Many in the relational-incarnational school suggest a one-to-one relationship between Christ's ability to incarnate the life-changing power and moral character of the gospel and our ability, as His children, to do so. Jesus' very presence is said to have been evangelistic. He did not just bring the word of truth; He was the word of truth. He did not just preach the gospel; He was the gospel and, of course, still is the gospel. Therefore, my presence (life, character and service) could also be termed "evangelistic" since I bear witness of Jesus as I live out a lifestyle that reflects His presence. By implication then, living the Christian life in character, fellowship and service is as valid a form of evangelism as is sharing the gospel. In line with such reasoning, one author wrote, "Perhaps we don't have a big enough definition of evangelism. When I say 'evangelism' I mean not only verbal proclamation but visual proclamation as well: the whole disclosure of God in the world."
Joe Aldrich, an articulate spokesman for this position, has written, "In the truest sense, evangelism is displaying the universals of God's character – His love, His righteousness, His justice and His faithfulness through the particulars of my everyday life. Therefore, evangelism is not a 'special' activity to be undertaken at a prescribed time. It is the constant and spontaneous overflow of our individual and corporate experience of Christ." He concludes that "even more specifically, evangelism is what Christ does through the activity of His children as they are involved in (1) proclamation, (2) fellowship, and (3) service."Thus, true evangelism is seen as not only the communication of the gospel, but also the "fellowship" and "service" of the saints. As we can see, the one-to-one comparison of a person's life to the life of Christ would lead logically to a one-to-one comparison of that life (fellowship and service) to the gospel of Jesus Christ (proclamation). Both are presumed to be efficient conveyors of good news and, therefore, evangelistic in nature. As Aldrich states, "Evangelism, then, is stereophonic. God speaks to His creatures through two channels: the written word and you, His 'living epistle,' His 'good seed.’ ”But what are we to make of such a comparison? I believe that this reasoning errs in two major areas. First, it is grounded in a misunderstanding of the technical, biblical definitions of witness and evangelism which leads to an artificial distinction between those terms. It is reasoned that " as long as a man simply tells another about Jesus, he is a witness. But the moment he tries to get that person to do something with Christ, he leaves the realm of witnessing and enters the province of soul winning, i.e., one who seeks to 'manipulate a prospect into doing anything with Christ.’ ”Thus, "witnessing and soul winning are two different specialities," and the teaching that "evangelism equals soul winning" can lead only to unhealthy evangelistic models to the hurt of the evangelistic enterprise.
I believe that such reasoning misses the point of the New Testament teaching on the nature and activity of the witness and of evangelism. It is technically incorrect to broaden, and therefore dilute, the New Testament meaning of witness by including a nonverbal, nonpersuasive ministry of "being light to the world" and/or a verbal testimony to Christ with no emphasis on the decisive nature of the gospel.
To be a witness, in Luke's terminology, means "to bear witness in the sense of proclaiming Christ" (Acts 4:33; 23:11). Luke 24:48 and Acts 1:8 indicate that the apostles were witnesses, having been "commissioned by the Lord with the proclamation of the message of the kingdom.”In Acts, the verb (to witness) is used in solemnly declaring and attesting the apostolic preaching in order to win a favorable verdict from the hearers (Acts 2:40; 8:25; 20:24).
Thus, Luke uses this word in the sense of giving "the full proclamation of the message of Christ," the "testimony to Jesus as the Christ (Acts 18:5), the proclamation of the grace of God (Acts 20:24), [and] the urgently wooing address of the gospel of Christ.”21
It is not surprising that in this context of bearing witness (Acts 28:23), Paul also saw fit to "convince" or "persuade" nonbelievers to come to Christ. "The term witness suggests something of the atmosphere of a trial, a lawsuit between Christ and the world, in which the apostles are witnesses."
Thus, the role of the biblical witness to Christ and the gospel is (1) to acquaint himself thoroughly with the facts of the case, i.e., the historical gospel information; (2) to deliver the facts faithfully, regardless of the circumstances or unpopularity of the facts, i.e., to be ready to suffer unjustly; and (3) to describe the meaning and significance of the facts to others with a passionate persuasiveness. The concept of a biblical witness is placed firmly in the context of persuasive proclamation of the gospel and is to be identified biblically with soul winning – asking someone to do something with Christ. The apostolic witness was intended to elicit a response. They preached, as Bunyun put it, what they "smartingly did feel." Our witness can do no less.
In looking at the second error of this false comparison, it is plain from our previous discussion on the definition of both "gospel" and "evangelism," that neither of these terms allows for the nonverbal/nonpersuasive "service" and "fellowship" of the saints to be included under the technical definition of evangelism. While the methodology of first-century evangelism was indeed flexible, the definition of what constituted true evangelism was narrow and precise. Evangelism is soul winning. It is the proclamation of the gospel with a view to persuading lost men and women to come to Christ. Anything less is not evangelism.
Mark McCloskey
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Relational Evangelism or Intentional Evangelism? II
Divine Channels?
The one-to-one comparison assumes that both one's life and the gospel are divine channels through which the living Christ is communicated with saving benefit to the nonbeliever. While I would never want to minimize the crucial role of the quality of life of the one bearing witness to the gospel, we must ask, "Is the one-to-one comparison valid?" I believe the answer is no.
Jesus was the perfect, sinless Word of God incarnate. In Him all the fullness of God dwelt in bodily form (Colossians 1:19). He was the gospel itself. In like manner, the gospel is the light of the glory of Christ (2 Corinthians 4:4), and the power of God for salvation (Romans 1:16). But we fall far short of this. True, we are in the process of being renewed into His image (2 Corinthians 3:18), and we will manifest, to a degree, the character and service given us by Christ.
But we must keep in mind that we are limited in our reflection of the glory of God in the face of Christ, due to our continued fallenness. Our lives, character and service do not bear witness to the glory and saving presence of Christ on a level equal to that of the self-authenticating power and authority of the gospel. Our lives do not do justice to the nature and intent of true evangelism. Here are some reasons.
Our lives, in the process of sanctification, cannot bear the burden of purity, truth and glory inherent in the gospel. As Alan Walker commented, "A serious fallacy has spread through the church today. It is the so called presence concept. While valuable as a protest against too great a trust in merely verbalizing the gospel, the presence concept is a danger as a half truth. The presence idea is the reappearance of one of the worst features of the liberal era of theology. It claims that it is only necessary to be kind and good, to be concerned. The presence idea is filled with pharisaism, a pharisaism which claims that quality of life can be so transparent that Christ shines through. It is a denial of the evangelical faith which believes that a man must, through repentance and faith, be brought to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ.”
