Diet and exercise

Faith is a lot like a muscle.  A muscle requires two things to flourish: good nourishment and regular exercise.  When well-nourished and exercised regularly muscles get stronger.  Just like our muscles, we nourish our faith through the things we consume--the things we read, see, and listen to.  We exercise our faith through the trials we experience.  Both nourishment and exercise are necessary.  We often cannot control the trials we experience, but we can control how we nourish our faith.  So for the sake of your faith be smart about what you consume.

The blood is the life

23 But be sure you do not eat the blood, because the blood is the life, and you must not eat the life with the meat. 24 You must not eat the blood; pour it out on the ground like water. 25 Do not eat it, so that it may go well with you and your children after you, because you will be doing what is right in the eyes of the Lord.  Deuteronomy 12:12-25

I will set my face against any Israelite or any foreigner residing among them who eats blood, and I will cut them off from the people.  Leviticus 17:10

People try to find life in all sorts of things.  Sometimes it's a shiny new car, a bigger house, or better clothes.  Some people try to find life in the cool new iPad, or a higher salary, or a more important title, or security, or even by having children.  The list goes on and on.  This is not new.  In the ages of the Old Testament there was a common belief in pagan civilization that by drinking the blood of an animal you could attain some of the life of that animal.  One way God set Israel apart is by forbidding them from drinking the blood of animals.

God wants us to find life in Him.  And this is good for us because that's the only place life can be found.  All other avenues lead to death, not life.  So for Israel, God forbade them from drinking the blood of animals.  God was their life.

The Jews in the time of Jesus took this command seriously, so imagine what they thought when Jesus came along and said while teaching in the synagogue,

"Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them. 57 Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me. 58 This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your ancestors ate manna and died, but whoever feeds on this bread will live forever."  John 6:48-58

To the unaware this appeared to be a direct assault on the commands of God, and yet, in reality it was the explanation of the commands of God.  We are to find our life in Christ and him alone.  There is no life for us outside of Christ.  This is one reason, among many, why the sacrament of Communion is so important to the Christian.  Each time we drink the cup of wine or grape juice, which Christ said is his blood, we agree with Christ and witness that He alone is our life:

26 While they were eating, Jesus took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take and eat; this is my body.”  27 Then he took a cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. 28 This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.  Matthew 26:26-28

Do you want true and lasting life?  "Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day."  (John 6:54)  Partake of Christ.

The smell of smoke

A father tucked his son into bed and opened the window like he always does to let the cool summer breeze in.  "Goodnight, son," he said.  And he gave his son one last kiss before shutting the bedroom door and heading downstairs to his own bed.

Hours later the father awoke to the smell of smoke.  He quickly got up out of his bed and ran over to his bedroom door.  When he grabbed the door knob it was so hot it burned his hand and he had to let go.  Fortunately his bedroom was on the first floor so he ran over to his window, unlatched the locks and opened it.  He kicked the screen off and quickly climbed outside.  He came out in such a hurry he lost his balance and fell into the bushes underneath his window.  He ran a few feet away from the house and looked back.  He saw the flames were coming out of the first floor windows but they hadn't yet reached the second floor where his son's room was.

A couple months prior the father had purchased a fire-escape rope ladder, yet he hadn't put it in his son's room yet or shown him how to use it.  It was sitting in the garage still in its packaging.  The father ran over to the garage window and after grabbing a stick from the flower bed he smashed the glass.  He unlocked the window, opened it and climbed inside.  The smoke in the garage was almost too much to handle but he covered his face with his white t-shirt and quickly found the rope ladder.  After climbing back out of the garage he ran around to the front of the house.

By the time the father made it to the front of the house smoke was already pouring out of his son's open window.  "Son!  Come to the window!!" he screamed up, but there was no response.  In a panic the father pulled the rope ladder out of its packaging.  The ladder had two large hooks on the end of it for hanging on the windowsill.  The father yelled, "Son you need to grab the ladder!  Wake up!"  But still his son did not come to the window.  The man threw the ladder up and tried to reach the window but the hooks hit the siding of the house and fell back to the ground.  The father tried again and one of the two hooks caught the bottom of the window.  "Climb down the ladder!" the father screamed.  "Son!  Climb down, son!  You can do it.  You've got a way out now!  I've made a way for you!  Just climb down!" But there was no response.

That is where my story ends.  So now a question for you:  If you were the father what would you do?

1 And you were dead in the trespasses and sins 2 in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience— 3 among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind. 4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, 5 even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved— 6 and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, 7 so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. 8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast.  Ephesians 2:1-9

63 “It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. 64 But there are some of you who do not believe.” (For Jesus knew from the beginning who those were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him.) 65 And he said, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.”   John 6:63-65

The Road Not Taken by Robert Frost (modified by me)

Two roads diverged in a yellow wood,
And sorry I could not travel both
And be one traveler, long I stood
And looked down one as far as I could
To where it bent in the undergrowth;

Then took the other, as just as fair,
And having perhaps the better claim
Because it was grassy and wanted wear,
Though as for that the passing there
Had worn them really about the same,

And both that morning equally lay
In leaves no step had trodden black.
Oh, I kept the first for another day!
Yet knowing how way leads on to way
I doubted if I should ever come back.

