Saturday, June 29, 2013
PRAYER
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6d1rsDBB_0w
CLEARLY HEARS! HE KNOWS TRUTH FROM LIES AND THOSE OF REAL FAITH.
ENJOY LEARN OF HIM!
REAL DIRECTION NOT JUST ANOTHER RELIGION.
with Jesus Christ
You are free to download this article provided it remains intact without alteration.
You are also free to transmit this article and quote this article
provided that proper citation of authorship is included.
If you were asked to choose one of the following phrases to complete the sentence, which would you choose?
To be a Christian is...
(1) to believe that Jesus was born, lived, died, and was raised from the dead?
(2) to accept that God became a man in the person of Jesus Christ in order to reconcile all men with Himself?
(3) to receive Jesus and have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ?
Option #1 - has to do with the historical Jesus and the events of His life in the first century.
Option #2 - has to do with the theology of Jesus which explains incarnation and Christology.
Option #3 - has to do with the personal, subjective experience of Jesus.
There really should be a fourth option: (4) All of the above. The objective historical foundation and theological formulation are essential prerequisites to the subjective relationship with Jesus. But if one's understanding of Christianity is comprised only of assent to the objective facts, and devoid of the subjective personal relationship with Jesus Christ, can such a person be considered a Christian?
What does it mean to have a "personal relationship with Jesus Christ"?
Evangelical Christians have often proclaimed and explained that to be a Christian is "to receive Jesus and have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ." Many who have heard that proclamation have not been able to understand what evangelical Christians mean by that phrase. Is it possible for the non-Christian, the natural man, to understand or comprehend the meaning of that phrase?
The natural man can understand "religion" how religious organizations function, how they solicit finances, how they utilize propaganda to get their message out. The natural man can understand rational assent to religious tenets, propositions, principles, statements of history, theology, and doctrine. The natural man can understand adherence to a belief-system, or devotion to an ideology or an organization. The natural man can understand "spirituality" if it is defined as the serenity of "well-being", or devotion to a meaningful cause, or the recollection of an ecstatic experience, or conformity to a moral ideal.
But is it possible for the natural man, the non-Christian, to understand what it means to "have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ"? The Apostle Paul explained that "the natural man cannot understand spiritual things" (I Cor. 2:14). Is "having a personal relationship with Jesus Christ" a spiritual reality that requires the presence and appraisal of the Spirit of Christ to understand what it means? If so, is it possible to adequately explain the meaning of this reality to a non-Christian?
A philosophy student, with whom I had an acquaintance, was very brilliant, well-read and articulate. He was willing and desirous of considering the facts of Christian history and theology under the microscope of human reason. But with a sneer and derisive comments full of scorn, he would mock and make deprecatory comments about those who referred to a "personal relationship with Jesus Christ." Why? This was outside of his ability to understand on a purely rational, philosophical and scientific level.
In our attempt to explain the phrase and its meaning we will consider the individual words of the phrase: (1) Relationship. (2) Personal. (3) Jesus Christ.
RELATIONSHIP - In its broadest sense this simply means that one object has a connection or correlation with another object. The relation of this to that. Mathematically, it may be the relationship of x to y. Geometrically, it may be the angle of relationship between one line and another line. Mechanically, it may be the relationship of the clutch to the drive shaft of an automobile, or one part of a machine to another part. Cosmologically, it may the relationship of earth to the sun; or even more extensively it may be the relation or relationship of everything in the universe to a constant (such as the speed of light within a vacuum), which is how Einstein developed his "Theory of Relativity", which was essentially a theory of relationship.
The above mentioned relationships are all impersonal relationships. As it is our objective to understand a personal relationship, we must explore what that means.
A personal relationship must involve at least one person. The first dictionary meaning of "personal" is defined as "how something relates to or affects a person." With this broad definition, a person can have a "personal relationship" with anything that affects or relates to them a dog, a tree, a flower, a bottle of beer, etcetera ad infinitum.
An individual person might consider the historical evidence of a particular event or person, and then relate such to their own situation. Is that a personal relationship? An individual person might develop ideas into a logical explanation of how they fit together and function. Is that a personal relationship with a particular ideology? Can one have a personal relationship with history? ...philosophy? ...theology? If a person associates themself with, or relates to, a particular social unit, such as an organization like a fraternity, is that a personal relationship? Does loyalty, adherence, commitment and dedication to a grouping of other persons constitute a personal relationship? What is a personal relationship?
Surely the reader can recognize that I am questioning whether the phrase "personal relationship", as used in the evangelical terminology of contemporary religion, is but the personal affect that Christian history, theology and community have upon a person who consents and assents to relate to such. In its broadest definition this could be called a "personal relationship"; but are we content to accept that as the intent of the Christian relationship with Jesus Christ?
PERSONAL - How personal does the relationship have to be to be a personal relationship?
If you receive a loan from another individual, is there a personal relationship between the payer and the payee?
Is the legal and contractual relationship between an employer and employee a personal relationship?
Do you have a personal relationship with your great, great grandfather who may have died twenty years prior to your birth? Or is it just a biological and genealogical relationship of heritage?
Is it possible to have a personal relationship with George Washington or Napoleon Bonaparte?
Is there a necessary personal relationship between siblings within the same family? Does biological kinship establish a personal relationship?
Let me share a personal illustration: I have a sister. We are related. She is my relative. We have a genetic and biological relationship. Is that a personal relationship? I have not seen nor communicated with this sister for over twenty years, nor does she apparently ever desire to do so. Do we have a personal relationship?
We must admit that the broadest definition of a "personal relationship" allows for a unidirectional relationship whereby an individual person relates to an object, an idea, a cause, an image, a fantasy, a mental construct, or a person who is no longer living. A "personal relationship" also allows for a relationship of two or more persons that is merely contractual, biological or social.
But a "personal relationship" is also defined as a dynamic inter-relatedness between persons, an experiential relationship between two persons that involves subjective interaction and communication, a person-to-person relationship, the connection, correlation and interaction of at least two persons in what might be better termed an interpersonal relationship.
I have an interpersonal relationship with Joe, for example. We are friends. We interact. We communicate back and forth. Since Joe is a Christian, I have a different kind of interpersonal relationship with him than I would have with a non-Christian friend. With a Christian friend I have something in common that allows for communion and fellowship (koinonia), a communication based on our spiritual commonality in Christ; a deeper level of interpersonal interaction and communication than I could have with a person who was not spiritually one with me in Christ.
But every other interpersonal relationship that I might have is not on the same level of experiential interpersonal relationship that I have with my wife. The interaction of our interpersonal relationship as husband and wife involves a connection, a "knowing", an intimacy, an "intercourse" (social and sexual) that is deeper than any other interpersonal relationship that I have. And the fact that she is a Christian wife allows a spiritual communion and oneness that makes our marital interpersonal relationship as deep as any human interpersonal relationship can be.
That is why the Apostle Paul uses the intimate interpersonal relationship of husband and wife as the best human and physical analogy to the interpersonal relationship of a Christian with Christ. (Ephesians 5:22-33). The closest oneness and intimacy of personal relationship on earth that can be used to picture and describe and explain the oneness and intimacy of a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, is the marriage relationship.
JESUS CHRIST - What then is a "personal relationship with Jesus Christ"? Or would we be better served to refer, instead, to an "interpersonal relationship with Jesus Christ", in order to avoid any idea that we are referring to an individual person relating to an object, an idea, a cause, an image, a fantasy, a mental construct, or a person that is no longer living?
Is a "personal relationship with Jesus Christ" just a relation of our mental assent to an historical Jesus? Is a "personal relationship with Jesus Christ" just an ideological relationship of belief based on the circumstantial evidence of reports that we can read in the Gospels of the New Testament? Is it possible to have an interpersonal relationship with an historical personage that lived hundreds of years ago? Is it possible to have a interpersonal relationship with a logical construct of theological tenets about God and His Son, Jesus Christ?
Or does an "interpersonal relationship with Jesus Christ" necessitate an experiential, interactive relationship that involves an inter-relatedness, a oneness, a union, a commonality of identity, an intimacy, a "knowing" that can only be likened to the marriage relationship on earth?
That would necessitate the recognition that the Jesus of history, who walked around Palestine over 1900 some years ago, is still alive as a living Person, though in a different form in a spiritual form, and capable of interacting in an interpersonal relationship with human persons today. That is the message of the Christian gospel that Jesus lived, was crucified on the cross, and was raised from the dead in the resurrection, and having ascended to God the Father, He was "poured out" and made available in spiritual form, as the "Spirit of Christ" (Rom. 8:9), in order to indwell the spirits of persons in every age, becoming one with them in spiritual union, and becoming the basis of their new spiritual identity, as they engage in a dynamic interpersonal relationship with the living Lord Jesus.
At this point we need to admit that even the reference to an interpersonal relationship with Jesus Christ might be inadequate. The marriage relationship that Paul employs in Eph. 5:22-33 breaks down in illustrating the relationship of Christ and the Christian because the relationship between the Christian the the living Lord Jesus is also an intrapersonal relationship, involving the indwelling presence of the Spirit of Christ within the spirit of the Christian.
In order for the Christian to have a dynamic interpersonal relationship with Jesus Christ it necessitated that Jesus be a living Person. That was facilitated by the historic resurrection of Jesus when He was raised from the dead on the third day to become the every-living Lord Jesus. In order for the Christian to have a spiritual intrapersonal relationship with Jesus Christ, it necessitated that Jesus be a Spirit-person. That was implemented by the Pentecostal outpouring of Jesus in Spirit-form when the Spirit of Christ became available to indwell the spirits of receptive individuals in every age as the life-giving Spirit (I Cor. 15:45).
This is why evangelical Christians employ the Biblical terminology of being "born again," to explain the living reality of the personal Spirit of Christ coming to dwell in the spirit of a receptive person in an intrapersonal relationship, and that to engage in a growing and developing interpersonal relationship whereby the living Lord Jesus functions in and through the Christian.
It is important to understand that a personal relationship with Jesus Christ is not just an objective relationship to the benefits that Christ allegedly made available by His historical actions of death, burial and resurrection. Protestant Christian religion, in particular, has tended to objectify the relationship of the Christian to God and Christ in a forensic, juridical and legal framework that posits the relationship as but the "justification" of a right relationship with God the Judge in the heavenly realm. As a corollary, the relationship of the Christian with God has been viewed as a static "reconciliation" that is no more personal that "reconciling" one's financial books.
The intrapersonal and interpersonal relationship of the Christian with Jesus Christ must be recognized as a subjective, internal, spiritual reality, whereby an individual in any age receives the living Spirit of Christ into his or her spirit (Rom. 8:9), thus becoming a Christian, a Christ-one. That relationship must involve a dynamic sense of ontological interaction and communion, a living and functional communication.
