TANNER THETFORD . COM

Serving the Saints: A Primary Evidence of Salvation

9/30/2014

The Bible thoroughly speaks to an important reality when it comes to those who profess faith in the biblical God. This reality is that of false conversion. The basic idea is this: there are some people who may believe that they are Christians, are saved, and will go to heaven when they die, and yet they are entirely mistaken.

This doctrine is essential to a proper understanding of many biblical texts. Without this framework, entire blocks of Scripture are literally impossible to understand. However, this begs a crucial question for the introspective reader: how do I know that I am not one of them?

The Bible fortunately anticipates this critical question asked by its readers. The answer that it gives is that of biblical assurance. Assurance is an interesting topic to study throughout the Bible and the New Testament in particular. There are many answers that the Bible gives to fill out this concept of assurance. In fact, the entire letter of 1 John is almost singularly devoted to this doctrine. However, there is a particular aspect or emphasis to assurance that has been simply hammering me in my recent studies. It is found in essence in several pieces, but is distilled in the book of Hebrews:

Hebrews 6:9–10 (ESV) — 9 Though we speak in this way, yet in your case, beloved, we feel sure of better things—things that belong to salvation. 10 For God is not unjust so as to overlook your work and the love that you have shown for his name in serving the saints, as you still do.

Here in context the author of Hebrews has provided his readers with a harsh warning against apostasy. However, he follows that grave warning with the encouragement I have quoted in verses 9-10. Despite his warning, he states that he is convinced that those who he refers to as "beloved" are genuinely saved. He then provides in verse 10 the evidence or assurance of salvation that I want to focus on. This evidence of salvation is the work and love they have shown and continue to show in serving the saints.

Have you ever heard somebody say something to the effect of "I like Jesus, but I just don't like the church." There is a sense in which we can sympathize with their feelings. Oftentimes we recognize that the people that make up the visible church are imperfect and frankly, hypocritical. However, the assurance of salvation that is provided here strikes at the very heart of such thinking. It is precisely because of their devotion to the people of God, the church, that the Christians reading this letter can know that they have salvation.

Getting the order is important here. It is not that serving in God's church is the work that you must do in order to earn your passage into heaven. Rather, salvation comes first and the service and love that flows out of that salvation demonstrates that you have indeed been saved. It follows then that while not everybody who serves in the church and loves the brethren is saved, everyone who is saved will serve in the church and love the brethren.

Again, I must qualify what I am saying at this point. Does everyone who will ever believe have to sign up for ministry opportunities at their church? Does one's lack of participation in church activities indicate that they are damned? Obviously neither of these is unequivocally the case. Membership in God's kingdom is not established by outward actions, but a changed heart. However, we must take seriously the biblical assertion that one way that salvation manifests itself in God's people is through their love for the other people of God. The Bible knows nothing of "lone wolf" Christians. Neither is the concept of those who have a personal relationship with God, but don't spend any time with God's people a plausible one. When someone is saved by the Spirit of God they are adopted into the family of God. Those who are truly adopted into God's family, love God's family and want to spend time with them. Sure the institution of the church may be imperfect at times, but if one would be united to Christ, he must be united to and serve Christ's body as well.

The entire book of first John speaks to this topic as well. John tells us that one of the primary evidences that we have been saved comes from the fact that we love the brethren. In fact, love for the brethren is a constant theme throughout much of the epistle's early chapters:

1 John 2:9–10 (ESV) — 9 Whoever says he is in the light and hates his brother is still in darkness. 10 Whoever loves his brother abides in the light, and in him there is no cause for stumbling.

1 John 3:14–16 (ESV) — 14 We know that we have passed out of death into life, because we love the brothers. Whoever does not love abides in death. 15 Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him. 16 By this we know love, that he laid down his life for us, and we ought to lay down our lives for the brothers.

I want to leave you with a final passage that really hit home with me. The parable of the sheep and the goats. Look at the primary means that Jesus' uses to determine who is a sheep and who is a goat. Remember again that these means are not how salvation is determined, rather they are one of the crucial indicators that someone has indeed been saved by God.

Matthew 25:31–46 (ESV) — 31 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 And he will place the sheep on his right, but the goats on the left. 34 Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, 36 I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’ 37 Then the righteous will answer him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? 38 And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? 39 And when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?’ 40 And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.’ 41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.’ 44 Then they also will answer, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to you?’ 45 Then he will answer them, saying, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.’ 46 And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

May the Spirit of God cause us to search our hearts and lives to discover whether or not we truly bear this essential fruit.

-tanner

0 Comments

Devotional Thoughts: Spurgeon on Salvation before Service

9/28/2014

1 Comment

April 19th, 1885 Charles Spurgeon preached a sermon on the following passage:

Matthew 8:14–15 (ESV) — 14 And when Jesus entered Peter’s house, he saw his mother-in-law lying sick with a fever. 15 He touched her hand, and the fever left her, and she rose and began to serve him.

This passage has always held some interest for me. In particular, I have often thought of the text in a sort of wordly fashion. What I mean is that Jesus and his disciples have had a long day, and are likely tired and desperately in need of some rest. "Let us go to Peter's house," they might say, "his mother always takes good care of us." When they arrive however, she is incapacitated and sick with a fever. "This will not do," I imagined Jesus saying, "I will heal her so that she may minister to us." You see, it's the immediacy of her service that struck me. Why is she not given a little bit of time to relax? After all, she has just come out of a fever.

Spurgeon helped me to see through my flawed perspective on the text and recognize the deeper spiritual truths that are present there. While time prevents us from covering every point that Spurgeon did in his sermon, I would like to bring to your attention something of what is expressed by this small tangent in the text.

In typical Spurgeon fashion, he begins early in the sermon bringing out the spiritual consequences of the passage. His effort is to make the text relevant to his audience and force them to see that there are truths here for them to learn as well. He starts this process by comparing the fever of Peter's mother to the fever that dwells in each and every one of us: sin.

What would the fever represent? Those who are in a fever represent spiritually those who are on fire with sin. . . .

Those who have a fever in their souls are hot after sin, dried up with ill desires, inflamed with evil lusts. What unhealthy energy many even show in the indulgence of their passions, or in the pursuit of their ambitions: they are so inflamed with their desires that their life is consumed. . . .

These fevered people are frequently very restless. It is one effect of the fever that the man cannot lie long together either on this side or on the other, but turns to and fro. Even his sleep is broken; neither by day nor by night can he find rest. He is dried up, and feels as weak as if he were brought into the dust of death and utterly dissolved. . . .

One symptom of a fever is that a man loses appetite for that which would be good for him. Some of our unconverted friends have no taste for the gospel; we cannot easily induce them to come to hear it. . . .

