Lens Crafters

As I read through the Pentateuch I can’t help but contemplate the vast difference that can be observed between the theocratic law handed down to Israel by God through Moses and the often democratically fueled cultural relativism that seems to permeate the world view of the average human today. And that's really the crux of the issue; one's world view. What is the baseline, the cornerstone, the foundation of how you perceive the world around you. Does it begin with the ascendancy of your rights and prerogatives as a sentient creature? Or is God's sovereignty and prerogatives the lens through which you see His creation?

Our society’s fixation on personal equal rights for all makes it quite difficult I think to read through ancient Israel’s laws without revulsion and disdain.  It’s no wonder really that God is so often portrayed by people today as a bloodthirsty tyrant who has no place in modern society.  The fuel they typically prefer to use for their fire is the many examples throughout the Old Testament of laws which seem backward and uncivilized to our modern minds.  One example can be found in Deuteronomy 17:2-7.  The Law as given through Moses dictates that if anyone is accused of worshiping other gods in the manner of the heathen nations Israel was going in to dispossess, that person was to be immediately executed if the charges were proven to be true.  This particular law concludes with the sentence “You must purge the evil from you.”  I am confident that any average “modern” citizen of the U.S. or any other western nation would be horrified by reading such a thing.

The reason for the harshness of this law is that Israel was God’s chosen nation.  As such they had to be uniquely holy and blameless to the nations around them so as to accurately reflect God’s attributes and thus showcase His glory.  It was absolutely critical for this to work that the Israelites could not, under any circumstances, engage in the despicable practices (including infanticide via burning to death) of the false religions they were surrounded by.  Therefore God knew that any tendencies toward even the “tamest” of these heathen practices would in time lead Israel down a path of forsaking Him and decreasing His glory and thus necessitated purging immediately and with finality. Even if we do not completely understand how summary capital punishment for an Israelite found practicing pagan idolatry can be right and true we must accept that it is because scripture tells us that God is perfectly just and good (Exodus 34:5-7, Psalm 18:30, Matthew 5:48).

Could God have instead implemented a system of counseling a wayward citizen back from the brink of idolatry or any other approach which might seem less draconian to us?  Perhaps, but that’s really beside the point.  God in His perfectly manifested and perfectly synchronized justice and omniscience chose not to do it that way.  He chose to do it in a manner that best exalted His name.  His glory was and is of paramount importance, not that of one of His creations.  And this I believe is the foundational worldview-shaping truth which is anathema to modern unregenerate mankind.  The idea that anyone or anything in the universe should be ascribed greater worth than oneself is a detestable thought to a heart which has always been and currently is in rebellion against God.

So the question is this.  Who built the lens you use to perceive reality?  Was it you or is it God?  The answer to this question has ramifications far beyond your opinion of justice in ancient Israel.  It will shape how you see everything from the doctrine of salvation to church polity, from the role of women in ministry to forgiveness, from judgment among Christians to evangelism.  If your lens was constructed by you then you cannot help but have a problem with the concept of God’s authority.  It may not manifest itself in every area of your theology but it must come out sooner or later.  And when it does it will be in favor of your rights and prerogatives, not God’s.

Nap Time

Richard Wurmbrand (1909-2001) was a Romanian Christian pastor.  He spent 14 years in communist prisons.  He endured physical and mental abuse the likes of which we cannot begin to imagine because he refused to recant his faith.  The communist governments of the former U.S.S.R. and eastern bloc European countries as well as present day communist countries such as China and North Korea were and are barbarically oppressive of Christians.  A world view such as communism which is predicated upon the state being the supreme authority and benefactor in people's lives cannot tolerate any competing religions which might undermine their power base through belief in a supreme being.

By the way, the state "religion" of any communist regime is classically atheist.  I intentionally use the word religion to describe atheism.  Religion can be defined as "a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith."  Regardless of whether we as a culture typically view atheism as a religion it is in point of fact very much one.

But back to Mr. Wurmbrand.  Among the litany of physical tortures he suffered were multiple broken bones, a dozen or so places on his body where his flesh was carved into, 18 puncture wounds, years of solitary confinement, repeated brainwashing for up to 17 hours a day for weeks and months at a time, being frozen to within minutes of dying before being revived repeatedly, and enduring an agonizing separation from his wife and son.

