Why I Tithe

The crucifixion and resurrection of Christ put an end to the practice of hopeful sinners reticently approaching God from respectable distance while carefully managing their behavior according to script (law). "It is finished!" wasn't just the end of an earthly mission, but the period at the end of the old covenant sentence the faithful had been serving. Jesus wrote a new story in which the cleansed sinner bounds into God's presence and jumps into his lap, invited and accepted, because of the shed blood of the Lamb. Under this new covenant, any and everyone who believes can enter God's presence, and if they need something, they merely ask and they will receive.

Given such a view on the new covenant, some folk are amazed to hear that I've practiced tithing for virtually my entire life as a Christian. In fact, I can't hardly imagine a scenario in which I wouldn't give at least a tenth of my increase in the name of the Lord. Considering Paul's Holy Spirit inspired stance on legalism and my views on the contemporary practice of tithing (see this), some might wonder why. Hopefully, this article will explain my reasoning.

Jesus taught that believers should be giving people. Since we're meant to be like Christ, that certainly makes sense, for who is more giving than he? Jesus did speak about tithing within the framework of OT Jews giving as commanded; however, his three word declaration on the cross announced the fulfillment of that economy. Giving, under the new covenant, is a matter of identification and collaboration with the joyful kindness (grace) of God; therefore, Christians give, not under compulsion, but in exhilaration whatever they purpose in their hearts to give.

Years ago (1979), upon embracing Christ's invitation to follow him, I knew I wanted to experience life as God would have me live it. I saw readily from the Word that becoming a giver was part of that, but in what way? I yearned for some dependable instruction from God that would clarify the nebulous purpose of my heart. In reading the scriptures and hearing some good preaching, I discovered that holy men of old found tithing an expression of faith in this regard, apart from any law, and something clicked for me.

I've been tithing ever since.

In all the years that have followed, I haven't secured anything nor assured myself of any measure of blessing by tithing. God has been faithful sure enough, and he's been real to me, but not because I've locked him into an arm's length contractual agreement by putting forth consideration. He's not a stranger I'm doing business with, after all. He shares what it's like being him with me, and it's my joy to cooperate with him and so experience what it's like to be kind and generous.

So I'm alive and well and free in the Holy Ghost, and I don't tithe because I have to...

I tithe because I want to.

I Just Don't Have the Tithe

In regard to what is to follow, let me refer you to Banking on God: the Tithe by Dan Edelen. It is an excellent interaction with the theological and biblical implications of the subject, and I highly recommend it.

The gospel is good news because it establishes our acceptance by God on the basis of the finished work of Christ rather than our works. That work of Christ was not undertaken just to change our label (e.g. saved or unsaved), but to change our very natures by enabling our dead spirits to be quickened by the infusion of the Holy Spirit. Believers in Christ are actually born of the Spirit, and made new creatures thereby. Christianity, therefore, is not about status but substance: we who were dead in trespasses and sins have actually been made alive in Christ Jesus, eternally.

On the other hand, the law (including tithing) was put in place (see Galatians 3:19-25) to serve as a custodian over sinners who were merely given the promise of Christ's coming, not the substance. It was only meant to keep Israel from running completely amok while they waited for the Promised One. Now that Christ has come, the law has been superseded by the realization of actual fellowship with God through the indwelling of his Holy Spirit. Reverting to the custodial to attain blessing from (or standing with) God through works of the law is a fool's errand, capable, only, of proving that in our natural selves we are sinners.

When I was a kid in nursery school, all the kids had their own nap mat. When nap time came, we unrolled our mat, laid down quietly and caught a few zzzz's. Back then I was always rested, my class functioned well and was always in good order, and I got stickers for being a good boy! Life was good and I had no reason to worry about anything.

Things were simpler then and more blissful, at least according to my idealized recollection, when there was something that clearly told me what to do and rewarded me for doing it. Nowadays, my life tends to be more harried: I'm often tired, things get chaotic, only duty tells me what to do, there are obligations to meet and bills to pay, and no one gives me so much as an "attaboy" for behaving myself. I wonder what people would think if I shucked my adult freedom and responsibility and hired a babysitter to keep me in line and give me stickers when I was doing well and being a good guy?

Christians who revert to legal principles (such as tithing) and depend upon rules and regulations in order to attain blessing or to assure themselves of standing with God have done that very thing. At best they are childish and at worst they are alienated from Christ. That's not a minor issue, but strikes at the heart of what it means to be born again. Such action is every bit as preposterous as an adult trying to establish the simple bliss of childhood by putting themselves in the charge of a babysitter! 

What this really comes down to whether or not it's appropriate for a Christian to claim that any objective, specific behavior (like tithing) serves as a basis for securing blessing from God. In truth, that is purely and simply a legalistic principle that has no place in understanding a believer's relationship to God. Under the auspices of the Gospel, all one has to do in order to get whatever he or she needs from God is to ask in Jesus name! But then, that requires the messiness of faith rather than a cut and dried formula that can be exercised braindead and worse, Spiritless.

I could go on, and on, and on dealing with the folly that's been perpetrated on this subject (e.g. seed sowing, 100 fold return, etc.) but right now, I just don't have the tithe.