I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I,
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference. 
I took the one deemed safe, and why
I'll always mourn the difference.

Who authored the Scriptures?

41 Now while the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them a question, 42 saying, “What do you think about the Christ? Whose son is he?” They said to him, “The son of David.” 43 He said to them, “How is it then that David, in the Spirit, calls him Lord, saying,

44 “‘The Lord said to my Lord,
“Sit at my right hand,
    until I put your enemies under your feet”’?

45 If then David calls him Lord, how is he his son?” 46 And no one was able to answer him a word, nor from that day did anyone dare to ask him any more questions.  Matthew 22:41-46

In this passage Jesus is reasoning with the Pharisees about their expectations of who the Christ would be.  Jesus references Psalm 110:1 which was written by King David.  The Pharisees believed the Christ would be a man--and only a man--from David's lineage (that's why Christ is called "son of David") but Jesus questioned their understanding by showing that David, who lived multiple generations earlier than them, called Christ his Lord.  "The Lord (the Father) said to my Lord (the Son), 'Sit at my right hand, until I put your enemies under your feet.' "  David would not have called Christ his Lord if Christ was merely a man because the title "Lord" infers subjugation and you are not subject to people who live multiple generations after you die.  By calling Christ his Lord David showed he knew the Christ would be a God-man.

How did David have this insight?  Jesus says because David was "in the Spirit" when he wrote those words.  In other words, his words were not his own but they were given to him by the Holy Spirit. Peter provides more insight into this phenomenon as he explains why the apostles' testimony is dependable:

16 For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. 17 For when he received honor and glory from God the Father, and the voice was borne to him by the Majestic Glory, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased,” 18 we ourselves heard this very voice borne from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain. 19 And we have the prophetic word more fully confirmed, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts, 20 knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone's own interpretation. 21 For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.  2 Peter 1:16-21

What this means is people put pen to paper to write the words we can now read as Scripture, but it was the Spirit who instructed them what to write.

What's the real question?

Choices.  Let's suppose I put two briefcases in front of someone.  Both contain my own money which I want to give away.  One of the cases has one hundred dollars in it.  The other case has one million dollars in it.  I then tell the person that they can choose freely which one they want and it's theirs without condition.  They look at me bewildered but I assure them I'm telling the truth.  Which one would they choose?  This is not a trick question.

I think you will agree everybody in this situation, having complete freedom, would choose the briefcase with one million dollars in it.  The choice is so obvious it is almost absurd.  No one would need to force or compel them to choose that case because the value of one million dollars is so much greater than one hundred dollars that the choice is irresistible even though the person had complete freedom to choose either case.  The issue guiding the person's decision is not whether the person has free will to choose but whether the person can correctly value the contents of each briefcase.

Now I put two different options in front of someone.  They can choose self or choose Christ.  They can live their life and do whatever they want to do or they can live their life and do whatever Christ wants them to do.  But here is what is at stake: if they choose self, they get to do whatever they want in this life but forfeit an eternity with Christ in the next.  If they choose Christ, they get to do whatever Christ wants in this life and get an eternity with Christ in the next.  Which one would they choose?

The same question underlies this choice as with the choice of briefcases.  It's not a question of whether the person has free will (it never has been).  It's a question of does the person correctly value the options?  Does the person understand the value of Christ?  The unbelieving world is unbelieving precisely because they do not and so pursuing their own ambitions and catering to themselves is always more valuable to them than a relationship with Christ.  Yet when someone actually sees the "surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus" (Phil 3:8)--just like the person who sees the value of the million dollars--they will always choose Christ and they will do so without compromising their free will.

Once you've gotten this far then we can move to the next question, which is how does someone come to see the surpassing value of knowing Christ and why do so many people not see?

7 But whatever were gains to me I now consider loss for the sake of Christ. 8 What is more, I consider everything a loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whose sake I have lost all things. I consider them garbage, that I may gain Christ 9 and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ—the righteousness that comes from God on the basis of faith. Philippians 3:7-9

Understanding death gives us hope!

Have you ever wondered why people die? I'm sure everyone does at some point. You could take it from a physical perspective and say we die because our heart stops pumping and so on. But that's only a secondary cause.  I'm talking about the primary reason people die.  Sure, people die because the heart stops beating, but why does the heart ever have to stop beating?

If you've grown up in church your immediate response may be "because of sin."  And yeah, that's true, we die because we sin, but that answer actually begs another question which is why then do babies and those in utero who have no opportunity to actively sin still die sometimes?  The Bible says some amazing things about sin and how it relates to death and ultimately our hope.

"Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned—" (Romans 5:12).  This verse basically supports our first supposition which is all people die because all people sinned and death is the penalty for sin.  Notice it says sin entered the world through one man, which is referring to Adam.  For some context, if you read the account in Genesis you'll see the first sin occurred when Adam disobeyed a command from God not to eat fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

There was a span of time, at least several hundred years--maybe even several thousand--between Adam and Moses where people had no direct command from God. During this span of time between Adam and Moses people still sinned but their sin was not charged against them since there was no law to obey: "To be sure, sin was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not charged against anyone’s account where there is no law." (Rom 5:13)  Adam's sin was charged against him because God expressly commanded him not to do something and then Adam did it anyway.  But after Adam lots of people prior to Moses sinned by doing things counter to God's unexpressed will yet their sin was not counted against them because they had no command telling them to do otherwise.  Still, even though their own sin was not counted against them they all died!  As Paul says, "Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who is a pattern of the one to come." (Rom 5:14)  So why did all of these people whose sins were not counted against them still die?  Because of Adam's sin.  That is, the people who died between the time of Adam and Moses did so not because they sinned by breaking God's commands, but because Adam sinned and Adam represented them.  This reality is repeated 5 times by Paul:

• Verse 15: "By the transgression of the one [Adam] the many died."
• Verse 16: "The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation."
• Verse 17: "By the transgression of the one, death reigned through the one."
• Verse 18: "Through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men."
• Verse 19: "Through the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners."

You may be wondering how one person's sin can affect all of humanity.  It seems so unfair, doesn't it?  Yet, a similar question should be asked.  Namely, how can one person's sacrifice benefit all who are in Him?  Notice in verse 14 Paul calls Adam "a pattern of the one to come", meaning Christ.  So Adam, our representative, follows the pattern of Christ, who is the representative of all who are in Him.  It would be quite odd to accept one representative and not the other.  Paul's goal in these verses is not actually to explain why death occurs, but rather why Christ's death and resurrection can effectively give us new life.  To help us understand Christ, Paul explains Adam.  "For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God’s abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ!  Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people." (Romans 5:17-18)

So, why do we die?  Because Adam sinned (as do we).  Why can we live?  Because Christ died and lived again.

"May grace and peace be multiplied to you in the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord. His divine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of him who called us to his own glory and excellence," 2 Peter 1:2-3

A modern-day Matthew 20:1-16

At a restaurant one day a man was at the checkout counter buying his meal.  Looking behind him he saw a line of several people waiting to check out as well.  He looked at the cashier and said, "I'd like to buy the food for the 3rd and 4th people behind me."  Out of his wallet he pulled a 20 dollar bill and handed it to the cashier. "This should cover it," he said.

The cashier looked at the man and, referring to the 3rd and 4th person in line, asked, "Are they in your group?"

"No, I just want to buy their meals," the buyer replied.

The people in 3rd and 4th place didn't hear the buyer talk to the cashier, but the person directly behind him did and chimed in indignantly, "Wait a second. Why did you skip me? Why would you buy their meals but skip me? You got something against me?"

"Not at all," the buyer responded. "I just want to do something nice for them."

"That's messed up man. Skipping over me."

"I'm sorry you think I'm being unfair," the buyer responded. "When you came into the store, didn't you expect to buy your own meal? So why is it unfair for me to buy a meal for whoever I want to with my own money?"

More thoughts on N.T. Wright's view of justification

A couple weeks ago I wrote about my view on justification and why I disagree with N.T. Wright.  If you're interested, you can view it here http://mycircumlocution.blogspot.com/2013/04/my-thoughts-on-nt-wrights-view-of.html.  Here are a few more observations on N.T. Wright's definition of justification.

1) N.T. Wright's view on justification handles our case before God as a civil complaint rather than a criminal complaint.  He says our justification is when God's court, in a dispute between two opposing parties, finds in our favor.  This dispute is not a moral dispute as in "I, the plaintiff, accuse you, the defendant, of breaking the law" but a "who's right/who's wrong" dispute.  He argues, "JUSTIFICATION denotes, primarily, that action in the lawcourt whereby a judge upholds the case of one party in dispute before him (in the Hebrew lawcourt, where the image originates, all cases consist of an accuser and a defendant, there being no public prosecutor).  Having heard the case, the judge finds in favour of one party, and thereby ‘justifies’ him" (http://ntwrightpage.com/Wright_NDCT_Justification.htm).  In other words, in a dispute between two parties, justification is when God declares one party right and one party wrong and in God's court the Christian faithful will ultimately be vindicated.  Wright sets this up as a dispute that will be resolved on Judgement Day.  He says "justification is the covenant declaration, which will be issued on the last day, in which the people of God will be vindicated and those who insist on worshipping false gods will be shown to be wrong" ("What Saint Paul Really Said: Was Paul of Tarsus the Real Founder of Christianity?", p131).  There are two issues with this in my mind.  The first issue is who Wright identifies as the accuser (the plaintiff).  In his view it is idolators who are the plaintiffs and Christians who are defendants.  In my opinion, one reason Wright is wrong here is because in the Bible it is not idolators that accuse Christians before God, it is Satan himself who is our accuser (Zech 3:1, Rev 12:10).  Satan is the plaintiff.  The second issue is the nature of the dispute.  The judgement is not a question of "who's right?" and "who's wrong?" (as in a civil case) but rather "does the accused (defendant) hate God and love evil or do they love God and hate evil?" (as in a criminal case) The case of Job is relevant here.  God asks Satan, "Have you considered my servant Job? There is no one on earth like him; he is blameless and upright, a man who fears God and shuns evil." (Job 1:8), to which Satan replies, "Have you not put a hedge around him and his household and everything he has? You have blessed the work of his hands, so that his flocks and herds are spread throughout the land. But now stretch out your hand and strike everything he has, and he will surely curse you to your face." (Job 1:10-11)  So Satan seems to make the accusation that Job is a disobedient God-hater who loves evil.  I agree with Wright that in the end Christians will be vindicated and declared to be "in the right", but I think this verdict will be a result of our being "in Christ" and therefore found to be morally blameless--people who fear God and shun evil (something that is only possible by a Spirit-regenerated life found through faith in Christ).