The idea that "I don't speak, I let my life do the talking" or "I shouldn't speak until my life has done some talking" forces us to ask, "Whose life is good enough for such an assignment?"
Samuel Shoemaker once said, "I cannot by being good, tell men of Jesus' atoning death and resurrection, nor of my faith in His divinity. The emphasis is too much on me, and too little on Him. Our lives must be made as consistent as we can make them with our faith; but our faith, if we are Christians, is vastly greater than our lives. That is why the 'word' of witness is so important.”This subtle shift toward the life of the messenger and away from the content of the gospel is noted by another author: "Relational evangelism, in spite of its good intentions, does not put its emphasis on the hearing of the word of truth as the necessary kindling which the Holy Spirit ignites in regeneration (Romans 10:17). Relational evangelism's approach can neglect the theological content of the gospel by shifting the focus to the personality and experience of the evangelist.”
The "stereophonic" approach (God speaking to the lost equally through two channels – you and the gospel) is confusing for the non-Christian. Instead of being exposed to the clear witness of the self-authenticating power and authority of the gospel, he is exposed to its dim reflection in a fallen human life. True, this life should be different from that of the unregenerate. But understanding the source of this distinction becomes a burden of spiritual discernment that the non-Christian cannot bear.
How is he to tell the difference between the solid and attractive lifestyle of the Mormon family across the street and that of the evangelical family next door? Both husbands go to church on Sunday with the entire family, treat their kids and wives nicer than does anyone else on the block, are faithful to their wives and are very friendly. They are both against abortion, don't drink or smoke, and are continually mentioning Jesus Christ and their activities at church. How is a spiritually blind, unregenerate man to distinguish between the truth of the gospel and the lie of a cult? Between that which brings eternal life and that which leads to death and destruction? If the lost are to "tune in" on the character and lifestyle of the messenger before they hear the gospel, and if this channel is considered to be on a par with the gospel message channel, then I must argue that the lost will not have access to the clear information they need on which to base any sort of eternal decision. At best, they will pick up "static" when the life of the messenger falls short (which is inevitable for all of us) and contradicts his perfect message. How can we expect the non-believer to know that we are a reflection of the good news until they know what the good news is?
Even the most perfect life ever lived was radically misunderstood by many in His audience. Jesus manifested the very life of God, yet was rejected and put to death by His own countrymen. The pagan neighbors of Peter's audience unjustly slandered the Christians as "evil doers." This should convince us of the limits of letting our lives speak for the gospel or of placing the testimony of our lives on a par with the gospel. The gospel is too important to be left to the uncertainties and insufficiencies of human character and behavior. It must be allowed to speak for itself in all its power and authority.
Mark McCloskey
The one-to-one comparison assumes that both one's life and the gospel are divine channels through which the living Christ is communicated with saving benefit to the nonbeliever. While I would never want to minimize the crucial role of the quality of life of the one bearing witness to the gospel, we must ask, "Is the one-to-one comparison valid?" I believe the answer is no.
Jesus was the perfect, sinless Word of God incarnate. In Him all the fullness of God dwelt in bodily form (Colossians 1:19). He was the gospel itself. In like manner, the gospel is the light of the glory of Christ (2 Corinthians 4:4), and the power of God for salvation (Romans 1:16). But we fall far short of this. True, we are in the process of being renewed into His image (2 Corinthians 3:18), and we will manifest, to a degree, the character and service given us by Christ.
But we must keep in mind that we are limited in our reflection of the glory of God in the face of Christ, due to our continued fallenness. Our lives, character and service do not bear witness to the glory and saving presence of Christ on a level equal to that of the self-authenticating power and authority of the gospel. Our lives do not do justice to the nature and intent of true evangelism. Here are some reasons.
Our lives, in the process of sanctification, cannot bear the burden of purity, truth and glory inherent in the gospel. As Alan Walker commented, "A serious fallacy has spread through the church today. It is the so called presence concept. While valuable as a protest against too great a trust in merely verbalizing the gospel, the presence concept is a danger as a half truth. The presence idea is the reappearance of one of the worst features of the liberal era of theology. It claims that it is only necessary to be kind and good, to be concerned. The presence idea is filled with pharisaism, a pharisaism which claims that quality of life can be so transparent that Christ shines through. It is a denial of the evangelical faith which believes that a man must, through repentance and faith, be brought to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ.”
The idea that "I don't speak, I let my life do the talking" or "I shouldn't speak until my life has done some talking" forces us to ask, "Whose life is good enough for such an assignment?"
Samuel Shoemaker once said, "I cannot by being good, tell men of Jesus' atoning death and resurrection, nor of my faith in His divinity. The emphasis is too much on me, and too little on Him. Our lives must be made as consistent as we can make them with our faith; but our faith, if we are Christians, is vastly greater than our lives. That is why the 'word' of witness is so important.”This subtle shift toward the life of the messenger and away from the content of the gospel is noted by another author: "Relational evangelism, in spite of its good intentions, does not put its emphasis on the hearing of the word of truth as the necessary kindling which the Holy Spirit ignites in regeneration (Romans 10:17). Relational evangelism's approach can neglect the theological content of the gospel by shifting the focus to the personality and experience of the evangelist.”
The "stereophonic" approach (God speaking to the lost equally through two channels – you and the gospel) is confusing for the non-Christian. Instead of being exposed to the clear witness of the self-authenticating power and authority of the gospel, he is exposed to its dim reflection in a fallen human life. True, this life should be different from that of the unregenerate. But understanding the source of this distinction becomes a burden of spiritual discernment that the non-Christian cannot bear.
How is he to tell the difference between the solid and attractive lifestyle of the Mormon family across the street and that of the evangelical family next door? Both husbands go to church on Sunday with the entire family, treat their kids and wives nicer than does anyone else on the block, are faithful to their wives and are very friendly. They are both against abortion, don't drink or smoke, and are continually mentioning Jesus Christ and their activities at church. How is a spiritually blind, unregenerate man to distinguish between the truth of the gospel and the lie of a cult? Between that which brings eternal life and that which leads to death and destruction? If the lost are to "tune in" on the character and lifestyle of the messenger before they hear the gospel, and if this channel is considered to be on a par with the gospel message channel, then I must argue that the lost will not have access to the clear information they need on which to base any sort of eternal decision. At best, they will pick up "static" when the life of the messenger falls short (which is inevitable for all of us) and contradicts his perfect message. How can we expect the non-believer to know that we are a reflection of the good news until they know what the good news is?