Biblical Economics

The world's in turmoil and capitalism and free markets seem to be getting most of the blame. What position on these economic matters should a Christian take? Let me sketch out an outline of Biblical Economics that may help you make up your mind.

Private Property
The foundation of freedom under God and economic prosperity is private property. When Moses led the formerly enslaved out of bondage into a land flowing with milk and honey, freedom and opportunity lay in each man having inviolable land rights in perpetuity. When a person has what they have, unassailable by fellow citizens or governmental power, that person has the basis to work and make a future for himself and his family, and at least the basis for freedom from tyranny.

Entrepreneurial Freedom
God gives people the ability to create wealth. Folk anywhere who have the freedom to take risks and prosper from their efforts, make such efforts to their own benefit and that of those around them. The entrepreneurs gain wealth, those around them gain goods and services they desire. Capitalism (even in it's muted form practiced in the West) has been the only reliable engine of economic development and rising standards of living the world has ever known. Why not, it was God's idea for the economy of a fallen world.

Equality in Justice
Government is responsible under God to maintain justice between people. Me and mine should be protected from violations coming from you and yours. Justice must be blind, with the economically weak standing on equal ground before the bench with the economically strong. That in NO WAY means that justice can be, or should be, equated with economic equality. The poor will always be among us, the law should never allow them to be trampled under by rest of us. Certainly, making everyone poor in the name of equality is the very worst injustice.

Care for the Poor
Since the unfortunate, the feeble, the young, and the disabled will always be among us, sustenance should always be made available to them. However, no provision whatsoever should be made for the able but idle: they should be left to their condition in the hopes that their belly might teach them the lesson of life--no work, no food. The unfortunate, the feeble, the young, and the disabled are no burden to society despite their need. The idle are parasites and fools.

Workers' Wages
A worker's labor is as much an entrepreneurial risk as the investment of intellectual and tangible property. Workers, therefore, deserve to benefit from the profits of any entrepreneurial endeavor as much as do the entrepreneurs themselves. There would be no need for the disaster that is unions, nor the myriad socialistic and inefficient governmental impositions on business if workers were allowed to "freely" share in the profits of the organizations they work for. Perhaps worst of all has been the shill game (SS, healthcare) which in effect refuses to pay workers their wages for today, today.

The Wealth Gap
When economic activity sifts people into the haves and have nots over time, differences in economic prosperity and power can become entrenched and widen. The richer gain more of the means of production and power, the poorer lose more and the result is a loss of freedom and opportunity. A mechanism to reshuffle the economic deck in about every other generation (about every 50 years) would be helpful to long-term, overall economic activity and opportunity.

Usury
Relative weakness between the parties in a transaction, the existence of urgency, and sheer greed should not be allowed to so color interest rates that they become so burdensome that they lock intransigently the borrower into a perpetual state of debt, or threaten (just by their extent) the on-going ability of the borrower to continue economically. Whereas it is economically beneficial to have a ready pool of capital within any nation that can be borrowed by those with a need or with an idea to exploit, it is anything but economically useful to have the burden imposed in order to do so be so weighty as to crush further economic activity from the borrowers.

Monetary Manipulation
Dependable scales are necessary to continuing market activity. If measures are constantly shifting, someone is getting the shaft and the resultant uncertainty will depress economic activity. When the value of money is constantly shifting, either arbitrarily or through manipulation, it is as if a pound is a pound one minute but not the next, or for one customer but not the next. Policies that allow central banks and government printing presses to manipulate currency values seem to me destined to artificially benefit some economies at the expense of others. Ultimately, the result will be depressed economic activity that otherwise could be greater and political instability.

These are temporal considerations that affect this age of sinful man. None of them will transition into eternity, but today, for this age, they form the basis of understanding what a biblically informed approach to economics would look like. I think it interesting that no politician is even remotely promoting such an approach to economic policy, nor is any political party. For all the posturing that comes from such quarters, it is obvious that politicians pay no attention whatsoever to what the Bible might suggest concerning practical considerations of governance. But maybe the Cubans are starting to.

Becoming Holy

Holiness, I think I have established, is about the uniqueness of God's being, and by extension, about that which is not God being made holy by being consecrated to him. It is the consequence of anything, and eventually everything belonging entirely to the holy God. Ultimately, even the reprobate sinner and the principalities, powers and rulers of this present darkness will be his in the fullest sense of the word (that's what the Lake of Fire is all about). In this bubble of time we call history, there is an option available to us. We may render ourselves "not God's" which is but an illusion that can only last for a lifetime, or we may surrender ourselves to God believing him to be Lord which can translate into eternity.

In relinquishing ourselves to God by grace through faith, we become holy, the actual efficacy thereof coming through two impositions. First, sacrificial blood must be imposed upon that which was not intrinsically holy in order to consecrate it; and second, the divine breath (the Spirit of God) which is intrinsically holy, must be imposed upon that which was sprinkled with sacrificial blood to make holy in substance. This is the pattern of things to come revealed in the OT, and this is the fulfillment of things that are in the NT. I would call these two aspects of holiness 1) positional holiness, and 2) substantial holiness.

