Every few days, during the summer months, at our local Walmart, there is a man standing on the corner holding up a sign saying he will work for food. Car after car stops and gives him donations. Right behind him is a sign offering $7.00 an hour for inexperienced people and more if you have experience at Burger King. Across the street is a similar sign at Taco Bell. Walmart has now hiring signs out, as does every business within sight.
$7.00 would be more than food, and having in some of those businesses and heard them asking people if they want a job, I am pretty sure the guys sign is a lie. A friend of mine offered $10.00 and a meal if the guy would just sit in his fleamarket stand for 30 minutes while he went to get something to eat and the guy refused. When the offer was raised to $20, the guy still refused. Obviously, he expected to make more staying where he was. He is defrauding every person who stops to help him.
I am a firm believer that God tells us to help the poor. As a Christian, it is our obligation. Nevertheless, I am to follow God,s instruction in how I give. Paul instructed tha church in Thessalonica, "For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat. For we hear that there are some which walk among you disorderly, working not at all, but are busybodies. Now them that are such we command and exhort by our Lord Jesus Christ, that with quietness they work, and eat their own bread," (II Thessalonians 3:10-12).
To give such a person money merely rewards him for his sin and encourages him to continue. I have a responsibility not to encourage him to cheat and lie. I am going against God in giving to him. Charitable organisations such as rescue missions and homeless shelters can be very valuable, or they can encourage wickedness, and it only takes very small changes in how they run to make the difference.
God established a welfare program in Israel. It did not encourage laziness, but it did enable destitute people to have food and drink. We ought to use a similar model in our charitable efforts. Leviticus 19:9-10describes it, "And when ye reap the harvest of your land, thou shalt not wholly reap the corners of thy field, neither shalt thou gather the gleanings of thy harvest. And thou shalt not glean thy vineyard, neither shalt thou gather every grape of thy vineyard; thou shalt leave them for the poor and stranger: I am the LORD your God."
The food was available, but the recipients had to go and gather it for themselves. if they were not willing to do that much, they deserved to starve. To be seen gleaning another man's field might be embarassing, but a genuinely hungry person would not allow that to stop him. On the other hand, if he had nothing because of mis management or laziness, the embarassment might cause him to change his ways.
What would happen if our charitable organizations worked in a similar manner?
Monday, February 9, 2009
Friday, February 6, 2009
Created in the Image of God
"So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them." (Genesis 1:27)
What does this mean, that we were created in the image of God? What color is his skin? Is his face a composite of all humans? The Bible uses many anthropomorphisms or human characteristics to describe God and his actions, as the hand of God, or his eye. How big are his hands?
We are told that he has the power to be everywhere at once, and to keep the universe together. A physical body like ours does not have such capabilities. With only 2 hands, just 3 basketballs become a jugling act. How can God juggle the planets, not to mention the moon and all the stars? Paul, speaking of the ressurection of the dead, in I Corinthians 15:35-55, stresses that there are differences between plant materials, between different animal, and between earthly and heavenly things. Our human bodies of flesh and blood cannot exist in God's kingdom. Therefore, Gods body must of necessity be different from ours.
Romans 1:21-25 describes human beings a trying to reduce God to their level. "Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen."
While anthropomorphisms allow us to describe God and his actions in terms we can understand, we need to be careful that in so doing, we do not loose sight of the fact that he is in many respects very unlike us. We run the risk of defining him as merely a grlorified human. Joseph Smith exemplified this tendency saying, "As God was, we are; as God is, we shall be".
Romans 8:29 tells us, "For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren." He also tells us that Christ is the image of the invisible God in Colossians 1:15 and Hebrews 1:3.
Apparently part of that image was lost as a result of sin. II Corinthians 5: 17 tells us "Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new." At least part of the image is in knowledge according to Colossias 3:9-10, "Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds; And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him:", and is renewed at salvation. this should change our actions.
A second part is described in Ephesians 4:22-24. "That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts; And be renewed in the spirit of your mind; And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness." Righteousness and true holiness were part of our original state and in recieving Christ are renewed in us. We need to conciously put away the old actions, and live as the new person.
II Corinthians 3:18 informs us that we will be conformed to the image of Christ by getting to know him more fully, from study of his word. "But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord."
