I know “Independent” is largely how our English forefathers were known, but I’m more of a New England Congregationalist. I’ll appeal to one of our early documents, the Cambridge Platform, “the definitive statement of church order and discipline produced by the Congregationalists of colonial New England” (Historic Documents of Congregationalism 83). “The term independent, we approve not” (2.5). “One point the authors of the Cambridge Platform (1649) were concerned to make was that though they were Congregational, they did not support an extreme independency” (HDC 83-84). Checkout what the Cambridge had to say on Synods, the main point of difference between us and Presbyterians: “The Synod’s directions and determinations, so far as consonant to the Word of God, are to be received with reverence and submission; not only for their agreement therewith, (which is the principal ground thereof, and without which they bind not at all), but also, secondarily, for the power whereby they are made, as being an ordinance of God appointed thereunto in His Word” (16.5). As long as the final authority in the local Congregation is Christ mediated through the local elders, we are far from independent. “Indeed many of the statements in the deleted Westminster Chapter 30 are affirmed in the Saybrook Heads of Agreement (1708) and certainly by actual practice in early American colonies. . . . The Key issue for the Congregationalists was the freedom of the local church, as opposed to the synod as a collected body, to set its own ‘rules and directions’” (HDC 7). In the Heads of Agreement 4.1, drawn up in 1691 and accepted in Saybrook in 1708, we read “We agree, that particular churches ought not to walk so distinct and separate from each other, as not to have care and tenderness towards one another. But their pastors ought to have frequent meetings together, that by mutual advice, support, encouragement, and brotherly intercourse, they may strengthen the hearts and hands of each other in the ways of the Lord.” I’m sticking with the authors of the Cambridge Platform in not approving the term “independent.”
Tuesday, August 23, 2011
Friday, July 29, 2011
Idolatry vs True Religion
In idolatry we love something other than God with the love only He deserves, but it is rarely the idol that we love, it is ourselves. We only serve these man-made gods as we perceive it to benefit us. When we love God we will praise Him though He slay us for He is worthy of all praise and honor. We serve idols for what we get out of it, not because we think they deserve it, not because we find in them the greatest good and beauty. We find our greatest good not in the idol but in ourselves, in our own comfort and pleasure. We either worship God or ourselves.
Monday, February 14, 2011
"I believe that the only form of authentic Christian preaching is expository preaching." -- Al Mohler
I have a bunch of quotes here about preaching that I need to have in one place and I don't want to lose them. Here goes:
“No better portrait of expository preaching could be found than in Nehemiah 8:8. After the people gather at the Water Gate and demand that 'the book' be brought forward, the text says of Ezra and his fellow scribes that 'they read from the book, from the law of God, clearly, and they gave the sense, so that the people understood the reading.' 'Giving the sense' is not merely the act of translating from one language to another. It has to do with explaining a text, breaking it down, and making its meaning clear to the congregation. Essentially, this is what it means to preach. The heart and soul of expository preaching--of any true Christian preaching--is reading the Word of God and then explaining it to the people so that they understand it.”–Al Mohler, He Is Not Silent
“First there will be careful exposition of God's truth, so that hearers clearly understand what God says, and then there will be an appeal to men and women's wills to respond with reasonable obedience. . . . If we are to expound the whole will of God, we must know His will in detail, and that can be achieved only by a grasp of the whole of Scripture. Admittedly, it is a lifetime assignment, but that provides no excuse for laziness. We should beware of preaching only from passages of Scripture with which we are already familiar. It is easy to neglect the Old Testament, since we tend to be more familiar with the New. But we need the instruction, encouragement, and comfort of all the Scriptures, and if shepherds and teachers do not lead God's people into the pastures of the Old as well as the New, the sheep are unlikely to lead themselves into them. To bring our people into fresh pastures we must continually break new ground.”–Derek Prime, On Being a Pastor
“So what we find in groups where Greek and Hebrew are not cherished and pursued and promoted is that expository preaching--which devotes a good bit of the sermon to explaining the meaning of the text--is not much esteemed by the preachers or taught in the seminaries.”–John Piper, Brothers, We Are Not Professionals
“Expository preaching is the communication of a biblical concept, derived from and transmitted through a historical, grammatical, and literary study of a passage in its context, which the Holy Spirit first applies to the personality and experience of the preacher, then through the preacher, applies to the hearers.”
