spoken word…
Are the Gifts of the Spirit for Today? A Brief Exploration
Introduction
“Are the gifts of the Spirit for today?” This is a big question and an important one because it impacts the church, missions, and individual’s spiritual lives. It is an important question because many denominations and individuals are divided over it.
Truly and sadly very often “those who [speak] most loudly of being led by the Spirit [are] the very persons responsible for quenching the Spirit’s work.”[1] Interestingly, this was also true of the Corinthians of Paul’s day. Yet, Paul does not say, “Away with the Spirit!” Instead, he says, “Don’t quench the Spirit” (1 Thess. 5:19)! The Spirit is not the problem; we are.
I think both camps, cessationists (they believe the gifts have seized) and continuationists (they believe the gifts continue), are right on some points and wrong on others. “Error is much more likely to be propagated, when it is mixed with truth. This hides deformity and makes it go down more easily.”[2] Those who believe that the miraculous gifts of the Spirit continue and those that believe they do not both very often sound right. This likely means that both arguments have been construed wrongly.
Neither side is understanding the question rightly. Of course, I will not satisfy everyone, or, perhaps, anyone. But this is my attempt to satisfy myself on this subject. And I hope to bring you along as well.
We will first look at four negative arguments that people make that believe the charismatic gifts have seized. Then we will look at one positive argument in favor of the continuation of the charismatic gifts. I also have included a long excursus that outlines a somewhat chronological example of the ongoing powerful and uncommon work of the Spirit since Pentecost. Finally, we will look at a few practical reflections.
Who is Jesus?
We find a very telling theological statement in the movie Talladega Nights, “I like to think of Jesus as wearin’ a Tuxedo T-shirt, ’cause it says, like, ‘I want to be formal, but I’m here to party too.’ I like to party, so I like my Jesus to party.” We often have self-conceived versions of Jesus. We may not say that we think Jesus is “wearin’ a Tuxedo T-shirt” but we do very often have misconceptions about who Jesus is.
How can we clear up our misconceptions and why is it so vital? It is vital because if we know Jesus, God the Son, then we know the Father because Jesus has made Him known. Jesus is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of His nature (Heb. 1:3). God’s glory is shown through the heavens (Ps. 19:1-2) but it is most clearly shown through His Son because Jesus is the image of God (2 Cor. 4:4). “The Word [God the Son] became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen His glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth” (Jn. 1:14). Jesus Himself said, “I and the Father are one” (Jn. 10:30) and He said, “Whoever has seen me has seen the Father” (Jn. 14:9).
If we leave Jesus in the cradle as the incarnate Son we are doing Him an injustice because we are forgetting about His pre-incarnate state. We are forgetting about the riches that He lift in heaven to come to earth (2 Cor. 8:9). We are forgetting that all things were made through Him (Jn. 1:3). We are forgetting that He upholds the universe by the Word of His power (Heb. 1:3). We are forgetting that He is utterly “holy, holy, holy” (Is. 6:3; Rev. 4:8). We are forgetting the respect that is due His Name as YHWH. We must have a biblical perspective of Jesus before we will truly know Him and fall at His feet in worship and amazement. If we do not have a biblical perspective of who God the Son is passages like Philippians 2:6-9 and Colossians 1:15-22 will not rightly amaze us and cause us to weep and worship as we should.
So what will keep us from “Tuxedo T-shirt” misconceptions of Jesus? We must remember that are hearts are desperately wicked and we have a bent towards idolatry. We have a tendency to make gods in our own image; including making Jesus in our image. This is an especially difficult temptation for us because Jesus is in the form of a human. He is fully God and fully human yet we must not error on either side here.
We must know the Word of God; the New Testament and the Old Testament. We must build out view from Scripture not from society, music, movies, our own thoughts, or anything else. We must look at the ways that He has been revealed, not at the ways we would have liked for Him to have been revealed.
The awesome thing is the more we get to know the real Jesus the more we will fall in love with Him and the more we will worship Him as the exalted God. As we see who God is, we will see that gazing upon Him is like seeing a multi-faceted diamond. We can look at any one facet and be endlessly amazed or we can zoom out and see the diamond as a whole and likewise be endlessly amazed. We will now look at different views of Jesus’ work and see different facets and perspectives of who He is and what He has done.