On the other hand, a fevered patient often feels a great thirst, which he cannot by any means allay. He longs to drink and drink again, and with all his drinking the heat is not abated. Sometimes the sick man has an appetite for what he must not taste, he craves after the most injurious and even unnatural things . . .

But the worst point in the case of the sinner is this, that this fever of his will prove fatal. This son, daughter, husband, or wife of yours will perish through the fever of sin, if it be not cured.1

At this point some may question Spurgeon's dealing with the text. Does the fever of Peter's mother truly represent sin? If not, is Spurgeon not taking liberties with the text? This is a fair question. However, the scriptures often describe the malady of sin as a sickness or disease. While that may not be be the primary point of the fever here, it is fair to make at least a reference or comparison. Truly, all sickness and disease in our world point us to the ultimate sickness and disease of sin. In the new heavens and new earth where sin has been abolished forever, sickness and disease will exist no more. Moreover, however Spurgeon's illustration is actually going to serve to bring more clarity to the reaction of Peter's mother, thus shedding more light upon the text at hand.

Spurgeon goes on to describe several points based upon this comparison. I want to focus upon two of them. First, he describes the healing of the fever as the equivalent of a believer being healed by Jesus of his sin. What is the response or the reaction of the one cured of his fatal fever?

Thirdly, it is plainly taught in the text that STRENGTH TO MINISTER COMES WITH HEALING. “Immediately she arose and ministered to them.” Fever causes extreme weakness, and when it leaves the patient, he is for a considerable time greatly debilitated. The cures of nature are slow; but when Jesus cures, he does it at once. Though he uses only a touch and a word, yet he cures so perfectly that no weakness remains. The woman did not lie in bed a week or two, and feed upon nourishing diet, and so recover her strength; but there and then she arose from her bed, girt her garments about her, and went about the duties of the household. . . .

The moment the Lord Jesus Christ saves a soul he gives that soul strength for its appointed service. . . .

I want to call your attention to this, that her service was immediate service, rendered on the spot, without delay. Some of you have been converted during our late special services; let me bid you serve the Lord at once, even as the Lord has served you. “What, get to work directly?” Yes, immediately; for there is something very beautiful about that which is done by new converts. Oh, the beauty of that first look of love! Oh, the sweetness of those first notes of praise! Oh, the power of those first sentences of testimony! . . .

I would not have a converted person wait a week before trying to do something for Jesus. Run as soon as you find your feet.2

Peter's mother did not wait to minister to Jesus and the disciples because she did not need to! When Jesus heals, he does so completely and fully. She was ready and able to serve them at once. Similarly, when we are converted to Christ, we are made ready and able to serve him and his church at once. Now, prudence must be taken in the case of those in leadership positions. Paul rightfully says that elders should not be new converts. However, service need not always be preaching, teaching, or leading. There are many tasks available to those who are newly converted that they are able to accomplish. How often I have heard of those newly converted to Christ who began handing out gospel tracts or attending bible studies or volunteering for the homeless ministries!

Does this not betray an ulterior motive of the part of the church however? She just wants people to be saved so that she can press their talents and gifts into their service? It may perhaps, except for what Spurgeon makes clear in his final point:

THE DESIRE TO MINISTER ALWAYS ARISES OUT OF HEALING. Here was a woman, a poor woman, an old woman, a widow woman, one who had just been sick, and she desires at once to minister to Christ, and she can do it, and she does do it. How think you, was she moved to this? Was not it that strength naturally suggests activity as soon as ever you get it? . . .

And then the gratitude for this strength impels you to activity. How can a man be still when Christ has spoken for him and delivered him? . . . Can you ever be silent for Christ now that the Lord Christ has redeemed you from the curse of the law and the penalty of sin? I tell you, if you can be quiet and do nothing for Christ, I am afraid you have never tasted of his love and grace. . . .

Once more, I think I may say that those who are healed by Christ are sure to do something for him of the right sort, because their former habitudes will assist them. I do not mean by this that sinful activity can ever help us into holy activity, but I do mean this; that we can turn our old habits to account for Jesus. I believe that Peter’s wife’s mother was a particularly nice old lady. There is rather a prejudice against a wife’s mother, and if Peter found it the proper thing to have her living in the house, I am sure she was a specially good woman. I have a picture of her in my mind’s eye,—a dear old soul, always busy and happy. . . .

As for you, young men who have been so restless, so vigorous, so dashing in sin, it seems to me that this habitual energy ought to be placed under consecration to Christ. A horse that has no mettle in it is easily managed; still, a horse with a little mettle, though he may kick, and plunge, and do a great deal of mischief, is all the better horse when he is broken in. If he be under proper management, if he answers to the bit, you like the mettle. So it is with a man when he is converted. If he had mettle in him that led him to kick and plunge when he served the devil, if he did so much mischief and damage against the kingdom of Christ, he is the very man to pull well in Jesus Christ’s chariot.3

You see, when Peter's mother was healed of her fever, she wanted to minister to Christ and his disciples. She was not pressed into a service she was unwilling or unfit to participate in. Instead her natural giftings as given to her by God were used in a sanctified and holy way.

The same goes for all who are converted into the kingdom of God. We are not pressed into a service for which we are unwilling or not well equipped. Instead we are called to serve in the capacity that God has created us for. Instead we are able to minister by use of our particular gifts and for our particular calling.

I also love the final point that he makes about the most stubborn of people. It is often these who are the most zealous in their opposition to Christ that upon conversion are most useful to God's kingdom. Look at the apostle Paul who persecuted and attacked Christ's church before he was saved. How great was the impact that he made for God's kingdom once he finally submitted to Christ! Let us pray boldly for those in our lives that we see enslaved by the fever of sin. Perhaps God will grant them repentance, and they will be used mightily for his glory.

Let us together thank God that he healed us, and resolve to serve him for our pleasure and the good of his kingdom.

-tanner

1 C. H. Spurgeon, The Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit Sermons, vol. 31 (London: Passmore & Alabaster, 1885), 219-221.
2 Ibid, 225.
3 Ibid, 226-228.

1 Comment

Update: A Busy Month

9/22/2014

0 Comments

Hey guys. Just wanted to give a quick update to where I have been this month. I've already preached twice this month. Once at the Southwest Bible Conference two weeks ago, and just yesterday for Sunday Worship. Additionally, I have resumed teaching my Bible Study Lessons on Thursdays on the topic of Genesis thru Joshua. Check out the Sermon and Bible Study pages for a chance to listen to some of these. Also, look out for weekly updates on the Bible Studies page.

I will make an effort to return to posting more articles here fairly soon. Thanks for your patience!

-tanner

0 Comments

Theology: Who is Junia, and Why Should You Care?