“Expository preaching at its core is more a philosophy than a method. Whether or not we can be called expositors starts with our purpose and with our honest answer to the question: ‘Do you, as a preacher, endeavor to bend your thought to the Scriptures, or do you use the Scriptures to support your thought?’ This is not the same question as, ‘Is what you are preaching orthodox or evangelical?’ Nor is it the same as, ‘Do you hold a high view of the Bible or believe it to be the infallible Word of God?’ As important as these questions may appear in other circumstances, a passing grade in systematic theology does not qualify a person as an expositor of the Bible.”–Haddon Robinson, Biblical Preaching
“On the Sunday after his return Calvin mounted the pulpit in St. Peter's and began with the very chapter and verse of the Bible where he had left off preaching three years earlier . . . ‘Nothing could have been less dramatic or more effective. . . . In this way Calvin signaled that he intended his life and his theology to be, not a device of his own making, but a responsible witness to the Word of God” (George quoted by Lindberg in The European Reformations).
“No better portrait of expository preaching could be found than in Nehemiah 8:8. After the people gather at the Water Gate and demand that 'the book' be brought forward, the text says of Ezra and his fellow scribes that 'they read from the book, from the law of God, clearly, and they gave the sense, so that the people understood the reading.' 'Giving the sense' is not merely the act of translating from one language to another. It has to do with explaining a text, breaking it down, and making its meaning clear to the congregation. Essentially, this is what it means to preach. The heart and soul of expository preaching--of any true Christian preaching--is reading the Word of God and then explaining it to the people so that they understand it.”–Al Mohler, He Is Not Silent
“First there will be careful exposition of God's truth, so that hearers clearly understand what God says, and then there will be an appeal to men and women's wills to respond with reasonable obedience. . . . If we are to expound the whole will of God, we must know His will in detail, and that can be achieved only by a grasp of the whole of Scripture. Admittedly, it is a lifetime assignment, but that provides no excuse for laziness. We should beware of preaching only from passages of Scripture with which we are already familiar. It is easy to neglect the Old Testament, since we tend to be more familiar with the New. But we need the instruction, encouragement, and comfort of all the Scriptures, and if shepherds and teachers do not lead God's people into the pastures of the Old as well as the New, the sheep are unlikely to lead themselves into them. To bring our people into fresh pastures we must continually break new ground.”–Derek Prime, On Being a Pastor
“So what we find in groups where Greek and Hebrew are not cherished and pursued and promoted is that expository preaching--which devotes a good bit of the sermon to explaining the meaning of the text--is not much esteemed by the preachers or taught in the seminaries.”–John Piper, Brothers, We Are Not Professionals
“Expository preaching is the communication of a biblical concept, derived from and transmitted through a historical, grammatical, and literary study of a passage in its context, which the Holy Spirit first applies to the personality and experience of the preacher, then through the preacher, applies to the hearers.”
“Expository preaching at its core is more a philosophy than a method. Whether or not we can be called expositors starts with our purpose and with our honest answer to the question: ‘Do you, as a preacher, endeavor to bend your thought to the Scriptures, or do you use the Scriptures to support your thought?’ This is not the same question as, ‘Is what you are preaching orthodox or evangelical?’ Nor is it the same as, ‘Do you hold a high view of the Bible or believe it to be the infallible Word of God?’ As important as these questions may appear in other circumstances, a passing grade in systematic theology does not qualify a person as an expositor of the Bible.”–Haddon Robinson, Biblical Preaching
“On the Sunday after his return Calvin mounted the pulpit in St. Peter's and began with the very chapter and verse of the Bible where he had left off preaching three years earlier . . . ‘Nothing could have been less dramatic or more effective. . . . In this way Calvin signaled that he intended his life and his theology to be, not a device of his own making, but a responsible witness to the Word of God” (George quoted by Lindberg in The European Reformations).
