He now sees what he always believed."
- the words that mark the life of Harold O.J. (Joe) Brown) found on his gravestone.
Thursday, November 05, 2009
In Memory
We honor the great people we have admired, and who have passed on,
by becoming the people that they strived to be.
Friday, February 13, 2009
The Way of a Ship on the High Seas
“There are three things that are too amazing for me, four that I do not understand:
the way of an eagle in the sky,
the way of a snake on a rock,
the way of a ship on the high seas,
and the way of a man with a maiden.
Proverb 30:18-19
the way of an eagle in the sky,
the way of a snake on a rock,
the way of a ship on the high seas,
and the way of a man with a maiden.
Proverb 30:18-19
Friday, January 23, 2009
Reading the Bible as Story
In Scot McKnight’s book, “The Blue Parakeet” the idea of reading the Bible as story is a major theme. He says we must read the Bible as story. It is a whole series of stories written in different ways for different reasons. The earlier stories affect the later stories. As he says, none of the stories is the final story. But together they all tell “The Story.” It is a true story. It is a story with power. But most of all it is God’s story
Story is a very important word these days. We hear is quite often on the lips of young people. Some people say they think in stories (probably not most). They have been influenced by the post-modern period that we have all passed through. For post-modernity, story is more important than fact, than science or truth. Truth is something that those in power or those with money use to control the less powerful. (Those who write the story, control the glory). But stories can communicate without appealing to truth or being totally true. Since post-modernity distrusts truth as either being nonexistent or unknowable, it has appealed to story as a way to understand people and the world around us without having to be true. Stories communicate and there is wiggle room in them because the story can be “true” for you but not necessarily true for me. It can tell something of value without having to be true. And that’s okay, because I still understand something about you and the world around me without needing the obsolete and or even dangerous idea of truth.
As a Christian, I can’t accept that truth is non-existent, obsolete or even dangerous. The idea of truth is foundational for us to understand that there is an ultimate reality. There is objective truth no matter how hard it might be, a times, to discern it. Jesus said he was the truth. He said the Holy Spirit would lead us into all truth. So, truth must stand.
But…as we try to understand the world around us, we realize that everything has a story. I have my story…the story of my life. You have your story. The town we live in has a story. The nation we live in has a story. The whole earth has a story. There is a true story for everything. For us to understand each other and the world around us, we need to listen to all the stories. Our existence is a series of interlocking stories.
Many people are uncomfortable with the word story to describe our existence. Some prefer fact and factual accounts. Others prefer more the objective perspective of “provable” history. Still others look to the empiricism, objectivity and precision of science. But all these are simply different ways of telling the story of something or someone. All are trying to communicate something in a fashion that will tell the real story.
I suspect the reason people have a hard time thinking of the Bible as Story is because stories aren’t always true stories. They are often fictional. We tell stories to our children before bedtime. Bedtime stories are meant to put children sleep. Novels are stories. Sometime they are pure fiction. Nowadays we have seen the rise of the “historical novel” where the background is carefully researched history, but the story line is fictional. The characters are real, but they could have been because their character and actions were taken from the accounts of real people living real lives and their real events. We fear that mixing fiction and history will cloud the truth.
The reason for approaching the Bible as story is because in reality, it is a story. It is God’s story of himself creating, interacting, redeeming and bringing to culmination the world around us. We must not deny that it is a story…God’s Story. But it is a true story. It is a powerful story. God tells us this story so we can understand him and his love for us. It tells us how to love him back and love the people he so loves.
As student of the Bible and theology now for nearly 30 years and I have seen people treat the Bible in ways that was never intended. People see the Bible as if it were written in the 20th century. They see it as a textbook. They want it to be history has they read it now. They want the biographical accounts of figures as though they were written from the perspective of a “modern.” Some think they can distill science out of the Bible. Some appeal to the precision of Greek and Hebrew languages and surmise that because of this precision one can simply exegete the texts based on a grammatical-historical basis and arrive the real meaning of a text based simply on the reading of an isolated bit of text. Still others see the Bible as communicating directly to them with no notion of it place in history or the culture from which is came.
The Bible is a series of writings done from 1500 B.C. to nearly 100 A.D. It uses many different ways of speaking: history, poetry, narrative, parable, metaphor, fiction, prophetic, apocalyptic and more. All demand that the reader pay attention to the way the writer wrote. All demand that the reader keep the writer’s words in their historical and cultural context. All demand that the reader keep in mind where the writer’s words…his part of the story…fits into the overall story. But most of all, the reader must keep in mind that the Bible is telling a story through the patchwork of stories, accounts and different kinds of writing.
Yes, the grammatical-historical method of reading the Bible is good. Yes, because of the descriptive nature of the accounts, we can see direct correlations between the physical world of the writer and how we see our world. Yes, there is a certain precision in the language. But, we must not make the mistake of expecting more precision from the language than it can give us. We must be careful not to think that the Bible is scientific. It does not have that optic. We must be careful that in exegeting the passages we study, that a too reductionist approach will not yield the message the author was conveying.
We need to remember that the Bible is story…God’s story told through the stories of the writers that he chose and that he gifted to write the story. And such, we need to become “his-storians.” We need to read the story. Listen to it time and time again. Get to know the fabric, the warp and the woof of the story. We need to learn when something is speaking figuratively or factually. We need to know when the meaning of a text must be qualified by its historical setting and background culture. We need to learn to ask the right question as we read so that we can get the right answers.
The more we listen to the story, the more we’ll understand the story. That is why even those who don’t know the Greek and the Hebrew (while being very important for translation and exegesis) can still understand the story. The story communicates. God made it that way. He speaks a language we can understand because it is a story of our earth, our world and the people around us. As “his-storians” we can hear his voice. But we will only hear it when we listen to God as the master storyteller. After all, it is his story.
Story is a very important word these days. We hear is quite often on the lips of young people. Some people say they think in stories (probably not most). They have been influenced by the post-modern period that we have all passed through. For post-modernity, story is more important than fact, than science or truth. Truth is something that those in power or those with money use to control the less powerful. (Those who write the story, control the glory). But stories can communicate without appealing to truth or being totally true. Since post-modernity distrusts truth as either being nonexistent or unknowable, it has appealed to story as a way to understand people and the world around us without having to be true. Stories communicate and there is wiggle room in them because the story can be “true” for you but not necessarily true for me. It can tell something of value without having to be true. And that’s okay, because I still understand something about you and the world around me without needing the obsolete and or even dangerous idea of truth.