9/7/2014

0 Comments

I ran across an interesting blog last week called "The Junia Project." It is a blog that's main purpose seems to be promoting the egalitarian position when it comes the roles of men and women in the church. This is an interesting and important topic of discussion that is very prominent in our day and age. For what it's worth, there are primarily two stances when it comes to the roles of men and women in the churches, the egalitarian position and the complementarian position. The egalitarian position is summarized well on the About page of The Junia Project's website. I have reproduced it below:

The Junia Project is a community of women and men advocating for the inclusion of women at all levels of leadership in the Christian church and for mutuality in marriage. We believe that when interpreted correctly, the Bible teaches that both men and women are called to serve at all levels of the Church, and that leadership should be based primarily on gifting and not on gender.1

The complementarian position (sometimes called the hierarchical position) essentially states that while men and women are both equal as to their essence and nature in the eyes of God, their roles and functions differ, especially in the area of church leadership. The primary difference usually lies in whether or not women are qualified to serve in pastoral positions in the church. Egalitarians say that it should be based upon the individual's giftings, while complementarians say that women are precluded from such positions from the outset.

This debate is extremely relevant to us today. I want to spend several posts looking into the stances and positions of each group, and examining the major biblical texts for each group. Today I want to focus on one simple verse.

As I was examining the articles and pages of "The Junia Project" I noticed that one of the tabs titled Who Was Junia? This caught my interest as I have never heard of Junia before.

The Junia Project is named for Junia, a woman apostle in the early church (see Romans 16:7). Her ministry in partnership with Andronicus and Paul reminds us that God’s intention is for men and women to partner together as equals in the home, the church, and the community.2

This intrigued me, especially considering how much I enjoy the book of Romans. It seems to me that if there were indeed a woman apostle, that I would have remembered her, and that it would be a major point in favor of the egalitarian understanding of women's roles in the church. I quickly turned to Romans 16:7 and found the following:

Greet Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen and my fellow prisoners. They are well known to the apostles, and they were in Christ before me. Ro 16:7-ESV.

Imagine my shock to find that the verse in question doesn't even call Junia an apostle. This must be a translational issue, I thought. Let's try the NIV instead:

Greet Andronicus and Junia, my fellow Jews who have been in prison with me. They are outstanding among the apostles, and they were in Christ before I was. Ro 16:7-NIV.

You can see that the translation makes all of the difference. Are Junia and Andronicus to be included among the group labelled as "apostles?" or are they just well known to the apostles? The answer is going to lie in a syntactical study of the underlying greek phrase. Again, the major issue is whether or not the pronoun referencing Junia and Andronicus is to be included in the referent noun "apostles," that lies within the prepositional phrase.

At this point I will note one other argument that often comes up concerning this text. Some have argued that in the greek, the name Junia is masculine and should be rendered as a male's name. I don't find the underlying arguments at all compelling and agree that Junia here is female. As such, I will not deal with those issues here at this time.

On to the syntactical study of the greek phrase. Here is the phrase in greek:

οἵτινές εἰσιν ἐπίσημοι ἐν τοῖς ἀποστόλοις -NA28

Since I am assuming that the vast majority of my readership cannot read greek, I will explain real quickly what each of the words refers to. οἵτινές is the pronoun referring us back to Junia and Andronicus, translated as "they" in the ESV and NIV above. εἰσιν is the "to be" verb translated as "are" in both the ESV and NIV. ἐπίσημοι is the primary verb in question, translated as "well known to" and "outstanding among" in the translations above. Finally, ἐν τοῖς ἀποστόλοις is the prepositional phrase "to the apostles" OR "among the apostles" above.

A simple word study cannot give us a definitive answer. Instead we must look at the relationship that the words and phrases have to one another. I began with a very open search looking for the same construction as used above anywhere I could find in the NT. I did not specify any verbs, but I did specify our preposition "ἐν." The results were dismal, not a good sign given the fact that my search was so open. I found only 2 other verses of interest, both written by John.

There was much grumbling among the crowds concerning Him Jn 7:12-NASB.

which is true in Him and in you 1 Jn 2:8–9-NASB.

The results did indeed point to the fact that the pronoun in question is not always included in the referent prepositional phrase. In John 7, Jesus is the "Him" in question, while the crowds are distinguished from him. Jesus is not a member of the crowds in a grammatical sense here. Similarly in 1 John, Him (Christ) and "you" are distinguished from one another and not included.

However, these cases are not similar enough to our text in question. We need to expand our search to more literature so that we can narrow our criteria and get more similar results. There are primarily three things that our text has that we need to match:

1. The verb ἐπίσημος
2. The preposition ἐν
3. The noun being referred to in the prepositional phrase should be in the dative case

Fortunately I found a journal article that helped to broaden my search. They noted many important texts texts that share this construction. The pseudepigraphal writing "Psalms of Solomon" in chapter 2 and verse 6 for example reads as follows:

ἐπισήμῳ ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν3

This text is pretty clear in its intended meaning: "they were a spectacle among the gentiles." The article notes:

Semantically, what is significant is that (a) the first group is not a part of the second—that is, the Jewish captives were not gentiles; and (b) what was ‘among’ the gentiles was the Jews’ notoriety. This is precisely how we are suggesting that Rom 16:7 should be taken. That the parallels discovered conform to our working hypothesis at least gives warrant to seeing Andronicus’ and Junia’s fame as that which was among the apostles.4

The article goes on to note many more parallels in construction, several of which are in literature I am unfamiliar with, I just want to highlight a few more:

In TAM 2.905.1 west wall. coll. 2.5.18 we read the description of a man who is “not only foremost in his own country, but also well known to the outside population” . . .