Thursday, January 20, 2011
Somethings Edwards Taught Me About Heaven
First we must start with some basic presuppositions. We don’t have the space here to defend these so much, but they are things you will no doubt readily agree with. Heaven was created to be a place of eternal happiness, joy, and blessedness (all of which is basically the same). It is a place for the worship of God and the magnifying of His glory. He is our greatest treasure and in Him do we find our greatest joy and satisfaction, and He is most glorified in our enjoyment and treasuring of Him. So in His presence, in heaven are joys and pleasures forevermore, and He wipes away every tear signifying that there is no unhappiness or grief.
One other point that may require a little explanation is that we can expect to recognize each other at the judgement and in the eternal state. Some evidence to consider in this regard would be Paul’s consolation to the saints in Thessalonica (1 Thess. 4:13-18). Paul’s consolation to these Christians that lost friends is that they will meet again. For this to be a comfort it seems they must be able to recognize one another. Jesus’ teaching concerning the rich man and Lazarus would also seem to indicate that individuals will recognize one another after death and that they will be aware of each other’s state, whether of blessedness or corruption.
With this in mind Edwards concludes that the condemnation, judgement, and wrath that fall upon the reprobate will not be a sorrow to believers, but will actually increase their joy. In this world we sorrow over the lost, those we know and love and even those we don’t know. This is appropriate, because or mission here is evangelism, and while men yet live there is the hope that they would turn to Christ. Yet in the world to come that chance is gone. The reprobate no longer will enjoy the patience and mercy of God, but they will experience His full wrath and nothing but. Such is the demand of the righteous justice of a holy God. In heaven we will only love what God loves and we will hate what God hates.
I’d love to keep going and develop this further but you’re running out of time.
Edwards warns the lost saying, “Perhaps there are now some godly people, to whom you are near and dear, who are tenderly concerned for you, are ready to pity you under all calamities, and willing to help you; and particularly concerned for your poor soul, and have put up many fervent prayers for you. How will you bear to hear these singing for joy of heart, while you are crying for sorrow of heart, and howling for vexation of spirit, and even singing the more joyful for the glorious justice of God which they behold in your eternal condemnation? “You that have godly parents, who in this world have tenderly loved you, who were wont to look upon your welfare as their own, and were wont to be grieved for you when any thing calamitous befell you in this world, and especially were greatly concerned for the good of your souls, industriously sought, and earnestly prayed for their salvation; how will you bear to see them in the kingdom of God, crowned with glory? Or how will you bear to see them receiving the blessed sentence, and going up with shouts and songs, to enter with Christ into the kingdom prepared for them from the foundation of the world, while you are amongst a company of devils, and are turned away with the most bitter cries, to enter into everlasting burnings, prepared for the devil and his angels? . . . How will you bear to see and hear them praising the Judge, for His justice exercised in pronouncing this sentence, and hearing it with holy joy in their countenances, and shouting forth the praises and hallelujahs of God and Christ on that account?”
Edwards writes in another place, “All natural affections, so far as found in animal nature or the infirmity of the present state, will cease in another world; and with respect to any affection that the godly have had to the finally reprobate, the love of God will wholly swallow it up, and cause it wholly to cease.”
So here is a mystery to our finite minds, that we could be so blessed in God’s presence that not only will we not grieve over the lost, even our loved ones, even if they be our own children, but that we would in fact rejoice it there condemnation, praise God for it, and be more happy for it. I confess that this is a mystery to man’s mind, how this could be so. Edwards explains that it is so because God’s infinite love swallows it up, but even still how this could be so, I don’t think we can understand, but we can understand that it is so. And if this is so, then how glorious heaven must be! It truly is beyond any imagining or conception of men. This is an amazing doctrine, a man humbling, and God honoring and glorifying doctrine. God is far beyond our comprehension. He is wonderful and terrible, and worthy of all our affection and praise. And apart from seeing Him this way, can we really say we honor Him aright? Do we know Him as He is? We never fully will, but as we grow in this grace these are the wonderful and terrifying things we will discover and relish.
One other point that may require a little explanation is that we can expect to recognize each other at the judgement and in the eternal state. Some evidence to consider in this regard would be Paul’s consolation to the saints in Thessalonica (1 Thess. 4:13-18). Paul’s consolation to these Christians that lost friends is that they will meet again. For this to be a comfort it seems they must be able to recognize one another. Jesus’ teaching concerning the rich man and Lazarus would also seem to indicate that individuals will recognize one another after death and that they will be aware of each other’s state, whether of blessedness or corruption.