2) I think N.T. Wright's definition of God's righteousness is too shallow.  I do not mean that in a derogatory way, but in a descriptive way.  He says "God's righteousness refers to his own faithfulness to the covenant he made with Abraham" (http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2009/june/29.34.html?start=1).  If this is true then God's righteousness is dependent on the existence of the covenant and therefore God's righteousness was non-existent prior to the Abrahamic covenant.  I just don't believe this to be true.  Rather, I understand God's righteousness to be an immutable attribute of God that has always been and always will be--just like his love and his glory.  It is not dependent on anything outside itself.  I agree with John Piper who says God's righteousness "is his unwavering faithfulness to uphold the glory of his name in all he does. No single action, like covenant keeping, is God's righteousness. For all his acts are done in righteousness" (http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2009/june/29.34.html?start=1).  So while God's righteousness includes his faithfulness to the covenant he made with Abraham, it is not limited to that faithfulness.  Why is this distinction important?  Because Wright's understanding of justification is dependent upon his definition of God's righteousness.  Due to his definition he argues God's righteousness cannot be transferred to believers.  If God's righteousness is an action like faithfulness to a covenant then he argues it cannot be given to others.  He says, "If we use the language of the law court, it makes no sense whatever to say that the judge imputes, imparts, bequeaths, conveys or otherwise transfers his righteousness to either the plaintiff or the defendant. Righteousness is not an object, a substance or a gas which can be passed across the courtroom." (N.T. Wright, What Saint Paul Really Said, p98).  I believe Wright's error here is that he focuses on what God's righteousness does and not on what it is.  Paul indeed says that Christ's righteousness is credited to us (Romans 4:22) which communicates to me that there is indeed a transfer taking place.  Another key verse to make mention of is 2 Corinthians 5:20, "For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God."  Wright suggests this verse actually means "for our sake God made Christ, who did not know sin, to be a sin-offering for us, so that in him we might become God’s covenant-faithfulness." (http://ntwrightpage.com/Wright_Becoming_Righteousness.pdf)  Yet when I read his interpretation of that verse I feel like he is massaging it a little bit too much to fit his paradigm.

3) N.T. Wright sees no connection between the problem of our sin and our need for justification.  In his view, God justifies us on the basis of our being "in Christ", not on the basis of our moral standing.  "The person justified is described as ‘just’, ‘righteous’ ... not as a description of moral character but as a statement of his status before the court (which will, ideally, be matched by character, but that is not the point)." (http://ntwrightpage.com/Wright_NDCT_Justification.htm)  My reply to him would be, "Yes, but...our being 'in Christ' perfects our moral standing."  You cannot separate the two.  The easiest way to answer the question "Why are people justified?" may be to answer its corollary:  Why are some people unjustified and therefore condemned?  To me the Bible seems clear those who are condemned are so because of their imperfect moral standing (evil deeds).  Consider Jesus' words in John 3:

18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. 19 This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil.  John 3:18-19 (emphasis mine)

Here Jesus explains that people are condemned because they do not believe.  But why don't they believe?  His answer is:  because they love the darkness since their deeds are evil.  The darkness hides the evil.

Also consider what Paul says in Romans:

5 But because of your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God's righteous judgment will be revealed. 6 He will render to each one according to his works: 7 to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; 8 but for those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury. (Romans 2:5-8)

Unjustified people are condemned because their deeds are evil.  Since their deeds are evil they love the darkness because it allows them to continue doing evil deeds.  So if people are condemned because of their imperfect moral standing, it follows that people are justified because of their perfect moral standing, and perfect moral standing is only possible through faith in Christ when his righteousness is credited to us (Romans 4:24).

Furthermore, a direct rebuttal to Wright's view is found in Acts 13, where Paul states, "Therefore, my friends, I want you to know that through Jesus the forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you. Through him everyone who believes is set free from every sin, a justification you were not able to obtain under the law of Moses." (Acts 13:38-39, emphasis mine)  Paul makes it extremely clear that our justification equates to being "set free from every sin" through belief.

4) Finally, Wright says the gospel is not "a system of how people get saved" ("What Saint Paul Really Said: Was Paul of Tarsus the Real Founder of Christianity?", p45).  Instead, to Wright the good news is the declaration that Christ is the fulfillment of God's promise to Abraham.  He says, the "gospel is the royal announcement that the crucified and risen Jesus, who died for our sins and rose again according to the Scriptures, has been enthroned as the true Lord of the world" (http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2009/june/29.34.html?start=2).  The byproduct of this gospel, he argues, is that people get saved, but the opportunity for salvation is not the gospel itself.  I completely agree the gospel is the good news that Christ is the fulfillment of God's promise to Abraham, but I would argue the fulfillment of God's promise includes salvation.  Referring again to Acts 13, Paul starts his message by defining the good news:  "We tell you the good news: What God promised our ancestors he has fulfilled for us, their children, by raising up Jesus." (Acts 13:32-33)  But Paul doesn't stop there.  He ends his message with the wonderful reality that "through Jesus the forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you. Through him everyone who believes is set free from every sin" (Acts 13:38-39).  So the full gospel message includes "Christ is King" and also "Christ is Savior".  What's fascinating here is that this is emphasized by the very name "Jesus Christ".  "Christ" comes from "christos", a Greek word meaning "anointed one".  It equates to the Hebrew word for "Messiah" (John 1:41).  The "anointed one" refers to a priest or king--both of which describe Christ's role.  "Jesus" means "YAHWEH is salvation".  Mary was told to name her baby "Jesus" because "he will save his people from their sins" (Matthew 1:20-21).  This sheds light on why Christ said "Whoever believes in [God's Son] is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God" (John 3:18, emphasis mine).  The name "Jesus Christ" is the gospel.

