CONTROVERSY VI: What about God's Wrath?

(This is a new article series that I am "trying out" with my readers. These are intended to be thought-provoking. Please see their Intro Article: Jan. 26, 2008)

God's wrath is a sticky topic, don't you think? We have a hard time differentiating between the God, who is Love, and the God, the Righteous Judge. I though it would be appopriate to follow up the "Love" article with a "Wrath" dissertation.

God is a God of love, but His love is not only benevolence, goodwill, and compassion. His love is stern and desires the best for His beloved. God is not a man, He is spirit; God does not fluctuate in His emotions or opinions (ref. Jms. 1:17); He is always the same (ref. Mal. 3:6). He is a God of love, and He is a God of righteousness. He calls His sheep to become like Him as He transforms them into His likeness (ref. 2 Cor. 3:18).

He is also a jealous God, Who has called His people to be holy and perfect, as He is holy and perfect (ref. Matt. 5:48; 1 Pet. 1:16). God’s righteousness compels Him to punish sin, for nothing that is of sin can stand in the presence of God (Ez. 9:15). However, the Lord loves His people, and He will transform them into His righteousness (ref. 1 Cor. 1:30) so that they can be in His presence. He will discipline His people in order that they may become like Him and have fellowship with Him:

“…because the Lord disciplines those He loves, and He punishes everyone He accepts as a son...” (Heb. 12:6)

God is not only a God of love, who disciplines His children; He is also a Holy God, Who executes wrath on all unrighteousness. Wrath is a type of boundary for man, a limit that the Lord places on wickedness and sin, against which man can and does press. The believer must understand the goodness of God, His mercy and compassion, for these are that, which He exudes first:

“The LORD, the LORD, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness…” (Ex. 34:6)

However, this does not imply that the Lord does not feel anger; He is not a “push-over,” passive God, Who allows wickedness to continue without His intervention. There is a time when He does act against that, which is offensive to His holiness:

“Yet He does not leave the guilty unpunished; He punishes the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation.” (Num. 14:18)

This is to place a deserved holy reverential fear in the hearts of man, to adore Him and reverence Him as the Sovereign Ruler of all things, Who sees and knows all things and will act in His wrath against that, which does not please Him. The wrath of God, therefore, serves as the “fear-factor” for all evil, spirits and men alike, so that all know that God is holy, and He can and will act against that, which is not.

But why are so many of us hesitant to talk about the wrath of God? First, it is a confusing subject; so many times, people are spending an excessive amount of effort in simply understanding God’s love for them, overcoming brokenness of not receiving love from others. If someone were to teach about His wrath, it might be too overwhelming for the new Christian to bear.

Secondly, it is an offensive topic; there have been legalistic doctrines in the past, which obsessed over God’s anger, distance, and displeasure with sins to the extent that the goodness of God was completely forgotten. This out of balance ideal burdened and/or disillusioned Christians in their faith, leaving them with little freedom to enjoy God’s goodness, and making them inept in their ability to extend His love to others.

Thirdly, the topic of the wrath of God brings conviction, which is not always a popular topic. People would much rather hear about the blessings and promises of God, or have their “ears tickled” (ref.2 Tim. 4:3), than to listen to the requisites of holiness, which the blessings require. Moreover, speaking about the wrath of God requires the preacher to examine his life before he teaches about the topic; self-examination is always a sensitive and terrifying experience.

The wrath of God, in essence, requires a standard of excellence in one’s walk with Him, which is intimidating and difficult to accomplish, and not many ever enter into that intimacy with Him. As Christ said:

“‘Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.’ “(Matt. 7:13-14)

CONTROVERSY V: What about Love?

(This is a new article series that I am "trying out" with my readers. These are intended to be thought-provoking. Please see their Intro Article: Jan. 26, 2008)

Have you noticed that we (and boy have I caught myself more than I’d like to admit) have an odd tendency to use the word “love” a lot? We use it for food, “Oh I just love chocolate!” We use it for sports, “I just love football games, especially the Super Bowl!” And then, occasionally, not as often as we should, we, blushing, fidgeting, and looking at the ground, will use it to express our feelings towards a “loved one,” “I love you…”

Do we really know what that word means? It’s a slippery topic. We will either take one stance of discomfort, or we will associate it with the Hollywood-ized hype of “sexualism.” But what is love?