With this in mind Edwards concludes that the condemnation, judgement, and wrath that fall upon the reprobate will not be a sorrow to believers, but will actually increase their joy. In this world we sorrow over the lost, those we know and love and even those we don’t know. This is appropriate, because or mission here is evangelism, and while men yet live there is the hope that they would turn to Christ. Yet in the world to come that chance is gone. The reprobate no longer will enjoy the patience and mercy of God, but they will experience His full wrath and nothing but. Such is the demand of the righteous justice of a holy God. In heaven we will only love what God loves and we will hate what God hates.
I’d love to keep going and develop this further but you’re running out of time.
Edwards warns the lost saying, “Perhaps there are now some godly people, to whom you are near and dear, who are tenderly concerned for you, are ready to pity you under all calamities, and willing to help you; and particularly concerned for your poor soul, and have put up many fervent prayers for you. How will you bear to hear these singing for joy of heart, while you are crying for sorrow of heart, and howling for vexation of spirit, and even singing the more joyful for the glorious justice of God which they behold in your eternal condemnation? “You that have godly parents, who in this world have tenderly loved you, who were wont to look upon your welfare as their own, and were wont to be grieved for you when any thing calamitous befell you in this world, and especially were greatly concerned for the good of your souls, industriously sought, and earnestly prayed for their salvation; how will you bear to see them in the kingdom of God, crowned with glory? Or how will you bear to see them receiving the blessed sentence, and going up with shouts and songs, to enter with Christ into the kingdom prepared for them from the foundation of the world, while you are amongst a company of devils, and are turned away with the most bitter cries, to enter into everlasting burnings, prepared for the devil and his angels? . . . How will you bear to see and hear them praising the Judge, for His justice exercised in pronouncing this sentence, and hearing it with holy joy in their countenances, and shouting forth the praises and hallelujahs of God and Christ on that account?”
Edwards writes in another place, “All natural affections, so far as found in animal nature or the infirmity of the present state, will cease in another world; and with respect to any affection that the godly have had to the finally reprobate, the love of God will wholly swallow it up, and cause it wholly to cease.”
So here is a mystery to our finite minds, that we could be so blessed in God’s presence that not only will we not grieve over the lost, even our loved ones, even if they be our own children, but that we would in fact rejoice it there condemnation, praise God for it, and be more happy for it. I confess that this is a mystery to man’s mind, how this could be so. Edwards explains that it is so because God’s infinite love swallows it up, but even still how this could be so, I don’t think we can understand, but we can understand that it is so. And if this is so, then how glorious heaven must be! It truly is beyond any imagining or conception of men. This is an amazing doctrine, a man humbling, and God honoring and glorifying doctrine. God is far beyond our comprehension. He is wonderful and terrible, and worthy of all our affection and praise. And apart from seeing Him this way, can we really say we honor Him aright? Do we know Him as He is? We never fully will, but as we grow in this grace these are the wonderful and terrifying things we will discover and relish.
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
Who's Your Valentine
The month of February is always adorned with hearts (paper hearts, hearts on balloons, heart shaped boxes full of chocolate) and the colors of white, red, and pink. The location of Valentine’s Day on February 14th, the holiday commercialism has given the greatest prominence to among those celebrated in the month, makes us think of romantic love when we think of February. Originally the day was associated with two early Christian martyrs by the name Valentine from the 3rd century. It had no association with romantic love until the 14th century, and even then it wasn’t until the 1800’s in England when it began to take on a form familiar to what is celebrated by most today, with the exchanging of letters, poems, or cards, i.e. “valentines.” But since it has us thinking about the topic of love, let us continue. However, I want us to think about a different love. Rather than the romantic love, cheapened as it is by our culture, I want us to think about a loyal, steadfast love, the love our Creator has for His people.
Many of you are now anticipating a discussion of the Greek verb agapao (or its cognate agape), which so many writers have invested with special meaning as the unconditional love of God. This is opposed to another Greek verb for “to love,” phileo. But D. A. Carson has already shown in his book Exegetical Fallacies the errors of such distinctions. He adds the following footnote that is helpful for our purpose here, "Perhaps I should add that I am not suggesting there is nothing distinctive about God’s love. The Scriptures insist there is. But the content of God’s love is not connected on a one-to-one basis with the semantic range of any single word or word group. What the Bible has to say about the love of God is conveyed by sentences, paragraphs, discourses, and so forth; that is by larger semantic units than the word" (53).