Jesus is the thread weaved all through Scripture. He is the end and the culmination of all the types and shadows in the Old Testament (2 Cor. 1:20). In Sherlock Holmes mysteries there are all sorts of problems put forward but Sherlock Holmes is the one in the end that solves them. In a similar way all the problems presented in the Bible are solved in Jesus. He is what the whole story of the Bible is truly about.
If we get Jesus out of the cradle, off the cross, and in the glory clouds in our minds it will change the way in which we live.[1] The incarnation of Jesus is absolutely vital and we should never play it down and the cross is also absolutely vital and we cannot play it down but we never only see these views of Christ. We must not only see the humble and suffering Jesus but we must also see the exalted Jesus. He is the Lion of the tribe of Judah. He is described in Revelations with flames coming out of His mouth. Jesus could not be bound by the cradle or the cross, may He never be bound there in our minds. He, as C.S. Lewis has said, is not tame but He is good.
A sampling of who Jesus is:
- Jesus is the promised offspring (Gen. 3:15), the long awaited Messiah. He is the son of Adam, the son Abraham, the son of David, the Son of God (Matt. 1:1-16; Luke 3:23-38). He is the offspring that was bruised on the heel by the serpent on the cross but by His death and resurrection He stroke Satan the serpent of old with a death blow by bruising his head (Gen. 3:15; Rom. 16:20). Jesus is the offspring through which the nations are blessed (Gen. 22:18; Gal. 3:16).
- Jesus is the better Adam. Sin came into the world through the one man Adam and it is through the one man Jesus that we can receive the free gift of righteousness (Gen. 3:6; Rom. 5:12; 17).
- Jesus is the creator of all things and it is in Him that all things hold together (cf. Jn. 1:1-14; Col. 1:15-20; Heb. 1:3).
- All through the Old Testament there were lambs sacrificed for intentional sins and even unintentional sins. We know that “without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins” (Heb. 9:22) and yet “it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins” (Heb. 10:4). So there was a need for a better lamb. Jesus is that lamb. Jesus is the perfect Lamb without blemish that takes away the sin of the world (Jn. 1:29; Rev. 5:9-10; 12).
- Jesus is the true High Priest (Heb. 7:23-28). Jesus went into the holy places not with the blood of animals but with His own blood and thus He secured an eternal redemption (Heb. 9:12). We are as whores (Hosea) but Jesus presents us to God without spot or winkle (Eph. 5:25-27).
- Jesus is a better King and long awaited true King. All the Old Testament kings were let downs and failed. Jesus is Kings of kings and Lord of lords. He is the eternal true King (Phil. 2:9-11)!
- Jesus is perfectly wise. He is wisdom personified, wisdom incarnate, wisdom in flesh. Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life. He always did the right thing He always acted in perfect wisdom.
- Jesus is not tame but He is good (cf. Ex. 19:21-24; Lev. 10:1-3; 2 Sam. 6:6-7; Rev. 1:12-18).
- Jesus is God. He is fully God and fully man. For example He slept in a boat during a storm at sea and then He calmed the storm. Jesus is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of His nature (Heb. 1:3). God’s glory is shown through the heavens (Ps. 19:1-2) but it is most clearly shown through His Son because Jesus is the image of God (2 Cor. 4:4). “The Word [God the Son] became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen His glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth” (Jn. 1:14). Jesus Himself said, “I and the Father are one” (Jn. 10:30) and He said, “Whoever has seen me has seen the Father” (Jn. 14:9). Jesus is the Great I AM, YHWH (Is. 40:3-5; Ex. 3:14-15; Jn. 8:58-59; Jn. 18:5-6. Is. 9:6; Lk. 2:11; Is. 7:14; Matt. 1:23).
-
Jesus is all of this and yet He was born of a woman born to die. He was born to be despised and rejected by man. He is being worshiped in heaven right now and always as the angels say “holy, holy, holy…”
Do you know Jesus? Will you worship Him as He deserves?
____________________
[1] Jeff Owens helped me see this in a sermon he preached.
Slave.
Addiction, the affliction we embrace. Drowning in more, yet never full, we consume the poison.
