Facebook, Worms and Blogging

I just followed my daughter's example and took down my Facebook page. I had a few people that used Facebook to communicate with me, but by and large it was a weird conglomeration of wall to wall notes from people I don't even know. Then one of my friends got worms - or something like that. I decided it was time to dump it before I got worms too.

Time to get back to writing blogs more frequently. I know I have been very irregular for a long while, but I want to get back at it. Blogging is writing and writing makes me think and thinking is good. It helps if people send me questions, but if not, I will make up my own questions.

Go ahead - ask any old question and I will give it a whirl. I am thinking especially about those pastoral or theological or philosophical questions that are out there... The meaning of life, the importance of flossing, the relationship of the health care debate to the Christian Gospel... stuff like that.

So, from now on I will do at least a couple of blogs a week. I promise! Check back soon.

If we confess our sins...

Someone recently wrote to me with a great question.

I'd like your take on this issue: If all sins are forgiven at the cross, why does I John 1:9 say, If we confess our sins He is faithful and just to FORGIVE us our sins.

While 1John 1:9 is commonly used to teach that believers can confess their sins and be right with God again, the primary meaning of the verse is that true believers are those who have confessed their sins and so have come to God for salvation.

The immediate context is a series of five "if-then" statements that are parallel to each other.

• If we say we have fellowship with Him, but walk in darkness...
• If we walk in the light as He is in the light...
• If we say that we have no sin...
• If we confess our sins...
• If we claim that we have not sinned...

These are parallels that deal with the same basic question - Who is saved and who is not saved? Each statement alternates between people who are not saved and people who are saved. If verse nine is forced to apply to forgiveness of ongoing sins it throws the whole passage out of balance and brings up good questions.

Of course, Christians should repent, confess their sins to God and seek reconciliation with God when they sin. But that is not the primary meaning of this verse. On the other hand, verse nine points to the basis of God's forgiveness. Namely, God is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness because "the blood of Jesus Christ, His son, cleanses us from all sin." (v.7)

One problem of using 1John 1:9 as an instruction to believers about their continuing relationship with God is that it then seems to mean sin is "no big deal." If you sin, you can just confess and God will justly forgive you. Some people think they can callously sin with the intention that they will later confess it and be forgiven.

Chapter two clearly says that the Christians should NOT sin, but that if they do sin, they have an Advocate with the Father. This makes it clear that we are not sinless, but that we should take sin very seriously. After all, Jesus Himself, is our blood sacrifice. Do we love Him or not?

Chapter three emphatically says that sin cannot characterize the life of the true believer. A person who is chronically defeated by the same sins needs to ask serious questions about his relationship with God.

(1John 3:9) No one who is born of God practices sin, because His seed abides in him; and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. (NASB)

Homicide & Pragmatism

The paper this morning reported the eleventh homicide in Stark County in the past two months. This one was a two year old girl - evidently shot during some sort of gang hit at her home. A few weeks ago another person killed his own 3 year old and 6 year old children and former mother-in-law, apparently to spite his ex-wife. How can humans behave in such a brutal way?

Well, many Americans live by the philosophy of pragmatism. "What works is what is right." They also like utilitarianism. "What is useful is good." So they make their choices based on what seems to "work for them" at the moment.

Moral purity or impurity? Fidelity or infidelity? Peace or violence? Honesty or dishonesty? Kindness or unkindness? Truthfulness or lies? Modesty or immodesty? Hard work or sloth? Drug addiction or clean living? Murder or tender care?

Pragmatism says that it all depends on what works for you. If it is useful to you, then it is good! So behavior varies from moment to moment and situation to situation because people's choices depend on what they think "works for them." This should not surprise us. We have been trained to think this way. We have been indoctrinated with the so called "scientific" view that we are all products of the ultimate pragmatic principle - Natural Selection (AKA "survival of the fittest.") No surprise that our society is more and more like a dangerous jungle.

But we have God's own revelation.

(2Timothy 3:16-17) All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,
17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

God says that we are not a cosmic accident, but His own creation. He says that although He has mercifully put up with our sinful rebellion for a while, there is a day of accounting coming. He says that no matter what you may think "works for you," the only thing that REALLY and TRULY works is submitting to God and His word.

(Proverbs 14:12) There is a way that seems right to a man, But its end is the way of death.

When man originally decided to rebel against God, he brought death into the world. (Romans 5:12) On the one hand death is a penalty for sin - "The wages of sin..." (Romans 6:23) But on the other hand death is God's way of limiting sin and bringing sinners to account. People can't just go on living in their sin, they will die and face their Creator.