This giant of faith would eventually be released and ransomed by western Christian organizations so that he could escape to the west.  After doing so he founded Voice of the Martyrs, a group dedicated to the relief and advocacy of persecuted Christians around the world.  Today VoM is active across the globe, distributing hundreds of thousands of newsletters each month and providing relief to thousands of Christian martyrs.

Here are three quotes from Richard Wurmbrand on the state of the western church.

•  “I suffer in the west more than I did in communist lands. I suffer in the west more than I suffered in a communist jail because now I see with my own eyes the western civilization dying.”
• “The underground Church is a poor and suffering church but it has no lukewarm members.”
• “The west sleeps.”

Christian, are you as useless as lukewarm water; neither good for cooling and refreshing or for salving and cleansing?  If someone were to sample your "spiritual water" would you be so distasteful that they would spit you out?  Does your mouth profess love for Jesus while your heart is far from him?  Are you asleep in the light, enjoying the comforts of freedom and wealth while the truth and authority of the word of God is slowly and methodically destroyed by the religion of atheism in America?

Awake, sleeper, and arise from the dead, and Christ will shine on you.

Soli Deo Gloria

Sound and Fury, Signifying Nothing

My apologies to Mr. Shakespeare for shamelessly stealing part of his line.

Anger.  Is it an emotion?  Dictionary.com seems to think so; it defines anger as "a strong feeling of displeasure and belligerence aroused by a wrong".  Poor Merriam-Webster apparently doesn't know what it thinks about anger.  Its entry for anger points to angry which points back to anger.  Huh?  Perhaps they think that anger is such a common and obvious piece of the human experience that no one truly needs a real definition of it.  I would agree that with very few exceptions visitors to Merriam-Webster's web site already think they know all about anger.  But perhaps anger has been mislabeled, misinterpreted, and misunderstood by humans since that little matter of fruit in the garden.

I have been studying the book of James lately.  A few weeks ago I ran across a pretty familiar passage but this time it decided to jump out and hit me between the eyes.

James 1:19-20 - Know this, my beloved brothers: let every person be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger; for the anger of man does not produce the righteousness of God.

It sounds pretty simple; we should not respond hastily about anything.  I've always accepted it at that level and moved on.  But what happens if we dig into this passage a little deeper?  

Let me set a couple of baselines for my conclusions first.  I'm not going to spend the time to dissect each of these core beliefs in this post.  But it is essential to at least know where I'm coming from, even if you don't know why.

• God is the only absolute good in the universe
• God and by extension His revealed word are the only absolute truths in the universe
• All of reality is defined by the two preceding statements
• Man, as a being created by God, must align his system of beliefs with God's standard if he wishes to hold a world-view that matches reality

With those items as the basis for progression let's look at the end of our passage first; "for the anger of man does not produce the righteousness of God."  About God's righteousness Psalm 7:11 has this to say: God is a righteous judge, And a God who has indignation every day.  Immediately we see a contrast.  Man's anger does not produce righteousness.  But God can be both righteous and indignant (i.e. angry) at the same time.  Clearly there must be a vast difference between man's anger and God's anger.  Therefore anything we think we know about anger should be automatically suspect.  With that in mind I go back to our web definitions above.  Anger is defined as a feeling, which is a synonym for emotion.  I believe this is accurate in terms of how anger is expressed and viewed by humanity.  But in light of our preceding conclusion that our own understanding is suspect I believe we should be prepared to accept that we might just be wrong about our understanding of anger.  

In other words, we as humans tend to think of anger as an emotional response to a situation we dislike.  But I am suggesting that anger handled the correct way (i.e. the biblical way) is not an emotional response at all.  Allow me to explain.

First I should note that James is not referring to a specific situation or type of encounter here.  His purpose is to present a series of general life guidelines and how we should respond to them.  There is a theme throughout James of actions speaking louder than words but he doesn't get into the meat of that argument until chapter two and after.  This first chapter certainly has elements of it but the individual vignettes contained here are still mostly autonomous.  It's kind of like a section of detailed proverbs, each of which can be applied in a broad sense.  Therefore it is best understood that our passage is intended to be taken in the same way.