There is a lot I do not fully understand about the image of God, but if I can be transformed into the image of Christ, who is the express (exact) image of God by getting to know him, it is worth the effort.
What does this mean, that we were created in the image of God? What color is his skin? Is his face a composite of all humans? The Bible uses many anthropomorphisms or human characteristics to describe God and his actions, as the hand of God, or his eye. How big are his hands?
We are told that he has the power to be everywhere at once, and to keep the universe together. A physical body like ours does not have such capabilities. With only 2 hands, just 3 basketballs become a jugling act. How can God juggle the planets, not to mention the moon and all the stars? Paul, speaking of the ressurection of the dead, in I Corinthians 15:35-55, stresses that there are differences between plant materials, between different animal, and between earthly and heavenly things. Our human bodies of flesh and blood cannot exist in God's kingdom. Therefore, Gods body must of necessity be different from ours.
Romans 1:21-25 describes human beings a trying to reduce God to their level. "Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen."
While anthropomorphisms allow us to describe God and his actions in terms we can understand, we need to be careful that in so doing, we do not loose sight of the fact that he is in many respects very unlike us. We run the risk of defining him as merely a grlorified human. Joseph Smith exemplified this tendency saying, "As God was, we are; as God is, we shall be".
Romans 8:29 tells us, "For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren." He also tells us that Christ is the image of the invisible God in Colossians 1:15 and Hebrews 1:3.
Apparently part of that image was lost as a result of sin. II Corinthians 5: 17 tells us "Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new." At least part of the image is in knowledge according to Colossias 3:9-10, "Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds; And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him:", and is renewed at salvation. this should change our actions.
A second part is described in Ephesians 4:22-24. "That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts; And be renewed in the spirit of your mind; And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness." Righteousness and true holiness were part of our original state and in recieving Christ are renewed in us. We need to conciously put away the old actions, and live as the new person.
II Corinthians 3:18 informs us that we will be conformed to the image of Christ by getting to know him more fully, from study of his word. "But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord."
There is a lot I do not fully understand about the image of God, but if I can be transformed into the image of Christ, who is the express (exact) image of God by getting to know him, it is worth the effort.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Modesty, The Biblical Standard of Dress
Many have set standards of dress, especially for women. Some have forbidden slacks, others forbid bright colors, or bare arms. Several groups have restricted the wearing of jewelry or makeup. Timothy 2:9-10 gives the following instruction. "In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; but (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.
The key word in the passage is 'modest'. Strongs Concordance defines the Greek word used as meaning 'orderly, or decorus'. it is translated as of good behaviour or modest. Webster's Encyclopedic Dictionary defines modest as, "Restrained by a sense of propriety; not forward or bold; unpretending; bashful; diffident; free from anything suggestive of sexual impurity; pure; moderate; not excessive, extreme, or extravagant." A simple working definition is not calling attention to oneself.
These definitions cause us to understand that Paul is not forbidding the use of any jewelry, or demanding long skirts, etc., but is advocating resraint in all these things. Sexually revealing attire is not modest, but neither is dress which emphasizes ones religious beliefs. To dress in a long plain dress, with long sleeves, no makeup and no jewelry, as some advocate is immodest. It calls attention to you.
To say it is dressing so everyone will know that that you are a Christian is like the Pharisees Jesus described in Matthew 23;5, "But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments." He accuses them of hypocrisy and pretense, a contradiction to the definition of modesty. In Mark 12:38-40 warns, "Beware of the scribes, which love to go in long clothing, and love salutations in the marketplaces, And the chief seats in the synagogues, and the uppermost rooms at feasts: which devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayers: these shall receive greater damnation."
By the same standard, the woman that told pastors wives that they should never buy a dress costing less than $300 and must go to the beautician at least once a week is equally wrong and immodest. She is also advocating rejection of God's standard as described in the verse in I Timothy, as well a I Peter 3:1-4, which says, "Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives; While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear. Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel; But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price."
Quite simply, emphasis on dress, whatever the purpose, implies a fleshly, worldly perspective. As I Samuel 16:7 says' "for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the LORD looketh on the heart." The focus needs to be on God, not our appearance. It is the world that says "appearance is everything."