Students who know that they have a final test coming up might be motivated to study the material. Inevitably a few students will show up and say, "I thought the test was next week. Can't I have an extension?" But the teacher gave them the syllabus at the beginning of the year. The teacher wrote the test date on the board every day and offered remedial classes for students who wanted help preparing. The other students were all preparing and talking about the upcoming test. Does it really matter now, on test day, when you say, "I didn't believe it would be today?"

The universal fact of death should put the "fear of God" into everyone and show that pragmatism and utilitarianism are a sham. No matter what you think "works for you" today, we will all someday stand before God and give an account. It is not optional and it doesn't matter what you believe about it. God has given us ample warning in His word - the Bible. He has even built into us a sort of warning system - the Conscience. We know that there is more to right and wrong than the short term utility of our actions.

(Proverbs 21:30) There is no wisdom or understanding Or counsel against the LORD.

God is holy and just. He will make everything right in the end. But, that includes EVERYONE, not just murderers. That means you and me!

Fortunately, God has - like the teacher - provided help for those who believe the test is coming. The teacher provides remediation. God provided redemption and reconciliation through the sacrifice of His Divine Son, Jesus The Christ. Through the provision of Christ by His death and resurrection, all who call on Him can be saved from their sin and have ultimate eternal life with God.

(2Corinthians 5:21) For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.

(John 5:24) “Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life.

Are you ready to be examined by your Maker? Getting ready for that day is the only really pragmatic thing you can do.

Proprietary Attitudes?

It must be a byproduct of our materialistic culture. Or maybe it is more universal. I am speaking of our proprietary attitude... sometimes called our greedy desire to make a buck.

Someone told me this week about a nationally known speaker who published books and materials without copyrighting them - thinking that he would let others use them freely. All was well until the day when someone ELSE copyrighted the speaker's materials and made him pay to use his own things!

WOW!

I like to read books - especially books about the Bible, Christian living, and Ministry. What amazes me is the constant production of new books. Some of these are really helpful. Some are not so helpful. Many great books are written that are TRUE. They are true to the Word of God and true about the application of God's word to life. Often these books have a limited appeal. Many other books are just plain FALSE. They are a pablum of rehashed psychobabble that appeals to carnal people's pride and passion for earthly prosperity. These books are (guess what) VERY POPULAR - even best sellers.

Prosperity Theology - the teaching that God's desire is that every child of His should have health and wealth in this world - is wildly popular. No matter that its only relationship to the Bible is the misapplication of misinterpretations of misquoted proof texts.

Is this just sour grapes? Could it be that I am just jealous of the megachurch stars who preach such drivel and live in million-dollar homes and wear silk and diamonds?

My heart is certainly sinful enough, but I don't think that is the case here. I am carnal enough to envy someone for coming up with a great book that has the potential to help many people understand the truth of God's word. But not because of the money. I just wish I could be that insightful. I wish I could be that effective in ministry.

But not for the fame and fortune - and I think that is true for the authors I envy too. They are not doing what they do for fame and fortune. They are doing it because it is their ministry from God. It is the outworking of their gifts for God's glory. Praise God!

As for the flagrant frauds - the snake oil salesmen - the purveyors of false hope - I know I don't envy them. But I do pity the poor souls who are deceived by them. These false prophets will someday answer to God. At that point their earthly luxuries will seem to be a curse, rather than a blessing.

(2Corinthians 2:17) For we are not, as so many, peddling the word of God; but as of sincerity, but as from God, we speak in the sight of God in Christ.

Weird Science Humor

One of my favorite comics - Non Sequitur - is running a series suggesting that people who believe in creation are dismissing proven science whenever it contradicts their beliefs. Today's strip has Danae suspending her belief in gravity... ha, ha, ha.

What is REALLY funny is that the evolutionists are the ones who dismiss proven science when it contradicts their beliefs about evolution. One obvious example is the second law of thermodynamics - the well established fact that all systems tend toward entropy. According to this law, no system could become more complex apart from a huge input of energy.

My second example: A day or so ago, I heard a radio program interviewing an ivy league scientist who has observed that humans "have evolved" to need high quality prepared food. He points out that "other animals" live on raw foods - plants or meats. They find it and they eat it. Humans, on the other hand, need to have foods that are chopped or ground up and cooked.

This is weird and funny because it contradicts the basic concept of natural selection. Natural selection says that those who have characteristics that make them more likely to survive and thrive are the ones who will pass on their genes. Wouldn't it be easier to survive and thrive if you could just go out in the back yard and eat grass? But no! We need higher quality food to begin with and then we need to grind it and chop it and cook it to get the good out of it.

My last recent example is a professor, John Long, at Vassar College, who creates robots with fins and tails, etc. He and his students make these robots to represent early life forms, and to test theories about what effect different evolutionary changes (e.g., stiffer backbones, etc.) would have had.