For humans, positional holiness can only be achieved through the application of the blood of the Lamb of God through faith. When one comes to the conviction that Jesus Christ died for his or her sin and that he or she is trusting that blood alone to make them acceptable to God, that one has become positionally holy. His or her tabernacle of flesh has been sprinkled with blood. As the Holy Spirit inhabits that sprinkled tabernacle, that one has now become one with God and is thereby made substantially holy. Since our tabernacles are made of transitory stuff, God has appointed a day when all that is passing will be transformed into that which is not. Our substantial holiness will then be perfect.

Notice, I have made no reference to efforts or toil in explaining the biblical concept and process of holiness. Had I done so, I would have been in error. Holiness is not something developed from that which is not holy of itself. Holiness is a derivative property for all but him who alone is holy. For us who are not him, holiness comes imputed and imported. To walk in holiness, then, what is required is not a supernatural effort from that which is only natural, but an abandoned cooperation of the natural with the supernatural who has come in.

When the Tension Snaps

Stretch a rubber band too far and it will snap. Maybe that's the explanation for the actions of the Arizona pastor in this article. In my last post, I said the the tension of living in two worlds can get the best of any of us, and that none of us would make it if not for the grace of God. Now, I know that grace is available to the fellow in question, but I don't think we could say he was making it by any stretch of the imagination. It kind of reminds me of the ka-fling of a noted figure a few years back.

Scriptures are clear about both our attitude toward governing authorities and the general tenor of our prayers concerning them. Wanting violence done to them, or sickness to come upon them, or desiring their death followed by burning hell is not in accord with the Word. Such sentiments cannot be inspired by the Holy Spirit, and can only be the result of the flesh, or even the Devil. This preacher, I can safely say, is not moving in the Spirit!

In his defense, I can understand his dismay with Barak Obama. The man is anything but a good president; in fact, he is destroying the country so fast and so thoroughly it makes my head spin. I can only hope that recent trends presage an awaking of Americans from the stupor induced by eight years of W's incoherent babbling and the repeated shots to head we took at the hands of his administration. We needed a change like a baby in a soiled diaper, but we're getting short-changed like the prince who woke up as a toad.

We don't have to like what the people in charge do, but we should always like to see them get saved. We don't have to kowtow to their formulations of policy, but we always have to give them the honor they are due. Feel the rubber band twisting in your gut? Let it go before it snaps, and your treatment of enemy here ends up making you an enemy in the hereafter.

Choose to Believe

"What is it to believe? It is to have such confidence in what the Lord has said that we take Him at His word, simply because He said it." ...Smith Wigglesworth (emphasis added)


What is it that the Lord wants from people? Nothing more, nothing less than faith. Oh, I know there are other aspects to holiness and righteousness, but at the most basic, the most fundamental, everything comes down to faith. Works never were and never will be the issue, for God is more than willing to look at us, not on their basis, but through grace. The only issue, as far as humans are concerned, that is ultimately determinative with God is faith. It was that way in the beginning, it is still that way, and will be until the end of time when all things are made new.

When Adam and Eve were in the garden, the issue to be decided was not whether or not they would toe the line of obedience, but whether or not they had confidence in what the Lord said. To undermine them, the Devil had to first assault the character of God and pull the rug out from under grandpa's and grandma's confidence in his word (note vs. 4-5). That accomplished, disobedience was a foregone conclusion. It is impossible to remain obedient under testing if one has diminished or no trust in God's character and word.

Humankind gets things all topsy-turvy when it comes to God. We project upon him our own performance orientation, and make him the cosmic task master who's ever eyeing our stats and looking to cut us from the team; however, with God it's never, "what have you done for me lately?" What can we ever truly do for him anyway? No, we may be servants of the Most High, but our relationship with him is never subject to performance reviews.

Our moments of trial and ordeal come down not to our feats but to our faith. Everyone needs, in those times in the valley of decision, to take stock of his or herself and talk to themselves about what they think of God and his word. When Eve did so, she talked herself clean out of faith: we need to learn from her error and instead choose to believe.

God In the Old Testament vs. God In the New Testament

The link between the Old Testament and New is problematic for many Christians. It has been since the first century, it will likely be until Jesus returns. Today's typical evangelical view of the subject might be summarized as the moral law remains but the ceremonial law has passed away.

To which I say, "rubbish!"

The law as a means or a measure of relationship with God, moral, ceremonial or otherwise, is caput. The law never worked as means of achieving rightness with God, and it never could have. It wasn't meant to. It was no more than a means of restraining the Jews until Christ showed up and of uncovering, for any exposed to it, the fundamental sinful nature of mankind. It actually fertilizes our innate sinfulness, and offers no remedy nor instruction as how to overcome it.

Those who choose to live by a legal principle, inspired though it may be in the Old Testament, are fallen from grace and apart from the benefits of Christ, even if they call themselves Christian. So is there some benefit to the Old that is still viable in the realm of the New Testament? Yes, for there is a revelation of God there and the intimation of Christ.

People have claimed that the Old Testament God is different than the New, but that is an utter impossibility. There is but one God and he is immutable. What God revealed himself to be in the Old Testament, he still is today and always will be. Any conception from the New Testament cannot be taken to adapt, assuage, adjust, or evolve what God was in the Old. He is that he is.