. . . Here the person who is ἐπίσημος is called such only in relation to outsiders (πρῶτος is used in relation to his own countrymen). It is not insignificant that ἐν plus the dative personal noun is used: the man is well known to a group of which he is not a member. Similar idioms are found in Asia Minor TAM 2.1-3.838; TAM 2.1-3. 905 west wall. coll. 3.12; and Fd Xanth 7.76.1.1.1.1.4. In each instance the group that the individual is well known to but is not a part of is mentioned with ἐν plus the dative. Although these data are not plentiful, they are excellent parallels and point in but one direction: ἐπίσημος followed by ἐν plus personal datives does not connote membership within the group, but simply that one is known by the group. Thus, the inscriptions, like biblical and patristic Greek, supply a uniform picture of ἐπίσημος with personal nouns: when followed by ἐν, the well-known individual is outside the group.5

5 Journal for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood 6, no. 2 (2001): 8.

One more source of texts is cited by the article, which is extremely relevant to this discussion:

There are several examples with personal nouns in hellenistic literature. Lucianus speaks of Harmonides the pipe-player craving fame for his musical abilities to the extent that he wants “glory before the crowds, fame among the masses” (ἡ δόξα ἡ παρὰ τῶν πολλῶν καὶ τὸ ἐπίσημον εἶναι ἐν πλήθεσι). He clearly sees himself as set apart from οἱ πολλοί! Elsewhere he uses the genitive to indicate an inclusive idea: “Show me the men of old, and particularly the famous ones among them” 6

That said, please note the fairness of the authors as the note another text in this same group of hellenistic writings:

Lucianus thus shows the same patterns that we saw earlier, viz., an exclusive notion with ἐν plus the dative and an inclusive notion with a genitive modifier. But he is not consistent in this. On at least one occasion his words unmistakably have an inclusive force for ἐν plus the dative. In his work On Salaried Posts in Great Houses, he offers advice to servants: “… you must raise your thirsty voice like a stranded frog, taking pains to be conspicuous among the claque and to lead the chorus” . . .

. . . This is the first parallel to Rom 16:7 we have seen that could offer real comfort to inclusivists. It is unmistakable, it is personal, and it is rare.7

The evidence is extremely clear. When the three criteria that we noted above are taken into consideration, the group is nearly always excluded and distinguished from the noun in the preposition. Typically, when the author prefers to include the group within the noun, they use the genitive case rather than the dative case. While there are exceptions, they are indeed "rare."

Combining the force of the syntactical evidence with the support of other biblical data and New Testament passages (which we will deal with in time), I believe there is no reason to assume that Junia or Adronicus were apostles. The ESV translation at this point is best. Now I realize that what we have discussed is not really "fun." I realize that having to go into this kind of depth in a study may seem ridiculous to some. I also realize that our conclusions are not popular or even progressive. However, even if you disagree, please note that our method of argumentation has sought to understand and take the text as it presents itself. This is not "my scholars vs your scholars" type of appeals to authority. That is how secularists and humanists argue. Arguments that seek to cloud the air with dust and mist are typical of those who are large on rhetoric and small on reasoned logic. Such arguments are NOT becoming of Christians.

One thing that I love about submitting to God's Word in every area of life is that I don't have to fear seeking out the truth. So many people do, even if they are not explicit about it. They have a gut reaction or impulse to some sort of stance or perspective, and do not want to seek out the facts on the subject for fear that they would be forced to alter their stance. People that hold to things that are actually true do this as well, but it is such a shame because they are not able to furnish good reasons for what they believe. I do not have to come to the Bible with a particular agenda (as the liberal theologians do I might add). Rather, I can approach God's Word as a humble and obedient servant and ask God to point me in the direction that he says, whether that accords with what I want or not. Such is the picture of the true heart of Christian faith.

We should not take this text as some indication that even in the early church there were women apostles in the authoritative and pastoral sense. One may seek to argue that point, but arguing it from Rom 16:7 is wrong. That said, we do clearly see here that women are included and respected by Paul in the labors of ministry and the advancement of God's Kingdom on earth. Praise God that he has called men and women both to his Son, and given clear instructions and guidance in how we are to serve Him!

-tanner

1 The Junia Project. "About the Junia Project." juniaproject.com.http://juniaproject.com/about-2/ (accessed September 6, 2014).
2 Ibid, http://juniaproject.com/who-was-junia/.
3 Ken Penner and Michael S. Heiser, “Old Testament Greek Pseudepigrapha with Morphology” (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2008), Ps Sol 2:6.
4 Burer, Michael H. and Wallace, Daniel B. "Was Junia Really an Apostle? A Reexamination of Romans 16:7" Journal for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood 6, no. 1 (2001): 7.
5 Ibid, 8.
6 Ibid.
7 Ibid.

0 Comments

Politics: What Abortion is Really About

9/6/2014

0 Comments

Abortion is a hot-button topic in American politics. I will say however, that it seems to have taken a bit of a back seat during our day to more prominent issues. For the liberal left, abortion is a decided issue. Anyone who disagrees hates freedom and ought to be shouted down. This is the same direction the debate over homosexuality is going as well. You can marginalize those who disagree with you by coolly asserting that their opinions are not even worth responding to. In the mind of the typical American, it seems that this tactic has worked. for those who don't think often about these issues, it seems that the most discussed stances are those that people generally side with. It kind of reminds me of how advertising works.
However, just because the legality of something has been determined does not mean that the morality of said issue is decided. That debate continues on regardless of how one may respond to the subject. This is something that we must continue to keep in mind in the political battle over homosexuality as well.

It isn't often that the true issues at hand are debated over an issue. Typically what happens is that a particular stance on an issue is taken by somebody because they can see how the other stance infringes fundamentally on one of their presuppositions. This works both ways as well. What happens typically is somebody fundamentally "feels" that abortion is right or wrong. Then they try to formulate arguments supporting their feelings. This blinds people from discussing the real issues that are fundamental to the debate and discussion. They are too committed to their presuppositions to examine them critically or to try and step into somebody else's worldview to try and understand them.

It is rare to hear straight from the pro-abortion side why they so strongly support their stance. However, I was directed to an article off of facebook where somebody in great support of abortion spelled out clearly what they think the issue is about. The article spoke of actress Sarah Paulson who was challenged by somebody in a "Taco and Beer" challenge. This is a spin-off of the wildly popular ALS Ice Bucket challenge in which the challenge is in support of abortion. What Sarah Paulson said is incredibly revealing:

“It’s about autonomy, it’s about reproductive freedom and a woman’s right to choose,”1

The first sin in the garden of Eden was autonomy. Satan tricked us into thinking that rather than submitting to God in all areas of our lives, instead we could become God. Intellectual and moral autonomy is precisely what Jesus calls us to surrender in order to die to ourselves and become his disciples. At it's core, Paulson's statement decalres that standing up for abortion is about standing up for man's most fundamental characteristic as a fallen creature. Essentially Paulson declares that the issue is about sin.

Notice also the implication of her choice term "reproductive freedom." This is ahint that the real matter is one of sexual freedom and autonomy. You see from a naturalistic or humanistic worldview sex is something that we are allowed to engage in with whomever we want whenever we want (as long as it's consensual, though even that standard is degrading). Nobody has the right to tell us what we are going to do with our bodies. Additionally, babies are simply an unfortunate result of the animalistic and sensual act that is sex. We have rationalized that because they are not born yet, they are ours for the killing.