As a Christian, I can’t accept that truth is non-existent, obsolete or even dangerous. The idea of truth is foundational for us to understand that there is an ultimate reality. There is objective truth no matter how hard it might be, a times, to discern it. Jesus said he was the truth. He said the Holy Spirit would lead us into all truth. So, truth must stand.
But…as we try to understand the world around us, we realize that everything has a story. I have my story…the story of my life. You have your story. The town we live in has a story. The nation we live in has a story. The whole earth has a story. There is a true story for everything. For us to understand each other and the world around us, we need to listen to all the stories. Our existence is a series of interlocking stories.
Many people are uncomfortable with the word story to describe our existence. Some prefer fact and factual accounts. Others prefer more the objective perspective of “provable” history. Still others look to the empiricism, objectivity and precision of science. But all these are simply different ways of telling the story of something or someone. All are trying to communicate something in a fashion that will tell the real story.
I suspect the reason people have a hard time thinking of the Bible as Story is because stories aren’t always true stories. They are often fictional. We tell stories to our children before bedtime. Bedtime stories are meant to put children sleep. Novels are stories. Sometime they are pure fiction. Nowadays we have seen the rise of the “historical novel” where the background is carefully researched history, but the story line is fictional. The characters are real, but they could have been because their character and actions were taken from the accounts of real people living real lives and their real events. We fear that mixing fiction and history will cloud the truth.
The reason for approaching the Bible as story is because in reality, it is a story. It is God’s story of himself creating, interacting, redeeming and bringing to culmination the world around us. We must not deny that it is a story…God’s Story. But it is a true story. It is a powerful story. God tells us this story so we can understand him and his love for us. It tells us how to love him back and love the people he so loves.
As student of the Bible and theology now for nearly 30 years and I have seen people treat the Bible in ways that was never intended. People see the Bible as if it were written in the 20th century. They see it as a textbook. They want it to be history has they read it now. They want the biographical accounts of figures as though they were written from the perspective of a “modern.” Some think they can distill science out of the Bible. Some appeal to the precision of Greek and Hebrew languages and surmise that because of this precision one can simply exegete the texts based on a grammatical-historical basis and arrive the real meaning of a text based simply on the reading of an isolated bit of text. Still others see the Bible as communicating directly to them with no notion of it place in history or the culture from which is came.
The Bible is a series of writings done from 1500 B.C. to nearly 100 A.D. It uses many different ways of speaking: history, poetry, narrative, parable, metaphor, fiction, prophetic, apocalyptic and more. All demand that the reader pay attention to the way the writer wrote. All demand that the reader keep the writer’s words in their historical and cultural context. All demand that the reader keep in mind where the writer’s words…his part of the story…fits into the overall story. But most of all, the reader must keep in mind that the Bible is telling a story through the patchwork of stories, accounts and different kinds of writing.
Yes, the grammatical-historical method of reading the Bible is good. Yes, because of the descriptive nature of the accounts, we can see direct correlations between the physical world of the writer and how we see our world. Yes, there is a certain precision in the language. But, we must not make the mistake of expecting more precision from the language than it can give us. We must be careful not to think that the Bible is scientific. It does not have that optic. We must be careful that in exegeting the passages we study, that a too reductionist approach will not yield the message the author was conveying.
We need to remember that the Bible is story…God’s story told through the stories of the writers that he chose and that he gifted to write the story. And such, we need to become “his-storians.” We need to read the story. Listen to it time and time again. Get to know the fabric, the warp and the woof of the story. We need to learn when something is speaking figuratively or factually. We need to know when the meaning of a text must be qualified by its historical setting and background culture. We need to learn to ask the right question as we read so that we can get the right answers.
The more we listen to the story, the more we’ll understand the story. That is why even those who don’t know the Greek and the Hebrew (while being very important for translation and exegesis) can still understand the story. The story communicates. God made it that way. He speaks a language we can understand because it is a story of our earth, our world and the people around us. As “his-storians” we can hear his voice. But we will only hear it when we listen to God as the master storyteller. After all, it is his story.
Friday, December 19, 2008
"All doesn't always mean "all."
Back in July, while on my across-America bike ride, I read a short inspirational letter. It started with the first verse of Genesis 3. “Did God really say?” These are the words of the serpent casting doubt into the mind of Eve about what God had told Adam and her. Then the writer quickly moves to the Gospel story of a boy whose father brings him to Jesus for healing. The man asks “if” Jesus can help. Jesus says,
All things are possible for one who believes. ~ Mark 9:23
Our writer, trying to be helpful and encouraging says, “All means all.” And we should never let Satan tell us otherwise. All things are possible for the believer.
The well-meaning writer arrived at an overstated conclusion through a mistaken notion of how to do word study because…
“All” does not always mean “all.”
Our writer’s method of word study was to go to Strong’s Concordance and simply looking at the definition found there. If you know Strong’s it is very limited in it’s lexical entries. Just looking at those definitions is not good Bible Study. In translation and word study, we use a concordance to see where and how words are used in the Bible. This gives us a range of meanings. Then we use the context of the Bible to determine which meaning to use. The Greek word "pas" (or all) found in the text, can also mean “each,” “every,” “everyone,” everything” “whole,” “all things.” In the NIV the translators chose the word “everything” to translate pas in Mark 9:23 (in contrast his our writer’s version). And what is more, one translated word does not give the full meaning meant in a text.
“All” does not always mean “all.”
After Strong’s, good word study would include looking in a Bible Dictionary or taking a look at a Greek Lexicon like Brown, Driver Briggs. Then good word study would take a look at a theological dictionary like Colin Brown’s New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology. There we find some other ways to think about the word "pas." Then we look at all the verses in the Bible containing our word, thanks to our concordance, and see how the word is used. Then we decide which meaning fits our verse.
But just looking at the lexical entry in Strong’s is not good Bible study and does not yield the meaning of a word or the meaning of the text that contains it. And as we will find, “All does not mean all.” And this goes for the Hebrew word col as well.