Having received Carson’s wise hermeneutical counsel let us see what we can learn about God’s love for His people by studying that love described by the Hebrew noun hesed in the context of Psalm 103. Hesed occurs 246 times in the Old Testament, over half of which are found in the Psalms (NIDOT Vol II 211). It is used 4 times in Ps 103 and we learn at least 4 things about the lovingkindness of God here.
Ps 103 expresses praise for the benefits, the blessings of God. The first paragraph, vv. 1-5, focuses on God’s benefits for the individual. All those who can say with David “Bless the Lord, O my soul, and all that is with in me, bless His holy name, bless the Lord O my soul, and forget none of His benefits,” those who have put their faith in Him, have received the benefits enumerated in the next three verses. One of which introduces us to our word hesed, “lovingkindness.” Verse 4 tells us that we are crowned by God with His lovingkindness. The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon (BDB) informs us that the basic meaning of the word is “goodness, kindness” (338-339). When you survey its occurrences differences emerge when it is used of men or of God. When used of people it can refer to favors shown to another, a kindness. It can be used especially of a kindness shown to those who are lowly. Rarely will it describe a person’s affection for God, or of something’s lovely appearance. When used of God, as it is all four times in Ps 103, it refers to God’s “lovingkindness in condescending to the needs of his creatures.” It is used of God’s lovingkindness; “in redemption from enemies or troubles,” “in preservation of life from death,” “in quickening of spiritual life,” “in redemption from sin,” and “in keeping the covenants.” It is also sometimes “grouped with other divine attributes,” and that is what we find here in v.4, “Who crowns you with lovingkindness and compassion.” We also can see here the lovingkindness of God as redeeming us from trouble, if not actually preserving us from death, since VanGemeren (Expositor’s Vol. 5 652) and Calvin (127) see the lovingkindness and compassion (v. 4b) as the means by which we are redeemed from the pit (v. 4a).
The next three uses in Ps 103 teach us more about the lovingkindness of God. First it is abundant. Verse 8 says, “The Lord is compassionate and gracious, slow to anger and abounding in loving kindness.” In this, the second section of the psalm (vv. 6-14), David has moved from the benefits to the individual to the benefits received by the community of God’s people. Second, also in this section we learn that not only is God’s hesed abundant, it is also great in its extent (“extent” is BDB’s word, but “degree” seems a better description here). Verse 11 says, “For as high as the heavens are above the earth, so great is His lovingkindness toward those who fear Him.” Calvin says of this verse that, “The form of expression is equivalent to saying that God’s mercy towards us is infinite” (135). The third quality of God’s hesed is found in its use in the third section of the psalm, in v. 17, “But the lovingkindness of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting on those who fear Him.” God’s hesed for His people is abundant, great, and everlasting, it will never run out.
There is a forth quality of God’s hesed we see manifest in Ps 103 (explicitly in the last two uses, though evident from the context in all four) which we learn from the objects of His hesed. In v. 11 it is said that His hesed is “toward those who fear Him,” and in v. 17 it is “on those who fear Him.” VanGemeren says, “The love of God is not indiscriminate. He loves those ‘who fear Him’” (Expositor’s Vol 5 654). The Hebrew word here translated “fear” is yare. The basic meaning is “fear,” but the semantic range goes from terror, to “standing in awe of,” and in its three uses here in Ps 103 (vv. 11, 13, and 17) it is translated by “fear, reverence, or honor” (BDB 431). It is “clear from the cultic context of the Psalms that this use of fear is more closely associated with worship than terror. It is recorded [of those who “fear” God] that they praise, glorify, and stand in awe of YaHWeH” (NIDOT Vol. II 531). Only those who reverence, worship, praise, and glorify God, will receive His lovingkindness. When we learn to value God supremely, we will enjoy His hesed.
As this month reminds us of love, let us remember how God loves, how He loves each one of us, and let us endeavor to show that kind of love to one another.