Granted, this explanation of a personal, intrapersonal and interpersonal relationship with Jesus Christ requires spiritual understanding that can only come by the presence of the Spirit of Christ within the spirit of a receptive person. (I Cor. 2:8-16). That is the difficulty Christians have in attempting to explain what it means to have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. It cannot be understood until He, the Person of Christ, is received by faith. Then, we have the spiritual and relational understanding of regeneration and new birth (Jn. 3:1-6). Then, we can have the spiritual understanding of the indwelling of the Spirit of Christ within our spirit (Rom. 8:9); that the living Lord Jesus Christ is in us (Col. 1:27; II Cor. 13:5), and lives in us (Gal. 2:20) as our spiritual life (Col. 3:4). Then, we can begin to fathom that we are united in a spiritual oneness of union with Him (I Cor. 6:17). Then, we can begin to understand that we are new creatures (II Cor. 5:17; Eph. 4:24; Col. 3:10), and that our identity is only "in Him" as Christ-ones, Christians that who I am can only be explained on the basis of Who He is. Then, we can begin to understand the dynamic function of the Lordship of the Living Lord Jesus, not just as an assent to His being Lord, God, Deity, but as the acceptance of the fact that my life is no longer mine to determine, but is entirely as His disposal and determination.
(Of course, my life was really never mine to determine, anyway. I was just deceived into thinking that it was, and that I was an independent self-determining self. I am convinced that one of the major reasons why the natural man, as well as most religion, including evangelical Christian religion, does not understand what a personal, intrapersonal or interpersonal relationship with Jesus Christ involves, is because they do not understand or accept that the non-Christian, the unregenerate person, has a personal, intrapersonal and interpersonal relationship with Satan, the Evil One - Jn. 8:44; II Tim. 2:26; I Jn. 3:10. cf. The Natural Man.)
So, how do we as Christians attempt to explain that the Christian life is a personal, intrapersonal and interpersonal relationship with Jesus Christ?
We do not want to "fake people out" and offer them "religion" instead membership, involvement, commitment, dedication. In much of Christian religion today people are told about a relationship to "churchianity" rather than Jesus Christ. They are introduced to the "fellowship of excitement" whereby people can "get all excited about Jesus"; hyped up and "high" on Jesus. They are introduced to "programs", the success of which is evaluated by the numbers of buildings, budgets and baptisms. They are introduced to the "escape hatch" whereby the penalty of sin can be removed, and a "fire insurance policy" of eternal assurance in heaven is offered. The past can be forgiven, the future can be assured such an offer provides an impersonal relationship to sin and an impersonal relationship to a future destiny, but it does not adequately encompass a dynamic and living personal, intrapersonal, and interpersonal relationship with the living Lord Jesus Christ in the present.
It is imperative that we, Christians, explain, as best we can by the empowering of the Spirit of Christ, how a personal, intrapersonal, and interpersonal relationship with Jesus Christ is initiated and functions. Only God can effect that relationship of Christ with another, as an individual chooses in the receptivity of faith to receive the living Spirit of Christ into his or her spirit.
Thursday, June 27, 2013
Spirit led yet?
2 Corinthians 31Are we beginning to commend ourselves again? Or do we need, like some people, letters of recommendation to you or from you? 2You yourselves are our letter, written on our hearts, known and read by everybody. 3You show that you are a letter from Christ, the result of our ministry, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts.4Such confidence as this is ours through Christ before God. 5Not that we are competent in ourselves to claim anything for ourselves, but our competence comes from God. 6He has made us competent as ministers of a new covenant--not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.7Now if the ministry that brought death, which was engraved in letters on stone, came with glory, so that the Israelites could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of its glory, fading though it was, 8will not the ministry of the Spirit be even more glorious? 9If the ministry that condemns men is glorious, how much more glorious is the ministry that brings righteousness! 10For what was glorious has no glory now in comparison with the surpassing glory. 11And if what was fading away came with glory, how much greater is the glory of that which lasts .
Wednesday, June 26, 2013
Getting free in Christ
http://www.raystedman.org/thematic-studies/new-covenant/legalism
But legality is one of the favorite weapons of the enemy. He loves to get Christians to be legalistic, for then he has destroyed their enjoyment of the Spirit and he can use them to spread havoc among a generation or a company of believers, and ruin a vital, active, and growing Christian group.
That is exactly what happened in Galatia, and is what drew forth the letter to the Galatians from the Apostle Paul. Here was a group of young Christians who had a fantastic beginning. Their response to the preaching of the apostle was heartwarming. They had given themselves totally to Christ. Paul was greatly enthusiastic about this group of growing young Christians.
But, after a while, word came to him that legality had set in, legalism was taking its toll. What had been a bright and marvelous testimony of the grace and glory of God was being turned into a dull, apathetic group of religionists -- cold, barren, and empty, almost devoid of spiritual life. RAY STEDMAN
NARROWWAY, is a relational based faith, he was called the wind, the power of wind, the Spirit operated in power.
He is not subject to platonic theology as requiring their permission to operate , what snuffs out the spirit is legalism, faithlesness, and teaching him away in formularized performance based religion.
Stedman says it so well it beocme life less rule following, It no longer is about who you become in Christ but if your good enough, for who? or constant questioning the work on the cross, that's called doubt, fear, none of which is from Christ. Thanks.
Tuesday, June 25, 2013
Tic Tok, it goes by...
“When you kill time, remember that it has no resurrection.” Tozar
I really like this because time is something in material driven society that is wasted to see how much we can get, while our life flies by, with little to no eternal rewards,,
every day is opertunity for faith use it...love and care.
The question will be did you do what I ask you to do??? is personl and means to know the intent of our hearts that is what will be important.
John 16-17 KJ3, YOUNG'S LITERAL
I really like this because time is something in material driven society that is wasted to see how much we can get, while our life flies by, with little to no eternal rewards,,
every day is opertunity for faith use it...love and care.
The question will be did you do what I ask you to do??? is personl and means to know the intent of our hearts that is what will be important.
John 16-17 KJ3, YOUNG'S LITERAL
Legal Spirit? Again?
(Nicolations)doctrine , If the Holy Spirit’s presence in our lives cannot prevent us from sinning or being deceived by false teachings and evil men, what in the world would cause us to think being an associate of another human being can?
THANKS ,
False Doctrine of Spiritual Coverings
The doctrine of ‘Spiritual Covering’ has taken the Nation by storm in countless mainline denominations. It fuels the ego of some that dogmatically herald this false doctrine as it benefits them if you are seduced into believing that you need them, rather than the counsel and direction of God in your life via the Holy Spirit.
This false teaching promotes that every believer should be “under” the authority (covering) of a leader,??? what? pastor or group. You must be “accountable” to them.
This false teaching promotes that every believer should be “under” the authority (covering) of a leader,??? what? pastor or group. You must be “accountable” to them.
I am mindful as I submit the following there are those that do implement this doctrine in their churches and affiliations who are sincere and without guile in their doing so. However, this is a very subtle, divisive and controlling doctrine in many aspects that needs to be avoided cleared up..
yes thanks, well said, another fad out of how to book..
Sunday, June 23, 2013
A trip in the unseen,a world God loves.
To be completely whole, we must do more than know / talk about that
which is wrong;
We must be conformed to that which is right????. the sign is to have a faith imparted to others which will lead them through faith to Christ and eternal life. And baring his truth, and in ecclesia. You got to go and experience the presence of God by faith. Such must be our goal.John16, KJ3 , YOUNG'S literal, NEB TRANSLATIONAL.
“Refuse to be average. Let your heart soar as high as it will.”
“True faith rests upon the character of God and asks no further proof than the moral perfections of the One who cannot lie.”
“Jesus calls us to his rest, and meekness is His method. The meek man cares not at all who is greater than he, for he has long ago decided that the esteem of the world is not worth the effort.”
“What we think about when we are free to think about what we will – that is what we are or will soon become.”
“The man who would truly know God must give time to Him.”
“Faith is an organ of knowledge, and love an organ of experience.” Love to all. enjoy Tozer,
We must be conformed to that which is right????. the sign is to have a faith imparted to others which will lead them through faith to Christ and eternal life. And baring his truth, and in ecclesia. You got to go and experience the presence of God by faith. Such must be our goal.John16, KJ3 , YOUNG'S literal, NEB TRANSLATIONAL.
“Refuse to be average. Let your heart soar as high as it will.”
“True faith rests upon the character of God and asks no further proof than the moral perfections of the One who cannot lie.”
“Jesus calls us to his rest, and meekness is His method. The meek man cares not at all who is greater than he, for he has long ago decided that the esteem of the world is not worth the effort.”
“What we think about when we are free to think about what we will – that is what we are or will soon become.”
“The man who would truly know God must give time to Him.”
“Faith is an organ of knowledge, and love an organ of experience.” Love to all. enjoy Tozer,
Thursday, June 20, 2013
Historical insights impact
It followeed I read on the distortion of the text and intent from worrds and forms , the is done By DD fairbairn ,Ma 1910 studies in theology, he also speaks to the issue so the early ecclesia was free in which the enture body was considered and undivided. I think that would be great again to see us all so, my dream for us.One community driven by his love.
No one owned anyone, but Christ and the forms were not allowed to dictate other wise by elevating a few of the people, page s 35 etc, and page 192 on the montanous seeking to protect Tertullian from the false doctrines used for power and form to control by was the case with walker and Angus eluded to the dangerous neoplatonic and esoteric mechanisms being explored and implemented by those in the later times.. see Walker and Angus.
They warned of the esoteric events as the gospel battled to bring new life.
The above discussion pleaded hard for the preisthood of the believers over ruled them latter on.The eccleasia ended as we knew it to be, The spirit as the exchange into platonics sophistry and other forms of the mystics practices adopted indirectly were grasp as a way of control.. often without notice.
Gettng back required a serious effort to escape the matrix of being policed would to enforce going back to truth as well, publications were hard to find and nothing was discussed keeping people under the forms intended. as the quasi relgious actions of intimidation and rejection of those speaking truth.
It;s amazing to see all this praise God for the truth seekers did not remain silent over what took place. I can think not of more wonderful set of words use that in page,31,32 where he speaks of the relational terms, in the body as each one was active value not as mere by standers. . your all the priesthood a living temple not a rock pile, but alive mobile and active. God hates religion, Christianity is Christ alone. Greta reminder of just how much is left and centered around man by action verses the pleas made by tongue.
"The only righousness God approved was the righousness of faith" agree fully It was a matter of Spirit.
The untiy included all as active particpators and without the artifical construction of those who put themselves over them. Interesting becasue it well explains why they kept the words for hiearchy under KJV James the wealth and power not to to loose over the souls of men would be a grip for all time, to be in bondage again to man. see his own decree to the translators.. He speaks to that in this 1910 publication where the clear distinction of what indwelt body was like before it enthroned men as near divinities and titles. Long before any of the mainstream denominations existed.
The transmutation that came to be would by adding preists (Ot gov form), was to obediance now ceased to be moral but became legal, and the worship was no longer spiritual but sacerdotal, or sophistry with mere inactive spectators, compared to what it was,there is no growth and no ability whatsoever to deal with sueprnatural side of spiritual warfare issues is in shape or way spoken of by Paul. 1 Corinth 4;20,
yes sir the clergy and laity were not part of scripture they were invented and added latter on to support the economic interests, the actual quote here opens it wide up, 1910, God sees elders as they acted as servants. Jesus served for those on the street.
The ideall was a free spirual brother hood, where men lived in the spirit and walked by it...Clergy laity did not stand sharly opposed to each other, distinguished and divided by officals, which are ever fictious, sancities, nay clergy and laiity did nto even exist then. quote...author
The man who lived nearest to God stood highest amoung them, either which is consisdered he who loved most lived best ,paul refers to legalsim as a form of witchery Ms. page 202-203 in
Office carried with it special sancity, sancity only quailied the office. I mentiond the modifications added were admitted to by james as means of holding people in suppression and under the control of the state and the clergy which are all state controled which is the case todayas wellto soem degree, theuir are thibngs attached the when money are given by secular to the religious institutions. The warnings here listed.Please see the actaul instructions given to his translators, as they were offered money also to do so as they did sorry to burst the ole bubble but .