Why is this so important to me? This past March, my father died of pancreatic cancer. Like nearly all Christians do, I prayed that he would be healed. But like 97% of everyone who is stricken by this cancer, he died in the first year after the diagnosis.
But the Word says that [it is the LORD] “who forgives all your sins and heals all your diseases,” (Psalms 103.3) But all, does not always mean all. God only heals 3% of all pancreatic cancer patients. Steve Jobs of Apple fame is one of them. But he is rare. The rest like my father die of the disease and within the first year. People die of disease all the time. Sometimes, all means all and sometimes it doesn’t.
Here are some other examples of when all does not mean all.
“I am going to bring floodwaters on the earth to destroy all life under the heavens, every creature that has the breath of life in it. Everything on earth will perish.” Genesis 6.17
“All” didn’t mean “all,” Noah’s family and all the animals and fish were not destroyed by the flood.
“You are to bring into the ark two of all living creatures, male and female, to keep them alive with you.” Genesis 6.19
The fish were not included in all living creatures.
“But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.” John 14.26
The Spirit teaches all things, but not everything. Man cannot contain all knowledge because he is finite. Therefore all cannot mean all. But it can mean everything that we were meant to know: the totality of what God’s will for us is and not an iota more.
“He who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all — how will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things?” Romans 8.32
Does this mean he will give everything we desire or everything that exists? No, he gives us all things that we were destined for. We do not get all things? All does not mean all.
“To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some.” 1Corinthians 9.22
Does Paul become a murderer, a thief, or a prostitute? No he does not become all things. He becomes everything that God might intend for him to become. All does not mean all.
“For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him.” Colossians 1.16
God did not create sin. God did not create angels that were fallen. God did not create sinful man. Man became sinful, but God did not create him that way. He did create everything and all things that he intended to create…the fullness of his intention. But “all things” does not mean “all things.”
“I can do everything through him who gives me strength.” Philippians 4.13
Here “all” translates pas. Paul does not mean we can do everything. God is not going to make me brain surgeon over night. He has not made me a wonderful preacher like (put the name of your favorite preacher here). No, we cannot do everything. But we can do all that God intends for us to do to bring him glory.
It is a hermeneutical error to look up a word in a concordance and cite its definition as the meaning for every like word like it. We have to look at how the word is used in order to arrive at the meaning of the text. It is a hermeneutical fallacy to impose the lexical meaning of a word on all incidences of the same word in the Bible. Every word takes on the nuance of the immediate context.
“All” often needs to be understood as a general promise that is not meant to be exhaustive in fulfillment. Even with God all things are not possible. God cannot go against his own nature. He cannot go against his character. God cannot sin. He cannot do all things. “All” does not always mean “all.”
So when we look at Mark 9:23, what is Jesus getting at?
The story is about a man who brings his boy to Jesus. The boy is stricken with a condition like epilepsy. But the condition comes from an evil spirit living in the boy. The man already brought the boy to Jesus’ disciples but they could not heal the boy. The man Jesus asks for help in the conditional. Jesus says, “If you can? Everything is possible for him who believes.” Jesus then proceeds to cast out the demon and heal the boy. This is completely possible for Jesus. And we believe in him because he can. We also believe Jesus when he says “Everything is possible for him who believes.” But evidently everything is not possible for someone who believes. In this case, prayer was necessary to express belief. So, all does not mean all. We cannot do everything. But we can do everything that the Lord empowers us to do for his glory.
I can do everything, and all things that God intends and wills for me. I can stand against what the world says is not possible. All things that God wants me to do I can do.
We can do all kinds of things, but not everything. God does not heal all our diseases. He does heal all classes of disease, and every disease until the one he allows to kill us.
This mighty assurance of Jesus is meant for us to take heart that when Jesus asks us to do something, we can do it, because he is right there with us giving us the power and his will to do it.
“All” does not always mean “all.” But we can do all things that come from faith in Jesus.
Amen.
All things are possible for one who believes. ~ Mark 9:23
Our writer, trying to be helpful and encouraging says, “All means all.” And we should never let Satan tell us otherwise. All things are possible for the believer.
The well-meaning writer arrived at an overstated conclusion through a mistaken notion of how to do word study because…
“All” does not always mean “all.”
Our writer’s method of word study was to go to Strong’s Concordance and simply looking at the definition found there. If you know Strong’s it is very limited in it’s lexical entries. Just looking at those definitions is not good Bible Study. In translation and word study, we use a concordance to see where and how words are used in the Bible. This gives us a range of meanings. Then we use the context of the Bible to determine which meaning to use. The Greek word "pas" (or all) found in the text, can also mean “each,” “every,” “everyone,” everything” “whole,” “all things.” In the NIV the translators chose the word “everything” to translate pas in Mark 9:23 (in contrast his our writer’s version). And what is more, one translated word does not give the full meaning meant in a text.
“All” does not always mean “all.”
After Strong’s, good word study would include looking in a Bible Dictionary or taking a look at a Greek Lexicon like Brown, Driver Briggs. Then good word study would take a look at a theological dictionary like Colin Brown’s New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology. There we find some other ways to think about the word "pas." Then we look at all the verses in the Bible containing our word, thanks to our concordance, and see how the word is used. Then we decide which meaning fits our verse.
But just looking at the lexical entry in Strong’s is not good Bible study and does not yield the meaning of a word or the meaning of the text that contains it. And as we will find, “All does not mean all.” And this goes for the Hebrew word col as well.
Why is this so important to me? This past March, my father died of pancreatic cancer. Like nearly all Christians do, I prayed that he would be healed. But like 97% of everyone who is stricken by this cancer, he died in the first year after the diagnosis.
But the Word says that [it is the LORD] “who forgives all your sins and heals all your diseases,” (Psalms 103.3) But all, does not always mean all. God only heals 3% of all pancreatic cancer patients. Steve Jobs of Apple fame is one of them. But he is rare. The rest like my father die of the disease and within the first year. People die of disease all the time. Sometimes, all means all and sometimes it doesn’t.
Here are some other examples of when all does not mean all.
