Grace in practice, not just theory

One of my favorite maxims is "The best of men are men at best". It's a reminder to me that no matter how venerable I may think some man - either living or dead - to be, he had flaws and errors both in his beliefs and his practice. Countless times I have found an author or preacher whom I feel I can agree with in all points, but inevitably I find a something in his life or his teachings that I disagree with and I am disappointed. The fact that this discovery disappoints me is puzzling for two reasons. One, his overall agreement with me on what I think to be right ought to cause me to pause and consider whether or not this point on which we disagree is an inconsistency in my life instead of immediately supposing that the fault belongs to the other party. Secondly, it exposes to me that I had again fallen into the trap of imagining that there was a man who was in all actuality perfect while here on this earth. While I claim to refute that doctrine, and ever do in word, my hypocrisy is evidenced when the failure of a man I admired causes me feel betrayed.
I'm striving to fix this inconsistency in my life and to live every moment in the reality that every human on this earth has shortcomings and therefore a need for grace from their fellow humans. I expect it myself, when I fail in a duty or what someone expected of me, I want them to realize I'm fully human and forgive my fault. With all this in mind, it sickens me to see the level at which so many so-called christians look for opportunity to expose, decry, and disassociate themselves from someone else who claims to love the same Lord they claim to love, because of a difference in belief or practice on an issue of lesser importance than the gospel. What I am referring to is not the instances where men who have dedicated their lives to watching for the souls of other men do their duty and warn the true disciples of Jesus Christ of false teachers who are preaching another gospel; but of men and women of all walks of life who will verbally flay any man or woman who happens to disagree with their soap-box issue. The devil loves to see us defame a man who exalts Christ in his preaching because he dresses more casually than we deem appropriate, but listen to a preacher whose preaching is empty, because we like that he wears a tie, or when we would rather hear a distorted message preached from the KJV than Christ and him crucified from the ESV. How fractured and divisive, weak and lethargic, ineffective and unchrist-like the church is when we major on minors.
If we claim to believe the doctrines of grace, but all that means is that we are proud that we have our intellectual "I"s dotted and "T"s crossed, with no intention of showing a little of that grace to someone who is not on the same spiritual plane we imagine ourselves to be on, we have made a mockery of Christ's love for us. The Pharisees were horrified not only that Jesus associated with publicans and sinners in his evangelism, but that he chose and loved fishermen, tax collectors, and physicians as his religious cohorts, and even went so far as to call them brethren! Therefore, if I'm maligned for refusing to partake in the bashing of those who don't look, act, or believe just exactly like I do, or vilified for actually defending them, I'll feel like I'm in good company. After all isn't that the essence of grace?

Boaz, a type of Christ

In my last post I wrote about the cities of refuge being a type, or picture, of Jesus Christ. I would say that is one of my favorite "things" that typifies our Saviour in the Old Testament. However, one of my favorite people that give us a forshadowing of Jesus, is found in the book of Ruth, pictured in Boaz.
First we see that he was a near kinsman to Ruth (Ruth 3:9). Here we have a Moabitess, and yet she was of close kin to this man of the stock of Abraham. These, who looked on the outset like two total strangers were in actuallity close relatives. In like manner we are told that we were predestined to be conformed to the image of Christ, that He might be the firtsborn among many brethren (Rom. 8:29). Again in Hebrews 2 we read that Jesus was made a little lower than the angels that he might bring many sons to glory, also that He is not ashamed to call them brethren. Though our sin has robbed us of much of the image of God, and on the outside we would never be associated with Him, yet through His mercy he has made us siblings and joint heirs with Christ.
Secondly, Boaz was a mighty man of wealth (Ruth 2:1). The same was said of our Lord Jesus in II Cor. 8:9, For ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, that ye through his poverty might be rich. The Son of Man walked this earth from infancy in a stall to manhood with no place to lay His head, He was despised and rejected of men, a man of sorrows and aquainted with grief; this same Jesus is the owner of the cattle on a thousand hills, He both appoints and casts down every king raised up and every one defeated. Although in humilty he made himself of no reputation and took upon himself the form a servant, let us not forget that truly the Messiah was a mighty man of wealth!
Third, we see that even as a mighty man of wealth, Boaz took notice of a stranger. Eph. 2:19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God; Boaz had no need of Ruth, he had many servants and gleaners, he had a nation of women who came from a much more acceptable background from which to choose his bride. But, in mercy and grace and he chose the woman who was a stranger and foreigner.
Lastly, before Boaz could marry Ruth, he had to redeem her from the hand of another. (Ruth 4:1-10) We too were possessed by another, we were by nature the children of wrath, and in need of a redeemer. Thus we are told in Gal. 4:4-5 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.
Isn't God gracious to give us such a clear picture of his love for us through a love story in the Old Testament?

Pride and evil speaking

Prov. 6:16-19
16 These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:
17 A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,
18 An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief,
19 A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.

