Christian Unity

Bible Software Review: e-Sword

2009-11-02T10:09:00.000-08:00

One of my favorite resources for Bible study is a free software package called e-Sword, by Rick Meyers. From the e-Sword web site:

"Freely you received, freely give." (Matthew 10:8) Jesus told us that since we've been blessed we should bless others. I am happy to provide a blessing to others in the form of free Bible study software!

e-Sword provides a wealth of Bible translations, commentaries, dictionaries, and related resources, most of which are free. Additionally, a good selection of copyrighted resources are available for purchase from the respective copyright holders.

This review addresses version 7.7.7, which is the version I have installed under Linux using wine on this ubuntu 8.10 machine. Newer versions have replaced this version, but the comments below generally apply to the current version as well.

The installed resources are presented in the e-Sword software in a well-designed layout that makes the tool a joy to use.

The main window includes three main areas, containing the Bible text, the selected commentary, and the selected dictionary. Each of the three sections can be expanded to fill the window.

A tool for navigating the Bible appears on the left side of the screen. When you select a book, chapter, and verse, the Bible and (optionally) commentary windows are advanced to the selected passage. When a particular commentary has comments on the selected verse, an "I" information icon appears in its tab, making it extra convenient to review what various commentators had to say about the passage.

One of the available commentaries is the Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge (TSK). This commentary is really an extensive cross reference directory, showing other passages addressing similar concepts, enabling the scriptures to become a commentary on themselves -- the best of all commentaries.

Throughout e-Sword, Bible references act as hyper-links so clicking on the link takes you to that passage in the Bible window. Alternatively, you can see the referenced passage in a popup bubble by hovering the mouse over the link.

The King James Version is provided with Strong's concordance links. Hovering over these links results in a popup bubble with the Strong's definition for that word in Hebrew or Greek. Clicking on the link takes you to that word in the Strong's and/or Thayer dictionary.

Among the many resources available are topic files (.top) which cover a plethora of topics, including the nine-volume Anti-Nicene Fathers, the Wars of the Jews by Josephus, Fox's Book of Martyrs, and many other documents from the early church period, as well as many from the early Reformation Movement and the modern period.

Bible searches can be conducted across a single version, or across multiple selected versions.
A parallel view is supplied enabling you to view up to four versions of your choice side-by-side.

Or, you can compare a selected verse across all the installed translations:

There is also a built-in editor with most of the essential features of a word processor, which is a convenient way to create your own study notes.

Other features include a Step reader, a graphics viewer, a scripture reading tool, a scripture memory tool, and a prayer request tool.

One limitation of the e-Sword scripture reading tool is that it does not offer an option to use paragraph-style presentation of the scripture. The text is always shown with each verse starting on a new line. This is how I prefer it anyway for Bible study, but some people prefer the paragraph style for reading.

There are other free Bible software packages for Windows and/or Linux. The Sword Project is an open source Bible study framework on which multiple Bible study applications have been built. The Sword Project applications can be built for a variety of operating systems. The Sword Project and its companion interfaces provide many similar features, but lack some of the paid copyrighted resources. In particular, the NIV is not permitted to be used in any open source software package.

Another option is The Word, a closed-source Windows Bible application. I hope to try The Word in the future and perhaps will offer a review of it at that time. Currently The Word has some of the same limitations as The Sword Project regarding modern copyrighted Bible translations. But perhaps that will change in the future.

I have used e-Sword for many years and am quite satisfied with it for my Bible study purposes. However, there are enthusiastic users of all of these applications. Those who invest their time and skills to provide these tools free of charge are to be commended and appreciated. If you should decide to use one of these, I urge you to make a donation to support the tool of your choice.

Online Teaching Platforms

2009-10-26T10:40:00.000-07:00

Matt 24:45-51 "Who then is the faithful and wise servant, whom the master has put in charge of the servants in his household to give them their food at the proper time? It will be good for that servant whose master finds him doing so when he returns. I tell you the truth, he will put him in charge of all his possessions. But suppose that servant is wicked and says to himself, 'My master is staying away a long time,' and he then begins to beat his fellow servants and to eat and drink with drunkards. The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of. He will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the hypocrites, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

2 Tim 3:16-17 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

Acts 20:26-27 Therefore, I declare to you today that I am innocent of the blood of all men. For I have not hesitated to proclaim to you the whole will of God.

A primary responsibility of congregational leaders is to teach them the Bible. To me that means that we must teach the "whole" Bible, not just selected excerpts. If not, then who is responsible for teaching it?

Our congregation's schedule provides for three teaching opportunities each week, plus occasional events outside the regular schedule. We are further limited by the fact that we do not own a building, so scheduling additional opportunities requires us to find (rent) a place. When we do teach, we have one or two large classes to meet the needs of the entire congregation. That just seems inadequate to me. If we continue in this manner, how will we ever get the entire church taught the entire Bible? We need a new approach.

The internet provides a possible answer.

Adoption of online training has exploded in the past decade. Tens of thousands of courses have been offered using an open source course management product called Moodle. In turn, Moodle has been interfaced to various social networking environments where classes can be conducted in a social setting. Facebook users can take classes using the PodClass interface. For a more futuristic environment, SecondLife users can take classes through the Sloodle interface.

I'm dipping my toe into the pool. Just a little. I would love to find a way to provide additional Bible study opportunities in the local congregation -- ways that don't require people to be physically present at the same time, and that don't require renting a facility. The technology seems to be available. I want to learn how to apply that technology effectively, combining both online and "real life" interactions and sound adult educational principles. I want to evaluate whether it is a feasible way to enhance our existing Bible teaching methods.

I would like to hear from folks who have experience in these or other similar courseware environments. What worked, and what didn't? What could have been done better?

1 Peter: Godly Suffering, Part 2

2009-10-18T15:39:00.000-07:00

Martyrdom.

That sobering subject may have been part of what the Holy Spirit had in mind when Peter wrote to the scattered saints about godly suffering. The book was most likely written between AD 60-64, during the reign of Nero. Peter may well have been writing to prepare the disciples for the persecution that would occur in AD 64 under Nero. In that year, a great fire broke out in Rome, and a substantial portion of the city was burned. Some of the Roman people began to attribute blame to Nero himself. Nero responded by deflecting the blame to the Christians. The Roman historian Tacitus wrote:

...they were covered with the hides of wild beasts, and worried to death by dogs, or nailed to crosses, or set fire to, and when the day waned, burned to serve for the evening lights.

That such cruelty was done to saints of God seems unimaginable to our modern western minds. Nero's cruelty was shocking even to many Roman witnesses in that day. But that is what happened within a short time after Peter's first letter was written. It is hardly surprising that Peter would write to prepare the believers for what was about to come.

With that bit of historical background, let's consider what Peter said on the topic of suffering in his first letter.

1Pe 1:6-7 In this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while you may have had to suffer grief in all kinds of trials. These have come so that your faith--of greater worth than gold, which perishes even though refined by fire--may be proved genuine and may result in praise, glory and honor when Jesus Christ is revealed.

Peter introduced the subject of Christian suffering early in the first chapter. He compared the suffering of Christians to the refining of gold by fire -- certainly suggestive of a fiery test of their faith. (He came back to the fiery imagery in 1 Pet 4:12) Peter indicated that there would be "all kinds of trials" which would prove the genuineness of their faith. There would be a reward of praise, glory, and honor for those who passed the test -- a reward to be received when Jesus returns.

1Pe 2:18-20 Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh. For it is commendable if a man bears up under the pain of unjust suffering because he is conscious of God. But how is it to your credit if you receive a beating for doing wrong and endure it? But if you suffer for doing good and you endure it, this is commendable before God.

Of course not all would personally face martyrdom at the hands of Nero. Some would face suffering of a different kind. Maybe this comes closer to the kind of suffering that modern Christians in western countries might face - unjust treatment because of faith in Jesus. But in reality, very few of us actually face beatings for our faith, as some first century slaves apparently did. Peter instructed them to "bear up under the pain" because they are conscious of God -- in other words, to stand resolutely on their faith even when it cost them a beating, in order to receive the commendation of God.

1Pe 2:21 To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps.

Christ suffered even to the point of death in order to fulfill God's purpose. Therefore, Peter taught, Christians should likewise refuse to back down in the face of persecution.

1Pe 3:13-14 Who is going to harm you if you are eager to do good? But even if you should suffer for what is right, you are blessed. "Do not fear what they fear; do not be frightened."

Persecution forces Christians to choose whom they will fear. In the above passage, Peter referred to the words of God recorded by Isaiah the prophet:

Isa 8:12 "Do not call conspiracy
everything that these people call conspiracy;
do not fear what they fear,
and do not dread it.
Isa 8:13 The LORD Almighty is the one you are to regard as holy,
he is the one you are to fear,
he is the one you are to dread,
Isa 8:14 and he will be a sanctuary;

It seems that Peter, like Isaiah, had in mind a kind of persecution that could cost a person his life. Consider the following familiar passage in the context of that kind of suffering:

1Pe 3:15 But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect,
1Pe 3:16 keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander.
1Pe 3:17 It is better, if it is God's will, to suffer for doing good than for doing evil.

