Theology - Jeremiah's Vow

The Penetrating Sight of God

In 1 John 1:5-10 we are confronted with a rather alarming reality. John tells his readers that if they claim to be in the light there should be a distinct difference in them from the world. There are three characteristics in a person who declares a relationship with God.

First, if we have a genuine relationship with God we will walk in the light. The metaphor of light and dark in John’s writings point to a new knowledge about who God truly is. The implication is that when the darkness of our lives encounters the light of God’s being we are, possibly for the first time, confronted with what is truly wrong with us. And as a result we live according to the truth we have been exposed to.

Second, if we have a genuine relationship with God we will not live in self-deception. John articulates this by saying, “If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves.” When the light of God’s character and God’s words is shown on us we have two choices. We can deny what we see or we can accept what has been revealed. If we choose the former we begin living in denial and self-deception. If we choose this path, John makes it clear that we not only have made ourselves a victim of a lie, we cannot claim to have any truth within us.

Third, if we have a genuine relationship with we accept that our brokenness can only be healed by the Gospel. In verse 10 John takes the idea of sin one step further. Before, John was saying that if we deny sin at all we are deluding ourselves but, if we take it a step forward and assert that we have not sinned, in other words, if we say that there is no brokenness in us, we are making the testimony of God regarding our sinful natures out to be a farce. Our sin, our brokenness, is the clearest evidence that God’s efforts for redemption are essential for us to experience any healing whatsoever.

As my pastor was preaching through this passage this past Sunday he said something that, on the surface, sounds obvious. However, when we consider it for fully it sparked a deeper love for God and a greater appreciation for God’s grace. This is what he said.

“God is light. Therefore, God hides nothing and nothing is hidden from God.”

Until we acknowledge and accept the range and scope of God’s ability to see all things, the longer it will take for us to know that God is not surprised by our sin. There is nothing past, present, or future that God does not already know about you and me. There is nothing that escapes God’s perception or awareness.

God not only knows all things, he has seen all things. This means that if God, with this knowledge, still decided to send Jesus to earth on a mission of salvation, there is no reason for us to run from God when he calls. We may be ashamed of our sin. We may regret the choices we have made. We may find it hard to escape the weight of the consequences of what we have said and done. But none of these things are severe enough to separate us from the love of God.

God has seen it and he still loves us. The truth that John points to–that God is light–is both terrible and terrific. I cannot hide from God. And, he does not want me to hide from him. Nothing is beyond the penetrating sight of God.

King David said it best when he said,

⁷ Where can I go from your Spirit? Where can I flee from your presence? ⁸ If I go up to the heavens, you are there; if I make my bed in the depths, you are there. ⁹ If I rise on the wings of the dawn, if I settle on the far side of the sea, ¹⁰ even there your hand will guide me, your right hand will hold me fast. ¹¹ If I say, “Surely the darkness will hide me and the light become night around me,” ¹² even the darkness will not be dark to you; the night will shine like the day, for darkness is as light to you. (Psalm 139:7-12 NIV)

Stop running from God. There is no place to escape from him. Run to him and experience the fullness of joy he has promised to all who seek him. Begin today to see that he desires to be found.

The Best Antidote to Legalism

Legalism is the belief that the way to please God and secure access to heaven is by complying to a set of regulations. This does two things. First, legalism robs us of any peace and joy the Gospel offers to us. When we are governed by fear we flip faith on its head. We begin to put our trust in something that neither has the power, nor was it ever intended to keep us safe–namely, our own ability. The Gospel reminds us that we are unable and incapable of meeting every regulation that God has for holiness. When we try to live out the Gospel in this way, we kill ourselves a thousand times a day.

Second, legalism distorts the God the Bible describes, who extends grace to sinners. God becomes a tyrant rather than a father. God is capricious and not gracious. God becomes impatient, petulant, and vindictive when we fail to live up to the standards legalism imposes. None of these attribute describe God. And yet, this is how we feel when legalism is the guiding theological lens we see through.

Legalism over promises and never delivers. It fosters a combative mindset and a environment of one-upmanship that is unhealthy for the church and unbecoming of a follower of Jesus. Legalism is a poison withing the soul of a believer and there is only one cure. We have to have a sound and true understanding of what the Bible says. This is the only remedy. The best antidote to legalism is good theology.