Well, we know what the Word says about it:

“God is love.”(1 Jn. 4:8)

Ok, good so far. What else does it say:

“There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love.” (1 Jn. 4:18)

Whoah! Now what does that have to say about the discomfort that we feel when we try to express our love to the people who need to hear it the most from us? Well, what else do you have to say, John:

“This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins.” (1 Jn. 4:10)

Ah, the real kicker…in other words, we really don’t know what love is unless we learn is from God’s example…

Love must be defined in the context of God’s love for mankind, sending His Son to die for him so that man might have fellowship with Him for eternity. Therefore, true love can only be defined in the context of God’s love for man. God is a good and perfect God, Who is under no obligation to reach out to anyone, who is unworthy of being in His presence. However, God, in His goodness, reached down to those of no worth, the sinners, then identified Himself with their predicament, taking on the very form of a man.

God, Author of Creation, God of all glory and honor, gave up His precious Son to rescue man from his filth, bringing the unworthy into a covenant relationship with Himself, which is a relationship that ensures eternal association with no possible of disengagement. Love is a goodness, sacrifice, and bond that bears little reason or logic in the mind of a rational human being, and can only be relegated to a supernatural majestic God, Who is and behaves in the unfathomable.

No wonder we have such a hard time knowing when and how to use the word “love”! We can’t know love unless we know God, and He is still unknowable!

“As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways and My thoughts than your thoughts.” (Isa. 55:8)

So then, how can any of us know God, really?

“With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.” (Matt. 19:26)

“The Scripture says, ‘What eye has not seen and ear has not heard and has not entered into the heart of man, [all that] God has prepared (made and keeps ready) for those who love Him [who hold Him in affectionate reverence, promptly obeying Him and gratefully recognizing the benefits He has bestowed]. Yet to us God has unveiled and revealed them by and through His Spirit, for the [Holy] Spirit searches diligently, exploring and examining everything, even sounding the profound and bottomless things of God [the divine counsels and things hidden and beyond man's scrutiny].” (1 Cor. 2:9-10 AMP)

CONTROVERSY IV: What about Tolerance?

(This is a new article series that I am "trying out" with my readers. These are intended to be thought-provoking. Please see their Intro Article: Jan. 26, 2008)

Have you noticed that it seems the Church today is prone to tolerate inappropriate behavior, and that it is becoming increasingly more difficult to tell a Christian apart from a non-Christian?

The Church is supposed to be a light in the darkness, but why is it that her “statistics” are little different than the world’s? Within the Church, divorce rates are nearly equal with the culture’s; pornography is rampant among both men and women in the world and among Christians. And I don’t have to mention the horrible stories that have surfaced about leading men and women pastor’s and their private lives.

In our attempts to be “relevant” with our neighbors, we are becoming like them, succumbing to the temptations of the flesh, to which none of us are immune.

I think we have a misunderstanding of the meaning of “tolerance.” We take that to mean acceptance and overlooking a wrong, when that is not the inherent meaning of the word. “Tolerance” means “forbearance, patience;” it is acceptance of the individual, but rejection of the beliefs. We are not teaching anyone anything if we allow people to continue in their sins…besides, their sins will eventually affect us, which is why Paul talks about being mindful of who you fellowship with (ref. 2 Cor. 6:14-17). We can love an individual who is trapped in sin, but we must always be ready (for the right timing/as the Spirit leads) to point out that their sin is sin—and that it has to be dealt with.

Paul confronted the Corinthian church because they accepted and lauded the man caught in heinous immorality. True tolerance would have brought in the individual, loved him enough to confront him of his wrongs, and then help him to leave his lifestyle...true tolerance is following the Matt. 18 principle of confrontation. If the individual doesn’t listen to one, take a witness; doesn’t listen to 2, take him to the elders, doesn’t listen to the elders, take him before the church; doesn’t listen to the church, cast him out so that Satan can destroy his flesh and his spirit might be saved (as Paul recommended).