They were to set apart Christ as Lord. That title was to be reserved for Christ alone, and not to be applied to the emperor. Each Christian was to be resolved in his or her own mind how to answer if faced with the awful choice of martyrdom or denial of Christ. They were to be prepared in advance to answer with gentleness and respect, and to embrace the suffering rather than to commit the great evil of denying Jesus.

1Pe 4:12-13 Beloved, do not be surprised at the fiery trial when it comes upon you to test you, as though something strange were happening to you. But rejoice insofar as you share Christ's sufferings, that you may also rejoice and be glad when his glory is revealed. [ESV]

Clearly there was a "fiery trial" that was about to confront them. Peter was concerned that the believers might be frightened into denying the faith during the coming trial.

1Pe 4:15-16 If you suffer, it should not be as a murderer or thief or any other kind of criminal, or even as a meddler. However, if you suffer as a Christian, do not be ashamed, but praise God that you bear that name.

He anticipated that they would face punishment for their belief in Jesus. He warned them about being ashamed and admonished them not to shrink back from testifying that they bear the name of Christ. For some of them, such testimony would cost them their lives. Peter remembered the words of Jesus:

Mar 8:38 For whoever is ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of him will the Son of Man also be ashamed when he comes in the glory of his Father with the holy angels."

He also undoubtedly remembered his own denials of Christ during the Savior's last few hours on earth. He must have remembered the Lord's words at that post-resurrection breakfast on the shore, recorded in John 21, asking Peter if he truly loved the Lord. He remembered the kind of death that Jesus had predicted for him. He had spent the subsequent 30 or so years getting ready to face his own personal test. And he charged all his readers with being ready for similar testing.

1Pe 4:17-18 For it is time for judgment to begin with the family of God; and if it begins with us, what will the outcome be for those who do not obey the gospel of God?
And,
"If it is hard for the righteous to be saved,
what will become of the ungodly and the sinner?"

The coming persecution was a judgment on the family of God. It would separate those with genuine faith from those who lacked it. It would be hard for the righteous to be saved. This was no lightweight test. The only way to pass was to be willing to die for the faith.

How would we fare under such a test? Would our faith survive the fiery trial? Do we survive the much lighter trials we actually do face? Sobering questions.

1 Peter: Godly Suffering, Part 1

2009-10-13T15:38:00.000-07:00

Before we look at what Peter wrote about suffering, let's take a quick look at the attitudes of the Israelites toward godly suffering through the previous ages.

Suffering was not a new subject when Peter wrote. Some of the earliest writings in the Old Testament tell us of the suffering of godly men. Two (of many) prominent examples are Joseph and Job.

Joseph suffered as a slave and as a prisoner for a crime he did not commit, for a period of 13 years. (Gen 37-41). Joseph suffered righteously, and God used his suffering to bring about great things for the sons of Israel.

Job suffered as Satan tested his faith in God. Job lost his family, his wealth, and his health. He suffered righteously, and by doing so he brought glory to God. But he suffered a lot.

Despite prominent examples of godly suffering such as these, the Israelites had a hard time accepting the idea that the righteous should suffer. The psalmist (probably David) wrote:

Psa 44:17 All this happened to us,
though we had not forgotten you
or been false to your covenant.
Psa 44:18 Our hearts had not turned back;
our feet had not strayed from your path.
Psa 44:19 But you crushed us and made us a haunt for jackals
and covered us over with deep darkness.

And in another psalm, Asaph wrote:

Psa 73:12 This is what the wicked are like— always carefree, they increase in wealth.
Psa 73:13 Surely in vain have I kept my heart pure; in vain have I washed my hands in innocence.

To man, it seems that only the wicked should suffer, and that the righteous should be rewarded in this life. To endure suffering in this life, in order to gain rewards in the next, requires great faith. Sometimes we feel it requires more faith than we have.

Early in his ministry, near the beginning of the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus said:

Mat 5:11 "Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me.
Mat 5:12 Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.

Jesus expected us to rejoice when we suffer for him, because of our reward in heaven.

When Jesus sent out the twelve (Matt 10), he told them he was sending them out as sheep among wolves. He told them they would be arrested, called before councils and flogged. He told them they would be hated and they would be betrayed. But he sent them anyway. And he told them that those who stand firm to the end would be saved.

In Matthew 16, we get a glimpse into Peter's attitude toward suffering:

Mat 16:21 From that time on Jesus began to explain to his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, chief priests and teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and on the third day be raised to life.
Mat 16:22 Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. "Never, Lord!" he said. "This shall never happen to you!"

Peter did not think it was a good plan for Jesus to suffer. Jesus rebuked him sharply for that.

Later, Peter would try to fight to prevent the arrest of Jesus. After the arrest, he would deny Jesus three times rather than risk suffering alongside Jesus. After the resurrection, Jesus confronted Peter's unwillingness to suffer:

Joh 21:18 Jesus said, "Feed my sheep. I tell you the truth, when you were younger you dressed yourself and went where you wanted; but when you are old you will stretch out your hands, and someone else will dress you and lead you where you do not want to go."
Joh 21:19 Jesus said this to indicate the kind of death by which Peter would glorify God. Then he said to him, "Follow me!"

Peter was going to have to suffer for Jesus. Having seen Jesus crucified only a few weeks earlier, these words must have cut to his very soul. He would live with these words for over thirty years before they would be fulfilled. Peter, not wanting to face that future suffering, responded:

Joh 21:21 When Peter saw him, he asked, "Lord, what about him?"
Joh 21:22 Jesus answered, "If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you? You must follow me."

What a hard teaching for Peter to accept! How many of us would have accepted that we had to suffer so profoundly, yet another disciple would not? Yet that is what Jesus called Peter to accept. Peter was going to have to suffer.

During the book of Acts, we see a transformed Peter. In chapter 4 the Jewish rulers were astonished at his courage. Later, after being released, they joined the other disciples and prayed -- not for safety, but for boldness. And in chapter 5, the apostles went right back out into the streets to preach.

In chapter 12, Peter is once again in prison. King Herod had put James the brother of John to death. Seeing that this pleased the Jews, he then arrested Peter. When the angel of the Lord comes to set Peter free, he finds Peter... sleeping like a baby!

What a remarkable transformation had occurred, compared to the Peter we saw in the latter chapters of the gospels! By the time Peter was writing his first letter to the Christians, he had spent thirty years proving his repentance for shrinking back from suffering.

Next time: Peter teaches us about suffering.

1 Peter: Godly Relationships

2009-10-06T02:59:00.000-07:00

One of the themes of the book of 1 Peter is that Christians should have godly relationships. The great salvation we have received in Christ demands that we treat other people differently.

1Peter 1:22 Now that you have purified yourselves by obeying the truth so that you have sincere love for your brothers, love one another deeply, from the heart.

A prerequisite for us to love one another in that way is that we first have purified ourselves by obeying the truth. Having done that, we will be capable of loving deeply, from the heart. Without purifying ourselves, the sin in our lives would block the kind of deep love God wants us to have.

1Peter 2:1 Therefore, rid yourselves of all malice and all deceit, hypocrisy, envy, and slander of every kind.

The particular sins that Peter lists are all of an interpersonal nature. They are the kind of sins that ruin relationships. Let's take a look at them one at a time.

First, we are called to rid ourselves of all malice. Malice is that evil intent that desires to harm someone else -- the very opposite of love. Christians must not wish for evil to come upon a brother or sister. There can be no seeking revenge in our relationships. Instead we must be quick to forgive, and to forget. God removes our sins as far as the east is from the west (Psa 103:12). We should forgive in the same way.

We should also rid ourselves of all deceit. It is impossible to have a relationship of love when you don't let the other person know the real "you." The motive behind deceit may be greed (tricking someone out of their money or possessions), pride (denying our own failures), malice (scheming to bring harm on someone), or many other similar evil motives. Regardless of the motive, deceit prevents real love.

Peter also wrote that we should rid ourselves of hypocrisy. Hypocrisy is holding others to a standard that we ourselves do not meet. It is pure selfishness, being concerned about our own comfort and pride but having no compassion for the other person. Hypocrites place heavy burdens on others but do not bear those burdens themselves. Jesus reserved his most stern rebukes for the hypocritical Pharisees (Matt 23).

The next evil Peter listed is envy. Envy is a form of hatred of others, because they possess something that we want but do not possess. It is the form of evil that causes the poor to hate the rich. It causes us to hate those who are more successful than us in any area of life. Quite obviously we cannot love those whom we envy. Instead, we should rejoice with those who rejoice (Rom 12:15).

