The thing that strikes me about this, is that here is a guy (for whom I have great respect for what he's taught me) who totally sensualizes and physicalizes and futurizes "heaven" and every prophetic text referring to the kingdom of Christ, and the new heavens and new earth. And then he takes this passage, which in context, is only fulfilled by resurrection, and applies both the presence of God, and the experience of that presence (which he actually believes doesn't happen until we physically die!) to the physical pleasures that God has given us in this life to enjoy. Now, I don't have a problem with that application, with the qualification that these things picture, and demonstrate, and make tangible to our understanding the eternal, spiritual, invisible kingdom that is within us. (See again Ward's article.) And yes, we are enjoying them now, as we are enjoying the reality and substance of God's presence now. But again, according to this passage, and probably a hundred others, that presence is brought about by our resurrection. And not until.
So...can a futurist really apply all these benefits and experiences of resurrection and heaven (ie, God's presence) to their present time? Whether they are applying these word pictures metaphorically *or* literally, they are applying them *prematurely*, according to their paradigm of redemption, and the timing of its fulfillment. And it struck me as ironic in a way, that as preterists we get accused of making the Bible irrelevant to our day? By honoring the time statements? And yet, we have way more Scriptures to apply to our lives right now, than any futurist has any hope of doing. Anytime soon. (with due respect to one of my favorite teachers)
0 Comments
I wanted to share some thoughts about a message we just added to our video archive at NCMI, called The Holiness of God. We have a growing archive of sermons at our website. They are all wonderful messages that Ward has given communicating the beauty of the kingdom and grace of God. This one in particular, though, is probably one of the two or three most significant, and impactful to me personally. It is foundational to what our ministry is all about, because it so clearly defines God's radical mercy which He has lavished upon us. Indeed, it took an act of infinite mercy to bring us into the presence of an infinitely holy God. Since I started seeing Christ in the Old Testament, this has become one of my favorite passages: Isaiah 57:15 For thus saith the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity, whose name is Holy; I dwell in the high and holy place, with him also that is of a contrite and humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the heart of the contrite ones. It seems to come up a lot in our podcast studies in the prophets, and it's often my "go to" passage when I am writing about the kindgom of heaven--its character and substance, how it was fulfilled, and how we experience it. In this sermon, Ward talks about this passage in conjunction with one of his bullet points: "The Holiness of God does not allow Him to dwell with evil." That statement should cause us all to pause and consider just what it took to make us the "many mansions--or dwelling places--in our Father's house." No less than this was required: that we be made holy as He is holy. Nothing less would ever do. Ward also makes a rather provocative, yet entirely Biblical statement: If you are saying in your heart, "God will never save that guy, he's too wicked," then God probably hasn't saved you. When you consider it, in light of Isaiah 57:15, you will understand my heart's passion toward the ministry of NCMI. It's only in humbling ourselves before God's holiness, and seeing who we really are apart from Him, that we can know the incalculable riches of His mercy, and share it with others. So that we can truly experience the joy of forgiveness and presence with God. And rest in His completed work. For me, it's all right there in that passage. There are so many Christians who have trusted Christ as their Savior, and yet are still burdened with feelings of guilt and shame. And that guilt and shame tends to come out toward others as self-righteousness and condemnation. And I think it's what mainly keeps people away from "churches." That is why this message is so needed. I am personally so thankful for the technology of video and the internet, which allows us to share these messages with a wide audience. And I know there are all kinds of things competing for your time and attention. But I just wanted to encourage you all to listen to this one message even if you typically don't get a chance to listen regularly. I can't tell you how many times I had to pause it while editing through tears (as I need a clear view to insert text at the appropriate places). And also, I was thinking of so many applications of this message to current preterist "in-house" debates on the forums, including the unbiblical concept known as "progressive sanctification" which is being argued for and against. It occurred to me as I was listening to this message and as I considered the cross, the most awesome display of God's power there ever was, and what it accomplished: my holiness in His sight--that this "progressive sanctification" notion is a particularly blatant offense to God. And it must grieve Him to know that His children still see themselves as lacking something, when He's already given them Himself. Blessings, Tami This series of four sermons is without a doubt the clearest and most beautiful presentation of the gospel and grace of God that I have heard in my life:
