This is from D.A Carson's Book "Basics for Believers":
"I would like to buy about three quid's worth of gospel, please. Not too much - just enough to make me happy, but not so , much that that I get addicted. I don't want so much gospel that I really learn to hate covetousness and lust; I certaintly don't want so much that I start to love my enemies, cherish self-denial, and contemplate missionary service in some alien culture. I want ecstasy, not repentance; I want transcendence, not transformation. I would like to be cherished by some nice, forgiving broad-minded people, but I myself don't want to love those from different races - especially if they smell. I would like enough gospel to make my family secure and my children well behaved, but not so much that I find my ambitions redirected, or my giving too greatly enlarged.
I would like about three quids worth of gospel please"
- "Basics for Believers" , page 9; D.A Carson -
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Friday, April 9, 2010
2 Kings 5:1-14 : Meditations
The first thing that grabs you is Verse 1: "..the LORD had given victory to Syria". This is not to be skimmed over and it gives those who say that God always favours them as his children, no matter, what had better take a second, or even a third look at this verse.
It may be that the Syrians avoided the Israelites in battle, and thus preserving the notion that God always sided with his chosen people. However, this is unlikely. The reaction of the king (note the small "k") of Israel probably indicates that neighbourly relations were not always of the cordial kind. And in an era where skirmishes and wars were common place, Israel and Syria came to blows and the LORD favoured the latter!
This goes to show that the Lord is indeed sovereign, and that everything is under his command, both good and evil. Not that he is evil, but evil is not outside his jurusdiction. A quick read of Job 1-2 will show that Satan cannot do anything unless it is willed by God ultimately. Now, this also means that God is not in our pocket, so to say. That even the best of intentions may not garner his favour because we look on 'favour' in uniquely earthly terms (i.e: If I do good, God is sure to bless my requests and give me stuff etc etc)
Was the king of Israel always good? Was Israel always devoted to it's God? Of course, not. So one could say that the Syrians, like the Babylonians, were at one time or another used as instruments of his wrath for his purpose. Not that they were any better, they too were cruel, bloodthirsty and idolatous, with the Syrians and Babylonians worshipping Rimmon (v.18) and Marduk respectively
No, the issue here is that God chooses to save who he'll save and let those perish who he chooses to let perish. This is harsh to our ears but what can we say of the fact that he chooses to save Naaman, a gentile and worse, an enemy of Israel who was probably directly involved in the loss of Jewish lives in his role as commander of the Syrian army? That he uses a Jewish prisoner who is now essentially a slave in a Syrian household to carry out her plans. What of her eventual fate or redemption? We hear no more of her after this.
But in the end, Naaman is cured and becomes a follower of Yahweh. He seems for all intents and purposes, a changed man on the inside and out. His leprosy was external but the more serious condition of the leprous heart was dealt with in this chapter. And in God extending his mercy to Naaman through Elisha, it is in essence a snapshot of Paul's mission to the Gentiles (Romans 11:13)
Ultimately, the lesson we learn from this is that we should not be presumptious in being able to read the mind of God. It is God's perogative to give grace to who he wants, and likewise, it is his choice to issue condemnation. It should serve to make us a little less cocksure about our self delusional lofty status in this world and to realise that we are his created beings, made to worship and serve him with meekness,humility and love
SDG
It may be that the Syrians avoided the Israelites in battle, and thus preserving the notion that God always sided with his chosen people. However, this is unlikely. The reaction of the king (note the small "k") of Israel probably indicates that neighbourly relations were not always of the cordial kind. And in an era where skirmishes and wars were common place, Israel and Syria came to blows and the LORD favoured the latter!
This goes to show that the Lord is indeed sovereign, and that everything is under his command, both good and evil. Not that he is evil, but evil is not outside his jurusdiction. A quick read of Job 1-2 will show that Satan cannot do anything unless it is willed by God ultimately. Now, this also means that God is not in our pocket, so to say. That even the best of intentions may not garner his favour because we look on 'favour' in uniquely earthly terms (i.e: If I do good, God is sure to bless my requests and give me stuff etc etc)
Was the king of Israel always good? Was Israel always devoted to it's God? Of course, not. So one could say that the Syrians, like the Babylonians, were at one time or another used as instruments of his wrath for his purpose. Not that they were any better, they too were cruel, bloodthirsty and idolatous, with the Syrians and Babylonians worshipping Rimmon (v.18) and Marduk respectively
No, the issue here is that God chooses to save who he'll save and let those perish who he chooses to let perish. This is harsh to our ears but what can we say of the fact that he chooses to save Naaman, a gentile and worse, an enemy of Israel who was probably directly involved in the loss of Jewish lives in his role as commander of the Syrian army? That he uses a Jewish prisoner who is now essentially a slave in a Syrian household to carry out her plans. What of her eventual fate or redemption? We hear no more of her after this.