For some this may present a difficulty. Aligning the Old Testament martial characteristics of God with what appear to be the touchy-feely graces of the New can prove to be a climb up Everest. God, however, does not change and we need to let his self-disclosure speak for itself. With a cat in one arm and a dog in the other, we must wrap our arms around the totality of all he reveals himself to be and embrace God for who he is, majestic and enigmatic.

God, as we're introduced to him through our friends Moses and the Prophets, may be a bit scary, even a lot scary, but in order to truly know the inviting God of our friends the Apostles, it is incumbent upon us to take all biblical revelation about God and his character seriously-- as unassailable truth. When considering the nature of God as he's revealed himself to be in the Bible, it's best to take the advise of an old children's song and make new friends but keep the old.

Are You Ready for Religion in Politics?

Biblically, I see the only purpose of government, under God, as protecting the innocent from the evil-doer. Secularly, this is an absolute necessity if life amongst sinners is to continue until Jesus comes back. In the best of worlds, we wouldn't need government, in ours (even in the Millennium) we do, desperately. The Bible instructs us to cooperate with the governing authorities in their purpose of ensuring justice, they don't bear the sword for nothing!

But that government bears the sword and not the key leads us to some further conclusions... 

Government is not in place, under God, to tell anyone what to think, how to run their life, what to do for retirement or education or with private property or what to do medically. Certainly, government in this world in this age should never enforce a belief system, though it did in ancient Israel. Government, at its most fundamental, is there simply to keep the powerful and the violent from doing harm or oppressing the rest of the population.

With that Biblical, worldwide mandate in mind, let me suggest a few policy positions a politician who actually brought biblical religion into the realm of politics might take:

Concerning the Use of Deadly Force

• The Death Penalty should be enforced, without pity or mercy, upon anyone who willfully or callously takes the life of another.
• No other government or body should be allowed to kill or oppress the citizens of this country while they are in their own lands, without incurring the response of the sword, which necessitates a strong, ready and able military.
• Abortion should be illegal, unless the unborn child is causing immediate, physical distress that realistically threatens the mother's life. A practitioner, or anyone else, who performs an illegal abortion should be sentenced to death.

Concerning Crime and Punishment

Prisons, by and large, should be abolished. Criminals owe their victims, not the state. Those that commit crimes should be indentured to the victims of those crimes until restitution is made. Those too violent to put on the streets should be sentenced to death. Crimes that are of a personal nature should not be crimes at all.

Concerning Economic Justice

Labor should not be commoditized. The ox is not to be muzzled as it treads the grain. It is a travesty that the most powerful sliver of the workforce uses its power to enrich itself, tapping into the harvest, while the mass of the workforce is forced into ever tighter, constricted competition for less and less. In hubris, the powerful actually believe they deserve that much more than the poor schlubs at the bottom of the ladder. God is no respecter of persons and has no respect for greed. Neither should the law! Whatever profit a corporation disburses in dividends to stockholders and bonuses to the top tier of management should be at least matched and distributed among all of its employees, including the janitor and the receptionist. Sole proprietorships and partnerships should follow similar rules.

Concerning Welfare

Those who will not work, should not eat. Those who cannot work, should be shown mercy. Those who cannot find work ought to be put to work serving the public good.

Concerning Reparations

The bulk of idle federal landholdings, not held in trust for Native Americans, ought to be divided among and deeded to all those who can trace their lineage to former slaves. Those slaves were not only often abused and mistreated, but were given nothing upon achieving freedom, and that needs to be rectified. Whether it's 40 acres or not doesn't matter, but regardless, no mules will be distributed..

Concerning Law and Order

Every neighborhood in this country, rich or poor, should be safe enough for even a stranger to pass through without fear. Wealthier neighborhoods already are, but poorer neighborhoods often do not experience the same level of law and order. There is no excuse for governing authorities to abandon entire areas of cities to the de facto control of gangs, thugs and crime. The poor deserve safe neighborhoods every bit as much as the wealthy.

More police need to be placed on our streets, particularly, the mean ones. There's not one square inch of this country that the government, under God, can justifiably cede to the rule of thuggery rather than the rule of law and order. One idea for utilizing our police forces that would help immediately: stop parking them along the streets in patrol cars manning speed traps and start placing them more often on the streets preventing crime!

Concerning Political Parties

The Constitution should to be amended to specifically ban elected officials at any level of government from being associated with any political party, and furthermore, should ban any association which seeks to organize candidates or office holders into ideological blocks in order to gain political power. Taxpayers should not foot the bill for party politics as it does now through gridlock; double staffing; witch hunting, grand standing inquisitions; primary elections and matching funds for campaigns.

I could go on, but I won't. Hopefully, you're reading in between the lines and can see the problem that lies ahead for any who would resolutely attempt to bring biblical religion into politics. Jesus rules, unapologetically, with a rod of iron, and we will rule with him, like him. 

The world is not ready for that just yet, but ready or not, it's coming!

Works vs. Faith

Jesus was asked one day, "What must we do to do the works God requires?" His answer, "The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent."