“I am going to bring floodwaters on the earth to destroy all life under the heavens, every creature that has the breath of life in it. Everything on earth will perish.” Genesis 6.17
“All” didn’t mean “all,” Noah’s family and all the animals and fish were not destroyed by the flood.
“You are to bring into the ark two of all living creatures, male and female, to keep them alive with you.” Genesis 6.19
The fish were not included in all living creatures.
“But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.” John 14.26
The Spirit teaches all things, but not everything. Man cannot contain all knowledge because he is finite. Therefore all cannot mean all. But it can mean everything that we were meant to know: the totality of what God’s will for us is and not an iota more.
“He who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all — how will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things?” Romans 8.32
Does this mean he will give everything we desire or everything that exists? No, he gives us all things that we were destined for. We do not get all things? All does not mean all.
“To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some.” 1Corinthians 9.22
Does Paul become a murderer, a thief, or a prostitute? No he does not become all things. He becomes everything that God might intend for him to become. All does not mean all.
“For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him.” Colossians 1.16
God did not create sin. God did not create angels that were fallen. God did not create sinful man. Man became sinful, but God did not create him that way. He did create everything and all things that he intended to create…the fullness of his intention. But “all things” does not mean “all things.”
“I can do everything through him who gives me strength.” Philippians 4.13
Here “all” translates pas. Paul does not mean we can do everything. God is not going to make me brain surgeon over night. He has not made me a wonderful preacher like (put the name of your favorite preacher here). No, we cannot do everything. But we can do all that God intends for us to do to bring him glory.
It is a hermeneutical error to look up a word in a concordance and cite its definition as the meaning for every like word like it. We have to look at how the word is used in order to arrive at the meaning of the text. It is a hermeneutical fallacy to impose the lexical meaning of a word on all incidences of the same word in the Bible. Every word takes on the nuance of the immediate context.
“All” often needs to be understood as a general promise that is not meant to be exhaustive in fulfillment. Even with God all things are not possible. God cannot go against his own nature. He cannot go against his character. God cannot sin. He cannot do all things. “All” does not always mean “all.”
So when we look at Mark 9:23, what is Jesus getting at?
The story is about a man who brings his boy to Jesus. The boy is stricken with a condition like epilepsy. But the condition comes from an evil spirit living in the boy. The man already brought the boy to Jesus’ disciples but they could not heal the boy. The man Jesus asks for help in the conditional. Jesus says, “If you can? Everything is possible for him who believes.” Jesus then proceeds to cast out the demon and heal the boy. This is completely possible for Jesus. And we believe in him because he can. We also believe Jesus when he says “Everything is possible for him who believes.” But evidently everything is not possible for someone who believes. In this case, prayer was necessary to express belief. So, all does not mean all. We cannot do everything. But we can do everything that the Lord empowers us to do for his glory.
I can do everything, and all things that God intends and wills for me. I can stand against what the world says is not possible. All things that God wants me to do I can do.
We can do all kinds of things, but not everything. God does not heal all our diseases. He does heal all classes of disease, and every disease until the one he allows to kill us.
This mighty assurance of Jesus is meant for us to take heart that when Jesus asks us to do something, we can do it, because he is right there with us giving us the power and his will to do it.
“All” does not always mean “all.” But we can do all things that come from faith in Jesus.
Amen.
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Christianity is not a religion...really?
“Christianity is not a religion, it’s a relationship.” I sometimes hear this when conversing about what it means to be a Christian. When I hear it, I often appreciate the intention of the speaker because it’s good to draw a distinction between what some mean as religion and what Christian believe.
But…I always cringe because strictly speaking it is quite proper to speak of faith in Christ as religion. But, what the Christian means by religion and what the average person on the street means is different.
For the Christian, the word “religion” is the life that one lives out of faith in God. Religion is the life that comes from seeking to live the will of God and the values of God.
This understanding comes from the way the English word translates several Greek words from the New Testament. One word is "deisdaimonia" and is used in Acts 17:22 and 25:19. This word comes from two other words: "deos" meaning awe, fear or reverence, and "daimonion" meaning demon or god. Literally the word means awe, fear, or reverence of demons or of God. Paul uses the word when he describes what he has seen in Athens. He speaks of the Athenians as “deisdaimonia,” or religious, when he refers to their “objects of worship” (Acts 17:23) and to an altar that had the inscription “to an unknown god.” Paul has chosen this word meaning “awe of god” to describe the attitude of the Athenians toward their objects of worship and the inscription, to an unknown God. “Religion” or “Religious,” in this case refers to man’s orientation of awe or reverence toward the gods or God.
In Acts 25:19, when talking to King Agrippa over the court case of Paul, Festus the then governor of Caesaria Maritima, used the word "deisdaimonia" to refer the belief of the Jews and their conflict over Paul’s message of Jesus’ resurrection. Here, religion translates "deisdaimonia" and refers to the belief of the Jewish accusers of Paul.
Another Greek word in the New Testament, is "threskeia" meaning religion or worship. It is used Acts 26:5, James 1:26 and 27. In the Acts passage, Paul uses “threskeia” and referring to the worship or belief of his former sect, the Pharisees. The Pharisaic worship or belief is a subset of the greater “belief in God” or religion that was Temple Judaism. Paul uses the word to speak of a particular belief system within a belief system.
In James "threskeia" is used in 1:26 firstly to refer to ones belief or faith in God, but then in verse 27 he uses the adjectival from "threskos," or religious, to describe the kind of behavior that belief should spawn or promote in the believer’s life namely: “to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.
A third word that is translated “religion” is "eusebeo" often transated to worship, or show piety, and is found is 1 Timothy 5:4. This verb is a close neighbor to the New Testament words "eusebeia" meaning godliness or piety, and "eusebes" meaning devout, pious, godly, reverent. The word "eusebeo," a verb, describes the Christian belief of the people to whom Paul is referring. He seems to choose the verb form to describe the active belief of the Christians that should be put into action through caring for their own families.
Finally, in Hebrew 10:11, the word "leitourgeo" meaning to perform religious duties. It is the verbal form of "leitourgia" meaning religious service, ceremony, service. The writer of Hebrews speaks of the duties of the priest in the Hebrew system of Temple worship as religious. Here religion is the execution of organized traditional Jewish worship.
