Another issue arises when wrath is necessary in order for love to exist such that love is incomplete without wrath to help define it.
The issue is that the thing that defines carries more power than the thing defined. If love is dependant upon wrath for its definition, then wrath is more powerful than love. If, however, wrath is merely a function of love, then love remains supreme and wrath is its servant.
When I read of God's nature in Scripture it is clear to see that his nature is defined by Love. In fact, He defines himself with that idea. We can also see a world in which love displays wrath. In Hebrews we read that God disciplines those He loves, and in Revelation we see that God will punish those who killed His bride.
It is also clear that wrath is poured out upon sin, because sin destroys God's creation... and love demands the removal of anything that destroys the object of that love.
In the beginning there was God. In the end there will be God + whatever He wishes to create. Sin will no longer exist, because sin corrupts and God is incorruptible. Wrath is a function of love that is required in order for love to be complete (God's love for Himself and His character is the ultimate love). If sin were necessary for God's love to be complete, then I would expect a much different creation story... one in which God created that which was necessary for His glory to be fully revealed.
Think of Jesus speaking in John 10 when He states that He is the good shepherd. Do you think anyone in that crowd would have considered a shepherd "good" if he intentionally slaughtered the sheep? Most likely not, even if they belonged to someone else.
If that same shepherd killed a wolf invading the flock, however, he would be seen as a hero. Love for the sheep demands wrath upon the wolf. Wrath upon the sheep does not make sense. (Of course some will argue that the sheep receiving God's wrath are instead goats, but for this point I am merely looking at the necessity of wrath either as a function of love or a defining factor of love, and one would not attempt to define love for some sheep by destroying other sheep.)
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Monday, October 5, 2009
The Supremacy of Love
One of the issues that has arisen in my recent Sovereignty journey is the possibility that God's wrath is necessary so that His mercy and grace can be fully understood and appreciated. I agree with the statement as it is. The question then becomes, how did God plan to reveal his wrath? What was His original design, and what does it say about His character?
In the beginning we are told that God creates. He called His own creation "very good". Wrath was missing in creation, and in the rest of the story I get the idea that God does not pour our His wrath on "very good" things. Wrath is reserved for evil things, disobedient and unbelieving things.
However, wrath and justice were clearly a part of His original plan (because they exist if not other reason). They reveal a truth about His love, that love costs the lover. He designed a system in which wrath would necessary not just to define His great love, but also to deal with sin. Sin entered the world (we can presume it was by God's plan) and sin must be destroyed according to God's character and nature.
That means that from the beginning it was God's design to create, have sin enter creation (the story is also quite clear that God did not create sin directly), and then deal with sin in a permanent way. That is where God's wrath enters the equation. God's wrath is such that it is able to destroy sin completely (and death, the effect of sin).
The question then becomes, who did God plan to release his wrath upon? The answer also becomes clear in Scripture... Himself. If we look at the conversation in Revelation we see that a question went out as to who would be worthy to bring salvation to the world. God Himself was the only one found worthy; and one might even say able. His wrath is such that were it poured out on anything or anyone else they would be forever destroyed. Only He was able to take upon Himself the full measure of His wrath and still survive.
God's plan was not that His creation would endure His wrath, but that it would experience and witness His wrath; the fullness of which was displayed upon Christ on the cross. He could do this because wrath is inferior to grace. Life triumphs over death. Love reigns supreme and is able to swallow up sin and death... and still has more to give. As Paul writes, where sin abounds grace abounds all the more.
We read in Scripture that some of creation will also partake in God's wrath. That does not mean God designed creation for His wrath. When God speaks of sin and redemption He speaks of all of creation. All fell; all were redeemed. On the cross He completed the task and paid the price in full. Those who fail to enter in to His rest do not do so because of a lack of grace but a lack of belief.
In the beginning we are told that God creates. He called His own creation "very good". Wrath was missing in creation, and in the rest of the story I get the idea that God does not pour our His wrath on "very good" things. Wrath is reserved for evil things, disobedient and unbelieving things.
However, wrath and justice were clearly a part of His original plan (because they exist if not other reason). They reveal a truth about His love, that love costs the lover. He designed a system in which wrath would necessary not just to define His great love, but also to deal with sin. Sin entered the world (we can presume it was by God's plan) and sin must be destroyed according to God's character and nature.
That means that from the beginning it was God's design to create, have sin enter creation (the story is also quite clear that God did not create sin directly), and then deal with sin in a permanent way. That is where God's wrath enters the equation. God's wrath is such that it is able to destroy sin completely (and death, the effect of sin).