It shows how compeltely the new testament idea of christian sacrifice had been memtamorphosed and with subtle and fantastic ingenuity the histroy of the OT COULD BE USED TO FOSIT DOCTRINES IN THE NEW... AUHTOR OF THE BOOK .
PAGE 202 IS REFERNCED...Ad caciium sacremento domina calicis.
I think the facts bare it's truth well, and those seeking to know how to get back to the revelatory relationship would be thrilled to know the path does not have be so obscure, the idea of fictious creations or the legalized dogma which is mentioned in the paper by Lawrence @ probe In order for faith operate the spell of legalism must be broken, faith is free not under bondage neither fear, or paranoia promote faith nor does doubt in it's lack, Phil 1;9
I added the materials quote very old book love it, 1910 thanking the lord for the truth. I have no fear of those truths, enjoy the ability to be as accepted by Christ as able as any prophet, etc all those in him are his, to operate and teach and move about as our lord directs within all the freedom he has granted.
The beauty of the Christian life and relationship is found within the God head it self John 16- 17 in him, clarifying that required exposing the long term need to view history to see where things came from and way as the old saying goes follow the money. I would like to add for those seeking, there are people who are deeply serious about truth.
I thank this author for his honesty, in the depths of the historical info and for those out there not remaining silent, and seeking a much deeper relationship with Jesus allowed to all his people.
Narrowway 2011 is praying for those trapped in DARKNESS to get free, I have no doubt your fed up with all the culture is laden in it's lies and deception your aware of how it all works. I agree but Jesus is the way out, going to the fallen angle is a death way, he is seeking to bring you down as well, shortterm carnal pleasure than comes the price, each sacrifice requires little more thanthe last like alcohol or drugs, it;s never enough.despite the pleasure of the min, all the way by your own loss or your friends, to the father of lies.
The power you seek is not found in sacrificing your self or another life form., or friend but in new life, out side the institutions you mention are corrupt, only to have fallen into a much deeper corruption. Love and trust comes out of total surrender to Christ alone.
nw
Wednesday, June 19, 2013
Thanks lawrence, wonderful job...
Written by Dr. Lawrence Terlizzese
The American Church has fallen under the error of Pelagianism. Law and Grace do not represent two plans of God, but two phases of the same plan of redemption: preparation and fulfillment.
“For the Law was given through Moses; grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ.” (John 1: 17, NASB)
A young college student once told me that a pastor’s son argued with him that no religion—and especially not Christianity—was about faith in any God, but rather the good works that we do for others. Christianity, so the preacher’s boy said, concerned doing to others what we would have done to us; it does not even matter if God exists or not, only the good we do for people counts—philanthropy, morality and being a good person matters most, not faith in Jesus Christ as the Son of God.
What the young theologian argued was that all religions are basically the same. They are moralistic[1], which means they inspire people to do good works and that any metaphysical aspect, such as who God is or what he may have done for humanity is irrelevant. Similarly, we often hear that people choose to do evil and that they are not born that way, it is the environment that makes us corrupt—that we are not corrupt by nature.
This all sounds like common sense, but amounts to a denial of the central Christian belief in salvation by grace through faith alone. If we are not sinners by nature but only by choice than we can conceivably make more good choices than evil ones in order to redeem ourselves and then there would be no need for faith or a savior. Good works and keeping either the internal law of conscience or the old Mosaic Law would suffice.
Christians continually misunderstand and misuse the Law, thus placing themselves and others in bondage to a de facto works salvation mentality. The Apostle Paul argued that we did not begin with the Spirit in our salvation only to be perfected by “the flesh” in the works of the Law (Galatians 3: 3). Paul repeatedly identified legalism as a work of the flesh or sinful human nature and worldliness. He spoke of “the elemental principles of the world” (Galatians. 4: 3 and Col. 2: 8, 20) not as secularism, or so called “worldly” practices such as dancing, smoking or movie attendance, as Christians do today. Rather, worldliness according to these passages was the religiosity of the Judaizing heresy that imposed legal restrictions on believers such as circumcision (as seen in Galatians) or dietary restrictions, festivals and Sabbath observance or angel worship (in Colossians). Paul rejected his great religious inheritance, status and fame as a Pharisee, considering it all a work of the flesh, so that his righteousness would not derive from the Law, but from Christ (Philippians 3: 1–9). Religious legalism represents as great a threat to grace in the New Testament than any libertine license for sin.
Works salvation indicates a profound insecurity concerning individual freedom in the world’s religions and a desire to impose an authoritarian structure. Christians are not guiltless either, as they harbor the same tendencies to impose the Mosaic Code or some form of it on Christians and non–Christians alike. For example, Torah Observant Christians, Reconstructionism, Theonomy, and Covenant Theology all hold to a continuity between law and grace that brings Christians back under the legal and moral requirements of the Mosaic Code. The persistence of Christians who want to commit themselves to the Law, even after 2000 years of Christian history, indicates the Church’s misunderstanding of the role of the Law after Christ and the Church’s uneasiness with its own belief in grace.
The Mosaic Law was given to Israel on Mount Sinai as their Constitution and guide to holiness; it was never capable of bringing eternal salvation, but served as a teacher to the preservation of Israel in the Promised Land while demonstrating God’s righteous character. It was a temporary operating system, so to speak, that was necessary in order to display human sinfulness and point to humanity’s need for grace. But, crucially, it was destined to pass away or be retired once the plan of God came to fruition in the Life of Christ (Galatians 3). It showed only humanity’s guilt, yet foreshadowed in its practices the promise of God’s ultimate work of grace (Hebrews 8: 5; 10: 1). Once grace arrived in the work of Christ, the Law was no longer necessary (Hebrews 8: 6). The Law only pointed to human need for grace or the presence of sin. The Law shows people their unrighteousness. God demonstrates his mercy only after explaining and portraying his righteousness. God gives the Law first to demonstrate sin and then sends his Son to reveal His love and grace.
The Mosaic Law functions similarly to natural law or general revelation in demonstrating humanity’s need for God, the absence of God from the human heart (Romans 1 & 2). The Law and general revelation both perform a preparatory role: either telling humanity it does not know God, as with general revelation, or revealing humanity’s sin, as with the Law (Romans 3). They give no saving knowledge, but function only to condemn and never to save. Law and Grace do not represent two plans of God, but two phases of the same plan of redemption: preparation and fulfillment.
Any return to the Law rejects faith in Christ and even creates a hindrance to the progression of the plan of God in history. The Book of Hebrews gives a dire warning to all who return to these former elements: “For if we go on sinning willfully after we receive the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a certain terrifying expectation of judgment.… Anyone who set aside the Law of Moses dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. How much more severe punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled underfoot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified and has insulted the spirit of grace?” (Hebrews 10: 26–29).
The Law is no longer operative because all its demands were satisfied. Its expiration date has matured and it is no longer in effect since the death of Christ. The Law then has no direct application in the new age of grace. The Law is to the Church what the Articles of Confederation is to the United States. They serve great historical value in providing a history that led to the creation of the U.S. Constitution and contain pertinent principles of government decentralization to learn from—but no one is obligated to abide by them any longer. As a system of government it has been retired. The Mosaic Law, like the Articles of Confederation, today serves a strictly instructive role; it retains an honorary position as system emeritus.
Although, the Law as a binding system has been retired in the plan of God’s redemption, it serves an important role in the advice and instruction readers learn from it. The Law offers examples of righteousness and models of holiness. Paul noted that “whatever was written in earlier times was written for our instruction” (Romans 15: 4). He adds that the history of Israel serves as an example of learning for the Church today (I Corinthians 10: 6) and that “All Scripture is …profitable for teaching … and for training in righteousness” (I Timothy 3: 16). The Church looks back to the Law for guidance and for the meaning of holiness and righteousness, but never applies the Law in the same way as Israel did as a civil nation. The New Testament writers use the Law as examples of righteousness in the reiteration of the Ten Commandments (Romans 13: 8–10; James 2: 8–11). The Law must be used “lawfully” (I Timothy 1: 8) as instruction and not as a binding operating system.
To argue for subdivision in the Law such as ceremonial, dietary, moral, sacrificial, etc., in essence denies the Law’s instructive capacities today. The Law is either obsolete in its entirety or it is operative in its entirety and if it is obsolete yet still instructive, it is instructive in its entirety today. The Law has not been abrogated, as if God somehow made a mistake. Again it was fulfilled, and hence has accomplished its purpose; its telos and reason for existence has been realized. The Law was then retired; it serves now only to instruct in righteousness and to demonstrate sinfulness.
The Law never comes to the Church today unmodified from its original context in ancient Israel. If the so–called “moral law” was binding, then its enforcement and punishment must also be binding. Partial Law advocates must change the meaning of the Law to make it palatable. Every system that adopts an operative role for the Law modifies it to some extent through illegitimately subdividing the Law into convenient sections, in a clear case of selective morality, where only some principles from a given system are conveniently chosen and partially applied through abandoning its original meaning and context to fit a contemporary understanding. For example, Sabbath observance is now on Sunday instead of Saturday or the commandment against adultery applying to a monogamous Christian context instead of its original Hebrew polygamous one.
Without enforcement of the Law there is, in reality, no Law. The Church cannot honestly say it is somehow under the obligations of the Law if also does not keep its enforcement. This is where the entire operative approach to the Law breaks apart into utter incoherence in relation to the New Testament principle of grace. The penalty for most infractions against the Law was death by stoning and was often administrated by a civil and religious authority (Deuteronomy 17). Since the Church does not inherit Israel’s civil authority, enforcement of the Mosaic Law becomes impossible[2]. (See my article on the prophetic voice of the Church here.)
As the premiere Law of all time, greater than the Code of Hammurabi, greater than the Qur’an, greater than Roman law (Galatians 3:21), the Mosaic Law offers itself as instruction and example for individual morality and civil society, but requires no uncontestable obligation regarding its adoption and enforcement. The Law ceases to be a legalistic code that must be enforced to the letter upon pain of death. Instead, it speaks as the Word of God. It now brings life instead of death. In Christ “the ministry of death” transforms into “the ministry of the Spirit” and life” (2 Corinthians 3).
The old Law was not a failure, so that God had to begin again with a New Commandment of Love. The Law was as Paul said, “weak … through the flesh,” (Romans 8: 3), meaning it was simply incapable of producing anything other than the recognition of sin and condemnation (Romans 7: 7–13). It could never save and transform humanity. For that purpose God sent his Son and “condemned sin …in order that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled [plēroō, completed, finished or accomplished] in us who do not walk according to the flesh [sinful human nature] but according to the Spirit” (Romans 8: 4).