The final evil in Peter's list is slander. The Greek word here is καταλαλιας, which literally means speaking against. Slander involves all kinds of evil speaking against one another, and it destroys love. The proverb we learned from our mothers is appropriate here: If you cannot think of something nice to say, don't say anything. Paul wrote that we should only speak what builds others up (Eph 4:29). James wrote that we must not speak evil against one another (James 4:11). And if it is wrong to speak evil against our brother, it is wrong to listen to one who is doing it. If we would all refuse to listen to that kind of talk, it would put an end to evil speaking in the church.

Peter next reminds us that we are the people of God, a royal priesthood, a holy nation. That is all about our position in Christ and our relationships which result. We should treat one another as royal priests and as holy ones of God. We should be using our voices to praise God, not to criticize our brothers. As James wrote:

Jam 3:10 Out of the same mouth come praise and cursing. My brothers, this should not be.

Peter then writes about giving proper respect to everyone. That includes respecting authority and obeying the law; loving our brothers; and fearing God. Respect has to come from a humble heart. As the famous poet wrote:

"Every man is in some way my superior." - Ralph Waldo Emerson

An attitude like that fosters respect. We would all be better off if we would respect others in this way.

After giving instructions to wives (submit to your husbands) and husbands (being considerate, showing respect), Peter summarizes:

1Pe 3:8-9 Finally, all of you, live in harmony with one another; be sympathetic, love as brothers, be compassionate and humble. Do not repay evil with evil or insult with insult, but with blessing, because to this you were called so that you may inherit a blessing.

There is more in 1 Peter about our relationships: Not retaliating (1 Peter 2:21-25); showing hospitality and serving (1 Peter 4:9-10), the relationship of elders to the church (1 Peter 5:1-4), and submission of the young men (1 Peter 5:5-6). What a great improvement there would be in the church if we all would follow these instructions!

ICOC Cooperation Agreement: The Sequel

2009-09-20T18:42:00.000-07:00

Our congregation has decided to affirm the August 2009 revision of the ICOC Plan for United Cooperation. I am fully in support of this decision. Since I rather famously objected to the original version, it seems appropriate for me to explain why I am comfortable with affirming the new document.

Each of the two documents begins with a statement of purpose. The original document states:

The purpose of the following paper is to affirm and enhance the unity of the family of churches known, since 1992, as the International Churches of Christ.

The revised document states:

The purpose of this document is to provide a structure for Regional and International cooperation among our family of churches around the world.

The difference in the two purpose statements is representative of the difference in the two documents as a whole. My original objection was that the first document defined a subset of the worldwide church based on a set of doctrinal beliefs and practices. I have always believed that there is a doctrinal boundary to the worldwide church, comprised of the basic gospel facts which must be understood in order to become a Christian. But the original document defined a narrower boundary in which a person had to agree with additional interpretations beyond the core gospel facts in order to participate. My objection was not over any particular doctrine on which that document called for agreement. Instead, my objection was over the principle of defining a subset of the worldwide church based on a set of beliefs in addition to the core gospel doctrines. To me, that seemed to create a faction in the church. While many have disagreed with me about that, it still appears that way to me.

The new document abandons that approach. Instead of trying to define a subset of the church based on peripheral doctrines, it simply seeks to establish a basis for cooperation among willing congregations. It calls for "sound doctrine" but it doesn't attempt to list the doctrines on which there must be agreement. For example, our congregation can disagree with others in the co-op on topics like the role of women, without for that reason being excluded from the co-op. To me, that is a significant because it respects the consciences of churches and church leadership groups in a manner consistent with Romans 14.

Someone might object that the new agreement still references the old in the footnotes, and therefore affirming the second document is equivalent to affirming the first. I asked the same question, and was assured that the new document does not incorporate the old. That makes sense to me. They produced the new document to address the concerns of people like me, so we could cooperate with a clear conscience. It would make no sense to do that if they were going to still require agreement to the first document.

Here is my heart in the matter. I deeply appreciate the effort of those who produced a plan for cooperation which people like me can affirm. I believe they did this in order to address concerns like mine. I want to express my gratitude for that, and to demonstrate that gratitude by affirming the new document.

Despite not affirming the first document, our congregation has continued to cooperate in foreign missions, regional meetings, conferences, bringing in guest speakers, sending out guest speakers, and in many other ways. We strongly believe in the stated purpose of the new document, and can demonstrate that belief by our past actions. We affirm our desire to cooperate with these congregations to do God's work around the world. May God bless our collective efforts.

1 Peter: Holy Living

2009-09-15T16:57:00.000-07:00

Several themes run through the book of 1 Peter:

The great salvation we are receiving
Our response to salvation:

Holy living
Godly relationships
Suffering as a Christian

In this article we will take a look at the necessity of responding with a holy life.

God has done amazing things on our behalf. Even in our corrupt, fallen state, we instinctively know that we should respond with gratitude for the great grace and mercy of God. The book of 1 Peter instructs us on the kind of grateful response God desires.

1Pe 1:13-16 Therefore, prepare your minds for action; be self-controlled; set your hope fully on the grace to be given you when Jesus Christ is revealed. As obedient children, do not conform to the evil desires you had when you lived in ignorance. But just as he who called you is holy, so be holy in all you do; for it is written: "Be holy, because I am holy.”

Grace should motivate us to change how we live. We learn God's ways, and we choose to live by them, to be self-controlled, and to leave our former evil ways behind. God calls us to be holy, because he himself is holy.

What does it mean to be holy?

When Moses stood on holy ground, he was commanded to remove his sandals. Holiness demands to be honored. (Ex 3:5)
Mount Sinai was holy. (Ex 19:23) Moses had to put a boundary around it to keep the people off the mountain, so that they would not be put to death. (Ex 19:12-13)
In the tabernacle was the Holy Place. When performing his service there, Aaron had to wear a certain robe with bells so that he would not be put to death. (Ex 28:34-35)
Beyond the Holy Place was the Most Holy Place. Only the High Priest could enter the Most Holy Place, and he could only enter once a year. He could not enter without blood, because blood was essential to make atonement for his sins and for the sins of the people.

When something is holy, it must be kept from all uncleanness. It must be reserved (sanctified) for holy uses. That which is holy must be treated with reverence. There are severe consequences for profaning what is holy.

Now stop and think about this: We are called to be holy.

1Pe 1:17-19 Since you call on a Father who judges each man's work impartially, live your lives as strangers here in reverent fear. For you know that it was not with perishable things such as silver or gold that you were redeemed from the empty way of life handed down to you from your forefathers, but with the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect.

In order to be holy, we must live as strangers in this unholy world. We just cannot fit in. After all, we were redeemed through the most precious, sacred, and holy of sacrifices. We dare not treat those sacrifices as unholy:

Heb 10:28-31 Anyone who rejected the law of Moses died without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. How much more severely do you think a man deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God under foot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified him, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace? For we know him who said, "It is mine to avenge; I will repay," and again, "The Lord will judge his people." It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

So it is unthinkable that we would not respond to the incomparable gift we have received, by being holy ourselves.

Therefore, we must get rid of the unholy ways of our flesh:

1Pe 2:1 Therefore, rid yourselves of all malice and all deceit, hypocrisy, envy, and slander of every kind.

We are to rid ourselves of these things. Nobody will do this for us -- although the Holy Spirit will certainly help, when we make the effort.

1Pe 3:10-12 For,
"Whoever would love life
and see good days
must keep his tongue from evil
and his lips from deceitful speech.
He must turn from evil and do good;
he must seek peace and pursue it.
For the eyes of the Lord are on the righteous
and his ears are attentive to their prayer,
but the face of the Lord is against those who do evil."

Yes, Christians are forgiven. Yes, that includes sin that we commit as Christians. But it absolutely does matter how we live.

Heb 12:14 Make every effort to live in peace with all men and to be holy; without holiness no one will see the Lord.

We have heard the term "holy" so often, and have seen actual holiness so seldom, that we really don't even understand how far we fall short of that standard. I think we tend to cut ourselves way too much slack in this area. Holy living is not just a good idea.

1 Peter: Inexpressible and Glorious Joy

2009-09-04T18:25:00.000-07:00

1Peter 1:8-9 Though you have not seen him, you love him; and even though you do not see him now, you believe in him and are filled with an inexpressible and glorious joy, for you are receiving the goal of your faith, the salvation of your souls.

What a difference it would make if Christians really understood what they have been given through the grace of our merciful God! We don't deserve the salvation we have been given. We would have no grounds for complaint against God if instead he decided to punish us according to our deeds. Yet God granted us an immeasurably great favor.