Today in common usage, the word religion has quite a range of meaning. Most use the word to refer to some type of belief in God or some type of traditional organized religion like Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Shintoism, Taoism and the like. It can also mean something that someone practices consistently and continually.
Many Christians are uncomfortable referring to their belief in Christ as simply another of one the world belief systems. As well, many Christians are uncomfortable with being called religious when this simply means being a member of a church, or a part of some sort of organized “religion.” Of course this discomfort is for good reason because Christian belief goes much deeper that simply following traditions, or holding merely intellectually to a system of believe or a code of ethics. Being a Christian involves both “head” as a way of believing, but also “heart” because being a Christian means loving God. For the Christian following the form Christianity without faith is not possible. To simply have intellectual ascent without true love for God from the heart is not true belief. That is why some have chosen to say, as in the words of Bill Hybels, “being a Christian is not a religion but a relationship.”
But is this strictly true? Is it right to say Christianity is not religion? Or is it intellectually wrong to refer to faith in Christ as a religion? No, not really, if one looks at how the writers of the New Testament thought of religion. For them religion was simply how one orients themselves toward God through faith, or worship, piety, or even idolatry. It was a serious way of acting in the world with regard to God or the gods.
For the Christian to refer to his religion or the way he or she believes about God is a mark of identity. I am a Christian. I have a religion, a way of orienting myself toward God. Christian belief is the religion where faith is a relationship with the living God through his son Jesus Christ made possible by the power from the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Religion is not how we get to God or how we please God so he’ll let us into heaven, rather it is our orientation toward God and the life we live having found God, or rather, after he has found us. My religion is living relationship with God that affects every part of my life and causes me to live out the wonderful values of God. Love of God and people, joy in life because of God, forgiveness when people have wronged me, serving the needs of others, having the certain hope of spending eternity with God, not letting the evil of the world take over my life but rather pursuing a life of goodness and holiness, treating God’s creation with awe, respect and care, are all part of what it means to have belief in Christ as the religion of my life.
By all means, we need to distinguish between what “religion” means to the average person on the street and heartfelt faith in Jesus. But, to say that being a Christian is not a religion, well…you’d be on thin ice or even in error.
So, if you want, you can say, “being a Christian is not a religion, but a relationship.” It sounds nice and it even alliterates. But James, Jesus’ half brother might respond by saying:
“Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world. - James 1.27
But…I always cringe because strictly speaking it is quite proper to speak of faith in Christ as religion. But, what the Christian means by religion and what the average person on the street means is different.
For the Christian, the word “religion” is the life that one lives out of faith in God. Religion is the life that comes from seeking to live the will of God and the values of God.
This understanding comes from the way the English word translates several Greek words from the New Testament. One word is "deisdaimonia" and is used in Acts 17:22 and 25:19. This word comes from two other words: "deos" meaning awe, fear or reverence, and "daimonion" meaning demon or god. Literally the word means awe, fear, or reverence of demons or of God. Paul uses the word when he describes what he has seen in Athens. He speaks of the Athenians as “deisdaimonia,” or religious, when he refers to their “objects of worship” (Acts 17:23) and to an altar that had the inscription “to an unknown god.” Paul has chosen this word meaning “awe of god” to describe the attitude of the Athenians toward their objects of worship and the inscription, to an unknown God. “Religion” or “Religious,” in this case refers to man’s orientation of awe or reverence toward the gods or God.
In Acts 25:19, when talking to King Agrippa over the court case of Paul, Festus the then governor of Caesaria Maritima, used the word "deisdaimonia" to refer the belief of the Jews and their conflict over Paul’s message of Jesus’ resurrection. Here, religion translates "deisdaimonia" and refers to the belief of the Jewish accusers of Paul.
Another Greek word in the New Testament, is "threskeia" meaning religion or worship. It is used Acts 26:5, James 1:26 and 27. In the Acts passage, Paul uses “threskeia” and referring to the worship or belief of his former sect, the Pharisees. The Pharisaic worship or belief is a subset of the greater “belief in God” or religion that was Temple Judaism. Paul uses the word to speak of a particular belief system within a belief system.
In James "threskeia" is used in 1:26 firstly to refer to ones belief or faith in God, but then in verse 27 he uses the adjectival from "threskos," or religious, to describe the kind of behavior that belief should spawn or promote in the believer’s life namely: “to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.
A third word that is translated “religion” is "eusebeo" often transated to worship, or show piety, and is found is 1 Timothy 5:4. This verb is a close neighbor to the New Testament words "eusebeia" meaning godliness or piety, and "eusebes" meaning devout, pious, godly, reverent. The word "eusebeo," a verb, describes the Christian belief of the people to whom Paul is referring. He seems to choose the verb form to describe the active belief of the Christians that should be put into action through caring for their own families.
Finally, in Hebrew 10:11, the word "leitourgeo" meaning to perform religious duties. It is the verbal form of "leitourgia" meaning religious service, ceremony, service. The writer of Hebrews speaks of the duties of the priest in the Hebrew system of Temple worship as religious. Here religion is the execution of organized traditional Jewish worship.
Today in common usage, the word religion has quite a range of meaning. Most use the word to refer to some type of belief in God or some type of traditional organized religion like Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Shintoism, Taoism and the like. It can also mean something that someone practices consistently and continually.
Many Christians are uncomfortable referring to their belief in Christ as simply another of one the world belief systems. As well, many Christians are uncomfortable with being called religious when this simply means being a member of a church, or a part of some sort of organized “religion.” Of course this discomfort is for good reason because Christian belief goes much deeper that simply following traditions, or holding merely intellectually to a system of believe or a code of ethics. Being a Christian involves both “head” as a way of believing, but also “heart” because being a Christian means loving God. For the Christian following the form Christianity without faith is not possible. To simply have intellectual ascent without true love for God from the heart is not true belief. That is why some have chosen to say, as in the words of Bill Hybels, “being a Christian is not a religion but a relationship.”
But is this strictly true? Is it right to say Christianity is not religion? Or is it intellectually wrong to refer to faith in Christ as a religion? No, not really, if one looks at how the writers of the New Testament thought of religion. For them religion was simply how one orients themselves toward God through faith, or worship, piety, or even idolatry. It was a serious way of acting in the world with regard to God or the gods.