The question then becomes, who did God plan to release his wrath upon? The answer also becomes clear in Scripture... Himself. If we look at the conversation in Revelation we see that a question went out as to who would be worthy to bring salvation to the world. God Himself was the only one found worthy; and one might even say able. His wrath is such that were it poured out on anything or anyone else they would be forever destroyed. Only He was able to take upon Himself the full measure of His wrath and still survive.
God's plan was not that His creation would endure His wrath, but that it would experience and witness His wrath; the fullness of which was displayed upon Christ on the cross. He could do this because wrath is inferior to grace. Life triumphs over death. Love reigns supreme and is able to swallow up sin and death... and still has more to give. As Paul writes, where sin abounds grace abounds all the more.
We read in Scripture that some of creation will also partake in God's wrath. That does not mean God designed creation for His wrath. When God speaks of sin and redemption He speaks of all of creation. All fell; all were redeemed. On the cross He completed the task and paid the price in full. Those who fail to enter in to His rest do not do so because of a lack of grace but a lack of belief.
Friday, October 2, 2009
Thoughts on Sovereignty: Who should I hate?
Yes, this topic is still on my mind. Over the last few weeks I have been looking at this area of Sovereignty and it led me to jump back into Romans to do a nice 16-week study of the book focused around this one question: How are we justified and how are we condemned? Certainly one cannot come up with doctrine simply from one book, but I had to start somewhere and Romans seems to be central to the discussion.
Today I am focusing on one of the questions that arises from the position that God designed part of creation for the purpose of receiving His wrath. The question simply is, "What part of creation should I set apart for wrath?" or "Who should I hate?"
If God's design was that part of His creation was purposed for wrath then that means that displaying wrath is part of God's nature. God never acts outside of His nature. When we look at "wrath" in its pure and final form we see that wrath = separation from God. If love is unity with God, then eternal punishment is banishment from God. This is an entirely different problem, the fact that wrath is central to God's nature, and it involves people being separated from Him. It begins to sound somewhat Eastern to me; a belief that God is both the good and the bad; that His love is defined by His wrath just as much as his wrath is defined by His love.
For the sake of this blog I will assume that the above works out, and that God did indeed design part of his creation for the sole purpose of revealing His wrath against it in order that His love may be clearly understood to those chosen to receive it.
The next truth we are faced with is that those who are chosen have been chosen in order to be changed; changed into God's likeness specifically. This is referred to countless times throughout the New Testament, that God is at work changing us from the inside out, making us look more like Him.
This is not a new teaching at all; we have always been told that we should be patient because God is patient, forgiving because He forgave us, giving because God so loved that He gave.
The teaching I have not received is that which helps me understand how I am to embody God's wrath. It seems to follow that if God knows those He has set aside for wrath that it is in His will that I also discover those. If His will is not just for eternity, but for the earth too (something we teach on the love side) then part of my transformation should include displaying God's wrath to that part of creation that was designed for it. (All of a sudden I can see where things like Crusades come into being.)
To be fair, I have never met anyone I consider a credible source that has actually taught this message; that just as I grow in God's love I should also grow in His wrath. Wrath is something we withhold for sin, not the sinner... for that is God's job. It is interesting how we make that distinction in the area of wrath, but not love. Of course we were never commanded to display God's wrath (towards creation), and we were often commanded to display His love. Perhaps that is significant in understanding God's design.
Still two issues arise that I have been unable to answer:
Today I am focusing on one of the questions that arises from the position that God designed part of creation for the purpose of receiving His wrath. The question simply is, "What part of creation should I set apart for wrath?" or "Who should I hate?"
If God's design was that part of His creation was purposed for wrath then that means that displaying wrath is part of God's nature. God never acts outside of His nature. When we look at "wrath" in its pure and final form we see that wrath = separation from God. If love is unity with God, then eternal punishment is banishment from God. This is an entirely different problem, the fact that wrath is central to God's nature, and it involves people being separated from Him. It begins to sound somewhat Eastern to me; a belief that God is both the good and the bad; that His love is defined by His wrath just as much as his wrath is defined by His love.
For the sake of this blog I will assume that the above works out, and that God did indeed design part of his creation for the sole purpose of revealing His wrath against it in order that His love may be clearly understood to those chosen to receive it.
The next truth we are faced with is that those who are chosen have been chosen in order to be changed; changed into God's likeness specifically. This is referred to countless times throughout the New Testament, that God is at work changing us from the inside out, making us look more like Him.
This is not a new teaching at all; we have always been told that we should be patient because God is patient, forgiving because He forgave us, giving because God so loved that He gave.