Truly, the only grounds for any absolute standards in morality and ethics are derived from a moral Creator. Once we have abandoned many of those presuppositions, we fail to find any reasons for some of the standards that previous generations held to. For sinful man, abortion is primarily about asserting our own autonomy in this world - apart from God and his objective standard. Abortion is about rebelling against God's requirements in the area of human sexuality and doing what we see fit with our bodies. Beloved, see abortion for the slap in the face of God that it is, and do not fall prey to a compromised position of allying with the enemy.

-tanner

1 http://www.buzzfeed.com/skarlan/watch-sarah-paulson-support-reproductive-rights-while-eating#4g69frg

0 Comments

Christian Living: What is Cultural Relevance?

9/3/2014

0 Comments

Something that many churches aim to pursue these days is cultural relevance. I believe this is a good thing. Our faith and our religion ought to be relevant to the culture. A religion that is no longer relevant is reduced to traditionalism, and history shows us that such a reduction leads to the death of a movement. However, what exactly it means to be culturally relevant is another matter that is discussed very little. Oftentimes I think those who disagree emphatically over this issue do not take the time to understand each other properly. Defining one's terms is essential to beneficial and understandable discussion.

What then does it mean to be culturally relevant? The primary drive of culturally relevant teaching is to be able to relate material and content in one's cultural setting. This has to do primarily with an issue of context. Context is something that is very important to Christians, especially in their reading of the Scriptures. However, the context we are speaking of when we discuss cultural relevance is one's societal context. Societal context can mean something as basic as using language that your hearers can understand, to respecting traditions and customs, all the way to complex ideas of morality and perceived intentions. Being culturally relevant means communicating in a meaningful way to your hearers and respecting the customs that are in place in your context.

In this understanding or sense of the term, the Bible explicitly promotes being culturally relevant. Paul discusses communication and others understanding what you are saying in 1 Corinthians 14 when he talks about the gift of tongues. People being able to understand what is being communicated is primary for Paul. He also discusses not putting unnecessary stumbling blocks before hearers of the gospel in the same book. Additionally, he describes becoming "all things to all men" in 1 Corinthians 9, which obviously has relevance for respecting societal customs.

However, some take the issue of cultural relevance too far. Some say that when cultural morality and the Bible meet, it is the Bible that must give way - in the name of cultural relevance. This is simply the seed of postmodernism in the thinking of many professing believers. It is clear that in the same letter that Paul so promoted cultural relevance, he also condemned rampant immorality. In chapter 5 he promotes excommunication for those in the church committing adultery. In chapter 6 he lists off many vices and practices that are not appropriate at all for people to engage in and asserts that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.

What then is the proper balance for us when it comes to being culturally relevant? The answer is really quite simple for us. There are certain areas that are described in the Bible as non-essentials. Paul speaks to the idea of eating food from the marketplace that had been sacrificed to idols. He says that you should not worry about such things because idols are not real and the food can be received with thanksgiving. At the same time however, Paul declares emphatically that he would not partake if it placed an unnecessary stumbling block in front of others. The key is that where the Bible says we should draw the line, like issues of morality and the gospel, then we do. Where the Bible leaves things open, we do as well, but always with an attitude of love.

However, this topic drives at something much deeper, something that betrays the overwhelming relevance of the Christian worldview. A culturally relevant message is one that means something and makes a difference for the society at which it is directed. The Bible's central theme and message is emphatically relevant because it deals with the most fundamental problems with mankind. You want to know a religion that fails the relevance test? Look at Islam. Far from being focused upon overarching truth that addresses man's fundamental issues and problems regardless of his age or society, Islam is obsessed with imposing 6th and 7th century Middle Eastern culture on a 21st century world. Sure, the Bible has descriptions of similar laws and practices for it's society, but such practices are overtly NOT normative for all time. Rather, Jesus himself makes a sharp distinction between those biblical issues that are traditionally and culturally driven, and those issues that are from God himself. The Qur'an's insistence on the establishment of Sharia Law even centuries later betrays the fact that the book is not divine. It does not speak to all men for all time the way that only God can speak.

Instead, the Bible is primarily wrapped up with one theme: how can man be right with God? Every book and chapter in some way seeks to drive at this problem. The answer is foreshadowed, hinted at, and expressly declared to be Jesus Christ. Christianity is overwhelmingly relevant because men are still sinners that need a Savior. We do not have to tone down our message or sugar-coat the truth. In fact we ought NOT to do so! To engage in such behavior perverts the message and actually takes the power from it. Nothing could be more relevant for our society than the simple preaching of the gospel, and the imposition of the Christian worldview into all areas of life. We need to get back to the Bible. Then we will find that we are more relevant to our culture than we ever could have imagined ourselves to be in our own wisdom and planning.

-tanner

0 Comments

Christian Living: I Feel Like God's Calling Dudes, They Just Want to Play Call of Duty

8/31/2014

0 Comments

I love Christian Rap. Every song is like a sermon with a beat. The lyrics and message are strong and they don't compromise. It seems to me that in many genres of music, the Christians are about 10 years behind the culture. Christian rap is ahead of the game in my opinion. Secular rap feels like it is all about the beat and the lyrics don't matter at all. Christian rap has substance and content in addition to good beats.

I have really been struck by Andy Mineo's new EP. There are definitely a few really good songs on it. It was also nice to see a fun song or two. Andy's personality really shows through when he does that. My favorite song on the album however is called "Death of Me."

In "Death of Me" Andy relates his struggles as a traveling artist on tour. "Yea, it must be a struggle making all that money playing your music" one might think. That's the beauty of Christ in the lives of His people. We recognize when we are going astray spiritually and are not close to God. The Bible describes unbelievers as completely numb to those feelings of the Spirit. We however have tasted of God and know that he is the one we need.

The second set of verses really hit home with me. Andy talks about the challenges of making time to commune with God and enjoy his presence. When I get busy, I know one of the first things to go is my prayer life. It's so easy to be focused on other things and forget to make time to be with God. The problem is that we begin to slip far away and not even know it. Next thing you know we forgot what communing with our Savior is like and we are so distracted by other things that we don't even think to come to him.

One line that really struck me falls towards the end of the second set of verses. "I feel like God's calling dudes, they just want to play Call of Duty." This line really hit me because there have been times in my life when I spent a lot of my free time gaming. You see I am a very passionate person. Whenever I set my heart to do something or pursue something, I want to be the best there is at it. The sad thing is that I have sometimes set that passion on the most trivial fleeting things like video games. Playing all of the time just trying to get better and better. All for what? To what end? You know I never stopped to think about it. I just thought that I liked the game and I wanted to get good at it. In the end however, it was a trap. A trick and a lie to waste the time, energy, and passion that God gave me.