I am Arminian in theology, not because I feel any particular bond or loyalty to Jacob Harmenszoon, but because I believe the Bible clearly teaches that salvation is not accomplished without, and is predicated upon, the the conscious choice of the saved. It's not that God isn't involved in nor even providing the impetus toward that choice, but that belief in Christ is a response made by, not for, the saved. It's a question of personal faith, and, given the wooing of the Holy Spirit, it is possible for everyone.

Believing in Jesus is, in fact, the work that God requires of us. As Mark Knopfler might say, "that ain't workin'!" But that is the way we do it! Faith is not the product of sweat and toil, nor the fruit of planning and vision. It's a response to a circumstance, a reaction to a stimulus. The word of the Lord (stimulus) came to Abraham, faith was his response, righteousness credited was his reward.

Jesus died for our sins and rose from the dead on the third day because of our justification (circumstance), the reaction of the saved to that circumstance is faith, eternal life is the repercussion. Where's the work in all this? The answer is that it is excluded. The believer did nothing work-like in order to be made righteous, he merely responded to something done by another.

It is by grace that we are saved, through faith, not of works so that no one can boast. The work was done by God, we only respond to it. Jesus was being tongue in cheek when he answered that question the way that he did on that day so long ago. It must have struck a perplexing note in his hearers. "What kind of work is that?" they might have asked themselves. That's the point-- it isn't one, and I think that's just what the Lord wanted to point out.

Confession Is Good for the Soul

"If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness."     1 John 1 :8-9 NIV

Confession, as used in the text above, means agreement. Literally, it's saying the same thing, so confession in this context, which is about our sin, is seeing some thought, or intent, or action, or word of ours as being wrong before God, and consciously agreeing with God concerning its wrongness. In other words, confession is saying, “I agree with you, God, that this thing from me was sinful.” If a confession is limited in scope to just an admission of the facts, i.e. "I did this," without agreeing with God about its wrongness, then a necessary ingredient of confession which makes purification "take" will be missed.

There are biblical descriptions of confession that are helpful: 

• Lev 5:5 makes confession part of the sacrificial system. Each sin had to be confessed as part of offering sacrifice. In Christ the believer has but one sacrifice over a lifetime and does not have to offer Christ again and again with every failing and confession of sin (Hebrews 10:12-14). The Christian recognizes Jesus' singular sacrifice as applying to whatever sin might occur in the believer's life whenever it is confessed.

• Prov 28:13 makes confession essential for prospering in life. If one wants their life to be blessed as much as possible, confession rather than suppression that sin was committed is necessary.

• James 5:16 associates confession (to each other as well as God) with healing. This applies only in those cases where the sickness was a corrective measure applied in response to sin (as in 1 Corinthians 11:30). If your theology can't handle the thought of God taking punitive action against a believer, you need to change your theology so as to agree with the Word, or risk missing out on this potential remedy.

• The verse at the head of this post binds confession of sin to God's faithfulness in responding to such with forgiveness and cleansing from unrighteousness. One might wonder why confession would be necessary in light of the once-for-all-time provisions of the cross and resurrection, since they are one-time events sufficient in effect for our entire lives. Suffice it to say that the cross is what's effective, the confession is merely a means of applying the fact of what was already supplied to the momentary guilt of failure--the blood of Jesus cleanses us from sin, confession clears our consciences.

So, believers in Christ confess sin so that they may continue to grow in spirit and in grace, particularly so in the case where the sin is against another person, especially a brother or sister in Christ. Harbored sin, that is unconfessed sin, puts static between the believer and God. The heart is not in phase with God, or agreement, and so there's noise in between. That noise is Holy Spirit convicting the believer of sin. (John 16:8-11) Conviction in this sense is just the Holy Spirit saying to the believer, “That ain’t right.”

This does not imply or direct believers to adopt a formal, ritualistic approach to confession as some expressions of Christianity, like Catholicism, have done. That wouldn’t be necessarily erroneous if not for the formal pronouncement of penance and absolution afterwards. Like all things Christian, our only mediator is Christ, never another person. When one's sin was overtly against another person, then confession needs to be to God, then to the person wronged, not to an uninvolved party. Certainly, any resulting restitution is to the wronged party, not to the uninvolved through some abstract exercise of penance.

When we confess our sin we must not only say that something is sin, we must actually see it that way, as God does, in our own minds and hearts. If we are in agreement of heart as well as mouth with God on the matter, there is no sense of imposition or burden in our confession. We don't see it as God making us do something we don't really want to. We confess willingly to God, even though with embarassment, because we desire our communication with the Holy Spirit to be static-free.

The blood that atones for all our sin has already been shed, once and for all. That singular effusion was sufficient to wash away all our sin before God-- past, present and future. Therefore, confession doesn’t obtain something we don’t already have without it, it just makes the most, in the here and now, of what was already provided in full. When it arises from that light, and expresses heartfelt agreement with God on the nature of what we have done, confession is truly good for the soul!

When Grace Leads to Universalism

What can we know about God's heart? About what drives him, what moves him, what makes him draw lines in the sand? The answer of course is the Bible, our source for all that is indisputable regarding God. I suppose we can come to know these sorts of things experientially in a more personally relevant way through our fellowship with his Spirit within us, but any and every thing we can know beyond doubt arises from the Word.

Some passages I've always found particularly salient in this regard are 2 Peter 3:9

"The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance."