1) He has given us a new birth, a fresh start with a clean slate, forgiven of all of our sins, through the resurrection of Jesus. (1 Peter 1:3)

2) He has given us an unimaginably wonderful inheritance, safely reserved for us in heaven. (1 Peter 1:4)

3) He protects us as we wait to receive the inheritance. (1 Peter 1:5)

However that does not mean we are without challenges. We face trials which test the genuineness of our faith. But if we have genuine faith, there is nothing to fear. Genuine faith will stand up under fire. Even as gold is proven pure by fire, so our faith will be proven genuine by our trials. (1 Peter 1:6-7)

As a result, we love God and are filled with "an inexpressible and glorious joy" ("joy unspeakable and full of glory" as the KJV phrases it.) Or, at least, we could be so filled, if only we fully recognised what we have been given.

Too many Christians wonder whether they actually do possess these blessings. We may doubt our salvation because we see our own sinfulness too clearly. When we aren't sure we've received the blessings, we don't experience the joy. Many things can block that joy, such as: loving this present world; failure to repent and to make Jesus Lord; loving the things of the world; becoming entangled in worldly pursuits; false doctrines about works salvation; false doctrines about the nature of God; a lack of faith.

But it is clear that God intends for Christians to be filled with joy. God wants us to receive the inheritance, and he knows what we are made of. So he has promised to protect us as we wait for our inheritance (1 Peter 1:5.) We are responsible to remain in the vine (John 15). When we do so, God will produce fruit in us, to make us into what we need to become. So we can have great security in our salvation. And with that security, we can experience the inexpressible and glorious joy of our salvation.

1 Peter: Paul, Silas, and Peter

2009-08-25T12:13:00.000-07:00

1 Peter 5:12 With the help of Silas, whom I regard as a faithful brother, I have written to you briefly, encouraging you and testifying that this is the true grace of God. Stand fast in it

Peter did not write this letter alone.

Many have remarked at the striking similarity between 1 Peter and some of Paul's letters. A quick comparison of certain verses demonstrates that similarity:

Eph 1:3 Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ	1Pe 1:3 Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ!
Col 3:8 But now you must rid yourselves of all such things as these: anger, rage, malice, slander, and filthy language from your lips.	1Pe 2:1 Therefore, rid yourselves of all malice and all deceit, hypocrisy, envy, and slander of every kind.
Eph 5:22 Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord.	1Pe 3:1 Wives, in the same way be submissive to your husbands
1Th 5:6 ...let us be alert and self-controlled.	1Pe 5:8 Be self-controlled and alert.
1Co 16:20 ...Greet one another with a holy kiss.	1Pe 5:14 Greet one another with a kiss of love.
Rom 8:18 ... the glory that will be revealed in us.	1Pe 5:1 ... the glory to be revealed:
Rom 4:24 ...for us who believe in him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead.	1Pe 1:21 ... you believe in God, who raised him from the dead ...
Rom 13:1 Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities...	Pe 2:13 Submit yourselves for the Lord's sake to every authority instituted among men
Rom 12:6 We have different gifts, according to the grace given us. If a man's gift is prophesying, let him use it in proportion to his faith. Rom 12:7 If it is serving, let him serve; if it is teaching, let him teach;	1Pe 4:10 Each one should use whatever gift he has received to serve others, faithfully administering God's grace in its various forms. 1Pe 4:11 If anyone speaks, he should do it as one speaking the very words of God. If anyone serves, he should do it with the strength God provides
1Ti 2:9 I also want women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes,	1Pe 3:3 Your beauty should not come from outward adornment, such as braided hair and the wearing of gold jewelry and fine clothes.

Beyond the similarity of many verses of Paul and Peter, the overall structure of his plea is the same. Peter introduced the letter by identifying himself as an apostle. He proceeded to identify his intended audience by their location and by the blessings they have received from God. He extends grace and peace. Next he describes in more detail the great blessings they have received from God. Then he proceeds to call for an appropriate response to those blessings. This is all very "Pauline" -- compare to Ephesians, Colossians, and Romans. However, Peter seems to go back and forth several times -- lavish description of blessings, then calling for a response, then revisiting the blessings, and calling for a response again, etc.

Overall, the similarity to Paul's letters is unmistakable. And there is a good reason for that similarity. 1 Pet 5:12 tells us that Peter wrote this letter with the help of Silas (Gk Silvanus). There is virtually unanimous agreement that this is the same Silas who accompanied Paul on his second missionary journey (approximately AD 51-54.) Silas was a leading brother in Jerusalem (Acts 15:22) and a prophet (Acts 15:32). He joined Paul first in Jerusalem as one selected to deliver the decision of the council to Antioch and other churches. After visiting Antioch with the letter, he accompanied Paul to Syria, Cilisia, Derbe, Lystra, Phrygia, Galatia, Troas, Macedonia, Philippi (where he was jailed along with Paul), Thessalonica, Berea, and Corinth. While on that journey, he assisted Paul in writing both letters to the Thessalonians. Silas had extensive exposure to Paul's teaching as well as his writing. He was undoubtedly familiar with at least most of Paul's letters by the time 1 Peter was written (approximately AD 60-64). It is no surprise, therefore, that we see many similarities between 1 Peter and the letters of Paul.

1 Peter: Authorship, Audience, and Purpose

2009-08-17T18:12:00.000-07:00

That the apostle Simon Peter is the author of the letter we call 1 Peter has been overwhelmingly supported from the earliest times. Irenaeus, Clement, Origen, Cyprian, and Tertullian all not only quoted from the book, but also explicitly attributed it to Peter.

The author of the book we call 2 Peter, on the other hand, has been questioned by some, almost exclusively because of the differences in the style of Greek between 1 Peter and 2 Peter. 1 Peter is written in a polished, well structured, almost formal style. 2 Peter, on the other hand, is rougher and more unsophisticated. This naturally raises the question as to whether the two books were written by the same author.

However, this objections can be easily overcome.

1Pe 5:12 With the help of Silas, whom I regard as a faithful brother, I have written to you briefly, encouraging you and testifying that this is the true grace of God. Stand fast in it.

Silas (Gk Silvanus) has always been widely accepted to be the same person as the Silas who traveled with Paul and who assisted him in writing 1 and 2 Thessalonians. Silas was not merely an amanuensis but also a prophet (Acts 15:32). If he truly did participate in the composition of 1 Peter as well as the two Thessalonian letters of Paul, is no surprise that the organization and style of 1 Peter resembles Paul's letters. I will say a bit more about this similarity later.

2 Peter, on the other hand, mentions no amanuensis. It therefore is not surprising that an unschooled, ordinary man such as Peter (Acts 4:13) would write in that style.

It should also be noted that a portion of 2 Peter 3:8 is clearly quoted (but not attributed) by Irenaeus in Against Heresies, book V: "a day of the Lord is as a thousand years." Irenaeus used the same phrasing as in Peter's letter, and not the phrasing from the similar OT passage. He quoted this passage in proof of his argument, implying that he assumed his readers would know and accept the validity of the reference. So it is evident from this reference that 2 Peter was well known and accepted before the end of the 2nd century. (Justin Martyr makes a similar reference in his Dialogue with Trypho. There are other alleged references to 2 Peter by Polycarp, Clement, Ignatius, and others, though some of these are less certain.)

Internal evidence for Peter's authorship of 2 Peter is strong. First of all, the author claims to be "Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ" (2 Pet 1:1). He claims to have been an eyewitness, present on the Mount of Transfiguration (2 Pet 1:16-18) He claims to have written a previous letter (2 Pet 3:1). Even the fact that this author refers to the flood of Noah (2 Pet 3:6) as a "type" or parallel of future events, just as Peter did in 1 Pet 3:20, weighs in favor of the same author writing both books.

It is impossible to determine the precise place and time when 1 Peter was written. 1 Pet 5:13 refers to the church in Babylon sending greetings, but there are multiple theories about what "Babylon" refers to, and no real evidence to use in choosing which theory is best. Of course 1 Peter was written before Peter was martyred (traditionally believed to be around AD 64), and obviously before he wrote his second letter. Most scholars seem to place the time in the late 50's or early 60's of the first century. It was written to Christians scattered throughout Asia Minor. While it is apparent that there were elders in at least some of these churches (1 Pet 5:1-4), he addresses all members of the churches in a general sense, rather than directly addressing the letter to their leaders.

Peter wrote this letter for the purpose of "encouraging you and testifying that this is the true grace of God. Stand fast in it." (2 Pet 5:12) We should study the letter and teach it with that same purpose.

Three New Topics

2009-08-17T08:29:00.000-07:00

I try to post an article on this blog at least once a week. That is easier some weeks than others. Sometimes it is hard to find the time, due to other pressing issues. At other times, writers' block gets in the way, as I struggle to think of new and relevant material.

Today, writers' block is not a problem. Right now I have three topics screaming at me to write.

1) A group in the ICOC has developed a new, much shorter Cooperation Plan proposal. Long time readers will remember that I objected to the original Plan For United Cooperation. The new proposal is much shorter (one page rather than twelve) and appears to have eliminated some of the more objectionable aspects. I will be studying this and discussing with the other leaders in my congregation. Once I have done that, I intend to write an article with my observations about the proposal.

