The Irony and Tragedy of Sin

Why is it that people can become emotionally and morally indignant over poverty and exploitation and prejudice and abortion and the infractions of religious liberty and the manifold injustices of man against man, and yet feel little, or no, remorse or indignation or outrage that God is disregarded, disbelieved, disobeyed, dishonored, and thus belittled, by millions and millions of people in the world? And the answer is: sin. And that is the ultimate outrage of the universe. -  From "What is Sin" by John Piper

How a Deep Theology Leads to Deep Worship

This is from a talk John Piper gave at his 2015 pastor's conference.  Without getting technical he was talking about a book arguing against the New Perspective on Paul (a new view of justification) and how it impacted him.  It is a great example of how deep theology leads to deep worship.

[Paul’s] depiction of humanity’s condition required a much more rigorous dependence on divine grace than did Judaism’s. . . . It is no caricature of Judaism to say, with Sanders, that it lacked a doctrine of the “essential sinfulness” of humankind; no Jew would regard that claim as an insult. For Paul, on the other hand, it is precisely the “essential sinfulness” of humankind that requires a salvation based on grace alone, apart from [all] human “works.” (34)

I recall pausing, as I read, and asking myself, “Do I know my condition? Do I know what he means by my essential sinfulness. Do I have a grasp of what it is about me that requires the death of the God-man for me to be saved? Do I have any suitable notion of my own evil?” This is somehow proportionate to what it cost to save me?

That’s where this conference came from. And just to complete the illustration. Therefore, the old perspective on Paul, clarified and heralded in the Reformation, is not fundamentally mistaken. Yes, there is grace in Judaism — atonement, repentance, forgiveness — but no this did not rule out for them the mingling of good works with grace as the basis of a right standing with God. One thing rules that out: we are so sinful, we can’t contribute any good works to the basis of God’s acceptance of us. There are no good works anywhere in unregenerate humanity, there never have been, ever since the fall of Adam and Eve into sin. That’s how bad it is. I defend that statement shortly.

And at that point last summer, I felt a weight both personally and doctrinally. Doctrinally, it became clear that, if I didn’t see the true nature and depth and power and extent of sin not only would I distort the doctrine of justification, but I would distort almost everything: what happened when Christ died for sin? What happens in conversion — new birth and faith and repentance? How do sanctification and perseverance in faith and holiness come about? What will heaven be like? Will I be safe from sinning there?

And personally, I felt: Do I know the nature of my own sin? Do have a proper sense of the power and depth and evil of what I am dealing with in what Paul calls “indwelling sin” in believers? Do I have a kind of love to Christ and thankfulness for grace that corresponds to the horrors of what I was rescued from and to the price the most beautiful and innocent person paid for that rescue?

Justification Relies Solely on Grace.

I testify again to every man who accepts circumcision that he is obligated to keep the whole law. 4 You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace. (Galatians 5:3–4)

One baby step of reliance on law-keeping undoes everything. If you rely on one single act of your own to be the basis of your right standing with God, you have fallen away from the God’s gracious way of declaring you righteous. - John Piper

23 Declarations I’ll Make If Trump or Clinton Is Elected

Found this post from Marvin Williams on a former professors FB page.  A must read for anyone who follows Christ!

Trump anxiety. Is it real? Psychologists and massage therapists believe it is real. They are seeing more and more of their clients stressing over the rise of Donald Trump. People are fearful, nervous, and panicky about the possibility of Donald Trump becoming president of the United States, and I don’t blame them.

His rhetoric is divisive, abusive, exclusive, and the most disturbing of all, it’s popular. I have to admit, it frightens me to think that Trump could become the leader of the most powerful nation in the world (It scares me just as much if Clinton becomes president, and these could declarations can be applied to her as well).

I know this fear is not healthy for me, and that is the reason I have decided to do something about these feelings. Instead of panicking and becoming nervous over the possibility of Trump or Clinton becoming president, I have decided to make some simple, but powerful biblical declarations. I invite you to join me.

1.    I will trust that God reigns. Psalm 93

2.    I will believe God rules over the nations, and he gives authority to whom he chooses. Daniel 4:32

3.    I will embrace that no one can stop God. Daniel 4:35

4.    I will be still and know that God is God. Psalm 46:10

5.    I will not fear, but I will place my hope in God alone (not the government). Psalm 131:3

6.    I will remember God determines a ruler’s authority and boundary. Acts 17:26

7.    I will remember God has placed him/her there. Romans 13:1

8.    I will trust that the Lord’s purposes will prevail. Proverbs 19:21

9.    I will refuse to be anxious. Philippians 4:6

10.I will turn my stress into prayer requests. Philippians 4:6

11.I will intercede for him/her. 1 Timothy 2:1-2

12.I will pray and work for the peace of our country. Jeremiah 29:7

13.I will submit to his/her leadership, as long as his/her demands don’t conflict with God’s law. Titus 3:1; 1 Peter 2:13