Even the most perfect life ever lived was radically misunderstood by many in His audience. Jesus manifested the very life of God, yet was rejected and put to death by His own countrymen. The pagan neighbors of Peter's audience unjustly slandered the Christians as "evil doers." This should convince us of the limits of letting our lives speak for the gospel or of placing the testimony of our lives on a par with the gospel. The gospel is too important to be left to the uncertainties and insufficiencies of human character and behavior. It must be allowed to speak for itself in all its power and authority.
Mark McCloskey
Relational Evangelism or Intentional Evangelism? Part III
The Difference It Makes
The relational school in general has a built-in aversion to methodology, technique, tools and systematic strategy. The practical result of this, I believe, is illustrated in a story told about D. L. Moody. One evening after a crusade meeting, Moody was confronted by an irate man who challenged his methods in bringing the gospel to non-Christians. Moody calmly asked him, "Tell me, what methods do you use in doing evangelism?" "I don't do evangelism," responded the man. To which Moody replied, "Well, I think I like the way I do it better than the way you don't. "
Moody's experience is still common today. Usually those critical of methods offer none as a better alternative. Carl Henry observed, "Every method of not evangelizing is wrong – and many methods of evangelizing are right." As Benjamin Oisraeli once said, "It's easier to be critical than correct. "
The avoidance of methods can lead easily to the inactivity of paralysis. It is no accident that where you find an emphasis on how to do evangelism, there you will also find people doing evangelism. The reason is that it has been made easier through the availability of a simple strategy and method. The questions, "How do I start, and how do I communicate the gospel clearly?" have been answered. The usual doubts and fears about sharing the gospel have been substantially resolved, enabling the once inactive believer to take his first concrete steps in evangelism.
It is also no accident that, generally, where you do not find a method, there you will not find the widespread practice of evangelism. Only those who are by nature creative and outgoing will find the resolve to overcome their fear and inertia and engage in evangelism. The rest will be paralyzed by the simple question, How do I go about doing this?" Evangelism may be much discussed and positively reinforced but, in the final analysis, little is done. While we need to be flexible in our methods and avoid building a monument to anyone approach, we also need to realize that a method is often the difference between doing evangelism and just talking about it.
The Relationship Short-Circuit
While it is not the intent of those who lead the way in relational evangelism, emphasis on the evangelist's quality of life and his relationships with non-Christians can be misapplied easily to the practice of evangelism.
First, the emphasis on sharing the gospel in the context of a warm, ongoing relationship is easily misinterpreted by the one overcome by the cultural undertow of convenience and comfort to mean that no initiative need be taken to verbalize the good news. To fulfill our calling as ambassadors, we only need to engage in a friendly relationship with a non-believer and point generally to Jesus. But the claim that everything we do is evangelism, or that developing relationships is evangelism, is often a cover-up for a witness that is so vague that nothing we do is evangelism. Such thinking can degenerate easily into a philosophy of evangelism that elevates the cultivation of relationships above the theological concerns of the urgent and crucial nature of the gospel.
The spirit of convenience can creep in here. If evangelism is hard, creates tension and is subject to rejection, such a "rocking of the boat" is to be avoided, lest it jeopardize the relationship. What is sacrificed is a clear presentation of the gospel and the call to repentance. The end result is inactivity and/or verbal reticence in the name of sensitivity and relationship building.
Second, this reasoning severely limits the scope of evangelism to encompass only those non-Christians to whom the evangelist can relate in an atmosphere of ease and harmony and in a convenient manner. The majority of non-Christians will be excluded from one's realm of witness.
In summary, a lack of a comprehensive mindset leads to an unfamiliarity with, if not rejection of, theological concerns and practical methodology that encourage the doing of evangelism. Evangelism is nothing if it is not done. The gospel is powerless to change lives if left untold
Mark McCloskey
The relational school in general has a built-in aversion to methodology, technique, tools and systematic strategy. The practical result of this, I believe, is illustrated in a story told about D. L. Moody. One evening after a crusade meeting, Moody was confronted by an irate man who challenged his methods in bringing the gospel to non-Christians. Moody calmly asked him, "Tell me, what methods do you use in doing evangelism?" "I don't do evangelism," responded the man. To which Moody replied, "Well, I think I like the way I do it better than the way you don't. "
Moody's experience is still common today. Usually those critical of methods offer none as a better alternative. Carl Henry observed, "Every method of not evangelizing is wrong – and many methods of evangelizing are right." As Benjamin Oisraeli once said, "It's easier to be critical than correct. "
The avoidance of methods can lead easily to the inactivity of paralysis. It is no accident that where you find an emphasis on how to do evangelism, there you will also find people doing evangelism. The reason is that it has been made easier through the availability of a simple strategy and method. The questions, "How do I start, and how do I communicate the gospel clearly?" have been answered. The usual doubts and fears about sharing the gospel have been substantially resolved, enabling the once inactive believer to take his first concrete steps in evangelism.
It is also no accident that, generally, where you do not find a method, there you will not find the widespread practice of evangelism. Only those who are by nature creative and outgoing will find the resolve to overcome their fear and inertia and engage in evangelism. The rest will be paralyzed by the simple question, How do I go about doing this?" Evangelism may be much discussed and positively reinforced but, in the final analysis, little is done. While we need to be flexible in our methods and avoid building a monument to anyone approach, we also need to realize that a method is often the difference between doing evangelism and just talking about it.
The Relationship Short-Circuit
While it is not the intent of those who lead the way in relational evangelism, emphasis on the evangelist's quality of life and his relationships with non-Christians can be misapplied easily to the practice of evangelism.
First, the emphasis on sharing the gospel in the context of a warm, ongoing relationship is easily misinterpreted by the one overcome by the cultural undertow of convenience and comfort to mean that no initiative need be taken to verbalize the good news. To fulfill our calling as ambassadors, we only need to engage in a friendly relationship with a non-believer and point generally to Jesus. But the claim that everything we do is evangelism, or that developing relationships is evangelism, is often a cover-up for a witness that is so vague that nothing we do is evangelism. Such thinking can degenerate easily into a philosophy of evangelism that elevates the cultivation of relationships above the theological concerns of the urgent and crucial nature of the gospel.