2) This past weekend I attended a seminar produced by Douglas Jacoby and Steve Staten, titled "WHY DO THE NATIONS RAGE? Gospel Solutions to Prejudice and Separation." This seminar directly confronted the racial issues facing our churches today. These important issues are clearly relevant to our Lord's plea for unity among Christians.

3) In a few weeks I will begin teaching a four-week series on the book of 1 Peter. As is my custom, I will be blogging on the topic as I prepare for the classes. Due to the fact that I have an actual deadline to be ready for this class, the other topics may have to wait. But I'll try to work them in.

Grace Conversation ends

2009-08-08T18:54:00.000-07:00

Mac Deaver and Phil Sanders have withdrawn from the conversation between progressives and conservatives at graceconversation.com. Earlier, Greg Tidwell withdrew from the conversation. With the withdrawal of all of those representing the conservative side of the question, the conversation has now come to an end.

The stated goal of the conversation was to discuss "the disagreements that separate the conservative and progressive branches of the churches of Christ." The primary two topics that they set out to discuss include whether all doctrinal error leads to damnation (and if not, which do and which do not); and the proper effect of doctrinal error on the boundaries of fellowship.

I have followed this conversation with great interest. I appreciate the willingness and the efforts of all of the five participants to participate in the discussion to the extent that they did. Of course it is unfortunate that some of the men felt it necessary to stop the conversation, especially since the second topic was never addressed. However, I think things went far enough to draw a few conclusions.

1) There is great interest in this topic. A significant community of readers participated in lively discussions in the comments. The range of views in the comments went farther in both extremes than the actual five principle conversation participants. While the comment threads ranged far and wide, and emotions sometimes showed, the commentors added life to the conversation.

2) Neither side persuaded the other. To some that may seem to have been a foregone conclusion, but I hoped for more.

3) Both conservatives and progressives agreed that certain doctrinal errors lead to apostasy. They also agreed that not every instance of doctrinal error leads to apostasy. However, the conservatives were persistently unwilling to state exactly which scenarios lead to apostasy, nor exactly how they determine whom to fellowship and whom not to fellowship. Progressives kept asking the question in various ways but it seemed to be an unanswerable question.

It was interesting to observe how difficult communication was between these two groups. They use the same words but mean different things. They read the same passages but come to entirely different conclusions from them. I think there must be a fundamental set of basic assumptions on which the two groups have radical differences, which lead them to read the scriptures differently. It is unfortunate that this discussion did not discover and illuminate these basic assumptions. Instead, the conversation was on a different level, focusing on the different conclusions they hold due to those different foundational assumptions.

There is a danger in staking out your beliefs publicly. Once you have done that, it becomes much more difficult to change them. Maybe conversations like this have a better chance of success if the principle participants have not previously tied their reputation publicly to one side of the question.

I believe God will resolve this disagreement at some point. I don't know whether it will be in short time or long, whether in this life or the next. But I am confident that God cares about this question, and he wants us to understand.

Jesus prayed that the church would be one so that the world will believe. The importance of the world believing cannot be overstated. What a tragedy that, as of today, we are not one, and therefore the world does not believe. I am sure that God cares more about that than he does about many of the points on which conservatives and progressives disagree. May God help us to stop straining out gnats and swallowing camels.

Forgiveness

2009-08-06T03:14:00.000-07:00

1Ti 1:15 Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners--of whom I am the worst.

God wants to forgive.

He had a choice. He could give us what we deserve for our sins, or he could send his Son to suffer and to die on the cross so that we could be forgiven. Because he chose the cross, we know beyond any doubt that God wants to forgive. He intensely wants to forgive.

There was no other way but the cross.

Before going to the cross, Jesus prayed in the garden, "If you are willing, take this cup from me; yet not my will, but yours be done." If forgiveness of sins were possible without sending Christ to the cross, surely God would have been willing, and Jesus would not have gone to the cross. But God knew from the beginning that there was no other way. So Jesus humbly submitted to God's will.

As he was being crucified, Jesus uttered some amazing words, words that take our breath away. "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing." He had already been unjustly condemned, mocked, beaten, and scourged. Now his hands and feet were nailed to the cross and he was dying a slow, torturous death. Yet Jesus still wanted to forgive -- and to forgive even those who drove the nails into his hands and feet.

Yes, God wants to forgive. He *really* wants to forgive.

Mic 7:18 Who is a God like you,
who pardons sin and forgives the transgression
of the remnant of his inheritance?
You do not stay angry forever
but delight to show mercy.

How about us?

Mat 6:14 For if you forgive men when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you.
Mat 6:15 But if you do not forgive men their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins.

Jesus warns us that if we do not forgive those who sin against us, neither will God forgive us. There is no more sobering passage in all the scripture. Even though God intensely desires to forgive, he will not forgive if we do not forgive. God must find our refusal to forgive highly offensive--so offensive, in fact, that it outweighs his tremendous desire to forgive. Unforgiveness is an ugly, ugly thing. Like God, we should also find our unforgiveness offensive. After all, failure to forgive would cost us our salvation. We simply must forgive.

How many of us will forfeit the forgiveness that could have been ours, because we refuse to forgive others?

Forgiveness is hard. We see the evil in the other person and we want justice, not mercy. We feel violated and betrayed. It's not fair! We don't think the other person deserves forgiveness. We just don't want to forgive. How unlike God we are!

But we are never more like Jesus than when we forgive someone who has hurt us. Jesus even forgave those who drove the nails into his hands. We, too, need to forgive those who don't deserve forgiveness. If there are people who have wronged you, whom you have not yet forgiven, take care of that before the sun goes down. Be urgent, and forgive!

Thank God for his mercy! May we learn to be more like him.

Doing What I Hate

2009-07-27T11:07:00.000-07:00

Romans 7:15 I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do

Why do we keep doing what we hate?

Churches of Christ have a long history of quarrelling and dividing over virtually any disagreement. Disagreements have been with us throughout history, but division over those disagreements came to churches of Christ in a big way in 1889, at Sand Creek. The issues of that day included instrumental music, choirs, missionary societies, preaching colleges, hired preacher-pastors, and church fund raisers. Since then, further divisions have occurred over communion cups, Sunday Schools, premillennialism, the Holy Spirit, church organization, qualifications for elders, marriage / divorce / remarriage, the role of women in the church, discipling practices, and more.

Churches of Christ continue to repeat the mistakes of our forefathers. The spirit of Sand Creek is alive and well. We keep doing what we hate -- which the Lord also hates:

Proverbs 6:16-19
16 There are six things the LORD hates,
seven that are detestable to him:
17 haughty eyes,
a lying tongue,
hands that shed innocent blood,
18 a heart that devises wicked schemes,
feet that are quick to rush into evil,
19 a false witness who pours out lies
and a man who stirs up dissension among brothers.

I am writing this because I recently heard a report that one of the former ICOC congregations was "blacklisted" by leaders at another congregation. Having personal knowledge of the supposedly blacklisted congregation, I find that appalling. What kind of mindset would conclude that it is right to make such a judgment about a church they have not visited, about leaders they have not approached, about a group of penitent baptized believers who have made Jesus their Lord? What scripture gives anyone that right?

Divisiveness is deep in our DNA. It permeates our history, and we have so far failed to learn from that history. If we fear God, we would be wise to learn those lessons. The judgment we use on others will be applied to ourselves as well. Those who create divisions in the church do so at their own peril.

Children and Self Control

2009-07-20T10:39:00.000-07:00

My daughter shares some blog postings from her Google Reader from time to time. Recently she shared this article which offers some great insight and practical advice for teaching self control to your children.

If we want our children to grow up with reverence for God, then that reverence is best instilled in the earliest years, which means church is not a place to eat or be amused, but a place to be still and listen and experience God on whatever level possible.

I like the idea in the above blog link of training a toddler to control his or her own body, as an early exercise in developing self control. "You are boss of your body. You can decide to sit still."

Long time readers will remember that my congregation includes the children (except the smallest toddlers) in the adult worship service with their parents. Of course this creates a couple of challenges: managing the child's behavior, and making the worship experience a constructive time for the child. I have blogged about this before. Following are a few more blog articles my daughter has sent me in the past, which offer more practical advice for making the worship experience constructive for children:

Children in Public Spaces
Children in Church
Children in Church, part 2
Babbling Babies in Church

I'm sure you noticed that all of these blogs are written by women. Maybe that's because my daughter tends to send me articles from blogs written by women. But I suspect there is more to it than that. Usually women are much more focused on the challenges of raising small children than men are. That is unfortunate, since the scriptures challenge fathers to bring up their children in the Lord. This is a topic that should be of interest to fathers and church leaders alike, as we carry out our God-given responsibilities to the next generation.