Because believers now have the Holy Spirit, they are new creations (2 Corinthians 5: 17) and the Law is accomplished in them. This does not mean Christians live perfectly as Christ did, but that there are no moral or legal requirements that they must meet as a sign of their acceptance by God; instead of living up to a standard, they live out of the sufficiency of Christ. They are guided by the Holy Spirit to accomplish the New Commandment of Love, also called “the law of the Spirit” (Romans 8: 2), “the law of faith” (Romans 3: 27), “the law of Christ” (Galatians 6: 2) and “the royal law” (James 2: 8), reflecting the image of God in Christ. Jesus did not leave a legal code to regulate every aspect of life, like Moses; instead he gave the Church an orientation of love and freedom. Law compels obedience through fear of punishment. It dominates the individual’s will so that his choices are not his own. Grace inspires obedience through the revelation of God’s love; “the goodness of God leads to repentance” (Romans 2: 4). Law is for the immature or those who cannot act responsibly without it. They need to be told what to do in external and institutional codes. Grace is for the mature who act according to the Law of the Spirit or the spirit of the Law residing internally in every believer. They live by the Spirit at a higher standard of personal accountability to God and not according to the letter of the Law (Matthew 19). Law is for the lawless, not the righteous (I Tim 5: 5-10).
The new Law of the Spirit (i.e., the Law of Love) continues where the old Law left off. But this new law is different from the old because it can only be accepted by faith, a committed trust in the unseen Word of God (2 Corinthians 4: 16--5:7; Hebrews 11: 1--12: 3) as a gift of God’s grace, which makes the old Law a law of works, not a law of faith (Romans 3: 27). Abraham understood that "the just shall live by faith" (Romans 1:17). Anyone living righteously knew it even when they were under the Law—that keeping the Law was impossible, requiring grace (Romans 4). The Law required moral and legal perfection, complete and total obedience or works, requiring human effort in order to achieve acceptance with God. Any attempt to work one’s way back to God on the basis of keeping the Law disqualifies one from salvation by grace through faith (Romans 3–5). “I do not nullify the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died needlessly” (Galatians 2: 21).
Christians are not justified by grace through faith, only to be sanctified by works either the works of the Law or any other code of conduct. Theologically, Evangelicals typically divide the term salvation into three stages: justification, a positional salvation that can never be revoked; sanctification, a lifestyle that reflects justification, and glorification, the end result of salvation when believers are restored to the complete image of God in the eschaton[3]. The Church often struggles the most with the middle stage of sanctification, asserting the need for a code of conduct as many Evangelicals do or even a sacramental merit system as Roman Catholics accept that measures the believer’s progress and growth towards Christlikeness. Although most Evangelicals will hotly deny that they are setting up a new works salvation system in their codes, the practical effects are the same: justification is by faith and sanctification is by works.
Good behavior does not eradicate the guilt of original sin, simply doing more good works to outweigh our evil ones will do nothing to accomplish salvation, which is the whole substance of the ancient debate between law and grace from Jesus and the Pharisees, to Paul and the Judaizers, to Augustine and Pelagius to the Reformers and the Catholics. It manifests today in the Free Grace Gospel versus Lordship Salvation position as well as the numerous attempts to reassert the principle of law in the Church to act as a hedge against antinomianism and moral libertinism.
The human condition remains so stricken with sin that only a divine intervention will save people from condemnation. No amount of good deeds—even if they were perfect—could erase the curse of sin inherited from the First Adam (Romans 5: 12–21 ). Salvation must be ontological and not simply moral. There must be a change in being and not merely a change in doing. This means there must be a change in the spiritual condition of people and not simply a moral or behavioral change. God does not forgive sin without compensation for sin. Salvation requires more than just a divine act of will to rescue humanity, which then translates to morality and law (or contemporary manifestations of moralism and legalism). This bears out in the New Testament in the struggle between law and grace or works and faith. One position focuses on ontology (the transformation of the spiritual condition or essence) and the other on morality (human effort or works). Salvation focuses on either God or man; either God saves humanity by grace or humanity contributes through its merits to its own forgiveness and restoration.
Human nature tends to self–righteousness and belief in its own ability to earn the grace of God expressed in morality and law, or what Paul called “works.” Morality means the choices people make based on what they think is right or wrong. Law, that is “Policy” in human terms, is the morality of a few people enforced on the majority, through institutional and legally binding codes of behavior. The modern world has adopted a humanistic perspective that sees humanity as preeminent, not God; it has abandoned ontology and metaphysics.[4] In lieu of metaphysics, the modern world uses morality and law as a guide to life; it creates an understanding of God in its own moral image as glorified law–giver and not the Spirit who changes hearts, minds and lives. Thus Christianity and all religion are reduced to morality as opposed to faith, which is irrelevant to the modern world.
Christianity appears increasingly moralistic and legalistic where a code of behavior replaces living faith in God. This manifests in everything from health and eating rules and dress codes, to Prohibition and club or church membership; middle class family values become identical with Christianity: ideals such as a high work ethic, patriotism, and belief in Christian America. Voting becomes a sacred duty, keeping the Ten Commandments becomes emphasized, along with political activism, and so forth. None of these are bad, but they are never a replacement for faith. Yet, they often are made the test of faith and their presence is often mistaken for a vital life in Christ. These things represent morality and even Christian morality, but morality should never be confused with faith and salvation. Salvation is not morality, it is an ontological change in the condition of the human heart and its relationship with God through the Spirit that is freely given and accepted by faith alone. Morality does not constitute the elements of faith, it follows faith as a natural consequence (Ephesians 2: 8–10), and must never be the measure of faith (Romans 14; 1 Corinthians 8; 10: 12–33).
Theologically speaking, most of the American Church has followed the classic heresy known as Pelagianism,[5] a belief that denies the inherent sinful condition. Pelagius the fourth century monk and arch opponent of St. Augustine argued that original sin does not exist as the guilt humanity inherits from the First Adam and that Adam’s sin was his own. The human race cannot be held accountable for a sin they did not commit. People are born innocent into a corrupt environment and only become sinful after they have sinned. On the surface this doctrine appears rational and fair, but cuts the heart out of the principle of grace and throws all religion back into a legalist and moralist mode. Without a notion of original sin, today called “radical evil,” or “total depravity,” or simply the “sinful human nature,” it makes perfect sense that the way back to God is through being a good person or moral reformation. As theologian Paul Tillich noted “[Pelagianism] … is always effective in us when we try to force God down to ourselves. This is what we usually call ‘moralism,’…. Pelagius said that good and evil are performed by us; they are not given [or an ontic condition, meaning we are not born into a state of sin; rather we become sinners through our own misdeeds or sins]. If this is true then religion is in danger of being transformed into morality.”[6]
The principle of grace advocated by the Apostle Paul, St. Augustine and the Reformers radically opposes moralism and makes salvation a matter of a divine intervention in the human condition that can be received only by faith. Works do nothing to alter the human condition of sin and condemnation. No moral or legal remedy exists that will change our basic sinful selves. Moral transformation (works) follows faith, but has no causal effect on salvation or loss of salvation. What God gives in grace he will not revoke (Rom 8: 26-39; 11: 29). Grace is not an excuse or license for sin. Those who argue that way simply do not understand grace and its transforming effects on moral character, nor have they ever participated in it (Rom 6). “For sin shall not be master over you, for you are not under law, but under grace” (Rom 6: 14)!
About the Author
Dr. Lawrence Terlizzese is a research associate with Probe Ministries. He holds both a Th.M. and Ph.D. in Theological Studies from Dallas Theological Seminary, and a B.A. in Biblical Studies from Columbia International University in Columbia, South Carolina. He is the author of two books, Trajectory of the Twenty First Century: Essays in Theology and Technology and Hope in the Thought of Jacques Ellul. He can be reached at lawrence@probe.org.
Further information about Probe's materials and ministry may be obtained by contacting us at:
The American Church has fallen under the error of Pelagianism. Law and Grace do not represent two plans of God, but two phases of the same plan of redemption: preparation and fulfillment.
“For the Law was given through Moses; grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ.” (John 1: 17, NASB)
A young college student once told me that a pastor’s son argued with him that no religion—and especially not Christianity—was about faith in any God, but rather the good works that we do for others. Christianity, so the preacher’s boy said, concerned doing to others what we would have done to us; it does not even matter if God exists or not, only the good we do for people counts—philanthropy, morality and being a good person matters most, not faith in Jesus Christ as the Son of God.
What the young theologian argued was that all religions are basically the same. They are moralistic[1], which means they inspire people to do good works and that any metaphysical aspect, such as who God is or what he may have done for humanity is irrelevant. Similarly, we often hear that people choose to do evil and that they are not born that way, it is the environment that makes us corrupt—that we are not corrupt by nature.
This all sounds like common sense, but amounts to a denial of the central Christian belief in salvation by grace through faith alone. If we are not sinners by nature but only by choice than we can conceivably make more good choices than evil ones in order to redeem ourselves and then there would be no need for faith or a savior. Good works and keeping either the internal law of conscience or the old Mosaic Law would suffice.
Salvation by Grace Through Faith Alone
Salvation by grace through faith provides the great distinctive of the Christian faith compared to the other world religions. In contrast, the monotheistic religions Islam and Judaism both present a path of works salvation through obeying either the Torah or the Qur’an. The pantheistic religions, like Buddhism and Hinduism, believe in a rigorous path of enlightenment. While they subscribe to a unique theological heritage and may even be saved, many within the Christian sphere tend to under–appreciate and even unintentionally deny God’s free and eternal gift of salvation through a well–meaning but misdirected emphasis on the Mosaic Code, also called the Law (or the Ten Commandments) or other moral and legal codes that operate in a similar fashion, as measuring sticks for salvation.Christians continually misunderstand and misuse the Law, thus placing themselves and others in bondage to a de facto works salvation mentality. The Apostle Paul argued that we did not begin with the Spirit in our salvation only to be perfected by “the flesh” in the works of the Law (Galatians 3: 3). Paul repeatedly identified legalism as a work of the flesh or sinful human nature and worldliness. He spoke of “the elemental principles of the world” (Galatians. 4: 3 and Col. 2: 8, 20) not as secularism, or so called “worldly” practices such as dancing, smoking or movie attendance, as Christians do today. Rather, worldliness according to these passages was the religiosity of the Judaizing heresy that imposed legal restrictions on believers such as circumcision (as seen in Galatians) or dietary restrictions, festivals and Sabbath observance or angel worship (in Colossians). Paul rejected his great religious inheritance, status and fame as a Pharisee, considering it all a work of the flesh, so that his righteousness would not derive from the Law, but from Christ (Philippians 3: 1–9). Religious legalism represents as great a threat to grace in the New Testament than any libertine license for sin.
Works salvation indicates a profound insecurity concerning individual freedom in the world’s religions and a desire to impose an authoritarian structure. Christians are not guiltless either, as they harbor the same tendencies to impose the Mosaic Code or some form of it on Christians and non–Christians alike. For example, Torah Observant Christians, Reconstructionism, Theonomy, and Covenant Theology all hold to a continuity between law and grace that brings Christians back under the legal and moral requirements of the Mosaic Code. The persistence of Christians who want to commit themselves to the Law, even after 2000 years of Christian history, indicates the Church’s misunderstanding of the role of the Law after Christ and the Church’s uneasiness with its own belief in grace.