However, the application of this truth applies to more people than just gamers. I certainly do think many great minds and passionate hearts during our day have been caught up in this industry. There are many shiny baubles and distractions for human beings, though. How many things there are in the world to pursue! We have so many options to spend our time and energies on in our day. How many are spurning God's call on their lives so that they can waste their time doing things that don't matter at all?

I don't mean to criticize those who may be legitimately called to secular positions. Praise God for people who will work as unto the Lord in any industry that that glorifies God and promotes human flourishing. However, I know that I have at many times in my life put the calling that I knew was mine on the back burner because I wanted to spend more time doing what I wanted to do. Already I wish I had those years back. I can only imagine my sorrow and regret if I had wasted my entire life pursuing vanity.

-tanner

0 Comments

Christian Living: Should Christians "Party" and/or Spend Time with Those Who Do?

8/30/2014

0 Comments

College in America is more and more stereotyped as a time of partying and fun. School is less about studies and more about getting to know people and drinking heavily on the weekends. While this experience may not be typical for many American college students, I think certainly some elements of the lifestyle are present for most.

I confess that my college experience was nothing like this. I can recall attending one Halloween party where that type of atmosphere was present. Other than that, I don't believe I ever attended this type of function. It's not that I actively avoided these types of people. It simply was a crowd that I didn't find myself running in.

The party I attended I did so before I became a Christian. When I was saved, the church and atmosphere in the area confronted me with a major question: Can Christians legitimately be in and among and spend time with these types of people and run in these types of crowds?

It is a question that deserves some attention. Depending upon your church background and stance the answer may seem immediately apparent. The ironic thing is the "obvious" answer among Christians is different. For some the answer is essentially: "Of course a Christian should not be actively in the company of such people." Yet others would affirm something along the lines of: "Jesus spent time with sinners. How are we supposed to reach the lost if we don't meet them where they are?" Which answer is correct for the faithful believer? Is it somewhere in the middle?

First, let me address the issue of a Christian partaking in this type of behavior. Is it appropriate for a Christian to drink heavily with and among the company of others? Paul speaks to this issue directly and poignantly in Ephesians 5:18:

Ephesians 5:18 (ESV) — 18 And do not get drunk with wine, for that is debauchery, but be filled with the Spirit,

This verse is clear, and there really isn't any confusion in the Greek either. Referring to the act of getting drunk, Paul explicitly calls that behavior "debauchery." Paul also utilzes the imperitive form of the verb. We are commanded explicitly to NOT get drunk. Paul is not describing the context in particular either. It's not as though getting drunk at home by yourself is any more acceptable to Paul than getting drunk at a party among friends. Neither is acceptable according to Paul. I would argue that getting drunk among unbelievers is even more unacceptable, as it slanders your witness. However under no circumstances is such behavior acceptable for the Christian. So it is clear that Christians are not to partake in such activity directly.

How about drinking among such people but not getting drunk? This approach is really a slippery slope. How much is too much? Just when is somebody "drunk?" These answers can both be subjective, and we don't have much in the way of biblical answers available to us. I'm going to move on to an even stronger stance so as to answer this question by way of implication.

Are we even permitted to actively hang out with these people in these settings? This is where the rubber meets the road with this question. Fortunately we have biblical instruction explicitly on this topic. Paul gives some general wisdom on the subject when he is discussing the resurrection from the dead in 1 Corinthians 15. Referring to those who disbelieve in the resurrection and who think that when you die it is simply over he describes their motto, and immediately gives some Christian wisdom:

1 Corinthians 15:32–33 (ESV) — 32 If the dead are not raised, “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die.” 33 Do not be deceived: “Bad company ruins good morals.”

Note that the attitude of these people is generally the attitude of many in our day and age. Philosophical naturalism and neo-Darwinianism have mostly concluded that there is no afterlife, and when we die it is over. Paul says that the natural consequence of such a perspective is hedonism: “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die.”
This is what those people we are discussing this morning are pursuing, The entire scene of partying and drinking heavily promotes this mindset. What is the biblical response to this perspective? Paul tells us in the next verse that “Bad company ruins good morals.” This is the biblical version of "You become like those you hang out with." Paul explicitly explains that we are not to be deceived and those we hang out with will influence us no matter how strong we think we are in our faith. Our good morals will be corrupted and diminished by hanging out in these crowds.

This still however may not answer the question for many. It is a general warning, and doesn't explicitly say the behavior is absolutely wrong. It tells us generally at very least, that such scenes and crowds we should not spend the majority of our time with, but it does not rule out the behavior entirely. Fortunately, we have another text from the Bible to clarify the subject for us.

Proverbs 23:19–21 (ESV) — 19 Hear, my son, and be wise, and direct your heart in the way. 20 Be not among drunkards or among gluttonous eaters of meat, 21 for the drunkard and the glutton will come to poverty, and slumber will clothe them with rags.

This text is very explicit. It tells us not to be among drunkards or gluttonous eaters of meat. The picture of those who "party" in excess often and spend much of their time and energy feasting. To me this picture captures the spirit of "partying" perfectly. As such, the command explicitly condemns such practice for those who would order their lives after an image of godliness.

What then do we make of Jesus? Does he not violate this very command? Did Jesus not actively spend times with each of these types of people and meet them where they were? This is a legitimate concern and I would like to bring two thoughts to bear on such a topic.

First, Jesus was sinlessly perfect. To say that we are permitted to go to these places because Jesus went to these places, fails to recognize this fundamental difference between Jesus and us. I do not grant that Jesus went to these places (as I will argue next), but even if I did, I am corrupted by sin in a way that he is not. As one of my professors said, I am not permitted to even mess around with sin because it will corrupt me. Yet, our heavenly father can work it together for good because it does not corrupt him. In a sense, he can "handle" it to shape and mold it to the good of his people though he is not the author.

Secondly, and more importantly, we have no evidence whatsoever that Jesus actively spent time "partying" with sinners in the manner that is prohibited by Proverbs, in the manner that people in our day often pursue it.

Yes, Jesus turned water into wine at a party. However, was that party the 1st century equivalent of a modern frat party? Perhaps a night in the VIP lounge of the hottest club? Hardly. In the context of John 2, Jesus was at a wedding. This is a time that calls for celebration and moderate drinking of alcohol is perfectly appropriate in this context. Jesus turns water into wine not because he didn't want the party to stop, but because he was assisting in the celebration! What is the righteous occasion that modern "partying" celebrates? Friday? Equating these two is absurdity. The fact the we party just because it is the weekend displays the wicked excess to which our society has fallen, and is exactly the denunciation that Proverbs refers to.

