faith for faith

“If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me” (Mt. 16:24). The call of Jesus Christ for any who would follow after him to “take up his cross” is a radical command. For Christ is not, as many who interpret the passage declare, speaking of one’s petty trifles, such as bad hair days, broken cars, etc., as one’s crosses, but that those who would follow after him must continually be killing themselves and their natural passions, by a bloody crucifixion nonetheless. It is an act of priestly service declaring to God and to the world the God whom we serve. The apostle Paul says in Romans 12:2 that this killing of ourselves, this offering up our “bodies as a living sacrifice” upon the altar of the Holy Spirit, is not merely something that is suggested of those who are radical followers of Christ and who are mentally unbalanced according to the world, but it is the “reasonable service” of those who are in him. Crucifying one’s self for the sake of following Christ is reasonable. Its reasonableness rests not in the act of crucifying one’s body, but it rests in what God through Jesus Christ has done. For, as the apostle puts it, the greatness of the “mercies of God” are such that all ambitions and pursuits in this age are brought to nothing in the light of God’s work. For if God did not spare the life of his only Son but gave him up for us all, why then would we not give up all things in this age to follow hard after him by putting to death the deeds of our bodies? (cf. Rm. 8:13). Indeed, it would be unreasonable for us to do otherwise. Therefore, if we who claim to be in Christ love and pursue the things of the world, viz. the desires of the flesh, the desires of the eyes, and pride in possessions (1Jn. 2:15, 16), we prove ourselves, in the least, to be unreasonable, and at the most, that the love of the Father is not in us in spite of our claims. Just a thought.

Great periods in history are defined by great struggles. Early in the history of the church, there was the infamous struggle for the doctrine of the trinity against the heresy of Arius who, with his followers, denied the full deity of Christ. This struggle resulted in the church’s uniform stance against the heresy and in the composition of the still recited Nicene Creed of 381 A.D. A little over a millennium later, after hundreds of years of false teachings perpetuated by wicked men and the ignorance of the masses in Europe, the Reformation erupted, regaining for the Faith such pivotal doctrines as “justification by faith alone apart from works” and “the priesthood of all saints.”

Today, we find the church in turmoil yet again. All around us, false teachings such as the prosperity gospel and fundamental doctrinal misunderstandings such as that of nature of the trinity (as revealed by the popularity of The Shack) are being propagated throughout the American church. Amid this, we do find the American church struggling with issues facing it, but what issues is it struggling with? Is it the sacrificial and life-demanding nature of the Gospel? Is it the orthodox understanding of God as trinity? Is it the great doctrine of justification by faith alone which we have somehow lost again? No, our “great” struggles in the American church today are concerning the type of music that is being played in our worship services, the buildings we build to house those services, and whether or not Joe Schmoe is drinking a beer while he is cooking a hamburger on his grill. We are so consumed with making sure that Frank is tithing his gross income rather than his taxed income that we have neglected everything that is weighty concerning the Faith which are forefathers fought for with their blood. And because of our neglect we shall be remembered (if we are remembered at all) as the generation that had much potential and resources (e.g. freedom, money, etc.) and yet did nothing with them. Just a thought.

In honor of James & Elizabeth Cooper and Paul & Meredith Bradley
who, by God’s grace, will be married tomorrow.

Marriage is indeed a gift from God. For marriage, from its consummation in the Garden, was created to be a shadow of the depths of the Messiah’s love toward his elect and of his headship over her. The depths of Christ’s love was demonstrated in that while his bride was yet comprised of sinners, Christ put forth his figurative heel to be bruised so that he might by that act crush the head of the Adversary for the sake of the church’s lawless deeds and for her righteousness (cf. Rm. 5:8; Gen. 3:15; Is. 53:12). Likewise, marriage was created to be a picture of the oneness that Christ shares with his bride the Church. Just as the church is one with Christ through her submission in love to him who is her Head, so too in marriage, when a wife willingly submits to her husband and to his God-ordained headship, a household that was once comprised of multiple wills becomes one. These realities, among many others, make marriage a holy bond that should never be entered into lightly nor abandoned for the sake of personal preferences or conveniences. For marriage is never merely about mere persons, nor is it about one man and one woman, but it is always about God and his faithfulness to his people whom he foreknew. Just a thought. Congratulations, y’all!