The Role of the Law Today: Instructive, not Operative
Preachers and theologians are known to say “We are still under the 10 Commandments” or “The moral law is still in effect, but the rest has been fulfilled by Christ.” Although, these explanations offer some guidance on what to do with the 800 pound gorilla in the room— with the theology of grace—they ultimately cannot avoid inconsistencies either with the Law or with the New Testament principle of grace, God’s unconditional love.The Mosaic Law was given to Israel on Mount Sinai as their Constitution and guide to holiness; it was never capable of bringing eternal salvation, but served as a teacher to the preservation of Israel in the Promised Land while demonstrating God’s righteous character. It was a temporary operating system, so to speak, that was necessary in order to display human sinfulness and point to humanity’s need for grace. But, crucially, it was destined to pass away or be retired once the plan of God came to fruition in the Life of Christ (Galatians 3). It showed only humanity’s guilt, yet foreshadowed in its practices the promise of God’s ultimate work of grace (Hebrews 8: 5; 10: 1). Once grace arrived in the work of Christ, the Law was no longer necessary (Hebrews 8: 6). The Law only pointed to human need for grace or the presence of sin. The Law shows people their unrighteousness. God demonstrates his mercy only after explaining and portraying his righteousness. God gives the Law first to demonstrate sin and then sends his Son to reveal His love and grace.
The Mosaic Law functions similarly to natural law or general revelation in demonstrating humanity’s need for God, the absence of God from the human heart (Romans 1 & 2). The Law and general revelation both perform a preparatory role: either telling humanity it does not know God, as with general revelation, or revealing humanity’s sin, as with the Law (Romans 3). They give no saving knowledge, but function only to condemn and never to save. Law and Grace do not represent two plans of God, but two phases of the same plan of redemption: preparation and fulfillment.
One Law, Indivisible, With Grace for All
There is only one Law, which must be accepted as a whole. The unity of the Law applies equally to either its total fulfillment in Christ or to the possibility that the Law remains operative after Christ. The Law cannot be subdivided into different sections such as moral, ceremonial and civil that were applicable before Christ and those sections still applicable after Christ. Any theological approach to the Law that states its partial effectiveness misunderstands the unity of the Law and the work of Christ that has already fulfilled the Law in its entirety. One either keeps the whole Law or does not (Galatians 3: 10; James 2: 10; Matthew 5: 19; Deuteronomy 27: 1; 28: 1; 30: 8). Likewise, either Christ fulfilled the Law or he did not. Nowhere in the New Testament does it say the Law was partially fulfilled in Christ, leaving the Church to fulfill the rest. A change in one aspect of the Law, such as the Old Testament Priesthood, necessitates the inauguration of a new law and not merely a partial change in the old law (Hebrews 7: 12). Paul argued against the Judaizers, who imposed legal restrictions on Christians, that if they accepted one part of the Law they were “under obligation to keep the whole Law” (Galatians 5: 3).Any return to the Law rejects faith in Christ and even creates a hindrance to the progression of the plan of God in history. The Book of Hebrews gives a dire warning to all who return to these former elements: “For if we go on sinning willfully after we receive the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a certain terrifying expectation of judgment.… Anyone who set aside the Law of Moses dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. How much more severe punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled underfoot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified and has insulted the spirit of grace?” (Hebrews 10: 26–29).
Does Retirement of the Law Mean God Changed?
The problem many express with notion of the Law’s retirement is based on this conclusion: God cannot change, so how can He, in effect, repeal his own law? The Law was given in order to maintain Israel as a separate people who would act as a conduit through whom God would send his Messiah to reach the whole world. “When the fullness of time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the Law” (Galatians 4: 4). The Law was by its very nature temporary and conditional to Israel as an operative system in the history of God’s plan of universal redemption. Once the Law and Israel achieved their purposes, or were “fulfilled” in Christ they became obsolete (Hebrews 8: 13). The Law had an expiration date, a shelf life that only lasted until Messiah arrived. The Law played a preparatory role for the coming of Christ; it never had the power to save, but only to condemn in identifying and demonstrating human sin and inadequacies. Its function was to ready mankind for salvation. The Law is good and holy, but it is also obsolete and incomplete (Romans 7; Galatians 3).Good News! The Law is Fulfilled in Christ
The Law was not abolished, repealed or revamped in any way in the new age of grace. Jesus himself says that he did not come to destroy [katalyō] or subvert the Law, but to fulfill [plēroō] it (Matthew 5: 17), which means to complete, to finish, accomplish or expire. Paul repeats Jesus’ declaration by stating that “Christ is the end [telos] of the law,” meaning he is the termination or conclusion of it (Romans 10: 4). Jesus does not change the Law nor add to it which he himself admonishes against (Matthew 5: 17–19). The Law was fulfilled in Christ, meaning he met all of its requirements and standards as well as the subsequent punishments for failure. He lived the Law for humanity, keeping it perfectly as our representative before God, and died for all of us, meeting its requisite punishment for sin. Jesus’ last words on the cross “It is finished [teleō]” (John 19: 30), marks the completion and fulfillment of the Law and effectively completes all of its requirements, obligations or demands for us. Any attempt to place believers back under the Law, even partially, amounts to a rejection of the work of Christ. “You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace” (Galatians 5: 4).The Law is no longer operative because all its demands were satisfied. Its expiration date has matured and it is no longer in effect since the death of Christ. The Law then has no direct application in the new age of grace. The Law is to the Church what the Articles of Confederation is to the United States. They serve great historical value in providing a history that led to the creation of the U.S. Constitution and contain pertinent principles of government decentralization to learn from—but no one is obligated to abide by them any longer. As a system of government it has been retired. The Mosaic Law, like the Articles of Confederation, today serves a strictly instructive role; it retains an honorary position as system emeritus.
Although, the Law as a binding system has been retired in the plan of God’s redemption, it serves an important role in the advice and instruction readers learn from it. The Law offers examples of righteousness and models of holiness. Paul noted that “whatever was written in earlier times was written for our instruction” (Romans 15: 4). He adds that the history of Israel serves as an example of learning for the Church today (I Corinthians 10: 6) and that “All Scripture is …profitable for teaching … and for training in righteousness” (I Timothy 3: 16). The Church looks back to the Law for guidance and for the meaning of holiness and righteousness, but never applies the Law in the same way as Israel did as a civil nation. The New Testament writers use the Law as examples of righteousness in the reiteration of the Ten Commandments (Romans 13: 8–10; James 2: 8–11). The Law must be used “lawfully” (I Timothy 1: 8) as instruction and not as a binding operating system.
To argue for subdivision in the Law such as ceremonial, dietary, moral, sacrificial, etc., in essence denies the Law’s instructive capacities today. The Law is either obsolete in its entirety or it is operative in its entirety and if it is obsolete yet still instructive, it is instructive in its entirety today. The Law has not been abrogated, as if God somehow made a mistake. Again it was fulfilled, and hence has accomplished its purpose; its telos and reason for existence has been realized. The Law was then retired; it serves now only to instruct in righteousness and to demonstrate sinfulness.
The Law never comes to the Church today unmodified from its original context in ancient Israel. If the so–called “moral law” was binding, then its enforcement and punishment must also be binding. Partial Law advocates must change the meaning of the Law to make it palatable. Every system that adopts an operative role for the Law modifies it to some extent through illegitimately subdividing the Law into convenient sections, in a clear case of selective morality, where only some principles from a given system are conveniently chosen and partially applied through abandoning its original meaning and context to fit a contemporary understanding. For example, Sabbath observance is now on Sunday instead of Saturday or the commandment against adultery applying to a monogamous Christian context instead of its original Hebrew polygamous one.
Without enforcement of the Law there is, in reality, no Law. The Church cannot honestly say it is somehow under the obligations of the Law if also does not keep its enforcement. This is where the entire operative approach to the Law breaks apart into utter incoherence in relation to the New Testament principle of grace. The penalty for most infractions against the Law was death by stoning and was often administrated by a civil and religious authority (Deuteronomy 17). Since the Church does not inherit Israel’s civil authority, enforcement of the Mosaic Law becomes impossible[2]. (See my article on the prophetic voice of the Church here.)
As the premiere Law of all time, greater than the Code of Hammurabi, greater than the Qur’an, greater than Roman law (Galatians 3:21), the Mosaic Law offers itself as instruction and example for individual morality and civil society, but requires no uncontestable obligation regarding its adoption and enforcement. The Law ceases to be a legalistic code that must be enforced to the letter upon pain of death. Instead, it speaks as the Word of God. It now brings life instead of death. In Christ “the ministry of death” transforms into “the ministry of the Spirit” and life” (2 Corinthians 3).
A New Commandment
Though the Law was fulfilled, accomplished and expired in Christ, and its requirements and penalties no longer directly apply today. This does not mean the Church lives lawlessly and without moral standards. The fulfillment of the Law in Christ means the fulfillment of the Law in his Body, the Church. Jesus and both the Apostles Paul and James stated that the commandment of love fulfills the Law (Matthew 22: 37–40; Mark 12: 29–31; Romans 13: 8–10; Galatians 5: 14; James 2: 8). “Love … is the fulfillment [plērōma] of the Law” (Romans 13: 10) The Church, as well as Christ, bring a completion and conclusion to the Law. Jesus left the Church with a new commandment of love that fulfills the old Law. Just as the old Law marked the distinction of Israel as a holy people from the rest of the pagan nations (Deuteronomy 28: 1–2), so the new commandant of love distinguishes the Church from a hostile world system: “A new commandant I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you, that you also love one another. By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another” (John 14: 34, 35).The old Law was not a failure, so that God had to begin again with a New Commandment of Love. The Law was as Paul said, “weak … through the flesh,” (Romans 8: 3), meaning it was simply incapable of producing anything other than the recognition of sin and condemnation (Romans 7: 7–13). It could never save and transform humanity. For that purpose God sent his Son and “condemned sin …in order that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled [plēroō, completed, finished or accomplished] in us who do not walk according to the flesh [sinful human nature] but according to the Spirit” (Romans 8: 4).
Because believers now have the Holy Spirit, they are new creations (2 Corinthians 5: 17) and the Law is accomplished in them. This does not mean Christians live perfectly as Christ did, but that there are no moral or legal requirements that they must meet as a sign of their acceptance by God; instead of living up to a standard, they live out of the sufficiency of Christ. They are guided by the Holy Spirit to accomplish the New Commandment of Love, also called “the law of the Spirit” (Romans 8: 2), “the law of faith” (Romans 3: 27), “the law of Christ” (Galatians 6: 2) and “the royal law” (James 2: 8), reflecting the image of God in Christ. Jesus did not leave a legal code to regulate every aspect of life, like Moses; instead he gave the Church an orientation of love and freedom. Law compels obedience through fear of punishment. It dominates the individual’s will so that his choices are not his own. Grace inspires obedience through the revelation of God’s love; “the goodness of God leads to repentance” (Romans 2: 4). Law is for the immature or those who cannot act responsibly without it. They need to be told what to do in external and institutional codes. Grace is for the mature who act according to the Law of the Spirit or the spirit of the Law residing internally in every believer. They live by the Spirit at a higher standard of personal accountability to God and not according to the letter of the Law (Matthew 19). Law is for the lawless, not the righteous (I Tim 5: 5-10).
