some reflections...

...after attending the first Saturday men's connection - topic: sexual sin/purity.

If it's only by grace that a man can be pure, why focus on things we can do? Why not dwell on how to allow God to reign his grace in our hearts? All else is fleeting legalism, that is if it's only by grace.

The advice to "run to God" during temptation is irrelevant advice to some who is blinded by sin.

On the edge of a knife cutting my feet;
to remain, bloody soles endure,
or fall, soul lost for sure.

(inspired after hearing the phrase "on the edge of a knife")

Seven sure ways to fight sexual sin:

1. revel your sin to God and others
2. repent of your sin
3. renew your commitment to Jesus
4. replenish your walk with Jesus
5. request help from the Jesus and others
6. refrain from situations that allow sin to creep in
7. rejoice in Jesus

If we could do all these steps no one would sin...then how is it that it's all by grace?

I was reminded on how "instant gratification" is somewhat like a plague to those of us in the west (even thought I hate talking like that, I mean about generalizing about those of us in the west). I need to remember that though I could have instant victory from sin right now (and oh how I pray for that), I need to be ready to battle it out for 2 years, 20 years, or til I die. I should not loose heart in battling sin because I don't receive instant, complete victory, but keep on fighting. Jesus fought the temptation to the point of sweating blood...have I ever fought that hard? Am I willing to fight that hard for the rest of my life...? I need help if I am to do that. Praise God he gave us Jesus, his Spirit, and the church. With out these, we would be toast.

Cry out to God because he's the only one that can change your heart.

It is only by grace that any of us don't sin. So...what does that mean practically? Especially when we do sin? For the believer?

It's very confusing to talk about sin in this manner when you're a Calvinist.

I have yet to attend a seminar on sexual purity that is actually helpful or gets at the heart of the matter and focuses on that. What the hell is the heart of the matter anyways? And why don't we talk about this subject all the time if it's so pervasive??? Especially in the church???

He is Jealous for you!

You adulterous people! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God. Or do you suppose it is to no purpose that the Scripture says, "He yearns jealously over the spirit that he has made to dwell in us"? But he gives more grace. Therefore it says, "God opposes the proud, but gives grace to the humble."

I feel heavily the adulterous longings of the old man still in me today. I feel wretched and hopeless, but I remembered that he who is in me is greater than he who is in the world, and that it doesn't depend on the man who runs or wills, but on God who has mercy.

He yearns jealously over the spirit he made to dwell in me. I take this to mean he will not let me utterly slip away to ruin. He made a spirit to dwell in me, and he's jealous over it. He will go head to head with my opponents for me, just like I will take out anyone or anything that stands in the way of me and my wife and children.

Our right standing with God is not dependent on how well the day goes, but on how well Jesus lived, which was perfectly. We have been filled with Jesus, therefore our days are well, forever!

A line from one of my favorite hymns, "I am his, and he is mine!" This is true and worthy of rememberance when I feel my heart pull toward things that are but a shadow of a thought of satisfaction.

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.

word association

What's the first word (or concept) that comes to your mind when you hear the word:

"people"

"man"

"men"

"humans"

Be honest, I'm curious.

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)

Stinkin English (Language)!

"And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh." Ez 36: 26-27

"My presence will go with you, and I will give you rest." Ex 33:14

"Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest." Matt 11:28

"Be faithful unto death, and I will give you the crown of life." Rev 2:10

"And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever..." John 14:16

"Think over what I say, for the Lord will give you understanding in everything." 2 Tim 2:7

"...and he will give you the desires of your heart." Ps 37: 4b

So, do you think the Psalm 37 reference should be taken literally like the above texts, or do you think they should have translated it "fulfill"?

How have you always understood this text? This text has always confused me. I hear people reference it like it means he will "fulfill" the desires you have, but it reads like he will "put the desires in you."

It seems recently that I'm really baffled by the word choices they use in Bible translations. I suppose they just want to be consistent and translate a word the same every time it's used.

Someone should make a translation for white, middle class, 30 year-olds who were raised in a rural setting but now live in the metro as a carpenter.

Thoughts?

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.