Leaders Need One Another

2009-07-12T17:00:00.000-07:00

I am registered to attend the 2009 International Leadership Conference in Denver on September 3-6. This will be my third time attending (having also attended in Chicago in 2004 and Los Angeles in 2007). These conferences bring together ministers, elders, and others from ICOC congregations for fellowship and inspiration. As one who is committed to pursuing unity with other Christians, I am glad to be able to attend this year and am hopeful that the time will lead toward greater unity among these churches.

A few days ago I received an emailed article promoting the event, titled "Leaders Need One Another." The article reminded us of our responsibility to counsel one another (Rom 15:14) . It spoke of how much we need each other, as different parts of the same body (1 Cor 12:21-26). The writer then said,

Boy, do we need one another. We need one another for the encouragement to persevere in an increasingly lost world. We need each other for direction and perspective when the work of ministering gets heavy and disorienting. We need each other for counsel and advice. And perhaps most important, we need each other as reminders of God's miraculous devotion to the salvation of souls, including our own! We need to be together.

I heartily "amen" all of that. We need more communication, not less. We need to show the world that believers in Christ can be united, so the world will believe (John 17:20-23). We need the love and support of other believers. To the extent that we isolate ourselves from other parts of the body of Christ, we deprive ourselves of the benefits God intended for us to share.

But I wish that the organizers of this event didn't stop there. This event is focused only on the congregations tracing their roots back to the International Churches of Christ. What about our brothers and sisters in the traditional churches of Christ? What about the independent Christian churches? What about others who have made Jesus Lord and have been baptized into Christ (Gal 3:26-29)? Are we not therefore one in Christ? Do we not need them, and do they not need us? We desperately need those brothers and sisters. And now more than ever, I think we might have something to offer to them also.

In the Chicago ILC of 2004, we had a guest speaker from Abilene Christian University who was the highlight of the conference in my opinion. There have been other interactions between the ICOC and ACU, but I don't hear much about that any more. There just doesn't seem to be a lot of interest in those things. With the approaching 200th anniversary of the Declaration and Address, the ICOC should re-examine its roots, and reconcile with the rest of the family.

A Witness Between Us

2009-07-04T15:47:00.000-07:00

What we have here is a failure to communicate.

The Israelites had taken possession of the Promised Land. Two-and-a-half tribes inherited land on the east side of the Jordan, and the remaining tribes inherited on the west side. By prior arrangement, the fighting men from the "trans-Jordan tribes" -- those on the east -- crossed over to the west side to help their brothers defeat the inhabitants of the land before returning to their families on the east.

After returning to their inheritance, the trans-Jordan tribes set up an altar as a reminder to future generations that living on the other side of the Jordan did not make them any less a part of God's people. But the remaining tribes reacted angrily to the building of the altar:

Jos 22:11-12 And when the Israelites heard that they had built the altar on the border of Canaan at Geliloth near the Jordan on the Israelite side, the whole assembly of Israel gathered at Shiloh to go to war against them.

The Israelites presumed that the trans-Jordan tribes would offer sacrifices on the altar in violation of the Law. The Israelites were prepared to go to war, and surely to destroy the trans-Jordan brothers over this matter. Fortunately, before starting a war they sent a delegation to talk things over:

Jos 22:13-14 So the Israelites sent Phinehas son of Eleazar, the priest, to the land of Gilead--to Reuben, Gad and the half-tribe of Manasseh. With him they sent ten of the chief men, one for each of the tribes of Israel, each the head of a family division among the Israelite clans.

The trans-Jordan tribes indignantly denied that they had built an altar for sacrifices in violation of the Law, insisting that they built the altar as a memorial, not as a place to make burnt offerings:

Jos 22:26-27 "That is why we said, 'Let us get ready and build an altar--but not for burnt offerings or sacrifices.' On the contrary, it is to be a witness between us and you and the generations that follow, that we will worship the LORD at his sanctuary with our burnt offerings, sacrifices and fellowship offerings. Then in the future your descendants will not be able to say to ours, 'You have no share in the LORD.'

After understanding better what their brothers had done, the Israelites were pleased:

Jos 22:30-31 When Phinehas the priest and the leaders of the community--the heads of the clans of the Israelites--heard what Reuben, Gad and Manasseh had to say, they were pleased. And Phinehas son of Eleazar, the priest, said to Reuben, Gad and Manasseh, "Today we know that the LORD is with us, because you have not acted unfaithfully toward the LORD in this matter. Now you have rescued the Israelites from the LORD's hand."

Had they failed to talk things over first, the Israelites would have incurred the wrath of God for destroying the trans-Jordan tribes. They were rescued from that fate by a few days of communication.

Maybe we could benefit in similar ways by communicating more.

I'm not aware of any congregations in our area who are prepared to go to war with each other. But the longer we go without communicating, the more distant we become; the more likely we become to mistrust one another; the more likely that rumors, gossip, and slander will create divisions in the church. Communication can stop those things. By communicating we can gain a better understanding of the challenges our brothers face and the motives for their decisions. We can put unfounded rumors to rest. We can learn how much we have in common. We can come to realize how much we could learn from each other. We can build trust.

So our congregation's leadership is embarking on an experiment. We are planning a Saturday meeting between our elders, ministers, along with our wives. and those of another local congregation. We plan to have some structured discussion and some unstructured, just to share what each congregation is doing, how we are doing it, what is working well and what is not. We will share a meal or two together. We hope to give and to receive some practical advice, to build deeper relationships, and to grow in our trust and love for one another.

We did something similar with a congregation in NC about three years ago, but have never done this locally. The NC experience was a delightful time and one that has definitely helped us feel more connected with a church in another state. Now we want to do the same thing in our own area. If this first round goes well, we hope to schedule a similar event with other congregations, maybe one each quarter. And we hope to inspire these other congregations to do likewise.

This probably won't bring world peace or cure cancer. But it's not complicated. Anyone can do it. We hope it will have visible and lasting benefits to the church.

Fear of the LORD

2009-06-23T19:45:00.000-07:00

Pro 1:7 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge,
but fools despise wisdom and discipline.

Fear of God is one of the most frequently encountered concepts in the scriptures. From the time Abraham was commended for his fear of God (Gen 22:12) until the multitudes in heaven are commended for their fear of God (Rev 19:5), the theme is repeated over and over. Solomon stated that fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge, the very foundation on which understanding is built. It seems that, in the view of Solomon, a person who does not fear God cannot credibly claim even to know God. Fear of God could be called a central theme of the Old Testament.

But, has the fear of the LORD become obsolete?

Many people who self-identify as Christians would say that Jesus brought an end to the need for God's people to fear him. For them, God seems to have changed. They acknowledge that God in the Old Testament demonstrated his wrath, smiting people with wars, disease, and death. But they see God in the New Testament quite differently. Some go so far that they teach God will forgive everyone in the end. Perhaps this is the kind of teaching Paul had in mind when he spoke of people having itching ears. So, believing those myths, those folks see no reason for fearing God.

It is true that John wrote "perfect love drives out fear." But until we reach a state where we sin no more, we cannot help but fear the one who has the power to condemn. Perhaps that is why God's Word repeatedly admonishes us to fear God.

We find it difficult to understand how God's love, grace, and mercy can coexist with his righteous wrath. Every person we know leans toward one side or the other -- either toward generous grace and mercy, or toward strict judgment. We naturally visualize God being like people we've known (often, like our own earthly fathers.) But God is not like anyone you or I ever met. His love and his righteous wrath both exist, and both exceed anything we can imagine. We can't predict what God will do based on what some human might or might not be inclined to do. God will do whatever he pleases. As the prophet Isaiah wrote,

Isa 46:9 Remember the former things, those of long ago;
I am God, and there is no other;
I am God, and there is none like me.
Isa 46:10 I make known the end from the beginning,
from ancient times, what is still to come.
I say: My purpose will stand,
and I will do all that I please.

Throughout the Old Testament, we learn that fear of God is intended to motivate us to obey and to avoid sin. A few examples:

Lev 19:11 "You shall not steal; you shall not deal falsely; you shall not lie to one another.
Lev 19:12 You shall not swear by my name falsely, and so profane the name of your God: I am the LORD.
Lev 19:13 "You shall not oppress your neighbor or rob him. The wages of a hired servant shall not remain with you all night until the morning.
Lev 19:14 You shall not curse the deaf or put a stumbling block before the blind, but you shall fear your God: I am the LORD.

Lev 19:32 "You shall stand up before the gray head and honor the face of an old man, and you shall fear your God: I am the LORD.

Lev 25:17 You shall not wrong one another, but you shall fear your God, for I am the LORD your God.

The Israelites were commanded to fear God, and to teach their children to do so. (Deut 6:1-2; 6:24, 10:12-21, 31:12-13). Jehoshaphat appointed judges and commanded them to judge justly, out of fear the LORD. A lack of fear of God led the Israelites to turn away from God. (Jer 5:21-24). That is just a small sampling of the Old Testament cases showing how fear of God led to obedience and blessings, while failure to fear God led to sin and destruction.