The key word in the passage is 'modest'. Strongs Concordance defines the Greek word used as meaning 'orderly, or decorus'. it is translated as of good behaviour or modest. Webster's Encyclopedic Dictionary defines modest as, "Restrained by a sense of propriety; not forward or bold; unpretending; bashful; diffident; free from anything suggestive of sexual impurity; pure; moderate; not excessive, extreme, or extravagant." A simple working definition is not calling attention to oneself.
These definitions cause us to understand that Paul is not forbidding the use of any jewelry, or demanding long skirts, etc., but is advocating resraint in all these things. Sexually revealing attire is not modest, but neither is dress which emphasizes ones religious beliefs. To dress in a long plain dress, with long sleeves, no makeup and no jewelry, as some advocate is immodest. It calls attention to you.
To say it is dressing so everyone will know that that you are a Christian is like the Pharisees Jesus described in Matthew 23;5, "But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments." He accuses them of hypocrisy and pretense, a contradiction to the definition of modesty. In Mark 12:38-40 warns, "Beware of the scribes, which love to go in long clothing, and love salutations in the marketplaces, And the chief seats in the synagogues, and the uppermost rooms at feasts: which devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayers: these shall receive greater damnation."
By the same standard, the woman that told pastors wives that they should never buy a dress costing less than $300 and must go to the beautician at least once a week is equally wrong and immodest. She is also advocating rejection of God's standard as described in the verse in I Timothy, as well a I Peter 3:1-4, which says, "Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives; While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear. Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel; But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price."
Quite simply, emphasis on dress, whatever the purpose, implies a fleshly, worldly perspective. As I Samuel 16:7 says' "for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the LORD looketh on the heart." The focus needs to be on God, not our appearance. It is the world that says "appearance is everything."
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Women Should not Wear Pants,or Should They?
Godly women don't wear pants! Have you heard that statement? This has been an issue for many years. A new pastor is pastoring one of the churches my dad started, and he will not allow their church to attend our youth camp because we allow the girls to wear pants.
Nearly always, those who hold this view start with Deuteronomy 22:5, "The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God." They then assume that pants are mens apparel. Such an assumption ignores the fact that throughout most of history, neither men nor women wore pants, both wearing robes.
To bolster their argument, many will refer to Exodus 28:42. I will include verse 43, as it is part of the context, and modifies how the verse is to be understood. "And thou shalt make them linen breeches to cover their nakedness; from the loins even unto the thighs they shall reach: And they shall be upon Aaron, and upon his sons, when they come in unto the tabernacle of the congregation, or when they come near unto the altar to minister in the holy place; that they bear not iniquity, and die: it shall be a statute for ever unto him and his seed after him."
Notice that verse 43 stresses that these are for the priests, and are to be worn any time they are ministering about the tabernacle or altar, implying that they were not common for otherpeople. Looking back to verses 40 and 41. we find that they also were to wear coats and bonnets. The breeches were to be worn that their nakedness not be seen.
From the description, the breeches were to reach from the waist to the thigh. In todays language, that is a pair of shorts. They were to be worn under the coats and girdle. They were underwear. If this is men's apparel, would it not be an equally valid interpretation to forbid women to wear underwear, or perhaps forbid them to cover their nakedness? These garments were specifically for the priests, and provide no insight to what is or isn't mens clothing.
Deuteronomy 22:5 clearly teaches the women are not to dress as men, and that men are not to dress as women. We are repeatedly told that homosexual behavior is repugnant to God. Cross dressing is definitely off limits. That is not the same as women wearing pants designed for women. If one believes it is wrong for a woman to wear pants, he has the right to his belief and should practice them. However, since there is uncertainty, he should listen to Romans 141, "Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations." The rest of the chapter is focused on the idea that we ought not make issues of these type of things, nor allow them to cause division. As Paul tells us in verse 14, "I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean."
In verses 17-19 Paul points out that it is not these kinds of things which make us pleasing to God, and we need to focus on those instead. "For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. For he that in these things serveth Christ is acceptable to God, and approved of men. Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another. These controversies ar counterproductive.