What? Did these robots evolve or were they created by design? Do these changes evolve, or are they design changes? What could these robots possibly prove about evolution? At the most, they are a way to "act out" the proposed theories about how subsequent changes would have affected the descendents.

These robots are infinitely more simple than real animals. How ironic that it takes so much intelligent design just to act out a theory that denies the need for intelligent design!

This is science? Ha, ha, ha!

What Should Be Our Stand On War?

Another great question came by e-mail:

If 3 'Bible Scholars' are for war and 3 'Bible Scholars' are against war and all 6 cite specific Bible passages to support their stand, who is correct? What should be OUR stand on the subject of war?

This question suggests to me that the person asking it does not really respect Bible scholarship. It suggests that 1) you can make the Bible say anything and 2) that "scholarship" consists of coming up with a number of proof texts. Who are these scholars? What is their approach to Bible study? Why should I believe ANY of them? What war are they talking about and what exactly are they saying?

The real question is, "What does the Bible say about war?" The answer is pretty complicated because there are many things the Bible says about different wars in different situations, but let's assume that we are talking about modern wars like Iraq or Afghanistan.

This reminds me of an old joke. The husband is talking to a friend and says, "I make all the big decisions in our family... what political party we will support and what our foreign policy should be. My wife makes the little decisions... what we will eat, what we will wear, and what car we will drive."

War is the prerogative of the state, not the individual. Romans 13 says that the state "bears the sword." The state is ordained by God to punish "evildoers." There are international evildoers and certainly a state can and should act to protect its citizens. If it doesn't do this, the state will soon disappear.

(Romans 13:1-4) Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God.
2 Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves.
3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same.
4 For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil.

Will you call 911 when burglars break into your house and threaten you and your family? Assuming that you will, does that mean that you are "for war?" International wars are the same thing on a different scale. The state is acting to protect the lives, freedoms and possessions of its citizens.

If a state is engaged in stealing the resources of others or of bullying its international neighborhood, obviously we should be opposed to that. To be opposed to that behavior generally means being in favor of some sort of war. (Even economic or diplomatic sanctions are an aspect of warfare - isolation, blockade, siege.)

Should we be "for" war? Wars lead to all kinds of tragedy and human suffering. Generally speaking I am opposed to war. On the other hand, should I be happy if our government refuses to protect us from a nuclear Iran, or from Taliban terrorists, or from N. Korea on the basis that I am against war? I don't think so. I think that our government is supposed to protect us and our interests in the world just like the police are supposed to protect our interests locally - and sometimes that requires the force of arms. Will there be collateral damage? Yes - and I'm against it. Will there be errors of judgment? Yes - and I'm against that too. And while I'm at it, I am against strategic and tactical errors as well.

But, it boils down to this - governments are ordained by God specifically to enforce the peace by violence. We wish it never had to come to that, but obviously it does.

Gambling or Investing?

This morning I received this great question by e-mail:

Is investing in stocks considered gambling? If so, should we not do so?

A very interesting question indeed!

(Proverbs 16:33) "The lot is cast into the lap, But its every decision is from the Lord."

It is possible to argue that there is no such thing as gambling - because everything is controlled by God.

The problem with gambling is that it is poor stewardship of what God has entrusted to us. Generally, gambling appeals to our sinful and foolish nature with the promise of instant riches. The riches it promises are not the kind of riches that Jesus tells us to pursue, and by pursuing them they become an idol. We are focused on those things instead of on serving Christ.

(Matthew 6:19-21) ¶ “Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal;
20 but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal.
21 For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.

(Matthew 6:24) ¶ “No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will be loyal to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon.

On the other hand, investing is certainly not a problem in the Bible - it is considered good stewardship. Remember that the parable of the talents says that the servant who did NOT invest what was entrusted to him was lazy and wicked!

(Matthew 25:26-27) ¶ “But his lord answered and said to him, ‘You wicked and lazy servant, you knew that I reap where I have not sown, and gather where I have not scattered seed.
27 So you ought to have deposited my money with the bankers, and at my coming I would have received back my own with interest.

The servant, in his own defense, said that he didn't want to risk the master's money by investing it. The master, however, expected him to do exactly that and take the risk with the expectation that he would probably be careful WHAT he invested in.

It is one thing to invest in relatively safe investments with a reasonable expectation of a return on the investment. Sometimes that doesn't work out, but usually it is good stewardship. It is another thing entirely to spend God's money buying lottery tickets or stocks that have about the same chance of profitability. That is just foolish and a waste of what was entrusted to you.

The most important question is the heart. If we are doing whatever we are doing because of our covetous love of material things and that is taking our time and energy that should be given to God - it is sin.

Are we motivated by sober hopes of good stewardship or by feverish dreams of earthly riches?