Total Depravity and the Gift of Faith And I grew up in church. And heard "the gospel" preached practically from infancy. Or I should say, that I heard many adulterated versions of it. The thing about the truth of God, is that it pierces my heart to its core. And the way that I have learned to recognize the truth of God, is that it alone tells me the truth about myself. It tells me who I really am. Which is really not who I most often think I am, or who others tell me I am. One might suppose it would be hard to sort through all of this other, to find the truth. But it's not hard to find, because it's in the Bible. Every other version of "truth," even within the context of "Christianity" and "church," and in the context of "Scripture" selectively presented, stops short of piercing through our hearts to show us who we really are. And it seems that is not by accident. There is purposeful attention given, great care taken, to change the truth of God into a lie. The lie tells us we are something more than we are (apart from Him), and that He is something less than He is. And the result is that there are relatively few in "Christianity" who know and understand to worship Him both for who He is and for what He has done. And by extension, there are so few who know how to treat others in Him, according to the new creation that they are, and the very righteousness of God which they have become. Having said that, there really is such a thing as false humility. It's the flip-side of the pride coin for a Christian. Because while it's true that we must be confronted with who we are in God's eyes, by dropping every other comparison to see ourselves naked before Him, in order to recieve His mercy; having received it, we are now righteous--holy, unblameable, unreprovable--in His sight. The only view that matters. But as soon as we start comparing ourselves outwardly to others, we tend toward one of two extremes--"better than" or "worse than" --but both are equally prideful because they both effectually diminish the glory, and despise the victory, of the cross. Well the messages may offend. I am actually hard pressed to name anyone in my own Christian community, with whom I regularly fellowship, who would not find them offensive to some degree. The truth does offend. It offends our very nature apart from Christ. But the amazing thing about that is that this same truth is the only place we can find rest. Real rest for our souls, every day. In His "mercies new every morning." "Oh, Lord in the morning, will I direct my prayer unto thee, and will look up"..."You are my glory, and the lifter of my head." The thing about all of those other versions of the gospel? There is no rest in any of them. That is why I love the real one so much. I hope some of you will check out that series, and may it be a blessing. Tami Proverbs 19:22 What is desired in a person is kindness.
We've all experienced the loss of friendships. Sometimes we lose them because someone moves away, and we just "lose touch." Those "losses" are just part of the changing seasons of life. But sometimes friendships die, right before our eyes, for lack of kindness. I have been contemplating the essence of kindness in the face of such a death. I keep thinking about this: Ephesians 4:32 And be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God in Christ forgave you. Kind. Tender-hearted. Forgiving. Regardless of how one may choose to analyze that admonishment from Paul grammatically, I believe that tenderheartedness and forgiveness are intrinsic qualities of kindness. For only a tender heart can be kind. And only one who has forgiven--unreservedly, extravagantly--out of the abundance of mercy they have been shown, is free to show unrestrained kindness. And is there any other kind? Is there such a thing as tempered kindness? Guarded kindness? No. For such would be perceived as feigned or forced, and therefore, most assuredly, unkind. The face of unkindness masks a hard, rather than a tender and open, heart. And it reveals a reluctance to forgive. Usually we withhold forgiveness and harden our hearts to protect ourselves from being hurt. Again. It's natural. When someone has hurt us, we want to protect ourselves from being hurt again. So