The teaching I have not received is that which helps me understand how I am to embody God's wrath. It seems to follow that if God knows those He has set aside for wrath that it is in His will that I also discover those. If His will is not just for eternity, but for the earth too (something we teach on the love side) then part of my transformation should include displaying God's wrath to that part of creation that was designed for it. (All of a sudden I can see where things like Crusades come into being.)
To be fair, I have never met anyone I consider a credible source that has actually taught this message; that just as I grow in God's love I should also grow in His wrath. Wrath is something we withhold for sin, not the sinner... for that is God's job. It is interesting how we make that distinction in the area of wrath, but not love. Of course we were never commanded to display God's wrath (towards creation), and we were often commanded to display His love. Perhaps that is significant in understanding God's design.
Still two issues arise that I have been unable to answer:
- Jesus makes it clear that thinking is equal to doing. It seems that some hold onto the position that certain parts of creation will go to hell, and that in doing so they will be accomplishing their God-ordained purpose. IE - God's character led Him to design part of creation for destruction. It seems like a semantic "out" to say, "I believe this, I just do not act on it, for that is God's job." Would that not be like hating someone but refraining from murdering them? I cannot imagine anything close to "hate" than the statement that a person was designed for the sole reason that they might be punished for all eternity. So, if we believe this, shouldn't it enter into our actions in some way? Otherwise we seem to be living outside our character; hypocrites as it were.
- Others will say that vengeance is God's responsibility. Wrath is something that He reserves for Himself because He alone truly knows the destiny of creation. Though I have not arrived at Romans 12 in my study, we know that it tells us to avoid revenge in order to leave room for God's wrath. The implication here is that God is repaying a wrong that is done. When we look at sin (doing wrong against God) it has a simple definition of living outside of His will and plan. When I choose my will instead of His I have sinned against Him. That presents an awkward situation in the case of the person who was designed to reject God's will. Is He not actually living in obedience to God by his rejection? Such a person would be disobedient to his calling if he were to seek repentance or grace. So, how does vengeance, wrath, or justice fit into such an equation? If rebellion is obedience, and obedience is loving God, then where does punishment fit?
Let me say at this point that Yes, I believe it is possible to over-think things and miss the simplicity of the truth. Yet, truth is my goal. It is created in me to search for the truth until I reach one of two conclusions. Either I will find the truth because it is knowable or I will conclude that this truth is currently unknowable, a mystery as it were. We know that such truth exists for us on the earth because we do not see clearly here, not as we will see in eternity. (Honestly I believe God's sovereignty may be just such a mystery... but for now I am still pressing to see what is knowable.)
Why the press to "know"? Well, my life is consumed with God's character. Submitting myself to Him such that His character is made more real through my life is my purpose... to live is Christ. If it truly is no longer I who live but Christ who lives in me, then my life will look like His. And, if displaying wrath against creation is central to God's nature then follows that I should be seeing that same wrath against creation revealed in my life.
Something in my spirit struggles with that concept, even beyond the fact that I don't see any commands along those lines in Scripture; it goes deeper to a belief that God's love is self-defining and complete and that wrath is merely a function of love, not a definer of love. I will delve into that concept more in another post.
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
The Priority Principle
As I spend time with leaders from both the business and church world I have noticed a common theme. With a few questions, a decent cup of coffee, and about an hour of time they can describe why they do what they do. What they talk about are their core values; those things that they want to describe their life when it is all said and done.
Another thing becomes quite apparent with just a bit of digging. Many of these leaders have a hard time connecting the tasks that fill their days to their core values.
Sometimes it is just a matter of better understanding what they do and why. This is especially true of people with repetitive job cycles (each day looks the same, or each week follows the same pattern).
Most pastors fit into that category as there are certain things that must be done each week before the next Sunday arrives. Their to-do lists are often full before a week even begins. Many times they struggle with motivation because they have forgotten the connection that the task has to their values.
Other times the reason it is hard to find a connection between task and value is because there is no connection. People in this state often talk about things like "the tyranny of the urgent". They are doing things that must be done, but when you ask, "why?", they have a hard time giving a satisfying answer.
One little exercise I ask clients to walk through is to look at their To-Do list for a given week, take each task listed, and ask "Why am I doing this?" Take that answer and ask "why" again. Keep asking why until you get down to something you would consider a core value.
For example, a task might be "write follow-up letters to all guests from Sunday". Why? Because we want guests to feel welcomed and help them connect to our church. Why? God welcomed us into His family, we want to do the same. Why? We value Grace and Hospitality; two characteristics God displays to us.