14.I will obey his/her leadership, as long as his/her demands don’t conflict with God’s law. Titus 3:1

15.I will be ready to do good. Titus 3:1

16.I will remember we are not fighting against flesh and blood. Ephesians 6:12

17.I will cry out to the Lord. Psalm 72:12-14

18.I will believe God directs the heart of political authorities. Proverbs 21:1

19.I will not panic if I don’t fully understand God’s plan. Proverbs 20:24

20.I will still preach the gospel and work for peace and justice. Psalm 82:3-4

21.I will honor and respect those in authority. Proverbs 24:21; Romans 13:7; 1 Peter 2:17

22.I will use rights and freedoms granted to me by the authority of the Constitution.Acts 16:35-39; 22:22-29

23.I will not move to Canada or the Caribbean (Well, I might go to the Caribbean for a purely selfish reason – It’s warm)

We are not slaves to fear and our ultimate hope is not in a donkey or an elephant but in the Lion from the tribe of Judah. His name is Jesus! Therefore, when we feel panic and fear, let us not lose hope, but remind ourselves of these powerful biblical truths.

Please check out these posts if you want to know more about if Christians should vote or how to determine for whom you should vote.

Turn Your Minutes into Moments

What other declarations can you make?

Which declaration resonates with you the most?

When you feel nervous or fear during this election season, which declaration will you remind yourself of the most?

Caesar Kalinowski on Missional Living

Our church is being intentional about discipleship and developing leaders in missional living.  It is a long journey to change a culture.  We looked at 3DM but had some concerns with it so decided against it wholesale but are using it's principles.  Caesar was one of the founders of Soma Communities and has some good things to say in these three free videos here. 

The Little Jesus Who Would

RobertHart on Cutting Christ Down to One Size Fits Whatever We Want

On July 7, 2015, former President Jimmy Carter said the following in an interview with the Huffington Post: "I believe Jesus would. I don't have any verse in Scripture. . . . I believe Jesus would approve gay marriage, but that's just my own personal belief. I think Jesus would encourage any love affair if it was honest and sincere and was not damaging to anyone else, and I don't see that gay marriage damages anyone else."

Often described as "a religious man," Carter was known as an Evangelical when he ran for the White House in 1976. That year, when, in what has always been seen as an error in judgment, he agreed to be interviewed by Playboy, he displayed at least a personal moral scruple and a working knowledge of what Jesus actually said as recorded in the Gospel according to St. Matthew: "But I say unto you, that whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart" (5:28).

Since those days in 1976, a new phrase has caught the public's attention: "WWJD"—"What would Jesus do?" Like Jimmy Carter when speaking last July to the Huffington Post, an individual facing a moral decision is advised to consider what Jesus would do, or what hewould say. As a result, what purports to be moral guidance might be nothing more than subjective thought, opinion, or sheer imagination, taken as divine wisdom. This seems to me to be a waste of mental energy and time, inasmuch as what Jesus did, and what he said, can be accurately known easily enough by reading
the Bible.

---

When the younger candidate Carter gave his famous answer toPlayboy, he at least thought along the lines of what Jesus said. As an elderly former President, he gave his answer to the Huffington Postbased on speculation, admitting, "I don't have any verse in Scripture." That is very interesting, because I can think of several verses of Scripture that actually answer the question addressed to Mr. Carter, and that answer it in exact opposition to his affirmative. We know what Jesus said, and have known it since the first generation of Christians were taught and given the New Testament.

Another Jesus, Another Spirit

Lest I appear to be picking on Jimmy Carter exclusively, I hasten to point out that a fictitious Jesus ("another Jesus," to use the words of St. Paul in 2 Corinthians 11:4), subject to human imagination, is very popular nowadays. We see this malleable Jesus everywhere.

For instance, we can note what was said and done at the General Convention of the Episcopal Church last June in Salt Lake City, Utah. The convention took place around the time that the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges (June 26, 2015), declaring a never-before-known Constitutional right to so-called same-sex marriage. Among the events at the convention was something meant to be a Eucharist of sorts, celebrating the victory of homosexual church members who had long sought to have same-sex "marriage" formally approved for their whole national church. It was now approved by the General Convention and its new Presiding Bishop, Michael Curry.

Another Episcopal bishop and openly practicing lesbian, Mary Glasspool, declared in a sermon at that service, "We got to this place of redefining marriage by redefining two other words: home and family." Glasspool interpreted the Gospel of Mark, in which Jesus, as a grown man, discerns that he must begin his mission and ministry to all the people of Israel, to mean that Jesus was moving away from his natural family: "The concept of family is transformed. The reign of God transcends the closest of family trees," she said.