The spirit of convenience can creep in here. If evangelism is hard, creates tension and is subject to rejection, such a "rocking of the boat" is to be avoided, lest it jeopardize the relationship. What is sacrificed is a clear presentation of the gospel and the call to repentance. The end result is inactivity and/or verbal reticence in the name of sensitivity and relationship building.
Second, this reasoning severely limits the scope of evangelism to encompass only those non-Christians to whom the evangelist can relate in an atmosphere of ease and harmony and in a convenient manner. The majority of non-Christians will be excluded from one's realm of witness.
In summary, a lack of a comprehensive mindset leads to an unfamiliarity with, if not rejection of, theological concerns and practical methodology that encourage the doing of evangelism. Evangelism is nothing if it is not done. The gospel is powerless to change lives if left untold
Mark McCloskey
Monday, August 23, 2010
Communication in Marriageby Dr. Adrian Rogers
Marriage counselors agree: Most, if not all, marriage problems are rooted in poor communication. We often act in our marriages as though we are soloists, singing alone and beholden to nobody. But marriage is a duet, not a solo. And the Song of Solomon shows us a real life marriage filled with the music of intimate, personal, and open communication.
DISCUSSION
Here's the stark truth about communication in marriage: You will communicate, or your marriage will disintegrate. And marriages today that are on the rocks are there because of poor communication.
Experts say there are five levels of communication:
Frivolous Level. This is the communication we experience daily in our casual relationships. The weather, the latest scores, clothes, and the like – we do this often and think about it rarely. It's communication on "automatic pilot."
Factual Level. This is a little more content oriented than frivolous communication. Factual communication digs a little deeper into the knowledge of various subjects. There's still no real personal involvement.
Fellowship Level. Now, we're beginning to get a little personal. We share ideas, judgments, and philosophies. We begin to risk rejection for our beliefs.
Feeling Level. In this kind of communication, we go a step deeper. We not only share ideas and core beliefs but we share our feelings about those beliefs. We let others know how important they are to us. This is much riskier, and it's about as deep as most people ever get with each other.
Freedom Level. This is the deepest level of communication. We are completely open with our mate. We share our deepest dreams, fears, ideas, and feelings – without fear of rejection. The word "intimacy" comes from the Latin intimuce. It means "innermost." And truly intimate communication encompasses all those dreams, beliefs, and feelings you wouldn't share with anybody else. Freedom level communication is the secret of lasting love.
When the Bible speaks of a husband and wife coming together in the act of marriage, it says, "So and so knew his wife." To be completely known and still be loved is the supreme goal of marriage. That's true intimacy. Every marriage needs it to survive.
THE DIFFICULTY WITH DIFFERENCES
Intimate communication won't happen without some adjustments – especially on the part of men. In most troubled marriages, the men won't talk. One woman told me that the only time her husband speaks is when he wants food or sex. That's wrong. Men need to talk, whether they want to or not.
Husbandly silence is the culprit in most family communication problems. The wife, who craves communication, pushes her husband into a corner just to get him talking. She pushes and pushes, and Pow! He explodes. Ironically, this is often better to the wife than silence. At least she has his full attention. I'm not saying she intends to pick a fight. But deep down within her there is something that prefers argument to silence. She wants communication. That's understandable. That's how God made her.
Have you noticed how many books there are on marriage? On intimacy? On communication? Here's the problem: The people who need them don't read them! Women read them, but men – who truly need to adjust to their wives' communication needs – don't.
This too is understandable. There are natural barriers to men communicating with the intimacy their wives desire. And wives need to take that into account and make some adjustments.
Consider the articles found in women's magazines: "Five Ways to Develop Closeness in Your Marriage" and "How to Have Harmony in the Home" and "Achieving Intimacy With Your Lover." Now what do men read about in their magazines? "How to Remodel Your Garage" and "How to Double Your Gas Mileage" and "How to Make It Big in the Stock Market."
Yes, there are differences between men and women that affect marital communication. Some of these stem from the fact that we are raised differently. Boys are taught not to cry, not to show emotion. Part of the macho self reliance myth is silence, which supposedly communicates complete self-control.
These differences between men and women should give us all a healthy amount of understanding toward the struggles of our spouses. But they shouldn't stop us from trying, with the power of the Holy Spirit, to imitate the intimacy between Solomon and his spouse. We'll never arrive at perfection. But the closer we get, the happier our homes will be.
DISCUSSION
Here's the stark truth about communication in marriage: You will communicate, or your marriage will disintegrate. And marriages today that are on the rocks are there because of poor communication.
Experts say there are five levels of communication:
Frivolous Level. This is the communication we experience daily in our casual relationships. The weather, the latest scores, clothes, and the like – we do this often and think about it rarely. It's communication on "automatic pilot."
Factual Level. This is a little more content oriented than frivolous communication. Factual communication digs a little deeper into the knowledge of various subjects. There's still no real personal involvement.
Fellowship Level. Now, we're beginning to get a little personal. We share ideas, judgments, and philosophies. We begin to risk rejection for our beliefs.
Feeling Level. In this kind of communication, we go a step deeper. We not only share ideas and core beliefs but we share our feelings about those beliefs. We let others know how important they are to us. This is much riskier, and it's about as deep as most people ever get with each other.
Freedom Level. This is the deepest level of communication. We are completely open with our mate. We share our deepest dreams, fears, ideas, and feelings – without fear of rejection. The word "intimacy" comes from the Latin intimuce. It means "innermost." And truly intimate communication encompasses all those dreams, beliefs, and feelings you wouldn't share with anybody else. Freedom level communication is the secret of lasting love.
When the Bible speaks of a husband and wife coming together in the act of marriage, it says, "So and so knew his wife." To be completely known and still be loved is the supreme goal of marriage. That's true intimacy. Every marriage needs it to survive.
THE DIFFICULTY WITH DIFFERENCES
Intimate communication won't happen without some adjustments – especially on the part of men. In most troubled marriages, the men won't talk. One woman told me that the only time her husband speaks is when he wants food or sex. That's wrong. Men need to talk, whether they want to or not.
Husbandly silence is the culprit in most family communication problems. The wife, who craves communication, pushes her husband into a corner just to get him talking. She pushes and pushes, and Pow! He explodes. Ironically, this is often better to the wife than silence. At least she has his full attention. I'm not saying she intends to pick a fight. But deep down within her there is something that prefers argument to silence. She wants communication. That's understandable. That's how God made her.