Each task could go a number of directions. This exercise does two things for you. First, for those tasks that do lead to a core value it allows you to speak vision and not just task. We are no longer "writing follow-up letters to guests", we are extending Grace and Hospitality to people that God loves, just as He did to us. It might flavor those same letters with a different tone and passion.
Second, for those tasks that do not lead to a core value it helps you see that it either does not need to be done or it does not need to be done by the leader. It is important that a leader does not fill their week with tasks that have no connection to their core values. That drains motivation and quickly decreases their performance, creativity, passion, etc.
The simple truth is that there are more things that must be done than a leader can do in any given week. In the past we turned to "time management" tools to help us become more efficient. Sadly, the same technology that allowed us to become more efficient also allowed people to make more demands on us.
Cell phones allow us to make connections at any time, anywhere. They also allow people to believe that we are available to connect any time, anywhere. Email and every other online communication tool allow people to send questions, requests, comments, etc. to us with little to no effort. Put a $0.10 price tag on emails and I bet the average in-box would be cut in half.
Today the focus is not so much on time management as it is on Priority Management. Leaders that will be consistently successful are those that keep a tight reign on their weekly to-do list, keeping them in line with their core values.
Another thing becomes quite apparent with just a bit of digging. Many of these leaders have a hard time connecting the tasks that fill their days to their core values.
Sometimes it is just a matter of better understanding what they do and why. This is especially true of people with repetitive job cycles (each day looks the same, or each week follows the same pattern).
Most pastors fit into that category as there are certain things that must be done each week before the next Sunday arrives. Their to-do lists are often full before a week even begins. Many times they struggle with motivation because they have forgotten the connection that the task has to their values.
Other times the reason it is hard to find a connection between task and value is because there is no connection. People in this state often talk about things like "the tyranny of the urgent". They are doing things that must be done, but when you ask, "why?", they have a hard time giving a satisfying answer.
One little exercise I ask clients to walk through is to look at their To-Do list for a given week, take each task listed, and ask "Why am I doing this?" Take that answer and ask "why" again. Keep asking why until you get down to something you would consider a core value.
For example, a task might be "write follow-up letters to all guests from Sunday". Why? Because we want guests to feel welcomed and help them connect to our church. Why? God welcomed us into His family, we want to do the same. Why? We value Grace and Hospitality; two characteristics God displays to us.
Each task could go a number of directions. This exercise does two things for you. First, for those tasks that do lead to a core value it allows you to speak vision and not just task. We are no longer "writing follow-up letters to guests", we are extending Grace and Hospitality to people that God loves, just as He did to us. It might flavor those same letters with a different tone and passion.
Second, for those tasks that do not lead to a core value it helps you see that it either does not need to be done or it does not need to be done by the leader. It is important that a leader does not fill their week with tasks that have no connection to their core values. That drains motivation and quickly decreases their performance, creativity, passion, etc.
The simple truth is that there are more things that must be done than a leader can do in any given week. In the past we turned to "time management" tools to help us become more efficient. Sadly, the same technology that allowed us to become more efficient also allowed people to make more demands on us.
Cell phones allow us to make connections at any time, anywhere. They also allow people to believe that we are available to connect any time, anywhere. Email and every other online communication tool allow people to send questions, requests, comments, etc. to us with little to no effort. Put a $0.10 price tag on emails and I bet the average in-box would be cut in half.
Today the focus is not so much on time management as it is on Priority Management. Leaders that will be consistently successful are those that keep a tight reign on their weekly to-do list, keeping them in line with their core values.
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
Importance of Inflow
These last few months have been some of the most intense of my life. The whole process of hearing from God and then attempting to match my practical day-to-day life with His call has been incredibly transformational.
It has also been draining, and from what I am seeing it is only going to get more so. Some days I find myself looking back on my position as an associate pastor and thinking just how easy I had it. I realize there is always a case of greener grass, but the fact is I did have it easier back then. Some of that is probably because God was in the process of teaching me what it meant to be poured out for Him. Much of it was that I was the associate pastor... and I have come to believe there is just a whole different level of responsibility that a senior pastor feels.
As my ministry has changed I can empathize more with Paul when he recounted his sufferings in 2 Corinthians 11:16-29. That sounds silly even as I write it, but I find it amazing that at the end of his (quite substantial and impressive) list of trials he says, "besides everything else, I face daily the pressure of my concern for all the churches."
That is a new thing for me, being concerned for "all the churches". I could honestly say that I was concerned with "my" church, but not "all" the churches. Now, as I work with multiple pastors and business people across the city I find that I am constantly being poured out. I pray more, I hurt more. I battle worry and anxiety, not just for my family and our well-being, but for their families and well-being.