I have recently been meditating on these verses, considering that if something is said to be hated of the Lord and even abominable to him; I ought to also hate it and examine myself closely to ensure I am not caught up in something found on this list. As I thought about each of these sins, how they interacted with each other and what they looked like extenuated out to their furthest end, I was struck with a startling truth. Every one of these sins are engaged when we gossip about someone in order to elevate our position or reputation.
It starts (as so many sins do) with pride, we view ourselves as deserving of some recognition that we are not currently getting and so go about to change that, by dragging someone else through the mud.
Secondly, it moves to that member that James said was the hardest to control, the tongue. We craftily work in barbs, "white" lies or simply exaggerated truths, about whoever we need to cut down, into our conversations with those we wish to impress.
We are now guilty of hands that have shed blood. Not only is the hatred in our heart considered murder by God, (Matthew 5:21-22) but to wreck someone's reputation has long been considered a physical offence in courts of law because of the damage it does to their ability to interact in society and even make a living.
Of course none of this just happens. Bitterness builds up in our hearts as we allow our pride to steep and continue to tell ourselves that deserve better, that we've been wronged. We decide which words will do the most damage to our victim with the person to whom we plan to speak, we decide what lead-ins will be the most effective to portray ourselves in the most innocent light and our comments the most natural to the flow of the conversation. All of this is followed by a justification in our minds for doing what we did or what we're about to do.
It is now time to execute our plan, we've decided what to say, who to say it to, how to say it, and we now find the most convenient time to say it, preferably sooner than later. The longer it goes unsaid, the longer we remain in our current state and the longer we have to watch the one we hate deserve recognition we think should be ours.
There is here the assumption that what we are about to say is not the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. This is the crucial link and the one we work hardest to convince ourselves we are not committing. For sure, there are times we can speak the truth with malicious intentions, but most of the time we, like Daniels opponents, have to fabricate something in order to maximize the effect it will have on cutting them down and ultimately building us up.
The last sin is exactly what we are hoping for; this entire process has been devised and executed with the sole purpose of driving a wedge. Many commentators say that when these lists are given ("six, yea seven", "three, yea four" etc.) the last item is the one with the strongest emphasis. When we consider the seemingly endless list of passages that call us to love the brethren, walk with them in unity, edify one another, forgive each other, and so many commands that are contrary to the notion of discord; we begin to understand how much God hates the one that sows such among his children.
Perhaps I've used some superlatives in this post, maybe I used words that you considered over-the-top or too strong for "such a small sin", but that is my great fear; that we are minimalizing something God sees as huge. Gossip, slander, lying, bearing false witness, sowing discord... these are sins that God despises and we are fools if we commit them and then try to justify ourselves by minimalizing them, they are wickedness of the highest sort!

Was king Saul saved?

Alright here's another question recently asked me, eat the meat, spit out the bones, but don't spit them at me! :-)

Was King Saul saved? And if so what does I Sam. 16:14 mean when it says “the Spirit of the Lord departed from Saul,”?

The first thing that we must understand when dealing with this question is that we must be careful of attempting to say definitively whether someone was or wasn’t saved, when scripture is silent on the issue. While I say we must be careful in such a statement, I do not say that we cannot discern such issues based on what the scriptures do tell us.
When attempting to ascertain whether or not someone is converted, there are certain characteristics that the scripture tells us to look for. I will give you those traits and then we will lay them against Saul’s life and see how he measured up.
(1) A saved person trusts completely in God for his salvation, deliverance, and sustenance. (Gal. 2:16)
(2) Said faith will manifest itself in actions both personal and observable. (Jam. 2:14-18)
(3) A saved person loves God. (John 8:42, I Cor. 8:3, I John 5:2)
(4) A saved parson loves others, particularly his brothers and sisters in Christ. (I John 4:7-8, 20-21)

So then, let us now look at how King Saul matches up to the litmus test God has given us.

(1) Did Saul trust fully in God for his salvation, deliverance, and sustenance?
I could not find one place in scripture where it speaks of Saul’s faith and reliance on God, in a positive or negative way.

(2) Did Saul’s actions show faith in a personal and observable way?
While I could not find a place in the scriptures where it says that Saul believed in God, I did see two distinct events where he showed great reliance on self and no reliance on God. The first takes place in I Sam. 13, here the Israelites are planning to do battle (though greatly outmatched both numerically and technologically) with the Philistines. God has clearly commanded that there is to be no sacrifice offered but by the priest, in verse 9 Saul disobeys God’s command, bypasses the correct order of worship, and sacrifices himself. The second incident occurs in chapter 15, where God commands Israel to utterly destroy the Amalekites, yet Saul makes the executive decision to save alive the choicest animals and the king of the Amalekites himself. Now, I understand that great, godly, saved men often sin, sometimes in disbelief; but I found two elements that intrigued me concerning both incidents. The first is that both times when confronted with his sin he tried to pin the blame on someone else, in chapter 13 on the Philistines, the people and Samuel, in chapter 15 he again falsely accuses the people. The second correlation was that of no true repentance, the first time there was no repentance at all (I Sam. 13:15). The second time, while there was a show of sorrow, it was evidently to save face and not true repentance before God. (I Sam. 15:30)

(3) Did Saul love God?
Again the scriptures are silent on this issue, while I could find no place where the scriptures say Saul loved God not, I could neither find a reference that said he did love God. This becomes more troubling when we realize that the scriptures expressly say that the next two kings, David (Psa. 18:1) and Solomon (I Kings 3:3) loved God. Doubts then begin to creep into our mind as to why the scriptures say no such thing of Saul.