Have you noticed how many books there are on marriage? On intimacy? On communication? Here's the problem: The people who need them don't read them! Women read them, but men – who truly need to adjust to their wives' communication needs – don't.
This too is understandable. There are natural barriers to men communicating with the intimacy their wives desire. And wives need to take that into account and make some adjustments.
Consider the articles found in women's magazines: "Five Ways to Develop Closeness in Your Marriage" and "How to Have Harmony in the Home" and "Achieving Intimacy With Your Lover." Now what do men read about in their magazines? "How to Remodel Your Garage" and "How to Double Your Gas Mileage" and "How to Make It Big in the Stock Market."
Yes, there are differences between men and women that affect marital communication. Some of these stem from the fact that we are raised differently. Boys are taught not to cry, not to show emotion. Part of the macho self reliance myth is silence, which supposedly communicates complete self-control.
These differences between men and women should give us all a healthy amount of understanding toward the struggles of our spouses. But they shouldn't stop us from trying, with the power of the Holy Spirit, to imitate the intimacy between Solomon and his spouse. We'll never arrive at perfection. But the closer we get, the happier our homes will be.
Sunday, August 22, 2010
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Why does God love me?
Why does God love me?
Have you ever really thought about that? The more I put my mind on the cross and the more I fail, the more I realize that there is only one answer to this question. Why does God love me? Because He is sovereign and decided I was to be a vessel of love, instead of wrath. That’s it. He simply chose to love me. When my mind sets to this I want to fall on my face and never get up. I want to continually be in prayers of thanksgiving and praise to His Holiness. But I am so unworthy of His love as soon as I see the waves of the weather and the lust of the eyes; I am back in the flesh. I fail. When I do, I do not have an angry Father, I have a loving Father I can come to in repentance with His arms open, as if to say, “That’s ok….I don’t love you because you’re good….I love you because I Am good.” Am I saying it’s ok to sin? God forbid! I’m just saying that what I do has nothing to do with His love for me. He is just and the punishment I deserved, He has paid for in full. This must stay at the forefront of everything I do.
Have you ever really thought about that? The more I put my mind on the cross and the more I fail, the more I realize that there is only one answer to this question. Why does God love me? Because He is sovereign and decided I was to be a vessel of love, instead of wrath. That’s it. He simply chose to love me. When my mind sets to this I want to fall on my face and never get up. I want to continually be in prayers of thanksgiving and praise to His Holiness. But I am so unworthy of His love as soon as I see the waves of the weather and the lust of the eyes; I am back in the flesh. I fail. When I do, I do not have an angry Father, I have a loving Father I can come to in repentance with His arms open, as if to say, “That’s ok….I don’t love you because you’re good….I love you because I Am good.” Am I saying it’s ok to sin? God forbid! I’m just saying that what I do has nothing to do with His love for me. He is just and the punishment I deserved, He has paid for in full. This must stay at the forefront of everything I do.
Monday, August 16, 2010
The Gym And The Gospel?
I don't know what else to call the ministry God has placed us this summer with the "neighborhood kids"other than a gym ministry. We began to invite kids to our church gym on Wednesday nights this summer. Our church typically takes a break from student ministry and children’s ministry on Wed. nights due to the members taking vacations and such. The kids from the neighborhood across the street from our church began to show up right before our break from youth ministry occurred. Well, actually there were a few showing up all during our youth ministry. But during the summer, word got out that we were going to open the gym on Wed nights for the local kids to come and play. We even ran the bus a few times. Most of the kids who showed up were black kids from 6-15. The neighborhood most live in is riddled with violence, poverty and drugs. Most are unchurched and if they do attend church it is very, very poor doctrine or downright heresy. Our youth pastor began this summer gym ministry with no set plan or curriculum. We began with the idea of opening the gym, letting them play freely for about 30 minutes or so, then calling them together. We separated them by gender and would share a devotion with them from God's word. There were maybe, 20-35 kids showing up most Wednesday nights. So, what has God privileged me to see during this time? What has God shown me about our church and more importantly about myself? I am going to try and list a few thoughts and struggles. It’s not exhaustive by any stretch. Since I am still trying to process this stuff. These are honest thoughts, and I am sure some are not very theologically framed. You know, since us Calvinistic folk are such sticklers for theological correctness. So, forgive me if I veer slightly. I have many questions and observations I am beginning to wrestle with. Here are a few. Well here goes!
1. Wow, 98% of Our church is white! I don’t mean the color of the building. Oh sure I noticed it somewhat but not like now. Not to say that there is anything wrong with that. But, yet we sit smack dab in the middle of a predominately African American neighborhood. That brings me to something else I have thought about lately. Why is it I don’t know what to call these kids? How do I refer to them as I write this, black, African American, or colored? I think that is why I and others refer to them as the “neighborhood kids”.You know, trying to be politically correct, I guess. How about just call them by their names, hmm what a marvel concept.
I have listened to a couple of pastor’s talk about the lack of the blacks with in the reformed faith. Pastors such as Thabiti Anyabwile, who by the way is one of my favorite pastor/ bloggers. I have recently listened and read articles by reformed Pastor Eric Redmond who has written a book “Where are all the brothers”. trying to understand this issue and problem.
2. Some in our church somehow think that we were just allowing them to have fun and that was it. Oh, how mistaken those who think such things are. I and the others who share these devotions with these kids are motivated by the gospel. In fact the word devotion is a poor description of what we do. Actually we share the gospel of Jesus Christ when we get these kids together. Not just a bible story. You see, I understand that as I see the faces of these kids change from week to week that I may never see them again. I am not much of a fan of the relational evangelism model. Where is it that some get the idea we have to get to know someone for weeks before we share the gospel with them. Let’s just say for example you have pegged someone as a possible gospel candidate and after a while of getting to know them, right before you have planned to present them the gospel, (of course, after you felt now is the time) after you have built some sort of relational bridge and all, you find out they have just died. How will you live with the guilt of waiting for that "right" moment and not sharing the gospel? You might say, “Well God is sovereign, He must not have meant them to here the good news”. What! No, maybe you were just disobedient!