Yes, Jesus ate with sinners. However he did not do so in such a way to affirm them in their sin. Jesus' call to those who would follow him was a call to die. A call to give up everything and follow him. Jesus does NOT ask people to continue on in their lifestyles and add on a little bit of relationship with him from time to time. Yet this is primarily the image that we paint for people if we go and party with them while trying to simultaneously tell them about Jesus. We are affirming them in their lifestyle and saying to them that as Christians we can live in this manner as well. Rather, Jesus calls for radical abandoning of one's sinful lifestyles to pursue and follow him wholeheartedly.

Matthew 11:18–19 (ESV) — 18 For John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say, ‘He has a demon.’ 19 The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, ‘Look at him! A glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!’ Yet wisdom is justified by her deeds.”

Here Jesus' detractors accuse him of exactly what we are talking about. Is Jesus' point that, yes indeed they have judged correctly, but they didn't understand that he was doing God's work among the sinners while he "partied" with them? Again, hardly. His very rebuke to them betrays the fact that he did not conduct himself in this way. He notes that his deeds will justify himself. What is his point? His point is that the charges of the Pharisees are incorrect! He did not conduct himself in this manner. He did not engage in the behavior they are charging him with. Instead, Jesus spent time with sinners, yes, but he certainly did not violate Proverbs in the process. He did not actively involve himself with gluttony and drunkeness, but rather ministered to those who had fallen victim to the sins of gluttony and drunkeness. It is the very fact that he was associating himself with such people that caused the Pharisees to level their charge, and yet Jesus affirms that his own actions betray the fact that they are not judging rightly.

In conclusion, the "partying" atmosphere that is so common in our day is not something that Jesus would promote or be involved with at all. However, Jesus would seek to minister to these people and call them to radical repentance and faith. As believers, we are to conduct ourselves with the same mindset of our Savior to be sure, but the appropriate place to call sinners to repentance is NOT from the other end of the beer pong table. Examine your heart and the Scriptures before God to make sure that you are conducting yourself in a manner worthy of our Lord.

Isaiah 5:22 (ESV) — 22 Woe to those who are heroes at drinking wine, and valiant men in mixing strong drink,

-tanner

0 Comments

Devotional Thoughts: Sharing the Cup With Christ

8/29/2014

0 Comments

An interesting request is made of Jesus in Matt 20. The mother of James and John approaches Jesus and asks him if her sons can sit at the right and left hand of Jesus in the kingdom. These were places of great honor and respect, and their mother is obviously hoping to secure that honor and respect for her sons.

Jesus response is very interesting, and the exchange is one that has always confused me a little bit. That is why I want to examine it a bit more closely today. Jesus' initial response begins in v 22:

Jesus answered, “You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I am to drink?” They said to him, “We are able.” -Mt 20:22.

The interesting thing is what Jesus chooses to focus upon here, as well as the responses of James and John. Note 3 things:

1. The Cup being referred to is the wrath of God.
This is a common Old Testament allusion, and Jesus use of it here points forward to his suffering and guilt bearing upon the cross. Here are just two passages that refer to the cup:

For in the hand of the LORD there is a cup
   with foaming wine, well mixed,
   and he pours out from it,
   and all the wicked of the earth
   shall drain it down to the dregs. -Ps 75:8.

Wake yourself, wake yourself,
   stand up, O Jerusalem,
   you who have drunk from the hand of the LORD
   the cup of his wrath,
   who have drunk to the dregs
   the bowl, the cup of staggering. -Is 51:17.

Notice that the cup is the wrath of God due to sinful man. In Psalm 75, it is poured out upon the wicked of the earth, the ungodly and sinners. This is what is so striking about Jesus drinking the cup! He is openly proclaiming here that he will take the wrath of God upon himself. However, he does not have a cup that is due to him, instead he takes the wrath of sinful man upon himself. Here we have a direct reference to the gospel.

2. Positions of honor, respect, and importance are directly tied to suffering.
Notice how Jesus is responding to the request made by the mother of James and John. He could have brought up anything in his response, and yet he chooses to focus on the cup. This is not without purpose. What Jesus is doing is tying worthiness of lofty and respected positions directly with the willingness to be made low and function as a suffering servant. This is further emphasized with the short excursus that Jesus goes into through v 28.

And when the ten heard it, they were indignant at the two brothers. But Jesus called them to him and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. It shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be your slave, even as the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” -Mt 20:24–28.

Jesus is pointing the brothers to the fact that if they want to be important and respected leadership, they must humble themselves and take on the form of a servant just as Jesus has done. They must be willing to participate in his "taking of the cup" and suffer and die for God's people.

3. Note finally the audacity of the response of the brothers: "We are able."
This is the part of the text that has always grabbed my attention. We know from the Old Testament what the cup Jesus is referring to is. It is the wrath of almighty God. We know that only Jesus can drink of that cup. That is why Jesus had to come! Yet the brothers are so bold as to claim that they are able to drink from that cup as well. I have always assumed that they simply didn't understand the reference Jesus was making to the Old Testament. How else could someone make such a bold claim as to say that they can drink from the wrath of God. After all, they couldn't imagine that Jesus the perfect Messiah would actually drink God's wrath. The Messiah is God's servant, a conquering king. He has no reason to drink the wrath of God. Such would be their mindset.

However, even mistakenly, James and John affirm that they can drink of the cup. This is where I have always had difficulty understanding the passage. I would expect Jesus' response to be a rebuke of some sort. I would expect Jesus to explain how only HE is fit to drink the cup. However Jesus doesn't respond that way, listen to what he says instead:

He said to them, “You will drink my cup, but to sit at my right hand and at my left is not mine to grant, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared by my Father.” -Mt 20:23.

Jesus affirms that they are able to drink the cup! What? What can he possibly mean by this?

It is in this affirmation by Jesus that we find great joy and comfort from a sympathetic Savior. Sure, there is a very real sense in which we are unable to drink the cup of God's wrath as Jesus did. However, in drinking God's wrath, Jesus is embodying a suffering servant who sacrifices himself for his people. In drinking God's wrath, Jesus is demonstrating laying one's life down for the sake of God's Kingdom, no matter the particular role that God has given you.

The cup then is something that we are able to participate in. It is not as though we can bear the weight of God's wrath as Jesus did. However, Jesus goes out of his way to affirm that James and John will indeed suffer for the kingdom of God in their own way. James will eventually be martyred, and John will suffer exile to Patmos. They will both give their lives for the cause of God's kingdom, and Jesus does not minimize that at all, even though his sacrifice for us is infinitely greater.

Behold the mercy and grace of our Savior! Beloved, our lives and our suffering count. What we go through for God's kingdom, the sacrifices we make for the glory of Jesus, these are things that God forever looks upon with joy and gladness. Sometimes we think the part we play is so small and insignificant. It is good to be humble. But also recognize here that our lives count for the Savior, and he won't forget them. He doesn't minimize our sacrifices either, but places them on par with his sacrifice for the sins of the world. Not that my piece of the puzzle is anywhere as important or big. Yet God has something for each of us in his kingdom, and our faithful carrying out of that assignment - humbly submitting as a servant to our task, pleases God very much.