Regardless of ones position, he should avoid hypocrisy on his stance. For example, if it is wrong for a woman to wear pants, then idon't tell her it is okay for her to put on shorts under her dress so she can engage in activities where they will be seen, such as jumping on a trampoline. It is not right to forbid women to dress as men, then have pastors dress as women for a skit at youth camp. They are still disobeying God. Just be consistent.
Nearly always, those who hold this view start with Deuteronomy 22:5, "The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God." They then assume that pants are mens apparel. Such an assumption ignores the fact that throughout most of history, neither men nor women wore pants, both wearing robes.
To bolster their argument, many will refer to Exodus 28:42. I will include verse 43, as it is part of the context, and modifies how the verse is to be understood. "And thou shalt make them linen breeches to cover their nakedness; from the loins even unto the thighs they shall reach: And they shall be upon Aaron, and upon his sons, when they come in unto the tabernacle of the congregation, or when they come near unto the altar to minister in the holy place; that they bear not iniquity, and die: it shall be a statute for ever unto him and his seed after him."
Notice that verse 43 stresses that these are for the priests, and are to be worn any time they are ministering about the tabernacle or altar, implying that they were not common for otherpeople. Looking back to verses 40 and 41. we find that they also were to wear coats and bonnets. The breeches were to be worn that their nakedness not be seen.
From the description, the breeches were to reach from the waist to the thigh. In todays language, that is a pair of shorts. They were to be worn under the coats and girdle. They were underwear. If this is men's apparel, would it not be an equally valid interpretation to forbid women to wear underwear, or perhaps forbid them to cover their nakedness? These garments were specifically for the priests, and provide no insight to what is or isn't mens clothing.
Deuteronomy 22:5 clearly teaches the women are not to dress as men, and that men are not to dress as women. We are repeatedly told that homosexual behavior is repugnant to God. Cross dressing is definitely off limits. That is not the same as women wearing pants designed for women. If one believes it is wrong for a woman to wear pants, he has the right to his belief and should practice them. However, since there is uncertainty, he should listen to Romans 141, "Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations." The rest of the chapter is focused on the idea that we ought not make issues of these type of things, nor allow them to cause division. As Paul tells us in verse 14, "I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean."
In verses 17-19 Paul points out that it is not these kinds of things which make us pleasing to God, and we need to focus on those instead. "For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. For he that in these things serveth Christ is acceptable to God, and approved of men. Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another. These controversies ar counterproductive.
Regardless of ones position, he should avoid hypocrisy on his stance. For example, if it is wrong for a woman to wear pants, then idon't tell her it is okay for her to put on shorts under her dress so she can engage in activities where they will be seen, such as jumping on a trampoline. It is not right to forbid women to dress as men, then have pastors dress as women for a skit at youth camp. They are still disobeying God. Just be consistent.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Lessons to be Learned From Controversy
Years ago, hair length got to be a really big issue in many churches. Some even specified a maximun length that a Christian man could wear, and a minimum for a woman. It got to be quite a controversy in many churches as a result. Studying what the Bible says about the subject can be very rewarding, not just about hair length, but about how we are to deal with other things as well.
There are a few references in the Old testament. The Nazarites were instructed by God never to cut their hair during the course of their commitment as proof of their dedication to God. This did not apply to others. Leviticus 19:29 tells Israel "Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard." This sounds almost as if God were forbidding them to trim their hair or beard.
Some of those who set maximum and minimum lengths used Ezekiel 44:20 as their basis. Notice that the verse specifies "Neither shall they shave their heads, nor suffer their locks to grow long; they shall only poll their heads." This verse, and the one in Leviticus together forbid shaving the head, and deliberate attempts to modify ones appearance by how they cut their hair, but do not specify any length except that it is not to be long. Verse 15, however, specifies that this verse refers specifically to priests who are ministering in the temple.
The only passage in the New Testament is I Corinthians 11:3-19. "But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head. But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.
For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man. For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels. Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord. For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God.
Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered? Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering. But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.
Now in this that I declare unto you I praise you not, that ye come together not for the better, but for the worse. For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it. For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you."
Paul, writing by the inspiration of God, states in verse 16, if there is contention over the matter, the Apostles did not set such a standard, nor did churches controlled by God. This standard is not from God, but of the flesh. That all the claims are true does not make it right for us to set the standard.