Freedom from the substance, freedom from the porn, is what we yearn, yet ever embrace our shackles.
Numbing ecstasy, this misery. Bound by this high, damaged by this drink.
Party or prison, this prism through which we peer.
Addiction, this affliction, for which we ever yearn. We burn, burn out, and repeat the syndrome.
No end in sight, all is night, an endless cycle down.
Yes, dirt and sand is all this land, as we thirst for peace and joy. An empty well is where we dwell, no thirst is quenched below.
But as I gaze upon Your grave, where for me You bled, my shackles brake and to You take rest from all this hell. Slave to sin, never again; You my Master alone.
Yet why do I embrace this noose that holds me?
Lord, why do I run to a whore when I know all she has in store for me is death?
I see the light, the joy, and close my eyes, and turn away.
Why don’t I stay?
I run to the slaughter but You’ve prepared a feast. I slit my wrist, when for me You bled.
O’ the misery that is me, when I turn away.
Why don’t I stay?
You quench my thirst, all else is empty wells.
Why swallow up this gravel, when You have abounding streams?
O’ the misery that is me, apart from You.
Marriage like a Mirror
Marriage is like a mirror.[1] It’s pretty good at pointing out blemishes. It shows you things that you wouldn’t have seen otherwise. It shows you ugly things.
A mirror tells me my pants do not go with my shirt and a mirror tells my wife that she should smudge a little more stuff on her forehead. A mirror helps us by pointing out faults and blemishes. It does this without a word. Just by being there. Marriage—the covenant union of one man and one woman—has this same effect.
It often brings the scalpel to things that we were rather fond of. It tells me, “Paul, you may think you are not selfish, but look at this, I disagree.” It tells me, “You may think you are sympathetic and caring but, I beg to differ, look at this.” Marriage, like a mirror, tells me what I am. It is hard to see sometimes. But, like a mirror, it’s better for everybody, if I take a good and true look into it.
The mirror of marriage doesn’t promote vanity. It promotes healthy realism. It shows us when we need to “change our shirt.” Marriage is a mirror that God uses to remake us in His image.
This image is actually best reflected when spouses image the Triune God through their respective loving roles. Spouses, in contrast to the Trinity, show love through dealing with the failings of their spouse; through loving them in the midst of their failure, and gently pointing out their flaws. Yet, this is all done, or should be done, in love. For the building up and the betterment of the other.
May I, and may my spouse, truly desire not to just have a better, easier marriage, but may we desire to be more like Jesus who gave His life for us. May we desire to use the “mirror” to be transformed into the image of the Son.
Now may I resolve to honestly and humbly look into the mirror!
_______________________________________________
[1] The single person has a different mirror, their “mirror” is singleness. They must ask, for instance, what will truly satisfy. A spouse? Let me tell you, or let my wife tell you, a spouse makes a bad god.
Eschatology and Ethics
Eschatology (i.e. the teaching on end times) is not mainly about charts and predictions. It is about worship, longing, and hoping. It is about crying out, How long, O’ Lord?! (Rev. 6:10) and “Come, Lord Jesus!” (Rev. 22:20). Eschatology is about motivation. Motivation to not live for this world that will soon be dissolved but for one that is unfading (cf. 1 Pet. 1:4; 2 Pet. 3:10-12). When we hope in Christ’s return we have motivation to be pure as He is pure (1 Jn. 3:3). Motivation to labor diligently and constantly because our Master is expected at any time (e.g. Matt. 24:36ff; 25:13; 1 Thess. 5:1-2). We are to constantly remind ourselves of His nearing advent and of the feast we shall share with Him (cf. Matt. 26:29; Mk. 14:25; Lk. 22:16; 1 Cor.11:26; Rev. 19:9).[1]
I do think it is good to be well-informed when it comes to Christ’s return. We should understand the main arguments for the different views on eschatology. However, I don’t think we should be dogmatic about how and when exactly it will happen (cf. e.g. Mk. 13:32). But that it will happen and will be glorious. And that it should motivate us as we seek to live faithful lives here as exiles waiting for our blessed hope.