Many of you are now anticipating a discussion of the Greek verb agapao (or its cognate agape), which so many writers have invested with special meaning as the unconditional love of God. This is opposed to another Greek verb for “to love,” phileo. But D. A. Carson has already shown in his book Exegetical Fallacies the errors of such distinctions. He adds the following footnote that is helpful for our purpose here, "Perhaps I should add that I am not suggesting there is nothing distinctive about God’s love. The Scriptures insist there is. But the content of God’s love is not connected on a one-to-one basis with the semantic range of any single word or word group. What the Bible has to say about the love of God is conveyed by sentences, paragraphs, discourses, and so forth; that is by larger semantic units than the word" (53).
Having received Carson’s wise hermeneutical counsel let us see what we can learn about God’s love for His people by studying that love described by the Hebrew noun hesed in the context of Psalm 103. Hesed occurs 246 times in the Old Testament, over half of which are found in the Psalms (NIDOT Vol II 211). It is used 4 times in Ps 103 and we learn at least 4 things about the lovingkindness of God here.
Ps 103 expresses praise for the benefits, the blessings of God. The first paragraph, vv. 1-5, focuses on God’s benefits for the individual. All those who can say with David “Bless the Lord, O my soul, and all that is with in me, bless His holy name, bless the Lord O my soul, and forget none of His benefits,” those who have put their faith in Him, have received the benefits enumerated in the next three verses. One of which introduces us to our word hesed, “lovingkindness.” Verse 4 tells us that we are crowned by God with His lovingkindness. The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon (BDB) informs us that the basic meaning of the word is “goodness, kindness” (338-339). When you survey its occurrences differences emerge when it is used of men or of God. When used of people it can refer to favors shown to another, a kindness. It can be used especially of a kindness shown to those who are lowly. Rarely will it describe a person’s affection for God, or of something’s lovely appearance. When used of God, as it is all four times in Ps 103, it refers to God’s “lovingkindness in condescending to the needs of his creatures.” It is used of God’s lovingkindness; “in redemption from enemies or troubles,” “in preservation of life from death,” “in quickening of spiritual life,” “in redemption from sin,” and “in keeping the covenants.” It is also sometimes “grouped with other divine attributes,” and that is what we find here in v.4, “Who crowns you with lovingkindness and compassion.” We also can see here the lovingkindness of God as redeeming us from trouble, if not actually preserving us from death, since VanGemeren (Expositor’s Vol. 5 652) and Calvin (127) see the lovingkindness and compassion (v. 4b) as the means by which we are redeemed from the pit (v. 4a).
The next three uses in Ps 103 teach us more about the lovingkindness of God. First it is abundant. Verse 8 says, “The Lord is compassionate and gracious, slow to anger and abounding in loving kindness.” In this, the second section of the psalm (vv. 6-14), David has moved from the benefits to the individual to the benefits received by the community of God’s people. Second, also in this section we learn that not only is God’s hesed abundant, it is also great in its extent (“extent” is BDB’s word, but “degree” seems a better description here). Verse 11 says, “For as high as the heavens are above the earth, so great is His lovingkindness toward those who fear Him.” Calvin says of this verse that, “The form of expression is equivalent to saying that God’s mercy towards us is infinite” (135). The third quality of God’s hesed is found in its use in the third section of the psalm, in v. 17, “But the lovingkindness of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting on those who fear Him.” God’s hesed for His people is abundant, great, and everlasting, it will never run out.
There is a forth quality of God’s hesed we see manifest in Ps 103 (explicitly in the last two uses, though evident from the context in all four) which we learn from the objects of His hesed. In v. 11 it is said that His hesed is “toward those who fear Him,” and in v. 17 it is “on those who fear Him.” VanGemeren says, “The love of God is not indiscriminate. He loves those ‘who fear Him’” (Expositor’s Vol 5 654). The Hebrew word here translated “fear” is yare. The basic meaning is “fear,” but the semantic range goes from terror, to “standing in awe of,” and in its three uses here in Ps 103 (vv. 11, 13, and 17) it is translated by “fear, reverence, or honor” (BDB 431). It is “clear from the cultic context of the Psalms that this use of fear is more closely associated with worship than terror. It is recorded [of those who “fear” God] that they praise, glorify, and stand in awe of YaHWeH” (NIDOT Vol. II 531). Only those who reverence, worship, praise, and glorify God, will receive His lovingkindness. When we learn to value God supremely, we will enjoy His hesed.