In light of Romans 10:9 it's questionable to me whether an individual has to know their sins are forgiven in order to be saved.  However I do think forgiveness of sins and assurance of salvation is what makes the good news truly "good".  The question should be asked about Wright's view:  what's good about news that doesn't imply some potential benefit to the hearer?  In order for the news that "Christ is the fulfillment of God's promise" to be good news I have to know how it affects me.  It is indeed good news to those who believe, but it is terrible news to everyone who doesn't.  That's why the gospel includes the declaration that through faith we (each person and individual) can receive freedom from slavery to sin and become children of God, which is indeed a message of salvation.  I agree with Wright the gospel is not a message instructing people "how to get saved" simply because there is nothing to do in order to be saved.  The gospel is a message that you either believe or you don't.  And Paul knew by sharing this message with people some would be saved because they would believe the news.

There are other issues where I completely agree with N.T. Wright, like the historical resurrection, for instance.  While I do not fully agree with his view on justification, I think his explanation of justification is a positively challenging one.  It certainly forced me to try to figure out what I believe.

Why is it important to be clear about what justification is and what it does?  First, it's important because justification is the moment at which you become reconciled to God and God becomes "for you".  When you know God is for you can live empowered and confident as Paul did (Romans 8:31).  Also, when sharing the gospel with someone we need to understand what the "good news" is and justification is a huge part of the message.  People want to know how this good news affects them.  Why is it relevant?  The answer is because it offers freedom from sin and kingdom benefits.  Justification is what makes the good news truly "good" for the individual.   Understanding how justification works will help make us much clearer communicators of the message.

One size does not fit all

Jesus did not employ a one-size-fits-all ministry.  To the rich young ruler who thought he had obeyed every commandment perfectly Jesus gave a requirement too difficult for the young man to embrace--give away everything he has (Mark 10:17-22).  Yet to the broken woman about to be stoned for adultery he gave grace (John 8:1-11).

Pottery Barn Patio Set for sale, anybody?

We had been looking for a patio table set for about a week or so.  We had hit most of the big box stores to price them out and had just started looking at Craigslist for some deals.  One posting we found was for a Pottery Barn "Chesapeake" table set.  It was perfect!  The poster was selling it for $300 but the advertisement was for an estate sale to be held a week later, so we figured we'd keep looking and if we didn't find anything else we would visit the sale.  A short while later we saw another ad for a Pottery Barn "Chesapeake" table set.  This one looked identical in the posted photographs.  The ad said it was in excellent condition and it was selling for only $150!  We were so excited, we immediately emailed the seller and asked if we could come and see the table set.  "It's exactly what we were looking for", we said.  The seller replied within minutes and we had it scheduled to go see the table set the next day after church.

The next day I have to admit I was pretty distracted throughout the church service.  We were going to get such a great deal on this patio set I couldn't wait to go pick it up and take it home.  Occasionally I would catch myself and remind myself, "It's only patio furniture, Robby.  Pay attention to the sermon."  But still, I couldn't stop thinking about the deal we had gotten.

Immediately after the service we went and picked up Lee from childcare and put him in the car.  Then we rushed to the seller's house.  Her husband met us at the door and said, "She'll meet you by the garage."  So we walked over to the garage door as it slowly began opening.  "Here it is," we heard the lady say as she pointed downward.  Our eyes went from her down, down, down until we saw it.  It was beautiful.  Exactly like the photos in the advertisement.  Except it was Pottery Barn Kids!

Uh oh.  The thought sunk in.  Maybe we didn't read the ad well enough.  I bet Pottery Barn Kids was in the advertisement and we didn't read it carefully.  We had looked at the photograph but there was nothing in the photo to indicate its size, so we just assumed it was the same as the one we had seen earlier for $300.  Now the low price of $150 made a lot of sense.  It was a kids table!

I looked at Katie.  Would she say anything?  Would she fess up to our mistake?  I was so embarrassed.  I looked at it and said, "I like it.  What do you think, Katie?"

"Yeah, it looks good," she replied.  Ugh.  We both felt ridiculous.

"We'll take it." I said, with a fake smile.  So I paid the seller $150 and she helped me pack it in the car.  As we drove home we could not believe we just bought this kids table.  I was mad at myself for not reading the ad carefully, and I was mad at myself for not being able to fess up to our mistake.  I was just so embarrassed and wanted to save face.

It hit me then that maybe this was God's way of telling us not to put our hope in good deals or nice furniture.  I had been so excited about the patio set I basically missed out on the teaching lesson at church that day, and all for naught.  It was a convicting thought, and I thanked God for reminding me what's important.