This means that every Christian should become a better theologian. We already are theologians. The only difference between many of us is the time we spend getting our theology right.

The Father of Jesus Christ

My church will begin a study of the book of Colossians this weekend. We will be working through the book over the next several weeks (something I am looking forward to). Even though I have read the letter many times, we were all encouraged to read the letter again as a way of preparing for the messages and discussion during our LifeGroup meetings.

One of the benefits of reading a book of the bible several times in a short amount of time is the way different ideas, thoughts, and peculiarities seems to come to the forefront. One of these ideas is found in verse 3 of chapter 1. Paul is commending the church Colossae for their hospitality and kindness toward other saints. As he does so he makes this simple statement, identifying who he is giving thanks to. He writes, “We always thank God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ…”

While there are many things that we could discuss about this description, the one that came to mind this time around is the relational reality of God’s connection to Jesus. Paul describes God as the Father of Jesus. Is there something that we have missed in the kind of relationship that exists between God and Jesus. We have grown so accustomed to the speaking of Jesus’ divinity we forget that while he walked upon this earth he did not relate to Jesus upon this aspect of who he was.

Jesus was a man in the full meaning and implications of what that means. To dismiss this is to negate a critically important part of who Jesus is. Even though Jesus had and has an eternal relationship with the Father, Jesus lived for himself the kind of life we can experience with the Father. When we were adopted into the family of God we were given access and permission to call God our father as well.

God’s Power and the Gospel

The apostle Paul tells us that the Gospel is the power of God unto salvation (Romans 1:16). This idea has captured my imagination for a couple of reason. First, there is a direct link between the Gospel and salvation. While this may appear obvious on the surface, I get the impression that many people no longer see this link. The Gospel, the good news of Jesus’ life and ministry, is essential to redemption. Without the Gospel there can be no salvation. The church has lost some of its urgency regarding this reality. Continue reading “God’s Power and the Gospel”

I Felt the Waters Again

One of the great mysteries of the Christian faith is tied to the sacraments of the church. Depending on which church you attend there may be a variance in how many sacraments are observed and practiced. But, regardless of what church you attend two have remained central and essential to all–Communion and Baptism. I would like to talk about this second one today. Continue reading “I Felt the Waters Again”

Lent Day #37 | Redemption

As we draw closer to Easter morning we will take some time to explore what it means that God has redeemed us

We have interacted with the idea of redemption at various times during this series of reflections (here, here, here, and here). Today, as we draw closer to Easter morning we will take some time to explore what it means that God has redeemed us.

Redemption is a financial term. Many of us have used coupons before. We go to a store with the coupon and when we redeem it we get what it offers at the time of check-out. The reality of this transaction is included in our salvation. When Jesus came to earth, his mission was to redeem that which was lost. In what way was it lost? It was lost to sin and sinfulness. No man or woman who has ever lived can rise up to God. Our blood has been tainted by the sin of Adam and Eve. When they disobeyed God and decided to do their own thing, they damned their ancestors to a life of struggle, strife, and strain.

I want to correct a common misconception here. There are some who believe (and teach) that Jesus redeemed us from the devil. The idea being the enemy of God was holding us captive. This does not make any sense because he too is captive. The devil must still submit to the will of God, even though God is waiting to pronounce his final judgment! So, if we were not redeemed from the devil, who are we in debt too? We are in debt to ourselves. The reason we are stuck in our predicament is because we keep making withdrawals from the account and have been overdrawn for millennia. The debt of sin is the belief we can live independent of God. This however is not the case. If it were not for God we would have nothing. Paul, said it this way,

²⁴ “The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by man, ²⁵ nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all mankind life and breath and everything. ²⁶ And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place, ²⁷ that they should seek God, and perhaps feel their way toward him and find him. Yet he is actually not far from each one of us, ²⁸ for, ‘In him we live and move and have our being’.” (Acts 17:24-28a, ESV)

If it is true that “in Him we live,” then we need someone to redeem our debt and make a deposit into our account of unrighteousness. The only one who could do that was Jesus. When we came into this world, he lived the life we could not live; he died the death we deserved; was raised to life from the grave so we could stand before God forgiven–not perfect. We will never be perfect, but we are being perfected.