So let's take a look at the progression of responses James and the Holy Spirit chose to use.

1. quick to hear
2. slow to speak
3. slow to anger

Taken independently of each other these three elements all can be understood to mean roughly the same thing as mentioned above; don't be hasty.  But what if they are intended to be followed in a chronological sequence?  I believe that paints a very different picture.  

First, we should always be ready to listen to what others have to say.  This should be the initial response to every situation; to hear what is being said.  Sadly, far too often I don't manage to even get past this first step because my own self importance gets in the way and drives me to spout off with what I think I know.  

Only after we have listened fully should we speak, and slowly at that.  I do not believe this phrasing necessarily calls for an actual decrease in the cadence of words flowing out of our mouths (although it might not be a bad idea sometimes).  Rather it points to an increase in the thoughtfulness and care applied to our choices about which words flow out of our mouths.  Instead of dashing off a hasty rebuttal in the heat of the moment we should carefully and critically assess what we are about to say.  

Words are incredibly powerful devices.  Later in his book James calls the tongue "a restless evil and full of deadly poison".  It is not the physical member of our bodies that is being referenced here but that which flows from it.  Words, whether spoken or written, have the power to destroy people and topple governments.  Consider the case of Egypt these past few years.  A regime decades in power eventually toppled by mere words which led to ideas and progressed beyond the ability of those in power to check.  On a personal level, words once uttered usually cannot be completely taken back.  No matter how much one apologizes or how much biblical forgiveness is sought after the specter of poorly chosen words has the potential to hang in the air like a deadly cloud, souring relationships and fueling resentment.  Throw them around hastily at your peril.
Finally, only after hearing completely and responding carefully should the notion of anger even be entertained.  And James emphasizes slowness even here at the far end of our response spectrum.    

I believe the Holy Spirit belabors the point of slowing down because He fully understands how difficult this concept of deliberate measured responses would be for us to understand.  We of the fast 21st century lifestyles who dash off 10 texts in half as many minutes (conservatively!), air inter-personal drama with all 857 of our Facebook friends, and share with Twitter what we had for lunch.  All while surfing 3 news web sites and scanning the RSS feeds of 5 more with the television blaring in the background.

To sum all of this up here is the revelation that struck me as I read James 1:19-20.  Anger is typically understood as an emotional feeling triggered quickly and acted upon hastily.  But the anger that I see prescribed by James is far from a fast response to stimuli.  Rather, it is a carefully considered and reasoned decision about how to deal with a situation.

Thus speaking to the point of this post, I'm not so sure that biblical anger as found in James should even be classified properly as an emotion.  And I don't know about anyone else, but of the many and varied times in my life that I have been angry not many have looked anything like the process described above.  

Sound and fury, signifying nothing indeed...

Soli Deo Gloria

Please Judge Me

The phrase "don't judge me" seems to be a popular one among young people in our modern culture.  It is typically meant humorously in response to amusement from one's peers when caught doing something ridiculous or strange.  For example, upon being greeted by the sight of a close friend dressed in an outlandish get-up involving hiking boots with speedos the expected response would be laughter.  The friend with the questionable fashion sense might then respond good naturedly with "don't judge me."  In this sense we are dealing with nothing more than humor among buddies.  However, I have also seen the phrase used in concept if not in exact word in and among Christians when being confronted with sin issues in their lives.  This concerns me greatly.  I fear that some Christians resist biblical judgment from other believers in an attempt to excuse away their own ungodly behavior.  Anyone who professes to have a relationship with Jesus must guard against this sinful conduct.

Let me be clear that there is indeed a form of judging which is not in accordance with biblical truth.  This would be what Jesus was referring to in His famous condemnations of Pharisaical hypocrisy in Matthew 7:3-5 and John 8:7.  Unfortunately, sometimes Christians take those passages and apply them carte blanche to any and all situations where they are confronted with their own sin.  They commit the common but inexcusable error of informing their philosophy with only a piece of what God has said about a topic instead of considering additional information He has provided in scripture.  Jesus was not condemning all forms of judging in the Matthew passage.  He was making the point that judging others while at the same time ignoring your own sin is foolishness (see Romans 2:1-11).  Nor was He excusing the sin of the adulterous woman in John.  In fact, if one continues to read the John passage, in verse 11 He tells her to stop sinning herself.