As this month reminds us of love, let us remember how God loves, how He loves each one of us, and let us endeavor to show that kind of love to one another.
Monday, March 16, 2009
Fertility Clinics and the Christian
I'm going to kind of shoot from the hip tonight. It is not that I haven't given this topic much thought, I'm just not going to prepare such a formal post as usual. I'm just going to share something that's on my mind, and I hope you will let me know what you think.
I find it odd, and an oversight, that so many people who are against abortion and embryonic stem cell research, based on the conviction that life begins at conception (a conviction I share), are OK with, and even quite supportive of in vitro fertilization. The procedure creates more fertilized eggs than are implanted, it creates more people than are given a chance at life. Thus it basically insures the death of many individuals.
It seems to me that most people who resort to fertility clinics are those who have put careers and other personal interests, other worldly pursuits before family, until they are beyond normal child-bearing years. They then expend huge resources trying to get pregnant while there are children in need of adoption, and putting at risk their health and the health of the child they are trying to conceive at their old age. This too seems to be the result of a selfish and worldly desire to want what they want, a child biologically their own.
I'm making generalizations that certainly do not describe everyone seeking the help of fertility clinics, nor every situation in which one would seek their help. I do think, however, that it describes much of what goes on and is worth thinking about. I realize that this issue will hit close to home for some, and my intent is not to cause harm or offense, but to get us all thinking consistently and Biblically about all of life and about all of our decisions. If there is a valid point here I do not seek to condemn anyone with it, but to encourage right living from here on out.
I find it odd, and an oversight, that so many people who are against abortion and embryonic stem cell research, based on the conviction that life begins at conception (a conviction I share), are OK with, and even quite supportive of in vitro fertilization. The procedure creates more fertilized eggs than are implanted, it creates more people than are given a chance at life. Thus it basically insures the death of many individuals.
It seems to me that most people who resort to fertility clinics are those who have put careers and other personal interests, other worldly pursuits before family, until they are beyond normal child-bearing years. They then expend huge resources trying to get pregnant while there are children in need of adoption, and putting at risk their health and the health of the child they are trying to conceive at their old age. This too seems to be the result of a selfish and worldly desire to want what they want, a child biologically their own.
I'm making generalizations that certainly do not describe everyone seeking the help of fertility clinics, nor every situation in which one would seek their help. I do think, however, that it describes much of what goes on and is worth thinking about. I realize that this issue will hit close to home for some, and my intent is not to cause harm or offense, but to get us all thinking consistently and Biblically about all of life and about all of our decisions. If there is a valid point here I do not seek to condemn anyone with it, but to encourage right living from here on out.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
God Hates Sin But Not The Sinner?
And another thing... This is related to the issue of God's wrath. You’ve heard the cliche, "God loves the sinner, but hates the sin." And of course this is accompanied by the implications that so must we hate sin but love sinners. There is some truth to this, understood in a certain way. God does demonstrate His love toward us while we were sinners as Romans 5:8 says. On our part we should manifest love toward others as the fruit of the Spirit, and we are to do what we can to live in peace with all people (Galatians 5:22; Romans 12:18). Certainly by showing love to the unlovely (as God does) people are won to the kingdom. But, on the face of it, the cliche we are considering does not ring true. Consider Psalm 5:5, in which David says of God, "You hate all who do iniquity." Here it does not say that God hates sin, but that He hates the one who sins. D.A. Carson, in The Difficult Doctrine Of The Love Of God, a book I’ve recommended before, says, "Fourteen times in the first fifty psalms alone, we are told that God hates the sinner, his wrath is on the liar, and so forth. In the Bible, the wrath of God rests both on sin (Romans 1:18ff) and the sinner (John 3:36)" (69). I think this notion that God hates sin but not the sinner minmizes the seriousness of sin. People think that sin is no big deal because God is love and He will forgive. To realize that God hates sin and the one who sins should open our eyes a fresh to the deadly seriousness of sin and demand that we pursue holiness.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