Paul rebukes the Corinthians for setting up such conflicts, and warns that the very conflict(herisy) identifies those who are not pleasing to God. Conflicts in the church are proof of an unspiritual church according to I Corinthians 3:3. "For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?" Romans 16:17 warns us to identify those who cause such division, and avoid them.
There are a few references in the Old testament. The Nazarites were instructed by God never to cut their hair during the course of their commitment as proof of their dedication to God. This did not apply to others. Leviticus 19:29 tells Israel "Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard." This sounds almost as if God were forbidding them to trim their hair or beard.
Some of those who set maximum and minimum lengths used Ezekiel 44:20 as their basis. Notice that the verse specifies "Neither shall they shave their heads, nor suffer their locks to grow long; they shall only poll their heads." This verse, and the one in Leviticus together forbid shaving the head, and deliberate attempts to modify ones appearance by how they cut their hair, but do not specify any length except that it is not to be long. Verse 15, however, specifies that this verse refers specifically to priests who are ministering in the temple.
The only passage in the New Testament is I Corinthians 11:3-19. "But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head. But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.
For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man. For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels. Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord. For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God.
Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered? Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering. But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.
Now in this that I declare unto you I praise you not, that ye come together not for the better, but for the worse. For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it. For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you."
Paul, writing by the inspiration of God, states in verse 16, if there is contention over the matter, the Apostles did not set such a standard, nor did churches controlled by God. This standard is not from God, but of the flesh. That all the claims are true does not make it right for us to set the standard.
Paul rebukes the Corinthians for setting up such conflicts, and warns that the very conflict(herisy) identifies those who are not pleasing to God. Conflicts in the church are proof of an unspiritual church according to I Corinthians 3:3. "For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?" Romans 16:17 warns us to identify those who cause such division, and avoid them.
Monday, February 2, 2009
What is the Source of Our Standards?
A recent magasine article listed several reasons for having a dress code. One of the reasons given was to honor the pastors convictions. This called to mind a visit I made to a church in Texas several years ago. The pastor had only been there a few months, although the church had been there for over 30 years.
The pastor was convinced that it was wrong for anyone to participate in the actual service,( as usher, musician, etc.) who was not wearing a suit and tie. The town he was in was a small farming and ranching community, while he was from a large city. He was really upset that none of the men in the church wore suits and ties to church, although as he admitted they wore neatly pressed Levis and shirts. He had removed several of them from positions of leadership as teachers, ushers, and even the songleader. Needless to say, the church was rebelling.
Being from a some what similar background as the people, I could understand their dilema. In much of the Texas panhandle, even bankers do not wear suits on a regular basis. People wearing suits are viewed as crooks, as they are probably a salesman trying to get them to buy something they don't want or a government bureaucrat trying to dictate how things are to be done who has no experience outside his office. In their view, wearing such fancy clothes is an attempt to decieve others as to ones importance and identifies one as untrustworthy. Their experience has borne this belief out in many cases, and the pastor did not helping himself by his position.
James 2:1-9 deals with this very situation. "My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons. For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold ring, in goodly apparel, and there come in also a poor man in vile raiment; And ye have respect to him that weareth the gay clothing, and say unto him, Sit thou here in a good place; and say to the poor, Stand thou there, or sit here under my footstool: Are ye not then partial in yourselves, and are become judges of evil thoughts?
Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him? But ye have despised the poor. Do not rich men oppress you, and draw you before the judgment seats? Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called? If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well: But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors. "
The pastor, though it was his conviction, was committing sin. He had no authority from God to impose his convictions on the church, and infact his convictions were ungodly. To follow them would cause the church to sin as well. Too often we've been told to follow our convictions, our conscience, or our heart. Titus 1:15 states "Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled." Many times our standards are not from God, but reflect the evil in our own heart, as the pastor who preached that it was wrong for a woman to wear open toed shoes because they were such a sexual turn on to men. Obviously, he was showing his own wickedness, as most guys I know have never indicated such a problem. In Jesus' day most people wore open toed sandals, and neither Jesus nor the apostles condemned them.
Quite simply, the conscience of the leader or pastor is not a sound basis for our standards. Who knows how badly his mind and conscience is defiled. A well known pastor here in our area was caught soliciting homosexual favors, and numerous others around the country have been guilty of other sexual and financial sins. Standards need to be wholly based on the Word of God.