we may say, "I forgive you, but..." What we are really saying with that "but," is that we acknowledge what the other person has done to hurt us, and we recognize our responsibility to forgive them, but we aren't willing to acknowledge the hurt that we have caused them. We aren't ready to receive the forgiveness that we are so piously offering, and so desperately in need of ourselves, because to do so would require a humility and a vulnerableness that our hardened heart will not accommodate. What I am learning? Protecting myself from being hurt again: it's just a form of pride. And "God resists the proud, but gives grace to the humble." And it is His kindness that leads me to repentance." His kindness: His tender heart, and His forgiveness. And if I want my friend to repent? Again, it is kindness that leads. It is kindness that initiates. It is what drew my heart to God. It is what draws my heart to others, time and time again. But kindness only flows from a tender heart. There is no such thing as self-protective, hard-hearted kindness. Thankfully, there is no vicious cycle with God, the way there is between us, because He doesn't withhold His kindness based on our failure to perform in return. He lavishes it upon us freely. His mercies are new every morning. But it's only when we receive them from Him with a tender heart, broken and contrite, that we can forgive others, "even as Christ forgave us." Because it's only when we come to the place of knowing that we are rich beyond measure in Him, that we can freely give out of that abundance, as though we had nothing to lose. And resuscitate a friendship dying for lack of kindness. "What is desired in a friend is kindness;" in fact, kindness is the very air a friendship breathes. To prove this, we need only to look to the One who said, "I have called you friends," and be Him to one another. Awhile back I participated in a podcast series entitled, "Exploring the Garden Scene." During that time, a gentleman wrote and asked me, "Can you get a covenant creation out of Genesis 1-3 without using anything from the rest of the Bible?" I was incredulous! Yes, the question came from a professing preterist, who prides himself on "logic," and he was completely serious. I asked him in response, "Pick any passage from the Old Testament prophets that you believe is about the kingdom of Christ. Now, can you get the gospel out of that passage without using anything from the rest of the Bible?" He never answered me.
The more I study Genesis creation, the more I realize just how much we are missing when we isolate it from the rest of the Bible. Concerning the nature of Adam's transgression in "eating" from "the tree of the the knowledge of good and evil," and what that tree represents in the garden scene, here are some parallels between Genesis and the New Testament to consider: Jesus said to the pharisees: John 5: 37 And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape. 38 And ye have not his word abiding in you: for whom he hath sent, him ye believe not. 39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. 40 And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life. Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life... The pharisees believed that through obeying the law, they had eternal life. In other words, they trusted in self-righteousness. [But]: they are they [the Scriptures and the law] which testify of me. What was Jesus saying? Paul explains: Romans 3: 19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty ["sin revived, and I died"] before God. 20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. Galatians 2:16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. The pharisees thought that "in them" (in the works of the law, in self-righteousness) they had life, but all the law did was show them their guilt. The purpose of the law was never to bring them life, it was to lead them to Christ (the tree of life): Galatians 3: 24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. This is what Jesus was referring to when he said to the pharisees, "search the Scriptures....for they testify of me." But they were worshiping "the creature" (the law, and their own effort to keep it) rather than "the creator" (the Savior to whom the law pointed). Now for the parallels to the garden scene: Genesis 3: 6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food ["in them you think you have eternal life"], and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat. 7 And the eyes of them both were opened ["sin revived, and I died"], and they knew that they were naked ["that every mouth should be stopped and the world would be guilty before God"...for by the law is the knowledge of sin"]; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons. 8 And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden. 9 And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou? 10 