I see this as an opportunity that I will not let pass away. It is the gospel that raises to life the spiritually dead sinner. It is the gospel that transforms lives and releases the chains of sin. It is the gospel that saves. It is what we as Christians are called to do, to evangelize. Most don’t have a clue that this is our motivation. We don’t look at this as organized carnality. Although at times that is what it appears to be, due to the behavior of the kids. Some may never ever have the chance to hear the gospel. At least an accurate presentation of the gospel and not some squishy feel good “Jesus has a wonderful plan for your life” gospel or even worse, if that isn’t bad enough, heresy. No we give a call for repentance. We preach sin, righteousness, and judgment. We preach a command to respond to the gospel today not “just” a free offer. We preach for conversion not decision.
Truly these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men everywhere to repent." -Acts 17:30
"And this is his commandment, that we believe in the name of his Son Jesus Christ..." - 1 John 3:23
3. In these short weeks I have learned more of these kids’ names and where they live, and what their hopes and dreams are then I know the names or where some members of our church family live, much less about some of their burdens and needs. . What is sad is my family and I have been attending this church for 3 years. This is where I have one of those Arsenio Hall moments, for those old enough to know what I mean. You know "things that make you go hmmm". What does that say about our church? No, really what does that say about me?
4. Why are we so freaked out over their behavior problems? How else do we expect unregenerate people especially undisciplined kids who are raised by only one parent or a grandmother and no real father figure in the home to act? Especially those who have grown up in the environment like they have. Why is that so hard for us who are claiming regeneration to really get? After all we were all enemies and hostile toward God ourselves at one time. I know, I know, you can’t blame it on their environment as the reason they act this way (unruly at times) it is the sin that they are in bondage to. True enough, but “be for real” a minute. Most kids in our church have never been subjected to the conditions and environment these kids have. Most in our church have never walked across the street or even set foot in that neighborhood and seen it for themselves. Yes we need order. Yes we have to have some form of civility. When there isn’t, we escort them out. But,where is the compassion?
5. Should we invite these kids to come and hear the gospel and God’s word? Should that be done over there in their neighborhood? By inviting them in to the midst of our youth, are we potentially harming our youth in some way? What should be our youth and their leader’s response toward these kids? If we allow our youth to look down their noses at these kids are we helping create an atmosphere that is conducive to becoming little Pharisees? Have we already become Pharisees and God is revealing this to us through this?
6. Why has God allowed this to happen? What is it God showing us? Will we miss this opportunity to grow as a congregation and individuals?
I pray that God saves some of these kids. I do know that the seed has been sown. It is up to God to cause the growth.
1. Wow, 98% of Our church is white! I don’t mean the color of the building. Oh sure I noticed it somewhat but not like now. Not to say that there is anything wrong with that. But, yet we sit smack dab in the middle of a predominately African American neighborhood. That brings me to something else I have thought about lately. Why is it I don’t know what to call these kids? How do I refer to them as I write this, black, African American, or colored? I think that is why I and others refer to them as the “neighborhood kids”.You know, trying to be politically correct, I guess. How about just call them by their names, hmm what a marvel concept.
I have listened to a couple of pastor’s talk about the lack of the blacks with in the reformed faith. Pastors such as Thabiti Anyabwile, who by the way is one of my favorite pastor/ bloggers. I have recently listened and read articles by reformed Pastor Eric Redmond who has written a book “Where are all the brothers”. trying to understand this issue and problem.
2. Some in our church somehow think that we were just allowing them to have fun and that was it. Oh, how mistaken those who think such things are. I and the others who share these devotions with these kids are motivated by the gospel. In fact the word devotion is a poor description of what we do. Actually we share the gospel of Jesus Christ when we get these kids together. Not just a bible story. You see, I understand that as I see the faces of these kids change from week to week that I may never see them again. I am not much of a fan of the relational evangelism model. Where is it that some get the idea we have to get to know someone for weeks before we share the gospel with them. Let’s just say for example you have pegged someone as a possible gospel candidate and after a while of getting to know them, right before you have planned to present them the gospel, (of course, after you felt now is the time) after you have built some sort of relational bridge and all, you find out they have just died. How will you live with the guilt of waiting for that "right" moment and not sharing the gospel? You might say, “Well God is sovereign, He must not have meant them to here the good news”. What! No, maybe you were just disobedient!
I see this as an opportunity that I will not let pass away. It is the gospel that raises to life the spiritually dead sinner. It is the gospel that transforms lives and releases the chains of sin. It is the gospel that saves. It is what we as Christians are called to do, to evangelize. Most don’t have a clue that this is our motivation. We don’t look at this as organized carnality. Although at times that is what it appears to be, due to the behavior of the kids. Some may never ever have the chance to hear the gospel. At least an accurate presentation of the gospel and not some squishy feel good “Jesus has a wonderful plan for your life” gospel or even worse, if that isn’t bad enough, heresy. No we give a call for repentance. We preach sin, righteousness, and judgment. We preach a command to respond to the gospel today not “just” a free offer. We preach for conversion not decision.
Truly these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men everywhere to repent." -Acts 17:30
"And this is his commandment, that we believe in the name of his Son Jesus Christ..." - 1 John 3:23
3. In these short weeks I have learned more of these kids’ names and where they live, and what their hopes and dreams are then I know the names or where some members of our church family live, much less about some of their burdens and needs. . What is sad is my family and I have been attending this church for 3 years. This is where I have one of those Arsenio Hall moments, for those old enough to know what I mean. You know "things that make you go hmmm". What does that say about our church? No, really what does that say about me?
4. Why are we so freaked out over their behavior problems? How else do we expect unregenerate people especially undisciplined kids who are raised by only one parent or a grandmother and no real father figure in the home to act? Especially those who have grown up in the environment like they have. Why is that so hard for us who are claiming regeneration to really get? After all we were all enemies and hostile toward God ourselves at one time. I know, I know, you can’t blame it on their environment as the reason they act this way (unruly at times) it is the sin that they are in bondage to. True enough, but “be for real” a minute. Most kids in our church have never been subjected to the conditions and environment these kids have. Most in our church have never walked across the street or even set foot in that neighborhood and seen it for themselves. Yes we need order. Yes we have to have some form of civility. When there isn’t, we escort them out. But,where is the compassion?
5. Should we invite these kids to come and hear the gospel and God’s word? Should that be done over there in their neighborhood? By inviting them in to the midst of our youth, are we potentially harming our youth in some way? What should be our youth and their leader’s response toward these kids? If we allow our youth to look down their noses at these kids are we helping create an atmosphere that is conducive to becoming little Pharisees? Have we already become Pharisees and God is revealing this to us through this?