The Internal Law of the Spirit
The Law of the Spirit expresses the fulfillment of the Old Testament promise that the Law will be written on the hearts of God’s people in a new covenant after God fills them with his Spirit and forgives their sin (Jeremiah 31: 31–34; Ezekiel 36: 24–27; Hebrews 8: 7–13; 12: 24). Believers are not accountable to the Law, but may approach God through Jesus Christ, the Great High Priest and Mediator between God and man (I Timothy 2: 5; Hebrews 4: 14; 7: 18-19). Grace supplies believers with a greater righteousness and accessibility directly to God, in contrast to the Law of Moses, because as grace fulfills all the requirements of the Law, it also provides both personal transformation and purity of heart through faith. It is not enough to simply not commit murder or adultery. One must not harbor hate or lust also (Matthew 5). The Law—is now internalized in believers through the Holy Spirit.The new Law of the Spirit (i.e., the Law of Love) continues where the old Law left off. But this new law is different from the old because it can only be accepted by faith, a committed trust in the unseen Word of God (2 Corinthians 4: 16--5:7; Hebrews 11: 1--12: 3) as a gift of God’s grace, which makes the old Law a law of works, not a law of faith (Romans 3: 27). Abraham understood that "the just shall live by faith" (Romans 1:17). Anyone living righteously knew it even when they were under the Law—that keeping the Law was impossible, requiring grace (Romans 4). The Law required moral and legal perfection, complete and total obedience or works, requiring human effort in order to achieve acceptance with God. Any attempt to work one’s way back to God on the basis of keeping the Law disqualifies one from salvation by grace through faith (Romans 3–5). “I do not nullify the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died needlessly” (Galatians 2: 21).
Christians are not justified by grace through faith, only to be sanctified by works either the works of the Law or any other code of conduct. Theologically, Evangelicals typically divide the term salvation into three stages: justification, a positional salvation that can never be revoked; sanctification, a lifestyle that reflects justification, and glorification, the end result of salvation when believers are restored to the complete image of God in the eschaton[3]. The Church often struggles the most with the middle stage of sanctification, asserting the need for a code of conduct as many Evangelicals do or even a sacramental merit system as Roman Catholics accept that measures the believer’s progress and growth towards Christlikeness. Although most Evangelicals will hotly deny that they are setting up a new works salvation system in their codes, the practical effects are the same: justification is by faith and sanctification is by works.
The Ontology of Salvation
Grace represents a temporal discontinuity in the plan of God within an overall eternal continuity. The coming of Christ was a radical disruption in the nature of things (ontology) and punctuated history with grace. The new age of grace, only foreshadowed and hoped for in the previous time, was always in view in God’s plan of redemption. But until the coming of Christ there was no tangible mechanism to dispense Grace to humanity. Law never acts as a means of salvation, even if there was someone who kept it perfectly, such as Saul of Tarsus (Philippians 3: 6) .Good behavior does not eradicate the guilt of original sin, simply doing more good works to outweigh our evil ones will do nothing to accomplish salvation, which is the whole substance of the ancient debate between law and grace from Jesus and the Pharisees, to Paul and the Judaizers, to Augustine and Pelagius to the Reformers and the Catholics. It manifests today in the Free Grace Gospel versus Lordship Salvation position as well as the numerous attempts to reassert the principle of law in the Church to act as a hedge against antinomianism and moral libertinism.
The human condition remains so stricken with sin that only a divine intervention will save people from condemnation. No amount of good deeds—even if they were perfect—could erase the curse of sin inherited from the First Adam (Romans 5: 12–21 ). Salvation must be ontological and not simply moral. There must be a change in being and not merely a change in doing. This means there must be a change in the spiritual condition of people and not simply a moral or behavioral change. God does not forgive sin without compensation for sin. Salvation requires more than just a divine act of will to rescue humanity, which then translates to morality and law (or contemporary manifestations of moralism and legalism). This bears out in the New Testament in the struggle between law and grace or works and faith. One position focuses on ontology (the transformation of the spiritual condition or essence) and the other on morality (human effort or works). Salvation focuses on either God or man; either God saves humanity by grace or humanity contributes through its merits to its own forgiveness and restoration.
Human nature tends to self–righteousness and belief in its own ability to earn the grace of God expressed in morality and law, or what Paul called “works.” Morality means the choices people make based on what they think is right or wrong. Law, that is “Policy” in human terms, is the morality of a few people enforced on the majority, through institutional and legally binding codes of behavior. The modern world has adopted a humanistic perspective that sees humanity as preeminent, not God; it has abandoned ontology and metaphysics.[4] In lieu of metaphysics, the modern world uses morality and law as a guide to life; it creates an understanding of God in its own moral image as glorified law–giver and not the Spirit who changes hearts, minds and lives. Thus Christianity and all religion are reduced to morality as opposed to faith, which is irrelevant to the modern world.
Christianity appears increasingly moralistic and legalistic where a code of behavior replaces living faith in God. This manifests in everything from health and eating rules and dress codes, to Prohibition and club or church membership; middle class family values become identical with Christianity: ideals such as a high work ethic, patriotism, and belief in Christian America. Voting becomes a sacred duty, keeping the Ten Commandments becomes emphasized, along with political activism, and so forth. None of these are bad, but they are never a replacement for faith. Yet, they often are made the test of faith and their presence is often mistaken for a vital life in Christ. These things represent morality and even Christian morality, but morality should never be confused with faith and salvation. Salvation is not morality, it is an ontological change in the condition of the human heart and its relationship with God through the Spirit that is freely given and accepted by faith alone. Morality does not constitute the elements of faith, it follows faith as a natural consequence (Ephesians 2: 8–10), and must never be the measure of faith (Romans 14; 1 Corinthians 8; 10: 12–33).
Moralism: The American Heresy
The common sense approach to religion in America argues that people are responsible for their own actions and therefore can make amends for their misdeeds with good deeds. Although, this position is not false, we need to seek to correct and learn from our mistakes, it makes no difference to one’s spiritual condition, which can only change by faith in the person and work of Christ.Theologically speaking, most of the American Church has followed the classic heresy known as Pelagianism,[5] a belief that denies the inherent sinful condition. Pelagius the fourth century monk and arch opponent of St. Augustine argued that original sin does not exist as the guilt humanity inherits from the First Adam and that Adam’s sin was his own. The human race cannot be held accountable for a sin they did not commit. People are born innocent into a corrupt environment and only become sinful after they have sinned. On the surface this doctrine appears rational and fair, but cuts the heart out of the principle of grace and throws all religion back into a legalist and moralist mode. Without a notion of original sin, today called “radical evil,” or “total depravity,” or simply the “sinful human nature,” it makes perfect sense that the way back to God is through being a good person or moral reformation. As theologian Paul Tillich noted “[Pelagianism] … is always effective in us when we try to force God down to ourselves. This is what we usually call ‘moralism,’…. Pelagius said that good and evil are performed by us; they are not given [or an ontic condition, meaning we are not born into a state of sin; rather we become sinners through our own misdeeds or sins]. If this is true then religion is in danger of being transformed into morality.”[6]
The principle of grace advocated by the Apostle Paul, St. Augustine and the Reformers radically opposes moralism and makes salvation a matter of a divine intervention in the human condition that can be received only by faith. Works do nothing to alter the human condition of sin and condemnation. No moral or legal remedy exists that will change our basic sinful selves. Moral transformation (works) follows faith, but has no causal effect on salvation or loss of salvation. What God gives in grace he will not revoke (Rom 8: 26-39; 11: 29). Grace is not an excuse or license for sin. Those who argue that way simply do not understand grace and its transforming effects on moral character, nor have they ever participated in it (Rom 6). “For sin shall not be master over you, for you are not under law, but under grace” (Rom 6: 14)!
Endnotes
1. For an article on how Millennial generation Americans display, among other traits, a tendency to be what sociologist Christian Smith dubs moralistic therapeutic deists, see: http://www.probe.org/last-christian-generation.htm
2. Lawrence Terlizzese, Romney vs. Obama and Beyond: The Church's Prophetic Role in Politics, Probe Ministries, 2012, http://www.probe.org/propheticchurch.
© 2013 Probe MinistriesAbout the Author
Dr. Lawrence Terlizzese is a research associate with Probe Ministries. He holds both a Th.M. and Ph.D. in Theological Studies from Dallas Theological Seminary, and a B.A. in Biblical Studies from Columbia International University in Columbia, South Carolina. He is the author of two books, Trajectory of the Twenty First Century: Essays in Theology and Technology and Hope in the Thought of Jacques Ellul. He can be reached at lawrence@probe.org.
What is Probe?
Probe Ministries is a non-profit ministry whose mission is to assist the church in renewing the minds of believers with a Christian worldview and to equip the church to engage the world for Christ. Probe fulfills this mission through our Mind Games conferences for youth and adults, our 3-minute daily radio program, and our extensive Web site at www.probe.org.Further information about Probe's materials and ministry may be obtained by contacting us at:
Probe Ministries
2001 W. Plano Parkway, Suite 2000
Plano TX 75075
(972) 941-4565
info@probe.org
www.probe.org
2001 W. Plano Parkway, Suite 2000
Plano TX 75075
(972) 941-4565
info@probe.org
www.probe.org
Looking at the hsrtory
Never does ekklesia refer to a building in which people gathered, for worship or for any other purpose. (In fact, the early Christians in the New Testament didn't even have special buildings or places in which to meet during the period in which the New Testament was written. This came much later. For the most part, the first Christians met in private homes it was personal why Jesus said my ecclesia.). The battle of terms practices came around it got silenced many times for those seeking the truth money may have had something to do with it, pelase read King james instructions to the translators the history thereof is quite interesting..
Is my faith weaker, never it is stronger than ever 2 Corth 3 we are not people of print alone but a people indwelt which means personal connect, awareness, and leading, unction, power, revelatory expressions of faith. Most people way back had no bibles, gberations of them, by the way many were unable to read, most things were passed orally. I agree lets stop making up stuff and talk about the truth.They were led and knew who it was leading them,? elders sir were servants. simple practicaland ready to go whererver.
Thanks., what words did,
Is my faith weaker, never it is stronger than ever 2 Corth 3 we are not people of print alone but a people indwelt which means personal connect, awareness, and leading, unction, power, revelatory expressions of faith. Most people way back had no bibles, gberations of them, by the way many were unable to read, most things were passed orally. I agree lets stop making up stuff and talk about the truth.They were led and knew who it was leading them,? elders sir were servants. simple practicaland ready to go whererver.
Thanks., what words did,
Now concerning the word “church,” Professor Smith of Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible states that “church” comes from a word meaning “circle,” which is akin to our word “circus.” Professor Lipsius (German theologian during the Reformation) also shows that “church” came from “circle.” Professor A. F. Fausett of Home Bible Study Dictionary” agrees with Professor Lipsius...."
"Robert Brown’s work The Myth of Kirke” also confirms that “kirke” (church) means “Circle” or “Circular” (p. 22)..........The places of worship among the German and Celtic nations were always circular [witness circular Stonehenge, one of the most ancient stone megaliths on earth]. Compare Anglo-Saxon ‘circe,’ a small church, with ‘circol,’ a circle.” In Scotland it is called “Kirk” and in Gemany it is “Kirche,” in England it is the word “Circe” (the “c” having a “k” sound)."
"But according to Brown’s book, “Kirke/Circe” was also the name of a Goddess."
"Kirke or Circe was the daughter of the Sun god, who was famous for taming wild animals for her circus. But get ready for this: Circe is pictured holding a golden cup in her hand mixed with wine and drugs, by which she controlled the kings of the world. the question is answerered in scripture itself."
Revelation 17: 4 says "And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication:" back to Christ totally.??? the term had a grip of some sort may be the reluctance to change is the best answer to it 's impact.
Besides I doubt totaly, jesus would have ever used the esoteric name, knowing it;s back ground is dark.
Thanks my response thanks to the senders.