And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself. Notice also in the above passage, that they sewed fig leaves together to cover themselves, and yet, even after they had covered themselves, they were still aware of their nakedness before God, and were ashamed. Why? Because "by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin." Here is an undeniable parallel to the garden scene that brings to a fine point what the fig leaves with which Adam and Eve tried to cover themselves represent: Isaiah 59:1 Behold, the LORD'S hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear: 2 But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear. 3 For your hands are defiled with blood, and your fingers with iniquity; your lips have spoken lies, your tongue hath muttered perverseness. 4 None calleth for justice, nor any pleadeth for truth: they trust in vanity, and speak lies; they conceive mischief, and bring forth iniquity. 5 They hatch cockatrice' eggs, and weave the spider's web: he that eateth of their eggs dieth, and that which is crushed breaketh out into a viper. 6 Their webs shall not become garments, neither shall they cover themselves with their works: their works are works of iniquity, and the act of violence is in their hands. We must understand that it was their works of law which God calls "works of iniquity." Again, why? Because by the law is the knowledge of sin. Attempting to be justified (declared innocent) by keeping the law only further reveals our true guilt. This is the self-perpetuating lie of "the serpent": first, in the garden, it told them that the law could bring them life; then, when their eyes were opened and they realized they were guilty and ashamed before God, they attempted to cover themselves with garments of their own making (ie, more self-righteous works). I think this is why Jesus told the pharisees that their father the devil was "a murderer and a liar from the beginning." The lie of the serpent has always been the same: what you believe will bring life (righteousness, and presence with God) instead brings death (guilt, shame, and separation from God). Now, look at how beautiful this is (and notice again the parallel to the garden scene): Revelation 3: 15 I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. 16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth. 17 Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing [she saw that the tree (the works of the law) was good for food, and desirable to make one wise..."in them you think you have eternal life"] ; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked: 18 I counsel thee to buy of me ["Come, buy wine and milk without money and without price".... ie, "not by works of righteousness we have done, but by His mercy he has saved us!"] gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness does not appear. When Adam and Eve tried to cover themselves with fig leaves (their own works) they were still naked and ashamed, they were kept from the tree of life, and expelled from the presence of God to toil vainly in a "dry and thirsty land where there was no water." Now, when Christ covers us with white raiment (His righteousness, the garments of our salvation), the shame of our nakedness does not appear, we are given right to the tree of life in the presence of God , and invited "to drink of the water of life freely." That is what the entire Bible is about from beginning to end. Fig leaves in Genesis, to white raiment in Revelation. The phrase "Jews for Jesus" has a nice ring to it, due to the alliteration and all. But the fact is that ALL JEWS are for Jesus! Only those who believe in Jesus can legitimately call themselves Jews, according to the Scripture. According to the Scripture, there is NO SUCH THING as a Jew who is NOT for Jesus! So, the phrase "Jews for Jesus" is kind of redundant.
Scripture makes it crystal clear to us who is a Jew, and who is not: Romans 2: 28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: 29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God. In the first century, there were those who claimed to be Jews, but were not. Jesus had these harsh words for them: Revelation 2: 9... I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan. ("Satan" simply means "adversary", and it was a term used in the New Testament to refer to enemies of the gospel and God's people.) In fact, to be a Jew, or part of "Israel," is to be a new creation in Christ: Galatians 6: 14 But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world. 15 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature. 16 And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God. Scripture also clearly identifies "the Seed of Abraham", to whom all God's promises belong: Galatians 3: 7 Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham...16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ... 