But someone will say that Jesus changed all that. Notably, Jesus himself addressed the subject:

Luk 12:5 But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear him who, after the killing of the body, has power to throw you into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear him.

Jesus apparently anticipated that some would object to the notion of fearing God. To overcome that objection, Jesus reminded us that God has the power to "throw you into hell" -- just about the most frightening prospect that could be mentioned. He was talking about "real" fear, not an unemotional respect.

The early church demonstrated and taught that instruction from Jesus. Acts 9:31, 10:34-35, 2 Cor 7:1, Heb 10:30-31, 1 Pet 2:17.

Paul feared the LORD, and therefore devoted his life to persuading others (2 Cor 5:11).

When we don't fear God, we tend to take sin lightly. We sin knowingly, anticipating that it will be forgiven. We don't see God immediately punishing sinners, so we are more inclined to sin.

Ecc 8:11 When the sentence for a crime is not quickly carried out, the hearts of the people are filled with schemes to do wrong.
Ecc 8:12 Although a wicked man commits a hundred crimes and still lives a long time, I know that it will go better with God-fearing men, who are reverent before God.
Ecc 8:13 Yet because the wicked do not fear God, it will not go well with them, and their days will not lengthen like a shadow.

Isa 57:11 "Whom have you so dreaded and feared
that you have been false to me,
and have neither remembered me
nor pondered this in your hearts?
Is it not because I have long been silent
that you do not fear me?

Fear of God is actually a gift of the Holy Spirit:

Isa 11:2 The Spirit of the LORD will rest on him—
the Spirit of wisdom and of understanding,
the Spirit of counsel and of power,
the Spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD -
Isa 11:3 and he will delight in the fear of the LORD.
He will not judge by what he sees with his eyes,
or decide by what he hears with his ears;

Perhaps there is no other topic in scripture associated with more blessings than is the fear of the LORD. A few examples of the blessings promised to those who fear God: (Isa 33:5-6; Psa 34:7-9; Psa 112:1-3; Psa 103:11-17) And then there is the 128th Psalm:

Psa 128:1 Blessed are all who fear the LORD,
who walk in his ways.
Psa 128:2 You will eat the fruit of your labor;
blessings and prosperity will be yours.
Psa 128:3 Your wife will be like a fruitful vine
within your house;
your sons will be like olive shoots
around your table.
Psa 128:4 Thus is the man blessed
who fears the LORD.
Psa 128:5 May the LORD bless you from Zion
all the days of your life;
may you see the prosperity of Jerusalem,
Psa 128:6 and may you live to see your children's children.
Peace be upon Israel.

Fear of God is the beginning of knowledge, and is the source of many blessings. Failure to fear God is the cause of much sin and destruction.

Do we really fear God? If so, I think we would be zealous to get sin out of our lives. We would create wide boundaries for ourselves to keep ourselves as far as possible from committing sin. We would certainly study our Bibles to learn what God has commanded. We would be zealous to obey. We would be concerned for the lost. We would pray humble prayers. We would serve the poor. We would speak up for the cause of the weak and helpless. We would arrive at church on time. We would pay attention to the words in the songs we sing. We would listen attentively to the message preached from the Bible. We would absolutely give rapt attention to the reading of God's Word. We would not quickly forget what was said and done when we returned home from worship. If we fear God, we would not try to justify ourselves. If we fear God, we would not be people-pleasers. If we fear God, we would not speak evil of our brother. If we really fear God, we will not fit in very well in a world where those around us do not fear God.

If we really fear God, we will be greatly blessed. The fear of the LORD is the key to this treasure.

Heb 12:28 Therefore let us be grateful for receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken, and thus let us offer to God acceptable worship, with reverence and awe,
Heb 12:29 for our God is a consuming fire.

Ecc 12:13 Now all has been heard;
here is the conclusion of the matter:
Fear God and keep his commandments,
for this is the whole duty of man.

Hello World!

2009-06-19T19:16:00.000-07:00

In case you were worried, no, I haven't fallen off the face of the earth. Many things have been going on which have taken my time and attention away from blogging. But let not your hearts be troubled! Just click over to the Grace Conversation, an on-going discussion between progressives and conservatives in churches of Christ. The past couple of days have brought a flurry of posts from the progressive writers, and a promise of more on the near horizon. Jay Guin lists the planned articles on his blog.

Meanwhile, I would appreciate your prayers on behalf of my congregation. Almost weekly for the past six weeks, a different dear brother or sister in our church has gone into the hospital unexpectedly for emergency surgery. Pray that we can have an emergency-free weekend!

Abigail

2009-06-08T04:20:00.000-07:00

This blogger has a new grandchild! Abigail was born June 3 at 2:23 am. Baby, parents, and grandparents are all doing fine!

She is now my second granddaughter. You of course remember Abigail's cousin Evelyn.

In honor of her father's heritage, Abigail has a Korean middle name:

Speaking Evil

2009-06-05T10:21:00.000-07:00

James 4:11-12 Do not speak evil against one another, brothers. The one who speaks against a brother or judges his brother, speaks evil against the law and judges the law. But if you judge the law, you are not a doer of the law but a judge. There is only one lawgiver and judge, he who is able to save and to destroy. But who are you to judge your neighbor?

Why do Christians find this passage so difficult to obey?

When James speaks of the Law, he is referring to the Law of Liberty (James 1:25), which Paul calls the Law of the Spirit of life (Rom 8:2) and the Law of Christ (1 Cor 9:21, Gal 6:2). That is the law that governs Christians. And the primary command in that Law is to love one another (John 13:34, 1 John 3:11, 1 John 3:23, etc).

When we speak evil of our brother, we are sinning in two ways. First, we are doing harm to one we are supposed to love. Why speak evil "of" our brother, rather than speaking the truth "to" our brother? Second, we are rejecting the Law of Christ, which calls us to treat our brother as we would like to be treated ourselves. In effect we are saying the law of love is just not that important.

It is likely that James was addressing the controversy over whether Jewish rites like holy days and circumcision continued to be binding on Christians. His instruction, then, was to hold our tongues rather than saying critical things to third parties about our brother. James equates speaking evil against a brother with judging him. And he commands that we should leave that up to God.

Albert Barnes says the following on this issue:

Not a few of the harsh judgments which one class of religionists pronounce on others, are in fact judgments on the laws of Christ. We set up our own standards, or our own interpretations, and then we judge others for not complying with them, when in fact they may be acting only as the law of Christianity, properly understood, would allow them to do. They who set up a claim to a right to judge the conduct of others, should be certain that they understand the nature of religion themselves. It may be presumed, unless there is evidence to the contrary, that others are as conscientious as we are; and it may commonly be supposed that they who differ from us have some reason for what they do, and may be desirous of glorifying their Lord and Master, and that they may possibly be right. -- Albert Barnes Commentary

Despite the clear biblical instruction in James and elsewhere, Christians are prone to being critical of those who hold different opinions. Haven't we all heard Christians question the sincerity of other Christians with whom they disagree? Haven't we seen Christians treating other Christians with suspicion and disrespect, because they hold a different interpretation of scripture? Haven't we seen Christians avoiding association with other Christians because their practices are different in some way?

Because we think our brother is wrong about something, we feel justified in ignoring the clear instruction of James. So we speak evil of our brother. It should not be so. Let's resolve not to speak evil of our brothers, and not to give audience to that kind of talk. If we have a different opinion, let's keep that between ourselves and God. Our brothers will stand despite the disagreement, because God is able to make them stand.

Relational Unity

2009-06-01T18:54:00.000-07:00

Here is holy ground; here is the gate of heaven. No such prayer was ever heard before or since. It could only be uttered by the Lord and Savior of men, the mighty Intercessor and Mediator, standing between heaven and earth before his wondering disciples. Even he could pray it only once, in the most momentous crisis of history, in full view of the approaching sacrifice for the sins of the world, which occurred only once, though its effect vibrates through the ages. -B. W. Johnson, The Sunday School Helper

...it is the greatest prayer ever prayed on earth and the greatest prayer recorded anywhere in scripture. John 17 is certainly the "holy of holies" of the gospel record, and we must approach this chapter in a spirit of humility and worship. Warren W. Wiersbe, The Bible Exposition Commentary

The prayer of Jesus at the end of the the Last Supper is a priceless treasure for Christians. In it we learn what was most important to our Savior on the evening before he went to the cross. Necessarily, we also learn what must be most important to us as his disciples.

Jesus prayed asking that his Father protect the disciples so that they might be one. And he prayed for that oneness so that the world might believe the gospel of Jesus. The oneness of the disciples was of surpassing importance to Jesus on this momentous occasion, and therefore it must also be so for his followers.

So, what kind of oneness did Jesus have in mind?