6. Why has God allowed this to happen? What is it God showing us? Will we miss this opportunity to grow as a congregation and individuals?
I pray that God saves some of these kids. I do know that the seed has been sown. It is up to God to cause the growth.
Thursday, August 12, 2010
Just Passing Through
“These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth. For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country.” Of Abraham it is said: “For he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.” Again it is said of the saints of old: “But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God: is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city.” (Heb. 11:13-14, 10, 16)
In the annals of history there has been one common thread that motivated and captivated the thoughts of the redeemed of God; it was the promise of a city built by God, which is reserved for their eternal home and is called the heavenly Holy Jerusalem. The true saints of God have ever been utterly convinced that the pledge of the Father is to be unequivocally trusted. God cannot lie, thus, His promises are absolute! Abraham did not scour the world in search of a city; he understood the promises of God and awaited, looked forward to, that point in time when he would walk upon the streets of gold of his hometown. Abraham looked not for anything of this world, but he awaited the world to come.
The citizens of Holy Jerusalem have always known that what we journey toward is “afar off,” yet, we have embraced them because we recognize this world is not our home. We instinctively, because of our heavenly birth, are acutely aware of the fact that we are simply passing through this filthy foreign land. The word “seek” includes the idea of craving; and the word “country” out of the language infers one’s fatherland or native home. Having been born of God, true believers crave to be at home in their native Fatherland.
Because of this craving, we are not ashamed to display our homesickness and our longing to complete this journey. The word “desire” has the idea of stretching one’s self out in order to grasp a future event. The problem facing our generation is that there are too many saints who have lost sight and hope of the Fatherland, and have become too comfortable in Egypt. They are bogged down in the quagmire of the hog pen and no longer stare toward the Father’s house. Embrace the promises of God! We are just passing through!
From the Pastor: Dr. M. J. Seymour, Sr.
In the annals of history there has been one common thread that motivated and captivated the thoughts of the redeemed of God; it was the promise of a city built by God, which is reserved for their eternal home and is called the heavenly Holy Jerusalem. The true saints of God have ever been utterly convinced that the pledge of the Father is to be unequivocally trusted. God cannot lie, thus, His promises are absolute! Abraham did not scour the world in search of a city; he understood the promises of God and awaited, looked forward to, that point in time when he would walk upon the streets of gold of his hometown. Abraham looked not for anything of this world, but he awaited the world to come.
The citizens of Holy Jerusalem have always known that what we journey toward is “afar off,” yet, we have embraced them because we recognize this world is not our home. We instinctively, because of our heavenly birth, are acutely aware of the fact that we are simply passing through this filthy foreign land. The word “seek” includes the idea of craving; and the word “country” out of the language infers one’s fatherland or native home. Having been born of God, true believers crave to be at home in their native Fatherland.
Because of this craving, we are not ashamed to display our homesickness and our longing to complete this journey. The word “desire” has the idea of stretching one’s self out in order to grasp a future event. The problem facing our generation is that there are too many saints who have lost sight and hope of the Fatherland, and have become too comfortable in Egypt. They are bogged down in the quagmire of the hog pen and no longer stare toward the Father’s house. Embrace the promises of God! We are just passing through!
From the Pastor: Dr. M. J. Seymour, Sr.
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
Saturday, August 7, 2010
Law Of God
The Christian is released from the law as the procuring ground of his justification and
as the ground of his condemnation before God, because Christ has rendered in his room
and stead that perfect obedience which the law required, and also suffered its penalty:
therefore he is freed from the law as a covenant of works, to obtain life and glory thereby,
but not from that submission to God which its terms enjoin. The Christian has been de-livered
from the curse of the law (Gal. 3:13), but not from its requirements. The Christian
has been delivered from the condemning power of the law, but not from its precepts—
otherwise liberty would be his to live in sin, which is the only other possible alternative.
The Christian has been delivered from the terror of the law, but not from obedience
thereto. The Christian died to the penalty of the law when his Surety suffered in his stead,
but he is under the law to Christ as a Rule of Life or director of conduct.
A.W. Pink (studies in scriptures 1934)
as the ground of his condemnation before God, because Christ has rendered in his room
and stead that perfect obedience which the law required, and also suffered its penalty:
therefore he is freed from the law as a covenant of works, to obtain life and glory thereby,
but not from that submission to God which its terms enjoin. The Christian has been de-livered
from the curse of the law (Gal. 3:13), but not from its requirements. The Christian
has been delivered from the condemning power of the law, but not from its precepts—
otherwise liberty would be his to live in sin, which is the only other possible alternative.
The Christian has been delivered from the terror of the law, but not from obedience
thereto. The Christian died to the penalty of the law when his Surety suffered in his stead,
but he is under the law to Christ as a Rule of Life or director of conduct.
A.W. Pink (studies in scriptures 1934)
Rome vs The Gospel
At the Council of Trent in the 16th century, the Roman Catholic Church placed its eternal and irrevocable curse on the Gospel, announcing it as actually heretical. I am certain that in the hearts and minds of the delegates at the Council, this was never intended - not even for a moment - but that is in fact what happened.
The most relevant Canons are the following:
Canon 9. If anyone says that the sinner is justified by faith alone..., let him be anathema.
Canon 11. If anyone says that men are justified either by the sole imputation of the justice of Christ or by the sole remission of sins,... let him be anathema.
Canon 12. If anyone says that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in divine mercy (supra, chapter 9), which remits sins for Christ's sake, or that it is this confidence alone that justifies us, let him be anathema.
Canon 24. If anyone says that the justice received is not preserved and also not increased before God through good works but that those works are merely the fruits and signs of justification obtained, but not the cause of the increase, let him be anathema.
Canon 30. If anyone says that after the reception of the grace of justification the guilt is so remitted and the debt of eternal punishment so blotted out to every repentant sinner, that no debt of temporal punishment remains to be discharged either in this world or in purgatory before the gates of heaven can be opened, let him be anathema.
Canon 32. If anyone says that the good works of the one justified are in such manner the gifts of God that they are not also the good merits of him justified; or that the one justified by the good works that he performs by the grace of God and the merit of Jesus Christ...does not truly merit an increase of grac and eternal life... let him be anathema.