Grace within freedom
Satan in his temptations strikes principally at the faith of God's people; that being a grace which gives much glory to God, and in the exercise of which believers have much peace, joy, and comfort; both which he envies and grudges; and it is also a shield which keeps off, and quenches his fiery darts, and is a piece of armour he is sadly harassed with, and therefore endeavours all he can to weaken and destroy it, or wrest it out of their hands: but though, through the power of sin, and the force of temptation, it may fail as to some degree of the steadfastness of it, as to the acting and exercise of it, and as to the sense believers may have of it; yet never as to its principle, it being an irrevocable gift of God's grace; a work of his almighty power; a solid and substantial grace, even the substance of things hoped for; an immortal and incorruptible seed, and of which Christ is the author and finisher; and to nothing more is its security owing, than to the prayers of Christ, which are always heard, and to his powerful mediation, and prevalent intercession; Christ is the advocate of his people; he prays that they might have faith, and then he prays, that it may not fail; and it shall not, notwithstanding all the opposition of hell, and earth, unto it:
by John Gill
(when you step out in faith and know what it is to know the oppostions always come from close quarters often directly from those who claim faith, or family friends, community maybe the first to attack what it is you are doing. Amazing mystery? Fear drives the mind of the soul that something which does not exist, holds an imagianry value, which can be lost..).NW
by John Gill
(when you step out in faith and know what it is to know the oppostions always come from close quarters often directly from those who claim faith, or family friends, community maybe the first to attack what it is you are doing. Amazing mystery? Fear drives the mind of the soul that something which does not exist, holds an imagianry value, which can be lost..).NW
ON THE WAY?
Greetings from narrowway, thanks to those in ecclesia the contact has been warming, all is well.
Yes sir, I did realize those things would take place any time the matrix is broken the milk is spilt and shock results , the endless circle breaks. I was reminded in the NEb- Kj3 young's literal translation was more or less as gripped by the post modern forms, it uses some strong verbs, I love defining the more life giving power of the God as Spirit without reducing the impact of the more intense verbs .
Years ago I made contact in early Bible school with professor who love the read the little etc and never used the English translations due the emphasis on terms and the way it was said he felt was often reduced in strength.
As young as I was I have him to thanks for telling me take the time to really plow it's al worth it , I wish to have done had done much earlier on ibnthat department. I spent a great deal of time alone with my lord that's learning in the hearing comes it's amazing. For many it's life long desire to try find those first steps is life time of reading how to books,you mentioned trouble is they will not do for you what you need to do for your self is to get to where the parroting disappears and the hearing takes over. Sort of joke to me but great wisdom in it, the alternative lecture halls is to hear God , the greatest teache.
That part was hard fro the platonic way it needs sight, logic,and of all. paul well tells he the spirit is the best teacher he;s undivided and deal with truth on an exclsusive basis.
We feel the ability to operate under his influence of his Spirit is life in his knowledge. Quite unlike the formuals. A life apart is not looking for economic notoriety, though money is not bad, it is the love of it, that enters idolatry, and leads to the present day distortions many have ask about why? Called self sir all about self.
That's the case it the west as the east with many things as much as people defend all they done the free fall state went on decade after decade and people are doing all the same stuff expecting different results??/ Spirit led is not a circle of repeating all the same stuff.
Jesus is the way out of trouble in any of those forms of endless routines things as far as hearing get bogged down in formalism inirealas they do today..
The joy of any person of faith who is in Christ is Christ alone, as a theologian I do not add loads of the extras, legal techniques, that drives people into utter frustration, lets love and care by truth and respect. I think a real love once it's known, is speaking without words... does much more. I added from Christocentric website Jim follower does fine job stretching the barriers of the circle.
The love looked for is not found in forms of structures or performance based religions. But in a relationshipwith Jesus was all a about the religion of Israel had missed it for centuries,quite some time, as an ecclesia their is no circle with me, Just Christ no forms that required, nor titles or power but servitude, like my lord that's it simple, almost to simple, I value the hearing, a quest , deep one, Time taken with my lord and sharing the beauty and power of his presence, undivided and laden with love.
So what's next his presence nothing wrong with that . people ask me where I go and Jesus I say only him no idols here, people places or getting free of worldly dependencies and walk in him, love one another and your neighbors, pray for them. The real freedom people seek is only found in his form and person.
John 13-17.kj3 NEB,Young's literal.
Grace man all the way,
Saturday, June 15, 2013
From christ inyou.org
Ecclesiastical Intervention
Allow me to be a story-teller and share a couple of stories:
The first has to do with a prominent man who had fortuitously managed to get the right "breaks" in life, and rose to a position of power in the nation. Outwardly he appeared to be a brilliant success. But inwardly he had numerous areas of personal dysfunction. There was apparent sexual obsession, a propensity to violence, an abuse of power and control, etc. Suffice it so say he was a man who indulged his desires. He had an abundance of material wealth and opportunities unlimited. But he was full of personal aspiration - "the lust of the eyes" - the selfish desire to possess for himself; he was full of personal gratification - "the lust of the flesh" - the selfish desire to please himself; and he was full of personal reputation - "the boastful pride of life" - the selfish desire to promote himself (I John 2:16). His desire for physical gratification led him to have sexual relationships with women outside of the context of marriage. On one occasion this man had gotten away with murder it was termed "justifiable homicide" by one with "diplomatic immunity."
This man had problems! Here was a man who was in "a state of denial." He was not facing up to his problems; he was running away from his problems. He was reacting to his problems with anger and hostility (fight), with anxiety and fear (fright), and with escapism and withdrawal (flight). This man was conniving and manipulative. He would pull any strings necessary to resolve the present distress. He was a master in crisis management, both nationally and personally. The end justified the means, and he could justify everything he did. He was constantly covering-up, putting out fires, putting band-aids on cancer. Typically, he could see other's faults but not his own, and was full of blame toward others for causing his problems.
Now this man was religious. He was a leader in the church. On an earlier occasion he had even been referred to as "a man after God's own heart". But he was still full of behavioral dysfunction. The "flesh" was winning out in self-indulged desires. He was going to have to live with the consequences of his selfish and sinful choices.
This all became particularly evident during an "intervention" session that was engineered to force this man to see his problems. He was confronted; he was exposed; his problem was revealed his self-indulgence, his sin. The intervention facilitator pointed at the man and said, "You are the source of the problem." "What are you going to do about it?"
Have you caught on to what I am doing? I gave you some clues in the story. The biggest clue was that this man was "a man after God's own heart." (I Sam. 13:14; Acts 13:22) What character in the Bible is referred to in that way? Yes, David. I was just retelling in a contemporary form, the story of David and his encounter with Bathsheba as recorded in II Samuel, chapters 11 and 12.
Take the time to read the original version of that story in II Samuel 11,12. The interaction that takes place in this narrative can serve as a viable pattern for dealing with behavioral problems. We see that addictive behavior is often "acted out" in times of boredom and loneliness; we see a man involved in cover-up and denial and self-justification; we see Nathan, the prophet, doing an "intervention" a confrontational forced awareness of the problem and he does so by using an allegorical story that reveals the selfish injustice of David's actions; David was forced to address the need for repentance; but he still had to live with the consequences of his past choices.
Now, I am going to tell you another story that does not have the ingredients of a successful resolution of the problem. In this story the "denial" is not addressed, the "codependency" continues, there is no "intervention", and no recorded recovery. This story is not original either! But I am going to tell you right up front that this story is based on a fairy-tale from the Danish story-teller, Hans Christian Anderson, entitled The Emperor's New Clothes. Do you remember the story? For those of you deprived of a complete juvenile literary education, allow me to retell it to you. I will do so in an embellished adaptation, but you will get the story!
Once upon a time there was an emperor (a king) who was full of pride and self-centered concern. He was really enamored by royal vestments, royal robes. It was a real ego-trip for him to dress up and engage in the "pomp and circumstance" of royal eminence. One day he got "conned" by a couple of con-artists two alleged "weavers" who were out to fleece the king of his wealth. They offered to weave and stitch for him some royal finery "fit for a king." They began by weaving an intriquing tale in the mind of the king. They explained that their weaving was so extraordinary and supernatural that it was visible only to the elite and knowledgeable and invisible to those who did not have "eyes to see". "Take my order," begged the king, "Money is no object!"
Now the king was not about to admit that he could not see the clothing that these alleged weavers were weaving and stitching, for to do so was to admit that he was unenlightened and undiscerning. Those around him joined him in the "denial", operating as if everything was normal. It was a "cover-up" concerning the fact that there was no cover-up. To protect themselves they participated in the pretence and "played the game." The king's so-called friends and colleagues gushed with praise for the non-existent garments. "Oh, how beautiful; how majestic; how moving and inspiring!" They extolled the features of the fanciful and farcical finery.
In this case there was no "intervention"; only a humiliating exposure. The pompous pride of the emperor prompted him to organize a public parade to showcase his non-existent garments. The citizens of the kingdom, cowed by fear, said nothing about the absence of clothing. They only repeated pious platitudes of respect for royalty.
As the parade proceeded down the avenue, one child had not been "cued" for the pretense. As the king passed by, the child exclaimed, "The King doesn't have any clothes on!" They attempted to "shush" him, but the unspeakable had been spoken.
The king was publicly humiliated for the fool that he was. But despite the exposure of his exposure, he continued to "play the game", and exclaimed "The procession must go on!" The denial was continued. What a fool!
Have you recognized what I have just done to you, or for you? In the first story, I told you what I was going to do. In the second story I did it. And now I am going to tell you what I did.
In the first story I told you the story of David, Bathsheba and Nathan. In the second story I played the role of Nathan the prophet, and told you a story, in like manner as Nathan told David a story, and with a similar purpose to reveal a problem that is being covered up. In playing the role of Nathan the prophet, I also played the role of the child on the parade route who exposed the naked king.
Now you might say, "that was a silly story. Who would be so foolish?" And if I were to be as blatantly blunt as Nathan was, I would have to say to you, "You are the ones!" "You are the emperor and his subjects!" Actually, the institutional church is the emperor over the realm of Ecclesiastica, and religious church members are the citizens of the kingdom of Ecclesiastica.
The emperor, organized religion, is filled with self-centered concern, "pomp and circumstance", vested interests. But it got "conned" by a couple of weavers who could weave a good tale, and thereby fleeced the flock. We could identify them as Jimmy Bakker and Jimmy Swaggart, but there are many such "weavers" posing as ministers, preachers and evangelists. What has happened is that it seems that everyone in the kingdom of Ecclesiastica has joined in the "denial."
Like David, the institutional church is engaged in crisis management, the end justifies the means as it manipulates people in the "programs." It is engaged in a gigantic "cover-up" of the severity of the sin-problem. Like the citizens in the kingdom of the emperor, the members of organized churches are participating in the co-dependent denial which perpetuates dysfunctional socialization. "I'm OK; you're OK; we're OK; everything is OK in the institutional church." "It's beautiful; it's inspiring; it's awesome!" "We're comfortable with what's going on. "Hear no evil; see no evil; speak no evil monkey see, monkey do! "Don't rock the boat; don't be critical; don't touch the Lord's anointed (I Chron. 16:22). "If you think there are problems, then just overlook them. "Be quiet and "play the game." "We want the appearance of peace and unity at any cost. "Don't make waves. We want to maintain the status-quo."
Is this not the self-delusion of lying to themselves and others? playing the fool like the emperor and his subjects?
