Suffering

As I spend time reading the new testament concerning suffering, it seems to me that it is in fact a central concept. I have heard mentioned a few times in the past few weeks at small group that BBC focus on suffering, while other churches focus on etc, etc, etc...

This morning I realized perhaps what is going on. The new testament talks about it in a way that's like this, "and after you have suffered a little while, the God of all grace, who has called you to his eternal glory in Christ, will himself restore, confirm, strengthen, and establish you!" This is encouraging right?! At BBC it seems to be more like this, "you're going to suffer if you're a Christian, this life isn't easy, deal with it!" Not really encouraging to me.

(I'm making a point here so I'm being drastic about it...)

But I think the real difference is that the NT talks about it in a way that focus more on the end result of the suffering, namely your reward in heaven, and BBC talks about it in a way that mainly combats the American, fluffy, desire to be happy and have everything handed to us on a platter, complaining spirit (which I'm never guilty of). I don't thing BBC has a wrong view, I think they're probably just trying to not foster a "lazy" spirit.

What do you think? I think I'm on to something here. Realizing this will help me hear it now and deal with it more healthily.

Man = ?

Emily and I had a good discussion after church today. It was spawned by hearing the words "man" and "sin" used many, many times together frequently.

Is "man" synonymous with "sin"?

Emily and I came to the conclusion, "not entirely", but it is sure talked about that way a lot. It is incomplete to stop at man = sin, because man equals at least one more thing that is very, very important, namely, created in the image of God.

Is it fair to say, "apart from God all we can do is sin."?

It says at the end of Romans 14 that "whatever does not come from faith is sin." True for both the believer and non-believer.

Here's the progression I have trouble with.

1. A non-believer performs an act of service (like helping save someone's life at a car accident scene).
2. It's a sin because it does not proceed from faith.
3. Sin deserves punishment.
4. A non-believer doesn't have a propitiator.
5. Therefore the non-believer suffers more of God's wrath in hell because the performed an act of service.
6. It would have been the same for the non-believer if he had just sat there and watched the person die, even though he could have helped.

I don't know about this, it's troubling to me, and perhaps I thinking about things all wrong.

Emily and I came to the conclusion that for the non-believer, an act of service toward someone else out of a "genuine" heart isn't a wrath-heaping act, though it doesn't achieve the ultimate purpose of glorifying God. Our rational for this is that, the non-believer is created in God's image, and when performing acts of service is doing what he or she is created to do, and that shouldn't be something that produces for them more wrath.

I would love to hear your thoughts on this. I know there really isn't such a thing as "neutrality" in Christendom, but I'm a little confused on this one.

Let me sum up my thoughts with these statements:

1. When the believer serves it blesses God and people.
2. When the believer sins and repents, the wrath is absorbed through Jesus' atonement.
3. When the non-believer serves it blesses people, but not God.
4. When the non-believer sins and they don't repent (ie, get saved), they incur wrath for their sin.

Other Thoughs on Worm Theology

This is a great post [Worm Theology], thanks Phil. This is a topic Mel and I have talked quite a bit about, not particularly using the phrase “worm theology,” but just how there is a tendency to beat ourselves up within the theological circles we are currently in. I was really encouraged just yesterday by the message at Jubilee. It was about how Paul planted churches and then went around encouraging and building up the believers at those churches. An illustration was given of Mike Tyson, and how his trainer made him into the great boxer that he was by constantly telling him how great he was, how many talents he had, etc.. Even though there was obviously much work to be done in the training.

There is a word that is used all over the book of Acts (and all over the N.T., for that matter). It is paraklesis, the same word used of the Holy Spirit as Comforter and Counselor. The idea is of one coming alongside to encourage and exhort. It’s the word used when describing Barnabas as the son of encouragement, and even N.T. prophets are spoken of as ones who strengthen and encourage (Acts 15:32).

I heard a ministry leader from North Carolina once say that he thought that there was an incredible spirit of ‘unworthiness’ over this whole area (Minnesota) among many of our churches. That churches tended to beat on their flocks, contributing to this general sense of ‘unworthiness’ and spiritual depression. I believe this was an accurate discernment of some the enemy’s schemes here. We need to move in the opposite spirit, namely that of grace and and of mercy, as Phil mentioned.