The pastor was convinced that it was wrong for anyone to participate in the actual service,( as usher, musician, etc.) who was not wearing a suit and tie. The town he was in was a small farming and ranching community, while he was from a large city. He was really upset that none of the men in the church wore suits and ties to church, although as he admitted they wore neatly pressed Levis and shirts. He had removed several of them from positions of leadership as teachers, ushers, and even the songleader. Needless to say, the church was rebelling.
Being from a some what similar background as the people, I could understand their dilema. In much of the Texas panhandle, even bankers do not wear suits on a regular basis. People wearing suits are viewed as crooks, as they are probably a salesman trying to get them to buy something they don't want or a government bureaucrat trying to dictate how things are to be done who has no experience outside his office. In their view, wearing such fancy clothes is an attempt to decieve others as to ones importance and identifies one as untrustworthy. Their experience has borne this belief out in many cases, and the pastor did not helping himself by his position.
James 2:1-9 deals with this very situation. "My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons. For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold ring, in goodly apparel, and there come in also a poor man in vile raiment; And ye have respect to him that weareth the gay clothing, and say unto him, Sit thou here in a good place; and say to the poor, Stand thou there, or sit here under my footstool: Are ye not then partial in yourselves, and are become judges of evil thoughts?
Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him? But ye have despised the poor. Do not rich men oppress you, and draw you before the judgment seats? Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called? If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well: But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors. "
The pastor, though it was his conviction, was committing sin. He had no authority from God to impose his convictions on the church, and infact his convictions were ungodly. To follow them would cause the church to sin as well. Too often we've been told to follow our convictions, our conscience, or our heart. Titus 1:15 states "Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled." Many times our standards are not from God, but reflect the evil in our own heart, as the pastor who preached that it was wrong for a woman to wear open toed shoes because they were such a sexual turn on to men. Obviously, he was showing his own wickedness, as most guys I know have never indicated such a problem. In Jesus' day most people wore open toed sandals, and neither Jesus nor the apostles condemned them.
Quite simply, the conscience of the leader or pastor is not a sound basis for our standards. Who knows how badly his mind and conscience is defiled. A well known pastor here in our area was caught soliciting homosexual favors, and numerous others around the country have been guilty of other sexual and financial sins. Standards need to be wholly based on the Word of God.
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Guilty before God
A man walked into a restaraunt in Farmington one day and placed his order. I don't remember what he ordered to eat, but I'll probably never forget his demand that they bring him two alkaseltzers and a glass of water before his meal, and two more afterward. Either he had a serious heartburn problem, or he thougt the food was going to be awful. I think if I were the cook, I'd feel insulted. If I thought the food would be that bad, I'd not eat there.
While that is the most extreme case I've ever seen, There are a great many people who live expecting everything they eat to cause heartburn. As a result they carry packages of Tums or a similar product with them, or they take Prilosec every day.
While unpleasant, heart burn itself is not a serious problem. It is a signal that something is wrong. One of the most common causes of heatrburn, and the easiest to fix is over eating or drinking. The stomach is unable to contain and process all the food and some is pushed back into the esophogus, where the stomach acid begins to burn the lining. If this occurs often, the valve at the top of the stomach may be damaged, allowing leakage more often, a condition known as acid reflux. Ulcers, stomach cancers and parasites can also cause heartburn.
The use of antacids or Prilosec work by neutralizing part of the stomach acid or lessening the amount. This tends to stop the pain, but does nothing for the underlying cause. Left untreated, ulcers, cancer, acid reflux, and parasites continue to get worse until they become serious problems. The over eating causes obesity and leads to other serious health problems, including diabetes and heart contitions.
Because the antacids and Prilosec ease the pain, people assume the problem is gone and do not act on the symptom, allowing the problem to grow. In addition, they tend to become habituted to the problem and accept it as normal. Thus they advise everyone around to try their particular remedy.
Like heartburn, feelings of guilt are an indicator of a more serious problem. Unless the underlying problem is corrected, efforts to aleve the guilt will only be temporary. Romans 3:19 explains it thus. "Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may be guilty before God." The purpose of the law was to cause awareness of guilt, by making us aware of our sin.