The institutional church is being humiliated before the world today for the "fool" that it is. It is deluded into thinking that it has something that is spiritual and invisible, and everyone pretends they are enlightened when in reality it is unclothed, and everyone is "playing the fool." Rather than being "clothed in righteousness", the institutional church of Christian religion is naked in its hypocrisy. But it continues to "play the game" of "churchianity" and to engage in "denial". "The procession must go on!" "Crank up the organ; bring on the robes!"
The risen and living Lord Jesus spoke to the church in Laodicea in Revelation 3:14-22: Vs. 17 "you do not know that you are wretched and miserable and poor and blind and naked." Vs. 19 - the need is to "repent." Vs. 22 - "He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches."
No one today seems to be willing to hear what the Spirit of God is saying. No one seems to be willing to "speak out" and "intervene." It takes the intrepidity of a prophet or the innocence of a child to reveal the pretense! I guess that is what I am trying to do to do an "ecclesiastical intervention" to confront and reveal and make people aware of the problem, the blatant foolishness of the present situation in organized religion. I am playing the role of Nathan the prophet as well as the role of the child on the parade route. The child merely exposed the situation. The prophet purposefully intervened to seek God's intended end individual repentance and the restoration of functional humanity.
Some religious people will be as angry at me as David was when he heard Nathan's story and then he got "pinned" with the personal application. Some religious people would want to silence one who is speaking as I am speaking, just as they tried to silence the child who exposed the king's exposure. It is painful to have to admit "denial" and "co-dependency" and even the addiction to religion, much less spiritual nakedness. In fact, the Lord Jesus was "crucified" at the instigation of the religious authorities, for exposing the nakedness, the pretense, the hypocrisy of their religious system, and their unwillingness to accept Him for who He was and is.
We must understand the reality of the Christian gospel the vital indwelling dynamic of the risen Lord Jesus Christ and His Life lived out through us to the glory of God. I am unwilling to continue to play the "naked church" game, parading around clothed only in "pomp and circumstance", nor am I willing to see others deceived into playing that game either. That is why I am willing to be used as a facilitator for "ecclesiastical intervention." Do not settle for addiction to religion; settle only for the Life of Jesus Christ lived out in you!
Allow me to be a story-teller and share a couple of stories:
The first has to do with a prominent man who had fortuitously managed to get the right "breaks" in life, and rose to a position of power in the nation. Outwardly he appeared to be a brilliant success. But inwardly he had numerous areas of personal dysfunction. There was apparent sexual obsession, a propensity to violence, an abuse of power and control, etc. Suffice it so say he was a man who indulged his desires. He had an abundance of material wealth and opportunities unlimited. But he was full of personal aspiration - "the lust of the eyes" - the selfish desire to possess for himself; he was full of personal gratification - "the lust of the flesh" - the selfish desire to please himself; and he was full of personal reputation - "the boastful pride of life" - the selfish desire to promote himself (I John 2:16). His desire for physical gratification led him to have sexual relationships with women outside of the context of marriage. On one occasion this man had gotten away with murder it was termed "justifiable homicide" by one with "diplomatic immunity."
This man had problems! Here was a man who was in "a state of denial." He was not facing up to his problems; he was running away from his problems. He was reacting to his problems with anger and hostility (fight), with anxiety and fear (fright), and with escapism and withdrawal (flight). This man was conniving and manipulative. He would pull any strings necessary to resolve the present distress. He was a master in crisis management, both nationally and personally. The end justified the means, and he could justify everything he did. He was constantly covering-up, putting out fires, putting band-aids on cancer. Typically, he could see other's faults but not his own, and was full of blame toward others for causing his problems.
Now this man was religious. He was a leader in the church. On an earlier occasion he had even been referred to as "a man after God's own heart". But he was still full of behavioral dysfunction. The "flesh" was winning out in self-indulged desires. He was going to have to live with the consequences of his selfish and sinful choices.
This all became particularly evident during an "intervention" session that was engineered to force this man to see his problems. He was confronted; he was exposed; his problem was revealed his self-indulgence, his sin. The intervention facilitator pointed at the man and said, "You are the source of the problem." "What are you going to do about it?"
Have you caught on to what I am doing? I gave you some clues in the story. The biggest clue was that this man was "a man after God's own heart." (I Sam. 13:14; Acts 13:22) What character in the Bible is referred to in that way? Yes, David. I was just retelling in a contemporary form, the story of David and his encounter with Bathsheba as recorded in II Samuel, chapters 11 and 12.
Take the time to read the original version of that story in II Samuel 11,12. The interaction that takes place in this narrative can serve as a viable pattern for dealing with behavioral problems. We see that addictive behavior is often "acted out" in times of boredom and loneliness; we see a man involved in cover-up and denial and self-justification; we see Nathan, the prophet, doing an "intervention" a confrontational forced awareness of the problem and he does so by using an allegorical story that reveals the selfish injustice of David's actions; David was forced to address the need for repentance; but he still had to live with the consequences of his past choices.
Now, I am going to tell you another story that does not have the ingredients of a successful resolution of the problem. In this story the "denial" is not addressed, the "codependency" continues, there is no "intervention", and no recorded recovery. This story is not original either! But I am going to tell you right up front that this story is based on a fairy-tale from the Danish story-teller, Hans Christian Anderson, entitled The Emperor's New Clothes. Do you remember the story? For those of you deprived of a complete juvenile literary education, allow me to retell it to you. I will do so in an embellished adaptation, but you will get the story!
Once upon a time there was an emperor (a king) who was full of pride and self-centered concern. He was really enamored by royal vestments, royal robes. It was a real ego-trip for him to dress up and engage in the "pomp and circumstance" of royal eminence. One day he got "conned" by a couple of con-artists two alleged "weavers" who were out to fleece the king of his wealth. They offered to weave and stitch for him some royal finery "fit for a king." They began by weaving an intriquing tale in the mind of the king. They explained that their weaving was so extraordinary and supernatural that it was visible only to the elite and knowledgeable and invisible to those who did not have "eyes to see". "Take my order," begged the king, "Money is no object!"
Now the king was not about to admit that he could not see the clothing that these alleged weavers were weaving and stitching, for to do so was to admit that he was unenlightened and undiscerning. Those around him joined him in the "denial", operating as if everything was normal. It was a "cover-up" concerning the fact that there was no cover-up. To protect themselves they participated in the pretence and "played the game." The king's so-called friends and colleagues gushed with praise for the non-existent garments. "Oh, how beautiful; how majestic; how moving and inspiring!" They extolled the features of the fanciful and farcical finery.
In this case there was no "intervention"; only a humiliating exposure. The pompous pride of the emperor prompted him to organize a public parade to showcase his non-existent garments. The citizens of the kingdom, cowed by fear, said nothing about the absence of clothing. They only repeated pious platitudes of respect for royalty.
As the parade proceeded down the avenue, one child had not been "cued" for the pretense. As the king passed by, the child exclaimed, "The King doesn't have any clothes on!" They attempted to "shush" him, but the unspeakable had been spoken.
The king was publicly humiliated for the fool that he was. But despite the exposure of his exposure, he continued to "play the game", and exclaimed "The procession must go on!" The denial was continued. What a fool!
Have you recognized what I have just done to you, or for you? In the first story, I told you what I was going to do. In the second story I did it. And now I am going to tell you what I did.
In the first story I told you the story of David, Bathsheba and Nathan. In the second story I played the role of Nathan the prophet, and told you a story, in like manner as Nathan told David a story, and with a similar purpose to reveal a problem that is being covered up. In playing the role of Nathan the prophet, I also played the role of the child on the parade route who exposed the naked king.
Now you might say, "that was a silly story. Who would be so foolish?" And if I were to be as blatantly blunt as Nathan was, I would have to say to you, "You are the ones!" "You are the emperor and his subjects!" Actually, the institutional church is the emperor over the realm of Ecclesiastica, and religious church members are the citizens of the kingdom of Ecclesiastica.
The emperor, organized religion, is filled with self-centered concern, "pomp and circumstance", vested interests. But it got "conned" by a couple of weavers who could weave a good tale, and thereby fleeced the flock. We could identify them as Jimmy Bakker and Jimmy Swaggart, but there are many such "weavers" posing as ministers, preachers and evangelists. What has happened is that it seems that everyone in the kingdom of Ecclesiastica has joined in the "denial."
Like David, the institutional church is engaged in crisis management, the end justifies the means as it manipulates people in the "programs." It is engaged in a gigantic "cover-up" of the severity of the sin-problem. Like the citizens in the kingdom of the emperor, the members of organized churches are participating in the co-dependent denial which perpetuates dysfunctional socialization. "I'm OK; you're OK; we're OK; everything is OK in the institutional church." "It's beautiful; it's inspiring; it's awesome!" "We're comfortable with what's going on. "Hear no evil; see no evil; speak no evil monkey see, monkey do! "Don't rock the boat; don't be critical; don't touch the Lord's anointed (I Chron. 16:22). "If you think there are problems, then just overlook them. "Be quiet and "play the game." "We want the appearance of peace and unity at any cost. "Don't make waves. We want to maintain the status-quo."
Is this not the self-delusion of lying to themselves and others? playing the fool like the emperor and his subjects?
The institutional church is being humiliated before the world today for the "fool" that it is. It is deluded into thinking that it has something that is spiritual and invisible, and everyone pretends they are enlightened when in reality it is unclothed, and everyone is "playing the fool." Rather than being "clothed in righteousness", the institutional church of Christian religion is naked in its hypocrisy. But it continues to "play the game" of "churchianity" and to engage in "denial". "The procession must go on!" "Crank up the organ; bring on the robes!"
The risen and living Lord Jesus spoke to the church in Laodicea in Revelation 3:14-22: Vs. 17 "you do not know that you are wretched and miserable and poor and blind and naked." Vs. 19 - the need is to "repent." Vs. 22 - "He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches."
No one today seems to be willing to hear what the Spirit of God is saying. No one seems to be willing to "speak out" and "intervene." It takes the intrepidity of a prophet or the innocence of a child to reveal the pretense! I guess that is what I am trying to do to do an "ecclesiastical intervention" to confront and reveal and make people aware of the problem, the blatant foolishness of the present situation in organized religion. I am playing the role of Nathan the prophet as well as the role of the child on the parade route. The child merely exposed the situation. The prophet purposefully intervened to seek God's intended end individual repentance and the restoration of functional humanity.
Some religious people will be as angry at me as David was when he heard Nathan's story and then he got "pinned" with the personal application. Some religious people would want to silence one who is speaking as I am speaking, just as they tried to silence the child who exposed the king's exposure. It is painful to have to admit "denial" and "co-dependency" and even the addiction to religion, much less spiritual nakedness. In fact, the Lord Jesus was "crucified" at the instigation of the religious authorities, for exposing the nakedness, the pretense, the hypocrisy of their religious system, and their unwillingness to accept Him for who He was and is.
We must understand the reality of the Christian gospel the vital indwelling dynamic of the risen Lord Jesus Christ and His Life lived out through us to the glory of God. I am unwilling to continue to play the "naked church" game, parading around clothed only in "pomp and circumstance", nor am I willing to see others deceived into playing that game either. That is why I am willing to be used as a facilitator for "ecclesiastical intervention." Do not settle for addiction to religion; settle only for the Life of Jesus Christ lived out in you!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)