As Dr. Michael Horton rightly noted, "It was, therefore, not the evangelicals who were condemned in 1564, but the evangel itself. The 'good news,' which alone is 'the power of God unto salvation' was judged by Rome to be so erroneous that anyone who embraced it was to be regarded as condemned." But knowing full well that Rome's full curse is on me for believing the following, I quote the Scripture and embrace the only true Gospel of my Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ.
"To the one who does not work but trusts him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness" (Romans 4:5). God justifies the "ungodly." God does not wait until sinners are righteous in and of themselves before He declares them righteous. If He did, I for one would despair of ever getting there. The word "Gospel" means "good news" and the amazing "good news" of the Gospel is about how Jesus' life, death and resurrection breaks all the power of despair and saves sinners by supplying to them a perfect unassailable righteousness AS A GIFT.
Question: Whose righteousness is supplied?
Answer: Christ's own righteousness (1 Cor 1:30).
The connection between the sinner and the Savior is trust, not improvement of behavior. THAT COMES LATER (Eph 2:8-10).
This is our hope - while ungodly in and of ourselves, when we give up all hope of self attained salvation, trust in the Savior allows the Savior to save and He does so with resplendent and majestic power! Paul wrote, "For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law" (Romans 3:28). The basis of this despair shattering hope (the ungodly justified) is "Christ for righteousness to everyone who believes" (Romans 10:4, literal translation). Through the mechanism of faith alone (which itself is God's gift) God counts sinners (the ungodly) as righteous because of Christ.
"For our sake [God] made [Christ] to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God" (2 Corinthians 5:21). Justification by faith alone is really shorthand for justification by the Person and work of Christ alone. Jesus saves - not merely potentially or hypothetically - but He actually saves - all by Himself! All the sins of all the people who would ever believe in Him were transfered to Christ on the cross and He bore the penalty these sins deserved; and what is transfered to these sinners is a righteousness that has never known sin - the very righteousness of Christ. That is the kind of righteousness given to me - a righteousness that always obeyed every command of God fully and perfectly from the heart. The wonder of it all is that now, because of Christ, God not only merely tolerates me, but He has declared me as just, righteous, and fully pleasing to Him. "Therefore having been justified by faith we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ." (Romans 5:1). This peace is not a mere temporary ceasefire on God's part. I am forever justified before God through faith in the perfect Savior. To quote Martin Luther's Latin phrase, I am "simul iustus et peccator" - at the same time just and sinner. Christ's own perfect righteousness is mine. It is not merely that God because of Christ now sees me as "just as if I'd never sinned", but more than that.. much more than that... He now sees me as "just as if I'd always obeyed!" This, ladies and gentlemen, is the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
John Samson
Refornation Theology
Friday, August 6, 2010
Escaping The Coming Evil
Escaping the Coming Evil
From the Pastor: Dr. M. J. Seymour, Sr.
“The righteous perisheth, and no man layeth it to heart: and merciful men are taken away, none considering that the righteous is taken away from the evil to come. He shall enter into peace: they shall rest in their beds, each one walking in his uprightness.” (Is. 57:1-2)
The fact that all men shall come to death is an undeniable reality that has been fixed upon the minds and hearts of men since the fall of father Adam. However, when God, not man, targets and brings death to a certain category of individuals, one would suppose that folks would take notice of this unusual turn of events. But, this would be a false assumption, because fleshly awareness and spiritual awareness are not common to all without exception. When God begins to remove the righteous the unrighteous do not have a clue, for they are blinded in all spiritual discernment. It is as Sodom and Gomorrah; they had no spiritual familiarity with true righteousness, thus, they could not perceive that not even ten righteous men dwelt among them, which they could have cared less anyway. Righteous and merciful men are dreadful to the depraved conduct of men.
The words “taken away” carry the idea of a gathering up by removing. In essence God is gathering the righteous up by removing them from this world. It is as in the days of Noah; with the exception of Noah and his family, all the righteous were removed by the means of death prior to the pouring out of the wrath of God. It is possible that not even one person fully comprehended until Noah and family were sealed in the ark and the wrath of God flooded upon them. They were swept away in blissful unrighteous ignorance.
The righteous are gathered up into a place of holy peace, of mental, physical, and spiritual rest, and of complete tranquility. We cannot fully grasp this side of our gathering up and removal the unspeakable things in the paradise of the third heaven. It was unlawful for Paul to reveal the gloriousness of the eternal resting place of God for those justified and vindicated in the Lamb’s blood.
It is said that in death we can take nothing with us, but, in this passage we discover the righteous shall depart in their uprightness wrought by the Potter’s hands saturated with the blood of Christ Jesus. O, sweet peace and rest is the righteous’ escape from evil!
From the Pastor: Dr. M. J. Seymour, Sr.
“The righteous perisheth, and no man layeth it to heart: and merciful men are taken away, none considering that the righteous is taken away from the evil to come. He shall enter into peace: they shall rest in their beds, each one walking in his uprightness.” (Is. 57:1-2)
The fact that all men shall come to death is an undeniable reality that has been fixed upon the minds and hearts of men since the fall of father Adam. However, when God, not man, targets and brings death to a certain category of individuals, one would suppose that folks would take notice of this unusual turn of events. But, this would be a false assumption, because fleshly awareness and spiritual awareness are not common to all without exception. When God begins to remove the righteous the unrighteous do not have a clue, for they are blinded in all spiritual discernment. It is as Sodom and Gomorrah; they had no spiritual familiarity with true righteousness, thus, they could not perceive that not even ten righteous men dwelt among them, which they could have cared less anyway. Righteous and merciful men are dreadful to the depraved conduct of men.
The words “taken away” carry the idea of a gathering up by removing. In essence God is gathering the righteous up by removing them from this world. It is as in the days of Noah; with the exception of Noah and his family, all the righteous were removed by the means of death prior to the pouring out of the wrath of God. It is possible that not even one person fully comprehended until Noah and family were sealed in the ark and the wrath of God flooded upon them. They were swept away in blissful unrighteous ignorance.
The righteous are gathered up into a place of holy peace, of mental, physical, and spiritual rest, and of complete tranquility. We cannot fully grasp this side of our gathering up and removal the unspeakable things in the paradise of the third heaven. It was unlawful for Paul to reveal the gloriousness of the eternal resting place of God for those justified and vindicated in the Lamb’s blood.
It is said that in death we can take nothing with us, but, in this passage we discover the righteous shall depart in their uprightness wrought by the Potter’s hands saturated with the blood of Christ Jesus. O, sweet peace and rest is the righteous’ escape from evil!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)