(4) Did Saul love others, particularly saved people?
This question has the clearest answer out of the four in my mind. Saul hated anyone that interfered with his plans. He attempted to kill David on multiple occasions, (I Sam. 19:10, I Sam. 24, I Sam. 26) he used his own daughter to further his agenda, (I Sam. 18:21) and even attempted to kill his own son for sticking up for David (I Sam. 20:33).
All of these facts along with the idea that God rejected Saul as a leader of His people, leads me to believe that Saul was in fact unregenerate. Like Pharaoh was set up as king so that God might be vindicated in His promise that Israel would repent that they had ever asked for a king.
As for the second part of the question, “What is meant by ‘the Spirit of the Lord departed from Saul?’” All the commentators I could find agreed that this is not speaking of the Holy Spirit, which abides in a Christian for one’s entire life, but of the general graces which God had bestowed upon Saul previously. Clarke writes,

“The Spirit of the Lord departed from Saul - He was thrown into such a state of mind by the judgments of God, as to be deprived of any regal qualities which he before possessed. God seems to have taken what gifts he had, and given them to David; and then the evil spirit came upon Saul; for what God fills not, the devil will.
An evil spirit from the Lord - The evil spirit was either immediately sent from the Lord, or permitted to come. Whether this was a diabolic possession, or a mere mental malady, the learned are not agreed; it seems to have partaken of both. That Saul had fallen into a deep melancholy, there is little doubt; that the devil might work more effectually on such a state of mind, there can be but little question. There is an old proverb, Satan delights to fish in troubled waters; and Saul’s situation of mind gave him many advantages.”

War for love.

I open this post with the disclaimer that this post is a summery of Dr. Paul Tripp's sermon on "The War of Love" that I heard him preach tonight and not an original work.
1Jo 4:7-11 Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God. He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love. In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him. Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins. Beloved, if God so loved us, we ought also to love one another.
A couple of words that we rarely if ever used in the same breath are "war" and "love", yet this scripture passage teaches that we are in fact fighting a war of love and there are four battlefronts where this war is seen.
I. The confrontation of definition.
There has been much damage done to the church of Jesus Christ in America because we have allowed the world to redefine what is meant by "love". It is more than respect, it is more that affection, it is more than an absence of dislike. Love is willingly and sacrificially giving of yourself regardless of whether the one being loved deserves it or not! Herein is love... [God] sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.
II. The confrontation of motivation.
The motivation that is presented to us here has nothing to do with whether we feel like it or not, love is a duty. However, biblical love is always joyful because it is motivated by something greater than itself. Our motivation is to be that we have been loved when we were the least deserving, the vertical love from God to us should cause us to manifest horizontal love for everyone around us. All too often we are guilty of the sin of forgetfulness though, we go throughout the day without ever once thinking about the fact that God saved our souls from hell. We allow other's action or our feelings to be the motivation for our love, instead of remembering that the greatest love ever manifested was manifested towards us! Such a great love cannot be bottled up inside of us, we should not be able to help but love others because of that.
III. The confrontation of conflict.
It is our nature to be bent toward deceit, this is even (perhaps especially) true with self-deceit. We allow ourselves to believe that because we raise our hands in worship, or because we regularly attend church, or work hard, or tithe, that we really do love God. God has given us another test, he says that any man who claims to love God yet hates his brother is lying. It's not okay to argue with your spouse on the way to church, it's not okay to get angry at the slow driver in front of you, it's not okay to get fed up with the kid's bickering and just start smacking, IT'S NOT OKAY! God says "Quit lying to yourself, because you are proving that you don't really love me!" This war for love is being waged a very regular basis, since our sovereign God knew just what to give us as the ultimate litmus test to see whether we truly love him or not.
IV. The confrontation of calling.
There is an incredible truth given to us in one little word in this text, that is the word ought. When we read that word we often think of it as synonymous with should, such as "I ought to go to the grocery store today." We think it means a good idea or logical suggestion, while that is a good definition there is another connotation being carried here that we tend to overlook. That is the definition that means a natural course or literally designed for that purpose. Such as "Rain ought to be wet" or "The sun ought to be bright". When we apply this definition to this passage we find a radical concept, that is that as Christians a part of our new man that has been put on is an intrinsic design to love. That is what we are called to do, what we should do, and also the very thing we were designed to do; love is our purpose in life. When we fail to love our brother not only are we in disobedience, but we are also using our bodies and emotions in a way that they were never meant to be used, against their very nature.
Cool quote: "Love (God) rescued me from love (for self) so that I can love (others)!
I hope this short outline helped you in some small way, the way the sermon did for me in a large way. I was called to reexamine my view of brotherly love, love toward God, and my very purpose in life.