The entire prayer centers around relationships. First, Jesus referred to the relationship he had with the Father before the world began. He defined eternal life as knowing the Father and his Son. He had come to reveal the Father to the disciples, and he had completed that work. He had lived with them and had protected them. Now he was leaving them, and he was concerned for their continued spiritual safety. He wanted them to share his joy. He wanted them to be set apart from the world, for a sanctified relationship with the Father. Indeed, the Lord's prayer was all about relationships.

Then he spoke of those who would believe because of the apostles' message. Jesus wanted us to be one, in the same way as the apostles, and in the same way as the Son and the Father. He has given us glory so that we can be one. That oneness would cause the world to believe. And it would show the world that the Father has loved his followers. It is all about relationship.

Jesus prayed that his followers could be with him. He wants us to share the experience of his glory -- the glory that came through the relationship of love between the Father and the Son. He wants an eternal relationship of oneness.

Jesus knows the Father. He shared that with the disciples, and they came to know of the Father through Jesus. Jesus wants to continue showing us the Father so the Father's love will be in us, and so Jesus himself will be in us.

Every phrase of Christ's prayer was about relationships. He was praying for a relational unity among his followers -- a unity that transcends whatever intellectual differences might appear among us.

It is a sad fact that Christians today are far from being "one." In fact, the lack of oneness among Christians is a primary complaint leveled against Christianity by outsiders. We should not be surprised that this has been the result of our divisions. Jesus told us in advance that we must be one so that the world would believe. All men would know we are his disciples, if we would simply love one another. But our Christian predecessors throughout the ages have chosen to quarrel and divide rather than to hold onto the relational unity. Christians have disagreed on innumerable questions. When they disagreed, more often not they chose to divide, as if that were their only option. They did not find a way to rely on that relational oneness to hold them together.

Far too often, we just follow in the unfortunate footsteps of our forefathers.

The unity for which Jesus prayed is not all about technical points of doctrine. That doesn't mean doctrine is unimportant. But it does mean we should not base our unity on detailed doctrinal agreement. Jesus said not one word in his prayer about the kinds of things that divide believers today: things like instrumental music (or a cappella music...), qualifications for elders, technical points about divorce and remarriage, kitchens, missionary societies, fund raising techniques, buildings, communion cups, or any other such thing. Those matters are not the basis of unity. Instead, we are called to be one because Jesus is one with his Father, and because the Father and the Son have reached out to save us in the most amazing manner. We are called to a relationship as brothers and sisters, since we have been adopted by the same Father.

We should admit that we might be wrong about disputed points. We are not as perfect as we imagine, doctrinally or otherwise. Our misplaced pride in our exegetical abilities has done immense damage to the church. Our unwarranted trust in our own hearts has blinded us to our own lack of objectivity. We've deceived ourselves, and in the process have snuffed out the belief of outsiders. The world does not believe, because we have not been one. That is a huge problem.

I have resolved to be part of the solution and not part of the problem.

It's time we stopped quarreling about all the things we've quarreled about in the past. It's time we held our tongues rather than speaking evil of our brothers. May God help us to do so.

May we be brought to complete unity to let the world know that God sent Jesus and that God loves us even as He has loved his Son. Amen!

Looking Back: Propositions or Laws?

2009-05-20T10:37:00.000-07:00

Thomas Campbell anticipated that the intention of the thirteen propositions might be misconstrued. So in introducing them he wrote:

"Let none imagine that the subjoined propositions are at all intended as an overture towards a new creed, or standard, for the church; or, as in any wise designed to be made a term of communion;–nothing can be farther from our intention."

This clarification applied to all of the thirteen propositions, but in particular to this portion of proposition 11:

Lastly, that in all their administrations they keep close by the observance of all divine ordinances, after the example of the primitive church, exhibited in the New Testament; without any additions whatsoever of human opinions or inventions of men.

Thomas Campbell did not intend for that principle to become "a new creed, or standard, for the church" nor "a term of communion." For several decades the Reformation Movement followed Campbell's intent by not drawing lines of fellowship over these types of disagreements. But sometime around the middle of the 1800's that changed dramatically. And by 1889, battle lines were drawn, and a new, less noble document was written. In the Sand Creek Address and Declaration, Daniel Sommer wrote:

And now, in closing up this address and declaration, we state that we are impelled from a sense of duty to say, that all such as are guilty of teaching, or allowing and practicing the many innovations to which we have referred, that after being admonished and having had sufficient time for reflection, if they do not turn away from such abominations, that we can not and will not regard them as brethren.

Clearly Sommer's Sand Creek Address and Declaration was a reversal of Campbell's Declaration and Address. And the result of that reversal has been more than a century of increasing division in the church.

I think Thomas Campbell had this one right.

Looking Back: Three Great Evils

2009-05-16T10:28:00.000-07:00

Following the propositions, the Address continues for more than thirty pages, explaining the motives of the Association and anticipating objections. Amidst all that, Campbell lists three great evils that had fallen upon the church, which the Association would attempt to correct:

The three evils were:

First, to determine expressly, in the name of the Lord, when the Lord has not expressly determined, appears to us a very great evil.

A subtle twisting of this reverses its intent. Campbell was certainly not advocating the Regulative Principle, the prohibitive nature of silence! And as the following assures us, he was not advocating lines of fellowship over honest disagreements:

A second evil is, not only judging our brother to be absolutely wrong, because he differs from our opinions; but, more especially, our judging him to be a transgressor of the law in so doing: and of course treating him as such, by censuring, or otherwise exposing him to contempt; or, at least, preferring ourselves before him in our own judgment; saying, as it were, stand by, I am holier than thou.

Thirdly, he absolutely was not advocating putting people out of the church for their differing views on various matters:

A third and still more dreadful evil is, when we not only, in this kind of way, judge and set at nought our brother; but, moreover, proceed as a church, acting and judging in the name of Christ; not only to determine that our brother is wrong, because he differs from our determinations: but also in connexion with this, proceed so far as to determine the merits of the cause by rejecting him, or casting him out of the church, as unworthy of a place in her communion;--and thus, as far as in our power, cutting him off from the kingdom of heaven.

Perhaps the movement would have fared better if these principles had not been buried in the last 30 pages of the lengthy address!

Looking Back: The Address

2009-05-16T10:16:00.000-07:00

Having established the Association, the document turns immediately to the Address, in which a more complete explanation of their motives and goals is presented.

Campbell's address opens with a lament of the evils of division, and the imperative to work for remedy. He particularly reminds readers of the responsibility of Christian leaders to work for unity. And he points out the increased responsibility of those who enjoy the freedom of religion available in America. Nowhere in the world is there a greater opportunity to remedy the division of believers. To whom much is given, much will be required.

He reasons that our divisions are not over "great doctrines of faith and holiness", but over the opinions and inventions of men. He appeals to us to give those things up "that our breaches might thus be healed."

Then he announces his invitation to all believers:

"To this we call, we invite, our brethren, of all denominations"

He reminds the reader of the goal, and urges believers to take action:

"Are we not all praying for that happy event, when there shall be but one fold, as there is but one chief shepherd. What! shall we pray for a thing, and not strive to obtain it!!"

In summary, he writes:

"Oh! that ministers and people would but consider, that there are no divisions in the grave; nor in that world which lies beyond it: there our divisions must come to an end! we must all unite there!-- Would to God, we could find in our hearts to put an end to our short-lived divisions here; that so we might leave a blessing behind us; even a happy and united church. What gratification, what utility, in the meantime, can our divisions afford either to ministers or people? Should they be perpetuated, 'till the day of judgment, would they convert one sinner from the error of his ways, or save a soul from death? Have they any tendency to hide the multitude of sins that are so dishonorable to God, and hurtful to his people? Do they not rather irritate and produce them? How innumerable and highly aggravated are the sins they have produced, and are at this day, producing, both amongst professors and profane."

Then he introduces the centerpiece of the document, the famous set of thirteen propositions for unity. On these propositions he hoped to initiate a new unity among all believers.

"As the first fruits of our efforts for this blessed purpose we respectfully present to their consideration the following propositions..."

Campbell anticipated the potential for the intention of these propositions to be misconstrued. So he wrote:

"Let none imagine that the subjoined propositions are at all intended as an overture towards a new creed, or standard, for the church; or, as in any wise designed to be made a term of communion;–nothing can be farther from our intention."

I have previously commented on the thirteen propositions which followed, so I refer readers to those articles. Following the thirteen propositions, as the address continues, Campbell made it perfectly clear that he was not trying to dictate terms to all believers. Instead he was trying to start a dialogue that would lead to unity.

"From the nature and construction of these propositions, it will evidently appear, that they are laid in a designed subserviency to the declared end of our association... It remains with our brethren, now to say, how far they go towards answering this intention.... If evidently defective in either of these respects, let them be corrected and amended, till they become sufficiently evident, adequate, and unexceptionable. In the mean time let them be examined with rigor..."

It is a shame that his proposals have been misappropriated by others to divide rather than to unite. Maybe by re-examining them we can correct our course and accomplish the godly purposes for which they were originally written.