But in the end, Naaman is cured and becomes a follower of Yahweh. He seems for all intents and purposes, a changed man on the inside and out. His leprosy was external but the more serious condition of the leprous heart was dealt with in this chapter. And in God extending his mercy to Naaman through Elisha, it is in essence a snapshot of Paul's mission to the Gentiles (Romans 11:13)
Ultimately, the lesson we learn from this is that we should not be presumptious in being able to read the mind of God. It is God's perogative to give grace to who he wants, and likewise, it is his choice to issue condemnation. It should serve to make us a little less cocksure about our self delusional lofty status in this world and to realise that we are his created beings, made to worship and serve him with meekness,humility and love
SDG
Saturday, April 3, 2010
Theology of the Cross
" But God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us "
- Romans 5:8 -
It is appropriate during Easter that one should reflect on the Cross and what it means to us. Strangely, the Cross is rarely preached, let alone the blood of Christ. This is all part of a current trend that recently has seen attacks on the Doctrine of Penal Subsititution, the Deity of Christ, Double imputation, Propitiationary Sacrifice and the Redeeming act of Salvation. Churches avoid mention of any of these because it is seen as distasteful, off putting and primitive
However, if one stays true to God, and the Word; we must acknowledge these things. You cannot omit these elements; it's a package deal. Justification must mean the Cross. And you must have a theology of the Cross which explains the whole story for what it is, and not a day where one goes on Easter egg hunts and eats lots of Chocolate
No, it is a story which starts off in dark tones. Man, headed towards eternal condemnation and separation from a Holy and just God because he wallows in Sin, unable to do a single thing about it. A God, who loves men and women, totally justified in pouring his wrath out on a rebellious and hateful creation..performs the ultimate act of redemption
The sacrificial offering of his Son. Pure and Holy. A willfull sacrifice by the Son, not coerced, bribed or cajoled. One done out of the purest love. Doing the will of the Father.
As he lay on the Cross, bearing your sins and mine; he could have stepped down. "Enough!" , he could have said. A stiff necked people that refused to listen, follow or obey were now spitting on him and willing him a humiliating and painful death. Oh, he could have wiped them and the whole world out with a thought, or a word.
But he didn't
Till the awful deed was done, and finally, he uttered the last words, that will ever be said by God hanging on that cross: "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit"
It was done. Redemption. Saved. Rescued. No words can describe what was done on that Cross for me that day. Nothing I do from here till the day I die can ever make up or repay that. I can give every waking minute to the Lord, every penny, submit every thought and even give my body to be burned for him..no, not enough. Never enough
And that was Grace. A free gift to someone who doesn't deserve it. It was also Mercy. Ultimately, it was an act of Love from the author and creator of Love: God almighty
On this day, remember this: No cross,no salvation.
May you have a blessed Easter. And always have the Theology of the Cross. Always
SDG
- Romans 5:8 -
It is appropriate during Easter that one should reflect on the Cross and what it means to us. Strangely, the Cross is rarely preached, let alone the blood of Christ. This is all part of a current trend that recently has seen attacks on the Doctrine of Penal Subsititution, the Deity of Christ, Double imputation, Propitiationary Sacrifice and the Redeeming act of Salvation. Churches avoid mention of any of these because it is seen as distasteful, off putting and primitive
However, if one stays true to God, and the Word; we must acknowledge these things. You cannot omit these elements; it's a package deal. Justification must mean the Cross. And you must have a theology of the Cross which explains the whole story for what it is, and not a day where one goes on Easter egg hunts and eats lots of Chocolate
No, it is a story which starts off in dark tones. Man, headed towards eternal condemnation and separation from a Holy and just God because he wallows in Sin, unable to do a single thing about it. A God, who loves men and women, totally justified in pouring his wrath out on a rebellious and hateful creation..performs the ultimate act of redemption
The sacrificial offering of his Son. Pure and Holy. A willfull sacrifice by the Son, not coerced, bribed or cajoled. One done out of the purest love. Doing the will of the Father.
As he lay on the Cross, bearing your sins and mine; he could have stepped down. "Enough!" , he could have said. A stiff necked people that refused to listen, follow or obey were now spitting on him and willing him a humiliating and painful death. Oh, he could have wiped them and the whole world out with a thought, or a word.
But he didn't
Till the awful deed was done, and finally, he uttered the last words, that will ever be said by God hanging on that cross: "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit"
It was done. Redemption. Saved. Rescued. No words can describe what was done on that Cross for me that day. Nothing I do from here till the day I die can ever make up or repay that. I can give every waking minute to the Lord, every penny, submit every thought and even give my body to be burned for him..no, not enough. Never enough
And that was Grace. A free gift to someone who doesn't deserve it. It was also Mercy. Ultimately, it was an act of Love from the author and creator of Love: God almighty
On this day, remember this: No cross,no salvation.
May you have a blessed Easter. And always have the Theology of the Cross. Always
SDG
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)