“It is a pity that the church’s teaching on eschatology, the last days, has been concerned mostly with arguments about the order of events. In Scripture itself, the primary thrust of eschatology is ethical,” says John Frame.[2] I agree with Frame, although that should not be a cop-out for studying the book of Revelations and all the other relevant passages.
Yet, if we are just concerned with revealing that which Jesus said would be unrevealed until He came back then we are in a fruitless pursuit (cf. Matt 24:36; Acts 1:7; 1 Thess. 4:13-5:3). However, I do think it is profitable to have general convictions regarding end times. But, in my opinion, a dogmatic conviction is simply unbiblical and unwise. Most of the Pharisees, for example, were so dogmatic they missed Jesus the Messiah. They were so stuck in their ingrained thoughts (and convictions) that they couldn’t see their long Promised Savior before their eyes. Instead, we should be like the Bereans (Acts 17:11). We should know and search the Scriptures; but we should not have every jot and tittle of eschatology dogmatically lined out to a t.
Seven ways the Main Thrust of Eschatology is Ethical[3]:
- We live in the “already but not yet.” That is, the Kingdom of God has been ushered in but it has not been decisively established yet. “So while we are risen with Christ, we must seek the things that are above (Col. 3:1-4). We have died to sin (v. 3), but we must ‘put to death’ the sins of this life (v. 5). So the Christian life is an attempt, motivated by God’s grace, to live according to the principles of the age to come.”[4]
- Peter reminds us that since the present world will be dissolved we should not then live for this world but the next. And thus have morals shaped by the next Kingdom and not this evil one (2 Peter 3:11; 1 Cor. 7:26, 29).
- We “purify ourselves as He is pure,” why? Because we eagerly await the return of Jesus (Phil. 3:20; 2 Peter 3:12; 1 Jn. 3:3). Thus, we see that eschatology is not about hanging up charts that map out when Jesus will return, we clearly cannot know that, but about being found ready when He does come (Matt. 24).
- We can be sure that since Christ resurrected from the grave and was the “firstfruits” that we also will be raised. Therefore,we are told, to be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the labor of the Lord, because our labor in the Lord is not in vain (1 Cor. 15:58)! When we remember that we too will be raised and receive glorified bodies and enjoy God forever we are motivated to labor for the Lord.
- “We look to the return of Christ as our deliverance from tribulation and thus a source of hope (Luke 21:28).”[5]
- We must always be ready to meet the Lord, always! This is a great prod to faithfulness ( 24:44; 1 Thess. 5:1-10; 1 Peter 1:7; 2 Peter 3:14).
- We also think of the reward that God will give in heaven and this also encourages us to labor for Him (see for example Matt. 5:12, 46; 6:1; Rom. 14:10; 1 Cor. 3:8-15; James 1:12; Rev. 11:18).
Take Away
1) We should study end times. We need to seek to accurately handle the Word of truth (I speak to myself!). Yet we should not dogmatically hold to our position on this subject.
2) We need to remember, that the end of the story, and the main point of the Revelations, is to show that God through Jesus the Christ is victorious! This truth encouraged John who was exiled on Patmos and all the churches that were being persecuted to whom the letter went. If we read the letter, especially in that context, we will respond, not so much with a certain view of how everything will happen, but by saying, “Come Lord Jesus, come”! And that is the more powerful takeaway from the book.
3) Thus, we need to understand that all talk of end times does, or should, have a very practical thrust.
Conclusion
A person can have charts on the wall, even fairly accurate ones, and yet not have Christ in their heart and exuding out of their heart. If our study of the second coming of Christ and the future Kingdom of God does not have a very practical thrust, I don’t care how much we think we understand eschatology, we don’t understand eschatology. May we meditate on eschatology, but may it change not merely our view of the end times, but our ethics!
_____________________________________________________
[1] “We are called to be a people of memory, who are shaped by a tradition that is millennia older than the last Billboard chart. And we are called also called to be a people of expectation, praying for and looking forward to a coming kingdom that will break in upon our present as a thief in the night” (James K. A. Smith, Desiring the Kingdom, 159).
[2] John Frame, The Doctrine of God, p. 277.
[3] These seven points are taken from John Frame.
[4] Ibid., 277.
[5] Ibid., 278.
in X 