Paul, in essence, was indicting the church’s lack of love for the sinner! They didn’t love him enough to correct his wrong! That’s what the Hebrews writer refers to when it comes to God’s love and discipline,

“‘…the Lord disciplines those He loves, and He punishes everyone He accepts as a son.’ Endure hardship as discipline; God is treating you as sons. For what son is not disciplined by his father? If you are not disciplined (and everyone undergoes discipline), then you are illegitimate children and not true sons.” (Heb. 12:6-8)

Now, I’m not saying that we need to go condemn everyone who walks in the church doors. Rather, we must purpose is to love these individuals trapped in sin, and then, when the timing is right, help them see that their lifestyle leads only to destruction. We don’t need to beat them over the head with the Bible, but strive for patience, love, and correction at the appropriate time…we mustn’t be afraid to confront an issue. We can confront sin in gentleness and love, accepting the individual and seeking to lead him out of his sin.

“Brothers, if someone is caught in a sin, you who are spiritual should restore him gently. But watch yourself, or you also may be tempted. Carry each other's burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ.” (Gal. 6:1-2)

CONTROVERSY III: What about Ethics?

(This is a new article series that I am "trying out" with my readers. These are intended to be thought-provoking. Please see their Intro Article: Jan. 26, 2008)

Why is it that ethics is “complicated,” has a lot of “gray areas,” has not “rights and wrongs”? Have you wondered that? Why it is that we have classes that actually teach about ethics because it is difficult to know how to behave “ethically” (which is differentiated from morally, mind you)?

Ok…maybe it’s just me…or perhaps it’s a prophetic tendency that I have…I just don’t think ethics is as hard as we try to make it to be. I know that a lot of ethics teachers and doctors, etc. say that ethics is complex; there are many gray areas, etc. That we have to discuss…but the more and more that I study ethics, and the more and more I grow in my relationship with God…the more and more I am persuaded that ethics is not hard…man has made it so.

Yes-ethics is complicated, confusing, and ridiculous if one does not have a Biblical worldview. Without the Truth, there is no solid foundation for life. But, golly-with it…life gets simple…it really does.

And I’m not saying that flippantly or naively-I am fully aware that tough things happen-children are killed in car accidents or are molested, raped, and brainwashed. Many suffer illnesses, for which there are little cures of relief. Others die in a crossfire between two family feuds…I’m not saying that life is not difficult; even Jesus makes that statement:

"In this world you will have trouble; but take heart. I have overcome the world..." (Jn. 16:33)

I am saying that a perspective of right and wrong, ethics and morality…that is not hard when it comes to the Word of God.

God laid out His ethical plan in the Ten Commandments…He goes into details in the Torah of how it is applied, which can be applied in other situations relevant to the stated circumstance.

When the Lord says, “do not murder,” He means, don’t kill. There are exceptions in the case of war, which He goes into greater detail as well in the Torah, but for the most part…you don’t kill-period.

“The LORD brings death and makes alive; He brings down to the grave and raises up.” (1 Sam. 2: 6)

God gives life and He takes it away-who are we to decide whether to end someone’s life (in a case of euthanasia) even if they wish it…we are finite creatures! There is only One, Who determines the days of an individual, and that is God!

We get so bogged down in ethical rules and regulations…but that is not what God intended. He made the works of humans really simple: “‘Don't be afraid; just believe.’” (Mk. 5:36) Faith is the only work that we are called to do…believe Him…and that in itself is hard enough.

Please understand…I’m not oversimplifying this because of naivety-yes, I am young, and I have a lot to learn; I am by no means professing that I have “arrived.”

But, I know suffering-I have been to the grave and back countless times; I have endured horrendous physical pain for months on end without solution, other than accusation. I know spiritual and emotional confusion, when spiritual mentors have attempted to “deliver me” from my distress through accusations and over-spiritualization of chronic illness, reminiscent of Job’s friends. Consequently, it is only by God’s grace that I am still alive, my body is beginning to “pull out” of another physical mess, functioning and rebuilding, and by golly! I AM SANE and full of joy today.