Ezekiel 18:23 and 33:11, which virtually say the same thing (the latter is copied here)

"As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD, I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn from their ways and live."

and I Timothy 2:4

"God our Savior, who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth."

What these verses tell me, indisputably, is that God wants people, all people, saved. There is no joy in his heart over anyone being lost. I submit that there isn't anything necessary to his glory in it. There will not be one person thrown into eternal torment whom the Lord would not rather have by his side in glory. 

Which leads to another thought-- why can't God have what he wants? I mean he is omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent and omnitemporal. What stands in the way of him getting what he desires? Certainly, if he desires a thing, such as all people getting saved, that thing is good by virtue of the one who alone is good wanting it.

As some fashion them, the so-called doctrines of grace declare that people get saved because of a sovereign act of God. Before the human race born of Adam even came into existence, God chose those who were to be saved, and then fashioned existence to effect that choice. The benefactors of that choice believe and persevere, irresistibly, as they come into being. Under such a regimen, the only thing that leads to people ending up in heaven is God instilling a grace enablement within the souls of the chosen. Once elected, salvation is inevitable.

Is that a problem? Yes, if we actually take what God has told us about himself to be true! He has said of himself that he doesn't want anyone to be lost. The scripture is clear about this. If all it took to accomplish his desire was his own act, how would he act? Since I'm not willing to see God as schizophrenic, I must answer that He would save everyone. God would have to be schizophrenic to state a particular desire that must be good, and yet not be able to bring his considerable skills, power and goodness to bear upon accomplishing it.

We know from the Word that not everyone will be saved. Therefore, there must be some other factor in the equation that God is not willing or able to circumvent for that to be so. Some will, other than God's, must be in play and allowed by God to be decisive in determining who gets saved. Otherwise, God's desire would be decisive and everyone would, in fact, get saved. 

It seems clear to me, that for one to hold on to sovereign election as promulgated in the doctrines of grace and yet also accept God's testimony about his desire and his power, that one is forced, logically, to adopt universalism. If God's will is the only effectual one, then everyone will be saved. Perhaps that explains the universalist drift in the history of Calvinistic churches in New England.

Thankfully, I'm not a Calvinist, so I just accept the testimony of the Word and experience no contradiction at all.

Believers In Divine Healing Can Go to a Doctor

With this we finish the series on the subject of divine healing.

Show Yourself to a Priest
In modern western society, the professional tasked with certifying the health of individuals who have been sick is the doctor. In ancient Hebrew society that was not the case, the priests performed that function. According to Moses, a person who was ill (with certain symptoms anyhow) needed to have a priest pronounce them clean before they could rejoin the commerce of normal life. That is why Jesus told some of the folks he healed to show themselves to a priest. It was the way to verify that healing had taken place in that society according to the Mosaic law.

I understand, anecdotally, that Kathryn Kuhlman followed that pattern in her ministry. If someone was on medication or in treatment, she told them to show themselves to the doctor and let him or her see the healing for his or herself. I applaud that approach. Afterall, we are not promoting pretend healings (ones that are present in words but not in body) any more than we foist pretend deliverances (ones where spirits are roped and bound but the folk haven't changed).

To those who are fellow charismatics, let's be honest: a healing either has occurred or it hasn't. Some may be delayed in appearing, but we were never tasked with making excuses for the inactivity of God by using wispy exercises in semantics if they haven't. If a healing hasn't occurred, we say it hasn't happened, YET!  Having folks confess healings that haven't actually occurred is just plain lying and more worthy of rebuke than anything Jesus' disciples did.

Healing has also been turned into a carnival and a sleight-of-hand show by some. Whereas Jesus and the Apostles drew crowds when healing, they never resorted to revving them up nor manipulating them emotionally in order to "build faith". My point is this: nothing akin to what is often practiced today in the name of healing and deliverance was even remotely testified to in the Bible, and if not there then why here? Where are the demonstrable results, anyhow, for such antics when the dust settles after they're done? 

When a healing occurs in someone who has had a prior diagnosis, we should want it verified so that all the glory can go to God. Jesus did. A physician may not be able to admit that God was the cause, but at least he or she can verify that what was, no longer is. The faithless will posit everything other than God as the reason, but at least they won’t be able to justifiably deny that something actually did occur.

Use Your Head, and That of Others
God has been known to provide food miraculously, without toil and sweat, sowing and reaping. Just because he has chosen to do that at times, doesn't mean he chooses to do that at all times. So a sensible believer sows and reaps, eats a balanced diet, and prays that God will bless the efforts. Generally, he does and we eat with thanksgiving.

God has been known to miraculously zap folk from one place to another or to allow them to pass through or over things they could not otherwise get by. Just because he has chosen to do that at times, doesn't mean he chooses to do that at all times. So a sensible believer flies or drives, walks into the depths only with scuba gear, and prays that God will grant traveling mercies. Generally, he does, and we thank God for reaching our destinations.

Should we be too good to use the fruit of sensible efforts, and demand nothing but the miraculous? Good diets, good habits, joy in God and peace with people go a long way toward providing our bodies with what they need to function well. Even though we have the earnest of the invigorating Spirit of God sustaining our dying flesh; a fatty diet, a taste for tobacco, or disdain toward a brother or sister will likely produce less than optimum health. So we do what makes sense and trust God to bless us.