When we got home we put it on our patio and tried to figure out how we were going to use it.  Our kids wouldn't use it, we knew that.  Maybe we could paint it white and use the chairs in the kids' rooms.  Maybe we could use it as a coffee table.  At the end of the day we just did not want the thing, so we decided to post it on Craigslist.  That night, after midnight, I put the ad and some photos I took up on the classifieds site.  I listed the patio set for $249.  If I made nice profit, all of this trouble would have been worth it!

At 4:30 in the morning, Katie elbows me and says, "Someone just emailed about our patio set!"

"What? Are you serious?  What are they doing up at 4:30?" I replied.  Sure enough, the person wanted to come by in the morning to look at it.  I replied, "Sure.  Come by before 9am."

"Is the price negotiable?" the person responded.

"As long as it's reasonable." I replied.

I got another email from the same person.

"Will you take $185?," she wrote.  "The exact same type of patio set was posted on Craigslist yesterday for $150 and someone beat me to it."

Incredulously, I said, "Katie, you have to read this email."

"Yeah, $185 is fine." I emailed back.

Sure enough, the lady came by at 9am, picked up the Pottery Barn Kids patio set and paid me $185.

"And when you hear Jesus say, 'The Spirit blows where it wills,' don’t hear him taking from you the will that you treasure, but hear him giving to you eyes to see Christ as your treasure." (John Piper, "The Free Will of the Wind")

A name written on a cardboard box

We moved into our new house about a month ago and we still have boxes stacked to the ceiling in our living room.  That's not surprising because between moving in and today my wife gave birth to our daughter, Ellie!  Needless to say the past couple weeks we have been adjusting to new life as a four-person family.

Still, in some down time I decided to take a couple hours and see how many boxes I could empty, so I grabbed my retractable box cutter knife and went to work.  As I flipped one box over I saw something written on the side.  It said "For Ellie's Room".  My wife had written that on the side of the box several months prior and had packed it full of things we'd need for the new baby.  We had been planning and anticipating Ellie's arrival for quite some time.  In preparation we had collected things we'd need, packed them up, and labeled them, all in expectation of the new member of our family.

It reminded me how God did the same thing for those of us in his family.  This is what He has said:

But now, this is what the Lord says—
    he who created you, Jacob,
    he who formed you, Israel:
“Do not fear, for I have redeemed you;
    I have summoned you by name; you are mine.  Isaiah 43:1

Yes, long before you or I existed, God summoned us by name and claimed us as his.  "You are mine" are quite possibly the most reassuring and comforting words in all the Bible.  God wrote our name down.  Not in black magic marker, and not on the side of a cardboard box.  He wrote it in a book.  It's a book He's going to open on the Last Day--the Lamb's book of life.

"It is one thing to construct a theology of election (or any other kind of theology) purely on the basis of rational speculation. It is quite another to utilize logic in seeking a coherent understanding of biblical revelation." (R.C. Sproul on the theology of election)

My thoughts on N.T. Wright's view of justification

N.T. Wright is the current Bishop of Durham, fourth in place of authority of the Church of England.  Despite being a Protestant, his view of justification is neither Protestant or Catholic.  The orthodox historical teaching of Christianity in both Protestantism and Catholicism is that through faith in Christ sinners receive alien righteousness--that is, righteousness from outside themselves--which justifies them in God's law-court.  This transfer of righteousness occurs when a believer first puts faith in Christ.  This is what we call "justification".  On the contrary, N.T. Wright disagrees with this at two points.  First, he does not believe any transfer of righteousness takes place but rather God sort of ignores our sin (an act possible because Christ sufficiently atoned for it through his death) and gives us a label or status of "being right".  Second, he believes we are only truly justified ("declared right") on the Day of Judgement, and any talk of being justified in the present only anticipates when we will be justified in the future.  You could think of it this way:  whereas most of Christendom understands justification to be how we get into God's family in the present, Wright says justification is God declaring we're in His family on the Last Day.

To illustrate this let me use the example of Costco membership.  If you are not familiar with Costco, it is a membership club retailer.  Anyone can become a member if they pay membership dues.  Upon paying the dues they are given a membership card which they must use to gain entry and when making purchases.

The historical orthodox understanding of justification is that upon paying my membership dues I am a justified Costco member.  There is a monetary swap that takes place where I give Costco a dues payment and they give me membership benefits.  The membership card is a seal of my membership and every time I walk into Costco I flash my card so they know I am a justified member.  My card is proof my dues have been paid in full already.  So, the justification event occurs when the monetary swap takes place and from then on I am justified and have access to full membership benefits.

In the above illustration, the membership dues are debt for sin.  When Christ pays my debt, I am justified and given the membership card of faith.  My faith is the evidence that I have been justified already.

In contrast, Wright's view of justification has nothing to do with paying dues (debt for sin) and actually assumes Costco grants membership in a slightly different manner.  Imagine if Costco gave out free membership cards to whoever wanted one which allowed entry into the store but did not allow people to purchase anything yet.  So upon receiving my card I could play with the products along with other cardholders but no one was actually declared a justified member yet which meant no one could experience the full benefits of membership yet.  Everyone is told if they take a free card now at some point in the future their card will give them access to all membership benefits.  They just have to keep the card until they are justified.  When I flash my membership card today I am understood to be a future rightful member and allowed to window shop based on the expectation there will be a future event when Costco will justify me by declaring me a member.  In effect I get to experience some membership benefits today on the expectation that I will be justified later.