Brothers and sisters, you are transformed (1 Cor 3:18), beloved children (John 1:12; Luke 15:20), possesors of a good heart (Ez 36:26; Luke 6:45), and incredibly gifted (Eph 4:8; 1 Cor 12:7) for many works of service that will glorify our Lord Jesus Christ.

Let’s strive to excel in building up the church!! (1 Cor 14:12)

Worm Theology

Excerpt taken from Wikipedia:

Worm Theology is a term used for the conviction in Christian culture that in light of God's holiness and power an appropriate emotion is a low view of self. Some might suggest that because of this view God is more likely to show mercy and compassion. The name may be attributed to a line in the Isaac Watts hymn Alas! and Did My Saviour Bleed (Pub 1707) [1], which says "Would he devote that sacred head for such a worm as I?" This thinking was prevalent in the days when this hymn was originally written, perhaps because there was also a higher view of God. Furthermore, worm theology can be attributed to a recognition of the ugliness of sin, resulting in contrition.

Some might suggest adherents of worm theology have inner wounds that they are not necessarily aware of, and such a belief just matches what they feel about themselves and sometimes others. On the other hand God detests sin so much because it separates us from Himself; it could then be argued that in our sin we are as worms in God's sight.

C.S. Lewis expresses the view, "Whenever we find that our religious life is making us feel that we are good-above all, that we are better than someone else-I think we may be sure that we are being acted on, not by God, but by the devil. The real test of being in the presence of God is that you either forget about yourself altogether or see yourself as a small, dirty object." (Mere Christianity 1952, P.124)

I have been wrestling with this lately, and been having some discussion with the pastors at BBC. The older I get, and now especially that I have children, I am noticing a "way of speaking" that I don't think gets as the heart of God for us, his children.

For example, the last line of the Lewis quote above, "The real test of being in the presence of God is that you either forget about yourself altogether or see yourself as a small, dirty object." Is this really how God wants me to view myself? If I (me, Phil Carlson in the flesh just as I am) "have been filled with him" (Col 2:10), should I really see myself as a "small, dirty object?" Wouldn't this be to the disgrace of Jesus in me?

For many years I used to think that the concept of Jesus in me was like eating food, that Jesus wasn't really a part of me, he was just inside me. If I have been "transformed" (Rom 12:2), there should be no divorce of Phil Carlson and Jesus Christ. I am NOT saying I am Jesus, but I have been completely transformed into his image, and I'm being made into his likeness as we dwell here in both kingdoms. I'm not solely who I once was, I'm something different.

Perhaps the problems therein lies, we are in two worlds. There is still the venom of the old man in me, yet I have been transformed, decisively forever. If I only view myself as being the old man, and Christ as being something outside me, I fall pray to worm theology, something I think grieves the heart of God.

So, the way of speaking I am getting at is language often heard at BBC. I think it spoken out of a heart of humility before God, and a way of glorifying God.

Here are some examples that I can recall:

• We are nothing, you are everything!
• There is nothing good in us.
• Love isn't you making much of us, it's you allowing us to make much of you.

There is nothing theologically wrong with these phrases, it's just after hearing them for 10 years there are starting to causing me to develop a condition that is unhealthy, namely depression.

God revealed himself as a father, so I think I'm warranted in drawing conclusions like this. When I think about my relationship with Corban, there are a times when he's disobedient and we have a break in the relationship. Once we have been restored, the last thing I want him to think is, "daddy sees me as a disobedient child who screws up all the time, and he wants me to dwell on the fact that I'm a failure." I want him to, and hope he does think, "daddy loves me unconditionally as his son, and he loves me even when I make mistakes, and once we are healed, he forgets about what I did, and wants me to forget about it too"

Just like a diet of too many carbs, with too few proteins and fibers is unhealthy, a spiritual walk that has too much depravity and not enough grace and mercy is unhealthy.

You are not a worm, you are a beloved child of God.