Generally, we see the clear sensibility of using our understanding of how things work to aid our journey through life, and we do so with thanks to God. To that end, what's the difference between spraying bodies of water with a pesticide oil to rid the environment of a pesky infestation of gnats, and taking an antibiotic to deal with a bodily infection? Bugs in the wilderness versus bugs in us. Does faith in God’s provision of healing preclude using the knowledge of the physician? Before we exclude using the sensible, shouldn't we ask ourselves whether doing so is truly faith in God or just hubris in us?

The Bottom Line
The last thing believers want to do is displace their faith in God with faith in men and women in lab coats. It is an unspeakable joy to know that God is willing to exert his awesome power to address our mundane needs. He has purposely made effective blessing in the here and now (healing in this case) part of the atonement of Christ. Can we let the wonder of that sink in for a moment!

Does that mean that the blessings won by Christ can only come to us by way of the miraculous? I don't see that kind of sentiment anywhere taught in scripture. Trusting God is what we're asked to do by God. So, in the words of an old Keith Green song, which I think we can apply to the subject of divine healing well enough, "keep doing your best, and pray that it's blessed, and Jesus takes care of the rest."

Stop, In the Name of the Law

What we do has no impact on our acceptance by God. Our record cannot add to, nor detract from what has already been done by Christ; in other words, present actions cannot rewrite ancient history. It is on the basis, and only on the basis of what Christ finished, that our standing with God rests. God quenched the flames of his wrath in the blood of Christ, so there is none left for us who believe! Everyone who puts their faith in Christ's finished work has become, and will remain the righteousness of God in Christ Jesus.

Faith in Christ is what matters, but what we do does reflect upon the reality of that faith. If I say I have faith but have no works, I'm a liar plain and simple. Such is at best merely so-called faith, which cannot save but only leave me in my sin under the wrath of God. Faith that is efficacious salvifically doesn't try to bamboozle God with lip-service while a faithless heart does evil works. Faith is active, faith works, specifically, through love.

What good works we do are actually not our own fault. These "things" have been seeded by the hand of our loving God onto the pathway of our lives. We will stumble into them just by walking, without having to climb Everest or swim the English Channel to accomplish them. To miss such "things" so readily provided by God could only mean that we didn't have the faith to bother. Oblivious is not something faith is.

We live out of what Christ has freely given to us through faith; namely, righteousness and the Holy Spirit. We have nothing to prove by trying to live up to some code by willful exertion. If we attempted to prove something to God in that fashion, we would only prove that we are sinners. Doing the good that God has prepared for us to do and endeavoring to emulate Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit only demonstrates the faith in him that we do have.

It certainly is a joy to be alive, accepted, and actuated by God. Burdening ourselves and others with a need to earn status or to measure up before God is joyless. It's embracing the law instead of the gospel and trying to find satisfaction in emptiness. That's a fool's errand that smacks of the curse. The law was not given to us that we could gain righteousness by it. If that's what you're doing, please, stop in the name of Jesus, and especially in the name of the Law.Stop, In the Name of the Law

Is That How Jesus Would Do It?

I did not grow up in church, per se, even though I did attend a few mainline church services along the way. I did some hard time in Sunday School, but got released early, when I was 11, for bad behavior. ;-) Occasionally in those years, a televangelist popped into view while flicking the TV dial through its rotation. The, well, "unique" techniques of communicating employed by those televangelists struck me as weird and distracting. If folk talked the way they did anywhere else, they'd never be taken seriously, but laughed to scorn.

For the hecklers of such it wouldn't be a content issue driving them to scorn, but a technique issue. The behavior of the messenger distracted from the message, and understandably so. So what lesson, from all that, do I think I can pass on to communicators of the gospel today? "Stop being a clown!" Church is not a carnival, preaching the Gospel isn't a performance, and the "anointing" doesn't have any biblical, behavioral signs or tics! 

Enough with huffing and puffing, the added "ahees" in between words, the eyes rolling back in their sockets, sudden shudders, profuse, self-inflicted sweating, hanky waving, and on, and on, and on. I'm reminded of a car manufacturing anomaly from the 70's: the Chevette SS. Stripes and chrome, and a bigger engine package could never hide the reality-- it was still just a Chevette! Rather than the example of Christ, these "demonstrative" preachers emulate the illusionist's art-- distracting the audience's attention away from the truth they should be zeroed in on.

Maybe it's just cultural, maybe it's blatant, faithless, manipulation... could it be doing the Devil a favor?

WWJD. I think it's germane to the preaching "craft." If Jesus didn't do it, should we? Who better knows how to communicate eternal, life-giving truth than he? It's alright to be a fool for Christ, and it's OK to preach foolishness as the world sees it, but it's not acceptable to diminish the majesty and importance of the message of Christ through affected tomfoolery. So, the next time you're preaching, or even the next time you're going to see a preacher, do everyone a favor, especially the Lord of glory: ask yourself, "Is that how Jesus would do it?"