Redemption is what Jesus has done to remove the burden of our sin debt. He was submitted the coupon of his blood for the balance of sin in the world. The hymn writer was correct when they said

What can wash away my sin?
Nothing but the blood of Jesus;
What can make me whole again?
Nothing but the blood of Jesus.

Refrain

Oh! precious is the flow
That makes me white as snow;
No other fount I know,
Nothing but the blood of Jesus.

For my pardon, this I see,
Nothing but the blood of Jesus;
For my cleansing this my plea,
Nothing but the blood of Jesus.

Refrain

Nothing can for sin atone,
Nothing but the blood of Jesus;
Naught of good that I have done,
Nothing but the blood of Jesus.

Refrain

This is all my hope and peace,
Nothing but the blood of Jesus;
This is all my righteousness,
Nothing but the blood of Jesus.
(Source)

What is “The Overview Effect?”

sunrise-over-earth I came across this video and was struck by the startling struggle that those who do not have a faith orientation have in trying to describe realities of life that are sublime and spiritual. When faith is not the ground of those realities that are non-material and yet undeniable real our language betrays us. Take the time to watch this and listen to the wonder, awe, splendor and mystery those interviewed attempt to explain and quantify. Without a faith perspective we do not have the proper framework to express those yearnings and realizations that are not because of the object observed, but because of our awakened understanding of the larger story we are participating in. This was a remarkable video, both in its beauty, but also in its ignorance.

This is my take and I am sure that many of those in the video would disagree with my assessment. Let me know if and where I’m wrong. I look forward to your thoughts!

I would recommend watching it “full screen.”

Now THIS is How You Answer the Question!: N. T. Wright and the Church of England

Earlier this week I wrote about the “battle” within the Church of England regarding the ordination of woman as bishops. What sparked by comments, and concern, was the lack of genuine theological reflection and verbal conviction from those that desire for this to become the practice of the church.

I came across another example of this tendency toward giving in to the trends of the culture rather than forming opinions and views because that is where our understanding of Scripture is taking us. The Washington Post recorded the following comments

An official close to Maria Miller, minister for women and equalities, expressed concern about the move. “Whilst this is a matter for the church, it’s very disappointing,” the official said. “As we seek to help women fulfill their potential throughout society, this ruling would suggest the church is at the very least behind the times.” [Source]

I may be the only one, but this is not the way for the church to move forward by worrying if the world feels that we are behind the times. This is one of the reasons that I give the Roman Catholic Church credit. They are not willing to surrender their identity for the sake of making those outside the church happy.

Enter Bishop N. T. Wright. Continue reading “Now THIS is How You Answer the Question!: N. T. Wright and the Church of England”

The Church of England and her Fight for Peace

Whenever the church, regardless of theological or denominational flavor, surrenders it moral prerogative it loses valuable ground to speak prophetically to the world for which Christ died and the church is called to serve.

Yesterday was a historic day for the Church of England. The governing body of the church finally put to a vote the resolution to afford women the opportunity to serve the church as bishops. This particular issue has been a significant point of contention for the Church of England. The main issue is that there are those (labeled “conservatives”) who do not believe that this role of oversight and spiritual responsibility should ever be held by a woman. There are others (labeled progressives) who feel that this is an idea whose time has come. Women have been serving as priests in the Church of England for the last two decades. There have many discussions regarding this.

What was voted on yesterday was the compromise legislation that would have allowed those parishes who found themselves under the spiritual supervision of a female bishop to be accommodated and, in essence, transferred to the care of another bishop during the time that the female bishop served. This did not sit well with the conservative crowd. There were concerns about whether this would cause for unfair treatment of those parishes that did not submit to the leadership and authority of their bishop. The irony of this situation is that they compromise resolution actually brought the opposing sides together against the measure.

Now, I am not really interested in the politics of the debate. Nor am I going to comment on whether the church should or shouldn’t do this. What I take exception to are some of the reasons that were cited for why this decision should result in the approval of these female bishops.

I have seen various versions of this rationale. However, the following example is the most egregious example of what is wrong with making decision in the church that are not based on scriptural reflection and theological conviction.