In the latter illustration I possess a membership card of faith just like the first, but I must wait with the expectation and hope that my card will allow me to be justified in the future.

Are we just splitting hairs?  Why does any of this matter?  Whether you've ever thought deeply about justification before or not, consciously or subconsciously everyone deals with its implications at some point.  Justification has everything to do with your relationship with God--whether you are right with God and how you become right with God.  You may never use the label "justification", but whenever you consider your relationship with God you are considering your justification.  Everyone will come to some conclusion as to whether they are "right" with God, and that conclusion will influence, if not define, their life.  The assurance that we are reconciled with God and that God is for us and not against us should form the bedrock of our life as Christians.

For that reason, I think N.T. Wright's understanding of justification is ultimately dangerous for the Christian, and will actually undermine a Christian's faith.  Here are two reasons why:

1. If my being declared right with God is a future event I will easily be tempted to try to attain it through some work of my own before then.  On the contrary, if my justification is based upon a work already done by Christ, I know I cannot do anything to earn it because it is already accomplished.

2.  If I can only hope I will be justified in the future, I must live my life now merely hoping God is for me, but never with certainty.  On the contrary, if I have already been justified by the work of Christ, that means I am reconciled to God today and He is absolutely, unequivocally for me today.


To read more about Wright's views on justification:
http://ntwrightpage.com/Wright_NDCT_Justification.htm
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2009/june/29.34.html?start=1
http://ntwrightpage.com/Wright_Becoming_Righteousness.pdf
http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/trevinwax/2007/11/19/trevin-wax-interview-with-nt-wright-full-transcript/

Small movements create big errors over long trajectories

If you ever go rifle target shooting you'll quickly learn how small movements at the tip of the gun barrel amount to huge distances at the target.  Let me try to give you an idea of the precision required to hit a one-inch target 100 yards away:  If you remember your geometry, a circle has 360 degrees in it.  So imagine taking a pizza and slicing it into 360 equal-sized slices.  That's a small slice of pizza!  Now imagine taking a pizza and slicing it into 21,600 equal-sized slices.  If you are aiming for a one-inch target 100 yards away you'll miss that target completely if you aim 1/21,600th of a pizza too high or too low (see http://www.snipercountry.com/articles/mildot_moa.asp for more on this).  The same error at the gun would miss a 10 inch target 1,000 yards away.  The further the bullet travels the more "off-target" it becomes.

This is as true in theology as it is in rifle shooting.  That is, a pastor's teaching today has a trajectory that will have some effect in the future.  The effect can be positive or it can be negative.  It can be Biblical or it can heretical.  Which is why pastors spend a good deal of time refuting ideas they view as not Biblical or trying to clarify ideas that, while not in error themselves, have a trajectory which will eventually result in erroneous belief.  To the layperson it may have the appearance of grumpy old men or women arguing about things that don't matter, but to the theologian/pastor these issues have eternal kingdom consequences.  Not just in the future "salvation" sense but in shaping our worldview today.  Knowing this, when I hear one pastor or theologian critique (constructively) another's teaching I will try to discover the underlying erroneous belief the critiquing pastor is attempting to prevent.

One example is a back-and-forth between John Piper and N.T. Wright on the doctrine of justification.  At this point in time, each has written books responding to the other's views and it has at times becomes quite difficult to understand the differences between their views.  I began to wonder why they would spend so much time writing books when the differences between them seem so minute.  Of course, their chosen vocation is to write books and teach, but surely they have better things to do than write volumes that essentially only tweak the other's ideas.  In fact, when I read Wright and then go on to read Piper my immediate response is, "I agree with both of these guys!"

I did not understand their motivation until I read this explanation from John Piper on what he thinks is at stake:

"Therefore, the very thing that N.T. Wright and others are wanting to accomplish, namely an engaged, bold, loving, sacrificial, mission-oriented church will cease to be that, just like the mainline churches have ceased to be dynamic forces in the world, because they threw away the essence of certain crucial doctrines. You don’t see it now, because N.T. Wright himself is such a good embodiment of engagement, but I’m saying that some of the things he says have the trajectory that if they’re followed out, are going to in fact undermine the very thing he wants to accomplish, namely, a sacrificially loving church." (John Piper, "Interview With John Piper About The Future of Justification: A Response to N. T. Wright")

Whether you agree with him or not, it's important to see that Piper's concern isn't so much about what N.T. Wright himself believes, but rather where he thinks Wright's teaching will lead the church.  Consider for a moment that today's Christian pastors are profoundly influenced by the teaching of the pastors and theologians who wrote hundreds of years ago:  people like John Wesley, John Calvin, Martin Luther, Augustine, Jacobus Arminius, Charles Spurgeon, C.S. Lewis, John Stott, and on and on.  Some denominations even carry the name of a theologian--like Lutherans or Wesleyans.  The writings and teachings of Piper, Wright, and other pastors have long-lasting implications for the church which is why they take doctrine seriously, and why we should too.