It is both incredibly fulfilling and incredibly draining at the same time.
That point become ultimately clear to me today as I stared, blank-faced, at my computer screen. I was trying to write and realized there was just nothing inside of me. I felt truly empty. That is when it hit me. It has been two days since I just sat and soaked in God's Word.
I have read my Bible in the last two days, but it was more of a reference tool as I was dispensing advice, preparing a message, or framing my prayers. I had not stopped long enough to allow God to fill me with His Word, and so I became empty.
Shortly after I realized that I was empty (and why), I thanked God for how He has chosen to use me at this season of my life. I realized that there have been times I have gone weeks or even months without allowing God to fill me before I felt this empty. That was a humbling and convicting thought... that I was giving away so little of what God had given me that I could last months between fill-ups.
That is most certainly not the case now. The calling God has given me is too big for me. The steps of faith He requires are too large. And that is just the way He wants it. Each day I am compelled to come to Him and simply commit myself to His glory. That is about all I can muster, to say, "Today God I am Yours, please fill me and use me as You see fit."
In that beautiful moment He fulfills what He promises so often in the Scripture; He gives me strength, wisdom, clarity, and passion for His Kingdom and Glory. Then He is good enough to take care of all of the other things I need in life as well.
It has also been draining, and from what I am seeing it is only going to get more so. Some days I find myself looking back on my position as an associate pastor and thinking just how easy I had it. I realize there is always a case of greener grass, but the fact is I did have it easier back then. Some of that is probably because God was in the process of teaching me what it meant to be poured out for Him. Much of it was that I was the associate pastor... and I have come to believe there is just a whole different level of responsibility that a senior pastor feels.
As my ministry has changed I can empathize more with Paul when he recounted his sufferings in 2 Corinthians 11:16-29. That sounds silly even as I write it, but I find it amazing that at the end of his (quite substantial and impressive) list of trials he says, "besides everything else, I face daily the pressure of my concern for all the churches."
That is a new thing for me, being concerned for "all the churches". I could honestly say that I was concerned with "my" church, but not "all" the churches. Now, as I work with multiple pastors and business people across the city I find that I am constantly being poured out. I pray more, I hurt more. I battle worry and anxiety, not just for my family and our well-being, but for their families and well-being.
It is both incredibly fulfilling and incredibly draining at the same time.
That point become ultimately clear to me today as I stared, blank-faced, at my computer screen. I was trying to write and realized there was just nothing inside of me. I felt truly empty. That is when it hit me. It has been two days since I just sat and soaked in God's Word.
I have read my Bible in the last two days, but it was more of a reference tool as I was dispensing advice, preparing a message, or framing my prayers. I had not stopped long enough to allow God to fill me with His Word, and so I became empty.
Shortly after I realized that I was empty (and why), I thanked God for how He has chosen to use me at this season of my life. I realized that there have been times I have gone weeks or even months without allowing God to fill me before I felt this empty. That was a humbling and convicting thought... that I was giving away so little of what God had given me that I could last months between fill-ups.
That is most certainly not the case now. The calling God has given me is too big for me. The steps of faith He requires are too large. And that is just the way He wants it. Each day I am compelled to come to Him and simply commit myself to His glory. That is about all I can muster, to say, "Today God I am Yours, please fill me and use me as You see fit."
In that beautiful moment He fulfills what He promises so often in the Scripture; He gives me strength, wisdom, clarity, and passion for His Kingdom and Glory. Then He is good enough to take care of all of the other things I need in life as well.
Monday, August 31, 2009
Thoughts on Sovereignty
[This is a rather long, probably rambling thought on the question, "If God deserves the full credit for the salvation of the elect, does He also share the full blame for the damnation of the rest?"]
I have written on this before, but the topic has arisen once again and it is an important topic, fully worthy of two posts on my prestigious blog.
The issue of sovereignty is, at its core, the age old question, “Is God good?” Some think sovereignty is about Gods power verses our lack of power, but that is merely the first level of the discussion, and it is rather easily answered. With just little research and discovery we find that He has all power and we have none, or we have none outside of that which He has given us.
No, the much more pressing question is, how does this all-powerful God choose to use His power? Is He giving and kind or sadistic and evil? It is the question the serpent first posed to Adam and Eve in the garden. Would God really be so cruel as to deprive you of His good fruit? Would he really kill you simply because you ate of it?
Before we go much further let me say that there is only one answer to the question, “Is God good?” It is a whole-hearted “Yes!” Jesus uses goodness as His standard for God. When the people called Him “good teacher” He reminded them that there is only one who is good, and that is God. By definition anything God does is good, regardless of how it looks through our eyes.