For the Christian to refer to his religion or the way he or she believes about God is a mark of identity. I am a Christian. I have a religion, a way of orienting myself toward God. Christian belief is the religion where faith is a relationship with the living God through his son Jesus Christ made possible by the power from the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Religion is not how we get to God or how we please God so he’ll let us into heaven, rather it is our orientation toward God and the life we live having found God, or rather, after he has found us. My religion is living relationship with God that affects every part of my life and causes me to live out the wonderful values of God. Love of God and people, joy in life because of God, forgiveness when people have wronged me, serving the needs of others, having the certain hope of spending eternity with God, not letting the evil of the world take over my life but rather pursuing a life of goodness and holiness, treating God’s creation with awe, respect and care, are all part of what it means to have belief in Christ as the religion of my life.
By all means, we need to distinguish between what “religion” means to the average person on the street and heartfelt faith in Jesus. But, to say that being a Christian is not a religion, well…you’d be on thin ice or even in error.
So, if you want, you can say, “being a Christian is not a religion, but a relationship.” It sounds nice and it even alliterates. But James, Jesus’ half brother might respond by saying:
“Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world. - James 1.27
Thursday, May 29, 2008
Legalism and Liberalism
I recently read an article by the leader of a large Christian organization where he says that “Legalism and Liberalism are not the design of” the Gospel. The article, which was in reality a weekly letter meant for the inspiration and encouragement of members of the organization, likens the extraordinary design of the Tower bridge London to the form and function of the Gospel. He says the all the aspects of Jesus message such as “Humility, mercy, brokenness and peacemaking embrace righteousness, holiness, courage and zeal. are all in balance.” Like the bridge whose form and function allow the bridge to be a “strong and sure” means of transmitting vehicles and people over the bridge as well as an aesthetically striking landmark, so the Gospel is balanced in it’s beauty and power. Others have said in the Gospel, “Love and justice embrace.”
It is a very good analogy. But, in a further point, the author says that the Gospel and is not legalistic or liberalistic. The phrase goes nicely in the author’s chain of alliterating phrases. I believe with all my heart that the Gospel is not legalistic. But is the Gospel not liberalistic?
A look at various definitions of liberal and liberalism show a range of meeting:
1. "Open to new behavior and opinions, willing to discard traditional values"
If this is the meaning of liberal then I believe it is wrong to say the Gospel is not liberal. Jesus was a "liberal" of his time. He definitely challenged the traditional values and was openly professing new behavior and opinions. As a preacher of the Gospel I hope I help people discard their traditional values that are not in accord with the Gospel.
2. "favorable to individual rights and freedoms"
If this is the meaning of liberal then I believe it is wrong to say the Gospel is not liberal. Jesus upheld the rights and freedoms of individuals. This one of the watch words of the Reformation which contributed to the formation of "liberal democracies". The United States is a liberal democracy, meaning that is favorable to individual rights and freedoms. Freedom of religion is one of the great watchwords or our liberal society. Would we have it any other way? Would Americans tolerate the persecution and restrictions of the beliefs of others? Would we prohibit, Muslims to bury their dead in the United States because they are Muslim and not Christian?
3. "concerned with broadening a person's general knowledge and experience rather than technical or professional training"
If this is the meaning of liberal then I believe it is wrong to say the Gospel is not liberal since it is indeed concerned with broadening a person's knowledge through the Spirit-led journey of searching for truth. The Gospel is about bringing people New Life and not turning them into religious encyclopedias. John Piper said something like "Brothers, we are not professionals."
But if liberalism refers to theological liberalism which does not hold to the inspiration and authority of Scripture and therefore denies that the Bible is God's word, then I could say that yes, the Gospel is not liberal. Salvation of the people God loves depends on “conserving” the reality of the truth of the Scripture and the truth about the Scriptures.
If liberal means that the death of Jesus on the Cross is "cosmic child abuse" instead of an atoning sacrifice the redeems a fallen world, the the Gospel is not liberal.
If liberal means the libertine throwing off the morality of Jesus concerning such aspects of like as monogamous marriage, the sanctity of life, living with integrity, loving another through taking care of the poor, the Gospel is not liberal.
My reason for taking up this issue I am very concerned that Christians turn their back completely on the word liberal. We should not always be conservative as being conservative is not always in keeping with the message of the Gospel. I am a liberal when it comes to the Christian traditional value of not taking care of the environment. I am a liberal when it comes an end-times theology which does not promote good and right treatment of people and the world in the here and now. I am a liberal in challenging the current tradition of tolerance that does not allow Christians to live and be Christian in all theatres of their life.
Most of all I am liberal with regard to the habit of many American Christians who always make conservative and liberal black and white categories. I am not always conservative. I am often liberal. But I am not always a liberal and I am often conservative. It all depends on whether being liberal or conservative is in accord with the Gospel.
Christians need to be careful in always thinking that the word liberal is a dirty word. It’s not. Thankfullly, the Gospel is liberal in it’s outlook on the life and freedoms of people. It is liberal in that God wants all people to be saved.
I am tenaciously conservative in holding on to the liberality of the Gospel.
It is a very good analogy. But, in a further point, the author says that the Gospel and is not legalistic or liberalistic. The phrase goes nicely in the author’s chain of alliterating phrases. I believe with all my heart that the Gospel is not legalistic. But is the Gospel not liberalistic?
A look at various definitions of liberal and liberalism show a range of meeting:
1. "Open to new behavior and opinions, willing to discard traditional values"
If this is the meaning of liberal then I believe it is wrong to say the Gospel is not liberal. Jesus was a "liberal" of his time. He definitely challenged the traditional values and was openly professing new behavior and opinions. As a preacher of the Gospel I hope I help people discard their traditional values that are not in accord with the Gospel.
2. "favorable to individual rights and freedoms"
If this is the meaning of liberal then I believe it is wrong to say the Gospel is not liberal. Jesus upheld the rights and freedoms of individuals. This one of the watch words of the Reformation which contributed to the formation of "liberal democracies". The United States is a liberal democracy, meaning that is favorable to individual rights and freedoms. Freedom of religion is one of the great watchwords or our liberal society. Would we have it any other way? Would Americans tolerate the persecution and restrictions of the beliefs of others? Would we prohibit, Muslims to bury their dead in the United States because they are Muslim and not Christian?