We must understand what the Promise is

28 And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose. 29 For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. 30 And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.  Romans 8:28-30

This is one of the most reassuring scriptures in the whole Bible.  It doesn't matter what situation you find yourself in, if you are a Christian you have the promise from God that all things are working together for good for you.  Rest in that truth for a moment.  Let it sink in.

There is nothing that happens in this world outside of God's sovereign will.  Let me unpack that statement.  If you are a Christian, God is your fortress and He surrounds you and protects you.  The implication of that fact is nothing can happen to you unless God allows it through his walls.  And if He allows it through the walls the Bible guarantees you it is for your ultimate good.  That is what Romans 8:28 promises us as Christians.

When Paul made this statement he was responding to the suffering of Christians.  He was reassuring the believers in Rome that their suffering was temporary and that it would be replaced with glory.  Ten verses before this most wonderful promise Paul said, "For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us." (Romans 8:18)

Notice how verse 29 begins with the word "For".  When a sentence begins with "for" it means "because".  So the promise given in verse 28 is because of what is said in verses 29 through 30.  To hopefully make this more clear let me rephrase verses 28 through 30 and emphasize certain words:

All things work together for good for those who are called according to God's purpose BECAUSE those whom he foreknew he also predestined TO BE CONFORMED to the image of his Son.  And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also JUSTIFIED, and those he justified he also GLORIFIED.

So what is the "good" that is promised to those who love God and are called according to his purpose?

1. You will be conformed to be like Christ.
2. You will be justified.
3. You will be glorified.

That is the most wonderful promise you could ever be given.  Notice that Paul never says God will remove our suffering in this life.  He says we will be conformed to be like Christ, which may come through suffering.  In fact, Paul says we as Christians may go through tribulation, distress, persecution, famine, nakedness, danger, and sword (vs 35)!  Yet, "in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us." (vs 37)  We may even die in the midst of our suffering but even then our suffering is but a momentary affliction.  Even death will not void the promise of verse 28 because after death we will be glorified.

This is not false hope.  It is hope in what is eternal instead of what is temporary.  "For this light momentary affliction is preparing for us an eternal weight of glory beyond all comparison" (2 Corinthians 4:17).

38 For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, 39 nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.  Romans 8:38-39

"Sin will always appears as a trifle to those whose view of God is small. If you were to discover a little boy pulling the legs off of a grasshopper, you would think it strange and perhaps a little bizarre. If the same little boy were pulling the legs off of a frog, that would be a bit more disturbing. If it were a bird, you would probably scold him and inform his parents. If it were a puppy, that would be too shocking to tolerate. You would intervene. If it were a little baby, it would be so reprehensible and tragic that you would risk you own life to protect the baby. What’s the difference in each of these scenarios? The sin is the same (pulling the limbs off). The only difference is the one sinned against (from a grasshopper to a baby). The more noble and valuable the creature, the more heinous and reprehensible the sin. And so it is with God.

If God were a grasshopper, then to sin against Him wouldn’t be such a big deal and eternal punishment wouldn’t be necessary. But God isn’t a grasshopper, He’s the most precious, valuable, beautiful being in the universe. His glory and worth are infinite and eternal. Thus to sin against an infinitely glorious being is an infinitely heinous offense that is worthy of an infinitely heinous punishment.

We don’t take sin seriously because we don’t take God seriously. We have so imbibed of the banality of our God-belittling spirit of the age that our sins hardly trouble us at all. Our sin seems small because we regard God as small. And thus the penalty of hell—eternal conscious suffering under the wrath of God—always seems like an overreaction on God’s part. If we knew God better, we wouldn’t think like that."  (Denny Burk, "Rob Bell Outs Himself")

A new house, for a reason

The past few weeks have been busy.  We bought a new house two weeks ago and we're now busy putting our old house up for rent.  Many people told us how stressful house shopping would be.  Our goal was to find a house we thought we could be in a while, with a neighborhood and community that is safe and play-friendly for our kids.  Shortly after we began looking for a house to buy my wife and I sat down at the kitchen table one morning and I shared a passage of Scripture with her.  I thought it would give us peace during the potentially turbulent time ahead.

The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by human hands. And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything. Rather, he himself gives everyone life and breath and everything else. From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands. God did this so that they would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from any one of us. Acts 17:24-27

It is assuring to me to know God himself marked out our appointed times in history and the boundaries of our lands.  That single truth instills so much peace over my life.  We could look for a new home knowing God himself would determine the house we move to, just as He determined the house we're moving from and how long we'd been there.  Yes, God is more involved in our lives than we could possibly understand.  During the tense negotiation process with the seller my wife and I would constantly need to remind each other, "God will put us in that house if He wants us to be there.  Remember Acts 17:26?"

Now that the house-buying process is behind us, my family moves excitedly on to the house-living experience.  And yet we still have to remind each other about that passage in Acts 17, because more important than where we are is why we're there.  God puts us where we are so that we would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from any one of us (vs 27).  We are where we are for a reason: So that we might seek God.  Perhaps we seek him through being thankful for where we live, or perhaps it's through relying on God to get us through just another day where we live.  Either way, no matter where we live God has put us there so that we would seek him, reach out for him, and find him.  I encourage you to remember that the next time you think "I love my home" or "How can I live here another day?"