I know physical, emotional, and spiritual pain to some degree-and even my suffering is nothing compared to a multitude of others’ in Africa, Asia, or even in this country. I’m not tooting my horn-I’m just explaining that I have been through hardship…

…and I still profess that, though life may be hard… it does not have to be complicated…man makes it so when he tries to figure it out, especially figure it out without putting God into the equation. We are not “called” to figure out life or the world. We are called to believe God, Who is good, loving, powerful, mighty, everlasting, omniscient, omnipresent, Who is over all things and in Him all things have their existence. (ref. Col. 1:16-20)

Call me simple, naïve, or young…God is bigger than man; and we can live a life of peace and rest despite hardship because we know Who is in control.

CONTROVERSY II: What about Salvation?

(This is a new article series that I am "trying out" with my readers. These are intended to be thought-provoking. Please see their Intro Article: Jan. 26, 2008)

There has been a lot of controversy surrounding the whole “baptism” and “salvation” doctrines surrounding the Christian faith. Some questions many believers have asked are as follows:

Is salvation a part of the conversion process separate from baptism and receiving the Holy Spirit? Is there a “two-stage initiation”? Or do are you saved when you are baptized? What does the Holy Spirit have to do with it?

In answer to the question "does 'salvation' take more than one step," I say, no. We are saved when we accept Christ as our Savior:

“That if you confess with your mouth, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.” (Rom. 10:9)

Salvation is a heart decision; we are saved because we believe in the Lord Jesus. Moreover, following this decision, we receive the Spirit’s seed/seal of sonship in Christ:

“Now it is God Who makes both us and you stand firm in Christ. He anointed us, set His seal of ownership on us, and put His Spirit in our hearts as a deposit, guaranteeing what is to come.” (2 Cor. 1:21-22)

“…you received the Spirit of sonship. And by Him we cry, ‘Abba, Father.’ The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are God's children.” (Rom. 8:14-16)

In other words, what I have gleaned from the Scriptures is that we are saved by that one faith decision, which is from our hearts, we receive the Spirit of sonship, and thus, we are saved- salvation is a one-step process:

“There is one faith, one baptism, one Holy Spirit.” (ref. Eph. 4:4-5)

However, I do believe that we have stages of empowerment in our Christian walk, which happens after salvation. For example, if you look at the Apostles, they received the Holy Spirit before Pentecost:

“Again Jesus said, ‘Peace be with you! As the Father has sent Me, I am sending you.’ And with that He breathed on them and said, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit.’” (Jn. 20:21-22)

Here, they received the seed of salvation, i.e. the Spirit. They were saved and were going to go to heaven, but their transformation into the fullness of who God had purposed them to be did not occur until the overflowing/empowerment of the Spirit’s power in Acts 2:

“But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be My witnesses…’” (Acts 1:8)

“All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them.” (Acts 2:4)

Here, it appears that “filling with” and “receiving” the Spirit are separate things. “Filling with” is His empowerment, which is different from salvation. This empowering came at the event of Pentecost when the Apostles were completely transformed from those fearful fishermen, etc. into powerful preachers of the Gospel. So, really, Pentecost, “filling of the Spirit” was a stage in the process of spiritual maturity, but not salvation.

In summary, what I have found Scripture to show is that salvation is a one-step process, but walking in the fullness of Christ is a process of the Spirit’s empowerment, being transformed from glory to glory into His likeness (which comes through the Spirit). (ref. 2 Cor. 3:18)

CONTROVERSY I: What about the Dinosaurs?

(This is a new article series that I am "trying out" with my readers. These are intended to be thought-provoking. Please see their Intro Article: Jan. 26, 2008)

Just a curious question: have you ever wondered about the "Leviathan" and "Behemoth" mentioned in Job 40:15-24 and ch. 41? What do you think they are?

Some scholars have argued that the Behemoth was a large land animal, like an elephant or hippopotamus. These scholars also contest that the Leviathan was something to the nature of a crocodile or other water dwelling creature. But are these accurate assumptions of what these beasts really are? How come old Canaanite myths say that the Leviathan was some type of seven-headed sea monster, or how did the idea of sea-monsters come into being in the first place? Why do we have fairy tales about dragons and whatnot? I have a dissertation that may shock some of you, and others may think I've completely "lost it," but hang in there with me and let's see how "off" or "on" I may be...