With that as our foundation let us consider a more specific case; whether God has found it good to create some people for His glory and others for His wrath. This is the end reality of most discussions about the chosen and elect. In our desire to give God full credit for our salvation (which He deserves) we often paint a picture in which He also receives full credit for the damnation of the lost.
Though I am willing to accept that premise, I neither desire to do so nor do I think it is necessary according to Scripture.
One objection is somewhat subjective, loosely resting upon principle’s found in Scripture. It has to do with my nature as a father in light of God, the ultimate Father. He says of me that I am evil, and yes I still desire good for my children. How much more, He continues, does He want good things for His children? In Matthew this was not directed only at people who were destined for eternity with God. He was speaking in a more general term, relating our “good” wickedness to his perfect goodness.
Imagine a scene that took place five years ago as my wife and I were discussing children. We decided that we wanted two, a son and a daughter. We hoped to have the son first and the daughter second, some two years later.
The son will be our treasure. Each day we will shower him with love, and each night he will fall asleep secure in our acceptance and care.
The daughter will be reserved for our wrath. Each day she will receive only what she needs to survive. We will not let her die so that we can torture her for another day. Each night we will cut, burn, and beat her and then throw her into a room of utter darkness to fall asleep in her misery.
After this talk we look at each other and agree that our plan is good, in fact it is very good. Then we rest and go to bed.
My stomach squirms just writing these things. They are so far from the truth as to be horrific and ghastly. No sane person would read that conversation and call it “good”. And, if I heard anyone talking like that about my children I would do whatever it took to stop it. I would die before I let my daughter be treated in such a way.
In that light it is no great stretch for me to believe God’s heart went out in the same way about His own sons and daughters. Then, in His great power and mercy he made sure that it did not have to be that way. He would do whatever it takes to redeem His creation. And he did it.
Scripture is extremely clear that when God redeemed creation through Jesus that He completed the task. He saved all, fixed it all, and covered it all. Every wrong was righted; every sin covered when Jesus paid the price and proved His power.
This is what we expect from a good and powerful God. When we were completely unable to save ourselves from an eternity of suffering He stepped in and saved us.
And yet Scripture is also clear that some will not be saved. Some will experience God’s wrath for all eternity. That is really where the problem arises. If God were to say to us, “All will be saved, even if you don’t think they should be,” ten we would deal with it. We might not like it, but in submission to His will we would live with it. Jesus told a parable similar to that after all and the message was clear; God’s mercy is much greater than ours.
But, God does not say that. He tells us that some will be judged for all time in endless fire and separation. How does that happen? We only have two choices. The first is that God decided from the beginning that it would be good to create some things for the sole purpose of releasing His wrath upon them. The second is that He created us with the ability to reject His love and choose His wrath instead.
I reject the first option for two reasons. First it goes against the definition of love that God uses to describe Himself. (His very nature is love, defined as fully giving oneself for another. Wrath receives its definition from love, as the absence of true love.) Second, God says that each will be judged according to his own words and deeds.
Some hesitate to land upon the second option for fear that it will raise a new problem. For, if someone is able to choose death, then couldn’t they also choose life? Not necessarily. Let us take the first man and woman as an example.
What part did Adam and Eve play in the life they discovered? None. Yet, what part did they play in their own death and separation from God? Every part according to God, perhaps somewhat shared with the serpent.
Similarly let us consider the children of Israel. What part did they play in their rescue from Egypt? None. And yet to whom does Scripture attribute the blame for those who died in the wilderness? Certainly not to God. The terms “hardened hearts, disobedience, and unbelief” describe those who were saved from Egypt and yet did not enter His rest.
Might the process of our salvation follow a similar pattern? Might it be more of a process than a single point in time? What if we are all dead in our sins, bound in slavery until God comes and breathes new life into us, setting us free with the offer of eternal life? What if when Scripture says that Jesus died once for all it means just that? That all of us who are by our sinful nature objects of God’s wrath are offered freedom? It has nothing to do with any action or choice we take; God just chose to pay the price for our sin and offers us new life. And this new life is offered to us all, in fact it is granted to us all in his superior grace and mercy. He says to everyone, “Come and eat, enter my rest!”
What then do we say of those who end up experiencing God’s wrath? Perhaps it is of those that the author of Hebrews refers in chapter 6:4-6, “It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age, if they fall away, to be brought back to repentance, because to their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace.”
This is a picture of one who has been freed from the blindness of sin, who has tasted the breath of life… and yet then rejects that very life choosing to embrace death instead.