Romans 5:12 tells us, "Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned." Death, both physical and spiritual is the result of sin. We all die because all have sinned. After physical death, comes judgement for ones life. "And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgement."(Hebrews 9:27)
This judgement is described in Revelation 20:11-15. "And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them. And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
And the sea gave up the dead which were in it ; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. And death hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire."
Guilt is a warning of our sin. It causes a great deal of discomfort, but it is not the main problem, and unless the sin is dealt with, the guilt will return. Even worse, we will not only die physically, but spiritually as well. This is not ceasing to exist, but rather an eternal state of dying, without completing the process. The best example is of a burn victim, living day after day in agony, but not dying or recovering. Death is infinitely preferable. Matthew tells us that death is unattainable for those who are there.
I John 1:9-10 advises, "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." God not only forgives, but takes away the sin. There is no longer guilt for past sin. Jesus died for our sin, and "For by one offering he hath perfected forever them that are sanctified. " (Hebrews 10:14)
"Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:" (Romans 5:1). The guilt is gone, and so is the effect of sin. "For Gos so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the through him might be saved.
He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God." (John 3:16-18)
Confessing our sin and believing in him removes the guilt, and eliminates the underlying cause of the guilt. There is an old saying that there is nothing harder to live with than a guilty conscience. Is preserving our pride worth living with a guilty conscience and then spending eternity in Hell?
While that is the most extreme case I've ever seen, There are a great many people who live expecting everything they eat to cause heartburn. As a result they carry packages of Tums or a similar product with them, or they take Prilosec every day.
While unpleasant, heart burn itself is not a serious problem. It is a signal that something is wrong. One of the most common causes of heatrburn, and the easiest to fix is over eating or drinking. The stomach is unable to contain and process all the food and some is pushed back into the esophogus, where the stomach acid begins to burn the lining. If this occurs often, the valve at the top of the stomach may be damaged, allowing leakage more often, a condition known as acid reflux. Ulcers, stomach cancers and parasites can also cause heartburn.
The use of antacids or Prilosec work by neutralizing part of the stomach acid or lessening the amount. This tends to stop the pain, but does nothing for the underlying cause. Left untreated, ulcers, cancer, acid reflux, and parasites continue to get worse until they become serious problems. The over eating causes obesity and leads to other serious health problems, including diabetes and heart contitions.
Because the antacids and Prilosec ease the pain, people assume the problem is gone and do not act on the symptom, allowing the problem to grow. In addition, they tend to become habituted to the problem and accept it as normal. Thus they advise everyone around to try their particular remedy.
Like heartburn, feelings of guilt are an indicator of a more serious problem. Unless the underlying problem is corrected, efforts to aleve the guilt will only be temporary. Romans 3:19 explains it thus. "Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may be guilty before God." The purpose of the law was to cause awareness of guilt, by making us aware of our sin.
Romans 5:12 tells us, "Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned." Death, both physical and spiritual is the result of sin. We all die because all have sinned. After physical death, comes judgement for ones life. "And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgement."(Hebrews 9:27)
This judgement is described in Revelation 20:11-15. "And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them. And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
And the sea gave up the dead which were in it ; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. And death hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire."
Guilt is a warning of our sin. It causes a great deal of discomfort, but it is not the main problem, and unless the sin is dealt with, the guilt will return. Even worse, we will not only die physically, but spiritually as well. This is not ceasing to exist, but rather an eternal state of dying, without completing the process. The best example is of a burn victim, living day after day in agony, but not dying or recovering. Death is infinitely preferable. Matthew tells us that death is unattainable for those who are there.
I John 1:9-10 advises, "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." God not only forgives, but takes away the sin. There is no longer guilt for past sin. Jesus died for our sin, and "For by one offering he hath perfected forever them that are sanctified. " (Hebrews 10:14)
"Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:" (Romans 5:1). The guilt is gone, and so is the effect of sin. "For Gos so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the through him might be saved.
He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God." (John 3:16-18)
Confessing our sin and believing in him removes the guilt, and eliminates the underlying cause of the guilt. There is an old saying that there is nothing harder to live with than a guilty conscience. Is preserving our pride worth living with a guilty conscience and then spending eternity in Hell?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)