I have a pretty strong inclination that these large beasts were none other than DINOSAURS! Let me explain: go back with me to the Creation:

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." (Gen. 1:1)

Pretty simple really, right? God created the universe and all that is contains: that's what that verse is saying. Verses 20-21:

"And God said, 'Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the sky.' So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living and moving thing with which the water teems, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good."

Ok-so God created all the living creatures of the sea (Day 5).

Day 6: "And God said, 'Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind.' And it was so." (vs. 24)

And of course you know that man was created in God's image on the same day (vs. 26-27) So: here we have Creation, with all living creatures, including man, together on the earth-since Dinosaurs are creatures, wouldn't you agree that they were among those created things on the earth? Then we had to flood in Gen. ch. 7, which destroys all living creatures, BUT! God preserved 2 of every animal (7 of the clean ones-for sacrifice):

"'You (Noah) are to bring into the ark two of all living creatures, male and female, to keep them alive with you. Two of every kind of bird, of every kind of animal and of every kind of creature that moves along the ground will come to you to be kept alive.'" (Gen. 6:19-20)

So, 2 of every kind (including dinosaurs) were preserved on the ark. Now let's look back at Job 40 and 41. Just looking at the descriptions of the Behemoth and Leviathan, I would have to contend with the accepted view that these are hippos and crocodiles. The Behemoth "moves his tail like a cedar" (40:17) Hippos don't have any body part that is like a cedar...and look at the elephant: his tail is no more than a wisp-now you might say that God is referring to his trunk, but why didn't God call it that in the first place or call it his mouth/nose or something to that effect? God knows how He formed the beast; surely, He would have described it accurately. Look at some of the other descriptions: (vs. 24)

"'Can anyone capture him when he is on his watch, with barbs can anyone pierce his nose?'"

I have known many an Indian and Arab that have caught the elephant and used it for transportation-and the hippo used to be used for food-but a dinosaur?! Imagine the Allosaurus, the dinosaur that has that kind of look-long neck, extremely large, with a tail like a cedar...aha! It is far more plausible for man to not be able to catch that thing than an elephant! Wouldn't you agree? Now-to the Leviathan, look at 41:6

"'Will the traders bargain over him? Will they divide him among the merchants?'"

Well, down here in Texas, we have things called crocodile boots and gator belts-made from the skin of these creatures-so, yes. We do bargain over crocodiles-and their meat is pretty tasty too. (I know from personal experience!) Vs. 15

"'His strong scales are his pride, shut up as with a tight seal.'"

Do crocodiles have scales like fish? I don't think so...

"'His sneezes flash forth light; out of his mouth go burning torches.'" (vs. 18, 19)

Did you know that there were dinosaurs, I'm thinking of the Parasaurolophus in particular, that breathed a type of gas or fire for defense? Pretty cool...anyway-I don't think crocodiles do that; but a Dinocephalosaurus, those long-necked swimming dinosaurs, would better fit that description.

So: hee hee-that gives you something to think about, huh? I think we have gotten this notion that dinosaurs lived millions of years before man because we have gotten away from studying Creation and moved to Evolution in our education systems. But which is real? God created the earth, that includes dinosaurs; Evolution says that dinosaurs evolved and died, and man evolved and prospered...isn't that in direct contrast with the Truth of the Word of God? Something to ponder...

CONTROVERSY...a new series of articles

Happy New Year all!

Throughout my ministerial and biblical studies, I have noticed an alarming trend of differences in worldview among Christians. So, I have decided to intermittently post different articles that discuss a variety of topics, over which Christians may have differences of opinion. Why? I don't know; maybe this will provoke discussion from my readers; maybe it will inspire some of you to have your own personal reflection, "what do I really believe?"; maybe it will lead you to go into your "prayer closet" and seek the Lord about these topics, asking Him to teach you His Truth about them (thus, growing in your relationship with the Father). Now the rules of the game: these topics will not be offensive; they will be thought-provoking. If any of you do wish to comment, please be "kind;" I am not trying to offend anyone and I would rather you not offend me or any others in return (ha ha). HEY! Let's have some fun, shall we?