The religious tendency for some to abstain from the consumption of alcohol is not a new thing and has been done rightly by some (e.g. John the Baptist who vowed not to drink among other things) and wrongly by others (e.g. the Pharisees who did so for the praise of men). And whenever abstinence from alcohol is rightly done, it is always done as a personal decision and not as a corporate demand. Nowadays, however, there is among many Christian circles a corporate demand for alcohol abstinence, and there are seemingly incessant teachings that demonize its use and vilify its user. And those who concoct such doctrines on alcohol and its use, do, like so many other teachers of the church do today, teach their particular personal doctrines without Scriptural warrant and without understanding their doctrine’s ramifications. In the case of the demonizing of alcohol, there are logical ramifications for it regarding the nature of Jesus Christ. First, those who teach against the use of alcohol say that either the consumption of alcohol is always a sin or that it is always unwise, and they deem it so by their own testimony and by their violent demands for its abstinence. Second, it is clear from Scripture that Jesus Christ both drank alcohol (cf. Mt. 11:19) and created alcohol miraculously to be consumed by others (cf. Jn. 2). Third, therefore, since (in spite of lies to the contrary: read further) alcohol was not a necessary evil for the sake of the safe consumption of water, and since Jesus Christ chose both to drink alcohol and to distribute it when he could have chosen not to, Jesus Christ therefore was in the least unwise and at the most a sinner, both of which declare him to be imperfect and therefore demonstrate that he is not God. Just a thought.

If you, like me, have grown up a Baptist and have enjoyed the terrible precision with which the ordinance of baptism has been carried out by Baptists, here is for you a bit of food for thought. Ponder for a moment upon that which you have heard from most Baptists regarding baptism: it must be done by immersion, it must be done by a legitimate Baptist church and pastor, it must be done without one holding one’s nose for that would taint the symbolism of death (no joke, I heard that one from a professor last week), etc. Now ponder upon that which you have heard concerning the other ordinance given by our Lord–communion. How is it practiced? Is it practiced with the same precision that baptism is practiced with? Do we commune with each other and the Lord around a real table or as a meal (for it is called the Lord’s Table and the Lord’s Supper)? Do we with our hands break the bread as we quote Christ’s words, “This is my body which is broken for you”? Do we drink with the broken bread the wine which is designed to call to remembrance the power that is in Christ’s blood and which is to lift our thoughts to the new wine that shall be served at the Marriage Supper of the Lamb? No, we do not. We with our precision on one ordinance and our neglect of the other show ourselves to be ignorant and careless in the least and Pharisees and hypocrites at the most. Just a thought.

Now that school is out for me, I am excited to be able to get back to the figurative notepad and write more about the things that I believe matter in life, which unfortunately does not include the hand with which one passes a “communion tray” or what a pastor does with his remaining vacation time when he ditches his church for another church among several other things. In this vein, I intend to begin a series starting this week, entitled, “Just a Thought,” which shall consist of several small blog posts written by yours truly (and whomever else whose fancy is tickled by the opportunity) that are designed to make one think outside of his cultural and religious box and to ask the all important question, “Why?” None of these posts shall be treatises by any stretch of the imagination, but I hope that they will inspire you, first, to think about the subject that is being addressed in a way that you might not have thought about that particular subject before and, second, to encourage you to begin to ask questions yourself and to seek for answers that are not bound solely in culture and tradition. I know that many, particularly those in the church, are scared at the thought of people asking questions and thinking for themselves, but I personally delight in the thought and think that these things when guided and bound by the Scriptures and the Holy Spirit will be a very healthy practice for the church. I hope that you will be encouraged in the coming weeks and that your encouragement will spill over into your churches. Soli Deo gloria.