3. "concerned with broadening a person's general knowledge and experience rather than technical or professional training"
If this is the meaning of liberal then I believe it is wrong to say the Gospel is not liberal since it is indeed concerned with broadening a person's knowledge through the Spirit-led journey of searching for truth. The Gospel is about bringing people New Life and not turning them into religious encyclopedias. John Piper said something like "Brothers, we are not professionals."
But if liberalism refers to theological liberalism which does not hold to the inspiration and authority of Scripture and therefore denies that the Bible is God's word, then I could say that yes, the Gospel is not liberal. Salvation of the people God loves depends on “conserving” the reality of the truth of the Scripture and the truth about the Scriptures.
If liberal means that the death of Jesus on the Cross is "cosmic child abuse" instead of an atoning sacrifice the redeems a fallen world, the the Gospel is not liberal.
If liberal means the libertine throwing off the morality of Jesus concerning such aspects of like as monogamous marriage, the sanctity of life, living with integrity, loving another through taking care of the poor, the Gospel is not liberal.
My reason for taking up this issue I am very concerned that Christians turn their back completely on the word liberal. We should not always be conservative as being conservative is not always in keeping with the message of the Gospel. I am a liberal when it comes to the Christian traditional value of not taking care of the environment. I am a liberal when it comes an end-times theology which does not promote good and right treatment of people and the world in the here and now. I am a liberal in challenging the current tradition of tolerance that does not allow Christians to live and be Christian in all theatres of their life.
Most of all I am liberal with regard to the habit of many American Christians who always make conservative and liberal black and white categories. I am not always conservative. I am often liberal. But I am not always a liberal and I am often conservative. It all depends on whether being liberal or conservative is in accord with the Gospel.
Christians need to be careful in always thinking that the word liberal is a dirty word. It’s not. Thankfullly, the Gospel is liberal in it’s outlook on the life and freedoms of people. It is liberal in that God wants all people to be saved.
I am tenaciously conservative in holding on to the liberality of the Gospel.
Sunday, February 03, 2008
"“…he who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the Churches."
In Revelation, we find a striking series of phrases that the Apostle John uses as he brings the prophetic message for The Church. These seven phrases are used in conjunction with seven messages to seven churches of Asia Minor which is now Turkey. These are messages from God for the guidance, direction and correction of these churches. Some believe that he brings seven messages because it would signify to the first readers and hearers of the Revelation, that God was speaking to the whole church, since the number seven is a complete number. Each time he completes one of these “revelations” from God, he end by saying, “… he who has an ear let him hear what the Spirit says to the Churches.” These are among the most striking words that God speaks to the Church in all of his Word. They draw us in to give real ear to what he is saying. As a start to really give ear, we need to know who it is that John is speaking of: who is the Spirit. In John’s first writing to the church (the Gospel), he gives us just such a basis for understanding.
Near the end of his earthly life, and before he left and went to the Father, Jesus promised the coming of “another Counselor” (in the NIV). He said this to the disciples so that they would know that Jesus was not leaving them alone but that the “Counselor”, by which he meant, “the Spirit of Truth” or “the Holy Spirit”, would be with them. He said that, “… the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.” (John 14.26). Jesus was giving the Spirit to mediate his continuing presence but also continue to reveal with Jesus had taught them. He also would have a role in bringing new information and even give the prophetic gift. His role is to reveal what belongs to Jesus and to make it known. That is why he is called the Spirit of Truth. Jesus who is the Truth and speaks the Truth sends the Holy Spirit to guide us into all truth. The Apostle Peter reflects on this when he says that it is the Holy Spirit who was the instrument that God used to bring us the writings of the Old Testament and the New (2 Peter 19-21). The “Counselor” brings the truth to the church.
The word “counselor” comes from the Greek word “paraclete” which is made of two words: the preposition “para” meaning alongside, beside or with: and the verb “kaleo” meaning to call. Literally it means the one called to come along side. Various English words have been used to translate the word “parakletos” such as counselor, advocate, intercessor, helper, one who encourages and comforts.
This Spirit that John is speaking of in his first writing, is same Spirit of whom he speaks in the Revelation. It is the Spirit who is the “one who comes along side ” the church and guides it into all truth. In these seven messages John brings insight to what the Spirit comes along side to do. Each church is given either a commendation, and/or a rebuke, and/or an action and a reward for overcoming.
• To the Church of Ephesus, the Spirit commends them for their hard work and perseverance. But he rebukes them for having forsaken their first love and calls them to remember that first love and to repent.
• The church of Smyrna was commended for having suffered persecution and poverty because of their service for the Lord. The Spirit brings no rebuke to this church but that they should not fear and be faithful.
• To the church at Pergamum, the Spirit commends them for holding on to the faith. But he still says that they have compromised the values of the faith. So he charges them to repent and be true to the faith they have held to.
• The Spirit says to the church as Thyatira that they have shown love, faith and service. But they are chastened for their immorality. They too are called to repent.
• The Spirit says to the church of Sardis that they have been effective, yet their effectiveness is only superficial so they are to wake up, repent and be worthy of their deeds.
• The church at Philadelphia is commended for being faithful. The Spirit has no rebuke for them only the charge to hold on.
• Finally, the Spirit says to the Church at Laodicea, they are not commended for anything but he rebukes them for being lukewarm. He charges them to be earnest and repent.
These seven messages to seven churches are the kind of thing that the Spirit did in the past of the Church. He was given to come along side the Church and take from what is from Jesus and make it known to us. The Spirit said to the churches in John’s time to continue hold to the true values of God and his kingdom that Jesus taught them. There is nothing new in what the Spirit said to the churches only to hold on to the values that Jesus had already taught. The Spirit said to the churches, where there was fault and error, to repent to change and be the kind of people the God could reward. The seven-fold message to the seven-fold church was given a seven-fold promise of blessing for those who “had an ear to hear.” Reading them warms the heart, awes us at God’s goodness and can only cause to be thankful. Those who are faithful, who repent and overcome will:
• be given right to eat from the tree of life which is in the paradise of God,
• not be hurt at all by the second death,
• will receive the hidden manna, and a white stone with his/her own special name written on it,
• receive authority over the nations and the morning star,
• be dressed in white and will never have his name blotted out from the book of life,
• will be made a pillar of the temple, never to be left by God and will have the name of God and the name of the city of God written on him as well as a new name
• and the right to sit with God on his throne.