And so God retains full credit for all those who are saved, and yet He holds none of the blame for those who are condemned.
I have written on this before, but the topic has arisen once again and it is an important topic, fully worthy of two posts on my prestigious blog.
The issue of sovereignty is, at its core, the age old question, “Is God good?” Some think sovereignty is about Gods power verses our lack of power, but that is merely the first level of the discussion, and it is rather easily answered. With just little research and discovery we find that He has all power and we have none, or we have none outside of that which He has given us.
No, the much more pressing question is, how does this all-powerful God choose to use His power? Is He giving and kind or sadistic and evil? It is the question the serpent first posed to Adam and Eve in the garden. Would God really be so cruel as to deprive you of His good fruit? Would he really kill you simply because you ate of it?
Before we go much further let me say that there is only one answer to the question, “Is God good?” It is a whole-hearted “Yes!” Jesus uses goodness as His standard for God. When the people called Him “good teacher” He reminded them that there is only one who is good, and that is God. By definition anything God does is good, regardless of how it looks through our eyes.
With that as our foundation let us consider a more specific case; whether God has found it good to create some people for His glory and others for His wrath. This is the end reality of most discussions about the chosen and elect. In our desire to give God full credit for our salvation (which He deserves) we often paint a picture in which He also receives full credit for the damnation of the lost.
Though I am willing to accept that premise, I neither desire to do so nor do I think it is necessary according to Scripture.
One objection is somewhat subjective, loosely resting upon principle’s found in Scripture. It has to do with my nature as a father in light of God, the ultimate Father. He says of me that I am evil, and yes I still desire good for my children. How much more, He continues, does He want good things for His children? In Matthew this was not directed only at people who were destined for eternity with God. He was speaking in a more general term, relating our “good” wickedness to his perfect goodness.
Imagine a scene that took place five years ago as my wife and I were discussing children. We decided that we wanted two, a son and a daughter. We hoped to have the son first and the daughter second, some two years later.
The son will be our treasure. Each day we will shower him with love, and each night he will fall asleep secure in our acceptance and care.
The daughter will be reserved for our wrath. Each day she will receive only what she needs to survive. We will not let her die so that we can torture her for another day. Each night we will cut, burn, and beat her and then throw her into a room of utter darkness to fall asleep in her misery.
After this talk we look at each other and agree that our plan is good, in fact it is very good. Then we rest and go to bed.
My stomach squirms just writing these things. They are so far from the truth as to be horrific and ghastly. No sane person would read that conversation and call it “good”. And, if I heard anyone talking like that about my children I would do whatever it took to stop it. I would die before I let my daughter be treated in such a way.
In that light it is no great stretch for me to believe God’s heart went out in the same way about His own sons and daughters. Then, in His great power and mercy he made sure that it did not have to be that way. He would do whatever it takes to redeem His creation. And he did it.
Scripture is extremely clear that when God redeemed creation through Jesus that He completed the task. He saved all, fixed it all, and covered it all. Every wrong was righted; every sin covered when Jesus paid the price and proved His power.
This is what we expect from a good and powerful God. When we were completely unable to save ourselves from an eternity of suffering He stepped in and saved us.
And yet Scripture is also clear that some will not be saved. Some will experience God’s wrath for all eternity. That is really where the problem arises. If God were to say to us, “All will be saved, even if you don’t think they should be,” ten we would deal with it. We might not like it, but in submission to His will we would live with it. Jesus told a parable similar to that after all and the message was clear; God’s mercy is much greater than ours.
But, God does not say that. He tells us that some will be judged for all time in endless fire and separation. How does that happen? We only have two choices. The first is that God decided from the beginning that it would be good to create some things for the sole purpose of releasing His wrath upon them. The second is that He created us with the ability to reject His love and choose His wrath instead.
I reject the first option for two reasons. First it goes against the definition of love that God uses to describe Himself. (His very nature is love, defined as fully giving oneself for another. Wrath receives its definition from love, as the absence of true love.) Second, God says that each will be judged according to his own words and deeds.
Some hesitate to land upon the second option for fear that it will raise a new problem. For, if someone is able to choose death, then couldn’t they also choose life? Not necessarily. Let us take the first man and woman as an example.
What part did Adam and Eve play in the life they discovered? None. Yet, what part did they play in their own death and separation from God? Every part according to God, perhaps somewhat shared with the serpent.
Similarly let us consider the children of Israel. What part did they play in their rescue from Egypt? None. And yet to whom does Scripture attribute the blame for those who died in the wilderness? Certainly not to God. The terms “hardened hearts, disobedience, and unbelief” describe those who were saved from Egypt and yet did not enter His rest.