Peter Broadbent, bishop of Willesden in London, has called for a “yes” vote so that the church does not “look completely stupid in the eyes of society.” [Source]

Excuse me!

This is a bishop of the church and the best reason he can provide is that the church would “look completely stupid in the eyes of society.” It does not matter what the context of this comment was, it represent that ongoing trend within many Christian circles to make decisions based on the greater motivations of the surrounding culture. The words that describes this is capitulation. Whenever the church, regardless of theological or denominational flavor, surrenders it moral prerogative it loses valuable ground to speak prophetically to the world for which Christ died and the church is called to serve.

The bishop of Willesden may hold to a conviction that women should be allowed to serve as bishop within the church. He may look forward to the day this is no longer an issue, but the stated reason was a poor choice of words, at best, or a total surrender of moral ground, at worst.

At least I found a voice from within the church that saw the problem with arguments for this measure that did not actually address the concerns of those that opposed it.

Tom Sutcliffe, an opera critic and member of the Synod for over 20 years, said he would be voting against the measure because it did not provide adequately for traditionalists.

“This is a very bad piece of legislation … I personally do want women bishops, but we have to make proper arrangements for those who don’t accept them on religious grounds,” he said. [Source]

Any time we fail to firmly and consistently ground our convictions we run the risk of being swayed by influences outside of the faith. This kind of thinking is what causes the church to look weak, anemic, impotent and dated. This is the not the way theological issues should be addressed. The Church of England has revealed the symptoms plague churches across the board. There can be cordial and sincere disagreement about a wide range of issues. However, these disagreements, I believe should be grounded in an individuals theological convictions.

Conviction should be the way forward. Not capitulation. The Church of England and the new archbishop of Canterbury have a long road ahead. I will be praying for them.

Church of England votes against ordaining women bishops (abc.net.au)
Church vote rejects women bishops (bbc.co.uk)
~~Church of England nears vote on female bishops (kansascity.com)~~
Church of England Refuses to Allow Female Bishops (nytimes.com)
Church of England won’t allow female bishops (cbsnews.com)

Thoughts on Interpreting Scripture

The process of reading, interpreting and ultimately understanding what the Bible says ought to be the greatest priority of the follower of Jesus.

I am reading through some material that has been sitting on my desk (and floor, for that matter) and interacting with it. I will be doing this more often over the next few weeks. This will give me a way of putting this information on the site and providing a way to search through a lot of material quickly.

I came across this article by R. C. Sproul, Sr., in Tabletalk Magazine. In it Dr. Sproul is looking at how do we interact and interpret the Bible. The following reflections and quotation page numbers are taken from the January 2011 magazine.

Two Principles to Govern Interpretation

1. The Analogy of Faith: This is the idea that scripture is its own interpreter. What this means on a practical level is that a through investigation of what the Bible has to say on a subject should be done before any exploration of other sources.

2. “Sensus literalis“: This does not mean that “every text in the Scriptures is given a “woodenly literal” interpretation, but rather that we must interpret the Bible in the sense in which it is written” (6). What this means is that we do not violate the laws of grammar or genre in order to arrive at an understanding of what the text says. Sproul makes this plainly clear.

“Though the Bible is not like any other book in that is carries with it the authority of divine inspiration, nevertheless, the inspiration of the Holy Spirit over a written text does not turn verbs into nouns or nouns into verbs. No special, secret, arcane, esoteric meaning is pourted into a text simply because it’s divinely inspiried. … No, the Bible is to be interpreted according to the ordinary rules of language.” (6-7)

At the heart of this principle is the idea that we start with what we know and understand and then trying to make sense of those areas that are not as clear. In order to treat the Bible as a cohesive text we have to maintain that sense as we engage it. To do otherwise is to violate the integrity of the message that the bible contains. Sproul provided this clarifying thought. “Though we affirm the basic clarity of the sacred Scripture, we do not at the same time say that all passage are equally clear” (7).

The process of reading, interpreting and ultimately understanding what the Bible says ought to be the greatest priority of the follower of Jesus. These two principles are helpful guides as you study.

Let me know if you agree with Dr. Sproul or not…

Related articles

Two Principles to Govern Interpretation