These are rich blessings that are also rich in symbolism that requires a knowledge of all of God’s Word to understand. We need the ears of the fruit of our study. But our study of the Word of God, inspired by the Holy Spirit, which needed in order to understand these unbelievable blessings, will be a richness in itself.
“He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the Churches. Today, do we have an ear to hear what the Spirit says to the Churches? The Spirit commended, chastened and challenged to action the seven-fold church representing God's Total Church. Do we have the right ear to hear? Are we willing to take stock in the things we can be commended for? Are we willing to hear the things that we must be rebuked for? Are we willing to be challenged to action and change what God wants us to change? Are we ready to be students of all of God’s word so we can understand the rich symbolism and information from which John draws to bring us a message from the Spirit? Are we ready to be thrilled by the rich blessings that God promises to those who have ears, who listen and overcome by hearing the message of the Spirit?
“He who has an ear, let him hear what he Spirit says to the Churches.” The Holy Spirit is here to take what is from Jesus and give it to us. He is here to guide us into all truth. Do we have an ear to hear his truth, take it in and let it change us so that we can be overcomers in a world that has lost it ability to hear the voice of it master.
“He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the Churches.”
Amen.
Maranatha.
Near the end of his earthly life, and before he left and went to the Father, Jesus promised the coming of “another Counselor” (in the NIV). He said this to the disciples so that they would know that Jesus was not leaving them alone but that the “Counselor”, by which he meant, “the Spirit of Truth” or “the Holy Spirit”, would be with them. He said that, “… the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.” (John 14.26). Jesus was giving the Spirit to mediate his continuing presence but also continue to reveal with Jesus had taught them. He also would have a role in bringing new information and even give the prophetic gift. His role is to reveal what belongs to Jesus and to make it known. That is why he is called the Spirit of Truth. Jesus who is the Truth and speaks the Truth sends the Holy Spirit to guide us into all truth. The Apostle Peter reflects on this when he says that it is the Holy Spirit who was the instrument that God used to bring us the writings of the Old Testament and the New (2 Peter 19-21). The “Counselor” brings the truth to the church.
The word “counselor” comes from the Greek word “paraclete” which is made of two words: the preposition “para” meaning alongside, beside or with: and the verb “kaleo” meaning to call. Literally it means the one called to come along side. Various English words have been used to translate the word “parakletos” such as counselor, advocate, intercessor, helper, one who encourages and comforts.
This Spirit that John is speaking of in his first writing, is same Spirit of whom he speaks in the Revelation. It is the Spirit who is the “one who comes along side ” the church and guides it into all truth. In these seven messages John brings insight to what the Spirit comes along side to do. Each church is given either a commendation, and/or a rebuke, and/or an action and a reward for overcoming.
• To the Church of Ephesus, the Spirit commends them for their hard work and perseverance. But he rebukes them for having forsaken their first love and calls them to remember that first love and to repent.
• The church of Smyrna was commended for having suffered persecution and poverty because of their service for the Lord. The Spirit brings no rebuke to this church but that they should not fear and be faithful.
• To the church at Pergamum, the Spirit commends them for holding on to the faith. But he still says that they have compromised the values of the faith. So he charges them to repent and be true to the faith they have held to.
• The Spirit says to the church as Thyatira that they have shown love, faith and service. But they are chastened for their immorality. They too are called to repent.
• The Spirit says to the church of Sardis that they have been effective, yet their effectiveness is only superficial so they are to wake up, repent and be worthy of their deeds.
• The church at Philadelphia is commended for being faithful. The Spirit has no rebuke for them only the charge to hold on.
• Finally, the Spirit says to the Church at Laodicea, they are not commended for anything but he rebukes them for being lukewarm. He charges them to be earnest and repent.
These seven messages to seven churches are the kind of thing that the Spirit did in the past of the Church. He was given to come along side the Church and take from what is from Jesus and make it known to us. The Spirit said to the churches in John’s time to continue hold to the true values of God and his kingdom that Jesus taught them. There is nothing new in what the Spirit said to the churches only to hold on to the values that Jesus had already taught. The Spirit said to the churches, where there was fault and error, to repent to change and be the kind of people the God could reward. The seven-fold message to the seven-fold church was given a seven-fold promise of blessing for those who “had an ear to hear.” Reading them warms the heart, awes us at God’s goodness and can only cause to be thankful. Those who are faithful, who repent and overcome will:
• be given right to eat from the tree of life which is in the paradise of God,
• not be hurt at all by the second death,
• will receive the hidden manna, and a white stone with his/her own special name written on it,
• receive authority over the nations and the morning star,
• be dressed in white and will never have his name blotted out from the book of life,
• will be made a pillar of the temple, never to be left by God and will have the name of God and the name of the city of God written on him as well as a new name
• and the right to sit with God on his throne.
These are rich blessings that are also rich in symbolism that requires a knowledge of all of God’s Word to understand. We need the ears of the fruit of our study. But our study of the Word of God, inspired by the Holy Spirit, which needed in order to understand these unbelievable blessings, will be a richness in itself.
“He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the Churches. Today, do we have an ear to hear what the Spirit says to the Churches? The Spirit commended, chastened and challenged to action the seven-fold church representing God's Total Church. Do we have the right ear to hear? Are we willing to take stock in the things we can be commended for? Are we willing to hear the things that we must be rebuked for? Are we willing to be challenged to action and change what God wants us to change? Are we ready to be students of all of God’s word so we can understand the rich symbolism and information from which John draws to bring us a message from the Spirit? Are we ready to be thrilled by the rich blessings that God promises to those who have ears, who listen and overcome by hearing the message of the Spirit?
“He who has an ear, let him hear what he Spirit says to the Churches.” The Holy Spirit is here to take what is from Jesus and give it to us. He is here to guide us into all truth. Do we have an ear to hear his truth, take it in and let it change us so that we can be overcomers in a world that has lost it ability to hear the voice of it master.
“He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the Churches.”
Amen.
Maranatha.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