Might the process of our salvation follow a similar pattern? Might it be more of a process than a single point in time? What if we are all dead in our sins, bound in slavery until God comes and breathes new life into us, setting us free with the offer of eternal life? What if when Scripture says that Jesus died once for all it means just that? That all of us who are by our sinful nature objects of God’s wrath are offered freedom? It has nothing to do with any action or choice we take; God just chose to pay the price for our sin and offers us new life. And this new life is offered to us all, in fact it is granted to us all in his superior grace and mercy. He says to everyone, “Come and eat, enter my rest!”
What then do we say of those who end up experiencing God’s wrath? Perhaps it is of those that the author of Hebrews refers in chapter 6:4-6, “It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age, if they fall away, to be brought back to repentance, because to their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace.”
This is a picture of one who has been freed from the blindness of sin, who has tasted the breath of life… and yet then rejects that very life choosing to embrace death instead.
And so God retains full credit for all those who are saved, and yet He holds none of the blame for those who are condemned.
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Generational Change
Change. It is a hot topic these days as many people find themselves dissatisfied with the status quo. In all of our recent talk about change we seem to have forgotten an important fact.
It often takes as long to change the status quo as it took to establish it.
We know this is true from experience. If you spend ten years adding weight to your physical frame, don't expect it to come off in ten weeks. If you spend ten years building your debt portfolio (car, credit cards, school loans, etc.), don't expect to be debt free in ten weeks.
Most pastors and ministry leaders will nod in agreement to these points; they are things we regularly speak about. But, let us bring it home into the church realm.
If we have spent ten years (or more) building mediocrity and apathy into our churches, why do we expect them to become missional in ten weeks (or even ten months)? People will give lip service to things like life-long commitment to a vision, but few actually mean it.
Everyone wants to sign up to be Gideon; called to change one day, and seeing God's deliverance soon after. Fewer want to sign up to be Moses, who was called, then sent to 40 years of training, then served for 40 years, and then asked to turn the ministry over to someone else before ever entering the promised land.
Imagine if God revealed a fool-proof plan that guaranteed in twenty years your church or denomination would begin growing 100% each year. Would you sign up for that plan?
What if you got to the fine print and read that the next nineteen years will see mostly internal change and very little external fruit. To top it off the twenty-year plan has someone else's name at the top of the leadership chart.
Is the plan still as appealing as it was at first? Would you still be willing to commit the next twenty years of your life to the plan knowing you may never see the fruit?
Our culture has infected us with such "new" and "fast" mentality that we have a hard time talking about generational change. We spent a generation getting where we are; what if it requires a generation to get back on track?
It is true that nothing is impossible with God. He can turn a nation to himself in mere days (see Nineveh and Jonah). It is also true that God is not as concerned with our calendar as our character. If it takes forty years for Him to mold us into a usable vessel that is acceptable to Him.
Is it acceptable to us?
It often takes as long to change the status quo as it took to establish it.
We know this is true from experience. If you spend ten years adding weight to your physical frame, don't expect it to come off in ten weeks. If you spend ten years building your debt portfolio (car, credit cards, school loans, etc.), don't expect to be debt free in ten weeks.
Most pastors and ministry leaders will nod in agreement to these points; they are things we regularly speak about. But, let us bring it home into the church realm.
If we have spent ten years (or more) building mediocrity and apathy into our churches, why do we expect them to become missional in ten weeks (or even ten months)? People will give lip service to things like life-long commitment to a vision, but few actually mean it.
Everyone wants to sign up to be Gideon; called to change one day, and seeing God's deliverance soon after. Fewer want to sign up to be Moses, who was called, then sent to 40 years of training, then served for 40 years, and then asked to turn the ministry over to someone else before ever entering the promised land.
Imagine if God revealed a fool-proof plan that guaranteed in twenty years your church or denomination would begin growing 100% each year. Would you sign up for that plan?
What if you got to the fine print and read that the next nineteen years will see mostly internal change and very little external fruit. To top it off the twenty-year plan has someone else's name at the top of the leadership chart.
Is the plan still as appealing as it was at first? Would you still be willing to commit the next twenty years of your life to the plan knowing you may never see the fruit?
Our culture has infected us with such "new" and "fast" mentality that we have a hard time talking about generational change. We spent a generation getting where we are; what if it requires a generation to get back on track?
It is true that nothing is impossible with God. He can turn a nation to himself in mere days (see Nineveh and Jonah). It is also true that God is not as concerned with our calendar as our character. If it takes forty years for Him to mold us into a usable vessel that is acceptable to Him.
Is it acceptable to us?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)