In both cases what Jesus was really doing was confronting the Pharisees' with the truth that they condescendingly judged others while wallowing in their own systematic and unrepentant sin.  The issue with the Pharisaical judging was not the act of judging itself but the hypocritical heart attitude behind the judgments!

Contrary to false teaching that all judging is wrong there is most definitely a proper time and place for judgment and confrontation of sin among Christians.  We already know from the preceding passages that hypocritical judgement is sinful.  But biblical truth doesn't stop there.  To obtain a fuller picture there are a multitude of passages we could draw from.  For the sake of brevity I will briefly focus primarily on only two of them: Matthew 18:15 and Galatians 6:1-5.

Matthew 18:15 is part of a larger passage that deals with the proper procedure for confronting sin in a local church body.  For the purposes of this discussion I just want to focus on the instructions in verse 15.  We are clearly advised that confrontation is the correct course of action when a brother's (or sister's) sin is involved. There is no ambiguity here.  In Galatians 6:1-5 Paul continues the brush strokes found in Matthew by explaining that this confrontation must be done in a spirit of gentle love rather than harsh condemnation.

The complete picture that can be drawn from these various passages is twofold.  First, we as individuals must constantly evaluate our own hearts to be sure we have no unconfessed sin in our lives.  The key word there is unconfessed.  As 1 John 1:8 tells us, we all sin.  If we all sin and the act of sinning itself immediately precludes us from ever judging anyone (as misinterpreters of John 8:7 would suggest) then it would be completely illogical and contradictory for Matthew 18:15 and Galatians 6:1 to also instruct us to confront sin when we encounter it.  Since we know that the bible is God's revealed word and God is incapable of error (Psalm 18:30) then we must assume there is a logical explanation for this impasse.  The answer can be found by continuing to read the passage in 1 John.  Verse 9 reveals that sin once confessed is forgiven and the sinner is cleansed from unrighteousness; thereby making them qualified to pass judgment when appropriate.  In fact, after being glorified that is exactly the role children of God will assume in Christ's kingdom (1 Corinthians 6:2-3).

The second component of biblical judging is the attitude carried by the judge.  The aforementioned Galatians 6 passage as well as 2 Timothy 2:24-26 reveal the proper motivation for someone contemplating an act of Christian judgment.  Is the desire to see a brother or sister restored to union with Christ?  Or is it to build oneself up by tearing others down?  Is the love of Jesus toward a sibling in mind as found in John 13:35?  Or is a cold and unfeeling adherence to the letter of the law all that is in view?  The answer to this question will reveal immediately whether you should be confronting sin or possibly getting on your knees in repentance yourself.

On the flip side of the coin, how should we respond when we are on the receiving end of judgment?  How can we know whether the person confronting us is doing so correctly?  And what if we are confronted with anger or hostility rather than compassion and love?  The simple answer is that we shouldn't worry about any of that.  Only God knows the hidden truths contained in man's heart (1 Corinthians 2:11).  And there are a litany of verses that tell us to receive instruction and admonishment with a glad heart.  1 Peter 5:5 takes the view of being approached by one's elder, or one in whom wisdom is found, and listening to their instruction with humility.  2 Timothy 3:16 reminds that one of the functions of scripture is for reproof.  And my personal favorite is found in Proverbs 13:18 where Solomon goes right for the jugular by revealing the stupidity of anyone who dislikes correction.  It could be argued that a hostile confrontation by a brother or sister may need to be confronted itself in the due course of time.  But wisdom and discernment should dictate that this secondary confrontation needs to be handled delicately and separated by some passage of time from the situation to which we are currently involved in.  So rather than wasting time and energy trying to immediately determine if we are being confronted by someone with a clean heart our best course of action is to receive instruction with humility and then join the Holy Spirit in a serious examination of ourselves to root out the possible sin that may be hiding in our inner man.

As David sings in the climactic verses of Psalm 139, the cry of our hearts should be for God to cleanse us from sin by any means necessary.

Don't judge me?  On the contrary, please judge me!

Soli Deo Gloria