Note finally the uniting of Christ's people with himself. Jesus Christ suffered greatly on our behalf, and Paul speaks of sharing in that same suffering. While being martyred for the cause of Christ is very much sharing in his suffering; there is a sense also in which all believers are united with Christ in his suffering for us. Becoming a Christian is being adopted into God's kingdom and family. When God does that, we are coming together to share in the mission and work of our elder brother, Jesus. However, we are all also his body. And we go forth in the power of His Spirit accomplishing the mission that he has for us. We have been united with Christ in a very real and spiritual sense, so that we may continue to carry out the work of building his kingdom.

Beloved, we share in the sufferings of Christ. We do so by being spiritually united with him, and by carrying out the work that God has given each of us as individual members of Christ's body. That work is something that God remembersa nd looks down upon with joy. We are all meaningful to God in his kingdom. Not because of who we are, but because of what he has done for us. Let us praise God for that, and go forth in unceasing effort to glorify and honor God with our lives.

-tanner

0 Comments

Devotional Thoughts: The Relationship Between Faith and Effort

8/28/2014

1 Comment

Genesis 30:25-43 provides us with a very interesting account of Jacob dealing with Laban. In particular, I want to focus on Jacob's husbandry practices to try and influence the physical traits of the goats that were in his care. As such, I primarily want to look at v 38-43.

A quick summary of the action up until this point will put things into perspective. Jacob has been working for Laban for a long time now. He initially agreed to work for Laban for 7 years so that he could marry Rachel. After Laban tricked him and gave him Leah instead, Jacob agreed to work another 7 years so that he could marry Rachel also. In addition, he has now spent some time having children with his wives. At minimum he has been working for Laban for 14 years, but it could be a bit longer. Jacob approaches Laban and asks if he can depart, however Laban won't have it. He keeps trying to get Jacob to stay by asking him to name his wages. Jacob finally decides a way to try and get Laban to agree. Jacob offers to keep Laban's goats for what appears to be one final generation of offspring. When the generation is up, all of the goats that are less desirable - striped, speckled, and spotted will be Jacob's. Laban's will be the rest. Laban sees an opportunity he can't refuse and he accepts.

As if Jacob didn't lay a good enough deal for Laban, Laban goes out of his way to remove every striped, speckled, or spotted goat among his flock. This would make it much more unlikely that goats with those traits would be reproduced at all. It is at this point that Jacob turns to employ a little trick that he has learned in his time pasturing Laban's flocks.

Evidently, there was a belief by Jacob that whatever the animals were looking at when they mated, their offspring would share similar traits. It is likely this view was held by more than just Jacob himself. Due to this belief, we get the account that Jacob tried to put sticks that he had made striped, speckled, and spotted before the strong goats when they were mating. He was hoping to ensure that the best of the goats would end up as his possessions when the cycle was up. Please be aware that the deck was quite stacked against him, as Laban had attempted to trick him entirely.

There is much speculation at this point about Jacob's practices. Was he trying to employ some sort of dark magic or sorcery? Was he not trusting in the Lord fully to deliver him? The context seems to indicate that this was simply a husbandry "trick" that he had learned, not some sort of magic. It is to the relationship of man's effort and God's working that I would now like to turn.

Trusting in God and believing that God will provide for us and look after us does not relieve us of human responsibility and effort. There is an old joke that demonstrates this point well.

There was a great flood that devastated a city in which a faithful pastor was living. He escaped the devastation by climbing onto to his roof, but the waters were still rising quickly. He was not worried however, he knew God would deliver him.

A few men in a life raft happened to float by his house and see the man. "Come aboard Pastor, we have room for you!" they called. "No friends, the Lord will provide." he responded, and they shrugged their shoulders and paddled away.

A few hours later, the Pastor had moved to the highest part of his roof, when a speedboat came by. "Hop in, friend" they called to the minister. "No worries friends, the Lord will provide." They headed away also.

Finally, the waters had risen so high that the Pastor was isolated to a small patch at the highest point of his house. At that time a low flying helicopter looking for survivors spotted him and flew down to pick him up. He refused to get on the helicopter and insisted to the men that the Lord would provide. The helicopter flew off to look for more willing survivors. Finally the flood waters rose so high that the Pastor was swept away and he drowned.

When he found himself dead and in heaven, he approached God and asked him: "Why didn't you save me?" God looked at him incredulously: "I tried three times!"

The point illustrated here is this: God often uses natural means and events to accomplish his supernatural purposes. He spreads his kingdom through the preaching of his gospel by his church. He brings about the punishment of his people in the Old Testament by using other nations to oppress them. He heals people through the use of medicines, and he provides for your family through the hard work that you do. Does it mean that you have to work any less hard because God will provide? No. However, the faithful Christian recognizes that all that has been provided for them is from God, even if they may be working their fingers to the bone for him to provide it. Faith does not exclude our effort.

It is the same here with Jacob. He is trusting in the Lord to provide for his needs. He isn't practicing some sorcery or wizardry. He is simply attempting through the best means he knows of to try and work hard to ensure that he can beat Laban at his own game. It does not matter one whit that his means are entirely flawed or useless, and the text doesn't indicate that the manipulation with the sticks was a contributor to the actual production of the offspring in this way. Despite his flawed method, God chose to bless him, and ultimately in the next chapter, Jacob will attribute any success he has to God.

This is a crucial truth to keep in mind for our own lives. Often, we are directed by Scripture to put our trust in the Lord, and he will provide for our needs. However, this does not at all mean that our task is to stay holed up in our homes praying all day. Rather, we are to certainly pray, but after we have done so, we are to go out into the world and through the efforts of "working as unto the Lord" seek to accomplish the things that we have prayed for. It is through faithful obedience to him and a heart that is set upon obedience to God that the Lord will often provide for his people.

-tanner

1 Comment

<<Previous

Serving the Saints: A Primary Evidence of Salvation

Devotional Thoughts: Spurgeon on Salvation before Service

Update: A Busy Month

Theology: Who is Junia, and Why Should You Care?

Politics: What Abortion is Really About

Christian Living: What is Cultural Relevance?

Christian Living: I Feel Like God's Calling Dudes, They Just Want to Play Call of Duty

Christian Living: Should Christians "Party" and/or Spend Time with Those Who Do?

Devotional Thoughts: Sharing the Cup With Christ

Devotional Thoughts: The Relationship Between Faith and Effort

Archives

Categories