An Episcopal priest named Kimberly Jackson, of the Diocese of Atlanta, read a prayer to begin their version of communion: "Spirit of Life, we thank you for disordering our boundaries and releasing our desires as we prepare this feast of delight: draw us out of hidden places and centers of conformity to feel your laughter and live in your pleasure."

That contrasts quite sharply with the Book of Common Prayer tradition, in which everything is intended to conform wholly to Scripture, and the standard for prayer is the one that Jesus taught, which includes the Church's petition to the Father, "Thy will be done." The new liturgical phrase, "disordering our boundaries and releasing our desires," sounds much more like the slogan of an early twentieth-century pagan cult, The Law of Thelema, created by a magician named Aleister Crowley. To each member of the cult it is taught, "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law."

In stark contrast to Christianity, The Law of Thelema makes of highest priority the will of each individual, rather than the will of God. And just as Jimmy Carter's little Jesus "who would" replaced the big Jesus who did and said what is recorded in the Gospels, the Holy Spirit has been replaced by a malleable spirit guide (again, in St. Paul's words, "another spirit"), invoked as the "Spirit of Life" in the Episcopal LGBT service. This spirit is a "she," and guides her followers, apparently, only where they want to go anyway. She was thanked in their prayer for just that.

But Jesus said, "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled" (Matt. 5:17–18). That is what we can read for ourselves. It takes only a minute or two to find his actual words, a minute worth more than many hours of speculation on what Jesus would have said.

Getting the Words Right

In recent years it has become popular to say, "Jesus never said anything about homosexuality." Again, it is not the Jesus whose words and acts have been recorded for our learning, but the Jesus who would, of whom they speak.

If they are to be given any excuse, it may be that English translations of Scripture can be unclear in places. For instance, the word "fornication" is used frequently in many English-language Bibles. Every time this word is used, it is with the strongest condemnation of sexual sin. This includes cases where Jesus utters the word himself (e.g., in Mark 7:20–23).

In modern English, we think of "fornication" as meaning only heterosexual intercourse before or outside of marriage. But the Greek word used throughout the New Testament that is translated as "fornication" is porneia. (This is the root not only of the English word "fornication" but also "pornography.") It means any and every kind of sexual sin and also perversion, and thus refers not only to sexual relations outside of marriage, but also to adultery, homosexuality, pedophilia, bestiality, and so forth.

We know that "Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners" (1 Tim. 1:15), not to affirm their sins. He ate and drank with sinners, to be sure, but not to join in their riotous living, but to call them to repentance (Luke 5:30–32). He came to save his people from—not inbut from—their sins (Matt. 1:21).

The word most often associated with the malleable Jesus, and the unholy spirit, is "love." Right after the Obergefell v. Hodges decision was announced, President Obama tweeted, "Love wins." This is a new gospel (again, in the words of St. Paul, "another gospel") of inclusion and affirmation. In this new gospel, of a malleable Jesus who would, the good news is that nothing is sin: "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law." Except for Christians, of course: anyone who believes in or preaches traditional Christian morality is guilty of the sin of hate.

But we know that "charity . . . rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth" (1 Cor. 13:4,6). Indeed, the word "charity," as used here in the King James translation, may be the best English translation of the Greek word agape in this context. In some places, agape is translated as "love" in the King James Version, while at other times, as here, it is translated as "charity." Making the distinction helps clarify things. For one may love a big juicy steak, but one cannot have charity for a big juicy steak. In any case, agape, the word used for divine love or charity, is very distinct from eros, the word used to indicate carnal love.

Love & the Cross

In Christian theology, the love of God is associated most closely with the cross of Christ (Rom. 5:8). The sight of Christ crucified was very terrible—indeed, it was so ugly that, in the words of the prophet, "We hid as it were our faces from him" (Is. 53:3). It was a violent, bloody sight, where the Man of sorrows was poured out like water, and all his bones were out of joint (Ps. 22:14). At once it was God's judgment on sin and the manifestation of his love, where he paid our debt in full ("Teleo," John 19:30).

Jesus came to save the world, to seek and to save the lost, to pour out his soul unto death as the "propitiation for our sins" (1 John 2:2). He came for that, not to usher in an era in which lust and carnality, and "the releasing of our desires," take the place of repentance and of taking up one's cross to follow the Son of Man. Give me the real Lord Jesus, who paid my debt, who commanded me to repent, and who forgave my sin.

Give me the Jesus who did and who said, not the other Jesus, the one who would. 

Robert Hart is rector of St. Benedict's Anglican Catholic Church in Chapel Hill, North Carolina (Anglican Catholic Church Original Province). He also contributes regularly to the blog The Continuum. He is a contributing editor of Touchstone.