29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise. Isaiah prophesied that when the Messiah came to redeem His people by forgiving their sins, Jerusalem would be called "The city of the LORD, The Zion of the Holy One of Israel" (Isaiah 60). Scripture tells us plainly and irrefutably that "the city of the Lord" and "Zion" is the church of Jesus Christ: Hebrews 12: 22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, 23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, 24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel. So, regardless of your nationality, if you are a believer in Jesus Christ, you should feel free to call yourself a "Jew for Jesus". Or, to avoid superfluous redundancy, it would be entirely accurate to simply call yourself a "Jew" Peace to you, the "Israel of God," Tami Question: When Jesus spoke of "the light of the world" and a "city set on a hill," he was referring to:
A) His church B) The United States of America According to a spokesman for John Hagee's organization "Christians United for Israel," the answer is B) the United States of America: "America is a shining city on the hill ordained by God. We have that tradition right here in America, and we do see Israel's promise in the Scripture" (source) Where did he even get the phrase "shining city on the hill?" Jesus said to His disciples, Matthew 5:14 Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid. Compare it also, to this description of a "shining city," which is the church: Revelation 21:23 And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof. So, this spokesman for John Hagee's influential organization "Christians United for Israel" is taking a description of the church, the body of Christ, from the Bible, and applying it to the United States of America! And how many thousands of Christians are following this? Recently we were having a discussion with some friends about "heaven." We had all attended a church service a few evenings earlier, the theme of which, coincidentally, was "what will heaven be like?" One of the passages the pastor quoted at church, and that we again referred to in our dinner discussion, was this from Revelation 21:
And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away (Revelation 21:4). Our futuristically minded neighbors agreed with us that this is a description of heaven. A place of no more tears and no more sorrow. So we went on to discuss some other passages which identify the tears and the sorrow, and what removed them…we discussed the cross and the nature of our redemption. We discussed the "Revelation of Jesus Christ" and how it was not about the history of our planet, but the history of our redemption in Him, the restoration of innocence and presence with God. It struck me that while much "food for thought" had been brought to the table, the same question was still being asked, and the query remained pretty much unsatisfied: "Is this all there is?" This is all very related to discussions even among "preterists" who acknowledge with their lips a completed redemption and yet in their hearts are far from experiencing the full impact of forgiveness. Could this be why the preterist view fails to be convincing to futurists? That often times those who present it focus on proving something that happened in the past, and have still not even experienced the impact of what they are "proving" for themselves? I am speaking of the power of the cross. What we need, preterists and futurists alike, is revelation: The Revelation of Forgiveness. Because forgiveness *is* heaven. Forgiveness *is* home. Our futurist friends look forward to "going home" someday. So many of our preterist friends do too. No wonder we have nothing to offer to those who are seeking (regardless of their perceptions or paradigms) ultimate satisfaction and eternal comfort and rest. As I was contemplating my neighbor's responses afterwards to our discussion of "heaven", it was very apparent that no "time statement argument" of what happened empirically in 70 AD was going to reveal forgiveness to her. And it is only *that* revelation which will answer the longing in her heart for her heavenly home. If the Bible equates forgiveness with heaven, and even supposed believers in heaven fulfilled are not acknowledging that *all* of their sin has been forgiven, then doesn't it stand to reason that this is where our focus as preterists needs to be? Fulfilled eschatology = fulfilled redemption. I get really perplexed when people say they want to focus on soteriology rather than eschatology. The two cannot be separated, because either eschatology is fulfilled, or neither is our salvation. I just think there are a lot of "preterists" out there who have not really grasped the impact or the context of the forgiveness of sin and until they do, their "AD 70 message" is going to fall flat. Psalm 16:11 Thou wilt show me the path of life: In thy presence is fulness of joy; At thy right hand there are pleasures for evermore.