The Word Says, "Just Breathe"

If we don't live by a code or law, if there is nothing we can earn or merit, if our records do not effect our salvation, how then do we live? The simple and straight forward answer is that we live out of the Spirit that God endued us with when we were born again. We live inspired, not perspired lives. Our existence is a promenade with God-- we walk hand and hand with him where he's walking. Where he goes we go, what he does we do, what he says we say. It's the life model of Christ.

The Christ inspired life is not about passing some proficiency exam or earning continuing ed credits to advance up a ladder. It's about the grace that allows a human to live in loving partnership with the God, our Creator. Folk that attempt to live by a code are not generally folk that experience God personally. They, in effect, are trying to jam their good deeds down God's throat and he, in response, gags at their company.

God sees all our works: all the failure, all the sin, all the self-serving, self-centered acts of willfulness, not just the acts we want him to see. Since our good deeds in themselves can never erase bad ones, and everyone sins, trying to earn or maintain favor from God on the basis of our works gets us nowhere. His favor is all we have going for us; apart from Christ, we have nothing. 

In an emergency, the desperate cry that's often heard is "Somebody, do something!" In our desperation to be at peace with God, our panicked souls often invoke that same cry, but ironically, they do so reflexively. We're that somebody, and so we seek to save ourselves. However, the something that needs doing has already been done by someone else. And so perfectly, in fact, that nothing else could be or needs to be done in addition.

Our rescuer stands by us, alive and well, the victor over hell and death. Oxygen mask in hand, he offers us the breath of life. All we need to do is accept it and breathe in. Yet many of us balk. Why do we find it so hard to acknowledge our own inability to save ourselves or to keep ourselves saved? Are we so prideful that we'd rather go down in flames trying to do it ourselves rather than yield, child-like, to the rescue of God?

What a lot this life is! Looking to keep us far from the help we actually need the devil says, "Look what you've done!" Looking in the mirror of pride the flesh says, "Look what I've done!" Looking at the cross Jesus died on faith says, "Look what Christ has done!" And cutting to the very marrow, the Word says, "Just breathe."

To Hell With It

I said in an earlier post that we do not have anything to prove to God, nor can we measure up to his (or anyone else's) standard. All that we can prove by such vain efforts is that in our own Adamic natures, we are sinners. Does that mean we should live willy nilly, that anything goes? No, sin will always be sin, and God will always hate it. Ultimately, he must completely disable it!

Philosophically, sin is an impossibility. How can that which is against the will of God (sin) exist in objective reality when God is omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent and righteous? God could not be said to have the last two attributes if he allowed or could not stop sin. So, sin can only exist in this temporary framework of spacetime, which is constricted, cursed and scheduled for termination.

The grace of God allows the illusion of ongoing sinful life for, really, just a moment, because of the possibility of repentance and redemption among the denizens therein. A time is coming, and shortly, when reality will come a-knocking, and then, nothing that stands in opposition to the will of God will stand any longer. That coming, ultimate reality check is called hell.

Some folk wonder how a loving God could put living human beings into a fiery lake forever, but I don't know what other possibility could exist. They usually think that, even if the lake is real, it cannot possibly be forever. Sometime, the flame has to go out, and the worm metamorphose and fly away to different quarry. All of us who are parents, or who had parents, realize that punishment ends sometime, right? No, such thoughts arise from a misunderstanding of human and angelic nature, sin and independent wills.

Ultimately, how can any will exist but that which is omnipotent, particularly if the omnipotent one was righteous too? For any opposing will to exist contemporaneously and/or permanently would undermine the nature of the supposedly omnipotent, righteous one. That one would then, in fact, not be omnipotent and righteous, but impotent and indifferent-- merely capable of conceiving but not of delivering.

Why does that make hell necessary?

Primarily, human and angelic being cannot be disposed of nor dissolved. We know the Spirit of God is eternal and indestructible, but what he lends breath or personal spirit to cannot be destroyed either, though it can be established with independence as a being. Humans and angels (I don't have a scripture reference for angels, but it does make sense to me) fall into this category. If everything in nature reveals something about the invisible attributes of God, think about what the conservation of mass and energy reveals to us about the breath from God that makes us a person-- it cannot be destroyed.

Once created, humans and angels cannot be destroyed. However, they can be disabled, they can cease having independent freedom of thought and action. How? Overwhelm their will with incessant fire and they will never entertain a thought, nor devise a scheme, nor hatch a plot in opposition to God's will again. They will never act on such again. Don Piper's experience of a painful recovery after a traffic accident is helpful here:

In the first few weeks of my recovery, I was in such constant physical pain I couldn't hold any thoughts in my mind for more than a second or two (from 90 Minutes in Heaven, p. 102)

One long "arrrrgh!" will be their lot, cosmic pink noise. Coherent thought will be impossible, no conceptions nor communications. Their eternal will is silenced in perpetual flames, whereas God's will continues unabated, unfettered by opposition. It has to be.

God created us with divine-like capacities in order to fellowship with him. Christ reveals in flesh and bone, in spirit and in thought what that looks like. It’s not oppressive nor coercive, but food and life, joy and peace. Our wills are meant to be experienced as the replication and expression of his. Exertion of our will (our works) is not the means to achieve that, inspiration is. As for sin, to hell with it!