This past summer on our family vacation, which included three extra teenagers, as each of ours brought a friend, I watched an Ellen DeGeneres DVD with the girls. I have always enjoyed her comedy and we laughed a lot. At the end of one of the segments, however, it got a little more serious, when she took comments and questions from the audience. A young woman came to the mic who would be recognized on the street immediately by any of us as being a lesbian. She immediately choked up to the point of having difficulty speaking, and expressed to Ellen what a difference she had made in her life by "coming out" and how it gave her hope for her future, and brought her comfort in the midst of all the pain she had experienced at the treatment she had received by those in her community, and some in her own family. Ellen was visibly moved (sure, there may be some who would say it was all staged and contrived, but I am not speaking here to those people) and motioned for the woman to come forward. She bent down over the front of the stage and embraced her, at which point the woman sobbed uncontrollably in her arms. My girls all teared up as most anyone with even a basic sense of compassion would. I was moved to tears as well, but perhaps for more specific reasons. I immediately wondered if she came from a "fundamentalist" background. It is a story I am sure you all have heard over and over again from homosexuals who speak out: they come out from "fundamentalism" and break free of its oppression. Invariably, anyone who comes out as a homosexual, and is a member of a church even remotely resembling the church in which I grew up, has only one option available to them, and that is to leave that church...or be expelled. You know what's perplexing? You don't see gossips being compelled to leave the church. On the contrary, it's often a "the more the merrier" mentality. You don't see those who perpetuate strife among brothers being kicked out, as they often manage to present themselves as acting in the interest of "truth". But there is no such thing as truth void of mercy; that "truth" is a lie. As I watched Ellen embrace this young woman, and comfort her in her pain, letting her know she was not alone, I thought about Christ, and how He would have responded to her. We don't have to wonder whether He would have responded like Ellen who embraced her, or like the "fundamentalists" who had turned their backs. We already know. I thought about my girls and what I am teaching them about Christianity, and who Christ is. And who we are in Him. What made me weep was the fact that an unbeliever was demonstrating to them them a level of compassion that they were not likely to see in a "church" any time soon. My 17-yr-old daughter asked me a few months ago, "If I got pregnant, would you kick me out of the house? Because [so-and-so's] mom would kick her out." I was immediately grieved that the question had to be asked, but what I realized after a very tender conversation with her, was that she knew the answer, she just needed to hear it from me again. And so I resolved that day that she would continue to hear it again, and often. The moralist will dismiss this as sentimentalism, or "emotionalism", or as somehow excusing immorality. I even heard one say recently that to admit to our moral weaknesses, and confess them to one another, was to take pride in them, or to be without remorse. That somehow owning up to our human frailty and reveling in the mercy of God is the height of debauchery. (Nothing like entirely missing the point!) But "God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ." As Christians, who have experienced God's mercy and forgiveness and are commanded to love one another as Christ has loved us, we should respond to a fellow believer who struggles with homosexuality the same way we respond to a fellow believer who struggles with any other area of weakness. And yet for whatever reason, this one "sin", and even one who commits it, has been separated as untouchable by the church. This is especially perplexing since the afore-mentioned sin of gossip arguably does much more damage to God's people and the reputation of His Kingdom in the world. It should sadden all of us, and convict our conscience, to see an unbeliever show more compassion to a stranger than we as members of God's household would show to a hurting brother or sister. Why does James write, "Confess your faults one to another?" He tells us why, in that very context: James 5: 16 Confess your faults one to another, <em>and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much. It goes hand in hand with this passage: Galatians 6: 1 Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, <em>restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted. 2 <em>Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ. We confess our faults, or our struggles and weaknesses, with one another <em>so that</em> we may be restored and healed. But where there is fear of judgment and condemnation, not to mention excommunication, this restoration cannot be accomplished. Christ's law cannot be fulfilled through our communion if we are fearing one another. That is why the apostle writes, "There is no fear in love. Perfect love casts out fear" (1 John 4:18). So many times I have heard Christian parents speak about the ultimate shame of finding out their child struggles with homosexuality. But would these same parents hang their heads and be afraid to show their faces in church if their child struggled with being unkind, unloving, self-righteous or judgmental? It is no wonder that hurting people desperate for mercy often run as far from "church" as they can get. As parents, we should consider fervently how we are portraying Christianity to our children. I want my children to encounter Christ in my loving arms. I want all who enter my home to be embraced by His mercy. And someday, maybe those expelled from "church" will be drawn to the Kingdom of our Savior. |
About Me:
I have been married to my loving husband Keith for 26 years. We have three beautiful and brilliant children, ages 24, 22 and 20. Nothing cheers my heart more than having them all at home, yet nothing is more satisfying to my mind than watching them grow from afar. My personal passion is theology: the knowledge and experience of the Truth and Mercy found only in the person and work of Jesus Christ, and displayed in the lives and communion of His people. My husband and I love to travel, and because our children are often out and about in the world, we get lots of opportunities to see it! And we also love to fill our home with friends who love us, and love our wine collection. Archives
November 2012
Categories
All
|